With any spell? Definitely. Even if you rules only with a spell that allowed attacks. Because most spells are set up to do things besides damage, and have weak damage if they do better things. For example the spell Steel Wind Strike lets you do 5 attacks. If you qualify for sneak attack, you are now practically guaranteed to hit at least once. And then there is the Spell Storm Sphere, where on each of your turns you get a Bonus Attack with Advantage. One spell gives you an extra attack with Advantage, so you always get sneak attack.
Right now, the spells: Booming Blade, Greenflame Blade and Shadow Blade, are three legal spells that let you sneak attack with (because they either add damage to a weapon and let you attack with it as part of the spell, or they create a legal sneak attack-able weapon in the case of Shadow Blade).
In my opinion, those specific spells are good enough. Learn them and use them to sneak attack.
An Arcane Trickster can't cast Steel Wind Strike- it's a 5th level spell and they can only cast up to 4th level spells. Also, it's a melee spell attack, and as has been repeatedly stated, spell attacks are not weapon attacks (aside from the three specifically listed exceptions) and only weapon attacks are allowed for sneak attack.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
the reason it was done this way is 100% the fault of munchkin/powergamers from 3.5 who used volley spells to do absolutely absurd damage so as a knee jerk reaction they just excluded spells from sneak attack
To me from a balance perspective its totally fine to allow it since you can only sneak attack 1/turn. We don't have to worry about volley effects like scorching ray in 5e. Honestly I don't really blame them for the change I blame the optimization/munchkin community from 3.5
Spells can be Versatile tools, Weapons, or protective wards. They can deal damage or undo it, impose or remove Conditions , drain life energy away, and restore life to the dead.
Spells can be Versatile tools, Weapons, or protective wards. They can deal damage or undo it, impose or remove Conditions , drain life energy away, and restore life to the dead.
PHB PG 201
They can be, that doesn't mean that all of them do all of those. (and note that in this case versatile is used as the English word, not the weapon property) For example shadow blade would be a spell that could be considered a weapon.
I'd imagine it is intended as actual weapons only, swords, bows etc. However, if you can add some flavor into it, I'd go to your DM and see if you can't come up with some compromise. DM's are friends, not food Enemies.
I recently started playing a sorcerer/assassin so this is of interest. After reading this thread, if I were DM I’d say you could use cantrips that require an attack roll PLUS either have the war caster feat, spell sniper feat, or use the subtle spell Metamagic.
You could even limit the spell damage to 1d8 on the grounds that the sneakiness makes you use a more focused, less reckless version; aiming your ray of frost at the head is like shooting a rifle instead of a shotgun. It’s mostly to keep things true to the character.
Just tossing this out there from 3.5 and pathfinder ray spells such as scorching ray were subject to sneak attack as they were pinpoint targets but it also only applied to the first ray.
Under 3rd Edition rules, you could sneak attack with anything that required an attack roll except for siege weapons like catapults and ballistas. But there were a heck of a lot of things that were completely immune to sneak attacks- plants, oozes, constructs, undead, elementals, and anything that was immune to critical hits.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
The rules for sneak attack are pretty clear - a finesse melee weapon or a ranged weapon. Spells are neither. Therefore sneak attack using a firebolt cantrip is not allowed unless the DM homebrews it. Your DM has said no, so no it is. Doesn't matter how many pages of discussion you get on a forum.
For any DMs considering allowing this, at least just keep in mind that you're allowing the character to trade a potential average of 9 (1d8+5) damage for a potential average of 20 (4d10) damage, in addition to the already ludicrous damage of sneak attack. That is a very substantial upgrade to a class that already does significant damage.
I am not certain but I have a sneaking suspicion that WotC did not allow SCAG this AL season due to (partly at least) the bladetrips for this exact reason.
Booming Blade and Green Flame Blade on Arcane Trickster end up being a straight up damage boost for them with the scaling cantrips.
Booming makes it even worse as the rogue can just then yeet out of there leaving them to take even more damage if they move.
Overall I do not think the blade trips have broken the game but I do feel they for sure buffed the Arcane Trickster into the top for DPR for rogues for most of the game until the subclass capstones start becoming active.
I am not certain but I have a sneaking suspicion that WotC did not allow SCAG this AL season due to (partly at least) the bladetrips for this exact reason.
