As the thread title suggests.
The Rogue arguably one of the weakest classes in the game and its alternate class the ninja are leagues appart in powerlevel.But why do I have take all that asian flavour with katanas and shuriken and whatnot,just to make a rogue that works?
Why does the ninja get acces to pretty much all rogue talents and classfeatures, but the rogue only gets gimped versions of everything(like the Ki pool) and can't even take advanced ninja tricks?
These and other question arise when I look at the current state of things with these classes.
Does anyone feel the same?Or should I just suck it up and reflavour pretty much every single thing that makes the ninja a ninja?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yesssss....let the reign of the rogue threads flourish. Down with the monk threads!
I think the rogue could be in use of a power bump, in the same way that monks got one. At the same time, I am glad that rogues are mostly non-magical as opposed to ninjas who are quite magical. I think just about every class ability they have has been plundered by other classes (in part because the rogue is more of a personality than just a class), so a powerlevel boost to just the rogue would be greatly appreciated. Nothing like making sneak attack super easy to set up / land or full BAB, but more interesting things to do.
I think reflavoring everything is a fine bandaid for now though.
|
I like the idea of the ninja being a ki-powered rogue that specializes in combat and infiltration. I don't mind it being better than the rogue at combat.
I'd like to see the rogue make up for that by being better in a wide variety of non-combat situations. That's not to say that they should always be a jack-of-all-trades, but that their out-of-combat options should all be extremely strong.
Also, I think one of the major features of the rogue is that it's not a supernatural class. Any increases to its power should be non-supernatural in nature.
This has definitely been gone over on other threads. For example, this one. I'm disinclined to rehash the ideas that people came up with there, but there were some pretty interesting ones.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I considered a luck pool like the ninja's ki pool.
-some stuff it can be used on...
*bonus to cmd or escape artist.
*avoiding confirmed critical
*reflex save vs cone or whatever lets you dive for cover
*reroll a natural 1
Yeah well.... I understand that some people see the rogue as more of a skillmonkey "live by their wits" kind of character,while others,like me, want to focus on the backstabby sneakyness.And theres nothing wrong with that.The problem I see is that when I look at rogue talents I can only shake my head.Most of them are so situational its not even funny anymore.Also it stands to reason that a mundane character that outbards a bard cannot be done.
How would a rouge compete with spellcasting out of combat?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have been tempted since i first saw the ninja to copy and past rogue in for ninja, change ki to 'panache' and give it back trapfinding for poison use, and cover the rogue in my core book with that.
How would a rouge compete with spellcasting out of combat?
They wouldn't, it's not really possible. But the deniers (pick one or more):
1) Don't care.
2) Like it that way because magic should be better than everything.
3) Play mostly rogues and probably advocated for how awesome they were in the past, so any implication that they're less than amazingly great will be taken as a personal insult and/or force them to admit they were wrong.
4) Play with spellcasters that for whatever reason (lack of skill, lack of interest, obsessive resource hoarding, extreme courtesy, etc.) don't exercise the full extend of their capability.
You're not going to win with them, so just accept that a small handful of people will deny any perceived issue and move on to finding a solution.
I don't think Paizo is going to do it, but your best bet is probably just reflavoring the ninja mechanics to vanilla rogue stuff. A Cunning or Guile pool, for example, would probably work nicely.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here's my argument for using a Rogue over a Ninja: way more archetypes available. There are some seriously awesome Rogue options when you look at all of the TONS of archetypes that have been written for them. For example, a Ninja can't take the Carnivalist archetype because they don't get Trap Sense, and that is one of the most FUN archetypes to come out in recent months!
I'm also one of the people who doesn't mind the Rogue being a little less combat-savvy because they have other (out of combat) options that most other characters just don't.
Trapfinding is huge in a game with a lot of traps (duh).
Evasion is a huge life-saver, and Ninjas don't get that.
Ninjas don't get proficiency with the sap, which is extremely useful when you just don't want to KILL that guy at the moment.
There are advantages to the Rogue, and you just have to recognize them and USE them in your games. If you're looking for straight martial ability, be a Desna-damned Fighter! ;)
No.
Once the APG fell into my hands and I discovered the monk feats: spiderwalk and cloudwalk, then I knew 'for sure' that Paizo was going to base the ninja off a monk.
Imagine my shock when the ninja became a rogue alternate class, and the issues we have now...
MMV.
I'm not seeing it as a ranger, but I'm really intrigued by the idea.
MMV.
