Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Luminosity 08-09-04, 03:49 PM	Chill Touch Necromancy Level: Sor/Wiz 1 Components: V, S Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Touch Targets: Creature or creatures touched (up to one/level) Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: Fortitude partial or Will negates; see text Spell Resistance: Yes A touch from your hand, which glows with blue energy, disrupts the life force of living creatures. Each touch channels negative energy that deals 1d6 points of damage. The touched creature also takes 1 point of Strength damage unless it makes a successful Fortitude saving throw. You can use this melee touch attack up to one time per level. An undead creature you touch takes no damage of either sort, but it must make a successful Will saving throw or flee as if panicked for 1d4 rounds +1 round per caster level. Doesn't constant Sneak Attacks with a touch seem a tad overpowered to you?
tarkin 08-09-04, 03:58 PM	It would ... if the spell somehow let you sneak attack when you otherwise could not. The only advantage this spell has over using sneak attack with a dagger is: 1) Slightly better damage (1d6 vs 1d4) 2) Slightly better to hit (touch attack) 3) A save for a chance to do 1 point of Strength Damage 4) It makes the Sneak Attack damage count as Negative energy damage, thereby ignoring DR. ------------- But when a mage uses this spell he gets the advantages of 1-3 anyway. The spell is no more beneficial to a trickster than to any other mage. The only real reason to use this with sneak attack is optino #4, a relatively low value thing. Basically it lets you ignore the DR. Everythign else a regular mage gets when using this spell, or a thief could get from using a dagger.
Glak 08-09-04, 04:01 PM	No, not at all. That wizard could be using a club and doing just as much damage. 1d6 damage as a touch attack is no big deal. The wizard has to endanger himself by getting in close too. The Str damage is no big deal because often the opponent won't live long enough for it to matter. I suggest that you play the game a bit more.
meabolex 08-09-04, 04:09 PM	Note that if you have a melee sorcerer/wizard, this spell is very good -- especially with unarmed strike. You can discharge a touch attack with each unarmed strike: Alternatively, you may make a normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon) while holding a charge. In this case, you aren’t considered armed and you provoke attacks of opportunity as normal for the attack. (If your unarmed attack or natural weapon attack doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity, neither does this attack.) If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges. If the attack misses, you are still holding the charge. As for an arcane trickster -- if you're purposely getting in melee combat, you generally deserve to die (:
Luminosity 08-09-04, 04:14 PM	It would ... if the spell somehow let you sneak attack when you otherwise could not. The spell does this against subjects like dragons. Many rogues/Arcane Tricksters rarely hit them at all. Touches make it trivial. 2) Slightly better to hit (touch attack) My dictionary doesn't contain the definition of slightly you seem to be using. But when a mage uses this spell he gets the advantages of 1-3 anyway. The spell is no more beneficial to a trickster than to any other mage. It is much, much more benificial to a trickster than to most other mages. It alows them to sneak attack with touch attacks, iteratively. The only real reason to use this with sneak attack is optino #4, a relatively low value thing. Basically it lets you ignore the DR. No, it's to get sneak attacks with a touch, a very large advantage. And ignoring DR is nothing to sneeze at either. Everythign else a regular mage gets when using this spell, or a thief could get from using a dagger. I'm talking about Arcane Tricksters, not regular mages.
Luminosity 08-09-04, 04:16 PM	No, not at all. That wizard could be using a club and doing just as much damage. 1d6 damage as a touch attack is no big deal. The wizard has to endanger himself by getting in close too. The Str damage is no big deal because often the opponent won't live long enough for it to matter. I suggest that you play the game a bit more. Sneak attack. Not just a mage. An Arcane Trickster.
Luminosity 08-09-04, 04:17 PM	As for an arcane trickster -- if you're purposely getting in melee combat, you generally deserve to die (: Nah, they've got more defenses than a rogue, due to abjuration spells.
Rundor The Mighty 08-09-04, 04:32 PM	better just to blast them with a sneak attacked scorching ray from a safe distance then get into melee and potentially get clobbered. Only lvl 1? well you can lauch off a ranged lesser orb spell (from miniatures handbook) for 1d8 + sneak attack. 5d8 + sneak attack by level 9 from a lvl 1 spell and you never have to get in melee. Btw, what kind of trickster would have a good str score, you need the dex so your melee touch suffers. I played a mage who did a lot of melee touchs and man did he get spanked a lot.
