|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
It's certainly going to be the most skill-monkey-ish of the full BAB classes, moreso than the Ranger, thanks to its access to Trapfinding via Slayer Talents.
I think there is a trait for that. But I suppose that trait is not valid in PFS.
Uhm, I dislke that kind of spells.
anyways, unless the ACG have new impresive stealth talents, the ranger is clearly better.
I think they have a spell to neagate scent and the bonus from favorite terrain, not sure if that constitue "considerably better" though, I should be missing something.
- Grimmy- Doodlebug Anklebiter
- Starbuck II
A slayer can take the ranger mounted combat style, instead of putting skill points into stealth you put it into ride. Done.
As aproud warrior the salyer can take the feint feats, and instead of fighting from the shadow he could prefer to combat his enemies face to face. Done.
The Rot Grub wrote:
If that's true, then the needed fix is to strengthen the fighter, not to gimp several other classes..
Well, yes, that have been requested from a long time, but that would be powercreep, and apparently every figther related powercreep is bad.
Lauren Tacita wrote:
What's this about dipping Knife Master? That's an illegal combination... You can't dip Rogue as a Slayer, right?
You can, they changed that.
The good thing is that it should be now clear for everyone that having a lot of feats and hitting things all day long is not a good justification for sucking at skills and having poor saves.
A shame they never wanted to admit that for fighters.
Ttrue. I should have said THE Non-magical martial.
feat expert Non-magical guy that Kill things with pointy sticks all day long?
Ok. The guy hit harder than a fighter, have better saves and 6+int skill points per level, and skip prereq for combat feats. I suppose the slayer is now THE martial.
Vod Canockers wrote:
Maybe, just maybe if they stopped killing Israeli (and American) citizens and firing rockets into Israel and sending in human bombs, then Israel would stop sending in their army to retaliate.
Maybe if they stop killing palestine citizens and stealing their land they stop firing rockets.
I have one similar, it took me an eternity to decipher the secret name of odraude.
Because it was a lof of work that hey wanted to avoid. If you mind, Rinjyn have a system where you cherry pick your class features, it is probably broken at many levels but if you are not purporsely trying to break anything it works just fine.
Degoon Squad wrote:
We realy need a rogue Freaquently repeated myths thread.
Or when they are all good and sneak around with stealth plus invisibility, plus bunch of better class features.
Lets see, totally non exahustive list
- Mikaze (the best mikaze, even if mikaze aoi have more fans)
Lamontious was in that list but his lack of rhyming and rapping lately get him out.
- Ross Byers
The trap argument is bad anyways. Ignoring hte fact taht everyone in the game can find and disarm magic traps if they so wish, there is also the fact taht putting traps in a dungeon so the rogue do not feel bad is sad.
You do not combat just for the barbarian. sorcerer, the druid and the bard of the party participate just as good.
You do not put social interaction so the bard feel good. The barbarian, the socerer and the druid of the party can participate just fine.
But somehow, you have to put traps upon traps for the rogue or you are a bad GM.
You misundertood, or are just being purporsefully obstuse.
Skills and rogeu talens have their uses, it is just that what other class get is more useful. and they still fight better.
I agree that every PC have to have a chance to shine, I disagree taht is all on the DM. If the DM have to work harder for one class because that class is subpar then that calss is not Ok in my book.
Not sure why. You can perfectly have a barbarian,a paladin and a ranger working int he same team and everything would work just fine.
A Barbarians without rage or a cavalier without mount is much more than a rogue who can not sneak attack.
Wizards and cleric are a bit different, thecnically they do depend on a single class feature, but unlike rogues who can basically do one thing (flank for sneak attack, feint for snak attack, sneak attack this sneak attack that...) every spell of wizards and clerics is a diferent option. Something that shut donw one spell do not shut donw their entire spell list (except antimagic field, but that shut down almsot everyone)
Petty Alchemy wrote:
Because things that give you 25/50/75% immunity to a class's defining feature are poor design.
I feel diferent. The poor design was making the rogue so dependent of a single calss feature.
Hey, it seems like Lemmy is becoming famous
I agree with the results of this thread
I would improve rogue talents in order for the rogue to feel like the best rogue, instead of making him fighter #2.
How is playing with the core book / rules changing the rules or as someone else said earlier playing a different game? All the other books are optional extras, just because they have been published doesn't mean that they 'must' be used.
Everything is optional.
On the other hand, removing any other option from the game in order for the rogue to not be bad is just sad.
It probably would not make too powerful, but it is a change in the wrong direction, IMHO.
Now that I think about it, according to Rinjyn rules if you take summon monster from the summoner class feaute your summoner effective level eill be 1.
So, uhm, I suposse this post was not a good birthday present.
No, it is not that simple. The amulet increase the CMB for trip, disarm and sunder. The only way to add it to grapple hcks is via hamatula strike.
But things like cracked pale green prism Ioun stone do add +1 to attack and CMB. A wayfinde plus a dusty rose Ioun stone give another +2 to CMB and CMD.
Spells like heroism and haste also add.
Just to be on topic again
But for well balanced campaigns where the DM rewards creative game play it isn't that hard to play a rogue and feel rewarded in doing so.
Creativity is not in the class but in the player, but there is more, other calsses actually have more options than rogues and that sinergy better with creative players.
You do what?, stealth?, every other roguish classes do that too.
The problem is not htat the rogue is subpar in combat, the problem is that the rogue is subpar in combat plus other do better the out of combat thing.
That is why i like the thug cornugon smash/brutal beating/offensive defense combo.
I actually think that sneak attack and the low to hit is not that big problem per se.
The actual problem is the lack of options besides " I try to sneak attack"
Ok can someone explain why they're saying Rogues have bad to-hit? I'm just not getting it, aside from not being full BAB how is a Rogues ability to hit, or to improve their to-hit, any worse than any other 3/4 BAB class?
BEause those otehrs 3/4 have class features designed for that. Mutagens or judgement for example.
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote: