|
Secondly, if you do manage to get ahead of everyone, as a rogue, you will not oneshot kill anything. You will hurt it, perhaps badly, but you will be out of stealth and away from aid, and it will then proceed to show you how fragile a d8 hit die with poor AC and two bad saves can be.It is also extremely difficult to do with any race that doesn't have darkvision which includes most of the available ones.
Eh, I almost never play anything that isn't a Dwarf, Half-orc, or gnome, so it doesn't come up much for me.
But yes, darkvision is pretty much mandatory for a rogue.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Because i WANT use stealth, espetialy in battle. I do not care much what will happen to that warrior - sure, i will try help him, but i have my own quest - choose the most dangerous/important target and kill it so it will not do the most evil things to the party.
Ah, the goal is Stealth during combat, so you can enable Sneak Attack on priority targets?
Keep in mind that you can't use Stealth unless there's something to hide behind. As a result, there will be many battles in which you literally cannot use this tactic.
For those times, I recommend snapleaf. Or if you have more time to set up, a potion of invisibility.
I think you can improve with 1 item change though, if you change your +3 amulet of fists into a +2 agile amulet of fists, you can do much more base damage (from 14 str to 26 dex, so 8-2-1=5 more damage per attack, -1 to attack, a better than average tradeoff I think)That's my next planned upgrade, going from +3 to +3 Agile, which is where I'll probably level it off.
I upgraded to +3 three levels ago, and I have to say that the ability to overcome Silver and Cold Iron DR was well worth the extra damage I could've gotten with Agile.
On almost all of my martial characters I aim for straight enhancement bonuses as a priority for that reason.
Wouldn't a +2 agile amulet of fists technically count as a +3 enhancement for purposes of bypassing DR? The agile enhancement is technically a +1 enhancement bonus. Would a Vorpal weapon not count as a +5 enhancement bonus for overcoming DR?
No only the actual numerical values go towards bypassing DR. Except in certain situations.
Ninja'd
|
1st shadow dancer... Hm, that looks good. But as i said early this character do not cast spells :3You do realize that Assassin is a spellcast Prestige Class, right?
There's a feat that lets you sneak attack against things that have concealment. It's pretty good if your local GM's know that concealment negates sneak attack.
I would also very heavily recommend you play a race with Darkvision. Not being able to see when you are sneaking around is problematic.
What? Assassin is totaly not spellcast cast.
There is always darkvision googles. That`s 120, not 60
|
|
I also understood that Oger wants to sneak during battles, not before them.
The problem with no darkvision is that you reduce your chances to get sneak then. The concealment you get from dim light won't work if the dim light also gives your enemies concealment from you (which happens without darkvision). Same with actual darkness. Thus you're left to rely mostly on cover (if going for stealthy sneak attacks instead of flanking sneak attacks), and that might be difficult to come by. Sometimes it's really up to GM which things on the map give cover and which do not, and quite often the maps are just plain open.
The goggles (I guess you're talking about Goggles of the Night) would help, true, but they're also so expensive that you have had to struggle through many levels before you can get them. They cost 12k, and the fame you need to buy something in that price range is 31 (because the previous, 27, caps off at 11,75k). Assuming you get the maximum of 6 fame per level, you could technically get the goggles on level 7. And that's not going into the having the money part of it. All in all, having darkvision from your race is much easier, and leaves money for making your character an effective sneaker in other ways.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I played a rogue in my Kingmaker game for a while (until she died). I've played them in the past and they're a pretty fun class. I like having an obscene amount of skill ranks and sneak attack.
In the lower levels, I played it a lot like a hit and run kind of character. Spend a turn moving behind cover and stealthing, spend the next turn throwing a dagger for 1d4+2d8+X. Such tactics are pretty potent in the lower levels, when nobody has a BAB of 6+ yet (and thus, multiple attacks per round).
In the higher levels, spells like invisibility and the greater version will help out, as well as spells like glitterdust. Remember, you get sneak attack whenever your target is denied Dex to AC--so being blinded counts. You can also use the dirty trick combat maneuver to set up a sneak attack, provided your dirty trick can blind the target.
