I read this and it hurts my mind as to how badly some of you don't realize how nuts the rogue can get, I believe that they're one of the classes with the most potential for power. In the game I'm running now a player is using a rogue with two weapon fighting feats.
At level 8 when the get that sweet +6 BAB, you take combat trick to get your improved two weapon fighting, then at level 9 when you get your regular feat you take two weapon feint, which allows you to forgo your first attack to make a feint attempt that denies the enemies DEX until the end of your turn, and it magically doesn't require you to waste feats on the horrible Improved Feint, and even doesn't have Two Weapon Feint in the requirements to make things even more wonderful.
Rogues are nuts. Stealth Checks aren't the hardest thing in the world to pull off either, to repeat many many people on here, GMs just usually do it wrong.
Then tell us how it is done. I am not saying that because from what others have said and personal experience the rogue is not impressive. Also dropping that first attack is a terrible idea. Many monsters have most of their AC tied up in natural armor or an armor bonus to AC, so losing dex won't really help that much.
Hell, a lot of big monsters technically GAIN AC from losing their "Dex Bonus".
Hell, a lot of big monsters technically GAIN AC from losing their "Dex Bonus".
I believe yoiu are thinking of Dex modifier, a bonus is a poitive number, a dex penalty is or penatly. Both are modifiers.
So losing Dex bonus means you lose positive not negative modifier.
Hell, a lot of big monsters technically GAIN AC from losing their "Dex Bonus".
No they don't. You don't get a higher AC from losing your dex penalty.
Example: Hill Giant
AC 21, touch 8, flat-footed 21 (+4 armor, –1 Dex, +9 natural, –1 size)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but losing your first attack while two-weapon fighting means you still have one attack left at your full attack bonus (-2 for TWF of course), right?
Still not saying it is a good idea, but basically it works out to the same as taking a feat so that you can take -2 to your attacks in order to add Sneak Attack damage to one attack a round. You just need to be holding a weapon in your off-hand to pull it off.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Confucious say, full attack like Murphy's rules of combat. If enemy is in range, then so is squishy rogue.
A major problem with the rogue for me is the amazing number of lackluster talents and archetypes. A distressing number of talents are only useable Once-per-day. Once-per-day! They're extradinary abilities that do not use resources! Why does Camaflogue, Assault Leader, and Knock-out Blow Once-per-day abilities! Once-per-round is far more reasonable and increases the useability of many, many Rogue Talents.
And they could've had a thing with archetypes where they had a archetypes that focused on a set a skills and got half their level to certain skills sets. Instead we got a piddly +1 or +2 I'm seeing with some of them. Or something more combat orienated and robust than "You can take Combat Trick TWO TIMES! Oooooooo!" The Acrobat doesn't even get half their level to Acrobatics. And many times there's been an opportunity to turn trap sense into a scaling bonus to hit, saves, AC, etc, and they don't do it. And the Skirmisher archetype for Ranger has alot of abilities that I think Rogues should've have.
I totally agree. I've read an awful lot of rogue talents thinking "That's really cool!" until I get to the part where it says "once per day." Yeah. No thank you.
I can't make heads or tails as to why the vast majority of them even have such a limitation.
17 of those talents would be taken more often if they didn't have a limit to the number of times per day they can be used. And if you had to sacrifice sneak attack dice instead of pluses to hit for Powerful and Deadly Sneak people would take them. So 19 talents right off the bat that could've been better done.
Oh man, there's so many bad Rogue Talents that I decided compile a list of talents and why me and my group (and possibly you guys) never take them.
