A better thread title would be "What can a Rogue do that a Bard can't?"
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Apart from writing 'rogue' on his character sheet?
Sneak Attack and associated Rogue Talents. Or, for a Ninja, Sneak Attack, associated Ninja Tricks, and Ki Pool.
As compared to standard Bards, they get Rogue Talents, Trapfinding, Uncanny Dodge, and Evasion as well, and they gain a slightly different skill list (it has Disable Device), but not a better one, and have slightly more skill points at 1st-5th level, ignoring Bardic Knowledge, but not past that.
As compared to Archaeologists, they actually have more skill points in non-Knowledge skills throughout their career (since Archaeologists lose Versatile Performance)...but Archaeologists gain what amounts to Trapfinding, Rogue Talents, Uncanny Dodge, and Evasion. So that's all they have, aside from Sneak Attack.
So...not much. Some of the Ninja ki-pool stuff is defensible as legitimately better (Swift Action Greater Invisibility 8/day at level 10 comes to mind)...but Rogues are a bit screwed.
This is a problem with Rogue, not Bard, IMO.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dude! Don't attract too much attention to Bards! Paizo may decide to Crane Wing the class!
They nerfed Investigators and the class is not even out yet! Why? Because they make Rogues look bad...
News flash, Paizo. EVERY class makes Rogues look bad! Except, maybe, Fighters, but that is just because they suffer from different problems... And Fighters at least manage to be reliable at what they do (as limited as that is).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Rogues give the player the chance to play in hard mode, and sometimes we all need a little challenge.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dude! Don't attract too much attention to Bards! Paizo may decide to Crane Wing the class!
Bard are casters.
Do you think they have recieved so much love by mistake?
|
|
Dude! Don't attract too much attention to Bards! Paizo may decide to Crane Wing the class!
I don't think the corebook classes are changing, for better or for worse, any time soon.
They nerfed Investigators and the class is not even out yet! Why? Because they make Rogues look bad...
This isn't precisely true. The currently available version is nerfed hard, but based on the response from the people making it in the discussion thread it sounds like the final version of Studied Combat is actually gonna wind up a pretty cool ability and, frankly, quite possibly better than Sneak Attack in many ways.
Just for the record.
Actually, I'll add one positive: be forced to work in complete silence without losing any of their class' abilities.
This isn't precisely true. The currently available version is nerfed hard, but based on the response from the people making it in the discussion thread it sounds like the final version of Studied Combat is actually gonna wind up a pretty cool ability and, frankly, quite possibly better than Sneak Attack in many ways.
This is true. However, from posts like this or this, weakening the Investigator because it was too good compared to the Rogue was always the intent of the changes. So it is still a good point in relation to motivation and perception.
It also appears to have remained the intent. As far as I can tell the reason Studied Combat might end up with the final version (which I agree is better than the original Sneak Attack) is because they don't think that it would be. If they do/did, it will likely be re-weakened because of the Rogue, which would again be the problem of the Rogue being a millstone dragging down other classes.
EDIT: I should add something on topic. Rogues have access to Scout, which opens up many shenanigans.
|
|
This is true. However, from posts like this or this, weakening the Investigator because it was too good compared to the Rogue was always the intent of the changes. So it is still a good point in relation to motivation and perception.
It also appears to have remained the intent. As far as I can tell the reason Studied Combat might end up with the final version (which I agree is better than the original Sneak Attack) is because they don't think that it would be. If they do/did, it will likely be re-weakened because of the Rogue, which would again be the problem of the Rogue being a millstone dragging down other classes.
The issue seems to be doing exactly what the Rogue does better than the Rogue, Sneak Attack, skill monkeying and all. Not necessarily just being more effective for the most part. The new version of Investigator may have something better than Sneak Attack...but it's not sneak attack, nor does it do anywhere near the damage of sneak attack (it adds a bonus to hit, which is better, IMO, but also a notably different thing), and thus isn't doing both skills and sneak attacking better than the Rogue. It's doing something else entirely, and thus okay.
Or at least that's the impression I get.
This is true. However, from posts like this or this, weakening the Investigator because it was too good compared to the Rogue was always the intent of the changes. So it is still a good point in relation to motivation and perception.
It also appears to have remained the intent. As far as I can tell the reason Studied Combat might end up with the final version (which I agree is better than the original Sneak Attack) is because they don't think that it would be. If they do/did, it will likely be re-weakened because of the Rogue, which would again be the problem of the Rogue being a millstone dragging down other classes.
