Arcane Trickster - Is it *ever* good?

[Terror_Beach_Party]

i'm fully aware of how craptacular the Arcane Trickster PrC is. It's traditional baseline of Wiz5/Rog3 is an exercise in futility to build up from level 1. And even after you get into AT, those first 5-6 levels are still challenging to fit into your party's average power curve.

my question to all of you is ---- does the Arcane Trickster ever ramp up to a decent power level in non-epic play (levels 1-20)? Meaning, at 18-19th level, does the power level and utility of the AT cause your party to "ooh" and "aah"?

I'd like to play an AT for a 16th level campaign (the starting level) that should run to level 22-23 or so. The AT concept and premise looks fun. And since my party consists of a Barbarian build and a martial/melee Cleric, the AT looks to be strong at fleshing out the party's needs.

ideas?

or better yet .. any new "tech" from any of the recent sourcebooks (CA, CD, CW, the newish FRCS books, etc.)?

Thanks.

[Username17]

It's traditional baseline of Wiz5/Rog3 is an exercise in futility to build up from level 1. And even after you get into AT, those first 5-6 levels are still challenging to fit into your party's average power curve.

It is also a world of sucking for higher levels as well. By the time you finally get your grubby hands on the high level spells, you're basically looking at a paradigm where in order to meaningfully effect enemies you need to penetrate SR, so you end up being ineffective 15% of the time because of the roguing, in exchange for which you get substandard sneak attacks that don't matter. If you were going to do Rogue/Wizard/Arcane Trickster - you'd be better off as a Wizard. Or a Rogue. The Arcane Trickster's supposed trick of throwing spells with sneak attack dice is objectively inferior to being a Rogue with the UMD skill, a wand of Improved Invis, and a pile of alchemist's fire. More sneak attack and more attacks beats the crap out of having spell slots with a slightly bigger chasis.

my question to all of you is ---- does the Arcane Trickster ever ramp up to a decent power level in non-epic play (levels 1-20)? Meaning, at 18-19th level, does the power level and utility of the AT cause your party to "ooh" and "aah"?

You can make some builds that are just plain bizzare that will end up pretty decent. You can be one of those stupid sygil dudes from races of destiny and get the sneak attack for free - wandering into the affair from straight Wizard. Similarly, if you are using UA generic classes you can slap some sneak attack into the pile for no reason.

Fundamentally however, the bonuses that the Arcane Trickster delivers don't really synergize well. At level 20 you can finally sneak attack for 7 whole extra dice to your meteor swarm - and noone gives a crap. Ranged attack roll requiring damage spells are just about on the very bottom of the pile, and the ability to do small amounts of extra dice with them is just not important.

If you want to be a Wizard who does some Roguing, I suggest that you either become an illusionist/diviner, or become a Geometer out of Complete Arcane. The Geometer class gives the only indispensible facet of Rogues - the whole Trap detection thing. Wizards can be set up to be good scouts/trap finders - but they don't do it by getting sneak attack.

Fundamentally: a sneak attacker does not want to be burdened down with a Wizard's crap BAB, and a Wizard cannot accept the loss of spellcaster levels.

-Username17

[User3]

AT's can be good, bu the amount of work is probably not worth it and you have to NOT do what they want you to do..

For example, for a nice blend of Sneak and spells in a 100% legal build would require you to take levels in this order: Rogue 5(your carefree youth), then Assasin 7(those years during the war ), then Bard 1/ and then Sublime Chord 1(that summer on the beach doing Elvis's Blue Hawaii), then add AT to flavor....

By 16th level you can have 8d6 sneak, 6th level spells, some crazy class stuff and a BAB of +8. Use Extra spell to get some decent spells on your Assasin list like the Con-vocations(CA spells wth names that start with "Orb") and you can do some decent but not amaizing damage in combat or spellwise. By 23rd level, you should have 9th level spells. Go you. Max out Sneak damage as a Blinking Giant Octopus and you are good to go.

[Lago_AM3P]

Dude, if you want to be an arcane trickster so bad, just shapechange/POA into a Gloom (epic level handbook).

You get 13 die worth of sneak attack, opportunist, and a huge amount of stackable move silently. If you can con your DM into letting you change (read from a scroll of POA and pray), you can take up arcane trickster without giving up any caster levels.

Take up arcane disciple: hero / war / competition, and you'll be able to back that ass up with some sneak attack die.

[Desdan_Mervolam]

I figured the point of an Arcane Trickster was to be a stealth, espionage and infiltration-themed character. He gets through most encounters by avoiding them, and if he has to fight, relies more on buffs and so forth to get him through. You don't really need high level magic to be an effective mage/thief. Hold Portal, Obscuring Mist, Unseen Servant, Comprehend Languages, Detect Secret Doors, Sleep, Disguise Self, Silent Image, Animate Rope, Feather Fall, and Jump are all spells that are great in the hands of someone who already has stealth abilities. and those are just first level, and the ones that have immediatly obvious uses. I mean geeze, for a character like this, if you have to draw a weapon or cast an offensive spell, it's because you fucked up and are dead anyway.

-Desdan

[Username17]

You can get better stealth/scouting out of just having Mage PrCs. A dedicated Illusionist, for example, can become invisible and all that crap, and you what else? He'll have Mind Blank before you get anywhere decent with AT.

Depending upon what extra books you are allowed to use, you can be a better "Wizard who also has Hide" with a variety of classes like Shadowcrafter, but even with the core books you get better stealthing off of just having more spell levels under your belt.

