| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do think that rogue talents suffer a little bit from Druid Spell List Syndrome, where the list as a whole looks worse because it's loaded up with so many obvious dogs, when it contains a few pretty good options, a number of decent options, and then some situationa/bad nonsense that distracts form the rest of the list, especially from the decent options. Would I love to see rogues get some more awesome and unique talent options? Absolutely! Rogues currently have a huge amount of headroom - they could get a lot more awesome stuff and still be fine balance-wise - but I do think that if you cut the Hold Breath-quality stuff from the list it'd make a better impression. (Seriously, if a character option is going to be situational, it shouldn't have the property that it's STILL never worth even considering in campaigns where the situation is common.)
My current annoyance about the rogue is this: I built a rogue NPC and wanted the NPC to use poisoned weapons. I saw that there are several rogue tricks around poison use and I thought "great!" Then I looked and saw that rogues didn't get the ability to use poison without threat of self-injury and thought that was lame. I thought at least it would be a rogue trick, but still no dice.
If nothing else I'll probably give automatic poison proficency to rogues as a standard feature. They certainly need all the help they can get.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If only the situation is right, all feats/abilities can be defended, even Hold Breath.
Prone Shooter. I dare you.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
My current annoyance about the rogue is this: I built a rogue NPC and wanted the NPC to use poisoned weapons. I saw that there are several rogue tricks around poison use and I thought "great!" Then I looked and saw that rogues didn't get the ability to use poison without threat of self-injury and thought that was lame. I thought at least it would be a rogue trick, but still no dice.
There's an archetype for that, actually.
If only the situation is right, all feats/abilities can be defended, even Hold Breath.Prone Shooter. I dare you.
That is something for errata, not a badly designed feat. Maybe it was supposed to say you do not suffer the AC penalty? Although the rest seems to hint at somebody simply not understanding the rules there. If there was a penalty on ranged attack roles, it would be really great.
So again, case for errata, not a weak or badly designed feat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I always thought errata was meant to fix bad design.
Well, you *can* use it for that.
Maybe my background is different, but errata are usually used to list and fix errors. This I would consider an actual error since there is no penalty on ranged attacks when you are prone.|
|
On the subject of Hold Breath and Breath Mastery...
What do you think of the Slow Reactions/Confounding Blades screw up?
On the subject of Hold Breath and Breath Mastery...
What do you think of the Slow Reactions/Confounding Blades screw up?
I am not quite sure what you mean, so I looked those up and will post what I think you mean. First the talents:
Benefit: Opponents damaged by the rogue's sneak attack can't make attacks of opportunity for 1 round.
Prerequisites: Advanced talents
Benefit: When a rogue with this talent hits a creature with a melee weapon that deals sneak attack damage, her target cannot make attacks of opportunity until the beginning of her next turn.
Looking at those talents I guess you mean that a lowly rogue talent essentially is better than an advanced talent.
Now I can think of the following situations:1. Simple error: Someone did not know the other talent existed.
2. Preparation for later usage: Some (later to be introduced) prestige class or feat might require this AoO blocking as an advanced talent.
3. Details matter: Looking at the language there might be a difference in power level. Slow Reactions requires you to actually deal damage, so DR might prevent this from working. Confounding Blades on the other hand only requires a melee attack that would deal sneak attack damage, so even if you do not pass DR, it still works. This is more powerful and justify an advanced rogue talent.
I guess it's #3, so I see no issue here :-)
Unless you mean something else?
On the subject of Hold Breath and Breath Mastery...
What do you think of the Slow Reactions/Confounding Blades screw up?
Sorry, I had not seen you have provided a link to a discussion. I think my post is still correct, though, and I disagree with the result of that thread. :-)
Sneak attack is not negated by DR, however.
That's correct. But it does not bypass it either. So if you have DR 10 and you deal only 10 damage including sneak attack, Slow Reactions would not prevent AoO whilst Confounding Blades would.
If you're only dealing 10 damage total while including SA past 10th level (CB is an Advanced Talent, remember) something is VERY wrong.
