|
Nope but might he not have more fun yet if he were more effective in combat?The rogue in our current PF game rocks and the guy playing him is having a lot of fun.
Someone going to say we are having BAD/WRONG/FUN?
Since when has the rogue been all about combat?
Actually the rogue is doing some great damage. He just got a +2 silvered agile rapier and he is loving every minute of it.
He didn't say the rogue was all about combat, just asked if being more effective than he was would increase the players fun.
A thread about how much rogues suck? Must be Friday...
But it was posted on Thursday.
Furthermore, that's just to be able to disarm magical traps. Considering the possibility to require more skill checks/other tactics to overcome a challenge means you might be investing even more to do what the rogue can do for free.
Plus there seems to be some disagreement as to whether you actively search for hidden traps (costing you a move action) or if you can just walk up to them and get a free perception roll. I always rule you have to search for them (people actively sweep for mines in the real world, as far as I'm aware). In which case someone with 'Trap-Spotter' comes into their own, particularly in 'against-the-clock' scenarios.
To be honest the rogue class suffers from two really ambiguous rulings - 'free mine sweeping' or not, and whether you can sneak attack from Stealth.
|
i have a potion for that, it lets me disarm magical traps when i need to for 50gAnd how many potion of that do you carry around with you? How much gold do you waste in an average campaign? What other interesting potions can you buy for 50g?
How much would you waste when playing in a campaign I designed?Furthermore, that's just to be able to disarm magical traps. Considering the possibility to require more skill checks/other tactics to overcome a challenge means you might be investing even more to do what the rogue can do for free.
Comparing resource intensive solutions to free solution only favours the resource intensive solution up when they are not important.
This means, in a situation that disfavours the rogue (remember, the rogue is situational).
the real question is how many magical traps do you think you're going to need to disarm? i can find them as easy as you can, but only need to pop the potion when its magical in nature. so yeah i say again "i have a potion for that". 50g shouldnt need more then one or 2 an adventure.
furthermore, when using the ninja as an example i have just as many skills and better combat effectiveness. so yeah i say AGAIN "i have a potion for that".
resource intensive? 50g is not resource intensive....
|
|
the real question is how many magical traps do you think you're going to need to disarm? i can find them as easy as you can, but only need to pop the potion when its magical in nature. so yeah i say again "i have a potion for that". 50g shouldnt need more then one or 2 an adventure.
resource intensive? 50g is not resource intensive....
Even in your example, you already have to spend 100 gold.
Furtheremore, if you encounter 3 magic traps that adventure, you may have a problem.
btw, How are determining that a trap is magic? Detect magic is resource driven too, you could have prepared an other spell.I'm not saying your strategy is bad. If it really only takes you 100 gold piece for each adventure, it's probably not a bad idea to forgo the rogue.
I just hope that when you encounter your 3th trap of the day and it kills you, you will think of this thread.
well i guess we wont need to since i did this, and it worked very well.
i never said to you " you only need to carry 2 because gms dont have more then 2 magical traps" i said you SHOULD only need 1 or 2 in an adventure. also you dont need detect magic to find a magical trap, you only need to hit your dc for finding it. if your gm actually does throw a magical trap that is also invisible then thats why you have a mage/cleric to let you know.
Are there any reasons to assume otherwise?
You are not the first to claim that. As far as I know, you only get an automatic perception check when it's reactive against other skills (or similar abilities) such as stealth or disguise.
Without trap spotter or a hold over from the 3.5 search skill, its very hard to get a "you must look for traps actively" out of the perception rules. It doesn't specify when you get a passive perception skill , it just says that you usually do.
The active search reading for traps is, i believe, RAI but it seems to have been left out of the raw.
|
Many of you are looking at it differently from the way that the game designers look at it.
They -want- certain options to suck. Its why they created Vow of Poverty, for example. More specifically, its why they created VoP and, yet, tried to justify giving casters twice the GP in wealth (via crafting) by asserting that feats have to be 'worth something'.
If spell casters don't trump everything else (ala Ars Magica style), then the game designers feel like they've made a mistake somewhere.
They -want- some characters to feel like Gabriel to the spell caster's Xena - to be window dressing in the story about the real heroes (the casters).
Pathfinder made their own version of Vow of Poverty?
Yeah, it's in Ultimate Magic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It the worst piece of game rules I've ever seen in d20.
It immediately made me take back all the mean things I've said about how screwed up 3E's VoP was. At least they *tried* to make something useable. It even is useable to druids, sorcerers, and a few other builds/classes. Being upset with 3E VoP when PF's VoP exists is like being angry with someone for coughing on you while you're being mugged at gunpoint by someone else.
|
They -want- some characters to feel like Gabriel to the spell caster's Xena - to be window dressing in the story about the real heroes (the casters).
