Rogues and underpoweredness


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

501 to 550 of 666 << first < prev | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | next > last >>

Starbuck_II wrote:
drbuzzard wrote:

Above you cite a 3rd level rogue doing 9d6+6 which is rather on the side of unbelievable. Please explain how this occurs. They can't have 3 attacks at that level (which seemed like the logical breakdown, 3 attacks of 1d6 weapon, +2 d6 sneak, +1 weapon, +1 str). Unless he has one heck of an over wealth by level weapon, I don't see it as possible.

I guess if you have a rogue capable...

Ninja works.

If he meant Ninja when he write Rogue, it is possible. Very resource draining (1 Ki point per each round you get an extra attack).

That would be funny, since Ninja is often pointed out as yet another example replacement for rogue. I have to agree. Those guys are pretty much superior to rogues. >.>


mplindustries wrote:
3.5 Loyalist wrote:

Yeah, seen this all before. In the discussion of how strong the rogue is, what is often being missed is the use of stealth, ranged and initiative control.

E.g. rogue scouts out targets. Moves up to within 30, the rest move up to about 50-60, with the bonus to their stealth from distance to cover their average to weak stealth checks. If they are detected, the targets start to move to the party but the rogue is still hidden. You can play with angles here to get some great crossing fire. Rogue sneak attacks with ranged, wins initiative, sneak attacks with another single shot and retreats to the cover of the hidden party. Rest of party busts out. Rogue enters melee with feinting, tumbling or 5, move and another sneak attack if the opening is there. Or they shoot the enemies in the face while the rest of the pcs are the sudden wall of advancing steel and spells.

Basic stuff, it isn't about DPR an full round attacks, it is about using stealth, then sneak attacking, sneak attacking again and doing just so much in the very early rounds.

Anyone can do what you described--anyone can take Stealth and do that--Rangers can even better at it than the Rogue with favored terrain, and Ninjas and other spellcasters like the Bard can just be legit invisible. This is not a "rogue" tactic, this is a Stealth tactic--it's good but does not help the rogue's case because it is not Rogue specific or even something the Rogue is best at.

Nope, two sneak attack ranged shots will be better on the damage than two ranger shots. The ranged ranger's strength is the full round arrow storm, but then they are stationary, and aren't sneaking and zipping backwards. Of course though, the ranger is better at long ranged past the sneak attack ranged. As for spells, invisibility, all good, the attack makes you visible (just discussing basic early level invis at this stage), is your initiative up to winning after the surprise? This isn't the same build as the high initiative rogue, and the bard "sneak attacker" will be doing a lot worse damage than two sneaks (because they don't have sneak attack). Oh and try to perform and up your ranged attacks, well, might just give away your position.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kenjishinomouri wrote:
Kierato wrote:

We have identified the problem.

So what's the answer to the problem?
Play a ninja, or a rogue with the ki talents.

The archetypal rogue is a sneaky fellow that sneaks around and gets by with her wits, stealth and a quick knife.

If you want to deal a lot of damage, be a fighter. If you want to rain fire down upon your enemies, play a spellcaster.

Dunno about Ninjas. Are you complaining about the balance about Rogues vs Ninjas or because someone in your game is running a Ninja and is more useful than your Rogue? Rogues to my way of thinking will also be superb con-men or 2nd-story burglars.

The Ninja should be a cross between thief, spy and assassin. I haven't seen the class, but one thing they should not be is a combat monster (yeah, revealing my ignorance of the Paizo Ninja here).

That said, it also sounds like a complaint that other classes can do things as well as a Rogue--but I will now point out that few classes can do everything as well as a Rogue and still carry out their primary class function.

Given all the skills a Rogue can have (my fighter 6/cleric 3 is rather envious about that), I suggest picking a Modus Operandi or two and make that your strong suit. Can't recall that many Ninja con-men or gamblers.


3.5 Loyalist wrote:


Nope, two sneak attack ranged shots will be better on the damage than two ranger shots. The ranged ranger's strength is the full round arrow storm, but then they are stationary, and aren't sneaking and zipping backwards.

Wait, how is a rogue getting of 2 ranged attacks while not stationary?

Quote:


This isn't the same build as the high initiative rogue, and the bard "sneak attacker" will be doing a lot worse damage than two sneaks (because they don't have sneak attack). Oh and try to perform and up your ranged attacks, well, might just give away your position.

Depends in sound is needed for the perform. Perform (mime) requires no sound for example.

Bard (Archeologist) can put up heroism before he goes sneaking (long duration), Allegro for haste, +2 song (assuming level 5), Deadly aim, Point blank shot, Rapid shot.

Hit would be 13/13 (2 Luck, 2 Morale, 3 BAB, 1 PBS, 4 Dex [can craft a +2 dex item starting with so 16 Dex, 1 Haste]
Rapid Shot/deadly aim would lower to 10/10/10 (1d6+6, assuming Mighty +2, PBS 1, Deadly aim +2, +1 bow, 2 luck).

DPS would be vs Target AC 18 at level 5:
(.65)(9.5) +(0.05)(2)(0.65)(9.5)= 7.13 x3=21.4/rd

Now a 5th level Rogue ranged requires PBS, Rapid Shot, we can assume WF?
We can give a +1 bow but no guaranteed Dex item so 16 Dex. Str 14 for Mighty to be kind.
We will assume he has 1st round of combat within 30 feet because how else if he sneak attacking.

BAB 3, 3 dex, 1 PBS, 1 WF, -2 Rapid shot =6.
Bow +6/6 (1d6+4 +3d6), target AC again 18
(.35)(7.5+10.5) +(0.05)(2)(0.35)(7.5)= 6.6/rd = 19.7

Math says you lose.

I'll think up a good Ranger soon.
Ranger would be like Rogue but better base damage (long bow composite), better BAB +5, free ranged feats, and spells by 5th.
Hit +9 (5 BAB, 1 PBS, +1 bow, 1 WF, -2 Rapid Shot, 3 Dex, -2 Deadly Aim)
Damage (1d8+ 2 Mighty, +1 bow, 4 DA so 1d8+7), target 18 AC

(.45)(11.5+0) +(0.05)(2)(0.45)(11.5)= 5.7 per strike =17.1

Now I haven't factored in Favored enemy, assuming Ranger casts Gravity bow raises damage by 2.2/strike, 3 strikes means +6 damage or 23.8 /rd.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Apply 3.5 Loyalists Rogue Strategy to the Ninja. Ninja does it (far) better.


There's also the fact that archery rogues are a trap. It's generally difficult to keep a foe flat-footed versus your attacks. Generally a foe is flat-footed vs your attacks is if they haven't acted in combat, or are blinded. That makes sneak-attack pretty much useless with ranged weapons after round 1, and only if the rogue goes before their victim.

For example: A 5th level rogue sneaks up on Troll.

