| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just had a conversation with my GM that went like this:
Me: "I've just been looking through the online forums, and some of the houserules for casters are pretty interesting, for example, the consensus is that the wizards versatility in having access to potentially all the spells is so much more valuable than the sorcerers ability to cast his known spells spontaneously that they ought to switch their spell-progressions (wizards getting new spell levels a character level later than sorcerers) to make them closer in power....of course this is for relatively high-op games"
GM: "I think those people would think twice if they faced a sorcerer who could throw out a fireball every round of combat"
Me: "Err...well, no...fireball is considered a pretty weak spell when you're talking about that level of optimization."
GM: "Ok then, finger of death."
Me :"...I guess...more like, summoning obscure creatures with powerful abusable spell like abilities and stuff."
I just realized how glad I am we're not one of those groups racing to break the system. To the point where I'm the only one even partially aware of the most broken stuff. (and I sortof make it a point to not go there, though I did select grease as my first level bard spell and it did save our bacon in our first fight)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
+1 to this!
I really don't like seeing crazy, non-justifiable (in the roleplaying sense) combinations at the table. If they're also over-powered/unbalanced in comparison to the rest of the party, then the fun level really drops.
It's bad enought that I'm still trying to weed out the remnants of 3.5 in my game - at this point, the only things that I want to keep are regional feats (it's an FR game), a handful of other feats, the prestige classes specific to FR, and a few justifiable early 3.5 prestige classes.
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
This update on Atomic Gamer is brought to you by:
Atomic Gamer
Your Source for Everything that is Atomic Gamer.
Also I know I have posted this before but:
Helpful tips I have learned from this forum:
1. Never roll a good alignment.
2. Never play a fighter when you can play a paladin.
3. It's super bad to heal other players.
4. Monks lol.
5. No seriously don't play a rogue ever because of every other class.
6. Never heal during combat.
7. Falchions.
8. RAW isn't just a pro wrestling show.
9. DPR or go away.
10. I'm not playing the right way.
This update on Atomic Gamer is brought to you by:
Atomic Gamer
Your Source for Everything that is Atomic Gamer.Also I know I have posted this before but:
Helpful tips I have learned from this forum:
1. Never roll a good alignment.
2. Never play a fighter when you can play a paladin.
3. It's super bad to heal other players.
4. Monks lol.
5. No seriously don't play a rogue ever because of every other class.
6. Never heal during combat.
7. Falchions.
8. RAW isn't just a pro wrestling show.
9. DPR or go away.
10. I'm not playing the right way.
"AtomicGamer approves this message."
-AtomicGamer
LOL, I hear you Atomic.
Lamontius, thanks for keeping the straw man of "never heal in combat" alive. Without such heroic efforts that straw man might actually die and be replaced by "healing is generally a poor tactical option, but is sometimes necessary" which is what is actually argued.
My group had a power gamer in it once. He was stuck on rogues though, but this was back in 3.5 when rogues were still "respectable" classes to play. He's the only player in our group who ever argued that by RAW he could stand in thigh-deep lava and slug it out with a fire demon (and win).
The rest of us just rolled our eyes and went with it.
I know many of the supposed "optimal" builds, but I deliberately choose not to play them. I much prefer role playing flavor to dealing out massive amounts of awe-inspiring damage. Somehow, through tactics, good fortune with dice and party buffs, my characters still manage to bring enough awesome to satisfy me, in spite of their glaring optimization weaknesses.
My witch, for example, is charisma optimized. I deliberately did not take "slumber" and focused instead on what I felt were concept appropriate hexes. My average strength druid went the archer route, for crying out loud.
Now, there was a time I did optimize and was probably something close to a "munchkin". My dragon-slaying ranger is a hippogriff-riding magic arrow raining dragon-bane wielding nightmare of draconic death. But I haven't played him in years.
Now, having said that, once my character's concept is determined, I do my best to make that character as viable and effective as possible. And as such, they usually are pretty solid characters you wouldn't mind having around in a pinch.
@Lamontius, I actually kinda believe #5 at this point. Our Rogue died a horrible death, cudgeled by Spriggans, and we haven't missed his Disable Device skill or Sneak Attack yet.
And a bunch of other classes can already do that stuff anyway.
Okay now normally all my posts are straw men but the rogue thing actually chaps my hide a bit and gets me emosadfase'd enough to roll up a dhampir inquisitor as a remedy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
5. No seriously don't play a rogue ever because of every other class.
Rogues only suck at not being a rogue. What are ya tryin' to do be effective in combat! That's for suckers, pling away with a bow or hide and steal everything one the baddie is down- gosh!
Oh well Monks are undeniably badass.
