rogue question. reguarding sword sage dip.

[Agamemmnoth]

Was reading through this for a rogue friend of mine

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?156350-3-5-The-Rogue-Handbook-A-Fistful-of-d6

This build really caught my attention

Rogue 5/Assassin 9(prob swap out for avenger or slayer of domiel) (good aligned rogue)/Swordsage 1/Unseen Seer 1/Nightsong Enforcer 4 (apparently getting 13d6 worth of sneak attacks.

now if I'm correct this build would grant you level 3 maneuvers having an initiator level of 5.

Now here's the controversial part. in order to get 13d6 you would have to be able to take assassin stance for the extra 2d6 sneak attack. Is that not against what it says in TOB? Does it not say your first stance has to be a level 1 stance?

His argument is "I disagree with that interpretation. By RAW, you don't "start play" if you multiclass into it at 9th level, so you aren't forced to take a 1st level stance. By RAI, there's no reason why you should be forced to take a 1st level stance, and the phrase "start play" has been used by WotC books often enough that I'm inclined to believe they just didn't think of multiclassing when they wrote that line."

So is this strong enough of a case for my friend to bring to his dm? He's in a different campaign than I am.

[Azoth]

It is widely accepted (on this forum atleast) that the "start play" part does in fact mean that regardless of your IL when taking your first level in a Martial Initiator class that your first stance must be a level 1 stance.

Now, there are still several attractive level one stances for him to take, Child of Shadow I'm looking at you, and a second level won't hurt him badly. At most he gives up 1d6 sneak attack dice.

This is easily made up for with any of the following items:
Rogue's Vest=+1d6
Assassination weapon enhancement (+1)=+1d6
Deadly Precision weapon enhancement (+1)=+1d6
Bracers of (hunter or murder) can't remember which ATM but both are good for rogues=+1d6

So through gear alone he can gain +4d6 sneak attack dice.

[Curmudgeon]

This phrase is used fairly commonly in class descriptions.
The bard’s selection of spells is extremely limited. A bard begins play knowing four 0-level spells of your choice. At most new bard levels, he gains one or more new spells ...
A sorcerer’s selection of spells is extremely limited. A sorcerer begins play knowing four 0-level spells and two 1st-level spells of your choice.
A wizard begins play with a spellbook containing all 0-level wizard spells (except those from her prohibited school or schools, if any; see School Specialization, below) plus three 1st-level spells of your choice.
A psion begins play knowing three psion powers of your choice. Each time he achieves a new level, he unlocks the knowledge of new powers.
A psychic warrior begins play knowing one psychic warrior power of your choice. Each time he achieves a new level, he unlocks the knowledge of a new power.
A wilder begins play knowing one wilder power of your choice. At every even-numbered class level after 1st, she unlocks the knowledge of new powers.
A spellthief’s selection of spells is extremely limited. A spellthief begins play knowing no spells but gains one or more new spells at certain levels ...
A vigilante’s selection of spells is extremely limited. A vigilante begins play knowing two 1st-level spells of his choice. At most new vigilante levels, he gains one or more new spells known ...
Bonus Feat: A wu jen begins play with a bonus metamagic feat.
...
A wu jen begins play with a spellbook containing all 0-level wu jen spells plus three 1st-level spells of your choice. The consequences of attempting to make "begins play" mean at 1st character level are completely ridiculous. How is a multiclass Wu Jen going to retroactively gain a bonus metamagic feat at 1st character level? How is the Vigilante PrC supposed to make spells know to the character at their first character level, long before they could qualify to enter the class?

In the context of class descriptions, "level" means levels in that class, and "begins play" means beginning at level 1 in that class. It works that way for all classes, Swordsages included.

[Agamemmnoth]

This phrase is used fairly commonly in class descriptions. The consequences of attempting to make "begins play" mean at 1st character level are completely ridiculous. How is a multiclass Wu Jen going to retroactively gain a bonus metamagic feat at 1st character level? How is the Vigilante PrC supposed to make spells know to the character at their first character level, long before they could qualify to enter the class?

In the context of class descriptions, "level" means levels in that class, and "begins play" means beginning at level 1 in that class. It works that way for all classes, Swordsages included.

makes perfect sense.

[Agamemmnoth]

This phrase is used fairly commonly in class descriptions. The consequences of attempting to make "begins play" mean at 1st character level are completely ridiculous. How is a multiclass Wu Jen going to retroactively gain a bonus metamagic feat at 1st character level? How is the Vigilante PrC supposed to make spells know to the character at their first character level, long before they could qualify to enter the class?

