| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We had a barbarian be our scout for a while.
This ended pretty quickly when he was consistently able to take out whatever things he found while scouting. A whole session of just him doing things and us twiddling our thumbs got boring real quick.
Oh man does AM BARBARIAN scout with his sunglasses on or off tell me I MUST KNOW
Actually, /everysingle/ ability a rogue has, beyond his capstone.. some other class has.
And that's not even counting the Ninja as a separate class.
He was a wereshark, not AM. Turns out being able to tunnel through the ground with some land shark feat helps a lot with scouting and getting the surprise. Just gotta prairie dog every so often.
But yes, with sunglasses.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The sunglasses are standard issue, sir. They never come off. Orders.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Turns out being able to tunnel through the ground with some land shark feat helps a lot with scouting and getting the surprise.
*knock knock*
...candygram.
Turns out being able to tunnel through the ground with some land shark feat helps a lot with scouting and getting the surprise.*knock knock*
...candygram.
Candy! Coming! Just a second! Err, just a minute... um, I seem to be having a problem... see I don't actually have any arms here, would someone be kind enough to get the door please and thank you?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Turns out being able to tunnel through the ground with some land shark feat helps a lot with scouting and getting the surprise.*knock knock*
...candygram.
Like that, but with more blood and screaming and bitten in half sentries.
R Chance, the problem for me is actually the move to requiring (or at least implying) miniatures and a grid. In the old days, each class had a different focus, but each focus would last 10 minutes at most before the next encounter, and the next player's moment to shine. Fight the monster, sneak past him, cast a divination spell... you could do an entire adventure in one session, comprised of a dozen combat or not-combat encounters.
Now, however, the problem isn't the increase on combat's importance, but on combat's time-table. At high levels, I have had fights that encompassed an entire 4 hour gaming session each.
Thus, the holdovers from previous editions of classes having focuses that exclude each other simply doesn't work. If I'm a rogue who's great at social situations and stealth operations but cannot fight, I will shine some of the time, but will spend entire sessions feeling sub-par as I leave the 4 hour fight to those who are 'better suited.' This means that if a GM is attempting to ensure each player has equal time in the spotlight, they need to have entire sessions dedicated to non-combat situations, which given Pathfinder's all-encompassing skill system, means only the characters that have high ranks in Diplomacy, Stealth, etc., can fully participate. This means there are entire sessions where one character shines and another doesn't, rather than the short 10 minute sections of older editions.
I love older editions, and I fully participate in the Old School Renaissance for this purpose. I love my Adventurer Conqurer King rogue who can't fight, but does so much damage with his ambush tactics and is so good at sneaking that he survives combats-and sometimes finishes them before they start. However, my Pathfinder rogue built for the same purposes is not nearly as engaging, as most GMs don't appreciate me defeating the encounter they spent hours designing (and expected the players to take hours defeating) by sneaking past it or secretly poisoning the monsters.
Can all these problems be fixed by a good GM? Yes, but I've found that the younger the GM and less experience he has with older editions, the longer those combats last and the less time is spent on non-combat situations, because while Pathfinder doesn't explicitly declare such, it does imply that long combats are the focus of the game. When there is a skill for everything and combats are 4 hours long at high levels, then only characters built for combat shine for entire sessions, and only the one character with lots of skill points shines when out of combat, (which, to ensure equality and to allow downtime between combats, can also take up 4 hour sessions.) This means that no matter what you do, someone has nothing to do for hours on end.
For many GMs, the answer to this problem is to skip situations where one characters shines in favor of situations where multiple shine. For many players, the answer to this problem is to only choose classes with combat focuses, and to divide the skill-monkey role up between them by choosing classes like Alchemist, Ranger, Cavalier or Oracle who also gain a few more skill points per level. Either way, the rogue suffers.
|
May I plug myself? The entire point of Rogue Glory was to address these issues...
Yep, I plugged you earlier after picking up the PDF.
I haven't played the rogue variant that's proposed, but I'll definitely encourage someone in our tabletop group to try it if they can get over the hurdle of rolling a rogue.
I can provide my feedback sans-play (which is always limited of course).
I'm a fan of the "guile pool". It seems to be the most obvious way to make the rogue competitive with the ninja.