I'm not seeing it as a ranger, but I'm really intrigued by the idea.
You do realize that once get the chance to work on a Way of the Shinobi, that a ranger shinobi archetype will be included with that, among the several other classes using a shinobi version for each.
since rogues can get a ki pool, i think it comes down to the stats used for it.
ninjas use CHA. good if you want to go eldritch heritage (which needs skill focus, feat tax).
rogues use WIS. good for will saves and perception.
ninjas get the extra attack for 1 ki point thing, but rogues can get that and more if they dip in monk, also using WIS (+WIS>AC,Flurry,Saves)
i don't think it's clear cut either way, especially with the further archetypes rogues have access to.
sure, if you compare ninja to rogues NOT building to compete this way, it's no competition, but that's kind of silly.
That's why it's a good idea to get the ideas now :-)
The Ki pool Rogue Talent gives you half your wisdom modifier in Ki points....thats nothing.Even with a 16 in wisdom you only get 1 Ki point,thats it,you never get more unless you spend feats on it..or maybe take Monk Vows but that does not fit most Rogues I would say.And you can't get the greater invisibility ninja trick either.A ninja gets half his level+his Cha modifier.
Certainly not the same.
It's full WIS mod. If you get another Ki Pool (multiclass), then when stacking it only adds a further 1/2 WIS mod.
Honestly, No.
I find the current rogue slightly underpowered in combat, and also find large amounts of rogue talents disgusting.
I'm looking at you Hold Breath, or Confounding Blades.
There are quite a few talents that are bad, bad, bad.
So I rewrote almost every talent.
I gave rogues a new ability called "Sneak Attack Augmentation", in addition to their normal rogue talents, available at levels 2,6,10,14,18. This ability grants the rogue one of the sneak attack modifying talents at 2 and 6 and access to the greater at 10, 14, and 18. I still limit these augments to one per SA however.
Finally I bumped the rogues will save to good, and called it a day.
I also rewrote fighters, and monks.
My players seem happy and now I get no "Martials suck" complaints.
If anyone is interested I aim for the Paladin/Barbarian/Inquisitor/Magus power level and feel that I have gotten there pretty well.
Not really happy at all.
BOTH classes are tremendously weak.
What's worse is people see ninja being slightly better and make all sorts of ridiculous statements about how powerful Ninja is. Like the thread saying they're more powerful than wizards.
The bard, ranger, and alchemist are reasonably good replacements for these failures of classes, though. So a little re-flavoring and it's all good, I guess. I would like it if the actual rogue and ninja were decent classes, though. Just like I'd rather have a monk that is good instead of having to play a Synth Summoner and pretend the claws are punches and the spells are ki and battle auras and such...
|
As the thread title suggests.
The Rogue arguably one of the weakest classes in the game and its alternate class the ninja are leagues appart in powerlevel.But why do I have take all that asian flavour with katanas and shuriken and whatnot,just to make a rogue that works?
Why does the ninja get acces to pretty much all rogue talents and classfeatures, but the rogue only gets gimped versions of everything(like the Ki pool) and can't even take advanced ninja tricks?
These and other question arise when I look at the current state of things with these classes.
Does anyone feel the same?Or should I just suck it up and reflavour pretty much every single thing that makes the ninja a ninja?
Ah, but they also get none of the feats or favored class bonuses tied specifically to rogues unless you obtain DM fiat...by RAW they can't gain extra talents or other benefits that are specific to rogues and rogues alone, so...
Also, since when is the rogue one of the weakest classes? If you get a guy flanked (easy if your party has a wizard with spells that can do that or an up-front fighter), you can dish out HEAVY damage with two shortswords...
ninja is the same tier as the rogue. in other words, bottom.
through free action loopholes, the gunslinger can deal decent damage. despite lacking a decent amount of grit.
want a rogue or ninja? try ranger or bard. they work much better.
It´s true, some classes like gunslinger and barbarians can escalate their damage to gamebreaking amounts through loopholes or some tricks.
All the nice stuff sneak attack got, like the sap feats, was changed and errataed into oblivion. Right in the beginning i built myself a halfling rogue with a tab into fighter for an extra feat and slingstaff wepaon proficiency. Then i used bludgeoner and the sap feat chain to deal nice amounts of nonlethal sneak attack knocking people out. Was real fun.
I think in the beginning the rogue was just fine, but then base classes and archetypes of other classes came and compared to the power creep there it just fades to grey.
Unfortunately, the sap feat chain hasn't been nerfed to reasonable levels or at all yet, so I'm not sure which nerfs you're referring to.
