So, how's that Arcane Trickster working out for you?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

151 to 200 of 241 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

If one manages to tag someone with ghoul touch I have generally found it better to coup de grace the target with a scythe or something as opposed to a ranged spell sneak attack.


Abraham spalding wrote:


Grease, Glitterdust, Blindness/deafness, and Ghoul Touch are just three other ways to cause your opponents to be flat footed to you which means you can follow up with rays afterwards. Spectral hand is a nice spell to have in a wand for those touch spells in this case too.

So to summarize, the arcane trickster is acceptable at taking out the trash.

But then again so is the rogue, only better as he follows up the wizard's action immediately and with multiple sneak attacks. And he can do so against non-gimped targets to boot.

The arcane trickster benefits from the one man is an island fallacy. You look at one character on paper and imagine he's not part of an adventuring party.

I mean let's summarize the class:
1. Casting on par with a bard (aka half-casting)
2. Poor Bab
3. Half-rogue skills and double the directions to take those skills.
4. Reduced sneak dice

How does this seem good mechanically?

-James


james maissen wrote:


So to summarize, the arcane trickster is acceptable at taking out the trash.

But then again so is the rogue, only better as he follows up the wizard's action immediately and with multiple sneak attacks. And he can do so against non-gimped targets to boot.

I think his point was that it's easier to get a sneak attack (by causing your target to lose their Dex bonus to AC) with the arcane trickster's toolkit. Where in cases a rogue couldn't get a sneak attack, a trickster has a trick to get one.


meabolex wrote:
james maissen wrote:


So to summarize, the arcane trickster is acceptable at taking out the trash.

But then again so is the rogue, only better as he follows up the wizard's action immediately and with multiple sneak attacks. And he can do so against non-gimped targets to boot.

I think his point was that it's easier to get a sneak attack (by causing your target to lose their Dex bonus to AC) with the arcane trickster's toolkit. Where in cases a rogue couldn't get a sneak attack, a trickster has a trick to get one.

Hence my everyman is an island comment.

All of the ways that he mentions there are better handled by a separate caster dropping that spell on the target rather than the rogue.

The Arcane trickster won't get a sneak attack until the next round and will get (as presented) one sneak attack at 3d6 less, rather than the rogue who will get potentially multiple sneak attacks, each for more, and before the target gets a chance to react.

-James


james maissen wrote:

All of the ways that he mentions there are better handled by a separate caster dropping that spell on the target rather than the rogue.

Except where the seperate casters are busy dealing with the primary threat, the same conditions that ALL multiclass casters shine in. This is a straight replacement: you have party X with a rogue, another wizard, or an AT. If you had another wiz, there are likely many times where you would prefer to have another fighting class (otherwize why don't ALL parties just have clerics and wizards?). If you just had a rogue, you may find yourself wanting a second or third control spell. The AT provides both.

Like many other multiclass characters, they operate best as backup. Some people don't like playing backup, and so can see no value in playing such a character. Having seen a party made of ALL backup thrash APL+4 encounters (7 players), I can say that they really CAN synergize their abilities and maximize their force multipliers. In a game where spells are king, 5 spells vs 2 will generally always be better, even if the 5 are at lower level.


james maissen wrote:


So to summarize, the arcane trickster is acceptable at taking out the trash.

But then again so is the rogue, only better as he follows up the wizard's action immediately and with multiple sneak attacks. And he can do so against non-gimped targets to boot.

The arcane trickster benefits from the one man is an island fallacy. You look at one character on paper and imagine he's not part of an adventuring party.

I mean let's summarize the class:
1. Casting on par with a bard (aka half-casting)
2. Poor Bab
3. Half-rogue skills and double the directions to take those skills.
4. Reduced sneak dice

How does this seem good mechanically?

-James

It's limited at lower levels, especially. If your party has either a wizard or rogue, you can take the role of one or the other. Cast grease and let the other rogue take out the monster, or let the wizard cast glitterdust and you take it out with an attack spell. You can't do it with big damage spells all day, but it gets good after 10th level or so.