Oh, come on, this was just a simple example to illustrate it.
It would be more sneak attack damage, but the idea is that forDR X >= Sneak Attack Damage + Rest of Damage
-> Slow Reactions has no effect
-> Confounding Blades works.
Clearer?
1st level spell Obscuring Mist can.Sneak attack is not negated by DR, however.
Edit: Link.
As does blur and every other kind of concealment. That's what the shadow strike feat is for :-)
This might make Confounding Blades even better because it might still trigger, though it is kind of shady as to whether the "deal sneak attack damage" would already count for :-/
|
I thought Sneak Attack was never included in the total.
I always thought Sneak Attack was done separate.
Lets say I do 1d6 + 2 and then 2d6 sneak attack.
I am fighting a vampire who has DR 10 Silver and Magic.
Let's say I roll a 4 + 2 equals six which doesn't bypass DR then after that I make my SA roll which comes to 5. The vampire then takes 5 damage from my Sneak Attack.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This might make Confounding Blades even better because it might still trigger, though it is kind of shady as to whether the "deal sneak attack damage" would already count for :-/
As mentioned in the other thread, if you really want to get right down to it there are NO melee weapons that deal sneak attack damage, as it is not a function of the weapon.
But we won't be that pedantic. ;)
I don't think Confounding Blades would work if the damage was negated by DR. It requires a melee attack "that deals sneak attack damage." If that damage is entirely negated, it isn't an attack "that deals sneak attack damage." So, still useless.
I don't think Confounding Blades would work if the damage was negated by DR. It requires a melee attack "that deals sneak attack damage." If that damage is entirely negated, it isn't an attack "that deals sneak attack damage." So, still useless.
Not necessarily:
1. DR is described to represent various things, e.g. tough skin or instant magical healing. In the latter case it would work.2. You could also make the following argument: The definition focuses on "a weapon that deals sneak attack damage". There are many weapons that allow you to deal sneak attack damage, some might not. Or it focuses on the lethal damage (where the "lethal" is usually omitted) vs. non-lethal damage.
3. Definition again: "a weapon that deals sneak attack damage", not that you actually have to deal damage as it is with confounding blades. So it would work even when you do not surpass DR.
I think #3 is correct and this talent is actually quite ok for an advanced talent.
EVERY melee weapon is capable of dealing sneak attack damage. There is no reason to include that line unless you want to specify that the attack has to actually deal damage. Also, you can deal nonlethal sneak attack damage, so I'm not sure where you are going with the lethal vs. non-lethal thing.
EVERY melee weapon is capable of dealing sneak attack damage. There is no reason to include that line unless you want to specify that the attack has to actually deal damage. Also, you can deal nonlethal sneak attack damage, so I'm not sure where you are going with the lethal vs. non-lethal thing.
With a weapon that deals nonlethal damage (like a sap, whip, or an unarmed strike), a rogue can make a sneak attack that deals nonlethal damage instead of lethal damage. She cannot use a weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage in a sneak attack, not even with the usual –4 penalty
Often "lethal" is omitted whilst "nonlethal" is called out, so it could be argued that the talent is supposed to mean "whenever you do not use a weapon that deals nonlethal damage by default".
But again, I see #3, not this #2. Just stating possible viewpoints and my own opinion :-)
confounding blades = you have to do damage ( i mean sneak attack + weapond dice + mods)
That is the point that I dispute. It says
"When a rogue with this talent hits a creature with a melee weapon that deals sneak attack damage, her target cannot make attacks of opportunity until the beginning of her next turn." and NOT"When a rogue with this talent hits a creature with a melee weapon and deals sneak attack damage, her target cannot make attacks of opportunity until the beginning of her next turn. "
The more we are discussing it, my #2 above seems to be looking better and better. There might even be some weapons (stone age? future?) that state that you cannot deal sneak attack damage with them, I don't know.
#3 would still be valid then, just extended.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After reading this thread I have come to the conclusion that almost everyone in it is completely insane. This entire thread is based on personal opinion and focused on maybe four of the myriad of talents provided to people.
