Face skills aren't everything. There are Cha based classes that can serve as the face. The ranger can cover the non-face skills a rogue would usually handle. He doesn't have to out-do the rogue, just replace him.
Oh look back on topic, and +1 to this ^
Face skills aren't everything. There are Cha based classes that can serve as the face. The ranger can cover the non-face skills a rogue would usually handle. He doesn't have to out-do the rogue, just replace him.
Yes but even if the Urban ranger were to claim to be better at skills outside of face skills here is a list of skills he still doesnt get that are not face skills that the rogue does get:
Acrobatics (Dex)
Appraise (Int)
Escape Artist (Dex)
Linguistics (Int)
Sense motive (Wis)
Sleight of hand (Dex)
and my very favorite and the most important
Use Magic Device. (Cha)
Also the ranger is far to MAD to get bonus skill points from intelligence and still remain better at combat and keep his skill tricks or spells (depending on classic ranger or skirmisher) with wisdom to get this.
it also puts a bog on his charisma modifier.
Replacing a the face is impossible for any ranger to do.
Now if you want to play the urban ranger because you have a bard in the company and basically you two can work together to cover all the skills the other doesnt get you now have what I would call Team work and group dynamics.
But if you are going to say the rogue can be entirely replaced by the urban ranger, not true in the slightest.
Each class possesses its own uniqueness even in the similiarities with other classes, dont get me wrong I love the urban ranger but he can't straight up "replace" any rogue. He can be a good substitute, but a substitute isn't better than the original.
So I've been reviewing this thread and looking over the various classes and archetypes. I've come to the conclusion that I believe we are arguing the wrong points. The system assumes that you have a melee, skill, divine, and arcane character. So if someone builds an Urban Ranger they are filling the role of the skill-based character. He brings different things to the table and does replace the rogue but that doesn't invalidate the rogue anymore than the Archivist invalidates the Urban Ranger.
I think, in these discussions, we should keep things like this in mind. The druid doesn't replace the cleric even though they both provide strong divine casting. The sorcerer doesn't replace the wizard either. Every class brings something to the table that another does not bring. There is a lot of overlap on purpose so that people don't have to multiclass so much.
So what does the skill-based character need to bring to the table? What makes the rogue a better choice for one player or campaign than the Urban Ranger or other skill-based character? Besides recon, what is the expectation?
Bob no.
The Urban Ranger cannot out do the rogue at skills. I repeat. CANNOT.
I have already posted why above, if you truly reviewed the thread you would understand why.
If you need me to repeat why I will, but it will have to wait.
Do not bring this arguement up again.
The Urban Ranger fills a different niche. They get NO, I repeat NO face skills as class skills. That alone means they are not even close to the same as rogues.
I think you missed my point and that we are in agreement. The urban ranger does not replace the rogue. It fills a similar role that relies more on skills than other abilities. Everything is campaign dependent. A party that consists of barbarian, druid, witch, and urban ranger would be similar to, but bring different abilities, a fighter, cleric, wizards, and rogue.
Getting face skills is easy for any class. Only those with high skill points, like the rogue, bard, and ranger, can benefit from them and still have points left over for other skills.
Getting face skills is easy for any class. Only those with high skill points, like the rogue, bard, and ranger, can benefit from them and still have points left over for other skills.
please explain how a ranger with an average charisma (I say average because he needs CON, STR, WIS, and DEX so his CHA is going to be low usually or otherwise his combat ability is compromised) with NO face class skills is going to get better than a rogue at face?
5th level ranger with 12 CHA (generous)
5 (max ranks) + 1 (CHA mod) = +6 to diplomacy.
that means on average he rolls a 17 at level 5... not thrilling at any rate and he has spent 5 skill points to be fairly mediocre.
5th level rogue with 14 CHA (if he is a face likely)
3 (ranks because he spreads) + 2 (CHA mod) + 3 (class skill)
that means on average he gets a 20 at level five.... oh but wait he has rogue talents that can give him a reroll or a bonus on his check?
yeah the rogue didnt even max diplomacy as a skill when the ranger did and beat him by 3 on average with talents to boot it up higher.
And if you play with the optional rule of traits from the APG then you could give the ranger something that might help him with skills, but thats one skill and the rogue could take something else that could boost a plethora of other abilities or give him another skill as a class skill the ranger would normally have so the point is really moot. Infact its more in favor of the rogue because the rogue gets more skill points and is more likely to tap all his skills much faster.
Before you mention at high levels it doesnt matter because it balances, skill mastery at level 10 beats pretty much any other class at skills because it guarantees no failures pretty much.
EDIT: I already mentioned all of this before.
I am not saying rogues are God's because of the fact they are good at skills. I am just saying that they are the king of skills. That to me is inarguable, they get the most skill points, the most class skills, talents to keep it that way, and skill mastery to never fail.
Now how good skills are is really differing from game to game. In my games, and games i play in skills are important. I think they should be.
You seem too hung up on the rogue being better at skills then other classes that can fill those roles without sacrifice. The only time a bard/ranger would need to dump something to up his skills would be if he is trying to match or beat the rogue.
The issue with that is, why try to match the rogue? It works just as well without the overkill bonuses a rogue brings. The rogue is good if you want to beat a skill check by over 15. The classes that bring more then skills to the table beat them by 4-5. They are still both successes at my table
|
Yes but even if the Urban ranger were to claim to be better at skills outside of face skills here is a list of skills he still doesnt get that are not face skills that the rogue does get:Acrobatics (Dex)
Appraise (Int)
Escape Artist (Dex)
Linguistics (Int)
Sense motive (Wis)
Sleight of hand (Dex)and my very favorite and the most important
Use Magic Device. (Cha)
Also the ranger is far to MAD to get bonus skill points from intelligence and still remain better at combat and keep his skill tricks or spells (depending on classic ranger or skirmisher) with wisdom to get this.
it also puts a bog on his charisma modifier.
Replacing a the face is impossible for any ranger to do.
