|
Okay, bit of backstory.
I've been gaming for near on 16 years, all the way back from AD&D second edition. I know that there are older, more long running gamers out there, but I've got a few years under my belt, and I've noticed one thing.
Back in the day, if I wanted a balanced party, I had to be the cleric, because NO ONE ELSE would EVER play them. A lot of times, people would just declare their character, giving no thought to party composition, and I was stuck playing the healer. It wasn't too bad, I had a couple of fun healer-type characters, but it always irked me that my role was basically chosen for me by other players who refused to play anything other than that one character they wanted to do. The one time I put my foot down and declared I wouldn't play a healer, no one played one, and the GM basically had to be generous with the potions for us to survive.
I've noticed the same thing happening in my recent games, except switch out 'healer' for 'trapfinder.' Many think that trapfinding is a useless or superfluous ability. One of my friends just hand-waves them away as a 'resource drain,' until he encounters them in combat or finds a save-or-die trap (or save or suck, or save or ability drain, or save or level drain . . . etc.)
With the rogue's abysmal reputation (deserved or not, that's a conversation for another thread) it seems like no one is EVER willing to play a trapfinder, and I'm always forced to fill the role if I want to make sure our party is balanced. Anyone else find this as an issue? To date I have discovered (I think) all the ways to get trapfinding, but no one will EVER play one, and it kinda makes me angry.
I think I have found out why people don't go for these though, and it is because trapfinding is TERRIBLE to try and use. It requires Wis (for finding, or else you trip it) and it requires Dex for disabling (or else you trip it.) There aren't a lot of classes that work off of dex and wisdom (possibly a dervish dancer cleric of Serenrae, who can't get trapfinding, or an archery inquisitor, who can't get trapfinding.)
Ways to get trapfinding:
1) Baseline Rogue, plus a few archetypes don't give up trapfinding (most, ironically, do, which makes them an even worse class, IMO)
2)One archetype for the oracle (the seeker) which is terrible because they are based off of Cha, and they don't get trap-spotting (unless they wait 'till lvl 6 and choose find traps as a spell.)
3)One archetype for rangers (Urban ranger) which works out pretty well for an archery ranger, except they don't get trap-spotting.
4)TWO archetypes for alchemists (Crypt breaker, which is terrible, and Trap breaker, which is pretty good.) Again, neither get trap-spotter.
5)Slayer, if you use up two of your slayer talents for 1-Trapfinding, and 2-Trapspotting. However, again, you need good dex and wis, and Slayers tend not to have that.
6)Bard (Archaeologist), they can get trap-spotter, but sadly, have to wait until level 6 to disarm magical traps.
My solution:
Play as a half-elf. +2 racial to perception, plus the free skill focus feat (put it in perception)=+9 to perception at level 1 with a wisdom of 10.
Has anyone else had this problem?
|
You missed Investigator as an option, which is probably the single best trapfinder in Pathfinder, actually.
And is good at skills, combat, and buff spells to boot. And can have Perception and Disable Device both be Int based via the Empiricist Archetype. Plus has access Trap Spotter. So...that might be the solution you're looking for.
Also, and perhaps equally importantly, trapfinding isn't really essential. Particularly the full-bore version with Trap Spotter and Disable Device maxed. Anyone with Perception can avoid traps adequately, if not perfectly.
Trapfinder, to me, is often on the level of 'ooze slayer'. Sure, having someone good at killing oozes is useful. An ooze might kill a character or even a party if you aren't careful, but it's a bonus far more than a character archtype to shoehorn into every party.
You forcing yourself to play a trap finder is your fault, really.
Anybody with Perception (i.e. everybody who doesn't want to be ambushed constantly or be completely bushwhacked by invisible creatures because they can't even pinpoint their square) can find traps just fine.
The Perception DCs for traps cap out at 34. The average is 20-25 for 90% of traps.
|
|
You forcing yourself to play a trap finder is your fault, really.
Anybody with Perception (i.e. everybody who doesn't want to be ambushed constantly or be completely bushwhacked by invisible creatures because they can't even pinpoint their square) can find traps just fine.
The Perception DCs for traps cap out at 34. The average is 20-25 for 90% of traps.
