The most ironic thing about this thread, is that in every dungeon and dragons game ive played since 1985 and including pathfinder, someone has always played a rogue. I have never played a game session and campain without somone being a rogue. along with fighters, rogues, are the classes i have seen picked in every home campain i have ever played in.
I have your rogue at 94.44 when full attacking and flanking to get sneak attack.
The shield is at 15/10
The damage was 1d4+1d6+35
The sap was at 16/11 = off hand attack
The damage was 1d6+35
Here is how. I got the attack bonus.
+7 BAB
+6 mod from STR
+2 flanking
-2 from TWF
That puts us at a +13
now the Sap(offhand) is a +3 weapon so it sits at 16
The shield gives is a +2 and sits at + 15
I have no idea where you are getting the 77.5 and 78.5 from.
----------------
Now I will apply the -2 to hit, and change the average of 3.5 to 4.
You end up with 83.5<---a smaller number
The most ironic thing about this thread, is that in every dungeon and dragons game ive played since 1985 and including pathfinder, someone has always played a rogue. I have never played a game session and campain without somone being a rogue. along with fighters, rogues, are the classes i have seen picked in every home campain i have ever played in.
Nobody is complaining here. We are just saying someone else can do it better.
Well, at level 20, that comes out to -2 to hit for +5 damage for 2 talents. It's pretty much even with power attack for 2 weapon fighters
No it won't. You will do less damage. Power Attack is more damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nobody is complaining here. We are just saying someone else can do it better.
But do what better, exactly, as what the Rogue actually does is the probably the core question. Rogues don't fit in one box, hence why the drama - they can do a lot of things, and they can do those things well, you can even build them to do multiple things.
Where the problems arise is when people try get square pegs in round holes and stick to this '18 Dex' mythology, which is as outdated as Paladins REQUIRING 17 Cha or better.
Nobody is complaining here. We are just saying someone else can do it better.But do what better, exactly, as what the Rogue actually does is the probably the core question. Rogues don't fit in one box, hence why the drama - they can do a lot of things, and they can do those things well, you can even build them to do multiple things.
Well, the thing is you aren't telling us what exactly they do better when we give counter examples. In fact you I felt kind of insulted by your back lash.
Edit: Especially saying I have a one way to play mentality. I know everyone has many ways to play. I'm not complaining about any of them.
Also, I feel I should mention that just because you're doing double damage (just as nonlethal now), it doesn't make those talents any better. In fact, it only magnifies the problem, because the penalties and bonuses are all relative. The 10.5%-66.7% reduction in damage is still a 10.5%-66.7% reduction in damage, which is a larger penalty than Powerful Sneak ever provides (a 4.86% increase in sneak attack dice), and almost always a larger penalty than Deadly sneak provides (a 14.3% increase in sneak attack dice).
Also note: the damage increase from Powerful and Deadly Sneak only apply to sneak attack dice. They do not increase the base weapon damage or any static bonuses you have from weapon enhancements, added elemental dice, or stat bonuses. So this largely depends on how much of your damage is pure sneak attack, which makes even Deadly Sneak not worth it very quickly, even at the low-loss end.
False. The penalty stays the same, the damage increases with level.
-2 Static
.5 (for both now not for each) per sneak attack die which increases.Which means as you get more sneak attack dice it looks better and better.
The problem is that both the penalty and increase are relative to the original damage done. Again, assuming you hit between a 2 and an 18, it is a minimum 10.5% damage penalty for a 4.86% or 14.3% increase in sneak damage.
So the penalty will still scale with your damage increase. This means that at 2nd level, say you're doing 1d6+3(stat)+1d6(SA), you reduce your damage by 20% (assuming you hit the target on an 11), or 2 damage, with a .17 increase in damage from Powerful Sneak, or a .5 damage increase in damage from Deadly Sneak (obviously not accessible at this point, though). At 10th level, say you're doing 1d6+5(stat)+1(enhancement)+2d6(elemental)+5d6(SA). The penalty from PS/DS is again 20% (just saying you hit on an 11 base, again), making the damage reduction 6.8 per attack. However, the bonus from PS is only .85 and DS 2.5.