Luminosity 08-09-04, 04:46 PM	Only lvl 1? well you can lauch off a ranged lesser orb spell (from miniatures handbook) for 1d8 + sneak attack. How many times per turn can he use that spell? It's iterative sneak attacks that I'm talking about, folks.
smrtgmp 08-09-04, 04:48 PM	Originally posted by Luminosity The spell does this against subjects like dragons. Many rogues/Arcane Tricksters rarely hit them at all. Touches make it trivial. Yeah, it would be easier to hit the dragon. Assuming you can get through its spell resistance. Not to mention that an arcane trickster that gets that close to a dragon will likely end up dead in short order. another thing to concider is that a rogue who is sneak attacking with spells only gets one sneak attack per round, as opposed to the rogue who is using TWF.
tarkin 08-09-04, 04:48 PM	The spell does this against subjects like dragons. Many rogues/Arcane Tricksters rarely hit them at all. Touches make it trivial. You misunderstood what I was saying. I was stating that it does not let them sneak attack, while you were stating that once they do Sneak Attack, they are more likely to succeed against Dragons. These are two different things. My dictionary doesn't contain the definition of slightly you seem to be using. Nope, you are over-estimating the value of touch attack. Touch attacks are slightly more valuable in part because only an idiot relies on just AC as there defense in a high end game. That dragon for example should be FLYING, not in touch range. It is much, much more benificial to a trickster than to most other mages. It alows them to sneak attack with touch attacks, iteratively. Wrong. You are focusing on the sneak attack part. This spell is incredibally usefull to any mage, it lets them do touch attacks iteratively. Yes, a Trickster can throw in Sneak Attacks on top of that, but that is the hole point of being a Trickster. It is the TRICKSTER part that is giving them the power, the Chill Touch gives a Trickster no more advantage than it gives a regular mage. No, it's to get sneak attacks with a touch, a very large advantage. And ignoring DR is nothing to sneeze at either. I do admit that ignoring DR is a good thing... except when doing a Sneak Attack chances the damage is going to be so high you will defeat the DR anyway. DR in general is not that good against a Sneak Attack I'm talking about Arcane Tricksters, not regular mages. And that is the problem. You don't seem to understand that the things you are complaining about as being over-powered help out the regular Mages MORE than it helps out the Arcane Trickster. The advantages that Chill Touch gives to a regular mage are almost the EXACT same advantages it gives to a Trickster. What you are having problems with the huge power of Sneak Attack, not the power of the Chill Touch spell. But Sneak Attack has severe limitations regarding when and where you can do it. Is Sneak Attack with a Chill Touch a good idea? Yes. Is it a GREAT idea? no. It is definitely not overpowered. The same limitations on Sneak Attack apply. Take that Dragon you were so concerned about. Chances are the Arcane Trickster: 1) Is not going to get close enough to touch the dragon, because the Dragon is flying and the Trickster is not. 2) If the trickster CAN get close enough, he is going to get SMASHED by the Dragon's AoOs (They have reach...) attempting to get close enough to touch the Dragon. 3) And then when he tries to attack, it will NOT be a sneak attack because the dragon will see them, not be flat footed, and not be Flanked.
Kaminton 08-09-04, 04:49 PM	Originally posted by Luminosity The spell does this against subjects like dragons. Many rogues/Arcane Tricksters rarely hit them at all. Touches make it trivial. Because you need at least 3 levels of rogue, you have a tougher time beating SR. You still need to flank the dragon, or otherwise deny it its Dex bonus. It is much, much more benificial to a trickster than to most other mages. It alows them to sneak attack with touch attacks, iteratively. Arcane tricksters have wizard BABs. Just how many sneak attacks do you think you're getting out of this? You're better off either energy substituting scorching ray, or using a higher level ranged touch spell. No, it's to get sneak attacks with a touch, a very large advantage. And ignoring DR is nothing to sneeze at either. By the time you're fighting a dragon (or anything with DR), especially as an arcane trickster (minimum level 9), you will almost certainly have a magical weapon of some sort. Dragons only have DR/magic, so it's irrelevant in this case. Also, even though they have abjurations, arcane tricksters still: 1. Can't wear armor 2. Have Wizard HP and BAB 3. Need high Dex and high Int (ie, his other stats aren't that impressive unless you play with super-high stats) for their primary classes. I really don't think you want to be in melee with anything big like a dragon - it'll kill you with a full attack (or less).
bitnine 08-09-04, 05:08 PM	I really don't think you want to be in melee with anything big like a dragon - it'll kill you with a full attack (or less).Heh, I knew I wasn't the only one thinking that as an arcane trickster, I'd probably avoid walking up to a dragon so as to engage it in melee.
