Hey i wanted to build a skill monkey type rogue for PFS- but had a few questions before hand since i've never been to a PFS meet before. First off, how do most GMs play stealth out? i've heard the argument that you can only stealth behind cover and the second you step out you are seen no matter what. i mean seriously, how would you sneak up on anything if you can't get closer than the rock you are standing at 200 feet away. though i disagree wholeheartedly with this, i'm not the GM and i can't argue.
Secondly, How often do traps come into play? As well as interesting things you can do with climb/acrobatics? AKA: How linear is everything? If you understand what i mean.
Finally, how often do interesting non-combat encounters come up? im okay with being vastly subpar in combat as long as i can do something out of combat. but if its just "Go here and get this relic" for every encounter, im not sure id want to run a skill rogue.
Varies by GM. Usually, if you break line of sight or go into a darkened area. Also, ALWAYS remember: Flanking is your best friend.
Varies by scenario. Be prepared for traps anyways.
Climb is situational, and knotted rope makes climbing a DC 5 check, which you can easily take 10 on assuming no combat. Acrobatics, however, is especially good for trying to dodge attacks of opportunity, and considering rogue, I highly recommend some ranks in there.
Again, varies by scenario. I can't put my finger on it, but whatever it is, a skill monkey rogue is always a welcome addition to any party, even those go fetch stuff scenarios: Bonus points if you got a good Use Magic Device.
|
PFS scenarios vary between being combat heavy and half-and-half. There are several urban scenarios that involve investigation and interviewing with small bits of combat interspersed, and a social rogue would function well at those times. Make sure, however, that you're bringing something to combat.
If you want a stealthy skill-monkey character, I would recommend an inquisitor. An inquisitor of Norgorber would have a lot of rogue flavour while being more effective in and out of combat (and if you want Disable Device as a class skill, there's a trait for that).
i understand that stealth is impossible in combat, i've accepted this long ago :P But imagine its a dungeon, and theres a hallway forking off to the right. As the scout i want to be able to find where their reinforcements would come from and the most tactical way to go through the dungeon. But their is an enemy of some sort in the hallway to the right. Most GMs i know would say "roll a stealth check" and you could sneak past the hallway and continue on your way. But i also know some GMs that say "You can't stealth in the open and the enemy sees you the second you try to cross the hallway".... Essentially making stealth 100% useless except for the most situational of circumstances.
The main things i would like to do in PFS are social encounters, non-combat problems/puzzels and infiltration. But the main focus being "good at a little bit of everything" being the scout, trapfinder and fast talker. if i could get away with slightly illegal things (picking pockets or otherwise using sleight of hand and bluff) is bonus points, but i understand that its probably not possible.
you see, thats what i find is so annoying- that rogues are overshadowed in everything they do by some other class. Fighters are better pick pockets, Bards are better skill users, Barbarians and fighters are better damage dealers, tanks, combat maneuver users, rangers are better stealth characters the list goes on. No, i don't care for magic in the slightest which is a reason i don't want a bard. I want to find traps and still actually fight in a battle. Don't you dare tell me to make an archeologist or a dervish dancer.
Edit: Op you did it before i posted, you told me to be an archeologist bard... i HATE archeologists, its pretty much saying "Hey there rogue, &$#% you! im better at everything you do 100% of the time"
Also i know that stealth isn't pseudo invisibility, but i also know that in real life i can walk quietly behind someone and not be noticed. or cross from tree to tree while they aren't looking. This is out of combat i'm takling about, i realize stealth is really gray area inside combat
Oh i wasn't saying anything bad about you, its just that archeologists get everything a rogue does and more. What does a rogue get that the bard doesn't? Sneak attacks and improved uncanny dodge and a few more rogue talents (which archeologists still have access too). What does the archeologist get? Bonus to ALL perception checks (not just traps) plus the ability to disable devices much more quickly and effectively than the rogue, All knowledge skill checks as well as bonuses too them, give herself a +1 on attacks and damage rolls as per the bardic performance, Oh yeah and spells!
I'm sorry but whoever made this class clearly forgot that there is such thing as a rogue, when they literally copied everything from their class page.