This only gets worse the more bonuses you add to your base damage, and continues all the way to 20th level.
Doing double nonlethal damage doubles the penalty as well as the bonus, just making it even worse.
*Edit* Also, it's no way even close to Power Attack, even for a TWF Fighter. PA gives +2 to damage for -1 to hit. At best, Powerful Sneak gives 1.7 damage (.17 damage per die * 10 dice) for -2 to hit, and Deadly Sneak gives 5 damage (.5 damage per die * 10 dice), for -2 to hit. This makes Deadly Sneaky just barely break even with Power Attack, compared to a class with a lot more bonuses to hit than the Rogue will get (and thus doesn't have the same penalty to its damage).
So yes, at 19th level? Deadly Sneak gives the same relative bonus-to-penalty that Power Attack does. Until then, it only makes you do less damage.
Well, the thing is you aren't telling us what exactly they do better when we give counter examples. In fact you I felt kind of insulted by your back lash.Nobody is complaining here. We are just saying someone else can do it better.But do what better, exactly, as what the Rogue actually does is the probably the core question. Rogues don't fit in one box, hence why the drama - they can do a lot of things, and they can do those things well, you can even build them to do multiple things.
That was not backlash. It was clarification since the other poster was misreading the comments as complaints.
We have been telling you what is done better for the past 10 pages. Most of the primary things you build a rogue for can be done better by the ranger, inquisitor, or bard. Examples are all over this topic.
Damage can be done better by a rogue than a bard in some cases, but that point was ceded long before it came up, by me anyway, but a bard is not bad at damage.
The current subtopic was about power sneak and deadly sneak, and how its better to not choose those talents since they lower DPR.
The most ironic thing about this thread, is that in every dungeon and dragons game ive played since 1985 and including pathfinder, someone has always played a rogue. I have never played a game session and campain without somone being a rogue. along with fighters, rogues, are the classes i have seen picked in every home campain i have ever played in.Nobody is complaining here. We are just saying someone else can do it better.
but that kind of is the point isn't it. this entire thread is claiming that rogues are inadaquate but doesn't seem to be born out by how many people play the game.
Prehaps the point is, is that the people, the gamers who are attracted to rogues in the first place, don't really care about the mechanics, and are choosing to be rogues for reasons that cannot be encapsulated by numbers, for the same reason i think many people would choose to be han solo over luke skywalker, in real life or in a make believe world or in an RPG representing thier skill sets, even though luke would be superior to han in every concievable mechanical meteric.
The most ironic thing about this thread, is that in every dungeon and dragons game ive played since 1985 and including pathfinder, someone has always played a rogue. I have never played a game session and campain without somone being a rogue. along with fighters, rogues, are the classes i have seen picked in every home campain i have ever played in.Nobody is complaining here. We are just saying someone else can do it better.but that kind of is the point isn't it. this entire thread is claiming that rogues are inadaquate but doesn't seem to be born out by how many people play the game.
Prehaps the point is, is that the people, the gamers who are attracted to rogues in the first place, don't really care about the mechanics, and are choosing to be rogues for reasons that cannot be encapsulated by numbers, for the same reason i think many people would choose to be han solo over luke skywalker, in real life or in a make believe world or in an RPG representing thier skill sets, even though luke would be superior to han in every concievable mechanical meteric.
We are not saying the rogue is "inadequate". We are saying others can do the job better. That does put the rogue in a bad position, but that does not mean he can't do the job.
If the rogue could not function, then it would be inadequate.
Personally as long as you bring a functional character to the table I am happy, but that does not mean I don't want the rogue to be better than it is.
That was not backlash. It was clarification since the other poster was misreading the comments as complaints.We have been telling you what is done better for the past 10 pages. Most of the primary things you build a rogue for can be done better by the ranger, inquisitor, or bard. Examples are all over this topic.
