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

PaizoCon 2014!

Rogue buffs?


Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew


I've been thinking about approaching my DM with some various idea's on how to buff the rogue so people will pick them again.
My current ideas:
Agile enchantment as a class feature for specific weapons.
Ways for them to get better perception and sense motive bonuses.
A point pool similar to ki or perhaps grit.
It might also be interesting for them to have a revision to sneak attack.
Ways for the rogue to dodge and deflect attacks.(the rogue gets decked really easy.)

I would also like to develop a good homebrew archetype for a knife thrower. Someone that have bonuses to damage and perhaps a couple ways of getting a full attack off from range that applies sneak attack on every hit. (without losing trap finding and trap sense thank you.)

So, what are your ideas to buff the rogue?


Robespierre wrote:

I've been thinking about approaching my DM with some various idea's on how to buff the rogue so people will pick them again.

So, what are your ideas to buff the rogue?

I think the answer is to find someone that enjoys playing the rogue. I have three players that love rogues, and while only one is currently playing one, the others would have except they felt a need to spread out the group's capabilities by selecting other classes. The rogue we have is mainly made for dungeon-delving/trapfinding with the basic TWF/sneak attack approach to combat and she's doing just fine with no need for any buffs.


I just wish the class wouldn't get stomped in when it tried to deal its damage and could do damage semi consistently without the entire party needing to babysit the rogue. "fighter flank with me flank with me flank with me. I'm getting hit hard and about to die heal me cleric. Give me greater invisibility wizard." I also have a hard time with the idea that scouting is their forte. Not conceptually but mechanically. A dead rogue seems pretty common when scouting. As for people that enjoy the rogue that would be me. However I have a hard time justifying going rogue when I could go urban ranger, bard, ninja, or even an alchemist.


Robespierre wrote:
I just wish the class wouldn't get stomped in when it tried to deal its damage and could do damage semi consistently without the entire party needing to babysit the rogue. "fighter flank with me flank with me flank with me. I'm getting hit hard and about to die heal me cleric. Give me greater invisibility wizard." I also have a hard time with the idea that scouting is their forte. Not conceptually but mechanically. A dead rogue seems pretty common when scouting. As for people that enjoy the rogue that would be me. However I have a hard time justifying going rogue when I could go urban ranger, bard, ninja, or even an alchemist.

Depends on what you want. For my rogue player, urban ranger might be attractive, but she would never want a bard (doesn't want to worry about spells and doesn't care for most of the bardic performance stuff), ninja bites into her trapfinding specialty, and she doesn't want to get anywhere near the complexity of the alchemist. For the more casual players, rogue is great. For optimizers and 'hard-core' gamers, there are likely more powerful options.


It just seems a ton of classes are better than the rogue. I guess you can justify that there is nothing wrong with the rogue because it's simple. However I would like it to be more on par with other classes.

Sczarni

I don't think needing the assistance of the rest of the party is a bad thing-- it encourages teamwork. That's what I like about the Precise Strike feat. It lets rogues get an extra D6 when they're doing what they do best, and it lets the other melee guy get in on the action so he'll want to flank with the rogue.

I think the real obstacle the rogue faces is that, believe it or not, he's MAD. Rogues are martial types, so they need Strength, but most Rogues focus all their energy on Dex so they can TWF or use bows. I think the best buff Rogues could get would be proficiency in either some heavier armor or some two-handed martial weapons, so they can stop leaning on Dex like a crutch.


Robespierre wrote:
It just seems a ton of classes are better than the rogue. I guess you can justify that there is nothing wrong with the rogue because it's simple. However I would like it to be more on par with other classes.

Define better. For my rogue player, the rogue class is a better fit for what she wants to play conceptually. If you instead define better as being optimal in combat or in some other way then your answer will probably differ.


Silent Saturn wrote:

I don't think needing the assistance of the rest of the party is a bad thing-- it encourages teamwork. That's what I like about the Precise Strike feat. It lets rogues get an extra D6 when they're doing what they do best, and it lets the other melee guy get in on the action so he'll want to flank with the rogue.

I think the real obstacle the rogue faces is that, believe it or not, he's MAD. Rogues are martial types, so they need Strength, but most Rogues focus all their energy on Dex so they can TWF or use bows. I think the best buff Rogues could get would be proficiency in either some heavier armor or some two-handed martial weapons, so they can stop leaning on Dex like a crutch.

I just don't like a class that needs to be babysat in order to do mediocre things is all. The only reason you perceive the class as MAD is because it needs absurd stats to not be crushed and deal decent damage. Personally I don't see stealth in heavy armor but perhaps you do.

HappyDaze wrote:
Robespierre wrote:
It just seems a ton of classes are better than the rogue. I guess you can justify that there is nothing wrong with the rogue because it's simple. However I would like it to be more on par with other classes.
Define better. For my rogue player, the rogue class is a better fit for what she wants to play conceptually. If you instead define better as being optimal in combat or in some other way then your answer will probably differ.

Being better in combat and out of combat. That's the thing there are classes that can fill the same concept and be better outside of combat and inside of combat. I just wish that the class didn't go to waste because of some bad revisions and poor patch work. -coughninjacough-


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I liked the part where instead of actually helping Robespierre with his question and goal, there's debate instead.

Robespierre: Here is one of my ideas on buffing them. Playtesting has so far shown it to be a pretty nice replacement.


What level do your games typically go to? At low levels, only the bard compares to the skill-worthiness of the Rogue. Spellcasters don't have the variety or endurance to use spells to negate the use of skills at that point.

As far as being better at combat, if you are looking at the charging cavalier or the two-handed fighter and saying, "I want to do that!" then you really need to find a way to give up just as much versatility as they did to get there. It chafes me when I see people earmarking their damage potential, and moreso when their goal is to match a class that is giving up everything else to pull ahead in this regard.

I don't think that there is anything really wrong with the rogue as it is. In fact, thinking about it- every single game of D20 I've played in, someone has played a Rogue or the closest available class (for D20 Modern and Star Wars RPGs). Considering how often I've moved (every 2 years at least for the past 16), I've had a lot of gaming groups, and this has held true.

For the current incarnation, there is nothing more wrong with the rogue than there is with any other class that can't inherently cast spells.

House Rule Idea for a Deadly Rogue:

If you want, you can pull all of the sneak-attack modifying talents out of their Talent list. Also, get a copy of Complete Scoundrel (for the Ambush feats). Convert those feats (and any other good ones, like Hamstring) into worthy talents. Whenever they gain a dice of sneak attack damage, including level 1, they also get access to one of those sneak attack modifying talents. To counterbalance how many of those they are getting compared to normal, each sneak attack can only have one modifier on it at a time (per attack, so iteratives can each apply a different one as long as the attacks hit). If you don't want combat resources competing with utility resources, only allow the sneak attack talents to come from gaining a dice of sneak attack.

I was trying to consider how to re-purpose the rogue's combat concept, and one idea was to allow them to be the guy who probably won't pound you outright, but you do NOT want him in the fight for long. Basically, that type of enemy in video games who isn't that deadly, but stacks so many annoying penalties onto you that you eventually become unable to fight. Bleed was a major idea, with my variant Bleed rules.

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew / Rogue buffs? 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.