I'm not asking for build advice, im asking if a skill user is even viable in PFS
Pretty much i want to be the eyes, ears and to some degree the mouth of the party. The skills i would like to use are Stealth (for gathering information) Perception obviously along with that, Acrobatics (for jumping purposes), Climb (for vantage point and alternate route), Escape artist (for alternate routes and the few times i might be captured while sneaking around), Disable device (Jamming doors and other mechanisms), Sleight of hand (for getting weapons into no weapon zones, stealing as well if it is a good time too). Bluff, Intimidate and Diplomacy would all have skill points in them but not a focus, if there was a bard that would be their job. But i still want to be able to be an effective persuader if needed.
I was thinking of going a halfling using a sling staff (maybe a drop into some martial class just to get martial weapon proficiency) but thats only if i can get some clarification if "Warslinger" applies to sling staffs. a Halfing Filcher archetype, one of the few that don't sacrifice trapfinding.
im asking if PFS campaigns give you the opportunity to do these, and if so how the GMs generally handle them. And another question possibly, if other party members support this or if they scoff and complain that they aren't fighting right now and just blasting their way into a dungeon.
Thanks Matt2vk, thats useful enough... I'm just really getting sick of people telling me to not play a rogue because bards are better -.- Its probably the thing about pathfinder that pisses me off the most.
Oh its not bards, bards are great! if they stayed where they should. I don't believe that a bard should be the stealthy guy- Or atleast buff up rogues so that they do something on par with the bards. there is NOTHING a rogue can do that a bard can't (In regards to PFS)
Bards are great support, but there is one rogue I play that has the possibility to do insane damage.
Half-Orc Skulking Slayer/Scout
4th level, he can do a sneak attack on a charge.
at 5th: 1d12+12+3d8 on a charge. with a greataxe.
Sap Master at 5th? use greatclub instead: 1d10+18+6d8 non-lethal.
I get about 7 skill points a level for lots of things. Sure I lose Disable Device as a class skill, but there's a trait for that.
Only thing I have to worry about is AC. A dip in fighter should fix that.
Other than that, I practically throw out the whole concept of stealth for sneak attacks. I don't get what everyone is saying when they say rogues are terrible at damage. (Why bother with bard support when you could just maul that BBEG?)
Also, when he can manage to cleave, the target he cleaves into is flat-footed.
Feats and build:
1st: Power Attack
2nd: Rogue Trick: Suprise Follow-Through or Cleave
3rd: Cleave or Surprise Follow-Through
Sap Master:
1st: Bludgeoner
2nd: Combat Feat: Power Attack or Sap Adept
3rd: Sap Adept or Power Attack
5th: Sap Master
*and by raw, yes this is ALL LEGAL!
Rogues can be pretty cool characters, and it isn't too hard to make a character that does all of what you said.
Five sessions in and I am yet to have a real opportunity to stealth; has happened twice.
Have had a ball in melee, however.
Working just fine without worrying about Sneak attack - nice when it happens, isn't essential though. Engage the enemy and shuffle about, don't get into the mantra of having to line up the sneak attack BEFORE engaging.
I have a half elf thug, Half Orc would be even better.
I do 'face skills', and a bit of a dabble at 'rogue skills'.
Dex is mediocre, Str is beefcake. Take a 2 handed weapon and get in the thick of it.
Don't be a wussy rogue, go smash things and have a blast :)
|
Rogues, even pure skillmonkey ones do fine in PFS. You might get frustrated by some of the earlier combat heavy scenarios, but the scenarios I've played from 2nd and 3rd seasons have a variety of challenges, where an agile and opportunistic mountebank can excel.
Couple of thing:
*Get vanish a an sla through the major magic rogue talent. Great way to get a sneak attack in on a crowded square during high noon, etc. Saw a rogue/barbarian multiclass with a slingstaff yesterday who used this 6 times during the module.
*Get Gang Up somewhere down the line. Yes, it needs two melee allies in order to work, but that's like every party in PFS.
*Don't dump Wis, it's an important statistic for the Rogue. I would not get more than 12-13 points, but dumping never. Affects Perception, Sense Motive and Will saves
And yeah, have fun.
You have to understand that PFS modules are designed to be completed by a mix of characters who may not always have certain skills available to them -- and thus certain skills usually considered indispensable, are really just gravy. You're not going to find a PFS mission that requires you to get past a locked door, without there being at least one alternative to having to use disable device to open the lock. (Usually more than one.)