Spot on.
Similarly, I went through bunch of different ways to play the Rogue already and merrily debunked the various assertions that X class were 'uniformly better', because it was pretty clear those classes were only 'uniformly better' if you were only uniformly playing the game a uniform way, which we aren't.
When the posters are asserting that the Thieves Guildmaster should be buffing ans hasting his troops in combat I really had to wonder, could you imagine for a moment Petyr 'Littlefinger' Baelish or Varys 'The Spider' with swords drawn and smacking steel? Wow, they'd wonder what they'd done wrong and how badly they'd failed should it ever come to that.
You can't take both Reactionary and Killer and you can't take Combat Trick more than once. Thank you for playing, please try again.@Wraithstrike
Dude... it's a 20 point buy. I just keep copying and pasting the old stats.Str 16 10 points
Dex 16 10 points
Con 10
Int 12 2 points
Wis 12 2 points
Cha 7 -4 points+2 Str (human bonus), +2 strength (Level 4, Level 8), +2 str (crappy belt of STR for good measure)
** spoiler omitted **
I did not even catch the traits were both from the same category, nor the talents. I was just focused on the deadly and powerful sneak. Good catch. I am sure he won't like the one of "Thank you for playing, please try again" though.
... The classes we pointed to could also draw swords and smack steel. Hilariously rogues aren't so good at one on one combat.
Take the Swashbuckler Archetype, then take Combat Trick twice as well as a free martial weapon proficiency.
Nobody is complaining here. We are just saying someone else can do it better.But do what better, exactly, as what the Rogue actually does is the probably the core question. Rogues don't fit in one box, hence why the drama - they can do a lot of things, and they can do those things well, you can even build them to do multiple things.
Where the problems arise is when people try get square pegs in round holes and stick to this '18 Dex' mythology, which is as outdated as Paladins REQUIRING 17 Cha or better.
So high dex rogue isn't a thing. Just an out dated concept.
That would be like high strength barbarian suddenly becoming an outdated concept.Who else is meant to do two weapon fighting? No one else pumps their dex that high. The ranger gets it without qualifying (if they choose too). Two weapon fighting is meant for the rogue. Yet your telling me that that is wrongbadfun, an outdated concept that my dense mind can't get passed.
... The classes we pointed to could also draw swords and smack steel. Hilariously rogues aren't so good at one on one combat.
As can a Rogue, here we go again.
You just insist you are right whilst talking about pretty subjective and highly variable scenarios. Just because you proclaim your position a lot doesn't prove anyhting...
You say it doesn't work, I say it does.
The variables aren't just with the class, they also lay with the player.
I'm sure I could equally make a range of poor mechanical choices and sub optimal playstyle methods with any class in the game and similarly decry the class as subpar with exactly the same legitimacy as shown in the last ten pages.
You seem to want the rogue to do all sorts of things, but when questioned you always go back to combat as a base, then fine, take a combat rogue. Don't complain that your high dex rogue skilled in lockpicking can't ALSO outfight the Fighter.
|
You can't take both Reactionary and Killer and you can't take Combat Trick more than once. Thank you for playing, please try again.@Wraithstrike
Dude... it's a 20 point buy. I just keep copying and pasting the old stats.Str 16 10 points
Dex 16 10 points
Con 10
Int 12 2 points
Wis 12 2 points
Cha 7 -4 points+2 Str (human bonus), +2 strength (Level 4, Level 8), +2 str (crappy belt of STR for good measure)
** spoiler omitted **
Um. You can. The swashbuckler archetype allows you to take It twice. If you're going finesse, take finesse rogue as a rogue talent and get three feats in exchange for tricks. Try again.
So high dex rogue isn't a thing. Just an out dated concept.
That would be like high strength barbarian suddenly becoming an outdated concept.
Saying it's the mandatory 'must have' is an outdated concept.
