Bards are not as effective as rogues at finding tracks. They can find magic traps, but they do not get the 1/2 class level bonus.
So?
Urban rangers do get the 1/2 class level bonus, but are not as good at social skills.
Which is why I listed them in the party that already had social covered.
Yes, there are class set ups in a party that make up for the rogue. There are also classes that replace EVERY OTHER CLASS. This isn't an issue. It also does not mean the rogue is obsolete.
At this point it becomes fairly obvious that you didn't really read my post that well before commenting on it.
And trapfinding sucks chunks? Yet you dropped a level of wizard to get it, and the class skill to go with it? I think not.
@Big Norse Wolf
i can agree with the above quote in this post. if trapfinding really sucked chunks that horribly. then why did you decide to sacrifice a whole wizard level to get this ability?
i really don't understand your logic,
you say that the rogue is worthless because the wizard can do his job better than he can. but you gave up a whole level of the 'superior class' for a 'worthless ability'. i beleive that means, that deep down inside, you do not feel that the rogue is completely worthless.
And trapfinding sucks chunks? Yet you dropped a level of wizard to get it, and the class skill to go with it? I think not.
@Big Norse Wolf
i can agree with the above quote in this post. if trapfinding really sucked chunks that horribly. then why did you decide to sacrifice a whole wizard level to get this ability?
1) Trapfinding, the bonus of 1/2 bonus per level, blows chunks.
2) the ability to find magic traps is meh for this character (detect magic does it better)
3) The main benefit of the dip into the rogue class is +3 to most of the good skills in the game (perception disable device all the social skills) . So its not the 1/2 level bonus you get, its the +3 (6 levels worth of bonus in one level). Its a lot of bang for your buck.
4) The ability to disarm magic traps is held in high esteme by people touting the rogues ability. Picking it up at the cost of 1 mere level isn't that bad
5) Between your intelligence bonus and specialization bonus the extra spell or so from being a level higher on the even levels isn't that big a deal. That one level dip of misspent youth only hurts a caster every other level when it blocks access to higher level spells.
6) That a one level dip into rogue is a viable idea does not make the rogue viable. A wizard 9 rogue IS not A rogue. He's a wizard with a sprinkle of rogue.
i beleive that means, that deep down inside, you do not feel that the rogue is completely worthless.
And now you're questioning my honesty based on internet psychoanalysis.
Im sort of wondering why, in a world full of scrying wizards etc, youd ever decide NOT to put layers of lead around valuables etc?
My players got narky about me running enemy forces using conventional tactics from todays battlefield rather than medieval ones - I simply pointed out that with wizards and clerics running around with 100% precise and accurate area weapons no warfighters would use massed mobs in a medieval fashion.
Even in the 21st century battlefield there is no real way to launch the equivalent of a fireball into an area with such precision we can hit a line of enemy combatants and MISS all of our guys locked in melee with them.
Lead shielding and other basic countermeasures should thus about in PF.
Yet mysteriously, apparently the average person has not made such steps to adjust to a magical world.
If the lead blocks the detect magic coming in then it also blocks the magic sensor going out. You can't have it both ways.
and a smart DM will place that lead lining on every trap he uses. not just so the rogue can feel useful. but to distinguish a sense of diversity in the party.It seems to me that you're just saying the same thing in a more diplomatic sounding way. The lead is being used exactly to make the rogue feel useful, which is done by preventing the wizard or whoever from stepping on his toes. I'm all for making sure the wizard doesn't laugh at how useless everybody else is, but at least pony up and admit that you're putting in effort to prevent that from happening.
i will admit to that
If the lead blocks the detect magic coming in then it also blocks the magic sensor going out. You can't have it both ways.
and who says that the sensor has to be magical?
why can't it be mechanical?
in a world where magic and wizards are very real, i beleive technology would advance drastically faster, not slower.
Do you mind posting a write-up of the trap as it appears in AoW?
I had to go to work after my last reply:
CR;10, Hardness;8, hp;60, touch trigger; automatic reset, Will DC 20 to take 2 con and resist affects, Search DC 30, Disable Device DC 35
The steel lock was warded by a high monstrous priest of Kyuss. Anyone who opens it without a complex prayer to Kyuss must make a DC 20 will save.