But Rogues DO suck IMO.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Rogues are awesome...or can be anyway.
I do think that they should at least have full BAB or something though
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just realized how glad I am we're not one of those groups racing to break the system. To the point where I'm the only one even partially aware of the most broken stuff. (and I sortof make it a point to not go there, though I did select grease as my first level bard spell and it did save our bacon in our first fight)
So a nutshell summation of this thread is greasy bacon > bacon > anything else?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I GM a group that's pretty much entirely new players, and I'm the only one who ever reads the boards or really studies the rules.
It has its good side and its bad side. On the one hand, I don't have to worry about massive power disparity, or about players arguing with my on-the-fly calls. On the other hand, I have to keep reminding people over and over how touch AC works, and I have to spend a bunch of time helping everybody level up.
They're getting better, though. We've gone from level 1 to level 4 so far, and they're beginning to pick up on things better. It's a great group overall.
But every once in a while, I get the urge to go play Pathfinder Society and spam color spray at monsters like a boss.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Too right. I didn't realise rogues were awful until I came online...
Yeah, I keep forgetting to tell my rogue player who in my last campaign danced away from most area of effect spells (I think there is literally one AOE effect that hit him, because he rolled a 1 on his Reflex save), dealt massive amounts of sneak attack damage in nearly every combat, avoided AOOs like a pro, AND could stand right in front of you and you not see him, expertly play the party face, AND singlehandedly deal with nearly any dungeon hazard you can imagine, that he sucked and should have played a different character.
Anyway, yeah, I think sometimes reading optimization discussions does more harm to me at our table than good, given most issues complained of rarely come up.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I GM a group that's pretty much entirely new players, and I'm the only one who ever reads the boards or really studies the rules.
It has its good side an its bad side. On the one hand, I don't have to worry about massive power disparity, or about players arguing with my on-the-fly calls. On the other hand, I have to keep reminding people over and over how touch AC works, and I have to spend a bunch of time helping everybody level up.
They're getting better, though. We've gone from level 1 to level 4 so far, and they're beginning to pick up on things better. It's a great group overall.
I know the feeling man. I've got a group much like that myself, with one veteran (besides myself), one semi-veteran (the veteran's husband), and one guy who's a little past newbie but his offline group's game is so full of houserules that I'm having to correct him constantly and point out basic stuff about the game because he didn't learn the original rules first. The other two or three (one player's in and out, and I think she enjoys listening in more than actually playing) are very new to the game: one picked it up very quickly and is already GMing, one is stumbling along but pushing on stubbornly, and the other (Ms. in-and-out) seems to mostly just be here because this is what all of us do on Mondays and Thursdays, and is the one I have to keep reminding basic stuff about the rules like AC and how to calculate attacks and stuff.
Overall they're a good group, just advancing at very different rates.
Anyway, yeah, I think sometimes reading optimization discussions does more harm to me at our table than good, given most issues complained of rarely come up.
Also know that feeling. As I've said in a couple other threads, it sometimes boggles my mind to see the kind of things groups report complaining about on the forums. Makes me wonder things like "and how old are these players?" or "and you're friends with these people why?"
|
I have one player who showed up at the game shop and asked if he could play last minute. I guided him through rolling a dwarf barbarian because he just wanted to hit things with an axe.
He's gotten the hang of power attack and rage with my help. But he rolled a fighter with a rapier for his second character, and by the third scenario was switching to a great sword and swapping dodge for power attack. :(
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Too right. I didn't realise rogues were awful until I came online...Yeah, I keep forgetting to tell my rogue player who in my last campaign danced away from most area of effect spells (I think there is literally one AOE effect that hit him, because he rolled a 1 on his Reflex save), dealt massive amounts of sneak attack damage in nearly every combat, avoided AOOs like a pro, AND could stand right in front of you and you not see him, expertly play the party face, AND singlehandedly deal with nearly any dungeon hazard you can imagine, that he sucked and should have played a different character.
Anyway, yeah, I think sometimes reading optimization discussions does more harm to me at our table than good, given most issues complained of rarely come up.
Even a 2-3 class dip gives you awesome-sauce from rogue levels. Hmmm I'll take extra damage on flanking a boatload of skill points and class skills, oh yeah and a rogue trick and evasion what a terrible trade off!
Had a vet complain when I took 2 rogue levels as a Druid, never have regretted this- nothing funnier then a sneak attacking BEAR.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Had a vet complain when I took 2 rogue levels as a Druid, never have regretted this- nothing funnier then a sneak attacking BEAR.
I would contend that a sneak attacking WHALE would be funnier, if only for the visual. No one expects a whale with a shiv.
