People are way too sensitive about this. Those of us saying "play a bard" are not saying a rogue is useless*. We are saying the other classes can do skill stuff, and be good in combat, while being a better all around character most of the time. There is no mechanical reason to play a rogue in 95% of these situations.
*Well, most of us are not saying that anyway.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
68% of statistics are made up on the spot.
68% of statistics are made up on the spot.
99% of my stats have are known because I have seen them on character sheets that are rules legal so it's not too hard for me to reproduce the stats or the character sheet in question.
|
so you are saying that he plays his character better than you play your own while he is also not really taking full advantage of his class
No, I'm not saying he's playing it better, he is just mechanically better at it. His Bluff, Sleight of hand and Stealth skills are better or equal to mine due to the bonus that his archetype grants him. He does more damage in combat (probably mostly gear-related). Also, since I gave up trapfinding for some extra fighter feats for my archetype, he can out-rogue me on the trap side of things. Oh, BTW, he can also cast spells.
I'm pretty much done with this class. I've tried to stick it out for too long.
- You play a class because it is fun, not because it is "special".
I agree. But it's hard to enjoy playing a class that can't pull it's weight, and that other characters overshadow at everything you try and do, if you are trying to play a hero.
1) The rogue in my example did enough damage to kill a target before it gets a round.
Not really.
If you took the average CR 10 foe from the Bestiary (which is where the 24AC came from), you would see it had 130 HP, and you did not do 130 HP damage.So no, you did not kill a target before it gets a round to smack you back.
so you are saying that he plays his character better than you play your own while he is also not really taking full advantage of his class
No, I'm not saying he's playing it better, he is just mechanically better at it. His Bluff, Sleight of hand and Stealth skills are better or equal to mine due to the bonus that his archetype grants him. He does more damage in combat (probably mostly gear-related). Also, since I gave up trapfinding for some extra fighter feats for my archetype, he can out-rogue me on the trap side of things. Oh, BTW, he can also cast spells.
I'm pretty much done with this class. I've tried to stick it out for too long.
Ah, but your sneak attack is SO much better. Not that he doesn't have sneak attack. By level 10 he has 2d6 and you have 5d6. See 3d6 of dice, I'm sure that was worth the spell casting and bardic music that you don't have.
Also did your swashbuckler not dump dex? Dumping dex is the best thing to do as rogue.
|
|
Ah, but your sneak attack is SO much better. Not that he doesn't have sneak attack. By level 10 he has 2d6 and you have 5d6. See 3d6 of dice, I'm sure that was worth the spell casting and bardic music that you don't have.Also did your swashbuckler not dump dex? Dumping dex is the best thing to do as rogue.
As other have pointed out, it is so situational, it is a non-factor. Yes, if I do land a really good hit once in a blue moon (TWF with longsword and shortsword, BTW) I do some nice damage, but it is only in the 24-point range on average. Only one attack will hit most times I do get in a full attack. Meanwhile, the bard is moving in and consistently doing damage. I don't know what his exact stats are, but it is consistent and steady damage on most rounds in the 10-15 point range. Did I mention he can also cast spells?
No, I did not dump DEX, because I thought it would be helpful for AC and skill purposes. I did get a good stat array due to my rolls (we don't do point-buy) so I have an 17 Str and a 20 Dex. I think his stats are higher. Honestly, the only thing that is keeping me alive is a Cloak of Displacement.
Sure, this is probably some sour grapes on my part, but it is a little disheartening to play a character for about a year now to be completely outclassed in my niche role as scout and secondary melee. I'll probably do something heroically stupid in the next session so I can come in with a wizard.
Rogues should have built in specialization options. 3 PrCs in specific that rogues could work towards that should be built in combat styles to choose from: duelist, shadow dancer, and arcane trickster. Take those 3 PrCs and boil them down into combat styles like the ranger, and you have some pretty great optimization options for the base rogue.
