|
Feinting isn't an end, it's a means to an end (damage). No one else cares about feinting. It either eats your whole feat load or ruins your full attack and everyone else hits better than the rogue anyways.
Having bluff is nice, of course, but feint is absolute garbage [...]
I agree 100% with this statement. I have never built a rogue with improved feint as I despise having to rely on feinting to get the sneak attack in. I have always "cheated" in the sense that I take a hit a lower level and take things that appear useless (Dodge, Mobility, etc.) so that I can be more effective later through the reliance of a friendly sorcerer or wand (greater invisibility). At much higher levels (13+) where every foe and their dog has True Seeing, then I rely on magicks that let me get to flanking range ASAP.
Idk, I'd rather not be dependent on limited resources for scouting.
Also message + silence doesn't work, you can't make noise nor can you even cast message while silenced as a bard.
EDIT: Oh zone of silence. nvm. Still lots of 4th level spells competing for that slot.
117 dmg in one round at level 20? Wow thats low.
117 dmg in one round at level 20? Wow thats low.
32% of the mobs health and 4 strength damage just isn't good enough?
OK
Level 20 archer. Ranger. Swift action instant enemy.
Deadly Aim:-6 atk +12 dmg
Many shot
Rapid shot
Clustered shots
Assume 20 str and +5 adaptive bow
28 dex
(+6 dex str belt)
Full attack routine (only dex, BAB, favored enemy with instant enemy, and enh bonus)
36/36/31/26/21
Regular damage damage
d8+32
Many shot dmg
2d8+64
If the first three shots hit on a full attack expect 4d8+128 damage. Haste adds another accurate shot, while Haste doesn't benefit a rogue unless they are ridiculously lucky to be full attacking a sneak attack.
Damage is totaled before damage reduction because of clustered shot.
This is with just one swift action of self buffing. At this point Gravity bow is 20 minutes and makes each d8 into 2d6. Bracers of Falcon aim or whatever for 4000 gold to give another +1 atk and 19-20 crit range. Various +1 bane arrows. Plenty else to buff up. Lets also remember the Ranger is better at stealth than rogues since you get favored terrain.
Yeah, an unreliable 117 dmg and 4 str damage is pretty bad.
Yeah, an unreliable 117 dmg and 4 str damage is pretty bad.
Unreliable? How so?
NOTE: At least the rogue is dependent on 3rd level spell slots in a 4 spell level class.
Unreliable because sneak attack. A 20th level Ranger can cast instant enemy 4 times and an additional time for each pearl of power. Assuming the ranger isnt a terrible player he will be using them only when against a non favored and dangerous enemy.
Note that a Ranger makes a better assassin than a rogue. Higher stealth check+can full attack someone for farther than 30 ft away.
In a 4 man party of halfway decent players the Rogue has no unique trick. He cannot do anything special, hence he is eclipsed by the game itself.
Unreliable because sneak attack.
Why? Is this the blur/elemental/ooze/Protean/incorporeal hunting only campaign? Because if so the ranger is probably always fighting a favored enemy and doesn't even need instant enemy.
In a 4 man party of halfway decent players the Rogue has no unique trick. He cannot do anything special, hence he is eclipsed by the game itself.
Currently in a party as a rogue with an inquisitor, wizard, druid, and a synthesist summoner. They are halfway decent players and what you said just isn't true.
Minor magic absolutely does qualify you for arcane strike. The prerequisite FAQ is not limited to PrC's. SKR made it a point to say that minor magic and arcane strike was nearly used as an example in that very FAQ.
Sorry, that doesn't mesh with the rules. The core rules calls out Arcane, Divine, and Spell-like as being different things. Hell, even the FAQ says they can't, if indirectly, in the FAQ where it asks if you can use Metamagic feats on SLAs, and it says "No. Metamagic feats specifically only affect spells, not spell-like abilities" (behold the brilliance of the FAQ that can contradict itself all over the place).