If you make the save you take 2 points of con damage. On a failed save the lock snaps back shut and the characters body winks out of the material plane leaving all clothing and equipment behind. A tiny representation of the character appears naked and helpless on the trunk's panels. While trapped the character experiences continuous sanity blasting nightmares. "This is a necromantic effect."
Each hour the character is trapped they take 1d4 charisma, wisdom, and intelligence drain. When one of these is reduced to 0 the character's image animates long enough to be eaten by worms, and then is gone.
The trapped character can be freed with a dispel magic check against caster level 20. Alternately, antimagic, dispel evil, freedom, miracle, disjunction, or wish can rescue the character. Once the character is gone only wish, miracle or true resurrection can return him to life at which point he appears beside the trunk unconscious and naked.
The trunk can be disabled with a DC 35 disable device check which also frees any trapped characters. Destroying the chest also frees any characters but each time a creature damages the chest(from any range) it must make a DC 20 will save as if it tried to open it.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The open lock DC is only a 25, and appears on the same page, but is not in the traps description which is why I missed it at first.
1) Touch: A touch trigger, which springs the trap when touched, is one of the simplest kinds of trigger to construct. This trigger may be physically attached to the part of the mechanism that deals the damage or it may not. You can make a magic touch trigger by adding alarm to the trap and reducing the area of the effect to cover only the trigger spot.
- the knocking wizard is not touching the trap, he doesn't set it off. The prayer is a bypass to this, not carte blanche to have infinite range. There is no spell range or sensor mechanism listed, because if you're not touching it it can't work.
1) Touch: A touch trigger, which springs the trap when touched, is one of the simplest kinds of trigger to construct. This trigger may be physically attached to the part of the mechanism that deals the damage or it may not. You can make a magic touch trigger by adding alarm to the trap and reducing the area of the effect to cover only the trigger spot.
- the knocking wizard is not touching the trap, he doesn't set it off. The prayer is a bypass to this, not carte blanche to have infinite range. There is no spell range or sensor mechanism listed, because if you're not touching it it can't work.
True. I realized that as I was typing it out. I read the long description as opposed to the short description when I should have read both.
I'm sorry, but your number are so precisely contrived to the exact number that your rogue needs for the situation to be in his favor inorder to make this point that its hard to believe that this is a genuine argument.Actually that's just how the numbers work out. The DC is based on a spell trap that's exactly level appropriate. The skill modifiers are also perfectly reasonable. Look over them.. what's out of line? I'll go into it in more detail below.
WOW... such an amazing coincidence that you picked the exact number you needed and the right circumstances so that your rogues ability would actually be useful. At random. Its astounding!
I think his point is that it is a real concern in a real game. The rogue can handle it and still not lose anything, while the wizard can not do so or at least do it as easily, which leads to a the rogue not being so easily replaceable. Not all magic traps are at APL. I generally use such traps if they are on their own. I use weaker one if I am trying to soften the party up for the next fight or drain resources. I see it as a valid concern.
I have been all through the books and the discussion forums about rogue skills and it seems that you can indeed take a single level of rogue and then apply your total HD to the acquired skills. This rules discrepancy makes leveling a Rogue a pointless waste of time. Since essentially it is the same as taking 1 level of wizard and gaining every spell at every level. The entire class is bought for a SINGLE level and the only thing left exclusively to the Rogue is a collection of little talents.
This essentially makes Rogues obsolete.
I don't think the skills make rogues obsolete. I think their combat ability makes them so. No one likes to play a class that must be babysat by other classes to be effective. In the next iteration of the rogue, Paizo should eliminate backstabbing or change it into a dirty fighting style with abilities like the Inquisitor's judgement.
Sneak attack is useless against smart players or monsters. The ultimate one trick pony easily defeated.
I ran a lvl 17 party this weekend with a rogue as one of the enemies. A weretiger rogue with pounce at that, so even better than a regular rogue.
Out of nine characters (5 PCs and 4 henchmen), the rogue had two options to attack. And he took one person down because they ignored him foolishly, then was obliterated by a caster.
Took the rogue 5 rounds to set up to attack the only target he could effectively do so against without dying. His options were:
1. Raging Barbarian: Attacking him ineffective due to heavy fortification armor. Would die in one round to barbarian.
2. Fighter: Attacking him ineffective due to heavy fortification. Would die in one round to fighter.
3. Sorcerer: Mirror Images up.
4. Wizard: Flying and invisible.
5. Oracle: In elemental form and immune to sneak attack.
6. Zen Archer Monk: Open to attack.
7. Bard: Open to attack.
8. Eldritch Knight: Open to attack.
9. Cleric: Heavy Fortification armor.
Three targets possible to attack.
