Drain can't make you not qualify for feats...You can reverse engineer the argument with Ability Drain/Damage. The Devs have specifically said that that doesn't make you lose your feat should you be reduced to less than the requirement. You have it but you just can't make use of it.I think this more goes along the line that your actual ability score is what matters not the augmented one.
Which clashes with the idea to use magic items to qualify for build choices.
Ability score damage only gives you a penalty to associated rolls, you don't actually lose ability score points. Think of this as a temporary penalty, much like Bull's Strength is a temporary bonus. Note that ability score damage is cured automatically.
Ability score drain removes the affected ability score points until you have them restored, with all that that entails - losing skill ranks, bonus spells, and not qualifying for feats. Think of this as a permanent penalty, much like how a permanent bonus actually adds to the affected ability score.
*Edited for clarity.
It most certainly can. The stat is actually reduced.
Oh by the way. Whatever rule you're quoting wasn't there either as far as I can tell."Permanent bonuses:
Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increases the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, or other bonuses."
The first does not specify feats in anyway or anything about things you qualify for on level up.
It most certainly can. The stat is actually reduced.Drain can't make you not qualify for feats...You can reverse engineer the argument with Ability Drain/Damage. The Devs have specifically said that that doesn't make you lose your feat should you be reduced to less than the requirement. You have it but you just can't make use of it.I think this more goes along the line that your actual ability score is what matters not the augmented one.
Which clashes with the idea to use magic items to qualify for build choices.
Ability score damage only gives you a penalty to associated rolls, you don't actually lose ability score points. Think of this as a temporary penalty, much like Bull's Strength is a temporary bonus. Note that ability score damage is cured automatically.
Ability score drain removes the affected ability score points until you have them restored, with all that that entails - losing skill ranks, bonus spells, and not qualifying for feats. Think of this as a permanent penalty, much like how a permanent bonus actually adds to the affected ability score.
*Edited for clarity.
I retract my stance on that.
Oh by the way. Whatever rule you're quoting wasn't there either as far as I can tell."Permanent bonuses:
Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increases the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, or other bonuses."The first does not specify feats in anyway or anything about things you qualify for on level up.
If a permanent ability drain can disqualify you for a feat already taken, doesn't it make sense that a permanent ability bonus can qualify you for a feat in the present?
You have a strength score of 11.
You put on a +2 belt of Giant Strength.
You still have a strength score of 11, but you now have a +1 temporary bonus to strength-related rolls. Think of it like ability score damage in reverse.
24 hours pass.
The bonus changes from temporary to permanent. Think of it like ability score drain in reverse.
This is where the magic happens. Your strength used to be 11, and an ability bonus with a duration greater than one day "actually increases the relevant ability score after 24 hours". So your strength actually increases by +2 to 13.
You have a strength of 13, and now qualify for power attack should you level up. You could also retrain a previously taken feat into power attack, if you're lucky enough to have access to the downtime rules.
Oh by the way. Whatever rule you're quoting wasn't there either as far as I can tell."Permanent bonuses:
Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increases the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, or other bonuses."The first does not specify feats in anyway or anything about things you qualify for on level up.
Okay, I'll walk you through this:
You have a strength score of 11.
You put on a +2 belt of Giant Strength.
You still have a strength score of 11, but you now have a +1 temporary bonus to strength-related rolls. Think of it like ability score damage in reverse.
24 hours pass.
The bonus changes from temporary to permanent. Think of it like ability score drain in reverse.This is where the magic happens. Your strength used to be 11, and an ability bonus with a duration greater than one day "actually increases the relevant ability score after 24 hours". So your strength actually increases by +2 to 13.
You have a strength of 13, and now qualify for power attack should you level up. You could also retrain a previously taken feat into power attack, if you're lucky enough to have access to the downtime rules.
None of the rules cited would allow you to make such a conclusion.
"Actually increases the relevant ability score."
"Actually increases the relevant ability score."
Which means: "Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, or other bonuses."
That has nothing to do with qualifying for feats.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Actually increases the relevant ability score."Which means: "Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, or other bonuses."
That has nothing to do with qualifying for feats.
Are you saying your Strength score isn't a statistic used to determine whether you qualify for Power Attack?
Are you saying your Strength score isn't a statistic used to determine whether you qualify for Power Attack?"Actually increases the relevant ability score."Which means: "Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, or other bonuses."
That has nothing to do with qualifying for feats.
Cool. Well you find a GM that let's you change your build path depending on what you are wearing.
I'll be over here, not trying to stretch the RAW.
There are a lot of problems that come from interpreting it that way, so without a dev quote, I'm not going to believe you guys on this. Even with a dev quote my GM is still likely to wipe his arse with these kind of nonsensical rules.
