I have been seeing this come up alot here is a recent quote from a thread:
In 20+ years of my experience, rogues do not suck in combat.
Personal experience is the worst judge of these things. You could be a better player than the others, for example. If you are good at making characters and everyone else is bad or even just average, you will outperform them regardless of class.
I will, however, agree that Rogues don't suck--no, Rogues are obsolete. They do nothing other classes can't do better. Vivisectionist Alchemists are better Sneak Attacks by miles. Bards are better skill characters plus they contribute more to the party overall with spells (or can deal more damage, either through Inspire Courage or as a Dervish), Inquisitors and Rangers are comparable skill characters that are significantly better in combat. Alchemists value Intelligence, so often have comparable skill ranks, too. Even just be a Ninja instead--they are literally just Rogues+ since they can be actually invisible and whatnot.
Malastra wrote:
However they have sneak attack and debilitating effects like slowing, bleeding and so on.
I have taken down many foes with blade and bow using sneak attacks.
They do not suck.
Sneak Attack is a weak damage mechanic. It's only, effectively, 3.5 damage every two levels, and only in very specific circumstances. It doesn't multiply on a crit, and Rogues have trouble hitting, as they are the only 3/4 BAB class (other than monks) that don't have a built in mechanic to raise their attack bonuses.
Objectively, Rogues are a poor choice if you want to fight (obviously, just about everyone does this better), a poor choice if you specifically want to fight with Sneak Attack (Vivisectionist), a poor choice if you want to be highly skilled (Bards are better with skills), and a poor choice if you want to combine fighting and skills (Rangers and Inquisitors, and to a lesser extent Bards and Alchemists do this better).
Fighters are good combat characters, but borderline useless outside of fighting. Plus, multi-classing an even split is the worst possible way to multiclass.
So, if she wants skills and wants to be effective, I highly recommend just being a straight Urban Ranger (so she can still trapfind).
My other recommendations in no particular order:
Inquisitor (any sort)
Dawnflower Dervish Bard
Archaeologist Bard
Some other kind of Bard
Vivisectionist Alchemist
Ranger (if she doesn't care about Trapfinding, any archetype will do)
Ninja (at the very least, if you won't accept anything else)
Thus endeth the quote.
So one wanted to be serious about making a rogue viable, how would they do it?
-full BaB
-2 or 3 good saves
-more realiable ways of getting sneak attack?
-any or all of the above?
What are the fundamental core mechanics that identify rogues?
-sneaky skill monkeys
-dirty fighting and sneak attack
-trapfinding
-brains/ finesse over brawn
-getting out of sticky predicaments (ie. evasion, escape artist, slippery mind)
What are the community's thoughts? Do rogues need a re-write? Has this issue been addressed with paizo?
I think editing to give a better title might be a good idea unless you want the thread to get off on the wrong foot...
This is my sneak attack replacement that tries to address a couple of the problems I've seen. The first post in the thread explains it a bit more, I think.
Making the Rogue into the legit Assassin class and doing away with the PrC would be a good start. Give 'em a good Fort save and Poison Use, let them have an ability like Death Attack (but with less prep time, jeez), and give them a bunch of powerful, yet flavorful abilities they can use.
Weapon Finesse for free, maybe, upping to something like Dervish Dance after 10-12th level, with all Finesseable weapons he's proficient with.
Drop the Trapfinding schtick, just like all but...1 I think of his Archetypes does and replace it with something else.
Make him the combat pragmatist type (kicking sand in their eyes and stuff, essentially a scaling bonus to Dirty Trick that also makes Dirty Trick more defined.).
Keep his 3/4 BaB and d8 hit dice but lessen his reliance on Sneak Attack just a little. Maybe by making Feint maneuvers mo' betta.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm going to put forward an opinion that will hopefully garner support from the roleplaying crowd.
I like rogues because sometimes I just like to play a scoundrel.
