So, I've been playing Pathfinder for about the past two years and I've seen and played a mighty handful of rogues, and all of them played either the TWF style or Greatsword style, and then one ninja who focused on shurikens and poisoning. When it came for me to build my second rogue, I came across the Scout archetype, and I thought 'Hey, this seems . . . really good, actually.' So I searched the internet a fair bit, and haven't seen a single other example of building the Scout in the same way that occurred to me, and wonder if it has been mentioned and disregarded for some reason that I missed.
I'm in a mid-level campaign of 10th level right now and I built this as an alternate in the event that my current character dies.
20 point buy, Rogue(Scout), PF-only, level 10
Race: Half-Elf
Base stats:
Str 14
Dex 16 (+2 Racial)
Con 14
Int 10
Wis 12
Cha 8
Feats
1 - Power Attack
Bonus (Ancestral Arms) - Elven Curve Blade [Proficency]
2 (Finesse Rogue) - Weapon Finesse
3 - Furious Focus
5 - Dodge
7 - Mobility
8 (Combat Trick) - Vital Strike
9 - Spring Attack
Rogue Talents
2 - Finesse Rogue
4 - Offensive Defense
6 - Bleeding Strike
8 - Combat Trick: Vital Strike
10 - Slippery Mind
9 - Spring Attack
At this level, I would probably have him equipped with a +2 Agile Elven Curve Blade (Adamantine, for DR).
With the Skirmisher ability, as long as the Rogue moves 10'+ in a given round, he treats a foe as flat-footed for the purposes of dealing Sneak Attack damage. So, on an ordinary Spring Attack, his strike looks like (assuming Dex 24 by this point)
+16 Elven Curve Blade Vital Strike + 1.5x Dex bonus + (+6) from Power Attack +2 enhancement +5d6 sneak attack +5 bleed
+16 ECB (2d10+18+5d6+5 bleed/phase) for an average 46.5+5 bleed/phase. Meanwhile, he's maintaining an AC of..
+4 Armor (Darkleaf leather or Robes of Mage Armor)
+7 Dex
+5 Dodge (Offensive Defense)
+1 Dodge (From feat)
+4 against attacks of opportunity
And, with other gear likes a Ring of Protection or Amulet of Natural Armor, he gets an AC of ~ 29 to 30 (34 against attacks of opportunity, which are a likely problem with how much he moves).
His Bleed, Sneak Attack, and AC bonuses will continue to scale simply due to leveling. He does not need a flank or the element of surprise. His HP is rather sturdy. His saves, admittedly, are rather shoddy, and will need to be bulked up in the future as possible (starting with Slippery Mind, for instance). A dip into Fighter wouldn't be too-unwelcome for feats like Devastating Strike and Improved Vital Strike when the time is right, but I overall don't see why I've never seen a build like this previously proposed.
The same reason you don't see many ranged rogue builds, only worse. Rogue damage doesn't actually scale with level unless you are getting multiple attacks with sneak attack. Being restricted to 1 attack puts you at not dishing out enough damage compared to your friends. By level 10, your DPR is 30. Front line melees tend to be in the 80s and can break 100. 70+ was considered the minimum to really be doing it as your primary thing when the old DPR olympics was being done. 1 attack per round really hurts.
Not to mention, your build isn't valid. Vital Strike and Spring Attack are not compatable. Though that is a rule I disagree with and house rule away.
I'm confused. The discussion started by talking about one kind of Rogue, one who does damage, and then mentioned another kind of Rogue, a Scout. Now in my mind a scout is someone, who, um, well, scouts, gathers information, climbs walls, swims, walks narrow ledges, avoids traps, stays hidden, but apparently the discussion remained only about how much damage the other kind of rouge could do.
Well, to be fair the scout archetype doesn't actually get an advantage to any of those things. The scout rogue trades out a defensive combat ability for an offensive combat ability. So a discussion about scout archetype rogue probably isn't going to be about scouting so much as a mechanics related to combat.
seems that nobody wants to explore, interact, or learn about the world they are part of
Where did you get that from!? No one said "I hate roleplaying!" anywhere!
