At 2nd Level, Rogues can take a feat called Minor Magic...
You've dabbled in a variety of tricks, gaining minor magical abilities from a particular tradition. Choose arcane, divine, occult, or primal magic and then two cantrips from the common cantrips available to that tradition.
I've been doing some looking around and it seems like the Spell attack DC for cantrips that do damage, such as produce flame, would come from my Charisma. (see Innate spells p. 302) Also, these cantrips will still auto heighten with my level like cantrips from actual spell casting classes.
I guess I'm just a little confused as to why someone would take this feat? Instead, You could just dabble in multi-classing in Sorcerer. At 2nd-level you could take the Sorcerer Dedication feat (p. 230). You still, technically, get to choose which tradition of spells your cantrips come from, but you are *also* trained in the bloodline's two skills. Plus you still get to use your Charisma as your primary casting mod. Not to mention Sorc Dedication is a prerequisite for further multiclassing in Sorcerer. (if you wanted) But Overall it seems like a better deal than minor magic, since you're also getting two free skills.
Is there a reason why someone should take minor magic? Is there something I'm missing!? It seems like a trap.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
You might plan to MC as something else and not care to wait until you have the Sorcerer dedication + two following feats.
Minor Magic exists for Rogues who don't have high enough mental stats to qualify for a caster MC (or the mental stats you do have don't line up with the tradition you want), don't want to take the extra feats required to exit an MC, and/or are only interested in utility rather than offensive spells.
That said, minor magic > magical trickster feels like a really obvious path on a surface level and I kind of don't like that it's actually a trap option because you'll never scale proficiency.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I guess I'm just a little confused as to why someone would take this feat?
They want more cantrips? Nothing stops you from taking this, the multiclass feat and Cantrip Expansion for 6 cantrips slots.
Now if you mean JUST it, you can get Shield and Detect Magic and use then without issue without worrying about proficiency or stat. It's also NOT a dedication feat, so it you want non-caster archetype, like Aldori Duelist, you can do so without worrying about the 3 feat minimum for archetypes.
I second this.
Like multi-classing, but with out all the flavor baggage, nor the pre-requisites.
Maybe a fourth racket?
An “Eldritch scoundrel” one. Although there already is a scoundrel
What is tripping me up with future rackets is they are all named for some kind of “underworld” role or role on a heist team
I clearly have not seen enough of that genre to readily think of what 2 or 3 more of those would be (that also have mechanical niches)
There is also an added element to consider being are future rackets going to fill out all the stats ? Int rogue would be fun but is surely mostly what an investigator would be. No clue on Wisdom (unless this is where inquisitor sits but unlikely) and I doubt there would be a con one at all unless it is poisoner
Idly, after puzzling on the lack of scaling proficiency I had an idea that I'm implementing as a Houserule.
Innate spells gain proficiency to match your highest Spellcasting DC, if you have one. So I think it's reasonable to have innate spells gain proficiency to match your Class DC if you don't have a higher casting DC, since that's kinda a martial equivalent. It's never higher than a caster's DC and caps lower, but it makes innate spells more viable on Martials.
That seems like a useful and suitable house rule; at the least it should be applied to Magical Trickster's rules text since that feat calls out "wielding innate magic" as a reason you would want to take that feat, which as it stands is simply untrue.
For MC options not all are conceptually appropriate for all characters. If you want "knows magic tricks" but not "learned magic through academic study, divine guidance, primal instincts, artistic inspiration, or magical nepotism" as part of your rogue's character the feat is more appropriate.
Nothing requires you to take a damage dealing cantrip that has a DC.
Detect Magic, Shield, Mage Hand, Message, and Guidance are all pretty darn good spells for a Rogue to have at his/her disposal, and probably of far more long term use than a damage dealing cantrip. A Rogue has other ways to do damage besides cantrips.
Yes. There are plenty of non-attack options. And being able to choose the spell list is nice. For example, a Rogue with Wizard MC could use Minor Magic to pick up cantrips like Guidance or Stabilize that aren't on the Arcane list.
Are spell attack rolls agile?
Are spell attack rolls agile?
Spell attacks don't have weapon properties and wouldn't get anything from agile anyways, so no. This is, of course, why you need Magical Trickster to sneak attack with spells, as they normally wouldn't qualify.