You can still do it, but there are now a lot of alternatives to it that all fit under the Rogue banner. The problem is that when this doctrinal 18 Dex is challenged, there are a lot of people getting really upset about it and go into fits of hysteria saying that you are now 'forcing them' into Great Axe wielding Half Orcs, as though the only option to A must only be B.
TWF is not 'meant for the Rogue', it is simply an option for the Rogue. Its like saying they must ALL wield a Rapier and a Hand crossbow because those things are written too. No, they are options. Options from a vast menu of possibilities open to the class. Just because it is there doesn't mean you have to take it.
Um. You can. The swashbuckler archetype allows you to take It twice. If you're going finesse, take finesse rogue as a rogue talent and get three feats in exchange for tricks. Try again.You can't take both Reactionary and Killer and you can't take Combat Trick more than once. Thank you for playing, please try again.@Wraithstrike
Dude... it's a 20 point buy. I just keep copying and pasting the old stats.Str 16 10 points
Dex 16 10 points
Con 10
Int 12 2 points
Wis 12 2 points
Cha 7 -4 points+2 Str (human bonus), +2 strength (Level 4, Level 8), +2 str (crappy belt of STR for good measure)
** spoiler omitted **
Did he specify swashbuckler archetype, because I didn't see it in his build.
Just checked again. Nothing about the swashbuckler archetype. So that would make his build illegal.
Or you could just apply the Swashbuckler archetype.
The most ironic thing about this thread, is that in every dungeon and dragons game ive played since 1985 and including pathfinder, someone has always played a rogue. I have never played a game session and campain without somone being a rogue. along with fighters, rogues, are the classes i have seen picked in every home campain i have ever played in.Nobody is complaining here. We are just saying someone else can do it better.but that kind of is the point isn't it. this entire thread is claiming that rogues are inadaquate but doesn't seem to be born out by how many people play the game.
Prehaps the point is, is that the people, the gamers who are attracted to rogues in the first place, don't really care about the mechanics, and are choosing to be rogues for reasons that cannot be encapsulated by numbers, for the same reason i think many people would choose to be han solo over luke skywalker, in real life or in a make believe world or in an RPG representing thier skill sets, even though luke would be superior to han in every concievable mechanical meteric.
We are not saying the rogue is "inadequate". We are saying others can do the job better. That does put the rogue in a bad position, but that does not mean he can't do the job.
If the rogue could not function, then it would be inadequate.
Personally as long as you bring a functional character to the table I am happy, but that does not mean I don't want the rogue to be better than it is.
which is the point, you are attempting to define the rogue in a mechanical sense. many people who play rogues don't view them as such. no amount of luke skywalker will equal han solo. The tropes within the game matter to many people.
Alot of people who play this game, do not see numbers, or view classes in terms of data, no more so than han solo is viewed by his capabilities. An RPG like pathfinder is always going to be defined by more than numbers. The rogue is an example of that, attempting to deconstruct the rogue in a purely functional and mathematical manner misses the point of why many choose to be a rogue.
People will choose things because they are "cool" or "sexy". You may not agree that merely being "cool" should be a function within this game, but in fact many people do think that is a function, and for many people, the class called rogue is "cool", which is not somthing that can be quantified, just as no matter how much better luke skywalker can do everything better than han solo, many people are still going to be han solo, because han is "cool", whatever mechanical defiencies hans has simple has no bearing on his functions which is being cool as hell.
which is the point, you are attempting to define the rogue in a mechanical sense. many people who play rogues don't view them as such. no amount of luke skywalker will equal han solo. The tropes within the game matter to many people.Alot of people who play this game, do not see numbers, or view classes in terms of data, no more so than han solo is viewed by his capabilities. An RPG like pathfinder is always going to be defined by more than numbers. The rogue is an example of that, attempting to deconstruct the rogue in a purely functional and mathematical manner misses the point of why many choose to be a rogue.