Yeah, no. Plenty of times where I've run into a magical trap that has a magical, no-bypass trigger. Like "Detection, a live character enters a room, trap-Phantasmal Killer." Or the trap is on the treasure chest. Wanna open the chest and get the loot?
Many pathfinder-made campaigns and moduals ASSUME the party has a trapfinder in it, and will PUNISH you if you don't . . . eventually.
Yeah, out where I play spotting the traps isn't much of an issue. The general problem is having someone in the party who can disarm a trap that we must get past or has the ability to do something like unlock an iron door which can neither be knocked down nor sundered all that easily.
And there are a fair number of archetypes out there now (thinking Bard at the moment) which gives the character the ability to disarm magical traps. Funny thing is a lot of these variants don't offer disable device as a class skill.
More often than not there's usually a way around things when you can't disable device but I have to admit I've been through at least a few scenarios where things were unnecessarily difficult due to the gap in the party.
You forcing yourself to play a trap finder is your fault, really.
Anybody with Perception (i.e. everybody who doesn't want to be ambushed constantly or be completely bushwhacked by invisible creatures because they can't even pinpoint their square) can find traps just fine.
The Perception DCs for traps cap out at 34. The average is 20-25 for 90% of traps.
Yeah, no. Plenty of times where I've run into a magical trap that has a magical, no-bypass trigger. Like "Detection, a live character enters a room, trap-Phantasmal Killer." Or the trap is on the treasure chest. Wanna open the chest and get the loot?
Many pathfinder-made campaigns and moduals ASSUME the party has a trapfinder in it, and will PUNISH you if you don't . . . eventually.
None of which contradicts what I said. Magical traps can still be FOUND by any character. Disabling them is another matter.
Setting them off safely, however, is something anyone can do.
Get a wand of Summon Monster 1.
Or, take it like a man. 99.999999% of pre-made traps do nothing but deal a bit of damage.
Pathfinder APs and modues, IME, are no easier or harder whether you have someone with Trapfinding or not.
|
|
Yeah, no. Plenty of times where I've run into a magical trap that has a magical, no-bypass trigger. Like "Detection, a live character enters a room, trap-Phantasmal Killer." Or the trap is on the treasure chest. Wanna open the chest and get the loot?
Many pathfinder-made campaigns and moduals ASSUME the party has a trapfinder in it, and will PUNISH you if you don't . . . eventually.
Investigators still casually solve this problem by virtue of their own sheer awesomeness.
You forcing yourself to play a trap finder is your fault, really.
Anybody with Perception (i.e. everybody who doesn't want to be ambushed constantly or be completely bushwhacked by invisible creatures because they can't even pinpoint their square) can find traps just fine.
The Perception DCs for traps cap out at 34. The average is 20-25 for 90% of traps.
Yeah, no. Plenty of times where I've run into a magical trap that has a magical, no-bypass trigger. Like "Detection, a live character enters a room, trap-Phantasmal Killer." Or the trap is on the treasure chest. Wanna open the chest and get the loot?
Many pathfinder-made campaigns and moduals ASSUME the party has a trapfinder in it, and will PUNISH you if you don't . . . eventually.
Memorise more dispel magic, is the solution to that.
*edit*
If your DM is obsessed with traps, just make sure someone has the trapfinder trait and high perception.
The paizo campaigns have pathetic traps. Instead of investing in dispel traps, get some wands of CLW.
Summon monster 1, or summon mount, also works well.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
walking into a known trap so that it "sets off" and taking a hit on the cure stick is... well, it's a little metagamey at worst, masochistic at best. and the summon squirrel trick is a little sadistic. not saying it's not effective (it is!), it's just a little silly/cheesy.
having a guy who can not only spot it but also disable it has more cool factor. simply put, some folks have slightly higher story demands (over raw mechanics/utilitarian demands) in order to maintain that immersive feeling, which is a legit concern.
So combine a Wizard with Dispel Magic and anybody with Perception and Disable Device, and you're covered both story-wise (Master thief eats locks for breakfast, magic to counter magic) and mechanics-wise.
Still not a big deal.
Unless you have a very narrow idea of what constitutes a good story, the need for someone with Trapfinding to function as a party is nonexistent.
Okay, bit of backstory.
