Noireve's page

As for the group saying "well the effects are subtle like eyes whiting and such"... that makes Spellcraft REALLY FREAKING DUMB...

I mean, picture if you will... A wizard casts a silent Stilled Dominate Person with Eschew Materials... you say his eyes kinda go a little white or something (his eyes glow a little maybe?). Well, since there is no penalty to spellcraft with Silent+Still+Eschew, the spell is still very readily identifiable...

That means, you are some how saying that an opponent wizard could go "He is casting Dominate Person!!!", the fighter would ask "How the bloody hell can you tell???" and in reply the wizard would say "His eyes slightly glowed a Deep Sea green blue with a touch of magenta. Obviously Dominate. Charm is more a Light Sea blue green with a touch of hot pink"...

I mean... that just SOUNDS stupid... Now the glowing runes things solves the issue entirely (each spell has a unique set of runes) and is in line with Words of Power (as they are essentially more primal magic), but that opens a whole new can of worms. Now Illusion has an even HARDER time now (since glowing pretty runes makes things like invisibiity pointless...) and creates and even weirder time with stealth (if a wizard is behind a low barrier stealthed and casts a silent, still spell, would the glow give him away? Technically there is no listed penalty to stealth for casting a spell).

The other issue is Enchantment. Enchantment is also a school that is hosed enough (There is a reason why most people ditch enchantment with no worries...). Now a lot of its spells are rather pointless or lose all thematic value (how are you supposed to be a charming succubus using magic to charm your opponents without them even knowing when you glow eldritch runes eveywhere???)

So yes, the FAQratta is stupid and create ALL SORTS OF OTHER ISSUES....

lulz. I actually like that xD.

Honestly, I feel like the Proteans need more love... Having more Chaos vs Lawful stuff would be awesome lol. Having Asmodeus and that one LG paladin god (I am completely spacing her name...) pairing up would be HILARIOUS.

Or of course you can do the opposite quite well. Chaos working together to stop the horde of uniformity and conformity (think Shivering Isles from Elder Scrolls Oblivion).

And another inexperienced GM is painfully discovering the reality of the Martial-Caster Disparity and how higher level casters can shut down mundane things (like travel) with ease...

Consider this Barry....

A level 12 Cleric is literally more epic than Jesus...

Create Water from thin air? Check

Bless Water? Check

Turn Water to wine?Check

Cure Blindness? Check

Cure the Sick? check

Walk on Water? Check

Can tell falsehoods?Check

Speak such that all understand? Check[url]

Atone a person for their sins? [url=http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/a/atonement]Check

Break enchantments and such? Yup

Raise the dead? Yup

I mean... just think of that. A 12th level cleric is literally as epic (or more so) than Jesus. AND he can still open a can of Whoop ass in combat...

alexd1976 wrote:

I lean more towards your viewpoint, personally, but some people say they are WILDLY overpowered... which to me seems odd...

Expensive, sure, unreliable, absolutely...

Overpowered? Tell that to the guy flying around and dropping fireballs from the sky.

I don't consider them overpowered. So much as the mechanic they use to hit touch AC is way too easy to bypass. At the very least I would have uses flat footed AC. If a campaign has many large sized creatures in it. The Gunslinger is never going to miss. I know I ran Rise of the runelords and the player was one shotting giants with his musket. Mind you part of it was my fault for allowing a weapon that does x 4 on a crit. As well as the player being a optimizer. I had to double and triple the HP because he was almost never missing.

Compared to what a optimized Wizard run by a player who knows what he is doing. Not even close even with Advanced Firearms. Greater invisibility plus fireballs or summon monster means the Gunslinger is at a disadvantage. That's why it's hard to take some in the hobby seriously when it comes to them saying stuff is overpowered. The gunslinger is broken and/or overpowered. But the wizard surely not it's magic the wizard is supposed to be broken and overpowered.

There is a reason for Touch vs Flat Footed...