People will choose things because they are "cool" or "sexy". You may not agree that merely being "cool" should be a function within this game, but in fact many people do think that is a function, and for many people, the class called rogue is "cool", which is not somthing that can be quantified, just as no matter how much better luke skywalker can do everything better than han solo, many people are still going to be han solo, because han is "cool", whatever mechanical defiencies hans has simple has no bearing on his functions which is being cool as hell.
Dex rogue should not only be a way to play rogue, it should be THE way. That is what rogues are. I have never played with a non-dex rogue in both 3.5 and pathfinder.
Alot of people who play this game, do not see numbers, or view classes in terms of data, no more so than han solo is viewed by his capabilities. An RPG like pathfinder is always going to be defined by more than numbers. The rogue is an example of that, attempting to deconstruct the rogue in a purely functional and mathematical manner misses the point of why many choose to be a rogue.
People will choose things because they are "cool" or "sexy". You may not agree that merely being "cool" should be a function within this game, but in fact many people do think that is a function, and for many people, the class called rogue is "cool", which is not somthing that can be quantified, just as no matter how much better luke skywalker can do everything better than han solo, many people are still going to be han solo, because han is "cool", whatever mechanical defiencies hans has simple has no bearing on his functions which is being cool as hell.
Rock on. Preach it!
I'd also point out that whilst look was all 'mechanically better' on paper than Han, it was HAN to the rescue in the Death Star trench that allowed Luke to do his thing. No Rogue to the rescue, no win for the rebels.
And we see another example, the Luke Skywalker 'J3D1' class is, on paper better than the 'Rogue', but look what happens next time push comes to shove... its ANOTHER Rogue saving the day with Lando Calrissian and the mad sneak attack on the DeathStar 2.
Both Deathstar kills came down to Rogues.
Jedi that.
He still has incompatible traits. Yes I realize that is easy to get around, but I like picking nits.
Well, you're in the right place, because that's what this thread is about.
BAH your quote wasn't quoted. Yes I realize that is easy to get around, but I like picking nits.
|
|
BAH your quote wasn't quoted. Yes I realize that is easy to get around, but I like picking nits.[\QUOTE]
He still has incompatible traits. Yes I realize that is easy to get around, but I like picking nits.
Well, you're in the right place, because that's what this thread is about.
Well, I don't spend as much time on this thread as you do, Marthkus... Close but not as much.
The most ironic thing about this thread, is that in every dungeon and dragons game ive played since 1985 and including pathfinder, someone has always played a rogue. I have never played a game session and campain without somone being a rogue. along with fighters, rogues, are the classes i have seen picked in every home campain i have ever played in.Nobody is complaining here. We are just saying someone else can do it better.but that kind of is the point isn't it. this entire thread is claiming that rogues are inadaquate but doesn't seem to be born out by how many people play the game.
Prehaps the point is, is that the people, the gamers who are attracted to rogues in the first place, don't really care about the mechanics, and are choosing to be rogues for reasons that cannot be encapsulated by numbers, for the same reason i think many people would choose to be han solo over luke skywalker, in real life or in a make believe world or in an RPG representing thier skill sets, even though luke would be superior to han in every concievable mechanical meteric.
We are not saying the rogue is "inadequate". We are saying others can do the job better. That does put the rogue in a bad position, but that does not mean he can't do the job.
If the rogue could not function, then it would be inadequate.
Personally as long as you bring a functional character to the table I am happy, but that does not mean I don't want the rogue to be better than it is.
which is the point, you are attempting to define the rogue in a mechanical sense. many people who play rogues don't view them as such. no amount of luke skywalker will equal han solo. The tropes within the game matter to many people.
Alot of people who play this game, do not see numbers, or view classes in terms of data, no more so than han solo is viewed by his capabilities. An RPG like pathfinder is always going to be...
You are wrong again. I just look at a class as a bag of mechanics. I don't normally think "I am playing a rogue". I decide what I want, and choose the best class for it. I can do the a trope with another class. That is my point, and be better off in most cases.
The fact that people don't see numbers does not mean that the rogue could not use some help*. Improving it, is not a bad thing. I don't see the resistance to it, as long as the class is fundamentally the same.