Okay, bit of backstory.I've been gaming for near on 16 years, all the way back from AD&D second edition. I know that there are older, more long running gamers out there, but I've got a few years under my belt, and I've noticed one thing.
Back in the day, if I wanted a balanced party, I had to be the cleric, because NO ONE ELSE would EVER play them. A lot of times, people would just declare their character, giving no thought to party composition, and I was stuck playing the healer. It wasn't too bad, I had a couple of fun healer-type characters, but it always irked me that my role was basically chosen for me by other players who refused to play anything other than that one character they wanted to do. The one time I put my foot down and declared I wouldn't play a healer, no one played one, and the GM basically had to be generous with the potions for us to survive.
I've noticed the same thing happening in my recent games, except switch out 'healer' for 'trapfinder.' Many think that trapfinding is a useless or superfluous ability. One of my friends just hand-waves them away as a 'resource drain,' until he encounters them in combat or finds a save-or-die trap (or save or suck, or save or ability drain, or save or level drain . . . etc.)
With the rogue's abysmal reputation (deserved or not, that's a conversation for another thread) it seems like no one is EVER willing to play a trapfinder, and I'm always forced to fill the role if I want to make sure our party is balanced. Anyone else find this as an issue? To date I have discovered (I think) all the ways to get trapfinding, but no one will EVER play one, and it kinda makes me angry.
I think I have found out why people don't go for these though, and it is because trapfinding is TERRIBLE to try and use. It requires Wis (for finding, or else you trip it) and it requires Dex for disabling (or else you trip it.) There aren't a lot of classes that work off of dex and wisdom (possibly a dervish dancer cleric of Serenrae, who can't get trapfinding, or an archery inquisitor, who can't get trapfinding.)
Ways to get trapfinding:
1) Baseline Rogue, plus a few archetypes don't give up trapfinding (most, ironically, do, which makes them an even worse class, IMO)
2)One archetype for the oracle (the seeker) which is terrible because they are based off of Cha, and they don't get trap-spotting (unless they wait 'till lvl 6 and choose find traps as a spell.)
3)One archetype for rangers (Urban ranger) which works out pretty well for an archery ranger, except they don't get trap-spotting.
4)TWO archetypes for alchemists (Crypt breaker, which is terrible, and Trap breaker, which is pretty good.) Again, neither get trap-spotter.
5)Slayer, if you use up two of your slayer talents for 1-Trapfinding, and 2-Trapspotting. However, again, you need good dex and wis, and Slayers tend not to have that.
6)Bard (Archaeologist), they can get trap-spotter, but sadly, have to wait until level 6 to disarm magical traps.My solution:
Play as a half-elf. +2 racial to perception, plus the free skill focus feat (put it in perception)=+9 to perception at level 1 with a wisdom of 10.Has anyone else had this problem?
I don't see it as a problem as long as the party has a way to bypass traps. There are a few ways to get around them if you have a creative party, and you can do so without bending the rules.
Common ways include:
summoning monsters,
dispelling magic,
just taking the hit if you know what the trap is. As an example if you discover that the trap is a poison trap then take the save, and if the cleric has some anti-poison magic ready then you can use that if you fail the save.
PS: Yes, I know it is better to try to remove the poison than to intentionally get poisoned, but my point was that setting off the trap is not normally all that bad except for certain traps.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
i really don't see what ll the hype is about.
Aww poo have to play the cleric? Sweet. Ill take cleric ANY day. ESPECIALLY back in AD&D the cleric was darn near as good as a fighter in combat…worst thing about them is they couldn't use "cool weapons" they were stuck with things like hammer…mace…. but there was FLAIL… I dunno I like flails.
Back in AD&D spells were reversible too… I could have a slot for raise dead, but it could also be slay living.
I could cure light wounds as a neutral or evil cleric, I didn't have choose positive or negative energy.
So my clerics were ALWAYS mercs…. more Lord Verminaard, less Happy the heal bot Slappy.
and boy did I love using those awesome undead raising spells…"Do my bidding, my minions!"
The issue with "having to play the cleric" was/is always playing your character for whatever someone else wanted.
why when you hold al the cards?
HEAL me HEAL me?
Of course, my son…. but Ill need to collect that tithing, the church requires the first pick of the treasure hoard…agreed?
IF they ever renege…. when they need that heal…it became a harm,…oppsie daisy! never forget to pay your healing insurance policy!
