It´s sad, but always of you say "rogue" someone showas up and tells you to play a bard/barbarian/summoner/whatever and its quickly derailing.
|
Yeah, just play/dip a rogue if you want. The presence of more powerful/effective options does not discount years of playing with just Core classes and Core abilities and being successful.
That said, they are very easy to over-extend. One can't do everything and be intelligent and cunning AND charismatic and worth his weight in gold in a fight.
Don't listen to all the party poopers. They seem to have some obsession with going into everyone's threads and telling them that their build is wrong and no one should ever do what they want to. Boo to them.
As for good rogue talents, I have a few thoughts, mostly already stated. Offensive Defense is great, especially for more than a dip. You can get potentially huge boosts to defense. A TWF rogue who is able to hit even half the time will be getting boosts like +6 or +7 Dodge bonus to AC around level 6 or 7. Resiliency could potentially be good for the right type of character. Fast Stealth is simply great for any character who's being sneaky. Combat Swipe is super cool, because I love the Steal CM. Camouflage is good if you're spending time anywhere with plants. There are tons of good and interesting social tricks: Guileful Polyglot, Convincing Lie, Honeyed Words, Obfuscate Story and Steal the Story, Coax Information (especially paired with Charmer), False Friend, Quick Disguise, and a few others. Rogues can make amazing social characters with the right talents.
*looks through the talents Jack suggests*
Offensive Defense is good for a full class rogue, for a dip it's a +1 AC vs. guys you SA for 1 round. Compare to Dodge feat. It blows. And you seem to be implying using it to stack with itself, which is probably RAW currently, but will likely change soon. Paizo's always been pretty prompt about nerfing noncaster goodies that are "too good".
Resiliency just plain sucks....for any rogue build.
Fast Stealth: If you DM lets you get surprise rounds while stealthing alongside the not-stealthing party, this is outstanding. If, like most DMs IME have done, require you to separate yourself from the noisy party to get surprise, then a) It's sort of a trap because it encourages you to split off from the party, which is suicidal (SOOOOOO many monsters have senses that say, "stealth? hahahahahahaNo!") and b) if you're just off scouting and reporting back to the party, does speed often matter that much?
Steal talent doesn't help much because you still need all the pre-reqs for Greater Steal to make it a decent maneuver option, it helps no more than just getting a bonus feat does, effectively.
Camouflage is only 1 more than Skill Focus (WHY is this not a talent option??!!), until level 10, when it's plainly worse. In one natural terrain type only each application. And all it takes is an area attack to lose it for the day (it is hilarious that cone of cold destroys it but scorching ray does not, I admit). Pass.
Coax Information: It's only for using Intimidate as klingon diplomacy, not for demoralizing. Bluff...ok, I guess. Why on earth would you take a talent to use Diplo to sub. for Intimidate checks that themselves are subs for diplo, though?!
Guileful Polyglot: 4 skill points is not worth a feat. That is what you're getting from this, minus the +4 bonus in Linguistics checks actual points would be giving you.
Honeyed Words, Charmer: No. Just no. 1/day roll 2d20 take the better on a single skill roll is not better than a feat. Not even close.
Convincing Lie: This was the single biggest nerf to social characters ever printed! If you tell someone a lie, and he believes you, when he then repeats your lie to others, he is not lying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You are not lying when you are stating what you think is correct! So not only did this talent mean anyone without it fails forever at lying through multiple parties, it means even with the talent, you have a chance of failure, whereas before there was no roll for the 3rd party at all, because again, the second party is not lying! Rants don't do justice to just how horrible this talent is and what it's done to social characters.
Quick Disguise: Ok, this one is actually useful if you use disguises. Almost entirely for the minor details as a full round action, I don't think the 1-4 min. change will make much difference in most circumstances.
False Friend: Like Camouflage, plainly worse than skill focus by level 10, and only +1 better than it before then, for a very narrow application. Pass.