Once per day:
Assault Leader (Ex)
Camouflage (Ex)
Charmer (Ex)
Esoteric Scholar (Ex)
Fast Fingers (Ex)
Hard to Fool (Ex)
Honeyed Words (Ex)
Peerless Maneuver (Ex)
Positioning Attack (Ex)
Resiliency (Ex)
-Advanced Talents-
Another Day (Ex)
Hunter’s Surprise (Ex)
Knock-Out Blow (Ex)
Master of Disguise (Ex)
Redirect Attack (Ex)
Thoughtful Reexamining (Ex)
Unneeded X times per day:
Underhanded (Ex)
A penalty to hit instead of some other penalty:
Powerful Sneak (Ex)
Deadly Sneak (Ex)
They do the same thing! Just complaining:
Slow Reactions (Ex)
Confounding Blades (Ex)
A feat does it better (Skill Focus):
Canny Observer (Ex)
False Friend (Ex)
Okay but it's better given to NPCs and minions:
Black Market Connections (Ex)
Coax Information (Ex)
Deft Palm (Ex)
Distracting Attack (Ex)
Guileful Polyglot (Ex)
Lasting Poison (Ex)
-Advanced Talents-
Getaway Master (Ex)
Subpar or highly situational, but really, usually it's both:
Fast Picks (Ex)
Getaway Artist (Ex)
Hold Breath (Ex)
Iron Guts (Ex)
Ledge Walker (Ex)
Minor Magic (Sp)
Major Magic (Sp)
Nimble Climber (Ex)
Steal the Story (Ex)
Quick Disguise (Ex)
Rogue Crawl (Ex)
Rope Master (Ex)
Strong Stroke (Ex)
Survivalist
Terrain Mastery (Ex)
Wall Scramble (Ex)
-Advanced Talents-
Dispelling Attack (Su)
I ain't spoiling all that because I want everyone to see how long the list is for bad rogue talents!
|
What Rogues really need to be able to sneak attack prone enemies.
When I imagine what a rogue does going up in combat, I imagine him pulling out a bag of marbles and throwing them on the floor, waiting for the other guy to fall over, then stabbing the guy.
And trip builds are already pretty popular, right? Sure they're usually not rogues, but a tripping fighter or monk with a rogue ally could make a good team.
I also wish there were some better choices for rogue talents. Maybe there could be one talent that lets you sneak attack prone enemies, one that lets you sneak attack enemies who are entangled, one that lets you sneak attack enemies with whom you are grappling (which would also be amazing anti-grapple tech), there could be a talent that grants you an additional D6 of sneak attack dice...
I'd also like rogues to be able to set traps. Rangers got plenty of ways to do it, why not rogues?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Correct me if I'm wrong, but losing your first attack while two-weapon fighting means you still have one attack left at your full attack bonus (-2 for TWF of course), right?
Still not saying it is a good idea, but basically it works out to the same as taking a feat so that you can take -2 to your attacks in order to add Sneak Attack damage to one attack a round. You just need to be holding a weapon in your off-hand to pull it off.
It's more like saying you can take multiple feats, as long as you have 13 Int, in order to take -2 to your attacks in order to have a chance of getting your Sneak Attack damage when you full-attack. Considering that you're already a very MAD 3/4 BAB class that only gets one bonus combat feat as a class feature (maybe two, but then you don't have Weapon Finesse at first level so you can't fight at all), all of those italicized segments are quite significant.
(It's easy to forget that Feint isn't an automatic success. The DC is the opponent's BAB+Wis+10, or the opponent's Sense Motive+10 if higher, which is already hardly a guaranteed success considering that the rogue probably doesn't have as much Cha as a bard - but you also suffer a -4 penalty against non-humanoids, -8 against things of animal intelligence, and autofail against unintelligent foes. Considering that sneak attack already doesn't work on several types of creatures, adding a second list of monsters you can't attack properly makes things that much worse. If this ninth-level rogue of yours wants to feint against a CR9 Bone Devil, you'll need a bluff bonus of +23 just to succeed on a 10; good luck with that.)
Here is what I would do for the rogue.. All those " once per day" talents would be like wizard etc archetype abilities which are usually 3+ int per day.
I think dex would be the stat to base it on, what do you Gus think?
Rogues, and their thiefly ancestors, could always use their abilities. Seems like the devs were trying to make the talents like spells.
This should not be. Talents in no way, compare in power to spells. So, as was suggested, change the daily limit on the various talents that have it, to per/round.
I like the ability to use Acrobatics and Bluff (Added that one.) In an opposed check against the target's CMD to gain a sneak attack in standard combat.
It was mentioned, that this did nothing for the ranged problem.