I've never seen a real use for the Sleight of Hand skill, and Climb is one of those skills where the module writer can't assume the party will all have, so he has to include an alternative for the party that can't climb around.
Thanks Matt2vk, thats useful enough... I'm just really getting sick of people telling me to not play a rogue because bards are better -.- Its probably the thing about pathfinder that pisses me off the most.
Oh its not bards, bards are great! if they stayed where they should. I don't believe that a bard should be the stealthy guy- Or atleast buff up rogues so that they do something on par with the bards. there is NOTHING a rogue can do that a bard can't (In regards to PFS)
The trick is to play the character you want to play and take the "this class does this better" advice with a grain of salt. I've seen plenty of "classic" rogues in my PFS games (including my own) and they seem to do just fine; performing the tasks they're expected to do and contributing to combat in a meaningful way.
|
I'll second what others have said, that the PFS writers are under clear guidelines, not to include obstacles that will bring the session to a complete dead end, for want of a specific class or race ability. That's apparent in the scenarios I've played, as well as face to face conversations with those writers, VCs and 2 Campaign Coordinators.
However, that does not mean that opportunities to use those abilities will not come up, or that looking for ways to leverage an unwritten solution (that the scenario writer did not predict) will fail.
There may still be magical traps that require Trapfinding, clues that require a specific dead language, but these will not be the be-all, end-all of the scenario. Multiple options will exist for the PCs to progress, or the GM to deliver information, but they may not be as efficient as if the specific skill or ability were used.
GMs are advised to 'Reward Creative Solutions', and there have been times when a GM has agreed that good roleplay, a good idea, or a synergistic skill could provide a circumstance bonus to meet an otherwise impossible DC, or a different skill could be justified to crack the victory conditions, maybe at a higher DC.
But you have to meet the GM halfway with this; no-one's going to let you use your Climb skill for Knowledge Arcana. But if they can see that your PC has made the effort to be highly-skilled, they're more likely to give the benefit of the doubt. If it's obvious that you've spent skill ranks at every level, till you're trained in every Knowledge skill except Knowledge Planes, you're more likely to be allowed to sub Religion, especially if the gameplay of the group up to that point has been exemplary, and they really do deserve to succeed.
|
You have to understand that PFS modules are designed to be completed by a mix of characters who may not always have certain skills available to them -- and thus certain skills usually considered indispensable, are really just gravy. You're not going to find a PFS mission that requires you to get past a locked door, without there being at least one alternative to having to use disable device to open the lock. (Usually more than one.)
I've never seen a real use for the Sleight of Hand skill, and Climb is one of those skills where the module writer can't assume the party will all have, so he has to include an alternative for the party that can't climb around.
Seconding the mix of characters note. At a game day, there may only be enough players for a single table, so you may not have trap finding, healing or a skills - the party should be able to complete the module with any mix of characters which shows up.
Stealthing of by yourself is one of those things that can annoy the other players and potentially get your character killed. If the module says "You see the evil high priest raising a knife over the person tied to the altar" - for many judges, you have just triggered the encounter by yourself and the party is doomed to fail in rescuing the victim. You really need to play a few times to see how things work in your area.
I have seen lots of Sleight of Hand checks, but 99% of them have been for faction missions.
For the OP, PFS now allows for retooling of new characters any time prior to 2nd level (3 scenarios). So you have some leeway to play a couple of games and make your own observations. And I agree that while rogues were reasonable in the original PF rules, they have been left in the dust by new options starting with the APG.
|
I have never played PFS, but I hear a lot people talk about players sitting there, faces blank, silent, only speaking to denote actions and announce d20 rolls.
Is there any thing to this?
It's just seen more often in PFS play, because you can play with LOTS of random people. When you do that, there's a good chance a considerable number of people are going to be shy around strangers. If you have a table of enthusiasts or insanely-outgoing people, a table can be a blast. I recall a story about a table of Tengu at last years Gencon during the special. Apparently, they wouldn't shut their beaks the entire time.
I have had mixed experiences with pfs rogues. The last time I played, the rogue insisted on being stealthy and sneaky. It added at least 45 minutes to the playtime and it made everything harder. It also caused all the slow characters to spent 2 to 3 rounds entering combat. The rogue also almost died. The scouting was also didn't help, as the rogue didn't see any of the hidden monsters in 2 of the encounters.
