|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If we had a big book of rogue talents then I believe the supposed rogue problem would be solved. The problem right now is the fact that there just aren't enough talents and some of them just flat out suck. I could actually see some rogue talents that tap into a bit of the other classes without needing to multi class. Have a rogue talent that let's him dabble in the Alchemist class etc...
The problem ofcourse is that if you have a big book of rogue talents that were strictly better then the existing ones (which they would need to be to fix the problem) you would have people shouting about power creep. I personally think the should be at least as good as the ninja tricks, but I'm sure there are people who would have a problem with the supernatural nature of the ninja's abilities.
OK so lets see, on ninja tricks the rogue can already get a ki pool and take those if the rogue wishes, they can also dabble in getting grit and firearm training, and they can also dabble in arcane to the point of 0,1st level spells, and a familiar. They don't need another class they can dabble in, and they can already do most of what a ninja can do.
Rogues do not suck, the talents already fixed that. Fast stealth and hide in plain sight paired with either peerless manuver, slow reactions, manuvering strike, or fast getaway let the rogue creep in and out of combat pretty much at will. Throw in powerful sneak and swift posion for addition power. Not enough for you? The rogue can grab a number of combat feats that put him close in build to the fighter in many ways. If that doesn't do it for you there's one potentially devistating talent that gets underestimated quite a bit, Quick Trapsmith.
That's not even discussing how powerful evasion is or trapfinding, particularly the part where the only class in the game capable of disabling a magic trap is the rogue (short of I suppose a dispell.)
What makes a rogue underpowered? 2 things.
1) Sneak attack doesn't effect contructs, the undead, and equally leveled enemies with improved uncanny dodge. Talents or magic items that allow the rogue to vreak that rule would be appreciated.
2) Traps aren't as frequent or deadly as they used to be.
|
What makes a rogue underpowered? 2 things.
1) Sneak attack doesn't effect contructs, the undead, and equally leveled enemies with improved uncanny dodge.
That does not appear to be the case.
Sneak attacks affect everything, unless specifically called out. This includes constructs and the undead (save for incorporeal undead, and you can overcome that with Ghost Touch). Sneak attacks are actually much more useful in Pathfinder than in previous D&D versions.
The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot. A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment.
Note: typically it is creatures that are immune to critical hits are immune to sneak attacks (this includes things like elementals and oozes, but not much else). Some constructs may be immune, and some undead, but that would be called out in their Bestiary listing, and would not be the norm.
|
What makes a rogue underpowered? 2 things.
1) Sneak attack doesn't effect contructs, the undead, and equally leveled enemies with improved uncanny dodge. Talents or magic items that allow the rogue to vreak that rule would be appreciated.
2) Traps aren't as frequent or deadly as they used to be.
Silbeg is right about your 1). They specifically fixed that in Pathfinder. I would say the problem with Sneak Attack is that it simply doesn't do enough extra damage to justify its circumstantial nature. If I were king, I would find some ways to further boost it up (for example, by giving extra sneak attack dice on a critical hit).
You're absolutely right about 2). I've encountered at least one AP chapter that is completely trap-free. And even when there are traps, the CR rules usually have the effect of making them minor inconveniences rather than being actually dangerous. Though I must say, with Shattered Star I think Paizo did their best to bring back some good traps, so hopefully they're working to reverse this problem.
You're absolutely right about 2). I've encountered at least one AP chapter that is completely trap-free. And even when there are traps, the CR rules usually have the effect of making them minor inconveniences rather than being actually dangerous. Though I must say, with Shattered Star I think Paizo did their best to bring back some good traps, so hopefully they're working to reverse this problem.
I think its a very good thing traps arent as deadly as they used to be because honestly, I think traps being a major part of the game is stupid. I have played lots of games with trap loaded dungeons and it isnt fun. Sure the rogue (or someone with trapfinding) becomes important, but it slows things to a crawl, it makes the party paranoid, interferes with story, and makes it neccesary to have 1 specific class ability in order to get through an adventure. That isnt ok. There shouldnt have to be a rogue any more then there should have to be a barbarian. Most classes have moved outside this niche protection zone. But the rogue still has that trapfinding niche, even though most of the cool archetypes for the rogue trade out trapfinding (which in and of itself is infuriating).
If we had a big book of rogue talents then I believe the supposed rogue problem would be solved. The problem right now is the fact that there just aren't enough talents and some of them just flat out suck. I could actually see some rogue talents that tap into a bit of the other classes without needing to multi class. Have a rogue talent that let's him dabble in the Alchemist class etc...