So, how about give the Rogue full BAB with ranged weapons.
I'm looking at house rules, that are easily added, without excessive changes or rules writing. Someone said they wanted some errata on these issues, but for myself; I absolutely hate errata.
I like to be able to go to my Core book and get the rule from it. I don't like having to wonder if the rules printed up in my physical book are going to be questioned by my fellow players.
With a house rule it should be gone over at the onset, or when the rule is introduced. With errata, it's a surprise, because I don't really follow that stuff.
Anyway, it seems like, people are pushing for a sort of Pathfinder, version 4.0. These threads remind me a lot of the ones I used to read at the WotC 3.5 boards.
I didn't hate D&D 4.0. (Never really got to play it much.) But after just buying, the Pathfinder set, I really not, keen on new additions to obsolete, my current one. That is the paradigm that Hasbro seems to be set on, and it's likely to drive me away from the hobby.
(When in doubt, spray commas all over the place.)
I just wish my rogue was able to perform the steal and dirty trick combat maneuvers more reliably than the fighter.
I also love the weapon snatcher advanced rogue talent and I think that there should be more like it that at least make the rogue more viable in combat. I'm fine with the rogue not being able to go toe-to-toe with a fighter and coming out on top, but what bothers me is that he can't at least give the fighter a hard time by cheating. As mentioned, I think the rogue should get some benefit when using combat maneuvers for trip, disarm, dirty trick, steal - all the things you could expect from the guy who is always looking for an advantage.
I recall reading this suggestion somewhere before and I don't quite remember where but someone had suggested combining the weapon finesse and agile maneuver feats together. And if that isn't a possibility, I also personally think that the rogue should get weapon finesse as a free bonus feat at first level (like the swashbuckler in 3.5).
Maybe that's why rogues actually suck, considering that the lack of ultra powers is supposed to be that mundanes can do what they do all day, rogues seem extremely limited in that between the specific setups and the actual limitation 1/day (more limited than a spell caster).
So it looks like there are two major issues for the rogue. A lot of characters can be good at signature rogue skills like stealth and acrobatics- this is cool for other classes, but makes the rogue an option instead of a necessity for a party. And rogue talents are not as useful as the options other classes have. Sneak attack was a powerful attack option in 3.x, but a paladin's smite evil and a ranger's favored enemy now surpass sneak attack.
I'm just summing up what I consider good points that have been made.
Good summation. But SA is actually more powerful in PF, due to so few creatures being immune.
I mean, we have a rogue in one of our parties. If he gets flanking, and a Full attack, he's pretty good. But his BAB is low so he doesn't hit often enough. And HP & AC dismal, so if the monster turns on him, he's squished.
I never said that you would get your full attack when you snipe, but in the core rule book in stealth, it says that you can make dat check to remain hidden. If you pull that off it's beyond surprise round when you consider that the enemies are still not aware of your presence.Actually, it doesn't say you remain hidden, it says you can make the check to "use stealth again". You temporarily become visible when you attack, but you can re-hide afterward. Enemies do see you for a moment, and your position is revealed.
There's no "beyond surprise round" (whatever that means) at work here.
I don't have the book in front of me, but on the SRD is says "If you've already successfully used Stealth at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack and then immediately use Stealth again. You take a –20 penalty on your Stealth check to maintain your obscured location."
So should you succeed against enemies wouldn't that imply that they would all remain unaware and thusly continue to be flat footed to you?
Here is what I would do for the rogue.. All those " once per day" talents would be like wizard etc archetype abilities which are usually 3+ int per day.
I think dex would be the stat to base it on, what do you Gus think?
More like once per round and once per check. Seriously there's no excuse for these abilities to have any limit to number of times per day they can be used.
The Rogue Archetypes aren't any better. I'm thinking about just going through the rogue archetypes and talents and throwing up a rewrite/buff in another thread.
|
if you think the rogue needs to be fixed, you are doing it wrong.
I don't think it's broken, I think the rogue is less effective at it's own core role in the group as other party members are at theirs, and thus needs some improvement.
This could be partly due to the fact that a rogue's role can vary so much.
