| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm getting told that it is, and I don't have enough experience with Rogues to agree or disagree. I've always leaned towards Ranger, Fighter, and Sorcerer. How does the Rogue stack up in combat to other classes as far as RAW is concerned?
Edit: Should I have posted this here? It seemed appropriate since this is an issue dealing with the class under RAW, but maybe it should have gone in Advice. Would a moderator please move it?
A ranged rogue will get his sneak attack once.
At the beginning of a round when he goes first due to using Snap Shot.
The rest of the combat, he'll be doing weak amounts of damage compared to...well just about everyone else. Even a bard will be outdamaging them at range, due to all the buffs and arcane strike.
Here is one thread discussing this at length.
Here is another, much longer one.
That's why I recommend a cavalier archetype for your mounted skirmisher.
I have no responsibility if those threads get bumped and re-ignited.
The moderator gods will be here shortly, worry not.
I agree that DPR wise they lack the potential of other frontline fighters. Your roll (see what I did there?) in combat is to flank with your fighters or scamper off to do some skill monkeying that will help your party out.
However, a rogue serves in more purposes than combat. Disabling traps, talking your group out of hopeless situations, surviving when rocks fall etc. A good DM will create encounters where a group doesn't have to rely on their brute strength to win every encounter.
To put it this way, in my current campaign our rogue/master spy is attempting to take over an entire kingdom through bluffs and disguise checks. In combat all he really does is +2 to hit and sneak attack. When he decides to face, kingdoms crumble.
Yes. In ideal conditions they can deal comparable damage to a dedicated fighter, but are almost always going to have to spend time getting those conditions. There are ways (especially in Ultimate Combat) to ameliorate this, but they require so many feats they aren't that viable.
While this wouldn't be a problem if the Rogue had another purpose, but they aren't really the greatest skill-monkeys either. Traits and the Pathfinder skill system have reduced the value of having a large skill list, and they only get two more skill points than Bards, Inquisitors, or Rangers. All of those classes have much, much more going on for them than the Rogue. Add in that the value of most skills drops precipitously as you gain levels, and you have a class whose main focus is mediocre.
Oh, and they get to top it off with the worst set of saves in the game.
So in the end, the Rogue is mediocre at an important thing and okay at a mediocre thing. Overall, a pretty weak class.
|
Yes. It requires a favorable setup to deal comparable damage, and is still outdamaged even then. Add in the difficulty in achieving favorable conditions, and it struggles to even break even.
TOZ isn't wrong, but it does vary wildly depending on how important skill checks are in your game.
A creative player with a rogue can do a lot of things that avoid combat while accomplishing goals that other melee classes can't. This is more valuable in some games than others.
Also, UMD is your friend.
The moderator gods will be here shortly, worry not.
I agree that DPR wise they lack the potential of other frontline fighters. Your roll (see what I did there?) in combat is to flank with your fighters or scamper off to do some skill monkeying that will help your party out.
However, a rogue serves in more purposes than combat. Disabling traps, talking your group out of hopeless situations, surviving when rocks fall etc. A good DM will create encounters where a group doesn't have to rely on their brute strength to win every encounter.
To put it this way, in my current campaign our rogue/master spy is attempting to take over an entire kingdom through bluffs and disguise checks. In combat all he really does is +2 to hit and sneak attack. When he decides to face, kingdoms crumble.
This may be true but it is not limited to the rogue: the bard, the ranger (favored enemy: human all of a sudden makes you a scary face), jump to mind as capable infiltrators spies and manipulators. Both have archetypes that get trapfinding meaning that they can cover for the rogue and still bring more consistent combat tricks as well.
So, if the Rogue has issues in combat, as Mort says, how could it be fixed? What abilities would it need to be more useful?
Yes, rogues are 'weak' in combat - they generally have lower AC and HP, and do less damage unless they get in the right setup. But if you choose to be good at something with a Rogue, be it stealth, acrobatics, trap finding/disarming, you'll be pretty much untouchable.
OTOH, a Rogue with the Sap Master feat will knock people out like nobody's business. At 5th level you're pulling 6D6+6 sneak attack damage (before weapon and STR and magic, so 27+ on average). Non-lethal, but knocked out is better than dead. You can't question dead people, or ransom them, or hold them hostage. Unconscious monsters are easily dispatched after a fight. Doesn't work on everything, of course, but when it works on most things!
A level 5 wizard will out rogue a rogue in almost any situation.
The rogue is really weak in combat, it need a dedicated caster to babysit her to be able to come near the dpr other martial classes can put out, or very favorable situations, which are not very likely to occur that often.
