How useless is a skill monkey rogue?


Advice

351 to 400 of 1,376 << first < prev | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | next > last >>

Cold Napalm wrote:
You do realize that the request was for ANY circumstance?

Ehhh I assume that was a poorly phrased question that people leapt on. Is there any character that is good in ANY circumstance? They all have bonuses and weaknesses.. even the most powerly optimized character is going to have SOME weakness a DM can exploit.

If the goal is NOT an optimized character... then NATURALLY he'll be have more weaknesses and not be great for ANY circumstance.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Marthkus wrote:

I was thinking of playing a rogue with 18 dex and 16 int with 10s in all the other stats as a human. I plan to use my rogue talents for weapon finesse, fast stealth, a combat feat, weapon focus, and skill mastery twice. I'm only planning out to lvl 12.

That's your first major mistake. You don't plan ANYTHING out to level whatever! Stop that! You are just setting yourself up to get dead or become a glass cannon. Instead, build in response to the game. Find out that you are facing off against a lot of undead? Grab Great Fortitude. Find out there's lots of traps? Grab auto trap rolls that kick in whenever you come near one.

Fast stealth and skill mastery aren't all that much. Try Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus, Outflank, and the Knife Master archetype if you want to be decent at backstab. Take ranks in alchemy so you can make poisons.


Piccolo wrote:
Marthkus wrote:

I was thinking of playing a rogue with 18 dex and 16 int with 10s in all the other stats as a human. I plan to use my rogue talents for weapon finesse, fast stealth, a combat feat, weapon focus, and skill mastery twice. I'm only planning out to lvl 12.

That's your first major mistake. You don't plan ANYTHING out to level whatever! Stop that! You are just setting yourself up to get dead or become a glass cannon.

Ehhhhh... depends on how 'carved in stone' you make it. I have friends who plan up to 20... and I could never do that. What I HAVE done however, is take a look at all the feats I like, and make a note about their prerequisites and what level I can potentially get them at....

Nothing worse than seeing an awesome combo in your head... and 3 months later when you actually level, grabbing something that is kinda cool on THAT day...

I have my paladin 'sketched out' a bit feat wise through 12th level... and already switched out one of my planned one. :)


Don't plan anything? The only character I have ever played where that worked out was a druid, took all summoning feats and never summoned throughout the campaign. But druids are awesome so it all worked out.

I have seen unplanned fighters, rogues, sorcerers...ect. Not plan out their chars and need a respect mid campaign to function.

Grand Lodge

Ugh.

Unplanned hardly work out.

Of course, knowing your DM's playstyle, and campaign theme(parameters) are what truly make a plan come together.

Knowing is half the battle.


Piccolo wrote:


That's your first major mistake. You don't plan ANYTHING out to level whatever! Stop that! You are just setting yourself up to get dead or become a glass cannon. Instead, build in response to the game. Find out that you are facing off against a lot of undead? Grab Great Fortitude. Find out there's lots of traps? Grab auto trap rolls that kick in whenever you come near one.

Adapting to the immediate circumstances really isn't any smarter than planning ahead. Say that you're playing an AP, and in the low-mid levels there's lots of undead. Then in the later levels, there are not, you will have wasted an adaptation gambling that the game would continue as it is now. I'd say it is better to plan a build based on general response to circumstances (which of course can vary). If one has played enough, it should be pretty clear how to make a build which is at least capable in most circumstances.

Of course this takes experience, but I think it yields better results than reacting to stimuli.


Back to the topic, have you thought about what skills you'd like to be very good at? And meshed that w/ the Ranger's class skill list? You can always spend feats on Additional Traits for more class skills, at least until you've gotten 1 from each category of trait.


Marthkus wrote:

I was thinking of playing a rogue with 18 dex and 16 int with 10s in all the other stats as a human. I plan to use my rogue talents for weapon finesse, fast stealth, a combat feat, weapon focus, and skill mastery twice. I'm only planning out to lvl 12.

My normal feats would be ones that added bonuses to skills like stealthy and skill focus.

Can this character function and contribute to the party in an effective way regardless of the campaign situation?

Virtually no character is going to always function and contribute to the party in an effective way regardless of campaign situation. Too many variables. But a dexterous and intelligent rogue can do pretty well in some campaigns. Based on the APs I've had experience with, I think he'd do fine in Council of Thieves (which I ran to the finish) and Skull and Shackles (so far, because we just hit 5th level and I'm playing, so no insight from behind the screen).

