|
:)
Yah, in my experience, the 3E rogue is completely BS and broken, and PF went a lot into making it even worse. "Broken" is 100% a matter of opinion, and that is my honest opinion. Every single time a player has screwed up a game, they have been a Rogue and twisted all those "not versetile enough" skills around to both destroy the story and backstab other players (and their characters). There is extremely little you can't do with a Rogue. :)This is also one of the few cases where it is not (just) the player, and not just a single class feature. The entire Rogue class is entirely too easy to overpower and break.
I just gotta ask what they did that was so environmentally deforming that you as the DM had to throw your hands in the air and say "screw it".
|
I never said that.
Bluff, like Diplomacy should not be usable against a PC, outside of Feint.
Infinite Sneak Attacks a round. Add with that 2 Weapon Fighting Sneak Attacks with 2 Speed weapons, and it is just rediculous.
The fact that the Rogue has just as good abilities as a spellcaster, but infinite resources with them, rather than having to pick and choose which to use when. (Tricks, Skills, Sneak Attack)
The fact hat they can completely negate an effect even ten times higher than their level, and the attacker can't do anything to augment that. (Evasion) It really needs to change to Nat 20 only or something.
I never said that.
Bluff, like Diplomacy should not be usable against a PC, outside of Feint.
Infinite Sneak Attacks a round. Add with that 2 Weapon Fighting Sneak Attacks with 2 Speed weapons, and it is just rediculous.
The fact that the Rogue has just as good abilities as a spellcaster, but infinite resources with them, rather than having to pick and choose which to use when. (Tricks, Skills, Sneak Attack)
The fact hat they can completely negate an effect even ten times higher than their level, and the attacker can't do anything to augment that. (Evasion) It really needs to change to Nat 20 only or something.
Sneak attack can be negated. Its not all that hard to negate in fact.
Speed weapons don't stack together. Your limited to the one extra attack granted by haste or a weapon with the Speed property.
The rogue has some good abilities, yes, but they don't have access to spells the same way. Rogues are good at sneaking, and figthing dirty. Barring a large resource expenditure, they aren't going to be teleporting around, raising the dead, or anything of that nature frequently.
Evasion is hardly borked. Higher save DC's make it harder. Better yet, don't target them with reflex saves. Hit em with a Fort Save, or a Will Save, see how much evasion helps then (it doesn't, even if they can sub their reflex save as the result, its still a Fort/Will save, thereby negating evasion).
Rogues really aren't that bad, as long as the DM knows and enforces the rules, and doesn't let a player saying "But, I can...see...your wrong, you may the DM, but your wrong" make his mind up for him.
|
|
I never said that.
Bluff, like Diplomacy should not be usable against a PC, outside of Feint.
Infinite Sneak Attacks a round. Add with that 2 Weapon Fighting Sneak Attacks with 2 Speed weapons, and it is just rediculous.
The fact that the Rogue has just as good abilities as a spellcaster, but infinite resources with them, rather than having to pick and choose which to use when. (Tricks, Skills, Sneak Attack)
The fact hat they can completely negate an effect even ten times higher than their level, and the attacker can't do anything to augment that. (Evasion) It really needs to change to Nat 20 only or something.
1) PC on PC combat is a player being a dick. Tell your players ahead of time, that if they're going to disrupt the sessions like that, the door is over there and they can disrupt the session by leaving now, and not coming back.
2) Infinite sneak attacks, at the cost of a move action, so you only get to use ONE attack, which could have been multiple attacks from both weapons wielded. if they got a good flank, that means they're exposed and can be attacked.
3) Here's what the situation really is Beckett, if a rogue isn't sneak attacking, he's just a lightly armored fighter, and the fighter is a better party member at that point. The point of the rogue class is to serve fillet of kidney for the other players at the end of the day.
4) Evasion is entirely too eggs in one basket. If the rogue fails he still takes it all. Also this is only on reflex based saves. Is your ire the fact that when you target his strongest save that he can evade the damage, or that you only seem to prepare reflex based spells? Try hitting him with a will save, then the fireball, you'd be surprised just how fast they drop when being held immobile and helpless means that fireball still hits.
5) And I laugh when I see someone say the rogue has as good an ability as any spell caster. Last I checked rogues had no way of wishing people they hated into another realm. Or even wishing for better stats for that matter, let alone calling in an extra planar being to fight for them, and possibly become a party NPC without a feat for the next adventure.
|
3) Here's what the situation really is Beckett, if a rogue isn't sneak attacking, he's just a lightly armored fighter, and the fighter is a better party member at that point. The point of the rogue class is to serve fillet of kidney for the other players at the end of the day.
