The skill tricks are unlocked with 5,10,15, or 20 ranks in a skill, and most of the actual useful options require 15 or more ranks. A lot of the low level powers give you options that most gms hand wave anyway to not matter anyway. And for almost all of these extra options, one of the classes you listed will already be able to replicate that affect either through normal class features, or just by virtue of having spells. I think some of the options it grants are nice, but over all, these feature is too weak to help most rogue builds until you hit at least level 15 (exception is sniping, if you are willing to attack only once per round, a halfling sniper can have no penalty to their stealth check while sniping as early as level 5.
This is fair criticism. I just finished a level 18 campaign, so I was mainly looking at the higher level stuff. I do think there is some snazzy stuff available, but a lot of of it only comes available at 10 or 15 ranks.
Someone in another thread did mention something that I found very interesting, now rogue can sneak attack targets with any form of concealment, except total concealment. Of course, while not a major boost (Some home games did ignore that concealment rule) if you are used to play with people who follows the rules most of the time, it should help a bit.One of the central issues of the CRB rogue was just how difficult it was to actually get a sneak attack. But that was only a severe issue because landing sneak attacks had mediocre payoff.
It sounds like this new rogue has actual strengths to it that may make it worth-while.
I am concerned that the debuffs do not benefit allies (aside from maybe a minus 2 to AC). It seems like you will still only be able to pull off one sneak attack per round, if you are lucky. If the debuffs do not apply to allies, and the damage stays mediocre, then you will still have problems being a worthwhile team member.
VMC may give neat tricks, but that does little for a pure rogue. Rogues are rather feat starved anyways if they are trying to sneak attack consistently.
That actually helps a lot. I was getting tired of literal tissue paper being able to make a foe sneak attack immune without a feat tax.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Someone in another thread did mention something that I found very interesting, now rogue can sneak attack targets with any form of concealment, except total concealment. Of course, while not a major boost (Some home games did ignore that concealment rule) if you are used to play with people who follows the rules most of the time, it should help a bit.One of the central issues of the CRB rogue was just how difficult it was to actually get a sneak attack. But that was only a severe issue because landing sneak attacks had mediocre payoff.
It sounds like this new rogue has actual strengths to it that may make it worth-while.
I am concerned that the debuffs do not benefit allies (aside from maybe a minus 2 to AC). It seems like you will still only be able to pull off one sneak attack per round, if you are lucky. If the debuffs do not apply to allies, and the damage stays mediocre, then you will still have problems being a worthwhile team member.
VMC may give neat tricks, but that does little for a pure rogue. Rogues are rather feat starved anyways if they are trying to sneak attack consistently.
I'd wait on this. Someone in this thread pointed out that the the recent Concealment FAQ implies the Unchained Rogue can sneak attack targets under partial concealment. However, in reading the Unchained Rogue, they don't have any ability that allows them to sneak attack a target under partial concealment. It's certainly intended to (based off the FAQ), but the wording for it isn't there.
It's a technicality to be sure, but without the wording from the FAQ, we wouldn't know about the intention at all. I don't know the wording myself, but the other posted said that, based off what's printed, you wouldn't draw the idea that the Unchained Rogue can sneak attack targets under partial concealment.
This is fair criticism. I just finished a level 18 campaign, so I was mainly looking at the higher level stuff. I do think there is some snazzy stuff available, but a lot of of it only comes available at 10 or 15 ranks.
hmmmm. If the rogue auto gets them with skill ranks, then that actually makes their 8+ int skill ranks worth something.
|
I'd wait on this. Someone in this thread pointed out that the the recent Concealment FAQ implies the Unchained Rogue can sneak attack targets under partial concealment. However, in reading the Unchained Rogue, they don't have any ability that allows them to sneak attack a target under partial concealment. It's certainly intended to (based off the FAQ), but the wording for it isn't there.Someone in another thread did mention something that I found very interesting, now rogue can sneak attack targets with any form of concealment, except total concealment. Of course, while not a major boost (Some home games did ignore that concealment rule) if you are used to play with people who follows the rules most of the time, it should help a bit.One of the central issues of the CRB rogue was just how difficult it was to actually get a sneak attack. But that was only a severe issue because landing sneak attacks had mediocre payoff.
