|
3) Add some other tricks besides Sneak Attack that allow the Rogue to increase damage by fighting "dirty." As to exactly what, I'm not sure; but I'd bet the devs could come up with something.
This is a great idea, and should be tied to maneuvers.
If Rogues were treated at full bab for the purpose of Disarm, Trip, and Dirty Trick Maneuvers, had the ability to take a rogue talent to perform Dirty Tricks with a weapon as an attack, and had a scaling bonus for those maneuvers like a Lore Warden, I would play one in a heartbeat without any other changes to the class.
|
I don't hate or find rogues disappointing, nor do I know anyone who is (discounting on the inside). I think most people just prefer investigators and ninjas. I certainly do, and not even from a power standpoint.
If you don't want to change the rogue talent system, you'll just have to make more effective rogue talents and some other minor-moderate new class features.
You know, if we make enough threads about this with good suggestions inside each one they might actually change the rogue..
|
You know, if we make enough threads about this with good suggestions inside each one they might actually change the rogue..
Threads like this are what's getting us Unearthed Arcana: PF edition.
I pray that the unchained Rogue is worth playing, since PF has shown they can make solid classes (Alchemist), which makes me hope they're not completely married to 'realism' with this Rogue.
I don't have a ton of confidence in Paizo's stance on martial-caster disparity either, but we're never going to get a better shot at fixing the Rogue if you ask me.
Hope for the best and prepare for the worst. Everyone deserves that much.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except the alchemist is magic, which means the only limitations are their imaginations. Non-magic classes like the rogue or the fighter have to conform to the physical limitations of sedentary game designers.
Slayer strongly argues that they can make a pretty solid non-magical class if they're of a mind to.
re: weapon cord
He was joking about that, actually. That was very much not the actual logic used.
|
|
Best case scenario - The alternate rogue is still well below any class that can cast spells. (we all know that it's true, they won't ever push a martial class past a caster class. caster edition FTL)
I dunno, I feel like Slayer and Barbarian are pretty close to 4 level casters like Paladin, Bloodrager, and Ranger.
They'll still be worse than 6 or (especially) 9 level casters, sure. At least at high levels. That's pretty baked into the system at this point, though, and can't be readily change with a single Class.
Unchained may have other options to help with that particular problem, but they won't be in the Class section.
Worst case scenario - the alternate rogue is actually worse than the CRB rogue.
That...seems pretty unlikely. At least to me.
)
Worst case scenario - the alternate rogue is actually worse than the CRB rogue.
Will the rogue lose trap finding AND sneak damage??
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Best case scenario - The alternate rogue is still well below any class that can cast spells. (we all know that it's true, they won't ever push a martial class past a caster class. caster edition FTL)
Worst case scenario - the alternate rogue is actually worse than the CRB rogue.
"I hope you all like the NEW Rogue. We got rid of sneak attack, and gave them slight skill bonuses at all skills!...well. some skills. Also these skill bonuses only work against humanoids because...hey look at all these skill bonuses...also you can only use them once a day. And they lose experience if they don't steal from the party, and can't wear any armor...ever."
Except the alchemist is magic, which means the only limitations are their imaginations. Non-magic classes like the rogue or the fighter have to conform to the physical limitations of sedentary game designers.
re: weapon cord
Now now, the devs have told us that the martial-caster disparity in Pathfinder is nothing but a lie spread by a shadowy conspiracy with a sinister agenda.
|
Now now, the devs have told us that the martial-caster disparity in Pathfinder is nothing but a lie spread by an shadowy conspiracy with a sinister agenda.Except the alchemist is magic, which means the only limitations are their imaginations. Non-magic classes like the rogue or the fighter have to conform to the physical limitations of sedentary game designers.
re: weapon cord
Shadow Lodge?
Damn you Grandmaster Torch!
So, the obvious solution is the turn the rogue into at least a 4-level caster. That way the devs can give us an improved rogue without straying from their design paradigm.
So, the obvious solution is the turn the rogue into at least a 4-level caster. That way the devs can give us an improved rogue without straying from their design paradigm.
I like the awesome new still-spell-less Rogue improvement that came out, i.e. Slayer. It's pretty much what core Rogue should have been.
Well, Urban Ranger is already a better Rogue, so Slayer is kind of taking Rogue-ish talents if you think about it that way.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There seems to be a lot of disparity between a lot of parties here:
* on one side you have those who say the rogue is fine and doesn't need fixing, on the other side you have those who say it needs a huge boost
* between those that say the rogue needs a boost, you have those that say it needs a huge combat boost and those that say it needs a huge skills boost and those that say it needs a talent boost.