Surely you would not overlook the glorious Assassin prestige class?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sure, this is probably some sour grapes on my part, but it is a little disheartening to play a character for about a year now to be completely outclassed in my niche role as scout and secondary melee. I'll probably do something heroically stupid in the next session so I can come in with a wizard.
I'm not seeing the problem here. You built poorly, and poor builds should be punished and gruelingly unfun because ~player skill~. Now you have become a better player and will be playing the character types Pathfinder says you should be saying, so all is well. If anything, you should be thanking Pathfinder for this ingenious design and apologizing for your failure to understand that dex-rogues are for silly children.
|
|
I'm not seeing the problem here. You built poorly, and poor builds should be punished and gruelingly unfun because ~player skill~. Now you have become a better player and will be playing the character types Pathfinder says you should be saying, so all is well. If anything, you should be thanking Pathfinder for this ingenious design and apologizing for your failure to understand that dex-rogues are for silly children.
I wouldn't be that cynical. I don't think it was an intentional choice by the design team at Paizo to have the class in the current state it is.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not seeing the problem here. You built poorly, and poor builds should be punished and gruelingly unfun because ~player skill~. Now you have become a better player and will be playing the character types Pathfinder says you should be saying, so all is well. If anything, you should be thanking Pathfinder for this ingenious design and apologizing for your failure to understand that dex-rogues are for silly children.I wouldn't be that cynical. I don't think it was an intentional choice by the design team at Paizo to have the class in the current state it is.
I don't think so either, but don't you think that makes it worse?
Surely you would not overlook the glorious Assassin prestige class?
No, assassin should stay a PrC for evil inclined rogues that can be augmented even further by the duelist, shadow dancer, and arcane trickster combat styles.
|
|
No more than i think neglect is more malicious than abuse.
I don't think so either, but don't you think that makes it worse?
I dunno, to me it's more like:
"dex fighters shouldn't be too relevent in combat vs. dex fighters should be as relevent in combat"
is equivalent to
"Judicious spanking is good discipline vs. spanking is always child abuse"
while
"oops, we rendered the rogue class irrelevent"
is equivalent to
"But, I didn't realize the child needed both food and water!"
Sure, this is probably some sour grapes on my part, but it is a little disheartening to play a character for about a year now to be completely outclassed in my niche role as scout and secondary melee. I'll probably do something heroically stupid in the next session so I can come in with a wizard.I'm not seeing the problem here. You built poorly, and poor builds should be punished and gruelingly unfun because ~player skill~. Now you have become a better player and will be playing the character types Pathfinder says you should be saying, so all is well. If anything, you should be thanking Pathfinder for this ingenious design and apologizing for your failure to understand that dex-rogues are for silly children.
srsly what
srsly what
Did she break your sarcasm-meter?
"But, I didn't realize the child needed both food and water!"
Worse is the common attitude, more or less, that "no one cares if children need water or poison or whatever, because a good DM will make sure he/she is lactating and therefore render all these dietary suggestions moot -- therefore they're all good suggestions!"
srsly whatDid she break your sarcasm-meter?
I waded through all the sarcasm trying to find the rich nougat center and just wound up falling over a cliff on the other side because I dumped dex
314.159% of stats can be used to demonstrate that I am awesome. So is my inquisitor. :D
This makes me at least 34% more interested in statistics and 100% more interested in inquisitors.
I'm having trouble keeping up with the jokes in this thread. Too much laughing to read...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"But, I didn't realize the child needed both food and water!"Worse is the common attitude, more or less, that "no one cares if children need water or poison or whatever, because a good DM will make sure he/she is lactating and therefore render all these dietary suggestions moot -- therefore they're all good suggestions!"