Same thing goes for rogues… I really don't see why everyone always dislikes this class.
too may alpha personalities trying to be a their chest about the highest DPS.
You do that. will I'm picking pockets and filling mine, yay I opened the chest and just palmed the ioun stone inside.
what? you're stealing from the party?
No, you're playing a character.
THEIR characters have their bonuses and uses, YOURS has yours.
IF all the other character roles adequately filled, Id be HAPPY to play a rogue.
Just understand that a rogue might not do something every single round, because he might be stealthing/setting up for a good shot or he might not do anything the whole combat because something is immune to his sneak attack?
Aww heck just extra time to check out the treasure chest.
We have a gnome archeologist in my current group…. he spends most of his time in total defense.
In fact, I gave him the wand of cure light wounds because he's the least likely character to GET hit… he's hardly ever IN combat if he can help it.
IS his character worthless?
No.
In the Red Redoubt he disabled a trap DURING combat.
There are other things to do with your characters actions during combat rather than competing with the other players for "top dog spot"
the only thing that makes the rogue worthless is the opinions of armchair experts on these boards.
Get out an actually play one, they are plenty fun.
You forcing yourself to play a trap finder is your fault, really.
Anybody with Perception (i.e. everybody who doesn't want to be ambushed constantly or be completely bushwhacked by invisible creatures because they can't even pinpoint their square) can find traps just fine.
The Perception DCs for traps cap out at 34. The average is 20-25 for 90% of traps.
Yeah, no. Plenty of times where I've run into a magical trap that has a magical, no-bypass trigger. Like "Detection, a live character enters a room, trap-Phantasmal Killer." Or the trap is on the treasure chest. Wanna open the chest and get the loot?
Many pathfinder-made campaigns and moduals ASSUME the party has a trapfinder in it, and will PUNISH you if you don't . . . eventually.
Those can be bypassed by the rules.
By the rules only certain spells can be used on proximity traps. You can add additional detectors, but most traps don't have every detector possible.
Even when you set a trap off it is normally no more than a resource drain so unless you are on a timer you fix the problem and then continue forward.
Traps are not normally a real threat. They are real annoying however at times.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Pendagast, in what I can only assume is a post he has saved and has automated to copy-paste to every thread that mentions the word Rogue:
I've played Rogues, I've seen Rogues played.
Neither I nor anyone I've played with has ever had much fun with it.
And no, "I'm playing my character" is not an excuse to be a dick (which is what stealing from the party is). My Barbarian doesn't beat the s%%% out of your Rogue and steal his stuff, because I'm not an a!$!*&!. Don't steal stuff from me.
You repeatedly state things meant to be nothing but insulting, even where there's no reason for it ("Hurr durr Rogues great y'all are just armchair not real players who only rollplay and I'm better than you because I like things you don't like."). It's not even on topic in this thread, which is about the need for a Trapfinder, not the need for Rogue.
|
|
I've played Rogues, I've seen Rogues played.
Neither I nor anyone I've played with has ever had much fun with it.
You wanna know something funny? I've played a Rogue, enjoyed it and did well.
As people who've been reading my posts in Rogue threads know, I'm also of the opinion that Rogue is deeply mechanically inferior to, oh, most other classes in the game.
Y'know why? I paid attention to why my Rogue did well. It was a confluence of factors, firstly we rolled stats and I rolled very well. My Elven Rogue had Dex 20 and Int 18, with no stat below 12. Secondly, I was by far the best optimizer in the group (I picked rogue because I was unfamiliar with Pathfinder and liked the flavor, but from there I optimized well). Thirdly, it being our first game of Pathfinder we misunderstood the TWF rules and allowed two attacks with it even if you moved. Fourthly, a lot of what I did that was effective was, well, clever. The kind of things that are the player succeeding, not the character.
Years later, I played another Rogue, and did a fair bit less well (we were doing point-buy and using the TWF rules right), but still okay...but with a more complete understanding of how the rules worked, I was constantly struck by the question "What did being a Rogue as opposed to some other class get this character?" and consistently came up with the answer "Not much."
So...it's not just about not having fun with, or not doing well as, a Rogue. It's about taking an analytical look at the Class and comparing it to others as well. And, when you do that, it falls far short of many others.