The rogue used...
I think the problem here was a single rogue versus a party of 9...
16 rogues versus a part of 9 might have made sneak attack more...deadly...also 2 in the party with heavy fortification.
|
1) Touch: A touch trigger, which springs the trap when touched, is one of the simplest kinds of trigger to construct. This trigger may be physically attached to the part of the mechanism that deals the damage or it may not. You can make a magic touch trigger by adding alarm to the trap and reducing the area of the effect to cover only the trigger spot.
- the knocking wizard is not touching the trap, he doesn't set it off. The prayer is a bypass to this, not carte blanche to have infinite range. There is no spell range or sensor mechanism listed, because if you're not touching it it can't work.
The trap is not the lock.
Knock has opened the lock.Open/close open the lid.
But the trap is still there. If someone touch the lock it will still activate.
Looking the size of a Rinascimental lock and the quantity of gear sticking from the typical PC the guy checking the chest content has better doing that from the sides and not the front.
I think his point is that it is a real concern in a real game. The rogue can handle it and still not lose anything, while the wizard can not do so or at least do it as easily, which leads to a the rogue not being so easily replaceable. Not all magic traps are at APL. I generally use such traps if they are on their own. I use weaker one if I am trying to soften the party up for the next fight or drain resources. I see it as a valid concern.
I'm sorry, but your number are so precisely contrived to the exact number that your rogue needs for the situation to be in his favor inorder to make this point that its hard to believe that this is a genuine argument.Actually that's just how the numbers work out. The DC is based on a spell trap that's exactly level appropriate. The skill modifiers are also perfectly reasonable. Look over them.. what's out of line? I'll go into it in more detail below.
WOW... such an amazing coincidence that you picked the exact number you needed and the right circumstances so that your rogues ability would actually be useful. At random. Its astounding!
A few things.
1)That trap is actually pretty bad if you fail to disarm it. See my previous comments about "If traps were worthwhile". This is clearly a nonstandard trap, from 3.5 not Pathfinder, and Age of Worms a notoriously punishing adventure path (I know, I've played about half through it, but not quite to that trap apparently.) Compared to example traps it is FAR HIGHER than a CR 10 (automatic reset save or die? those are EXPENSIVE).2)I'm not sure what CL I would have to hit to dispel it, since none seems to be listed.
3)The save DC is fairly low, and a moderately well built character will have a hard time failing it. Worse comes to worst and I still see the necromantic aura, I could summon something to open the chest.
I've played in a LOT of different campaigns, and types of campaigns. Only one have I ever encountered more than a few traps here and there, and they are never more than a nuisance (poison, some dmg, maybe a status effect). Even if I relent and say, okay, sure, you need a magical trapspringer, what reason would I have for breaking a Rogue over an Archivist/Detective bard?
I think that in a party-oriented game the only time a rogue really shines is 1)when he's trying to mimic what another class does, like being a combat rogue and 2)in situations only he can participate in, i.e. scouting/sneaking and disarming traps.
1) Touch: A touch trigger, which springs the trap when touched, is one of the simplest kinds of trigger to construct. This trigger may be physically attached to the part of the mechanism that deals the damage or it may not. You can make a magic touch trigger by adding alarm to the trap and reducing the area of the effect to cover only the trigger spot.
- the knocking wizard is not touching the trap, he doesn't set it off. The prayer is a bypass to this, not carte blanche to have infinite range. There is no spell range or sensor mechanism listed, because if you're not touching it it can't work.
The trap is not the lock.
Knock has opened the lock.
Open/close open the lid.But the trap is still there. If someone touch the lock it will still activate.
Looking the size of a Rinascimental lock and the quantity of gear sticking from the typical PC the guy checking the chest content has better doing that from the sides and not the front.
Target one door, box, or chest with an area of up to 10 sq. ft./level
The last time I used the word it, but he exact wording is what is bolded
Opening/picking the lock is not the same as opening lifting the top of the chest. I think that is reasonable. Knock is also limited to one object being affect. It just happens to be able to bypass any two locks on that one object which is what the two means of closure are fore.