The issue seems to be doing exactly what the Rogue does better than the Rogue, Sneak Attack, skill monkeying and all. Not necessarily just being more effective for the most part. The new version of Investigator may have something better than Sneak Attack...but it's not sneak attack, nor does it do anywhere near the damage of sneak attack (it adds a bonus to hit, which is better, IMO, but also a notably different thing), and thus isn't doing both skills and sneak attacking better than the Rogue. It's doing something else entirely, and thus okay.
Or at least that's the impression I get.
I woudl be very boring if they gets sneak attack, It woudl be a vivisecsionist clone or something.
We playtested some of those classes, and the player of the investigator.
Rogues have slightly faster sneak attack, rogue talent, and advance talent progression than that one bard archetype.
And I think we can all agree that Paizo made rogue talents the equivalent of rage powers, dare I say even hands down better. That's why the Viking fighter archetype isn't herald as hands down better than the barbarian.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dude! Don't attract too much attention to Bards! Paizo may decide to Crane Wing the class!I don't think the corebook classes are changing, for better or for worse, any time soon.
Tell that to the Monk.
And I'm not even talking about their non-core toys that got severely nerfed / rendered useless like Crane Wing, Cloud Step (originally infinite speed at level 20), or brass knucks (originally -- and FINALLY -- a fair way to enhance unarmed strikes at the same price as a weapon).
I'm talking about stuff like monk's unarmed counting as a natural weapon (and thus you can take Imp. Natural Attack with it, as in 3E) or the whole "what are you guys on about, flurry of blows was TOTALLY meant to be used with two different weapons (sucks that "unarmed" is one weapon, huh?) all along, ignore all the evidence to the contrary, these are not the droids you are looking for..." (that thankfully got toppled by sheer massive player outrage) that were nerfed after the fact and came right from core.
So yeah, the correct answer is, "Bards are primary casters." Or possibly, "Bard class doesn't have anyone on the main paizo design team that actively hates them."
Paizo has absolutely NO problem nerfing or significantly changing core stuff, if it's from a class on their hit list.
I'm not good with people skills. Is that sarcasm?Rogues have slightly faster sneak attack, rogue talent, and advance talent progression than that one bard archetype.
And I think we can all agree that Paizo made rogue talents the equivalent of rage powers, dare I say even hands down better. That's why the Viking fighter archetype isn't herald as hands down better than the barbarian.
Rogue talents even work when the rogue is NOT raging.
I mean moving at full speed while sneaking!? Holy Shiite Muslim! Look out wizard the rogue can move slightly faster.
|
Seriously, i can't tell. Is this sarcasm or not?I'm not good with people skills. Is that sarcasm?Rogues have slightly faster sneak attack, rogue talent, and advance talent progression than that one bard archetype.
And I think we can all agree that Paizo made rogue talents the equivalent of rage powers, dare I say even hands down better. That's why the Viking fighter archetype isn't herald as hands down better than the barbarian.
Rogue talents even work when the rogue is NOT raging.
I mean moving at full speed while sneaking!? Holy Shiite Muslim! Look out wizard the rogue can move slightly faster.
It's sarcasm.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dude! Don't attract too much attention to Bards! Paizo may decide to Crane Wing the class!I don't think the corebook classes are changing, for better or for worse, any time soon.Tell that to the Monk.
And I'm not even talking about their non-core toys that got severely nerfed / rendered useless like Crane Wing, Cloud Step (originally infinite speed at level 20), or brass knucks (originally -- and FINALLY -- a fair way to enhance unarmed strikes at the same price as a weapon).
I'm talking about stuff like monk's unarmed counting as a natural weapon (and thus you can take Imp. Natural Attack with it, as in 3E) or the whole "what are you guys on about, flurry of blows was TOTALLY meant to be used with two different weapons (sucks that "unarmed" is one weapon, huh?) all along, ignore all the evidence to the contrary, these are not the droids you are looking for..." (that thankfully got toppled by sheer massive player outrage) that were nerfed after the fact and came right from core.
So yeah, the correct answer is, "Bards are primary casters." Or possibly, "Bard class doesn't have anyone on the main paizo design team that actively hates them."
Paizo has absolutely NO problem nerfing or significantly changing core stuff, if it's from a class on their hit list.
Sadly, the classes they love get treated even worse.
Since the Design Team LOVES Rogues and inexplicably thinks they're fine because they played one once and it did okay, they see no reason to improve it in the slightest.
It's sarcasm.Seriously, i can't tell. Is this sarcasm or not?I'm not good with people skills. Is that sarcasm?Rogues have slightly faster sneak attack, rogue talent, and advance talent progression than that one bard archetype.