For our testing purposes, we'll assume the rogue has an 18 Dexterity and a 14 Strength (reversing the stats from the earlier posted "brute rogue"). This gives our 5th level rogue a +14 Stealth (5 ranks, 3 class, 2 mwk tool, 4 Dex), along with a +8 to hit (+3 BAB, +1 enhancement, +4 Dex). Our rogue's attack routine includes a mwk composite shortbow (1d6+2). Our rogue's initiative modifier is +4.

Our rogue decides that to sneak attack this troll. Now the troll's Perception is only +8. But the rogue has several problems. Firstly, the troll has darkvision, low-light vision, and scent. This troll is not going to be the victim of more than 1 sneak attack, and here's why. The rogue needs concealment to hide, which means that he has to get within 30 ft. of the troll to sneak attack, but has to pass 60 ft. of darkvision. Assuming he can do that, the troll sees twice as far without concealment with light due to low-light vision (such as if the troll is next to a fire as in the Hobbit). Finally, if the rogue manages to reach the golden 30 ft. marker, Scent automatically detects the rogue's presence, and then the troll and the rogue Roll initiative (no surprise round sneak attack).

So our rogue has a 10% greater chance of going before the Troll (2 points higher). Not exactly the best odds in the world for it to be reliable. If we add Improved Initiative to our rogue, it gives us a +30% chance to go first, but even, luck is a fickle mistress. If the troll acts first, we don't get to sneak attack at all.

So assuming we act first, we roll against the Troll's flat-footed AC (14) with our +8. We have a 70% chance to hit him for 4d6+2 (16 average damage, DPR 11.2). So assuming we hit, we deal around 16 damage and now we're 30 ft. from an angry troll, who is no longer flat-footed on his turn, and has many more HPs and is bigger, stronger, and meaner than we.

Example (Ranger): Our ranger is going to use the same statistics as the one posted before (18 Str, 14 Dex). I'm going to assume that our ranger is a balanced ranger (melee + ranged combat style), and has at 5th level acquired the following feats: Power Attack, Deadly Aim, Rapid Shot*, Skill Focus (Stealth). Our Ranger is wearing a mwk breastplate w/ mwk tool, for a Stealth of +12. For offense, our Ranger has a mwk composite longbow (1d8+4/x3) and a +8 to hit (+5 BAB, +2 Dex, +1 enhancement).

In this scenario, the Ranger sneaks up on the troll as well, getting no closer than 70 feet. This nets the Ranger an effective +7 to his Stealth skill. Since the troll was near a fire (presumably cooking the last rogue to happen bye), the Ranger sees the troll. The ranger scatters some caltrops on the ground and then begins combat with a surprise round. Seeing as the ranger is invisible to the Troll (+2 to hit) and the troll is flat-footed, the ranger opens up with a Deadly Aim shot at +8 (70% chance, 12.5 average, 8.75 DPR). The Ranger and troll roll Initiative. The two begin fighting normally, with the advantage to the Ranger.

Now assuming we're in tight spaces (where the furthest you can attack from is 30 ft. away), then the Ranger and the Rogue can't effectively milk the Troll's flat-footed condition effectively, so the Ranger just swaps to his favorite weapon and fights it out (his AC will be between 18-20 with a 2 hander, or 20-22 with a shield). The rogue on the other hand has problems.


Starbuck_II wrote:
3.5 Loyalist wrote:


Nope, two sneak attack ranged shots will be better on the damage than two ranger shots. The ranged ranger's strength is the full round arrow storm, but then they are stationary, and aren't sneaking and zipping backwards.

Wait, how is a rogue getting of 2 ranged attacks while not stationary?

Quote:


This isn't the same build as the high initiative rogue, and the bard "sneak attacker" will be doing a lot worse damage than two sneaks (because they don't have sneak attack). Oh and try to perform and up your ranged attacks, well, might just give away your position.

Depends in sound is needed for the perform. Perform (mime) requires no sound for example.

Bard (Archeologist) can put up heroism before he goes sneaking (long duration), Allegro for haste, +2 song (assuming level 5), Deadly aim, Point blank shot, Rapid shot.

Hit would be 13/13 (2 Luck, 2 Morale, 3 BAB, 1 PBS, 4 Dex [can craft a +2 dex item starting with so 16 Dex, 1 Haste]
Rapid Shot/deadly aim would lower to 10/10/10 (1d6+6, assuming Mighty +2, PBS 1, Deadly aim +2, +1 bow, 2 luck).

DPS would be vs Target AC 18 at level 5:
(.65)(9.5) +(0.05)(2)(0.65)(9.5)= 7.13 x3=21.4/rd

Now a 5th level Rogue ranged requires PBS, Rapid Shot, we can assume WF?
We can give a +1 bow but no guaranteed Dex item so 16 Dex. Str 14 for Mighty to be kind.
We will assume he has 1st round of combat within 30 feet because how else if he sneak attacking.

BAB 3, 3 dex, 1 PBS, 1 WF, -2 Rapid shot =6.
Bow +6/6 (1d6+4 +3d6), target AC again 18
(.35)(7.5+10.5) +(0.05)(2)(0.35)(7.5)= 6.6/rd = 19.7

Math says you lose.

I'll think up a good Ranger soon.
Ranger would be like Rogue but better base damage (long bow composite), better BAB +5, free ranged feats, and spells by 5th.
Hit +9 (5 BAB, 1 PBS, +1 bow, 1 WF, -2 Rapid Shot, 3 Dex, -2 Deadly Aim)
Damage (1d8+ 2 Mighty, +1 bow, 4 DA so 1d8+7), target 18 AC

(.45)(11.5+0) +(0.05)(2)(0.45)(11.5)= 5.7 per strike =17.1

Now I haven't factored in...

Surprise, sneak, win initiative, sneak, move. Got it?

A rogue on the offensive can actually get a lot done while others wait around.


3.5 Loyalist wrote:
...

Riiight until the time where you sneak fail to surprise lose initiative, die, roll up new non rogue character.


Ashiel, you claimed "Scent automatically detects the rogue's presence, and then the troll and the rogue Roll initiative (no surprise round sneak attack)".

Nope

http://www.pathfinder-srd.nl/wiki/Scent

"The creature detects another creature’s presence but not its specific location. Noting the direction of the scent is a move action. If the creature moves within 5 feet (1 square) of the scent’s source, the creature can pinpoint that source."

It takes a while for the troll to sniff out the rogue. It knows someone is there, but it chews a move to work out direction, and would need to beat the rogue on initiative to be able to sniff-out before the sneak attack. Assuming it is even on high alert, it hasn't heard anything till now (and the rogue is on +3 up to stealth as it approaches at 30+). If the rogue attacks the moment they enter 30 by sensible declaring actions and intent, they can still sneak attack, the troll is just starting to work out something is up as the arrow flies.

Using the rogue, don't hesitate and wait to be discovered, got to be pro-active when dealing with scent and be wary of the wind direction. If the rogue moves within 30 and doesn't let that sneak off immediately, the troll can sniff out the rogue, then initiative, if rogue wins, they can still sneak, if the troll wins, they use the move to approach and try to find the rogue, if they get in 5 they've got them; but the rogue doesn't have to wait around to be discovered if their intent is to shoot in the back of the head.