Wow, good thing I never claimed he was.
There are Cha based classes that can serve as the face. The ranger can cover the non-face skills a rogue would usually handle.
I see that you've gotten 7 of the rogue's base 8 skills already spent before you even get to the face skills. The rogue isn't going to have much more luck with MAD than the ranger, since he needs Dex, Con, Int, and Cha himself to use all this. Str can be mitigated with SA, but dumping Wis is a good way to be taken out no matter your class.
Now if you want to play the urban ranger because you have a bard in the company and basically you two can work together to cover all the skills the other doesnt get you now have what I would call Team work and group dynamics.
But if you are going to say the rogue can be entirely replaced by the urban ranger, not true in the slightest.
Each class possesses its own uniqueness even in the similiarities with other classes, dont get me wrong I love the urban ranger but he can't straight up "replace" any rogue. He can be a good substitute, but a substitute isn't better than the original.
And I never said he was. He can replace the rogue is what I said, not supercede him. The tradeoff in skills is made up by being a tougher partner for the fighter. And seriously, 2 points per level and a few class skill bonuses do not make a huge difference.
You seem too hung up on the rogue being better at skills then other classes that can fill those roles without sacrifice. The only time a bard/ranger would need to dump something to up his skills would be if he is trying to match or beat the rogue.
The issue with that is, why try to match the rogue? It works just as well without the overkill bonuses a rogue brings. The rogue is good if you want to beat a skill check by over 15. The classes that bring more then skills to the table beat them by 4-5. They are still both successes at my table
this is exactly what I mean.
By making all making many checks or all checks synonymous at pssing with a 15 you de-value what it means to be good at a skill.
If a commoner could succeed at it 30% of the time its usually not something an adventurer is doing. A DC 15 is a low DC. A favored hand from lady luck can make anyone successful at it.
Now there is nothing wrong with that, perhaps your group finds that to be the way it should be.
My group does not.
YMMV
@ TOZ
relax my friend I do not see you as daft I just dont want others to misinterpret your intelligence.
You are right it is a trade off to be better at skills, but in my gaming group skills are important. Like I have said, YMMV.
As for the 8 base skills arguement, you are correct. But at level 2 you can spread to the next set of skills you wish you wish to delve in and miss out on a measily +1 in the ones you already tapped.
Thus creating a diverse (if favored class and no intelligence) 18 skill list to which you are most likely very proficient at.
I do not underestimate you TOZ be sure of that, I know you know what I know. If that makes any sense.
Fair enough. I thought you were a little defensive too. :)
I can be haha
One must keep his guard up on these forums, even to those who speak friend.
These are the lands of troll after all.
Successful Troll dreams of the day the Troll Nation is formally recognized by all.
Successful Troll dreams of the day the Troll Nation is formally recognized by all.
There be the king... One dare not speak his name for it fall upon the vilest tongues of the wicked deep.
Apologies for my previous off topic digressions, I'm too stream-of- consciousness for my own good. Anyway back on topic in some ways this discussion seems a bit silly to me based on how the rogue was presented to me which was a jack-of-all-trades, master of none. A role the bard shares, if a little differently.
Is the problem with the rogue that in a game where the best path to power is to hyper specialize he just can't compete because of his cosmopolitan nature?
Apologies for my previous off topic digressions, I'm too stream-of- consciousness for my own good. Anyway back on topic in some ways this discussion seems a bit silly to me based on how the rogue was presented to me which was a jack-of-all-trades, master of none. A role the bard shares, if a little differently.
Is the problem with the rogue that in a game where the best path to power is to hyper specialize he just can't compete because of his cosmopolitan nature?
While that seems to be the general consensus I believe otherwise.
Rogues are like the group enhancement, they enhance everything and can do everything.
On top of that they can do skills better than anyone else, while others can do skills better than anyone.
the rogue does what everyone does, but a little bit less.
Instead of being useless in some situations a rogue always has something to do, there is no I cant help moment for the rogue. The rogue is a teamwork improver.
please explain how a ranger with an average charisma (I say average because he needs CON, STR, WIS, and DEX so his CHA is going to be low usually or otherwise his combat ability is compromised) with NO face class skills is going to get better than a rogue at face?
I never said better. I said that they can get the skill and make it a class skill with ease. They have enough skill points that they can afford to put some ranks into a face skill or two. They won't be better than the rogue. I never said they would be.
I am not saying rogues are God's because of the fact they are good at skills. I am just saying that they are the king of skills. That to me is inarguable, they get the most skill points, the most class skills, talents to keep it that way, and skill mastery to never fail.
Now how good skills are is really differing from game to game. In my games, and games i play in skills are important. I think they should be.
I'm on your side. I was the one who posted a rogue build earlier to show what they can do.
You seem too hung up on the rogue being better at skills then other classes that can fill those roles without sacrifice. The only time a bard/ranger would need to dump something to up his skills would be if he is trying to match or beat the rogue.
The issue with that is, why try to match the rogue? It works just as well without the overkill bonuses a rogue brings. The rogue is good if you want to beat a skill check by over 15. The classes that bring more then skills to the table beat them by 4-5. They are still both successes at my table
Overkill? No one ever complains about the overkill that we see from casters, why is it overkill when the rogue can do it with a high level of competency? Besides, many skills are opposed skill checks. Those should be as high as humanoidly possible.
Overkill? No one ever complains about the overkill that we see from casters, why is it overkill when the rogue can do it with a high level of competency? Besides, many skills are opposed skill checks. Those should be as high as humanoidly possible.You seem too hung up on the rogue being better at skills then other classes that can fill those roles without sacrifice. The only time a bard/ranger would need to dump something to up his skills would be if he is trying to match or beat the rogue.
The issue with that is, why try to match the rogue? It works just as well without the overkill bonuses a rogue brings. The rogue is good if you want to beat a skill check by over 15. The classes that bring more then skills to the table beat them by 4-5. They are still both successes at my table
My apologies Bob. It appears my interpretation was inaccurate.
