Barbarian am wielding courageous weapon. Morale am better. Touch AC and saves am better. Barbarian am having many tricks to make self better. Puny fighter not even as smart as barbarian! Look at skill points.
... I'm not so good at speaking am. Barbarians have the option to wield a courageous/furious weapon to get a +2 to all of their morale bonuses. They also happen to be better at being smart because they get more than 2 per level. 2 per level is an incentive to dump if you don't use the intellect for other things. Superstitious is a very powerful rage power chain that gives them scary good touch AC, extra damage against almost all foes, and saves through the roof. Those are mostly morale bonuses too.
The pounce gig is actually very important. Giving up two attacks, even if they hit less is still giving up two attacks. He can easily get four natural attacks too. Barbarians have many options and builds. Why are we talking about them in a thread about rogues?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why are we talking about them in a thread about rogues?
Because rogues make me sad :(
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
oh hells yes, add a RageLancePounce discussion to this
let's throw in some Chaotic Good Paladin discussion, charm person morality issues and the monk class just to make it even more of a tire fire than it already is
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
oh hells yes, add a RageLancePounce discussion to this
let's throw in some Chaotic Good Paladin discussion, charm person morality issues and the monk class just to make it even more of a tire fire than it already is
Don't forget healthy doses of player entitlement. That's always fun.
Why are we talking about them in a thread about rogues?Because rogues make me sad :(
Really? Thought rouge made people pretty.
Well we'll try and make you happy. Nice thing about the forum is that if you have trouble with one thing you get 100s of options if you ask. Hence people pointing you towards bards. Nothing malevolent, just people wanting to be helpful.
Barbarian is actually the least likely to be mind controlled out of the martial classes w/o a good base will save. Rage alone is giving a bonus, and many barbs tend to go for superstitious, which makes saves quite high. And there are rage powers to reroll a save. I'd be far more concerned with the Fighter, Ranger, or Rogue getting converted to the enemy side than a Barbarian...unless they hit the barb before he can rage.
|
Ultimately depends on the GM. With an adventure contains little in the way of combat then a skill monkey rogue would be a better character choice than a raging lance wielding barbarian on a giant cat. Last campaign we played was combat-lite and the trip expert found that tripping people as a joke was most useful thing about his build. Now some may say the GM was bad and evil for invalidating the trip-build but I would like to rise two points;
(1) The player knew ahead of time the tone of the game but still chose to be a one trick combat pony.
(2) That aside is a game that invalidates a combat build any worse than one that invalidates a skill monkey build?
S.
oh hells yes, add a RageLancePounce discussion to this
let's throw in some Chaotic Good Paladin discussion, charm person morality issues and the monk class just to make it even more of a tire fire than it already is
RageLancePounce is ridiculous meta gaming;
Monks is used to poke fun at certain skill monkey builds;DM shouldn't make skill monkeys invalid to play; player entitlement
Paladins hit slightly better than a rogue and would never RageLancePounce enemies to death, that means they can't be chaotic. They also follow a personal code. Chaotic characters have to make moral decision based on their gut alone. Logical thought is reserved for neutral and lawful aligned players.
Atonement states that it is free if one accidentally breaks their behavior class restrictions meaning charm person can make a paladin lose their class features and possibly alignment, if atonement can restore alignment changes.
Could Monk be the stealthy two weapon fighter we have been looking for?
godspeed
I picture you as slim pickens riding that bomb to its destination while wildly waving your hat
... I... don't know what to say to most of that. I think you hit most of the bases.
Monks do best with one sword oddly enough. They can use one sword really well. So well they get two weapon fighting for free, with one sword.
|
|
Combat doesn't invalidate skills. Instant skill success magic invalidates skills.Ultimately depends on the GM. With an adventure contains little in the way of combat then a skill monkey rogue would be a better character choice than a raging lance wielding barbarian on a giant cat. Last campaign we played was combat-lite and the trip expert found that tripping people as a joke was most useful thing about his build. Now some may say the GM was bad and evil for invalidating the trip-build but I would like to rise two points;
(1) The player knew ahead of time the tone of the game but still chose to be a one trick combat pony.
(2) That aside is a game that invalidates a combat build any worse than one that invalidates a skill monkey build?
S.
