What's the deal with the rogue hate?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 607 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

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?


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Yay, this topic. I'll also pick this thread since you double posted. (Oops)

I think they're fine. Yes, you can use other classes to piecemeal their effects and do some other stuff, too. But, you're basically spending build resources to be rogue+ rather than a bardy bard, for example. Yes, some of these options are distinctly better. But, it's even better to let rogues be rogues and other classes be other classes. If you're hard up for trapfinding in your group then, sure, use those other options. But, rogues do perfectly well being what they are. That players can use other classes to grab off their plate and then point out what they do means rogues suck really only proves one thing: they're bullies who feel proud of what they do.


12 people marked this as a favorite.

I won't go too far into this, but:

1) It's rogue "love" much more than "hate." People (correctly) want to see the class improved.

2) Anything a rogue can do other classes with more abilities can do as well or better, and get some additional goodies as well. The clearest example is with the alternate ninja class, which can do all that rogues can do but also a few added things. Not that ninjas are all that powerful, but they come closer to the power curve than rogues.


Uwotm8 wrote:

Yay, this topic. I'll also pick this thread since you double posted. (Oops)

Whoops. Sorry. My mouse has the bad habit of rapid clicking.


Not this question again. First of all it is not "hate". Nobody hates the rogue, monk, or fighter, and many people that complain want them to be better. There are probably 20 threads on the topic. If you do a search you will find the answers, and you will not do any less reading by starting your own thread on it.

Grand Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.

I will point you here.

There are tons of threads like that.

Also, it is not "hate", it disappointment.


Rogues really could have used something like "Rogue Weapon Training" where they pick two light weapons at level 1 and two more at 6,12,18.
LvL 1: Dex to hit
Lvl 3: Dex to damage
Lvl 5: Plus 1 die size
Lvl 7: Double strike, if you have a weapon you have rogue weapon training in each hand you can make a strike with both weapons as a standard action.
Lvl 9: Improved Crit
Lvl 11: Plus 1 die size
Lvl 13: Once per round on a crit can add SA if you otherwise could not
Lvl 15: Gain SA on one attack of opportunity a round.
Lvl 17: Plus 1 die size
Lvl 19: All criticals deal SA
Lvl 20 Capstone: SA is multiplied on crit if you would normally deal SA.

Maybe a lot too powerful and something will need to be given to fighter to compensate, like say the weapon spec/focus tree for free and monks have pummeling stance baked in.


Mellok wrote:

Rogues really could have used something like "Rogue Weapon Training" where they pick two light weapons at level 1 and two more at 6,12,18.

LvL 1: Dex to hit
Lvl 3: Dex to damage
Lvl 5: Plus 1 die size
Lvl 7: Double strike, if you have a weapon you have rogue weapon training in each hand you can make a strike with both weapons as a standard action.
Lvl 9: Improved Crit
Lvl 11: Plus 1 die size
Lvl 13: Once per round on a crit can add SA if you otherwise could not
Lvl 15: Gain SA on one attack of opportunity a round.
Lvl 17: Plus 1 die size
Lvl 19: All criticals deal SA
Capstone: SA is multiplied on crit.

Maybe a lot too powerful and something will need to be given to fighter to compensate, like say the weapon spec/focus tree for free and monks have pummeling stance baked in.

Please don't try to sneak dex to damage in there. Dex should create damage for a rogue, but through its contribution to Stealth, which leads to more sneak attack opportunities. Or replace it with Improved Feint, which can create a sneak attack opportunity in its own way.


Mellok wrote:

Rogues really could have used something like "Rogue Weapon Training" where they pick two light weapons at level 1 and two more at 6,12,18.

LvL 1: Dex to hit
Lvl 3: Dex to damage
Lvl 5: Plus 1 die size
Lvl 7: Double strike, if you have a weapon you have rogue weapon training in each hand you can make a strike with both weapons as a standard action.
Lvl 9: Improved Crit
Lvl 11: Plus 1 die size
Lvl 13: Once per round on a crit can add SA if you otherwise could not
Lvl 15: Gain SA on one attack of opportunity a round.
Lvl 17: Plus 1 die size
Lvl 19: All criticals deal SA
Lvl 20 Capstone: SA is multiplied on crit if you would normally deal SA.