In the context of class descriptions, "level" means levels in that class, and "begins play" means beginning at level 1 in that class. It works that way for all classes, Swordsages included.

I have heard you're the local rogue expert. So what would be the best way to maximize a build like that. Taking two in sword sage? How much would you gimp the class by subbing avenger for slayer of domiel.

[Seharvepernfan]

You can still take Martial Stance after you take a level of swordsage, to get assassins stance.

[Agamemmnoth]

You can still take Martial Stance after you take a level of swordsage, to get assassins stance.

that was the answer I needed

[Agamemmnoth]

It is widely accepted (on this forum atleast) that the "start play" part does in fact mean that regardless of your IL when taking your first level in a Martial Initiator class that your first stance must be a level 1 stance.

Now, there are still several attractive level one stances for him to take, Child of Shadow I'm looking at you, and a second level won't hurt him badly. At most he gives up 1d6 sneak attack dice.

This is easily made up for with any of the following items:
Rogue's Vest=+1d6
Assassination weapon enhancement (+1)=+1d6
Deadly Precision weapon enhancement (+1)=+1d6
Bracers of (hunter or murder) can't remember which ATM but both are good for rogues=+1d6

So through gear alone he can gain +4d6 sneak attack dice.

now if you took the Sacred Strike feat would that turn those d6 into d8 against evil creatures? I assume it would.

[Azoth]

now if you took the Sacred Strike feat would that turn those d6 into d8 against evil creatures? I assume it would.

It should do so, as the feat doesn't specify that only SA dice gained from class levels get the damage boost.

Why spend a feat when gold is more abundant though. If you combine the Bracers of Murder and Bracers of the Hunter into one item using the MIC rules you gain an extra d6 of damage and reroll all 1's on SA dice.

This changes the average damage per dice from 3.5 to 4. Sacred strike has an average of 4.5 damage. So you only come up (on average) 1 damage lower per 2 dice of sneak attack damage you have. Even at +17d6 SA you only lose an average of 8 damage per strike. So instead of dealing (on average) +85 damage per hit you deal (on average) +77 damage.

This damage is also consistant across the board, and doesn't apply to just enemies your DM decides ping as Evil and not just Neutral with strong evil tendencies.

[Curmudgeon]

I have heard you're the local rogue expert. So what would be the best way to maximize a build like that. Taking two in sword sage? How much would you gimp the class by subbing avenger for slayer of domiel.
Going for the most and best dice of sneak attack is a short-sighted goal. Your objective should be to take down enemies; that's what makes for an effective combatant. A build that stops at Rogue 5 won't give you Crippling Strike (STR damage with every sneak attack) or Skill Mastery (very effective with Knowledge Devotion for a combat-focused Rogue).

I've never used Avenger, because it's an April Fool's joke and widely regarded as such rather than a playable class. Note that the table lists sneak attack progressing at odd levels, but the text states that it progresses at even levels. Of course text trumps table for these sorts of "disagreements" (or it's a subtle reinforcement of the joke :smallwink:). Mechanically speaking, Avenger is weak compared to the Assassin. Not only does it lack 1 die of sneak attack compared to the Assassin at odd levels, it has no access to Assassin spells. There are quite a few of those when you add in Spell Compendium, Complete Scoundrel, and Player's Handbook II. Slayer of Domiel is also a sub-par choice, because it requires expending two precious feat slots for entry requirements. I'd rather embrace the Evil and go kill somebody to qualify for Assassin.

A very high priority for any Rogue build is gaining high-quality feats. Rogues have no bonus feats, yet require several feats to patch some of the weaknesses WotC built into the base class. For instance, you need Craven the same way a Fighter needs Power Attack; that boosts sneak attack damage to where you're a serious threat rather than dependent on lucky damage rolls. (By contrast, Deadly Precision (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#deadlyPrecision) is a waste of a feat slot; its benefit to sneak attack damage is only about one-fifth that of Craven. Sacred Strike is also sub-par compared to Craven; it won't help at all against enemies who are primarily Neutral, Good, Chaotic, or Lawful; just the Evil ones.) If you're going to be fighting in melee, you need Staggering Strike (Complete Adventurer) as your level 9 feat to avoid full attacks by your enemies; Rogues are too squishy to withstand those.