It is to me a great mystery why the rogue did not get bumped to full bab, even with full bab a rogue would not jump far ahead of the other martial classes under favorable situations, but lets face it. The rogue only got a d8 hit dice, do not start with heavy armor prof, got the worst good save in the game, and the theme of the class does not favor armor, but still the rogue needs to put herself in a bad situation to get close to the other martial classes.
A vulnerable class that put herself out like that should do more damage than the other martial classes when she managed to sneak attack, that she does less than an optimized fighter is just a cruel joke.
The ninja archetype was a good step for buffing the rogue, but it did not buff the rogue in the right areas, it just made the rogue more fun to play, and a bit easier to get into position, but still when you were there you would be a sitting duck.
Of course there is more reliable ways to get off sneak attacks but then you need to have a personal babysitter that could buff the fighter instead of you, or spend many feats, or abuse consumables together with a high UMD skill.
The fix for a combat centered rogue is the ninja. When they're not going first or flanking they can use a swift action to go invisible and get in a sneak that way.
A level 5 wizard will out rogue a rogue in almost any situation.
I concur, a sad but true statement.
A level 5 wizard will out rogue a rogue in almost any situation.I concur, a sad but true statement.
I know. I love the idea of the rogue. But if you assume optimal builds, the wizard out does the rogue at the things a rogue does. And they are useful in a lot more situations.
So, if the Rogue has issues in combat, as Mort says, how could it be fixed? What abilities would it need to be more useful?Roll a Ranger? It worked for my wife.
I would recommend taking either the urban ranger archetype, or a bard with either the sandman or archaeologist archetypes, and you can role play as a rogue as good as with the rogue class if not better. The classes is just templates to be used for your creativeness, and if you do not want to drag down your group with a "true" rogue, I really recommend one of these options, and you might not feel worthless.
Sure - the first time each day that you need somebody to be unseen, open a door, or get to the top of a 100' cliff. After that the wizard suddenly becomes a commoner who needs a nap before tackling so great a challenge. But we can't expect to resolve that - I think people have been arguing rogue/wizard utility since it was Thief/Magic-User utility. ;)
It is not harder for a wizard to max stealth, disable device, climb etc, as he will have the skill points for it, thought his strength might not be that high, but his dex should not be far behind, and of course they are not class skills, but he still has spells for weighting up that problem.
But if you want a real comparison, tell me why anyone would choice a rogue over a bard with either the sandman or archaeologist archetypes, mechanically that is, not thematically.
The original uber-party (fighter, cleric, rogue, mage) was perfectly balanced in theory and in role. Assuming a 4 encounter day, the fighter and cleric could smash/heal through two groups, the mage could sleep one group, and the rogue could unlock/disarm the trap to get the gold (the 4th encounter). Essentially each class took care of one encounter.
Of course, this design philosophy was inherently flawed in that that's not the way everyone played the game. Most people thought gold giving exp was "dumb" and lots of people just wanted to play hack'n'slash. Even now, with traps giving exp, rogues are undervalued because traps as encounters are underused.
As Trailblazer notes, the rules of the game ought to reflect the way people play. Trap encounters are a great tool, but the core rules should recognize they are under-utilized and compensate the rogue for that lost spotlight opportunity.
So, if the Rogue has issues in combat, as Mort says, how could it be fixed? What abilities would it need to be more useful?
DEX -> damage.
If this causes other classes to feel less useful out of combat, they should be likewise compensated with some out of combat benefits. For example, fighters with 4 base skill points instead of 2.
Sure - the first time each day that you need somebody to be unseen, open a door, or get to the top of a 100' cliff. After that the wizard suddenly becomes a commoner who needs a nap before tackling so great a challenge. But we can't expect to resolve that - I think people have been arguing rogue/wizard utility since it was Thief/Magic-User utility. ;)
If you are assuming optimally chosen skills and equipment for the rogue, I see no reason to assume that the wizard doesn't have scrolls of such common spells as summon trapbait, fly, dispel magic, and invisibility. Plus, with all the intelligence they have, they can put points in the roguish skills.
But yes, in the exceedingly rare cases of many, many skill challenges or whatever, the rogue pulls ahead.
Sure - the first time each day that you need somebody to be unseen, open a door, or get to the top of a 100' cliff. After that the wizard suddenly becomes a commoner who needs a nap before tackling so great a challenge. But we can't expect to resolve that - I think people have been arguing rogue/wizard utility since it was Thief/Magic-User utility. ;)
And the second, and the third, and the fourth, thanks to scribe scroll and the ability to whip out said magic items over a lunch break.
