Early Level Survival ... with an Arcane Trickster

[Machine_Kiss]

Arcane Tricksters are a fun & popular character archetype. And at higher levels, the Rogue/Mage synergy really pays off in terms of versatility and damage efficiency (+7d6 SA attached to cantrips like Acid Splash).

Problem is, an organic-grown AT has an immense amount of trouble surviving those 1st 8-9 levels of awkward "non-synergy" levels due to horrible BAB, low SA dice, meager amounts of spells, & low level spells (comparative to the straight primary spellcasters in your party).

Many theories abound on how to make those early levels more productive and more survivable. One of the more interesting ones are the Trickster "Archer" angle. Going the Strongheart Halfling direction (+1 attack due to size), amping up DEX, and using low-level self-buffs like Cat's Grace to improve BAB to a respectable range. All the while using your SA dice as damage add-ons for your arrows and other auxiliary spells like Spider Climb to make your attacks get better angles and be harder to oppose. I've seen people post the numbers & conjectural scenarios ... and I have playtested them myself ... and it holds to be a promising combat style for early level AT's.

Unfortunately, it needs feat enhancement. And that means looking at feats like Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, & Rapid Shot. A Strongheart Halfling with a traditional Rog3/Wiz5 baseline gets 9 feats in his pre-Epic career. And ultimately, he'll get those plum 9th level spells at level 20. He'd also like to use his feats to make his spellcasting stronger and more versatile, using spell selection and skill ranks to make his Rogue-side more powerful. So, using 2 of 9 feats for early level combat efficacy seems like a small price to pay.

But you know ... the whole archery concept seems just ... weird. Especially with that horrific BAB of yours. But you only get so many Lesser Sonic Orbs and Melf's Acid Arrows to cast in those early levels. And you need some spell slots allocated to utility and Rogue-support spells. So that Bow is looking to be the sweetest combat alternative for you, as melee Sneak-Attacking (with your low CON and HP) is a complete no-no.

Of the 9 feat slots I mentioned earlier, the only "de rigeur" AT feats that every AT should have is Improved Initiative, a Craft Feat (CWI, Wands, or Staffs), and Quicken Spell. Others are all optional, based on your style of play, party composite, & other campaign ideosynchracies. Although feats like Energy Affinity (Energy Substitutions replacement in the MB book), Empower Spell, Energy Admixture, Silent Spell, Extend Spell, Spell Penetration/GSP, etc. are all viable options. Spellcasting Prodigy is headed for nerf-ville come next month, so that feat is being put on hold until I can see the final version.

For those of you who have not played an AT at those levels, don't even think of bypassing Rogue Evasion with expedited builds such as Rog1 / Wiz5 / GuildThief1. Rogue Evasion will save your life countless times. There's a reason why a Ring of Evasion costs so much in the DMG. Enemy Fireballs abound plenty in levels 5 to 10. The Guild Thief option can work only if you start your character at much higher levels and you have the gold to buy a Ring of Evasion (which is a smart idea).

Anyway ... I'm looking for insight and feedback from you Folks on ways to address these awkward early levels of the AT.

I'm especially intrigued as to if you think the Archer angle has viability.

Thanks for your time!

[Username17]

at higher levels, the Rogue/Mage synergy really pays off in terms of versatility and damage efficiency (+7d6 SA attached to cantrips like Acid Splash).

Um... no. While it sounds very impressive to be able to do an average of 26.6 points of damage with "only a 0th level spell", remember that you are at least an 18th level character when this happens. That means that regular warrior types are doing more damage than that without using a spell at all - just by poking things with their standard attack.

In fact, you are giving up 3 caster levels for this dubious priviledge. That means that instead of being a Wizard 5 / Rogue 3 / Arcane Trickster 10 - you could just be an 18th level Wizard, and have 4 extra 9th level spells.

Assuming that you have 4 major events happen every day, you could cast Summon Monster IX during every single one of them (which in 3rd edition took the crown of "worst spell in the entire game" over such wretched entries as "Find Traps" and "Vipergout") - and get a Wastrilith or a Monadic Deva on your team. So you have to ask yourself: is the ability spend virtually nothing in order to get the kind of damage out put that characters of your level are expected to get by expending actually nothing worth losing the help of some CR 17 monstrosity for a short period whenever you want it?

I would say that no, it isn't.

While Wizard/Rogue is a popular and entertaining combo - it sucks past about level 3 and doesn't ever really recover. The Arcane Trickster class only keeps you from falling even farther behind - it does not actually allow you to catch up, and thus never ever "pays off".