It sounds like this new rogue has actual strengths to it that may make it worth-while.
I am concerned that the debuffs do not benefit allies (aside from maybe a minus 2 to AC). It seems like you will still only be able to pull off one sneak attack per round, if you are lucky. If the debuffs do not apply to allies, and the damage stays mediocre, then you will still have problems being a worthwhile team member.
VMC may give neat tricks, but that does little for a pure rogue. Rogues are rather feat starved anyways if they are trying to sneak attack consistently.
The wording is there. They call out total concealment specifically as preventing sneak attack; regular old "concealment" doesn't make the cut anymore.
The wording is there. They call out total concealment specifically as preventing sneak attack; regular old "concealment" doesn't make the cut anymore.I'd wait on this. Someone in this thread pointed out that the the recent Concealment FAQ implies the Unchained Rogue can sneak attack targets under partial concealment. However, in reading the Unchained Rogue, they don't have any ability that allows them to sneak attack a target under partial concealment. It's certainly intended to (based off the FAQ), but the wording for it isn't there.Someone in another thread did mention something that I found very interesting, now rogue can sneak attack targets with any form of concealment, except total concealment. Of course, while not a major boost (Some home games did ignore that concealment rule) if you are used to play with people who follows the rules most of the time, it should help a bit.One of the central issues of the CRB rogue was just how difficult it was to actually get a sneak attack. But that was only a severe issue because landing sneak attacks had mediocre payoff.
It sounds like this new rogue has actual strengths to it that may make it worth-while.
I am concerned that the debuffs do not benefit allies (aside from maybe a minus 2 to AC). It seems like you will still only be able to pull off one sneak attack per round, if you are lucky. If the debuffs do not apply to allies, and the damage stays mediocre, then you will still have problems being a worthwhile team member.
VMC may give neat tricks, but that does little for a pure rogue. Rogues are rather feat starved anyways if they are trying to sneak attack consistently.
Like I said, it's a technicality, but the general rule is 'Concealment stops precision damage' and the Unchained Rogue does not specifically state that the Unchained Rogue can sneak attack targets benefiting from partial concealment.
Based off the FAQ, it's certainly intended to do so, but the nit-picky wording doesn't back it up. Remember, Pathfinder is a permissive system, if it doesn't give you permission to do so, then the assumed rule (when there is a rule) is that you can't and the Unchained Rogue, apparently, isn't given permission. Not technically, anyway.
I should reiterate, I don't know the official wording, so I can't truly decide what it does or does not. I'm merely restating what someone else posted.
I think I am going to houserule that players can give up feats at a faster rate in order to gain abilities from their VMC picks. I really dislike the fact that you don't really gain the the things that make you feel like a member of these classes until like... level 15 or 19 in a lot of cases. The campaign is basically over at that point.Well really going faster than this you might as well just run a gestalt game.
Not really. Gestalts get a lot more than 5 abilities from their second class, and they don't have to give up feats for it.
I'd like to know what the background skills are. There are additional skills filling out background stuff, no?
*cries over the fact that he doesn't have access to his pdf yet*
Lol, I have a feeling that the fact half of my subscriptions for last month got delayed into this shipment has put me somewhere near the end of the list.
*cries*
I'd like to know what the background skills are. There are additional skills filling out background stuff, no?
Correct. One new and a bunch of existing skills are grouped as Background skills. Each character gets an extra two skill ranks each level which he can only put into these skills, which can be used to represent hobbies, professional backgrounds etc.
For example Frank the fighter used to be a shepherd and has a fascination with magic tricks. On level 1 he gets an extra two skill ranks for background skills, so he puts 1 rank in Handle Animal and 1 rank in Sleight of Hand.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The FAQ also specifically notes the unchained rogue can sneak attack through concealment, so I'm not sure what your point is.ah, but that is the issue, the FAQ does not say the unchained rogue can, it says that to attack a target with partial concealment and still benefit from precision damage, you need to have an ability or feat that specifically says you can, and it calls out the unchained rogue as an example of a class with such an ability.
