Rogue Vs. Ninja: What's the point?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 133 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Lantern Lodge

After looking across the information for rogues and ninjas it appears to me almost as if rogues are obsolete. The vast majority of their abilities are identical and not only do ninjas have their own Tricks, they can instead take up a rogue Talent.

It seems like the ONLY thing a rogue has that a ninja can't is Trapfinding and the ability to disarm magical traps. Granted, this is an important skill, but it just seems a little slim in determining the difference between the two.

In the long run Ninja just reads like an over-powered archetype than an individual class.

Someone please come tell me that I'm wrong and that I'm an idiot.
And, y'know, tell me why so I can stop being an idiot.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Evasion can be extremely handy depending on the campaign. Ninjas have to wait quite a while for that. I think it's a bigger deal than trapfinding.

But Ninja Tricks and Ki are pretty dang cool for sure.

Edit: And I wouldn't say that the Ninja is overpowered. Higher powered than the rogue, maybe.


I am interested in this as well


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You're mostly right the only reason people don't pick ninjas over rogues more often is that
1) Ninjas are an equally mediocre dip.
2) Ninjas aren't as fluffy as rogues. Aka the flavor is wrong.
3) We don't like your fantasy 'round hea boy! Refer to 2, aka nothing eastern allowed games.
4) Ninjas don't have trapfinding.

Now why I don't think the Ninja is an overpowered archetype, they're still not the best at anything. Bards do skills better, rangers still fight better etc etc.

But Ninja's are more powerful mechanically than Rogues are so if you want to call if overpowered by comparison you could. I think the issue is that Ninja was essentially what Pathfinder wanted to do/should have done with the Rogue but was too afraid of alienating the 3.5 compatible crowd to do.


On paper the ninja looks better than rogue. In reality the ninja is no more powerful than the rogue. I've seen the ninja in games. They are different but no better. They suffer from the same problems rogues have and that is they work great in lower level games and can't hit at the higher levels.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

*Alternate Class
A ninja is a rogue alternate class. Archetypes are similar but different.

(Sorry to nit-pick. Just a point that has to be made.)

As to the nature of a rogue being mechanically inferior to a ninja... yeah. It seems that way. There is some argument back and forth over the value of certain class features (evasion is often mentioned, light steps vs trap finding, etc) but honestly the ninja is a mechanically more impressive class on paper. Ninja have to concern themselves with CHA in addition to other stats but rogue is kind of lacking a main stat as is. (I like a few extra points in Int to go full skill monkey)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ninja is as weak as the rogue, so calling it an overpowered archetype, even if it were plainly better, is laughable. Ninja still has every single problem and lack of a niche that rogue suffers. He does get some actual interesting class features, but he is also even more MAD (multiple ability dependent) than Rogue between the cha-based stuff and the crappy selection of finessable weapons. Ninja IMO is the most MAD class in the game. I guess if you can afford an 18 18 16 14 14 14 type stat array that's not a big issue, but for most people it is an issue.

Ninja also suffers from "lazy designer syndrome." There is currently no truly RAW means for a ninja to gain extra tricks, for example. It seems pretty clear they're intended to have their own feat or just use Extra Rogue Talent (same net effect, since you can get tricks as talents and vice-versa), but it has not been officially addressed, and until it is, PFS is a no-go, as is any vindictive DM angry about the "superior to rogues" thing looking for any RAW-legal way to screw you over (and judging by posts on this board, there are quite a few of these people). Likewise, there are few ninja-compatible archetypes and none specific for it. RAW, ninja is barred from the ones that swap the trap crap, which tend to have all of the really good rogue archetypes (and a slew of mediocre and bad ones too, of course). Would it really be unbalanced to let them swap poison use and no trace as if they were trapfinding/sense? Probably not, but good luck asking your DM. Even if it's an archetype that fluff-wise makes *more* sense for a ninja than a rogue.

I suppose Ninja is the better class just by virtue of having "talents" that are useful beyond the feat-gaining ones. But the true best answer to "ninja or rogue?" is "play bard, or alchemist, or synthesist, or ranger, or inquisitor, or..." Hell, give a Zen Archer Monk the Wisdom in the Flesh trait for Disable Device, and he becomes a pretty good rogue replacement, even.