Campaigns that emphasize reasonably diverse skills are where your PC will shine. A city campaign in which the PC is a well-connected guild thief would be right up your alley. An extended campaign in a mega-dungeon, probably not so much.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

3.x/PF kind of forces you to plan out your character several levels in advance if you want access to a lot of things, since you often need to burn multiple feats as taxes on prerequisites in order to eventually get what you actually want. You can't just happen to grab Whirlwind Attack when the situation demands it - you need to foresee that you'll need Whirlwind Attack far in the future and start taking its laundry list of prerequisites immediately.

(This pretty much just applies to martial classes, spellcasters can just grab whatever spells they want and don't usually need to worry about extensive prerequisites.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Don't listen to these guys. It's a viable choice, sir.

Rogues do just fine damage with a 2 weapon fighting build and can get that damage relatively easily.

These guys just want to say something sucks just because it isn't the best.

You have to go out of your way to make a specified archeologist build, but he if you want to do damage and have the rogue skills and abilities.... go rogue AS IS.... core rulebook.

The archaeologist will not do as much damage as the rogue, especially as the rogue classes damage will scale better with better magic weapons. I would suggest a 2 weapon fighting style rogue.... or a "ray specialist" rogue that becomes and arcane trickster. That seems pretty fun and will make good use of the high intelligence you want.

Again, rogues are better at multiclassing than bards.


AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Ahem, my bad... please proceed.

Grand Lodge

phantom1592 wrote:
Cold Napalm wrote:
You do realize that the request was for ANY circumstance?

Ehhh I assume that was a poorly phrased question that people leapt on. Is there any character that is good in ANY circumstance? They all have bonuses and weaknesses.. even the most powerly optimized character is going to have SOME weakness a DM can exploit.

If the goal is NOT an optimized character... then NATURALLY he'll be have more weaknesses and not be great for ANY circumstance.

The goal wasn't GOOD in any situation...just functional (I read that as not useless). This is why the question of is this for PFS asked. Because really, making a character for PFS's any situation is gonna be different from you don't know a DM's style any situation.

Grand Lodge

The OP has already found a nice alternative he is pleased with it.

The Rogue stuff doesn't even really apply here any more.


Marthkus wrote:

Don't plan anything? The only character I have ever played where that worked out was a druid, took all summoning feats and never summoned throughout the campaign. But druids are awesome so it all worked out.

I have seen unplanned fighters, rogues, sorcerers...ect. Not plan out their chars and need a respect mid campaign to function.

Look, at most, only plan a handful of levels. Hell, I have a Fighter that only has the next 3 levels planned out, and that's only because those grant the basics along with some improved defense.

Point is, think balance, don't plan out so far ahead. Instead, revise your plan to adapt to what's happening in game.

For example, that fighter I told you about, he took Weapon Focus, Dodge, and Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes. He's a 3rd level Fighter. Why all the defensive feats? He's been catching hell in these first few levels, and decided to patch up the crappy saving throws he has, plus he's a 2 handed variant so his offense rocks.

Get it? Be responsive. Don't plan your PC's in a vacuum, instead consider both your party members and the game challenges.


Marthkus wrote:

I was thinking of playing a rogue with 18 dex and 16 int with 10s in all the other stats as a human. I plan to use my rogue talents for weapon finesse, fast stealth, a combat feat, weapon focus, and skill mastery twice. I'm only planning out to lvl 12.

My normal feats would be ones that added bonuses to skills like stealthy and skill focus.

Can this character function and contribute to the party in an effective way regardless of the campaign situation?

At the very least change 16 int to 14 and 14 con

Grand Lodge

Piccolo wrote:
Marthkus wrote:

Don't plan anything? The only character I have ever played where that worked out was a druid, took all summoning feats and never summoned throughout the campaign. But druids are awesome so it all worked out.

I have seen unplanned fighters, rogues, sorcerers...ect. Not plan out their chars and need a respect mid campaign to function.

Look, at most, only plan a handful of levels. Hell, I have a Fighter that only has the next 3 levels planned out, and that's only because those grant the basics along with some improved defense.

Point is, think balance, don't plan out so far ahead. Instead, revise your plan to adapt to what's happening in game.