Are you saying your Strength score isn't a statistic used to determine whether you qualify for Power Attack?Cool. Well you find a GM that let's you change your build path depending on what you are wearing.
I'll be over here, not trying to stretch the RAW.
There are a lot of problems that come from interpreting it that way, so without a dev quote, I'm not going to believe you guys on this. Even with a dev quote my GM is still likely to wipe his arse with these kind of nonsensical rules.
Marthkus I honestly want to know whether or not you believe your Strength score is a statistic used to determine whether or not you qualify for Power Attack.
I'm not trying to stretch RAW or patronize you.
If anything you and I should know that the rules don't exactly make a lot of sense sometimes, I mean just look at Mounted Combat.
Are feats not considered bonuses as in "this might cause you to gain skill points, hit points or other bonuses"? If they are not bonuses, what other bonuses are you interpreting that statement to mean and what is your rationale for not including feats among them?
To the best of my knowledge this hasn't been covered by the Pathfinder FAQ, most likely since it's never been a controversial ruling - as far as I know magical items can qualify you for feats ever since 3.0 was published.
Though I'm guessing you'll cry foul since it's not a Pathfinder dev quote, the 3.5 FAQ did however cover this:
Q:A feat sometimes requires you to have a certain ability score, which is the case with Two-Weapon Fighting (it requires Dex 15). A character has, say, Dex 13, but wears an item, in this case gloves of Dexterity +2, and now her Dex score is 15. Can she take the feat and have it be active only when she wears the item?
A:Actually yes, she could take the feat, but she would lose the use of the feat if, for whatever reason, she loses the bonus from the item.
This can be found in the 2008 3.5 FAQ file found here.
Finally, it should be noted that you are shafting martial classes if items don't allow you to qualify for feats - typically spellcaster feats only ask for a caster level, while martial feats frequently have high ability score requirements.
*Edited for greater clarity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
None of the rules cited would allow you to make such a conclusion.
Heh! Entire thread from false rules conclusion. Rules not say Rogue a PC class.
Chapter in Core Rulebook named "Classes" not "PC Classes".
Phrase "your character" in advancement paragraphs at chapter start. Not in Rogue section.
Rogue class for cohorts and followers from Leadership feat. Get fun mob of 8 or 10 little flankers at seventh level.
Rogue never meant for PCs. Of course Bard outshine Rogue! Why silly humans try cohort as PC?
None of the rules cited would allow you to make such a conclusion.Heh! Entire thread from false rules conclusion. Rules not say Rogue a PC class.
Chapter in Core Rulebook named "Classes" not "PC Classes".
Phrase "your character" in advancement paragraphs at chapter start. Not in Rogue section.
Rogue class for cohorts and followers from Leadership feat. Get fun mob of 8 or 10 little flankers at seventh level.
Rogue never meant for PCs. Of course Bard outshine Rogue! Why silly humans try cohort as PC?
I'll just leave this here.
1. Why is the Bard blowing 3 feats on Skill Focus? (Sure, Bards get more out of that feat than anyone else, but that doesn't mean there aren't better uses for a feat slot!)1. He's trying to parity the rogue and then do more stuff. Focused study means 3 skill focus for 1 feat.
Except your Bard example didn't take Focused Study - It took Skill Focus three different times. (Or maybe you did... I seem to have mistaken Focused Study for a different feat. My bad, but the below still applies.)
Here's my concern: On your Rogue, you take Skill Focus: Bluff because you absolutely need to land those feint attempts if you can't stealth and plan on doing any damage at all. You take Skill Focus: Stealth because you'd rather sneak than feint, your damage still relying heavily on outside conditions (inherent weakness of SA), and you took Skill Focus: UMD because, as a non-magical class, you need all the magical help you can get.
Now, with the Bard build - The Bard doesn't suffer the same drawbacks as the Rogue. Without desperately needing SA to land (because it doesn't have SA) then it doesn't have any *need* for any Skill Focus feats.
In essence, they are "fun" choices, not "optimal" choices. Where with your Rogue build, you made all "optimal" choices.
For no other reason than this, it's an imbalanced discussion.
|
So, back again with my Archaeologist v. Rogue Analysis.
