Ninja vs. Rogue, what do you prefer?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 116 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Dread Knight wrote:
Quantum Steve wrote:
Starbuck_II wrote:
Dread Knight wrote:

It would vary depending on what kind of character I was making.

Ninja's get Poison Use, a Ki pool based off of Cha, some exotic weapon proficiency, and a good capstone ability but from what I hear people say on the messageboards not many even get that high level.

Rouges get trapfinding, trapsense, and get evasion quicker, proficient with more likely easier to find weapons, can get a Ki pool based off Wis, access to Archetypes, and what seems to me a good capstone ability but not as good as the Ninja.

To me that makes them pretty even.

Again, Access to more archetypes is what Rogues get.

Ninja can be rakes, Scouts, etc

Ninjas can't be Rakes because Rakes give up Trapfinding.

Ninja's can't be any archetype that replaces or alters Evasion,Rogue Talents, Trapfinding, or Trap Sense because Ninjas don't get those.

So, out of about two dozen archetypes, Ninja's have access to: Bandit, Burglar, Scout, and Trapsmith. That's it.

That is, of course, assuming that Alternate Classes can take Archetypes. I don't know where it is stated that they can.

Agree there and to be honest I don't think they can take base Class Archetypes since Samurai actually got the Sword Saint Archetype saying it's one for the Samurai class; my guess is that would need it's own Archetype(s) in order to take one.

Knight of the Sepulcher for the Antipaladin is found under the list of Paladin archetypes.


In my limited experience, ninja are very powerful. They are not particularly MAD. You don't need great Int because you get good skill points without it. You don't need great Str because you can use finesse for accuracy and sneak for damage. Greater invisibility plus flurry of shuriken = win. Invisibility helps you not get targeted by attacks and spells, so Wis and Con aren't as important as they are for a regular rogue. For enemies that can see invisible, there are other tricks available - e.g. Fogcutter Lenses plus Obscuring Mist.

Incidentally, has anyone here played a non-eastern flavored ninja? Do you still use wakizashi and shuriken?

Shadow Lodge

Matthew Downie wrote:
Incidentally, has anyone here played a non-eastern flavored ninja? Do you still use wakizashi and shuriken?

My ninjas use a wakizashi as a back up weapon, but really, they focus on weapons like Elven Curve Blade or a light weapon that has a higher crit multiplier instead of the increased crit range because, really, most of my damage is coming from sneak attack instead of from +x after the massive dice I roll.

The Exchange

Matthew Downie wrote:

In my limited experience, ninja are very powerful. They are not particularly MAD. You don't need great Int because you get good skill points without it. You don't need great Str because you can use finesse for accuracy and sneak for damage. Greater invisibility plus flurry of shuriken = win. Invisibility helps you not get targeted by attacks and spells, so Wis and Con aren't as important as they are for a regular rogue. For enemies that can see invisible, there are other tricks available - e.g. Fogcutter Lenses plus Obscuring Mist.

Incidentally, has anyone here played a non-eastern flavored ninja? Do you still use wakizashi and shuriken?

Kinda, I played a ninja who fled to the inner sea. He was more of a robin hood type bandit who wore medium armor. He was an athletic dude, trained to fight, to do parkour type acrobatics, and staying alive. He liked to share alcohol with people and chat them up. I guess he was nothing like a pajama wearing silent killer who enjoys killing and not taking credit for it.

Shadow Lodge

EDIT:Sorry, wrong thread.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Darigaaz the Igniter wrote:
Dread Knight wrote:
Quantum Steve wrote:
Starbuck_II wrote:
Dread Knight wrote:

It would vary depending on what kind of character I was making.

Ninja's get Poison Use, a Ki pool based off of Cha, some exotic weapon proficiency, and a good capstone ability but from what I hear people say on the messageboards not many even get that high level.

Rouges get trapfinding, trapsense, and get evasion quicker, proficient with more likely easier to find weapons, can get a Ki pool based off Wis, access to Archetypes, and what seems to me a good capstone ability but not as good as the Ninja.

To me that makes them pretty even.

Again, Access to more archetypes is what Rogues get.

Ninja can be rakes, Scouts, etc

Ninjas can't be Rakes because Rakes give up Trapfinding.

Ninja's can't be any archetype that replaces or alters Evasion,Rogue Talents, Trapfinding, or Trap Sense because Ninjas don't get those.

So, out of about two dozen archetypes, Ninja's have access to: Bandit, Burglar, Scout, and Trapsmith. That's it.

That is, of course, assuming that Alternate Classes can take Archetypes. I don't know where it is stated that they can.