MMV.
I'm not seeing it as a ranger, but I'm really intrigued by the idea.
Hmm, that doesn't really look like a ranger to me. I guess I was thinking less about 4th spell level martial and more about the combat styles and nature theme.
Unfortunately, the sap feat chain hasn't been nerfed to reasonable levels or at all yet, so I'm not sure which nerfs you're referring to.
Really? Well maybe then it was me reading it wrong late at night, happens.
But initially i thought that sap master and/or sap adept apply to all sneak attacks, which now doesn´t seem so.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I currently play a rouge, and I'm happy enough with the class as it is. Sure it could be a bit stronger, but it doesn't need to be.
The existance of ninjas doesn't take away from my enjoyment of playing a rouge.
|
this is my current sneak attack addendum. makes it come up more frequently.
Also, at 10th level, an ability that allows rogue to apply the effects of two talents that modify sneak attacks simultaneously... i am calling this Talented Strike... the capstone Master Strike now also allows up to three talents or effects...
top it off with a 2nd level 'pool' of some kind, and you're good to go.
(my rogue)
|
Hmm, that doesn't really look like a ranger to me. I guess I was thinking less about 4th spell level martial and more about the combat styles and nature theme.MMV.
I'm not seeing it as a ranger, but I'm really intrigued by the idea.
When I said Ranger I was referring more to which Chassis to adapt it to, rather than it being an actual ranger. And perhaps this is part why the idea never got much traction.
Again, very rough, but my thought on it was a Ninja should be a full BaB class with limited arcane spell access and/or a few spell like abilities, and either no armor or very limited armor.
The Rogue never made sense to me as chassis, and by using it many problems were created.
So, here's my experience from playing a reasonably (though not fully) optimized ninja a few months back, and had a higher point-buy: I nearly died. Often. When my GM made sure the monsters dealt half the normal damage. I personally killed a few foes, but mostly it was a bunch of us dog-piling a potent foe until it stopped moving. My party was constantly on the verge of dying. Our cleric went through all of her channels and spells, the paladin used every smite and lay on hands, and the mage was out of spells (and driven insane shortly thereafter). We'd had potions and they were used up.
We won, but barely. Though the GM didn't say as much, I suspect she "shaved" a few hit points off of the enemies, too. I'm also pretty sure that my opportune strike (Cheapy's replacement for the Sneak Attack, which is, by the way, awesome) shouldn't have worked in more than one situation that it did.
Now, you can't blame all of that on my ninja. Perhaps I (or we) could have played it better. Perhaps there some major thing that I was (or we were) missing. Perhaps it was just the module.
But daggum. I mean dag-gum. I've never been so near to such constant TPK as a third level character for an entire module as that. All. The. Time.
Personally, I had a blast. But I did not find the ninja to be "overpowered". I've played more than a few rogues, I've played a few mages (some of whom have been tremendously over-powered and loved it), and I've played a number of other characters besides. This? This was brutal.
Oh, yeah! I almost forgot. This was a 3.5 module, so my character, being a PF class, should have been substantially more potent, comparatively.
Hmm, that doesn't really look like a ranger to me. I guess I was thinking less about 4th spell level martial and more about the combat styles and nature theme.MMV.
I'm not seeing it as a ranger, but I'm really intrigued by the idea.
When I said Ranger I was referring more to which Chassis to adapt it to, rather than it being an actual ranger. And perhaps this is part why the idea never got much traction.
Again, very rough, but my thought on it was a Ninja should be a full BaB class with limited arcane spell access and/or a few spell like abilities, and either no armor or very limited armor.
The Rogue never made sense to me as chassis, and by using it many problems were created.
That would explain why it never stuck out to me then!
|
|
That would explain why it never stuck out to me then!Hmm, that doesn't really look like a ranger to me. I guess I was thinking less about 4th spell level martial and more about the combat styles and nature theme.MMV.
I'm not seeing it as a ranger, but I'm really intrigued by the idea.
When I said Ranger I was referring more to which Chassis to adapt it to, rather than it being an actual ranger. And perhaps this is part why the idea never got much traction.
Again, very rough, but my thought on it was a Ninja should be a full BaB class with limited arcane spell access and/or a few spell like abilities, and either no armor or very limited armor.
The Rogue never made sense to me as chassis, and by using it many problems were created.
It was either that or compare it to a Paladin :)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm currently studying Rogue Glory, which attempts to pull the rogue back up to the power level of the other classes. So far, I think they succeeded.
