So, fairly recently, I read a thread about Ninjas and how they're so awesome and stuff. I don't have an Ultimate Combat yet, so I can't vouch for that, but most everyone on the thread was in total agreement that the Rogue was underpowered in comparison to most (if not all) of the other base classes in the Core. I'm kinda curious as to the specifics of the Rogue's underpoweredness that everyone is talking about.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In general...there's nothing they can do that someone else can't do better.
Trap Finding? there are spells for that.
Damage dealing? Fighters do more and more often.
Sneaking? A level 2 spell gives you +20 to Stealth.
Skill monkeys? Rangers, Bards, Alchemists, etc.
Something I'm toying with to help out in combat is giving them full BAB while flanking, and them doing a flat amount of extra damage based on level. Or even just full BAB while flanking.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is what i think has done in the rogue. (repost)
1) Traps aint what they used to be.
*rocks in chair* In my day we walked uphill both ways to the dungeon, and traps were TPKs. Miss a trap ? Die. Look at a trap. Die. Hear the sound of the trap closing, the trap is so awsome that the vibrations kill you! Muahahahahah! The entire room spins around, you're chucked through a 200 foot tall corridor filled from top to bottom with permanent blade barrier spells and dropped into a vat of acid and then attacked by acid breathing sharks!
The DM had to keep a bonfire going just to dispose of all the character sheets, and he filled his Olympic sized swimming pool with the players tears!
Now traps are CR balanced. Some of them are bad, some of them are an inconvinience, but you're far more likely to die from a really hard encounter.
-What this means for your character is that if you're only 85% as a rogue as a real thing its no big deal.
2) Skill parity
In 3.whatever The ability to have skills as a class skill really mattered as you got up in levels. At 20th level a class skill would be at 23 ranks and a cross class skill at 11 ranks. The pathfinder equivilant is a +3 bonus, which fades quickly in importance as you level.
Grabbing a single level or rogue let you max out the skills, but you still had to pay double the sp's to do it. Even wizards couldn't usually afford to do that with more than 1 or two skills.
Under pathfinder, you get 90% of the benefit of having rogue class skills in a single level. Take 1 level, grab +3 to most of the good skills.
-This means you can be a rogue 1/ whatever X and loose very little trap finding ability.
3) trait customization.
With the ever widening availability and diversity of traits its become very easy to get that +3 bonus on the skills that you really care about.
-Even without a level of rogue you can probably use your traits to get disable device and perception.
4) Skill consolidation
In 3.0 you needed 8 skill points for perception (spot, listen, search), acrobatics (jump, tumble, balance) , and dealing with mechanical stuff (open lock, disable device). With the consolidation its pretty easy to get by on 4 skill points to do the same job.
5) Handy hobbies.
For things you might only need a little of you can put one rank into it and get a decent +3 bonus on it. This will let you hit a tn 15 check with a little luck.
6) Everyone can find traps.
The rogues trap finding ability can be made up with a good wisdom score and a feat. You don't NEED a rogue to do it anymore. Concentrate on getting a good perception score. Not every trap needs to be disarmed but they all need to be seen.
So the rogue is, IMIO, not necessary to a parties success. As a class, they really need to work to do a moderate amount of damage. Sneak attack increases your damage by 1.75 points of damage per level.. but its very uneven. You don't always sneak attack. Its incredibly hard to get off MULTIPLE sneak attacks that a lot of theory crafters go for. AT least in pathfinder there are monsters that can be sneak attacked (in 3.x seriously.. EVERYTHING was immune)
To deal their damage, rogues need to be on the other side of the parties other melee combatant.. the tank. Unfortunately, that is not a very good place to hang out because if you're flanking a monster with a fighter its very easier for the monsters buddy to flank you (flank sandwich goes both ways)
You're also reliant on your other party members to help you set up a flank. if you're a rogue and the rest of your party functions like a herd of cats it drops your damage considerably. No other class needs a competent party to function.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In general...there's nothing they can do that someone else can't do better.
Trap Finding? there are spells for that.
Damage dealing? Fighters do more and more often.
Sneaking? A level 2 spell gives you +20 to Stealth.
Skill monkeys? Rangers, Bards, Alchemists, etc.