I know players love having some options and decisions to make each round of combat. The pure core rogue is fairly bland for the average player. It's really just about finding a way to get into a flank and attacking, perhaps making an Acrobatics roll along the way, which tend to be fairly straightforward to make given appropriate-level encounters and the CMD of bad guys. The great thing about the ki pool was players would rub their chins and think "hmmm, do I want an extra attack this round?" or I see them counting squares on the battlemap mentally and considering the +20ft movement boost so they can get a standard attack at the end of moving 50ft.
The Glory Rogue doesn't really give a rogue this same boost in fun combat options. The Glory Rogue ends up being a question of "do I want to attack at an extra +1 to +3?" (at practical levels of play) or its just extra damage in a surprise round with the ambush ability.
The ninja really gave the rogue some interesting combat options. The extra attack and the extra movement are tabletop "whoa! moments", and ultimately you always want your PC to make other PCs swoon when you use an marquee ability.
That's combat - now about out of combat.
My issue with the rogue, like many others, is that they no longer shine at anything in particular. A trapper ranger, an alchemist, an inquisitor, etc can be as competent at disabling traps or sneaking/exploring (if not moreso).
The ninja, inquisitor and alchemist can employ real invisibility if they get caught sneaking around a darkened warehouse, and grant themselves darkvision so they don't give away their location.
The challenge is just giving a rogue access to invisibility and darkvision makes the peers again with the other alternative classes. They need something that makes their mundane talent at espionage, sneaking, etc as amazing as the magically enhanced alternatives
Whatever is done to the rogue - it needs to make you feel like it's a tough call between playing it, or playing the ninja. To me, this means both in-combat and out-of-combat options, not just flat attack bonuses or damage bonuses.
First off, sneaking is not invisability. Sneaking is immune to invisability purge, and even if you guess right with glitterdust, the rogue can still be hiding behind something.
Please consider this addition to the Rogue level chart.
1st. Unchanged
2nd. Sneak Attack +1 hit and damage
3rd. Continuing Threat. One foe at a time.
4th. Sneak Attack +2 hit and damage
5th. Continuing Threat. All foes who don't beat hide.
6th. Sneak Attack +3 hit and damage.
7th. Slight of hand can be used to take foe's off weapon and attack them.
8th. Sneak attack +4 hit and damage
9th. Slight of hand can be used to take foe's not worn or held item and equip it.
10th. Sneak attack +5 hit and damage.
Slight of hand as an attack ignores damage reduction. Rogues can have duels where the just try to snatch each other's ioun stones.
|
As for Medium BAB: Nobody seems to complain about that for Alchemists, Inquisitors, and Magi.Alchemists, Inquisitors, and Magi all have multiple other class features that boost their to-hit. Rogues don't.
Alchemists, Inquisitors, and Magi all have class features that grant ways to contribute in combat other than "I stab him". Rogues don't.
Alchemists, Inquisitors, and Magi also aren't encouraged to TWF (except Vivisectionists). Rogues are, by both flavor and mechanics, but that not only gives them a -2 to hit but also makes them pay more for weapon enhancements so their enhancement bonuses to hit fall behind the curve, dropping their to-hit even further.
Basically what I'm saying is that this is an incredibly shallow analogy that doesn't stand up to any degree of scrutiny.
Actually, that was exactly my point. People don't care about those classes' BAB because of their other class features.
That's why I'm saying that the way to fix the Rogue is to give him some better class features, rather than merely increasing his BAB.
So I agree with you. Surprise! :)
Take 2
Sneak attack:
Poison usage- a rogue never risks poisoning themselves when applying poison to their weapon, and gain a +2 to save vs poison
Trapfinding:
1/2 class lvl as a bonus on disable device, sleight of hand, disguise, stealth, and UMD. It's a rogue specific bardic knowledge.
Uncanny dodge:
Rogue gains a luck bonus = to int mod on all saves in addition to the benefit of UD.
Trap sense:
Replace trap sense with weapon training (rogue weapons) sit back and enjoy the +6 to hit and damage... Might seem a bit much, but it still puts them behind a fighter with weapon training, and only puts their base to hit above other full BaB classes by 1, but without the 4th attack iteration.
Imp Uncanny Dodge:
Rogue gains the mettle ability in addition to the benefit of IUD.
12th level:
Master ambushed. A rogue may take a swift, move, and standard action during the suppose round.