Casting far outstrips the bard. The AT is 3 levels behind a wiz/sor, with wizard spells. He's about tied with the bard entering the class, then gets better faster. A bard can use this class, too, so he'd be 3 caster levels behind another bard.

I argued for the rogue BAB during the beta, but my pleas fell on deaf ears. As it is, ranged touch spells and high dex go well together.

The trickster needs a high int score, even if he's a cha caster. The best build for this class is definitely a wizard. I argued for 6 skill points rather than 4, but oh, well. Almost everything's a class skill for you (including UMD), so you're not hurting. The most important rogue and wizard skills are covered, and a single rank in all but four skills gets you three more.
If you start with a 16 or better int and/or dex, you'll be fine.

The AT is 2d6 behind the rogue, but he's adding those dice to spells, unless things are going very wrong. If you're not absolutely dedicated to maximum spellcasting, a level or two of rogue makes for a capable sneaky guy with a few nice tricks.

Just my 2cp. This class doesn't shine between 4-9th levels, but it picks up steam after that.

Dark Archive

I mean, i'm generally one to try to argue for these splits. But in the case of the trickster, it doesn't work out.

At level 10 he starts to be OK again, with spells of 4th level (compared to 5th), his 2nd attack (just reached 2nd BAB), and 4d6 sneak attack (only 1d6 down). But at 11, he's back down 2 spell levels (4 vs 6), down another BAB on the full rogue (who is now +8 to his 6), and 2d6 damage. This continues; you are basically hyper-nerfed all the way to level 9, and every odd level. And the spice abilities (except the capstone, which is seen only at endgame if at all.. Few campaigns go this high). The save you gain in is the worst (ref), and you can't really do either job very well.

I love arcane archers, eldrich knights, and even the Theurge (the last only if you know you'll see the payoff level). But I don't see this guy as particularly effective or fun; he simply needs more. I miss Beguilers :(.


Maybe the AT would be better off taking levels in ninja rather than rogue. Sudden strike is not so bad since you probably won't be flanking anyway, and you can use ghost step two times a day (with 12 in wisdom) as a swift action, making you invisible for the rest of the round. It should make the first levels of AT a little easier.

Grand Lodge

Fred Ohm wrote:
Maybe the AT would be better off taking levels in ninja rather than rogue. Sudden strike is not so bad since you probably won't be flanking anyway, and you can use ghost step two times a day (with 12 in wisdom) as a swift action, making you invisible for the rest of the round. It should make the first levels of AT a little easier.

Unfortunately the requirement for an AT is specific... you need that sneak attack.


Yeah, but

Complete Adventurer wrote:

SUDDEN STRIKE AND SNEAK ATTACK

For the purpose of qualifying for feats, prestige classes, and
similar options that require a minimum number of sneak
attack extra damage dice, treat the ninja’s sudden strike ability
as the equivalent of sneak attack.

Grand Lodge

Benicio Del Espada wrote:


I'm in love with the concept, though I'm sure it's probably mediocre at best in actual play. Just wanted to know what other people thought about it.

Technically, no. It's a spell-like ability, not a spell. I think a GM could be talked into it, though. It is an interesting idea. Frankly, I don't know why mage hand isn't on the witch's list. It seems like a witchy thing to do.

Part of the reason is the distinction between the witch and other arcanists. What you're describing is more the performing trick of a low level mage or mage apprentice in theme. The witch at that level is more likely to be the person looking up herbal remedies or curses.


Fred Ohm wrote:
Maybe the AT would be better off taking levels in ninja rather than rogue. Sudden strike is not so bad since you probably won't be flanking anyway, and you can use ghost step two times a day (with 12 in wisdom) as a swift action, making you invisible for the rest of the round. It should make the first levels of AT a little easier.

Interesting idea. The AT isn't the sort to try to flank anyone, so it's no great loss. Adding your wisdom bonus to AC like a monk is nice too, if you have good ability scores. An item to raise your wisdom would help your AC, not to mention will saves (which are already good for the AT). Poison use could come in handy, too!

