Pathfinder versus 3.5 Assassin

[cfalcon]

When Pathfinder came out, I of course flipped straight to Assassin to see what they did. What I found surprised me:

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/prestige-classes/assassin

Compare to:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/assassin.htm

At the time, I didn't really bring it up. After all, there's a BUNCH of differences between Pathfinder and 3.5. But normally, what we saw was a general buffing of lackluster things, or some details tweaked. This is a full on redo of the assassin class, as it moves from having light spell backup (presumably to be a self reliant murderer) into a much more traditional rogue role- but of course, you still have the flavorful and interesting death attack.

Assassin was one of the few things WotC did that was supported throughout their product cycle. Even late books would add assassin flavored spells.

My experience with assassins is almost exclusively as NPCs. Even in the game I'm running where I have waived the alignment requirement (essentially allowing the wotc-web-enhancement version), I still won't see any. I've certainly never seen the Pathfinder one, and the must-be-evil thing removes it entirely from org play.

Anyone have experience with these two classes? Any ideas about why they moved away from the FF1-esque experience of starting with Thief and going into Ninja and getting a couple black magic spells? Does the new class work better? Etc.

[Ravens_cry]

The abilities are very NPC orientated in my opinion. I mean, what is the point being able to stop a mook from being resurrected?

[Greenish]

The abilities are very NPC orientated in my opinion.Yeah, I get that vibe too, but I haven't tried it.


I mean, what is the point being able to stop a mook from being resurrected?And if it's not a mook, it will get resurrected by the DM's say so, so making that more difficult… doesn't actually make anything more difficult.

[CTrees]

Well, inner sea has the red mantis assassin, which moves far enough towards the 3.5 assassin (with a kamen rider overlay) that it almost seems like they were trying to correct the disappointment some people felt about the pf assassin

[Ravens_cry]

Yeah, I get that vibe too, but I haven't tried it.
Nor I either, but one see it just by looking at them.


And if it's not a mook, it will get resurrected by the DM's say so, so making that more difficult… doesn't actually make anything more difficult.
My point exactly. A good DM might mean it removes some resource of the baddie if they have to get the more expensive or repeated resurrections to maintain some verisimilitude, but it's like comic books. If the baddie is going to come back, they will come back. If not them, someone else who fulfils the same role in the plot.

[cfalcon]

Well not every DM has a fully fixed story that the PCs have a set role in. The assassin's trick there COULD be important.

But the Red Mantis guy I had not seen.

I guess they decided the Assassin PRC was a bit overpowered or something? Or maybe they just didn't want it stepping on a rogue/wizard? I'm not sure. Ok, it seems I wasn't crazy and it mostly seems "removed and replaced with something totally different".

[Greenish]

Well not every DM has a fully fixed story that the PCs have a set role in. The assassin's trick there COULD be important.Eh, if the guy wasn't coming back once killed, the trick did nothing. If the guy's going to come back after being killed, the trick does nothing. I guess it might be useful in a situation where the guy has a fully statted out ally who could resurrect him without the trick, but for some reason can't with the trick.

Of course, Raise Dead can be stopped with hacking a body to bits, too.

I guess they decided the Assassin PRC was a bit overpowered or something? Or maybe they just didn't want it stepping on a rogue/wizard? I'm not sure. Ok, it seems I wasn't crazy and it mostly seems "removed and replaced with something totally different".I think they just wanted to make them easier to run for DMs. No spells to prepare or keep track of, just small list of "always on" special abilities (and "turbo death attack 1/day).

[Telasi]

Personally, I like the Pathfinder assassin better. This is wholly opinion, but I never understood why an assassin should have spellcasting just for being an assassin. I prefer the assassin non-magical, and the abilities the PrC gives are pretty cool already, in my opinion.

On the subject of player use, if a PC assassin killed one of my NPCs in a way that denied resurrection, the NPC would stay dead. Let them have their victories, if they've earned them. Just my take on it, and I run a game with only vague plotlines that are flexible enough to support that kind of thing.

