Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Sledged 12-31-07, 12:20 AM	If I have SA from a class other than rogue (swash 3/rang 2/assassin 3) and I take the feat Daring Outlaw (Complete Scoundrel), am I treated as having levels of rogue equal to my swashbuckler level to determine my sneak attack damage? Or does that only work if I actually have levels in rogue?
Salla 12-31-07, 12:24 AM	By the RAW, only rogue levels count.
unundindur 12-31-07, 10:59 AM	By RAW you are out of luck, any reasonable Gm though would likely allow it. I would :rolleyes:
Sledged 12-31-07, 08:59 PM	I guess that also means that a swashbuckler 2/warblade 6 (Tome of Battle) with Daring Warrior can't stack the swashbuckler levels for the purpose of qualifying for feats that require a minimum fighter level.
BugHunter 12-31-07, 09:09 PM	By RAW daring warrior only works with fighter levels and none of the martial adept classes. Of course a dm can house rule anything they want.
runestar 12-31-07, 10:58 PM	By RAW you are out of luck, any reasonable Gm though would likely allow it. I would :rolleyes: Reasonable is also a very subjective term.;)
Rahvan 12-31-07, 11:12 PM	Depends on how you look at it, you could say you are rogue 0 /Swashbuckler 3, so one could say you are on par with a rogue level 3 for sneak attack. As for the warblade you would you are fighter 2 (for feats, and I don't know the prerequisites of daring warrior) due to the swashbuckler levels, so it would say that you are level two fighter when you look at the feat prerequisites, and level 4 fighter from warblade levels, so level 6 for qualifying for fighter only feats. Don't know if it is fully legit, but it only makes sense....
Saiyamantis 01-01-08, 12:01 AM	Daring Outlaw says your rogue and swashbuckler levels stack to determine sneak attack damage, but it never actually says you have to have rogue levels. I'd treat your rogue level as zero, meaning your swashbuckler level alone determines sneak attack. Since all sneak attack damage stacks, you'll also add your assassin sneak attack afterwards. Daring Warrior says that your swashbuckler levels stack with fighter levels. The warblade's weapon aptitude gives you an effective fighter level for the purpose of qualifying for feats, which also stacks with fighter levels for the same purpose. I'd say that's good enough for Daring Warrior.
runestar 01-01-08, 08:00 AM	Daring Outlaw says your rogue and swashbuckler levels stack to determine sneak attack damage, but it never actually says you have to have rogue levels. I'd treat your rogue level as zero, meaning your swashbuckler level alone determines sneak attack. Since all sneak attack damage stacks, you'll also add your assassin sneak attack afterwards. True... So a single feat can now grant upwards to +10d6 sneak attack...and I thought that nothing would faze me after the pounce-barb variant in complete champion...:cool: But then again, swashbuckler was a pretty weak class to begin with, so I suppose it could use every little boost it can get.:P
BugHunter 01-01-08, 11:57 AM	Daring Outlaw says your rogue and swashbuckler levels stack to determine sneak attack damage, but it never actually says you have to have rogue levels. I'd treat your rogue level as zero, meaning your swashbuckler level alone determines sneak attack. Since all sneak attack damage stacks, you'll also add your assassin sneak attack afterwards. You don't need to be a rogue but you do need to have +2d6 of SA or SS to take the feat. Daring Warrior says that your swashbuckler levels stack with fighter levels. The warblade's weapon aptitude gives you an effective fighter level for the purpose of qualifying for feats, which also stacks with fighter levels for the same purpose. I'd say that's good enough for Daring Warrior. The warblade's weapon aptitude does allow for taking fighter level required feats but there is the -2 warblade levels to find your fighter level. So for a warblade/swashbuckler to take daring warrior you need to be warblade 6/ swashbuckler 2 and have the weapon specialization feat.
Ace_of_time 01-01-08, 12:24 PM	Assuming your talking about assassin/ swash and assuming swash has sneak attack too. They already stack. Sneak Attack: This is exactly like the rogue ability of the same name. The extra damage dealt increases by +1d6 every other level (2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th, and 10th). If an assassin gets a sneak attack bonus from another source the bonuses on damage stack. Edit: They don't get sneak attack, sorry.