Since talents are the only things that are (mostly) unique to rogues, it seems to me that rogue talents could fix a lot of the problems.
First, compare the talents to what other classes get baseline and boost them comparably. The Rogue talent Hard to Fool vs the Investigator talent Empathy is a perfect example of this:
This, to me, is a perfect microcosm of why the rogue has lagged behind. Rogue gets it a few (or only once) times per day. Investigator gets it on every roll. In addition, once per day the Investigator can friggin' read the thoughts of the target. What Paizo needs to do is go back and boost the frequency of rogue talents - the majority of them shouldn't even have a frequency, they should be unlimited!
Next, add a few baseline class abilities that would give the rogue a huge boost to combat usefulness. One that mimic's the arcane trickster's Impromptu Sneak-Attack would be huge but not at all game-breaking. Also, if any class can spot mundane traps and quite a few class archetypes can spot magical traps, make every non-archetype rogue get the trapspotting ability.
There's some other smaller things that would go a long way: removing the Combat Expertise pre-req from improved feint. I'd personally add a few other big ones (and these might be too much): making any light or 1-handed melee weapon a rogue picks up have the agile quality, give TWF for free, add 1/2 the rogues level to acrobatics checks to tumble.
I agree with everything you say except making Rogues TWF and go Dex-based baseline. I like 2H and 1H Rogues. To me, the typical Rogue is a Dex-based 1H wielder, but the game really penalizes that.
|
|
I agree with everything you say except making Rogues TWF and go Dex-based baseline. I like 2H and 1H Rogues. To me, the typical Rogue is a Dex-based 1H wielder, but the game really penalizes that.
Give a swashbuckler/daring champion trapfinding, and you have a 1h finesse rogue that is actually useful.
Contrary to what some people would say, the ninja is not a rogue.
Ninja is a rogue archetype. James Jacobs has said so.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ninja is a rogue archetype. James Jacobs has said so.Contrary to what some people would say, the ninja is not a rogue.
Yeah, I'll agree with this. There's a reason it can take a few Rogue Archetypes, although the number is pretty small.
I think it's widely regarded as a separate class, although I won't fight it as its own class.
What I would say is that the Ninja is a 3/10 class with the Rogue being a 1/10 class, whereas I'd consider most of the Rogue subs 6-7/10 classes. The Rogue, even as a ninja has a hard time meeting expectations, although the Ninja does a lot to help the issues that the Rogue has.
Me personally, I'd love to see the Rogue as more of a debuffer in combat. Not a MASSIVE amount of damage, but instead just decent damage and better combat mobility. Like if the Rogue didn't provoke AoOs for movement, and when it got sneak attack it could sicken/stagger/blind/etc opponents, it'd feel more Roguish to me.
Actually... Last time I remember seeing them talk about rogue in Unchained, they mentioned giving him the ability to inflict status effects, although I believe they would all be completely new ones unique to the Unchained rogue and they aren't even dependent on him getting sneak attacks(I going off of memory right now, so not a confirmation or anything). So yeah, if they stick with that idea, I'd say he could potentially become a decent melee debuffer.
|
|
Just found this little tread, it is nice to see People so optimistic about the Rogue.
The Reason for why a Rogue should never (from a mechanical view) be as good as any Martial class is because they have 8skill ranks/level. You can draw a pretty accurate curve between all classes when you consider Skill points/levels, damage output and saves. Paladins and most Spellcasters all have 2skillranks/level.
Unfortunately, the reflex skill is the least important skill for survivability. And having 8 skill ranks versus 6 + 1/2 level bonuses is not compared fairly by the system.
All classes have something unique. Paladins have mount & smite + lay on hands, Fighters have *1/2levels bonus feats, a relevant Save (Fortitude), weapon training & heavy armor proficiency.
Monks got very good saves, decent amount of skills and some utility abilities and "Stunning Fist".
If the Rogue had cheaper options to inflict weakening effects, then it could become more balanced (in my opinion).
The Monk gains Full BAB progression for all Combat Maneuvers, the Rouge would look good with full BAB progression for Dirty Tricks. (possibly even boostable with a talent, to allow sneak attacks to be replaced by bonuses on dirty tricks).
The BAB is perfect, the Rogue is something between a martial and a bookworm.
The (8!) Skill ranks are too many! There should instead be about 6 + selectable paths to compensate and further boost specialized characters. (each path should concern 4 progressable skills, where Trapfinding should count as 1skill)
Then for flavor you could have some diversity with "Trapsense" - offering options to instead boost Fortitude, Will or Reflex saves against something specific such as Enchantments, diseases or deatheffects.