And no, "I'm playing my character" is not an excuse to be a dick (which is what stealing from the party is). My Barbarian doesn't beat the s+*@ out of your Rogue and steal his stuff, because I'm not an a&&+#@$. Don't steal stuff from me.
This is indisputably true. A Class isn't a personality, and indeed has little or nothing to do with a personality. Nor is behaving 'in character' an excuse for dickishness...after all, you decide what kind of character you're gonna play and nobody is making you play a dick.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
... did someone just advocate stealing from the party because 'I'm playing my character?'
.
.
Seriously?
I thought that was like, entry-grade, GMPC/no-save mind control/making the paladin fall 'things you do once, realise it is a awful, awful idea and never do again' kind of thing.
What's next? I killed you all in your sleep and looted your bodies but don't worry it's just good rogue roleplay?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
BTW: This thread is about the rogue, and how nobody wants to take it in order to find and disable traps, just like some people never wanted to take a cleric just to heal the party.
Yeah, "trap finding" is not in the title, but it is in the opening statement.
When the OP gets into the main point of his statement he says -->"I've noticed the same thing happening in my recent games, except switch out 'healer' for 'trapfinder.' Many think that trapfinding is a useless or superfluous ability."
This is followed up with --> "With the rogue's abysmal reputation (deserved or not, that's a conversation for another thread) it seems like no one is EVER willing to play a trapfinder,"
I once played a commoner in a one-shot. It was a joke game, and I had a lot of fun. The commoner is an awful class. Objectively awful. I still had a great time with my infinite chicken spam.
The rogue lives in a not-quite-as-extreme but still comparable situation. OF COURSE you can still have fun with a mechanically poor class in the right circumstance and power balance.
I wouldn't play a commoner in a normal game. I might play a rogue in a normal game, but I wouldn't play a rogue in a high optimisation game with a wizard, druid and cleric for adventuring buddies. That's basically the crux of the thread.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
BTW: This thread is about the rogue, and how nobody wants to take it in order to find and disable traps, just like some people never wanted to take a cleric just to heal the party.
Yeah, "trap finding" is not in the title, but it is in the opening statement.
When the OP gets into the main point of his statement he says -->"I've noticed the same thing happening in my recent games, except switch out 'healer' for 'trapfinder.' Many think that trapfinding is a useless or superfluous ability."
This is followed up with --> "With the rogue's abysmal reputation (deserved or not, that's a conversation for another thread) it seems like no one is EVER willing to play a trapfinder,"
The Investigator neatly solves this particular problem. Serving as an excellent trapfinder if you care about that sort of thing, while being otherwise awesome. :)
|
Okay, ways to disable traps the "proper" way:
Trapfinder trait from Mummy's Mask
1 level of Trapper Ranger
1 level of Cryptbreaker Alchemist
1 level of Sandman Bard
1 level of Investigator
1 level of Seeker Sorcerer
1 level of Seeker Oracle
1 level of Aspis Agent PrC
1 level of Pathfinder Field Agent PrC
2 levels of Brother of the Seal PrC
2 levels of Trap Breaker Alchemist
2 levels of Slayer and taking the Trapfinding talent
2 levels of Archaeologist Bard
2 levels of Detective Bard
3 levels of Urban Ranger
8 levels of Sanctified Slayer Inquisitor, taking the Trapfinding slayer talent
Aram Zey's Focus (spell)
|
First of all, I didn't think still people proclaimed "Rogues are great, DPR morons! Steal from the group and party all night! *ELECTRIC GUITAR*"
But something I would like to touch on...
walking into a known trap so that it "sets off" and taking a hit on the cure stick is... well, it's a little metagamey at worst, masochistic at best. and the summon squirrel trick is a little sadistic. not saying it's not effective (it is!), it's just a little silly/cheesy.
having a guy who can not only spot it but also disable it has more cool factor. simply put, some folks have slightly higher story demands (over raw mechanics/utilitarian demands) in order to maintain that immersive feeling, which is a legit concern.
Traps for me don't work in games for reasons like this. Like there's some gaming to the system that doesn't work well for verisimilitude, but at the same time, I always took traps to be intended as fatal (assuming a level 1-2 character), which is why they always just did damage, as a water trap/rolling bolder really requires a lot more space and set up to make and employ.