Sledged 01-01-08, 01:13 PM	Here's the build I had in mind with Daring Outlaw: human swashbuckler (1d6) Two-Weapon Fighting, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (kukri) swashbuckler swashbuckler (2d6) Point Blank Shot fighter Far Shot swashbuckler invisible blade 1d6 Exotic Weapon Proficiency (bastard sword) ronin 2d6 assassin 3d6 swashbuckler 6d6 Daring Outlaw swashbuckler swashbuckler 7d6 swashbuckler Improved Two-Weapon Fighting swashbuckler 8d6 swashbuckler swashbuckler 9d6 Improved Critical swashbuckler warblade swashbuckler 10d6 Telling Blow swashbuckler swashbuckler 11d6 maneuvers: blood in the water dancing mongoose pouncing charge stance: punishing stance If I have to have a level of rogue to get the benefit of swashbuckling sneak attack damage, I'd just go with: human rogue 1d6 Point Blank Shot, Two-Weapon Fighting swashbuckler Weapon Finesse fighter Far Shot, Weapon Focus (kukri) swashbuckler rogue assassin 3d6 Daring Outlaw swashbuckler 4d6 invisible blade 5d6 swashbuckler Improved Initiative nightsong enforcer 6d6 swashbuckler 7d6 swashbuckler Improved Two-Weapon Fighting swashbuckler 8d6 swashbuckler swashbuckler 9d6 Improved Critical (kukri) swashbuckler warblade swashbuckler 10d6 Telling Blow swashbuckler swashbuckler 11d6 maneuvers: blood in the water dancing mongoose pouncing charge stance: punishing stance In fact, I think I like this build better. Comparing the options, I'd say it's a minor issue, at most, whether or not you have to have rogue levels to get the SA benefit of Daring Outlaw.
Sledged 01-01-08, 01:20 PM	But then again, swashbuckler was a pretty weak class to begin with, so I suppose it could use every little boost it can get.:P I'd say the feat is a thinly veiled attempt to make swashbuckler levels beyond 3rd more attractive.
Jaxgaret 01-01-08, 03:24 PM	Just chiming in here - I would rule it as Saiyamantis did.
mplindustries 01-02-08, 12:26 AM	I see no reason why your 0 rogue levels wouldn't stack with your X swashbuckler levels. 0 + X = X and there is no indication that you have to have rogue levels for the "stacking" to work. Plus, all the other arguments already mentioned (i.e. Swashbucklers are a 3 level class without Daring Outlaw) However, I'd be careful using Invisible Blade to qualify for Daring Outlaw, as it is technically not "Sneak Attack" but rather "Dagger Sneak Attack." Its a super minor difference, and I'd absolutely allow it to work, but I am sure there are nit-picky GMs that wouldn't.
Sedgewick 01-02-08, 05:05 AM	First off let me preface this post with the fact that I am not accustomed to the manuevers and stances as our group doesn't use them. I don't see why on earth you would only take 1 lvl of invisible blade, you don't get the prestiges full worth without taking all 5 lvls, ie. full fighter BAB, full sneak progression and the free action feint, not to mention you are limiting the unfettered defense to a max +1 ac by giving up wearing armor as opposed to a max of +5 ac if you have a 20+ int and there would be no reason not to.:D swash/rogue/invisble blade has great stat synergy from int, skills, bonus damage, and ac all off int. and if you are going to take even lvls of rogue you may as well take odd lvls of fighter:confused:
Sledged 01-02-08, 01:09 PM	However, I'd be careful using Invisible Blade to qualify for Daring Outlaw, as it is technically not "Sneak Attack" but rather "Dagger Sneak Attack." Its a super minor difference, and I'd absolutely allow it to work, but I am sure there are nit-picky GMs that wouldn't. Fortunately, even if dagger sneak attack, doesn't qualify, both builds still meet the prereqs for Daring Outlaw. That aside, I'm sure many DMs would allow it, especially if sudden strike is allowed to meet sneak attack prereqs and reqs. First off let me preface this post with the fact that I am not accustomed to the manuevers and stances as our group doesn't use them. Up until recently, I wasn't accustomed to them either. I don't see why on earth you would only take 1 lvl of invisible blade, you don't get the prestiges full worth without taking all 5 lvls, ie. full fighter BAB, full sneak progression and the free action feint, not to mention you are limiting the unfettered defense to a max +1 ac by giving up wearing armor as opposed to a max of +5 ac if you have a 20+ int and there would be no reason not to.:D My original goal was "lots of sneak attack damage with a high BAB." (In fact, one of my first attempts gave me a BAB of +19 and a SA damage of +12d6.) So in all honesty, I didn't look past 1st level "dagger sneak attack," full BAB, and the entry requirements. I thought about saving myself two feats and just going with a level of ronin instead, but EWP (bastard sword) is a nigh useless feat with this build. Also, one of the side benefits of the warblade is that I can change to what weapon the feats Weapon Focus and Improved Critical apply. If I go beyond kukri, dagger, and punching dagger with Weapon Focus or wield any other weapon, I lose invisible blade class features (namely dagger sneak attack). That being said, two kukris are the optimum weapons for this build. It's the only finessable weapon with a 18-20 threat range with the minimum TWF penalty. So it's unlikely Weapon Focus and Improved Critical will be changed too often. I'll look over the invisible blade more thoroughly and reevaluate the build. swash/rogue/invisble blade has great stat synergy from int, skills, bonus damage, and ac all off int. and if you are going to take even lvls of rogue you may as well take odd lvls of fighter:confused: Even levels of rogue: where the sneak attack damage is concerned, both builds have an odd number of effective rogue levels (rogue + swash = 15). Beyond that I don't see the benefit of having an odd number of rogue levels over an even number. The one level of fighter is there so I can get all the feats I wanted with this build (I try to avoid using flaws), and any more than one level would cost me sneak attack damage or maneuver goodies.