Arcane strike is clear. You must be able to cast arcane spells. Minor/Major magic does not qualify you for Arcane Strike. The rule say that SLAs are not spells, nor are they arcane or divine. They are a different thing. They are not spells. Are they similar to spells? Yes. Are they spells? No. Are they arcane? No. Are they divine? No.
In a 4 man party of halfway decent players the Rogue has no unique trick. He cannot do anything special, hence he is eclipsed by the game itself.Currently in a party as a rogue with an inquisitor, wizard, druid, and a synthesist summoner. They are halfway decent players and what you said just isn't true.
In that case I would argue that the party in question isn't halfway decent if the three of them together don't completely eclipse your roll. That or they are being nice and doing their hardest not to eclipse you.
Unreliable as more
How often are you sneak attacking? With how much assistance? Are enemies mobile? Does the enemy have Barbarian levels? Fortification? Immune to precision? Cant be flat footed? Cant be flanked? Do you even want to be close to monsters that can fear you easily with your weak will save?
Sorry, that doesn't mesh with the rules.
Yeah a lot of FAQs do that.
As it stands though, minor magic does let you grab arcane strike. Personally I consider it a trap option anyways.
Sorry, that doesn't mesh with the rules.Yeah a lot of FAQs do that.
As it stands though, minor magic does let you grab arcane strike. Personally I consider it a trap option anyways.
No, it doesn't, because it requires you to cast arcane spells. SLAs are not arcane spells. You have to meet the prerequisite some other way.
EDIT: Bards on the other hand DO cast arcane spells. So they can take the feat. And it's hard to call a single feat that lets you drop a +1-5 extra damage on all attacks a trap option. It's a hell of a lot better than Weapon Specialization.
Anyway the point is that 117 damage in one round is only impressive if you're a rogue.
How often are you sneak attacking? With how much assistance? Are enemies mobile? Does the enemy have Barbarian levels? Fortification? Immune to precision? Cant be flat footed? Cant be flanked? Do you even want to be close to monsters that can fear you easily with your weak will save?
Every round. Little. Yes. Not yet, I would have to feint those. No. No. Most of them. This comes up a lot because of things like walls and corners, it's why I advocate feint builds. Yes.
Anyway the point is that 117 damage in one round is only impressive if you're a rogue.
You keep ignoring the 4 strength damage. Stop that. It's important.
Sorry, that doesn't mesh with the rules.Yeah a lot of FAQs do that.
As it stands though, minor magic does let you grab arcane strike. Personally I consider it a trap option anyways.
No, it doesn't, because it requires you to cast arcane spells. SLAs are not arcane spells. You have to meet the prerequisite some other way.
EDIT: Bards on the other hand DO cast arcane spells. So they can take the feat. And it's hard to call a single feat that lets you drop a +1-5 extra damage on all attacks a trap option. It's a hell of a lot better than Weapon Specialization.
Well it does. I'm trusting the devs over your opinion of how the rules should work.
It is a trap option because it cost you a feat and a talent for something that is worse than bleeding attack. Which your build as a rogue is so tight that you are going to have to pick between the two. And if you plan on not wasting minor magic you'll build off of it to get dispelling attack, which is OK, I guess. You lose a lot for it.
1 |Combat Expertise, Skill Focus(Bluff)
2 |Finesse Rogue
3 |Deceitful
4 |Combat Trick(Improved Feint)
5 |Skill Focus(UMD)
6 |Minor Magic(Prestidigitation)
7 |Arcane Strike
8 |Major Magic(Silent Image)
9 |Greater Feint
10|Skill Mastery(Bluff, UMD, Stealth, Disable Device, Acrobatics)
11|Extra Rogue Talent(Opportunist)
12|Familiar
13|Improved Familiar(Small Air Elemental)
14|Crippling Strike
15|Extra Rogue talent(Dispelling Attack)
16|Feat(Combat Reflexes)
17|Extra Rogue Talent(Hard to fool)
18|Unwitting Ally
19|Quick Draw
20|Skill Mastery
I just don't like how that kind of build turns out.