Too right. I didn't realise rogues were awful until I came online...Yeah, I keep forgetting to tell my rogue player who in my last campaign danced away from most area of effect spells (I think there is literally one AOE effect that hit him, because he rolled a 1 on his Reflex save), dealt massive amounts of sneak attack damage in nearly every combat, avoided AOOs like a pro, AND could stand right in front of you and you not see him, expertly play the party face, AND singlehandedly deal with nearly any dungeon hazard you can imagine, that he sucked and should have played a different character.
Anyway, yeah, I think sometimes reading optimization discussions does more harm to me at our table than good, given most issues complained of rarely come up.
For every Rogue that rolls ludicrously well, there are 3 more Rogues who roll average to bad, miss a bunch, never get their Sneak Attack off, and fail to disarm most traps.
I'm sure someone out there has a story about how they played an armless, legless, Half-Orc with a bite attack and did well, but that doesn't make it good.
Obviously Rogues aren't bad to that extreme but they're still pretty bad when there's like 5 classes that can do everything they do but with other stuff that makes them better. Like Vivisectionists.
No, dipping doesn't count.
I have always wanted to make a Barbarian/Scout multiclass though.
I'm sure someone out there has a story about how they played an armless, legless, Half-Orc with a bite attack and did well, but that doesn't make it good.
If the half orc had rabies, then it would do some pretty nasty DoT damage...
Had a vet complain when I took 2 rogue levels as a Druid, never have regretted this- nothing funnier then a sneak attacking BEAR.I would contend that a sneak attacking WHALE would be funnier, if only for the visual. No one expects a whale with a shiv.
I would but I've seen this
@Rynjin most of my characters multiclass (so few of my characters would "count"), been that way since 2nd ed- trust me she's as much a rogue in mentality as a druid. There's plenty to love with the rogue and they can be very effective. Also in my opinion Ninja is interchangable with rogue and as for vivisectionist the rogue will always be better at what a rogue needs to be a skill monkey and rogue tricks make that shine.
VEry effective rogue 1st build the Arcane trickser, or the Shadowdancer- they multiclass too but rogues one of the best ways to get into those.
Rogues don't suck people who try to break the game suck.
I've never tried to break the game at all. I've just never been able to get a Rogue to work as well as any other decently built class in this game.
As for Vivisectionist, you should be at about the same amount of skill points because you're an Int caster with 4 + Int skill points, you have the same Sneak Attack progression, Discoveries (which are probably one of my favorite class features in the game), and some pretty nifty spells.
I built a (not Vivisectionist, but still) "Rogue" out of an Alchemist here a while back and it worked great. He didn't have Sneak Attack but he was sneaky and had a good Disable Device score, his Bomb damage more than made up for lack of SA, and he could do nifty things like throw bombs that both obscured vision and sickened people for getaways.
And Vivisectionist is better to get Arcane Trickster too, since a Rogue needs to multiclass with some Arcane caster to get into it, whereas a Vivicsectionist can be straight classed into it, since it'll have both the requisite spellcasting ability and Sneak Attack score. You need to get a trait (Two World Magic I believe), but other than that you're set with no effort really required on your part.
Ninja can do most of that, plus some other nifty tricks, but straight Rogue is just ugh IMO.
He's got the issue that other classes are on par with or outdo him at his defining out of combat features, and he's not exactly a meat grinder in combat either.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have one player who showed up at the game shop and asked if he could play last minute. I guided him through rolling a dwarf barbarian because he just wanted to hit things with an axe.
He's gotten the hang of power attack and rage with my help. But he rolled a fighter with a rapier for his second character, and by the third scenario was switching to a great sword and swapping dodge for power attack. :(
Wouldn't happen to be a chap named 'Dave' would it? ;-)
...I dun get it.
Knights of the Dinner Table reference. Dave is the guy that always plays a character with a "big sword" fixation.
A note: just having Disable Device=/=being a Rogue. People seem to skip over the REQUIREMENT of Trapfinding to disable magical traps all the time...
Thankfully, my non-Vivisectionist has a very lovely Dispelling Bomb to use.
Obviously Rogues aren't bad to that extreme but they're still pretty bad when there's like 5 classes that can do everything they do but with other stuff that makes them better. Like Vivisectionists.
Does not having Stealth as a class skill impede you much? [Or do all vivisectionists come from the hills? :-)]
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Too right. I didn't realise rogues were awful until I came online...Yeah, I keep forgetting to tell my rogue player who in my last campaign danced away from most area of effect spells (I think there is literally one AOE effect that hit him, because he rolled a 1 on his Reflex save), dealt massive amounts of sneak attack damage in nearly every combat, avoided AOOs like a pro, AND could stand right in front of you and you not see him, expertly play the party face, AND singlehandedly deal with nearly any dungeon hazard you can imagine, that he sucked and should have played a different character.