*Just to be clear, that does not mean it can't perform as is.
edit:fixed typo
Dex rogue should not only be a way to play rogue, it should be THE way. That is what rogues are. I have never played with a non-dex rogue in both 3.5 and pathfinder.
And there we have for all those asking, there's apparently only ONE way to play the class. Unlike any other class in the game.
If you don't do it the 18 Dex way, u r doin it rong.
Sorry Marthkus, there's a whole mountain of fantasy lit that disagrees with you there. Go away and read Thieves World, then maybe Lankhmar, and heck, I'm sure we could give you a mountain of other great works... then coem back and keep a straiht face when informing us that 18Dex bunnies are the one and only way.
He still has incompatible traits. Yes I realize that is easy to get around, but I like picking nits.Um. You can. The swashbuckler archetype allows you to take It twice. If you're going finesse, take finesse rogue as a rogue talent and get three feats in exchange for tricks. Try again.You can't take both Reactionary and Killer and you can't take Combat Trick more than once. Thank you for playing, please try again.@Wraithstrike
Dude... it's a 20 point buy. I just keep copying and pasting the old stats.Str 16 10 points
Dex 16 10 points
Con 10
Int 12 2 points
Wis 12 2 points
Cha 7 -4 points+2 Str (human bonus), +2 strength (Level 4, Level 8), +2 str (crappy belt of STR for good measure)
** spoiler omitted **
Did he specify swashbuckler archetype, because I didn't see it in his build.
Just checked again. Nothing about the swashbuckler archetype. So that would make his build illegal.
Or you could just apply the Swashbuckler archetype.
Hermean Paragon (PFS)
Chance Saviour (non-PFS)Now he has his +2 Initiative and can still take Killer.
I don't think all rogues have to use high dex, nor should they be pigeon holed into it. The right hand man to a crimelord who breaks in people's houses can also be a brute. I think the thug archetype is based off of that.
Some criminals steal with finesse, their victims only discovering the crime when the rogue is long gone and the coin already spent. A thug, on the other hand, cares nothing for finesse. Through both threat and violence, the thug gets what she wants by the promise of force, and has no problem making good on that promise as needed.
edit:clarity
Dex rogue should not only be a way to play rogue, it should be THE way. That is what rogues are. I have never played with a non-dex rogue in both 3.5 and pathfinder.And there we have for all those asking, there's apparently only ONE way to play the class. Unlike any other class in the game.
If you don't do it the 18 Dex way, u r doin it rong.
Sorry Marthkus, there's a whole mountain of fantasy lit that disagrees with you there. Go away and read Thieves World, then maybe Lankhmar, and heck, I'm sure we could give you a mountain of other great works... then coem back and keep a straiht face when informing us that 18Dex bunnies are the one and only way.
So dex rogue should be just like dex fighter, a sub-par option? I'm sorry but that is ridiculous. Two handed-Strength rogue should not be the best option for a rogue.
Better yet Dex rogue shouldn't be a concept that I need to get over if I want to play an effective rogue.
He still has incompatible traits. Yes I realize that is easy to get around, but I like picking nits.Um. You can. The swashbuckler archetype allows you to take It twice. If you're going finesse, take finesse rogue as a rogue talent and get three feats in exchange for tricks. Try again.You can't take both Reactionary and Killer and you can't take Combat Trick more than once. Thank you for playing, please try again.@Wraithstrike
Dude... it's a 20 point buy. I just keep copying and pasting the old stats.Str 16 10 points
Dex 16 10 points
Con 10
Int 12 2 points
Wis 12 2 points
Cha 7 -4 points+2 Str (human bonus), +2 strength (Level 4, Level 8), +2 str (crappy belt of STR for good measure)
** spoiler omitted **
Did he specify swashbuckler archetype, because I didn't see it in his build.
Just checked again. Nothing about the swashbuckler archetype. So that would make his build illegal.
Or you could just apply the Swashbuckler archetype.