Since the rounds are sub sonic and actually kinda slow (for a bullet), they are in fact dodge-able. But due to their mass (muskets would go all the way to 70 or 80 caliber... which is rediculous....) they have alot of KE so they punch through armor (well that is the thought process. It kind of depends on angle of attack as well since they are prone to Ricochet due to their lower velocity). Also you can throw off the aim of a firearm by being a moving target. Hitting a moving target is fairly difficult for a firearm (even with modern firearms, people sometimes have difficultly hitting moving targets with accuracy without lots of training and practice). Now hitting a BIG target much easier. After all, the joke is "not able to hit the broadside of a barn." If you miss something bigger than a barn.... well... you suck...

CRB wrote:

Ex-Clerics

A cleric who grossly violates the code of conduct required by her god loses all spells and class features, except for armor and shield proficiencies and proficiency with simple weapons. She cannot thereafter gain levels as a cleric of that god until she atones for her deeds (see the atonement spell description).

There is a similar mechanic for Clerics in PF to what paladins have to endure. I just don't think most GMs or players really follow it for some reason.

That is the problem.

A paladin makes 1 mistake and he is done.

A cleric has to GROSSLY violate their code. Also, clerics do not have defined codes like paladins. They don't have codified things that are "fall or not fall"

I cared about a pet that made many of the other classes at my table look like a joke. Sure, I'm sure they could have done something better, been optimized better, etc... but the summoner player didn't even have to try.

The fluff stuff is things I can fix on my own, but honestly it's easier when you can point to rules and then make exceptions, than point to rules and make restrictive rules over them. People tend to whine about that.

The better thing is to put caps on # of natural attacks, not this stupid mess.

If the only problem was massive multi limbed pounce monsters, putting a cap on natural attacks and increasing the cost of pounce would have been simple enough. There, no 100 tentacle pounce monsters.

What we got was a horrid mess.

As for the flavor thing, then I guess fighters are boring to you too right? After all, they got no real flavor built into the class. Or how about wizards? They are "guys who cast" . What other flavor do they got? Oh wait! thats right! you create it when you make your character! If a your complaint is that your player is making a bland summon, that issue is with the PLAYER. They would make a bland ANYTHING if it doesnt have pre-built flavor.

CWheezy wrote:

Did they not understand that when a barbarian dies from rage loss hp, they would have been dead anyway if they were not raging?

Its a pretty simple concept.

I imagine it's still traumatic for a fairly new player to hear "oh, you got knocked out...well, you die...sorry".

That doesn't change the fact that the barbarian has relatively few issues compared to something like the fighter and thus probably shouldn't have been unchained, but the sudden death thing was still an issue.

Personally I kinda like the sudden death thing. Made much more thematic sense than temp HP. I mean, they are not magic. Rage is literally an adrenaline rush. Sudden death after rage is like... you have had a tough fight, your on your last leg. The only thing keeping you going is your white hot blinding anger. You finally killed your opponent. Your anger spent, your smile, then breathe ypur last. I mean, its like an awesome version of the samurai capstone. Thematically it just awesome. The temp HP thing seems kinda meta gamey and weird. Not nearly as cool.

Looking ore at it... I am glad they made the Spiritualist... so I dont have to deal qith the Unchained Summoner.

Pretty much.

They should have left the Eidolon alone. The real problem came from SM and their spell list.

Pixie, the Leng Queen wrote:

What if your a blaster wizard? Your level 3 slots are gonna be kinda tight with fireballs.

Or what of your a battle cleric? Ypu built him to be a delf buffing melee machine (you know, like the typical warpriest trope). You built him so YOU can be in combat,not so Mr. Fighter can be useful at it while you stand back and watch.

Or say your a self buffing druid. Sure you can expend a spell slot to cast SNA to give your fighter a flanking buddy, but your supposed to be a wildshaping melee bot. Why waste a turn to summon when you prefer to go in and duke it out ypurself.

Or the oh so popular bard. When you take an archetype that DOESNT focus on "spam Inspire Greatness" and your fighter gets annoyed since you are not buffing him (say you took Thundercaller instead for awesomeness).

1st. A simple calculation, is your 1 round of fireball equal to or greater than an entire party under haste for 5+ rounds? If the answer is no, yes you should cast haste.

2nd. Does the buff on you do more for the over all party than on the martial? If no, then cast that buff on the other person.

3rd. That's just a silly question. If you could just flank the thing, go flank it yourself.

4th. Once again, is your thunder call equal to or greater than the entire party receiving bard buffs for 1 round? In this case, the thunder call is probably more effective.