IMHO, the rogue's problems are essentially
1) most talents are rubbish. They ought to be very nearly feat-equivalent.
2) Everyone gets skills, and skills are trumped by magic anyway.
3) Stealth doesn't work
4) Poor defences, esp Will and Fort saves
5) All the rogue's schticks have been stolen (oh, the irony)
So:
1) Fix the useless talents. Include xTWF, xxx Feint, xxx Dirty Trick, etc. Allow unlimited picks of Skill Focus. Add Hide in Plain Sight to Advanced. Add ability to reroll a save 1/day
2) Let the rogue achieve kewl stuff with high-DC rolls
3) Fix Stealth and allow it to be used in combat, esp to avoid AoAs or get a Sneak Attack. Allow melee sneak attacks in poor light.
4) see talents above. Trap Sense adds to all saves, not just Reflex.
5) Don't let other classes steal this lot
Weapon Finesse is another annoying one. You can get it as a talent at 2nd level, but then you're hopeless at 1st. IMC I let the rogue take it at 1st but swap it for TWF at 2nd.
IMHO, the rogue's problems are essentially
1) most talents are rubbish. They ought to be very nearly feat-equivalent.
2) Everyone gets skills, and skills are trumped by magic anyway.
3) Stealth doesn't work
4) Poor defences, esp Will and Fort saves
5) All the rogue's schticks have been stolen (oh, the irony)So:
1) Fix the useless talents. Include xTWF, xxx Feint, xxx Dirty Trick, etc. Allow unlimited picks of Skill Focus. Add Hide in Plain Sight to Advanced. Add ability to reroll a save 1/day
2) Let the rogue achieve kewl stuff with high-DC rolls
3) Fix Stealth and allow it to be used in combat, esp to avoid AoAs or get a Sneak Attack. Allow melee sneak attacks in poor light.
4) see talents above. Trap Sense adds to all saves, not just Reflex.
5) Don't let other classes steal this lotWeapon Finesse is another annoying one. You can get it as a talent at 2nd level, but then you're hopeless at 1st. IMC I let the rogue take it at 1st but swap it for TWF at 2nd.
With 1, some rogue talents /are/ just feats.
Which I personally find just a -little- disappointing.
Then there is the talents that give 2 skills. That is only just giving a +3 bonus on those two skill when you also spend a skill point into them. Nevermind a feat could give you a +4 bonus on two non-class skills (Extra Traits, +1 to skill and make it class skill.) Or ones like alertness.
Needs a little something more there especially.
The ones that allow you to reroll a skill check. They should increase in the number of times you can do that per day as you level up.
Lets Compare Rogue Vs Nina
Level 1:
Rogue- Sneak attack 1d6/Trapsense
Ninja- Sneak attack 1d6/poison use
Alright for level one, they are fairly balanced. I mean there isn't much of a difference beyond equipment, especially if the rogue took poisoner archetype.
Level 2:
Rogue - Talent/Evasion
Ninja - Trick/Ki pool
Alright this were we start getting separated
First off lets go with evasion vs Ki pool. Evasion is constantly on, and works for a number of spells/traps but.. its only for dex. Never the less its a powerful ability that could save ones ass very much so.. Oh, but its on a ring. :/
Ki Pool Now this little baby.. wow.. Extra attacks, more movement speed, bonuses to stealth or just flat out making acrobatical jumps so much easier. Not to mention it unlocks all those lovely ninja tricks that the rogue has to first get a pool to use himself.
More to come later!
Lets Compare Rogue Vs Nina
Level 1:
Rogue- Sneak attack 1d6/Trapsense
Ninja- Sneak attack 1d6/poison useAlright for level one, they are fairly balanced. I mean there isn't much of a difference beyond equipment, especially if the rogue took poisoner archetype.
Level 2:
Rogue - Talent/Evasion
Ninja - Trick/Ki poolAlright this were we start getting separated
First off lets go with evasion vs Ki pool. Evasion is constantly on, and works for a number of spells/traps but.. its only for dex. Never the less its a powerful ability that could save ones ass very much so.. Oh, but its on a ring. :/
Ki Pool Now this little baby.. wow.. Extra attacks, more movement speed, bonuses to stealth or just flat out making acrobatical jumps so much easier. Not to mention it unlocks all those lovely ninja tricks that the rogue has to first get a pool to use himself.