Sorry, that doesn't mesh with the rules.Yeah a lot of FAQs do that.
As it stands though, minor magic does let you grab arcane strike. Personally I consider it a trap option anyways.
No, it doesn't, because it requires you to cast arcane spells. SLAs are not arcane spells. You have to meet the prerequisite some other way.
Ashiel I believe you're wrong on this one. For the Barghest to be able to take Dimensional Dervish he would have to be able to cast dimension door. The FAQ ruled that yes Spell-like abilities allow you to qualify for stuff that requires you to cast. Link
Further theres a chart that tells you whether a spell-like ability is arcane or divine I've yet to find it but give me the benefit of the doubt for the moment.
EDIT: Found it.
Well it does. I'm trusting the devs over your opinion of how the rules should work.
I don't really care. Your precious FAQ also says it doesn't work because the FAQ specifically says that SLAs aren't spells. So even by the FAQ it doesn't work because the feat requires you to be able to cast "Arcane spells".
It is a trap option because it cost you a feat and a talent for something that is worse than bleeding attack. Which your build as a rogue is so tight that you are going to have to pick between the two. And if you plan on not wasting minor magic you'll build off of it to get dispelling attack, which is OK, I guess. You lose a lot for it.
Oh, for a rogue it would indeed be a trap option. Much like rogues themselves. But that's part of the reason Bards tend to eclipse them. It's not a trap option for a bard. Not only can they take it, but they can take it when they want to and it scales with their level and always works. Since they have better to-hit than rogues and don't have to rely on sneak attack to do decent damage, they tend to deal more damage to boot.
Ashiel I believe you're wrong on this one. For the Barghest to be able to take Dimensional Dervish he would have to be able to cast dimension door. The FAQ ruled that yes Spell-like abilities allow you to qualify for stuff that requires you to cast. Link
Further theres a chart that tells you whether a spell-like ability is arcane or divine I've yet to find it but give me the benefit of the doubt for the moment.
Dimensional dervish makes no distinction on how you cast dimension door. If it said you had to be able to cast dimension door as an arcane spell then no, it wouldn't work. The prerequisite on Arcane Strike is that they must be able to cast Arcane Spells.
SLAs are not spells. Even the FAQ says so. So you're not casting Arcane Spells.
Otherwise 90% of outsiders should have Arcane Strike because there is literally no reason for them to not have it. All demons, devils, hags, etc. All of them should have Arcane Strike. Especially since many of them revolve around using lots of natural attacks and have high caster levels.
Minor magic absolutely does qualify you for arcane strike. The prerequisite FAQ is not limited to PrC's. SKR made it a point to say that minor magic and arcane strike was nearly used as an example in that very FAQ.Sorry, that doesn't mesh with the rules. The core rules calls out Arcane, Divine, and Spell-like as being different things. Hell, even the FAQ says they can't, if indirectly, in the FAQ where it asks if you can use Metamagic feats on SLAs, and it says "No. Metamagic feats specifically only affect spells, not spell-like abilities" (behold the brilliance of the FAQ that can contradict itself all over the place).
Arcane strike is clear. You must be able to cast arcane spells. Minor/Major magic does not qualify you for Arcane Strike. The rule say that SLAs are not spells, nor are they arcane or divine. They are a different thing. They are not spells. Are they similar to spells? Yes. Are they spells? No. Are they arcane? No. Are they divine? No.
The game designers disagree with youMinor magic absolutely does qualify you for arcane strike. The prerequisite FAQ is not limited to PrC's. SKR made it a point to say that minor magic and arcane strike was nearly used as an example in that very FAQ.Sorry, that doesn't mesh with the rules. The core rules calls out Arcane, Divine, and Spell-like as being different things. Hell, even the FAQ says they can't, if indirectly, in the FAQ where it asks if you can use Metamagic feats on SLAs, and it says "No. Metamagic feats specifically only affect spells, not spell-like abilities" (behold the brilliance of the FAQ that can contradict itself all over the place).