Why is teamwork such a bad thing. This is honestly a two way street as well. The fighter/martial/whatever receiving a benefit from you should either pull their weight with the gift you gave them, or cede the buff/action to you.

But then your forcing people to not play their character.

MAYBE their fireball does less, BUT THEIR CHARACTER IS BUILT TO CHUCK FIREBALLS .They want to chuck fireballs, not play vending machine for someone else.

Maybe the cleric wants to have fun going in at hitting things. Why should he have to give up his wanted playstyle for a class that cant self buff? Regardless of what is more effective, its also about what the PLAYER wants to do. He wants to go up and things! Unless your suggesting clerics should never be self buff bots and instead be vending machines bacause "teamwork."

Maybe the bard doesnt want to be the spoony bard going around as a cheerleader. Maybe he wants to call down thunder and be a badass. Sure, the normal bard is much stronger, but thundercaller is just rule.of cool. Or maybe they are a Chelish Diva or Spund striker. Heck I made a SoundStriker Bard once with a dip into oracle for the Legalistic curse (and lore mystery... cuz may as well...) and Profession (Lawyer) so that I could flavor my spundstrike as legalese LITERALLY CAUSING YOU PHYSICAL PAIN. Sure, if I wanted to be "teamplayer" i would be a normal bard and focus on buffs... but I wanted to he a.lawyer damn it lol.

Technically Ur priests were ANTI theist instead of Atheist. They believed in them, they just hate them and steal from them.

Improved Unarmed strike.

If you dont get it for free, you pretty much need it to unarmed strike... at all..

Otherwhere wrote:

In RL, a garotte would basically coup-de-gras in 1 round.

Only in the movies. In "RL," it takes a lot longer than 6 seconds to strangle someone to death.

Garrottes perform a blood strangulation, not a normal airway strangulation

Reminds me of the tome of battle. You regain your abilities after a few minutes of effectively stretches and such to get ready. So in an combat scenerio it is "per encounter" but has real world limits that doesnt break senses.

HeHateMe wrote:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Really? I've been able to find a curse for each of my characters that fits with their theme, and doesn't make them unplayable.

My Life Oracle is Blackened, and cannot do hard labor thanks to her weak limbs. I built her as a spellcaster, so melee attacks are something she never does.

My Winter Oracle is Wasting, as the frostbite consumes his body. He goes into melee and uses the Enforcer feat to Intimidate foes.

My Flame Oracle is Legalistic, and never breaks his word. He uses buff spells and throws fireballs, when his Diplomacy skills fail.

You know, I realize you have a good point here so I need to clarify. I like to play spellcasters who are also melee combatants, and that's the reason why I find oracle curses so frustrating. If I enjoyed standing back and just casting spells during combat, the curses wouldn't be as big a hindrance.

Cold blooded isn't a bad one, that's probably the only one that wouldn't frustrate the heck out of me.

Tongues or Haunted don't really interfere much with melee.

Black Blood is solid. Anytime someone hits you with S or P weapons, you get free cold damage to them. Its kinda cool.

And the destructive one is super cool and flavorful as well. Pretty much walk around sundering everything lol

Alignment restrictions are really f&+#ing dumb...

Say you used to be NG. You fought many a battle along side your faithful angelic friend. You fought together, bled together, you saved the world together. But say, as the years go on, you get harder, more jaded. The cold world seems colder. Your alignment shifts just barely into N.

That friend who was there for you all those years? Yeah... nope. But here is a shiny new elemental! Dont speak amy of the elemental languages? TOO BAD! Ypu get elemental. No angel friend for you. No, angel friend sticks around tp help restore and heal you. Nope, angel is good as dead to you now.

That is stupid.....

Pixie, the Leng Queen wrote:

When it comes yo.create water.... me and a few friends destroyed.our poor GMs dungeon with it... turns out he didnt expect me (oracle) out cleric amd our Loradin to flood the dungeon with create water...

Did he expect there ever to be heavy rainfall there?