My rogue was a very fun character that filled an interested niche in our party. If I wanted to do straight damage, I could have done something else. If I wanted to be a knowledge monkey, I could have done something else. But I wanted to play a spymaster character, so the rogue levels were critical to pulling off that theme in my mind.
In general, PFS isn't a difficult version of Pathfinder. Everyone in the higher levels winds up being overprepared for most encounters, so even weaker builds can slide by. That's not to say every rogue build is weak, but, like all characters, they can be constructed poorly (in a strictly mechanical sense). I don't suspect that you'll have trouble making a rogue, ninja, or other assassin type character viable in PFS.
Roll up the character and if you have fun with it you're good to go, Oger.
|
|
Gnome. Trade out keen sense and low light vision for darkvision.
Pick up the Go unnoticed feat and pump your initiative.
Its not a good way to do it, but its probably the best way considering your restrictions.
I could swear there was a feat that lets you use your allies as cover for stealth. I'll see if i can find it.
|
@Some other people:
It's a bit perplexing to me when someone says that Class X will serve a player's goal better or worse than Class Y will, that there are people who can actually take offense at this and call it "hating" or "bashing". A couple of paragraphs up I cautioned a player against using a kukri; is this an instance of "kukri hate"? I also explained how hard it is to get Stealth to work; am I "Stealth bashing"?Nobody bats an eye when you say "this option doesn't work/won't give you what you're after", unless the option in question is the rogue class. Why is that? What's the difference between cautioning someone against a certain feat/spell/weapon/archetype choice and cautioning them against a certain class choice? Why is "don't use feat X" merely advice while "don't use class X" is somehow so "hateful" that people would actually get upset about it and tell them to stop giving that advice?
I don't understand why "X is a weaker option than Y" suddenly goes from "helpful advice" to "hating/bashing" if X is the rogue class instead of an individual feat/spell/item.
Although it's difficult to convey tone via text, there are certainly times when it's apparent.
Take BNW's 1st comment, for example. He cautions what tactics will be difficult to pull off in PFS, but provides helpful advice rather than negative language.
Now compare that to Fruian's 1st appearance, and right out of the gate we start seeing phrases like "trash class", "failure", and "crappie low tier class", all in the same comment.
Before that point, people had been cautioning that these tactics would be difficult to pull off, but they were still being helpful. No hostility, no animosity, and no trash talking.
After that point, we get progressively less helpful and more hostile.
Surely you can see the difference?
And I have to disagree with your point that it's always about the Rogue class. I've seen the same hostilities revolve around Monks and Fighters as well (and probably Monks the most).
|
|
I wouldn't bother with the kukri proficiency; its only advantage over the dagger is the higher crit range, but most of your damage doesn't multiply on a crit, so you get very little value out of it. Plus, some GMs might not consider it sufficiently "knife-like" if you use the Knife Master archetype.
Sneak Stab (Ex): A knife master focuses her ability to deal sneak attack damage with daggers and similar weapons to such a degree that she can deal more sneak attack damage with those weapons at the expense of sneak attacks with other weapons. When she makes a sneak attack with a dagger, kerambit, kukri, punching daggers, starknife, or swordbreaker dagger (Advanced Player's Guide 178), she uses d8s to roll sneak attack damage instead of d6s. For sneak attacks with all other weapons, she uses d4s instead of d6s. This ability is identical in all other ways to sneak attack, and supplements that ability.
Just mentioning that Knife Master does specifically call out the Kukri, so you needn't worry about Table Variation rearing his ugly head.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Although it's difficult to convey tone via text, there are certainly times when it's apparent.
Take BNW's 1st comment, for example. He cautions what tactics will be difficult to pull off in PFS, but provides helpful advice rather than negative language.
Now compare that to Fruian's 1st appearance, and right out of the gate we start seeing phrases like "trash class", "failure", and "crappie low tier class", all in the same comment.
I agree his word choices were harsh, but what's more important to me is that what he attacked was a game mechanic, while those who reply back attack people. Heck, the first example of people-oriented negativity comes before Fruian's appearance. And even if we were gonna pretend that attacking mechanics and attacking people were comparable, the post I linked says "hate", which is at least on par with "trash class".
Before that point, people had been cautioning that these tactics would be difficult to pull off, but they were still being helpful. No hostility, no animosity, and no trash talking.
See above.