[Maho-Tsukai]

Fluff/flavor- Pathfinder Assassin wins here. Unless it's some kind of Naruto ninja with magic eyeballs and shinobi spellcasting an assassin to me should be a mundane character who uses skill, stealth, cunning, subterfuge and their own human(or whatever race) capabilities to kill rather then magic. As a result, the pathfinder assassin is a better fit for me fluff-wise. While it was very cool and a fun class to play, the 3.5e assassin just seemed more like some evil shadow-ninja out of a Saturday morning cartoon or this week's issue of shonen jump. The pathfinder assassin overall just feels more like a skillful contract killer then the 3.5e one dose to me and from a purely flavor/fluff standpoint that makes it the better class as far as modeling what an "assassin" should be in my eyes.

Mechanics- 3.5e assassin has it here. While the spellcasting support dose clash with the flavor of the class, it dose make it very nasty and powerful. While some may disagree, with all the splatbook support/extra spells assassins a rogue/assassin is in many ways BETTER then a standard rogue, at least to me. Their spellcasting combind with their stealth and skills made them quite deadly. Also, not only did the 3.5e assassin have spellcasting support with a fairly strong list but the pathfinder assassin's abilities where rather lackluster. While flavorful, I find that the pathfinder assassin's abilities are far better suited to NPCs and are of little use to player characters. That may not be a bad thing as it means I have a nice class to use against my players when I want to raise the stakes a bit but for PCs the 3.5e assassin has the better mechanics.

[Morph Bark]

Personally, I like the Pathfinder assassin better. This is wholly opinion, but I never understood why an assassin should have spellcasting just for being an assassin. I prefer the assassin non-magical, and the abilities the PrC gives are pretty cool already, in my opinion.

On the subject of player use, if a PC assassin killed one of my NPCs in a way that denied resurrection, the NPC would stay dead. Let them have their victories, if they've earned them. Just my take on it, and I run a game with only vague plotlines that are flexible enough to support that kind of thing.

My thoughts exactly, on both accounts. Choosing spells can be a real pain, so the PF one is much easier to use. Also, if a BBEG where to be killed by a PC assassin, I wouldn't have him return - might actually even include a reference later on where the PCs hear that his minions tried getting him back and failed.

[Greenish]

This is wholly opinion, but I never understood why an assassin should have spellcasting just for being an assassin.For being an assassin, it's not needed, but it makes sense for Assassin, given that magic is one of the most versatile tools in the game, and not exactly rare at that.

Mundane is just at disadvantage when it comes to a magical world where Divinations and the like run rampart.

Though I do feel like Assassin should be prepared caster.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Really, why? Cause they should be able to select the best tools (spell in this case) for any given mission? or something else.

[Greenish]

Really, why?Because (I imagine) they work on learning the spells, instead of having a natural talent, and most of the spells on their list are utility or long duration buffs, not stuff you'd want to spam.

Somehow, assassins just feel more like "right tool for the job" than "when all you have is a hammer" to me.

[stainboy]

The classes hit two different archetypes. There's nothing wrong with the PF assassin but it's not a viable conversion for the 3e assassin.


Really, why? Cause they should be able to select the best tools (spell in this case) for any given mission? or something else.

Also this. Selecting the right tools for the hit fits the assassin archetype better than spontaneous casting. I'd like to see a contract killer class with prepared casting and a more open spell list (probably minus a few of the gems on the 3.5 assassin list, like Alter Self). It wouldn't need to replace the 3.5 or PF options or anything.

[Starbuck_II]

Because (I imagine) they work on learning the spells, instead of having a natural talent, and most of the spells on their list are utility or long duration buffs, not stuff you'd want to spam.

Somehow, assassins just feel more like "right tool for the job" than "when all you have is a hammer" to me.

But he gets the heart killing spell in Spell compendruim. That is a very asssassiny spell.