Something I'm toying with to help out in combat is giving them full BAB while flanking, and them doing a flat amount of extra damage based on level. Or even just full BAB while flanking.
the point of rogue is the spell caster doesn't need to waste his spell on finding a trap, or on sneaking the rogue can just do it, in combat he shouldn't be dealing the most damage, he supports the fighter, not outclass him, skill monkey(I personally feel the alchemist is a BAMF when it comes to being a skill monkey) but the rogue has access to tricks that let him do special things with skills, the rogue is in the class that its not the best at something but its moderate to good at a lot of things.
The problem is that the caster will prep the trap finding spell just to upstage the rogue, or that the rogue will have points in a lot of skills but wont be a master of any (that I feel is a big downside.)
I can see the argument as to why the rogue is weak, but at the same time I feel that its strength relies more on your own groups playing styles.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The main problem I have with the rogue is that ultimately, it's not really contributing much.
They have a lot of skills I suppose, but nothing really unique.
In combat they are one of the weaker classes.
No spells, which limits utility.
Really, the only unique semi - useful thing they get is level scaling trapfinding bonuses, and there are SO many other ways of dealing with traps, this really isn't a big deal.
Oh, and they have lousy saves too.
So, fairly recently, I read a thread about Ninjas and how they're so awesome and stuff. I don't have an Ultimate Combat yet, so I can't vouch for that, but most everyone on the thread was in total agreement that the Rogue was underpowered in comparison to most (if not all) of the other base classes in the Core. I'm kinda curious as to the specifics of the Rogue's underpoweredness that everyone is talking about.
It basically comes down to a number of factors, but here is a few to get you started.
Compounding this problem is how difficult it is - or can be - to get sneak attack. Pathfinder helped the rogue a lot by making almost nothing outright immune, but it still has issues. For one, you cannot sneak attack something unless it's either A) flat footed, or B) you're flanking it. This means that ranged sneak attackers are a trap (you'll get maybe 2 rounds of use out of it, and possibly not even 1). It also means that the low AC, low BAB, low-ish HP rogue will need to be in melee to attempt his sneaks.
Worse yet, any sort of cover or concealment prevents sneak attacking. Human rogue in a dark alleyway? No sneak attack (everyone without low-light vision has 20% concealment). 1st level wizard casts obscuring mist? No sneak attack. Blur? No sneak attack. Minor cloak of displacement? No sneak attack. Can't find a flanking buddy? No sneak attack. Guy flips a table over between you and him? No sneak attack. See where I'm going with this? Now the Advanced Player's Guide has a nice feat tax which lets rogues sneak attack foes with concealment, but now you need to spend a feat, and it doesn't solve many of the other issues.
Compare to a Ranger who can out-damage you at short and long range almost always, who doesn't need to jump through extra hoops to deal damage. Rogue fights incorporeal foe? No sneak attack and half-damage. Ranger fight's incorporeal foe? 2d6+6+6 divided in half. Ranger wins here. Meanwhile the ranger has the option of NOT dealing a lot of extra damage and just hitting more often (still at 2d6+6 or so). The rogue lacks this option vs higher than average AC foes.
=====
For the record I'm not saying rogues cannot be build to be played competently, but even Adepts (the NPC class) can be built to be played competently. At the moment, rogues are kinda "meh" as anything but a dipping class.
We have identified the problem.
So what's the answer to the problem?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We have identified the problem.
So what's the answer to the problem?
Play a ninja, or a rogue with the ki talents.
I love Rogues, they are a great and enjoyable class to play.
I just wish they weren't so underpowered.
You can make a fairly solid Rogue, but the RAW does you few favours and more than your share of punitive drawbacks.
We have identified the problem.
So what's the answer to the problem?
The 3.5 Psionic rogue wasn't half bad. Gave up a bit of sneak attack and I think some skills for a slower than full-caster psionic power progression (actually it was closer to Paladin/Ranger casting in terms of actual strength and resources, but it was versatile) which made them pretty good. The ability to gain concealment, or to slightly buff your attack rolls and HP with a limited resource made them a bit better; and they could bring more utility to the party.
