Hello, Guest! | Sign In | My Account | Shopping Cart | Help/FAQ Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games
 About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ

Paizo
Community
Store

# [Request] Regarding Rogue Talents

### Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew

 51 to 73 of 73 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Axl wrote:
I don't know how you calculated 14.25%. The increase is damage is 1/6 of a point on an average of 3.5. This is about 4.8%.

Average damage per 1d6 [1 (min) + 6 (max) = 7 / 2] = 3.5. When a 1 counts as a 2, the average damage per 1d6 (2 (min) + 6 (max) = 8 / 2) = 4.

A 4.8% increase from 3.5 = 3.668 average damage per 1d6.
A 14.28% increase from 3.5 = 3.9998 average damage per 1d6.

Axl wrote:

"The new version is somewhat better. The mechanic involved increases sneak attack damage by 1/6 of a point per die. I believe that rogue talents are supposed to be equivalent to feats - indeed some actually are feats. Therefore I consider Weapon Specialization to be a comparable feat.

To gain 2 points of damage through Powerful Sneak/Strike, the rogue needs 12 sneak attack dice. She achieves this at level 23. Until then, the class feature is worth less than a feat. And by the time that she reaches level 23, two points of damage per hit is trivial. The damage isn't multiplied on a critical hit like the fighter's Weapon Specialization. Still, your new version is a clear improvement."

To gain 2 points of damage on average through the modified version of Powerful Sneak, a rogue would need 4 dice of sneak attack.

Da'ath wrote:
Average damage per 1d6 [1 (min) + 6 (max) = 7 / 2] = 3.5. When a 1 counts as a 2, the average damage per 1d6 (2 (min) + 6 (max) = 8 / 2) = 4.

No, that's not how math works. It's not an even distribution because 2's are twice as likely as other numbers. When 1's count as 2's, the average damage is (2+2+3+4+5+6)/6=3.67, which is only a marginal improvement over 3.5. You need Deadly Sneak (1's and 2's count as 3's) before the average increases to 4, since that gives (3+3+3+4+5+6)/6=4

And since that costs 2 Rogue Talents to take, it needs to measure up to two feats, which it doesn't until you have 8 Sneak Attack dice. And even then, the damage still isn't multiplied on a crit and requires setup and doesn't work at all against certain monsters.

Roberta Yang wrote:
When 1's count as 2's, the average damage is (2+2+3+4+5+6)/6=3.67

Blah. I feel like an idiot. That's actually, believe it or not, how I did it the first time before tossing it out because it "looked wrong".

Roberta Yang wrote:
And since that costs 2 Rogue Talents to take, it needs to measure up to two feats, which it doesn't until you have 8 Sneak Attack dice. And even then, the damage still isn't multiplied on a crit and requires setup and doesn't work at all against certain monsters.

I do agree that the talents should be roughly equivalent to feats, outside of giving a rogue a flat bonus to damage in lieu of dice shifts (treat 1s as 2s, etc) the only other option I can think of offhand is adding in an ability modifier like they did with alchemists (alchemists get 1d6 points of damage + additional damage equal to the alchemist’s Intelligence modifier), which could be done for a rogue using Intelligence, Dexterity, or Charisma (I lean toward Dexterity, mind you).

Wait, on a D6, a 2 comes up twice as often as any other number?
Is that what you are saying?
Sounds like defective dice.
I wouldn't judge sneak attack by that. Maybe that's just me.

Goth Guru wrote:

Wait, on a D6, a 2 comes up twice as often as any other number?

Is that what you are saying?
Sounds like defective dice.
I wouldn't judge sneak attack by that. Maybe that's just me.

It has to do with the powerful sneak rogue talent. On a roll of 1, treat it as a 2 instead, which means your possible rolls are 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. There's another talent, deadly sneak, that makes the possible rolls 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, and 6.

Da'ath wrote:
Goth Guru wrote:

Wait, on a D6, a 2 comes up twice as often as any other number?

Is that what you are saying?
Sounds like defective dice.
I wouldn't judge sneak attack by that. Maybe that's just me.
It has to do with the powerful sneak rogue talent. On a roll of 1, treat it as a 2 instead, which means your possible rolls are 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. There's another talent, deadly sneak, that makes the possible rolls 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, and 6.