Yes, you can be a scoundrel with any class, but how much more fun do you have being a rogue scoundrel than, say, an alchemist scoundrel?
Bard as a scoundrel is silly to me.
I don't optimize; it never even crosses my mind. I want to play as a character - if I wanted to optimize in order to "beat teh gamz" I'd go play a videogame.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Please don't turn this into a "roleplay vs rollplay" thread :(
You're right...didn't think about that can of worms :X
Please ignore my post - it has nothing to do with the conversation at hand.
Carry on!
Why is it that being useful/optimizing and roleplaying are seen as separate things by so many people. If you were a "scoundrel" wouldn't it make more sense to be good at "scoundreling" than somehow, inexplicably surviving for X many years as a terrible "scoundrel"?
Either way, that's neither here nor there, this is about "Should there be changes made to Rogue, and if so, what?"
Making the Rogue into the legit Assassin class and doing away with the PrC would be a good start. Give 'em a good Fort save and Poison Use, let them have an ability like Death Attack (but with less prep time, jeez), and give them a bunch of powerful, yet flavorful abilities they can use.
Weapon Finesse for free, maybe, upping to something like Dervish Dance after 10-12th level, with all Finesseable weapons he's proficient with.
Drop the Trapfinding schtick, just like all but...1 I think of his Archetypes does and replace it with something else.
Make him the combat pragmatist type (kicking sand in their eyes and stuff, essentially a scaling bonus to Dirty Trick that also makes Dirty Trick more defined.).
Keep his 3/4 BaB and d8 hit dice but lessen his reliance on Sneak Attack just a little. Maybe by making Feint maneuvers mo' betta.
Would auto finesse be too strong? I mean, its a go-to for 99% of rogues, but I wonder if the loss of a feat is a good drawback for such a strong change, since it lets the rogue dump most of its stats into DEX for flippy-jumping and the sort.
Depends on when he would get it. Seems like if it came in around level 3-4 or so it would keep that "You have to survive long enough to qualify for it" deal.
It just seems like if it's a given for most Rogue builds anyway, why not have it be a class feature so there's less of a Feat tax to make the TWF-ing tree effective?
And it gives the Rogue a slight leg up over other classes going for TWF (barring Ranger, most likely).
what i am doing in my next campaign is using the viscous opportunist rules, plus replacing sneak attack with a flat +3 damage per die (multiplies on criticals, Non-ninja rogue only), and an ability at 10th level that has them also hit touch AC when applying sneak attack. strong ghosts and other deflection and secondary ac bonus possessing creatures will still be pretty resistant, but otherwise way more consistent versus the big natural armor amounts later in game. will probably post the data i acquire here.
Depends on when he would get it. Seems like if it came in around level 3-4 or so it would keep that "You have to survive long enough to qualify for it" deal.
It just seems like if it's a given for most Rogue builds anyway, why not have it be a class feature so there's less of a Feat tax to make the TWF-ing tree effective?
And it gives the Rogue a slight leg up over other classes going for TWF (barring Ranger, most likely).
True. Seems that every time I try to build a rogue, I get irritated trying to map out my feats. There are so many you'd like at or near the start, and I usually end up wasting a rogue talent at 2nd just to get my feats in the direction I want them to go.
If finesse was auto and I had a high dex rogue, then I'd just try to avoid doing a lot of direct combat until finesse. Then I could focus on feats that help the character build, like TWF, or running/acrobatic feats, etc.
EDIT:
One day I should try playing a enforcer type thug rogue, with high str and con, at the expense of int and dex.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is why we can't have nice things
Or
Why I learned to stop worrying about Roguesrdumbornotdumb thread #3059202 and just play my rogue regardless.
...rouge
What about monk's flurry of blows, but only with finessable weapons? That eliminates the poor BaB + TWF issues.
Replace sneak attack with a precise strike kind of ability... 1/2 class level to damage in melee or with in 30ft. I wouldn't combine it with flurry though.