I agree with your above statement, its a double standard that I have yet to see adressed.
It seems that most gamers limit skills to what it specifically says in the book about what a skill can do. Emphasis on CAN.
It doesn't list every possible application of a skill because that would be impossible.
Overkill? No one ever complains about the overkill that we see from casters, why is it overkill when the rogue can do it with a high level of competency? Besides, many skills are opposed skill checks. Those should be as high as humanoidly possible.You seem too hung up on the rogue being better at skills then other classes that can fill those roles without sacrifice. The only time a bard/ranger would need to dump something to up his skills would be if he is trying to match or beat the rogue.
The issue with that is, why try to match the rogue? It works just as well without the overkill bonuses a rogue brings. The rogue is good if you want to beat a skill check by over 15. The classes that bring more then skills to the table beat them by 4-5. They are still both successes at my table
My apologies Bob. It appears my interpretation was inaccurate.
I agree with your above statement, its a double standard that I have yet to see adressed.
It seems that most gamers limit skills to what it specifically says in the book about what a skill can do. Emphasis on CAN.
It doesn't list every possible application of a skill because that would be impossible.
That's one of the things I've noticed in these discussions. It's ok to be liberal with an interpretation of spells but when it comes to mundane (skills, combat, whatever), then the rule is to be strictly followed. I think that's bunk.
That's one of the things I've noticed in these discussions. It's ok to be liberal with an interpretation of spells but when it comes to mundane (skills, combat, whatever), then the rule is to be strictly followed. I think that's bunk.
Its because if you notice the spells section of the book and the skill section of the book are incomparable.
Honestly the skills system could have been done just like the spell system, complicated and over the top with specific instances and actions for each one of them.
But instead they left it up to DMs because unlike spells, which need to be specified otherwise they could do anything, skills are pretty (or so they thought) self explanatory.
Any action you take that is even mildly difficult should require a check if you are under pressure or if its the first time you have attempted it or abnormal in the current circumstances you are in. To not do so is not only a violation of rules but it completely de values skills.
It seems (most DMs on here appear to run it this way) that if a character says he does something he doesn't require a check to do so or makes the check arbitrarily low so it doesn't matter as much.
atleast thats my opinion.
very good point Bob, and I think it should be a highlighted one in this thread. To judge the "value" of a class which places alot of ability in skills you must first judge the value of skills. The value of the rogue is directly connected with the value of the skills.
@Ryzoken
No. just not about the skills arguement.
8 + int + favored class bonus if chosen.
also rogues can pick traits (an optional rule) that give them better skills or skills they dont have so the trait arguement is not a good one.
Also rogues talents make them better at skills, better than other classes.
They are the best at skills.
as for your conclusion that a rogue is unneeded.. your opinion. And I whole heartedly disagree with it because skills are important in my campaign, other classes can do their sub set of skills well but other skills not so much (traits give ONE skill and rogues can take them too).
I am not trying to come off as a fan boy here, I realize they have their flaws but skills is not something you are going to convince me another class can do better, they can't. If it takes a whole group to cover a rogues niche in skills, congratulations that doesn't make a rogue bad or obsolete it makes the rogue better than a combined group of people at skills and possibly still one uping a good majority of them at alot of them.
By the way if you are letting your group take ten on traps... that is definitely not legal. Infact letting groups take ten or twenty almost anywhere but back at home base or when there is absolutely NO risk of ANY danger is definitely a stretch outside how skills work... maybe thats why you think rogues are unneeded?
EDIT: oh by the way about rolling? other classes have to do that to, and unlike other classes at level 10 rogues can get Skill Mastery which means they dont have to roll anymore...
so let me get this straite, (yes i have bad spelling) you think that
Rogues are unneeded. The niches they cover can be covered by the rest of the party with a modicum of effort
why go to all that effort when you can have a rogue, and let the rest of the party spicialze in whatever they do.
fighters=damagerangers=dam.vs.+track
cleric=healing+dam.
bards=backup on everything
arcane=depends on how you biuld them...
rouges=Skills
yes, if the whole party wants to spred the welth of their hard won skill points, you could get away with out one, but why would you want to?
in just about every example you've shown Ryzoken, if the party spends enough of this or that they can do the stuff a rouge does naturaly
Ryzoken dont get me wrong, your very likly a VERY experenced player, and your gameplay can soport this type, but i wouldn't want to.
A group dynamic can cut out any class. ANY class if it needs to. To say the rogue is an exception to that rule would be a lie.
But something from that class will undoubtedly be missed, always.
You could cut out a Cleric. But you will probably miss that channel energy.
You could cut out the wizard/sorceror but you are going to miss that extra versatility with spells.
You could cut out a martial class but it requires you to fill the niche by casting extra buffs or summons or animal companions.
You can cut out anyone, but to say they wont be missed is a falacy.
Ryzoken.
Pick a level. you stat a party of Fighter/Barbarian Cleric/Druid, Ranger/Paladin, and a Sorceror/Wizard
just do the skills and I guarantee you I will not only make a rogue of the same level that can do everything they can do plus skills they probably cant do and he will be able to do it better.
You can choose anything that will help you be better at skills (because I intend on doing talents) but if you have all of them take Skill focus or something of that nature I am going to call BS because almost none of those classes would even consider it over their specialization and if you do need to then I rest my case because any of them would kill for that feat back to have a rogue instead.
By all means, I wont argue but if you want to do this lets do this.
EDIT: If you are going to use traits I would call it unrealistic to give all of them 2 traits related to skills because they definitely wouldn't. (reactionary is almost a must for fighters).
I will only choose one trait as well, since that will make it "fair" even though a rogue would definitely think about taking two traits for skills.
Also this is an OPTIONAL rule, just as a reminder.
i think WE are all missing the point. if you like the rogue (like me), use him, if not, don't.
if you cant get by without one, play one. if you can, dont.
there are a million ways to play this game. thats why i like to play.
i used to be all about who makes the most kills, now i just like playing. i like the rogue, i like the flavor...
i think WE are all missing the point. if you like the rogue (like me), use him, if not, don't.
if you cant get by without one, play one. if you can, dont.
there are a million ways to play this game. thats why i like to play.
i used to be all about who makes the most kills, now i just like playing. i like the rogue, i like the flavor...