Which comes down to pacing. Skills are always 'on' magic is a resource. Of course I'm not saying the PF hasn't made taxing spells as a resource very, very difficult. But it seems players can't play without having their cake and eating it too in the 21st century...
This thread has ADD. It has gone from rogues to bards, back to rogues, to rangers, back to rogues, to ninjas, back to rogues, and now onto barbarians.
You forgot the part about wizards.
1st paragraph:Seems kinda risky. I don't think rogues were intended to do that anymore than a monk was.
2nd paragraph: I asked that question because you said "They are about... leading enemies away from groups..." To me that reads as they were "made to ..." or "they are intended to..."
If a class is made or intended to do something it only makes sense that they should be better at it than another class. As an example paladins are made to do hit point damage to evil things, and a smiting paladin is difficult to out DPR, when fighting something that is evil.Now if you had said "rogues are good at...", I only would have asked you to describe how they are good at it.
Rogues are great at... I would say sneak attack, but a ninja is better. They can take 10 on UMD checks before anyone else with skill-mastery. So rogues would be good at skills right???????? Oh wait no they're not, that's a bard.
Oh they get evasion and uncanny dodge. THERE rogues are good at avoiding things like me playing one.
That is invalid. Rogues are good at skills. Skills just dont do too much as a whole so it does not matter much, that they are good at skills.
What was a Barbarian Created For? Killing things and being tough.
Is he the best?NO. He's a glass Cannon that gets Mindcontrolled and aimed at his own party.
Not my barbarians.
Katanas are the highest DPR weapon on the ninja's proficiency list. Plus you can use them with 2 hands and get 1.5x your Str bonus on them.Oh God in Heaven, no. Never. Katanas are basically crap, at least until modern metal was invented and the Japanese got ahold of it. Please do us all a favor and stay the heck away from cliches, they suck!Making the katana finessable would also be a nice addition for rogues. Give me a finessable agile katana, wielded in 2 hands with 18 base Dex and I'd be a happy camper, errr ninja.
Instead I have to waste a feat to get proficiency with the Elven Curved Blade or play a race I don't want to play.
What you were basically saying is that you wanted to pour on the cheese to a class that is already queso as all heck, by taking their best weapon and making it better via a feat. Me, I replied with stating that "katanas are the ultimate weapon" is NOT a good idea, because the cliche is inaccurate and also a damned cliche that refuses to die.
Wait ninjas/rogues are cheesy? HOW!?
The biggest problem with Rogues and combat is this belief that 18 Dex is a 'Good thing' and that Finesse is really 'all that'.
For a Rogue, more than a 14 Dex is a bit of an indulgence and is a waste of stats big time.
Str is where it is at for Rogues; finesse all you want, when your hits land they will be a joke. 10 or 12 Str on a Rogue? What a waste of time, will only lead to feelings of inadequacy and ineffectiveness.
Especially important when swinging a Katana (and no, it shouldn't be finessable, thats not how they work)
|
Whoah. I opted out of slamming Rogues over, and over here but...
Glass Cannon Barbarians?!?
You have to build around that, to make it so.
Invulnerable Rager? D12 HD? Superstition?
The list goes on, and on, to make Barbarians very hard to kill.
Hell, Barbarian even does the Dex based fighting better, with
Urban Barbarian.
Glass cannon my arse.
This is a thread about useless rogues, not pouncing barbarians.
This is a thread about useless rogues, not pouncing barbarians.
I'll allow it. Pouncing Barbar help make the rogue useless.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That is invalid. Rogues are good at skills. Skills just dont do too much as a whole so it does not matter much, that they are good at skills.Unless your campaign is a combat-lite game focusing on roleplaying & skills...
In which case the bard runs rings around the rogue and makes him cry, the ranger takes the group to a wilderness sidequest so he can take his turn shaming the rogue and the alchemist decides to be a sneaky vivisectionist assassin and shows the rogue what a real alpha strke is like and how to make poisons awesome.
The biggest problem with Rogues and combat is this belief that 18 Dex is a 'Good thing' and that Finesse is really 'all that'.
For a Rogue, more than a 14 Dex is a bit of an indulgence and is a waste of stats big time.
Str is where it is at for Rogues; finesse all you want, when your hits land they will be a joke. 10 or 12 Str on a Rogue? What a waste of time, will only lead to feelings of inadequacy and ineffectiveness.