If it comes to a initiative check of sneak or "sniff" first, trolls don't have a great initiative, dex rogue archer with high initiative has a lot potentially in their favour, even against your high dex troll with reversed str an dex. A good try flipping the stats around to prove your point, but that makes a troll with a lot less damage potential, so it isn't a threat that can so quickly kill a rogue.


Lastly, the cunning rogue can easily defeat scent another way.

"False, powerful odors can easily mask other scents. The presence of such an odor completely spoils the ability to properly detect or identify creatures"

A rogue that stealths within 65-80, and throws something rotting and filthy (dead cat, piece of an old monster) can totally distract the scent-using troll. Then move in 30 and let the troll-shooting games begin while it sniffs out the distraction. Anything strong ruins their ability to properly detect or identify creatures after all. Overload those sensors.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

...high dex troll? Standard bestiary trolls have 14 Dex, which results in the +2 initiative modifier Ashiel used.

Also, why would a troll that detects a non-troll creature hiding in the vicinity not go on high alert immediately? It doesn't need to know where you are for combat to begin, both sides just need to be aware of each other.


3.5 Loyalist wrote:

Lastly, the cunning rogue can easily defeat scent another way.

"False, powerful odors can easily mask other scents. The presence of such an odor completely spoils the ability to properly detect or identify creatures"

A rogue that stealths within 65-80, and throws something rotting and filthy (dead cat, piece of an old monster) can totally distract the scent-using troll. Then move in 30 and let the troll-shooting games begin while it sniffs out the distraction. Anything strong ruins their ability to properly detect or identify creatures after all. Overload those sensors.

I hope Sneaky McRogue doesn't try to sneak up on anyone else while he's carrying that rotting cat in his pocket just in case he runs into a troll.


Ashiel wrote:

There's also the fact that archery rogues are a trap. It's generally difficult to keep a foe flat-footed versus your attacks. Generally a foe is flat-footed vs your attacks is if they haven't acted in combat, or are blinded. That makes sneak-attack pretty much useless with ranged weapons after round 1, and only if the rogue goes before their victim.

For example: A 5th level rogue sneaks up on Troll.

For our testing purposes, we'll assume the rogue has an 18 Dexterity and a 14 Strength (reversing the stats from the earlier posted "brute rogue"). This gives our 5th level rogue a +14 Stealth (5 ranks, 3 class, 2 mwk tool, 4 Dex), along with a +8 to hit (+3 BAB, +1 enhancement, +4 Dex). Our rogue's attack routine includes a mwk composite shortbow (1d6+2). Our rogue's initiative modifier is +4.

Our rogue decides that to sneak attack this troll. Now the troll's Perception is only +8. But the rogue has several problems. Firstly, the troll has darkvision, low-light vision, and scent. This troll is not going to be the victim of more than 1 sneak attack, and here's why. The rogue needs concealment to hide, which means that he has to get within 30 ft. of the troll to sneak attack, but has to pass 60 ft. of darkvision. Assuming he can do that, the troll sees twice as far without concealment with light due to low-light vision (such as if the troll is next to a fire as in the Hobbit). Finally, if the rogue manages to reach the golden 30 ft. marker, Scent automatically detects the rogue's presence, and then the troll and the rogue Roll initiative (no surprise round sneak attack).

So our rogue has a 10% greater chance of going before the Troll (2 points higher). Not exactly the best odds in the world for it to be reliable. If we add Improved Initiative to our rogue, it gives us a +30% chance to go first, but even, luck is a fickle mistress. If the troll acts first, we don't get to sneak attack at all.

So assuming we act first, we roll against the Troll's flat-footed AC (14) with our +8. We have a 70% chance to hit him for 4d6+2 (16 average damage, DPR 11.2). So assuming we hit, we deal around 16 damage and now we're 30 ft. from an angry troll, who is no longer flat-footed on his turn, and has many more HPs and is bigger, stronger, and meaner than we.

Example (Ranger): Our ranger is going to use the same statistics as the one posted before (18 Str, 14 Dex). I'm going to assume that our ranger is a balanced ranger (melee + ranged combat style), and has at 5th level acquired the following feats: Power Attack, Deadly Aim, Rapid Shot*, Skill Focus (Stealth). Our Ranger is wearing a mwk breastplate w/ mwk tool, for a Stealth of +12. For offense, our Ranger has a mwk composite longbow (1d8+4/x3) and a +8 to hit (+5 BAB, +2 Dex, +1 enhancement).

In this scenario, the Ranger sneaks up on the troll as well, getting no closer than 70 feet. This nets the Ranger an effective +7 to his Stealth skill. Since the troll was near a fire (presumably cooking the last rogue to happen bye), the Ranger sees the troll. The ranger scatters some caltrops on the ground and then begins combat with a surprise round. Seeing as the ranger is invisible to the Troll (+2 to hit) and the troll is flat-footed, the ranger opens up with a Deadly Aim shot at +8 (70% chance, 12.5 average, 8.75 DPR). The Ranger and troll roll Initiative. The two begin fighting normally, with the advantage to the Ranger.

Now assuming we're in tight spaces (where the furthest you can attack from is 30 ft. away), then the Ranger and the Rogue can't effectively milk the Troll's flat-footed condition effectively, so the Ranger just swaps to his favorite weapon and fights it out (his AC will be between 18-20 with a 2 hander, or 20-22 with a shield). The rogue on the other hand has problems.

The ranger is stronger thatn the rogue as it should be, this results should not be a surprise for anyone.

But your analisis is biased. For some reason the ranger have his feats(including his bonus feats)and the rogue does not, for some reason the ranger have caltrops and the rogue do not, it is like the rogue did nothing to improve his chances of victory.

For example at 5 level a mithral chain shirt, 18 dex, and a buckler the rogue have 20 AC the same as your ranger. But your ranger is in medium armor(unless he is spending 40%+ of his WBl in his armor).

Now let asume this Rogue

1. Weapon finesse.
2. Befundling strike.
3. Improved Feint.
4. Ofensive defense
5. Extra rogue talent (ninja trick (deadly range).

This guy can shot before the troll can smell him. He do the same caltrops trick as theranger. With the first attack (surprise round) he deals +10 4d6+2 (20/x3) (because a masterwork shortbow is reasonable) 80% chances of hitting 12.8 DPR. And the attack also impose a -2 to the trolls attacks, so my efective AC is 22. The next sneak attack can increase the rogue AC in another +3.

PS: I am not saying rogues are strong enough. Rogues needs better rogue talents IMHO.

PS2: I think the ranger and the rogue would probably die in the hands of the troll so this example is not really that helpfull. A rogue would try to sneak pass the troll or return to warn the rest of the party.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kenjishinomouri wrote:
the point of rogue is the spell caster doesn't need to waste his spell on finding a trap, or on sneaking the rogue can just do it,

Why waste nothing? A wand of find traps and a wand of detect secret doors and you are mostly done. Those are cheap, specially if paid by the whole group.

