| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
People, you gotta read the first post before replying. The OP already said his GM ok'd slashing grace for shortswords, no worrying about agile enchantments and such.
OP, don't listen to the powergamers. Some people think that if you're not optimized to the hilt you're worthless. That's plain wrong, you can have fun however you like, and as long as your fellow players aren't all experience optimizers, you should do just fine. And even if you're not, it sounds like your GM would be reasonable enough to talk to and find a way to fix things.
These forums like to put down rogues, but that's just the powergamers ranting :P
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
OP, don't listen to the powergamers. Some people think that if you're not optimized to the hilt you're worthless. That's plain wrong, you can have fun however you like, and as long as your fellow players aren't all experience optimizers, you should do just fine. And even if you're not, it sounds like your GM would be reasonable enough to talk to and find a way to fix things.
So much this.
|
There is something to the notion that you should just play what you want and have fun.
In my Pathfinder game I DM for, my wife wanted to play a dual-wielding channel-energy focused cleric. It was cool and thematic... and she hated it. She didn't do much damage per hit, had fairly low accuracy, and even with buff spells she felt useless. I let her remake her character as a Warpriest focused on a single two-handed weapon, and she's having a blast; some of the most fun she's ever had playing. Same character conceptually, but mechanically it's much more satisfying.
It's important to remember that roleplay and mechanics are both sides of the same coin. On the one hand, you should play what you want. On the other hand, if you repeatedly fail mechanically, you won't have fun when you can't keep up.
Heck, I'm in a game right now where I'm playing as a Wizard going into EK. It was fun at first, but I had to miss a few games due to a vacation, and my DM won't let me catch up with the rest of the group level-wise. Playing with a bunch of 2s and 3s when you're level 1 sucks. I love the character, but mechanically I just can't do anything. I can't image purposefully doing that just to make a character you like.
You're playing a game. Play the game, and play it well. Then you can roleplay whatever you darn well please and enjoy every facet of it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Two-Weapon Feint is not the greatest route to go. Requiring 4 Feats (Combat Expertise, Improved Feint, Greater Feint, and Two-Weapon Feint) for the ability to Feint one round to set up an attack for the next round, all at a -2, which won't drop most enemies' AC by the time you can get it (around 7th level, the earliest you could probably snag it, things start getting bigger and having less Dex, meaning you've just spent 4 Feats just to get Sneak Attack, and not lowered their AC significantly if at all. That thing with 5-10 Dex gives zero f!&+s about being denied his Dex to AC).
A TWFing Rogue really isn't very viable. That's what he was asking about.
If he was feeling nostalgic for a Rogue character, and wanted to be effective, a Slayer would be an excellent choice for a TWFer with Sneak Attack. Full BaB, being able to ignore the Dex requirements for Improved/Greater TWFing (with Combat Style), and all the other Rogue-ish goodies, with the same flavor? Good character.
The Sword and Board route is really god there too. Playing one myself right now.
If you really must play a Rogue, seriously, stay away from TWFing.
I've seen Rogue after Rogue bite it trying to go that route.
That doesn't do what you said it does though. For "creature is flat footed until the end of your next turn" you need Greater Feint.
If you can afford it, the Dazzling Display/Shatter Defenses line combines really well with Power Attack/Cornugon Smash. It takes a lot of feats though, and it's not fool-proof. I was going that way in my WotW campaign, but other out-of-combat features were also needed.
edit- The forum-ites do have a bit of reason in their arguments. Rogues take a little more work to build/play well. It's not as easy as 2H-smash-barbarian.
There's a new Feat or two from the Monster Codex that makes Intimidate builds scary as all get out.
Yeah, I'm still not seeing the upside there.
First off, a -2 at first level for a 3/4 BaB character is baaad. You're looking at needing a 14 to hit your bog standard Goblin there.
But let's fast forward to level 8. You're giving up your first attack, to get 1 attack at -2 and another attack at -7, with Sneak Attack.
You're already way behind on to-hit, you're dropping an extra -2 (painful) and your extra chance to hit that incurred that -2 (which is the only upside to TWFing, you get extra chances to hit to balance out the penalty).
All that, to get one attack that is your best chance to hit, and one attack that probably needs a 20, to add an extra 4d6 damage.
And you dropped several Feats to get this capability.
To-hit is the most important thing in this game, that's why to-hit bonuses are valued (in the system) as double what damage bonuses are (EX Power Attack's 1:2 ratio and Weapon Focus vs Specialization).
He's better off snagging a single weapon and doing all he can to boost to-hit there, and then thinking about moving into Greater Feint to set up Sneak Attack for the next round. That extra 4d6 isn't worth the statistically likely chance that you'll simply miss because of penalties accrued.
He may as well play a Sanctified Slayer Inquisitor if he wants the extra 4d6 that bad. That class can get a +2 hit/damage AND that 4d6 against anyone he chooses. And Sneak Attack. And Favored Target.
