At the end of the day what is a rogue? Someone with the skill and motivation to make money dishonestly.
How do you fix the rogue? If you do wealth by level tables multiply that by 1.5, if not take party loot add about 50% to the rogues cut, or you want to do extra work let the rogue to outside jobs when the party has downtime.
Bottom line, a powerful rogue is partly the power of having resources others do not dishonestly gained. I'll probably come up with some tables for rolling for this as I'm sure some DMs will want to go there but simply put I think this can make the difference every ls looking for.
In my own games as a rogue pc I certainly had more money than anyone else in the party partly because when they had down time I pulled jobs. Eventually it turned into maybe 3-4 rolls.
|
Not all rogues are thieves unfortunately. Most peoples complaint about the rogue usually tend to be about the difficulty of getting a sneak attack off enough to be proportionately as powerful in combat as other characters, and though an increase in wealth might help with that, I do not see that being the answer.
Well rogues can easily have an excellent UMD, wands are cheap I think it can. Rogue with a handy haversack can basically become a low level utility caster and with any sort of preparation buff up.
I also didn't say its do to being a thief per-se. Burgling seems the easiest but also passing along secrets uncovered, negotiating better prices, having secret connections there's tons of ways to justify a rogues extra income.
The complaint I think is skill monkey got taken by bard, sneak attack damage but you know better got taken by vivisectionist, any cha based character can be better at party face, most people don't bother with traps, so what makes the rogue special?
Resources are important if the rogue has more that's their schtick.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
At the end of the day what is a rogue? Someone with the skill and motivation to make money dishonestly.
I was referring to this. That is an over simplification, there are investigators, spies, scouts ect. Even still they are not the only ones capable of having an increase in resources, having any craft will accomplish the same thing so now they are still left wanting as a class.
The Vivisectionist and the Bard Detective are only archetypes though they do take some of the best parts of being a rogue{sneak attack/disabling magical traps}, but they are not either one of them alone better than a rogue. The best ways to improve your rogue is to take your own archetypes, which there are many, to play the specific type of rogue you want to be.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
At the end of the day what is a rogue? Someone with the skill and motivation to make money dishonestly.
Probably the biggest generalization, and misrepresentation since the beginning of the Game, when it was called the Thief class.
I see the problem with the rogue, as not the lack of combat power, or lack of wealth to buy magic do-dads. It is not the rogue's primary function to be a warrior or a magic user. They have enough talent and physical ability to do some of each, but they will rarely shine at it. What a rogue is meant to do, is be the problem solver, the fixer, the finder of secrets. With the current skills system, what used to be the primary domain of the Rogue/Thief class, can now be done by anyone.
Granted, the rogue can usually do their Class Skills better than anyone else. But if the ranger or barbarian can Disable Device just good enough to get by, most of the time...the need for a rogue in the party really is negated. Almost any class can find a trap now, and almost anyone can figure out how to open a lock, without a rogue. So, the rogue no longer has a niche, that it once held almost by himself.
Want to make the rogue more relevant? Make the DC's for finding and disarming trap higher. Makes locks more difficult, and unable to be McGuyvered open. Make the Perception of monsters and guards higher. Then give more bonuses to the Rogue class that other classes cannot have. Create more situations where the Rogue's skills are needed. And do not make these skills available to another class that takes a 2 or 3 level Dip into rogue to "steal" these skills.
Make the rogue necessary for the party to accomplish its missions, and the worry about power will no longer be much of an issue. Just give them a role that they can fill, that cannot be filled well by any other class.
That wouldn't fix the issue.
Making everything harder so the Rogue is artificially more effective is exactly the wrong thing to do.
Ah we're going to get into semantics. ignore the wording interpret the class as you wish mostly rogues are still spies and thieves, mostly they have flexible morals and connections to criminal elements. They don't need to but whatever. A quick and dirty fix to their mechanical weakness is better equipment using the wealth by level tables and it makes sense with the fluff.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem with that approach, Dakota Strider, is three-fold.