I agree that flavor is important. I have a under-optimized (crippled by some people's standards) paladin, and I enjoy the flavor. My wife plays an under-optimized rogue, and has fun when she can RP or do skills.
But when I'm doing fine, and she sits with the bad taste of underachieving in her mouth and contemplate changing characters just to be better, or at times even do ANYTHING well, there is something wrong.
Lv 1 party: 20 point buy, 1 trait on skills, noted by asterisk.
Half elven fighter -Disable Device*: +8, Perception: +6 (non class skill),
18 Str, 16 Dex, 12 Con, 8 Int, 12 Wis, 8 Cha
iSBash, TWF [skill focus: Perception] - Trait: Vagabond Child (Disable Device)Aasimar Cleric of Abadar - Perception*: +11, Sense Motive: +9, Spellcraft: +5, Knowledge Religion: +5
10 Str, 14 Dex, 10 Con, 12 int, 18 Wis, 14 Cha
Selective Channeling - Trait: Eyes and Ears of the CityHuman Sorcerer - Diplomacy*: +10, Bluff: +9, Spellcraft: +4, Knowlege Arcana: +4
8 Str, 14 Dex, 10 Con, 10 int, 10 Wis, 20 Cha
Spell Focus: Ench, G Spell Focus: Ench. - Trait: World Traveler (Diplomacy)Elven Ranger -Perception: +9, Stealth: +8, Spellcraft +4, Slight of Hand*; +9, 2 random skills.
10 Str, 18 Dex, 10 Con, 10 Int, 16 Wis, 10 Cha
Point Blank Shot - Trait: Vagabond Child (Sleight of Hand)
Level 1 Rogue Half Elf
10 STR
16 DEX (Half Elf)
10 CON
14 INT
14 WIS
14 CHA
Favored Class: Skill Point.
Perception +8 (1 Rank, +3 Class skill, +2 Wisdom, +2 race)
Stealth +10 (1 Rank, +3 Class skill, +3 Dextertiy, +3 skill focus)
Sense Motive +6 (1 Rank, +3 Class skill, +2 Wisdom)
Bluff +7 (1 rank, +3 Class skill, +2 Charisma +1 trait (fast talker))
Diplomacy +6 (1 rank, +3 Class skill, +2 Charisma)
Disable Device +7 (1 rank, +3 Class skill, +3 dexterity)
also he gets six other skills
Use Magic Device +6 (1 rank, +3 class skill, +2 charisma) (none in your group have it and it by far sets a bar since he can replicate most others)
Sleight of hand +7 (1 rank, +3 class skill, +3 dex)
Bluff +7 (1 rank, +3 class skille, +2 charisma, +1 trait (fast talker)) (before I can take the rogue talent that allows a +10 to a check per day at level 2)
Acrobatics +7 (1 rank, +3 class skill, +3 dexterity) (also no one has this and its a pretty common skill)
Escape Artist +7 (1 rank, +3 class skill, +3 dexterity) (he needs this skill)
Linguistics +6 (1 rank, +3 class skill, +2) gets a bonus language along with his other two bonus languages for a high INT.
Your half elven fighters disable device check does not mean he can disable traps so that helps him little. Also it appears he took his favored class as a skill point? sure. As for the comment about the money I guarantee the rogue could afford it since he doesnt need nice armor or a weapon, unlike your fighter.
I also have no idea how you arrived upon
You have an Aasimar cleric, which is not a core race so already I am like WTF with that one, considering it isnt balanced with the core races, James Jacobs even says that when talking about the zero hit die races.
Lastly I would like you to note that you chose level 1, this is the only level the Rogue cannot tap all his skills with skill points. It is also a level the rogue wont have ANY talents. I did say any level so fair enough, but let it be noted you chose the level before he could tap 24 of his skills.
Also note no one in your party has Use magic device and didnt take a trait to cover it as a class skill, most of your classes took the favored class option for a skill point which is probably not going to be the case, you chose a race that isn't core, and lastly the rogue is one or two points shy in few skills and on top of that he can do several skills your group cannot do.
All before level 2 when his skills get twice as good, and before talents.
You can make your judgement, I will make mine.
|
A group dynamic can cut out any class. ANY class if it needs to. To say the rogue is an exception to that rule would be a lie.
But something from that class will undoubtedly be missed, always.
You could cut out a Cleric. But you will probably miss that channel energy.
You could cut out the wizard/sorceror but you are going to miss that extra versatility with spells.
You could cut out a martial class but it requires you to fill the niche by casting extra buffs or summons or animal companions.
You can cut out anyone, but to say they wont be missed is a falacy.
This is a point often overlooked.
It is a group game, designed to have 4 players interact to make the whole greater than the sum of it's parts.
Rogues are incredibly versatile, and so can be built many different ways to fill many different roles a party may need.
|
|
I argue that party can be built to cover the roles a rogue covers with minimal investment of resources, and that full casters are more versatile than rogues.
I also argue that four people can interact to make the whole greater than the sum of its parts, notably by obviating the need for a rogue.
I also find it interesting that from the quoted post, the only "class" archetype not referenced is the rogue. What does a party lose by cutting out a rogue?
The need to have to have someone else allocate resources to areas they are suboptimal in, and therefore not allocate them to other areas where they are more useful to the specific nature of the class.
|
|
While I did not explicitly spell out such things as "The Tarrasque is never worth its CR", common sense assumptions are still implied.
And the rest of that post is your usual absurdity.
Still waiting for a "a very solid and detailed explanation to back yourself" from you as to what you are fighting and what build you are using in your games.
Not expecting it, as we both know you are playing off book and posting it will only prove the old axiom "It is better to be silent and thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt."