Nah, not all non casters. Just Monks.
Those poor Monks. :(
I'm actually not even sure they hate Monks, the debate on VoP was whether there should be intentionally mechanically sub-par options...which they've certainly made available to Wizards and the like. Monks just have so few nice options (and that one's so flavorful) that it was a somewhat more biter pill to swallow.
.
.
.
They don't actually hate even Rogues, they just fell down on the execution on fixing them (allow Ki Pool as a Rogue Talent, maybe an Advanced one, then allow Advanced Ninja Tricks as Advanced Rogue Talents. Would've been so easy...*wistful sigh*).
And they don't hate other non-casters at all. They're quite useful and effective even into high levels.
well i guess we wont need to since i did this, and it worked very well.
i never said to you " you only need to carry 2 because gms dont have more then 2 magical traps" i said you SHOULD only need 1 or 2 in an adventure. also you dont need detect magic to find a magical trap, you only need to hit your dc for finding it. if your gm actually does throw a magical trap that is also invisible then thats why you have a mage/cleric to let you know.My point is, if you don't know if a trap is magical or not, you should be drinking a potion for each trap. That's the only way to be sure you are not trying to disarm a magic trap without the appropriate proficiency (well, that or use detect magic for the traps).
btw, what happens when you try to disarm a magic trap with the appropriate proficiency? Does it blow up in your face or do you just fail the check?
It's assumed that if you roll the perception DC, you know what's the trap and what's going on. That's why you can try to disable it.
It's not like you see a lot of movies where the guy says "ok , I know there's "something" here, but I don't know if it is a bear-trap, an explosive, a pit with a preassure trigger, some bolts that are thrown from the wall, a poison cloud, or a magical fireball. I'm going to disable it, but I have no clue if I should cling the bear-trap with a stick, remove the detonator, put a stone on the preassure trigger to disable it, block the bolt-throwing holes in the wall, use an antitoxin to disolve the poison cloud, or erase the magic rune. I'll try a random stuff to see what happens"
Does your DM ever describe things? Like... "your character finds a trap. It seems to be a plate with a preassure trigger, if you step on it, a rain of poisoned darts came from the ceiling. The ceiling is to high, but you could cut the spring in the trigger. Do you wanna try?" Or he just say numbers, like "it's a DC 30 trap to see, you need DC 35 to disable, and it does 3d6 damage" Because that's a damn bad DM then.
The skill only speaks of reactive perception check made towards observable stimulus.
Like the pressure plate you're about to step on, or the string accross the hallway, or the beam of light in your way.. or whatever it is you're going to step on to set off the trap.
|
|
The skill only speaks of reactive perception check made towards observable stimulus.Like the pressure plate you're about to step on, or the string accross the hallway, or the beam of light in your way.. or whatever it is you're going to step on to set off the trap.
This is not the intent of the folks at Paizo, as seen here.
Now, James Jacobs opinions are hardly defining on rules subjects, but he does play with the other folks at Paizo. Including playing a Rogue, so I think his idea of when you can roll to notice traps is probably spot-on from a designer's intent perspective.
I removed a post and some replies to it. It's okay to not like things, but you don't have to be a jerk about it.
This is not the intent of the folks at Paizo, as seen here.
Now, James Jacobs opinions are hardly defining on rules subjects, but he does play with the other folks at Paizo. Including playing a Rogue, so I think his idea of when you can roll to notice traps is probably spot-on from a designer's intent perspective.
Oh definitely, i think its the RAI, but i think its pretty much missing from the raw from when search got merged into perception.
Dumb question for Jiggy...AFAICT, Wall Climber is a ninja trick, not a rogue talent. Am I missing a rule somewhere, or is this is a house rule?
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Dumb question for Jiggy...AFAICT, Wall Climber is a ninja trick, not a rogue talent. Am I missing a rule somewhere, or is this is a house rule?
Ultimate Combat adds some new Rogue Talents, one of which is this:
Ninja Trick - A rogue with this talent can choose a trick from the ninja trick list. The rogue can choose but cannot use talents that require ki points, unless she has a ki pool. A rogue can pick this talent more than once.
Similarly, there's a ninja trick called rogue talent that does the opposite. So the end result is that rogues and ninjas share a common pool of talents/tricks.
|
|
Similarly, there's a ninja trick called rogue talent that does the opposite. So the end result is that rogues and ninjas share a common pool of talents/tricks.
But, RAW, not Advanced talents/tricks, because Ninjas can take Rogue ones but not the reverse.