I almost feel like traps don't really work in the game anymore, since damage traps are just a healing charge away, and complex traps (things that require working parts and more interaction) can drive the game to a halt. In this way, I completely agree that the trapfinder role is easily a forced role. The trait is really the best thing to make traps work without forcing someone into something, and even that's pretty meh.
No the rogue is the new rogue. It was always the weakest class and it still is. But now there are the possibillity to play the combat rogue of dreams, a.k.a slayer and the smart skill rogue of your other dreams a.k.a the investigator. Or just play a barbarian and Dodge the traps if traps is that Big a thing.
But if the rogue was the new cleric from back in the days where a cleric had only cure spells memorised because that was the sensible thing to do. At least he would feel that he was worth his spot on the team.
In my experience, if it was not for the resourcefulness or rogues/investigators/this kind of player/characters, the barbarians would not last 2 sessions.
Rogues attract a lot of people that think outside of the box and safe a lot of asses. It's a very unmeasurable thing.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Thinking outside the box" is not a class feature.
Barbarian players are just as capable of it as Rogue players.
Lets not bring the W word here.
Anything will excel played straight forward compared to a rogue. I mentioned that rogue attract certain mind sets. Not being able to go RAAARGH KILL ALL means a rogue needs to think about maximising his effect. UMD is incredible. Certain rogue/ninja archetypes are very unappreciated.
I'm all up for the rogue being powerful, as we can see with the Slayer/Investigator/Alchemist classes, they are the patched up rogues. Can anyone do the rogue thing? Yeah. Does the rogue give tools to do this? Absolutely.
Does the rogue still need patching? Yes, I did not contest that.
Also, I suggest always combining the Ninja and the Rogue, with a CHA/WIS pool as needed. Or play a ninja, straight up better.
A correction: The Crypt Breaker alchemist archetype can get Trapspotting, as an alchemist discovery.
There's also the Halfling Opportunist PrC, which can get Trapspotting as early as level 6.
I once ran a Rise of the Runelords campaign, and the six-player party had two rogues. They had an interesting combat tactic in conjunction with the elvish battle oracle. On the first round, the rogues with their high initiative would catch the opponents flatfooted. The oracle would buff herself. On the second round, the rogues would try to attack as best they could, flanking or two-weapon fighting. The oracle would buff again and move in. On the third round, the oracle began fighting and the foes would stop paying attention to the rogues because they had to stop the elvish death machine in their midst.
The modules threw traps in the party's path occasionally, though for the most part traps did not fit the quest. I recall them once sneaking into a fortress through a secret escape tunnel. I doubled the number of traps for that encounter, because sometimes it is fun to indulge in classics like a trap-filled corridor. The rogues disabled them all and even scavenged the poison off one for their own use. Spotting them was no trouble because many characters had maxed out their Perception skills.
In my current Jade Regent campaign, the ninja tries to disable the traps. In one enemy stronghold, she found and sampled the saki in one treasure room before attempting to open the trapped door on the other treasure room. She failed the roll and was hit by the trap, which burned through 75% of her hit points. The party blamed her poor roll on her being slightly drunk, and she has run with the concept and given her character a weakness for saki.
No, in the games I run, someone gladly plays the rogue or an equivalent trap-disabling skill monkey.
Mathmuse, that's a nice story, but it doesn't really lend anything to the conversation. You specifically littered a hallway with traps for your Rogues, and the Ninja roleplayed a bad roll well.
Nothing you said changes the fact that Rogues can be easily replaced or mostly replicated with more powerful trapfinding classes.
Any reason the same player couldn't run, oh, a Wizard? Or a Barbarian?In my experience, if it was not for the resourcefulness or rogues/investigators/this kind of player/characters, the barbarians would not last 2 sessions.
Rogues attract a lot of people that think outside of the box and safe a lot of asses. It's a very unmeasurable thing.
No… he said the Rogue class ATTRACTS a lot of people that THINK that way.
He's right, the barbarian players don't generally think outside the box… there's nothing preventing them from doing so, it's just a typical.