And I have to disagree with your point that it's always about the Rogue class. I've seen the same hostilities revolve around Monks and Fighters as well (and probably Monks the most).
I was trying not to cross the streams, but yes, monks and fighters too. Still always seems to be classes, though. For example, if someone had talked about a "trash feat" or said that the design of Spell X was a "failure" or whatever, we wouldn't have seen nearly the backlash we did. That's the target of my curiosity: what is it about certain classes that makes people so defensive about the exact same kinds of advice that they're totally okay with in any other context?
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I wouldn't bother with the kukri proficiency; its only advantage over the dagger is the higher crit range, but most of your damage doesn't multiply on a crit, so you get very little value out of it. Plus, some GMs might not consider it sufficiently "knife-like" if you use the Knife Master archetype.Sneak Stab (Ex): A knife master focuses her ability to deal sneak attack damage with daggers and similar weapons to such a degree that she can deal more sneak attack damage with those weapons at the expense of sneak attacks with other weapons. When she makes a sneak attack with a dagger, kerambit, kukri, punching daggers, starknife, or swordbreaker dagger (Advanced Player's Guide 178), she uses d8s to roll sneak attack damage instead of d6s. For sneak attacks with all other weapons, she uses d4s instead of d6s. This ability is identical in all other ways to sneak attack, and supplements that ability.Just mentioning that Knife Master does specifically call out the Kukri, so you needn't worry about Table Variation rearing his ugly head.
Good catch (I think someone else caught it too...?). Still, I wouldn't invest in proficiency for it.
|
|
Still always seems to be classes, though. For example, if someone had talked about a "trash feat" or said that the design of Spell X was a "failure" or whatever, we wouldn't have seen nearly the backlash we did. That's the target of my curiosity: what is it about certain classes that makes people so defensive about the exact same kinds of advice that they're totally okay with in any other context?
My guess is because a class represents a concept in peoples minds that hits a more personal note than any particular item or limited rules element can.
You roleplay as a Rogue. You get a feel for the class. You put yourself in that class's shoes. You think like a Rogue. And all because you wanted to.
If "Rogue" goes under attack, you feel attacked.
The same can't be said of an object, like a kukri, or a feat, like Prone Shooter.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If that is indeed the case, then it's a flaw that needs addressing on the part of the listener. I mean, being so invested in a gameplay decision that the criticism of that gameplay decision as it compares to other gameplay decisions feels like a personal attack? That's not healthy.
|
|
I have a gnome shadowdancer for pfs. With 2 levels of shadowdancer you get hide in plain sight and darkvision, which in my experience has allowed me to sneak attack pretty much all the time. (and I'm unsure what the whole I'm not a spellcaster thing is about. shadowdancer doesn't give you spellcasting).
If you're going to take skill focus stealth, then I suggest taking the dampen presence feat too, which will allow you to hide from creatures with blindsight/blindsense.
I'd say do a swashbuckler/knife master except for the stupid slashing grace not working with kukris. (that still bugs me, seriously, you can get dex to damage with one handed weapons, but not light ones. is dumb)
anyway, I think in general, if you aren't going the ninja invisibility route or the hide in plain sight route, then you're better off just maneuvering in to flanks. You'll get more sneak attackage that way than trying to hide. Or if you want to be able to solo sneak attack, go with any of the various feinting options.
|
|
being so invested in a gameplay decision that the criticism of that gameplay decision as it compares to other gameplay decisions feels like a personal attack?
Not "criticism as it compares to other decisions".
That's not what's happening here.
It's someone saying, "I like this", and someone else saying, "that's crap".
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
...then you're better off just maneuvering in to flanks.
Toward this end, kitsune have a +2 racial bonus to Acrobatics, and the daredevil boots are a fantastic (and affordable!) way to enable the tumbling. I have a DEX-based kitsune bard with those boots, letting him rock a +20 to tumbles at 5th level.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
being so invested in a gameplay decision that the criticism of that gameplay decision as it compares to other gameplay decisions feels like a personal attack?Not "criticism as it compares to other decisions".
That's not what's happening here.
It's someone saying, "I like this", and someone else saying, "that's crap".
I feel like maybe my post was unclear, as I don't understand the relationship between your reply and what I was trying to say. In your own words, what did you think I meant?