Nope. It was in the middle of a desert underground. We flooded the dungeon with water, drowned most anything that cpuldnt breathe water and couldn't escapse and forced out anything could THEN killed them as they left. It was kinda humorous actually... like how I got around a room with waist high water an filled with blood ooze swarms (the little ooze swarm that suck blood). Just shaped reverse gravity (since it makes 5×5×5 squares ypu shape) into a column then covered the cieling so the water went to the cieling.

And the forced flavor removes so many options. A being from your very nightmares? Nope. Non outsider like creatures lime dragons and such. Nope. Giant robots for crazy gnomes? Nope. Twisted creatures from the stars? Nope.

Why?

I believe it was ultimateagic that had full eidolon builds for what you wanted. Wanted a.angel? Here how. Want a Quipploth? Heres how. Ect ect.

RP restrictions are stupid and alignment restrictions are the.dumbest of all....

actually you can use something like VMware to create a virtual parition within your OSX environment to operate windows within OS X.

Or you can always create a hidden encrypted partition within another "normal" parition and have a encrypted version of linux within that parition utilizing something like Veracrypt...

I like.computers.... i love safety...

This seems like a crybaby post tbh...

None of those examples are RAW vs RAI... those are "GM wont let me have toys " complaints... RAW vs RAI would be like how Simulacrum works. This is just.... yeah....

Fairy dragon...

That is all...

Oh if you want to get funny... and if u can use 3rd party... A half fairy dragon (its a 3rd party race, not template) Sorcerer with the fairy dragon bloodline and your gestalt as fairy dragon.... because F!@!IN FAIRIES!!!!

Alchemy (Alchemist, Inquisitor, ect.)

SLA type (Kintecist, monks, old Warlocks)

Psychic

Arcane (arcane type, aka wizards and the like)

Oh actually bards can get quite thematic now that I think about it...

I was just thinking about Superstring Theory when it kinda struck me. Based upon Superstring Theory, all things in the universe (matter, energy, the universe itself....) are made of super tiny 10 (or 11... depends on who you ask) dimensional strings. The different Quarks and subatomic particles are actually the same strings vibrating at different frequencies and wave patterns. Different "notes" of you will. These "notes" come together to form everything we see and know. They form a sort of "Symphony of Creation" if you will.

With that in mind, you can imagine a Bard essentially not just playing the notes of a song or speech, but essentially intonating in such a way as to alter these very super strings, altering reality at its more fundamental level. This creates the effects we see in their spells and abilities, which is why everything requires Vocal components.

But hey, that's just a theory.... a game theor... oh wait... wrong site xD

For those touting the Counterspell horn, there is a flaw in your argument.

You are creating a reason to justify your stance based upon your evidence. But your evidence does not support you 100%.

Your "evidence" can also end up being ruled like this:

Enemy Wizard: Readies action to counter spell PC wizard.

PC Wizard: Ok, I go behind a wall and cast Summon Monster.

GM: Well he counters it.

PC Wizard: WAT?? WHY??? HOW??? I am behind a wall??"???

GM: *gives "evidence" that the counterspell people do*

PC Wizard: Well doesn't he have to see it???

GM: well the Rules of Counterspell says, "he readies action. You cast, he gets spellcraft check. Then counters. Never says anything about having to see it"

PC: WTF.....

Technically this can be seen based upon the rules you want to go and bring up. Unless you rules that YOU DO need to see the spell to do a spellcraft to counterspell. Now at that point you are introducing the rules of Spellcraft. At that point your argument falls apart...

You resort to having to make up "GLOWING MAGICAL SPARKLY RUNES!!!" In order to satisfy the requirement of perception... that and intentional misreading and mis using the english language... saying a spell CAN be used to counterspell does not mean you can ALWAYS see it to counterspell.

All of the same race sounds fun.

All the same class sounds like a mistake - you'd end up stepping on each-others toes too much. Different archetypes could help - especially for a class like monk where the archetypes are so different - but I think you'd be better off stretching it out to a class theme.

Ex.

All nature based. (ranger/druid/hunter/cavalier of the green)

All from a church (cleric/inquisitor/warpriest/paladin)

thieves guild (rogue/slayer/illusionist/snakebite striker brawler/ninja)

Etc. (and I probably missed a few potential classes for each theme)

Depends on the class...

All inquisitors actuly works (melee aegis build, ranged, caster, anti caster)

All alchemists is just stupid powerful (2 vivi beastmorphs, 1 bomber, 1 utility (cryptbreaker or something)).