As the rogue is, I'll think about it. One option would be to bring it to full BAB progression like a Ranger, which would help with the +hit and what-not, but people might cry foul when they can happily use Power Attack and Sneak Attack together (rogue with longspear + flanking would have 1d8+6+3+1d6 at a net +1 to hit while flanking, while a Ranger would have 2d6+6+3 at a net +2 to hit while flanking).
However it's late, and to really do it any sort of justice in "fixing" it, I'd like my mind to be refreshed. ^.^"
Rogues are commonly believed to have a high damage potential. The problem is that this doesn't work out in the game if the rules are being followed. Firstly, their lower BAB means that they have less accuracy compared to say a Ranger who is wielding a 2 handed weapon (18 strength ranger will have a 2d6+6+3 damage with the same to-hit bonus as an 18 Dex Rogue with Weapon Finesse but the rogue will be doing 1d6+6 (average 7)).
Only in Pathfinder, in 3.5, you just get Blink (ring works) (which doesn't prevent Sneak attack but does deny dex) and go to town on enemy.
If worried about immunities you can trade trap sense for Penetrsting strike (1/2 damage to immune, meaning you still always sneak attack).
3.5, Rogue got great love.
Pathfinder closed all the avenues (blink, Grease, glitterdust, splash weapons[direct hit not the splash]) even if they opened new ones (don't need penetrating strike now as less immunity).
So it made it harder for a Rogue to function.
People are just finally catching on to the nerfs.
Splash weapons not allowing sneak attacking alone was a terrible change.
Sure, sneak attacking with splash weapons (within 30 ft) wasn't ionic but it was effective and made the rogue competitive.
WBL guidelines says consumables don't count for limit (and DM is supposed to ensure you are made up any loss). So loading up was legal and RAW a good idea.
The benefit was it was a touch attack (and after hurting your target you hurt ones near it).
But I digress.
It has a 4e flare, but what about changing the rogue's sneak attack to something like this?
Sneak Attack: If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from her attack, she can strike a vital spot for extra damage.
As a swift action, a rogue can mark a target within 30 ft. The mark remains until the target dies or the rogue marks a new target. If an ability would allow the rogue to sneak attack at a greater distance, the range at which he can mark extends as well.While marked, the rogue deals additional damage with his attacks. This extra damage is 1d6 at 1st level, and increases by 1d6 every two rogue levels thereafter. Should the rogue score a critical hit with a sneak attack, this extra damage is not multiplied. Ranged attacks can count as sneak attacks only if the target is within 30 feet.
With a weapon that deals nonlethal damage (like a sap, whip, or an unarmed strike), a rogue can make a sneak attack that deals nonlethal damage instead of lethal damage. She cannot use a weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage in a sneak attack, not even with the usual –4 penalty.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In general...there's nothing they can do that someone else can't do better.
Trap Finding? there are spells for that.
Such as the cleric spell Find Traps? There are several problems with that. First, you still need a really good Perception skill to make use of it. Second, the spell only lasts 1 min./level, so you have to cast it when you think there might be traps, and can't possibly cover yourself at all times the way a rogue can. A rogue can find traps all day, every day, without expending any resources like spell slots to do so.
Damage dealing? Fighters do more and more often.
Hardly. One of the biggest buffs that Rogues received in Pathfinder was a stealth buff. Many of the creatures that used to be immune to sneak attack no longer are. Only elementals, oozes and a couple other creature types are immune to sneak attack now. I don't care what kind of 2h monster your fighter is, a Rogue with two weapons has just as many attacks per round and is adding +10d6 damage to each attack. And it's not like flanking is hard.
Sneaking? A level 2 spell gives you +20 to Stealth.
It can also be seen through with See Invisibility, which is common at high levels.
Skill monkeys? Rangers, Bards, Alchemists, etc.
This is like saying "Spells? Bards, Rangers and Paladins have spells, so why play a Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer or Wizard?"
Something I'm toying with to help out in combat is giving them full BAB while flanking, and them doing a flat amount of extra damage based on level. Or even just full BAB while flanking.
Totally unnecessary. Rogues have never had it as good as they have it now in Pathfinder.
I love Rogues, they are a great and enjoyable class to play.
I just wish they weren't so underpowered.
You can make a fairly solid Rogue, but the RAW does you few favours and more than your share of punitive drawbacks.