Agree there and to be honest I don't think they can take base Class Archetypes since Samurai actually got the Sword Saint Archetype saying it's one for the Samurai class; my guess is that would need it's own Archetype(s) in order to take one.
Knight of the Sepulcher for the Antipaladin is found under the list of Paladin archetypes.

in cheapy's list of developer's clarifications theres a line where james jacobs states that alt classes are glorified archetypes. So my assumption is that they'd stack with other archetypes as normal. I wish i could link it but im on my phone.


That's actually Jason Bulmahn saying it :)


Cheapy wrote:
That's actually Jason Bulmahn saying it :)

whoops, again I was on my phone.


Matthew Downie wrote:


Incidentally, has anyone here played a non-eastern flavored ninja? Do you still use wakizashi and shuriken?

I've got one who dervish dances with a scimitar, Qadiran flavored, think Ali Baba.

You can always call shurikens throwing knives: Lighter than daggers so they do less damage. And I don't know of any throwing knives in the rules that you would be stepping on.

Wakizashi and katana can be reskinned as sabres. I can't see even the most anti weeaboo GM taking issue with that since there's no such thing in Pathfinder but they're most certainly part of "a (mostly) medieval fantasy world."


If you don't want trap-finding and just want damage you cannot beat a rogue.
d8 for sneak attack dice beats the pants of a ninja.

The ki skills and their other minimal tricks are easily replaced through traditional means - party buffs and magic items. Its easy to get sneak attack as well, who really needs the help of invisibility?

If your DM looks at enemies spell lists and gets creative rogues will always be needed. Those symbols of insanity hidden under illusions or behind things are a TPK waiting to happen.


So when the GM gets creative and hides Symbols of Insanity under illusions what you really want is a caster with Arcane Sight and Dispel Magic...

Remember: Magic must fight Magic.


insaneogeddon wrote:


If you don't want trap-finding and just want damage you cannot beat a rogue.
d8 for sneak attack dice beats the pants of a ninja.

The ki skills and their other minimal tricks are easily replaced through traditional means - party buffs and magic items. Its easy to get sneak attack as well, who really needs the help of invisibility?

If your DM looks at enemies spell lists and gets creative rogues will always be needed. Those symbols of insanity hidden under illusions or behind things are a TPK waiting to happen.

except that the only rogue who gets d8s for sneak attack lose trapfinding (knife master) and can only get that sneak attack with daggers, kukri, and star knives. Everything else gets a d4 sneak attack... so... your point is moot. A ninja is infintely better than a rogue in combat. Turns out the ability to turn invisible as a swift action is rather nice.


Anzyr wrote:

So when the GM gets creative and hides Symbols of Insanity under illusions what you really want is a caster with Arcane Sight and Dispel Magic...

Remember: Magic must fight Magic.

I should make an Uncle character....


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Chaotic Fighter wrote:
Anzyr wrote:

So when the GM gets creative and hides Symbols of Insanity under illusions what you really want is a caster with Arcane Sight and Dispel Magic...

Remember: Magic must fight Magic.

I should make an Uncle character....

Improved unarmed strike "One more thing" whack


Noireve wrote:
insaneogeddon wrote:


If you don't want trap-finding and just want damage you cannot beat a rogue.
d8 for sneak attack dice beats the pants of a ninja.

The ki skills and their other minimal tricks are easily replaced through traditional means - party buffs and magic items. Its easy to get sneak attack as well, who really needs the help of invisibility?

If your DM looks at enemies spell lists and gets creative rogues will always be needed. Those symbols of insanity hidden under illusions or behind things are a TPK waiting to happen.

except that the only rogue who gets d8s for sneak attack lose trapfinding (knife master) and can only get that sneak attack with daggers, kukri, and star knives. Everything else gets a d4 sneak attack... so... your point is moot. A ninja is infintely better than a rogue in combat. Turns out the ability to turn invisible as a swift action is rather nice.

Thus my point: "If you don't want trap-finding and just want damage you cannot beat a rogue."

Half-Orc skulking slayer also gets d8. The weapon limitation is really nothing you can match the crit range of a ninja and crits and sneak attack are your damage source not the weapon.


Your DM (npcs) are not trying if arcane sight can spot traps. Layer them with the mundane, have them out of sight etc. Modules do the same things- you open a door: bam its there... how many casters volunteer to be at the front opening doors??


insaneogeddon wrote:
[If you don't want trap-finding and just want damage you cannot beat a rogue.

You can with a Fighter, Ranger, Alchemist, Paladin, Barbarian, Zen Archer or Inquisitor...