Pure druid parties are OP as all hell...

Straight summoners can break the game (1 synthesist, 2 master summoners, 1 first worlder for the unicorn and big beat sticks).

All oracles are quite capable (battle, heavens, life, and dark tapestry)

All bards can actually get humorous (2 dervish or arcane duelists, 1 magician, 1 thundercaller or soundstriker)

All magus can be do able (1 dex dervish magus, 1 str hexcrafter magus, 1 dex kensai magus, 1 defiler build hexcrafter magus)

TECHNICALLY, an all ninja party would be rather nasty. Invisble flanking flurry of shurikken from every direction could fell most things...

Well I did play game in which we all used nonlethal damage lol. We were part of a religious order lol.

We had:

Serene Paladin
Sword saint saMURAI of the order of the blue rose
A monk of the white lotus(me)
A life Oracle
A heavens Oracle.

Out was actually pretty fun and interesting to try lol.

On a side note, touch of serenity is awesome lol

Imma throw this out there for the counterspell peeps...

Using the same logic, if you targeted an enemy wizard and he moved behind a wall to cast his spell, you are still allowed to make a spellcraft check...

After all, as you said, the counterspell says you get a spellcraft whenever they cast, regardless if you can see the spell....unless you follow the rules of spellcraft checks...

alexd1976 wrote:

GM Rednal wrote:

...And in summary, all of this is why I stick with the opinion I mentioned before - metamagic may help you hide that YOU'RE the one casting it, but the fact that a spell is being cast is still obvious. XD

...if you recognize that a spell IS being cast, that implicitly states that it MUST have a visual or auditory (perhaps olfactory) clue, something that has never been published...

So where is this unwritten phenomenon occurring? How is it not connected to the caster?

I have difficulty reconciling this interpretation of the rules...

I generally think of it as "perceivable magical energy". Spellcraft itself notes you must be able to "clearly see" the casting in order to identify it.

It is rules-legal that non-humanoid creatures can cast spells. Therefore, I generally assume that specific movements (and perhaps words) are more of a "trigger" for the spell than anything else, and can be done in many different ways. There is no rules penalty for recognizing spells cast by creatures that aren't humanoid, either. Or, to put it another way, it's not the act of recognizing the gestures and sounds that lets someone figure out what the spell is.

Thus, my assumption is that whatever it is that allows Spellcraft to identify spells is something that can be applied regardless of the source - and perceivable magical energy fits that quite nicely.

--------------

To see this in practice, let's say that Intellectus the Wizard is traveling with his party, and they're going up against a foe who's very good at ranged attacks and could easily fill him full of pointy arrows. After a bit of thought, Intellectus tells his party that he's going to cast Greater Invisibility before they enter, then cast silent spells using a metamagic rod - the enemy is already prevented from seeing his gestures due to invisibility, and the lack of sound helps further disguise his location.

Once combat begins, Intellectus starts casting. The enemy is still able to...

But as per Spellsong, you CAN hide spellcasting. You can hide it inside.of simply playing a violin.

Those two schools were shafted long ago... by 2 spells...

Mind Blank and True Seeing...

(On a side note, the fact that those two spells single handedly decimate 2 whole schools of magic kinda annoys me... as if they didnt have.enough issues with the whole [mind-affecting] tag,...

Vutava wrote:

Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:

Vutava wrote:

Regarding #5: While there may be ways to conceal or prevent physical signs (on one's own body) of being a lich, a lich's very existence will slowly sap the life from the world around them. Sure, the village leader may still look alive, but the villagers would probably start getting suspicious at how fast things rot around her.

Where is this stated?

Technically, this is just Keith Baker's opinion on how liches work on Eberron. Think about it, though. Other undead need to feed on the living to maintain their existence, but liches don't. Where do they get the power to keep functioning? Simple, they suck it out of their environment.

you can say same thing about lesser undead like skeleton ,nowhere is stated that it must "eat" to remain animated

The 3.5 book Libris Mortis actually mentioned that even undead that urge to feed actually have no need for.it. They can go indefinetely with no sustance. The thing is, it is like a burning addiction. They psychologically need it. And to deprive thwm can drive them mad.