Maybe a lot too powerful and something will need to be given to fighter to compensate, like say the weapon spec/focus tree for free and monks have pummeling stance baked in.

Rogue damage is not really that bad since they are not primary combatants. They will struggle in optimized games, but boosting damage is wont really fix that.


wraithstrike wrote:
Rogue damage is not really that bad since they are not primary combatants. They will struggle in optimized games, but boosting damage is wont really fix that.

I agree that the pathfinder rogue is not a primary combatant but I am not certain that people in general would agree that a rogue is not supposed to be a primary combatant. I've always viewed them as the melee glass cannon. A little more challenging to setup than head to head face smashing but for a significant payout.

The pathfinder rogue skills, while nice, are obsurdly over valued due to the dumbing down of UMD and trap finding and sneak attack is such a busted mechanic its not worth building around.

If rather than a weapon training, in the flavor of what outlined, sneak attack was rewritten to be more usable I think rogue could still be salvaged as a combat contributor. If rogues were given a set of SA modifiers that they could exchange SA die for different effects it would help a lot as well, say something like the following.

1: 1SA
3: +1SA (sacrifice 1SA die to count as flanking for the round)
5: +1SA (sacrifice 1SA to ignore loss of SA due to concelement for the round)
7: +1SA (sacrifice 1SA to be able to SA undead or plants for the round)
9: +1SA (sacrifice 2SA to be able to SA constructs)
11: +1SA (sacrifice 2SA to have one target loose his dex bonus to armor for the round)

and so on.


Mellok wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Rogue damage is not really that bad since they are not primary combatants. They will struggle in optimized games, but boosting damage is wont really fix that.

I agree that the pathfinder rogue is not a primary combatant but I am not certain that people in general would agree that a rogue is not supposed to be a primary combatant. I've always viewed them as the melee glass cannon. A little more challenging to setup than head to head face smashing but for a significant payout.

The pathfinder rogue skills, while nice, are obsurdly over valued due to the dumbing down of UMD and trap finding and sneak attack is such a busted mechanic its not worth building around.

If rather than a weapon training, in the flavor of what outlined, sneak attack was rewritten to be more usable I think rogue could still be salvaged as a combat contributor. If rogues were given a set of SA modifiers that they could exchange SA die for different effects it would help a lot as well, say something like the following.

1: 1SA
3: +1SA (sacrifice 1SA die to count as flanking for the round)
5: +1SA (sacrifice 1SA to ignore loss of SA due to concelement for the round)
7: +1SA (sacrifice 1SA to be able to SA undead or plants for the round)
9: +1SA (sacrifice 2SA to be able to SA constructs)
11: +1SA (sacrifice 2SA to have one target loose his dex bonus to armor for the round)

and so on.

The rogue has light armor and being a glass cannon is another way of saying "secondary combatant".

Rogues can already SA constructs, plants and undead.

Oozes, elementals, and incorporeal(unless you have ghost touch weapons) are not subject to sneak attack.

edit: I have always liked the idea of giving up sneak attack for other benefits.

Silver Crusade

Mellok wrote:

1: 1SA

3: +1SA (sacrifice 1SA die to count as flanking for the round)
5: +1SA (sacrifice 1SA to ignore loss of SA due to concelement for the round)
7: +1SA (sacrifice 1SA to be able to SA undead or plants for the round)
9: +1SA (sacrifice 2SA to be able to SA constructs)
11: +1SA (sacrifice 2SA to have one target loose his dex bonus to armor for the round)

and so on.

Just a note on the progression you have there, you can already sneak attack undead/plants/constructs. Basically it's really only oozes and elementals (things that are truly amorphous) that can't be sneak attacked.

I'm with everyone else, the Rogue doesn't live up to the title, and because of that, everyone else who's Rogue-like can do their job better. You're better off waiting to see how they "unchain" it because right now it's the low man on the totem pole.

As far as it stands, no one 'hates' the Rogue, we just wish it could fill the role that it's designed for. And please don't argue about 'who is playing the Rogue', as creative people can play anything.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Million topic and one to discuss this, here we goooooooo!

Rogues need to put in more effort* than other classes to be up to scratch with the rest.

*system mastery, battlefield awareness, positioning, thinking outside of the box and making pigs fly.

PS: That's why I think they're fun, they force you get out there are die more often. I mean try harder and succeed.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Errant Mercenary wrote:

Million topic and one to discuss this, here we goooooooo!