I'd go with a ninja, just because that I could get 10 shurikens out if the rules permit it:
- Quick Draw, Greater Two-Weaon Fighting, Rapid Shot
- by level 20
3 attacks from primary hand
3 attacks from off-hand
2 attacks from flurry of stars
1 attack from Rapid Shot
1 attack from the extra attack that Ki Pool can grant

Provided they all hit and I'm still flanking, that 10 sneak attacks dealing 10d6 points of damage each... ouch... and TWF gets me to wield the quarterstaff, the kusarigama and 2 katanas for some cheesiness.


Why would you want a trap-finding rogue? What published PF modules are trap-heavy? And how often in PF do you hit a trap that is anything more than an inconvenience?


insaneogeddon wrote:
Your DM (npcs) are not trying if arcane sight can spot traps. Layer them with the mundane, have them out of sight etc. Modules do the same things- you open a door: bam its there... how many casters volunteer to be at the front opening doors??

You realize anyone can use perception to search for traps, the same way a Rogue can right? In fact, classes that have a WIS focus are almost certainly going to be better at finding traps with Perception than the Rogue who will only get +10 to Perception (and *only* to find traps) from his class at level 20. Please tell me a how a Rogue is somehow more adept at finding these traps than basically anyone who is willing to pump Perception?

Shadow Lodge

Democratus wrote:
Why would you want a trap-finding rogue? What published PF modules are trap-heavy? And how often in PF do you hit a trap that is anything more than an inconvenience?

1. To find and disable traps.

2. Paizo isn't the only publisher to publish adventures. Some GMs even create their own adventures.
3. Exactly as often as the GM deems reasonable.


Kthulhu wrote:
Democratus wrote:
Why would you want a trap-finding rogue? What published PF modules are trap-heavy? And how often in PF do you hit a trap that is anything more than an inconvenience?

1. To find and disable traps.

2. Paizo isn't the only publisher to publish adventures. Some GMs even create their own adventures.
3. Exactly as often as the GM deems reasonable.

Traps simply aren't the party-killers that they were in early editions of D&D. Dealing with them certainly doesn't justify a whole class, short of a DM who is particularly attached to trap-crawls. This is not the majority of players of PF.

Shadow Lodge

Democratus wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Democratus wrote:
Why would you want a trap-finding rogue? What published PF modules are trap-heavy? And how often in PF do you hit a trap that is anything more than an inconvenience?

1. To find and disable traps.

2. Paizo isn't the only publisher to publish adventures. Some GMs even create their own adventures.
3. Exactly as often as the GM deems reasonable.
Traps simply aren't the party-killers that they were in early editions of D&D. Dealing with them certainly doesn't justify a whole class, short of a DM who is particularly attached to trap-crawls. This is not the majority of players of PF.

Cos that would be BADWRONGFUN, huh?


Uh... no. It's because Pathfinder is not really designed around that kind of play style. I mean look at what a CR 13 trap in Pathfinder is, any trap more lethal than those is going to have to be much higher CR and thus not practical to include until much higher levels.


Kthulhu wrote:
Democratus wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Democratus wrote:
Why would you want a trap-finding rogue? What published PF modules are trap-heavy? And how often in PF do you hit a trap that is anything more than an inconvenience?

1. To find and disable traps.

2. Paizo isn't the only publisher to publish adventures. Some GMs even create their own adventures.
3. Exactly as often as the GM deems reasonable.
Traps simply aren't the party-killers that they were in early editions of D&D. Dealing with them certainly doesn't justify a whole class, short of a DM who is particularly attached to trap-crawls. This is not the majority of players of PF.
Cos that would be BADWRONGFUN, huh?

Or because that would be exceptionally boring... So you are saying that either:

1) The rogue be the only one in the party to get all the fun (ok rogue, roll perception... ok now roll disablke device, ok carrying on now).

or

2) The Summoner/Sorcerer/Cleric/Druid/Wizard just spams the crap out of summon monster/nature's ally 1 to set off all the traps that are in the way.

Either way... its not all that fun. Especially compared to say... engaging in combat in which nearly everybody can get involved (I say nearly because there is always that one guy who did some crazy thing that is all good in diplomacy... but sucks in combat). Now granted, a few stratigically placed traps in the MIDDLE of combat is cool (especially certain repeatable ones like a trap that shots a fire column down anytime the pressure plate is stepped on) but even in those scenerios the rogue is not very useful because you really can't disarm traps in the middle of combat.


Anzyr wrote:
Uh... no. It's because Pathfinder is not really designed around that kind of play style. I mean look at what a CR 13 trap in Pathfinder is, any trap more lethal than those is going to have to be much higher CR and thus not practical to include until much higher levels.