Unfortunately, it is a bad example since it lacks such a feature, this makes it questionable as to whether or not that FAQ allows the unchained rogue to sneak attack a target with 20% concealment.
Yes, in general concealment does negate all kinds of precision damage, unless you have a special ability that particularly says otherwise like the Shadow Strike feat or the Unchained rogue’s sneak attack.
This strikes me as sophistry of a most exacting kind.
1) Anyone who has access to the FAQ can clearly read the intention in the example. There shouldn't be any confusion on this point, because if you know there's a broad rule about concealment and precision damage you should also know that the Unchained rogue's version of sneak attack is an exception, as it is cited as such in the very same FAQ (which I have helpfully bolded above).
2) The only way to argue that the Unchained rogue "lacks such a feature" is if you willfully presume that the sentence, "A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with total concealment," is completely and 100% repetitive and lacks any meaningful content whatsoever. To do otherwise is to admit that the specification of "total" concealment specifically excludes lesser versions and therefore it does, in fact, have the necessary specificity to void the FAQ's general rule.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some of the feats in the stamina section begin with wording like:
"You can select this feat even if you don't meet the ability score prerequisite (XXXX). You gain the benefit of this feat only as long as you have at least 1 stamina point in your stamina pool."
I am not clear on what this is intending. Does it mean that you can spend stamina to use (as an example) combat expertise even though you don't have combat expertise as a regular feat?
I have read the unchained rogue section and a simple parsing conveyed the intent that only total concealment prevents sneak attacks.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some of the feats in the stamina section begin with wording like:
"You can select this feat even if you don't meet the ability score prerequisite (XXXX). You gain the benefit of this feat only as long as you have at least 1 stamina point in your stamina pool."
I am not clear on what this is intending. Does it mean that you can spend stamina to use (as an example) combat expertise even though you don't have combat expertise as a regular feat?
No, it means that, if you have a stamina pool, you can take the feat without meeting the prereq - but if you do, you have to keep a stamina point in reserve to actually use it. Run out of stamina and you lose access to the feat until your stamina recovers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*cries over a 30min, 1200 word review that was eaten by the preview button*
As a general rule before posting or previewing.
ctrl+a
ctrl+c (repeat until you feel comfortable)
Do the thing.
This has saved countless post of mine
The wording is there. They call out total concealment specifically as preventing sneak attack; regular old "concealment" doesn't make the cut anymore.I'd wait on this. Someone in this thread pointed out that the the recent Concealment FAQ implies the Unchained Rogue can sneak attack targets under partial concealment. However, in reading the Unchained Rogue, they don't have any ability that allows them to sneak attack a target under partial concealment. It's certainly intended to (based off the FAQ), but the wording for it isn't there.Someone in another thread did mention something that I found very interesting, now rogue can sneak attack targets with any form of concealment, except total concealment. Of course, while not a major boost (Some home games did ignore that concealment rule) if you are used to play with people who follows the rules most of the time, it should help a bit.One of the central issues of the CRB rogue was just how difficult it was to actually get a sneak attack. But that was only a severe issue because landing sneak attacks had mediocre payoff.
It sounds like this new rogue has actual strengths to it that may make it worth-while.
I am concerned that the debuffs do not benefit allies (aside from maybe a minus 2 to AC). It seems like you will still only be able to pull off one sneak attack per round, if you are lucky. If the debuffs do not apply to allies, and the damage stays mediocre, then you will still have problems being a worthwhile team member.
VMC may give neat tricks, but that does little for a pure rogue. Rogues are rather feat starved anyways if they are trying to sneak attack consistently.
Like I said, it's a technicality, but the general rule is 'Concealment stops precision damage' and the Unchained Rogue does not specifically state that the Unchained Rogue can sneak attack targets benefiting from partial concealment.