Obfuscate Story: Oh, a new ARG talent. This one's actually decent.
Steal the Story: If this actually did what the fluff says, it'd be awesome. All it actually does is give the person a penalty on diplomacy and intimidate checks, and likely a very mediocre penalty, like -3, since Rogue is too MAD to afford much more in Int, Wis, or Cha...
Heres a list of a few things a rogue should be able to do from their talents. These are just examples and in no way balanced but it gets the ball rolling in the right direction.
Swap out x amount of sneak attack damage for y condition. Give rogues the option for ALL conditions.
Swap out x sneak attack damage for y ability damage.
Silence - swap out sneak attack dice to silence a character for x rounds.
Hamstring - sneak attack prevents enemy from moving for x rounds.
A whole bunch of once per combat attacks: ex: Make d6's d10's for one round.
More sneak attack damage against x creature type. Aka: I really know humans well and so I get an extra 2d6 of sneak attack against them.
Rogue talents that make them the absolute king of two-weapon fighting.
Considered flanking when adjacent to an ally and both are attacking the same target.
Allow access to teamwork feats (as a talent) and consider ally's to have such feats for the purposes of using them. Like the inquisitor. There are a lot of great goodies in here for flanking based classes and it's an absolute shame that rogues can't use them as well as other classes. Ex: +4 to hit while flanking instead of +2. Take highest roll on stealth between you and your ally.
Rogue luck - Ability to reroll a save.
A slight derail but...
I like the rogue. It is true, there is not a lot that is unique to them outside of rogue talents because most other classes have stuff they can do (evasion, uncanny dodge, even sneak attack). But the way their abilities are combined are in a unique package.
Also, it is, because of its class skills and early level abilities, in fact a great dip class as well, and that in my book is a virtue in a class, not a weakness.
You can play a rogue extremely effectively, and whenever I have played a rogue or watched someone else play a rogue, I have never felt I was underperforming or that someone was performing my role better than I was, nor have other rogue players. There's a lot in how their abilities combine--and how you combine them--that is not always apparent in broad theorycraft threads where it's hard to address the realities and circumstances that come up in a real game.
Now, if you don't like the rogue, fine. Maybe you had a different experience than the universally awesome experience I have had playing rogues--it's entirely possible and even likely. If you think the class is crappy, fine. We have room to disagree in this universe. But I also too wish that the haters would stop pissing on someones else's parade when they say "I like the rogue" or "I have an idea for a build!" You're missing the f+*$ing point, people, they want to play a rogue. Get over it.
I really don't get the grudgewank against rogue players--and that's what it really smacks of, it's against the players rather than the class because it's THEIR threads who get derailed and flamed. What happened, did a rogue player sneak into your house one night and steal all your snickerdoodles?
It's one thing if someone says, "Hey, I want to play a sneaky character who does X,Y,and Z" and you say, "well, if I were doing this, I would prefer to accomplish this with an alchemist or a ranger," and explain the build, and even explain, calmly and rationally, why you wouldn't use the rogue, personally. But that's not what folks are doing, and I'm tired of the pointless class and player bashing going on. You want to talk about ideal sneak attack builds or skill monkey builds that are nonrogue? Then make your own thread.
</rant>
Please go back to your regularly scheduled thread, thank you.
I like the rogue. It is true, there is not a lot that is unique to them outside of rogue talents because most other classes have stuff they can do (evasion, uncanny dodge, even sneak attack). But the way their abilities are combined are in a unique package.
I could see the "better than the sum of its parts" argument...if it were true. But rogues as a whole are awful, and because talents, which suck, are the only major edge they have over other sneak attacking classes, it just doesn't hold. Mind, those other classes aren't overpowered, it's the rogue that is underpowered.
Also, it is, because of its class skills and early level abilities, in fact a great dip class as well, and that in my book is a virtue in a class, not a weakness.