And by level 18, a Rogue/Wizard Arcane Trickster build will have deprived you of 70 skill points and skill mastery when compared to a straight rogue - which means that your comparative stealthing is craptacular. Low level magics are actually just as available to the straight rogue for chicken feed with UMD.

---

The Arcane Trickster involves putting less hiding than you could have onto less magicing than you can have. But if you just tweak your character in that direction, you can get that much hiding without giving up any magic or that much magic without giving up any hiding. This is D&D, and there just isn't any reason to do your primary schtick poorly.

-Username17

[Wrenfield]

Regarding the Rogue 20 over the Arcane Trickster build -- keep in mind that the prodigious stealth and scout skills of a Rogue 20 can be just as valuable as high level spellcasting when used in savvy and creative ways.

Rogue 20 tends to get a lot of short shrift from power gamers who prefer tricked-out combat Rogues, but UMD-proficient Rogue 20 is still a build to be feared.

[Tae_Kwon_Dan]

It's not like it's a real tricky build either. Max ranks in UMD, a CHA of 16, and Skill Mastery UMD will allow you to be able to cast any spell in the game off of a scroll, out of a wand, or anywhere else that melts your butter.

[User3]

i don't think you can use Skill Mastery on UMD skill, can you? i think there is text explicitly stating that UMD can never be "taken 10" on.

[Tae_Kwon_Dan]

Whoops you're right. I thought it had an even on feats you normally can't take 10 on. Of course you want to be a UMD specialist it's not too hard to get the rest of the +9 needed to succeed on a 1.

[Username17]

Class features override skill descriptions. Rogues with Skill Mastery can take 10 on Use Magic Device if they have selected UMD as one of their skills to master. Otherwise, the Warlock's ability to take 10 on use magic device checks wouldn't do anything at all.

-Username17

[User3]

1102107014[/unixtime]]Class features override skill descriptions. Rogues with Skill Mastery can take 10 on Use Magic Device if they have selected UMD as one of their skills to master. Otherwise, the Warlock's ability to take 10 on use magic device checks wouldn't do anything at all.

-Username17

Frank, I believe your statement about class features (which I bolded above). Do you have a specific page number from the 3.5 DMG or PHB that states this?

Thanks.

[Essence]

It's simple logic, Guest. If class features didn't override skill descriptions, then Hide in Plain Sight, Camoflauge, Trapfinding, Track, and a host of other less-well-known class features would do absolutely nothing. Since they do something, we know that class features trump skill descriptions.

[Mole_2]

An arcane trickster won't be the single most powerful character in a party, but they are fun.

But alas, fun is not susceptible to mechanistic rules analysis and therefore not a relevant factor in discussions about the class.

I played an elven AT up to 11th (only 3rd AT) and really enjoyed it, yes I was aware of being a little bit "weaker" than the other party members between 4th and 9th level, but not enought to impact my enjoyment of the character and besides, by 11th level I was pretty much pulling my weight.

And in case anybody assumes that the character's death was due to the class's inherent weakness, it was more due to a DM who though 4 symbols of death at DC29 was a reasonable trap for an 11th level party and was surprised that only 2 of 6 survived.

[User3]

I'd be curious to see Frank build a 20th level rogue that could out-power a Wizard 5 / Rogue 3 / Arcane Trickster 10 / ArchMage 2. This assumes the Trickster has the Practiced Spellcaster feat to get 20 levels of spellcasting (but still only 17 levels of spells.

even if the rogue has UMD maxed out to the hilt and 70+ more skill ranks., I still don't see it being more powerful than an AT with 9th level spells.

[User3]

Bran, an Arcane Trickster is better than a rogue but he's not better than a wizard with the leadership feat and a permanently enthralled rogue. That was sort of the point.

[User3]

Who in turn, is not more powerful than a 20th level Arcane Trickster with the Leadership feat and a tricked out Druid.

[User3]

I wouldn't say the Arcane Trickster is "worse" than a rogue in the broad sense -- but it is worse at the Arcane Trickster's ostensible trick of shooting off a bunch of stuff and adding a boatload of sneak attack damage -- so if that's what you want to do, why not build a rogue? You get more sneak attack damage, you get more skills, you get a bunch of neat rogue toys, you get better hit points -- true, you don't get 9th-level wizard spells; but if you want your gig to be spellcasting, why are you blowing 10 prestige class levels and 3 rogue levels getting toys that add to just about the worst class of wizard spells -- single-target direct-damage?

--d.

[Lago_AM3P]

Okay, over a regular wizard, the important things an Arcane Trickster gains...

+7d6 worth of sneak attack damage and 2 additional skill points a level.

Seriously. What the hell? There are published PrCs out there that give just as good, if not a better skill list than the arcane trickster, and your sneak attack damage is so piss-poor as not to be worth mentioning.

This guy has the BAB bonus of a wizard and only 3 more average hp than his wizard friend, and he may or may not have any more martial weapon proficiencies. I don't know about you, but that would not qualify me to enter melee combat or 30' ranged combat. And since sneak attack damage only applies to, as Deirdre pointed out, some of the worst spells on the wizard spell list (you can use a 2nd level spell slot to dish out, maximum, 19d6 worth of damage if your opponent is within 30', subject to sneak attack conditions, AND not immune/resistant to fire. Good, but not great).

If you want to be an arcane trickster so bad, shapechange or POA into a gloom, and be happy. Hell, the sneak attack damage you get from being a gloom might not even stack with the one you get from being an arcane trickster.