More to come later!
Yes, ninja got more love than the base rogue. But it's not really a rogue, it's a ninja. The issue is changes to the base rogue, that enhance it, yet keep the same flavor.
I'm going to put forward an opinion that will hopefully garner support from the roleplaying crowd.
I like rogues because sometimes I just like to play a scoundrel.
How about making Rogues not being good in combat? Like a thief?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is my sneak attack replacement that tries to address a couple of the problems I've seen. The first post in the thread explains it a bit more, I think.
Our group's rogue uses it, along the Vicious Opportunist archetype from The Secrets of Tactical Archetypes II. That's currently his favorite character ever, from his own words (the guy previously had a hard time learning to roleplay or imaginatively deal with situations, and he greatly enjoys the versatility and brainpower he shows in each game).
The ability to turn any disadvantage into bonus damage is great, both in terms of mechanics and fluff; and being focused on dirty tricks means he has to think about how he can use the environment to deal with specific situations in a fashion no other character in the group can really equal.|
|
I wouldn't mind if the Ninja was still generally better than the Rogue in combat, as long as the Rogue had the advantage in other ways, such as better skills. Now, just about the only advantage Rogues have is trapfinding, which we all agree has been devalued over time.
I do think it would be pretty cool to give Rogues more synergy between Sneak Attack and dirty trick maneuvers, since that seems designed exactly for the Rogue. It would be very cool if sneak The only thing I don't like about Cheapy's replacement is that I like dice more than flat damage.
I also have the 1d4 instead of +2 version for you roll-dice-o-philes! Just can't crit with that. And it requires more caltrops than is safe for your feet.
Vexing Flanker
( Player's Handbook II, p. 85)
[Fighter Bonus Feat, General]
You excel at picking apart an opponent's defenses when your allies also threaten him.
Prerequisite
Combat Reflexes (PH) ,
Required for
Adaptable Flanker (PH2) ,
Benefit
You gain a +4 bonus on your attack rolls when fl anking.
Special
A fighter can select Vexing Flanker as one of his fighter bonus feats.
Normal
Flanking grants a +2 bonus on attack rolls.
Adaptable Flanker
( Player's Handbook II, p. 71)
[Fighter Bonus Feat, General]
When you and an ally team up against a foe, you know how to maximize the threat your ally poses to ruin your target's defenses.
Prerequisite
Combat Reflexes (PH) , Vexing Flanker (PH2) , base attack bonus +4,
Benefit
As a swift action, you designate a single opponent as the target of this feat. When you are adjacent to the chosen target, you can choose to count as occupying any other square you threaten for purposes of determining fl anking bonuses for you and your allies. You also occupy your current square for fl anking an opponent.
Special
A fighter can select Adaptable Flanker as one of his fighter bonus feats.
I wouldn't mind if the Ninja was still generally better than the Rogue in combat, as long as the Rogue had the advantage in other ways, such as better skills. Now, just about the only advantage Rogues have is trapfinding, which we all agree has been devalued over time.
I do think it would be pretty cool to give Rogues more synergy between Sneak Attack and dirty trick maneuvers, since that seems designed exactly for the Rogue. It would be very cool if sneak The only thing I don't like about Cheapy's replacement is that I like dice more than flat damage.
I still think that if the rogue got full BAB, it would differentiate the classes nicely.
Rogue= self-taught street tough who fights just to survive.
Ninja= specially-selected and trained to use ki powers to do things the rogue never learned. The ninja is NOT a street urchin borne of poverty. It was groomed by people with the means to teach the skills; the wizard to the rogue's sorcerer.
Yes, ninja got more love than the base rogue. But it's not really a rogue, it's a ninja. The issue is changes to the base rogue, that enhance it, yet keep the same flavor.Lets Compare Rogue Vs Nina
Level 1:
Rogue- Sneak attack 1d6/Trapsense
Ninja- Sneak attack 1d6/poison useAlright for level one, they are fairly balanced. I mean there isn't much of a difference beyond equipment, especially if the rogue took poisoner archetype.