*falls to his knees*
"He's seem the light!"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Only in Pathfinder, in 3.5, you just get Blink (ring works) (which doesn't prevent Sneak attack but does deny dex) and go to town on enemy.
This is patently incorrect. There is only one way to make this work, and that requires the optional mageslayer and pierce magical concealment feats, which allows the rogue to ignore the concealment problem with blink. Otherwise, a blinking rogue cannot sneak attack anyone.
A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment or striking the limbs of a creature whose vitals are beyond reach.
If worried about immunities you can trade trap sense for Penetrsting strike (1/2 damage to immune, meaning you still always sneak attack).
If you're giving up trap-sense, you're giving up one of the few actually unique things that a rogue has. Likewise, you're still less accurate, suffer from most of the normal problems, and are still out-damaged on average by the ranger (when penetrating strike is useful, your sneak damage caps at 5d6 which is an average of 17.5, whereas the Ranger's Power Attack reaches +18, and is applicable on critical hits).
3.5, Rogue got great love.
Actually they were pretty bad in 3.5 too. Just most non-casters were pretty bad, so perhaps people tended to not notice very often.
Pathfinder closed all the avenues (blink, Grease, glitterdust, splash weapons[direct hit not the splash]) even if they opened new ones (don't need penetrating strike now as less immunity).
Glitterdust still blinds so it can allow sneak attack. It just doesn't work as long because of the spellcaster nerf. Blink never worked. Grease worked, but now a few ranks in Acrobatics prevents the flat-footed, whereas in 3.5 having 5 ranks in Balance was something of a rarity. The alchemical weapon nerf was harsh though.
Splash weapons not allowing sneak attacking alone was a terrible change.
Sure, sneak attacking with splash weapons (within 30 ft) wasn't ionic but it was effective and made the rogue competitive.
WBL guidelines says consumables don't count for limit (and DM is supposed to ensure you are made up any loss). So loading up was legal and RAW a good idea.
The benefit was it was a touch attack (and after hurting your target you hurt ones near it).
But I digress.
This I agree with 100%. Sneak attack was a fairly effective method of keeping alchemical items useful, and it was a non-magical way to get touch-attack sneaks (now the only effective way is dipping into sorcerer or wizard or getting a magic item for at-will acid splash, but that's limited to 1/round).
This was one of those "If it isn't broken, don't fix it" scenarios.
You can get touch sneak attack nonmagically with guns. Even better, get a Seeking firearm, and you solve concealment, too. and if you get the deed to make enemies flatfooted upon missing them, you can go pretty crazy...
I would like the thank you greatly for giving me the link to this thread, it has answered all my questions as well as given me quite a bit of amusement along the way. I am much more learned into why people say that the rogue is underpowered and why I, personally, think it's not. And I only read a page and a half of it. I'd start listing things, but it'd take too long, and it wouldn't be anything you can't find in that thread after 30 minutes of reading. I would ask about how people find the Monk to be the worst class of all time, but that's another thread for another time.
Au revoir. :)
A rogue is not a "shishkebob on round one" combatant, never has been. They rely on stealth, flanking and bluffing to deliver their special brand of death.
Of these three methods:
- flanking is the easiest, has good reliability and is tied with stealth for the potential to get insta-smooshed by irate bad guys
- stealth is the medium difficulty, least reliable and equally as prone to provoking insta-smooshing by irate bad guys unless "built" around sniping
- bluffing to feint in combat is the hardest at entry but quickly becomes the most reliable method of denying Dex bonus, especially when the rogue finally acquires Greater Feint.
Rogues should not count on hitting unmodified AC - they depend upon hitting penalized AC. When successful, their reduced BAB is insignificant. Tanglefoot bags, while cumbersome, are remarkably effective throughout many levels of play, past the acquisition of Greater Feint. As are smokesticks.
A newer tool available for the rogue's arsenal at later levels is Greater Dirty Trick - and its ability to blind a foe. Blinded foes are your sneak attack's best buddy.
One thing that *seems* to be commonly forgotten: very few PCs actually solo play for long. The rogue as with every other class is assumed to not be operating in a vacuum.
I'm not sure why a rogue would want to use Smokesticks on a regular basis unless it was to flee, since the concealment from the smokestick prevents them from sneak attacking.