Rogues are skill based characters: They've got 8+int skill points and a whole host of class skills. Note, however, that the entire party gets skill points and class skills that lie outside of a given class's wheelhouse can be obtained through traits. If each character in a four person party that did not include a rogue dedicated 2 skill points to covering rogue skills, possibly using their traits to pick up the skills as class skills, what happens? We cover the rogue's 8 skills points (leaving just the +int, which I'm sure could also be covered in a pinch, possibly with favored class skill bonii) and possibly have slightly higher values in these skills as we're no longer forced to cover Dex, Int, Wis, and Cha all on the same character. Now we have 4 characters with 16-18's in each of those 4 ability scores, with an extra +1 trait bonus on top. A single rogue cannot hope to keep up with that level of proficiency under a point buy system (4x 16+? Not possible) and would have to roll extremely well.
There are 84 skills in the game. Of those, 21 are Craft, 30 are Profession, and 10 are Knowledge skills. I will grant you that the Profession and most of the Craft skills are not going to be used often enough to be worried about. So let's say there are 40 skills for the party to potentially deal with. The rogue can easily handle a good chunk of them. I posted a rogue earlier in the thread that did just that and I can repost him if you would like. This frees up the rest of the party to focus things like Knowledge (most wizards will go this route), Fly (many casters will want this), Craft (weapons, armor, bows, alchemy), and several others that they would have to sacrifice to cover the missing rogue.
About the only skill that a rogue would surpass other classes at would be trapspringing (perception and disable device) due to their trapfinding bonus. Problem is, trap DC's aren't spectacular, generally being set low enough that a character WITHOUT trapfinding can take 10 and discover said trap. Magic traps can be bypassed or shut down using dispel magic or similar effects, or can be avoided entirely using the extra magic a non rogue 4th member would bring to the table. This can even be done with a wand.
Dispel magic isn't going to be the best choice for magical traps as you gain levels. The DC is 11+Caster level. The wand gives you a +5 to your caster level. That is not even coming close to replacing the rogue who does better than that at level 1 (Ranks: 1, Class: +3, Stat: +3, Level Bonus: +1) and will continue to improve even if he puts no more ranks in the skill. Your wand remains stagnant and less useful.
Yes, you can Take 10 to search for traps but what good does that do when you can't disable said trap? You can't Take 10 on Disable Device unless you aren't going to fail by 5 or more. The rogue makes that incredibly likely. Don't forget that some of the archetypes make this even better. The trapsmith, for example, only triggers the trap if he fails by 10 or more. He can most likely Take 10 even if he doesn't have Skill Mastery.
that apply a subset of debuffs: Rogue talents provide a small subset of debuffs that can be applied to sneak attack targets. The core book's debuffs are: bleed damage, str damage, AoO prevention, and a weak dispel. AoO's can be avoided by intelligent play in virtually all circumstances (I've taken maybe 6 AoO's in 10 years of gaming), Str damage and dispel are better done by a mage (2 pts of str damage versus ray of enfeeblement. Not technically str damage, but still, a far more efficient str debuff given the average length of a combat encounter.) and lastly, bleed damage, replicated by a weapon enchant. The APG adds 4 more debuffs, but three of them only work for the rogue itself and the fourth makes the target flatfooted. Yawn.
I see at least 1 Attack of Opportunity each session. Just because it doesn't happen in you games doesn't mean that it isn't common in others. Bleed damage rocks and only improves as the rogue levels. Half the rogue's level is considered bleed. Of course, he needs to choose that talent but that is nothing to ignore.
The Strength Damage is cumulative. That means that if the rogue hits the enemy 3 times, that is 6 points of Strength Damage. That can be rather significant especially if the wizard is going to be using Ray of Enfeeblement. Don't forget that the Strength Damage affects more than just the To Hit and Damage, it also affects CMB, CMD, and should affect Encumbrance which can cause even more penalties.
The Dispelling Attack is actually better than the wand of dispel magic you said could replace the rogue. I don't see how you can say the weaker is better than the stronger.
or deal damage under certain conditions: Rogue damage is done more easily and efficiently by other classes. Caster damage scales 1:1d by level compared to 2:1d for rogues, and this damage can be applied at range. It can also be force damage, which is nigh unresistable and damages incorporeal critters normally, something the rogue need spend 8k gold to do. So the rogue's damage scales slowly, but can be applied with multiple attacks. Only if the target is flanked (putting the rogue in melee range and potentially requiring the rogue to move, costing the iterative attacks we were gunning for) or flatfooted. Rogue damage is horribly inefficient and unreliable. It's also damage, something that any class can do with varying degrees of efficiency. My last PF game, Legacy of Fire, our party fighter out damaged the rogue routinely, even when the rogue got sneak attack which was fairly often due to our group's forgiving approach to stealth.
The rogue damage is not necessarily done more easily and efficiently by other classes. Much of the caster damage is elemental of some sort which can be an issue or easily defended against (spells, evasion, etc). The rogue does not necessarily have to be in melee range to get his sneak attack. That is one of the better places to be though and shouldn't be an issue for anyone who actually built his rogue to be up in the fray. He has several defensive talents but also can just improve his Armor Class like any other character. Affecting incorporeal creatures isn't that difficult. They just take half damage from magic weapons, which he should have quick enough probably by level 3. I have seen the rogue get multiple sneak attacks consistently. Your fighter should be outdamaging the rogue consistently. That's the fighter's job. I would be worried if it was the other way around. Remember that the rogue is not a tank but a Humvee. As for forgiving approach to Stealth, from what I've seen on the boards, there are too many people who read too much into Stealth to make it ineffective.
In summary: Rogues are unneeded. The niches they cover can be covered by the rest of the party with a modicum of effort, the supposedly better skill modifiers they should be bringing are rivaled or exceeded by a group using traits and allocating skills to appropriate pc's (optimize skill key ability to synergize with class main ability, keeping and eye on skill points per level...), the debuffs they apply are of little concern and are better done by other classes/items with only certain exceptions, and the damage they do is inefficient and scales poorly.