And I think we can all agree that Paizo made rogue talents the equivalent of rage powers, dare I say even hands down better. That's why the Viking fighter archetype isn't herald as hands down better than the barbarian.
Rogue talents even work when the rogue is NOT raging.
I mean moving at full speed while sneaking!? Holy Shiite Muslim! Look out wizard the rogue can move slightly faster.
I'll have you know that I once played a rogue who did more than single digit damage for one session. Glorious!
Never once did I think, "You know what would be rad? Buffing my whole party, doing better damage, being better at skill monkeying, AND having spellcasting to fall back on."
|
|
Tell that to the Monk.Dude! Don't attract too much attention to Bards! Paizo may decide to Crane Wing the class!I don't think the corebook classes are changing, for better or for worse, any time soon.
Okay, I admit Monks get the shaft...but none of the problems you mention involve actually changing the corebook's wording of the Monk class, which is what I meant wasn't going to change (I admit, this may've been less than clear). And as long as the corebook's wording doesn't actively change, I'm not sure how the Bard could really get screwed too badly. Some other clases could, but the Bard doesn't really have a lot of questionable rules areas for such issues to crop up in.
Okay, I admit Monks get the shaft...but none of the problems you mention involve actually changing the corebook's wording of the Monk class, which is what I meant wasn't going to change (I admit, this may've been less than clear). And as long as the corebook's wording doesn't actively change, I'm not sure how the Bard could really get screwed too badly. Some other clases could, but the Bard doesn't really have a lot of questionable rules areas for such issues to crop up in.Tell that to the Monk.Dude! Don't attract too much attention to Bards! Paizo may decide to Crane Wing the class!I don't think the corebook classes are changing, for better or for worse, any time soon.
Dude. They added abilities to the monk via errata. Changes do happen in the CRB.
|
Dude. They added abilities to the monk via errata. Changes do happen in the CRB.Okay, I admit Monks get the shaft...but none of the problems you mention involve actually changing the corebook's wording of the Monk class, which is what I meant wasn't going to change (I admit, this may've been less than clear). And as long as the corebook's wording doesn't actively change, I'm not sure how the Bard could really get screwed too badly. Some other clases could, but the Bard doesn't really have a lot of questionable rules areas for such issues to crop up in.Tell that to the Monk.Dude! Don't attract too much attention to Bards! Paizo may decide to Crane Wing the class!I don't think the corebook classes are changing, for better or for worse, any time soon.
The ability not to take Improved Natural Attack (Unarmed Strike)?
The ability not to take Improved Natural Attack (Unarmed Strike)?Dude. They added abilities to the monk via errata. Changes do happen in the CRB.Okay, I admit Monks get the shaft...but none of the problems you mention involve actually changing the corebook's wording of the Monk class, which is what I meant wasn't going to change (I admit, this may've been less than clear). And as long as the corebook's wording doesn't actively change, I'm not sure how the Bard could really get screwed too badly. Some other clases could, but the Bard doesn't really have a lot of questionable rules areas for such issues to crop up in.Tell that to the Monk.Dude! Don't attract too much attention to Bards! Paizo may decide to Crane Wing the class!I don't think the corebook classes are changing, for better or for worse, any time soon.
"At 7th level, his unarmed attacks are also treated as cold iron and silver for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction."
That's in the CRB and came from errata.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, I admit Monks get the shaft...but none of the problems you mention involve actually changing the corebook's wording of the Monk class, which is what I meant wasn't going to change (I admit, this may've been less than clear). And as long as the corebook's wording doesn't actively change, I'm not sure how the Bard could really get screwed too badly. Some other clases could, but the Bard doesn't really have a lot of questionable rules areas for such issues to crop up in.Tell that to the Monk.Dude! Don't attract too much attention to Bards! Paizo may decide to Crane Wing the class!I don't think the corebook classes are changing, for better or for worse, any time soon.
I don't think most saw what was "questionable" about monk's unarmed strike being a natural weapon (it says so right in the class's entry!) or flurry of blows with "a single weapon", either.
Don't be so complacent. Designers can and WILL find something "questionable" about any rules item if they don't like it, or will outright invent a "problem" with it if they can't find a legitimate gripe.
There's a handful of athletic things that Rogues can technically be a little better at than bards. They're not good things, but they're things. You can get Improved Steal without putting 13 points into what's a dump stat for both classes, I guess.
Actually, I'll add one positive: be forced to work in complete silence without losing any of their class' abilities.