This goes back to that whole 'Ninjas are objectively better' thing I mentioned earlier in the thread. In fact, this and the lack of a way to get a full Ki Pool while Ninjas can indeed get Evasion in full is the entirety of Ninjas superiority...but those two combined, at 10th level plus? A hell of a lot of superiority considering how awesome, say, Invisible Blade is.
Which is why I've house-ruled them to be more completely compatible (and thus equal).
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Similarly, there's a ninja trick called rogue talent that does the opposite. So the end result is that rogues and ninjas share a common pool of talents/tricks.But, RAW, not Advanced talents/tricks, because Ninjas can take Rogue ones but not the reverse.
This goes back to that whole 'Ninjas are objectively better' thing I mentioned earlier in the thread. In fact, this and the lack of a way to get a full Ki Pool while Ninjas can indeed get Evasion in full is the entirety of Ninjas superiority...but those two combined, at 10th level plus? A hell of a lot of superiority considering how awesome, say, Invisible Blade is.
Which is why I've house-ruled them to be more completely compatible (and thus equal).
Well, my rogue is in PFS, which caps at 12th level, so that's kind of moot (for me). The ki pool is a big difference though, I'll give you that. On the other hand, I like a lot of the rogue archetypes that don't translate to the ninja.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
P.S. And maybe, just maybe, your gm start with just "your character finds a tile that seems to be lose, it lies bit higher than the rest of the floor. what do you want to do".
If you interact with the trap to find out the information you describe, you may have already triggered a magic trap.
Trapfinder somehow protects you from this.
If your DM describes it like that, and you interact with it, you may have already triggered a non-magic trap as well. The tile might be poisoned with a contact venom, for example. It's what you get when you roll Perception 30 and your DM tells you the tile is loose, but does not tell you that you see a slightly transparent substance above it. Or a magic rune, or some other hint about what the real trap (which you beated the Perception DC for) is.
And yes, trapfinding helps. If "I run over the plate and pray the darts don't hit me" is a valid way to disable traps, I guess. But even then, it does not balance it out with the ninja.Where is this assumed? When you make your perception check, you see the stimulus or hidden component. You don't suddenly get X-ray vision to see through solid objects.
It's assumed in the fact you can roll to disable device. If your PC does not know if the trap is a pressure plate, a invisible thread, or a laser ray, he can't disable it.
|
|
Well, my rogue is in PFS, which caps at 12th level, so that's kind of moot (for me). The ki pool is a big difference though, I'll give you that. On the other hand, I like a lot of the rogue archetypes that don't translate to the ninja.
Rogues are only debatably inferior to Ninjas pre-10th level. I'd argue that Ki Pool and the various tricks it enables are better than Evasion plus an equal number of Rogue talents, but it is arguable.
Then they hit 10th level and the Ninja can grab Evasion. You can now wind up with almost literally identical characters (assuming the rogue went with the poisoner archetype), only the Ninja has a Ki Pool and the rogue has one Advanced Talent. And that assumes the Ninja didn't distribute his Ninja Tricks effectively, since many of those are much better than Rogue Talents (though costing Ki). That's...looking a lot worse for the Rogue.
Rogues and Ninjas should not be able to take abilities from each others lists at all.
The should be two completely separate classes that don't step on each other's toes.
The should have made the Ninja a rogue archtype.
They did make the ninja a rogue archetype. And then it was a little too beefy text-wise to work as an archetype, so they made it an alternate class. That's all alternate classes are.
|
They did make the ninja a rogue archetype. And then it was a little too beefy text-wise to work as an archetype, so they made it an alternate class. That's all alternate classes are.Rogues and Ninjas should not be able to take abilities from each others lists at all.
The should be two completely separate classes that don't step on each other's toes.
The should have made the Ninja a rogue archtype.
Ayup.
|
A lot of people are talking about giving rogues a ki pool. There's almost no talk about what rogues would spend their ki on. Or are we assuming the ki pool would bring with it everything that monks get to spend theirs on?
There's already rogue talents that gives them a grit pool, along with firearm proficiency and a bonus grit feat. Is that not good enough?
|
|
A lot of people are talking about giving rogues a ki pool. There's almost no talk about what rogues would spend their ki on. Or are we assuming the ki pool would bring with it everything that monks get to spend theirs on?
Ninjas already have one with it's own uses (which do include the extra attack on a Full Attack...very nice with Sneak Attack), as well as being used to power various Ninja Tricks (which Rogues can already grab).
There's already rogue talents that gives them a grit pool, along with firearm proficiency and a bonus grit feat. Is that not good enough?