Anyway, yeah, I think sometimes reading optimization discussions does more harm to me at our table than good, given most issues complained of rarely come up.
For every Rogue that rolls ludicrously well, there are 3 more Rogues who roll average to bad, miss a bunch, never get their Sneak Attack off, and fail to disarm most traps.
I'm sure someone out there has a story about how they played an armless, legless, Half-Orc with a bite attack and did well, but that doesn't make it good.
Obviously Rogues aren't bad to that extreme but they're still pretty bad when there's like 5 classes that can do everything they do but with other stuff that makes them better. Like Vivisectionists.
No, dipping doesn't count.
I have always wanted to make a Barbarian/Scout multiclass though.
Way to miss the point dude.
Fact is, I have never seen a rogue perform poorly, and no, they didn't all "just roll well." And I find it irritating you assume that my one anecdote meant that that character rolled well and that's all there was to his success. Rogues are not a perfect class (talents need serious work to be what they should be), but the hate and suppositions do not mesh at all with reality, time and time and time again. I have decided that anyone who thinks rogues are a lousy class is someone who has never actually played the game. I know this is a faulty supposition, but it is equally as faulty as the supposition that rogues universally suck, so as long as that myth lasts, I reserve the right to stick to my own myth as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thing about a true rogue is that it's hard to succeed when you play them like a fighter. The rogue mindset requires flexibility of approach and rewards quick thinking, improvisation and movement. Then there's obtaining and using all the lovely toys rogues get to play with.
Standing in one spot and fighting whatever opponent comes in front of you isn't the best way to to succeed.
I know that's stating the obvious for the vast majority of people here, but I've seen my share of players who forget that. Even some very experienced players do from time to time.
Burglars, do you burgling!Keep doing your thing, FB!
Way to miss the point dude.
Fact is, I have never seen a rogue perform poorly, and no, they didn't all "just roll well." And I find it irritating you assume that my one anecdote meant that that character rolled well and that's all there was to his success. Rogues are not a perfect class (talents need serious work to be what they should be), but the hate and suppositions do not mesh at all with reality, time and time and time again. I have decided that anyone who thinks rogues are a lousy class is someone who has never actually played the game. I know this is a faulty supposition, but it is equally as faulty as the supposition that rogues universally suck, so as long as that myth lasts, I reserve the right to stick to my own myth as well.
And fact is, I've never seen a Rogue perform well. Does that make you wrong? No. Does it make me wrong? Not really.
Maybe he's a great class if you've got a really good grasp of the system, but for the average player I've seen them just fail time and time again.
I'm planning on making a new character for Serpent's Skull (my current character is going to go "training in the mountains" and come back in a level or two with a slight respec), maybe I'll try my hand at Rogue. Or at least Ninja, I already have a Ninja built.
I'm probably the only one in my group that reads the forums, and because of that, half the table assumes everything I make is going to be broken or overpowered. Any time I come up with a clever synergy between a class/feat/race combo, they assume I picked it up off of the forums. It's a little frustrating. Unless I was going waaay out of my way to purposely gimp my characters and shoot myself in the foot, my characters are just assumed to be OP right out of the gate. I could make a 3.5 Half-Orc Commoner and someone would think I was trying to pull something shady...
This same group found my Shadowcasters and Warmages to be "broken OP splatbook cheese." /facepalm
That being said, I used to peruse the CharOp forums a lot, not looking for ways to break the game, but looking for all the different ways the game [i]could/[i] be broken so I know what to look for, and what, as a DM, to houserule around. Preventative measures, if you will.
I've GMed for a Shadowcaster/Sorc/Noctumancer and played alongside a Warlock/Warmage/Eldritch Theurge (though she never made it high enough level to multiclass, the campaign ended too soon, very sadly) in the past. Very fun characters with lots of unusual tricks, but seriously far from broken.
I've played several Shadowcasters, but the most notable one that I wound up retiring due to breaking the table was a Shadowcaster/Warmage/Noctumancer. Made extensive use out of the Sudden metamagic feats, which since our DM only ran 1 encounter per day, made the feats seem a lot more powerful than they actually are. This character was just the wrong combination of class abilities for the kind of game the DM runs, so I volunteered to retire it, since the DM couldn't figure out what he was doing wrong.
My "broken" Warmage made use of Sudden Maximize and a bandolier of Spell-Storing daggers, Quick draw, and Rapid Shot. Sure, even though ti took my character a full week of Sudden Maximize uses to refill his daggers for one solid round of damage, the cries of "OP! Borked!" were a bit much, so I retired this guy too.