Perform mime (bluff high enough and it creates a wall of force)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I kinda want to throw an all Gnoll party at one of my groups sometime and have the Bard use Perform: Dog Whistle.
They'll never hear a thing.
I kinda want to throw an all Gnoll party at one of my groups sometime and have the Bard use Perform: Dog Whistle.
They'll never hear a thing.
OW OW OW OW OW
Sorry, this is a bit off topic, but what did Crane Wing "used" to do?
Is this one before or after the nerf? If so, which one is the right one, and I'd still like to see the other.
Benefit: Once per round, when fighting defensively with at least one hand free, you can designate one melee attack being made against you before the roll is made. You receive a +4 dodge bonus to AC against that attack. If you using the total defense action instead, you can deflect one melee attack that would normally hit you. An attack so deflected deals no damage and has no other effect (instead treat it as a miss). You do not expend an action when using this feat, but you must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed.
Benefit: Once per round, when fightingIIRC.defensivelywith at least one hand free, you candesignate one melee attack being made against you before the roll is made. You receive a +4 dodge bonus to AC against that attack. If you using the total defense action instead, you candeflect one melee attack that would normally hit you. An attack so deflected deals no damage and has no other effect (instead treat it as a miss). You do not expend an action when using this feat, but you must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed.
That's about the size of it. At my game table our GM runs it this way as opposed to the new erratta way. We have a monk in RoftRl that uses Crane Wing as the cornerstone of her combat style.
Actually, the old crane wing reduced the damage to 0. The attack was still treated as a hit, however, which meant that things like grappling, poisons, curses, etc. all came into effect.
When you deflected the hit you deflected everything, that was the FAQ.
Benefit: Once per round, when fightingIIRC.defensivelywith at least one hand free, you candesignate one melee attack being made against you before the roll is made. You receive a +4 dodge bonus to AC against that attack. If you using the total defense action instead, you candeflect one melee attack that would normally hit you. An attack so deflected deals no damage and has no other effect (instead treat it as a miss). You do not expend an action when using this feat, but you must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed.
99% correct, but you still had to fight defensively for Crane Style to come into play.
The pre-butchery version reads as follows:
Benefit: Once per round while using Crane Style, when you have at least one hand free and are either fighting defensively or using the total defense action, you can deflect one melee weapon attack that would normally hit you. You expend no action to deflect the attack, but you must be aware of it and not flat-footed. An attack so deflected deals no damage to you.
And the pre-errata Crane Riposte reads as follows:
Benefit: You take only a –1 penalty on attack rolls for fighting defensively. Whenever you use Crane Wing to deflect an opponent’s attack, you can make an attack of opportunity against that opponent after the attack is deflected.
I understand that it was apparently a feat that caused some issues in PFS (because of style archetype dipping) but I still think Paizo went so far overboard they're about to board a whole different boat when they issued this particular piece of "errata".
Actually, the old crane wing reduced the damage to 0. The attack was still treated as a hit, however, which meant that things like grappling, poisons, curses, etc. all came into effect.
It depends on the ability that is deflecting the attack.
For example, the Deflect Arrows feat says, "Once per round when you would normally be hit with an attack from a ranged weapon, you may deflect it so that you take no damage from it." It doesn't say the attack is a miss or is treated as a miss--instead, you take no damage from the attack. Because it is not a miss, effects that would trigger on a miss (such as Efreeti Style or Snake Fang from Ultimate Combat) are not triggered.Likewise, the Crane Wing feat (Ultimate Combat) uses similar language and does not say the deflected attack is a miss or treated as a miss.
Note that the Snatch Arrows feat counts as a deflected attack--you do not take damage if you choose to catch the weapons instead of just deflecting it, and catching the weapon does not mean the attack was a miss.Update 5/29/13: If the attack is deflected, not only does the target take no damage, but any other effects (ability drain, negative levels, harmful conditions, and so on) associated with that attack do not occur. If the deflected attack is a touch spell or other effect that requires "holding the charge," the charge is not expended. For example, if a ghoul's claw attack is deflected, the target is not subject to the ghoul's paralysis ability from the attack. If a shocking grasp touch attack is deflected, the attacker is still "holding the charge." The Crane Wing feat will be updated in a future printing of Ultimate Combat to clarify these issues.
What a bard can do that a wizard can't?
What a bard can do that a wizard can't?
Inspire Courage is pretty fantastic for one. Plus the Bard has a ridiculous number of skills. Good Hope is a pretty sweet spell. Theres a lot to say here but those are a few.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
What a bard can do that a wizard can't?
"Rogues do not suck because Wizards are overpowered" is a terrible argument.