Quote:
in combat he shouldn't be dealing the most damage, he supports the fighter, not outclass him, skill monkey(I personally feel the alchemist is a BAMF when it comes to being a skill monkey) but the rogue has access to tricks that let him do special things with skills, the rogue is in the class that its not the best at something but its moderate to good at a lot of things.

The problem with the rogue is that when he can't sneak, he sucks.Big Time. Even with less monsters being inmune to sneak attack, that means he sucks a lot of time. The increasing in tumble DC don't help him to flank, either.

In my games, the Rogue killed the Ninja and took his stuff.


TheSideKick wrote:

your gm should be changing things for every person to have fun on an equal footing, regardless if you chose to play a commoner or a synthesist summoner. a good gm lets a bad rogue be good in their games.

That's the argument of those who beleive Aquaman is on par with Superman, because the GM always put some crappy portion of the plot underwater. It's not. Superman can go underwater too. And swim at superspeed, actually.

As I read once in these forums, that your DM is forced to put an special olimpic events in every adventure to make you happy, doesn't mean your wheelchaired character isn't impaired.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Nicos wrote:
PS2: I think the ranger and the rogue would probably die in the hands of the troll so this example is not really that helpfull. A rogue would try to sneak pass the troll or return to warn the rest of the party.

So does the ranger. Who can have as much stealth as the rogue, or even more if he is in his favored terrain. I'm always surprised about this. Why does people think rogues have some kind of special rights about stealth? Any dexterous character can stealth. That includes archers from other classes (like inquisitor, paladins, rangers), dervish characters, etc. In my campaign, the scimitar-magus took a trait that gives him stealth +1 and class skill. He is as good as the rogue normally, twice as much when he cast invisibility.


gustavo iglesias wrote:
Nicos wrote:
PS2: I think the ranger and the rogue would probably die in the hands of the troll so this example is not really that helpfull. A rogue would try to sneak pass the troll or return to warn the rest of the party.

So does the ranger. Who can have as much stealth as the rogue, or even more if he is in his favored terrain.

So you are agreeingwith me, the example is not really that helpful.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh my rogue threads are always so funny!
Posts removed on every second page statistically and quotes over quotes filled with people throwing numbers at each other^^

From a game design pov, the rogue is in a special place.
It´s the only class with medium BAB that doesn´t have any spells or other ways to buff himself. That´s why the monk and ninja are both slightly better, even if they both have their own problems. Well the ninja sneaked her way into having stuff similar to spells, but got nerfed a lot because so many people whined about forgotten trick. And then in UE just some ki saving equipment pops up.....

But a rogue is not supposed to have spells or other mythic abilities.
Which leaves him with very situational talents and not enough feats, limited weapon choices and weak armor.

There are some out there who just like that. Playing a rogue is like choosing a handicap and i did that quite often in groups with weaker players with less system knowledge. Most times i still had an edge over them :)

But hey, since the rogue talents are so underpowered, why not give two for the price of one? Or just give the rogue extra feats every second or third level? That can change a lot and should not be a problem in a home game at least. And PFS is another basket...


Hayato Ken wrote:


But a rogue is not supposed to have spells or other mythic abilities.
Which leaves him with very situational talents and not enough feats, limited weapon choices and weak armor.

It is not about not being magical, it is about bad desing IMHO.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sigh. After having examined many of the classes, AND your collective arguments, I think I'd rather have a Rogue along whilst dungeon crawling, or indeed just about anywhere in the typical 4 man team. Rangers really don't have the skills Rogues do, and thus aren't as adaptable. Plus, Rangers are straight out warrior types, and should be treated as such.

I don't see why the lot of you seem to think crappy uber specific spells or the limited ki pool somehow compensates for lack of skills. A Rogue can do what he does, time after time, all day long. Spells have to be recharged, and ki pool has to be as well. But then, most of you have grown up on playing video games, and don't think economically (or tactically for that matter). Me, I'm used to having to scrounge for resources in most games, indeed, I find the typical video game shooter to be damned boring, as I always have ammo coming out of my ears.

I've done more damage with a dagger and a stupid Sleep spell, or lantern oil and a spark, than the lot of you seem to think is possible. Really, do you Rogue haters ever stop and consider just how flexible and all around useful it is to simply be good at more skills than anyone else? Do we have to constantly focus on combat, because the *game* certainly isn't solely about combat? Why does it have to be all about how much damage we can do in a single shot? Heck, do you know how many times I've smoked much higher level players with nothing more than a pack of kobolds or goblins armed with bows and a knowledge of the terrain?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Piccolo wrote:

Sigh. After having examined many of the classes, AND your collective arguments, I think I'd rather have a Rogue along whilst dungeon crawling, or indeed just about anywhere in the typical 4 man team. Rangers really don't have the skills Rogues do, and thus aren't as adaptable. Plus, Rangers are straight out warrior types, and should be treated as such.

I don't see why the lot of you seem to think crappy uber specific spells or the limited ki pool somehow compensates for lack of skills. A Rogue can do what he does, time after time, all day long. Spells have to be recharged, and ki pool has to be as well. But then, most of you have grown up on playing video games, and don't think economically (or tactically for that matter). Me, I'm used to having to scrounge for resources in most games, indeed, I find the typical video game shooter to be damned boring, as I always have ammo coming out of my ears.

I've done more damage with a dagger and a stupid Sleep spell, or lantern oil and a spark, than the lot of you seem to think is possible. Really, do you Rogue haters ever stop and consider just how flexible and all around useful it is to simply be good at more skills than anyone else? Do we have to constantly focus on combat, because the *game* certainly isn't solely about combat? Why does it have to be all about how much damage we can do in a single shot? Heck, do you know how many times I've smoked much higher level players with nothing more than a pack of kobolds or goblins armed with bows and a knowledge of the terrain?

You seem to have no idea what you're doing or talking about mechanically, I'm sorry but really re-read everything and play the game according to the rules then start talking.

For starter the ninja has the EXACT same skill points per level as the Rogue so ... yeah ...


Piccolo, I'm not exactly sure what has you worked up, but you don't need the broad brush smearing everyone who doesn't share your opinion.

I know this might come as a shock, but you actually don't know the people you're arguing with, so making assumptions based on absolutely nothing really isn't all that productive.

You also seem to be incapable of understanding the points presented by others. People here aren't hating on rogues. They are merely pointing out that they are comparatively lacking. Perhaps that is because they think it is an imbalance which needs to be fixed. That's why I went to the trouble of presenting numbers (as have others).

Yes, a rogue can go all day. However he's part of a party which likely can't, so that's a pretty dubious talent. Personally I like playing fighters, as I don't need to to resource tracking. However, I am particularly cautious for the resources remaining on the team since I know my fighter will crumple in a nasty combat if he doesn't have the backup he needs. The rogue is in the same boat.