- Cunning and Dextrous
- Sneaky and Good at Stealing
- Good with Traps
- Able to survive on the streets and aware of "the word on the street"
- Good at talking/tricking people into doing what they want
- Jacks of All Trades
CG Focused Study Human Rogue || 10 18 14 14 10 10 || Acrobatics, Disable Device, Escape Artist, Sleight of Hand, Stealth ||5|| Bluff,Use Magic Device, Perception||3|| Secondary Skills(4); Climb, Diplomacy, Disguise, Linguistics(max -1), Swim(1 rank)
NOTE: FCB in skills, all skills at max except where noted.Traits: Resilient(+1 fort saves), Indomitable Faith(+1 Will)
1 |Deceitful, Skill Focus(Bluff)
2 |Finesse Rogue
3 |Combat Expertise
4 |Combat Trick(Improved Feint)
5 |Skill Focus(UMD)
6 |Bleeding Attack
7 |Combat Reflexes
8 |Fast Stealth, Skill Focus(Stealth)
9 |Quick Draw
10|Skill Mastery(Bluff, UMD, Stealth, Disguise, Acrobatics)
11|Greater Feint
12|Opportunist
13|Iron Will
14|Crippling Strike
15|Great Fortitude
16|Hard Minded, Skill Focus(Acrobatics)
17|Extra Rogue Talent(Skill Mastery)
18|Defensive Roll
19|Improved Great Fortitude
20|Improved Evasion
Note that this rogue is much more fleshed out than the Archaeologist Comparison, so the results may very with a more defined bard.
Dex18
Con14
Int10
Wis10
Cha14
Feats:
1:Weapon Finesse
1:Skill Focus [Bluff]
3:Lingering Performance
5:Arcane Strike
7+:???
Rogue Talents:
4:Trap Spotter
8:Fast Stealth
12+:???
Spells Needed/Wanted:
1:Disguise Self
1:Grease
1:Comprehend Languages
2:Invisibility
2:Aram Zey's Spell Focus
2:Herosim
2:Mirror Image
2:Pageant of the Peacock
3:Haste
3:Good Hope
3:Glibness
3:Displacement
4:Greater Invisibility
Rest:???
Skills***:
Perception*
Disable Device*
Diplomacy**
Knowledge Local**
Bluff*
Stealth*
Slight of Hand*
Use Magic Device****
Perform [Whatever]****
Acrobatics*
*Maxed Ranks/Level
**1 rank in Knowledge Local, the rest in Diplomacy
***FCB into Skill Ranks
****Divide ranks in UMD and Perform about 50/50, or 75/25 in favor of UMD, depending on campaign.
Traits:
Vagabond Child
Fate's Favored
Note:This build does vary from the Bard Build I posted earlier in ability scores because I wanted to use the same basic stat array for the Rogue and the Bard, to reduce variation. Also I did a little more spell research this time, which is why the spells are expanded
Cunning and Dextrous:The rogue represents this with high Acrobatics rolls and high dexterity, while also having feint in-combat for a more clever use of actions. The Bard has the same Acrobatics[it does have a less at level 16, when the rogue gets Acrobatics] and High-Dex to represent dexterity, but instead of feinting in combat, the bard has spells like Grease and Invisibility that help him fight tactically to represent being cunning. So both "win" this sense they both show being cunning and dextrous.
Sneaky and Good at Stealing:The Rogue has a great Stealth and Slight of Hand to help with him sneaking into places and stealing or palming objects off of targets, and has a decent Bluff to talk his way out of things. The Bard has the same Stealth and Slight of Hand, more or less, but also has Invisibility and Greater to help him get in and out of places better, and has things like Disguise Self and Glibness for when he is caught and has to talk his way out of things. I'd say the Bard wins here.
Good with Traps:The Rogue is obviously good with traps due to Trapfinding and good Dex. The Bard is just as good with traps, with roughly the same bonuses to traps and can use spells like Aram Zey's Spell Focus to make him better with traps with a +5 to disable device[might not actually work, since bards don't technically get trapfinding, but instead "clever explorer", but RAI seems to be that it would work. Otherwise its kinda trash for a 2nd level spell]. The Bard also has Trap Spotter Rogue Talent, which makes him a bit better at finding them. At the Very Least, they are tied.
Street Skills:The bard is surprisingly better at knowing the streets than the rogue, when using Knowledge Local. Looking at other aspects of "street life" in pathfinder, the bard has Perform for a reliable income source, even if it is a bit lower than his other skills, and can bluff to help with reducing prices in "buisness transactions". The rogue can technically use Slight of Hand to Perform Juggle, so he can make a living there too, so he is actually better than the bard [unless the bard does the same thing], and has a roughly equal Bluff, maybe a bit more or less depending on level, so they are tied here more or less.
Talking to/Tricking People:The Rogue has a good bluff and diplomacy to take care of this, and is fairly good at it. The Bard has better Diplomacy, but only by a little, so they are tied in this, and still a good Bluff, and has Glibness and Pageant of the Peacock to add to it, so he is overall better at tricking/lying to people. So Bard is better at this.
Jack of All Trades:The Rogue has more physical skill ranks, but the Bard has Bardic Knowledge for an effective 10 ranks in every knowledge skill over 20 levels. The Rogue has Skill Master to let him take 10 on a handful of skills, but the Bard has Lore Master for taking 10 on all skills he has ranks in, and on occasional take 20. Bard wins here.
