Nope remeber that Full round attacks (which is what you need to make those extra attaacks) arent multiple standard actions.
However you may talk to your GM if they allow 3.5 materail as the Complete Arcane book had a feat to allow what your wanting to do.
If you're using a wand to cast an attack spell (say Shocking Grasp), don't you need to have the other hand free (empty) to apply the spell?
It's kind of a grey area. I've never seen someone go to those lengths, generally I think it's assumed you either poke them with the wand, or just keep holding the wand in your hand and touch them with a finger.
Some DMs may be extremely strict about the touch rules, and say that holding the wand (or anything else) discharges the spell. In which case you'll need to have a hand free (with no gloves, rings, long sleeves, or held items) in order to keep from zapping yourself or your gear.
It could be a useful tactic for a rogue. In the flank position, Use Magic Device to activate the wand. The rogue only needs to hit the target's touch AC to deliver the spell, along with sneak attack damage.
Although at medium/high levels, Spell Resistance makes this less useful.
Sneak attack damage is only applied to weapon-damage rolls, and never to spell damage. In order to get the ability to use sneak-attack on spell damage, you would need to take the Arcane Trickster prestige class, and even then, it is limited to very few uses per day.
... the Complete Arcane book had a feat to allow what your wanting to do.
I believe it was called "Dual Wand Wielder". IIRC, as a full round action, you could use two wands, but the off-hand wand expended two charges. I remember "Craft Wand" was a prerequisite, but I don't remember any other details.
Mabven, I think you're wrong.
The 3.5 book Complete Arcane clarified the definition of "weapon-like spells", noting that any spell that uses an attack roll and delivers hit point damage is a candidate for sneak attack.
The arcane trickster's feature allows her to deliver sneak attack damage on spells that do not use an attack roll, such as Fireball.
A quick search of the forums turns up many people who support your position and none so far who oppose it, but I seem to remember reading somewhere in the core rulebook that you can not sneak attack with a spell. It seems a vivid memory to me, because I have used sneak attack with spells in 3.5, and think I remember specifically looking for the answer to whether it still worked, and finding that it does not. But I have not found the supporting rule now, and am not finding any support on the forums, nor a definitive ruling from one of the developers in the forums, so I am comfortable saying perhaps my memory is flawed.
So wait....a 1st lvl Wiz/1st lvl Rogue can use Sneak attack to Magic Missile as long as it is within 30'?
Magic Missile does not have an attack roll, so no. (Unless he has Surprise Spells)
But for Scorching Ray, sure.
Sneak attack applies to any attack you make with an attack roll against a foe denied their dexterity.
AKA: There's no difference between doing 3 scorching rays and three thrown daggers as far as sneak attack cares.
|
If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from her attack, she can strike a vital spot for extra damage.
The rogue's attack deals extra damage (called "precision damage") anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target. This extra damage is 1d6 at 1st level, and increases by 1d6 every two rogue levels thereafter. Should the rogue score a critical hit with a sneak attack, this extra damage is not multiplied. Ranged attacks can count as sneak attacks only if the target is within 30 feet.
With a weapon that deals nonlethal damage (like a sap, whip, or an unarmed strike), a rogue can make a sneak attack that deals nonlethal damage instead of lethal damage. She cannot use a weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage in a sneak attack, not even with the usual –4 penalty.
The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot. A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment.
I don't see anywhere in Sneak Attack that states you have to make a die roll....
|
|
It's not *directly* because spells have attack rolls. Spells that have attack rolls are called "Weapon-like spells" and are treated as weapons for the purposes of how they interact with spells, abilities, feats, etc (you can take weapon focus for them, inspire courage can boost their damage, etc).