The issue now is two-fold.
Does open mean unlock or does it force to swing open?. This is important because if the spell automatically makes doors swing open when unlocked/opened it may not be a good thing, and I have never played it like that.
The other issue which is specific to the chest itself is whether or not the lock is an added on lock or a part of the chest itself. I would think it is a part of the chest since the entire thing is protected by one warding to an extent.
The question I guess is do you really want to rule that knock actually opens things as opposed to just unlocks. If it does then I rather have a rogue since the spell says "If successful, knock opens up to two means of closure.", instead of "knock may open..", which gives the caster a choice.
If knock opens as opposed to just unlocks what happens if you cast it on something that is already unlocked?
edit:I am just building off of your post.
A few things.
1)That trap is actually pretty bad if you fail to disarm it. See my previous comments about "If traps were worthwhile". This is clearly a nonstandard trap, from 3.5 not Pathfinder, and Age of Worms a notoriously punishing adventure path (I know, I've played about half through it, but not quite to that trap apparently.) Compared to example traps it is FAR HIGHER than a CR 10 (automatic reset save or die? those are EXPENSIVE).
2)I'm not sure what CL I would have to hit to dispel it, since none seems to be listed.
3)The save DC is fairly low, and a moderately well built character will have a hard time failing it. Worse comes to worst and I still see the necromantic aura, I could summon something to open the chest.I've played in a LOT of different campaigns, and types of campaigns. Only one have I ever encountered...
1. I know. I was pretty worried when I was DM'ing it.
2. It says a CL of 20 for the dispel magic, and earlier it said a high level priest so I would assume the caster was level 20 that made the trap.3. If played by the rules only the abjuration would show up. Even though I initially revealed it(necromantic aura) by accident I would have most likely given it to you anyway since the trap is so lethal at that level. It is a GM call to do that, but I don't think it is fair to run it differently than what I do at home.
I am not saying a rogue is mandatory at all. I just disagree with "obsolete" since to me it means can't compete or suicidal to choose. If the "rogue is not optimal" equals obsolete then a lot of classes are obsolete. I think you can have a rogue in a party and not bring the party down, and you don't need to be an expert level player to make it work.
A rogue is a good class in Carrion Crown as an example just due to the number of skills that can be taken. Now if you are dungeon crawling(fighting) without a decent number of chances for RP, or skill based things in general, then I say don't go with a rogue or even consider it if optimization is what the group really wants. However a rogue can always contribute without spending resources(money) in most campaigns, assuming skill based things come up. They actually save resources since the caster does not have to burn his resources to do what a rogue does for free. They are also not that far behind a fighter in DPR, and can get decent AC, at least enough to avoid getting hit more than 50% of the time which means the monster does not kill them in one full round attack.
|
|
stuff
I was giving the more favourable interpretation for BNW and considering only the lock warded.
The description of the trap is sufficiently ambiguous that both interpretations can be valid.Metrace, Knock and Open/close.
Beside our different reading of what the spell say if knock were to swing open doors, lids and so on it would trigger a lot of traps.
Not a great idea.
The main problem with the rogue is that, in a standard 4-person party, you can get everything he brings to the table and more from other character classes.
If your party already has a fighter, wizard, and cleric, then an archivist bard runs circles around the rogue. He finds and disables magical traps, out-socials the rogue by a wide margin, and brings team buffs that more than make up for the rogue's damage while still being a competent secondary combatant.
If the fighter in the above group is replaced by a paladin or a cavalier who can handle social interactions for the party, then an urban or trapper ranger makes a better addition to the party since he can handle traps just as well as the rogue while also being a full-BAB combatant (who can also handle wilderness duties in the case of the trapper).
The issue is not that the rogue's abilities can be distributed out among other party members. As has been stated, that is true for any character class. The issue is how incredibly easy it is to distribute those abilities. Building a party for serious adventuring that lacks a full-BAB character requires a significant amount of optimization and coordination of character builds amongst the party. However, building a party without a rogue is pretty much trivially easy, and sadly enough, often actually results in a better party that's also more fun for each player since there will be less situations where characters will be rendered spectators. Eliminating the designated skill-monkey role actually keeps players more engaged and results in less nodding off, playing on smartphones, side conversations, etc since everyone has more to do.