Me proposing a new rule as a hobby enthusiast, and not taking things into consideration and thus throwing the entire system out of whack is understandable. This isn't my bread and butter (just my cake, maybe? (mmmmm....cake.....)), after all. But yeah, the continuing trend of fixing the irrelevence of the rogue by adding archetypes to other classes that make the rogue almost a walking joke...that's not one mistake, that's piling mistake on top of mistake, expecting it to become massive enough that it collapses into a black hole of fail, and you can fall through the event horizon and when you reach the singularity you emerge in some other universe and find out the rogue is cool again.
Or something.
Mostly, I just think black holes are cool.
|
|
Further up the thread someone suggested that rogues get a +1/die bonus on attack rolls when sneak attack damage would apply. I can totally get behind this rule. It would make my sneak attacks hit more often and go a long way towards making melee sneak attackers more fun to play. When the fighters and full BAB classes can toss out damage in spades without really trying, I'd be happy just doing some nice burst damage after a few turns of positioning and single attacks.
or you could just build your rogue better, too, or talk to the bard player and figure out what you're doing wrong and what he/she is doing right, beyond pinning it on simply your choice of class
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wouldn't be that cynical. I don't think it was an intentional choice by the design team at Paizo to have the class in the current state it is.
Oh, I don't doubt it's an accident on Paizo's part rather than deliberate malice. But Paizo's white-knights who come out of the woodwork to defend everything as working-as-intended, like the "rogues are fine provided you ignore dex and play a half-orc greatsword-wielding face-smasher, and if you don't it's your own fault for being an idiot" thing we saw yesterday, treat it as a feature, not a bug.
There have been replies in this thread since my last post unironically agreeing with the ~player skill~ position.
|
|
or you could just build your rogue better, too, or talk to the bard player and figure out what you're doing wrong and what he/she is doing right, beyond pinning it on simply your choice of class
Hahaha!
Lamontius, you're such a joker.
Hahah...talk to the other player, he says.
::wipes eyes::
You kill me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
or you could just build your rogue better, too, or talk to the bard player and figure out what you're doing wrong and what he/she is doing right, beyond pinning it on simply your choice of classHahaha!
Lamontius, you're such a joker.
Hahah...talk to the other player, he says.
::wipes eyes::
You kill me.
nah, my DPR isn't high enough, I play a rogue
"Oh, poor little baby rogue has +20 bluff? I've got +26, so shut up and look pretty while the big boys talk" "Oh, you got diplomacy +18? I got +25, now go make me a sandwich and stop getting in the way"I have a 3rd level Rogue with +20 Stealth. Beat that, Homer.invisibility
edit: ok I'm not really trying and I realize the limitations of the invisibility spell.
AT THIRD LEVEL?!! ah, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Ah, but your sneak attack is SO much better. Not that he doesn't have sneak attack. By level 10 he has 2d6 and you have 5d6. See 3d6 of dice, I'm sure that was worth the spell casting and bardic music that you don't have.Also did your swashbuckler not dump dex? Dumping dex is the best thing to do as rogue.
As other have pointed out, it is so situational, it is a non-factor. Yes, if I do land a really good hit once in a blue moon (TWF with longsword and shortsword, BTW) I do some nice damage, but it is only in the 24-point range on average. Only one attack will hit most times I do get in a full attack. Meanwhile, the bard is moving in and consistently doing damage. I don't know what his exact stats are, but it is consistent and steady damage on most rounds in the 10-15 point range. Did I mention he can also cast spells?
No, I did not dump DEX, because I thought it would be helpful for AC and skill purposes. I did get a good stat array due to my rolls (we don't do point-buy) so I have an 17 Str and a 20 Dex. I think his stats are higher. Honestly, the only thing that is keeping me alive is a Cloak of Displacement.
Sure, this is probably some sour grapes on my part, but it is a little disheartening to play a character for about a year now to be completely outclassed in my niche role as scout and secondary melee. I'll probably do something heroically stupid in the next session so I can come in with a wizard.