The rework I had in mind after thinking about it for 1 afternoon was this:
1. empower the archtypes a little so they'd be more effective in the role they wanted to take (some don't need this), examples would be that ranged rogues can sneak attack at a range of 30ft + 5ft/lvl.
2. add low budget/low CR poisons, traps (especially recyclable traps) and alchemical items to give rogues more options at lower levels. (though other classes could use this)
3. IMO, rogues should be able to purchase items none of the other party members can, sometimes a far lower prices, due to their fence, their black market connections and the like. This depends heavily on the type of rogue you roll up, however.
4. write details on rogues by country in pathfinder, write about Honor among Thieves for the lawful rogues, etc.
I'd like to add in a small pseudo calculation.
On the first page there was mention that Rogues can't really get stealth kills due to low damage, even with sneak attack.
Let us think about how many sneak attacks a Rogue can do before an opponent acts.
I'm going to assume a lot of stuff goes in the Rogue's favour. If you want to buff stealth-kills, then a good place to start would be making these things more likely to go in the Rogues favour.
Suppose the rogue surprises an opponent.
1. Surprise round. The rogue gets to act against a flatfooted opponent for a single standard action. Assume the Rogue gets to do a standard attack.
2. First round. If the Rogue wins initiative then they get a full round against a flat footed opponent. Assume the Rogue gets a full-attack.
All of those attacks apply sneak attack.
Further suppose that circumstance favours the rogue such that every attack hits.
Let us now total the number of sneak attacks dealt.
Surprise round gives us 1 attack.
First round gives us a full attack. Assume BAB is low so there are no iterative attacks and we use either Rapid Shot or TWF. Thus we get 2 attacks from the full attack.
In total, before BAB hits 6, a rogue can get 3 sneak attacks off before an opponent acts.
If you are considering doing some house rules, then consider the following:
Are 3 sneak attacks going to do enough damage?
Is it easy enough for the rogue to accomplish?
For example, at level 1, a Human Rogue with Point-Blank Shot and Rapid Shot can use a shortbow to deal 6d6+3 damage (max 39) to an opponent before they act. Is that enough damage? Does this require too many lucky rolls?
Eldmar, you may have missed the change from 3.5, but in Pathfinder skill points from Intelligence is retroactive. Also you get skill points from magic items like a headband.
So at 20th level a Wizard starting with 18 Int will have an Int of at least 29. So that's 12 skill points per level including a favored class bonus.
20x12=240
Oh, sweet, where does it say that in the core book please? I bumped my rogues int - we hit level 4 after our last game session. I can get an extra 3 skill points.
Oh, sweet, where does it say that in the core book please? I bumped my rogues int - we hit level 4 after our last game session. I can get an extra 3 skill points.Eldmar, you may have missed the change from 3.5, but in Pathfinder skill points from Intelligence is retroactive. Also you get skill points from magic items like a headband.
So at 20th level a Wizard starting with 18 Int will have an Int of at least 29. So that's 12 skill points per level including a favored class bonus.
20x12=240
Not precisely said in the CRB, which says this:
Ability bonuses with a duration greater than 1 day actually increase the relevant ability score after 24 hours. Modify all skills and statistics as appropriate. This might cause you to gain skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. These bonuses should be noted separately in case they are removed.
And then James Jacobs said this:
"All bonuses are retroactive when an ability score increases, be they bonuses to damage, to skill ranks, to hit points, to saves, to skill checks... all of them. Skill ranks not being retroactive are a 3.5 convention we specifically removed from the game because it was a weird exception to the rule, and since now there are no exceptions to this rule, there's no need to specifically state that skill ranks are retroactively granted if your Intelligence goes up."
Here on this forums somewhere.
I never said that you would get your full attack when you snipe, but in the core rule book in stealth, it says that you can make dat check to remain hidden. If you pull that off it's beyond surprise round when you consider that the enemies are still not aware of your presence.Actually, it doesn't say you remain hidden, it says you can make the check to "use stealth again". You temporarily become visible when you attack, but you can re-hide afterward. Enemies do see you for a moment, and your position is revealed.