I think that rogues should 3 good saves to represent their resiliency...
What about my crossbow rogue, my archer rogue, or my greatsword rogue?
Why should the rogue force you to use weapon finesse or else have a useless ability?
What about my crossbow rogue, my archer rogue, or my greatsword rogue?
Why should the rogue force you to use weapon finesse or else have a useless ability?
Obviously it's a rough draft.
Would it make you feel better if you could choose between Weapon Finesse, Rapid Reload, and Precise Shot/Rapid Shot at that level, and then it bumped up to Dervish Dance, Crossbow Mastery, and Manyshot/Clustered Shots at level 8?
What about my crossbow rogue, my archer rogue, or my greatsword rogue?
Why should the rogue force you to use weapon finesse or else have a useless ability?
Obviously it's a rough draft.
Would it make you feel better if you could choose between Weapon Finesse, Rapid Reload, and Precise Shot/Rapid Shot at that level, and then it bumped up to Dervish Dance, Crossbow Mastery, and Manyshot/Clustered Shots at level 8?
Combat styles? It's getting rangery in here.
That's because Ranger gets a lot of nice things and he should share the love.
Well not only do you have stuff like this.. but some weapons that are 'rogue staples' in a way suck pretty badly.
Like the Garrote
Needs Exotic weapon prof.. for this.
Description: In order for you to use a garrote, your opponent must be helpless or unaware of you. You must make a grapple check (though you avoid the –4 penalty for not having two hands free) to successfully begin garroting your opponent. Sneak attack damage does not apply to a garrote. Your garroted opponent must make a concentration check (DC 20 + your CMB + level of the spell he’s casting) to cast a spell with a verbal component, use a command word item, or use any magic requiring speech. You gain the following additional option when grappling with a garrote.
Choke: You cut off your target’s air supply so he has to hold his breath (see Suffocation, and the Swim skill for additional information). Any round you do not maintain the choke, your opponent can take a breath and restart when he has to begin making Constitution checks.
Weapon Feature(s): choke
I mean honestly, You remove the ability to do sneak attack damage with it. You make it almost impossible to use normally. I mean.. this is a rogues weapon.. Why can fighters use it so much better? Honestly a fighter could get massive bonuses to his grapple, his damage even on this thing.
For its use limitation.. how many times have we seen in the movies, someone eventually working something around someones neck and then strangling them? It may not happen immediately, but eventually stuff like that does happen in movies. Though obviously Getting a helpless/unaware target is far easier. (or should be at least.)
For me, some of the big changes... Rogue Talents. There are some 'really good' rogue talents and there are a lot of really sucky ones.
Like the ones that add one or two skills or a few languages. Those ones end up leading to more garbage. gaining some actual bonuses on top of getting those as skills, now that would lead to something better.
IMO class features should be a little stronger than feats. So with the survivalist one, Perhaps add in Endurance there, or make it so the rogue can do something more with those skills.
There's nothing about Rogues that makes me think "I gotta play one of those some day." In every other class I can find a nifty base mechanic, a cool Archetype or an interesting gimmick. Not so for Rogues.
So I can't say they suck. To me, they are something worse than sucking; they are ignored.
Why not just say,"Feats for a specific class need no prerequisites."
I made a feat for Rogues called Continuing Threat. Lets just give it to them at 3rd level. Basically if they make an attack, and hide, they flank as long as the foe cannot see them. They don't need hide in plain sight unless there are no shadows and nothing to hide behind. This way they contribute to the fight with the big bad without being crit bait. As long as they stay hidden and don't attack anyone else, the threat lasts. If the foe drops, they can jump out and sneak attack someone else, and restart the feat.
