Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Another attempt at "Fixing" the Rogue


Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew


For those that find the class lacking: Rogue.

Climb and Swim are consolidated as the Athletics skill. Disable Device and Sleight of Hand are consolidated as the Thievery skills.

Changing this is simple enough for those that prefer them as separate skills.


pretty good, subtle changes to the class. I do have an athletics skill except I combined climb with jump, making it either str or dex based.

I do not much feel like combining sleight of hand and disable device, combining skills doesnt really help the rogue anyway, only makes it easier for people to emulate the rogue.

A few other comments :

- You forgot to include Trapfinding in the ability descriptions

- I like guile pool, I suppose this rogue is meant to replace the ninja rather than being in addition to the ninja, nice.

- Also I like the way talents are built up by level requirement better than the divide in talents/advanced talents. I have skipped reading through the individual talents, but I will do so later.

- I think the change to improved evasion is unneeded, I would like to keep the fail on a 1. An added talent to reroll a failed d20 1/day seems fair game though.

- I don't like the change to defensive roll either, rather have it function the same, with improved defensive roll to negate all damage. I also do not quite get the meaning of your defensive roll ability as described, is it supposed to be free movement ? It seems to require two rolls for an ability which seems to bog down the game more than needed.

- I do not like lightning dodge either, it messes with existing mechanics, rather keep mischance for concealment, I'd change it to a plain dodge bonus to ac if you want to keep it and/or the effect of blur. The improved lightning stance doesn't appeal to me either.

- I do actually like the 20th level ability, it is useful but not unplayable, I find some capstone abilities too much of a powerboost to be near unplayable and laying the bar too high for epic abilties.

Overall I like it, I will almost certainly adopt and adapt some of it in my game. Thanks, might get back on the individual talents later after I read them.


Remco Sommeling wrote:
You forgot to include Trapfinding in the ability descriptions

That I did. Thanks for the heads up.

Remco Sommeling wrote:
I like guile pool, I suppose this rogue is meant to replace the ninja rather than being in addition to the ninja, nice.

Absolutely. It is also meant to replace the Assassin and Master Spy prestige classes (through talents).

Remco Sommeling wrote:
I think the change to improved evasion is unneeded, I would like to keep the fail on a 1. An added talent to reroll a failed d20 1/day seems fair game though.

Perhaps it is unnecessary, but I wanted it to more closely resemble Mettle.

Remco Sommeling wrote:
I don't like the change to defensive roll either, rather have it function the same, with improved defensive roll to negate all damage. I also do not quite get the meaning of your defensive roll ability as described, is it supposed to be free movement ? It seems to require two rolls for an ability which seems to bog down the game more than needed.

Indeed, it is. It is supposed to work like Cartwheel Dodge. I suppose it does introduce more rolling, though that doesn't worry me all that much.

Remco Sommeling wrote:
I do not like lightning dodge either, it messes with existing mechanics, rather keep mischance for concealment, I'd change it to a plain dodge bonus to ac if you want to keep it and/or the effect of blur. The improved lightning stance doesn't appeal to me either.

It could be re-written as concealment. A dodge bonus would also work, though not as well (I think) as a flat "dodge" or miss chance. Alternatively, the ability could allow the rogue to garner an effect similar to the mirror image spell for X/rounds.

Remco Sommeling wrote:
I do actually like the 20th level ability, it is useful but not unplayable, I find some capstone abilities too much of a powerboost to be near unplayable and laying the bar too high for epic abilties.

^_^

Remco Sommeling wrote:
Overall I like it, I will almost certainly adopt and adapt some of it in my game. Thanks, might get back on the individual talents later after I read them.

Thank ye, and feel free!


Nicely done. If I'd wanted a rogue that was compatible with the core rules (as opposed to being compatible with my bizarro-world houserules), I have a feeling I would have also done something like this.


Thank ye kindly.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Remco Sommeling wrote:
Cheapy wrote:
Remco Sommeling wrote:

I am still not fond of the idea, instead of making it easier to sneak attack I rather see it :

- become more dangerous by making a sneak attack target inflict conditions much like the anti-paladin can do with his cruelties.

- Inflict sneak attack damage on a critical hit

- do more damage with a single blow rather than a flurry of attacks, thus validating spring attack for a rogue

- Add rogue talent that allow you to sneak attack stunned, nauseated and dazed opponents. This possibly could be a prerequiste to allow for more conditions like exhausted, frightened and grappled.

- get a bonus to hit shaken, entangled, sickened and flanked creatures

You should make a post in this board then, once you flesh it out! I'd love to see new ways to make the rogue...how do I say this...relevant.

Although, the last four of those five make it easier to sneak attack.

Not directly related to this, but something I would consider as a base to a reworking of the rogue is Detect Magic's attempt to fix the rogue, I like the work he does in general.

Detect Magic's rogue fix

I do quite like this version, and it is far better than the base rogue. It actually feels relatively pathfinder-ized ;)

I do feel however that one of the main issues of the rogue in combat is the difficulty in getting sneak attack. Vanishing Trick helps in this regard, but it's more of a bandaid rather than a true fix. Personally, I would prefer the necessary surgery rather than a bandage :) Something that opens up ranged rogues would be nice too.

Finally, the ability to choose between guile being based on Intelligence or Charisma would be phenomenal. It would fit the name, and more importantly, would open up the class a bit. Or even Wisdom as an option.

One of my main issues with the rogue is that they are a personality. Thus, any version of the class (if it must exist) should be built around versatility. Reworks of the rogue that focus just on Charisma fail this. Reworks of the rogue that focus on intelligence fail this. Reworks of the rogue that focus on...well any attribute really, fail this.

My brutish rogue sure as hell won't be charismatic.

All the other classes are actual classes. They aren't personalities. Even the fighter is an actual class.

The fact that Alchemist and Bards are just as skillful if not more so, and also have magic, is another issue. I'm not sure that's something that can easily be solved however.

(Is charmer meant to not have a DC? Because that goes against so many things...)

...I get carried away about rogues.

If I do allow rogues in the future, I will point people to this class, modulo the base attribute of Guile I mentioned above.


Cheapy wrote:
I do feel however that one of the main issues of the rogue in combat is the difficulty in getting sneak attack. Vanishing Trick helps in this regard, but it's more of a bandaid rather than a true fix. Personally, I would prefer the necessary surgery rather than a bandage :) Something that opens up ranged rogues would be nice too.

An attempt to "fix" this was adding the bit about Guile granting the rogue the effects of Improved Feint. Though they must have at least 1 point in their Guile pool, which I could agree is burdening.

In regards to ranged rogues, I allow them in home games, though it does necessitate a house rule for "ranged flanking." That way there's no sniping hassle to worry about.

Cheapy wrote:
Finally, the ability to choose between guile being based on Intelligence or Charisma would be phenomenal. It would fit the name, and more importantly, would open up the class a bit. Or even Wisdom as an option.

I thought about that, but decided against it. In retrospect, I don't think it's a very good design choice to force the rogue's class features to rely solely upon Charisma. While the charismatic rogue is great, there are so many other kinds of rogues...

Cheapy wrote:
One of my main issues with the rogue is that they are a personality. Thus, any version of the class (if it must exist) should be built around versatility.

Yea, so many people have such varied opinions on what a rogue should be, which sort of points towards the versatility you've suggested.

Essentially, I agree with everything you've said XD

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew / Another attempt at "Fixing" the Rogue All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.