Extra style points for invisible poisoned shuriken attack! XD


Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Personally, I think the easiest way to fix the Arcane Trickster is to give him his surprise spells at level 1 and give him another ability at level 10. Unless I'm mistaken, it isn't like he'll even be able to out damage a normal wizard even with that, but it would be a big improvement. Even if he could out damage a wizard, he still has fewer spells to do it with.

I'm actually creating an Arcane Trickster in a game that I just joined, but I'm going with a different route when compared to most of the people here. Instead of being ray focused, mine is going to be bow focused. I'm planning to eventually have him take a few levels in Arcane Archer as well when his BAB is actually high enough. He's also the only rogue AND the only wizard in the party, so at the very least I'm not going to have to worry about either of those overshadowing me, haha.


Matrixryu wrote:
He's also the only rogue AND the only wizard in the party, so at the very least I'm not going to have to worry about either of those overshadowing me, haha.

BORING "I PLAYED ONE ONCE AND..." ALERT!

old fart reminiscence:
I played a 2e game years ago in which my elf was the only magic-user/thief in the party. He had great dex, and so was a TWF when forced to melee (that happened a lot!).

I don't think sneak attack applied to spells, then. They didn't in our game, anyway. He was a greedy bast*#d, and got really rich by getting to the treasure before the rest of the party, and picking out the nicest bits. He was as bad as Haley!

Shadow Lodge

Fred Ohm wrote:

Yeah, but

Complete Adventurer wrote:

SUDDEN STRIKE AND SNEAK ATTACK

For the purpose of qualifying for feats, prestige classes, and
similar options that require a minimum number of sneak
attack extra damage dice, treat the ninja’s sudden strike ability
as the equivalent of sneak attack.

The Arcane Trickster advances sneak attack though. Extending it to sudden strike seems reasonable but not all GMs are going to let that fly.


Sneak attack is a class feature of the arcane trickster itself, not an advancement of another class' class feature. DMs should not convert it to sudden strike, I think.

The qualification for prestige classes with a sneak attack requirement can't mean that only for classes that give sudden strike dices, for it would be much simpler to give them a sudden strike requirement.


If I understand it right, sudden strike is the same as sneak attack, but you can't get it from flanking like you can with sneak attack.

The two stack as long as both apply; a ranged sneak attack doesn't require a flank. If ninja-boy tries to flank an enemy, only the AT sneak attack bonus applies.

Of course, if he's invisible (his schtick as much as the AT's) he can melee to his heart's content and apply both bonuses.

At least that's my interpretation, and I'm a reasonable guy and stuff!

Shadow Lodge

Fred Ohm wrote:

Sneak attack is a class feature of the arcane trickster itself, not an advancement of another class' class feature. DMs should not convert it to sudden strike, I think.

The qualification for prestige classes with a sneak attack requirement can't mean that only for classes that give sudden strike dices, for it would be much simpler to give them a sudden strike requirement.

I don't think I have the Ninja but everything I've heard points to it being quite mediocre. I'm just not seeing how taking a fairly weak base class and mixing a fairly weak prestige class is going to be a balance issue.

I'm not arguing that it's the the way the rules point, just sayin...

Dark Archive

My friend played one where blink granted sneak attack at all times, and Trog form (Alter Self) was +6 natural armor AND gave you 3 attacks and they were still... only OK.

Most of the spell effects they once relied on have been nerfed out (including "selective nerfing" the blink/attack combo), which leaves them having difficulty getting ranged sneak attack in, or lots of extra attacks... which makes them difficult to embrace.


0gre wrote:
I don't think I have the Ninja but everything I've heard points to it being quite mediocre.

That seems to be the consensus. It's a watered-down rogue with 6 skill points, monk-wisdom AC rules, and it can turn invisible with ki points (based on wis). Like so many splat classes, it's MAD.

Quote:

I'm just not seeing how taking a fairly weak base class and mixing a fairly weak prestige class is going to be a balance issue.

I'm not arguing that it's the the way the rules point, just sayin...

The good part is just being able to go invisible at will once or twice per day. That would take some of the suck out at low levels, but it wouldn't matter much later on. The "sudden attack" distinction wasn't needed. Regular sneak attack would have been just fine, as the ninja wasn't that great, anyway. Poison use at 3rd level is colorful, but not that useful to an AT.