That being said, the Dastardly Finish feat is probably the absolute sickest option that a rogue can get at the moment. It's basically "you die now" if you have a party member that can stun someone.
My wife rolled a rogue to fill out that niche in my current Shackled City game.
By level 6 she was having so little fun with her character I let her rebuild to an Urban Ranger.
TOZ for the win. ^-^
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It was almost a loss, since the damage bump took me completely by surprise. Rapid/Manyshot with FE bonuses is scary.
Oh yes, yes it is. o.o
Rivaled only by a Paladin's smite against an evil foe. A paladin archer is a terrifying thing against an evildoer. Most of the Paladins I make tend to focus heavily on Charisma over their other stats, so by 20th level I can almost assure a +10 to hit from Charisma on every attack, +20 to damage from the smite, and it ignores damage reduction.However, Ranger is arguably nastier more often. Especially if you take fairly broad favored enemies. Stuff like Magical Beasts, Undead, Evil Outsiders, and so forth. Even if you're playing a pretty generic game, you'll probably run into those things at some point (whereas stuff like Humanoid (Elf) is a poor choice in most cases).
On a side note, since I know you play 3.5 with Pathfinder, your wife might be interested in the collision enhancement from the Expanded Psionics Handbook is a +2 enhancement for a flat +5 bonus to damage. It's a pretty nice option for archers and general purpose offense. It's also available in the Psionics Unleashed for Pathfinder.
EDIT: Also Fighters are freakin' nasty archers as well, and also more attractive for multi-classing now. If you have weapon training 1 or higher, you can grab some of those gloves of dueling and increase the bonus to hit and damage by +2. So a Ranger 15/Fighter 5 can wear mithral full plate while moving at full speed with a perfect base attack, a number of bonus feats, +3 to hit and damage with their bow, +1 to hit from weapon focus, +2 to damage from weapon specialization, etc, etc, etc.
Pathfinder has shown some serious love to those who like killing things with pointy sticks, they have. :P
Pathfinder has shown some serious love to those who like killing things with pointy sticks, they have. :P
Indeed, but not as much to those who like killing things with wholly unsharpened sticks XD
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Indeed, but not as much to those who like killing things with wholly unsharpened sticks XD
Pathfinder has shown some serious love to those who like killing things with pointy sticks, they have. :P
I must disagree, my good friend. Fighters with quarterstaffs are just gnarly in Pathfinder. While it may not be RAI, Fighters can get improved strength modifiers using double weapons, as well as full Power Attack benefits when using double weapons, while making use of two weapon fighting feats. Combine all this with weapon training, gloves of dueling, and the normal fighter burger-blender tactics and you get one crazy dude with a not-so pointy stick.
Here's a quick guide if you want to make your own gnarly staff-fighter of epic asskickery (TM).
The double weapon Fighter basically revolves around these key concepts.
1) Having the accuracy and static damage boosts to make dual-wielding worth the effort.
2) Having the feats to handle the heavy investment it takes to make dual-wielding viable.
3) Being able to fully capitalize on the Power Attack feat while dual-wielding.
4) Being able to fully capitalize on a high Strength score while dual-wielding.The relevant rules are cited here.
"Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways. First, if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Second, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6.Table: Two-weapon Fighting Penalties summarizes the interaction of all these factors.
Double Weapons: You can use a double weapon to make an extra attack with the off-hand end of the weapon as if you were fighting with two weapons. The penalties apply as if the off-hand end of the weapon was a light weapon."
"Power Attack (Combat)
You can make exceptionally deadly melee attacks by sacrificing accuracy for strength.
Prerequisites: Str 13, base attack bonus +1.
Benefit: You can choose to take a –1 penalty on all melee attack rolls and combat maneuver checks to gain a +2 bonus on all melee damage rolls. This bonus to damage is increased by half (+50%) if you are making an attack with a two-handed weapon, a one handed weapon using two hands, or a primary natural weapon that adds 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier on damage rolls. This bonus to damage is halved (–50%) if you are making an attack with an off-hand weapon or secondary natural weapon. When your base attack bonus reaches +4, and every 4 points thereafter, the penalty increases by –1 and the bonus to damage increases by +2. You must choose to use this feat before making an attack roll, and its effects last until your next turn. The bonus damage does not apply to touch attacks or effects that do not deal hit point damage.""Double Slice (Combat)
Your off-hand weapon while dual-wielding strikes with greater power.