Traps in Pathfinder potentially deal as much as 10 hps damage per CR to a single target. That is most definitely within the lethal range for the majority of characters (past 1st or 2nd level due to the max starting HP thing). That sort of trap will be increasingly easy to spot and/or avoid...but that's not necessarily a bad thing.


Why do traps have to cause damage? Why not simply a trap which opens a cage door behind which is a CR+2 monster? Add that to a narrative in which the party is racing against time and/or the PCs know they won't have time to rest before fighting the BBEG and you can create tension.


How does "Oh look walking bags of XP." create any more or less tension as a trap, then just adding that monster anyway?


Anzyr wrote:
How does "Oh look walking bags of XP." create any more or less tension as a trap, then just adding that monster anyway?

It won't. If GMs are in the habit of going easy on the PCs and letting them win every fight, then my suggestion is a waste of time.

If the GM has impressed on the PCs that they won't win every fight, that they have to be prepared to run away sometimes to avoid a TPK, that, sometimes, running away will be possible only if they play smart, that's going to create a different approach.

And remember, no trap requires you to see what's in the cage before its released.


While monster-releasing traps don't seem all that useful, there is something to be said for using traps for narrative things like slowing the party down when they're under time pressure. Have the bad guy be running away, and there's web/entangling trap that'll slow the part down enough to let him make a getaway unless someone spots it and warns the party.

Alarm traps and traps that split the party off from each other are also particular favorites of mine. I think it does a much better job of making traps seem important if instead of just being HP damage, traps have some significant consequences for encounters. Not the killer traps of early D&D, but ones that change the way an encounter/mission plays out for the whole party.


My favorite trap I ever used was in a an underground jail complex the PCs were trying to escape from, with at least a token effort to being stealthy so the guards couldn't set up blockades or ambushes for them. It was a proximity triggered psionic suggestion (delivered telepathically so others in the party wouldn't be aware of it) to "run up and down the halls screaming for help." :D

Unfortunately, the person that triggered it made his save. That would've been hysterical!


i prefer rogue, ninja's just aren't swashbuckler enough for me

Shadow Lodge

Justin Rocket wrote:
And remember, no trap requires you to see what's in the cage before its released.

Or better yet, the cage (and thus the trap) isn't obvious.


I'm not seeing much reason to choose rogue.

If you have traps in combat you need a bard. Nobody else can take 10 on disable device in combat before level 10. They also halve the time to do so, bringing it down to something you can maybe contemplate if the trap is a major contributor to the encounter CR and if they also grab the quick disable rogue talent they do so in a mere 2d4/4 rounds. That's 2 rounds at most and 1 round 37.5% of the time.

So the rogue's not for traps used as part of a more interesting combined encounter. What about sneak attack? Well, they can do d8s and can take ki pool and ninja trick by level 4. And vivisectionist alchemists can prepare extracts of invisibility by level 4 and stack mutagen to strength. Or dexterity if going finesse with agile weapons. And they can use natural attacks to make 3 attacks at their highest attack bonus without having to be a tengu, which compensates nicely for not having great BAB.

Or you could take a ninja and have a ki pool of half your level plus charisma mod and can use for making extra attacks or 20' of movement or a stealth boost while rogues have their bare wisdom mod and can only use it for 10' of movement.

So, no. Not so great at sneak attacking.

It must be the shear number of skills. Except the ninja has the same number of skills. Pay no attention to the bard behind the curtain with bardic knowledge and/or versatile performance.


Kthulhu wrote:
Justin Rocket wrote:
And remember, no trap requires you to see what's in the cage before its released.

Or better yet, the cage (and thus the trap) isn't obvious.

No, part of the deal is the psychological set up. In fact, you could, used sparingly, replace the monster with magic mouth.


Democratus wrote:
Why would you want a trap-finding rogue? What published PF modules are trap-heavy? And how often in PF do you hit a trap that is anything more than an inconvenience?

Traps are easy XP if you defeat them. They burn healing and if you have a adventure where you ander pressure and time constraints that can matter.


Matthew Downie wrote:
insaneogeddon wrote:
[If you don't want trap-finding and just want damage you cannot beat a rogue.
You can with a Fighter, Ranger, Alchemist, Paladin, Barbarian, Zen Archer or Inquisitor...

Exactly ... not ninja. In the context of ninja vs rogue.

think you will find the hasted, 2 weapon knife master with flank feats will be getting 8 attacks at +10d8. Thats equivocal.


insaneogeddon wrote:
Matthew Downie wrote:
insaneogeddon wrote:
[If you don't want trap-finding and just want damage you cannot beat a rogue.
You can with a Fighter, Ranger, Alchemist, Paladin, Barbarian, Zen Archer or Inquisitor...