Adding your wis bonus to your AC is cool, if you have the ability scores to pull it off. The ninja AC improves with level, just like a monk, but you only took 3 levels, so no cookie for you. And no evasion.

The AT is better off doing the same thing with dex, and dumping wis. He needs int and dex, and if he's a sorcerer or bard mix, he needs cha, too. I'd rather just go wizard and forget about everything but int and dex.


Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Benicio Del Espada wrote:
It's a watered-down rogue with 6 skill points, monk-wisdom AC rules, and it can turn invisible with ki points (based on wis). Like so many splat classes, it's MAD.

I've seen a pretty good pathfinder conversion for the ninja here: http://www.dorkistan.com/PFRPG/classes/ninja.htm

Personally, I would change the sneak attack back into sudden strike just to prevent the guy from being more powerful than a standard rogue, but other than that I think this version is pretty good. It still suffers from MAD though. If you tried to make a Ninja Arcane Trickster you would want high Dex, Int, and Wis, which is kinda crazy.

Going back to the Arcane Trickster, I think I've figured out how to get one to actually survive and compete at low levels. If you cast the blur spell on yourself, you get the equivalent of hide-in-plain sight (without the low-light limitation) since it gives you concealment. You can just move or 5 foot step every round to regain your stealth so that your next attack will get sneak attack damage.


Matrixryu wrote:


I've seen a pretty good pathfinder conversion for the ninja here: http://www.dorkistan.com/PFRPG/classes/ninja.htm

Here's the link.

Looks much improved, at first glance.


Matrixryu wrote:
Going back to the Arcane Trickster, I think I've figured out how to get one to actually survive and compete at low levels. If you cast the blur spell on yourself, you get the equivalent of hide-in-plain sight (without the low-light limitation) since it gives you concealment. You can just move or 5 foot step every round to regain your stealth so that your next attack will get sneak attack damage.

Check this.


Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
nidho wrote:
Matrixryu wrote:
Going back to the Arcane Trickster, I think I've figured out how to get one to actually survive and compete at low levels. If you cast the blur spell on yourself, you get the equivalent of hide-in-plain sight (without the low-light limitation) since it gives you concealment. You can just move or 5 foot step every round to regain your stealth so that your next attack will get sneak attack damage.

Check this.

Ah, that's for pointing that thread out to me. It seems like the stealth rules are so convoluted that they don't make sense when you bring them together. I've gone ahead and thrown in my argument for blur allowing stealth ;)


Matrixryu wrote:
nidho wrote:
Matrixryu wrote:
Going back to the Arcane Trickster, I think I've figured out how to get one to actually survive and compete at low levels. If you cast the blur spell on yourself, you get the equivalent of hide-in-plain sight (without the low-light limitation) since it gives you concealment. You can just move or 5 foot step every round to regain your stealth so that your next attack will get sneak attack damage.

Check this.

Ah, that's for pointing that thread out to me. It seems like the stealth rules are so convoluted that they don't make sense when you bring them together. I've gone ahead and thrown in my argument for blur allowing stealth ;)

Yeah, convoluted is the right word. I've read your post there too. Food for thought. :)


nidho wrote:
Yeah, convoluted is the right word. I've read your post there too. Food for thought. :)

Looks like the poor trickster is condemned to a life of suck until 17th level...

Well, actually, he just sucks from 4-9th levels. The key here is having awesome int and dex. If you have no magic and no sneak attack, you have a bow as a fallback option, and plenty of skills that make you useful out of combat. A character with a round in which to act is rarely useless.

Tumble past those stupid ogres and use your wand of CLW to save the cleric from a grisly death! He'll thank you later...

Paizo Employee Developer

Hey, you guys might be interested in checking out Undefeatable 11: Arcane Trickster, recently made available by LPJ Design on paizo.com. It's a bunch of Pathfinder feats that I wrote for the Arcane Trickster class. You may also be interested in #10, which focuses on rogues. I don't want to hijack this thread though so if you want to discuss the feats you should probably do so over on the product pages!