Luminosity 08-09-04, 05:11 PM	Originally posted by tarkin You misunderstood what I was saying. I was stating that it does not let them sneak attack, while you were stating that once they do Sneak Attack, they are more likely to succeed against Dragons. These are two different things. I understood you and I know that they are different things. I don't believe that what you said was relevent. Nope, you are over-estimating the value of touch attack. Touch attacks are slightly more valuable in part because only an idiot relies on just AC as there defense in a high end game. That dragon for example should be FLYING, not in touch range. Oh yeah. I forgot that PC's have no way of flying. Except for, you know, Fly. And Polymorph. And Shapechange. And, by the way, if the Dragon is in the air and you're not, you're probably going to die anyway. And overestimating the value of touch attacks? A Great Wyrm has touch ac of less than ten and regular ac of more than 38. I'm going to call that a significant difference. Wrong. You are focusing on the sneak attack part. This spell is incredibally usefull to any mage, it lets them do touch attacks iteratively. For 1d6 per hit. A mage with iterative attacks would scoff at 1d6 damage. Yes, a Trickster can throw in Sneak Attacks on top of that, but that is the hole point of being a Trickster. It is the TRICKSTER part that is giving them the power, the Chill Touch gives a Trickster no more advantage than it gives a regular mage. It is the synergy that is an issue. These are individually balanced, but I think they're overpowered together. And it gives an AT a much greater advantage than a regular mage. Regular mages can't use Chill Touch to Sneak Attack. I do admit that ignoring DR is a good thing... except when doing a Sneak Attack chances the damage is going to be so high you will defeat the DR anyway. DR in general is not that good against a Sneak Attack First of all, it's an extra 5-20 damage on each attack. Second of all, it's secondary to the arguent. You don't seem to understand that the things you are complaining about as being over-powered help out the regular Mages MORE than it helps out the Arcane Trickster. The advantages that Chill Touch gives to a regular mage are almost the EXACT same advantages it gives to a Trickster. You don't seem to understand what you're saying at all, I'm afraid. How many sneak attack dice does a level 20 wizard get from using Chill Touch to overcome 20+ points of natural armor? Sneak attacking characters are intended to hit less often than fighter types. Do you think rogues have medium BAB because of Trapfinding? It's the Sneak Attack, and SA isn't supposed to hit more often than the fighter's first attack. 1) Is not going to get close enough to touch the dragon, because the Dragon is flying and the Trickster is not.[./quote] Mentioned above. [quote]2) If the trickster CAN get close enough, he is going to get SMASHED by the Dragon's AoOs (They have reach...) attempting to get close enough to touch the Dragon. That's the sort of thing that makes me wish Rogues had some sort of tumbling skill that let them move through threatened space. 3) And then when he tries to attack, it will NOT be a sneak attack because the dragon will see them, not be flat footed, and not be Flanked. Teammates are assumed in D&D. Dragons are easy to flank due to their size. And dragons aren't the topic of this thread.
Kaminton 08-09-04, 05:56 PM	Please don't say you're going to cast Tenser's Transformation to get more iterative attacks just to get more use out of chill touch... that just kills the rest of your spellcasting capabilities since you can't turn it off at will. Arcane tricksters just don't get that much BAB. 10 levels of arcane trickster: +5 6 levels of wizard: +3 4 levels of rogue: +3 Total: +11 At best you'll get 3 iterative attacks at level 20. If you want 9th level spells, you'll only have 2 (swap one level of wizard for one level of rogue). You'll never have more than 3 attacks, since full rogues only get that many. Is it *really* worth using a 1st level spell like this to deal damage (unless you're desperate)? A CR20 anything is going to laugh at you.
lord 08-10-04, 05:24 AM	>1) Slightly better damage (1d6 vs 1d4) Ok! No bigg deal >2) Slightly better to hit (touch attack) Change that to: extremly better to hit. > 3) A save for a chance to do 1 point of Strength Damage Ok, no big deal >4) It makes the Sneak Attack damage count as Negative energy damage, thereby >ignoring DR. Which i would say is an preaty ok bonus. (+10 on damage against werewolfs?) All in all, very, very good. But then ray of frost would do the same thing. Just not mention higher level spells... Arcane tricster seems ok at low/mid level but at higher... Well I have not tried it ;) ;)