Rogues need to put in more effort* than other classes to be up to scratch with the rest.

*system mastery, battlefield awareness, positioning, thinking outside of the box and making pigs fly.

PS: That's why I think they're fun, they force you get out there are die more often. I mean try harder and succeed.

And before the usual excuse comes up, notice how he said 'up to scratch'. The Rogue jumps through all those hoops to be mildly useful. Rogues are not like Wizards; Making the perfect choices in every part of your build doesn't make you a god, it makes you on par. Any one screw up, though, and like Wizards, you've wasted a huge chunk of your potential. You also don't have clones of yourself in a private demiplane.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

1. Rogues are underpowered in the CRB due to math.

2. No archetype or series of Rogue Talents has been released to diminish this handicap. (I love the Savage Critical monster feat, but it's a monster feat.) Monks were kind of as bad as Rogues, but have since received many archetype options and feats that make it a much more interesting class.

3. This forum has a problem with anyone rolling a Rogue for anything ever. There are situations in which Rogues work, but in order to get more publicity to the Rogue issue, they broadcast their dissatisfaction 24/7. Seriously, if a guy is rolling a Rogue for a low-difficulty AP with lots of traps, just let him do it. Rogue only starts having issues - in my opinion -around the 7th or 8th level, 5th level if high difficulty.

4. And yes, Slayer, Inquisitor, Alchemist and Investigator all provide different alternatives that eventually overshadow the Rogue, leaving the class with no special niche or build that the Rogue performs specially well. I blame the low power of Rogue talents and low power economy across the class.


Slayer and Investigator(Sleuth Archetype) are the two biggest ones, imo.

The Slayer is about as good at skills, but is a much better fighter with sneak attack and everything to boot.

The Investigator is about as good at fighting, but is much better at skills.

This would change if you make Rogue talents good, but Slayers can take those, so it might just be a crapshoot now.

Scarab Sages

The biggest problem with the rogue is math. Every other 3/4 BAB class has an in-class way of boosting it's accuracy. Rogue doesn't, and is therefore forced to rely on flanking. Additionally, Sneak Attack really isn't that great, because it is difficult to generate conditions where SA can activate, and when you can, there are several creature that are immune due to being amorphous, incorporeal, or concealment. Trapfinding is iconic, but it's weak with the current state of the game, and most of the good archetypes trade it out, and 8 other classes have access to it. For the final insult, you can get trapfinding as a trait.

That said, there are some recent improvements. For example, Underground Chemist from the ACG + the Bomber & Bomber Discovery talents from Ranged Tactics Toolbox allow you to make a very interesting Rogue as an Alchemist without extracts/mutagen while keeping the flavor of the rogue intact with trapfinding and sneak attack.

Scarab Sages

DominusMegadeus wrote:


The Investigator is about as good at fighting, but is much better at skills.

The investigator is MUCH better at fighting. Studied Combat can give a massive boost to hit that the rogue cannot match.


I stand corrected, even without Alchemy, the Investigator is just better at everything.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I dunno what the hell you guys are on about, rogues are great! They're fun to roleplay as a@@!*~&s thief and all arround sociopath! The rogue in my group has been doing quite a lot of damage, its not THAT hard to flank an enemy and get that sweet sweet sneak attack, especially if your team is smart about it and are willing to take a couples of AoO to get in a really good position for the rogue..! Plus, FUN. TO. PLAY. Sometimes you Dpr olympic / munchkins forget about the "fun" part of this game..


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The biggest problem with the rogue is the lack of good talents. The most common use for talents is to trade them for feats. Too many of the talents are only usable once a day. Compare that to rage powers that can be used once per rage. The abilities the talents give are also weak so that makes it even worse.

Compare the rogue talent charmer vs the investigators talent empathy. The rogue gets to roll diplomacy twice once per day for every 5 levels. The investigator always rolls sense motive twice and once a day can read a single targets surface thoughts. How is that even close to being the same power level? The barbarian rage power powerful blow gives a +1 to damage on a single hit, and an additional +1 per four levels. So at 8th level that is +3 damage, which is not that good, but he at least he can use it once per rage.

If they added a talent that allowed you to pick a skill when using that skill roll twice and take the better roll it make the rogue what he is supposed to be. Allow the talent to be chosen multiple times but each time it applies to a different skill.