First: It necessitates a Rogue to deal with traps/locks at all, thus locking a party slot that should be wide open for flexible choice among players.
Every group can be different. If there is a party without a rogue, a GM has the option to lower the DC's on obstacles, to give other characters a chance to fill the void. I would suggest lowering the reward for bypassing these lower DC obstacles however, as to give a reason to have a rogue along.
Second: It necessitates the frequent use of traps and locks that the Rogue has to deal with in order to arbitrarily give the Rogue this purpose.
Once again a matter of style and all GM's have the option of personal flexibility for how many they wish to include. However, every other class are given the chance to shine throughout an adventure or campaign. I do not see a reason that other classes cannot allow the rogue a chance to do his thing as well.
Third: by increasing the DC's, not only are you necessitating a Rogue and necessitating these traps/locks, but you're also decreasing a Rogue's odds of success compared to RAW, which means these Rogues you're promoting are suddenly more likely to get zapped/fried/shanked on a failed attempt.
It would force the Rogue to actually concentrate on maxing these skills, to excel at them, rather than just enough to be average, as any other class could be. And reward them for making this effort. Low Risk = Low Reward. High Risk = High Reward. And getting zapped/fried/shanked is part of the occupational risk that a rogue should expect when he takes a job. A fighter does not engage an opponent, not thinking they are going to come through unscathed, do they?
Honestly, the concept of a 'thief class' for bypassing this kind of problem should have died a long time ago.
If your party believes this, then they certainly have the option to allow all classes to use rogue-type skills with almost the same proficiency as the party's rogue. But then if the party's rogue feels like he is not getting a chance to do as much as the rest of the party, and feels under-powered, you will know what the cause is.
Trap Sense that increases with level is fine, but I think the Rogue should have bonuses to Disable Device and Stealth that increase with level as well.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I learned anything from playing Skyrim it's that the easiest way to fix any power problem rogues might have is simply removing the 30 ft. range limit on sneak attack. :D
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So a rogue is mostly spies and thieves with flexible morals and criminal connections.....
Generalizations like this stem from people's perceptions of what they see in THEIR gaming groups, not what is the norm all around. If you perceive that Rogues are like that in your game then perhaps the fix you suggest would work great....as a houserule for YOUR group.
My group never has a problem with rogues being underpowered, underfunded, unable to get a sneak attack, or not contributing enough to the group, and more than half the time they are not a criminal working with the party. They are the acrobatic, dexterous investigator. They are the former locksmith who grew up building locks and traps in the dwarven underforge. Sometimes they are the sneaky cutpurse and the backstabbing shadow but that is so overplayed that my group tends to find other ways to play the class and the other classes in general.
The easiest way to fix the rogue is to tell the player to roll a ninja instead.
If you perceive that Rogues are like that in your game then perhaps the fix you suggest would work great....as a houserule for YOUR group.
[me]Double checks[/me] yep this is indeed the Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew section of the forums...
Life is an endless adventure for those who live by their wits. Ever just one step ahead of danger, rogues bank on their cunning, skill, and charm to bend fate to their favor. Never knowing what to expect, they prepare for everything, becoming masters of a wide variety of skills, training themselves to be adept manipulators, agile acrobats, shadowy stalkers, or masters of any of dozens of other professions or talents. Thieves and gamblers, fast talkers and diplomats, bandits and bounty hunters, and explorers and investigators all might be considered rogues, as well as countless other professions that rely upon wits, prowess, or luck. Although many rogues favor cities and the innumerable opportunities of civilization, some embrace lives on the road, journeying far, meeting exotic people, and facing fantastic danger in pursuit of equally fantastic riches. In the end, any who desire to shape their fates and live life on their own terms might come to be called rogues.
Lets pull some key words for those butt-hurt about my statement about rogues having the skill and motivation to make money dishonestly.