I wouldn't bother with a Swordsage dip at all unless I had specific advantages in mind:

A need for the benefit of Weapon Focus (via Discipline Focus).
A DM who didn't correct their skills typo ("Class Skills (6 + Int modifier per level, ×6 at 1st level") for a level 1 dip.
Use of specific maneuvers. This would be a list limited in both number and strength. A 1-level Swordsage dip at high pre-Epic levels would limit you to level 4 maneuvers (IL under 11). A 2-level Swordsage dip at levels 19-20 would allow level 5 maneuvers as well as qualifying to take stances higher than level 1. You might dip Swordsage at levels 1 and 20 to get all of these benefits, assuming you're building the character for level 20 use.

If you want the benefit of Assassin's Stance, I suggest you purchase Shadow Hands (Novice) (Tome of Battle, page 150) and then take Martial Stance. Azoth's advice to spend gold rather than feats is very sound. Of course, I would instead suggest you buy Improved Unarmed Strike (Bracers of Striking (Magic of Faerûn, pages 155-156) or a Fanged Ring (Dragon Magic, page 101)) to qualify for Snap Kick (Tome of Battle, page 32); an extra attack with all your sneak attack damage is worth considerably more than a mere +2d6 damage on one attack.

[Agamemmnoth]

Going for the most and best dice of sneak attack is a short-sighted goal. Your objective should be to take down enemies; that's what makes for an effective combatant. A build that stops at Rogue 5 won't give you Crippling Strike (STR damage with every sneak attack) or Skill Mastery (very effective with Knowledge Devotion for a combat-focused Rogue).

I've never used Avenger, because it's an April Fool's joke and widely regarded as such rather than a playable class. Note that the table lists sneak attack progressing at odd levels, but the text states that it progresses at even levels. Of course text trumps table for these sorts of "disagreements" (or it's a subtle reinforcement of the joke :smallwink:). Mechanically speaking, Avenger is weak compared to the Assassin. Not only does it lack 1 die of sneak attack compared to the Assassin at odd levels, it has no access to Assassin spells. There are quite a few of those when you add in Spell Compendium, Complete Scoundrel, and Player's Handbook II. Slayer of Domiel is also a sub-par choice, because it requires expending two precious feat slots for entry requirements. I'd rather embrace the Evil and go kill somebody to qualify for Assassin.

A very high priority for any Rogue build is gaining high-quality feats. Rogues have no bonus feats, yet require several feats to patch some of the weaknesses WotC built into the base class. For instance, you need Craven the same way a Fighter needs Power Attack; that boosts sneak attack damage to where you're a serious threat rather than dependent on lucky damage rolls. (By contrast, Deadly Precision (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#deadlyPrecision) is a waste of a feat slot; its benefit to sneak attack damage is only about one-fifth that of Craven. Sacred Strike is also sub-par compared to Craven; it won't help at all against enemies who are primarily Neutral, Good, Chaotic, or Lawful; just the Evil ones.) If you're going to be fighting in melee, you need Staggering Strike (Complete Adventurer) as your level 9 feat to avoid full attacks by your enemies; Rogues are too squishy to withstand those.

I wouldn't bother with a Swordsage dip at all unless I had specific advantages in mind:

A need for the benefit of Weapon Focus (via Discipline Focus).
A DM who didn't correct their skills typo ("Class Skills (6 + Int modifier per level, ×6 at 1st level") for a level 1 dip.
Use of specific maneuvers. This would be a list limited in both number and strength. A 1-level Swordsage dip at high pre-Epic levels would limit you to level 4 maneuvers (IL under 11). A 2-level Swordsage dip at levels 19-20 would allow level 5 maneuvers as well as qualifying to take stances higher than level 1. You might dip Swordsage at levels 1 and 20 to get all of these benefits, assuming you're building the character for level 20 use.

If you want the benefit of Assassin's Stance, I suggest you purchase Shadow Hands (Novice) (Tome of Battle, page 150) and then take Martial Stance. Azoth's advice to spend gold rather than feats is very sound. Of course, I would instead suggest you buy Improved Unarmed Strike (Bracers of Striking (Magic of Faerûn, pages 155-156) or a Fanged Ring (Dragon Magic, page 101)) to qualify for Snap Kick (Tome of Battle, page 32); an extra attack with all your sneak attack damage is worth considerably more than a mere +2d6 damage on one attack.


Thanks for the advice. the reason I suggested avenger or slayer over assassin is (this needs to be a holy demon slaying rogue build that's what he wants) So I'm trying to max out his combat. I know craven is a must. I was going to sword sage for the Shadow Blade feat which allows me to use dex instead of str. I think the dm was going to allow him to bypass the feat requirements for slayer. I disagree with that but it's his dm. All the creatures they've fought in this campaign have been evil and will likely continue to be evil aligned. Hence the sacred strike. He had also planned on taking staggering strikes. The dm is rolling a 3.5 campaign but allowing the feat progression of pathfinder. so a feat at every odd level. plus I think he's getting two fang daggers eventually.