Scarab Sages

7 people marked this as a favorite.
UncleGeorge wrote:
I dunno what the hell you guys are on about, rogues are great! They're fun to roleplay as a**+%%*s thief and all arround sociopath!

That has nothing to do with the rogue class, you can do that with any of dozens of other classes that have already been mention.

UncleGeorge wrote:
The rogue in my group has been doing quite a lot of damage, its not THAT hard to flank an enemy and get that sweet sweet sneak attack, especially if your team is smart about it and are willing to take a couples of AoO to get in a really good position for the rogue..!

So you are forced to rely on positioning that any other class with built in accruracy boosts can do as well, and take more damage with poor HD and terrible saves for the privilege to do so? Bad design.

UncleGeorge wrote:
Plus, FUN. TO. PLAY. Sometimes you Dpr olympic / munchkins forget about the "fun" part of this game..

Thank you for insulting everyone who doesn't agree that Fun = balanced.

It's possible to make a fun and effective rogue. It requires every bit of system mastery you can muster, and in almost every case another class can do the same thing with less effort and be more effective while doing it.

Pushing for the rogue to be improved is not a sign of being a munchkin or badwrongfun. It's a desire to see a re-balance with the class to make it better than an NPC class.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
UncleGeorge wrote:
I dunno what the hell you guys are on about, rogues are great! They're fun to roleplay as a~%@##$s thief and all arround sociopath! The rogue in my group has been doing quite a lot of damage, its not THAT hard to flank an enemy and get that sweet sweet sneak attack, especially if your team is smart about it and are willing to take a couples of AoO to get in a really good position for the rogue..! Plus, FUN. TO. PLAY. Sometimes you Dpr olympic / munchkins forget about the "fun" part of this game..

You can have fun playing any class. I could play a commoner and have a blast while doing so. The problem is that there is not anything a rogue can do that can’t be done better by another class. You could rewrite your rouge as an archeologist bard, or investigator and have just as much fun.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
UncleGeorge wrote:
I dunno what the hell you guys are on about, rogues are great! They're fun to roleplay as a$+#!#@s thief and all arround sociopath! The rogue in my group has been doing quite a lot of damage, its not THAT hard to flank an enemy and get that sweet sweet sneak attack, especially if your team is smart about it and are willing to take a couples of AoO to get in a really good position for the rogue..! Plus, FUN. TO. PLAY. Sometimes you Dpr olympic / munchkins forget about the "fun" part of this game..

I can't tell if this is satire or if you actually don't get it.

You can roleplay being a thief and sociopath... as any class, and Slayers/Investigators actually steal and kill stuff better. If all a Rogue needs to do is flank and get sweet sneak attacks, then all a Slayer has to do is flank and get even stronger attacks that hit more often. But why would your group even bother taking AoO to get you in position when they can replace you with a Ranger who doesn't need that to do good damage, and has skills and can sneak and gets a cool animal companion?

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
UncleGeorge wrote:
I dunno what the hell you guys are on about, rogues are great! They're fun to roleplay as a@%~++#s thief and all arround sociopath! The rogue in my group has been doing quite a lot of damage, its not THAT hard to flank an enemy and get that sweet sweet sneak attack, especially if your team is smart about it and are willing to take a couples of AoO to get in a really good position for the rogue..! Plus, FUN. TO. PLAY. Sometimes you Dpr olympic / munchkins forget about the "fun" part of this game..

This post is so stereotypical of Rogue defenders that I'm not actually sure if it's sarcasm or not.

1. Roleplaying a character is not dependent on their class, anyone can act like that.

1a. A lot of groups don't WANT someone playing like that, as it can be very disruptive to everyone else's enjoyment of the game.

2. Sneak attack doesn't do loads of damage, and with a 3/4ths BAB it's hard to hit even with flanking.

3. Rogues have garbo hit points (d8) and garbo AC (light armor, no shields), taking AoOs to get into position could finish them before they land in position

4. Other classes are just better in a flanking position (Investigators come to mind).

5. Part of that 'fun' is being competent at what you do, and having a Rogue lacking the resources to contribute to most situations as well as being a drain on other resources isn't everyone's idea of 'fun.'

