The rogue's lack of flat feet is making me distressed.

I had some questions about Condition changes (in 11ish?) as they relate to rogue feats. In the move to Distressed and Unbalanced conditions from Flat Footed, many of the rogue feat effects became disconnected from rogue attack feats. Is this intended (to keep us from being unintentionally supra-awesome op), or is it unintentional from condition changes?

For instance, Thrust and Forehand previously had a 25% chance to apply Flat Footed (one Light Knife and one 1-Handed attack feat). Now they both apply Distressed. Compound and Footwork now both follow up on Distressed instead of Flat Footed which created a nice attack combo...but rogues seem to have no option now, outside of Feint, to apply Flat Footed.

This means the attack feats - Shank, Basic Dagger, Basic Rapier, Press (2 Flat Footed effects each), the Feature Feats - Opportunist, Cut Throat, and Daredevil (1 Flat Footed effect each), and all of the Rogue Reactive feats (1 Flat Footed effect each) can only be set up by the Rogue by using Feint (forced to use one of two slots there).

Any chance to get back an attack feat with 25% to apply Flat Footed, or move some of those Flat Footed rogue feats to Distressed?

Am I just doing it wrong? Because that could be what's going on.

Total guess, but maybe they made the change because they want a rogue to need teammates to get someone's feet flattened.

Once Sneak Attack is working as intended, Rogues will treat their target as Flat-Footed whenever their Sneak Attack is in effect.

Nice. I figured there was a lot of room to work it back in down the line (sneak, maybe flank, and 2 attackers, etc.). It's just kind of a blow right now. I don't expect the rogue to be a killing machine, but I do think they should be pretty effective in 1v1.

@Kobold: There aren't actually a lot of attacks that apply flat-footed now. Most that used to now apply Distressed instead.

Maybe he's thinking of flanking someone causing flat footed.

Use Feint or a Rogues Trick....

It pretty much limits the rogue melee to feint, basic exploit, press, rinse & repeat

Or use no rogue reactives, just general criticals, ignore your role feature and button mash Thrust or Compound. Having to use feint to use your role feats opens you up to taking more damage (you extend the battle and now use 1 non-attack feat). The damage total of button mashing seems of greater value greater than the bonus of waiting for any Flat Footed rogue reactives right now.

Now, I don't think this is MVP or anything. Ironing out roles will be a long process and future features can affect a lot of half-implemented stuff. I just think this should be on the list of things to look at when the time comes because it seems like a huge negative effect on the rogue role from changing the condition of (essentially) one rogue attack feat.

If the rogue doesn't see some major love very early in EE I will probably play my 4 months then move on to another game.

If the rogue doesn't see some major love very early in EE I will probably play my 4 months then move on to another game.

Can I has yur stuff? ;-P

Yes, I expect it will be mostly tier 1 with 1/20 durability, it usually is.

Kidding aside, If many of us are using T1 stuff with no durability after 4 months, I think the ghostliness will make Alpha look like downtown Manhattan.

I would be seriously surprised if they let the Rogue role continue in its current state that long in to EE. Also, I think having a solid Rogue roll is a part of MVP. Otherwise, why have it in the game at all?

Also, I think having a solid Rogue roll is a part of MVP. Otherwise, why have it in the game at all?

You might say the same about freeholders, experts, and aristos. We'll have them in the game, even if they aren't fully functional. I don't think that the 4 adventure roles need to be equally strong as part of MVP.

The MVP game isn't dungeoneering, or even especially close fights. We're doing open field fights. The terrain might give advantage to fighters and wizards over rogues and clerics for some time.

I think the problem with rogues, though, is they are a role looking for a function. Are they a class best suited for dungeoneering? Are they waiting for enough population to make banditry feasible? In WoW and its clones, rogues are melee dps types. When I played AD&D TT, rogues were a second-rate fighter that mostly brought a lot of small but useful skills to the table. I don't know how they play in PF TT. I don't think that GW wants to spell out that there is a trinity, and the rogue is intended to be used a certain way.