I don't like the idea of giving all Rogues Weapon Finesse. What it I want to build a Strength-based rogue instead? I would have a useless class feature.
|
without drastic conceptual changes (stick to the names/concepts of original class features), nor an alteration of vital statistics (BAB/saves/proficiency...) i am attempting with my rogue to address:
1) the narrowness of sneak attack (see my variant)
2) the lost niche of Trapfinder (see my variant)
3) the lack of dominance in the skill department (see my steetwise pool)
4) the parity of rogue talents (i have modified and added some)
5) the lack of interaction of multiple sneak attack talents (see my features Talented Strike @10th and Master Strike @20th)
i think addressing these five changes 'fixes' the rogue.
...
(*i have been back and forth about whether the streetwise pool should mechanically operate like Grit or like Ki, and am lately coming around to thinking that the latter is the best way to encourage class loyalty)
Ok, let me take a crack at it.
Replace sneak attack with precise attack: the rogue is a combat opportunist that always strikes for exposed and/ or vulnerable areas. The rogue adds half her level (min 1) to all melee damage and ranged damage within 30ft. The rogue must be able to see their opponent to gain this damage. Creatures that are immune to critical hits or have no discern able anatomy are immune to this extra damage. Note: this damage IS multiplied on a critical hit.
Trapfinding: a rogue is able to disable magical and non magical traps. Note: not adding half level to the roll.
Rogue talents: combat talent- a rogue may take any combat feat that they meet the pre-reqs for. The rogue counts as a fighter -3 for pre reqs. This talent can be selected MULTIPLE times
Trap sense is replaced by skulduggery: a rogue gains a +2 to disable device, escape artist, sleight of hands, and stealth checks. This bonus increases by +2 every 4 lvls there after for a maximum of +10 at 19th lvl.
Well defended: rogue gains evasion at lvl 2, uncanny dodge at lvl 4, imp uncanny dodge at lvl 8, and mettle at lvl 12 (mettle is evasion for fort and will saves).
What do you think about this? Added note: rogues get 3 good saves.
|
|
Precise Attack - if you are ok with surrendering the d6's, Cheapy's sneak attack alternative deserves another look. his +2-per-iteration multiplies.
Well Defended - i prefer Defensive Roll over Mettle. maybe 2/4/6/8/10 @ evasion/uncanny/defensive/imp.uncanny/imp.evasion?
Combat Talent - maybe only once, but, you can sub in your rogue level for your BAB for a single combat feat? that, or just add some feats (like Vital Strike or Spring Attack) onto the talent list which only a rogue 6+ can gain but without pre-reqs?
3 good saves - rogue/monk, here i come!
finally, why make Trapfinding worse?
Weapon finesse is a weapon quality, as opposed to a feat.
Remove combat expertise as a requirement for maneuver feats.
Two weapon fighting gets you the entire feat chain for one feat.
When full attacking from invisibility (or from being stealthed), the opponent loses his dex until the entire full attack action is done.
If you are able to perform a full attack on a surprise round (i.e. standing next to someone), you can do so.
These changes help some of the other classes too, but it will help rogues the most. There should probably be better rogue talents too, but that's a different kettle of flounder.
Precise Attack - if you are ok with surrendering the d6's, Cheapy's sneak attack alternative deserves another look. his +2-per-iteration multiplies.
Well Defended - i prefer Defensive Roll over Mettle. maybe 2/4/6/8/10 @ evasion/uncanny/defensive/imp.uncanny/imp.evasion?
Combat Talent - maybe only once, but, you can sub in your rogue level for your BAB for a single combat feat? that, or just add some feats (like Vital Strike or Spring Attack) onto the talent list which only a rogue 6+ can gain but without pre-reqs?
3 good saves - rogue/monk, here i come!
finally, why make Trapfinding worse?
Precise attack does less damage, but it does it more often and is multiplied on a crit which gives any rogue the static damage needed to keep up with everyone else... If you want more, then go duelist for 15 extra damage per hit at lvl 20.
Defensive roll can still be taken as an advanced talent in conjunction withe these.