If the rogue is replaced by the rest of the party, that actually is a supporting argument for the rogue. Just like many spells carry over from one caster to the next without invalidating the casters, the rogue isn't invalidated because some of his abilities are similar to other classes. Is the druid replaceable because his ability to wild shape is mimicked by the ranger, cleric, sorcerer, wizard, and witch? Is the druid no longer needed because the summoner pretty much does what the druid does already?
Yes, you can Take 10 to search for traps but what good does that do when you can't disable said trap? You can't Take 10 on Disable Device unless you aren't going to fail by 5 or more. The rogue makes that incredibly likely. Don't forget that some of the archetypes make this even better. The trapsmith, for example, only triggers the trap if he fails by 10 or more. He can most likely Take 10 even if he doesn't have Skill Mastery.Actually you can take 10 on disable device, you can't take 20. Many people confuse these mechanics.
My bad. I was actually thinking of the rules for Taking 20. I should wake up before responding next time.
8+ int + 1 for the rogue.
8+ ? + 4 for the party. ?= how ever many points the party opts to throw in to cover the relevant skills.
What are the relevant skills the party should have covered?
6 Knowledge skills
Disable Device
Perception
Spellcraft
That's already 9 skills. Did you want some stealth in there? How about some appraise? Diplomacy? Craft? Your party is already strapped for points whereas the rogue has points to spare.
Your rogue talents do not give a numeric bonus to any skill bonuses. They do give side benefits, like taking half the time to disable a trap or being able to move at full speed while stealthed, but some of those traits are offered as class archetype or race alternate features, and some simply don't matter. I really need to spend a class feature to half the time it takes to do an action that I generally only do outside of combat? Really?
Stealthing at full speed is probably one of the best talents. Disabling traps and locks at half speed is also very useful even if they are only situational. A good DM makes sure that the skills and talents aren't wasted. No, there shouldn't always be a trap in the room with the dragon but it doesn't hurt to throw one in every now and then. Looking at all the different talents that a rogue can have that are skill based, I have to disagree with you completely.
Camouflage is essentially a +4 all day to your Stealth check unless you change environments.
Ledge Walker is awesome and I know a rogue in my game who has wished that he chose it more than once. Combine this with Nimble Climber and your rogue is going to be a great burglar or at least be able to use his talents in many locations outdoors.
Trap spotting is essentially a free Perception check to find traps. You don't have to slow the party down with searching. You simply have to walk on by. Combine this with Canny Observer and your rogue is the best at finding those pesky traps that can do more than just slow the party down.
Skill Mastery is self explanatory.
A bonus feat can grant up to +6 to a single skill.
Coax Information, and Follow Clues allows you to no longer need one of the skills to accomplish a task.
Expert Leaper essentially cuts the DC to jump in half. It also can reduce a fall by 20 feet instead of 10. Excellent talent for swashbucklers or ninja.
Fast Getaway is an excellent talent to get you out of combat after you have already attacked this round. Combine this with Deadly Sneak and you can deal some decent damage and step away without too much worry.
Guileful Polyglot is a reliable comprehend languages especially if the character learns languages that are most common in the area. Four free languages saves 4 skill points.
Charmer, Fast Fingers, Hard to Fool, Peerless Maneuver, all give you a free reroll where you keep the better of the two rolls, unlike many of the other reroll abilities out there.
Honeyed Words grants a +10 bonus to a single Bluff check once a day. Sounds a lot like many spells, one time use for a nice size bonus.
Survivalist just makes two skills into class skills. Putting one rank in each of those does grant +3 bonus to both skills.
So there are several talents that do give bonuses to skills. Rerolls and the saving of skill points is essentially giving a bonus to skills as far as I'm concerned. For every point you don't have to spend on one skill, that's pretty much a +1 to a skill you do want to spend points on.
On traits: I do not believe they are an optional rule. They are certainly presented as a straightforward "this is them! Ask your Gm how many you get, normal is 2" rule and the Additional Traits feat certainly has no optional rule nomenclature attached to it. Perhaps your group has houseruled them away? In any case, you are correct, the rogue gets two traits, just like any character. The difference is, once again, the ENTIRE party gets 2 per character. 8 trait bonuses vs. 2.
Although the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook provides a complete game, along with guidelines and examples to aid GMs in creation of any new rules components their adventures might require, the open-ended nature of the rules allows for endless expansion and refinement. While any rules subsystem beyond those in the core rules should be considered optional, GMs should feel free to adopt, even invent, additional elements if doing so helps make battle feel more cinematic, increases players' investments in their characters, or simply make the game more fun.
So yes, the ENTIRE party can, and it might take the ENTIRE party to, cover the rogue's role. However, what are they spending to do so? half their skill points and two traits? So the rogue class, as a whole, is equivalent to half the groups' skill points and a number of traits. Meanwhile, by not taking a rogue, we can have a second arcane caster (capable to bending the universe to his whim at later levels), or a second druid (who brings an animal companion with scent. What rogue has scent?), or another cleric (I hear they're pretty nifty, them clerics).
You are using more than half the party's skill points to cover what the rogue can do. Even the animal companion does not replace the rogue. Want scent? Be a half-orc and take Keen Scent. You also had to use up all your party's traits to get some +1 bonuses. I will grant you that not all party's need a rogue. Maybe yours doesn't. To assume that all party's are the same as yours is a logical fallacy.
So we "lose": half the party's skill points, a number of traits.
But we gain: an entire additional spell progression.
Remind me again why we bother with a rogue? Their collection of self only traits that are of minimal importance? Or was it their totally replicable skill modifier values (excepting perception on traps and disable device values. I'll grant ya those, not that the DC's really call for those enhanced values)?