I don't know how they play in PF TT.

They run in to the same problem in table top play. They can be good skill monkeys and handy to have as a flanking buddy, but a two handed weapon + power attack always outclasses the rogue. They can disarm traps, but by 5-6th level, most traps are magical, meaning wizards are better at dealing with them (dispel magic doesn't risk setting it off).

Rogues are a bit of a jack of all trades, master of none in Pathfinder. In PFO, I think they'll need to: make trap disarming a part of the rogue skills, and create both bandit and guard skills for rogue. Fighters can fight, but a rogue knows who is fighting when and why, and can turn a profit at it. Just my two copper.

I think the problem with rogues, though, is they are a role looking for a function.

Yeah that is kind of how I feel as well. To go back to DnD 4.0, Fighters and Wizards are strikers. Wizards can also be Controlers. Clerics tend towards being Leaders. But what are Rogues? Lesser versions of strikers? That's redundant to Fighter and Wizard and, with their sneak attack not implemented, rogues aren't even good at being strikers.

Alexander's run down of a Rogue is pretty accurate for Pathfinder Society Play. Trap spotting is their biggest function, by far (although what Alex said about Wizards being better by level 5-6 is not true- he never met PFS Gale Windswept!). Scouting is also big, I suppose. But yeah, what is a skill monkey in a game that doesn't yet have need or use for *any* of those skills?

In time! but hopefully Rogues will find their place sooner rather than later. With only four roles to choose from, a lot of folks are going to want to play a rogue and have a meaningful experience with it.

Fighters can fight, but a rogue knows who is fighting when and why, and can turn a profit at it. Just my two copper.

That may be a subtle form of playing, and I think that's good and all. But what incentives does that subtle player have to devote himself to subterfuge feats? In the end, the rogue fighting style has to work at some level.

Some ways I could see it working out:

- A fighter in melee might be a match for a rogue in 1v1. But 2 Rogue vs. 1 target might be equal or more lethal than 2 fighters vs. 1 target. (Two wolves vs. 1 character, for example, is not fun. More wolves is less fun.) This, I think, should be the target in balancing rogues: they should do better in many on one than other classes.

- Rogue skilled adventurers can mix their dex-based subterfuge fighting style feats with either dex-based crafting feats or dex-based martial feats. They might usually/almost always be lightly armored, so might train ACE armor feats as well as rogue armor feats. (So Jack of all Trades lateral skill selections).

I don't have the quote on hand, by Ryan wrote a very clear post on what the role of a Rogue in PFO is.

...Ryan wrote a very clear post on what the role of a Rogue in PFO is.

Thoughts on Rogue:

Rogue in the MVP is an ambush predator. Rogue will have the Armor Feats to get benefits from Medium Armor, thus will have a mix of carrying capacity (for loot) and defense against physical attacks.

Rogue should have substantially higher Stealth than any other characters. High Stealth should enable Rogue to minimize detection when selecting targets and establishing ambushes. Working with other characters to drive potential targets into ambush zone should amplify Rogue's effectiveness.

Sneak Attack effect means Rogue punches above its weight when forcing the target into the Flat-Footed condition.

Sorrow's Release / Multi-Shot (Shortbow) is a great combo for ambushing. Especially if two Rogues work together.

and

I've said it before and I'll say it again: In d20 -> Pathfinder, there is no backstabbing.

Rogues get their Sneak Attack bonuses by attacking targets that are vulnerable. The primary method of making them vulnerable is to flank them, or to inflict a condition on them that makes them vulnerable.

We are staying true to this game mechanic. The objective of a Rogue is not to approach psuedo-invisibly and deliver a crippling alpha strike against an unaware opponent. The typical objective of a Rogue is to engage with a partner, get the target flanked, and make a series of attacks with Sneak Attack damage. The partner's objective is to keep the target in a condition where the Rogue's Sneak Attack will be applied.