OK. Fine.

Da'ath wrote:
Opportunistic Piety (Ex) Rogues often keep a number of holy symbols, lucky trinkets, and blessed items on hand, whether for use as part of a diguise or for use in an attempt to exhibit the signs of piety for their own sake. By spending 1 point of guile as a full-round action and making a Bluff check (DC 10 + using the rogue's level + Charisma modifier), a rogue may attempt to call upon the divine for assistance. A failed result means the higher powers didn't buy it. If successful, however, the rogue gains either the command undead (if evil) or turn undead (if good) feat using the rogue's character level. Neutral rogues may choose either command undead or turn undead, but once this choice is made, it may not be changed.

I think its weird that the rogue is competing against himself. The rogue targetting one undead and making a bluff check against it would make more sense to me. So, no area of effect. I think against an undead of equal level the check should be difficult, but possible. I might add training in Kn. Religion as a prereq too. The deity doesn't need to buy it, just the undead.

Oppurtunistic Piety (ex):
Some rogues keep holy items on hand, for disguises, simple deceit, or for some actual belief. You can, as a full-round action, spend 1 point of guile and target an undead creature to attempt to turn or command it as a cleric does. The DC of the will save the undead must make is 10 + 1/2 your ranks in Bluff + your charisma modifier.

Ciaran Barnes wrote:
I think its weird that the rogue is competing against himself. The rogue targetting one undead and making a bluff check against it would make more sense to me. So, no area of effect. I think against an undead of equal level the check should be difficult, but possible. I might add training in Kn. Religion as a prereq too. The deity doesn't need to buy it, just the undead.

It is weird. I'm not sure it's fair, either (my version). It allows the rogue to use something not normally available, but requires 2 checks to be successful. Most abilities either allow a save or require an attack of some sort as the determining factor.

I like your idea, however, so it's added.=)

rainzax wrote:

Limeylongears

i think the reason for using CHA for Guile Pool over, say, DX or INT, is part theme, part MADness. (MAD = multiple ability dependence)

that is, it represents 'confidence' and 'panache', which fall under CHA.

also, as a 'tack-on' to the already existing Rogue class, to provide incentive not to dump CHA.

cheers

I see what you mean - I suppose it depends how you're building your rogue. It'd make sense for a swashbuckler-y character who wants the opportunity to perform spectacular deeds of derring-do to have a CHA-based pool they could draw from; to my mind, 'guile' conjures up something that'd be determined by another attribute, though, and if you have a rogue who's using his/her powers not to be noticed, it doesn't feel quite right to me to have those powers determined by how charismatic they are. I do take the point about it being an incentive not to dump CHA, which I've been guilty of in the past, so maybe it's just self-interest :)

for the sake of the argument, say you are using the CHA-based pool to reroll a Stealth check. this either makes sense or deosn't based upon your 'philosophy of CHA'

if you see it as merely others reactions to your social entity, then no, it does not make sense.

i view CHA also as a sort of esteem or nerve. the idea that somebody who is confident is willing to take more chances means they might be able to improvise a breakthrough associated with a higher risk higher payout scenario. thus, in this way, this attitude of willingness to thrust yourself into a situation which will exceed your comfort level is where i see the Guile Pool CHA base as coming from.

but aside, i have moved past my original bias that this could be the only wellspring from which a skill 'pool' (of any name) could emerge for the rogue. an INT 'pool' could be explained as a capacity for a sort of meta-cerebral-simulation of potential outcomes that could provide insight into a higher risk scenario. a WIS 'pool' could be a fundamentally sound intuition and hyper-sensitivity-feedback to one's environment which could function similarly.

i have changed my 'pool' to reflect this after what was intended to be a mechanical suggestion.

Da'ath wrote:

It is weird. I'm not sure it's fair, either (my version). It allows the rogue to use something not normally available, but requires 2 checks to be successful. Most abilities either allow a save or require an attack of some sort as the determining factor.

I like your idea, however, so it's added.=)

I hope you rewrote it then. I spent less than 5 minutes on it.

Ciaran Barnes wrote:
I hope you rewrote it then. I spent less than 5 minutes on it.