Combat Functionality:Yes, I didn't post anything about this in the goalposts, but all characters in PF must be fully functional in combat. The Rogue is good at working with a party and has his own way of getting reliable sneak attack, so if he is solo he can manage it. His attack bonus will be significantly lower than the Bards, but his damage will be higher and he has Crippling Strike on top to do extra Strength damage. The Bard has spells for bonuses to attack and damage, as well as Haste for an extra attack and Archaeologist's Luck which provides up to a +6[with trait] to attack and damage, so his damage will be more reliable. They will both probably spend the first round of combat buffing and postioning [rogue needing positioning for SA and possibly feinting for AoO Sneak Attack, the bard wanting Haste or Heroism, or some other spell before attacking], possibly the rogue spending the second round positioning or the bard spending the second combat round buffing depending on situation. But overall, the bard is better at hitting and has great damage/hit, and so is more reliable as well as providing buffs to the party and better defense via Heroism and Mirror Image for "AC" and saves. So Bard wins here.
You started with a lot of false assumptions about what a Rogue is actually supposed to do. . .3.X re-defined the thief into the rogue which is simply "A melee oriented character focused solely on flanking to deal extra damage and abilities like evasion to avoid damage"
Sneak Attack at +10d6 at max level is the defining ability of the rogue and everything else is simply dressing-- much of what you assume is very dependent upon the individual character and assuming that all characters of those classes SHOULD be built to fill those particular roles.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You started with a lot of false assumptions about what a Rogue is actually supposed to do. . .3.X re-defined the thief into the rogue which is simply "A melee oriented character focused solely on flanking to deal extra damage and abilities like evasion to avoid damage"
Sneak Attack at +10d6 at max level is the defining ability of the rogue and everything else is simply dressing-- much of what you assume is very dependent upon the individual character and assuming that all characters of those classes SHOULD be built to fill those particular roles.
My comparisons in this thread aren't to compare what the rogue is mechanically, but what it should be thematically. I think of the theme of the rogue to be an agile, clever thief and con man who lives on the streets, and so my rogue v. bard comparisons are meant to see which class can fulfill the theme better. Mechanically, you are right, the rogue is a melee combatant focused on using flanking to gain extra damage. But if that where what you were going for, then only classes like Swashbuckler and Vivisectionist who actually get extra damage from flanking, so Bard would not be comparable.
I did a similar comparison here if you are interested.
Also, as it seems I forgot to post this in both of my previous comparisons, I figure I ought to put in my
My comparisons in this thread aren't to compare what the rogue is mechanically, but what it should be thematically. I think of the theme of the rogue to be an agile, clever thief and con man who lives on the streets, and so my rogue v. bard comparisons are meant to see which class can fulfill the theme better. Mechanically, you are right, the rogue is a melee combatant focused on using flanking to gain extra damage. But if that where what you were going for, then only classes like Swashbuckler and Vivisectionist who actually get extra damage from flanking, so Bard would not be comparable.
I did a similar comparison here if you are interested.
Also, as it seems I forgot to post this in both of my previous comparisons, I figure I ought to put in my ** spoiler omitted **as I make it a point to put this in every rogue thread I post in.
Its fair, and for the theme of an agile, clever thief and con man who lives on the streets and meeting that goal with a rogue or a bard all your comparisons are fair.
Just pointing out that rogue like fighter was effectively stripped of its defined place as "thief" which it had in previous editions-- just how the fighter is essentially just "full BaB and a ton of feats" to build into anything, rogue is "10d6 sneak attack and a ton of skill points"
Each successive edition has stripped some of the rogues advantage in skills-- in 2nd edition AD&D only the thief could even do most of the skills, 3.0 gave skills to everyone then 3.5 and PF have both increased more classes to closer to/the same skill points per level that the rogue has-- similar to how adding extra feats to all classes that PF did has reduced the utility of the amount of extra feats that the fighter gains.
Personally, the rogue really needs Pummel or whatever it is called in South Park Stick of Truth. The Rogue in that game learns a move that lowers armor of enemy (armor acts more like DR as attack don't miss normally).
Basically I'd think of it as Rogue trick that lowers enemy AC by 1/2 Rogue level for Rogue level duration. This supplements the bad Hit chance of rogue plus adds a nice debuff that benefits whole party if they are helping out (like boss).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...
hmmm... fair helping of power creep... that is the most simple, yet most accurate and effective solution I've seen so far on this thread. EP for the win! He's totally right that the rogue isn't really the problem, it's the additional classes and re-tooled feats/skills that changed around him along the way.