The combat talent change helps out the feat starved rogue and helps with combat potential, but keeps it balanced and by the -3. Besides you don't HAVE to take it more than once, but you can.
And trapfinding isn't nerfed, it's actually better because you still get the +10 bonus, but you also get that bonus to other quentisential rogue skills, and they come at increments that make you want to continue on in the base class.
Thought about adding disguise to the skulduggery ability... It would kind of be like bardic knowledge only for rogue skills. This alone would help keep rogues as the un matched skill monkeys of the game
But do all the changes unbalance the rogue? I thought long and hard about the three saves. Monks get them through physical focus and contemplation. The rogue would get them because the rogue is a survivor. A rogue will find a way when none other exists. There is always a trick to try, always an angle to each problem.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Eh. I still think he should have Ref and Fort but not Will. A Monk gets it through meditation (Will and kinda Fort) and intense physical conditioning (Ref and Fort), whereas a Rogue generally has good reflexes in order to survive, and has built up a resistance to toxins and diseases and such through hard living, but isn't exactly the contemplative type.
I certainly understand your reason. I even thought of a canny resilience, adding int to saves like the paladins divine grace. But I couldn't find a good place for it before level 12. Anyway what about the other changes?
Hum.
I of course like the idea of Bonus Feats/Better Combat Talents. I've never really liked Trapfinding to begin with, but that change seems as good as any.
I'm not sure what Skullduggery is exactly.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The main issue with a rogue is not his damage but his survivability.
Rogues have the same issue in Pathfinder that blasters do, in that the Pathfinder devs increased average hit points for everyone by around +2 per level (between higher hit dice for half the base classes and the introduction of the favored class mechanic), but did not increase the damage Sneak Attack dealt to compensate.
Now a rogue deals extra damage that is about the same as the wizard gets when he levels up, rather than about the same as the bard gets when he levels up. And the rogue only gets half as many of those as the wizard has levels.
D6 should not be the standard for damage when d8s are the standard for hit points. If you want to change the rogue, this is the prime place to start.
Now, on to the survivability aspect.
Every class has some kind of survivability aspect. Whether its lots of armor (fighters, paladins, clerics), extra AC through class features (monks, inquisitors), lots of hit points (barbarians), or spells (everyone else), each class has a way to protect itself from low-level CR appropriate enemies.
The only two classes that did not receive special protection in 3.5 were the ranger and the rogue. That has changed, however.
Now in Pathfinder, both classes have a higher hit dice, and the ranger has medium armor. The difference, however, is that the ranger has the flavor aspect, the animal companion, the extra damage and the extra feats to be the perfect archer character (and indeed, nine times out of ten when I play with a ranger, they are an archer. Not saying that's the only way to build them, just the only way I see people play them in actual games). So survivability is not an issue with them.
Not so with the rogue. The rogue has absolutely no survivability. Light armor does not protect you any more than the monk's Wis to AC protects you, but at least the monk can grapple or stun when he's in the thick of things. This forces the rogue to have a high Dexterity score, because if he doesn't, he's doomed. And even if he has a high Dexterity score, that still usually caps him at around 18-20 AC for the first five levels or so (18 Dex, +4-+6 from masterwork to +2 chain shirt).
So here's how you fix the rogue:
Some kind of ability that allows him to protect himself, but is still flavorfully appropriate and non-magical. No invisibility, no hiding in plain sight, nothing like that. Personally, if I had to come up with an ability, I'd do something like this:
Wasn't Me! (Ex): At level 3, the rogue gains the Quick Draw feat if he does not already have it. In addition to the normal benefits of the feat, the rogue is also allowed to store weapons in his backpack or pockets as a free action. After a rogue makes an attack with a weapon, he may make a Sleight of Hand check as an immediate action with a bonus equal to half his rogue level. If his Sleight of Hand check exceeds his enemy's Perception check, he may make a Bluff check with a bonus equal to half his rogue level. If he succeeds that check, the enemy does not know the rogue attacked it, and will assume the damage came from another of its visible enemies (or, if the rogue is alone, some mysterious force or invisible attacker).