Skill- pretty much all of this:
"live by their wits. Ever just one step ahead of danger, rogues bank on their cunning, skill, and charm to bend fate to their favor. Never knowing what to expect, they prepare for everything, becoming masters of a wide variety of skills, training themselves to be adept manipulators, agile acrobats, shadowy stalkers, or masters of any of dozens of other professions or talents. Thieves and gamblers, fast talkers and diplomats, bandits and bounty hunters, and explorers and investigators all might be considered rogues, as well as countless other professions that rely upon wits, prowess, or luck."
Motivation- "facing fantastic danger in pursuit of equally fantastic riches. In the end, any who desire to shape their fates and live life on their own terms might come to be called rogues."
Some definitions of the word rogue for those too lazy to google
"A dishonest or unprincipled man."
"An unprincipled, deceitful, and unreliable person; a scoundrel or rascal. 2. One who is playfully mischievous; a scamp. 3. A wandering beggar; a vagrant."
"Definition of ROGUE
1: vagrant, tramp
2: a dishonest or worthless person : scoundrel
3: a mischievous person : scamp
4: a horse inclined to shirk or misbehave
5: an individual exhibiting a chance and usually inferior biological variation "
So can we move on from semantics...
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your Definition of Rogue might fit in the Webster's dictionary, but as I mentioned before there are many archetypes to a rogue. Even still I am not "butthurt" my butt is fine thank you. You may be butthurt that no one agrees with your attempt to pigeonhole all stealth types as dishonest.
English words still mean what they mean, decimatated still means to destroy or kill 10% despite how many people want to misuse the word, for example. Rogue is a word in English has a meaning, I cited 3 sources to back it up and a link.
The second quote (where I ask that we drop the semantics discussion for the 2nd time, which everyone casually ignores) is the copy pasted from the srd which lines up pretty well with the English definition of the the word rogue.
I'm all for noble antihero rogue characters, but theclass implies a disregard for the law and the general principals of society. I like rogues they are fun to play but mechanically they have become a little on the weak side, this was a suggestion as a fix that doesn't require overhauling the class as written.
But, as always, when discussing anything, we have to turn this into an arguement of semantics... I don't want a flame war. I was suggesting a fix for the rogue mechanically. If you don't like it fine, you don't have to, but rather than focus on the part where I suggest the rogue obtains extra wealth per level thru dishonest means why don't you back up why mechanically having 1.5 times the resources as every other class doesn't address the mechanical issues of the class.
I'm all for discussion on the topic but lets stay on topic for once. Notice the topic isn't "Lets argue about the fluff aspects of the rogue class and over analyize every word in eachother's posts."
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Notice the topic isn't "Lets argue about the fluff aspects of the rogue class and over analyize every word in eachother's posts."
You are attempting to make fluff a mechanical aspect regardless of what you title it. You want to give rogues more loot since they are supposed to be dishonest and motivated toward crime in your view.
Here is a list of possible rogue archetypes any of which would not fit your description
Acrobat
Chameleon
Driver
Investigator
Sanctified Rogue
Scout
Survivalist
Trapsmith
If you profess to "fix" the Rogue class you will have to include them.
I like rogues: all those skills, the UMD possibility, and some interesting feat from ultimate combat..my rogue player loves Betrayer and have a lot of fun with the great number of skills rogues have. I tried to help him in combat with a homerules:
- HD qualify him for critical feats instead of BAB
When I think about rogues I think them as masters of critical hits (SA is precision damage).. in this way i let him the use of those interesting feats.
Combine this with Sneaking Precision and have fun :)
My player (and me too) have a lot of fun playing a rogue.. it could probably be less powered than a ninja but what's the problem?? when i introduced Ultimate Combat I asked him if he want to switch for a ninja but he has fun with his character. As dm i often create encounters tied for him, that require some skills, or that start with the use of betrayer..
I probably try to let him maximize SA damage on critical hits.. but atm i'm not sure..
I said HD cause he play a rogue without multiclass.. the idea is that Rogue Levels qualify him for critical feats..
|
there's really no need to fix the Rogue. Yes other classes can perform Rogue-like (though they will never be AS GOOD. Purely because of the Rogue Bennie for levels.)
