+2d6 Sneak Attack Req for Arcane Trickster

[Mistwell]

The Halfing rogue racial substitution from Races of the Wild gives the Halfling rogue +2d6 sneak attack on thrown weapon attacks. Assuming he is meeting the other reqs, would this situational +2d6 sneak attack meet that requirement for Arcane Trickster?

Yes. And in my opinion it's one way to make Arcane Trickster more on-par with out prestige classes.

 

[James McMurray]

I don't want to be too confrontational here, James, but these two answers are completely different. In one, you are claiming there is a rules based reason it would not work. In the second, you are saying that it is purely a matter of oppinion. I think it might be to your benefit to differentiate between the two a bit more in your posting. One is going to be generally well accepted and discussed. The other is going to get the rules forum riled up on a regular basis.

I could have just made the second post say "because I answered too quickly without thinking about it," but opted to be cute instead. Since I'd still disallow it in a game, the end result of the second post is the same: people know I won't allow it, but that there's no RAW reason behind it.

It's called changing one's mind in the face of evidence. I do it quite often.

 

[RigaMortus2]

I would be careful about fulfilling PrC prereqs with any material not in either Core or the supplement containing that PrC.

Very careful.

The prereqs are written so as to not name specific classes in order to give flexibility. Flexibility is an advantage and sometimes a disadvantage.

They even go so far as to say that if you take a generic class you can't take any nongeneric classes. We had a generic warrior in the party for a while. His fighter BAB + Sneak attack was nasty, but he missed out on a lot of PrCs that he could have taken as a rogue or fighter.

If by "non-generic classes" you mean to include PrCs and base classes from suppliments (non-Core) in that statement, then you are wrong. I would check out UA again. It most certainly does NOT say this. In fact, it states quite the opposite.

...a DM who desires to run a similiar campaign (while still allowing for character variety) can use these "generic" character classes in place of the character classes in the Player's Handbook.

If you use these generic classes, you shouldn't also use the character classes in the Player's Handbook (or the variants of those classes presented in this book). You can still include prestige classes if you wish to add that level of complexity to your game, but you may have to tweak some prestige class prerequisites that include class features not available to these classes.

You could go Spellcaster 6/Arcane Trickster 1. Take Sneak Attack as your class's bonus feats, and not lose out on caster levels (until you enter AT of course).

I am sure there is probably a way to enter the class earlier as well, you just need 1 level of the generic class to get +2d6 SA (w/ the bonus feat), then find a non-PHB arcane caster that has access to mage hand and can cast 3rd level arcane spells early.

 

[James McMurray]

I stand corrected. I never actually read it, just went by what the guy playing the character said.

 

[Notmousse]

The second example certainly, it's spelled out that in cases that SA is called for SS may be substituted. I believe this was in the Ninja section of CW.

The first instance I'm not certain about, but would not allow as it's conditional SA instead of full SA or an SA substitute like SS. Given the rules from the second example one might argue that RAI supports allowing conditional SA.