I think rogues should get a talent at first level, too. Otherwise you effectively wait for second level before you get to do your 'thing' - traps and sneak attack having their limits.
OK so lets see, on ninja tricks the rogue can already get a ki pool and take those if the rogue wishes, they can also dabble in getting grit and firearm training, and they can also dabble in arcane to the point of 0,1st level spells, and a familiar. They don't need another class they can dabble in, and they can already do most of what a ninja can do.
Yeah, spend a Talent to still be worse than na Ninja.... That sounds good. Or use firearms, which are the worst weapons in the game unless you 're a Gunslinger. Use a cantrip 3 times per day. That's surely useful...
Peerless Maneuvers is not only weak, but also limited to X times per day.
Swift Poison, like any other poison focused ability, is weak, because poisons are weak.
Powerful Sneak is freaking terrible! It makes Rogues even worse than if they hadn't taken it!
All of those Rogue Talents suck. And they suck hard.
Rogues desperately need better talents! Most of them are not just bad, but freaking terrible!
Aa book of Rogue Talents and nothing else would be a bit too much, but I'd love to see a "Ultimate Subterfuge" focused on classes like Bards, Inquisitors, Rangers and most of all, Rogues, of course.
Giving them better Talents would be a great start, but not enough, IMHO.
Big Book of Rogue Talents would be nice, maybe as a Rogue Archive with some more special use gear, animals, alchemy, equipment and other traits, weapon tricks, feats and some decent archetypes and prestige classes for Rogues.
Edit: As things are now, as GM I would allow a Rogue Talent at each level if there were no other changes.
Ok wow the things you miss from going 3.5 to PF! If sneak isn't as limited then one of the biggest losers for the rogue goes away oh and for 2 talents you can ensure you never get less then a 3 on your sneak D6's how is that not enough damage?
Comparing to casters is apples to oranges, casters can be very good at rogue role but for limited time perday. Oh and rogues can easily afford the skillpoints to max UMD, and they can suppliment their income enough in most games to more than afford an array of wands on other shinies and sub for a caster if you want to argue about casters in the rogue's role.
Ok wow the things you miss from going 3.5 to PF! If sneak isn't as limited then one of the biggest losers for the rogue goes away oh and for 2 talents you can ensure you never get less then a 3 on your sneak D6's how is that not enough damage?
Comparing to casters is apples to oranges, casters can be very good at rogue role but for limited time perday. Oh and rogues can easily afford the skillpoints to max UMD, and they can suppliment their income enough in most games to more than afford an array of wands on other shinies and sub for a caster if you want to argue about casters in the rogue's role.
Because the -X to hit is worse than adding 1 or 2 to damage if you aren't a full BAB class.
Wait, Rogues aren't. Seems like the talents suck then.There is a good Fighter Archetype: sneak attack and Talents in exhange for Weapon Training and armor training.
They could use those sucky feats and not have as much of any issue.
Slow Reaction, Offensive Defense, Finesse Rogue, Combat Trick, Opportunist, Weapon Training, are all nice or ok.
The rest is either bad, or blatantly embarrassing.
To be honest the first rogue talent I would add would be something like Finesse Sneak or whatever, adding Dexterity to damage when sneak attacking.
Or even better, make it so that Finesse rogue add dexterity to both atk and damage, because right now if you don't have an agile weapon, it sucks.
Also probably a rogue talent to sneak attack more often, something like what the scout archetype gives (sneak after charge, sneak after 10+FT move).
Or a talent for Swift action bluff for all sneak attack of the round.
Because seriously the swift action greater invis the Ninja get at level 10 basically is completely overpowered compared to anything the rogue get.
Some of the talents are pretty good. You only get to chose 4 normal talents anyway before you get the advanced ones at level 10. So Combat trick - a free combat feat, Weapon focus - oh another free combat feat, weapon finess - useful for the dex builds. That leaves you with either 1 or 2 to chose. Surprise attack is pretty nice as it lets you ignore dex bonus to AC even if you lose the initiative in the surprise round. That leaves possibly 1 talent to chose...... There are several other decent ones. As for advanced feats - opportunist, improved evasion, skill mastery. Dispelling strike is pretty nifty for debuffing in big boss fights.
I think the real issue behind the percieved 'weakness' of the rogue class is that people dont realise what they are and what their trole is. The class is not meant to be the main front line fighter type. It clearly states that the rogue is a support class. The rogue does a lot of different things reasonably well but does not compare to a specialist in any area.