I picked that up when it came out. Overall a really good collection of feats for rogue/wizards. Well worth a few bucks. There are a couple a feats I'll be amending for my own games (one uses the once per encounter mechanic which I dislike), but other than that it's very good. I look forward to what they do for the other PRCs.


I just got it, and, at first glance, I'm impressed. I hope Paizo (or at least my GM) will look at it. PrCs need some love, and some solid feats help a lot.

Nice to see some feats for gnomes, illusionists, and sorcerers, too. Highly recommended for all you poor, underpowered, helpless trickster players. Totally worth $1.25.

I hope you made at least a quarter off it, Mike. Very good work! =)

I'll take the rest of my praise to the appropriate thread. Hijack off.


Matrixryu wrote:
Personally, I think the easiest way to fix the Arcane Trickster is to give him his surprise spells at level 1 and give him another ability at level 10. Unless I'm mistaken, it isn't like he'll even be able to out damage a normal wizard even with that, but it would be a big improvement. Even if he could out damage a wizard, he still has fewer spells to do it with.

How about this? Surprise spells at 1st level, allowing any targeted spell to include sneak attack damage (this would include magic missile, among others) within 30'. Adding d6's to the first missile makes you much more useful to your party, but no more powerful than a rogue of your level, who can do the same thing (repeatedly) with ranged attacks.

The capstone would be the surprise spells at any range, which, as I read it, you get at 10th level, anyway. This would make the AT the only class I know of with a real use for the enlarge spell feat.

The AT is, as Treantmonk puts it, a glass cannon. He's all glass. He needs some cannon! XD

Shadow Lodge

Hah, Treant says blasting is a waste and writes off the whole class.

A bit of an update. We sort of warped to 15th level in the campaign I'm playing and I spent a good bit of time working on my trickster and he is pretty decent now. It's hard to guess without playing him but I think he would pull his own weight. I kind of decided to do a straight sorcerer when we migrated though so I'm not going to get to try him unless my straight sorcerer gets nuked.

As for surprise spells at first level I would suggest making it a limited number of times per day. Maybe 3 times per day at first level.

Surprise spells really works best when you can hit a large group of targets. Curiously enough you would be doing 8d6 HD surprise fireballs while your wizard buddy is doing 8d6 normal fireballs. Some of your other low level spells will be doing better.

Hmm... maybe unlimited surprise spells at 1st level does make sense. As you level up you will slowly outblast the wizard during the surprise round. There could be some crazy exceptions somewhere.


0gre wrote:
Hah, Treant says blasting is a waste and writes off the whole class.

Yeah, I noticed that. LOL! If you're trying to play your trickster as a god-wizard, you already messed up. I predict an early death. Your proper role is skill-monkey and opportunist assassin of mooks. You are also the best spy and sneak-thief in the game (you DID max out your int, right?). You can (and should) have some hastes and other utility spells memorized. Once in a while, you might take your noisy, clanking, way-too-visible party along with you.

Quote:


A bit of an update. We sort of warped to 15th level in the campaign I'm playing and I spent a good bit of time working on my trickster and he is pretty decent now. It's hard to guess without playing him but I think he would pull his own weight. I kind of decided to do a straight sorcerer when we migrated though so I'm not going to get to try him unless my straight sorcerer gets nuked.
Too bad. I'd really like to see how he works out at the "good" levels.
Quote:


As for surprise spells at first level I would suggest making it a limited number of times per day. Maybe 3 times per day at first level.

Surprise spells really works best when you can hit a large group of targets. Curiously enough you would be doing 8d6 HD surprise fireballs while your wizard buddy is doing 8d6 normal fireballs. Some of your other low level spells will be doing better.

Good suggestion. I hope the Paizonians are reading this and assessing the AT, and thinking about how we're trying to make him better, but not overpowered. And yes, adding 7d6 to an area spell makes blasting worth your time. Even if they all make their saves for half, they still took some decent damage.

Adding 7d6 damage to acid splash (at any range) is just sick. No save, no SR. Eat damage, suckah! XD The AT doesn't try to control the battlefield. He depopulates it.