The drawbacks of rogues are not only mechanical but the style of character and play that the class inspires. If we are talking a straight rogue and not just dipping for some other purpose, it's very often in my experience a lone wolf type character that sneaks ahead in advance. Sounds cool with a recon in the group, right?

The problem is that the rogue has no knowledge. Unless metagaming, he doesn't know that the troll has 30' of scent. He doesn't know when enemies can detect him and worse yet, he can't detect anyone that's hiding in some non-mundane way. Going off solo as a non-magic user in Pathfinder usually ends in pain.

Many of the traps seem to be off the charts in terms of DC to find, which is why you'd rather have a full party of players all searching than just a single die roll, even if it has higher bonus. If a trap is triggered and the rogue is alone there might be a problem once again.

Once there's combat, the rogue will often actively put himself in horrific danger "because I get to sneak attack". A rogue also needs the flank to have a fair shot at hitting anything. Rogues don't get particularly high AC unless they want to deal no damage at all, once again a weakness compared to the medium or heavy armor wearing melee combatants.

Rogues simply don't have the defenses, senses or offensive capability to back up the kind of character people who pick the class are inspired to play. To be an effective rogue you need to stay with the party and you are much more reliant on your comrades than other classes. This is clearly in direct conflict with the literary archetype of the rogue/thief/assassin/sneaky boy that people see before themselves when they roll up their character.

I'm sure you can be an effective rogue, winning the DPR olympics is hardly relevant in most campaigns, but I don't think you'll be effective in the role that most people seem to attribute to the class. Don't stop thinking tactically just because you can get a couple of d6s worth of extra damage from a certain position.


Piccolo wrote:

Sigh. After having examined many of the classes, AND your collective arguments, I think I'd rather have a Rogue along whilst dungeon crawling, or indeed just about anywhere in the typical 4 man team. Rangers really don't have the skills Rogues do, and thus aren't as adaptable. Plus, Rangers are straight out warrior types, and should be treated as such.

I don't see why the lot of you seem to think crappy uber specific spells or the limited ki pool somehow compensates for lack of skills. A Rogue can do what he does, time after time, all day long. Spells have to be recharged, and ki pool has to be as well. But then, most of you have grown up on playing video games, and don't think economically (or tactically for that matter). Me, I'm used to having to scrounge for resources in most games, indeed, I find the typical video game shooter to be damned boring, as I always have ammo coming out of my ears.

I've done more damage with a dagger and a stupid Sleep spell, or lantern oil and a spark, than the lot of you seem to think is possible. Really, do you Rogue haters ever stop and consider just how flexible and all around useful it is to simply be good at more skills than anyone else? Do we have to constantly focus on combat, because the *game* certainly isn't solely about combat? Why does it have to be all about how much damage we can do in a single shot? Heck, do you know how many times I've smoked much higher level players with nothing more than a pack of kobolds or goblins armed with bows and a knowledge of the terrain?

Agreed, although as noted above, rangers are a bit more in the camp of being stealth warriors. Still, rogues win on skills if its a skill based build.


Trikk wrote:

The drawbacks of rogues are not only mechanical but the style of character and play that the class inspires. If we are talking a straight rogue and not just dipping for some other purpose, it's very often in my experience a lone wolf type character that sneaks ahead in advance. Sounds cool with a recon in the group, right?

The problem is that the rogue has no knowledge. Unless metagaming, he doesn't know that the troll has 30' of scent. He doesn't know when enemies can detect him and worse yet, he can't detect anyone that's hiding in some non-mundane way. Going off solo as a non-magic user in Pathfinder usually ends in pain.

Many of the traps seem to be off the charts in terms of DC to find, which is why you'd rather have a full party of players all searching than just a single die roll, even if it has higher bonus. If a trap is triggered and the rogue is alone there might be a problem once again.

Once there's combat, the rogue will often actively put himself in horrific danger "because I get to sneak attack". A rogue also needs the flank to have a fair shot at hitting anything. Rogues don't get particularly high AC unless they want to deal no damage at all, once again a weakness compared to the medium or heavy armor wearing melee combatants.

Rogues simply don't have the defenses, senses or offensive capability to back up the kind of character people who pick the class are inspired to play. To be an effective rogue you need to stay with the party and you are much more reliant on your comrades than other classes. This is clearly in direct conflict with the literary archetype of the rogue/thief/assassin/sneaky boy that people see before themselves when they roll up their character.

I'm sure you can be an effective rogue, winning the DPR olympics is hardly relevant in most campaigns, but I don't think you'll be effective in the role that most people seem to attribute to the class. Don't stop thinking tactically just because you can get a couple of d6s worth of extra damage from a certain position.

Got to say, going off solo as a magic-user is a death sentence unless you have a very forgiving dm. SR, grapple, rend, poison, weak foes in large numbers chopping you to pieces and messing with spellcasting, large foes taking the spell hit (or saving) and curb stomping ol' robesy. There is a reason many types of spellcasters need melee or archers to keep them covered and the spells coming.

Rogue, ranger, barb, much better at solo adventuring ahead.

One game of mine, powerful wizard chased after a regenerating giant post-victory to solo him. He got eaten, and he wasn't the last to die going solo.


Piccolo wrote:
Sigh. After having examined many of the classes, AND your collective arguments, I think I'd rather have a Rogue along whilst dungeon crawling, or indeed just about anywhere in the typical 4 man team. Rangers really don't have the skills Rogues do, and thus aren't as adaptable.

Two skill points per level is the difference. You think Rogues are so much better at skills and thus insanely more useful in dungeons because of 2 skill points per level? Really?

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Nakteo wrote:
So, fairly recently, I read a thread about Ninjas and how they're so awesome and stuff. I don't have an Ultimate Combat yet, so I can't vouch for that, but most everyone on the thread was in total agreement that the Rogue was underpowered in comparison to most (if not all) of the other base classes in the Core. I'm kinda curious as to the specifics of the Rogue's underpoweredness that everyone is talking about.

The rogue is not underpowered, not by a long shot. I have found that the majority of people who think that fall into two categories: 1) players who don't really know how to build them effectively, and 2) players who are stuck with GMs who don't know how to build an adventure that suits the rogue. I will agree that Pathfinder and 3.0 have been pretty bad about nerfing the things rogues are supposed to be good at, but they've tweaked them in areas they were never meant to be good, such as front- line fighting (and before anyone protests that they're not good on the front line, see category 1 above).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Nightwish wrote:

The rogue is not underpowered, not by a long shot. I have found that the majority of people who think that fall into two categories: 1) players who don't really know how to build them effectively, and 2) players who are stuck with GMs who don't know how to build an adventure that suits the rogue. I will agree that Pathfinder and 3.0 have been pretty bad about nerfing the things rogues are supposed to be good at, but they've tweaked them in areas they were never meant to be good, such as front- line fighting (and before anyone protests that they're not good on the front line, see category 1 above).