It's a decent dip for class skills. Being a good dip but nothing more is not something to be proud of. Paizo did a decent job of making Paladin and Fighter no longer only dip classes. Ironically, rogue wasn't a dip class previously. It was the changes to the skill system, trap rules, and other little things that turned rogue into a dip class. In 3E, having a character that had mostly rogue levels was one of the best ways to make a non-caster.
You can play a rogue extremely effectively, and whenever I have played a rogue or watched someone else play a rogue, I have never felt I was underperforming or that someone was performing my role better than I was, nor have other rogue players. There's a lot in how their abilities combine--and how you combine them--that is not always apparent in broad theorycraft threads where it's hard to address the realities and circumstances that come up in a real game.
Fighter and barbarian outdamage you and hit and take hits better. Anyone with less MAD will outperform you at a given skill if it's an important score to them and they max ranks. Last time I had a rogue, I wanted to do a demoralize-based build, and I had to request the party sorc to not put ranks in Intimidate because it would've been really depressing knowing he was better at it than me... I was the trapfinder, but half the party had better perception modifiers than me, even with trapfinding. Being mediocre at lots of things isn't good in this game; the only reason bard being a jack of all trades is/was acceptable in 3E was because they could also party buff and drop save (or no save) or dies like Hideous Laughter and Irresistible Dance.
Now, if you don't like the rogue, fine. Maybe you had a different experience than the universally awesome experience I have had playing rogues--it's entirely possible and even likely. If you think the class is crappy, fine. We have room to disagree in this universe. But I also too wish that the haters would stop pissing on someones else's parade when they say "I like the rogue" or "I have an idea for a build!" You're missing the f%%+ing point, people, they want to play a rogue. Get over it.
I have had different experiences than you. And I've had many positive experiences w/ rogues in 3E, so the change is inexcusable and maddening to me. And we suggest other classes in these threads because another class can do basically every theme and role a player is looking to do better than the rogue, and this is "Advice." People put too much stock in names. You want someone who can tumble around, sneak attack, be good at lots of skills, scout... Don't need to do it with rogue, in fact you're better off doing it some other way. The only reason not to comes down to "I want to play a rogue for the sake of playing a class called rogue." Which is silly, and is not how most people think. For most, they just assume rogue is the class to do what they want, because of what the fluff text claims they can do.
I really don't get the grudgewank against rogue players--and that's what it really smacks of, it's against the players rather than the class because it's THEIR threads who get derailed and flamed. What happened, did a rogue player sneak into your house one night and steal all your snickerdoodles?
It's one thing if someone says, "Hey, I want to play a sneaky character who does X,Y,and Z" and you say, "well, if I were doing this, I would prefer to accomplish this with an alchemist or a ranger," and explain the build, and even explain, calmly and rationally, why you wouldn't use the rogue, personally. But that's not what folks are doing, and I'm tired of the pointless class and player bashing going on. You want to talk about ideal sneak attack builds or skill monkey builds that are nonrogue? Then make your own thread.
We grudge against the class, not the players. You're the one "grudgewanking" against us. Right now. Assigning motives to us and accusing us of things.
We don't go into a big essay on why rogue is inferior to other similar classes every time because...why the hell would we want to do that? It's a lot of work, and gets redundant very quickly. If a huge portion of the posters are saying something is a bad idea, that's enough for most to understand, and nothing is stopping them from doing some searches and researching for themselves. Hell, that'd be great. If it leads to them simply examining the rogue class and the recommended classes more closely, they can learn for themselves.Or they say, "I don't care, I like seeing 'Rogue' on my sheet" or "It's a core only game" / "DM won't allow that stuff", etc... And then we try and help make the best lemonade possible out of the lemon we have to work with. :)
*list of cool stuff*
Coincidentally, with WotC splat support, a 3E rogue could actually do quite a lot of what you just listed.
I keep saying paizo nerfed martials and especially the rogue and monk, but no one ever believes me...