The Rogue Talents are fairly decent now, but there should be added 1 for increased damage, 1 for increased special effect options and 1 for defense.
The rollable Sneak attack damage should be lowered but be compensated by a new fixed damage ability that should be Cha, Int or Dex based.
Even more fun would be added if 6 Rogue talents were added:
1 based of a specific ability score (Str/Dex/...) offering different conditions to effect targets with. (Should be a swift or Immidiate action as part of an attack).
These changes do add more than they substitute, so...
Improved Uncanny Dodge should be removed, reworked and added as an available Rogue Talent.
These fixes would make rogues more personal with specific saves and skill specializations, more flexible as a trickster who weakens and adds conditions to foes and still remaining a Rogue with appreciating Sneak attack damage, rather than a sneak attack damage as a requirement.
Something else that needs to be added is more feat trees to deny targets their Dex bonus (for low & medium advanced players). Each feat-tree should cost between 2 and 4 feats to be highly functioning, not 5 or 6 like some currently existing feat-trees demands.
Any opinions?
Just found this little tread, it is nice to see People so optimistic about the Rogue.
The Reason for why a Rogue should never (from a mechanical view) be as good as any Martial class is because they have 8skill ranks/level. You can draw a pretty accurate curve between all classes when you consider Skill points/levels, damage output and saves. Paladins and most Spellcasters all have 2skillranks/level.
Observationally, this is true.
From a game-design standpoint, it's only true if the additional skill points actually provide a useful/meaningful benefit to the character, which in most cases they completely fail to do.
I mean,.... I could design an alternate RPG where there was a tradeoff of attack bonus/damage for hair length. But since hair length is purely cosmetic with no game-mechanical effect, that would be a pretty stupid design choice, wouldn't it?
The BAB is perfect, the Rogue is something between a martial and a bookworm.
Not if it's expected to participate meaningfully in combat using BAB. Otherwise it needs some sort of situational bonus (like the monk's bonus when using unarmed combat) to make it effective.
Frankly, I think your entire post is misguided. The point should not be about balancing numerical attributes to get the 'flavor' of the class as you like. The point should be to develop a fun and playable chassis and then work the flavor around it.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Seriously? 8 skills per level is a reason for the rogue to have 3/4 bab with no spells and no other to hit boosters?
A bard has 6 per level, Versatile performance to make that effectively 12 per level, 6th level casting, and performance.
A inquisitor has 6 per level, a massive in-class bonus to initiative and skills, 6th level casting, judgements, and bane.
An investigator has 6 per level, the ability to boots it higher with inspirations, studied combat, studied strike and 6th level extracts.
A ranger has 6 skills per level, full bab, 4th level casting, and favored enemy.
A Slayer has 6 per level, free feats, sneak attack, and full BAB.
A rogue is hardly the best skill user, and those two extra skill points do nothing to balance of the class vs the other skilled classes.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
This never gets old
This never gets old
Aaah... I see what you did there. :D
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I was wondering why people are complaining about rogues. I thought as 3/4 BAB classes are concerned, they seem to have a few things going for them. So does anyone have any other reasons behind 'they suck' for them to, well, suck?
Rogues are spellcasters without spells. Their only method of contributing in a combat environment is by physically attacking enemies, but other 3/4 BAB classes like Bard are leaps and bounds beyond them in that regard (even 1/2 BAB classes can often match or outdo the rogue in this area). Their accuracy is comparable to that of a wizard's, and they're roughly as fragile as well since Wizards will typically have a comparable AC through most levels while having additional defenses.
Rogues are basically terrible at combat. They have terrible defenses. They aren't even very good at skills (other classes like Bard are better at skills, and classes like Ranger and virtually any caster has similar skills while also being able to support their skill with spells like pass without trace or blur). They provide no noteworthy party support abilities. They are just a drain on resources for breathing the air that other classes could be breathing.
EDIT: Rogues are actively punished for actually being rogues. Most of their class features actually require them to be in the worst places they could be. For example, if you are where you can sneak attack a big monster, odds are you're 1 round from being turned into burger-meat because your attacks, AC, and HP are all pretty bad.
Ninjas may be rogues but I personally dislike having that much flavour baked into a class. I don't want to play a rogue with a ki pool who can jump really high, use smoke bombs, turn invisible, throws shurikens and other ninja-ey things even though those things do make a ninja more powerful or effective than a rogue.