+1
You've summed up nicely why the rogue is a sub-optimal choice compared to other options.
stuffI was giving the more favourable interpretation for BNW and considering only the lock warded.
The description of the trap is sufficiently ambiguous that both interpretations can be valid.Metrace, Knock and Open/close.
Beside our different reading of what the spell say if knock were to swing open doors, lids and so on it would trigger a lot of traps.
Not a great idea.
Actually it is a great idea since most traps don't reset and/or have a trivial consequence when activated.
.... Eliminating the designated skill-monkey role actually keeps players more engaged and results in less nodding off, playing on smartphones, side conversations, etc since everyone has more to do.
How does it keep players more engaged? That does not even make sense to me as a general statement. It is not like having a rogue in the party means nobody else can take skills also. It is often a good idea to have two people covering certain skills such as perception.
Actually it is a great idea since most traps don't reset and/or have a trivial consequence when activated.stuffI was giving the more favourable interpretation for BNW and considering only the lock warded.
The description of the trap is sufficiently ambiguous that both interpretations can be valid.Metrace, Knock and Open/close.
Beside our different reading of what the spell say if knock were to swing open doors, lids and so on it would trigger a lot of traps.
Not a great idea.
Most traps do have a trivial consequence, but the ones that don't are the ones I worry about anyway. The problem is that you don't often find out the effect until it is to late. As for the resetting traps it seems Pathfinder is fond of those, and so am I. Normally there is a delay to the reset as opposed to just automatic though.
The idea is not just about the trap resetting. It can apply to double-trapped chests/doors.If you use a wand of knock you have to keep making/buying higher caster level versions in order to keep up.
If someone does not wish to buy the wand then how many time do they prepare it in a day?
.... Eliminating the designated skill-monkey role actually keeps players more engaged and results in less nodding off, playing on smartphones, side conversations, etc since everyone has more to do.How does it keep players more engaged? That does not even make sense to me as a general statement. It is not like having a rogue in the party means nobody else can take skills also. It is often a good idea to have two people covering certain skills such as perception.
I think what he means is precisely what I was saying. The rogue says "Ok I'm gonna search the room for traps. This square I roll a 5" DM:"You don't find anything" "Ok this next one I roll a 17" "you find a trap" "Ok what kind"
It's a dialogue between the DM and the rogue, and often lasts an agonizing amount of time at the table let along in game time. It's a similar problem that fighters or people with low charisma have in social encounters. Players check out if they aren't continually engaged. I know I do.
|
|
Actually it is a great idea since most traps don't reset and/or have a trivial consequence when activated.stuffI was giving the more favourable interpretation for BNW and considering only the lock warded.
The description of the trap is sufficiently ambiguous that both interpretations can be valid.Metrace, Knock and Open/close.
Beside our different reading of what the spell say if knock were to swing open doors, lids and so on it would trigger a lot of traps.
Not a great idea.
The hallway flood with poison gas, the trap sound an alarm, the chest content is destroyed, the door open when you are 200' away alerting the people in the next room, ....
Sure, trivial consequences.
|
|
I think what he means is precisely what I was saying. The rogue says "Ok I'm gonna search the room for traps. This square I roll a 5" DM:"You don't find anything" "Ok this next one I roll a 17" "you find a trap" "Ok what kind"It's a dialogue between the DM and the rogue, and often lasts an agonizing amount of time at the table let along in game time. It's a similar problem that fighters or people with low charisma have in social encounters. Players check out if they aren't continually engaged. I know I do.
Generally it go:
Rogue player: "I search this room and take 10"
The GM check the skill check against the trap DC and give the results
or
Rogue player: "I search this room"
GM, roll 1 or more dice, only one is meaningful unless there are multiple traps in separate locations, check skill check against DC of finding the trap, and say:
-if failed or there aren't traps "You spend 10 minutes searching the 60' x 60' room. There isn't any sign of a trap."
- if successful: "You spend 10 minutes searching the 60' x 60' room. In the far corner there are sign of a trap."
60 seconds at most.
So it is either a GM problem or a very short attention span problem.
I think what he means is precisely what I was saying. The rogue says "Ok I'm gonna search the room for traps. This square I roll a 5" DM:"You don't find anything" "Ok this next one I roll a 17" "you find a trap" "Ok what kind"It's a dialogue between the DM and the rogue, and often lasts an agonizing amount of time at the table let along in game time. It's a similar problem that fighters or people with low charisma have in social encounters. Players check out if they aren't continually engaged. I know I do.