How many third level scrolls are you planning to have your 5th level wizard use a day? The rogue should get the benefit of his WBL if you're going to start using up the wizard's.
If we now, for some reason would agree on 4+ encounters each of somebody to be unseen, open a door, or get to the top of a 100' cliff. Most days of the characters life span, than a wizard would not be enough, but there is plenty of classes that would still be as good as the rogue on it, and outshine them in every other area, but if you take the general case with a few hindrances each adventure and sometimes a little more, a wizard tailored for replacing a rogue will have spells prepared to fix most situations, and scrolls/wands as backups. and still be less of a liability in combat. Of course this will take from the WBL, but I really hope you are counting with a rogue spending funds also, espically on UMD choices that makes him a threat in combat, otherwise, yeah, then the rogue is just dead-weight without a babysitter.
Crafting doesn't effect WBL. You get X gold worth the items, no matter what source they're from.
-Thats income, not wealth. Big difference
The wizard is creating his own scrolls at half cost while the rogue is buying them full cost when he can find them. The wizard still comes out ahead.Crafting doesn't effect WBL. You get X gold worth the items, no matter what source they're from.
That is assuming you create a new character every level, a character that scribes all his own scrolls, will always be ahead of the same character that buys his scrolls at the grocery store.
|
The wizard is creating his own scrolls at half cost while the rogue is buying them full cost when he can find them. The wizard still comes out ahead.Crafting doesn't effect WBL. You get X gold worth the items, no matter what source they're from.
Doesn't matter. Each character gets X gold from adventuring. The wizard spends X/2 on crafting scrolls, the rogue spends X on buying scrolls. The wizard can create twice as much as the rogue can buy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That rogue suddenly finds himself without friends to back him up.
In that case, while the wizard is out of spells for the day and asleep the rogue raids his scroll stash.
And then he can't sneak attack!
Which is a huge issue. Without another character specifically helping him out, he sucks in combat.
I can't think of any other class that is like that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In that case, while the wizard is out of spells for the day and asleep the rogue raids his scroll stash. Now the rogue is ahead and the wizard is out. That is why you use WBL when you're doing these kind of comparisons.And I have no idea what the comment about "that's income, not wealth" is even suppose to mean.
And the rogue wakes up without his gear tied to an altar. Because the wizard doesn't just let the rogue steal his scrolls, and the other party members don't take kindly to having a person who steals from party members.
If you want spurts of awesome damage, choose a guide ranger, paladin, inquisitor, cavalier or alchemist. That is why I still think that the mounted infantry archetype is what you want. Good at ambushed, and can still do great damage at range.
The vivisectionist was the archetype that put the rogue in the grave, and the archeaologist was the archetype that nailed the rogues coffin shut. The vivisectionist is better in all ways when using sneak attack (mutagen + feral mutagen + sneak attack = death).
The archeaologist has all the non-sneak attack aspects of the rogue, but with an amazing spell list. Solid note is incredible for a rogue type. And they get rogue talents!
And I have no idea what the comment about "that's income, not wealth" is even suppose to mean.
-You do not remake a character every level. You make money (income)
-An adventurer makes money by looting stuff he kills.
-Each encounter gives X amount of gold. (on average)
- If characters spend Y amount of gold their wealth is X-Y (X-Y=W)
- A wizard spending 1/2 Y winds up with more wealth off of the xame income. (X- (1/2 Y) )
Benefit: Once per day, a rogue with this talent can roll two dice while making a Sense Motive check, and take the better result. She must choose to use this talent before making the Sense Motive check.
Special: A rogue can use this ability one additional time per day for every 5 rogue levels she possesses.
Honeyed Words (Ex)
Benefit: Once per day, the rogue can roll two dice while making a Bluff check, and take the better result. She must choose to use this talent before making the Bluff check.
Special: A rogue can use this ability one additional time per day for every five rogue levels she possesses.
Convincing Lie (Ex)
Benefit: When a rogue with this talent lies, she creates fabrications so convincing that others treat them as truth. When a rogue with this talent successfully uses the Bluff skill to convince someone that what she is saying is true, if that individual is questioned later about the statement or story, that person uses the rogue’s Bluff skill modifier to convince the questioner, rather than his own. If his Bluff skill modifier is better than the rogue’s, the individual can use his own modifier and gain a +2 bonus on any check to convince others of the lie. This effect lasts for a number of days equal to 1/2 the rogue’s level + the rogue’s Charisma modifier.