All you need is update the rogue class in the Core rulebook (i.e. the Core Rulebook PDF in the downloads section has been updated in the past) or include two or three new ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY rogue feats in an upcoming new hardcover.
Example of amazing rogue feats:
AMAZING ROGUE FEAT 1: prereq trapfinding ability, trapsense, trap spotter: You gain +3 on all Perception and Disable Device checks. This bonus can stack with the bonus from Skill Focus, if applicable. Also, whenever a rogue with this feat comes within 60 feet of a trap, hazard or secret door, she receives an immediate Perception skill check to notice it. The use of Disable Device is always a standard action for you, regardless of the task or difficulty, and if you beat the DC by 5, it becomes a move action, and you figure out how it works, how to bypass it without disarming it, and you can rig a trap so her allies can bypass it as well. Finally you can disable a trap at a range of 60 feet if you can manipulate the trap in any way, whether via spell such as mage hand or telekinesis or via ranged attack against an AC equal to the DC of the trap; if you lack the a way to precisely manipulate or disable the trap via ranged attack, you can set it off via spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons and many evocation spells.
Over 20 levels with the pre-mentioned goalposts, the Rogue is better than the bard at none of them, the Bard is better than the Rogue at 5 different goalposts, and they are tied in 3
I say your comparison was fairly objective. I think the value of skill mastery is being under appreciated, and that by taking skill mastery twice, the rogue is taking 10 on most of his skill (10/13) two levels before the bard can.
Aside from that, I say a fair comparison.
|
|
hmmm... fair helping of power creep... that is the most simple, yet most accurate and effective solution I've seen so far on this thread. EP for the win! He's totally right that the rogue isn't really the problem, it's the additional classes and re-tooled feats/skills that changed around him along the way.
All you need is update the rogue class in the Core rulebook (i.e. the Core Rulebook PDF in the downloads section has been updated in the past) or include two or three new ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY rogue feats in an upcoming new hardcover.
Example of amazing rogue feats:
AMAZING ROGUE FEAT 1: prereq trapfinding ability, trapsense, trap spotter: You gain +3 on all Perception and Disable Device checks. This bonus can stack with the bonus from Skill Focus, if applicable. Also, whenever a rogue with this feat comes within 60 feet of a trap, hazard or secret door, she receives an immediate Perception skill check to notice it. The use of Disable Device is always a standard action for you, regardless of the task or difficulty, and if you beat the DC by 5, it becomes a move action, and you figure out how it works, how to bypass it without disarming it, and you can rig a trap so her allies can bypass it as well. Finally you can disable a trap at a range of 60 feet if you can manipulate the trap in any way, whether via spell such as mage hand or telekinesis or via ranged attack against an AC equal to the DC of the trap; if you lack the a way to precisely manipulate or disable the trap via ranged attack, you can set it off via spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons and many evocation spells.
Glad you agree with me on the need of Power Creep. That said, I think you might be approaching this wrong. Adding ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY feats just makes the rogue feat-tight, which it already is to an extent. Feat taxes are some of the most disliked things in the game, and quite a few people detest needing to take them to a point where they just don't.
I think it would be better to see archetypes do things like let rogues sneak attack at full BAB, apply multiple that modify sneak attack, or give ways to ensure sneak attack. Along with rogue talents that do things like add sneak attack dice rolled to Saving Throws in addition to AC[one that is tacked on to Offensive Defense], let them substitute some skills with other skills [like versatile performance, but for rogues], and gave them certain thematic feats like Gang Up without needing prerequisites. Talent-taxes wouldn't be so bad, because the number of good rogue talents is rather low, and archetypes aren't really taxes if they completely power up the class. See Qinggong Monks.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Marthkus, you are aware that, at the very least, all of the Valeros Builds at level 9 have him wearing dex boosters so that he can get the Dex necessary to use his ITWF feat, right?
And those are from official sources. You're just wrong here, sir.
==Aelryinth
|
|
I say your comparison was fairly objective. I think the value of skill mastery is being under appreciated, and that by taking skill mastery twice, the rogue is taking 10 on most of his skill (10/13) two levels before the bard can.
Aside from that, I say a fair comparison.
Thanks. I don't think you can take skill mastery twice, but if you can, then the rogue is about tied with the bard in the "Jack of All Trades" department. Of course, the Bard is taking 10 on all of the skills he is using regularly by level 5, but most builds finish coming together at around 10, so the level disparity isn't to huge a deal.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All you need is update the rogue class in the Core rulebook (i.e. the Core Rulebook PDF in the downloads section has been updated in the past) or include two or three new ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY rogue feats in an upcoming new hardcover.
Amazing Rogue feat #1 - Mob Teamwork: Allies with whom you flank gain use of your teamwork feats. Only true flanking counts, not alternatives such as the Ratfolk's "Swarming" racial trait.