Generally it go:
Rogue player: "I search this room and take 10"
The GM check the skill check against the trap DC and give the resultsor
Rogue player: "I search this room"
GM, roll 1 or more dice, only one is meaningful unless there are multiple traps in separate locations, check skill check against DC of finding the trap, and say:
-if failed or there aren't traps "You spend 10 minutes searching the 60' x 60' room. There isn't any sign of a trap."
- if successful: "You spend 10 minutes searching the 60' x 60' room. In the far corner there are sign of a trap."60 seconds at most.
So it is either a GM problem or a very short attention span problem.
Then you enter the next room... it's empty .So the rogue searches for traps taking another minute. Then you enter the next room... it's empty...etc.
So it could get frustrating/boring for the rest of the party. The more they engage in searching or interacting with the room the more they reduce the rogues' niche. However the rogue (of course) does not have to open all the doors, chests & locks. Other players should (IMO)explore with him to keep interests peaked.
Actually that's just how the numbers work out. The DC is based on a spell trap that's exactly level appropriate.
-Its a level 4 trap for a level 5 party. There are other traps he could have picked that would have shown different outcomes.
I think his point is that it is a real concern in a real game. The rogue can handle it and still not lose anything
This is incorrect. The rogue had to invest talents. A rogue needs every talent they have in order to be halfway effective in battle. Combat is a MUCH more common and dangerous circumstance than traps.
while the wizard can not do so or at least do it as easily
The wizard auto detects the trap (detect magic) and uses knock from down the hall. Unless the lock also has a dc 29 , the d20 +15 from the knock spell SHOULD open it.
which leads to a the rogue not being so easily replaceable. Not all magic traps are at APL. I generally use such traps if they are on their own. I use weaker one if I am trying to soften the party up for the next fight or drain resources. I see it as a valid concern.
If its that big of a problem its not that hard to get a higher disable device or add more scrolls or even a wand of summon monst. 1 for polish mine detectors.
.... Eliminating the designated skill-monkey role actually keeps players more engaged and results in less nodding off, playing on smartphones, side conversations, etc since everyone has more to do.How does it keep players more engaged? That does not even make sense to me as a general statement. It is not like having a rogue in the party means nobody else can take skills also. It is often a good idea to have two people covering certain skills such as perception.I think what he means is precisely what I was saying. The rogue says "Ok I'm gonna search the room for traps. This square I roll a 5" DM:"You don't find anything" "Ok this next one I roll a 17" "you find a trap" "Ok what kind"
It's a dialogue between the DM and the rogue, and often lasts an agonizing amount of time at the table let along in game time. It's a similar problem that fighters or people with low charisma have in social encounters. Players check out if they aren't continually engaged. I know I do.
1. Most GM's don't have you check every square even though it is the rule to avoid wasting too much time IRL.
2. Everyone can search at the same time. Now if you choose to not put ranks in perception that is a debate for another thread.
This is incorrect. The rogue had to invest talents. A rogue needs every talent they have in order to be halfway effective in battle. Combat is a MUCH more common and dangerous circumstance than traps.
That is not true at all. You can be good at combat and trapfinding, not Full BAB good, but good enough to be a threat.
The talents the rogue are investing are also talents he would have invested anyway. Your comment about having to invest talents is like me saying a wizard taking invisibility is wasting a spell doing rogue stuff, but it would be mostly false since many wizards pick up invisibility anyway.
If its that big of a problem its not that hard to get a higher disable device or add more scrolls or even a wand of summon monster 1 for polish mine detectors.
Are you banking on the fact that the trap only affects one character or has no other adverse effect? You are also assuming the trap never resets. I think the way you play the game is influencing that. Even the AP's have resetting traps and ones that do nonconvential things.
That is not true at all. You can be good at combat and trapfinding, not Full BAB good, but good enough to be a threat.
I don't see both. The trap finding specialist is near useless in combat.
The talents the rogue are investing are also talents he would have invested anyway.
He invested them in trapfinding instead of combat. There's a loss there that's not being acknowledged. In fact , most rogues don't take these talents at all. By the logic that you need that much trapfinding to be effective most rogues aren't effective.