EDIT: Also, it's troubling to me that we're discussing the proper etiquette of criticizing game mechanics in a thread in which "I hate those people" was accepted without a second glance.
|
|
I'd say do a swashbuckler/knife master except for the stupid slashing grace not working with kukris. (that still bugs me, seriously, you can get dex to damage with one handed weapons, but not light ones. is dumb)
Er... Why it`s not work? There is nothing said about light weapons, only about one-handed. And light is onehanded too.
|
|
Hide in Plain Sight (Su): A shadowdancer can use the Stealth skill even while being observed. As long as she is within 10 feet of an area of dim light, a shadowdancer can hide herself from view in the open without anything to actually hide behind. She cannot, however, hide in her own shadow.
You almost need this. It is pretty much the only way to hide more than once in combat other than invisibility.
One thing to watch out for is that at least one party member is going to have a light source. I don't know WHY humans are so popular... weird things I don't know why they're not extinct. Someone's going to have a light source and its probably going to be within 20 feet of you.
They've clarified in the shadowdancers favor that the dim light is from a human perspective, not necessarily from the observers, but your dm may not know that.
One bit of table variation here is the kind of action you'll need to burn to Hide. To some "movement" means any movement at all, so you can 5 foot step, stealth as part of the 5 foot step , and then attack. Or better yet. start the round stealthed, attack, 5 foot step, and stealth again. Others think that movement means actual movement, you have to attack move hide attack move hide, which will put a serious dip in your damage.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
I always thought that "light weapons" is sub category in "one handed weapons"...
Surprisingly common mistake. They're separate categories (Core Rulebook, page 141).
Light: A light weapon is used in one hand...
One-Handed:A one-handed weapon can be used in either the primary hand or the off hand...
Unless otherwise stated, all weapons require at least one hand to wield. And all the weapons in the "two-handed" category require two hands to wield.
The major difference between "light" and "one-handed" is that if you wield a "one-handed" weapon in two hands, you get to apply 1.5x your Strength modifier to damage--as if it were a "two-handed weapon."
..If a one-handed weapon is wielded with two hands during melee combat, add 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to the damage rolls.
This is balanced by the drawback that if you wield a "one-handed" weapon in your off-hand while two-weapon fighting you suffer greater penalties for doing so (penalties found on page 202 of the Core).
Of course, at level 11 the Two-weapon Warrior archetype for the Fighter class (out of the Advanced Player's Guide) gets an ability that negates this drawback...
Gah, there are so many rules in this game!
|
|
Although it's difficult to convey tone via text, there are certainly times when it's apparent.
Take BNW's 1st comment, for example. He cautions what tactics will be difficult to pull off in PFS, but provides helpful advice rather than negative language.
Now compare that to Fruian's 1st appearance, and right out of the gate we start seeing phrases like "trash class", "failure", and "crappie low tier class", all in the same comment.
I agree his word choices were harsh, but what's more important to me is that what he attacked was a game mechanic, while those who reply back attack people. Heck, the first example of people-oriented negativity comes before Fruian's appearance. And even if we were gonna pretend that attacking mechanics and attacking people were comparable, the post I linked says "hate", which is at least on par with "trash class".
Before that point, people had been cautioning that these tactics would be difficult to pull off, but they were still being helpful. No hostility, no animosity, and no trash talking.See above.
And I have to disagree with your point that it's always about the Rogue class. I've seen the same hostilities revolve around Monks and Fighters as well (and probably Monks the most).I was trying not to cross the streams, but yes, monks and fighters too. Still always seems to be classes, though. For example, if someone had talked about a "trash feat" or said that the design of Spell X was a "failure" or whatever, we wouldn't have seen nearly the backlash we did. That's the target of my curiosity: what is it about certain classes that makes people so defensive about the exact same kinds of advice that they're totally okay with in any other context?
First, I would like to apologize for my posts yesterday, I was not feeling well, and some of the posts bashing Rogue as a class choice, especially when comparing them with a modified version, saying the modified version (Ninja) can do the Rogue thing better than a Rogue, without explaining HOW, when they are, functionally, identical, makes me go "What?"