For example, that fighter I told you about, he took Weapon Focus, Dodge, and Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes. He's a 3rd level Fighter. Why all the defensive feats? He's been catching hell in these first few levels, and decided to patch up the crappy saving throws he has, plus he's a 2 handed variant so his offense rocks.

Get it? Be responsive. Don't plan your PC's in a vacuum, instead consider both your party members and the game challenges.

OR...plan your character out WELL from the get go so you don't have to play a couple levels of catching hell maybe? See planning things out BADLY is not advised...so when we say plan out your character, we mean plan out your character WELL.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

The OP has already found a nice alternative he is pleased with it.

The Rogue stuff doesn't even really apply here any more.

By the way the ranger thing isn't panning out too well. He has half the skills I want. Traits only go so far. A level of rogue would fix this, but Then I get a dead level of abilities I don't want to use.


What are the skills you want?

Grand Lodge

You can put skill ranks in any skill.

Traits can give you other skills as class skills.

What skills are you looking for?


Sense motive, UMD, Disguise, Sleight-of-hand
Escape artist would be nice (makes stealthy a better feat)

Diplomacy for gather information.

There's enough skill points, just not enough skills.

Grand Lodge

You can put ranks in to all of those.


I don't understand the problem... You have enough skill points, so what is wrong? You said rogue dip could fix it, but rogue is only 2 more skill points anyway and you seem to have plenty for what you want.

Is the issue class skills? Just use traits / Additional Traits feat for that.


blackbloodtroll wrote:
You can put ranks in to all of those.

For a skill monkey that +3 hurts


Traits and feats like Cosmopolitan and Additional Traits can give you that bonus. The +3 is nice, but not really necessary, considering you'll have high skill bonuses anyway.


Ok so does a rogue need climb? Could knotted rope do the trick? If I can do without that, I can make a more balance build

10str 14dex 14con 16int 10wis 10cha (level bonuses into dex)
Traits: Reactionary(+2 intiative),Dangerously Curious(+1 UMD)

Skills(12)Acrobatics,Bluff,Diplomacy,Disable-Device,Disguise,Escape-Artist
Linguistics,Perception,Sense-Motive,Sleight-of-Hand,Stealth,Use-Magic-Devic e
1 :Skill Focus(Perception),Deft-Hands|
2 :|Finesse Rogue
3 :Stealthy|
4 :|Fast Stealth
5 :Alertness|
6 :|Combat Trick(Quick Draw)
7 :Skill Focus(Stealth)|
8 :Skill Focus(Use-Magic-Device)|Weapon Training(Rapier)
9 :Deceitful|
10:|Skill Mastery(Use-Magic-Device,Stealth,Perception,Sleight-of-Hand,Disable-Device, Acrobatics)
11:Skill Focus(Sleight-of-Hand)|
12:|Skill Mastery(Bluff,Diplomacy,Disguise,Escape-Artist,Linguistics,Sense-Motive)

Oh and this would be for PFS. Found out yesterday that I will have time to do that this summer. I'm waffling between something like this and a sorcerer or druid.


I would advice against bringing a character who can't do things in combat to a PFS game. I've had so many of those, and its actually really rough on them. Bring a good veratile character. There is combat in PFS, I have yet to have a game where there was none. When most of the party is skill monkeys with overlap it doesn't actually work out very well.

Sczarni

you silly people always putting reactionary as one of your traits.

Human is a must for free skill focus, or Elven/dwarf/gnome for the age related feat.


lantzkev wrote:
you silly people always putting reactionary as one of your traits.

I like survivor better actualy. No one bullied me as a kid! My childhood still sucked, but at least I wasn't bullied!


MrSin wrote:
I would advice against bringing a character who can't do things in combat to a PFS game. I've had so many of those, and its actually really rough on them. Bring a good veratile character. There is combat in PFS, I have yet to have a game where there was none. When most of the party is skill monkeys with overlap it doesn't actually work out very well.

1-9 just flank and sneak attack. Not crazy damage but enough. Depending on the situation I would have enough skills to be creative.

10-12 UMD more. Sneak attack with rays or wand of shocking grasp. Wand of fireball isn't bad either. Even if they save, its an AOE sneak attack


There are two equalizers in this kind of game: higher point buy and magic items. Everyone always forgets to mention just how integral magic items are to this game. UMD is the most important skill because it lets you use wands and scrolls. Wealth is so much power in this game.

Grand Lodge

I have always hated the Sneak Attack mechanic.

It is unreliable, and takes way too much effort to set up.