You don't seem to get it. He's setting up sneak attack on all attacks for two rounds.
How so? He's sacrificing his one extra attack to get Sneak Attack on his one remaining attack. Then he gets Sneak Attack next round too (with a 4 Feat investment).
It's a -2 penalty. It's a 10% less chance to hit. It's not as game breaking as you claim it to be. The point is that you sacrifice a bit of to hit and a single attack to get the classes main damage feature. A -2 for +1d6 to +10d6 damage. This is also why you don't take power attack on a rogue. You can get more out of your class feature than that feat.
It's a -2 to-hit...on top of the -2-3 to-hit from being a 3/4 BaB class vs full BaB, and the -1 (at least) to-hit of having a lower enhanctment on each weapon because you're TWFing.
That's a 25-30% less chance to hit. And 10% is bad enough already.
At 8th level he's trading (essentially) -5-6 to-hit for 4d6 damage (average 14). It's a barely better ratio than Power Attack (well actually it isn't since with a 2H weapon you're hitting -3/+9 at this level), but mechanically it's so much worse since Power Attack is a bad option for 3/4 BaB characters anyway.
In total it's a five feat investment of your 10 feats and 10 rogue talents of which you can use some to gain feats. One quarter of your characters potential to pretty much guarantee your main class feature for damage is always happening when you full attack and you lose a single attack every second round. Yes there's other options for getting sneak attack with less feats, but they don't help a TWF as much as this.
True, they don't help a TWFing character as much as this, but this doesn't help the TWFer a whole ton either.
Always about the power gaming on these boards. Can't see past your own optimizing to offer advice on anything that isn't the absolute best option for OMGAMSMASHDPRWINALLELSETEHSUXXORZ.
:rolleyes:
I'm offering him other options not because they need to be the best options (Slayer certainly isn't the best option in the game, nor is a TWFing anything usually), but because they're NOT the worst options. Which the TWFing Rogue is one of.
You don't seem to get it. He's setting up sneak attack on all attacks for two rounds. Not for the next round. It's a -2 penalty. It's a 10% less chance to hit. It's not as game breaking as you claim it to be. The point is that you sacrifice a bit of to hit and a single attack to get the classes main damage feature. A -2 for +1d6 to +10d6 damage. This is also why you don't take power attack on a rogue. You can get more out of your class feature than that feat.
In total it's a five feat investment of your 10 feats and 10 rogue talents of which you can use some to gain feats. One quarter of your characters potential to pretty much guarantee your main class feature for damage is always happening when you full attack and you lose a single attack every second round. Yes there's other options for getting sneak attack with less feats, but they don't help a TWF as much as this.
Always about the power gaming on these boards. Can't see past your own optimizing to offer advice on anything that isn't the absolute best option for OMGAMSMASHDPRWINALLELSETEHSUXXORZ.
It is not just a -2. It is a -2 on a medium BAB character with no way to get a bonus to overcome it. Personally I think going with an intimidate build is better if you dont have a good flank buddy.
Also Power attack with furious focus is not a bad combo, and if you waste a round setting up that is a lot less damage you are doing. \
Personally I don't know what the OP's "this meets the bar" standard is so he might not mind giving up a round to set something up, but it is a poor option in most games.
My opinion: If he wants a rogue let him play a rogue, but there is nothing wrong with presenting other options. If he does not want the options he can just say no, just like he did when I suggested going with a two handed weapon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sidestepping the debate for a second, I'll just say that in my experience TWF on a rogue is hard to pull off. I've repeatedly seen players get turned off the class after trying to make it work.
You're relying on full attacks from level one so setting up flanks is harder than for most other melee classes, your to hit bonus will be underwhelming (though your house rules on Grace will help here), and combining the feats needed for dex-based fighting, two-weapon fighting and feinting on a class with very few bonus feats means it'll take a long time to bloom.
There are ways to make viable combat rogues, but it usually means to make them as unintuitive as possible. The strength rogue with a falchion or dex rogue with an agile elven curve blade are good examples.
That's not to say that TWF rogues are the anti-christ. As long as you're aware of the drawbacks and the GM takes it into consideration and avoids using lots of high AC monsters, it can work. TWF can be a lot of fun in a campaign with lots of giants, for example.
All that said, I'd feel remiss if I don't note that there are other classes who have very similar flavour and mechanics to the rogue and can handle the mechanics side of your character better. The obvious choice is the Slayer, but inquisitors and rangers could also do a decent job.
There's a new Feat or two from the Monster Codex that makes Intimidate builds scary as all get out.
Really? Care to share for those who haven't gotten that yet?
Have you got permission to use the ninja? The damage output of a TWF is all about getting those sneak attacks, otherwise you're really not that useful.
Ninjas maintain the feel of rogues while being much better equipped.