Level 2:
Rogue - Talent/Evasion
Ninja - Trick/Ki poolAlright this were we start getting separated
First off lets go with evasion vs Ki pool. Evasion is constantly on, and works for a number of spells/traps but.. its only for dex. Never the less its a powerful ability that could save ones ass very much so.. Oh, but its on a ring. :/
Ki Pool Now this little baby.. wow.. Extra attacks, more movement speed, bonuses to stealth or just flat out making acrobatical jumps so much easier. Not to mention it unlocks all those lovely ninja tricks that the rogue has to first get a pool to use himself.
More to come later!
I do believe good sir that you miss understood. Merely I was comparing the two to show just where the ninja has power, and the rogue lacks it.
I had thought this topic dead, and posted not more.
oh, one more Rogue suck thread.
I'll just copy and paste my last post ;)
--------------------------
Does the Rogue sucks?
Short answer: Assuming the rogue is built is just right, a Rogue can be nice in the right Campaign, with the right GM, in the right party, at the right level, played by the right player.
Now for the long version. Here are some quotes on the topic.
So, some people claim the rogue isn’t a weak class. Just exactly what are they good at? Or to put it in other words: What do they bring to the party or even to the game?
Trapfinding? Rogues are good with traps and it is the only class with trapfining (not counting archetypes). Trapfindning is handy, but is that the only reason we have rogues? Is trapfindning the sole justification of the rogue? Is it possibly why the rogue is the only class that gets trapfinding? It’s a bit like saying: “we can only have one full arcane caster, because only the wizard should be able to be a full arcane caster. Because if we have more than one full arcane caster class then the wizard isn’t the only full arcane caster.” It does sound silly, right?
Do we have traps in the game so the rogue can feel useful?Skills? The Bard is just as good or even better. And let’s face it: 2 skills per level vs 4 is a big deal, but 6 skills per level vs 8 isn’t, especially when we’re talking about rangers that have more hit points so they can put their favored class point into skills. Then we got classes such as the alchemist that gets 4 skills + int. Not to mention the ninja. Also, there is the problem that skills are almost always hardcapped at what's "realistic" or "humanly possible. Really, we have loads of classes that can be the skill monkey that can also enhance their skills with magic, or should I say: Classes that gets skills and magic. Rogue talents: Frankly most of them are weak and some of them are just a joke. Minor magic and its "3 times per day"? Seriously, why not at will? I think the Rogue talents suffers from being divided into talents and advance talents. If the talents had been designed a bit like rage powers (one set can be picked from level 2, one set from level 6 and the really good from level 10), they could have been a bit more powerful from level 6. Sneak attack? Why is anyone upset some other classes get this ability? SA suck. You can’t use it unless you flank so you can’t take on someone one-on-one. If the bad guy flees and the rogue sets after him and catches up with him, what can she do? Nothing. Sure she can feint, but that is a move action (that will cost her two feats and int 13) so no more than one attack per round. Ah, I forgot, move action means she can’t chase after the bad guy. And on top of that feint isn’t an auto success. The sad part is that even when she has a flanking partner there are a lot of monsters/enemies/conditions that render SA useless. Not to mention the fact that when the rogue does get to use her SA, she will discover that the damage output from SA being good is just a myth. Yes, a full attacking rogue that gets to use her SA is still one of the weakest damage dealers in the game. I’d say, she is possibly the weakest damage dealer in the game. Finally, we got the rogue that want to use archery as her niche. Sorry, you can’t flank with a bow.
The Rogue is bad at dealing damage; she is not the skill masters (and even if she was, skills aren’t very good at higher levels); her rogue talents are mostly weak (or even very weak); and the only thing she got going for her is trapfinding, but as others have pointed out, there are other ways to deal with traps.
Exactly what does the rogue bring to the table? Really?
And
Anyway. Rogues are in kind of a weird place in Pathfinder, even moreso than in 3.5. They're not supposed to be as good at martial combat as...uh... all the other classes, so they aren't. What they get in return for this is out-of-combat problem-solving utility. Thing is, almost all (and indeed all, using non-core material) of this out-of-combat utility is redundant with other non-magical classes. That isn't even taking into account spellcasters, who by and large get more out-of-combat schticks, while having comparable or better in-combat schticks.
The rogue's schtick is skills and skills aren't very good. They certainly aren't good enough to explain why a class whose only real combat schtick is "stab a dude" is weaker at stabbing than pretty much everyone else. Skills are not only often nonfunctional (Diplomacy, original-version Stealth), they're also almost always hardcapped at what's "realistic" or "humanly possible" (Stealth again, all of the movement skills).