I suppose if I really wracked my brain, I could find a reason why my ex-soldier who is a knife fighting specialist with Butterfly Sting could possibly have learned some ninja abilities. And I suppose a those abilities could be reflavoured with a more western sensibility if I really wanted to but, honestly, it already rankles me a little that I'm forced to wield kukris to make the build really pay off without having to perform the mental acrobatics required to turn a ninja into a rogue, flavour-wise.
Ninja might be better in a strictly mechanical sense than rogue but that doesn't make it automatically appealing to a person looking to play a rogue.
Ninjas may be rogues but I personally dislike having that much flavour baked into a class. I don't want to play a rogue with a ki pool who can jump really high, use smoke bombs, turn invisible, throws shurikens and other ninja-ey things even though those things do make a ninja more powerful or effective than a rogue.
I suppose if I really wracked my brain, I could find a reason why my ex-soldier who is a knife fighting specialist with Butterfly Sting could possibly have learned some ninja abilities. And I suppose a those abilities could be reflavoured with a more western sensibility if I really wanted to but, honestly, it already rankles me a little that I'm forced to wield kukris to make the build really pay off without having to perform the mental acrobatics required to turn a ninja into a rogue, flavour-wise.
Ninja might be better in a strictly mechanical sense than rogue but that doesn't make it automatically appealing to a person looking to play a rogue.
Use a slayer. You get the BAB of an ex-soldier trained as a knife specialist instead of the BAB of some wannabe thug poser who has a rough idea that the point bit goes in the other guy.
Use a slayer. You get the BAB of an ex-soldier trained as a knife specialist instead of the BAB of some wannabe thug poser who has a rough idea that the point bit goes in the other guy.Ninjas may be rogues but I personally dislike having that much flavour baked into a class. I don't want to play a rogue with a ki pool who can jump really high, use smoke bombs, turn invisible, throws shurikens and other ninja-ey things even though those things do make a ninja more powerful or effective than a rogue.
I suppose if I really wracked my brain, I could find a reason why my ex-soldier who is a knife fighting specialist with Butterfly Sting could possibly have learned some ninja abilities. And I suppose a those abilities could be reflavoured with a more western sensibility if I really wanted to but, honestly, it already rankles me a little that I'm forced to wield kukris to make the build really pay off without having to perform the mental acrobatics required to turn a ninja into a rogue, flavour-wise.
Ninja might be better in a strictly mechanical sense than rogue but that doesn't make it automatically appealing to a person looking to play a rogue.
Yes, the character in question is taking slayer levels which is further evidence that the rogue is weaker at roguing than other classes. Ninja is a better option to rogue but is not the solution to the rogue's problems. It remains a fairly weak class and at least one person objects to its baked in flavour.
The problem with the "Ninja=Rogue therefor no problem" thing, is that an alternate class or archetype should be just that: an alternative, not a necessity for basic functionality. All Ninja may be Rogues, but not all Rogues are Ninja, nor should they have to be.
If I play a Bard or Magus, there are a multitude of archetypes that I can play, and they let me do something different, fun, flavorful and still effective. If I play a Rogue, a very limited selection of archetypes let's me sort of keep up, but still honestly be worse than if I had just grabbed a Slayer/Bard/Ranger/Ect. This is a problem
For the record, aside from throw shurikens (which is a weapon prof they get), you can opt to just not grab those talents.
Can't really opt out of having a ki pool either. I mean, I could just never use it but that removes several of the ninja talents from use as well. Opting to not use one of the ninja's class features rather defeats the purpose of going with a ninja so I have cool features, don't you think?
I admit that I haven't tried really hard to make a ninja work, mainly because I object to all the extra effort. All I really want is to play a not-sucky rogue and most every other class can be a not-sucky whatever without a good deal of added effort. I am lazy, rogues are a lot of work. Thankfully there's the slayer and investigator now.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not seeing all that baked in flavor with the ninja. Any character can buy/use smoke bombs/pellets. Ki is just a resource pool, so call it a 'rogue pool' if it's the actual word that bothers you. Or alchemy pool and call them chemical trick instead of ninja tricks.
No reason why taking a ninja means you're wearing black pajama's and are oriental.
Yes, yes I could do all of those things, which was acknowledged in my very first post. I don't want to do any of those things and other classes have less need for me to do those things. This is why ninja is not the panacea for what ails the rogue. Prince Yyrkoon has a good point too--most other classes don't require me to deconstruct an archetype in order to play a passable version of the base class.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe if rogues could also have weapon proficiency for guns and get two domains to choose spells from (spells per day based on int) and get heavy armor and full BAB the rogues might feel ok with giving up Trapfinding
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dear Rungok,
It's not a question of love or hate. There is no emotion involved whatever. It's simply a statement of fact. Claiming that "Rogues are underpowered compared to that of most other core classes" is about as controversial as claiming that "Water is wet."