Prerequisite: Dex 15, Two-Weapon Fighting.
Benefit: Add your Strength bonus to damage rolls made with your off-hand weapon.
Normal: You normally add only half of your Strength modifier to damage rolls made with a weapon wielded in your off-hand.""Double Weapons: Dire flails, dwarven urgroshes, gnome hooked hammers, orc double axes, quarterstaves, and two-bladed swords are double weapons. A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.
The character can also choose to use a double weapon two-handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can't use it as a double weapon—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round."
According to both the Double Weapon entry and the Two-Weapon Fighting rules, double weapons only count as one-handed and light weapon for the purposes of ATTACK penalties. In other words, it is still a two-handed weapon during these attacks. The double-weapon entry notes that you may use the double weapon as only a two-handed weapon by attacking with a single end of the weapon, so you are not required to accept the dual-wielding penalties if you're not striking with both ends at the same time. However, according to the rules it doesn't cause the double weapon actually become a one-handed and light weapon.
Likewise, Power Attack states that the bonus to damage is increased by 50% if the attack is made with a two-handed weapon. It then says the bonus is then halved for off-hand attacks or secondary natural weapons. Thus a 20th level Fighter with a -6 to hit would deal +18 on all main-hand attacks with his double weapon, and +9 with all off hand attacks (+18 / 2 = +9).
Finally Double-Slice allows you to use your full strength bonus on off-hand attacks instead of the -50% strength modifier. Because you are wielding a two-handed weapon, the rules for handed weapons providing a +50% strength modifier to damage, allowing you to get to apply a +50% strength modifier. Because the character is allowed to apply their abilities in the most beneficial order, the net result is 1.5 on both primary and off-hand while wielding a double-weapon with double slice.
=================
It's important to note that such a build is incredibly feat intensive. It requires no less than Power Attack, Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Double Slice, Two-Weapon Rend, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater Focus, Greater Specialization, and possibly an Exotic Weapon proficiency feat if using anything other than a quarterstaff (making that 8-9 feats before branching out into other options). That's nearly all of a Fighter's bonus feats over 20 levels, and nearly 1/2 of the character's total feats. A ranger might also be able to pull it off, but it probably wouldn't be worth it except against his favored enemy. The build also requires a certain amount of multi-ability dependancy, as an above average Dexterity is needed at most levels to be able to pull it off (You need a 15 Dex at 1st level, 17 Dex at 6th, and 19 at 11th).
Ergo, with sufficiently high investment, a Fighter can make a double-weapon very scary. If you're wondering why anyone would dual-wield with anything but a double weapon, the biggest reason is because it's not feasible for some classes to bother with Power Attack and a high Strength modifier. This is especially true with classes that have an average to poor base attack bonus, where the bonus from Power Attack would hurt more and pack less power at each level of play. It's also pretty much useless for Finesse based warriors who rely on bonus precision damage such as with Sneak Attack to get the job done, who can comfortably inflict heavy damage while focusing entirely on Dexterity and improving accuracy with their weapons, while being able to function on about 4 feats for the bulk of their build (finesse, twf, improved twf, greater twf).
Huh. Sounds useful.
Of course, since she's using Kirth's Ranger, she probably doesn't need it. :)
I really need to check out Kirthfinder. I've heard much about it on the boards. :)
The fix:
I guess I would do the following:
1) It's been mentioned before, and it's an important first step - give rogues back the ability to SA with alchemical potions
2) Allow SA against concealed opponents
3) Better, more useful talents. Talents that allow the Rogue to do really unique and useful things in or out of combat. Here's a few quick ideas:
- A tumble ability allowing full speed when tumbling and a bonus to tumble through enemy squares
- Ability to hide where there is no cover and/or while being observed
- Ability to hide as a swift action
- Ability to do a 5'step as an immediate action
Just some thoughts.
Question:
How does having cover prevent sneak attack? Concealment i know but i haven't read anything about cover.
One the grease subject, it's better in PF than it was on 3.5 and that's because in 3.5 if you had 5+ ranks in balance you weren't considered flat footed but in PF everyone who choses to walk within a grease effect is considered flat footed.