Set up a build and show how they're better/on par with any of the other frontliners instead of just showing up and telling people they're crap at building Rogues.


mplindustries wrote:
Piccolo wrote:
Sigh. After having examined many of the classes, AND your collective arguments, I think I'd rather have a Rogue along whilst dungeon crawling, or indeed just about anywhere in the typical 4 man team. Rangers really don't have the skills Rogues do, and thus aren't as adaptable.
Two skill points per level is the difference. You think Rogues are so much better at skills and thus insanely more useful in dungeons because of 2 skill points per level? Really?

Two starts to mean a lot, after a few levels (compare low int 1 per level to 3 per level, or 4 per level to 6 in which four barely covers the basics with no dabbling).

There is also a note on builds here, if you are pushing str, dex, con, with a melee and the rogue is pushing dex and int, that rogue is going to come out ahead on skills by a huge margin, all things being equal.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

+1 to gnomersy petition.

By the way, the Dm do not have to make an aventure to suit the rogue or any class.


Dungeons & No Traps


Nicos wrote:

+1 to gnomersy petition.

By the way, the Dm do not have to make an aventure to suit the rogue or any class.

Kinda have to agree there. Like one person said, it's the same sort of thing as giving every single evil lair an underwater entrance, just so Aquaman can be useful for once. Seems like the better solution would be to tweak the rogue so class doesn't need that kind of specialized pandering.

I can't think of any other class where big chunks of the campaign need to be rewritten just so they can be effective.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nightwish wrote:
The rogue is not underpowered, not by a long shot. I have found that the majority of people who think that fall into two categories: 1) players who don't really know how to build them effectively, and 2) players who are stuck with GMs who don't know how to build an adventure that suits the rogue. I will agree that Pathfinder and 3.0 have been pretty bad about nerfing the things rogues are supposed to be good at, but they've tweaked them in areas they were never meant to be good, such as front- line fighting (and before anyone protests that they're not good on the front line, see category 1 above).

Please go on to tell us about how we're also inferior roleplayers... oh wait, you already have (in your rogue thread).

Nightwish wrote:
Rogues are designed to shine outside the front line of combat and in social encounters. Unfortunately, despite the fact that the system is built to allow rich role play outside of combat, many players and GMs lack the patience and imagination for it, so they utilize only the tiniest portion of what the game can actually bring, fast-forwarding through everything that doesn't involve swinging a sword.

See the "Stormwind Fallacy". Roleplaying and optimization are not mutually exclusive.


3.5 Loyalist wrote:
Two skill points per level is the difference. You think Rogues are so much better at skills and thus insanely more useful in dungeons because of 2 skill points per level? Really?
Two starts to mean a lot, after a few levels (compare low int 1 per level to 3 per level, or 4 per level to 6 in which four barely covers the basics with no dabbling).

No, it means two more skills maxed out--that's really not a big deal--you don't need that many.

3.5 Loyalist wrote:
There is also a note on builds here, if you are pushing str, dex, con, with a melee and the rogue is pushing dex and int, that rogue is going to come out ahead on skills by a huge margin, all things being equal.

Why would I build by Better-than-a-Rogue Ranger differently than a Rogue? Why would I dump Int as a Ranger, but not as a Rogue? Why must the Ranger bump melee stats, but the Rogue can skip them?


Needs and wants, with rogues it isn't about what skills you need to have, it is about whatever skills you want. I find that a real strength.

If you want to compare the skills of your tough mighty ranger to the rogue, you are going to come out second best. It will go the same way if you compare skill ranger to skill rogue, except when you are in your favored terrain. Then good on you! However, er, there are a lot more skills than what terrain covers. The rogue just took them, lol.

Why no bumping of melee stats, well this is tied to experience. The dex/int, high initiative archer rogue doesn't need to do everything, they can already do a fair bit of ranged damage, stealth into position and those skills, oh those skills!

Rangers of course want the dex for the ranged to hit, the str for the damage on top (no sneak attack for them) via the better bows, and so as to be nice in melee when they get rushed.

Six is good, but got to make some design choices here.


I would like to see complete builds in this thread. It have become schordringer rogues Vs scrodinger raners.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Heh... This thread became quite heated, and now it's stuck in a loop.

"Rogues are underpowered because of X and Y"
"No they are not, because I said so"
"Rogues are underpowered because of X and Y"
"No they are not, because I said so"
"Rogues are underpowered because of X and Y"
"No they are not, because I said so"

And it goes on and on and on...

Don't get me wrong, I like Rogues, but not one of their defenders in this thread made any real case.

Rogues are a playable class. It's very possible to play an effective Rogue and have fun. Noone is disputing that. But that doesn't mean the class is not underpowered. This is something that applies to pretty much every game ever. The fact that something can be useful doesn't mean that it's not less efficient than something else.

IMHO, Rogues suffer from some serious drawbacks in a lot of different areas.

- They have crappy AC, and are not very good at ranged combat. Stay more than 30ft away from your target and you can't sneak attack. Stay close and it'll most likely find you. Rogues aren't really better at Stealth than any other class with Stealth as a class skill.
- Trapfiding is nice to have, but far from necessary.
- They are the one class who has no way whatsoever to buff their to-hit.
- They have the worst saves in the whole game. And no class features to help with that.
- Rogue Talents are terrible. For every decent one, we have 10 that are basically useless.
- They are pretty MAD, since they can't really dump any stat if they want to make use of those skills and still be able to contribute in combat. Oddly enough the one stat I think they can safely dump is Int.

I don't think having 8 skill points (or even 10) is that much of an advantage. The difference between 6 and 8 skill ranks is much less significant than the difference between 2 and 4.

Many of those Rogue Talents should be buffed, and a few others should be standard class features (like Trap Spotter). Give them some way to buff their saves and their to-hit, even if just slightly and they'd be much more fun and effective.


Nicos wrote:
I would like to see complete builds in this thread. It have become schordringer rogues Vs scrodinger raners.

I gave my stats for 20th trapper/guide ranger vs. 20 TWF rogue somewhere above, lost in the avalanche of posts.


drbuzzard wrote:
Nicos wrote:
I would like to see complete builds in this thread. It have become schordringer rogues Vs scrodinger raners.
I gave my stats for 20th trapper/guide ranger vs. 20 TWF rogue somewhere above, lost in the avalanche of posts.

The 20th level is not the best level to compare clases. I would like to see a 5t and 10t level comparision.

The ranger shoudl be stronger in combat of course, what I wonder is by how much?.


I'd like to see builds about 9th or 10th level... 20th level is not really a indication of anything. Few games ever get there and even when they do, byt that point, things are kinda crazy.


Generally I compare at 11th level. I pick that because it is the last level you can play in normal PFS gaming.

I'll see if I have my trapper/guide dervish vs. rogue dervish stats handy.


drbuzzard wrote:

Generally I compare at 11th level. I pick that because it is the last level you can play in normal PFS gaming.

I'll see if I have my trapper/guide dervish vs. rogue dervish stats handy.

it sounds fun. i would build a couple of rogues afther work.

PS. I ssume 20 PB and standaer WBl right?