Yeah, Arcane trickster characters are boned at mid levels. They are also boned at high levels. A 20th level Rogue or a 20th level Wizard is in all ways superior to the bastard hybrid character that you get by getting to 20th level as an Arcane Trickster. Remember, if you went straight Rogue and took the Leadership feat and were followed around by a Wizard - the companion Wizard would be a more powerful spellcaster than you would be if you had split your levels and gone Arcane Trickster.

The PrC suxxorz, the fact that you've noticed that there is no possible way to get into the class organically without putting your thumb into the eye of the rest of the party is actually the least of your concerns here. There is no light at the end of this tunnel, there is no silver lining, it just sucks.

-Username17

[da_chicken]

Except for the fact that the Wizard cohort would advance slow as molasses. And "upgrading" the cohort would reset his magic items.

The class is only good if your DM doesn't allow Leadership, you don't have a Wizard, and you don't have a Rogue. Or if you're a Rogue/Assassin. Then its just kinda amusing.

Still, as a hybrid, you should expect to be less powerful in areas of specialists.

But Rogue PrC suck. We knew that already.

[Lago_AM3P]

And it's pretty much the best one, too.

Other than the Ninja of the Crescent Moon, have there ever been any rogue-geared PrCs that weren't a total bag of ass?

[da_chicken]

Actually, I like the Skullclan Hunter from the MiniH. Amusingly enough, it's another hybrid PrC. This one would work well in a campaign with more so many undead that rogues become totally ineffective in combat.

FRUE's Telflammar Shadowlord is ok.

But the Rogue levels 11-20 are pretty much a PrC all in themselves, what with the random class-exclusive benefits.

[Username17]

Except for the fact that the Wizard cohort would advance slow as molasses.

What? I mean, that statement doesn't even make any sense at all.

Fact 1: The Wizard Cohort is 2 levels behind you.
Fact 2: The Wizard Cohort gains a proportional XP amount based upon your earnings.
Fact 3: If the Wizard catches up to you, he stops gaining XP instead.
Fact 4: It costs less XP to go up a lower level than a higher level.

So if you are in a 4 person party and are 18th level, your cohort is 16th level. When you beat a CR 18 encounter, you earn 1/4 of 5,400 XP. So you get 1350 XP. The Cohort is 16th level, so he gets16/18ths of that amount - 1200 even.

Sounds bad, right? Wrong! That Cohort is only 16th level, so he gains a level when he picks up 16,000 XP. You are 18th level - you go up when you get 18,000 XP.

1350 XP is seven and a half percent of a level for you. 1200 XP is exactly seven and a half percent of a level for him.

Unless one of you loses a level or starts spending XP for spells or magic items - the Cohort gains levels at exactly the same rate you do. How this corresponds to him gaining levels "slow as molasses" is beyond me.

-Username17

[da_chicken]

Huh. Guess I never noticed the XP rate change. I was thinking of the stupid 1/2 share 3.0 form.

[Jack_Lurch]

FRUE's Telflammar Shadowlord is ok.

If you have the Shadowwalker template, it's okay. If not, you languish for four (I think?) levels in Shadowdancer to get the Shadow Leap ability.

-Jack

[Username17]

Huh. Guess I never noticed the XP rate change. I was thinking of the stupid 1/2 share 3.0 form.

At two levels down, 1/2 XP is just as generous.

Once again, you are 18th level, he is 16th. He counts as half a party member. There are presumably 3 other 18th level PCs running around.

So you divide your XP accumulation by 4.5, he divides his by 9. So when you kick over a CR 18 bounce - you get your share of 5,400 XP - which is 1200 even. But he's only 16th level, so he gets his share of 9,600 - which is 1067.

And he still needs 16,000 XP to go up a level - and you need 18,000. 1200 is one fifteenth of a level for you, 1067 XP is one fifteenth of a level for him. You still go up levels at exactly the same time.

The only reason why Cohorts were rising slower than you is because they had their XP point set down two levels below you and could be 1 level below you iwhen recruited. In 3.5, Cohorts are recruited 2 levels down, and thus would gain levels ar the same rate as you regardless of which calculation you used.

-Username17

-Username17

[da_chicken]

In 3.0, if you remember, XP was determined by average party level, not based on individual level.

So, at 1/2 XP share he would require roughly 26.66 encounters to level, while you still require 13.33.

[Username17]

That depends. If you are using the FRCS experience system it functions exactly as it does in 3.5 except that ECL races are messed up in a more confusingly written fashion.