A Rogue can do the same thing, a little later, by using his Rogue Talents to get Ninja Tricks, while retaining the ability to deal with magical traps in other ways than face-planting. Then again, I have seen traps where either survival is unlikely if not found (10d6 fire damage in a 1-3) and disarmed, or worse things can happen, if the trap is magical.
Makes me wonder how someone does the trap thing better than a Rogue, especially since the class archetypes that gain trapfinding usually give up something else that is also good or useful. And don't get access to some of the Rogue talents that make finding traps incredibly easy. YMMV.
Now, on the difference between saying Class X is not worth taking and saying Feat X or Spell X are not worth taking; is that a feat or spell is a minor thing for a PC build, easily swapped out or replaced, where the class is, really, fundamental to the build.
Saying that, in your opinion, Combat Expertise is a feat tax, and not worth taking, unless you want one of the feats that requires having it, and saying that Rogue is a class tax, and not worth taking, is a different thing.
Then again, back in LG days, I never quite understood why people always thought of Fighter as only worth a 2 or 4 level dip, and not a worthwhile class on its own. ::shrug::
|
|
...then you're better off just maneuvering in to flanks.Toward this end, kitsune have a +2 racial bonus to Acrobatics, and the daredevil boots are a fantastic (and affordable!) way to enable the tumbling. I have a DEX-based kitsune bard with those boots, letting him rock a +20 to tumbles at 5th level.
Couldn't you do the same thing, without the 10 round limit, with Boots of Elvenkind?
The Elvenkind boots are a bit more expensive, 2500 gp instead of 1400 gp, but are always on, for a +5 competence bonus to all Acrobatics checks, but don't give the +1 attack bonus for successfully moving through the enemy's space.
Maybe it is just me, but +5 on all Acrobatics, always on, beats +5 to not provoke moving through threatened squares or the opponent's space for 10 rounds, with a +1 bonus to hit, if you successfully move through the opponent's space.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like maybe my post was unclear, as I don't understand the relationship between your reply and what I was trying to say. In your own words, what did you think I meant?being so invested in a gameplay decision that the criticism of that gameplay decision as it compares to other gameplay decisions feels like a personal attack?Not "criticism as it compares to other decisions".
That's not what's happening here.
It's someone saying, "I like this", and someone else saying, "that's crap".
Jiggy, earlier you asked, "what is it about certain classes that makes people so defensive?" I was responding to that, first.
Next, I was pointing out that your premise for asking that question was flawed. People aren't having a problem criticizing mechanics, they're getting upset over criticizing characters.
Harsh language only adds fuel to the fire.
Consider this: somebody criticizes the mechanics of a Tiefling Cleric. They point out races that might have more optimal stats, or archetypes that do X better, or advise against doing Y differently.
Nobody would have a problem with that.
Now, imagine someone telling you that Thomas The Tiefling Hero was a crap build, and should've been an Aasimar Life Oracle instead.
You'd likely get a little miffed.
Do you see the difference in presentation between these two approaches?
People have an emotional attachment to a roleplaying concept. The Rogue is more than a collection of skills ranks, feats, and class features. It's the archetypical villain, or the stealthy hero, or the beguiling liar.
Telling someone "That's crap, play a Ninja" is going to draw some defensive rebuttals.
Also, it's troubling to me that we're discussing the proper etiquette of criticizing game mechanics in a thread in which "I hate those people" was accepted without a second glance.
In this instance, the two are one and the same, except replace the words "game mechanics" with "character concepts".
|
|
Consider this: somebody criticizes the mechanics of a Tiefling Cleric. They point out races that might have more optimal stats, or archetypes that do X better, or advise against doing Y differently.
Nobody would have a problem with that.
But they do have a problem when you do that with the rogue *points up*
Now, imagine someone telling you that Thomas The Tiefling Hero was a crap build, and should've been an Aasimar Life Oracle instead.
The response would be twofold.
1) that the story is worth the mechanical disadvantages. When a tiefling cleric shows up at the table they're a walking story of redemption, of bettering ones self and rising above ones rather literal inner demons. An aasimar cleric doesn't come with that same story built in. PFS makes it hard to delve into any sort of background and stamping your background on your head comes in extra handy.
2) Would be that a cleric doesn't need to push the upper end of the power curve to get the job done. Spells alone provide enough power and versatility in 99% to do the job and the rest is just gravy. The dex based rogue DOES.