Quote:
Hmm... maybe unlimited surprise spells at 1st level does make sense. As you level up you will slowly outblast the wizard during the surprise round. There could be some crazy exceptions somewhere.

You only get the extra damage on sneak attacks, so it's not automatic. Since your BAB= wizard suck, you won't be confirming too many crits.


Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Mike Kimmel wrote:
Hey, you guys might be interested in checking out Undefeatable 11: Arcane Trickster, recently made available by LPJ Design on paizo.com. It's a bunch of Pathfinder feats that I wrote for the Arcane Trickster class. You may also be interested in #10, which focuses on rogues. I don't want to hijack this thread though so if you want to discuss the feats you should probably do so over on the product pages!

I actually just got that too. There's some good ideas in there, and I think I've managed to convince my GM to let me use the 'Street Mage' feat so that my character will be able to qualify for Arcane Trickster as a Wizard 5/Rouge 1. Well, by then I'll have seen whether or not it will even be worth trying to be an Arcane Trickster, lol.


james maissen wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:


Grease, Glitterdust, Blindness/deafness, and Ghoul Touch are just three other ways to cause your opponents to be flat footed to you which means you can follow up with rays afterwards. Spectral hand is a nice spell to have in a wand for those touch spells in this case too.

So to summarize, the arcane trickster is acceptable at taking out the trash.

But then again so is the rogue, only better as he follows up the wizard's action immediately and with multiple sneak attacks. And he can do so against non-gimped targets to boot.

The arcane trickster benefits from the one man is an island fallacy. You look at one character on paper and imagine he's not part of an adventuring party.

I mean let's summarize the class:
1. Casting on par with a bard (aka half-casting)
2. Poor Bab
3. Half-rogue skills and double the directions to take those skills.
4. Reduced sneak dice

How does this seem good mechanically?

-James

Been away:

You miss one huge difference:

The wizard can make trash... but he can't take it out.

The rogue can take out the trash... but he can't make it.

The arcane trickster does both -- and can fill in for either the wizard or the rogue when needed (not as often a wizard can be a wizard, but he can still do it).

Now he won't be a full fledge wizard for a while (but at 20th level he is), and he doesn't have the BAB of the rogue -- but he does have a regular source of touch attacks, and defenses that the rogue simply can't match without a huge expenditure of resources.

Paizo Employee Developer

The original poster asked me to talk a little bit about one of the feats in the aforementioned product, Undefeatable 11: Arcane Trickster. It's the feat Matrixryu mentioned above called "Street Mage." While I won't post the actual feat here, I will "preview" it a bit. The feat was built off of the idea of the old "Practiced Spellcaster" feat, except it's specifically designed for rogue/arcane spellcasters. It's a pretty good feat to take if you want to make sure your arcane trickster doesn't fall too far behind in terms of either his caster or rogue abilities (it boosts each of them a bit). In fact, the feat was specifically designed to address some of the issues raised in this thread in regards to the power level of the arcane trickster, and also to allow for a little more flexibility in terms of your lead-in levels to the prestige class.

I'd be happy to answer any general questions about the feats in Undefeatable 11 (or #10 for that matter), though since the products are generally only 5-6 pages and not very expensive, I won't be posting any of the actual feats.


DigMarx wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Fact of the matter is is that if you're obsssed with caster level and 9th level spells, you're not going to be happy with almost any of the split class PrCs. But if you can get outside of that constraining box and try to build organic instead of cheeseing for max caster levels you can get a class that's really fun to play and can contribute in a meaningful level.

Dude, shhhh! You're going to rouse the ire of the Stat Lords. Don't you know that it's mathematically impossible to have any fun playing a suboptimal build? You and the fighter'll just be all "man I wish I could do something" while the full casters are all "PEAOW PEAOW!! I can alter reality! Suck quickened empowered wish, CR appropriate monsters!"

Zo

This is one of the funniest things I have ever read on a board.


Mike Kimmel wrote:
The original poster asked me to talk a little bit about one of the feats in the aforementioned product, Undefeatable 11: Arcane Trickster. It's the feat Matrixryu mentioned above called "Street Mage."