Even then, this isn't good enough because it arguably doesn't work on stupid enemies or enemies who don't rely on sight. And even then, it's still not good enough because it pushes two skill taxes on the rogue.
So, yeah. Good luck with this guys. It's going to be really hard for you to balance the rogue correctly.
I would think that one obvious change should at least be to put them on the same 3/4 base attack, hit die, and save footing as other three quarter classes. Who else that is 3/4 BAB and two bad saves? I don't know another class that suffers this misfortune.
I think intelligence modifier to hit when fulfilling sneak attack conditions around level four would also be very helpful.
Changing sneak damage to a flat bonus may also help. I don't know how that would effect builds, you may end up with people gravitating towards crit fisher builds which would make rogue builds a bit more bland.
I think giving them a reason to leverage intelligence in combat would be the best solution, but it would be hard not to obsolete the duelist. perhaps bonuses to mind affecting spells through intelligence.
A character in a video game I once played defeated mental scanning by jedi through the use of mental mathematics to maintain focus away from deeper thoughts. I think that would be an interesting may to leverage an ability score.
perhaps something like Obfuscate[Ex;] The rogues interactions with the shady and the powerful have trained her to maintain mental activity away from vital thoughts, granting protection from manipulation.
Benefit: At the (insert level here)th level, the rogue adds her intelligence modifier to her will saves against any compulsion spell, spell like ability, or supernatural ability.
Another example of players more worried about mechanics than about the game
I'm sure your right that some other classes can do certain things better than rogues but here's my point so what ! I doubt care if he's not the best as long as he's good at what I want him to do then that's fine by me I'll still be happy and having fun
And just because there not the best don't mean they suck
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another example of players more worried about mechanics than about the game
But the mechanics are the game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No the mechanics are part of the game they are the system that allows you to interact within the game
Rogues work just fine. They do not need a rebuild.
This 3pp product set out to fix them up a bit. I have yet to read it, but the review it has so far says it's quite good.
As a disclaimer, it does use my sneak attack replacement mentioned above, but due to the way OGL material works, I don't receive any compensation.
|
NeoSeraphi, your point about stuff having more average HP, throwing off the HP/SA ratio is very insightful! I'd never thought of it in those terms before.
I don't really like replacing Sneak Attack with flat damage, because I enjoy rolling lots of dice. That's one of the reasons that I love playing Rogues. I'd rather see a minimal change, something that keeps the mechanic basically the same but still increases its damage level.
The obvious solutions are either give more SA dice per level, or give bigger dice.
However, I can see that one of the reasons Cheapy's version makes SA flat is so that it multiplies on crits. I like that. Since crits are SA are conceptually similar, they ought to synergize. Maybe we could give Rogues a new ability that makes their SA better on crits without making it flat, though?
Attack Weak Point for Massive Damage (Ex): Whenever a Rogue confirms a critical hit on a sneak attack, she rolls double the number of sneak attack dice on her damage roll.
Or, maybe more balanced:
Attack Weak Point for Slightly Less Massive Damage (Ex): Whenever a Rogue confirms a critical hit on a sneak attack, she rolls a number of extra sneak attack dice equal to her weapon's critical modifier. At X level, this increases to twice the weapon's critical modifier.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Like the OP said, the main insight that I think we need to consider, though, is that the Rogue's main problem is not that it's weak per se, but that that its role has been eclipsed by other classes. Just improving Sneak Attack isn't going to fix that issue.
We need to zero in on what the Rogue is supposed to be good at, who his competitors are in those areas, and work on making him the best at those things again. Ideally, we can do it without stepping on those other classes' toes, so that Rogue once again has its special niche.
1. Using stealth or misdirection to gain advantage in combat.
Competitors: Ranger on sniping, Alchemist on SA, Ninja.