There's no "beyond surprise round" (whatever that means) at work here.
I don't have the book in front of me, but on the SRD is says "If you've already successfully used Stealth at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack and then immediately use Stealth again. You take a –20 penalty on your Stealth check to maintain your obscured location."
So should you succeed against enemies wouldn't that imply that they would all remain unaware and thusly continue to be flat footed to you?
Flat-footed and denied dex are not the same. If you hide successfully then you get to sneak attack because you have concealment, and they lose their dex to AC against you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It should also be noted that unless you have a 25 point guy or higher you normally have to choose to be a combat rogue or a skill rogue.
A skill rogue struggles to keep pace with a bard. A combat rogue won't do it, neither will a rogue designed to do both. A combat rogue still won't match a frontliner's damage, and due to light armor is easier to kill.
In short a player is normally better off with another class.
One, horses do not belong in the dungeon. Heck, they don't even belong in caverns or forests of any kind. Why? No room for a Large beastie to maneuver. They are plains and steppe creatures, remember.Bears would like to talk to you about Large (larger even) beasties in caverns and forests.
(That being said, the Rogue should be able to cleanly murder someone of equivalent level with proper preparation and planning)
Bears move MUCH slower than horses can, and can pull far less weight. A bear enters caverns to sleep, not fight in. Oh, and horses are outright larger than bears, most bears anyway.
I always had it that if a Rogue sneak attacks somebody that was entirely unaware of their presence, a coup de grace maneuver was executed, forcing a Fort save or death. Not much (relatively speaking) to differentiate targeting between helpless and flat footed to a Rogue.
I found the new Stealth rules from the playtest on the blog made the "stealth in combat" issue much more dynamic and playable.
The issues raised by the OP are legit, but the solutions are a combination of GM finesse and house ruling (like the rule from the blog).
I think skills got a raw deal in the general power inflation of the game. If you have a GM who really likes skill checks and calls for them all the time, the value of the rogue (and bard, et al.) increases dramatically.
That, and if the DM has enough presence of mind to have enemies react logically to a series of attacks, they'd prepare for the PC group and wipe them out. Therefore, the PC's have to press onward once they attack, or forfeit surprise. That also means no resting to recover spells, ki, whathaveyou points.
If you have ever run the Return of the Rat King module from DCC, you would know the value of having a prepared enemy. Pones the heck out of the PC group.
How about instead of the extra damage die, simply allow Rogues to add their Int modifier to damage rolls?
This could be precision damage, to keep the backstab flavor, and have the max Int bonus to damage limited to Rogue level, so it avoids dippers.It deals less damage than rolling 5d6 or whatever, but it's also much less situational, only being innefective against creatures immunes to precision damage, which are not nearly as common in PF as they were in 3.X.
It'd would also mean Rogues have a real reason to invest in Int, so they can actually have more skills than Bards.
One of the things I tell most Rogue players is that they should put one of their best scores into Int, and consider taking a race that beefs it up. The thing the Rogue really does well is skills, so the more points in it they have, the more flexible they become. Moreover, having more languages means Disguise gets that much more credible.
Only downside is that past the Knowledges, very few skills use Int.
I should point out that the Knife Master Rogue archetype significantly beefs up the backstab, and it doesn't cost much. Plus, Outflank not only helps the Rogue, it really helps the party warrior connect. Aren't that many bonuses to hit one can get with feats.
Long long ago, in an edition far far away. Halfings and elves in non metal armor had surprise chances and moving silently bonuses as long as they were 30' in front of the metal clanking guys.
30' isnt so far ahead that the guy is going to get slaughtered.
I would use that old rule as a general table rule, even if some guy is clanking 30 feet down the hallway the guy listening to it is MORE likely not to notice some dude right there in a shadow, since he's concentrating on whats 30 feet down the hallway..... aaaaahhhh neck slice!
Roberta? You do know that Versatile Performance is quite auditory, and thus broadcasts one's position wherever one happens to be, ALL THE TIME, right? And if the DM has half a brain, all the enemies have to do is gather up and wipe out the party once they learn their Bard is getting funky, right?