Lantern Lodge

I wasn't thinking ninjas were over-powered in the sense of being god-like, merely it struck me as odd that ninjas had their own Tricks to choose from as well as being able to have their pick of any Rogue talent they think is shiny.

My point was that it seemed to make the Rogue a half-step from being pointless.

Although judging from the responses I'm getting the heavy impression that nobody likes Rogues or Ninjas, period.

Something you folks have against the sneaky types?

Lantern Lodge

Scott_UAT wrote:

*Alternate Class

A ninja is a rogue alternate class. Archetypes are similar but different.

(Sorry to nit-pick. Just a point that has to be made.)

I can not conceive of an instrument precise enough to have allowed you to split that hair.


MaestroVolpe wrote:
Something you folks have against the sneaky types?

Its not that people don't like them*. Its that they're just weak. Sneak attack is situational and doesn't compare to full BAB class DPR and magic can replace skills. Bards are just better skill monkeys in many cases. We have a few threads on this as is.

Personally I consider ninja a step up from rogue, but I think the archetypes could mesh better and that both could get some more love.

* Well maybe ninja... Eastern names get some hate sometimes.


MaestroVolpe wrote:
Scott_UAT wrote:

*Alternate Class

A ninja is a rogue alternate class. Archetypes are similar but different.

(Sorry to nit-pick. Just a point that has to be made.)

I can not conceive of an instrument precise enough to have allowed you to split that hair.

Lol.

Sczarni

I don't understand all this talk about ninjas being so MAD....

Human
Str 10
Dex 18
Con 14
Int 10
Wis 10
Cha 16

Done.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There's also the fact that sneaking is kind of pointless.

Monsters have scent, blindsense, tremorsense, etc... out the wazoo and stealth doesn't help against that crap.

That's aside from the dilution of class skill benefit means anyone can stealth well if they want to and that spells can do it better.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I really don't see a problem with rogues because I know a lot of people who still play them. It's not really about the power because not everyone cares about that. There is still something very appealing about the rogue and I would argue that it is probably one of the most played classes out there.

Sczarni

StreamOfTheSky wrote:

There's also the fact that sneaking is kind of pointless.

Monsters have scent, blindsense, tremorsense, etc... out the wazoo and stealth doesn't help against that crap.

That's aside from the dilution of class skill benefit means anyone can stealth well if they want to and that spells can do it better.

True that. Potions of negate aroma and invisibility trick help, but don't solve.

shallowsoul wrote:
There is still something very appealing about the rogue and I would argue that it is probably one of the most played classes out there.

I totally agree! I love playing rogues, and they will always have a special place in my heart. They are iconic and very commonly played at my table and at those I play on.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
shallowsoul wrote:
It's not really about the power because not everyone cares about that.

Ignoring a problem doesn't make it not a problem. Anecdotal evidence suggest that rogues aren't played as often as everyone thinks. I won't argue people don't play them, but I wouldn't say that means they don't have problems.


I'm going to have to disagree with the consensus here. While rogues and ninjas may not have the best attack bonus, It's pretty easy to apply sneak damage, and the damage builds up quick. All you have to do is feint them (preferably with improved two-weapon feint), which isn't that hard to do. Combine the two weapon fighting with a speed weapon, and you got 7 sneak attacks per round, which is on average over 200 damage from sneak alone. And it's even better (and easier) as a ninja, as they can be invisible, which applies your sneak, and use nonlethal unarmed, which does 2d8 (I think, don't remember off the top of my head), because of the unarmed mastery, per attack, plus it can be increased from the nonlethal sneak feats, to the point where it can basically one-turn kill anything (especially if you work as a team, and get an attack or CMB buff from a caster). Granted, that's not going to happen every time (wouldn't be fun if it did anyway), but you can't just dismiss that as weak.


Alec Colasante wrote:
and use nonlethal unarmed, ... plus it can be increased from the nonlethal sneak feats, to the point where it can basically one-turn kill anything

Thanks, this made me laugh... Non-lethal killing. I like it...


To put it simply, Ninja is an archetype of the rogue (or variant or alternate class; however you wish to put it), just as Samurai is an archetype of the Cavalier.


I have a ninja in my current RotRL campaign and I find that the class seems to have a few more legs to stand on than the rogue. The Swift Action Invisibility is incredibly handy for battlefield mobility and lining up sneak attacks. The class does bring some tools to the table that the rogue is sorely lacking, but that having been said I don't think the class is in any way "overpowered". I'd rather say that the current pathfinder rogue is a bit lacking.

