D&D 3E/3.5 Assassin in 3.5: How did I miss this?

[HeapThaumaturgist]

Ah, forgot to point out that we were making a special house-ruling that removed the Evil req and standard roleplaying req for the class in favor of some home-brew setting-specific requirements.

As an illustration that the PrC itself wasn't really all that bad, and barring role-playing/alignment req it is pretty effective and quite cool as far as PrCs go.

And yes, just having a spell list doesn't mean you can use a wand of any spell. But a wand of True Strike is pretty cheap, and on both Wiz and Asn lists, so your Wiz buddy can pop you out one with an afternoon's work. Etc etc.

I'm fond of a non-standard "scroll" of Obscuring Mist that takes the form of a small bead. It's a little hackney, but the ninja-smoke-bomb routine is always good for a laugh.

--fje

 

[Synthetik Fish]

Ah, forgot to point out that we were making a special house-ruling that removed the Evil req and standard roleplaying req for the class in favor of some home-brew setting-specific requirements.

As an illustration that the PrC itself wasn't really all that bad, and barring role-playing/alignment req it is pretty effective and quite cool as far as PrCs go.

And yes, just having a spell list doesn't mean you can use a wand of any spell. But a wand of True Strike is pretty cheap, and on both Wiz and Asn lists, so your Wiz buddy can pop you out one with an afternoon's work. Etc etc.

I'm fond of a non-standard "scroll" of Obscuring Mist that takes the form of a small bead. It's a little hackney, but the ninja-smoke-bomb routine is always good for a laugh.

--fje

I myself was thinking of al ittle bead like that. Mabye accompanied by a small "bang" (see Necklace of Fireballs in DMG, was basicly thinking of adding Obscuring Mist to a 1d6 fireball bead...)

 

[Lobo Lurker]

Assassins get Use Magic Device... technically, they can use any wand, scroll, or stave that they want to.

 

[Synthetik Fish]

Assassins get Use Magic Device... technically, they can use any wand, scroll, or stave that they want to.

yes... they can TRY.

 

[ARandomGod]

A) You must be Evil to be an assassin. Neutral won't cut it.

Nope, it's YOU who must be evil to be an assassin. Lots of other campaigns hand wave that restriction away. It's a pretty silly restriction after all.

But, um, yea, of course it has to BE on their spell list to be able to use it as a wand. There're still a good number of useful spells on that assassin list. ^_^

 

[Storyteller01]

And yes, just having a spell list doesn't mean you can use a wand of any spell. But a wand of True Strike is pretty cheap, and on both Wiz and Asn lists, so your Wiz buddy can pop you out one with an afternoon's work. Etc etc.

--fje

And lets not forget, any rogue/assassin working in in a magic environ has levels in Use Magic Device (at least in 3.0). How better to frame a mage than using one of his wands?

 

[RigaMortus2]

I always point this out with the Assassin, but there is a higher level Assassin spell that allows you to make Death Attacks at range. I think it is in CAdv...

 

[rgard]

A) You msut be Evil to be an assassin. Neutral won't cut it.

B) You can only use wands of spells that are on your spell list. Just because Fireball is evocation doesn't mean that an assassin can use it. (Not saying that you thought this, jsut putting it out there.)

I still think that in the proper circumstances, a level or 3 (to get 2nd level spells) in spellcasting is very devastating for a rogue. You should have a high Intel anyways (for skills) so taking a level in Wizard makes a lot of sense. Don't have to, but often it doesn't hurt (IMO.)

Yes, it says evil, but as I DM I let PCs be neutral assassins.

And the reverse is true for Wizards taking 2 levels of Rogue (gotta love that Evasion.)

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Synthetik Fish]

Yes, it says evil, but as I DM I let PCs be neutral assassins.

And the reverse is true for Wizards taking 2 levels of Rogue (gotta love that Evasion.)

Thanks,
Rich

Good point.

 

[ARandomGod]

Yes, it says evil, but as I DM I let PCs be neutral assassins.

And the reverse is true for Wizards taking 2 levels of Rogue (gotta love that Evasion.)

Thanks,
Rich

I don't understand why a wiz would only take two levels of rogue when he could take three and get AT. I can see why they'd stay a straight wiz, but two and only two levels of rogue? That's a waste!

Of course, other than a single dip in for wands, I don't see why any rogue wouldn't take several levels of mage (5) for AT! I've never seen someone really play a straight up rogue no multiclassing.