I don't mind Rangers being better at sniping; that should be one of their core strengths. I also don't mind Alchemists getting Sneak Attack, though I'd say the Rogues ought to be better. Heck, I don't even mind Ninjas being better "pure combat" Rogues, as long as Rogues are still better at their non-combat roles.
My Idea: Personally, when I think Rogue combat, I think flanking. I think just having a Rogue in combat ought to make things easier for everybody. Maybe if a Rogue is part of a flank, the flanking bonus should be higher for both attackers?
Also, maybe Rogues should be better at feinting? Obviously we could just give them the feats, but what if they could "feint" people just by making them worry about the Rogue? Maybe a Rogue could have some sort of "dangerous presence" that makes enemies worry about him, giving other combatants bonuses from their distraction?
2. Being highly skilled.
Competitors: Bard, Alchemist
Conceptually, the Rogue is someone who has mastered the art of solving problems without having any innate magical ability. I think Rogues really ought to be top of the heap when it comes to non-magical skills.
In my opinion, they ought to just have more skill points and class skills than anybody else, even Bards.
My Idea: Maybe a Rogue could pick one other ability score in addition to Intelligence. Each level, he receives a number of extra skill points equal to his bonus on that score. He can spend these skill points only on skills that are keyed to that ability (okay, 95% will pick Dex...).
3. Dealing with traps and environmental dangers.
Competitors: Ranger, Monk, Barbarian, utility casters
Rogues should have better saves. Evasion is awesome, but it doesn't help with Fort or Will.
My Idea: Shouldn't someone who's selfish and independent have a strong Will save?
The trap problem is a lot harder to solve. It's not really a Rogue problem; it's more a problem with the trap rules themselves, and also the conventions of adventure design. Most traps are easily solved by either detect magic/dispel magic or Barbarian Takes the Hit. Or they're just not there in the first place (I'm getting ready to run an AP chapter now, and I can't find a single trap in the whole book!). At worst, you just need somebody with Disable Device, and with the Pathfinder math on skills, it's easy for a non-Rogue to pick this up.
My Idea: Barring a total overhaul of the trap rules, or some sort of trap-happy renaissance among adventure designers, I think the only option is to make Rogues truly godlike at trap solving. Maybe they always automatically detect them, and nobody else does without really massive Perception checks. Maybe they can easily bypass them, but leave them active for enemies to get hit by. Maybe they're skilled at setting up their *own* traps to catch others.
As far as skill mastery and trapfinding is concerned, I came up with that skilduggery ability that replaces trap sense. It's like bardic knowledge and gives the same +10 bonus at lvl 19. This should keep rogues ahead of the game.
The well defended line also helps out the rogues survivability as well via mettle. It is a bit of a late entry though. I think there is a good argument for either a good fort or will save, and I think that a good balance would be to give them the good will save and poison use/ immunity early on.
Those are the two biggest issues I see about rogues, with sneak attack and poor BaB being the others. I like Cheapy's idea, and giving better bonuses to flank, or letting them flank while adjacent. And as far as the BaB issues, you could either let a rogue have a flurry like ability with finessable weapons and bows, or give them acces to fighter feats or weapon training. I like the weapon training personally. It would need to be a narrower group like: bows, light one handed blades, and saps (other light bludgeoning weapons).
Rogue is a great class, and I love them much. I just want to see them take their place back among the viable base classes.
|
|
Those are the two biggest issues I see about rogues, with sneak attack and poor BaB being the others. I like Cheapy's idea, and giving better bonuses to flank, or letting them flank while adjacent. And as far as the BaB issues, you could either let a rogue have a flurry like ability with finessable weapons and bows, or give them acces to fighter feats or weapon training. I like the weapon training personally. It would need to be a narrower group like: bows, light one handed blades, and saps (other light bludgeoning weapons).Rogue is a great class, and I love them much. I just want to see them take their place back among the viable base classes.