Booming Blade and Green Flame Blade on Arcane Trickster end up being a straight up damage boost for them with the scaling cantrips.
Booming makes it even worse as the rogue can just then yeet out of there leaving them to take even more damage if they move.
Overall I do not think the blade trips have broken the game but I do feel they for sure buffed the Arcane Trickster into the top for DPR for rogues for most of the game until the subclass capstones start becoming active.
The new AL season didn't leave them out. Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide is being replaced by the new fluff book, Tasha's cauldron of everything. It is going to be a compilation of SCAG, Elemental Evil Companion's guide, will also have the artificer from eberron and several other subclasses that are or were UA. You might even see spore druid there.
I am not certain but I have a sneaking suspicion that WotC did not allow SCAG this AL season due to (partly at least) the bladetrips for this exact reason.
Booming Blade and Green Flame Blade on Arcane Trickster end up being a straight up damage boost for them with the scaling cantrips.
Booming makes it even worse as the rogue can just then yeet out of there leaving them to take even more damage if they move.
Overall I do not think the blade trips have broken the game but I do feel they for sure buffed the Arcane Trickster into the top for DPR for rogues for most of the game until the subclass capstones start becoming active.
The new AL season didn't leave them out. Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide is being replaced by the new fluff book, Tasha's cauldron of everything. It is going to be a compilation of SCAG, Elemental Evil Companion's guide, will also have the artificer from eberron and several other subclasses that are or were UA. You might even see spore druid there.
Is it confirmed that the bladetrips will be in there? I just ask as I have not seen anything that suggests it will but I could have missed it.
I haven't seen anything confirming that, either. And the Elemental Evil Player's Guide has already been covered by Xanathar's Guide To Everything and several other sourcebooks, so there's no reason that any of its content would show up in Tasha's.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
If you can sneak attack with a cantrip, you can sneak attack with a bigger spell. Do you want arcane tricksters applying sneak attack damage to Vampiric Touch? No, you do not.
You can assassinate with anything where you “score a hit” and it’s a crit. But chances are your sneak attack will do more damage. I play a sorcerer/rogue and have done a shocking grasp instead of a weapon attack because it would look cool. But spells rarely require an attack roll and that’s the main rule for sneak attacks. But yeah, vampiric touch could be an assassinate attack but not a sneak attack.
They actually tweeted about this, do what you want but don't come here to argue the toss with your games master, its really his decision.
And basically, no, its not a weapon. As written, the reason they say finesse and ranged weapon is they really wanted the sneak attack to be dex based, which is what they should have said.
Sneak attack with cantrips wouldn't even be limited by ammunition and scale massively at later levels, since in some sort of drawn out fight, if these things exist (drawn out fights), a sneak attack can be performed pretty much every round.
Also, a thrown weapon is not a ranged weapon, so hand axes are out because they are strength based with no finesse and are not a ranged weapon, even when thrown. A ranged weapon is a list including "crossbow (any), dart, bow (any), sling, blowgun. A thrown dagger is included because a dagger is in the "finesse" category. Spells are not listed in the ranged weapon or finesse category and are therefore not permitted for sneak attacks.
but rogue damage does scale because their sneak attack dmg increases, just like a cantrip
An Arcane Trickster can't cast Steel Wind Strike- it's a 5th level spell and they can only cast up to 4th level spells. Also, it's a melee spell attack, and as has been repeatedly stated, spell attacks are not weapon attacks (aside from the three specifically listed exceptions) and only weapon attacks are allowed for sneak attack.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
the reason it was done this way is 100% the fault of munchkin/powergamers from 3.5 who used volley spells to do absolutely absurd damage so as a knee jerk reaction they just excluded spells from sneak attack
To me from a balance perspective its totally fine to allow it since you can only sneak attack 1/turn. We don't have to worry about volley effects like scorching ray in 5e. Honestly I don't really blame them for the change I blame the optimization/munchkin community from 3.5
Spells can be Versatile tools, Weapons, or protective wards. They can deal damage or undo it, impose or remove Conditions , drain life energy away, and restore life to the dead.
PHB PG 201
They can be, that doesn't mean that all of them do all of those. (and note that in this case versatile is used as the English word, not the weapon property) For example shadow blade would be a spell that could be considered a weapon.