But folks here are right to add that identifying the problem is insufficient without also suggesting solutions. I too, when I DM, institute various class amendments (especially with respect to the Rogue). (There's a bunch of my "World of Urth" ideas in the homebrew threads.) Suffice it here to simply reproduce those that distinguish the Rogue:
The Rogue is described in the CR, starting on pg.67. But on Urth, Rogues are somewhat more archetypical. A Rogue may not be of any lawful alignment. In addition to those itemized in the CR, & as long as he wears nothing heavier than light armor, the Rogue also gains the following class features:
• Proficiency with the Sword Cane (UE pgs.18 & 38).
• At 1st level, either the ‘Fleet’ (CR pg.124), ‘Improved Initiative’ (CR pg.127), or ‘Run’ (CR pg.132) bonus feat; PC’s choice.
• At 4th level, either the ‘Shadow Strike’ (APG pg.169) feat; or one of the 3 bonus feats given above that he hasn’t yet selected.
• ‘Light Steps,’ at 7th level, as per the ‘Ninja’ class feature of the same name (UC pg.16).
• As long as he’s using a bladed weapon from the Rogue’s proficiency list ([CR pg.68] e.g., dagger, hand-crossbow, rapier, sword-cane, etc.), he enjoys ‘Always a Chance,’ at 11th level, as per the mythic path ability of the same name (MA pg.20).
• If he has an Intelligence score of at-least 12, at 20th level he gains Invisibility (CR pg.301), as a spell-like power, at will.
I know that the aforementioned "fixes" are unsuited to all DMs &/or campaigns. Indeed, if you ask 25 D&D experts for an opinion, you should expect to get at-least 30 responses. Moreover, I tend to run an urban-heavy campaign; for which those wilderness loving DMs & players might think gives short shrift to Ranger & Druid types in any event. No plan is perfect, I suppose. But I hope these ideas speak well to someone out there.
Very Respectfully,
Peter S. Green
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
O yeah...I almost forgot, I also allow them to multiply all their extra sneak attack damage (however many d6's it is) if they score a critical hit while doing so (in accordance with the multiplier of the weapon they use).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmm... very interesting feedback from everyone.
I think if I'm going to do any houserule fixing (Which I admittedly am loathe to houserule things.) I would probably, after pick and choosing from the awesome list of suggested houserules, use:
>Rogues use their class level instead of BAB gained from rogue when making attacks that deal sneak attack damage. (much like a monk with flurry of blows)
>Sneak attack is not negated by less than 50% miss chance from concealment.
>Rogues can crit with sneak attack, doing 2x damage no matter the critical multiplier of the weapon. (like the Magus' spell crit)
>Rogue Talents that modify sneak attack (powerful sneak, etc) are NOT exclusive. Rogue talents that were only usable once per day are now usable a number of times per day equal to 1+Intelligence modifier.
...This doesn't necessarily negate the squishiness of D8 Hit Dice but at least gives them some advantages that they didn't have before. I prefer to 'nudge' things up bit by bit and see if it works better than to risk overshooting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmm... very interesting feedback from everyone.
I think if I'm going to do any houserule fixing (Which I admittedly am loathe to houserule things.) I would probably, after pick and choosing from the awesome list of suggested houserules, use:
>Rogues use their class level instead of BAB gained from rogue when making attacks that deal sneak attack damage. (much like a monk with flurry of blows)
>Sneak attack is not negated by less than 50% miss chance from concealment.
>Rogues can crit with sneak attack, doing 2x damage no matter the critical multiplier of the weapon. (like the Magus' spell crit)
>Rogue Talents that modify sneak attack (powerful sneak, etc) are NOT exclusive. Rogue talents that were only usable once per day are now usable a number of times per day equal to 1+Intelligence modifier.
...This doesn't necessarily negate the squishiness of D8 Hit Dice but at least gives them some advantages that they didn't have before. I prefer to 'nudge' things up bit by bit and see if it works better than to risk overshooting.
Jumping several pages into this thread, cause, honestly...hardcore, over-the-edge TL;DR...but I did at least breeze through the first page and this one, which, given all the posts, should give me some credit!
Anyway, I think those are great suggestions to balance out the rogue without going too far. I wouldn't worry about the d8 hit die. I don't think a rogue should be beefier than a monk.