You'd likely get a little miffed.
People get miffed whichever tack you take. *points up*
People have an emotional attachment to a roleplaying concept. The Rogue is more than a collection of skills ranks, feats, and class features. It's the archetypical villain, or the stealthy hero, or the beguiling liar.
The rogue class is not more than a collection of skills ranks a feats. rogue CHARACTERS are. The irony is that people relying on the name of a class to infuse their character with some quintessential essence are the ones accusing others of lacking any heart to their characters and focusing only on game mechanics.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Next, I was pointing out that your premise for asking that question was flawed. People aren't having a problem criticizing mechanics, they're getting upset over criticizing characters.
Harsh language only adds fuel to the fire.
Consider this: somebody criticizes the mechanics of a Tiefling Cleric. They point out races that might have more optimal stats, or archetypes that do X better, or advise against doing Y differently.
Nobody would have a problem with that.
Now, imagine someone telling you that Thomas The Tiefling Hero was a crap build, and should've been an Aasimar Life Oracle instead.
You'd likely get a little miffed.
Do you see the difference in presentation between these two approaches?
Wait, so people get upset by bashing the class because it feels the same as bashing their character, and your support of this is an example of how class-bashing and character-bashing are not the same?
Did I miss something?
Also, it's troubling to me that we're discussing the proper etiquette of criticizing game mechanics in a thread in which "I hate those people" was accepted without a second glance.In this instance, the two are one and the same, except replace the words "game mechanics" with "character concepts".
Okay, so our discussion of the etiquette of criticizing character concepts is happening in the same thread where "I hate those people" was considered acceptable. That's not better.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
...then you're better off just maneuvering in to flanks.Toward this end, kitsune have a +2 racial bonus to Acrobatics, and the daredevil boots are a fantastic (and affordable!) way to enable the tumbling. I have a DEX-based kitsune bard with those boots, letting him rock a +20 to tumbles at 5th level.Couldn't you do the same thing, without the 10 round limit, with Boots of Elvenkind?
The Elvenkind boots are a bit more expensive, 2500 gp instead of 1400 gp, but are always on, for a +5 competence bonus to all Acrobatics checks, but don't give the +1 attack bonus for successfully moving through the enemy's space.
Maybe it is just me, but +5 on all Acrobatics, always on, beats +5 to not provoke moving through threatened squares or the opponent's space for 10 rounds, with a +1 bonus to hit, if you successfully move through the opponent's space.
Thing is, tumbling is the only use of Acrobatics whose DC keeps scaling as you level. So if you're already DEX-based with Acro as a class skill, then by the time you could buy the boots of elvenkind, any Acrobatics check other than tumbling is already an auto-succeed (or will be soon). That means that in all cases except tumbling, the elf boots actually don't do anything. :/
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hm... how well Hellcat stealth goes with my "path"? Will it be good with hide in plain sight from shadowdancer?
They're mildly redundant. They're both different ways of doing the same thing.
Hellcat stealth is good because it doesn't need shadows, and trying to get the lighting conditions for every square on the map is a headache inducing exercise for a dm. This and Shadow dancer are great, but it only crops up about halfway though your PFS career. Its only a 2 feat investment, and rogues are kind of feat starved. The -10 can be pretty killer though. The problem is that sometimes you'll be in the dark against something with dark vision, and this shuts off because you can't bend the light around yourself.
Shadowdancer HIPS is good because because there's no -10 penalty and DMs have actually heard of it. You'll need to own the cheliax book for hellcat stealth and be prepared to show it to the dm frequently. its worded.. oddly and is occasionally going to stop the game while the dm parses it. The downside is the pretty extensive feat tax to get in.
The only way to know if hellcat stealth is going to work for you or not is to play it. I would get hellcat stealth and stay with it if its working. If not, trade it out for a prerequisite for shadowdancer.
In any case, I would avoid two weapon fighting.
It takes up feats you don't have
It requires standing still. Most characters have a strong tendency to zip around the map. PFS fights can get very mobile. As a stealth character you HAVE to move to stealth. Two weapon fighting requires you to stand still
PFS has more damage reduction that fort knox. Hitting twice for 5 points of damage will frequently result in you doing zero points of damage.