Lantern Lodge

I've been seeing a lot of interesting responses and fortunately minimal levels of animosity, so if you folks wouldn't mind I was wondering if I could perhaps expand the scope of my question in order to address a more deeply-rooted concern.

I haven't been able to play a tabletop RPG in almost ten years. Before then I was in love with 3.5, so when I moved to Washington and got a chance to settle down I thought I'd get back in the game only to find out that it'd been replaced by 4th E, which basically got rid of everything I loved about the game.

Then I heard about Pathfinder, which seems to have been made by folks who had the exact same thought that I did, only they actually did something about it.

I haven't played this game yet. I'm still in the Army, so I technically earn below the poverty line, so I'm going to do my research and make sure this is going to be a fun game before I lay down what little coin I have, and so far there are a few concerns cropping up.

It seems that there is actually a healthy debate as to the inherent value of having a rogue in the party, as seen above, since some folks seem to feel that a rogue's combat prowess is an oxymoron, and since their skills can be replaced almost entirely through spells.

The idea of a party going off without a rogue and being completely cool with it makes my hair stand up like the sound of bones against pavement or a geiger counter or the first few bars of a Justin Bieber spell.

The other concern is my recent discovery of the term MAD, which I've deduced to mean Multiple Ability Dependent and seems to be used purely as a pejorative. Whenever I played 3.5 we had two types of players-- the well-balanced, rational player, and the min/maxer. We used min/maxer as a pejorative. Because those players were always the 14-year-old (physically and/or mentally) who was convinced that they should be able to kill absolutely everything in the game in one hit but brought nothing to the table in terms of story or character depth.

So those are my thoughts. I beg you folks to reassure me that I'm completely wrong.

P.S. let me guess, Monks are considered to be a useless joke as well, right?


Rogues can actually take a ninja's ki pool and an unlimited number of non-advanced ninja tricks as rogue talents.


MaestroVolpe wrote:
It seems like the ONLY thing a rogue has that a ninja can't is Trapfinding and the ability to disarm magical traps. Granted, this is an important skill, but it just seems a little slim in determining the difference between the two.

Don't worry, it actually isn't an important skill at all. Several kinds of Bards and Rangers can do it, too. Heck, a level 1 spell grants the ability, so just about anyone can. Plus, traps are very rare to begin with and Dispel Magic can "disarm" them, too.

Abadar wrote:

I don't understand all this talk about ninjas being so MAD....

Human
Str 10
Dex 18
Con 14
Int 10
Wis 10
Cha 16

Done.

Ok, so you have two choices with this build:

1) Miss everything until level 2
2) Take Weapon Finesse at level 1 instead of using a Trick/Talent on it, which means all your other feats are delayed

Then, on top of that, you're dealing terrible damage until you get agile weapons.

On top of that, I don't think anyone can fill a rogue-like character's resume fully with only 8 skill points per level (too much is expected of them), and with Wisdom 10 your Perception (the most important skill in the game) and Will (the most important save that is already low thanks to it being a poor save for your class) will suffer.

Rogues/Ninjas are definitely MAD--your stat array only exemplified it.


MaestroVolpe wrote:


The idea of a party going off without a rogue and being completely cool with it makes my hair stand up...

If no-one wants to play a rogue, then the party can get by without one. That's a good thing.

Rogue versus trap is a fairly limited gameplay mechanic.
"Make a perception roll... You find a trap. Make a disable device roll... You disarm the trap. Moving on...."
Or: "Make a perception roll... You set off a trap and take thirty points of damage." "I heal him with the wand of cure light wounds." "OK, moving on..."
Or: "Make a perception roll... You fail. You take three hundred points of damage and die."
It's often more fun to disarm a trap without rogue skills. "I throw a rock on to the pressure plate to see what happens."

To respond to some of your other points:

Being ineffective in combat doesn't automatically make you a better roleplayer. Rogues are likely to die if they put points into charisma instead of Dex and Con. This is not a good thing.

Standard monks with standard attributes are pretty weak. Some of the archetypes added in the later books are quite effective.

Silver Crusade

Ninjas get a better set of weapon proficiencies, but that's about it.