Hermean Paragon (PFS)
Chance Saviour (non-PFS)Now he has his +2 Initiative and can still take Killer.
All of them are still trait bonuses, and therefore don't stack, so while you can choose more than one of those, one of them will be a waste of space.
Piranha Strike, Dueling Enchants.
Also just to keep things reasonable we should probably stick to the hardcover books. Chance Savior is AP specific. I think it is from Carrion Crown.
So dex rogue should be just like dex fighter, a sub-par option? I'm sorry but that is ridiculous. Two handed-Strength rogue should not be the best option for a rogue.Better yet Dex rogue shouldn't be a concept that I need to get over if I want to play an effective rogue.
Reactionary much?
Dex rogues work just fine, you are just wedded to 18Dex and can't handle any other suggestion. Similarly, this is not option A or option B, Dex OR 2hander Str Rogue. Which I have already pointed out to you repeatedly.
Over and over.
And Over
And over...
and over...
But you don't want to read anything other than...
Dex rogue should not only be a way to play rogue, it should be THE way. That is what rogues are. I have never played with a non-dex rogue in both 3.5 and pathfinder.
And saying anything else to you is just too confronting and too challenging to your religious view for you to accept.
I'm sorry you can't see past the limitation, and apparently you stopped reading what others posted a while back, so there's little point discussing the matter with you as you just aren't interested in any view other than your hardline (and in my view - highly flawed) opinion, and insist on lining up straw-men arguments all day in response.
If in your opinion there is only one way to play, and nothing else exists, then we can't help you.
Piranha Strike, Dueling Enchants.
Piranha Strike is nice.
And there we have for all those asking, there's apparently only ONE way to play the class. Unlike any other class in the game.
No one said that. People might say there is a better way to play something, but its like saying you get more damage out of a 2h weapon. That's not saying "Don't play with two weapon fighting" its saying "2h fighting will probably do better." You can play anything you want, what's effective and what is most effective are very different things. The only thing I see someone tell you not to play is the rogue who invest absolutely nothing into combat, in a game that has lots of combat.
btw, how did this become a conversation comparing luke and han? Just... I don't even... Jedi why!?
No one said that.
Are we even reading the same thread?
Dex rogue should not only be a way to play rogue, it should be THE way. That is what rogues are. I have never played with a non-dex rogue in both 3.5 and pathfinder.
MrSin, meet Marthkus, he's been honest enough to at least explicitly state what others keep inferring.
I'll just leave you two chatting between yourselves and let me know when the conversation is back on again, and that 18Dex is not the ONLY one true gospel :P
So dex rogue should be just like dex fighter, a sub-par option? I'm sorry but that is ridiculous. Two handed-Strength rogue should not be the best option for a rogue.Better yet Dex rogue shouldn't be a concept that I need to get over if I want to play an effective rogue.
Reactionary much?
Dex rogues work just fine, you are just wedded to 18Dex and can't handle any other suggestion. Similarly, this is not option A or option B, Dex OR 2hander Str Rogue. Which I have already pointed out to you repeatedly.
Over and over.
And Over
And over...
and over...
But you don't want to read anything other than...
Dex rogue should not only be a way to play rogue, it should be THE way. That is what rogues are. I have never played with a non-dex rogue in both 3.5 and pathfinder.
And saying anything else to you is just too confronting and too challenging to your religious view for you to accept.
I'm sorry you can't see past the limitation, and apparently you stopped reading what others posted a while back, so there's little point discussing the matter with you as you just aren't interested in any view other than your hardline (and in my view - highly flawed) opinion, and insist on lining up straw-men arguments all day in response.
If in your opinion there is only one way to play, and nothing else exists, then we can't help you.
Why did you even bother to post this? This added nothing to the conversation. No question were ask. You just asserted that your right and everyone else are dex-rogue bigots.
Dex rogue is 18 dex rogue. How do you see those as different things?
No one said that.Are we even reading the same thread?