Of course, even if you are going 3rd edition Core (which we are not if you are using the Arcane Trickster at all), you are still looking at the fact that a character at a lower level needs less XP to rise in level - so he's going to be taking (his level)/(your level) * 26.7 encounters to go up in level. That's not quite so bad as double time, although it still ends up with you wanting to abandon your cohort every other level.

-Username17

[Machine_Kiss]

According to Jonathan Tweet, the Summon Monster tables go like this:

SM Spell -- CR of Monster
=================
1 -- Less than 1
2 -- 1
3 -- 2
4 -- 3
5 -- 4-5
6 -- 6-7
7 -- 8-9
8 -- 9-10
9 -- 11-13

With CR13 being the highest monster you should be able to summon when using monsters external to the 3.5 PHb tables. He's the maestro who put the criteria together, so I'll take his engine over anybody elses. So those CR17 Wastriliths will hopefully not squeak into your SM spells in the future. The CR12 Monadic Deva is fully compliant with a SM9 spell though.

****

While I agree the AT low-level baseline is horrendous, and the mid-levels are sub-optimal ... the high end AT ramps up to achieve a terrific power-to-versatility level ratio. Especially if used in the role as the party Rogue (albeit magically-enhanced) or in 2 or 3 person partys. It's best taken as a Sun Elf or Strongheart Halfling. The former's bonus to INT helps the AT play catch-up in skill ranks with the straight Rogue, the latters racial skills and DEX bonus (for Ray shooting) are its benefits.

The benefit of the high-level AT over the high-level Wizard is survival. With a cranked-up Hide/Move Silently in addition to the standard Greater Invisibility spell and Silent Spell metamagics ... an AT can stay unseen throughout a many a combat.

The reason those cantrips like Acid Splash have such strength is that by using them for example, Quickened or in a Simbul's Spell Matrix, you are getting more bang for the buck out of low-level spells that sometimes aren't even used at all by some Wizards. This allows you to use your higher level slots for spells that can be used in more utilitarian roles. So that's where the AT is getting spell economy. And spells like Lesser Sonic Orb and Scorching Ray become more potent than those wielded by your standard Mage. Compliment these spells with no save/no SR other attack spells, and you get a well-rounded offense.

A great tactic for a high level AT is to cast a Solid Fog on himself while using Blindsight via magic item or spell and a Ring of Freedom of Action. Then fire high a volume of quickened Rays out of the Solid Fog at his foes.

And of course, when it comes to infiltration, the AT is "the Man". He has Fly, Dimension Door, Invisibility, Spider Climb, Silent Image, all at his beck and call. The Rogue can do this, but he needs magic items. Arm the AT with equal value magic items, and he can use those for defense and offense.

Playing a mid-to-high AT over the last 2 years, I've had nothing but good play success. And I consider that an achievement in light of my DM's over-powered challenges he continues to throw at us.

The AT is good. But its best played when starting a campaign at level 13 or higher. Sad, but true. You can sub-specialize in a number of archetypes - enchanter, summoner, illusionist, etc. But at the core, you remain a Ray-Monkey with your high DEX and Quickened feat close at hand. The other key feat for an AT is Imp. Initiative. With his high DEX and Kaupaer's Skittish Nerves up-&-running, he is more apt to be going first in a round than any Rogue, Mage, or standard enemy. And that first action is critical to the vast majority of all combat outcomes.

And finally, you have to be a pretty solid min/maxer *and* play tactician to really make it shine (unlike, say, a Cleric Archer or Frenzied Berserker build). It has a lot of nuances and ideosynchracies.

Tomorrow night we will be playtesting some archery scenarios for the low level AT to see if that angle works as a backup combat style. Using the feats I mentioned in the first post.

anyway ... thanks for reading and looking.

Take care.

[da_chicken]

That depends. If you are using the FRCS experience system it functions exactly as it does in 3.5 except that ECL races are messed up in a more confusingly written fashion.

Yes, Frank, if you're using optional rules in a different book and a special campaign setting, the rules are different.

Sorry, was suddenly greatly amused by that.

[Username17]

So those CR17 Wastriliths will hopefully not squeak into your SM spells in the future.

Last I checked, the specific over rided the general. In addition to the CR limitations, Summon Monster is not supposed to summon a creature capable of casting a spell that is as powerful as itself.

But more specifically, Summon Monster summons exactly what it says it does, and any additional guidelines printed for the summoning of monsters that are not on that list are just that.

Since Wastriliths say they can be summoned by Summon Monster IX - they can be summoned by Summon Monster IX. Anything Tweet put into a magazine article doesn't change that.