Based off the...
The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot. A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment.
The unchained rogue has nearly the same sentence, there´s one word difference. That word is pretty important, because it changes everything. Arguing with RAW there is not an option, because RAW it stands right there what cannot be done. Everything else can be done.
And this is backed up by the FAQ.
The FAQ also specifically notes the unchained rogue can sneak attack through concealment, so I'm not sure what your point is.ah, but that is the issue, the FAQ does not say the unchained rogue can, it says that to attack a target with partial concealment and still benefit from precision damage, you need to have an ability or feat that specifically says you can, and it calls out the unchained rogue as an example of a class with such an ability.
Unfortunately, it is a bad example since it lacks such a feature, this makes it questionable as to whether or not that FAQ allows the unchained rogue to sneak attack a target with 20% concealment.
Yes, in general concealment does negate all kinds of precision damage, unless you have a special ability that particularly says otherwise like the Shadow Strike feat or the Unchained rogue’s sneak attack.
This strikes me as sophistry of a most exacting kind.
1) Anyone who has access to the FAQ can clearly read the intention in the example. There shouldn't be any confusion on this point, because if you know there's a broad rule about concealment and precision damage you should also know that the Unchained rogue's version of sneak attack is an exception, as it is cited as such in the very same FAQ (which I have helpfully bolded above).
2) The only way to argue that the Unchained rogue "lacks such a feature" is if you willfully presume that the sentence, "A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with total concealment," is completely and 100% repetitive and lacks any meaningful content whatsoever. To do otherwise is to admit that the specification of "total" concealment specifically excludes lesser versions and therefore it does, in fact, have the necessary specificity to void the FAQ's general rule.
Technically, the line you quoted (is that the text from Unchained Rogue?) is correct, but it deosn't mean that the Rogue can sneak attack targets under partial concealment.
It's possible to gain access to things without being inclusive of those before it. For example, a Ranger could select Double Slice, Two-Weapon Defense and Greater Two-Weapon Fighting as bonus feats, but he doesn't have Two-weapon Fighting or Improved Two-Weapon Fighting.
Assuming your quoted text is true, then it's true the Unchained Rogue cannot attack those under total concealment. However, it's also just as viable true, based off the text, that the Unchained Rogue cannot attack those under partial concealment.
The general rule states that those benefiting from concealment are immune to precision damage. Nothing in the Unchained Rogue, (as far as I'm aware or has been quoted), specifically overrides the general rule. Only the FAQ gives any indication that otherwise.
No, it means that, if you have a stamina pool, you can take the feat without meeting the prereq - but if you do, you have to keep a stamina point in reserve to actually use it. Run out of stamina and you lose access to the feat until your stamina recovers.Some of the feats in the stamina section begin with wording like:
"You can select this feat even if you don't meet the ability score prerequisite (XXXX). You gain the benefit of this feat only as long as you have at least 1 stamina point in your stamina pool."
I am not clear on what this is intending. Does it mean that you can spend stamina to use (as an example) combat expertise even though you don't have combat expertise as a regular feat?
So long story short this is a way of getting combat expertise while having an intelligence lower than 13?
The unchained rogue has nearly the same sentence, there´s one word difference. That word is pretty important, because it changes everything. Arguing with RAW there is not an option, because RAW it stands right there what cannot be done. Everything else can be done.
And this is backed up by the FAQ.
The rules are there to tell us what we can do not what we cannot do. Because, otherwise, the rules don't tell me I can't breathe fire from my mouth for being a level 1 human commoner. Pathfinder is a permissive system, if the system doesn't give you the permission to do something, then you can't do it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
*cries over a 30min, 1200 word review that was eaten by the preview button*
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/lazarus-form-recovery/loljledaigp hbcpfhfmgopdkppkifgno?hl=en
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/lazarus-form-recovery/
Lazarus - never write a long forum post without it.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
So the FAQ was written with the expectation it would not apply to unchained rogues, but had wording that unfortunately failed to exempt them, this means to me at least, until they change the FAQ, unchained rogues are affected by a unintended nerf due to a minor communication error.