The problem there is they aren't being used as effectively in what they are good at. So they are sacrificing something that the party could enjoy to be a slightly lesser rogue. Im ok with that.
I don't want a party to say 'We have to have a Wizard A Fighter A Cleric and a Rogue.'
I want them to say "Lets do a Cavalier, a Witch, A Bard and an Inquisitor" and have tem have a chance at playing effectively.
There is no reason for 'equality' in the classes. There's every reason some should be inferior in one way or another to each other.
my 2 cents.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes. Having classes that are inferior in some ways and better than others IS equality.
Having classes be inferior in some ways and even more inferior than others is not equal. It is not balanced. And it is not desired in a game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Rephrased, some may desire it, but it is not the desired outcome when designing a game in my opinion.
|
addressing the 'skill dip = instant mastery' issue:
Let there be 3 tiers of Skill Mastery:
1) Class Skill in every class the character possesses
2) Class Skill in at least one class the character possesses
3) Not a Class Skill in any class the character possesses
1) May invest up to 1 Rank per character level (max 20 ranks); gains the +3 Class Skill bonus
2) May invest up to 1 Rank per 2 character levels (max 10 ranks); gains the +3 Class Skill bonus
3) May invest up to 1 Rank per 2 character levels (max 10 ranks); does not gain the +3 Class Skill bonus
If your having rogue problems,
I feel bad for you son.
I got ninety nine problems,
but the rogue ain't one.
If your having rogue problems,
I feel bad for you son.
I got ninety nine problems,
but the rogue ain't one.
Well of course he's not a problem.
He can't even kill zombies effectively.
Huehuehuehuehue
addressing the 'skill dip = instant mastery' issue:
Let there be 3 tiers of Skill Mastery:
1) Class Skill in every class the character possesses
2) Class Skill in at least one class the character possesses
3) Not a Class Skill in any class the character possesses1) May invest up to 1 Rank per character level (max 20 ranks); gains the +3 Class Skill bonus
2) May invest up to 1 Rank per 2 character levels (max 10 ranks); gains the +3 Class Skill bonus
3) May invest up to 1 Rank per 2 character levels (max 10 ranks); does not gain the +3 Class Skill bonus
so, to buff the rogue, we have to nerf non rogues and make multiclassing a pain in the arse.
PF already discourages multiclassing. there needs to be at least some multiclass friendly incentive. the guy who did the skill dip delayed his primary class a whole level to gain a class skill he didn't have.
the half rank stuff is BS that needed to go and further shoehorns classes into specific predertimined roles.
now the fighter can't have decent social skills anymore nor be a decent tactician.
now the bard is trait taxed to be a viable trapfinder
this is one of the things pathfinder tried to remove. don't just add it back in to enforce the need to play a rogue.
allow rogueless parties to compensate. don't penalize them for not having a rogue.
Easy fix for rogues is simply ban wizards, so people stop saying that they can do everything better.
Easy fix for rogues is simply ban wizards, so people stop saying that they can do everything better.
You'd have to ban Druids and Clerics and Witches and Magi and Rangers and Alchemists and Bards too.
And if you're banning a solid 1/3 of classes that can do what the Rogue can do and more, you're better off just admitting there's an issue with the Rogue and stop holding up the "healing" process.
To chime in about the definition: the dictionary definition of 'rogue' is irrelevant when the term 'rogue' as used within the system is already defined within the system itself. We already have a specific denotation of what rogue is supposed to represent; it's in the core.
But personally I think the idea of 'one class handles skills' is just bad design; it means that when you're using skills, everyone else just checks out, and then the rogue does the same in combat. It results in, at best, many members of the group simply being unable to contribute to important parts of the game. (Ignoring whether or not the rogue is /successful/ in it, that's how it works if it works properly.)