Arcane strike is clear. You must be able to cast arcane spells. Minor/Major magic does not qualify you for Arcane Strike. The rule say that SLAs are not spells, nor are they arcane or divine. They are a different thing. They are not spells. Are they similar to spells? Yes. Are they spells? No. Are they arcane? No. Are they divine? No.
You should quote SKR, rather than link for TLDR people:
ZanThrax: "Does this mean that a Rogue with Minor Magic does qualify for Arcane Strike then?"
SKR: "ZanThrax, yes (we almost included that as an example in the FAQ answer)."
The game designers disagree with youMinor magic absolutely does qualify you for arcane strike. The prerequisite FAQ is not limited to PrC's. SKR made it a point to say that minor magic and arcane strike was nearly used as an example in that very FAQ.Sorry, that doesn't mesh with the rules. The core rules calls out Arcane, Divine, and Spell-like as being different things. Hell, even the FAQ says they can't, if indirectly, in the FAQ where it asks if you can use Metamagic feats on SLAs, and it says "No. Metamagic feats specifically only affect spells, not spell-like abilities" (behold the brilliance of the FAQ that can contradict itself all over the place).
Arcane strike is clear. You must be able to cast arcane spells. Minor/Major magic does not qualify you for Arcane Strike. The rule say that SLAs are not spells, nor are they arcane or divine. They are a different thing. They are not spells. Are they similar to spells? Yes. Are they spells? No. Are they arcane? No. Are they divine? No.
You should quote SKR, rather than link for TLDR people:
ZanThrax: "Does this mean that a Rogue with Minor Magic does qualify for Arcane Strike then?"
SKR: "ZanThrax, yes (we almost included that as an example in the FAQ answer)."
My guess is that those folks who were convinced I was lying when I said SKR has weighed in on this would not take my "quoted" word for it and would want the link anyway. YMMV.
The game designers disagree with youMinor magic absolutely does qualify you for arcane strike. The prerequisite FAQ is not limited to PrC's. SKR made it a point to say that minor magic and arcane strike was nearly used as an example in that very FAQ.Sorry, that doesn't mesh with the rules. The core rules calls out Arcane, Divine, and Spell-like as being different things. Hell, even the FAQ says they can't, if indirectly, in the FAQ where it asks if you can use Metamagic feats on SLAs, and it says "No. Metamagic feats specifically only affect spells, not spell-like abilities" (behold the brilliance of the FAQ that can contradict itself all over the place).
Arcane strike is clear. You must be able to cast arcane spells. Minor/Major magic does not qualify you for Arcane Strike. The rule say that SLAs are not spells, nor are they arcane or divine. They are a different thing. They are not spells. Are they similar to spells? Yes. Are they spells? No. Are they arcane? No. Are they divine? No.
The game designers also agree with me.
No. A spell-like ability is not a spell, having a spell-like ability is not part of a class's spell list, and therefore doesn't give the creature the ability to activate spell completion or spell trigger items.
No. Metamagic feats specifically only affect spells, not spell-like abilities. Also, spell-like abilities do not have spell slots, so you can't adjust the effective spell slot of a spell-like ability.
Meanwhile...
Arcane Strike (Combat)
You draw upon your arcane power to enhance your weapons with magical energy.
Prerequisite: Ability to cast arcane spells.
Benefit: As a swift action, you can imbue your weapons with a fraction of your power. For 1 round, your weapons deal +1 damage and are treated as magic for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction. For every five caster levels you possess, this bonus increases by +1, to a maximum of +5 at 20th level.
The game designers also agree with me.The game designers disagree with youMinor magic absolutely does qualify you for arcane strike. The prerequisite FAQ is not limited to PrC's. SKR made it a point to say that minor magic and arcane strike was nearly used as an example in that very FAQ.Sorry, that doesn't mesh with the rules. The core rules calls out Arcane, Divine, and Spell-like as being different things. Hell, even the FAQ says they can't, if indirectly, in the FAQ where it asks if you can use Metamagic feats on SLAs, and it says "No. Metamagic feats specifically only affect spells, not spell-like abilities" (behold the brilliance of the FAQ that can contradict itself all over the place).
