Geeeek

[kingandy]

Since my D&D3.5 character died horribly last Tuesday, I am statting up a new one.

(The one who died was a pet idea of mine - a locksmith - who didn't really pan out as I had hoped; as a rogue I felt the need to be useful and so dived into combat instead of pootling along behind. In retrospect it wasn't all that good of a concept.)

So I'm planning to address the lack of magic in the party and my own fondness for charisma-based characters by playing a sorceror, and am planning to work towards the Daggerspell Mage prestige class. Unfortunately, Daggerspell Mage sorcerors have no dump stat and I have an 8 to deal with. I'm torn between dropping it in Wisdom (losing the will save / skill bonuses) and Strength (losing the attack/damage bonus). I'll probably go with Wisdom. I can do "Powerful but easily led." It's fun.

I came across some comments on web forums that suggested a rogue's Sneak Attack would add damage to spells that have an attack bonus. I can't find anything in the PHB to support or counter it - it does mention they get criticals, which does suggest accuracy would be appropriate, but the SA description doesn't specifically mention an association with criticals (even though all the same restrictions seem to apply). Does anyone have insight? I'm tempted to take a level of Rogue straight off...

Comments

[myki.livejournal.com]

A powerful but easily lead spellcaster? Are you a Dragon?

[kingandy]

Not nearly so chirpy, I think.

[wulfboy.livejournal.com]

Check out Complete Arcane which goes into more details. Basically, a spell that can critical (that is, uses an attack roll) can do sneak attack as if it were a weapon. So you need all the usual provisos (within 30-ft. for ranged weapon, target without dex bonus or flanked (assuming melee touch attack)) and so on.

[myki.livejournal.com]

Ahhh a Wyvern then.

[notdan.livejournal.com]

Noooo! Wisdom is the best stat! Not only does it govern will saves, it's the basis for Spot, which is clearly the Best Skill Ever.

[kingandy]

Ahh excellent. That makes the Rogue level much more useful than the third Sorceror one^[1], as a potential +1d6 damage on all melee attacks (and ranged, though they come up less often) is much better than one or two extra spells per day. And it would add to spell damage as well.

But then of course I'd be a level further away from level 2 spells ... hmmm, scorching ray.

Starting at third level, you see.

[arwel.livejournal.com]

High charisma and low wisdom are a winning combination. I have fond memories of Nook's bard in one of my games always suggesting the stupidest course of action and having the force of personality to get the party to go along with him.

[jayphoenix.livejournal.com]

SIGH - isn't it weird that when I see you (and others) talking about D&D stats (you with your new fangled 3.5 edition and others with 4th edition) all I can think of is that it wasn't like that when I rolled up my monk character in 1st edition or my mage in my brief foray into 2nd :o)

[myki.livejournal.com]

No... I getcha. I play in Andy's game and I remember the good ol' days.

[wulfboy.livejournal.com]

A popular trick with rogue/casters in 3.5 is the zero-level acid splash and ray of frost spells, as they do pitiful damage by themselves, but with sneak attack are well worth a 0-level spell slot. Plus they are ranged touch attacks. Oh and wands of them cost fuck-all.

If you can do it, the first-level "orb" spells from Complete Arcane work just as well, but do more damage. I would say that a first-level wand is superior to a longbow for the touch-attack element alone. Oh and the orb spells don;t have spell resistance, as Woody and I learned to our intense displeasure come high-level 3.5 D&D.

You still have the hassle of actually getting a sneak attack, but thats your problem.

[kingandy]

Internets have suggested spells like Black Tentacles and Grasping Fist (or whatever) are good largely because they grapple the target and allow you to ranged-sneak-attack with your lvl-0 spells.

[zombie-all-star.livejournal.com]

Of course, Arwel's description has nothing to do with my Bards stats.

I am disappointed that the Bard has disappeared from 4th Ed, to be replaced with a Warlord, which is a poor substitute.