Funnily most of the people here for some reason think it is hard for a Rogue to get sneak attacks off at higher levels, that all a rogue is good for is finding traps and then even more bizarrely are the folks who think that a rogue should out perform every other damage class all while running, jumping, dodging, fighting and acting like every cliche crappy anime character in the world.
I've been playing rogues or fighter/rogues for quite some time now, granted not in this insanity bred, power gaming fiasco known as PFS but let me assure you if a rogue is played well and the person playing it is even moderately intelligent it will be the party's best friend. There is so much a rogue can do besides damage and trap finding and it's silly to see how many people just do not get it.
Also to that one person whinging about PF not being Anime yet again. Look if you want your game to be Anime go for it none of us will stop you or care. but please stop rallying around this selfish idea that would force all of us to endure PF as some insipid anime inspired failure. IF you really want Anime in your d20 system go play BESM ffs leave PF and D&D alone.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After reading this thread I have come to the conclusion that almost everyone in it is completely insane. This entire thread is based on personal opinion and focused on maybe four of the myriad of talents provided to people.
Funnily most of the people here for some reason think it is hard for a Rogue to get sneak attacks off at higher levels, that all a rogue is good for is finding traps and then even more bizarrely are the folks who think that a rogue should out perform every other damage class all while running, jumping, dodging, fighting and acting like every cliche crappy anime character in the world.
I've been playing rogues or fighter/rogues for quite some time now, granted not in this insanity bred, power gaming fiasco known as PFS but let me assure you if a rogue is played well and the person playing it is even moderately intelligent it will be the party's best friend. There is so much a rogue can do besides damage and trap finding and it's silly to see how many people just do not get it.
...
Oh, don't worry. It happens to pretty much every class. They usually take turns, you know.
In the beginning it was the cleric ("Oh my god! No heavy armor proficiency? You ruined it!!!"),then the wizard ("The sorcerer powers are so much cooler! Why am I so weak now? I am supposed to be the GOD here!")
then came the barbarian ("Soo many fighter-only feats! You ruined the king of battle!"),
then the fighter ("Oh no, I cannot get rage powers! I completely suck! And I got too few skills!"),
then the bard ("I am weak! Rogues can do everything better than I! And cleric are better buffers"),
then the monk ("I suck because my role is too undefined! I do not outdamage a fighter!"),
now the rogue...
I probably did not get the right order. Some classes always "suck" and are always too bad or too good ("Paladin smite evil is sooo overpowered!"). There are some all-time favorites like monk and bard and fighter and - recently - rogue.
Don't worry, it will pass. Even if you have to wait for the next book to come out ;-)
On the subject of Hold Breath and Breath Mastery...
What do you think of the Slow Reactions/Confounding Blades screw up?
I am not quite sure what you mean, so I looked those up and will post what I think you mean. First the talents:
Benefit: Opponents damaged by the rogue's sneak attack can't make attacks of opportunity for 1 round.Prerequisites: Advanced talents
Benefit: When a rogue with this talent hits a creature with a melee weapon that deals sneak attack damage, her target cannot make attacks of opportunity until the beginning of her next turn.
Looking at those talents I guess you mean that a lowly rogue talent essentially is better than an advanced talent.
Now I can think of the following situations:
1. Simple error: Someone did not know the other talent existed.
2. Preparation for later usage: Some (later to be introduced) prestige class or feat might require this AoO blocking as an advanced talent.
3. Details matter: Looking at the language there might be a difference in power level. Slow Reactions requires you to actually deal damage, so DR might prevent this from working. Confounding Blades on the other hand only requires a melee attack that would deal sneak attack damage, so even if you do not pass DR, it still works. This is more powerful and justify an advanced rogue talent.I guess it's #3, so I see no issue here :-)
Unless you mean something else?