Rogues are mechanically weak, and haven't gotten stronger, unlike most other classes (Fighter has Mutagenic Fighter now, Monk has MoMS/Zen Archer), which is why people want to bring this to light, which it seems has happened a bit since they're on the Unearth/Unchained list of things to fix.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I've always thought of the rogue's main role as melee support. The one who plays nice with the fighter/barbarian/ranger/etc. and works in tandem with them to get lots of flank. Turn the melee advantage of the dedicated fighter into an even more unfair advantage by adding sneak attack, basically.

Rogue sucks if you try to go lone-wolf. You really need to coordinate with at least one other party member. Ideally with the whole party. The boards here generally don't like teamwork though, and classes are assessed mostly based on what they can do on their own.

I do wish we had better rogue talents available, admittedly.


Gluttony wrote:
I've always thought of the rogue's main role as melee support. The one who plays nice with the fighter/barbarian/ranger/etc. and works in tandem with them to get lots of flank. Turn the melee advantage of the dedicated fighter into an even more unfair advantage by adding sneak attack, basically.

I'm afraid I've never understood how that's supposed to work. The fighter isn't the one who gets sneak attack, and the rogue can't reliably hit with 3/4 BAB.

If you want to make the fighter better at what she does, the wizard can summon a monster to occupy that space and give the fighter a rather marginal bonus, and when the summoned toy gets eaten, there's no loss.

If you want to go ninja-ing around and doing the flanking by yourself, you need a lot of work and expertise to be able to make sure that you a) can actually hit your opponent, and b) can survive the inevitable counterattack. Because even if you use the rest of the party, you're still, by definition, on the other side of the bad guy than the fighter.


Gluttony wrote:

I've always thought of the rogue's main role as melee support. The one who plays nice with the fighter/barbarian/ranger/etc. and works in tandem with them to get lots of flank. Turn the melee advantage of the dedicated fighter into an even more unfair advantage by adding sneak attack, basically.

...

Most classes can do this better than the rogue.

1) More AC, more Hp, to get into position.
2) More accuracy, so Butterfly Sting,Combat Manuevres and effects work more often
3) Have more "tricks" than the rogue to get there. Bladed Dash magus, Grace spells, etc.
4) Acrobatics stuff as easily done by other classes too.
5) Sneak attack is garbage damage. Numbers have been run, this is not up for contest. Also, it hits not very often.

I like the Rogue, but it is just not as good. I will always be playing rogues, because it isnt just a bunch of math it is also the idea that comes with the package that we've been associating with during all these years.

Also, Ninja does solve some rogue problems.


Just for the record, FUN = BALANCE means overpowered classes are balanced. I, for one, think that we should bring everyone to the power level of, say, Investigators or Slayers, rather than bringing them down to the level of Rogues or up to the level of Druids.

I love the Rogue, but I just don't feel there are many builds out there that make me say "good thing I chose Rogue!"

The only ones I can think of are the gimmicky Savage Critical build, something based on Violent Display, or an Underhanded build.

Grand Lodge

UncleGeorge wrote:
I dunno what the hell you guys are on about, rogues are great! They're fun to roleplay as a#$!%&*s thief and all arround sociopath! The rogue in my group has been doing quite a lot of damage, its not THAT hard to flank an enemy and get that sweet sweet sneak attack, especially if your team is smart about it and are willing to take a couples of AoO to get in a really good position for the rogue..! Plus, FUN. TO. PLAY. Sometimes you Dpr olympic / munchkins forget about the "fun" part of this game..

You don't need to be a Rogue to do those things.

It's not all about the DPR either. Every possible role, is done better by another class.

Any class, could potentially be fun to play. Even the Commoner.

Don't accuse people of this "munchkin" crap. Throwing that out there doesn't make a better case.

Also, you can roleplay just about any class as a "thief and sociopath".

Playing a Rogue doesn't make anyone a better roleplayer.

Also, Rogues could be LG bastions of goodness.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:

I've always thought of the rogue's main role as melee support. The one who plays nice with the fighter/barbarian/ranger/etc. and works in tandem with them to get lots of flank. Turn the melee advantage of the dedicated fighter into an even more unfair advantage by adding sneak attack, basically.

Rogue sucks if you try to go lone-wolf. You really need to coordinate with at least one other party member. Ideally with the whole party. The boards here generally don't like teamwork though, and classes are assessed mostly based on what they can do on their own.

I do wish we had better rogue talents available, admittedly.