Your comment about having to invest talents is like me saying a wizard taking invisibility is wasting a spell doing rogue stuff, but it would be mostly false since many wizards pick up invisibility anyway.
Invisibility is 1 of a wizards 15 spells. Talents are much rarer.
Are you banking on the fact that the trap only affects one character or has no other adverse effect?
No, I'm not. But either the adverse affect can be handled or the party is eventually going to come across something that the rogue can't handle
You are also assuming the trap never resets. I think the way you play the game is influencing that. Even the AP's have resetting traps and ones that do nonconvential things.
If the trap resets then you can try to disarm it, or have everyone move through before it resets.
I don't see both. The trap finding specialist is near useless in combat.
I can't find James's rogue so I can only assume his ignored combat and focused only on trapfinding. If that is the case he will be bad at combat if he used everything for traps. My point was that there is a happy medium.
He invested them in trapfinding instead of combat. There's a loss there that's not being acknowledged. In fact , most rogues don't take these talents at all. By the logic that you need that much trapfinding to be effective most rogues aren't effective.
You don't need all those talents though. I took a scout(3.5) class through Shackled City, and there is an area full of traps. I never set one off. The Scout has no talents for trapfinding. I made sure I was good at it though.
Ranks 4class bonus 3
1/2 class level 2
masterwork thieves kit 2----only affects disable device
skill focus(perception) 3
eyes of the eagle +5
wis bonus +3
racial bonus(half elf) 2
total perception bonus to find traps:22 ish
Disable device was about disable device was about a 15 or 16.
I would have had trouble with the disable device check also if I had a rogue, unless I purchased a masterwork item that would help with disabling traps which brings me to about 18ish. That still keeps me under 50%. I guess if I go rogue I can get the talent that forces me to fail my 10 or more to set the trap off. James mentioned it upthread. I didn't actually look it up though. I am sure I could use his uber disable device build to get one or two more points to from somewhere, and I am still free to use my 2 feats, and remaining talent to fight.
That skill focus was a racial feat from the half-elf race.
Invisibility is 1 of a wizards 15 spells. Talents are much rarer.
That does not change the fact that you said that the talent was being used when it is something that would have been chosen anyway, which is what my point was.
No, I'm not. But either the adverse affect can be handled or the party is eventually going to come across something that the rogue can't handle
That is true in theory only.
Yo
If the trap resets then you can try to disarm it, or have everyone move through before it resets.
I have never seen a group sit back and try to time the reset on a trap or see if it has one. Of course it is a good idea. More than likely they would find out the hard way, and by then it may be too late.
You're still spending money to do something a rogue does for free.
Far less than a rogue is going to need to spend on a magic weapon to hit something.
One talent that a rogue spends on trap spotter makes him FAR superior to the wizard on detecting traps. Traps aren't just on doors. Traps aren't just magical.
At that level that one talent is half his talents.
A caster level 10 knock spell has a 1 in 20 chance of opening an amazing lock.
the dc on amazing is...?
A wizard with a knock spell has a caster level + 10 bonus
The caster level= max ranks. To offset the +10 you have a +7 dex and +3 from the trained skill. I don't see how the rogue comes out vastly ahead on this one without blowing feats and talents.
Lock: The DC to open a lock with the Disable Device skill depends on the lock's quality: simple (DC 20), average (DC 25), good (DC 30), or superior (DC 40).
So, are you going to be buying wands of knock at CL 15-20? Thats going to get expensive.
Use the spells. By the time you're level 10 second level spells are a dime a dozen.
A level 10 or 11 rogue can open them (disable device at about +22) every time by taking 20.
If you want to throw taking 20 into the mix there's a very narrow set of circumstances where the roguey wizard can't do the same thing.
After he disables whatever traps are on the door, with a better chance than the wizard.
What are your campaigns like, 4 hours of door opening?
You don't need all those talents though. I took a scout(3.5) class through Shackled City, and there is an area full of traps. I never set one off. The Scout has no talents for trapfinding. I made sure I was good at it though.
What point buy were you using to get a 16 wisdom score?
You're still spending money to do something a rogue does for free.Far less than a rogue is going to need to spend on a magic weapon to hit something.
The other combat(hp damage) classes don't use magic items?
You don't need all those talents though. I took a scout(3.5) class through Shackled City, and there is an area full of traps. I never set one off. The Scout has no talents for trapfinding. I made sure I was good at it though.What point buy were you using to get a 16 wisdom score?