Amazing Rogue feat #2 - Mana Slight: (Prerequisite: minor magic rogue talent) The Rogue may end an ongoing spell effect by grasping its magical energies and severing their connection with its caster. The Rogue must be sharing the same map location as the caster (in the square or tumbling through it) and must succeed at a Slight of Hand skill check opposed by the caster's Concentration check.
Amazing Rogue feat #3: - Sleeve Grab (Combat): As a move action, the Rogue may make a Slight of Hand skill check opposed by the targets CMD to grab the target, giving the target the grappled condition. The Rogue and target are not actually grappling. The Rogue does not gain the grappled condition, need not make a check each round to maintain the grab, gains no benefit to grapple checks against the target, and may not use his or her next grapple check to move/damage/pin/tie the target. The target can free itself with an Escape Artist skill check whose DC is the Slight of Hand result used to initiate the grab, or by grappling the Rogue.
Thanks. I don't think you can take skill mastery twice, but if you can, then the rogue is about tied with the bard in the "Jack of All Trades" department. Of course, the Bard is taking 10 on all of the skills he is using regularly by level 5, but most builds finish coming together at around 10, so the level disparity isn't to huge a deal.I say your comparison was fairly objective. I think the value of skill mastery is being under appreciated, and that by taking skill mastery twice, the rogue is taking 10 on most of his skill (10/13) two levels before the bard can.
Aside from that, I say a fair comparison.
You can.
Also nice find on the Valeros example Aelryinth.
Thanks. I don't think you can take skill mastery twice, but if you can, then the rogue is about tied with the bard in the "Jack of All Trades" department. Of course, the Bard is taking 10 on all of the skills he is using regularly by level 5, but most builds finish coming together at around 10, so the level disparity isn't to huge a deal.I say your comparison was fairly objective. I think the value of skill mastery is being under appreciated, and that by taking skill mastery twice, the rogue is taking 10 on most of his skill (10/13) two levels before the bard can.
Aside from that, I say a fair comparison.
Skill Mastery: The rogue becomes so confident in the use of certain skills that she can use them reliably even under adverse conditions.
Upon gaining this ability, she selects a number of skills equal to 3 + her Intelligence modifier. When making a skill check with one of these skills, she may take 10 even if stress and distractions would normally prevent her from doing so. A rogue may gain this special ability multiple times, selecting additional skills for skill mastery to apply to each time.
How is the bard taking 10 on all of his skills by level 5?
Marthkus, you are aware that, at the very least, all of the Valeros Builds at level 9 have him wearing dex boosters so that he can get the Dex necessary to use his ITWF feat, right?
And those are from official sources. You're just wrong here, sir.
FACT CHECKED: You are correct here.
The rule is still nonsensical. I still don't see most GMs letting it fly.
|
Marthkus, you are aware that, at the very least, all of the Valeros Builds at level 9 have him wearing dex boosters so that he can get the Dex necessary to use his ITWF feat, right?
And those are from official sources. You're just wrong here, sir.
FACT CHECKED: You are correct here.
The rule is still nonsensical. I still don't see most GMs letting it fly.
Why? I mean, if you need a certain amount of speed to do X...why does it matter that it's from a magic item? You can wear the item continuously for what amounts to weeks, months, or years, in what universe isn't that long enough to learn a Feat?
Why? I mean, if you need a certain amount of speed to do X...why does it matter that it's from a magic item? You can wear the item continuously for what amounts to weeks, months, or years, in what universe isn't that long enough to learn a Feat?Marthkus, you are aware that, at the very least, all of the Valeros Builds at level 9 have him wearing dex boosters so that he can get the Dex necessary to use his ITWF feat, right?
And those are from official sources. You're just wrong here, sir.
FACT CHECKED: You are correct here.
The rule is still nonsensical. I still don't see most GMs letting it fly.
The abilities you pick on level up depend on what you are wearing and for how long you were wearing it.
Great that makes tons of sense... Now you get players that want to wait on level up until they wear their gear for long enough. Or they want to rent gear to grab feats early, because even though they couldn't use it without the item their build benefits from taking the feat earlier. Just layers of meta-gaming needlessly added.
I will give perhaps a slightly different answer. The rogue:
- Possesses mechanics which suggest it is a fighter/combatant (SA) when in reality it is squishy and more of a striker. This is misleading to beginner players who think: sexy, light fighter.
- Creates an expectation of solo adventures, whereas the bard typically is seen as working with the party
The first can be overcome with experience. However, the second almost seems to be a function of the class. The rogue is a class that works well when the DM arranges solo adventures, information-gathering sessions and so on. It's almost like running two different campaigns...one where the rogue shines, and one where the combat-oriented classes shine.