MAD is a bad thing because the game just is not designed in favor of the MAD classes. You get spread too thin, you have to buy a lot of +stat magic items, and even the per 4 levels increase (to only one stat) works against you. Being MAD basically guarantees your defenses/saves or attack/damage will end up lacking due to diluted ability scores.

And yes, monks are the weakest class in the game. They were in 3E, then PF nerfed them further.

It sucks, rogue was my favorite class, and I also like playing martial arts types (since monk has sucked for a decade, I've learned by now to just never take more than a dip in monk when making a "martial artist," though). I expect to be good at my job, though. When all trapfinding does is let you disarm (not even FIND, anyone can do that!) magical traps and "class skill" means so little that a wis-based caster will equal or exceed my perception check to find traps w/o even intending to upstage me... why am I even needed? If the fighter can do the same damage as I can with sneak attacks...all the rounds, all the time... why bother going to the trouble of setting up for SA when I could just be a fighter?
Being mediocre or 2nd or 3rd best in the party at many things but best at nothing is not terribly fun, at least for most people. Maybe if everyone else were all well-rounded mediocre types, but that's not the case. Most classes are fairly dedicated specialists, they do certain things VERY well. In a party filled with specialists, does it really help them to double up (except doing it less well than the other guy) on something they already have covered? Wouldn't it be better to cover a specific area that the other PCs don't have covered, rather than play a class that can only do a 2nd rate job of covering that role in return for also doing a 2nd rate job on roles already covered?

Optimizing has little to do with roleplaying. Some of my most optimized characters have also been some of my most heavily roleplayed. And some of my least optimized ones I didn't even give much of a personality. Indeed, if anything, the more effort I put into making a character, the more attached I am to him/her and the more I feel invested into fleshing him/her out. While as ones quickly thrown together I have little to no attachment to. Crazy concept, huh?

Bigdaddyjug wrote:
Ninjas get a better set of weapon proficiencies, but that's about it.

They get less selection for finessable weapons, and when you need dex, cha, con, some wis to make up for the poor will save, and at least int 10 so as to not throw away the "lots of skills" advantage you're supposed to have... it'd be nice to not also need a good strength score. You know?

So I'm not sure their selection is actually better. Tends to have higher base damage, yes. But an extra 1 or 2 average damage isn't a big difference when it means you have to sack other ability scores to use the weapon well.

Silver Crusade

The wakizashi is the best light weapon in the game. Ninjas get access to it, rogues do not. The katana is a better one-handed weapon than any on the rogue list and is very nice used in two hands if you go the Str ninja route.

So tell me again how it's not better?


The wakizashi is like a rapier, but actually light (so you can offhand dual-wield it with only a -2 penalty), it gets the deadly advantage and it is slashing which is just better than piercing, at least as far as i know because there is not a single monster that is less vulnerable to piercing than to slashing.


I am going to show the 12 year old player in my PFS group this thread while I crumple up her Ninja's Character Sheet and throw it away in front of her while waggling my finger and telling her 'no'.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lamontius wrote:
I am going to show the 12 year old player in my PFS group this thread while I crumple up her Ninja's Character Sheet and throw it away in front of her while waggling my finger and telling her 'no'.

Don't forget to yell at her "Why weren't you a trapper ranger! I warned you this would happen!"

Sczarni

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Lamontius wrote:

I am going to show the 12 year old player in my PFS group this thread while I crumple up her Ninja's Character Sheet and throw it away in front of her while waggling my finger and telling her 'no'.

You, sir, should be kept nowhere near 12 year old girls...


Ninja can do lot of dmg and can be nasty, but are fragile, even more than rogue, and this is one of the biggest problem of the class. Also, as rogue, ninja got the worst attack bonus of all classes, with the exception of full arcane casters. All other class with BAB equal to
level * 0.75 got self buffs or party buffs. There's no reason to play a rogue when you can play a ranger or bard with archetype. Staff should fix that, but seems we will never have a rule revision.


What makes ninjas more fragile than rogues?


MrSin wrote:
What makes ninjas more fragile than rogues?

Higher ability score in Cha than Con for Ninja abilities? Though I feel like the whole Greater Invisibility at level 10 thing really helps with that except for enemies with methods to get around that.


No archetype, different class abilities, but i think that ninja is more powerful than rogue. Both are not the best choice for a party.
While i wait for a revision of classes (maybe forever...) i just use lot of homebrew rules and class fix that i found on this forum :)

Lantern Lodge

Okay, so what I'm really hearing from all of you is that ALL of my fears are hugely confirmed.