I know I had a 16 in wisdom, and 14 in dex using 20pb and a half elf. The other stats are just guesses. The scout class gets a bonus to its fort save and I used the favored point to boost my hp. That offset the 12 con I had since I normally go with at least a 14.
str 12
dex 14
con 12
int 12
wis 16(14+2 racial)
cha 9
edit:I had a 12 con.
I removed a post. That level of condescension is just not necessary.
I know I had a 16 in wisdom, and 14 in dex using 20pb and a half elf. The other stats are just guesses. The scout class gets a bonus to its fort save and I used the favored point to boost my hp. That offset the 12 con I had since I normally go with at least a 14.
str 12
dex 14
con 12
int 12
wis 16(14+2 racial)
cha 9
edit:I had a 12 con.
-What does this character DO in combat? Please put the standard response down. I am NOT a hack and slash player. I do realize that there are other aspects to the game. Conversely i recognize that combat is a large part of the game.
Apologies, I was referring to the superior (DC 40) lock. Again, you forget the trapfinding bonus, like it isn't even there.
whoops. I did.
It applies to all disable device checks. Read it again. 10 ranks + 7 dex + 3 trained + 2 masterwork tools + 5 trapfinding at level 10.
Thats a +27 to start with, compared to your +20. Superior locks are quickly approaching trivial for this rogue.
Ok, he has a +7 and the ability to take 10. He's better at opening the locks. That doesn't remotely compare to 5th level spells. If your party is being defeated by locked doors regularly you are doing something seriously wrong.
A level 10 wizard has 5-7 second level spells. Barely half of a dozen, and some of his best defensive spells are at this level.
And summoning in A giant rhino makes for a heck of a door opener if you run out.
No, but all you ever bring up is how awesome knock is, and how it makes the rogues opening of locks obsolete.
My main argument was for the hybrid approach: grab the skills and then use the magic when you have to. Where the lion's skin will not reach, patch it with the fox's. The same character can do both.
If you want to throw taking 20 into the mix there's a very narrow set of circumstances where the roguey wizard can't do the same thing.
Except he is still 4+ points behind the rogue (even optimized) due to trapfinding.
Yes. He is.
SO WHAT?
How often do you hit the circumstance where you need to quickly and quietly open a door that's exactly 5 points higher than the wizards ability? A rogue's usefulness on alternate Tuesdays under a blue moon does not remotely make up for their low power the rest of the month.
I know I had a 16 in wisdom, and 14 in dex using 20pb and a half elf. The other stats are just guesses. The scout class gets a bonus to its fort save and I used the favored point to boost my hp. That offset the 12 con I had since I normally go with at least a 14.
str 12
dex 14
con 12
int 12
wis 16(14+2 racial)
cha 9edit:I had a 12 con.
-What does this character DO in combat? Please put the standard response down. I am NOT a hack and slash player. I do realize that there are other aspects to the game. Conversely i recognize that combat is a large part of the game.
Apologies, I was referring to the superior (DC 40) lock. Again, you forget the trapfinding bonus, like it isn't even there.
whoops. I did.
It applies to all disable device checks. Read it again. 10 ranks + 7 dex + 3 trained + 2 masterwork tools + 5 trapfinding at level 10.
Thats a +27 to start with, compared to your +20. Superior locks are quickly approaching trivial for this rogue.
Ok, he has a +7 and the ability to take 10. He's better at opening the locks. That doesn't remotely compare to 5th level spells. If your party is being defeated by locked doors regularly you are doing something seriously wrong.
A level 10 wizard has 5-7 second level spells. Barely half of a dozen, and some of his best defensive spells are at this level.And summoning in A giant rhino makes for a heck of a door opener if you run out.
No, but all you ever bring up is how awesome knock is, and how it makes the rogues opening of locks obsolete.My main argument was for the hybrid approach: grab the skills and then use the magic when you have to. Where the lion's skin will not reach, patch it with the fox's. The same character can do both.
...If you want to throw taking 20 into the mix there's a very narrow set of circumstances where the roguey wizard can't do the same thing.
Except he is still 4+ points behind the rogue (even optimized) due to
You have my post combined with someone else's. I could probably figure out what goes where, but could you use the quotations bbcode tags to separate the different post?