I always see it as a "wheeee DICE!" mechanic that inexperienced players believe will do waaaaay more damage than it actually does.

Give me static damage any day.

Sczarni

Why not do both? =D

Rogue with strength focus, power attack, etc.

No one argues that static modifiers aren't "always on" while sneak attack isn't. The thing is you can generally combine them and there's no reason to not look at sneak attack for increased damage.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

I have always hated the Sneak Attack mechanic.

It is unreliable, and takes way too much effort to set up.

I always see it as a "wheeee DICE!" mechanic that inexperienced players believe will do waaaaay more damage than it actually does.

Give me static damage any day.

Except I am not looking to be the king of combat here. I just need to be functional and get creative with skills every once in awhile.

My rogue only needs to be on par with a vanilla monk in combat, if I don't focus on combat.

I would have to be clever with my skills to be really effective.

Grand Lodge

I thought you were going for Freebooter/Trapper Ranger.

That gives you skills, and combat.

Also, your allies will love you more.

If you are looking to be the "awesomest" at every damn skill, and not cast spells, and still not be crippled by combat, then you are asking for too much.

Choose something, and focus.

Sczarni

Try this out then for feats:

Weapon focus to Dazzling display
Get hero's Display and Performing Combatant.

Now you can demoralize opponents as free actions easily with your perform skills.

Then pick up shattered defenses. Now you can always sneak attack those demoralized (shaken) critters... Guess what, you have also added utility to your whole group with a skill, added cool flair, and your sneak attack will be useful automatically nearly as long as your opponent isn't immune to fear effects.

Did I mention how cool the flavor is of this?


Marthkus wrote:

Sense motive, UMD, Disguise, Sleight-of-hand

Escape artist would be nice (makes stealthy a better feat)

Diplomacy for gather information.

There's enough skill points, just not enough skills.

Sounds like a Bard to me.


Oh goodie, another combat gimped PFS rogue someone gets to carry around.

Well I can at least hope you're not at my table.

While people decry the optimizers, the only way many PFS tables don't get wiped is because someone carries the dead weight on their backs. (and yes, I have been there plenty of times doing the carrying).


Piccolo wrote:
Sounds like a Bard to me.

Shhhh! That's a dirty word 'round these parts!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Marthkus wrote:
Ok so does a rogue need climb?

One rank plus the class skill bonus lets him never fail a DC 5 check, while giving him a better chance at higher DCs, so it's worth the investment early on. You should always go for the knotted rope when you can of course.


Marthkus wrote:
10-12 UMD more. Sneak attack with rays or wand of shocking grasp. Wand of fireball isn't bad either. Even if they save, its an AOE sneak attack

Negative on the wand of fireball, that's a trick only arcane tricksters get.


drbuzzard wrote:

Oh goodie, another combat gimped PFS rogue someone gets to carry around.

Well I can at least hope you're not at my table.

While people decry the optimizers, the only way many PFS tables don't get wiped is because someone carries the dead weight on their backs. (and yes, I have been there plenty of times doing the carrying).

No offense, but if the DM doesn't give guidelines as to what roles the party needs filled, then the DM deserves what he or she gets.


StreamOfTheSky wrote:
Piccolo wrote:
Sounds like a Bard to me.
Shhhh! That's a dirty word 'round these parts!

They're goofy, I'll grant you, but in this case it would work. Those APG archetypes are great for specializing the Bard into whatever.


Piccolo wrote:
drbuzzard wrote:

Oh goodie, another combat gimped PFS rogue someone gets to carry around.

Well I can at least hope you're not at my table.

While people decry the optimizers, the only way many PFS tables don't get wiped is because someone carries the dead weight on their backs. (and yes, I have been there plenty of times doing the carrying).

No offense, but if the DM doesn't give guidelines as to what roles the party needs filled, then the DM deserves what he or she gets.

PFS is the organized play. The groups are usually PUGs(pick up groups) and you weren't keen on who was showing until it happens do to attendance and other things. There is no DM giving guidelines and controlling the group makeup. In this situation someone is showing up and dileberately expecting the party of strangers to carry him through combat.


Piccolo wrote:

No offense, but if the DM doesn't give guidelines as to what roles the party needs filled, then the DM deserves what he or she gets.

This is a PFS table, which means "you play what you brought". There's no prior GM preparation, as it is discouraged to tell people much of anything about modules that people have not played yet. Best you will get is "don't play up" or maybe "a balanced party is good".