I agree that the rogue is pretty underpowered and the ninja is by comparison light years ahead.
The group I play in agreed to the following house rules on the rogue:
.
.
1) A second good saving throw - fortitude. The rogue is the ONLY d8 3/4 bab class that gets only one good saving throw - the monk gets three, all others get two.
2) Bonus feats at 5th, 10th, 15th and 20th levels. We agreed that this isn't necessarily the best way to fix the class as some more flavorful rogue tricks built into the class would be better, but general feats allow flexiblity for a player to choose a rogue talent, "flavor" feat, or combat feat, so we went with it as a quick fix, a band-aid so to speak.
I'm not saying this is necessarily the best fix, but this is what we came up with. We're happy with the idea of a second good saving throw, and that's my primary contribution with this post - I'd like Paizo to consider doing this for the rogue if they make any changes, as it seems like a no brainer to us.
I'm not a fan of ninjas in general, being more on the pirate side of life.
I'm REALLY not a fan that they make better rogues than rogues.
What's MOST annoying though is the fact that they are basically in the majority - almost everyone can be a better "rogue" than the actual Rogue class.
There are countless threads dedicated to how the poor Rogues are shown up by everyone else, but my personal favorite illustration is that Sorcerers can effectively get the Rogue Disable Device Class Ability (and magical devices/ traps) for the cost of a Feat (their Eschew Materials bonus Feat, specifically), which is slightly more offensive than having to give up say real class abilities as the Urban Ranger or the Vivisectionist.
Imitiation and flattery, I guess... but the end result is that the Rogue has no unique flavor of it's own in PF.
Like most, I'm experimenting with houserules to "fix" them.
-TimD
this is my current sneak attack addendum. makes it come up more frequently.
Also, at 10th level, an ability that allows rogue to apply the effects of two talents that modify sneak attacks simultaneously... i am calling this Talented Strike... the capstone Master Strike now also allows up to three talents or effects...
top it off with a 2nd level 'pool' of some kind, and you're good to go.
(my rogue)
I might add your sneak attack errata as houserule for my next game I DM.
Since everyone's sharing their fixes, here's my sneak attack replacement. There are 49 posts above that one discussing it, and a bit after that too. I think Rainzax based his off that one (which is awesome), but I wanted a bit more restraint with mine so I had it be slightly less damage more often. I didn't want to make the rogue too good.
Well I don't think I would be happy with your fix.The reason is it only slightly expands on opportunities for getting SA and the bonus damage is even smaller.
I mean at 10 level a Vicious opportunist would get +10 damage,...sounds good but it really isn't.A full BAB Class would get +3 Damage from Power Attack alone and all martials get some kind of additional bonus to damage.And the Rogue only gets its bonus damage against foes that are already at a disadvantage and have the worst to-hit of all martial classes.
At least being invisible gives you +2 to hit and removes dex to AC.
In my playtests, it expanded the conditions with which they got the extra damage by quite a lot. Maybe we just use conditions more often though. The bow user was certainly happy that he was actually able to use his extra damage ability, at least.
Yes I understand that its better than regular SA. But I think just getting SA bonus a little more often is not all that strong. In fact I'm thinking if the Rogue would always get sneak attack without having to meet any prerequisites it would still be ........well one would have to test it.
|
|
potentially, Sneak Attack can serve as a great trigger for other cool effects. think Bleeding Attack or Slow Reactions or Offensive Defense. and so expanding upon the number of attacks that qualify for Sneak Attack dice, even at half strength, expands the rogue's potential to exert control over the battlefield using these talents.
in my opinion, Sneak Attack should not just be extra damage dice, it should be also be a catalyst for other effects - it should act like a Primary Class Feature!
and there should be more of these talents. for example:
Foot Work (*)
A rogue making a sneak attack against a foe may also resolve her attack roll as a reposition combat maneuver check against her foe's CMD. This attempt does not provoke an attack of opportunity from her foe.
Ruse (*)
A rogue may use this talent when she makes a sneak attack against a foe whom one of more allies also threatens. If successful, her foe takes a -2 penalty per sneak attack die to attacks made against the rogue's threatening allies for 1 round. Her enemy suffers no such penalty if she chooses to attack the rogue.
Robbery (*)
A rogue may use this talent when making a sneak attack. If she damages her foe, she may make an immediate Sleight of Hand check against her foe. Her foe receives a -1 penalty to his Perception check per sneak attack die to notice the attempt.