First Thoughts: Ninja's, Ḥashāshīns, and Rogues OH MY

[Sleep-Walker]

For those that read these boards extensively, you will find a number of threads about how weak the Rogue is compared to everything else. Now I enjoy playing rogues, although the rogue does seem expected to be able to do a lot without much reward. So my first question is, does the Ninja [in your respective opinions] hold its own against other classes?

I don't like taking away trap finding from any rogue archetype. I feel that parties at character creation mentally work out who can cover each area. Someone needs to be able to heal, someone needs to be able to find traps. By stopping the ninja from finding traps as well as a rogue means that for a lot of established groups with a ninja you will still need a rogue to find magic traps. I know groups where a player who wants to play a ninja will be pressured into playing a rogue because of the need for better trap finding because that's what a rogue is for. It would be like making a healer archetype that couldn't heal very well. In your collective opinions, do you feel that the ninja can fill the rogues role in a classic four player party?

I agree that Ninja tricks and Rogues talents should allow cross over one way or neither. Allowing a Ninja to take Rogue Talents and not letting a Rogue take Ninja talents would be a kick to the face to a class that so many see as below par anyway.

I have some sympathy with discussions about changing the name or even adding an alignment restriction. Assassin comes from an ancient sect of killers, so does Ninja. But why should Syrian Ḥashāshīns, be Evil only while Asian Ninjas have no alignment restriction. History is a funny thing. Some things we have no problem trampling, other things people get het up about. I mean ninjas can have death attack and use poison, so why don't they have the evil restriction that assassins do?

In regards to Evasion, many who build rogues believe that a one level dip in Shadowdancer is necessary to bolster Stealth to compete with Invis. All a Ninja needs to do is dip two levels in Shadowdancer to pick up Evasion, Darkvision, Hide in Plain Sight, and Imp Uncanny Dodge.

Many people have discussed the concept that Ninjas cannot dump CHA like rogues can. Well, I love Bluff, Gather Info [diplomacy] and so forth so I never dump CHA anyway.

I think I feel that the ninja is very good, too good in comparison to the rogue as is. I also feel that it makes the assassin Prestige class weaker in comparison. I think I would always take a Ninja over a Rogue [if teh party weren't going to whine too much about traps].

[Kaiyanwang]

I just have two things to say:

1) There are Ninja and Rogue powers i think the two should share. Others, better remain with the respective alternate classes

2) I really hope we end up with good Ninja and good Rogue without that any class needs a mandatory dip in Shadowdancer. If I balance a class about the fact will dip in a PrC, I think that one of the assumption of Pathfinder fall. Sadly, for some rogue a dip in Shadowdancer is the only way to obtain things (IMHO) supposed to be part of the class concept.

[KilroySummoner]

Sleep-Walker wrote:

Someone needs to be able to heal, someone needs to be able to find traps.

Absolutely false. Not only have I have never participated in a scenario where we needed to find a trap, I have never found a single instance where a rogue isn't far weaker than say a druid or almost any other class. Send a summoned animal ahead to find a trap or heal through it. In other words, unless a trap would cause nearly a TPK and a Rogue instead of a summoned animal (as cannon fodder) would somehow be required, they will still be incredibly weak.

If we see a trap, my Eidolon disables device or it blows up in its face and we heal through it. If it dies, it is expendable and I still am more useful. Often you can just use magical means to get around it. Then I do over twice as much contributory damage (which includes haste) as a sneak attacking rogue, often over four times. My point is that unless magical trap disarming is absolutely required for a given scenario, they will be incredibly weak.

Sleep-Walker wrote:

I think I feel that the ninja is very good, too good in comparison to the rogue as is.

Of course when you compare a class to the weakest class, they will be too good. I would definitely not want to nerf the ninja since it is nowhere near the most powerful class, I would instead want to buff the rogue. As it stands, the GM has to personally rewrite entire scenarios just to justify a rogue.

The crux of the problem is that the Rogue is a whole base class designed around being situationally non-horrible (party-killing magical traps that you can't get around). They take up party slots that compete with classes useful in all scenarios. They should have been balanced properly so that they do damage that is as least 2/3 of a damage-focused class instead of 1/5th.

[InfernosReaper]

Rogue's alright as is. Anyone who's got a problem with Pathfinder's Rogue has obviously never played this: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/rogue.htm 3.5 D&D's Rogue.

This Ninja class was built stronger than Rogue, which was modified to get said Ninja. I think a few minor class feature add/subtracts & a reduction in skill points should get the job done in making the Ninja more its own class & keep it from stepping on Rogue's toes. For those keeping score, the Cleric can use the Find Traps spell to locate said traps & let the Wizard(or whoever breaks stuff) take care of them.

I do prefer the Trapfinding to the Poison use, but that's just my opinion(cause poisons cost a lot with little return). That said, if you haven't checked what Rogue can do as of Advanced Player's guide, you should. http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/rogue Then make your judgments on the merits of each class.