As a fighting type you need magic weapons. Getting two of them eats into your gold supply.
Sneak attacks don't always happen. Full attacks don't always happen. Together they're almost a celestial alignment. Its HAAALELUJA praise gygax moment you'll remember for a long time when it happens, but its rarity is a severe problem when you rely on it to deal damage.
|
|
Absolutely nothing. Doesn't mean they get a pass on the responsibility to try, though. People are people.That's not healthyWhat has led you to believe that gamers, especially forum trolls are healthy? ;-)
Exactly, people are people. So, that being said, what makes you think you are fit to pass judgment on people? Instead of judging others, try doing something, anything else, up to and including nothing. Also, where has anyone in this thread say that they hate anyone else? I said "haters gonna hate" half-joking, and Kinevon mentioned haters, before going back and apologizing for his tone, but I have yet to see anyone say that they hate anyone else. Calling people unhealthy and hinting at mental instability does nothing to add anything positive to the conversation.
Edit: Cleaned up grammar a bit.
And personally, as far as arguments on the internet go, this feels pretty tame.
|
|
As far as the topic at hand goes, how about sacrificing a bit in the other stats to up strength a bit. It would go a long way to helping out with damage until you get Slashing Grace, and it stays relevant after you pick SG up. And I agree with BNW's comments on Hellcat Stealth, if you give it a try be sure and let us ow how it works out, it's a feat I've wanted to try out for a while but haven't been able to try yet.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Absolutely nothing. Doesn't mean they get a pass on the responsibility to try, though. People are people.That's not healthyWhat has led you to believe that gamers, especially forum trolls are healthy? ;-)Exactly, people are people. So, that being said, what makes you think you are fit to pass judgment on people? Instead of judging others, try doing something, anything else, up to and including nothing. Also, where has anyone in this thread say that they hate anyone else? I said "haters gonna hate" half-joking, and Kinevon mentioned haters, before going back and apologizing for his tone, but I have yet to see anyone say that they hate anyone else. Calling people unhealthy and hinting at mental instability does nothing to add anything positive to the conversation.
Edit: Cleaned up grammar a bit.
And personally, as far as arguments on the internet go, this feels pretty tame.
A lot in here to reply to; I'll try to do you justice.
First, I linked the "hate" example earlier. Your "haters gonna hate" post wasn't even on my radar for that topic, precisely because it was the type of post that could have been meant lightheartedly.
Second, I think it's far more unhelpful to ignore unhealthy behaviors than to point them out. Relatedly, pointing them out does not in any way "hint at mental instability". Taking "this behavior/mindset is unhealthy" as implying mental instability suggests that perhaps you think that only the mentally unstable engage in unhealthy behaviors, which couldn't be further from the truth. Everyone's got stuff that needs to get pointed out from time to time, even the best of us. Ignoring such things is exactly how you end up with an entire community being known for unaddressed flaws in the first place - the very premise of Bob's post.
Finally, I agree: this has been a comparatively tame thread. That's why I thought I might be more likely to get an answer about "the rogue phenomenon" than in other threads (they're usually too fast and loud). The "unhealthy behaviors" stuff just started as a comment on Nefreet's hypothesis; wasn't even aimed at anyone in particular.
Hope I covered everything; let me know if not.
|
|
2) Would be that a cleric doesn't need to push the upper end of the power curve to get the job done. Spells alone provide enough power and versatility in 99% to do the job and the rest is just gravy. The dex based rogue DOES.
Please do not confuse the Dex-based Rogue with the Rogue class in general.
Whether a Dex-based Rogue has to go uber-optimized to be effective is a different thing than a general, "Rogues suck.", which is what seems to have been stated as a consensus by some posters in this thread, and is generally the theme of several anti-Rogue threads. And, in some cases, some pro-Rogue threads that get dominated by the anti-Rogues.
Just like each Cleric is, in some ways, unique, so is each Rogue.
Whether the class is used to create Vila Restal or Robin Hood, each Rogue should be judged on the character, not the class.
If built badly, or run oddly, any class can be shown to be bad. I have had a player in my local group here who runs Barbarians who never Rage. And I have seen a Wizard PC charge into combat. It really depends on hwo it is built and how it is played, on how good a PC turns out to be.