So I'd be inclined to just buff their combat capability a bit through the BAB adjustment mentioned. The rogue can be an opportunistic combatant and not be /bad/ at being an opportunistic combatant. They don't have to be 'the best', they just need to be a viable option that can meaningfully reflect the archetypes they're supposed to be able to reflect.
Easy fix for rogues is simply ban wizards, so people stop saying that they can do everything better.You'd have to ban Druids and Clerics and Witches and Magi and Rangers and Alchemists and Bards too.
And if you're banning a solid 1/3 of classes that can do what the Rogue can do and more, you're better off just admitting there's an issue with the Rogue and stop holding up the "healing" process.
Not all full casters do everything a rogue does really, not to the extent a wizard does, spontaneous casters do not have the amount of flexibility needed, others have a far less impressive spell list to match the wizard's utility.
I do not consider it to be much of a flaw with the rogue as it is the system that makes you a bottom tier character if you don't cast spells. If you want to fix the rogue fix the casting classes or make everyone a caster.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
addressing the 'skill dip = instant mastery' issue:
Let there be 3 tiers of Skill Mastery:
1) Class Skill in every class the character possesses
2) Class Skill in at least one class the character possesses
3) Not a Class Skill in any class the character possesses1) May invest up to 1 Rank per character level (max 20 ranks); gains the +3 Class Skill bonus
2) May invest up to 1 Rank per 2 character levels (max 10 ranks); gains the +3 Class Skill bonus
3) May invest up to 1 Rank per 2 character levels (max 10 ranks); does not gain the +3 Class Skill bonus
I take two levels in ranger and put a ranks in stealth both times. Then I take a level in fighter, which does not have stealth as a class skill. Since I have three levels, I am only allowed to have one rank in skills that aren't class skills for both my classes, so I am no longer allowed to have two ranks in stealth. Does my extra rank just disappear?
I have suggested this in other Rogue discussions before, but if your goal is to make rogues the ultimate skill monkey, then these are among the easiest routes:
1. The class skill bonus for trained skills is +5 for a rogue, instead of +3.
OR
2. Rogues add one-half their level to trained class skills, or the normal +3 bonus for trained class skills, whichever is higher. Abilities like trapfinding would apply the rogue's full level, instead of half his level, if he is trained in Perception and/or Disable Device.
AND/OR
3. Give rogues "Jack-of-all-trades" as a rogue talent.
Rogues already get some rogue talents that uniquely alter the way they use skills compared to other classes. So they are already have that going for them.
To be honest, I never really saw an issue with rogues. In almost every game I've played in, someone has been a rogue, but not once have they complained about it, outshined/undershined any other character, or played the stereotypical thief. All of the rogues I have played with have been very flavorful and well-received. Although, my friends and I don't play to munchkin our characters, we play to roleplay. We may be weird like that.
Only if we can give them a Sonic Boom power.Here is the way I would fix rogues.
Combine the ninja class and the rogue class to make... the rogue! Instead of a Ki pool, call it Guile. Done.
And every time their initiative comes up, music plays. That music just happens to work with everything, so it sometimes plays when its not their initiative too.
Not all full casters do everything a rogue does really, not to the extent a wizard does, spontaneous casters do not have the amount of flexibility needed, others have a far less impressive spell list to match the wizard's utility.
I had a whole big post typed up and the forum ate it. Here's the gist of it:
Most of those classes (bar Cleric, the least of those) can do what the Rogue does WITHOUT their spells. The Rogue is basically "skill guy + some situational damage".
Magus and Alchemist are Int casters. They get a lot of skills. On top of that, they can both do a solid chunk of damage when they want to. Alchemists can even get Sneak Attack, and BOTH can turn invisble if they need to.
Bard and Ranger are only behind by 2 skills a level. BUT the Ranger is much better in combat, and the Bard's Versatile Performance nearly doubles his EFFECTIVE skill points far beyond what the Rogue can get, and his Bardic Performances and buff spells make him a super good force multiplier to everyone else on the field.