After rereading and thinking about it again I come to the conclusion that Confounding Blades is really powerful and basically works everytime provided
a) you have the sneak attack class featureb) use a weapon that can be used to deal sneak attack damage (pretty much all)
c) hit (not deal damage) with a melee attack
This is from a strict reading of the rules and makes it much more powerful than slow reactions. They probably restricted it to melee attacks to keep it in check. Also the image of threatening your opponent very actively with your weapon to prevent him from taking his attacks of opportunity seems quite fitting to me.
So this is how I see it. No hickup or uselessness in that talent there :-)
Let us compare for a moment, the rogue and the fighter. The fighter gets a few nice things like Weapon and armor training that are a little bit better than uncanny dodge and trap sense, but not nearly as good as a sneak attack. The rogue gets a d8 hd and 8+ Int skill ranks per level compared to the fighter's d10 hd and 2 skill ranks per level. They both have one good save. The fighter has a full BAB, and the rogue has a 3/4 BAB. Regarding these things, the only real advantage the fighter has is the full BAB. Now, if we throw in rogue talents and bonus feats, I think we'd all agree that feats are generally better than talents (depending on the build, and which talent you're talking about), but were the rogue talents any better than they are now, the rogue would clearly be the superior class to the fighter in almost all respects. They are something that was completely absent the class in 3.5, yet the rogue was still perhaps the best non-casting core class. It would unbalance the game if rogue talents were much more powerful.
|
Being a Rogue is objectively worse than being a Ninja in just about* every way. Ninjas do an adequate job with traps and are miles better at everything else Rogues are supposed to do, particularly the combat parts of the class.
Nobody has ever argued Ninjas are overpowered...except when you directly compare them to Rogues. That right there says something about the rogue being a tad bit underpowered.
*You have Trapfinding and Evasion. Yay? They're alright, especially Evasion, but a Ninja can grab Evasion eventually, while Rogues never gain a real Ki Pool.
After rereading and thinking about it again I come to the conclusion that Confounding Blades is really powerful and basically works everytime provided
a) you have the sneak attack class feature
b) use a weapon that can be used to deal sneak attack damage (pretty much all)
c) hit (not deal damage) with a melee attack
This is from a strict reading of the rules and makes it much more powerful than slow reactions. They probably restricted it to melee attacks to keep it in check. Also...the description of the feat says
"Prevent attacks of opportunity when you do damage with a sneak attack"
Also
"Talents marked with an asterisk add effects to a rogue's sneak attack. Only one of these talents can be applied to an individual attack and the decision must be made before the attack roll is made."
So, you have to do a sneak attack to use confunding blades, from a stric reading of the rules.
I cannot find a reference in the confounding blades description that you have to deal damage. Please provide a link where it says that.
It's even simpler: you do not need the sneak attack class feature, but just be a rogue and hit with a melee attack with a suitable weapon.
EDIT: due to Asterisk sneak attack is still required
On the subject of Hold Breath and Breath Mastery...
What do you think of the Slow Reactions/Confounding Blades screw up?
I am not quite sure what you mean, so I looked those up and will post what I think you mean. First the talents:
Benefit: Opponents damaged by the rogue's sneak attack can't make attacks of opportunity for 1 round.Prerequisites: Advanced talents
Benefit: When a rogue with this talent hits a creature with a melee weapon that deals sneak attack damage, her target cannot make attacks of opportunity until the beginning of her next turn.
...
After rereading and thinking about it again I come to the conclusion that Confounding Blades is really powerful and basically works everytime provided
a) you have the sneak attack class feature
b) use a weapon that can be used to deal sneak attack damage (pretty much all)
c) hit (not deal damage) with a melee attack
This is from a strict reading of the rules and makes it much more powerful than slow reactions. They probably restricted it to melee attacks to keep it in check. Also...
Note: added the confounding blades name above and added a space between the two talent descriptions to prevent misunderstandings. :-)
There is nothing inherently antiheroic about the bard or alchemist either. For the rogue antihero is in the class name and the mechanical bias towards stabbing people in the back or attacking from stealth and it's the way the rogue is traditionally played.The entire thing of the "heroic" character is somewhat absurd, by the same token I do not see anything heroic in the bard or alchemist.
to be or not to be heroic only depend of the action of the character not his class.