Even the druid that was posted earlier in the thread to compete with my rogue didn't actually come close to covering all the skills that my rogue was able to cover. Yes, the druid was a decent scout outdoors but my rogue could function anywhere at any time without needing to potentially get rid of one of his class features to do so (try to infiltrate a stronghold while bringing along a dinosaur). You use the rogue so that the wizard doesn't have to memorize dispel magic to handle a single magical trap and can use his spell for something else, like the dragon who has cast displacement. I have never seen a character built that can totally replicate the rogue's skill modifiers across the board. I doubt it can be done.
And I very much doubt the rogue will match the ENTIRE party's values for skill values. But maybe you know a way to get a 16-18 in four different stats in point buy. You do need 16-18 in four, by the way. Dex for Disable Device, Wis for Perception, Int for Appraise, and Cha for anything social. Can't rely on racial mods either (like the elven +2 to perception), since the rest of party could certainly include that racial mod. Let's see you squeeze 40 points worth of attributes out of the allotted 20-25.
Why would the rogue need to match the entire party's values for skill values? That would be silly. That's like saying that the diviner is pointless because the illusionist can cast everything the diviner can.
You don't need 16+ in your stats to be good at the skills. You can easily pull it off with 15 point buy. The sample rogue I posted earlier had the elite stat array. If you can't find it or don't want to scroll back, I can post it again.
Lv 1 party: 20 point buy, 1 trait on skills, noted by asterisk.
Half elven fighter -Disable Device*: +8, Perception: +6 (non class skill),
18 Str, 16 Dex, 12 Con, 8 Int, 12 Wis, 8 Cha
iSBash, TWF [skill focus: Perception] - Trait: Vagabond Child (Disable Device)Aasimar Cleric of Abadar - Perception*: +11, Sense Motive: +9, Spellcraft: +5, Knowledge Religion: +5
10 Str, 14 Dex, 10 Con, 12 int, 18 Wis, 14 Cha
Selective Channeling - Trait: Eyes and Ears of the CityHuman Sorcerer - Diplomacy*: +10, Bluff: +9, Spellcraft: +4, Knowlege Arcana: +4
8 Str, 14 Dex, 10 Con, 10 int, 10 Wis, 20 Cha
Spell Focus: Ench, G Spell Focus: Ench. - Trait: World Traveler (Diplomacy)Elven Ranger -Perception: +9, Stealth: +8, Spellcraft +4, Slight of Hand*; +9, 2 random skills.
10 Str, 18 Dex, 10 Con, 10 Int, 16 Wis, 10 Cha
Point Blank Shot - Trait: Vagabond Child (Sleight of Hand)
I'm going to preface this with the simple fact that I don't consider 1 to 2 points to be all that significant in the short term. At level 1, +2 can be a huge difference but a +1 difference is almost irrelevant.
That being said, here is a human rogue, 15 point buy, that has all the skills your party has plus a few extras:
Male Human Rogue 1
NN Medium Humanoid (Human)
Init +2; Senses Perception +7
--------------------
DEFENSE
--------------------
AC 14, touch 12, flat-footed 12. . (+2 armor, +2 Dex)
hp 8 (1d8)
Fort +0, Ref +4, Will +1
--------------------
OFFENSE
--------------------
Spd 30 ft.
Melee Shortsword +1 (1d6+1/19-20/x2) and
. . Unarmed Strike +1 (1d3+1/20/x2)
Ranged Sling +2 (1d4+1/20/x2)
Special Attacks Sneak Attack +1d6
--------------------
STATISTICS
--------------------
Str 12, Dex 15, Con 10, Int 14, Wis 13, Cha 10
Base Atk +0; CMB +1; CMD 13
Feats Alertness, Rogue Weapon Proficiencies, Skill Focus: Bluff
Traits Child of the Temple: Knowledge: Religion, Mathematical Prodigy: Knowledge: Arcana
Skills Acrobatics +6, Bluff +7, Diplomacy +4, Disable Device +9, Disguise +4, Knowledge: Arcana +7, Knowledge: Religion +7, Perception +7, Sense Motive +7, Spellcraft +3, Stealth +6, Use Magic Device +4
Languages Common, Dwarven, Elven
SQ Trapfinding +1
Combat Gear Shortsword, Leather, Sling, Bullets, Sling (20); Other Gear Thieves' tools, masterwork
--------------------
TRACKED RESOURCES
--------------------
Bullets, Sling - 0/20
--------------------
SPECIAL ABILITIES
--------------------
Sneak Attack +1d6 +1d6 damage if you flank your target or your target is flat-footed.
Trapfinding +1 +1 to find or disable traps.
So the skill break down is (you/me):
Disable Device: +8/+9 (+10 for traps)
Perception: +11/+7 (+8 for traps)
Sense Motive: +9/+7
Spellcraft: +5/+3
Knowledge Religion: +5/+7
Diplomacy: +10/+4
Bluff: +9/+7
Knowlege Arcana: +4/+7
Stealth: +8/+6
Sleight of Hand: +9/+6
So a single party member is competing with your whole party and actually outshining them in a few areas. As the rogue levels those values will change quickly. My rogue also has Acrobatics and Use Magic Device (which can invalidate a wizard if we go with your assumption that dispel magic invalidates magical traps).
Instead of focusing on replacing the rogue's skills, why not let the rogue have his skills and your party can focus on other things, like Knowledge skills so they don't get trounced by the unexpected. Or craft so they can save some money if they take some crafting feats.
You are using more than half the party's skill points to cover what the rogue can do. Even the animal companion does not replace the rogue. Want scent? Be a half-orc and take Keen Scent. You also had to use up all your party's traits to get some +1 bonuses. I will grant you that not all party's need a rogue. Maybe yours doesn't. To assume that all party's are the same as yours is a logical fallacy.
Why is it such a big deal that the party is using more then half or even all their skill points to replace a rogue? What else do your characters do with their skill points? You seem to be of the opinion if there is a rogue in the party no one else needs to use their skill points. It would seem more effective to let them use their skill points and take out the rogue entirely.