Just because the nasty side effects aren't explicitly stated, doesn't mean you can't nail the PC group with logical consequences for their actions.
Seriously, SINGING at one's opponents doesn't make you consider the fact that whatever the effects, it also erects the auditory equivalent of a flashing neon sign with the legend "GET YOUR PC SNACKS HERE!"?
Oh, and did you ever see the Order of the Stick strips involving their Bard? "Bluff, bluff, bluff the stupid ogre." Versatile Performance isn't as versatile as you think, if you figure it can be used willy nilly.
Roberta? You do know that Versatile Performance is quite auditory, and thus broadcasts one's position wherever one happens to be, ALL THE TIME, right? And if the DM has half a brain, all the enemies have to do is gather up and wipe out the party once they learn their Bard is getting funky, right?
Just because the nasty side effects aren't explicitly stated, doesn't mean you can't nail the PC group with logical consequences for their actions.
Seriously, SINGING at one's opponents doesn't make you consider the fact that whatever the effects, it also erects the auditory equivalent of a flashing neon sign with the legend "GET YOUR PC SNACKS HERE!"?
Curses, now my cunning plan to use Diplomacy while stealthed will be foiled!
Seriously what the hell is any of this supposed to mean?
Once per day:
Assault Leader (Ex)
Camouflage (Ex)
Charmer (Ex)
Esoteric Scholar (Ex)
Fast Fingers (Ex)
Hard to Fool (Ex)
Honeyed Words (Ex)
Peerless Maneuver (Ex)
Positioning Attack (Ex)
Resiliency (Ex)
-Advanced Talents-...
You do realize you've lumped in a lot of very useful abilities with the "bad" ones, like say Minor Magic (Detect Magic really helps with magical traps, and said traps get particularly evil in upper levels, so does Detect Poison while we're at it)?
Maybe the key here isn't the Rogue Talents you don't like, it's how they're used that determines how useful they really are?
Just sayin'...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Roberta? You do know that Versatile Performance is quite auditory, and thus broadcasts one's position wherever one happens to be, ALL THE TIME, right? And if the DM has half a brain, all the enemies have to do is gather up and wipe out the party once they learn their Bard is getting funky, right?
Just because the nasty side effects aren't explicitly stated, doesn't mean you can't nail the PC group with logical consequences for their actions.
Seriously, SINGING at one's opponents doesn't make you consider the fact that whatever the effects, it also erects the auditory equivalent of a flashing neon sign with the legend "GET YOUR PC SNACKS HERE!"?
One: Lolwut?
Two: Not even all of the Performances are auditory, many are dancing/acting/oratory.
Three: None of those skills are skills you'd use near enemies anyway unless you were talking to them specifically...in which case they already know you're there.
Four: Since you're not actually singing or dancing or anything, you're just using your Perform bonus in place of other skill bonuses, the entire thing is moot.
Seriously what?
Once per day:
Assault Leader (Ex)
Camouflage (Ex)
Charmer (Ex)
Esoteric Scholar (Ex)
Fast Fingers (Ex)
Hard to Fool (Ex)
Honeyed Words (Ex)
Peerless Maneuver (Ex)
Positioning Attack (Ex)
Resiliency (Ex)
-Advanced Talents-...You do realize you've lumped in a lot of very useful abilities with the "bad" ones, like say Minor Magic (Detect Magic really helps with magical traps, and said traps get particularly evil in upper levels, so does Detect Poison while we're at it)?
Maybe the key here isn't the Rogue Talents you don't like, it's how they're used that determines how useful they really are?
Just sayin'...
Yippee, you can spend a Rogue Talent to cast a Cantrip a limited number of times a day. Yay?
Woohoo! You can spend one minute to gain a +4 bonus on Stealth. Yay?
You can make a Knowledge check untrained? Oh that IS pretty cool wait it's once per day nevermind.
Yes, they truly are the overlooked gems.
I mean, we have a rogue in one of our parties. If he gets flanking, and a Full attack, he's pretty good. But his BAB is low so he doesn't hit often enough. And HP & AC dismal, so if the monster turns on him, he's squished.