Question:
How does having cover prevent sneak attack? Concealment i know but i haven't read anything about cover.
One the grease subject, it's better in PF than it was on 3.5 and that's because in 3.5 if you had 5+ ranks in balance you weren't considered flat footed but in PF everyone who choses to walk within a grease effect is considered flat footed.
Would you kindly explain how you are getting sneak attack when they move? Are you standing beside them and hoping for AoO?
With 3.5, you could sneak attack on your turn when they are on grease.
And how often do you see enemies with 5 ranks of balance?
Would you kindly explain how you are getting sneak attack when they move? Are you standing beside them and hoping for AoO?
When on grease, and move they are flat footed.
You are attacking them the same ways you were in 3.5, my personal favorite is shooting a bow but i have seen rogues jump in the grease and attack.
With 3.5, you could sneak attack on your turn when they are on grease.
What's stopping you from doing that in PF?
And how often do you see enemies with 5 ranks of balance?
Granted it wasn't common at all but there was this possibility, in PF there is not.
This is whats stopping it
Creatures that do not move on their turn do not need to make this check and are not considered flat-footed.
Something I've been toying with, and plan on testing today, is replacing sneak attack with a flat +2 damage, using the same progression. So at level 20, they'll be doing +20 damage per attack.
At level 5, they'll get one extra attack with BAB = Class Levels while flanking. Essentially, this turns rogues into a Full BAB class while flanking only. I think the extra attack will more than make up for the loss of that 1.5 average damage.
This is whats stopping it
Creatures that do not move on their turn do not need to make this check and are not considered flat-footed.
It was the same in 3.5, i am not trying to say that grease is the way for rogues to rock, i am merely replying to Starbuck_II who said that the PF grease made it worse for the rogues to use grease to get sneak attack.
Something I've been toying with, and plan on testing today, is replacing sneak attack with a flat +2 damage, using the same progression. So at level 20, they'll be doing +20 damage per attack.
At level 5, they'll get one extra attack with BAB = Class Levels while flanking. Essentially, this turns rogues into a Full BAB class while flanking only. I think the extra attack will more than make up for the loss of that 1.5 average damage.
Rogues are not that great unless you multiclass into say a fighter. You get access to better weapond and more feats, thus allowing you to enter battle and not cringe every time doing so. Pathfinder or someone like them should expand Rogue abilities like better saves, more access to weapons, and abilities...
It was the same in 3.5, i am not trying to say that grease is the way for rogues to rock, i am merely replying to Starbuck_II who said that the PF grease made it worse for the rogues to use grease to get sneak attack.Actually in 3.5 standing on grease was akin to balancing which meant that you needed 5 ranks in balance to avoid being flat-footed.
It was, perhaps, less than clear which would have been one motivation for the PF alteration,
James
You are right about that, i hadn't really noticed that according the balance skill you were flat footed whether you moved or not. Thank you for showing me that, it's always good to know about history.
Ok now i can see that the old grease was better for rogues in 3.5.
So whats the best solution for a houserule fix?
The Ninja. It does what a rogue is supposed to be doing.
Something I've been toying with, and plan on testing today, is replacing sneak attack with a flat +2 damage, using the same progression. So at level 20, they'll be doing +20 damage per attack.
At level 5, they'll get one extra attack with BAB = Class Levels while flanking. Essentially, this turns rogues into a Full BAB class while flanking only. I think the extra attack will more than make up for the loss of that 1.5 average damage.
I did this for the e6 rewrite 'm working on, but I also have the rogue "mark" the target (as I mentioned above), gave them weapon finesse for free at first level, allowed the damage bonus to multiply on crits, and made it only usable with light weapons or specifically called out ranged weapons.
Give it the ranger 3.5 treatment; d8, good fort and reflex, full BAB, and access to hide in plain sight without multiclassing.
Now, the ninja isn't so superior.
I did this for the e6 rewrite 'm working on, but I also have the rogue "mark" the target (as I mentioned above), gave them weapon finesse for free at first level, allowed the damage bonus to multiply on crits, and made it only usable with light weapons or specifically called out ranged weapons.Something I've been toying with, and plan on testing today, is replacing sneak attack with a flat +2 damage, using the same progression. So at level 20, they'll be doing +20 damage per attack.