Rogues/Ninjas are collectively seen as completely fungible, mostly useless in combat and therefore unwanted, and nobody likes a character with a well-rounded set of abilities because apparently min/maxing is the only way to go.

This does not sound like a tabletop RPG I would enjoy.

Which is a pity, this game sounded like it would be awesome.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't really like how you keep referring to specialization as min/maxing, as a pejorative.

And there is nothing wrong with being well rounded, or having multiple talents. Crippling over-specialization is just as much a bad thing as being a master of none. But there exists a golden median between the two. Having a role or set of abilities you do very well at, and also having other abilities and skills to assist the guy more specialized with, or to cover as a backup when he's not around.

If you want a game where specializing isn't the preferred method, you need a game system where there aren't any explicit or implicit party "roles." Even then, I suspect in some sort of open ended "buy abilities with points" sort of system, a lot of parties will self-impose role-filling and specialization, since that is pretty much always the most efficient and effective way to go.

Real life works much the same way...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
MaestroVolpe wrote:

Okay, so what I'm really hearing from all of you is that ALL of my fears are hugely confirmed.

Rogues/Ninjas are collectively seen as completely fungible, mostly useless in combat and therefore unwanted, and nobody likes a character with a well-rounded set of abilities because apparently min/maxing is the only way to go.

This does not sound like a tabletop RPG I would enjoy.

Which is a pity, this game sounded like it would be awesome.

To add to what Sky said, the problem is that the Rogue isn't well-rounded. At all. It's ridiculously over-specialized on one thing, skills. Skills Skills Skills. This is supposed to be what Rogues shine at.

The problem is, the skill system (and many classes) moved on, while Rogues did not.

Nowadays, even two guys with Int+4 classes, both human and putting their Favored Class bonus into skills, can cover the Rogue's role with basically no investment just by being reasonably careful. Bards, who got a massive boost to their skills via Versatile Performance, actually make out better on raw ranks than Rogues do.


I love rogues and ninjas. I always have. They have always been the under powered underdog that every party needed, but only a brave and inventive few would play. Then came PF... And now there is no country for old rogues... Except for gestalt land.

But in those few and far between gestalt games, they certainly have a place. Cleric/ rogue, wiz/ rogue, Druid /rogue, sorc/ ninja, oracle/ ninja, paladin/ ninja, monk/ rogue or ninja... And to a lesser extent, fighter, cavalier, and barbarian/ rogue and samurai/ ninja.

Other than that you are looking at 2-6 (which is kinda ballsy) lvl dips, and PFS games don't offer enough lvls to make those dips optimal.

But more to the point, ninja is better than a rogue even if its more MAD, but neither of them are good, and only slightly better than NPC classes. Barring a complete overhaul, they should make SA a feat, and the talents should be 2/1 feats.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
MaestroVolpe wrote:

Okay, so what I'm really hearing from all of you is that ALL of my fears are hugely confirmed.

Rogues/Ninjas are collectively seen as completely fungible, mostly useless in combat and therefore unwanted, and nobody likes a character with a well-rounded set of abilities because apparently min/maxing is the only way to go.

This does not sound like a tabletop RPG I would enjoy.

Which is a pity, this game sounded like it would be awesome.

Please don't base your impressions of Pathfinder RPG based on what people in this thread are telling you.

Rogues and ninjas can be perfectly enjoyable and effective characters. On an objective ranking scale, with everything turned to 11, it's certainly arguable that rogues and ninjas are some of the "worst" classes. However, not every group - in fact, I'd argue not even a majority of groups - play like that. It's perfectly valid to play like that, but it's likewise perfectly valid to play in games where extreme optimisation isn't needed or wanted.

Min/maxing isn't the only way to go. Promise. There are plenty of ways to play and plenty of games where people playing rogues and ninjas have a lot of fun and contribute a lot.


To be honest...in my ideal overhaul, to get Rogues back to where they should be, I would give them a free Skill Focus feat every other level. Then, I would bump a number of uncommon "rogu-ey" DCs by 5. (Acrobatics, Disable Device, UMD.) After that, I would probably increase the level of a number of common "bypass" spells. Knock at 4th level, Invisibility at 3rd, Greater Invis at 5th, not an exhaustive list by any stretch.