What kind of Rogue is this guy playing?! Considering that most like to have a really high Dexterity, like say a 22, how the heck do they have poor AC, especially when they can use a mithral shield without penalty, always get to keep their Dex adjust to AC, and can use special materials and enchantments to up their body armor just like everybody else?
Roberta? You do know that Versatile Performance is quite auditory, and thus broadcasts one's position wherever one happens to be, ALL THE TIME, right? And if the DM has half a brain, all the enemies have to do is gather up and wipe out the party once they learn their Bard is getting funky, right?
Just because the nasty side effects aren't explicitly stated, doesn't mean you can't nail the PC group with logical consequences for their actions.
Seriously, SINGING at one's opponents doesn't make you consider the fact that whatever the effects, it also erects the auditory equivalent of a flashing neon sign with the legend "GET YOUR PC SNACKS HERE!"?
Curses, now my cunning plan to use Diplomacy while stealthed will be foiled!
Seriously what the hell is any of this supposed to mean?
Easy. In one area, you are trying to beef up the party's Diplomacy. In the one next door all around you, everyone and their uncle can hear the racket, and has enough brains to figure out that it's a enemy Bard.
Still wanna attempt Diplomacy using Versatile Performance each and every time a Diplomacy roll is needed? That's not situational either, since most of the time the PC group is doing SOMETHING shady from a NPC perspective.
What kind of Rogue is this guy playing?! Considering that most like to have a really high Dexterity, like say a 22, how the heck do they have poor AC, especially when they can use a mithral shield without penalty, always get to keep their Dex adjust to AC, and can use special materials and enchantments to up their body armor just like everybody else?
TWF puts them way behind in both feats and money, high Dex in light armor still gives you lower AC than average Dex in heavier armor, and sword-and-boarding both goes against the iconic rogue image and is way too feat-hungry to be viable. (And too slow due to BAB requirements - no Shield Master until 15th?)
What kind of rogues do you run that point-buy a 16 Int and fight sword-and-board?
*ideal stealth attack calculations*
Good stuff. I had suspected that at level 1 and the levels where you get extra attacks would be where "stealth kills" would be semi-plausible, but otherwise it would be difficult.
I think you've quite effectively proven that in most cases the damage the rogue can deal just is not enough for stealth kills.Not to mention the difficulty in actually hitting with all those attacks...
So, if someone wanted to make stealth kills viable, it would seem a bonus to both attack and damage would be needed. Applying that to all sneak attacks would be a bit much, so maybe only flatfooted opponents?
Easy. In one area, you are trying to beef up the party's Diplomacy. In the one next door all around you, everyone and their uncle can hear the racket, and has enough brains to figure out that it's a enemy Bard.
Still wanna attempt Diplomacy using Versatile Performance each and every time a Diplomacy roll is needed? That's not situational either, since most of the time the PC group is doing SOMETHING shady from a NPC perspective.
None of this makes any sense and I'm not sure we're actually both speaking English.
I do seem to be getting the impression that you think "involves a Perform check" translates to "is deafeningly loud". Because everyone knows performers have zero control of dynamics and just scream at the top of their lungs constantly right
Easy. In one area, you are trying to beef up the party's Diplomacy. In the one next door all around you, everyone and their uncle can hear the racket, and has enough brains to figure out that it's a enemy Bard.
Still wanna attempt Diplomacy using Versatile Performance each and every time a Diplomacy roll is needed? That's not situational either, since most of the time the PC group is doing SOMETHING shady from a NPC perspective.
But why are you using Diplomacy on random mooks in enemy territory in the first place?
Your "downside" makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
And besides that fact, you get Diplomacy from Perform: ORATORY. I.e the one that lets you make speeches and such. It's not going to be any louder than a regular Diplomacy check anyway, since it's the same damn thing. It's not like you're banging a f$~$ing gong and chanting "AYAH FOOBOO BLARGSNAG!!!!!" at the top of your lungs doing this.
One: Lolwut?
Two: Not even all of the Performances are auditory, many are dancing/acting/oratory.