Rumormonger (Ex)
Prerequisite: Advanced talents
Benefit: A rogue with this talent can attempt to spread a rumor though a small town or larger settlement by making a Bluff check. She can do so a number of times per week equal to her Charisma modifier (minimum 0). The DC is based on the size of the settlement, and it takes a week for the rumor to propagate through the settlement. If the check succeeds, the rumor is practically accepted as fact within the community; succeeding by 5 or more over the DC decreases the time it takes the rumor to propagate by 1d4 days. A failed check means the rumor failed to gain traction, while failing by 5 or more causes the opposite of the rumor or some other competing theory involving the rumor’s subject to take hold.
Weapon Snatcher (Ex)
Prerequisite: Advanced talents
Benefit: A rogue with this talent can make a Sleight of Hand check in place of a combat maneuver check when attempting to disarm an opponent.
Another Day (Ex)
Prerequisite: Advanced talents
Benefit: Once per day, when the rogue would be reduced to 0 or fewer hit points by a melee attack, she can take a 5-foot step as an immediate action. If the movement takes her out of the reach of the attack, she takes no damage from the attack. The rogue is staggered for 1 round on her next turn.
Of course, the dozens of ways I see of using these to a party's advantage imply more than crunching numbers...
But it's more fun for both GM and players. Plus, none of that can be spellcrafted.
My point: the result of a fight with a BBEG or an army can be determined by the ratio party preparation/adversary preparation. The wizard excels at preparing himself. The rogue excels at unpreparing the adversary.
** spoiler omitted **...
haha, none of that can be spellcrafted?
charm person, glibness, zone of truth, etc.I can actually agree that Rumormonger might be hard to repalce with a spell, but the rest is easily duplicated with spells, perhaps nto easily in all cases, but possible.
And to not forget that archaelogists gets rogue talents also on top of a supreme spell list that is everything the party face could dream of.
Of course, the dozens of ways I see of using these to a party's advantage imply more than crunching numbers...
But it's more fun for both GM and players. Plus, none of that can be spellcrafted.My point: the result of a fight with a BBEG or an army can be determined by the ratio party preparation/adversary preparation. The wizard excels at preparing himself. The rogue excels at unpreparing the adversary.
I've never considered the social rogue a good argument for the class. It requires a very specific style of play and campaign to be any good at all. If you are hunting a dragon in the hills, you are dead weight. As you will be if you don't have a week to spread a rumor, or are going into a dungeon, or basically anything other than an intrigue heavy, urban campaign.
Even then, the Archeologist does all this better. Luck and spells to boost rolls, as well as for use in combat or exploration. He even gets the talents (though I don't think they are actually that useful). Specializing in it won't make for the greatest combatant, but still better than the social rogue.
Which is the other issue. Combat comparisons between an optimized rogue and a run of the mill member of another class find the rogue wanting. A rogue that burns his talents, feats, and ability scores on being good in social situations is going to go from "bad" to "outright useless" in combat. And like it or not, combat is a very large part of the vast majority of games.
There are solutions. Add a set of "non-combat talents" you get at odd levels, so the rogue can be a skill monkey AND a passable combatant. Shrink feat chains so that you don't have to burn all your feats just so you can do one trick passably. Remove the "once a day" from a lot of talents. But until then, rogue is bottom tier.
There are solutions. Add a set of "non-combat talents" you get at odd levels, so the rogue can be a skill monkey AND a passable combatant. Shrink feat chains so that you don't have to burn all your feats just so you can do one trick passably. Remove the "once a day" from a lot of talents. But until then, rogue is bottom tier.
What if you doubled Sneak Attack damage? Would that give enough DPR to compensate for lower AC and difficulty setting up the Sneak Attack?
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I know. I love the idea of the rogue. But if you assume optimal builds, the wizard out does the rogue at the things a rogue does. And they are useful in a lot more situations.A level 5 wizard will out rogue a rogue in almost any situation.I concur, a sad but true statement.
Once a day, if they have particular spells memorized meaning they don't have other spells memorized.
Schrödinger Wizard strikes again...
So, if the Rogue has issues in combat, as Mort says, how could it be fixed? What abilities would it need to be more useful?
Actually, I'd take a page out of the ninja handbook and give the rogue an extra ability - something called "Fortune" or "Inspiration" or some such. You can base it off charisma or intelligence and give rogues the ability to get skill or combat bonuses (i.e. reroll a miss, bypass DR, etc). I think there was a fairly well-known 3.5 class called the Factotum that had something like that.