Dispelling Strike has Minor Magic & Major Magic as prerequisites.
I think it must be mentioned that any self-respecting rogue has some sort of guild watching his back. Easier access to magic items, rogue NPCs to call on in times of need, and maybe even cool hideouts hidden in unexpected places. I think just having those things could make being a rogue fun enough to play, and the party could be thankful :)
Afhter what happened with the monk, There should be a massive outrage in the forum to give the fighter more skill per levels and the rogue better (and non stealable by other classes) rogue talents.
IMHO, 4 skill points per level should be the bare minimum for anyone who is not a Int-based full caster.
Better Rogue Talents can happen as more books are released. A bit more difficult is boosting their to-hit, AC and saves. All of which are pretty bad.BTW, I houserule that Minor Magic gives you 3 cantrips useable at will and a 1st level spell useable 3 times a day. Much more useful.
I think it must be mentioned that any self-respecting rogue has some sort of guild watching his back. Easier access to magic items, rogue NPCs to call on in times of need, and maybe even cool hideouts hidden in unexpected places. I think just having those things could make being a rogue fun enough to play, and the party could be thankful :)
DM reliant as none of that is a class feature.
If you bribe your DM maybe, but not all DMs will.
Now you've got me curious Lemmy, do you still have Major Magic? And if so, what does Major Magic do in your games?
Nah, I just removed it. I suppose it could do something like giving 2 extra 1st level spells, and/or increasing the number of uses per day. I just didn't bother because no player was interested.
One of my players wanted to play a sneaky character, but found the Rogue to be lacking and didn't like the fluff of Ninjas, so I told him to simply refluff his Ninja as a Rogue with some kind of shadow magic (not unlikely in a world where magic is a everyday thing) and underhanded tricks.
Like I said many times: Fluff is what you make of it. No one walks around with a label announcing their classes to the world! Some Character may not even know their classes! A Paladin may call himself a Paladin (or priest, or cleric, or templar, or holy knight), but Fighters and Rogues might not even see themselves as such.
After a while, we simply fused both classes. Now he has all class features of both Ninja and Rogue. And he's still far from OP.
yeah but nobody complain loud enough :(Afhter what happened with the monk, There should be a massive outrage in the forum to give the fighter more skill per levels and the rogue better (and non stealable by other classes) rogue talents.IMHO, 4 skill points per level should be the bare minimum for anyone who is not a Int-based full caster.
I think Paizo sees "+2 extra skill points per level" as too big of a change. And the devs repeatdly said that they might add minor tweaks, but not huge changes.
Better Rogue Talents can happen as more books are released. A bit more difficult is boosting their to-hit, AC and saves. All of which are pretty bad.Mmm that might not really solve the problem as the ninja and those alchemist and bard arhetypes could take those too. The rogue will still lag behind.
I have more of a problem with Rogues' AC, to-hit and saves than with their relative power compared to those classes. That said, adding prerequisites such as Evasion and X Sneak Attack dice would make it harder for those classes to steal them.
Also, making skills more useful at mid/high levels would do wonders for every non-caster in the game. e.g.: A high enough Acrobatics check might allow you to run over water, or a high-enough Stealth check might give you light concealment or some such. Whatever it's, Rogues should be able to do it much better and more often.
|
Dispelling Strike has Minor Magic & Major Magic as prerequisites.
Minor magic, while not game breaking, isn't bad, either.
Granted, I still have to try it out, but at Rogue 4 I picked this up (for Acid Splash). Since this is a weapon-like spell, its utility comes in the surprise round... where I can get off a 1d3+2d6 attack at 30' range... next level it'll be 1d3+3d6!!!
Yeah, not great, but you cannot draw a bow or sword and pull this one off. Should be at least partially helpful!
Better to rewrite the existing rogue talents so that they don't suck, and bring them up in power to equivalent abilities gained at similar levels. I think it's best to add a point pool mechanic, so that they can work similarly to other class abilities - I pulled over the gunslinger's grit mechanics, tying them to either Intelligence or Charisma (rogue's choice, picked at 1st level).
I also pulled out a bunch of talents and added a bunch of new ones.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I agree on the minor/major magic thing getting an oomph. Maybe minor at will, major Cha mod a day (min 1)?
If you put both your rogue talents into this you get that first level spell at 4th level. Same as the all the full and half casters get their second level spell. Seems fair.