The same can be said about a Barbarian who can be easily compared to a viking going out killing other people for personal gain and basing his fighting style off of anger and rage rather than reason like a fighter or ranger usually would
After reading this thread I have come to the conclusion that almost everyone in it is completely insane. This entire thread is based on personal opinion and focused on maybe four of the myriad of talents provided to people.
Funnily most of the people here for some reason think it is hard for a Rogue to get sneak attacks off at higher levels, that all a rogue is good for is finding traps and then even more bizarrely are the folks who think that a rogue should out perform every other damage class all while running, jumping, dodging, fighting and acting like every cliche crappy anime character in the world.
I've been playing rogues or fighter/rogues for quite some time now, granted not in this insanity bred, power gaming fiasco known as PFS but let me assure you if a rogue is played well and the person playing it is even moderately intelligent it will be the party's best friend. There is so much a rogue can do besides damage and trap finding and it's silly to see how many people just do not get it.
...Oh, don't worry. It happens to pretty much every class. They usually take turns, you know.
In the beginning it was the cleric ("Oh my god! No heavy armor proficiency? You ruined it!!!"),
then the wizard ("The sorcerer powers are so much cooler! Why am I so weak now? I am supposed to be the GOD here!")
then came the barbarian ("Soo many fighter-only feats! You ruined the king of battle!"),
then the fighter ("Oh no, I cannot get rage powers! I completely suck! And I got too few skills!"),
then the bard ("I am weak! Rogues can do everything better than I! And cleric are better buffers"),
then the monk ("I suck because my role is too undefined! I do not outdamage a fighter!"),
now the rogue...
I probably did not get the right order. Some classes always "suck" and are always too bad or too good ("Paladin smite evil is sooo overpowered!"). There are some all-time favorites like monk and bard and fighter and - recently - rogue.
Don't worry, it will pass.
Gorram it I quit WoW to escape this flavor of the month crap, now I get to deal with it in a table top game?!
It's stuff like this that makes me glad I run my own home brew world and game twice a week. I think I would rather scoop out my own eyes than participate in the debacle that PFS seems to be.
Gorram it I quit WoW to escape this flavor of the month crap, now I get to deal with it in a table top game?!
It isn't really "flavor of the month." Things just come out that change how people rate the different classes. Monks got a lot more hate before Ultimate Combat, because UC contained a bunch of neat Monk goodies. Barbarians were a bit "meh" before the Advanced Player's Guide. Clerics, Wizards, and Bards have always been awesome, to the point I would chock up any threads hating on them to random loons rather than "flavor of the month" style piling on.
The issues people have with Rogues have been pretty consistent since the game came out. They might not be significant enough to cause problems for some people, but for others they are a real concern. Personally, I rarely use Rogues because I have found I can get the same flavor and style with another class, but with better mechanical results. While other classes have gotten real nice toys, Rogues have gotten a better version (Ninja) and a bunch of archetypes stealing their schtick (Archaeologist, for example).
You might not agree, and that is fine. But please, don't chock up people thinking the Rogue is weak to some sort of "flavor of the month" thing. It is a "flavor of the two-years-and-counting," at least.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Gorram it I quit WoW to escape this flavor of the month crap, now I get to deal with it in a table top game?!
It isn't really "flavor of the month." Things just come out that change how people rate the different classes. Monks got a lot more hate before Ultimate Combat, because UC contained a bunch of neat Monk goodies. Barbarians were a bit "meh" before the Advanced Player's Guide. Clerics, Wizards, and Bards have always been awesome, to the point I would chock up any threads hating on them to random loons rather than "flavor of the month" style piling on.
The issues people have with Rogues have been pretty consistent since the game came out. They might not be significant enough to cause problems for some people, but for others they are a real concern. Personally, I rarely use Rogues because I have found I can get the same flavor and style with another class, but with better mechanical results. With time, I've only found this getting worse. While other classes have gotten real nice, mechanically sound toys, Rogues have gotten a better version (Ninja) and a bunch of archetypes stealing their schtick (Archaeologist, for example).