The bard, by contrast, possesses the ability to enable other party members, work with them, and fulfill intel roles.
In a party-based game, that is often more desirable.
"Destroys" might be too strong of a word, but here is a brief list of things that the bard has over the rogue:
— Better Saving Throws (Ref & Will compared to just Ref)
— A 6-Level spellcasting list that is generally themed around problem solving (the rogue's niche).
— A number of versatile party buffs that allow the bard to make other martial characters better at their jobs. (Inspire Courage, Heroism, and Greatness are the big three.)
— More skill ranks thanks to Versatile Performance. (It effectively allows you to take one skill point and turn it into 2 skill points, which means that by Level 2, the bard has as many skill ranks as a rogue and the number climbs as the bard obtains more versatile performances.)
— Better archetypes that allow for in-depth customization.
— More class-specific options, including bardic masterpieces and feats tailored to the bard's specific class mechanics.
That said, the rogue does have some things going for it:
— Better customization: more choice in rogue talents, though many rogue talents are traps.
— Better archetype overlapping. (Almost no bard archetypes overlap with one another, making bards extremely cookie cutter and generic.)
— Better potential damage thanks to Sneak Attack. (A sneak attack will always do more damage than a bard's attack; it's getting those sneak attacks to hit with the rogue's abyssmal attack bonus that's the problem.)
— Better multiclassing options. (A level or two of "dips" hurts the rogue far less than it hurts the bard.
Actually, I think that the Rogue should be able to select Solo Tactics (the inquisitor ability) as a rogue talent. Rogues gaining other class's features is precedented; favored terrain, hide in plain sight, ki pool, and unarmed strike mastery all come to mind. Solo Tactics as a concept also fits the rogue's niche very well; arguably better than the inquisitor. Adding Solo Tactics and a Teamwork Trick rogue talent (one teamwork feat that you qualify for) would be a nice start.
I don't understand this one: why should rogues be good at dispelling magic?
Amazing Rogue feat #3: - Sleeve Grab (Combat): As a move action, the Rogue may make a Slight of Hand skill check opposed by the targets CMD to grab the target, giving the target the grappled condition. The Rogue and target are not actually grappling. The Rogue does not gain the grappled condition, need not make a check each round to maintain the grab, gains no benefit to grapple checks against the target, and may not use his or her next grapple check to move/damage/pin/tie the target. The target can free itself with an Escape Artist skill check whose DC is the Slight of Hand result used to initiate the grab, or by grappling the Rogue.
That feat is problematic. It breaks almost all of grappling's rules and doesn't actually improve the rogue's chance to hit.
Here's a better example of a must-have feat that would really help the rogue.
You are able to exploit a foe's weakness at the cost of your focus.
Prerequisite: Sneak attack class feature, rogue level 4th.
Benefit: Whenever you make a full attack you may designate one opponent that is denied its Dexterity bonus to AC against your attacks or that you are flanking as a free action. Until the start of your next turn, all attacks you make must target the designated opponent but your base attack bonus from rogue levels when making these attacks is equal to your rogue level. Using this ability requires much of your concentration, imposing a –2 penalty to your AC until the start of your next turn.
I think Versatile performance is being overrated. . . yes, it "gives" the Bard more skill points-- but if we took it out and made performance simply a single skill where ranks in it you could do any performance it would be effectively the same and those arguments wouldn't be made. All Versatile performance really does is remove a skill point tax that existed in 3.5 where a Bard HAD to invest many of his skill points in multiple performance skills.
Effectively-- Rogue has 8+ Int skills whereas Bard as 5+Performance+Int-- so only 5+ per level to use on skills that are truly useful in anyway other than empowering their class ability (which many other classes just get without a skill tax--imagine if martial had to bury a skill point in attacks just to get the BaB they should or spellcasters having to put a skill in "Spellcasting" to be able to cast their spells-- this is part of why Concentration was removed, why spot/search/listen were rolled into one-- to remove some of the skill taxes and you would never claim that Rogue is getting 3 for 1 skill points because he has Perception on his list)
Also, on Archetypes--
The lack of good rogue archetypes isn't inherent to the rogue class. Until publication stops this is a problem that is very solvable, and which I expect/hope will be addressed-- either in ACG if there are any archetypes for core classes there, or in the next major rules hard cover (Ultimate Skills? just guessing a book centered on those kinds of characters/systems)
Again, with Masterpieces and bard feats-- that's partially a function of Rogue talents-- much of what might otherwise be feats that are available to rogues gets stuffed into talents, but as with Archetypes simply some extra support for rogues going forward can easily solve this issue (possibly in the before suggested Ultimate Skills type book).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Marthkus, you are aware that, at the very least, all of the Valeros Builds at level 9 have him wearing dex boosters so that he can get the Dex necessary to use his ITWF feat, right?