*Because* they're treated as weapons, sneak attack can apply. As written sneak attack applies to all things that deal damage because it neglects to say it must be a weapon or that it must require an attack roll. However, RAI is that it only applies to weapons and weapon-likes (which ends up being equivalent to "requires an attack roll"). You wouldn't let a rogue sneak attack with a fireball because (sans class ability) that's silly, but since the rules treat weapon-like spells as being weapons sneak attack *must* apply to those if you let it apply at all.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Note that the CRB FAQ also states that you can rake Weapon Specialization (ray) or Improved Critical (ray), and you can crit with such spells (but not with things like fireball). A claim that ray-style spells could do all that but were not eligible for Sneak Attack would be questionable at best.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I understand where you are coming from with weapon like spells, but why is Magic Missile singled out here? Just because it is the only targeted damage spell doesn't have an attack roll? I thought that was factored in by the lower damage?
Aside from "dem's da rulez", the thematic reason for this is that Sneak Attack represents aiming for a vital area or weak spot. Aiming is represented by an attack roll. Magic Missile is not something you can aim; the rogue has no control over what part of the body is hit by the spell. Scorching Ray, on the other hand, can be deliberately aimed at the crotch or whatever.
Doing lowered damage does not get it a free pass. Magic missile is not a weapon like spell.
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.
If sneak attack applied to all spells that did damage this ability would not be needed, therefore there must be spells that it must apply to and others that it does not.
We do know that rogues being a martial type class use weapons so sneak attack applies with weapons. Some spells act as weapons due to their mechanics, therefore those spells should qualify for sneak attack.
edit:
Spells as Sneak Attacks
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.
Before the "this is not 3.5 argument comes up":
The wording of the 3.5 and Pathfinder sneak attack read pretty much the same way.|
|
It's not *directly* because spells have attack rolls. Spells that have attack rolls are called "Weapon-like spells" and are treated as weapons for the purposes of how they interact with spells, abilities, feats, etc (you can take weapon focus for them, inspire courage can boost their damage, etc).
*Because* they're treated as weapons, sneak attack can apply. As written sneak attack applies to all things that deal damage because it neglects to say it must be a weapon or that it must require an attack roll. However, RAI is that it only applies to weapons and weapon-likes (which ends up being equivalent to "requires an attack roll"). You wouldn't let a rogue sneak attack with a fireball because (sans class ability) that's silly, but since the rules treat weapon-like spells as being weapons sneak attack *must* apply to those if you let it apply at all.
A side-note here.
Sadly, "spells that have attack rolls" are not weapon-like spells. A weapon-like spell is a spell that actually creates a magical effect that acts exactly like a weapon (Flame Blade for example).
The difference is important because you cannot, for example, use Arcane Strike with a Ray (as it is not a weapon-like spell).
In other words, if your feat, spell, whatever, enhances your attack roll, il will work with any spell that requires one (such as a Ray). But if it enhances your weapon, it will only work with a weapon-like spell.
|
|
As ShadowcatX noted, but I will add one other thing: A spell that creates a weapon is NOT a weapon-like spell. It is just a weapon. A weapon-like spell uses either (Touch) or (Ray/Ranged Touch) as the two weapon options (as those are the only two "weapon" types for spells). A spell that summons a weapon would be treated as a normal weapon of that type, except where the spell notes differently. Thus, a Flame Blade would be treated as a scimitar for all purposes (crit range, specializations, etc) except as noted by the spell (damage, damage type, hits touch AC and no str to damage).
FAQ touching on Rays and Weapon-like Spells.
Turns out that Spiritual Weapon is a weapon-like spell.
FAQ on rays and Weapon Specialization.
Anyways, if a spell requires an attack roll that you are personally doing, you can get sneak attack with it. So no sneak attack with a spiritual weapon or summons.
|
|
I guess we need more precise terms here.
Maybe "weapon-spells" for melee and ranged touch and weapon-like for things that imitate/summon actual weapons? (My prior post was using weapon-like for the former definition, not the latter.)
Under this definition scorching ray would be a weapon-spell (it is its own weapon type: ranged touch), while flame blade would be a weapon-like spell (it is treated as a particular weapon type, in this case scimitar)