Druid Wild Shape lets him go unnoticed and unnoticeable through pretty much any area. When was the last time you heard "Catch the pigeon!" shouted by an Orc, rather than "Catch that Rogue!"?
I do not consider it to be much of a flaw with the rogue as it is the system that makes you a bottom tier character if you don't cast spells. If you want to fix the rogue fix the casting classes or make everyone a caster.
But as I stated, most of those classes can match or exceed the Rogue WITHOUT factoring in their spells.
Much like the Fighter, he has a niche, and is good at that niche. For Fighter it's "hittin' stuff" and for Rogue it's "doing Rogue-y things".
Problem being that BOTH are niches other classes can fill while still doing other things just as effectively.
They're both fun classes, but they need extreme levels of effort to make well rounded without sacrificing anything to a significant degree, whereas other classes can do it with little to no effort required.
I've toyed with the idea of combining the two actually. Rogue would shore up Fighter's weakness (having skills) and Fighter would shore up Rogue's weakness (actually hitting things and doing damage). Would make the class more of a hard-hitting tactician character, greater than the sum of their parts.
Would IMO need something more unique to give it an identity of its own, but would fix most of the mechanical issues I think.
I've toyed with the idea of combining the two actually. Rogue would shore up Fighter's weakness (having skills) and Fighter would shore up Rogue's weakness (actually hitting things and doing damage).
Monte Cook sort of was heading in this direction with his Unfettered class, but didn't take it nearly far enough, and his Magister was better than a wizard, so the martials and skill guys got even more screwed in those rules.
On the subject of combining Ninja and Rogue into one class... I actually think thats the most legitimate idea I've yet heard. Giving rogues Poison Use and a pool of points (no longer called ki) to increase their stealth ability and do other things I think would solve a lot of their issues without getting into the ballpark of overcompensating.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also:
The regular Talents are mostly garbage.
The Advanced Talents should mostly just be regular Talents.
There should be new, better Advanced Talents.
Actually the rogue is not underpowered. The rogues problem is that now there are a couple of classes that with the right archetypes- can almost outdo the skill monkey rogue at his own game.
Add to that the fact that Adventure paths no longer are filled with Gygaxian traps, and the poor rogue is out of a job. He's still cool and fun, but he no longer has his special niche to himself.
My fix? Easier than many have tried, and Roberta makes my point:. The "once a day" Talents would be boosted to 3+ DEX or INT bonus per day, just like Wizard, etc abilities. Heck with this a rogue might even take now useless talents like Hard to Fool.
This way the rogue can use Resiliency or Defensive Roll or several others more often. See, that's the rogues real problem in combat. Generally, in order to line themselves up for a good FAO Sneak attack- they have to allow the monster to strike back with a FAO- and then the rogue is squished like a bug.
If they could stay there for another round, they'd do double damage.
Oh, and Powerful Sneak needs to be rewritten:
Powerful Sneak** (Ex): Whenever a rogue with this talent takes a full attack action and an attack during this time is a sneak attack, he treats all 1s on the sneak attack damage dice as 2s.
See, one thing a rogue has going for it is Talents. Some of the talents are great (Bleeding attack) but others are meh to worthless.
And this does not require a complete rewrite, something that isn;t going to happen for a long time. That's one thing that many of you forget- Piazo simply isn't going to do a rewrite of anything. They will errata, FAQ or even do a small fix. Thus anything suggested for a fix anytime in the nest few years will have to be limited to these.
Actually the rogue is not underpowered. The rogues problem is that now there are a couple of classes that with the right archetypes- can almost outdo the skill monkey rogue at his own game.
Add to that the fact that Adventure paths no longer are filled with Gygaxian traps, and the poor rogue is out of a job. He's still cool and fun, but he no longer has his special niche to himself.
Even if he has a traps as a niche... that is a really bad and limited "niche."
The game has to have traps in order for the rogue to feel fulfilled. As someone mentioend in a previous comment, either the rogue is an absolute necessity because he is the only one that can deal with traps, or make him worthless because there are either no traps or other classes can deal with them just fine.