As for the diety thing...

Remember that the Great Olds Ones ans such are.feared by Golarian Gods... they are known for wiping out planets...

And Cthulhu is a CR 30.

Tammy is a ranger lich who became a lich after someone killed her dog xD.

I belive Mark made it up for funzies.

And its funny because there is almost nothing exclusve to the rogue anymore. Trapfinding has been reduced to a trait. Sneak attack is everywhere. And getting rogue talents is easy.

Jiggy wrote:

Jack of Dust wrote:

Entryhazard wrote:

Jack of Dust wrote:

I disagree about the game being PvP not because the GM isn't a player but because in most cases a GM's goal isn't to defeat the party but rather to facilitate the adventure. I think for it to be considered PvP the GM would have to actively trying to destroy or work against the other players.

It's PvP in the sense that there's human intelligence behind the NPCs and they play by the same mechanical rules of the PCs.

That the goal isn't to defeat the opponent counts to a certain point as there are PvP scenarios like the WoW battlegrounds in which there are specific objectives that are beyond killing the opponent players.

Yes I understood the post. My point was that the GM isn't in opposition to the other players. The GM may provide obstacles for the other players but many of these obstacles are meant to be overcome rather than to stop or work against the other players' goals. The term "versus" in Player versus Player would imply that the GM is in direct opposition to the other players which often is not the case.

Would you feel better if you thought of "PvP" as standing for "PC mechanics versus PC mechanics"?

Well yeah, if you redefine the acronym you can make it mean anything you want. But the game's just not PvP by the accepted definition of the term. The players are not in competition with each other, and they're not in competition with the DM. It's a cooperative endeavor.

Except AGAIN, when.combat starts, the NPC mage should be doing everything he can to kill the PCs... the NPC barbarian who is known for destroying everything and smashing his opponents weapons SHOULD be sundering the PCs and going all out.

Now I am not saying the GM SHOULD BE KILLING THE PLAYERS. But the NPCs under his control.should try and play like the PCs, i.e. INTELLIGENTLY.

Lol almost makes PF sound like the Elder Scrolls games.

You have a solid game, but also, as many people found, modding improves.it,

Yeah I juat take 10 for my players. I especially find that, while npt meaning too, my players occassionally become more cautious when I am rolling dice. Have a flat perception makes things much easier and much more fitting.

Turin the Mad wrote:

Archaeologists get spells and luck in trade for all-day-long sneak attack - in trade for which they get at best the equivalent of 1d6 of crittable additional damage while their luck lasts. Archaeologists lose arguably the nastiest ability available to bards in trade for their luck and roguish trap dealing abilities: performance - specifically inspire courage, which is the only source of competence bonus to attack and damage rolls in the game at 1st level that I know of and can be provided for multiple combats/day. Adding insult to injuries, archaeologists don't get as rapid access as rogues do to those 'dealing with pesky traps' abilities. Eventually, if they survive long enough, they can match or exceed the rogue in dealing with traps - but they definitely don't hit anywhere close to as hard at melee or range, and they're more MAD than a rogue.

Both classes are support/not-by-themselves classes, always have been.

What I am not grokking is why it seems that "rogues suck" because they can't do their shtick solo? Well, they can, when built for it, and they don't have to be melee rogues to make it work. Sneak attacks avail themselves from all kinds of angles besides stealth. Feint in combat. Teamwork feats. Combat maneuvers (dirty trick, grapple, oh yeah baby, come to Sneaky McStabemmall). Good old-fashioned initiative bonuses - catch the buggers flat-footed, shoot 'em full of holes and fill 'em full of damage. The other party members actually preparing for bad guys by slathering any number of spells on the rogue.

Characters are not islands unto themselves as the sum is greater than the total parts when they work together. When so doing, your rogue/sneak attacker can and will dismember bad guys faster than almost anyone else in the group - and the sorry buggers either won't see it coming ... or can't stop it from happening.

Best part about rogues is that they can do it all day long until they've broken all of their toys or there's no one else that needs

...

But as time and experience has shown, being mediocre all day means ypur just that, mediocre.

People put way to much stock in going "all day" ....

Also with the upcoming Vigilante, there os even less reason to be a rogue...