That way, members of other classes could get a good breadth of skills, and casters COULD bypass challenges, but Rogues would have the depth to really get it done when you're in a hurry or under the gun and you need everything you've got to survive the other challenges.


I am working on style packages to offer my players for the rogue class. 3 abilities/ style, 2 styles/ rogue. Each style offers different perks and niches like combat, skill, utility, and magical focus. Things like adding int mod to hit, AC, and saves. Rerolls, and adding extra dice to rolls. HiPS, up to 2nd lvl spells, and various othe class ability packages... It's a start and a way to add to without taking away from the potential to versify a play style.


Alice Margatroid wrote:
MaestroVolpe wrote:

Okay, so what I'm really hearing from all of you is that ALL of my fears are hugely confirmed.

Rogues/Ninjas are collectively seen as completely fungible, mostly useless in combat and therefore unwanted, and nobody likes a character with a well-rounded set of abilities because apparently min/maxing is the only way to go.

This does not sound like a tabletop RPG I would enjoy.

Which is a pity, this game sounded like it would be awesome.

Please don't base your impressions of Pathfinder RPG based on what people in this thread are telling you.

She's right :) We're special.

Oh and they're not just mostly useless in combat. They're 2nd rate out of combat too. That's why no one likes them. They no longer have a niche at which they excel. They're squishies who are some of the worst classes at combat, while being in 2nd tier with skills and no spellcasting capabilities.

So they lack a way to truly aid the party (short of aid another). Their slot, no matter what the player is trying to achieve, can always be better filled with another class and then just flavored as you see fit.


I should note you can always have fun with a class, and that they aren't so broken no one enjoys them and you should never play one, or at least none of them are that bad to my knowledge. I advocate finding many ways to find what you want and taking what fits you best however.


MrSin wrote:
I should note you can always have fun with a class, and that they aren't so broken no one enjoys them and you should never play one, or at least none of them are that bad to my knowledge. I advocate finding many ways to find what you want and taking what fits you best however.

Indeed. Just because the class is one the weaker side of things mechanically doesn't mean it won't be fun to play.


MaestroVolpe wrote:
Scott_UAT wrote:

*Alternate Class

A ninja is a rogue alternate class. Archetypes are similar but different.

(Sorry to nit-pick. Just a point that has to be made.)

I can not conceive of an instrument precise enough to have allowed you to split that hair.

The distinction being that one can take archetypes derived from it and one (RAW) can't. (i.e Rouge's have had Paizo's support and have a number of archetypes that are not appropriate for Ninja)

Silver Crusade

I'm not sure people think the Ninja is a bad class. One problem I see is people trying to place that all magic DPR number on the class. It's not all about the DPR and besides, the Ninja comes with sorts of other goodies. I am currently playing a 12th level Ninja and he is a fantastic scout, infiltrator, and face. He likes to use his vanishing trick followed by a Spring Attack after he's studied an opponent for a round so he will either kill them or do Sneak Attack damage.

Nightshade 12th level Fetchling Ninja:

12th level Fetchling Ninja “Nightshade”

Str: 13
Dex: 20
Con: 12
Wis: 12
Int: 16
Cha: 18

HP: 12d8 + 12 + 2

AC: 26

Touch: 18

Flat: 21

Init: + 7

Traits: Reactionary, Bandit

Fort: + 8
Ref: + 16
Will: + 8

BAB: +9/+4

Attack: +2 agile wakizashi + 17/ +12 1d6 + 7 + 1d6 acid

Using Sneak Attack: + 19 / + 14 1d6 + 7 + 6d6 + 1d6 acid

Feats: Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (wakizashi), Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, Skill Focus: Perception.

Ninja: Tricks (Vanishing trick, Shadow Clone, Assassinate, Ghost Step, Fast Stealth, Ki Charge ( Reflex DC 20 3d6), Poison Use, Sneak Attack + 6d6, Ki Pool (10), No Trace + 4, Light Steps, Improved Uncanny Dodge, Master Tricks,

Fetchling: Native Outsider , Darkvision 60ft, Low-light vision, Skilled, Shadow Blending, Shadowy Resistance (Resist Cold and Elec 5), Spell-like Abilities (Disguise Self and Shadow Walk),

Skills: Acrobatics: +20, Bluff:+19, Diplomacy: +19, Disable Device: +19, Disguise: +19, Escape Artist: +20, Knowledge Local: + 16, Perception: + 22, Sense Motive: + 16, Sleight of Hand: + 20, Stealth: + 28, Use Magic Device: + 19,

