Arcane Trickster and Fireball

Rules Questions

51 to 61 of 61 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Since the regeneration is stopped and they can die, I would say the bleed would work too -- and since the bleed would be fire damage then it would keep the regeneration turned off, meaning a great use of this ability.

Though an arcane trickster could still use this without the capstone by using sorching ray (or similar spell).

Any rogue could do it with an acid arrow wand (with UMD). It is just important to note that with the 10th level ability you can do it to a group of trolls.

Another item of note is that you can stack bleed effects as long as the damage is of a different type.

The arcane trickster could kill a group of high hit point creatures fairly quickly with a low level quickened rod or the quickened spell feat. A 15 heal check isn't easy, and any time you force a divine caster to help his group, he really just lost his turn.

As an Arcane Trickster I would simply devote a little of my cash to go towards Dust of Disappearance.

You can't see me, you can't see me. ::BOOM!:: ::BOOM!::

Abraham spalding wrote:

Can you show me where it exists in pathfinder? If not then it's not pathfinder -- it's 3.5 as such bringing it forward to pathfinder would be a house rule.

Compatible =/= beholden to all the same rules.

All i can quote is p.5 of the CRB. In the foreword by Jason Buhlman he states the general principles of the PFRPG and its backwards compatibility with 3.5:

"...stick with the rules they already owned. It also made sense that those same gamers would like some updates to their rules...When design of this game first began, compatibility with existing products was one of my primary goals...So while the Pathfinder RPG is compatible with the 3.5 rules..."

Also from the Conversion Guide, under Spells:

Spells: On the whole, most spells can be used without any conversion at all, but there are a few notable exceptions.

Nowhere does it state the rule in question as an exception.

I think it's a bit rich to say that if Paizo doesn't cover every rule explicitly then their intention was to null it. And you're taking advantage of that ommission to OP your sneak attacks.

But like i've always said, houserule it how you wish.

the rule you are speaking of isn't even core. it's a sidebar in complete arcane. which is a splatbook. a spaltbook isn't even core. and the rules of a splatbook are merely houserules themselves, the only difference is that said splatbook houserule is published by the game makers and not written by a dungeon master themselves. and most splatbook rules started as houserules anyway. an "offical" splatbook is no less a houserule than a piece of 3rd party material. the only material that is not a house rule is the core book for a given game. which may or may not be altered by a dungeon master.

Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
the rule you are speaking of isn't even core. it's a sidebar in complete arcane. and any rule outside of core is merely a house rule.

Every rule is potentially a house rule. Even those in the Core RB.

Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
so the rule itself was merely a variant. and it was only made because wizards of the coast was afraid of what happens when somebody sneak attacks with an evocation spell. they also wanted the evocation school to remain useless too.

That's your opinion. Can you quote anyone from WotC saying that?

Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
why else did the arcane trickster lose caster levels?

They didn't. They lost one caster level. Every AT i knew went Unseen Seer to qualify. But that's also a houserule according to you.

Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
Why else was every rogue/caster PRC ludicrously underpowered?

Again, your opinion. AT's kick ass!

Regardless of all of that, the fact is it's a rule for all extra damage, not just sneak attacks.

Devilkiller wrote:

"Rules of the Game" article from 2004.

Skip Williams wrote:
Sometimes, you make multiple attacks with the same attack roll, such as when you use the Manyshot feat, or you make multiple attack rolls as part of the same attack, such as with the scorching ray spell. When you do so, only the first attack in the volley can be a sneak attack.

Oh. and this.

D&D 3.5 Faq wrote:

Can you use Manyshot with a sneak attack? If so, do all the arrows deal sneak attack damage?

You can sneak attack with Manyshot. If you do, only one arrow in the volley deals sneak attack damage.

And this.

Still think it was a houserule in 3.5?

+1 for ditching Imp Feint. it sucks.

Keep the sabres until you get the critical feats, then switch to dual kukris. Forget about the Double Scimitar, unless you can use Weapon Finesse with it.

Are you allowed 3.5 material?

Are you guys just running off on a tangent?

The Arcane Trickster's 10th level ability specifically states that it affects "Targets".

Aunasiel wrote:

Well the guide is very specific in the wording.

Pg 378
Surprise Spells: At 10th level, an arcane trickster can add her sneak attack damage to any spell that deals damage, if the targets are flat-footed.

Sorry, got distracted.

I agree that with this class ability all attacks of a magical volley would deal sneak attack damage.

3.5 errata shouldn't apply to PF-campaigns unless you're including 3.5 material relevant for that decision. I.e. unseen seer is a blast for an AT, but most core PF wouldn't include arcane seer's and hence I see no reason why a scorching ray shouldn't allow multiple SA. A rogue can get multiple SA with attacks, why shouldn't an AT do it with spells? It's after all his substitute from the brute attack.

Besides that, I truly believe that the AT in the long run is the superior rogue, not the superior wizard. Even before I've gotten my AT levels my Rogue/Wizard has been doing freakishly well. Ok some combats I've taken a very chilled, non-contributing approach, but on the other hand, I've earned the party more than 50% of its loot (Spider climb/invis/illusions/alter self + rogue skills = empty rich man houses) and my character has so far actually been the ONLY one managing to survive from level 1 (granted he has taken caution as the better part of valour approach a time or 7, but still...).

His recent pick-pocketing of mage, earning him a rod of fireball, also put him at the prime spot for damage dealing. He is only level 5, close to 6, and I can in no way see him getting any less powerful.

A lot of unattractive wizard options are shining brightly for the AT. Bonded object, 4 levels of AA (to have that anti-magic field on an arrow) and shape changing. Yes, 4 primary attacks with SA can definitely be worth it.

The AT is a very versatile character, like you said. Out of combat, they're as sneaky as most rogues, and have all but 4 skills on the list as class skills. Add in the high-as-possible intelligence such a character would have, and that's a lot of abilities without casting any spells at all.

Abraham Spalding said (maybe in another AT thread?) that most people don't seem to understand how to play one, and that's the main issue with it. If you're trying to TWF with it, you're going to be a sad little elf. Use a variety of scrolls and items, and you can overcome lots of obstacles using very few of your prepared spells as well as a wizard, or even a rogue.

51 to 61 of 61 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Arcane Trickster and Fireball All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Rules Questions