Exactly ... not ninja. In the context of ninja vs rogue.

think you will find the hasted, 2 weapon knife master with flank feats will be getting 8 attacks at +10d8. Thats equivocal.

Nope, because other rogues and Barbarians exist with improved uncanny dodge by then.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Starbuck_II wrote:
Shadowdweller wrote:
Rogue. Because Ninjas can't do the archtypes.

Which archetypes?

It can do 50% of them.

It can't do archetypes since Ninja is a more detailed archetype for Rogue then the others archetypes are.

Liberty's Edge

For me, it all depends on the kind of character I want to play.

If it is a burglar master, picking locks and pockets right and left, then Rogue.

If it is an infiltrator going through with stealth and disguise or a sneaky combatant, then Ninja it is.

KEVIN HELMES wrote:
Starbuck_II wrote:
Shadowdweller wrote:
Rogue. Because Ninjas can't do the archtypes.

Which archetypes?

It can do 50% of them.

It can't do archetypes since Ninja is a more detailed archetype for Rogue then the others archetypes are.

IIRC, it can as long as it still has the Rogue class feature that the archetype replaces/changes.

Shadow Lodge

Even though the Ninja is an odd "eastern" uncivilized barbarian, I find it more believable that most groups/people/party would accept a ninja than a thief in their ranks. Rogues just never really fit in the game, in my opinion, so I would vote Ninja personally.

Grand Lodge

JiCi wrote:
Provided they all hit and I'm still flanking, that 10 sneak attacks dealing 10d6 points of damage each...

How are you flanking with shuriken?


Probably by mis-reading the Gang Up feat.


Ninja, because they just do cooler stuff.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
JiCi wrote:
Provided they all hit and I'm still flanking, that 10 sneak attacks dealing 10d6 points of damage each...
How are you flanking with shuriken?

Can't you flank with a ranged weapon?

Grand Lodge

JiCi wrote:
Can't you flank with a ranged weapon?

Nope.

Flanking wrote:
When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.


JiCi wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
JiCi wrote:
Provided they all hit and I'm still flanking, that 10 sneak attacks dealing 10d6 points of damage each...
How are you flanking with shuriken?
Can't you flank with a ranged weapon?

Nope, but if you're a ninja, you can do something 10 times better. You can cast Improved Invisibility as a swift action that lasts for 20 rounds. You can do your 10 attacks with full Sneak Attack on a enemy that loses his dex bonus to ac AND you get a +2 bonus to attack, making it much easier to hit than with flanking, and you can do it without asking for help.

insaneogeddon wrote:
think you will find the hasted, 2 weapon knife master with flank feats will be getting 8 attacks at +10d8. Thats equivocal.

That is just cute, to the ninja doing 10 shuriken attacks with 10d6 sneak attack at a easier AC without the need of a flanking budy.

The rogue sucks. Ninja is simply better at almost everything.

And about traps:
You guys do realize that the only thing Trapfinder gives you is a bonus to skill checks and the ability to disarm magical traps? Anyone with high perception can find them. Mechanical traps, say like the ones that open monster cages, can be disarmed by anybody. Even in the most trap heavy campaign all you need is one guy with high perception (any wis caster will do), someone with high disable device (anyone with high dex and maxed skill, really) and one caster that can prepare dispel magic. Maybe get a few scrolls or a wand of it. Any dex inquisitor or cleric can do the job really well.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
JiCi wrote:
Can't you flank with a ranged weapon?

Nope.

Flanking wrote:
When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.

Well, that's sucks...

VM mercenario wrote:
JiCi wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
JiCi wrote:
Provided they all hit and I'm still flanking, that 10 sneak attacks dealing 10d6 points of damage each...
How are you flanking with shuriken?
Can't you flank with a ranged weapon?
Nope, but if you're a ninja, you can do something 10 times better. You can cast Improved Invisibility as a swift action that lasts for 20 rounds. You can do your 10 attacks with full Sneak Attack on a enemy that loses his dex bonus to ac AND you get a +2 bonus to attack, making it much easier to hit than with flanking, and you can do it without asking for help.

If I use the Invisible Blade trick in round 1 and the attack in round 2, since one extra attack needs a swift action to activate... That could work indeed >:D

Oh, one more thing in the ninja's favor: the Unarmed Combat Mastery Master Trick. You now have a monk with rogue abilities. The rogue cannot learn a ninja's master trick via the ninja trick talent.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Rogues rule!
Ninjas drool!

Shadow Lodge

Ninjas rule!
Rogues drool!

51 to 100 of 116 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Ninja vs. Rogue, what do you prefer? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.