The language might still need a little work, but I did rewrite a little bit of it.=)

Oh don't forget to mention that it operates like the feat turn undead. The channel class ability doesn't "turn" them anymore.

rogue talent idea
(stop me if this exists already in some book)

Quick Strike

Spoiler:

Quick Strike
An enemy who takes a 5-foot step through an area you threaten provokes an attack of opportunity from you. This applies whether they step into, out of, or through the threatened area.

As an immediate action, you may expend 1 point to make an opportunity attack against a foe using Spring Attack who moves through an area you threaten.

As an immediate action, while using this talent to strike a foe, you may expend 1 point and take a -2 to your attack roll to deny your opponent their Dexterity bonus to AC for this attack.

the goal here is to give rogue a talent to gain some battlefield control.

If it exists, I haven't seen it.

I rather like it. I need to look through the talents more carefully to double check for similar/pre-existing mechanics.

speaking of thrower builds, how about:

Knife Tosser

Spoiler:

Knife Tosser
Whenever you throw a dagger, it's damage is increased by one step.

As a swift action, you may expend points to increase the range increment of daggers you throw for 1 round. Each point expended increases the
range increment by +10 feet.

As a swift action, you may expend 1 point to increase the deadliness of all daggers you throw for 1 round. Any dagger that is deflected or snatched using the feats Deflect Arrows or Snatch Arrows inflict half damage instead of no damage.

tryin' to bring the dagger back in style.

I like charisma bonus + level for the guile pool. It's simple, makes sense, and awakened foxes could have it.

Finally settle on Charisma as the stat for the guile pool, due to a number of PMs/posts.

Added in Knife Tosser & Quick Strike to the "pending" section.

I'm not sure if I'm happy about NPC Rogues having quick strike.

looking at Quick Strike again, the last part seems strong. the creature should have a chance to retain it's DX bonus to AC. maybe it should be denied it's DX if it fails a Reflex save? suddenly this is getting complicated...

also, maybe make 'em pay 1 to stab the 5-footer?

how about name change and:

Last Strike

Spoiler:

Last Strike
As an immediate action, you may expend 1 point to make an opportunity attack against a foe who uses a withdraw action to leave an area you threaten.

As an immediate action, you may expend 1 point to make an opportunity attack against a foe who takes a 5-foot out of an area you threaten.

As an immediate action, you may expend 1 point to make an opportunity attack against a foe using Spring Attack who moves out of an area you threaten.

got rid of the free sneak attack. increased the opportunities instead. the flavor of having the 'last laugh' kind of inspired me to change (and simplify) all the opportunities to opponents leaving the threatened area. besides, Barbarian has a rage power that opperates as a 'first strike,' and i didn't want to cut in.

Goth Guru wrote:
I'm not sure if I'm happy about NPC Rogues having quick strike.

Yeah, and I never add anything that players or NPCs can't use. If it's too good for NPCs, it's too good for players and vice versa.

rainzax wrote:

looking at Quick Strike again, the last part seems strong. the creature should have a chance to retain it's DX bonus to AC. maybe it should be denied it's DX if it fails a Reflex save? suddenly this is getting complicated...

also, maybe make 'em pay 1 to stab the 5-footer?

how about name change and:

Last Strike
** spoiler omitted **

I think you have a good idea. I tried to condense it a little bit, though, into the following:

Last Strike As an immediate action, you may expend 1 point of guile to make an attack of opportunity against a foe who uses a withdraw action to leave an area you threaten; a foe who takes a 5-foot out of an area you threaten; or a foe using Spring Attack who moves out of an area you threaten.

I like it, but it seems like it should either be "advanced" or have some hefty prerequisites (combat reflexes, minimum level, etc.).

Re: Rainzax: You a 4e player? I noticed you use a lot of their phrasing. Just curious.=)

no. but i am half german.

edit: i agree on the advanced. specially cause it trumps a 3-feater.

Mug

Spoiler:

Mug
As a standard action, you may make a single attack against an adjacent foe. If this attack hits and deals sneak attack damage, you may immediately make a free steal combat maneuver against your opponent. If you expend 1 point you may roll your Sleight of Hand skill bonus in place of your CMB, and your opponent must beat your roll with a Perception check to notice the theft.

 51 to 73 of 73 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>