Why people still don't get how that(bolded part) works is something I can not understand. It's been like that since ages.

100% agree with everything you said, especially the "more/better talents".


6 people marked this as a favorite.

The Rogue's main role should be melee support.

It has little to no tools to do so, however.

Sovereign Court

The biggest thing for me are rogue talents; quite a few of the rogue talents that are once per day are things other classes get unlimited times per day as a base part of their class.

I love rogues, have two PFS rogues, but one of them I had to sacrifice trapfinding just to be a good melee character and the other went arcane trickster.

Anyway, IMHO, rogues could be fixed through talent changes alone.

Grand Lodge

Bards make better melee support.

Silver Crusade

blackbloodtroll wrote:
Bards make better melee support.

Bards/Alchemist/Investigators/Inquisitors/Eidolons/Animal Companions/anything with 3/4ths BAB that's not a Rogue...make better melee support.

I'm not even sure what melee support means, since we're dealing with light armored d8 hit die classes, and the Rogue has no innate way of boosting that 3/4ths BAB, which every other 3/4ths class has.

Honestly I don't feel like Sneak Attack even feels good, at least on a Rogue's chassis (Vivisectionist Alchemist give me life.)


4 people marked this as a favorite.

1) Sneak Attack is terrible. The extra dice sound like a lot of extra damage, but at level twenty all you get is 10d6. Average 35 extra damage (may be more, if you take those rouge talents) that doesn't get modified on a critical, can be ignored by blur unless you jump through a feat hoop, still can be ignored by fortification, and requires jumping through more hoops to set up properly.

2) Medium BAB, and unlike every other medium BAB class, no innate to hit boosting.

3) The classic Rogue image duel wields. Due to the high stat requirements, TWF is not a very good fighting style unless you can ignore prerequisites, like a Ranger or Slayer. And even then, penalties to hit, which goes back to point two.

4) Trap Finding is overrated. The Rogue gets to find all these deadly traps, so she has to sacrifice abilities elsewhere. This is a legacy issue, really as traps are not instant death like they used to be (which is a good thing. Over deadly traps don't actually make the Rogue better, they just make it necessary. Those are not the same thing.), and even in early additions this was questionable balance. There's a reason AD&D Rogues had the fast XP track: It's harder to notice that your class is kind of terrible when you're several levels ahead of everyone else.

5) Tries to be too many things at once. The Bard makes a good jack of all trades, and has the mechanics to be good, if not the best, at many, perhaps all, of it's roles. The Rogue...does not.

6) The big one: class is not concept. Rogue is really more of an archetype (in the literary sense, not the collection of alternate class features sense). You can roleplay a scoundrel/conman/thief as any class (save, perhaps, the Paladin). Back when you had only four classes, and the Rogue was the only one with actual mechanics for being roguish, this wasn't as apparent. But the game has evolved, and all a class really is is a collection of mechanics to let you realize your character concept, and there are multiple classes now that mechanically represent a flavor of the Rogue archetype better than the Rogue class.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I love the Rogue too.

My first Pathfinder PC was a Rogue.

They still suck at any role, they are supposed to do.

Now, I just play the "Rogue" concept, and play a class that's better suited for the role.

I wish it wasn't that way, but that's how it is.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

It has a skill emphasis in a game where skills are consistently de-emphasized with each new product.

Talents are underwhelming compared to any other pool of powers from any other class.

It's a class with very situational combat benefits.

It's a class with many abilities that only apply in a very narrow subset of adventuring locations, and which are largely obviated by the mid-high levels.

Everyone likes the concept, but more than any other class it has baggage and legacy rules dragging it down. It just doesn't play like what you'd expect from it, which leads to disappointment, which leads to complaint.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

my wettest dream is to see skills become utterly important and able to do things spells are not, but alas, this is not that game.

Grand Lodge

Bards handle skills better too.


Rogues are in a weird position, because while the class works, it's weak. Other classes have enormous advantages that rogues simply don't get. Such as every single other 3/4th BAB class getting spells and/or a giant pile of special abilities.

I've both seen and played very effective rogues in my groups' games, and I'll say that being a good rogue requires both knowing what the hell you're doing and actually working with other party members.

There is something of an anti-teamwork vibe on the boards, occasionally taken to the extreme that actually receiving buffs spells from other party members is declared parasitic behavior.