Personally, I think rogues do fine as a class, even before you add talents. Those extra little perks are just icing on the cake. It is all about how you rp your character, and to play the character within the set rules it was designed to be, not to wish for something else.
But, if there is a perceived weakness in the rogue as compared to some other classes, I think the better solution is to find out what makes other classes over-powered, and tweak those classes, not escalate the powers of the rogue class.
I usually use d20pfsrd when building characters to pick out feats, spells, and things like rogue talents/rage powers as I find it quicker than flipping through the various books to see what is available.
They have a quick reference chart for Rogue Talents that has a short description of the ability. It's sad how many times I've read the short description on the chart, thought "Oh, that looks really good, I'll take that", then clicked the link and read the actual talent and realized it was only usable once a day, could only trigger under very specific conditions, or applied a penalty to the rogue to use the talent; sighed and went back to looking for a talent to take.
|
|
Every time I want to make a rogue, I end up deciding on a reflavor of another class instead because it would fit the concept without me feeling like I'm falling behind.
The issues I see are two-fold:
- Point 1: The rogue has no to-hit bonus special to match up with the Ranger's Favored Enemy, the Fighter's Weapon Training, the Paladin's Smite, the Barbarian's Rage, the Inquisitor's Judgement, the Alchemist's Mutagen, the Magus' Arcane Pool, the Druid's Wild Shape, the Cleric/Oracle's Divine Favor/Power, The Monk's Flurry, the Sorcerer/Wizard/Witch's Transformation (or polymorph effects), the Cavalier's Challenge, the Gunslinger's ability to hit touch AC, the Summoner's flat bonus to Eidolon strength and dex or the Bard's Performance. Notice that I *literally* just listed every single class except Rogue. Every. Single. Class. Except. Rogue.
- Point 2: Rogue talents, for the most part, suck. And they suck hard. Some are so bad, that I would literally rather take a +1 bonus to a skill than take them (like Esoteric Scholar).
To fix point one, you'd need to give them a "bonus to attack rolls" ability, even if it functions indirectly. It doesn't have to be huge, but it should be around a +1 at 1st and up to a +5 at around 18th (alternatively, add int to attack). It can be limited use (like most similar abilities), but in that case it should come with some other benefit (like always getting at least half of your sneak attack damage when using it, even if not normally meeting the conditions). I do not think it should be a conditional bonus, except possibly by distance (the same way sneak attack is -- melee or within 30ft). I say this because no other class has their bonus made similarly conditional.
To fix point two requires a complete rewrite of most rogue talents. They should all be *at least* equivalent to a feat, if not slightly better due to their nature as a class ability. Taking the "give me a feat" options should be a fall-back, not the best option available. As it stands, many aren't even worth a trait and all but a handful aren't worth a feat. In fact, some are actually worse than not having anything at all (Powerful Sneak being the known example).
Been mucking with rogues as per PF for a couple of years now, and the only things I really miss from 3.5 to PF is a few feats for rogues and other such types. Talents (as long as you read, as some do have usage limits that are low) are nice, fast stealth, as GM_solspiral points out, up min dmg that sneak attack dice can do, plus much more. I don't think the rogue needs a power buff at all. Telling blow is one of the feats I think should be added. Allows sneak attack damage to be added on crits. Makes rogues even more dangerous, but doesn't break anything IMO.
Afhter what happened with the monk, There should be a massive outrage in the forum to give the fighter more skill per levels and the rogue better (and non stealable by other classes) rogue talents.
Big difference between the rogue, the fighter and the monk is that the rogue and the fighter can fulfil their roles: fighters may not be much fun without skills, but they are there to dish the hurt and they do it well. Rogues are still good scouts, even though other classes can scout almost as well. Monks...don't have anything they can do particularly well except run away fast. Even with the upgrade from the devs, the monk is still weaker than the rogue, because the rogue can DO something well that is useful to the party.
That said, I think the rogue does need a power-up, but not a major one. I'd start with better talents and gaining a talent at 1st level.
I would actually argue that -on average- an Expanded Content Pathfinder Monk is superior to a Rogue. He can either be a strong archer, or a sort of multi-tool that can hit decently hard in melee, maneuver around a lot, and has a few skills to contribute to the party. (Including what should be a solid perception check, given Wisdom as a secondary stat.)
Actually, when you think about 'the scout' character, Monks actually do that better. They've got better perception, nearly comparable stealth (if invested in), and they've got the move speed to book it back to the party if they have to.
When Monks get a Trapfinding archetype, then Rogues are done for :P