Dex rogue should not only be a way to play rogue, it should be THE way. That is what rogues are. I have never played with a non-dex rogue in both 3.5 and pathfinder.MrSin, meet Marthkus, he's been honest enough to at least explicitly state what others keep inferring.
I'll just leave you two chatting between yourselves and let me know when the conversation is back on again, and that 18Dex is not the ONLY one true gospel :P
That has nothing to do with what I said. He said it should be the only way to play the rogue, I said there were ways and their effectiveness varies and that no one said "There IS one way to play the rogue." Very different things. Rogues in pathfinder I rarely see depicted as strong guys. Look at that fort save...
You can be less condescending here.
No one said that.Are we even reading the same thread?
Dex rogue should not only be a way to play rogue, it should be THE way. That is what rogues are. I have never played with a non-dex rogue in both 3.5 and pathfinder.MrSin, meet Marthkus, he's been honest enough to at least explicitly state what others keep inferring.
I'll just leave you two chatting between yourselves and let me know when the conversation is back on again, and that 18Dex is not the ONLY one true gospel :P
THE way is the same as saying high strength fighter is THE way to play fighter. You CAN do something else, but good luck trying to be effective.
All of them are still trait bonuses, and therefore don't stack, so while you can choose more than one of those, one of them will be a waste of space.He still has incompatible traits. Yes I realize that is easy to get around, but I like picking nits.Um. You can. The swashbuckler archetype allows you to take It twice. If you're going finesse, take finesse rogue as a rogue talent and get three feats in exchange for tricks. Try again.You can't take both Reactionary and Killer and you can't take Combat Trick more than once. Thank you for playing, please try again.@Wraithstrike
Dude... it's a 20 point buy. I just keep copying and pasting the old stats.Str 16 10 points
Dex 16 10 points
Con 10
Int 12 2 points
Wis 12 2 points
Cha 7 -4 points+2 Str (human bonus), +2 strength (Level 4, Level 8), +2 str (crappy belt of STR for good measure)
** spoiler omitted **
Did he specify swashbuckler archetype, because I didn't see it in his build.
Just checked again. Nothing about the swashbuckler archetype. So that would make his build illegal.
Or you could just apply the Swashbuckler archetype.
Hermean Paragon (PFS)
Chance Saviour (non-PFS)Now he has his +2 Initiative and can still take Killer.
what the-
No.EITHER of them works to replace Reactionary. One I believe is PFS legal. The other is not.
All of them are still trait bonuses, and therefore don't stack, so while you can choose more than one of those, one of them will be a waste of space.He still has incompatible traits. Yes I realize that is easy to get around, but I like picking nits.Um. You can. The swashbuckler archetype allows you to take It twice. If you're going finesse, take finesse rogue as a rogue talent and get three feats in exchange for tricks. Try again.You can't take both Reactionary and Killer and you can't take Combat Trick more than once. Thank you for playing, please try again.@Wraithstrike
Dude... it's a 20 point buy. I just keep copying and pasting the old stats.Str 16 10 points
Dex 16 10 points
Con 10
Int 12 2 points
Wis 12 2 points
Cha 7 -4 points+2 Str (human bonus), +2 strength (Level 4, Level 8), +2 str (crappy belt of STR for good measure)
** spoiler omitted **
Did he specify swashbuckler archetype, because I didn't see it in his build.
Just checked again. Nothing about the swashbuckler archetype. So that would make his build illegal.
Or you could just apply the Swashbuckler archetype.
Hermean Paragon (PFS)
Chance Saviour (non-PFS)Now he has his +2 Initiative and can still take Killer.
what the-
No.
EITHER of them works to replace Reactionary. One I believe is PFS legal. The other is not.
I thought you were trying to take both traits. I understand now.
This added nothing to the conversation.
You aren't part of a conversation, a conversation involves an exchange of ideas, you are only interested in people agreeing with your 'one true way'.
I'll leave you and MrSin to keep chatting :)
Reached 1000ish post.
I don't believe in a one true way thing btw.