Are you kidding? I see a sneak attack several times each combat. The warrior player LOVES to set up the Rogue and himself with a +2 to hit via flanking.
|
Ah, but your sneak attack is SO much better. Not that he doesn't have sneak attack. By level 10 he has 2d6 and you have 5d6. See 3d6 of dice, I'm sure that was worth the spell casting and bardic music that you don't have.Also did your swashbuckler not dump dex? Dumping dex is the best thing to do as rogue.
As other have pointed out, it is so situational, it is a non-factor. Yes, if I do land a really good hit once in a blue moon (TWF with longsword and shortsword, BTW) I do some nice damage, but it is only in the 24-point range on average. Only one attack will hit most times I do get in a full attack. Meanwhile, the bard is moving in and consistently doing damage. I don't know what his exact stats are, but it is consistent and steady damage on most rounds in the 10-15 point range. Did I mention he can also cast spells?
No, I did not dump DEX, because I thought it would be helpful for AC and skill purposes. I did get a good stat array due to my rolls (we don't do point-buy) so I have an 17 Str and a 20 Dex. I think his stats are higher. Honestly, the only thing that is keeping me alive is a Cloak of Displacement.
Sure, this is probably some sour grapes on my part, but it is a little disheartening to play a character for about a year now to be completely outclassed in my niche role as scout and secondary melee. I'll probably do something heroically stupid in the next session so I can come in with a wizard.
Sneak attack is TOTALLY situational!
...Like when I get it on every single charge, because I am a Scout...or how I ALWAYS get to charge because I took Improved Overrun and Charge through on my Scout...or how I have a +15 Acrobatics so I can almost always get a flank...or how I took Friendly Switch, so if that stupid Bard is in my spot, I kick him and his d4 sneak attack dice, out of the way.
....Oh wait, the player makes the situation??? Lamontius's sarcasm is rubbing off on me. ;)
Well if you have a warrior at the table you have bigger problems.
Really though, the rogue does do much better if the other melee help him flank. This actually bothers me because it requires other people for him to do his job.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well if you have a warrior at the table you have bigger problems.
Really though, the rogue does do much better if the other melee help him flank. This actually bothers me because it requires other people for him to do his job.
...Or she could just Feint to deny his enemies Dex. Which, with a couple of feats becomes a move action. Or as I said, take the Scout Archetype and sneak attack all day. Both totally independent of other player.
Question though? What's so bad about working with other players, anyway?
Ah, but your sneak attack is SO much better. Not that he doesn't have sneak attack. By level 10 he has 2d6 and you have 5d6. See 3d6 of dice, I'm sure that was worth the spell casting and bardic music that you don't have.Also did your swashbuckler not dump dex? Dumping dex is the best thing to do as rogue.
As other have pointed out, it is so situational, it is a non-factor. Yes, if I do land a really good hit once in a blue moon (TWF with longsword and shortsword, BTW) I do some nice damage, but it is only in the 24-point range on average. Only one attack will hit most times I do get in a full attack. Meanwhile, the bard is moving in and consistently doing damage. I don't know what his exact stats are, but it is consistent and steady damage on most rounds in the 10-15 point range. Did I mention he can also cast spells?
No, I did not dump DEX, because I thought it would be helpful for AC and skill purposes. I did get a good stat array due to my rolls (we don't do point-buy) so I have an 17 Str and a 20 Dex. I think his stats are higher. Honestly, the only thing that is keeping me alive is a Cloak of Displacement.
Sure, this is probably some sour grapes on my part, but it is a little disheartening to play a character for about a year now to be completely outclassed in my niche role as scout and secondary melee. I'll probably do something heroically stupid in the next session so I can come in with a wizard.
Sneak attack is TOTALLY situational!
...Like when I get it on every single charge, because I am a Scout...or how I ALWAYS get to charge because I took Improved Overrun and Charge through on my Scout...or how I have a +15 Acrobatics so I can almost always get a flank...or how I took Friendly Switch, so if that stupid Bard is in my spot, I kick him and his d4 sneak attack dice, out of the way.