In return for this schtick, the rogue is worse at fighting. It's not just that the rogue is less capable and more-situational than a fighter, barbarian, or paladin: she's also weaker when it comes to wrecking some jerk than the ranger and (non-core) monk, who also rely on skill-based schticks (albeit skill-based schticks supplemented with class abilities), not to mention the alchemist, cleric, druid, and oracle. All of these classes have class abilities or spellcasting to do more than what's "humanly possible", and can still fight in addition to solving problems that don't require murder.
So yeah. I do think the rogue is a weak class. She's worse at fighting to be good at something that often isn't useful, and will often be overshadowed in her own specialty by someone else in the party.
I wish I knew how to fix it.
The main problem with the rogue right now is that it unfortunately brings other classes down. The investigator is a good example of this. I’m dreading it will impact the slayer and Swashbuckler as well.
Here is a post picked from the thread: “One Thread To Rule Them All: The Rogue and the ACG Classes”Do I need to say the
My own thoughts:
When looking at it from an in-combat and powergaming perspective, I think with the introduction of the investigator, slayer, and swashbuckler, the rogue is undeniably dead. The only reason I can think of to be a rogue over say an investigator is if you’re in a very AoE heavy game, and evasion would save your petusch often. Otherwise, the sheer versatility that extracts offer, especially their 1 minute brew time, combined with the amazing Inspiration pool, means in combat and out, a character will 95 times out of 100 be better as an investigator. Especially when it comes to skills and versatility. The int focus means that they’ll have the same number skills per level as a rogue with 10 Int, but with the extra skill points the rogue will get over the investigator probably won’t balance out against Inspiration, which allows the investigator to boost his skills, or spread out his skills more and rely on boosts to get them up to level. This class takes away from the skill monkey aspect of the rogue.
When it comes to the agile light armor fighter type, rogue has been the go-to for a while, due to sneak attack allowing nice bonus damage to an otherwise low-damage output basis. But now that the swashbuckler exists, I’m not seeing the rogue being used for that except for the most niche of builds. This is a very popular archetypical character, so I think the swashbuckler is going to steal quite the number of ‘potential characters’ from the rogue class.
And finally, the slayer. TWF rogues can be scary business, despite what the forums tell you. It may not work all the time, but when it does work, it’s a thing of beauty. A beauty stained in red and gore, but beauty nonetheless. The slayer’s wonderful mechanic of Favored Foe, a mix of the Guide’s Ranger Focus ability and the Deadly Focus ability of the Shadow Assassin by Super Genius, is a really interesting ability that allows you to spike certain enemies, really letting you focus on the assassin aspect that’s so popular amongst rogues. And with their reduced progression Sneak Attack, coupled with Favored Foe and their full BAB, the meatgrinder aspect of the rogue can shine here as well.
Amongst these three classes, they really take the three most popular archetypical rogue characters, and give each a base class. And I’m fine with that, actually. When the Dungeoneer’s Handbook came out, I hoped beyond hope that the Trap Breaker alchemist wouldn’t stack with the Vivisectionist. But it does. Or seems to at least. And I felt sad. Even though I’ve argued against the rogue many times, even though I’ve spent many hours coming up with patches that make rogues more awesome while not stepping on the toes of other, I felt bad for the rogue, as I really didn’t see any reason to play him anymore, unless you were really into the social aspects of the rogue. In which case, you may be better off with the bard anyways. But when reading over these three classes, after getting over the initial shock of seeing them, in my eyes, gut the rogue thoroughly, I came to embrace the new classes. The rogue is a personality. The rogue class is a hodgepodge of mechanics thrown together for legacy’s sake. If you asked anyone to make a “rogue” class for you, and without them having the legacy idea of what a rogue is, I doubt it’d be anything like this class. So I like that it was split out. I like that there are now three solid and mostly balanced classes that replace the popular aspects of them.
And despite the past few paragraphs, I still see a place for the rogue. The rogue will be a better meatgrinder than the investigator (hopefully). They’ll be a better skill monkey than the swashbuckler and the slayer. They’ll be a smoother talker than the slayer can ever dream of, using razor wit where the slayer just uses razers.