At level 5, they'll get one extra attack with BAB = Class Levels while flanking. Essentially, this turns rogues into a Full BAB class while flanking only. I think the extra attack will more than make up for the loss of that 1.5 average damage.
I was thinking roughly the same thing, except for the Mark thing. That's a little too 4e for me. I think that the crit multiplying damage will help a lot. Not sure about the limits on weapons though!
I make weapon finesse a property of weapons (and just give agile maneuvers to everyone).
Give it the ranger 3.5 treatment; d8, good fort and reflex, full BAB, and access to hide in plain sight without multiclassing.
Now, the ninja isn't so superior.
UC turns HiPS into an advanced rogue talent, or so I've heard.
I did this for the e6 rewrite 'm working on, but I also have the rogue "mark" the target (as I mentioned above), gave them weapon finesse for free at first level, allowed the damage bonus to multiply on crits, and made it only usable with light weapons or specifically called out ranged weapons.Something I've been toying with, and plan on testing today, is replacing sneak attack with a flat +2 damage, using the same progression. So at level 20, they'll be doing +20 damage per attack.
At level 5, they'll get one extra attack with BAB = Class Levels while flanking. Essentially, this turns rogues into a Full BAB class while flanking only. I think the extra attack will more than make up for the loss of that 1.5 average damage.
I was thinking roughly the same thing, except for the Mark thing. That's a little too 4e for me. I think that the crit multiplying damage will help a lot. Not sure about the limits on weapons though!
I make weapon finesse a property of weapons (and just give agile maneuvers to everyone).
I limited it to light weapons because it seemed weird being able to hit for weak points with something as unwieldy as a greatsword.
I say weapon finesse still requires a lot of training, just that the rogue would train it if he was restricted to light armor and light weapons, but that's just my opinion.
I did this for the e6 rewrite 'm working on, but I also have the rogue "mark" the target (as I mentioned above), gave them weapon finesse for free at first level, allowed the damage bonus to multiply on crits, and made it only usable with light weapons or specifically called out ranged weapons.Something I've been toying with, and plan on testing today, is replacing sneak attack with a flat +2 damage, using the same progression. So at level 20, they'll be doing +20 damage per attack.
At level 5, they'll get one extra attack with BAB = Class Levels while flanking. Essentially, this turns rogues into a Full BAB class while flanking only. I think the extra attack will more than make up for the loss of that 1.5 average damage.
I was thinking roughly the same thing, except for the Mark thing. That's a little too 4e for me. I think that the crit multiplying damage will help a lot. Not sure about the limits on weapons though!
I make weapon finesse a property of weapons (and just give agile maneuvers to everyone).
I limited it to light weapons because it seemed weird being able to hit for weak points with something as unwieldy as a greatsword.
I say weapon finesse still requires a lot of training, just that the rogue would train it if he was restricted to light armor and light weapons, but that's just my opinion.
UC does add HiPS as an advanced rogue talent.
And to not derail the thread too much more, my reasoning for the weapon finesse as a property is to allow for more interesting characters. I recognize that it's a fighting style that's different, but my urge to allow for more interesting characters, and thus getting rid of a basic feat tax, is far stronger.
I do understand your reasoning for light weapons only...Maybe a talent that lets them use another weapon they have proficiency in? Hmm.
I have some ideas to turn the rogue into a master flanker
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow this is a fairly interesting thread. I've never considered the Rogue to be lacking. As a matter of fact at our table it is the rogue that is often dealing out the most pain.
I find that 75% of the time he is either going first, using stealth, flanking and/or feinting all of which allow him to use his sneak attack and when he is isn't doing any of those he is charging (via the scout option).
In addition without him I think the party would have died 9x over due to traps not to mention good recon.
Wow this is a fairly interesting thread. I've never considered the Rogue to be lacking. As a matter of fact at our table it is the rogue that is often dealing out the most pain.
I find that 75% of the time he is either going first, using stealth, flanking and/or feinting all of which allow him to use his sneak attack and when he is isn't doing any of those he is charging (via the scout option).
In addition without him I think the party would have died 9x over due to traps not to mention good recon.
This is a good example of a campaign that supports a rouge, like how boom casting is weak unless you have encounters with multiple weaker enemies.