I'm confused. The discussion started by talking about one kind of Rogue, one who does damage, and then mentioned another kind of Rogue, a Scout. Now in my mind a scout is someone, who, um, well, scouts, gathers information, climbs walls, swims, walks narrow ledges, avoids traps, stays hidden, but apparently the discussion remained only about how much damage the other kind of rouge could do.
And this is why I am being driven away from the game
It seems that nobody wants to explore, interact, or learn about the world they are part of (everyone want to make a "Knowledge" roll and be told everything they need to know, which removes the element of learning how to ask the right questions, in fact removes having to figure out what question to ask at all, which used to be a great part of the interaction between DM and Player, player's do not "learn" about the adventure they are part of, they are told what they know, and it becomes irrelevant) and every character build is “crafted” to maximize, well, something, and I’ve never understood this. Playing the game has become so very different from the thing I used to enjoy so much.
Maybe I can put your mind at ease.
The combat chapter is long, and combat is complex and confusing.
The skills chapter is short, but extremely versatile in the gameplay opportunities it provides from someone such as yourself.
On a message board, you're going to see a lot of people looking for help, or discussing the nuances of the more complex system.
The people who enjoy just playing the game, exploring, having fun experiences, etc... they don't have any reason to bring that here. No news is good news. It's hard to "break" any system if the players are good roleplayers with the intent to role play.
So the change you're perceiving in the game's player base may, in fact, be a property of the medium through which you perceive it (the forums).
Find players who "get" your style and play with them. Forget the forums.
Now, Pathfinder RPG may actually attract a greater number of people who love a crunchy, combat based experience. There are lots of great RPGs out there that need support. I suggest you see some out, read reviews, and find one that has a heart in your style of play.
I'm confused. The discussion started by talking about one kind of Rogue, one who does damage, and then mentioned another kind of Rogue, a Scout. Now in my mind a scout is someone, who, um, well, scouts, gathers information, climbs walls, swims, walks narrow ledges, avoids traps, stays hidden, but apparently the discussion remained only about how much damage the other kind of rouge could do.
And this is why I am being driven away from the game
It seems that nobody wants to explore, interact, or learn about the world they are part of (everyone want to make a "Knowledge" roll and be told everything they need to know, which removes the element of learning how to ask the right questions, in fact removes having to figure out what question to ask at all, which used to be a great part of the interaction between DM and Player, player's do not "learn" about the adventure they are part of, they are told what they know, and it becomes irrelevant) and every character build is “crafted” to maximize, well, something, and I’ve never understood this. Playing the game has become so very different from the thing I used to enjoy so much.
I'm confused. Why would you come into a discussion about the effectiveness of a combat character build and then proceed to do nothing but lament editions of the game long ago passed?
I had not previously seen that Vital Strike and Spring Attack were incompatible, which was the duo that this essentially relied upon. And while I knew this build wouldn't dish out great damage, I thought it could survive better than most rogue builds, as that was the problem I'd often seen rogues run into - attempting to get sneak attacks put them in situations where they just got themselves killed.
I suppose . . . I will go back on my Fighter idea then. Oh well on that point. Although now I'm starting to wonder which classes can actually put Spring Attack to decent effect.
I suppose . . . I will go back on my Fighter idea then. Oh well on that point. Although now I'm starting to wonder which classes can actually put Spring Attack to decent effect.
Spring attack? That thing that lets you move, make one attack but you have to move at least 10 feet, still provokes, and is still limited by your movement and somehow cost you 2 feats as prereqs that really aren't' necessary? Pretty much no one. Barbarians for the cost of 1 okay rage power as a prereq can get their own version called Beastial Leaper, which does work with vital strike and they also happen to get a movement speed bonus.
|
Agile doesn't allow 1.5Dex to Damage.
Also, some people like uncanny/imp. uncanny dodge. If 1/2 my monks (that aren't martial artists/Aasimars with a trait) could get it, they would have a hilarious AC, and I'd have fewer MotSM's. But still, rogues don't need it that much, and I personally make sure I work in scout on my rogues whenever I can.