I don't know....
I find their REAL damage comes in with Sneak attack... which I needed to be flanking to get... which I needed acrobatics a LOT to get in place for...
I was pretty glad to have my high Dex quite a few times in serpent skull...
There IS a quality for a weapon that lets you use dex for damage...thus taking str right out of the equation. That was nice, but it didn't show up until I was about 15th level, so it wasn't as useful as I'd hoped.
Why hasn't anyone petitioned paizo for a new rogue re-write? The ninja was a step in the right direction, but too little/ too late.
That is invalid. Rogues are good at skills. Skills just dont do too much as a whole so it does not matter much, that they are good at skills.Unless your campaign is a combat-lite game focusing on roleplaying & skills...
Combat and roleplay have no relation with each other.
1- You can simply say "I roll Diplomacy to convince the guard to let me in" and be done with it. It's boring, but it's legal. No roleplay whatsoever.
2- You can role play during combat! You can taunt your enemies, ask for help from one of your allies or sacrifice yourself to protect a friend. Each and every decision you take based on your character's personality and perspective is role play.
Now, many people who prefer "roll play" will play games more focused on combat. But that doesn't mean combat and role play are incompatible.
In fact, I dare say that a player who stays in character and role plays during combat is a lot more interested than one who only does it in Charisma-based skill checks.
Remember, people, just because the dice are rolling, it doesn't mean your PC has to turn off her personality!
Gasp What do you do about the dreaded control feedback loop? (This is fun :P)
Remember, people, just because the dice are rolling, it doesn't mean your PC has to turn off her personality!
0_0 Oh my. This is happening in my tomorrows session. Role play in combat? What a novel idea. I normally get bored in combat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I try to do battle banter. My local PFS groups shush me when I do it though. Always bothered me when someone would tell me I can't do a battle cry. That's like, 30ish percent of the job of being a hero.
Why hasn't anyone petitioned paizo for a new rogue re-write? The ninja was a step in the right direction, but too little/ too late.
Rogue and Monk have both been requested. A lot.
It's not going to happen. I have little confidence they'd actually fix things even if they did deign to do so, anyway.
Hell, they actually nerfed the ninja from playtest to final release, even though either version was still barely better than rogue and still had massive unresolved problems.
|
|
0_0 Oh my. This is happening in my tomorrows session. Role play in combat? What a novel idea. I normally get bored in combat.Gasp What do you do about the dreaded control feedback loop? (This is fun :P)
Remember, people, just because the dice are rolling, it doesn't mean your PC has to turn off her personality!
I do this in combat, but it is hit and miss with different groups.
Even the most avid roleplayers in my groups will sometimes stare blankly, or fiddle with their phones when combat happens.
This is even more likely, when they are using dice apps on their phones(I despise these things).
To get this going, it best if the DM keeps with it.
The level of the roleplay in combat is drastically changed, depending on the DM's participation.
That is invalid. Rogues are good at skills. Skills just dont do too much as a whole so it does not matter much, that they are good at skills.Unless your campaign is a combat-lite game focusing on roleplaying & skills...
I can't account for everyone's game. :)
|
|
I try to do battle banter. My local PFS groups shush me when I do it though. Always bothered me when someone would tell me I can't do a battle cry. That's like, 30ish percent of the job of being a hero.
I would play up how stone-faced and emotionless your PC was during combat.
Really play it up though. Note how your PC yawns, as he/she attacks the enemy.
All is fair in love and war.
Why hasn't anyone petitioned paizo for a new rogue re-write? The ninja was a step in the right direction, but too little/ too late.Rogue and Monk have both been requested. A lot.
It's not going to happen. I have little confidence they'd actually fix things even if they did deign to do so, anyway.
Hell, they actually nerfed the ninja from playtest to final release, even though either version was still barely better than rogue and still had massive unresolved problems.
They will not sadly, as far as I know and I've been told by others. I've seen some weird statements about all sorts of things. What makes me saddest is when balance gets thrown to the side. Monk got a kind of almost a buff... almost. I didn't know ninja got nerfed, I don't know why it would need a nerf either. I've been stuck piling the house rules myself when I can. Ina PFS setting you just have to compromise with RAW and do what you can though.