You might not agree, and that is fine. But please, don't chock up people thinking the Rogue is weak to some sort of "flavor of the month" thing. It is a "flavor of the two-years-and-counting," at least.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Gorram it I quit WoW to escape this flavor of the month crap, now I get to deal with it in a table top game?!It isn't really "flavor of the month." Things just come out that change how people rate the different classes. Monks got a lot more hate before Ultimate Combat, because UC contained a bunch of neat Monk goodies. Barbarians were a bit "meh" before the Advanced Player's Guide. Clerics, Wizards, and Bards have always been awesome, to the point I would chock up any threads hating on them to random loons rather than "flavor of the month" style piling on.
The issues people have with Rogues have been pretty consistent since the game came out. They might not be significant enough to cause problems for some people, but for others they are a real concern. Personally, I rarely use Rogues because I have found I can get the same flavor and style with another class, but with better mechanical results. With time, I've only found this getting worse. While other classes have gotten real nice, mechanically sound toys, Rogues have gotten a better version (Ninja) and a bunch of archetypes stealing their schtick (Archaeologist, for example).
You might not agree, and that is fine. But please, don't chock up people thinking the Rogue is weak to some sort of "flavor of the month" thing. It is a "flavor of the two-years-and-counting," at least.
It's honestly not worth the wasted time and energy arguing with people on this board. There are rarely any actual discussions here just internet arguments. So I'll just jump on this bandwagon here real quick.
Arrgg!!! Rogue is terrible, I can't kill everything in one shot and my abilities are only of s supporting nature and not that of a front line combatant!! Buff me now or I am canceling my subscipt... I mean I am burning my books!
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
It's stuff like this that makes me glad I run my own home brew world and game twice a week. I think I would rather scoop out my own eyes than participate in the debacle that PFS seems to be.
What's all the "Class X is over/underpowered" stuff got to do with PFS? Most of the messageboards are non-PFS stuff.
Gorram it I quit WoW to escape this flavor of the month crap, now I get to deal with it in a table top game?!It isn't really "flavor of the month." Things just come out that change how people rate the different classes. Monks got a lot more hate before Ultimate Combat, because UC contained a bunch of neat Monk goodies. Barbarians were a bit "meh" before the Advanced Player's Guide. Clerics, Wizards, and Bards have always been awesome, to the point I would chock up any threads hating on them to random loons rather than "flavor of the month" style piling on.
The issues people have with Rogues have been pretty consistent since the game came out. They might not be significant enough to cause problems for some people, but for others they are a real concern. Personally, I rarely use Rogues because I have found I can get the same flavor and style with another class, but with better mechanical results. With time, I've only found this getting worse. While other classes have gotten real nice, mechanically sound toys, Rogues have gotten a better version (Ninja) and a bunch of archetypes stealing their schtick (Archaeologist, for example).
You might not agree, and that is fine. But please, don't chock up people thinking the Rogue is weak to some sort of "flavor of the month" thing. It is a "flavor of the two-years-and-counting," at least.
It's honestly not worth the wasted time and energy arguing with people on this board. There are rarely any actual discussions here just internet arguments. So I'll just jump on this bandwagon here real quick.
Arrgg!!! Rogue is terrible, I can't kill everything in one shot and my abilities are only of s supporting nature and not that of a front line combatant!! Buff me now or I am canceling my subscipt... I mean I am burning my books!
I have literally never seen anyone remotely this angry. The people participating in balance discussions - and they are discussions - sound nothing like that, and are often the players most passionate about the system. They're people who care enough about the game to dig through the fluff text saying what various character options are supposed to do to see if they're actually doing them.
"It's not worth the wasted time and energy arguing with people on this board" if and only if you're someone who insists on ignoring play experience and mathcraft in favor of naked assertions. In that case, yes, it is not worth the wasted time and energy arguing with people on this board - and not worth their time or energy either.