Sedgewick 01-10-08, 09:05 PM	my bad on the rogue + swash = 15 (odd number for sneak purposes), and 1 lvl fighter is the exception to the rule as far as odd numbered lvls of fighter being sub optimal.
Cartigan 01-10-08, 10:50 PM	Also, wouldn't you be able to take Daring Outlaw with the Ninja class?
BugHunter 01-10-08, 11:16 PM	According to how sudden strike is the same as sneak attack for feats and PrCs then sure ninja can take daring outlaw.
unundindur 01-16-08, 09:51 AM	I see no reason why your 0 rogue levels wouldn't stack with your X swashbuckler levels. 0 + X = X and there is no indication that you have to have rogue levels for the "stacking" to work. Plus, all the other arguments already mentioned (i.e. Swashbucklers are a 3 level class without Daring Outlaw) However, I'd be careful using Invisible Blade to qualify for Daring Outlaw, as it is technically not "Sneak Attack" but rather "Dagger Sneak Attack." Its a super minor difference, and I'd absolutely allow it to work, but I am sure there are nit-picky GMs that wouldn't. As far as I can see it would cualify, but only as long as you use daggers. That would follow the ruling for PrC requirements (you can qualify by using items, but once you lose the requirement you lose all benefits).
mplindustries 01-17-08, 01:16 AM	As far as I can see it would cualify, but only as long as you use daggers. That would follow the ruling for PrC requirements (you can qualify by using items, but once you lose the requirement you lose all benefits). Well, what you said would be the case if the ability was something like: Sneak Attack (Ex): Blah blah insert description of sneak attack here. The extra sneak attack damage only applies to attacks made with daggers, etc. However, it is actually presented as: Dagger Sneak Attack (Ex): Blah blah insert description of sneak attack here. The extra sneak attack damage only applies to attacks made with daggers, etc. As I said previously, it is in fact a super minor difference, but its not technically "Sneak Attack," it is "Dagger Sneak Attack." That said, I don't think many people would actually disallow it on that basis, and it was probably not even worth mentioning, but it is RAW that way. Poor wording is pretty rampant. I mean, technically, Dread Necromancers have no effective rebuking level, despite getting the Rebuke ability. Now, unlike the Dread Necromancer situation, I can actually see one potential reason to not let "Dagger Sneak Attack" qualify: the exact topic of this thread - qualifying for a feat that gives you a version of sneak attack that is better than the version you have. By RAW, Daring Outlaw only requires you to have the +2d6 Sneak Attack, not be able to use it. Invisible Blades still "have" +2d6 Dagger Sneak Attack even when not wielding a dagger, they just can't apply it. Besides, by your suggested method (by the way, a perfectly reasonable position to take without looking as deeply as I am wont to do), if I did take something like Daring Outlaw with just Invisible Blade for the prerequisites, when would I be denied the benefit of the feat? Would I suddenly lose all effective Rogue levels when I sheathed my daggers? Could I keep the bonuses even when I simply held a dagger in my hand, even if I didn't use it? If I actually have to "use" the daggers, do I keep the feat's benefits if I make a single dagger attack, say as my last one and use unarmed strikes for the rest? Its very problematic when someone could potentially lose/gain a particular ability multiple times in one round. Anyway, though, I want to reiterate that it was probably a pointless thing for me to mention in the first place. I would allow it to work, no problem. After the errata made Uncanny Feint useable only once per round, I feel as if its a pretty weak class and buffing it won't hurt anything. Oh, and it didn't even apply to the author's problem because he had sneak attack from other sources to qualify for it.