Nicos wrote:
drbuzzard wrote:

Generally I compare at 11th level. I pick that because it is the last level you can play in normal PFS gaming.

I'll see if I have my trapper/guide dervish vs. rogue dervish stats handy.

it sounds fun. i would build a couple of rogues afther work.

PS. I ssume 20 PB and standaer WBl right?

Yep, I follow PFS rules, then assume normal WBL, even though many say you do better in PFS.


Here's me trying to make an effective Rogue. I'm sure it's not the most optimized character ever, but then again, no class should have to be extremelly optimized in order to do well.

I tried to focus on a "classic Rogue" build, specifically, one that works mostly in urban enviroments.

Dr.Rogue McStealthy:

Dr.Rogue McStealthy CR 9
Male Half-Elf Rogue 10
N Medium Humanoid (elf, human)
Init +8; Senses low-light vision; Perception +15
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 23, touch 15, flat-footed 19 (+7 armor, +4 Dex, +1 natural, +1 deflection)
hp 68 (10d8+20)
Fort +9, Ref +17 (+3 bonus vs. traps), Will +10; +2 vs. enchantments
Defensive Abilities evasion, improved uncanny dodge (lv >=14), trap sense; Immune sleep; Resist elven immunities
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee +1 Silversheen Cestus +13/+8 (1d4+3/19-20/x2) and
. . +1 Silversheen Cestus +13/+8 (1d4+2/19-20/x2)
Ranged +1 Composite shortbow (Str +2) +14/+9 (1d6+3/x3)
Special Attacks sneak attack +5d6
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 14, Dex 23, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 12
Base Atk +7; CMB +9; CMD 27
Feats Combat Reflexes (7 AoO/round), Defensive Combat Training, Improved Two-weapon Fighting, Shadow Strike, Two-weapon Fighting, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (Cestus)
Traits Indomitable Faith, Reactionary
Skills Acrobatics +21, Bluff +14, Disable Device +26, Knowledge (local) +13, Linguistics +13, Perception +15 (+20 to locate traps), Sleight of Hand +21, Stealth +21, Survival +0 (+2 to avoid becoming lost), Use Magic Device +14
Languages Aboleth, Abyssal, Aklo, Aquan, Celestial, Common, Draconic, Dwarven, Elven, Infernal, Sylvan, Undercommon
SQ elf blood, rogue talents (crippling strike, finesse rogue, hide in plain sight [favored terrain [urban]], slow reactions, weapon training), trapfinding +5
Other Gear +3 Chain shirt, +1 Composite shortbow (Str +2), +1 Silversheen Cestus, +1 Silversheen Cestus, Amulet of natural armor +1, Belt of incredible dexterity +4, Cloak of resistance +4, Ioun stone (clear spindle), Ring of protection +1, Wayfinder (1 @ 0 lbs), Masterwork tool (Acrobatics), Masterwork tool (Disable Device), Masterwork tool (Sleight of Hand), Masterwork tool (Stealth), 4165 GP
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Combat Reflexes (7 AoO/round) Can make extra attacks of opportunity/rd, and even when flat-footed.
Crippling Strike (Ex) Your sneak attacks do 2 points of Strength damage.
Elf Blood You are counted as both elven and human for any effect relating to race.
Elven Immunities +2 save bonus vs Enchantments.
Elven Immunities - Sleep You are immune to magic sleep effects.
Evasion (Ex) If you succeed at a Reflex save for half damage, you take none instead.
Hide in Plain Sight (Favored Terrain [Urban]) (Ex) In your selected terrain, you can use Stealth to hide, even while being observed.
Improved Uncanny Dodge (Lv >=14) (Ex) Retain DEX bonus to AC when flat-footed. You cannot be flanked unless the attacker is Level 14+.
Ioun stone (clear spindle) Sustains bearer without food or water.
Low-Light Vision See twice as far as a human in low light, distinguishing color and detail.
Shadow Strike You can deal precision damage against targets with some concealment.
Slow Reactions (Ex) Foes hit by a sneak attack can't make AoO for 1 rd.
Sneak Attack +5d6 +5d6 damage if you flank your target or your target is flat-footed.
Trap Sense +3 (Ex) +3 bonus on reflex saves and AC against traps.
Trapfinding +5 Gain a bonus to find or disable traps, including magical ones.
Wayfinder (1 @ 0 lbs) A small magical device patterned off ancient relics of the Azlanti, a wayfinder is typically made from silver and bears gold accents. With a command word, you can use a wayfinder to shine (as the light spell). The wayfinder also acts as a nonmagical (magnetic) compass, granting you a +2 circumstance bonus on Survival checks to avoid becoming lost. All wayfinders include a small indentation designed to hold a single ioun stone. An ioun stone slotted in this manner grants you its normal benefits (as if it were orbiting your head), but frequently reveals entirely new powers due to the magic of the wayfinder itself (see Seeker of Secrets page 51)

Ideas and Observations:

- I focused on the classic TWFing Dex-based Rogue. Because that's pretty much what most most people expect from the class. I use cestus because I thin they are awesome for various reasons.
- I maxed out Linguistics because I like characters who speak tons of different languages, and the skill can also be used to forge documents. Diplomacy would probably be more useful, though. Anyway, skill are easily adapted to whatever kind of character you want.
- He has HiPS in Urban Enviroments, I like this Rogue Talent, and Urban is a somewhat common terrain. It could be easily switched for a less situational ability, though.
- Rogue's Saves are terrible. So I bought a nice Cloak of Resistance and the very cheao Wayfinder + Clear Spindle Ioun Stone, which makes him immune to Possession/Mind-Control by Evil Creatures. Also, the racial bonus for being half-elves and the "Dual-Minded" alternate racial trait always help. He could switch his Wis and Cha stats for a slightly better Will save, but Rogues are supposed to be charming, aren't they?
- I'm not sure about Slow Reactions. It seemed like a way to play the "skirmisher combatant" role, as you could possibly Sneak Attack and run away with impunity. I know you guys will have a better idea for the Rogue Talent.
-Dr.Rogue here should probably get the "Agile" enchantment on his weapons when he gets the money. That'll add some extra punch to his attacks.

BTW, I don't play PFS, so I dunno its rules very well. I assumed 20pt-buy and standard WBL.


This time I tried to follow Ashiel's idea: a Str-based spear-wielding Rogue. This one is a Tiefling.