[Duncan_Ruadrik]

I remember playing 3.x, and thinking "why cant i play a non-magical assassin? It doesn't make sense." I just really, really wanted to play an assassin without the spells. basically, I wanted to play a rogue.

When PF came out, I saw the Assassin and said.... "Why can't I play an Assassin that has actually useful class abilities... like spellcasting?"

Oops.

I have come to love the 3.5 Assassin. its a PrC that actually boosts its base class another tier (in theory) and a has a spell list that is short, but to the point. It is usable by PC's and NPC's... just dont get trapped by the concept of Death Attack.

Pathfinder Assassin, on the other hand, has literally NOTHING to offer a PC. Same bad Death Attack mechanism, but nothing else to go with it, besides some lackluster "what I kill stays dead" abilities that only matter AGAINST PC's.

Also, the 3.5 assassin has some interesting language in use.... "assassins cast spells just like a bard does" or something to that effect. Spontaneous casters, and POSSIBLY (depending on whom you ask) no arcane spell failure in light armor.

Dont know if there was ever an official ruling on that, and i always play it safe and assume otherwise, but if your DM lets it fly... *shrug*

[Ivellius]

Also, the 3.5 assassin has some interesting language in use.... "assassins cast spells just like a bard does" or something to that effect. Spontaneous casters, and POSSIBLY (depending on whom you ask) no arcane spell failure in light armor.

Dont know if there was ever an official ruling on that, and i always play it safe and assume otherwise, but if your DM lets it fly... *shrug*

Interestingly, that should mean that all Assassin spells have a verbal component. Huh.

[stainboy]

Interestingly, that should mean that all Assassin spells have a verbal component. Huh.

The class was inspired by Assassin! The Musical.

Come to think of it that's Sweeney Todd.

[balistafreak]

But he gets the heart killing spell in Spell compendruim. That is a very asssassiny spell.

More KALIMA than assassin to me, but YMMV.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/248/524821815_e9d41fd8ed.jpg

[T.G. Oskar]

I find great disappointment in the PF Assassin, compared to the 3.5 version. The 3.5 version has a severe lack of good class features (SA is more of a progression than anything else; spellcasting and HiPS are some of the two good things the Assassin has alongside UMD as a class skill, the Poison save is a joke) and its main ability is extremely quirky (you have to study an enemy for 3 turns and then you have three barriers for it to work!?).

The biggest problem I see with the PF Assassin is that it loses one of its best working abilities (spellcasting, something that's actually supported in 3.5) for a series of abilities that simply won't see too much work. As mentioned, they seem better for NPCs than anything else. They lost a great chance to pull off something interesting with Hide (they get HiPS but nothing that disables magical detection other than raiding 3.5 books for Darkstalker), and their combat capabilities are still lackluster. Even worse, the death strike ability could have worked well as a Rogue ability; that shows just how bad the Assassin is compared to the main class it's meant to represent. Certainly, the Assassin having spellcasting might seem a bit off, but it was one of the ways where the PrC had something over its original counterpart. It's roughly the same as having a prestige class that requires divine grace and lay on hands, that progresses your Lay on Hands and your smite damage, and that only provided daily uses of Remove Disease alongside the LoH's mercies; while flavorful, it misses on what little the paladin has that makes it good, and it becomes strictly inferior to the original class (which begs the question of why enter the class in any case). Then there's the higher insult that the ROGUE of all people get minor spellcasting abilities, and it begs the question of why remove such an useful ability for such pisspoor exchanges (Swift Death is the only thing that might make sense, and even then it's 1/day so it really blows).