....Oh wait, the player makes the situation??? Lamontius's sarcasm is rubbing off on me. ;)
Lamontia, I will refrain from any double entendres on that last line but yes, there are two things to always keep in mind with Sneak Attack
A. Learn every single way you can get it through your own actions
2. Educate your teammates on how they can position to assist you with it or if that is not an option take feats/abilities (like Friendly Switch) to mitigate their dum-dum moves
D. There were only two points why am I still typing
Working with other players is great! I love when a group has teamwork. When it has to happen for the character to be effective I have problems though.
|
|
Working with other players is great! I love when a group has teamwork. When it has to happen for the character to be effective I have problems though.
But it is a problem of their own creation. I am highly effective on my own. If a party member would like to, oh, I don't know, share a bonus to hit and obliterate bad guys with me, excellent! If not, then I will rely on the fact that I have a well built character, that I actually know how to play and run with it. ;)
Wait so one sneak attack per round with a scout is good? Find a way to throw on some double strike and sapmaster, then we're doing some good. Also how does overrun allow you to attack people on a charge and run away?
Archetypes should be used to create a character who's customized to be more appealing. Not something necessary to be useful. I find the feint chain to be a little too intensive myself.
Dude, me either. Every day I log on and see 100+ new posts. Why is it even still open??I can't believe that this thread is still attracting posts.
Why would it be closed? There is a lot of meaningful conversation going on. Plus this thread has it's own inside jokes now. Everyone loves inside jokes.
Archetypes should be used to create a character who's customized to be more appealing. Not something necessary to be useful. I find the feint chain to be a little too intensive myself.
Everyone assumes that a barbarian takes pounce. Which is technically an archetype. Without all the archetypes the barbar is just a worse so many rounds per day fighter.
Some archetypes just become part of the class.
Everyone assumes that a barbarian takes pounce. Which is technically an archetype. Without all the archetypes the barbar is just a worse so many rounds per day fighter.
Some archetypes just become part of the class.
I would suggest a little more subtlety and less overt generalization but that would defeat the purpose of your post
Erm... Pounce isn't an archetype. Its a rage totem line. Most of the Rage totem lines suck. Fiend totem may as well be NPC only because it doesn't dictate friend from foe. I would rather open up all rage totem lines than for no reason at all claim you can only get one at a time. Putting the word totem after it doesn't make it special...
|
|
Archetypes should be used to create a character who's customized to be more appealing. Not something necessary to be useful. I find the feint chain to be a little too intensive myself.
Personally, I do too. Also, my Cha is a little lacking, so I tend to go for a more "in your face" approach. :)But it's another option that is available.
Archetypes should be used to create a character who's customized to be more appealing. Not something necessary to be useful. I find the feint chain to be a little too intensive myself.Personally, I do too. Also, my Cha is a little lacking, so I tend to go for a more "in your face" approach. :)But it's another option that is available.
Lamontia plays her character's low CHA by stabbing things that my character is trying to use Diplomacy with, preferably while also having her character make fun of mine for being a goody-two-shoes and stealing my lunch money.
|
|
Archetypes should be used to create a character who's customized to be more appealing. Not something necessary to be useful. I find the feint chain to be a little too intensive myself.Personally, I do too. Also, my Cha is a little lacking, so I tend to go for a more "in your face" approach. :)But it's another option that is available.Lamontia plays her character's low CHA by stabbing things that my character is trying to use Diplomacy with, preferably while also having her character make fun of mine for being a goody-two-shoes and stealing my lunch money.
That only happened once, Lamontius. You need to move on already. Geeze.
Erm... Pounce isn't an archetype. Its a rage totem line. Most of the Rage totem lines suck. Fiend totem may as well be NPC only because it doesn't dictate friend from foe. I would rather open up all rage totem lines than for no reason at all claim you can only get one at a time. Putting the word totem after it doesn't make it special...
Totem barbarian is an archetype that only replaces rage powers, and is not particular about which rage powers you replace.