Lets say you had a 4th level barbarian, your barbarian just leveled up. Your DM (being an odd person) gives you the options to either take your next 16 levels in barbarian or trade them all for 15 skill points per level. The way you praise skill points to be so important (not saying they aren't but no one needs to master them) this would seem like a fair trade, but it just isn't.
As I said earlier in this thread, beating a DC by 50 and beating a DC by 30 have the exact same effect on the skill check. I do not see the need to devote an entire player character to the job of beating skill checks by obscene amounts.
You are using more than half the party's skill points to cover what the rogue can do. Even the animal companion does not replace the rogue. Want scent? Be a half-orc and take Keen Scent. You also had to use up all your party's traits to get some +1 bonuses. I will grant you that not all party's need a rogue. Maybe yours doesn't. To assume that all party's are the same as yours is a logical fallacy.Why is it such a big deal that the party is using more then half or even all their skill points to replace a rogue? What else do your characters do with their skill points? You seem to be of the opinion if there is a rogue in the party no one else needs to use their skill points. It would seem more effective to let them use their skill points and take out the rogue entirely.
Lets say you had a 4th level barbarian, your barbarian just leveled up. Your DM (being an odd person) gives you the options to either take your next 16 levels in barbarian or trade them all for 15 skill points per level. The way you praise skill points to be so important (not saying they aren't but no one needs to master them) this would seem like a fair trade, but it just isn't.
As I said earlier in this thread, beating a DC by 50 and beating a DC by 30 have the exact same effect on the skill check. I do not see the need to devote an entire player character to the job of beating skill checks by obscene amounts.
You didn't finish reading my post. The last paragraph covers why the rest of the party doesn't need to be trying to cover all the rogue's skills. There are more than 80 skills in the game, many of which are opposed and/or trained only. There are 6 that are Knowledge and a party that wants to know what's going on should take some of those.
In my games, skills are very important. The players are constantly trying to find ways to use their skills. The party is finding that having a wide variety of skills lets them do more.
Also, beating a DC by 50 or 30 does not always have the same effect. Knowledge skills give you more information the higher your result. Higher checks allow you to do more things with many skills.
Acrobatics: You can move faster and handle more challenging slopes. You can avoid more attacks of opportunity as you weave in and out of combat. You can jump farther and higher.
Appraise: The DC can be 30+ depending on the item.
Bluff: Opposed check
Climb: You can climb faster and on more treacherous walls. You also have a better chance of catching someone when they fall or yourself when you fall. If you are trying to catch someone who is falling from an overhang that is covered in slime, the DC is 55.
Craft: The higher your check, the faster you can craft items. Also, the higher your check, the more prerequisites you don't need for crafting magic items.
Diplomacy: DCs can get pretty high. To use successfully on a bearded devil, you need a 33 to make him Indifferent. If you then need him to allow you to do a few things that could result in his being punished the DC is 43 (15 + Cha + 15 + 5 + 5). The higher your Diplomacy, the more you can ask.
Disable Device: The higher the check, the more you can do. If your disable device is 50, you can open a lock without any tools. If your disable device check is 10 or more higher, you can bypass a trap instead of disabling it. If you want to make sure no one knows you even checked it out, the DC to disable a trap that uses imprisonment and you want the party to get past it, you need to hit DC 49.
Disguise: Opposed check. If you are playing an adult male half-orc that needs to impersonate the halfling mayor's venerable halfling grandmother, the DC is adjusted by +30. The higher your check, the more you can do.
Escape Artist: Opposed check in many applicable cases.
Fly: The higher your check, the better off you are in bad situations. You can fly through a tornado with a DC of 41 (25+16).
Handle Animal: The higher your check the better chance you have of training your animals. With a DC of 33 you can rear a brachiosaurus (I wouldn't, but you can).
Heal: The DCs are mostly static but being able to heal poisons and diseases at all levels of play can be very helpful. The poison spell has a base DC of 14 but that is easily adjusted by feats and increasing stats.
Intimidate: Opposed check. Demoralize is 1 round + 1 round for every 5 points you beat the DC.
Linguistics: I would usually only take this for the languages but the DCs can hit as high as 48 depending on the document you are dealing with.
Perception: Opposed check in many circumstance. A sleeping character who is near a waterfall starts with a penalty of 15 to his perception check a the drider is stealthing up to the party. The DC for this starts at 29. It's worse for other creatures.
Ride: If you have Mounted Combat, you can use your ride check as your mount's AC once per round. With a high enough check, you can do that while riding bareback.
Sense Motive: Opposed Check but with a high enough check, you can determine more information with less to go on.
Sleight of Hand: Opposed Check
Spellcraft: The higher your result, the more prerequisites you can ignore when crafting.
Stealth: Opposed check. If are a sniper, you want this to be 20 more than what you would normally want.
Survival: The higher your check, the more useful you are at keeping your party safe in the wild. While it is unlikely to be a factor often, you can predict next week's weather with a DC of 45. The higher your check the faster you can move while tracking and under worse circumstances. To track a falcon on a cloudy day (assuming it lands at some point), the DC starts at 30.
Swim: Static DCs, but they are increased by weight and armor. If your character is heavily encumbered trying to swim in a storm, the DC is 26.
So in cases where you have a static DC, yes it doesn't matter because once you can achieve that with regularity you will be fine. Since many skills can provide better results or are opposed, then you may want higher checks.
For those times when you are only focused on static DCs (handle animal, swim, etc) you have points to spend on other skills and still maximize the use of those skills.
I would agree with james it may be harder for a rogue to cover everyones skill points in a four person party.
However I think the above reasons listed by the both of them explains why they come in great handy, taking ranks in knowledge can be very important and often times the importance between life and death.
Lets just agree to disagree if you choose to keep the same opinion about rogues being unneeded because skill points are duplicatable by other classes because I find that to be inaccurate and really detract from playing a character (if you have to choose your skill points to cover someone else its less of a choice).
Traps are irreplaceable and having a rogue with UMD in a party with two casters is essentially having another caster.
Also rogues get talents at later levels (many of which makes skills much better).
Merry Christmas to all!