Arcane strike is clear. You must be able to cast arcane spells. Minor/Major magic does not qualify you for Arcane Strike. The rule say that SLAs are not spells, nor are they arcane or divine. They are a different thing. They are not spells. Are they similar to spells? Yes. Are they spells? No. Are they arcane? No. Are they divine? No.
You being serious? I could understand if it was JJ but SKR?
Dude, you can hem and haw all you want. SKR said it's legal, he says also that the design team almost used it as a specific example. Your need to be right will not outweigh the actual wrongness that you are.
Dude, you can hem and haw all you want. SKR said it's legal, he says also that the design team almost used it as a specific example. Your need to be right will not outweigh the actual wrongness that you are.
It's not about being right, it's about being logical and consistent (though logical equates to rightness most of the time).
This is what is happening.
The rules say that A is not B.
The FAQ says that A is not B.
The feat says you must have B.
Ergo, A does not qualify for B.
This is not complex.
Oh I can list off some of the things that don't make sense but are somehow a thing to the devs
1. Flat footed and dex denied being different things
2. Magic items letting you grab feats and other stuff on level up (My GM is thoroughly confused on this. He just let's people grab whatever feat they want and can only use it when they meet prerequisites. My rogue doesn't make use of this.)
3. SLAs being treated as casting spells (why not just write dimension dervish better?)
4. Greater feint being poorly worded (We just run it the way JJ does, even though that is far less powerful than the RAW)
5. Mounted Combat FAQs
6. Crane wing nerf
Dude, you can hem and haw all you want. SKR said it's legal, he says also that the design team almost used it as a specific example. Your need to be right will not outweigh the actual wrongness that you are.It's not about being right, it's about being logical and consistent (though logical equates to rightness most of the time).
This is what is happening.
The rules say that A is not B.
The FAQ says that A is not B.
The feat says you must have B.
Ergo, A does not qualify for B.This is not complex.
You have a design team member answering this specific question. Does x allow y? Yes.
There is no ambiguity, there is no extrapolation, there is no question to the authority of the person making the statement. SKR explicitly states "Yes," minor magic qualifies you for arcane strike.You may not agree with how they got to that point but it doesn't change the fact that you are incorrect about the rules in this matter.
Dude, you can hem and haw all you want. SKR said it's legal, he says also that the design team almost used it as a specific example. Your need to be right will not outweigh the actual wrongness that you are.It's not about being right, it's about being logical and consistent (though logical equates to rightness most of the time).
This is what is happening.
The rules say that A is not B.
The FAQ says that A is not B.
The feat says you must have B.
Ergo, A does not qualify for B.This is not complex.
Who cares about consistency!? Word-of-God says it works. Us mere mortals are the ones that need to figure out why.
No well thought out argument will counter SKR explicit-ally saying that it works.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh I can list off some of the things that don't make sense but are somehow a thing to the devs
1. Flat footed and dex denied being different things
2. Magic items letting you grab feats and other stuff on level up (My GM is thoroughly confused on this. He just let's people grab whatever feat they want and can only use it when they meet prerequisites. My rogue doesn't make use of this.)
3. SLAs being treated as casting spells (why not just write dimension dervish better?)
4. Greater feint being poorly worded (We just run it the way JJ does, even though that is far less powerful than the RAW)
5. Mounted Combat FAQs
6. Crane wing nerf
But seriously. Sometimes they'll post stuff like "We needed to tone down the Investigator since it's stronger than the Rogue." I can't help but facepalm sometimes.
Oh I can list off some of the things that don't make sense but are somehow a thing to the devs
1. Flat footed and dex denied being different things
The rules do this as well. Flat footed prevents you from making AoOs for example. There are also many cases where you can be denied Dex-to-AC versus specific opponents or under specific conditions while not being denied Dex-to-AC in other situations.
