SilentlySage's page

+1 for granting Shadow Strike, Trapspotter and Improved Evasion as bonus feats

Otherwise, the best way to fix the rogue is with talents. The mechanics would be fine with better talents to support them.

Change 1 use per day talents to scale with level, maybe +1 use per 5 levels.
A talent that gives a bonus to hit when able to sneak attack.
Talents to grant debuffs (shaken, sickened, etc.)
A talent that grants Skill Focus Feat on 1 skill per 5 levels
A talent that grants the Poison Use ability

Also, the Opportunity Attacker from the Halfling Opportunist prestige class would be pretty nice as a rogue talent.

This is how my group handles treasure distribution. It's fair, and everyone gets an even value of items, although it does requires a little more bookkeeping. When multiple people want the same item we just talk it out. Usually one needs it more than another. We also consider healing items as "party loot", distributed to characters as appropriate (cleric gets the wand of cure light wounds, party splits potions evenly).

The way we handle items worth significantly more than everything else is to withhold them from the loot distribution until we have more loot. For example if the loot has a +2 sword (~4,000gp) and ~2,000gp of other items, we'll split up the 2,000gp of items as usual, let one player carry and use the sword until we get more treasure. Once we get more treasure we divide everything else as usual.

you are sort of running into a key issue with the rogue. In general, the rogue isnt as good in combat as most classes.

This.

I'm playing my first Pathfinder Rogue right now, a TWF dagger wielding halfling. I was never hoping to be the star combatant, but I wanted to be decent. I've found that my combat performance is poor to middling, depending on the encounter. If I can get sneak attack, I do ok. Otherwise it's tough. I really enjoy my rogue outside of combat, and I have looked at several options to improve it. However, multiclassing more than a level or two would probably hurt more than help. You rely a lot on your sneak attack for damage, and multiclassing more than a level or two takes away from your sneak attack progression.

As for surviving combat, try staying on the outskirts of combat, using acrobatics to move around and get into flanking to deal the finishing blow if there are a lot of enemies. You don't want to be surrounded and take attacks from multiple enemies. Feint is nice, but alone it won't allow you to take on a powerful enemy one on one.

If you have characters dying, it sounds like your group could use a more combat focused class. If that was a fluke, you could keep playing as the rogue and accept that your role in combat is to support rather than be a front-liner. You seem to be contributing well in the diplomacy portion of the campaign.

It sounds like the GM is having a bit of a power trip. Playing a game is for everyone to have fun, and he's trying to force his vision of fun on everyone else. I think you should find a new GM, from in the group or from elsewhere. However, it probably would be a good idea to have a group discussion so you can all decide on what is and isn't allowed. Personally I find that one of the best parts of RPGs is that you aren't shoehorned into specific roles.

There is no reason a Cleric can't be a front-liner, even one or two feats can help them survive and be effective in front line combat. That's hardly power gaming. Like others have said, you could point him at some of the super-optimized builds in the forums here to show him what power gaming looks like.

Just to note, assuming your party is dealing with trippable foes, the Trip maneuver really helps with this sort of thing, and it helps with the accuracy issue as well. I had great success in PFS with my now-19th-level Rogue thanks to Trip.

Originally I opted to stay away from combat maneuvers, thinking that it would be difficult with the rogue's BAB, but the build you posted has me reconsidering. I currently have Combat Expertise anyway, for Improved Two Weapon Feint.

@Deadmanwalking: I see what you mean now. Thanks.

Sneak Attack is not a bad class feature, it's just not good enough to make Rogues effective.

I agree that sneak attack is not a bad feature, but that if you rely on it (as the rogue often does) you can be completely shut down when you are unable to sneak for some reason. Rogues just do not have enough other good options to make them effective in this case. Rogue talents especially are just so underwhelming.

Thanks for the advice guys. I will consider asking my GM if I can change my build to make it more effective. I mainly wanted to contribute by pointing out the difference between theory and practice when it comes to sneak attack. In practice it's so easy to negate sneak attack that it becomes a poor damage dealing mechanism to rely on.

If it's the sole enemy (or main threat, anyway), use a double-move and some Acrobatics to get around behind it so the Paladin will be auto-flanking with you after their charge. On turns 2 and 3, you'll get to full attack.

I do this all of the time, and it's fine, until the enemy takes a diagonal five foot step away from me.

For example (R = me, E = enemy, P = partner)
I've just moved into flanking:
_ _ _
R E P
_ _ _

After Enemy's turn (full attack, 5 foot step):
_ _ E
R _ P
_ _ _

I can't get sneak attack without moving at least 10 feet :(.

Bladelock wrote:

At this point, I'll leave the topic alone, because you guys are clearly playing a different game than I am. Maybe PF doesn't need to modify rogues, just the PFS.

SilentlySage appears to be talking about his (pretty standard) Rogue problems in regards to a home game...

As Deadmanwalking said, this is in a home game. The problems I've laid out here are present in any Pathfinder game. Sneak attack is a nice bonus, but it can't be relied upon.