That still doesn't change the fact that you are still holding up your "ability" to use lower level spells to modest effect as evidence of the build's power. And the fact is that a pure Wizard or a damage build (like a Berserker or a Cleric Archer) outblasts you by a lot. Ray spells are generally extremely weak at all levels, so being a "specialist" in them is not exactly a glowing endorsement.

-Username17

[da_chicken]

Last I checked, the specific over rided the general.

Which is why 3.0 Minotaur maze immunity worked even when it shouldn't have.

[Count Arioch the 28th]

Summoning a wastrlith has a proviso, though.

They're better than everything else in summon monster 9 by a long shot, but it is supposedly balanced by the fact that the wastrilith can make an opposed wisdom check with the caster, if the wastrilith wins, it breaks summoning, and attacks the caster.

However, the wisdom is only 12, that's not too hard to beat, and there are plenty of ways to nullify it if it does break summoning.

I'm not that good with rules and balance and crap, but even I can see that's not a good way to balance something.

[Machine_Kiss]

Not sure what the big hoo-ha is on focusing on the AT's "blaster" emphasis. Yeah, he can Ray-up opponents better than anyone, but his other spells are definitely *not* going to be blaster spells. High DC-emphasis blaster magi are one of the most over-rated power archetypes in the game. Especially at high levels when every creature and his brother is immune/resistant to a number of energy types, high SR, weird/quixotic templates that defy you the ability to i.d. their weaknesses, etc..

It's funny ... you see *all* of the credible character optimizers on the C.O. WotC Forum (and I mean ALL of them) laud the praises of the high level AT. I've been able to benchmark my own play and build architecture to other comparable level straight-on min/maxed Wizards over this time (Incantatrices, Arch-Magi, Shadow Adepts, etc.). And never once have I or the others considered high level AT's to be "weaker" than his comparative peers.

I think I'm definitely at the wrong board. I sense a lot of conjecturalizing here...

Later..

[da_chicken]

Hey, I'm not saying they're bad. I like 'em. I just saying they're not as good a rogue as a rogue and not as good a wizard as a wizard. If you already have both in your game, play something else. They are, however, better rogues than wizards are, and better wizards than rogues are.

[Username17]

They are, however, better rogues than wizards are, and better wizards than rogues are.

And they are worse Rogues and worse Wizards than a Rogue with the Leadership Feat and a Wizard Cohort.

Both the AT and the Leadership feat are Core and in the same DMG - so I can't see why anyone would get all that excited about the AT.

Last I checked, people on the Character Optimization Forum went gaga over the Mystic Theurge too, and he sucks something awful. A 20th level Wizard can get more clerical spellcasting out of the Summon Monsters VII, VIII, and IX that he can cast over a Mystic Theurge than the Mystic Theurge gets out of his 13 levels of Cleric.

Arcane Trickster characters are fun to play, they have a lot of basis in story and myth - but they suck. Do not delude yourself into thinking that Sneak Attack and beam spells synergize in any meaningful fashion. While you can be an 18th level character and chuck two ray spells a round (potentially getting sneak attack on both), remember that an 18th level Rogue has 2 more dice of sneak attack than you do and can throw four vials of acid if he has Rapid Shot.

That's 4 ranged touch attacks for 2 lousy dice of damage (assuming you use the supercharged versions - because you are friggin 18th level) each that get sneak attack and point blank shot - for a grand total of 44 dice + 4 per round with no save.

Meanwhile, an 18th level Arcane Trickster can cast a Polar Ray and a Quicked Energy Orb by expending 2 8th level slots. That's 30 dice for the two spells and an additional 7 dice of sneak attack each - for a grand total of 44 dice + 2 per round and one of them grants a save to avoid 7.5 dice worth of damage and nauseates for 1 round if they fail.

Those are roughly equivalent attacks, really (nauseating foes is pretty awesome, but letting people halve your attack damage with a save is the suck). But the Rogue can do it all day, and the AT may be out of 8th level slots after he does that only once (although he probably has one more 8th level slot left over).

I am simply unimpressed with that kind of damage output on an 18th level character. As noted, 18th level Rogues can match it without even resorting to magical equipment or expending highly limited high level spells. They can actually use magical weapons and significantly increase thay damage output - while the Wizard is pretty much capped at about 44 dice in a round.

Yes, magic and skills synergize. However, no it doesn't especially help you to literally cast those spells yourself when you have the skills. You do just as well having an actual Rogue do the Roguing and a separate Wizard doing the Wizarding - and both the Rogue and the Wizard end up being higher level if you do that. Even if they are still played by the same person (with leadership).

