4
\$\begingroup\$
  1. When an investigator/assassin studies a foe for the purposes of the special ability studied combat can this time spent studying a foe also count as time spent studying a foe for the purposes of the special ability death attack?
  2. Is there a feat or something that changes the investigator's studied strike so that it's, instead, sneak attack?
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ I did some editing (mainly to supply links instead of quotations); I hope that's okay. Also, the rules-as-written tag is for take-no-prisoners highly legalistic readings of the text; this doesn't sound like that kind of question. Feel free to rollback or edit further. \$\endgroup\$ – Hey I Can Chan Oct 2 '16 at 14:11
  • \$\begingroup\$ @HeyICanChan Further on that editing, I suspect these should be two separate questions. They look unrelated to me. What do you think? \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Oct 3 '16 at 22:50
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @doppelgreener I thought about that, but since death attack only triggers upon dealing sneak attack damage, it seemed closely related enough that someone searching for investigator/assassin stuff would want both in the same place. \$\endgroup\$ – Hey I Can Chan Oct 3 '16 at 23:18
2
\$\begingroup\$
  1. Studying for a death attack takes three consecutive standard actions, and studying for studied combat takes a move action, so studying for both can technically be done side by side in the same round.

  2. There is no feat that allows treating studied strike damage dice as sneak attack damage dice. There are feats that specifically improve studied strike and studied combat, however.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Did you really mean to say "in the same round"? (I'm not familiar with a way to take three standard actions and a move action in one round, myself.) Or did you mean something like "at the same time"? \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Oct 3 '16 at 22:49
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @doppelgreener I found studying for both can be technically done in the same round accurate. The dude might not be able to finish studying for the death attack in that one round, but he can, on the same round, do the first round of death attack study and the only needed round of studied strike study if he wants to. If you really think it's unclear, though, make it better! :-) \$\endgroup\$ – Hey I Can Chan Oct 3 '16 at 23:22
  • \$\begingroup\$ @HeyICanChan Oh yeah, good point. (I was thinking as in, do all the study for both.) I will make a little edit. \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Oct 3 '16 at 23:29
  • \$\begingroup\$ Studied Combat won't directly satisfy the requirement of Studying an Opponent for a Death Attack, that sucks. \$\endgroup\$ – Zangief Oct 6 '16 at 3:31
0
\$\begingroup\$

1) By RAW you can't use the "studying" part of the Death Attack to trigger Studied Combat. Let me explain the reasons why:

  • Mechanically Different:
    In order to use Death Attack as an Assassin you need to study a target for 3 rounds, with the actual action each round dedicated to studying the target being a standard action. In order to use the Studied Attack of an Investigator you are required to use Studied Combat. Studied Combat requires a move action and lasts for a number of rounds equal to your Int mod.

Say that you could use the "studying" part of Death Attack to trigger Studied Combat . At which turn would it start? The first? The third? If it starts on the first turn you essentially wasted 3 rounds of Studied Combat.

  • Thematically different:
    The studying for Death Attack is about stalking your target, not attacking it until the time is ripe (You use standard actions rather than move actions to study the target). For Studied Combat the studying is about stopping for a second to size up your target and then attacking with a plan (You use your move action rather than your standard action).

2) There is no method to convert Studied Strike to Sneak Attack, and most likely there never will be. During playtest the investigator class had Sneak Attack. However, it was deemed to take too much away from the rogue and thus was changed.

This is an argument both for and against letting you change it, should you ask your GM.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ You are saying "By RAW" but don't appear to cite proper RAW. \$\endgroup\$ – Zangief Oct 6 '16 at 3:35

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.