I guess the idea behind replacing the regular Assassin with the Red Mantis Assassin has some value. Illusion and Transmutation spells are no joke (some of the best buffs are amongst those two), and they get a small list of useful spells alongside that, but the fact that they went close to what the Spellthief does in terms of spells really seems surprising enough. They also get useful abilities each level, unlike the Assassin. There's no reason why not to use the Red Mantis over the vanilla Assassin, since it's at least three tiers away; toying with mundane methods of escape or make it closer to a Fighter PrC where you sacrifice your bonus feats and minor qualities for Sneak Attack, Death Attack and various abilities dealing with superiority in combat and dodging qualities might have worked, but the Assassin is tied definitively to the Rogue and that's what kills it. Maybe if you see the PF Assassin as a Fighter PrC? (And even then, it'd be better to keep levels in Fighter, or get a better PrC).

[The Random NPC]

Even worse, the death strike ability could have worked well as a Rogue ability; that shows just how bad the Assassin is compared to the main class it's meant to represent.

Rogues get death strike as a capstone in PF, if I remember correctly.

[jmelesky]

Rogues get death strike as a capstone in PF, if I remember correctly.

Yeah, though it's on every sneak attack, and you have options:


put to sleep for 1d4 hours
paralyzed for 2d6 rounds, or
slain

[stainboy]

RE: Red Mantis Assassin...

This class is way too specialized to be a generic assassin class, even if you refluff the praying mantis form (which is awesome, but maybe not what you're looking for). It's a rogue PrC that requires three tax feats and a non-Finesse weapon. It's designed exclusively for a strength-based Fighter 2 / Rogue 3.


Exotic Sawtooth Sabres should be light weapons, period. They'd be a flat +1 average damage over shortswords, which is about par for an EWP. The EWP still isn't worth the feat, but at least it's not strictly inferior to Oversized TWF.

[Ravens_cry]

Yeah, though it's on every sneak attack, and you have options:


put to sleep for 1d4 hours
paralyzed for 2d6 rounds, or
slain

Though it only works once. They are immune for the next 24 hours. Oh, and it fails against undead.

[Curious]

RE: Red Mantis Assassin...

This class is way too specialized to be a generic assassin class, even if you refluff the praying mantis form (which is awesome, but maybe not what you're looking for). It's a rogue PrC that requires three tax feats and a non-Finesse weapon. It's designed exclusively for a strength-based Fighter 2 / Rogue 3.


Exotic Sawtooth Sabres should be light weapons, period. They'd be a flat +1 average damage over shortswords, which is about par for an EWP. The EWP still isn't worth the feat, but at least it's not strictly inferior to Oversized TWF.


The SRD says they are light weapons, and Weapon Finesse works on light weapons. Still pretty taxy though.

[jmelesky]

Though it only works once. They are immune for the next 24 hours. Oh, and it fails against undead.

Yeah, the save DC could be higher, too.

But i see no reason it wouldn't work on undead (aside from wondering what "asleep" means to a lich). SA hits undead in PF.

[stainboy]

The SRD says they are light weapons, and Weapon Finesse works on light weapons. Still pretty taxy though.

Where do you see that?

Their description (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons/weapon-descriptions/sabre-sawtooth) says they're one-handed (not light) for all purposes except TWF, and this table (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons) lists them as exotic one-handed weapons.

[Ravens_cry]

Yeah, the save DC could be higher, too.

But i see no reason it wouldn't work on undead (aside from wondering what "asleep" means to a lich). SA hits undead in PF.
The additional effect is a Fortitude save that doesn't affect objects. Therefore, it doesn't affect undead, unless Pathfinder changed that.

[Curious]

Where do you see that?

Their description (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons/weapon-descriptions/sabre-sawtooth) says they're one-handed (not light) for all purposes except TWF, and this table (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons) lists them as exotic one-handed weapons.

Oh, dammit. I misread that 'counts as light for two-weapon fighting' as just counts as light. Disregard what I said, it's a terrible weapon.

[jmelesky]

The additional effect is a Fortitude save that doesn't affect objects. Therefore, it doesn't affect undead, unless Pathfinder changed that.

Ah, you're right. And if they had changed that, it would probably fall under "Immunity to ... death effects, ... paralysis, ... sleep effects ...".