I've seen rogues capable of dishing it and avoiding taking damage better than the fighter. A single feat (weapon finesse) and a munchkined DEX (combined with Uncanny Dodge) go a long way toward correcting many of the differences between the fighter and the rogue. In many cases they can surpass. At least, I've seen this in 3.5. I have yet to get to such a point in a Pathfinder game, but I could easily see this happening still.
4) Evasion is entirely too eggs in one basket. If the rogue fails he still takes it all. Also this is only on reflex based saves. Is your ire the fact that when you target his strongest save that he can evade the damage, or that you only seem to prepare reflex based spells? Try hitting him with a will save, then the fireball, you'd be surprised just how fast they drop when being held immobile and helpless means that fireball still hits.
At least, this is true until they can pick up Slippery Mind and/or Improved Evasion.
5) And I laugh when I see someone say the rogue has as good an ability as any spell caster. Last I checked rogues had no way of wishing people they hated into another realm. Or even wishing...
Sending people to the afterlife, I belive, qualifies them as having an ability that does just so. :)
|
|
3) Here's what the situation really is Beckett, if a rogue isn't sneak attacking, he's just a lightly armored fighter, and the fighter is a better party member at that point. The point of the rogue class is to serve fillet of kidney for the other players at the end of the day.I've seen rogues capable of dishing it and avoiding taking damage better than the fighter. A single feat (weapon finesse) and a munchkined DEX (combined with Uncanny Dodge) go a long way toward correcting many of the differences between the fighter and the rogue. In many cases they can surpass. At least, I've seen this in 3.5. I have yet to get to such a point in a Pathfinder game, but I could easily see this happening still.
4) Evasion is entirely too eggs in one basket. If the rogue fails he still takes it all. Also this is only on reflex based saves. Is your ire the fact that when you target his strongest save that he can evade the damage, or that you only seem to prepare reflex based spells? Try hitting him with a will save, then the fireball, you'd be surprised just how fast they drop when being held immobile and helpless means that fireball still hits.At least, this is true until they can pick up Slippery Mind and/or Improved Evasion.
Slippery mind is useful the turn after, but hold person allows for another save anyways, so its useless against that. Its more for dominate, suggestion, or charm.
Sending people to the afterlife, I belive, qualifies them as having an ability that does just so. :)
By spending only a single standard action? Maybe in lower levels, but I highly doubt the same holds true at higher levels. It takes more effort than the party wizard casting wish...
Well the generalists didn't get any capstone either.
|
|
Outside of combat fighters suck - why wasn't this fixed? I mean wizards can talk other languages, clerics can talk with the dead, rogues can sneak and hide. But fighters what do they have? Without a combat going on they are a completely pointless class. Should have been fixed or the class removed from the game...
Oh, hang on D&D/Pathfinder is ONLY about combat isn't it - ok fighters are cool again.
S.
This is Pathfinder not D&D!
lol Sorry.
Well, I think the masses have spoken on that other thread where people are chiming in about what levels they like to play the most.
Without tallying them specifcially, I am estimating that less than 1/3 of the responses even want to go above level 12 or so, and of those, only a couple responses even include level 20.
If only a couple people out of the dozens who have replied already even enjoy level 20, then it's not likely Paizo will be highly motivated any time soon to even bother with level 20 content, either for the classes or for adventures, APs, monsters, etc.
There just doesn't seem to be enough call for this level of play to justify them putting any time into it.
Alas, as a Tarrasque, I feel the slight - nobody wants to fight me when they're level 10, and nobody wants to play their characters up to levels where it's worth my time to actually wake up and eat them...
|
|
ok... I don't know if it was THIS tread or another ione were we discussed the specialist priest :P
basically people said that Grumsh cleric should be barbarians and ha little armor for that... but I was read my Monster Mythology (2nd edition) and I saw that Grumsh not only gives the war domain... his avatar is figther 20/cleric 20... fully armroed in black armor... basically... he is not that different from Gorum... now.. well not now, but that they I understood were it all pointed
|
|
Alas, as a Tarrasque, I feel the slight - nobody wants to fight me when they're level 10, and nobody wants to play their characters up to levels where it's worth my time to actually wake up and eat them...
Don't worry, there is only one of you in a campaign setting anyway. Not everybody who gets up that high in level will even be able to find you.