I'd imagine it is intended as actual weapons only, swords, bows etc. However, if you can add some flavor into it, I'd go to your DM and see if you can't come up with some compromise. DM's are friends, not
foodEnemies.Mike Mearls said he'd allow it:
https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/555432648907030528
I recently started playing a sorcerer/assassin so this is of interest. After reading this thread, if I were DM I’d say you could use cantrips that require an attack roll PLUS either have the war caster feat, spell sniper feat, or use the subtle spell Metamagic.
You could even limit the spell damage to 1d8 on the grounds that the sneakiness makes you use a more focused, less reckless version; aiming your ray of frost at the head is like shooting a rifle instead of a shotgun. It’s mostly to keep things true to the character.
Just tossing this out there from 3.5 and pathfinder ray spells such as scorching ray were subject to sneak attack as they were pinpoint targets but it also only applied to the first ray.
Under 3rd Edition rules, you could sneak attack with anything that required an attack roll except for siege weapons like catapults and ballistas. But there were a heck of a lot of things that were completely immune to sneak attacks- plants, oozes, constructs, undead, elementals, and anything that was immune to critical hits.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
The rules for sneak attack are pretty clear - a finesse melee weapon or a ranged weapon. Spells are neither. Therefore sneak attack using a firebolt cantrip is not allowed unless the DM homebrews it. Your DM has said no, so no it is. Doesn't matter how many pages of discussion you get on a forum.
Indeed, what Beardsinger said.
For any DMs considering allowing this, at least just keep in mind that you're allowing the character to trade a potential average of 9 (1d8+5) damage for a potential average of 20 (4d10) damage, in addition to the already ludicrous damage of sneak attack. That is a very substantial upgrade to a class that already does significant damage.
I am not certain but I have a sneaking suspicion that WotC did not allow SCAG this AL season due to (partly at least) the bladetrips for this exact reason.
Booming Blade and Green Flame Blade on Arcane Trickster end up being a straight up damage boost for them with the scaling cantrips.
Booming makes it even worse as the rogue can just then yeet out of there leaving them to take even more damage if they move.
Overall I do not think the blade trips have broken the game but I do feel they for sure buffed the Arcane Trickster into the top for DPR for rogues for most of the game until the subclass capstones start becoming active.
The new AL season didn't leave them out. Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide is being replaced by the new fluff book, Tasha's cauldron of everything. It is going to be a compilation of SCAG, Elemental Evil Companion's guide, will also have the artificer from eberron and several other subclasses that are or were UA. You might even see spore druid there.
Is it confirmed that the bladetrips will be in there? I just ask as I have not seen anything that suggests it will but I could have missed it.
I haven't seen anything confirming that, either. And the Elemental Evil Player's Guide has already been covered by Xanathar's Guide To Everything and several other sourcebooks, so there's no reason that any of its content would show up in Tasha's.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
If you can sneak attack with a cantrip, you can sneak attack with a bigger spell. Do you want arcane tricksters applying sneak attack damage to Vampiric Touch? No, you do not.
You can assassinate with anything where you “score a hit” and it’s a crit. But chances are your sneak attack will do more damage. I play a sorcerer/rogue and have done a shocking grasp instead of a weapon attack because it would look cool. But spells rarely require an attack roll and that’s the main rule for sneak attacks. But yeah, vampiric touch could be an assassinate attack but not a sneak attack.
Arcane Tricksters don't have the Assassinate ability in the first place, so that's a moot point.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
They actually tweeted about this, do what you want but don't come here to argue the toss with your games master, its really his decision.
And basically, no, its not a weapon. As written, the reason they say finesse and ranged weapon is they really wanted the sneak attack to be dex based, which is what they should have said.
Sneak attack with cantrips wouldn't even be limited by ammunition and scale massively at later levels, since in some sort of drawn out fight, if these things exist (drawn out fights), a sneak attack can be performed pretty much every round.
Also, a thrown weapon is not a ranged weapon, so hand axes are out because they are strength based with no finesse and are not a ranged weapon, even when thrown. A ranged weapon is a list including "crossbow (any), dart, bow (any), sling, blowgun. A thrown dagger is included because a dagger is in the "finesse" category. Spells are not listed in the ranged weapon or finesse category and are therefore not permitted for sneak attacks.