I tried a crafter with rogue melee skills, sometime back in Alpha 8 or so. I was mostly running solo and decided that fighter melee skills were stronger. Has anyone tried roguing in a group, or is the main complaint that the rogues don't solo well?

Urman wrote:

I think the problem with rogues, though, is they are a role looking for a function.

Yeah that is kind of how I feel as well. To go back to DnD 4.0, Fighters and Wizards are strikers. Wizards can also be Controlers. Clerics tend towards being Leaders. But what are Rogues? Lesser versions of strikers? That's redundant to Fighter and Wizard and, with their sneak attack not implemented, rogues aren't even good at being strikers.

Know your source material; 4e fighters are defenders, characters who take hits so that squishy characters don't have to.

Pathfinder characters are a lot more fluid, and most classes can fill one or more of those roles easily, or fill a niche not included in the big-4 roles.

To answer Urman's question, the main complaint of my original post was losing the ability to apply Flat Footed with an attack feat. Whether solo or in a group, the larger complaint is that the rogue role is weak in general (but that's quite possibly due to features just not being implemented yet). I'm fine with the role being doing less damage and being able to carry more things for right now and seeing what comes up in the future. In PFO groups, I think (and I hope) there will be a little more wiggle room on not needing to be a min/max-ish build to get in groups and be beneficial.

Based on my own TT and other games, as far as melee goes, I think the rogue role should be very solid on its own in PvE solo fights, but not able to wade through PvE groups like the other roles do. The rogue should probably handily lose to a fighter in straight PvP, but getting the jump on an injured or occupied fighter could mean victory. Two rogues on one fighter should be a very hairy situation for everyone. A healer or battle cleric should also own a rogue 1v1 like the fighter. A wizard should probably also toast a rogue with a little prep, but if a rogue gets the jump on a wizard...

Either way, I'm betting that a main rogue role will be fun to play and I'm going that way with my main.

I think the problem with rogues, though, is they are a role looking for a function.

At the moment they are barely a role.

Bluff does nothing.

Stealth does little to nothing. I'm aware that we will never be able to sneak up and back stab someone, but when this came up in chat a couple of weeks ago Tester Prime said stealth's main use currently is for gathering from nodes near mobs.

The rogue implements I have found so far have been so pointless as to never be used, they were just a waste of XP to learn.

Ryan's description seems to indicate Rogues are just a mule for carrying other people's loot. (Sorrow's Release is a long bow feat, so much for that 2 rogue ambush)

We can see how much the developers love the rogue by the fact that they forgot to implement Short Bow proficiency 2 in the last patch. Obviously no-one bothers to test rogue stuff on the test server.

Yupp and Ryan himself said that some Rogue stuff would appear in this patch .... ffffffff ..

There are no dungeons, and those will likely not be in game for a year or more. The Thief / Rogue / Whatever you want to call them..... Was ruined when they became a "Dungeneering" class.

Rogues were not any better when they became semi- glass cannons in most MMOS (ie WoW, Aoc, etc).

Instead, PFO lends itself more towards the Rogue being renamed "Brigand" and their role and skills should be built around that.

Their arttacks from Stealth should cause flat footed, rather than distress in my opinion. This should be especially true with certain bow attacks.

I would like to see certain bow attacks requiring the initial condition of being stealthed first. Perhaps calling it "Ambush Shot" and replacing the nomenclature and features of one of the other attacks.

Umm... "Run Shoot"..... Need I say mor, on that broken concept. (Note I don't call it a broken feat anymore, because it could be enabled. It is a broken concept because it does not do as it says).

As for the changes in Armor, encumbrance, etc... I'm glad for the changes. It is the first bit of "quasi love" Rogues have gotten in some time.

Medium armor is now ideal for providing moderate protection, movement and carrying capacity, perfect for Brigands.