I try to do battle banter. My local PFS groups shush me when I do it though. Always bothered me when someone would tell me I can't do a battle cry. That's like, 30ish percent of the job of being a hero.I would play up how stone-faced and emotionless your PC was during combat.
Really play it up though. Note how your PC yawns, as he/she attacks the enemy.
All is fair in love and war.
Lol, maybe. Wear a mask of stoney demeanor while I do it. Yawn with every dice toss. "Gosh... Yeah..." stretch my arms and make loud annoying comments in a monotone bored voice. I'm not so mean. I'll do what my brother does and shush them back. Its my character anyway.
Edit: gosh this post was a mess and I'm not sure how to clean it up nicely...
I don't know....I find their REAL damage comes in with Sneak attack... which I needed to be flanking to get... which I needed acrobatics a LOT to get in place for...
Yeah but your Acrobatics is pretty easy to trick out, an 18 Dex and a 14 Dex is only a modifier of 2, for something you will use here and there, whereas the difference between a 10 Str and an 14 Str is +2 to hit and +3 on damage that you will be rolling over and over every single combat round, AND it will make your Sneak attack even better.
Crank that STR to 18 and watch the sheer wanton destruction.The Dex may or may not help you position, the High Str works all the time AND works WITH your Sneak attack (whilst at the same time removing some of your reliance on it).
The 'Rogues need high dex' mindset is stuck in AD&D and 2nd Ed, and that old paradigm being adhered to is a significant part of the problem we see players with at the table.
18 Str, 14 Dex... all you'll ever need to bring the Pain Train.
So half-orc with a great axe is an optimum rogue.
That is about as wrong as RageLancePounce. Who is the high dex fighter? Who is the two-weapon-fighter? In 3.5 this was the rogue. Not so in Pathfinder.
High dex should be a thing that people can do.
So half-orc with a great axe is an optimum rogue.
That is about as wrong as RageLancePounce. Who is the high dex fighter? Who is the two-weapon-fighter? In 3.5 this was the rogue. Not so in Pathfinder.
High dex should be a thing that people can do.
Only characters with bonus feats could do two weapon fighting well in 3.5 because it was so demanding. You need a lot of bonus damage on both weapons to beat someone using a 2h still too, which usually wouldn't happen. Not too different in pathfinder.
Half-Orc is the best rogue because no one ever saw a sneak attack with a great axe to the face coming.
|
|
In which case the bard runs rings around the rogue and makes him cry, the ranger takes the group to a wilderness sidequest so he can take his turn shaming the rogue and the alchemist decides to be a sneaky vivisectionist assassin and shows the rogue what a real alpha strke is like and how to make poisons awesome.
That is invalid. Rogues are good at skills. Skills just dont do too much as a whole so it does not matter much, that they are good at skills.Unless your campaign is a combat-lite game focusing on roleplaying & skills...
How exactly does a Bard or any class for that matter run rings around another in a roleplaying encounter? In a rollplaying encounter perhaps you are right however.
For me the Rogue as a whole is a interesting class and I have thought of numerous characters on which the Rogue class fits the concept better than any other class. If my GM is worth there pay then my 'character concept' will be no more or less invalidated than anyone else's.
S.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Rogues should be musclebound hulks with middling Dex" is a better argument that the rogue class's design is horribly broken than anything I could possibly come up with. Good one Shifty.
On what planet is 14 a 'midling Dex'?
Who said you "should be"?, less hysteria, more what's written, cheers.
Sorry, but your 18 Dex is a diminishing return when weighed against the set of combat mechanics in Pathfinder.
No one says you can't have an 18 Dex, but the reality is that you will (unless you focus on a very specific set of builds out there) generally not find yourself hitting all that hard, and if this is going to make you all sad in the pants then you should probably avoid it...which is important if you want a COMBAT ROGUE (of course there are other varieties, if they are what you want to play instead - see look choice ermergerd!)
Rogues work JUST FINE, but if it's combat you are after, then you are shaping your Rogue a certain way.
Thats how it is Roberta.
8 being low and 18 being high; I'd call 14 middling.
Rogues work fine. They just don't stack up very well. You go for the 18 dex and finesse because ideally you can dump some strength(which has little use and which is most replaced...). The sneak attack dice should make up for some of the damage loss and you hit more, which is pretty important and one of the problems with the rogue is when he just can't land a hit.
