Redundant Rogue Talents? And Major Magic.

[Jadeite]

Never implied anything else. A Zen Archer can flank someone with a bow if he's next to him. A rogue with a wand can't (even if he has a short sword in his other hand).

 

[Volaran]

Never implied anything else. A Zen Archer can flank someone with a bow if he's next to him. A rogue with a wand can't (even if he has a short sword in his other hand).

Please provide a rules citation for this.

Reflexive Shot (Ex): At 9th level, a zen archer can make attacks of opportunity with arrows from his bow. The monk still threatens squares he could reach with unarmed strikes, and can still only make one attack of opportunity per round (unless he has Combat Reflexes). This ability replaces improved evasion.

This is a very handy class feature, but does not specifically indicate that a zen archer monk can suddenly flank with his bow. It indicates that the monk can take attacks off opportunity with his bow, and indicates that he is considered to be flanking opponents with his unarmed strike. This is an important notation because the monk's unarmed strikes are not restricted to his hands

Unarmed Strike: At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk's attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may make unarmed strikes with his hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. A monk may thus apply his full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all his unarmed strikes.

Because the monk threatens with his whole body, it means that he can hold a weapon like a bow in both hands and and still threaten (and attack) with his feet, or other body parts. The Reflexive Shot ability simply means that he can take of opportunity with his bow, not that he gains flanking benefits when making a ranged attack.

As noted previously:

Flanking

When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.

Nothing in the Reflexive Shot ability (or the Point Blank Master feat, which the Zen Monk also gets for free) has phrasing that says their bow is considered a melee attack. It simply gives them greater versatility for using a ranged weapon in close quarters.

Would you be able to provide a specific listing to suggest that cannot use a wand with a touch spell in a flanking situation? As indicated in the flanking rules, it is important that your ally be threatening the opponent at the time of your melee attack. I was not able to find a rule in the flanking section, or the section on touch spells to suggest that this was somehow excluded.

Similarly, I was not able to find something to suggest that you would not threaten with your primary weapon (a sword for example) even if you were activating a wand with your other hand on that particular round. If you have a rules reference there, I would also appreciate it.

 

[Jadeite]

Please provide a rules citation for this.
Similarly, I was not able to find something to suggest that you would not threaten with your primary weapon (a sword for example) even if you were activating a wand with your other hand on that particular round. If you have a rules reference there, I would also appreciate it.

It's in the rules you quoted yourself. You only flank while making melee attacks. While you would still provide a flanking bonus to others, a ranged attack with a ray would not count as flanking and therefore be unable to get the bonuses from sneak attack unless the target were denied his dexterity bonus.
Since activating a wand of scorching ray is a standard action, the rogue might try to use his melee weapon to feint. He might even make a 5ft step after feinting to avoid the attack of opportunity for ranged attacks.
Still pathetic and expensive.
You seem to be right about the Zen Archer, however.

 

[Volaran]

It's in the rules you quoted yourself. You only flank while making melee attacks. While you would still provide a flanking bonus to others, a ranged attack with a ray would not count as flanking and therefore be unable to get the bonuses from sneak attack unless the target were denied his dexterity bonus.
Since activating a wand of scorching ray is a standard action, the rogue might try to use his melee weapon to feint. He might even make a 5ft step after feinting to avoid the attack of opportunity for ranged attacks.
Still pathetic and expensive.
You seem to be right about the Zen Archer, however.

This may be the source of my confusion.

Never implied anything else. A Zen Archer can flank someone with a bow if he's next to him. A rogue with a wand can't (even if he has a short sword in his other hand).

Reading back, I can see that you were referring specifically to wands using a ranged touch attack, such as scorching ray, as per statements made by Transbot9. Out of context, it looks like you were referring to all wands. Sorry for the confusion.

I was referring to a melee touch attack with a wand, such as inflict light wounds, or shocking grasp. Melee touch attacks can be used when you flank an opponent, and so these wands would be valid for flanking sneak attack use, and would be significantly less expensive than a wand of scorching ray.

Primarily, I find a rogue using one of these wands in melee useful under two circumstances.

1. Opponent has high AC, where a touch attack can much more reliably hit, even in a situation where a rogue might be giving up an iterative attack to use it.

2. Opponent has DR (particularly high DR) where energy damage would more reliably be bypassing this than the rogue's melee weapon.

Obviously, there are situations when this tactic is particularly weak as well, such as against opponents with spell resistance.

I do believe that ranged touch attack do also have their place for the rogue, but they would certainly not get them in flanking situations. You'd more often get use out of this in situations like a surprise round, invisible rogue, or other cases where a ranged sneak attack would apply.

Again, you are correct in that a wand of scorching ray might be too expensive to invest cash in specifically for this tactic, but the rogue will continue to get mileage out of a wand of ray of frost or particularly acid orb (since it ignores SR) long after anyone else in the party, and those are pretty affordable.

For higher level wands that use melee or ranged touch spells, certainly the rogue may get better use out of them than a wizard or sorcerer if they find one in the field, but it may not be the best use of crafting time.

 

[Jadeite]

Chill Touch would be better than Shocking Grasp for this purpose. With a CL 5 wand Chill Touch, you get a lot more touch attacks than Shocking Grasp would grant, making it more cost effective. Might even be worth the Major Arcana Rogue Talent since that's also a prerequisite to the Dispelling Greater Talent. By 20th level, you could deal 20 touch attacks per day.

 

[Volaran]

Oh, that's a good point. I think you might even get iterative touch attacks on subsequent rounds of use. Good catch!

 

[Glade Riven]

Wand of Inflict (light, moderate, serious, critical). Other touch spells. In fact, since you can hold touch spells, a rogue could cast it while moving into position, then BLAM! Sneak attack with the hand of death. Avoids that attack of opportunity completely. Vampiric Touch would be a nasty combination with Sneak Attack.

For the flat footed, Range Touch would work fine.

 

[Jadeite]

A Wand of Cure Moderate Wounds would be inefficient. Wands of higher level would be even more inefficient. For the price of a Wand of Cure Moderate Wounds you could get a Wand of Chill Touch of 6th CL, allowing six touch attacks.
Unless the difference between normal AC and touch AC is greater than 20, you are usually better of with a Wand of True Strike. You also have no problems with SR that way.
Vampiric Touch is nice, but very expensive. With Wands more expensive than 750 gp, Chill Touch tops everything.

 

[Glade Riven]

I dunno, being able to heal without the cleric can be handy. Oh, um, if you mean inflict...inefficiant, maybe, but it does increase the effectiveness of the rogue - at least in a few more situations.