Yes, I see the investigator as better in just about every case. But there are character concepts that the investigator can’t meet that the rogue can, and vice-versa. Maybe if there’s an extract-less Investigator archetype. But otherwise, sometimes people want, for whatever reason, a non-magical character. And the rogue is still there for them.
Not everyone wants to be a druggie, like the investigator.
The Rogue Is Dead; Long Live The Rogue!
I doubt Jason is reading this thread of that he even cares, but if he does I'd like to say: when will the Devs notice that the niche the rogue has tried to fill has failed again and again. This is quite obvious with the new classes.
You can’t build a whole concept on skills and findning traps. The rogue isn’t good enough to be the party’s jack of all trade character. So many other classes to it better and bring more to the table, being able to actually kill things being one of these things other classes do better.
As Cheapy pointed out: “When it comes to the agile light armor fighter type, rogue has been the go-to for a while”. The problem however is that the rogue has never been able to fill that role, not even when Paizo created the Swashbuckler archetype. Nor has the rogue ever been good at assassin aspect that’s so popular amongst players. So now we get the slayer.
If the Devs just tried to put their pride aside and just look at the facts. There are so many classes that are built in the rogue chassis, that it is obvious that the rogue doesn't fill the needs of the high dex, skilled fighter type. The fix has always been to force someone to play the rogue to deal with traps. Make the rogue unique by making her the trap expert and then make sure every adventure has a lot of traps. The problem however is that now any class can find traps and all classes can disable them. Only a few classes can disable magical traps, but those can be dealt with by other means.
To me the Swashbuckler is just as much a rogue as the investigator and Slayer. They are all based on a concept or an idea of what a lot of people wish the rogue could/should have been.
The Ninja, Swashbuckler, investigator and Slayer are all rogues or at least how we wish rogues were done in the first place. I would even go as far and say that unlike the first edition bard, the third edition bard - and Inquisitor and alchemist - have strong ties to the rogue.
I agree with A Man In Black: “I do think the rogue is a weak class. She's worse at fighting to be good at something that often isn't useful, and will often be overshadowed in her own specialty by someone else in the party.”
Unlike A Man In Black however, I think I know how to fix it. The first step is for the Devs to acknowledge the rogue is a problem. From that point on anything is possible.
Ugh, another one? It's about to be a new week, does that mean we rotate to countless "monks suck" threads or is my calendar off?
Says the guy helping to necro a thread from over a month ago...
(Note, I'm fine helping to necro it since I think, while somewhat done to death, this type of thread does tend to lead to some decent fixes to the largely useless rogue)
Byrds rogue styles really aren't bad at all.
The 'As said in another topic thread'. I'm letting rogues add their Dex. bonus to hit and damage now. If I can ever get a gaming group together again. :(
I have been seeing this come up alot here is a recent quote from a thread:
In 20+ years of my experience, rogues do not suck in combat.
Personal experience is the worst judge of these things. You could be a better player than the others, for example. If you are good at making characters and everyone else is bad or even just average, you will outperform them regardless of class.
If I could redesign the rogue I would:
- create feats that let the rogue, and some other classes, to amazing stuff using skills.
- create a dex to damage feat . Probably with a 13 str prereq (I would prefer a str 11 or even lower, but I take it that pathfinder uses 13 as the minimum). Just being able to use dex to damage would have some very problematic consequences to the game. All of the sudden animals with str 4 but dex 18 would be really dangerous. Also, I don’t like dumping.
- Create a rogue talent, or a feat, that let you feint as a swift action that made the target flat footed against you the whole turn.
- give it Shadow Strike for free.
- boost/improve some of the rogue talents.
- Create some new rogue talents
- Boost its fortitude saves. At least vs disease and poison. I mean it deals with traps that are often poisonous so it should get resistant to poison over time.
I’d probably add some more abilities, feats and other stuff, but this is what I can come to think of right now. I hoped it helped.
If you want a simple fix here is my advice:
Mash the ninja and the rogue. Give the rogue the best of both Worlds. Sure it will still have some problems, but it will be an improvement. You should also give it Shadow Strike for free.
Perhaps at higher levels add an ability that let the rogue add dex to damage. You could limit it to attacks that don't deal sneak attack. So either SA or dex to damage.