Three: None of those skills are skills you'd use near enemies anyway unless you were talking to them specifically...in which case they already know you're there.
Four: Since you're not actually singing or dancing or anything, you're just using your Perform bonus in place of other skill bonuses, the entire thing is moot.
Seriously what?
Once per day:
Assault Leader (Ex)
Camouflage (Ex)
Charmer (Ex)
Esoteric Scholar (Ex)
Fast Fingers (Ex)
Hard to Fool (Ex)
Honeyed Words (Ex)
Peerless Maneuver (Ex)
Positioning Attack (Ex)
Resiliency (Ex)
-Advanced Talents-...You do realize you've lumped in a lot of very useful abilities with the "bad" ones, like say Minor Magic (Detect Magic really helps with magical traps, and said traps get particularly evil in upper levels, so does Detect Poison while we're at it)?
Maybe the key here isn't the Rogue Talents you don't like, it's how they're used that determines how useful they really are?
Just sayin'...
Yippee, you can spend a Rogue Talent to cast a Cantrip a limited number of times a day. Yay?
Woohoo! You can spend one minute to gain a +4 bonus on Stealth. Yay?...
Yes, and acting, oratory etc are hardly SILENT, ARE THEY?! Really man.
And every time a Bard opens her mouth to do their thing, any NPC beastie in a world where Bards are known to exist would happily target them just like they would a Wizard when casting a spell. Would you like your Bard pincushioned, or just gutted? Better yet, the Bard will likely have a worse AC than the Rogue, given that most like to put their high rolls in Charisma.
Unless you are running about using a Bard mime, Perform isn't silent. Try again, kiddo.
Have you ever USED those Minor Talent spells as a Rogue? Ever thought about running one, and using it to find traps or whatever? Wow. You focus so much on the upper levels, you never stop to consider what the little abilities can do.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"So then this guy started talking, and at first I thought it was okay, but then I realized he was talking really good, so I stabbed him to death. Then people from twenty rooms away ran over to help me because they somehow heard him talking good from that far away and wanted to help me murder him."
This is stupid.
Easy. In one area, you are trying to beef up the party's Diplomacy. In the one next door all around you, everyone and their uncle can hear the racket, and has enough brains to figure out that it's a enemy Bard.
Still wanna attempt Diplomacy using Versatile Performance each and every time a Diplomacy roll is needed? That's not situational either, since most of the time the PC group is doing SOMETHING shady from a NPC perspective.
None of this makes any sense and I'm not sure we're actually both speaking English.
I do seem to be getting the impression that you think "involves a Perform check" translates to "is deafeningly loud". Because everyone knows performers have zero control of dynamics and just scream at the top of their lungs constantly right
Do either of you know what goes into acting on stage? How about oratory to a group of people? You train to PROJECT YOUR VOICE so they can bloody hear you.
Do yourselves a favor, and try taking some acting classes or attend a play, and perhaps a speech. Ask yourselves what those large speakers are for.
"So then this guy started talking, and at first I thought it was okay, but then I realized he was talking really good, so I stabbed him to death. Then people from twenty rooms away ran over to help me because they somehow heard him talking good from that far away and wanted to help me murder him."
This is stupid.
Roberta, you are getting on my nerves.
In a world where people cast magic spells using hand gestures and mumbo jumbo, where Bards and their magical goofiness exist, what do you think would happen if YOU noticed something odd going on when someone started doing some grand performance in front of you, and it had peculiar effects?
Use your head.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your argument is now that bards are literally incapable of using normal speaking volume.
I'd type a further response but honestly I think that the sheer fact that that's actually your argument is a better counterargument than anything I could come up with.
and it had peculiar effects?
Versatile Performance doesn't have peculiar effects and isn't magical. It's literally "Hey, all that training I did learning to talk good lets me talk to people good".
Acting can be silent
it's called pantomiming
or just plain miming
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
if you want a rogue who deals respectable damage while still being viable at skills do the following
make strength your primary stat, not dexterity
pick up a 2hander (longspear is awesome)
take power attack
wear a single cestus
multiclass fighter for a bit
carry a composite shortbow as a backup weapon