And anyone who comes to my table expecting the Unchained Rogue to be denied sneak attack against targets with concealment is going to be bludgeoned with the CRB.
So the FAQ was written with the expectation it would not apply to unchained rogues, but had wording that unfortunately failed to exempt them, this means to me at least, until they change the FAQ, unchained rogues are affected by a unintended nerf due to a minor communication error.And anyone who comes to my table expecting the Unchained Rogue to be denied sneak attack against targets with concealment is going to be bludgeoned with the CRB.
But if I'm in a dim light, I don't have to worry about it being sneak attack :P
However, I totally agree. I know what the intention is, and I would run it with the intention; doesn't mean I won't keep arguing what the RAW states.
|
But if I'm in a dim light, I don't have to worry about it being sneak attack :P
However, I totally agree. I know what the intention is, and I would run it with the intention; doesn't mean I won't keep arguing what the RAW states.
Don't worry, I have Smite Player not Sneak Attack.
I do agree that strict reading of the rules plays out like you say. Hence why I don't strictly read the rules.
Oracle
1st Oracle's Curse(1/2 oracle level)
1st Oracle Mystery
3rd Revelation(limited list)
7th Orison
11th Curse Focus(+5 oracle level)
15th Improved Revelation(gains another revelation)
19th Greater Revelation(gains a third revelation)
You would be surprised how i can sneak attack you with the CRB even in deeper darkness. And i´m neither tiefling nor devil.
What i quoted was just the CRB rogue, not the unchained rogue.
It's not that limited some list all 10 revelations while some have 8 or 9 instead.
Would it be correct to assume that none of the Cha-to-AC revelations are available?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
However, I totally agree. I know what the intention is, and I would run it with the intention; doesn't mean I won't keep arguing what the RAW states.
It doesn't say that.
They've said it doesn't mean that.
And you're still running with it even KNOWING that.
That is just annoying. Please stop. You give people making rules arguments a bad name.
|
|
Ok, I want to point something out that really bothers me about the variant multiclassing rules, nowhere in the rules is it mentioned if you count as the class for the purposes of feats, for example, Versatile Channeler requires cleric (or necromancer wizard) and the rules have no mention of a variant cleric fulfilling that requirement.
|
So how many people here are giving the Fighter the boost it needs by doing the following:
Only Fighters can access Stamina Pool
Stamina Pool equals Fighter Level + Con modifierCause that's how I am gonna do it.
You might want to wait a little longer until more people actually have the book or their pdf, before suggestion house ruling the optional rules...
Also I am not sure that power is the prime Fighter problem ..
So how many people here are giving the Fighter the boost it needs by doing the following:
Only Fighters can access Stamina Pool
Stamina Pool equals Fighter Level + Con modifierCause that's how I am gonna do it.
You might want to wait a little longer until more people actually have the book or their pdf, before suggestion house ruling the optional rules...
Also I am not sure that power is the prime Fighter problem ..
Wait a little longer?!? A little longer!?! It's two whole weeks away! Fourteen eternities! I can't stand it! I'm going to go bury myself in the snow so that I can wait this out in suspended animation. Butters, revive me on the 29th!.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Rogue and concealment—Given the scalar implicature in the class description, since implicatures are not direct logical statements, there might have been a bit of wiggle room (although ignoring implicatures can lead to situations like "No, I was telling the truth when I said I didn't eat the cake you had in the fridge for your mother's birthday because I ate both that cake and your ice cream." and the like, so it's not best practice most times), but the FAQ makes it clear. It just came before the book this time.
*cries over a 30min, 1200 word review that was eaten by the preview button*
Noooooo. I hate that the most and obsessively copy my text as I work on things. Sounds like you are loving the book though, at least!
Would it be correct to assume that none of the Cha-to-AC revelations are available?
Yes, that would be correct -- neither of the Cha-to-AC revelations from the hardbacks are in the lists of level multiclass revelations.