This was of course primarily a player, not class, issue. But stealth for stealth's sake isn't at all helpful in pfs. I would much prefer a character with high social skills and perception. I know you don't like bards, but they are superior in my experience.
Bard (archetypes listed), Trapper Ranger, Zen Archer Monk (I assume the devs saying ZAM still works as we thought means the flurry of blows nonsense doesn't affect them in PFS?), Ninja, Inquisitor...
Take your pick.
Lot of good "rogue" options. Shame they banned Viv. Alchemist for not being family friendly. That was my favorite rogue.
The whole 'mix of characters' can sometimes come out a bit one-sided and/or wonky. I mind me of a table we had once, where the six player characters consisted of:
-- a wizard
-- a bard
-- a witch (playtest)
-- an alchemist (playtest)
-- a monk
-- a sorcerer
A smattering of healing, and the monk was our tank. We still completed the mission, and without anyone falling below 0 h.p. (We tended to blast through encounters, finishing them before they really got started.)
But we had no stealth. We didn't really have a face person, as the guy playing the bard was very, very shy, and the sorcerer thought diplomacy and bluff were beneath him (and had used Int as a dump stat). My alchemist was the disable device guy, and never had to use the skill.
Admittedly this was a low-level module, and one of the year 0 line, written and intended to be played when many players (and authors!) were still working with the 3.5e rules. And we were playing with the real PFRPG, and the APG Playtest rules. Bit of a 'power disparity' there to help us along.
But I've heard of tables where it was four characters, all fighters. And they still completed the mission. Skills are not intrinsically needed in any PFS module. Damned handy, yes -- but not absolutely necessary.
|
Thanks Matt2vk, thats useful enough... I'm just really getting sick of people telling me to not play a rogue because bards are better -.- Its probably the thing about pathfinder that pisses me off the most.
Oh its not bards, bards are great! if they stayed where they should. I don't believe that a bard should be the stealthy guy- Or atleast buff up rogues so that they do something on par with the bards. there is NOTHING a rogue can do that a bard can't (In regards to PFS)
Play what you want, and don't listen to "people".
And don't worry what math tells you is the best character.
|
I would assume that it is. My opinion is as follows:
A: Yes, other classes do what the rogue does better.
B: They are still viable and you can make it work.
My 9th PFS PC is going to be a pure rogue. Mainly because I've never seen a rogue with trapfinding. I actually plan on tanking(which if you're permanently invisible aka a ninja), is harder to do. For a rogue, stealth just means working harder to make it work. If that's fine with the OP, go for it.
How about a Lore Warden Fighter that takes traits to get stealth and whatever else as class skills?
Not the slightest bit magical, but can reliably do damage in combat and take a hit. Human and favored class in skill points and you have 6 + int (which you should probably have a 14 in to get the trip feats anyway) skill points.
Putting myself in the place of the OP; I would be extraordinarily frustrated if I asked for advice on creating a rogue only to have so many people trying to talk me out of it.
My first (and currently my favorite) PFS character is a rogue. While he may not be optimized; I have an absolute blast playing him; and he suits my play style perfectly. I wouldn't be able to say that if he were a bard; archaeologist or otherwise.
|
|
How about a Lore Warden Fighter that takes traits to get stealth and whatever else as class skills?
Not the slightest bit magical, but can reliably do damage in combat and take a hit. Human and favored class in skill points and you have 6 + int (which you should probably have a 14 in to get the trip feats anyway) skill points.
The Cosmopolitan feat would also net a few skills as class skills; that plus the Goldfinger trait from being in the Qadiran faction means anyone can Disable Devices! :)
Deane, we're not trying to talk him out of it to annoy him. It's because we're trying to help him.
Rogue was my favorite class in 3E. I cannot stand to play one in PF. I don't like playing casters, the unchallenged lords and masters of power, but I still expect some basic level of competence and awesome out of my character.
In PF, you can make lots of classes into a "rogue" and end up better off for it. Sad, but true.
Deane, we're not trying to talk him out of it to annoy him. It's because we're trying to help him.
Regardless of the intent, while I can't speak for the OP, I can certainly see where I would be frustrated by some of the answers in this post.
I still expect some basic level of competence and awesome out of my character.
It is possible to build a competent; and i dare say even awesome, rogue in Pathfinder, particularly in a restrictive setting like PFS.