Your Wizard can cast Improved Invisibility on your Rogue and watch the fun. It will even last longer and be harder to dispel if you do it this way. Your Wizard can give your rogue a token with suspended silence on it and your Rogue can use it while in melee with enemy spellcasters - and your wizard can still be casting magic because he's in a different place.

And finally, when your Rogue throws four vials of acid and does as much damage as the Arcane Trickster would have done in the same round - your Wizard Cohort still has an action left over and has more 8th level spells than your Arcane Trickster does and a higher caster level. Which means he can be blasting out 31 dice of damage by using the same strategy and not getting any sneak attack.

For those keeping track at home, that means that the Rogue can dish out 75 dice of touch attacks, and the "arcane trickster" can only dish out 44. If you have some different definition of "suck" that you'd like to share with us, I'm all ears. But to the best of my knowledge a straight Rogue can simply do anything an Arcane Trickster can do better - and since the Rogue is a core class, that means the Arcane Trickster sucks.

-Username17

[da_chicken]

But, why not play an AT with Leadership? It's not like they're mutually exclusive or AT requires gobs of feats.

[Thoth_Amon]

Yeah!

The AT can have a Hospitaler cohort and you can have all 4 classes covered!!

Well, I thought it was funny...

TA

[Username17]

But, why not play an AT with Leadership? It's not like they're mutually exclusive or AT requires gobs of feats.

Better question: why?

It's not like Invisibility stacks or anything. Once you have the cohort, why bother sacrificing 3-5 levels in effectiveness in both of your classes so that you can do your cohort's job nearly as well?

The Arcane Trickster loses out on 4 maxed skills, 2 sneak attack dice, some hit points, and all of your special abilities vs. a Rogue. The Arcane Trickster loses 3 caster levels and 10 caster-based PrC levels vs. a Wizard.

Unless you personally need to fill two holes in the party roster, there's no reason to do that. And with Leadership you can fill those two holes better.

Now the original question could perhaps best be restated as "can you make a good Archer Rogue at low and mid-level?" To which the answer is "YES!"

Rogues make great archers at low levels, because the realities of Point Blank Shot make you want to get in 30 feet anyways, and at medium levels the party wizard shouldn't be begrudging you an improved invis - which makes you one of the nastiest damage outputs in your party. And of course, it goes without saying that a Rogue is the absolute cat's pajamas outside of combat, with their ability to take down unpleasant spell effects with peanut butter and a pair of pliers.

An 8th level Invisible Archer Rogue is shooting 3 times for 4 dice of sneak attack each - and that's huge. Or at least, bigger than anything an 8th level Wizard can do.

As far as race, your best Core Rules bets are Deep Halfling or Gray Elf. The Deep Halfling gives you much needed save and to-hit bonuses and gives you the all-valuable Stone Cunning, while the Gray Elf gives you proficiency in the Long Bow and a bonus to your two favorite stats.

However, if you really want to cast spells and Rogue around, you should be a Rogue and take Leadership at 6th level. It gives you better Roguing and Wizarding at a lower level.Or you could be a Wizard and take a Rogue sidekick instead - you end up with much more of a caster emphasis, and the lower level Rogue Skills will hurt you, but this will also work (I played a character like this - it works pretty well).

-Username17

[Desdan_Mervolam]

1075924193[/unixtime]]However, if you really want to cast spells and Rogue around, you should be a Rogue and take Leadership at 6th level. It gives you better Roguing and Wizarding at a lower level.Or you could be a Wizard and take a Rogue sidekick instead - you end up with much more of a caster emphasis, and the lower level Rogue Skills will hurt you, but this will also work (I played a character like this - it works pretty well).

But in that scenario, you're not the one casting the spells, your cohort is. I don't have a problem with the idea of having a cohort to fill holes in the party (Done it myself), but what do you do if you want to play one character who is a sneaky wizard type?

-Desdan

[Thoth_Amon]

Play a wizard, max your Int (of course), take cosmopolitan (?) or pay cross class for cool roguing skills?

TA

[Username17]

Or play a Rogue and work up your UMD skill and go to town.

A Wand of Improved Invis is not terribly expensive, and as an added bonus you can be every bit as good of a healer as any other member of the party.

I agree that the sneaky wizard type should be much better than it is - but Sneak Attack is a crap way to enhance spells for the cost. You can get pretty far as a Wizard who takes Mindbender or something similar - you end up casting at full value and having a notable pile of Roguish social skills.

-Username17