The problem I have with sneak attack comes from how limiting it is in practice. I am currently playing my first rogue. I made the mistake of going down the TWF route, thinking it would increase my DPR and make me more viable in combat. I'm a core rogue, to keep Trapfinding and Uncanny Dodge. In theory I can dish out decent damage, but in practice this is what happens:

1. I charge in to get a single attack on an enemy with sneak attack while he's flat footed. Paladin does the same.
2. Now, either a) enemy is dead because of the paladin's massive damage, and I have to move to flank another enemy, getting only one attack again, or b) enemy is still alive.
3. Assuming the enemy is still alive, he can make a full attack and make a 5 foot step diagonally away from me. Now I can't flank him without moving 10 feet. I get one sneak attack again. Any other class that doesn't rely on sneak attack would be able to 5 foot step and make a full attack, while only missing out on the flanking bonus.

Also, if I do manage to get a full attack, but kill the enemy in one or two hits, there's no nearby enemy who is in flanking position. so my other attacks are wasted.

Then there was the time we had to fight an air elemental (immune to sneak attack and has DR). I was completely useless in that battle, only there to provide a flanking bonus. Now I have a wand of Acid Arrow that we found, but still...

I really like my rogue as a character. I have enormous fun roleplaying, interacting with NPCs. With my trapspotting feat, I am great at detecting traps. I can sneak nearly anywhere and tumble around the battlefield easily, but I feel so useless in combat. It gets really frustrating.

I really like the idea of a Kami in the items. Instead of sacrificing gold, perhaps the PCs need to sacrifice Xgp worth of some items the Kami are interested in. That way the PCs must spend the gold, but the Kami get something more interesting than just gold. You could even make an encounter or side quest out of getting the appropriate items.

...we have two competing rules and neither appears to have the specific>general upper-hand.

Really this is the issue. Which text takes precedence? Since it's not clear it is up to interpretation. It would be great to hear an official ruling on this matter, since I've seen it come up many times on different threads without clear resolution.

My thought is that since most skills do not say you can't take 10, and the UMD skill is the more specific of the two rules, I would rule that the text there is more important.

Let's get philosophical. If you go out to buy a raincoat that is "guaranteed to keep you dry, even in the toughest weather conditions" would you ask the shopkeeper if said raincoat also would keep you dry in ordinary rainy weather or when getting sprayed with a hose? Of course not, because you would rightly assume that the "guaranteed to keep you dry" part of the sentence is a statement about the general characteristics of the raincoat and the "even if" part of the sentence is there to provide an example of a situation that still does not compromise the garment's general ability to keep you try.

But if we carry this analogy further and provide the restriction "You can not stay dry while swimming", would you still expect a raincoat to keep you dry when you are swimming laps?

UMD does not say you can not take 10 if under stress. It says you can't take 10. Period.

The character has invested a rogue talent and a lot of skill ranks into being able to detect traps. He should be able spot most of them, that's why he's made that investment. Detecting and disarming traps is kind of the rogue's thing. Even then, there's still a risk of missing them if he rolls poorly. I would continue to throw in traps, expecting that he will find them, to avoid negating his character build choices completely.

Putting traps in a room where the party encounters enemies can make things interesting. They may know about the trap, but without time to properly disarm it, it becomes an obstacle they must avoid during the fight. Maybe they trigger it anyway to get to a better position to fight. Or perhaps they trigger it on purpose to damage the enemy. Maybe the enemy wants to trigger it (undead creatures might trigger a poisonous cloud trap, knowing it won't affect them).

As a heads up, a lot of the simpler and lower level magics are easily replicated by UMD and magic items. Minor magic is a pretty weak talent outside of being used as a prereq.

This is a good point, and I would choose this route as long as you're ok with not being consistent at low levels. Once you get to mid levels (with a decent Cha and a circlet of persuasion) you'll be able to use a wand with no chance of failure.

I've been playing a TWF, DEX based rogue (my first), and having a great time. He's up to level 7 now, so my experience is a little limited. One thing about a DEX based rogue is that if you're fighting an enemy you can't sneak attack, it can be frustrating not helping out much in the combat. If your party is good about helping you get sneak attack (flanking or spells like grease and glitterdust) you'll be fine the rest of the time, although still not the primary damage dealer.

It can be a lot of fun being "rogue-ish". It's true that you don't have to be a Rogue to act like one, so consider how important the class and combat effectiveness is to you.

As for the cantrips and spellcraft, if that's important to you then I would suggest the Minor Magic talent and a trait before a class dip to avoid the BAB hit. The Minor and Major Magic talents also lead to the Dispelling Attack Talent which is really good.

I'm going to be running JR in a couple of months, and would love to see your relationship rules. I've been researching and getting a ton of information on the forums.

I think that spreading the information across multiple volumes is a great idea. I'd much rather see some of the information now than have to wait until it's all done. Even just getting the rules and info for the main four would be a huge help, and should give most GMs a good starting point to flesh out their own rules for any NPCs that aren't available.