It rocks. Do whatever you have to to get your GM to let you have it.

Wash his car, buy him beer, or ply him with hookers and blow. It's that good a feat! :)


Another little trick would be to only take AT to maybe 5th or 6th level, then going rogue again. A sorcerer/rogue AT would still be a very competent rogue with a lot of tricks up her sleeve.

A gnome R3/S3/AT6 would have all the spells of a Sor9. Invisibility, scorching ray, fly, dimension door, etc., castable lots of time per day, gives her a nice arsenal of possibilities.

Take the aberrant bloodline for 10' reach and put the touch on your foes. Add sneak attack to your acidic ray, and take out a mook with a ranged touch attack (no bow needed).

The feats from Undefeatable, if you can use them, make this a great possibility.


We had an Illusionist/Rogue Arcane Trickster playing through Second Darkness that Totally Rocked. The Illusionist Swift Greater Invis thing combined with his favorite spell was kind of scary. He would routinely do in the area of 30d6 with a scorching ray spell (4d6+6d6 sneak attack x3 rays) The practiced spellcaster feat from Complete Arcane is a must though, in order to get your caster level up to full, even if you are down one spell level.


Yemeth wrote:
We had an Illusionist/Rogue Arcane Trickster playing through Second Darkness that Totally Rocked. The Illusionist Swift Greater Invis thing combined with his favorite spell was kind of scary. He would routinely do in the area of 30d6 with a scorching ray spell (4d6+6d6 sneak attack x3 rays) The practiced spellcaster feat from Complete Arcane is a must though, in order to get your caster level up to full, even if you are down one spell level.

Akshully, Ur doin' it wrong. Only one ray gets sneak attack damage. As was explained earlier in the thread, the spell is a standard action, not a full attack.

From the WoTC PDF:

Any spell that requires an attack roll and deals damage can be used in a sneak attack. In this case
"damage" is normal damage, nonlethal damage, ability damage, or energy drain. You can sneak attack
with a Melf's acid arrow spell, but not with a magic missile spell.
Ranged spells are effective as sneak attacks only at ranges of 30 feet or less (just like any other ranged
sneak attack).

A successful sneak attack with a weaponlike spell inflicts extra damage according to the attacker's sneak
attack ability, and the extra damage dealt is the same type as the spell deals. For example, a 10th-level
rogue who makes a successful sneak attack with a Melf's acid arrow spell inflicts 2d4 points of acid
damage, plus an extra 5d6 points of acid damage from the sneak attack (note that continuing damage from
this spell is not part of the sneak attack). Spells that inflict energy drains or ability damage deal extra
negative energy damage in a sneak attack, not extra negative levels or ability damage. For example, a 10thlevel
rogue who makes a successful sneak attack with an enervation spell deals 1d4 negative levels plus
an extra 5d6 points of negative energy damage.

If the sneak attack with a weaponlike spell results in a critical hit, the damage from the spell is doubled but
the extra sneak attack damage is not doubled (as with any sneak attack).
With spell effects that allow you to make multiple attack rolls, such as the energy orb spells or the Split Ray
feat from Tome and Blood, you must treat the effect like a volley -- only the first attack can be a sneak
attack.


Please note that is however for WoTC products which pathfinder isn't -- so going to that is one of those "YMMV" things.


Abraham spalding wrote:
Please note that is however for WoTC products which pathfinder isn't -- so going to that is one of those "YMMV" things.

If my GM wanted to allow SA damage with every individual scorching ray, I wouldn't argue! ;)


Abraham spalding wrote:
Please note that is however for WoTC products which pathfinder isn't -- so going to that is one of those "YMMV" things.

It is something that does need to be clearly delineated. To whit rules for 'volleys' of attacks (manyshot, scorching ray, magic missles, etc) and what and how other rules should treat them.

They are not separate attacks, as you cannot use the result of one before deciding the others. Rather they are all simultaneous.

WOTC threw this into Complete Arcane.

Paizo simply took the SRD and modified where they saw problems. This was settled already (in CA) and thus didn't seem to be a squeaky wheel.