So what rogue should I play, if the skill rogue is useless and the combat rogue is meh?
8 being low and 18 being high; I'd call 14 middling.
Rogues work fine. They just don't stack up very well. You go for the 18 dex and finesse because ideally you can dump some strength(which has little use and which is most replaced...). The sneak attack dice should make up for some of the damage loss and you hit more, which is pretty important and one of the problems with the rogue is when he just can't land a hit.
So what rogue should I play, if the skill rogue is useless and the combat rogue is meh?
Oh I know this one! BARD! No really it fits the character concept. If you think it doesn't that is because you are close-minded and unimaginative.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Except a '14' isn't just a '14' is it? Not all 14's are equal.
Think about it, take all the time you'd like.
Rogues work well in certain themes, but each theme has it's trade offs and you pick the flavour you like. This sort of bears out in traditional Rogue tropes when you consider it from the persepctive of a Thieves Guild.
Are you the Guildmaster? (High Int/Wis/Cha - Excellent social)
Are you one of the Thugs? (High Str/Dex/Con - Excellent combat)
Are you the 'smart thug'? (High Str, ok Dex, other mental Stat - Blends combat and social/skills)
Are you the Box man? (High Int/Dex, possible Wis - Great at looking for Traps/Devices etc)
Are you the Cat-Burglar (Similar to Above with a Dex bias, good entry rogue)
We can keep going, but what you wont be is ALL OF THE ABOVE at once.
Mind you, no class is.
I'd argue that the Combat Rogue is NOT meh, but the Combat Rogue isn't the Dex Rogue.
I'd argue that the Skill Rogue is NOT meh, but the Skill Rogue isn't the Dex rogue.
Rogues are my fave class hands down, and it took me a while to get the old biases I had picked up since the BASIC set through to 2nd Ed out of my belief system, and on the same note, 3.5 is a mystery to me - this is Pathfinder, and in Pathfinder things seem to favour certain approaches.
What do you WANT to do with your Rogue?
On what planet is 14 a 'midling Dex'?
Who said you "should be"?, less hysteria, more what's written, cheers.
Sorry, but your 18 Dex is a diminishing return when weighed against the set of combat mechanics in Pathfinder.
No one says you can't have an 18 Dex, but the reality is that you will (unless you focus on a very specific set of builds out there) generally not find yourself hitting all that hard, and if this is going to make you all sad in the pants then you should probably avoid it...which is important if you want a COMBAT ROGUE (of course there are other varieties, if they are what you want to play instead - see look choice ermergerd!)
Rogues work JUST FINE, but if it's combat you are after, then you are shaping your Rogue a certain way.
Thats how it is Roberta.
Just because it is that way does not mean it should be that way. If I can't make an effective 10 strength 18 dex rogue work then the class rules miss the concept. The same complaint is had against monks for DEX/WIS builds not being viable.
Considering the range is 7-18, racial mods are usually a net positive, and almost everybody wants at least decent Dex, 14 is pretty unremarkable.
Having high-Str greatsword-swinging half-orcs with average Dex be the "correct" way to play rogues proves that the class mechanics don't support the intended flavor or character concepts at all. What you end up with is no longer a rogue, but some sort of barbarian/ranger thing that happens to have its class levels in the class named rogue instead, while the actual character concepts that the rogue was meant to represent are abandoned in favor of facestabbing hulks.
Just because it is that way does not mean it should be that way. If I can't make an effective 10 strength 18 dex rogue work then the class rules miss the concept. The same complaint is had against monks for DEX/WIS builds not being viable.
Man if your mental image of a monk isn't a guy with average dodginess and wisdom but who has giant muscles and runs around with a giant sword then I dunno what to tell you, don't you realize Pathfinder's mechanics are perfect and it is fantasy stories that are wrong?
Except a '14' isn't just a '14' is it? Not all 14's are equal.
I'm not sure if that's a good reason to get onto someone for calling 14 middling. Do you have a definite number for middling? If it varies then calling it 14 is fine.
All of those are combat or skills. Its just different skills or combat. My point was when you specialize your still not great. You may even be siphoning from one side or the other. Do I have a 3rd option?