2. Magic items letting you grab feats and other stuff on level up (My GM is thoroughly confused on this. He just let's people grab whatever feat they want and can only use it when they meet prerequisites. My rogue doesn't make use of this.)
It's odd, yes, but it's at least in the rules. Though you lose access to those feats if you no longer meet the prerequisites for them (such as if an item brings your Int to 13, you take Combat Expertise, then later the item is sundered).
3. SLAs being treated as casting spells (why not just write dimension dervish better?)
This seems to be contested even inside the FAQ. However the core rules does refer to "casting" of spell-like abilities though distinguishes them from actual spells in more than one instance. There's nothing wrong with Dimensional Dervish since you can cast dimension door as a spell-like ability. The feat only cares about A) casting it, B) it being dimension door.
However, at no point does that mean that a SLA is now a spell. It never says that. It was never required to. The rules do not say it is. In fact the rules draw a clear distinction between spells and spell-like abilities (and also between arcane and divine spells).
Even the FAQ says that SLAs are not spells. Arcane Strike requires you to be able to cast arcane SPELLS. It is not complicated. A mistake has been made.
So we have.
A) The actual rules (the part that matters) making a distinction between spells and SLAs.
B) The FAQ (goofy as it often is) also acknowledging that SLAs are not spells.
Yet you guys want to act all big and ugly about it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ashiel I don't have a dog in this fight, but the SLA's allowing you to qualify for Prestige Classes wouldn't work by your reasoning as well except the Devs explicitly say it does.
But I do agree with you.
Word of God says it does.
The rules of the game says it doesn't.
This has happened numerous times too. Mounted Combat got busted by Word of God, but worked okay without it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dude, you can hem and haw all you want. SKR said it's legal, he says also that the design team almost used it as a specific example. Your need to be right will not outweigh the actual wrongness that you are.It's not about being right, it's about being logical and consistent (though logical equates to rightness most of the time).
This is what is happening.
The rules say that A is not B.
The FAQ says that A is not B.
The feat says you must have B.
Ergo, A does not qualify for B.This is not complex.
Who cares about consistency!? Word-of-God says it works. Us mere mortals are the ones that need to figure out why.
No well thought out argument will counter SKR explicit-ally saying that it works.
SKR doesn't even know how stuff works sometimes. Were you around when he tried to explain how unarmed strikes work, or how flurry of blows worked?
It was both sad and hilarious. He literally suggested that you needed to cast magic fang on each limb of a monk if you wanted to flurry with your unarmed strikes.
Ashiel I don't have a dog in this fight, but the SLA's allowing you to qualify for Prestige Classes wouldn't work by your reasoning as well except the Devs explicitly say it does.
But I do agree with you.
Word of God says it does.
The rules of the game says it doesn't.
This has happened numerous times too. Mounted Combat got busted by Word of God, but worked okay without it.
Indeed. But we have the rules. Anyone who's using the rules is going to use the rules. When you look on the PRD, you get the rules. When you open up your rulebook, you get the rules. By the rules these things are true. It's only if you want the dev's house rules that it matters further.
By the rules it doesn't work. If a rule is unclear, asking the opinion of someone else is a nice idea. But it's still the rules. Unless it is errata'd, it's still the rules. If you look it up on the PRD, SLAs are still not spells.
The rules do this as well. Flat footed prevents you from making AoOs for example. There are also many cases where you can be denied Dex-to-AC versus specific opponents or under specific conditions while not being denied Dex-to-AC in other situations.Oh I can list off some of the things that don't make sense but are somehow a thing to the devs
1. Flat footed and dex denied being different things
Oh the rules do it well now after some errata, but ponder this: "I don't have my dexterity bonus against X because I have trouble reacting to X, but I can still perform AOOs against X somehow..."
Like I can feint a foe, but if I punch them without improved unarmed strike I still generate an AOO.Now picture that working IRL. You get a person off balance to the point they can't make any move to dodge you and try to trip them, but then with cat-like reflexes they stab you in the stomach.