Dr.Stabby McSpears:

Dr.Stabby Spears CR 9
Male Oni-Spawn Tiefling Rogue 10
N Medium Outsider (native)
Init +3; Senses darkvision; Perception +14
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 24, touch 15, flat-footed 21 (+6 armor, +3 Dex, +3 natural, +2 deflection)
hp 78 (10d8+30)
Fort +11, Ref +14 (+3 bonus vs. traps), Will +9
Defensive Abilities evasion, improved uncanny dodge (lv >=14), trap sense; Resist cold 5, electricity 5, fire 5
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee +1 Silversheen Cestus +14/+9 (1d4+7/19-20/x2) and
. . +1 Silversheen Longspear +15/+10 (1d8+10/x3)
Ranged +1 Composite shortbow (Str +4) +11/+6 (1d6+5/x3)
Special Attacks sneak attack +5d6
Spell-Like Abilities Alter Self (1/day)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 22, Dex 16, Con 16, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 8
Base Atk +7; CMB +13; CMD 31
Feats Armor of the Pit, Combat Reflexes (4 AoO/round), Defensive Combat Training, Furious Focus, Lunge, Power Attack -2/+4, Shadow Strike, Weapon Focus (Longspear)
Traits Indomitable Faith, Resilient
Skills Acrobatics +16, Bluff +12, Diplomacy +12, Disable Device +21, Disguise +14, Intimidate +1, Perception +14 (+19 to locate traps), Sense Motive +14, Stealth +16, Survival +1 (+3 to avoid becoming lost), Use Magic Device +12
Languages Common, Infernal
SQ prehensile tail, rogue talents (bonus feat, combat trick, crippling strike, entanglement of blades, weapon training), trapfinding +5
Other Gear +2 Chain shirt, +1 Composite shortbow (Str +4), +1 Silversheen Cestus, +1 Silversheen Longspear, Amulet of natural armor +1, Belt of physical perfection +2, Cloak of resistance +4, Ioun stone (clear spindle), Ring of protection +2, Wayfinder (1 @ 0 lbs), 3065 GP
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Combat Reflexes (4 AoO/round) Can make extra attacks of opportunity/rd, and even when flat-footed.
Crippling Strike (Ex) Your sneak attacks do 2 points of Strength damage.
Damage Resistance, Cold (5) You have the specified Damage Resistance against Cold attacks.
Damage Resistance, Electricity (5) You have the specified Damage Resistance against Electricity attacks.
Damage Resistance, Fire (5) You have the specified Damage Resistance against Fire attacks.
Darkvision (60 feet) You can see in the dark (black and white vision only).
Entanglement of Blades (Ex) Sneak attack prevents the foe from taking 5' steps until the beginning of your next turn.
Evasion (Ex) If you succeed at a Reflex save for half damage, you take none instead.
Furious Focus If you are wielding a weapon in two hands, ignore the penalty for your first attack of each turn.
Improved Uncanny Dodge (Lv >=14) (Ex) Retain DEX bonus to AC when flat-footed. You cannot be flanked unless the attacker is Level 14+.
Ioun stone (clear spindle) Sustains bearer without food or water.
Lunge Can increase reach by 5 ft, but take -2 to AC for 1 rd.
Power Attack -2/+4 You can subtract from your attack roll to add to your damage.
Prehensile Tail Your tail can retrieve small objects on your person as a swift action.
Shadow Strike You can deal precision damage against targets with some concealment.
Sneak Attack +5d6 +5d6 damage if you flank your target or your target is flat-footed.
Trap Sense +3 (Ex) +3 bonus on reflex saves and AC against traps.
Trapfinding +5 Gain a bonus to find or disable traps, including magical ones.
Wayfinder (1 @ 0 lbs) A small magical device patterned off ancient relics of the Azlanti, a wayfinder is typically made from silver and bears gold accents. With a command word, you can use a wayfinder to shine (as the light spell). The wayfinder also acts as a nonmagical (magnetic) compass, granting you a +2 circumstance bonus on Survival checks to avoid becoming lost. All wayfinders include a small indentation designed to hold a single ioun stone. An ioun stone slotted in this manner grants you its normal benefits (as if it were orbiting your head), but frequently reveals entirely new powers due to the magic of the wayfinder itself (see Seeker of Secrets page 51).

Ideas and Observations:

- Mr.Stabby here is more focused on social encounters than Dr.Rogue McStealthy. He shoudl be pretty good at convincing people he didn't steal all their money.
- A reach weapon puts him in a slightly safer position. I picked Entanglement of Blades because this stops enemies from making 5ft-steps, so if they try to attack Dr.Stabby, they will provoke AoO from him and, hopefully, his flaking partner. Unfortunatelly, this is not as useful against big creatures. And those get pretty common after a while.
- Power Attack is usually not that good of a choice for Rogues. Their medium BAB and lack of self-buffing options make the accuracy loss pretty bad for them. But Furious Focus helps a lot with that. Specially after combats become more mobile and you have to move around a lot.
- His saves are still not very good. In fact, his Will and Reflex saves are worse than those of Dr.McStealthy. Hopefully, being a Outsider will make him immune to lots of spells. And of course, I bought Cloak of Resistance and the always lovely Wayfinder+Clear Spindle Ioun Stone combo.
- He has a cestus as a secondary weapon. If he loses his spear for some reason, at least he won't be defenseless. Even so, he should buy a secondary spear asap.
- Focusing on Str instead of Dex means his ranged attacks suck. But I got him a composite shortbow anyway. Better have a subpar option than no options at all, right?
- Being a Oni-descended Tiefling means he has Darkvision and can use Alter-Self as a spell-like ability. Those are pretty useful. He could take "Fiend Sight" to improve his senses even more.
- He still has about 3000gp remaining. Buy some consumables and "Happy Sticks".

Again, I'm using 20pt-buy and standard WBL.


@ lemmy

HiPS and cripplnig strike are both advanced rogeu talent, how mcstealthy have both?


Nicos wrote:

@ lemmy

HiPS and cripplnig strike are both advanced rogue talent, how mcstealthy have both?

Ah, my bad... HL doesn't tell me which talents are advanced and which are not, and since I built the characters at 10th level, both talents were available.

Well, switch one of those for "bonus feat" or something. Any other problem with these characters? Next time I'll build them level-by-level. It's pretty easy with HL.

Also, I'd like to see other people's builds for both Rangers and Rogues.

BTW, I find it absurd that Rogues have to spend a Talent in order to get Improved Evasion. This' another of those things that should be a standard class feature.


Lemmy wrote:
Nicos wrote:

@ lemmy

HiPS and cripplnig strike are both advanced rogue talent, how mcstealthy have both?

Ah, my bad... HL doesn't tell me which talents are advanced and which are not, and since I built the characters at 10th level, both talents were available.

Well, switch one of those for "bonus feat" or something. Any other problem with these characters? Next time I'll build them level-by-level. It's pretty easy with HL.

Also, I'd like to see other people's builds for both Rangers and Rogues.

BTW, I find it absurd that Rogues have to spend a Talent in order to get Improved Evasion. This' another of those things that should be a standard class feature.

Well too be fair, Improved Evasion isn't good on classes with high reflex saves(although for some reason they are the ones who have access to it).


Yeah, I know it's not very good... But it feels so Roguish.

I mean, Reflex is the only good save for Rogues, and they are tipically seen as "agile characters", so it seems fair that they get Improved Evasion.

Scarab Sages

Lemmy, what output is that you are using for the stat blocks you post? I want to put up a build I have that I think is pretty much awesome. Thanks

501 to 550 of 666 << first < prev | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Rogues and underpoweredness All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.