And those are from official sources. You're just wrong here, sir.
FACT CHECKED: You are correct here.
The rule is still nonsensical. I still don't see most GMs letting it fly.
EVERY GM I know allows it. That includes the hundreds of people I have met online, and the dozens I have met in real life. You are in the minority. Do I need to set up a poll?
So are you really saying a character has to have a 19 dex without any magic items in order to qualify for Greater Two Weapon Fighting? O.o
As God intended.
Just saying this won't fly with the group I am playing with and I don't see many GMs letting you do this.
EVERY GM I know allows it. That includes the hundreds of people I have met online, and the dozens I have met in real life. You are in the minority. Do I need to set up a poll?Marthkus, you are aware that, at the very least, all of the Valeros Builds at level 9 have him wearing dex boosters so that he can get the Dex necessary to use his ITWF feat, right?
And those are from official sources. You're just wrong here, sir.
FACT CHECKED: You are correct here.
The rule is still nonsensical. I still don't see most GMs letting it fly.
You can poll all you want that doesn't make the rule make sense.
I think Versatile performance is being overrated. . . yes, it "gives" the Bard more skill points-- but if we took it out and made performance simply a single skill where ranks in it you could do any performance it would be effectively the same and those arguments wouldn't be made. All Versatile performance really does is remove a skill point tax that existed in 3.5 where a Bard HAD to invest many of his skill points in multiple performance skills.
Some thoughts:
— Versatile Performance doesn't let you use one Perform skill in place of another; it allows you to use one Perform skill in place of other, more powerful skills. For example, Versatile Performance allows you to use Perform (sing) as a Perform skill or as either Bluff or Diplomacy. That means you're investing one rank into Perform (sing) and effectively spreading that ranks to cover two additional skills (Diplomacy and Bluff). So ultimately you net +2 skill ranks per level from this trade, or +1 skill rank if you want to count Perform (sing) as a tax. (It isn't because some performances, like countersong, rely on your Perform ranks.)— Your argument basically reads, "Versatile Performance is overrated. It gives the bard more "skill points," but if we took out versatile performance and merged all of the Perform skills together no one would make that argument." Of course no one would make that argument: versatile performance wouldn't have been a thing and as noted above, the ability doesn't allow you to use Perform skills interchangeably; it allows you to use the selected Perform skill as an entirely different skill.
The lack of good rogue archetypes isn't inherent to the rogue class. Until publication stops this is a problem that is very solvable, and which I expect/hope will be addressed-- either in ACG if there are any archetypes for core classes there, or in the next major rules hard cover (Ultimate Skills? just guessing a book centered on those kinds of characters/systems)
All problems with all pieces of game content are solvable; that's part of the system being alive. This doesn't change the fact that one of the rogue's weaknesses is weak archetypes because they focus on trading the rogue's weakest abilities. (Trapfinding and Trap Sense).
You can poll all you want that doesn't make the rule make sense.EVERY GM I know allows it. That includes the hundreds of people I have met online, and the dozens I have met in real life. You are in the minority. Do I need to set up a poll?Marthkus, you are aware that, at the very least, all of the Valeros Builds at level 9 have him wearing dex boosters so that he can get the Dex necessary to use his ITWF feat, right?
And those are from official sources. You're just wrong here, sir.
FACT CHECKED: You are correct here.
The rule is still nonsensical. I still don't see most GMs letting it fly.
I was arguing against you saying most GM's wont let it fly, and with that said what makes sense is often subjective. Either you are strong enough to do ____ or you or not. Whether you got that strong with normal training or taking steroids is not going to matter when it is time to do the task.
edit: I was using steroids in the sense of it being a strength enhancer, not it being illegal.
You can poll all you want that doesn't make the rule make sense.EVERY GM I know allows it. That includes the hundreds of people I have met online, and the dozens I have met in real life. You are in the minority. Do I need to set up a poll?Marthkus, you are aware that, at the very least, all of the Valeros Builds at level 9 have him wearing dex boosters so that he can get the Dex necessary to use his ITWF feat, right?
And those are from official sources. You're just wrong here, sir.
FACT CHECKED: You are correct here.
The rule is still nonsensical. I still don't see most GMs letting it fly.
You're aware of this line from the Core Rulebook, right?
Permanent Bonuses: Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increase the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics as appropriate. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. These bonuses should be noted separately in case they are removed.
Emphasis mine. The rules specifically say that any bonus that lasts more than 24 hours is considered a permanent increase to the character's ability scores. Therefore, while wearing the magic item you qualify for the feat you want. That said, if the item ever stops functioning or is removed, you lose access to the feat for an entire day.