-James


We've allowed (and still do even in 3.5) sneak attack damage on anything that allows precision damage to the full number of attacks in the volley.

Our (general and in 3.5 homebrouse rule -- pathfinder doesn't actually have anything stating that spells with multiple attacks are volleys or indeed that anything is a volley so such a house rule is currently unneeded) is that anything with a separate attack roll is treated as a separate attack.

This means each part that allows an attack roll can be sneak attacked, criticalled etc etc.

It hasn't "broken" anything that's for sure (oh wow 9d6x3 attacks! An average of 31 damage per attack! The fighter has only been doing that for years and you have a limited number of times you can do it a day with fire damage).


if you get 3 rays (@11th lvl) you do 12d6*3. that's an average of 44 dmg per ray (12+72/2). That's 132 dmg on average.

That's broken.


Tanis wrote:

if you get 3 rays (@11th lvl) you do 12d6*3. that's an average of 44 dmg per ray (12+72/2). That's 132 dmg on average.

That's broken.

Not really considering the level is 11+ and the encounters themselves dish out a lot of damage as well and have High HP.


Tanis wrote:

if you get 3 rays (@11th lvl) you do 12d6*3. that's an average of 44 dmg per ray (12+72/2). That's 132 dmg on average.

That's broken.

A level 11 Draconic Sorcerer with point blank shot and the appropriate dragon bloodline can do 102 damage on average with scorching ray. More, if he empowers it/maximizes.

I don't think 132 is too bad.


Tanis wrote:

if you get 3 rays (@11th lvl) you do 12d6*3. that's an average of 44 dmg per ray (12+72/2). That's 132 dmg on average.

That's broken.

I'm confused.

3 rays is why there's the x3.
4d6 is per each ray.

Even an 11th level rogue only has 6d6... so a pure rogue, who we aren't talking about here, only would have 10d6 damage rays.

Even if we assume 12d6*3, that's not 12+72/2 for average damage. The average roll of a d6 is 3.5. You are looking at 36x3.5, which is 126.

Since we are actually talking about an Arcane Trickster at 11th level.. he'd have +4d6 Sneak Attack damage, and be casting as an 8th level caster (only 2 rays).

That's 8d6x2, or 16x3.5, 56 average damage.

If you allow a "practiced spellcaster" type feat to max out the caster level and get that extra ray, and add that extra Sneak Attack damage (that I'm assuming you can get from Street Mage?), you are still only looking at the 10d6x3, or 105 average damage.

Which require touch attacks and can be blocked by fire protection/immunity.

Compared to other 11th level characters:

Blasting casters are doing 40-50 damage (depending on build) towards an area. Hitting even only two creatures equates to as much damage... anything more than two and he skyrockets past.

Other casters might just resort to Dominate, Hold Monster, Baleful Polymorph.. you know the drill.

Archers are capable of pulling off nearing 100 damage in a round (higher if they have the right bane arrows), all with damage that's more applicable, although they have to contend with armor.

A conservative estimate on a Full Attack from a Fighter would be over 100 damage on average.

.

Honestly... letting sneak attack apply to each ray simply keeps things in line, at least at the mid levels. I'd have to double check numbers at higher levels, but straight damage is usually overkill by those levels and people are tossing "fail = death or doomed to die" spells and effects around anyways.


I'm convinced. With the dearth of good touch attack damage spells in core, the situational nature of getting sneak attacks with them, and their limited effectiveness, you make a good case for letting the AT get sneak attack on every ray in scorching ray.

10 or 11d6 per ray really isn't out of line by the time he can do it.

Now, what about magic missile? :)


Wait, so... Arcane tricksters can sneak attack with FIREBALLS? Cool!

I just re-read the class, and frankly, it's tasty. Not sure how it compares to, say, Beguiler, but in a core PFRPG environment, it's fun enough. I'd probably go with Rogue 4/Wizard 3/AT 10, and play it as a Rogue with spells instead of trying to be a wizard with delayed casting.

Tricky Spells is effectively sudden silent+still, which is nice when, say, invisible but close to people you don't want to detect you...

151 to 200 of 241 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / So, how's that Arcane Trickster working out for you? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.