I will note that the trapfinding trait that keeps coming up in rogue discussions nowadays is a campaign trait from Mummy's Mask. In the context of that campaign it makes sense - it exists so that no one in the group is shoehorned into playing a class with the trapfinding ability in an AP that one would expect to be trap-heavy. The trait is NOT PFS legal, and getting it outside of a Mummy's Mask campaign requires GM permission, more or less. So it's not a trait one should actually presume they'll be able to get =P

But yes, just about anything a rogue can do, there's another class can do it better, often because of a class ability (favored enemy/terrain, stern gave, inspiration, versatile performance, etc.) that just makes the other class outright better at it.

Better/more useful low level talents would be very nice.

I will note that there is still something very satisfying about killing an enemy with an enormous amount of sneak attack damage, though.

Grand Lodge

Zhangar wrote:

I will note that there is still something very satisfying about killing an enemy with an enormous amount of sneak attack damage, though.

Which other classes can do better as well.

Sovereign Court

Zhangar wrote:
I will note that the trapfinding trait that keeps coming up in rogue discussions nowadays is a campaign trait from Mummy's Mask. In the context of that campaign it makes sense - it exists so that no one in the group is shoehorned into playing a class with the trapfinding ability in an AP that one would expect to be trap-heavy. The trait is NOT PFS legal, and getting it outside of a Mummy's Mask campaign requires GM permission, more or less. So it's not a trait one should actually presume they'll be able to get =P

At least one of the most useful rogue archetypes drops trapfinding.

Grand Lodge

You also can't just fix the Rogue with better talents.

Other classes already have access to the talents, and can use them more efficiently, along with having more trick up their sleeve.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Which other classes can do better as well.

Eh, not really. Not in terms of damage done, I mean. They may be less reliant on others to help deny an enemy dex to AC, but, iirc, rogues have the largest sneak attack pool. Other classes also tend to delay getting access to it.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Uwotm8 wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Which other classes can do better as well.
Eh, not really. Not in terms of damage done, I mean. They may be less reliant on others to help deny an enemy dex to AC, but, iirc, rogues have the largest sneak attack pool. Other classes also tend to delay getting access to it.

No, really, other classes do this better.

They get it off more often, and usually have other things to add to damage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
blackbloodtroll wrote:

No, really, other classes do this better.

They get it off more often, and usually have other things to add to damage.

Wait, you're lumping other damage bonuses with sneak attack to say other classes do sneak attack better? That kind of thing blurs lines of what we're discussing.

Scarab Sages

Uwotm8 wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

No, really, other classes do this better.

They get it off more often, and usually have other things to add to damage.

Wait, you're lumping other damage bonuses with sneak attack to say other classes do sneak attack better? That kind of thing blurs lines of what we're discussing.

Other classes do damage better, and other classes do Sneak attack Better.

Vivisectionist has extracts and Mutagen to enhance combat above sneak attack alone.

Slayer has less dice, but full bab+studied target+combat styles means they will do more damage than the rogue with sneak attack or without it.

Cult Leader or Mantis Zealot Warpriest while lackluster can still put out solid sneak attack and keep sacred weapon or bonus feats and fervor casting.

Grand Lodge

Uwotm8 wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

No, really, other classes do this better.

They get it off more often, and usually have other things to add to damage.

Wait, you're lumping other damage bonuses with sneak attack to say other classes do sneak attack better? That kind of thing blurs lines of what we're discussing.

Vivisectionist has Sneak Attack of a Rogue of the same level.


Imbicatus wrote:

Other classes do damage better, and other classes do Sneak attack Better.

Vivisectionist has extracts and Mutagen to enhance combat above sneak attack alone.

Slayer has less dice, but full bab+studied target+combat styles means they will do more damage than the rogue with sneak attack or without it.

Cult Leader or Mantis Zealot Warpriest while lackluster can still put out solid sneak attack and keep sacred weapon or bonus feats and fervor casting.

Those things make their overall damage output better. We were talking about sneak attack, specifically. Doing that and then trying to group in other things while the rogue just has sneak attack isn't any kind of fair comparison. Fact is, rogues get it at level 1 with a faster progression and overall larger pool. Other classes, due to their other benefits, tend to delay access to sneak attack and have a reduced pool size.

1 to 50 of 607 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / What's the deal with the rogue hate? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.