The current rules set however doesn't really support much "out of box thinking" because it's rules heavy… the old AD&D there was A LOT of magic user players that thought out side of the box… (which is where you get the stories of dudes riding floating disks and levitating dragons to keep them from biting you)
but these days spells are more specifically written to avoid such shenanigans (I much preferred original uses for spells personally)… so today's wizard players tend to be more of the Rawyer type and less of the shenanigans type.
Mathmuse, that's a nice story, but it doesn't really lend anything to the conversation. You specifically littered a hallway with traps for your Rogues, and the Ninja roleplayed a bad roll well.
Nothing you said changes the fact that Rogues can be easily replaced or mostly replicated with more powerful trapfinding classes.
which classes do you think are "more powerful" trap finder classes?
Sure other classes can do it, but I thought the general point is that you really don't NEED trap finding at all, because…well magic.
The trap finding classes like archeologist and alchemists are rather lack luster….
slayers are certainly powerful especially when matched Mono e Mono… but their limited number of talents are just more…. attractive on options OTHER than trap finding.
Rogue is still better at trap finding than other classes… just that magic is more resourceful and…how often do you NEED trap finding? about as often as a spell can do the job just as good.
|
|
which classes do you think are "more powerful" trap finder classes?
Sure other classes can do it, but I thought the general point is that you really don't NEED trap finding at all, because…well magic.
The trap finding classes like archeologist and alchemists are rather lack luster….
slayers are certainly powerful especially when matched Mono e Mono… but their limited number of talents are just more…. attractive on options OTHER than trap finding.
Rogue is still better at trap finding than other classes… just that magic is more resourceful and…how often do you NEED trap finding? about as often as a spell can do the job just as good.
Which classes are better trapfinders? Anything that gets trapfinding as a class skill, mostly by virtue of having better class features aside from trapfinding. Seeker Sorc DESTROYS Rogue something ugly, as does simply taking a trait not to need a Rogue.
Archaeologist and Alchemist lackluster? By what possible standard or form of measurement could you come to that conclusion? I'm genuinely curious. Even at base, both of them can do ranged combat well, which the Rogue infamously has problems with, not to mention the myriad of spells/extracts that straight up trump anything that the Rogue or their Rogue talents can do.
Traps are almost a relic of game design now that haven't moved on past their initial inception. They're 'roll to find, roll to disable' set pieces that don't really add a lot aside from making the Rogue feel good, and especially with the ACG, that niche is gone and buried.
Ive never seen an archeologist that was really impressive.
How is the bard any better at ranged combat than a rogue?
alchemists take a while to come online, by which time I see most players get bored with them.
Have never EVER seen a alchemist character take the trap finder route, usually for the aforementioned "there are other ways" reasoning.
The trap thing is less or more of thing, depending on who you play with (DM)
I play with a certain DM who, if you don't have turn/channel and trap skills in the party you will do a lot of dying (he likes undead and elaborate dungeon traps…. curses too… everything is cursed)
however…d20 system in general can be described as how you describe trap finding… roll this roll that… the whole game is that.
which classes do you think are "more powerful" trap finder classes?
All of the other classes that can get it.
Sure other classes can do it, but I thought the general point is that you really don't NEED trap finding at all, because…well magic.
True, though it's a good straightforward way of doing it.
The trap finding classes like archeologist and alchemists are rather lack luster….
u wot m8
slayers are certainly powerful especially when matched Mono e Mono… but their limited number of talents are just more…. attractive on options OTHER than trap finding.
Not really. Slayer is rad but its selection is more limited than the number it gets. The Rogue Talents it gets are mostly garbage with a few exceptions, Ranger Combat Style is great, and the others are build situational (like Favored Terrain).
Trapfinding easily fits into most Slayers' builds if they want it.
Rogue is still better at trap finding than other classes
How do you figure? It's no better than any other class with the class feature, and worse than some.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
People who think its a good idea to set off traps by just walking in to them has never seen Grimtooth traps.
The GM should design adventures around the party's capabilities, not the other way around. If the party has no trapfinder, then he shouldn't use traps often and shouldn't make them overly debilitating.
The GM should design adventures around the party's capabilities, not the other way around. If the party has no trapfinder, then he shouldn't use traps often and shouldn't make them overly debilitating.Or the player could fill their weakness with one of the several ways PF offer.
The player should be allowed to play what he wants. Proper adventure design is the GM's responsibility.