Gear:(108,000) + 4 Belt of Dexterity(16,000), Headband of Mental Superiority + 2 (16,000), + 3 mithral shadow chain shirt (13,750), +2 agile wakizashi (18,000), Ring of Protection + 2(8,000), Cloak of Resistance + 3 (9,000), Amulet of Natural Armor + 1 (2,000), Handy Haversack (2,000), Various Poisons, immovable Rod x2 (10,000), Deliquescent Gloves (8,000), Scrolls (Various), Wand of Cure Light Wounds, Shurikens,

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scott_UAT wrote:
MaestroVolpe wrote:
Scott_UAT wrote:

*Alternate Class

A ninja is a rogue alternate class. Archetypes are similar but different.

(Sorry to nit-pick. Just a point that has to be made.)

I can not conceive of an instrument precise enough to have allowed you to split that hair.
The distinction being that one can take archetypes derived from it and one (RAW) can't. (i.e Rouge's have had Paizo's support and have a number of archetypes that are not appropriate for Ninja)

Actually, ninjas can take any rogue archetype they qualify for. It would be just like stacking archetypes from another class. Unfortunately, most rogue archetypes swap out Trapfinding, so the only rogue archetypes ninjas are left with are Bandit, Burglar, Sanctified Rogue, and Scout.


I've been playing a Ninja from level 1 to level 8 so far, and I've NEVER found it lacking.

My party consists of a Cavalier, Gunslinger, Witch, and an Oracle. When it comes to combat I'm usually the main damage dealer (Bludgeoneer feat and Sap Adept/Sap Mastery with my Kusarigama), I went strength route so right now a single hit looks like 1d6 (weapon) + Str (currently 24 w/ Magic) + 1 (magic weapon) + 8d6 +16 (when Sap Adept/Sap Mastery can apply). I'm getting over 50 points of damage PER HIT, every swing, and my Combat Reflexes and reach means I'm not just hitting on full-attacks. Swift Invisibility + Scout Archetype + Goz Mask = almost always sneak attacking as well, and almost always hitting my opponents. Yes, those immune to S.A. are a pain, but much fewer than in 3.5. Besides, that's why I went the Str route instead of Dex, I can still put the hurt on. I don't care about my AC, no one is finding me to hit me.

So that's in combat.

Out of combat I have more skills than the rest of the party, except maybe the Witch (Int based). I don't pump my Charisma, it's still where it started at (16), because I don't even use that many Ki points (and will even fewer once I get Invisible Blade). So there's room to share the love in other abilities.

So out of combat I'm also shining a lot.

In the end, in MY party/campaign, my Ninja does feel a little overpowered compared even to the Witch and Oracle. People can play the way they want, but if you do just a little planning you're definitely going to be enjoying at least the first 10 levels a TON. We'll have to see how the higher levels come out, it'll be a fun journey. I'm planning on picking up a Ring of Invisibility, I'll have Nondetection on all the time, plan on picking up Dampen Presence feat, an item of Negate Aroma, and my Ninja will truly live up to the ridiculous image of the Hidden Master.

If you plan on going for a Ninja, have fun. Yes, I think it is more powerful than a standard Rogue, but I do miss Evasion. Worth trade though when you Ki pool grows, whereas a Rogue who picks up the Ki pool talent has the number stay static.


Bigdaddyjug wrote:
Scott_UAT wrote:
MaestroVolpe wrote:
Scott_UAT wrote:

*Alternate Class

A ninja is a rogue alternate class. Archetypes are similar but different.

(Sorry to nit-pick. Just a point that has to be made.)

I can not conceive of an instrument precise enough to have allowed you to split that hair.
The distinction being that one can take archetypes derived from it and one (RAW) can't. (i.e Rouge's have had Paizo's support and have a number of archetypes that are not appropriate for Ninja)
Actually, ninjas can take any rogue archetype they qualify for. It would be just like stacking archetypes from another class. Unfortunately, most rogue archetypes swap out Trapfinding, so the only rogue archetypes ninjas are left with are Bandit, Burglar, Sanctified Rogue, and Scout.

Scout Ninja, very nasty.

1 to 50 of 133 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Rogue Vs. Ninja: What's the point? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.