I'd have the rogue poach that ability, if a bit weakened. The idea is to give rogues a little bit extra - and I think an ability representing flashes of genius, opportunism, or just quick thinking (quicker than others', at least :) ) works well with the theme of the class.
I allow Dex to be used for attack rolls for finessable weapons without needing a feat, it's rolled into the basics of the game (Weapon Finesse is removed form the game as a result of course). And I'm considering at maybe 3rd level or so, the Rogue get's a special class ability (not a talent, all rogues will get this) that they can replace their Str with their Dex for damage (maybe allowable for finessable weapons only). Not sure how that would change things, but those should help rogues a fair bit, at least opening up some feats for them.
my 2 copper.
** spoiler omitted **...haha, none of that can be spellcrafted?
charm person, glibness, zone of truth, etc.I can actually agree that Rumormonger might be hard to repalce with a spell, but the rest is easily duplicated with spells, perhaps nto easily in all cases, but possible.
And to not forget that archaelogists gets rogue talents also on top of a supreme spell list that is everything the party face could dream of.
I got misunderstood here. What I meant is that no one can use spellcraft to figure out the fact that the rogue is tring to crush their evil plans. As opposed to any spell that can be uncovered by any witness with ranks in spellcraft (including our rogue). From a GM point of view, if an evil genius of a NPC figures out the wizards' trying to magically trick him, he's gotta be pissed. As opposed to the case where he even succeeds a sense motive against a rogue's bluff. He might then be mostly amused. Convincing people to do stuff also gives them way less excuses than forcing them to do it by magic. WWAD? (what would Asmodeus do?)
That said, I just looked at the archaeologist and it's awesome.
A Chameleon Sanctified Rogue or Chameleon Burglar is awesome too. (Though I admit I've not played one, I can only judge on paper.)
Also, many characters can specialize into countering spellcasting and spellcastersm or alternately despise spellcasters. So not being a spellcaster makes the rogue very hard to figure out, strategy-wise. And UMD is still there for when it's worth it.
The Rogue suffers from other classes stealing his niche and his abilities, and having nothing to counter that with.
Other classes can face.
Archetypes can SA and find traps and use Rogue Talents.
The ninja gets just about everything a Rogue does, and more.
Lots of skill points don't make up for the weaknesses of the Rogue, and class creep from other classes.
==Aelryinth
** spoiler omitted **...haha, none of that can be spellcrafted?
charm person, glibness, zone of truth, etc.I can actually agree that Rumormonger might be hard to repalce with a spell, but the rest is easily duplicated with spells, perhaps nto easily in all cases, but possible.
And to not forget that archaelogists gets rogue talents also on top of a supreme spell list that is everything the party face could dream of.
I got misunderstood here. What I meant is that no one can use spellcraft to figure out the fact that the rogue is tring to crush their evil plans. As opposed to any spell that can be uncovered by any witness with ranks in spellcraft (including our rogue). From a GM point of view, if an evil genius of a NPC figures out the wizards' trying to magically trick him, he's gotta be pissed. As opposed to the case where he even succeeds a sense motive against a rogue's bluff. He might then be mostly amused. Convincing people to do stuff also gives them way less excuses than forcing them to do it by magic. WWAD? (what would Asmodeus do?)
That said, I just looked at the archaeologist and it's awesome.
A Chameleon Sanctified Rogue or Chameleon Burglar is awesome too. (Though I admit I've not played one, I can only judge on paper.)
Sorry, that was my mistake, I should have thought it through a bit more what you meant, because it was so easy to replace these rogue talent with spells the way I thought you meant.
You clearly have a point that these methods would be harder to track, at least in most cases.
What do you mean with Chameleon, a race or archetype? It escapes my mind, at least I cannot remember seeing it. Please enlighten me :P
What if Rogues could add condition effects to their Sneak Attacks, much as a Paladin REMOVES condition effects with their Mercies?
Flanker
- A rogue that is flanking an opponent gains a bonus to their BAB equal half their number of sneak attack dice rounded up. So a rogue with +5d6 sneak attack gains an additional +3 to hit when flanking.
Talk about some unwieldy wording there, buddy! Why not take the approach of the monk and simply have their BAB equal their level when flanking? And make this an inherent feature of the class, not a talent.
Precision Sneak
- A rogue adds their dex bonus to damage instead of their str whenever they deal sneak attack damage.
Or in addition to? If you're going to take a talent it should probably be worth more than +2-3 damage, give or take.