[Azoth]

He is going to need some method of Move+Full Attack. Even with more feats, I don't feel Sacred Strike is worth it. Too many other good feats out there to blow one on a modicum of more damage.

Basic rogue feat suit will take up most of his feats.
Darkstalker, weapon finess, shadow blade, TWF tree, and his PRC feat prereqs.

[Curmudgeon]

I was going to sword sage for the Shadow Blade feat which allows me to use dex instead of str.
That's in addition to, not instead of. The text of the feat doesn't match the short description, and it wins in this sort of disagreement.

[Agamemmnoth]

That's in addition to, not instead of. The text of the feat doesn't match the short description, and it wins in this sort of disagreement.


So what would the best build for him be? and feats. I'm new to dnd 3.5 so all I know is what that guide told me which sounds like it isn't a good guide at all.

LV1- Weapon Finesse, Two Weapon Fighting, Knowledge Devotion

LV 3- Sacred Strike

LV 5- Able Learner

LV 7- Improved Two Weapon Fighting

LV 9- Craven

LV 11- Travel Devotion

LV 13- Greater Two Weapon Fighting

LV 15-Martial Stand

LV 17- Staggering Strikes

LV 19- Shadow Blade

these are what he's told me he's chosen. they sounded like solid choices to me, but like I said I'm new and I'm submitting my self to the rogue gods of this forum to help me guide my rogue friend along his back stabbing/ demon slaying ways.

I know he's taking an acf for penetrating strikes.

This is all based on the build I presented. If there is a better build selection for him I'm all ears.

[ddude987]

~
LV 5- Able Learner
~


Able Learner must be taken at first and doesnt really help this build. I'd cut it and get shadow blade a lot earlier if possible.

Also how is he picking up 3 feats at first level? Human and a single flaw? Two flaws? Is the DM allowing flaws?

[Agamemmnoth]

Able Learner must be taken at first and doesnt really help this build. I'd cut it and get shadow blade a lot earlier if possible.

Also how is he picking up 3 feats at first level? Human and a single flaw? Two flaws? Is the DM allowing flaws?

I should have stated that the dm gives everyone a "hero" bonus feat as a house rule.

[ddude987]

I would still address the issue with able learner being a 1st level only feat, and if he is going with the mostly rogue with a single level or two in swordsage I would stay away from the feat anyways.

[Agamemmnoth]

I would still address the issue with able learner being a 1st level only feat, and if he is going with the mostly rogue with a single level or two in swordsage I would stay away from the feat anyways.

the full build was Rogue 5/Assassin 9/Swordsage 1/Unseen Seer 1/Nightsong Enforcer 4

Now since learning that the guide he was using is not a good guide as it seems. I'm questioning the whole builds worth. He said able learner was needed to keep up the skills while multi-classing.

[Azoth]

Rogue builds vary depending on the main objective of the build. If he just wants the most SA dice possible, while still being competent at mele that is all well and good. We can make this happen easily.

What is the theme of the character? As in what does he see it doing and how does he want it to get there?

I see he has assassin and unseen seer. Is he looking to be a caster, or was that just a step towards gaining more SA dice?

[Agamemmnoth]

Rogue builds vary depending on the main objective of the build. If he just wants the most SA dice possible, while still being competent at mele that is all well and good. We can make this happen easily.

What is the theme of the character? As in what does he see it doing and how does he want it to get there?

I see he has assassin and unseen seer. Is he looking to be a caster, or was that just a step towards gaining more SA dice?

The goal he envisioned is this is a holy, dual wielding, rogue/demon slayer assassin able to step through the shadows while doing as much sneak attack and melee damage as possible, while still be ok at scouting if needed. He figured the spells would be an added bonus.

the build with some of the shadow manuevers seemed perfect for this, however, it seems I was wrong. Lol.

[ddude987]

the full build was Rogue 5/Assassin 9/Swordsage 1/Unseen Seer 1/Nightsong Enforcer 4

Now since learning that the guide he was using is not a good guide as it seems. I'm questioning the whole builds worth. He said able learner was needed to keep up the skills while multi-classing.

You shouldn't need to if I'm counting correctly but I could be wrong. From what I see, almost every single skill he needs trained to max or similar is a class skill for all the classes he would enter. In any case, as you stated, it isn't that good a guide.