Since it is a PFS table, he might get away with playing the character for a while without any trouble. It's only the more recent seasons which really have introduced flat out hard combats. As long as he plays old stuff, nobody will likely have to carry him. However once he sits at a full table of a season four scenario playing up, the rest of the table better be on the ball (with effective characters). Someone will have to carry him.

Grand Lodge

drbuzzard wrote:


Since it is a PFS table, he might get away with playing the character for a while without any trouble. It's only the more recent seasons which really have introduced flat out hard combats. As long as he plays old stuff, nobody will likely have to carry him. However once he sits at a full table of a season four scenario playing up, the rest of the table better be on the ball (with effective characters). Someone will have to carry him.

Not really true. If he has a completely utterly useless character and the table is a should we play up or not scenario, his character choice may reduce the table to playing down...which means a table of level 3 who would have played a 4-5 game for 1500ish gold would now play a 1-2 for 500. Yeah one game like that is not a big deal...but if he part of a weekly game and shows up every week, the other regulars will end up with around 3k less gold then they could have. That will kinda hurt when they get to 6-7 tiers (with level 5 played this way for 2k per session less...that is a total of 9k less gold). And some of season one stuff is WORSE then season 4 stuff at tier 1-2 (seriously some of those writers were on crack it seems and just took away a couple of mooks from the 6-7 tier). Also table size matters as well. If you have a table of 7 at every game, you can honestly bring whatever and the chances are, you can be carried and nobody will even notice. Table size is 4...well you'd better be on your A game with your A game character...especially for season 4 stuff or the harder season 1 stuff.


Cold Napalm wrote:
Not really true. If he has a completely utterly useless character and the table is a should we play up or not scenario, his character choice may reduce the table to playing down...

We don't know who a character is until we finally play with him. "please carry me" is a bad plan for PFS though.


Yeah, I really hate having to carry someone at a table. I find it completely miserable when I have most of a table that needs to be carried. Did a module a few weekends ago and the table consisted of:

My fighter
another well built fighter
pregen-cleric
pregen-rogue
gimpy inquisitor/fighter
gimpy druid/fighter

The two gimps might as well have not been there at all. At least the people playing the pregens managed to pull some weight (in particular the cleric, the pregen rogue is pretty lousy). Eventually the fighter/druid got whacked and there wasn't a noticeable difference in combat efficacy in the following encounters.

Grand Lodge

MrSin wrote:
Cold Napalm wrote:
Not really true. If he has a completely utterly useless character and the table is a should we play up or not scenario, his character choice may reduce the table to playing down...
We don't know who a character is until we finally play with him. "please carry me" is a bad plan for PFS though.

No...we have a pretty good idea BEFORE we play. But that is what level 1 respec is for. He can try his idea all he wants at level 1 and when he finds out that people have to carry him, he can respec before going to level 2. On a side note, yes I have played with a rogue made similar to what the OP has in mind...no it was not fun. My cleric could do NOTHING but heal for the whole bloody game. Seriously, I would have preferred to have just left him unconscious but most of the table seemed not okay with that plan so I just kept healing him (yeah yeah...despite the fact that I am a jack ass, I was not about to make 4 other people not have fun because the one badly made rogue was pissing me off).

Shadow Lodge

Wait, this is for PFS? Oh boy. This kind of build is alright in a home game, where the GM can cater to the player's unusual build, but in PFS that's not an option. OP, if you do make this character, you need to recognize that you are burdening people you may not know very well with your character. Your character will be an annoyance in PFS for two reasons.

First, and more obviously, there is the fact that your character simply won't pull his weight during combat. This means any table including you will receive fewer rewards and more death. Also, they'll take a lot longer to finish because combats will drag out. Second, your focus on skills means that you will completely steal the spotlight from people who have managed to build a balanced character and who like to use their skills- bards, rangers and alchemists spring to mind here.

Cold Napalm's advice is good here. Feel free to try your character at level 1, but if you notice that you are an unfun part of the table, then consider rebuilding.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sesharan wrote:
Second, your focus on skills means that you will completely steal the spotlight from people who have managed to build a balanced character and who like to use their skills- bards, rangers and alchemists spring to mind here.

I doubt this will actually happen...

351 to 400 of 1,376 << first < prev | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / How useless is a skill monkey rogue? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.