There's technically one that gives a Ki Pool, too. But it gives you a Ki Pool equal to Wis mod only, and it can only be used to power Ninja Tricks (or move +10 feet in a turn). It's really not even worth taking.
This in contrast to Ninja, who get 1/2 level + Cha Ki as well as a full suite of abilities (extra attack, or +20 feet move, or +4 stealth, and can jump as if they had a running start as long as they have any).
And the Ninja trick that lets them get a Rogue's equivalent ability (Evasion) is every bit as good as the real thing. It's Advanced, but still.
See why people are annoyed about the ninja?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ninja in the playtest was ok, IMO. Not as good as most other classes, but a huge improvement from Rogue. But then people complained. If rogue's gonna suck, ninja better suck, too! So they removed the free use per day of all the ninja tricks that cost ki, and raised the ki point cost of several of them to make charisma even MORE important and solidify ninja as the most multiple ability score dependent (MAD) class I've ever seen in my life. So, there it is. I consider Ninja unplayable as written. Maybe if you had 30 or 35 point buy, but how often is a DM willing to throw MAD classes a bone like that (a wizard can afford int 18 on 10 point buy, so by 30, he's long ceased caring)?
And yes, Powerful Sneak is awful. As are many of the other APG talents. As are the UC ones (Hold Breath! OMG!).
There are a few gems in the rough, though. Terrain Mastery talent, when taken many many many times and combined with Horizon Walker levels, can turn out quite good, albeit being hyperspecialized and optimization to nearly the point of theoretical optimzation (builds done as a thought experiment and not intended for actual games).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my homebrew, I just mashed rogue and ninja together...basically gave ninja trapfinding and evasion for free. So far, it hasn't blown up in my face.
|
|
Ninja in the playtest was ok, IMO. Not as good as most other classes, but a huge improvement from Rogue. But then people complained. If rogue's gonna suck, ninja better suck, too! So they removed the free use per day of all the ninja tricks that cost ki, and raised the ki point cost of several of them to make charisma even MORE important and solidify ninja as the most multiple ability score dependent (MAD) class I've ever seen in my life. So, there it is. I consider Ninja unplayable as written. Maybe if you had 30 or 35 point buy, but how often is a DM willing to throw MAD classes a bone like that (a wizard can afford int 18 on 10 point buy, so by 30, he's long ceased caring)?
And yes, Powerful Sneak is awful. As are many of the other APG talents. As are the UC ones (Hold Breath! OMG!).
There are a few gems in the rough, though. Terrain Mastery talent, when taken many many many times and combined with Horizon Walker levels, can turn out quite good, albeit being hyperspecialized and optimization to nearly the point of theoretical optimzation (builds done as a thought experiment and not intended for actual games).
It is not quite that MAD, for a few reasons.
One is that it doesn't need a stellar score in any one stat to be good all-around. A strength of 14 with +2 racial bonus is fine for offence, and a 14 and 12 in constitution or dexterity should be okay as well.
Secondly, the ninja is fully able to dump intelligence into the ground. 8 skills/level is great, and 6 skills/level is still good enough. Even putting it to 8 so we can bring up wisdom is a good tactical choice; a trait to increase will save one more point means we have good saves and consistent offence.
My favourite ninja stat spread is Str 16, Dex 12, Con 14, Int 8, Wis 12, Cha 14. AC is a little sticky until I can pick up a masterwork buckler and the mirror image rogue talent, but even vanishing trick means I can withdraw pretty easily. I go human for Iron Will and Toughness, and pick up Extra Ki at third level.
I would say only as MAD as a monk or a paladin. Still MAD, but not cripplingly so.
|
|
Ninja in the playtest was ok, IMO. Not as good as most other classes, but a huge improvement from Rogue. But then people complained. If rogue's gonna suck, ninja better suck, too! So they removed the free use per day of all the ninja tricks that cost ki, and raised the ki point cost of several of them to make charisma even MORE important and solidify ninja as the most multiple ability score dependent (MAD) class I've ever seen in my life.
Oh, it's not that bad. You need Dex* and Cha (plus a little Con to survive). That's...really about it actually. Your Will Save isn't gonna be spectacular, but that's what Traits and Feats are for.
And Ki's still useful, as are many of the Tricks (though some did get pricey as hell, admittedly). They're a hell of a lot better than nothing.
So, there it is. I consider Ninja unplayable as written. Maybe if you had 30 or 35 point buy, but how often is a DM willing to throw MAD classes a bone like that (a wizard can afford int 18 on 10 point buy, so by 30, he's long ceased caring)?
So, from this, I'm guessing you'll never play a Rogue under any circumstances, right?
*Or Str if going with a Str build...but a Dex build's actually pretty good on a ninja these days.