And again, we are not saying who would win in a fight. The issue is that there is little to NOTHNG the rogue is best at and is actually almost strictly worse in many scenerios. The fact that he is over shadowed 9/10 is just bad...

N. Jolly wrote:

Lord Twitchiopolis wrote:

Simple: Doing all the rouge does simultaneously.

Yes, the Archeologist is a better traps guy.
The bard is a better faceman.
The Investigator is a better skills guy.
The Slayer is a better assassin.
The Ninja is a better stealth.

But all of them sacrifice *something* to do what they do.

You want to be the ultimate generalist: to disable traps (including magical ones), be competent in social situations, do sneak attack damage, tumble around and be generally nimble, evade harmful effects entirely, sneak into and out of trouble, and be an all around scoundrel, all at once?

You play a rogue.

I'd love to see the point buy that allows a rogue to do all of that. Also bard/investigator/alchemist all have spells, and spells trump EVERYTHING a rogue can do, full stop.

Really, some people want to play a rogue because they want the idea of a rogue, and something NAME rogue should be able to do it. Sure, UC rogue is better, it's still pretty low, but it's the only non magical 3/4ths bab class, and that in itself makes it unique. Not good, but unique.

Playing rogue is more about wanting an idea of a non magical class that can do anything that the name rogue implies. It doesn't work, but that's because PF is a "Magic can do anything" game, and inversely kneecaps mundanes because of that design principle. TOB/POW is in the right track though as long as people aren't hung up on mundanes doing things other than full attacks and skill checks.

Remember, you can't trust a skill check to do anything that isn't written in the book at a stranger's table, and that's basically the ninety and 9 of the rogue's out of combat job.

Magic has it's limits. It's a resource that drains.

Wooh! You cast "detect traps!" That's good, for a couple minutes. Oh look, another area, a half hour later! Better recast! Half hour later? "Guys, I'm running out of spells! We need to rest!"

Investigator is the only one of those three who can get...

Anyone can find and disable traps... Trapfinding is just a bonus. The only rpgues get is the ability to disable magical traps. Thats it.

Ironically the rogue is one of the WORST at mobile fighting. The ninja is infinitely better with invisibility on demand.

Also that 7 str is gonna suck for you. Remember, your still wearing armor (which weighs), carrying weapons, and your handy haversack also weighs a bit. Oh and all the other gear you are wearing. A Ninja, again, can get by much easier since you really dont need int and your ki pool can really augment your skills.

Again, im not seeing anything really compelling about the rogue vs everybody that that gives him any reason to exist beyong the thug archetypw...

Oh and trap finding is apparently so valued that nearly every archetype trades it lol. Its a negligible ability at best.

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Neat necro.

Well, there is now this:
** spoiler omitted **

Where is that from?

Mostly likely the Dirty tricks Toolbox... along with the awesome Dirty Fighting Feat :P

What makes me sad is that, especially for people of the video game generation (like myself), the Magus is more a iconic "warrior" than the fighter himself. With Kensai it gets even more insulting since they count most of their levels as FIGHTER for feat prereqs... what a lot of people think of a badass warrior is not the foghter anymore... its the magus... thats sad..

Pixie, the Leng Queen wrote:

Oh and what he suggests is, again, similair to a Magus spell. Draw the line creates a line around you and gives you increased AoO equal to ypur casting stat. Combined with Combqt Reflexes and Kensai, you are lookin at over 10 AoO a round....

You are absolutely right that essentially de-mystified Magus abilities are an important part of the inspiration for some of my house rules regarding martials.

Oh yeah, but the fact they made them spells annoys me since that means it is HIGHLY unlikely we will ever see something like them for classes that dont have magic.

For instance, the spell Blurred Movement. Should that not have been something a.rogue does? I mean... casters get blur so a blur conditional on movement should be ok right? NOPE. Spell... so dont expect your rogue to get it ever... I mean.. its just ridiculous...

The problem is that, Paizo has shown that things even remotely awesome that are traditionally seen as just awesome martial prowess, have to be spells. Look at the Magus spell list. Force strike? That should have been part of Power Attack or a feat after PA. (G) Bladed Dash? That is a common swordsman trope. Bed of steel? Because the guys who were armor all the time dont get this comfortable in armor ever...