Besides, everytime a DM throws a Tarrasque at the party, Asmodeus eats a kitten.
Alas, as a Tarrasque, I feel the slight - nobody wants to fight me when they're level 10, and nobody wants to play their characters up to levels where it's worth my time to actually wake up and eat them...
On the other hand I understand the Pathfinder Tarrasque has some serious upgrades from the 3.5 version and actually merits that CR 24.
Too bad I never got to save the Tarrasque from that evil wizard what had captured him and was cloning from him. That was a good epic game.
Why does that seem to be a cliched plot in epic games? Seems like every Dm wants a clones army of tarrasque's...
|
|
Well, I think the masses have spoken on that other thread where people are chiming in about what levels they like to play the most.
Without tallying them specifcially, I am estimating that less than 1/3 of the responses even want to go above level 12 or so, and of those, only a couple responses even include level 20.
If only a couple people out of the dozens who have replied already even enjoy level 20, then it's not likely Paizo will be highly motivated any time soon to even bother with level 20 content, either for the classes or for adventures, APs, monsters, etc.
There just doesn't seem to be enough call for this level of play to justify them putting any time into it.
Alas, as a Tarrasque, I feel the slight - nobody wants to fight me when they're level 10, and nobody wants to play their characters up to levels where it's worth my time to actually wake up and eat them...
My understanding is that the majority of the people are saying 7ish to 20. Maybe I'm wrong, but it looked to me like 10 and lower are by far the minority, particularly in the case of peoples wishes for further published adventures.
I think any capstone would have to represent the malleable nature of the Pathfinder Cleric and certainly must be tied to the Domains they have chosen. These capstones should be balanced with each other, however, not with the Domain itself. No need to open that can of worms.
Might I suggest...
Supreme Aspect: Once per day, as a swift action, a Cleric may imbue themselves with the ultimate Aspect of either their Deity or their Philosophy. All aspects bestow traits that are the same for every Cleric while other traits are specific to the Domains the Cleric has Chosen. When in their Aspect Form, the Cleric gains the traits of Righteous Might as the spell. Additionally, they increase their base attack bonus to equal their level, gain +8 strength instead of +4 and increase their spell penetration by +4. The Aspect lasts for five rounds. A Cleric may choose to keep the Aspect until the end of the encounter, but once the encounter is over, they gain a number of negative levels equal to the number of rounds they maintained the Aspect for beyond 5.
Each Domain grants a different additional ability when the Cleric enters their Aspect Form. A Cleric receives all abilities from all Domains they possess.
Healing: You are wreathed in a pale, blue, healing aura. All of your cure spells are immediately maximized as they are cast, though the cleric need not give up the higher spell slot. This is in addition to the Empowerment already granted by this domain.
War: You gain the effects of the Transformation spell.
Good: You are wreathed in a white, holy aura. You gain feathered wings and the ability to fly at a speed of 100'. You gain a +10 enhancement bonus to your fly skill. Additionally, your weapon becomes Holy as per the weapon ability. If your weapon is already Holy, increase its damage against evil creatures by 1d6.
Fire: You are filled with holy or dark fire as an aura of flame surrounds you. All spells you cast with the fire descriptor deal half holy damage (if you channel positive energy) or unholy damage (if you channel negative energy) much like the flame strike spell. Additionally, all of your domain spells may be cast spontaneously as you spontaneously cast cure or inflict spells.
Etc. etc. you get the idea.
Yeah, that's the kind of capstones that I was talking about. I wouldn't even mind it if every domain had one but you only got to choose one of the two that you had. This might even be better as sometimes, you get extra domains through PrCs and such.
---
I like the idea. Loopy.
Deific domains becoming an aspect of the Cleric as a representation of their divine patron. :D
---
Jesus man, Clerics are powerful enough without needing a capstone ability. Their radically empowered Channel Energy (when compared to old Turn Undead) in addition to practically nothing taken away is more then enough. Clerics were not considered the most useful and powerful class for nothing in 3.5e
|
|
The problem is that there isn't a 20th level reason to stay Cleric (as oppossed to pestige classing), and at 20th level, there is no need to be balanced.
Even so, I think my initial Cleric capstone was very nice. It didn't really add power so much as just offer something cool. The Cleric becomes the Holy Symbol, no longer requiring to present one for Channeling and spells. I forgot the second aspect, but thinking that they become an outsider just like the Monk of Druid.