ToastedAmphibian 01-17-08, 06:08 PM	If you give a zombie a headband of intelect, does he now have an intelligence score? No. You dont have rogue levels. So you cant stack with them. If you go on the principle that everyone is level 0 in every class, then you get some ugly interactions. Things like monk belts, supierior unarmed strikes, and especially tashalatora feat. Besides, on level of rogue is pretty good. Also, you could learn assassins stance, +2d6 SA. Not bad really, especially if you combine it with that feat that gives you dex to damage when in a shadow stance
Jaxgaret 01-19-08, 04:45 AM	If you give a zombie a headband of intelect, does he now have an intelligence score? No. By your reasoning, if a Human puts on an Amulet of Natural Armor it would do nothing for them, since they have no natural armor bonus to enhance. Amulet of Natural Armor This amulet, usually crafted from bone or beast scales, toughens the wearer’s body and flesh, giving him an enhancement bonus to his natural armor bonus of from +1 to +5, depending on the kind of amulet. Emphasis mine. Thus characters with no natural armor bonus are treated as having a natural armor bonus of +0, so that items such as the Amulet work for them. The same concept applies to characters without levels in a particular class; they are considered as having zero levels in the class. You dont have rogue levels. So you cant stack with them. If you go on the principle that everyone is level 0 in every class, then you get some ugly interactions. Things like monk belts A Monk's Belt does work for characters without Monk levels.
Cartigan 01-19-08, 06:44 AM	By your reasoning, if a Human puts on an Amulet of Natural Armor it would do nothing for them, since they have no natural armor bonus to enhance. Racial and class abilities are differentiated in the entire polymorph line. Emphasis mine. Thus characters with no natural armor bonus are treated as having a natural armor bonus of +0, so that items such as the Amulet work for them. The same concept applies to characters without levels in a particular class; they are considered as having zero levels in the class. Of course they have 0 levels in that class, but you don't gain levels in a class because you take a feat. I think that if you take Daring Outlaw without Rogue levels, you progress according to the class that gave you sneak attack, not the Rogue's progression. Like you arn't going to start getting Sneak Attack dice if you use Sudden Strike to qualify, it doesn't make sense. You (should) keep getting Sudden Strike dice.
mplindustries 01-19-08, 07:16 AM	Racial and class abilities are differentiated in the entire polymorph line. Of course they have 0 levels in that class, but you don't gain levels in a class because you take a feat. I think that if you take Daring Outlaw without Rogue levels, you progress according to the class that gave you sneak attack, not the Rogue's progression. Like you arn't going to start getting Sneak Attack dice if you use Sudden Strike to qualify, it doesn't make sense. You (should) keep getting Sudden Strike dice. First, let me say that I would, and have in the past, allowed this feat to give phantom rogue levels, even without any to start. But, with a rereading of the feat, I might agree with you on this. It says that Rogue and Swashbuckler levels stack for "your bonus sneak attack damage." And it is missing the key phrase present in all the Complete Adventurer class combo feats: "If you have levels in both X and Y, your levels in X and Y stack..." So, your swashbuckler and rogue levels definitely "stack" without rogue levels. Its just a question of what "stacking" is and what they stack for. it never actually mentions anything about bonus sneak attack damage dice derived from rogue levels. It just says it stacks to determine "yours." Additionally, It never says what those levels do and don't stack with, just that they do at all. It can obviously be assumed each other, but it could just as easily be assumed with whatever gave you sneak attack. The only thing that is tricky about reading it this way are the implications of having multiple classes that give you sneak attack. Could a Rogue 3/Swashbuckler 3/Assassin 1 have +7d6 Sneak Attack with Daring Outlaw because your Rogue and Swashbuckler levels stack to determine your sneak attack damage from Rogue (effective 6th level sneak attacker +3d6) and then Assassin (effective 7th level sneak attacker +4d6?). Or perhaps just 6d6 because the Assassin's level doesn't stack with the Rogue/Swashbuckler level to derive Assassin based sneak attack? In the end, it is such a poorly worded feat that giving an abosolute RAW reading would be pretty much impossible.
VladTheInstaller 01-19-08, 02:47 PM	To anyone who goes down this zero levels of class x road (which is clearly not Rules as Intended), I'd like to point something out: this means by similar logic all characters can claim to have "0" levels in all casting classes, which unless I've forgotten something would go a good long way towards letting everyone use wands, scrolls, and the like. After all the feat is not giving you your 0 Rogue levels, but letting you add them to your Swashbuckler ones. Enjoy giving all characters access to all the spell lists, I guess.
Jaxgaret 01-19-08, 04:27 PM	Just as feats that require a character to have a natural armor bonus are not qualified for by characters with a natural armor bonus of +0, so do characters with zero levels in a spellcasting class not qualify to use spell trigger and spell completion items off of that class' spell list. It only counts for additive purposes, not base abilities. In the end, it is such a poorly worded feat that giving an abosolute RAW reading would be pretty much impossible. QFT.