You can't fall into the "give someone else what makes another class good" trap. Fighters are fighters because they have bonus feats and weapon training. Monks are monks because they have flurry.
If you want rogues to be better at combat, you need to come up with something unique that fits the rogue's flavor and allows the rogue to play differently than a fighter or a monk. If you think the rogue has issues with BAB (in other words, issues to hit) perhaps give the rogue an ability that allows him to dive prone under a target of his size or larger and attack from there, giving a +4 bonus to hit and soft cover against other attackers (but not the creature he's prone under).
Why all this concern over how to "improve" a rogue?
Want to do damage? Play a fighter or barbarian or ranger.
Want a better BA? Play a fighter or barbarian or ranger.
Want spells? Play a bard or mage or sorcerer.
Critical build? 2-weapon build? Don't play a rogue.
...Want to deceive others, evade people, avoid battlefields, and escape difficult situations? Then play a rogue. It's not a WOW world in PF.
|
|
Why all this concern over how to "improve" a rogue?
Want to do damage? Play a fighter or barbarian or ranger.
Want a better BA? Play a fighter or barbarian or ranger.
Want spells? Play a bard or mage or sorcerer.
Critical build? 2-weapon build? Don't play a rogue.
...Want to deceive others, evade people, avoid battlefields, and escape difficult situations? Then play a rogue. It's not a WOW world in PF.
The issue is that Pathfinder is a combat style game. Every other class is pretty decent in combat (and at least monks are interesting to play if you build them right). The rogue doesn't really have any special attacks that allow him to play uniquely, and his only combat ability requires him to get in close without any defenses.
You plain cannot avoid battlefields in Pathfinder. Combat WILL happen.
Deceiving others? A bard can do that better. Evading others? Monks can definitely do that better. And you can't "evade people".
|
Overall, the biggest reasons why Rogues.. suck, is look at other classes.
Bard: Bardic Music
Fighter : Lots of Fighter only feats
Barbarian: Rage
Druid: Druid spells, Wildshape, Animal companion
Ranger: Ranger Spells, Animal companion, Fighting style
Monk: Wholecraptonofstuff
Wizard: Supreme arcane power
Sorcerer: lots of arcane power/bloodline
Cavalier/Samurai: Horsemanship, Banner
Cleric: Channel Energy, Divine spells
Paladin: Stick up the keyster, champion of divine stuff
Gunslinger: Easy gunaccess, Grit
Meanwhile every class feature a rogue has, some other class has as well. /everysingleone/ Sure there are a few double ups with that stuff up there, but its much less extreme
I mean really, they get only two sets of class features. Uncanny dodge and trap sense. Every single archetype replaces one of those two things, and not really anything more.
First step, remove weapon finesse - Quality of weapon. This doesn't help rogue at the start, but its a work to the right direction.
Next, give rogues toys. Again, this doesn't quite put them out there, but it still a step in the right direction. Toys like a useful Garrote (Actually give rogues prof with that in the first place.) Boot daggers, coat sleeve daggers, etc.
then for the rogues themselves. Give them good fort/ref or ref/will. Next, Ambush feats. Feats that run off of sneak attack, can can be selected as a rogue talent.
For Rogue talents, improve the "you gain these two skills" talents into something that still gives the skills, but gives a little more.
Lastly, give a rogues a few class features /somewhere/ that they don't have to buy with talents. Since you know, Some bard archetypes and the ninja can just get those if they wanted.
...Want to deceive others, evade people, avoid battlefields, and escape difficult situations? Then play a rogue.
Except rogues are worse at those things than other classes like bards and monks too.
just seriously like oh hey it's good to meet you all check out my rogue build no really hear me out on this it's a knife maste-huurrrghthtt and then just disappearing under a mass of fists on my face all at once
I wake up in a cold sweat
That's mainly from the booze but still