Trap Spotter is a godsend in a dungeon crawl. Unless you like spending forever searching every square inch of crypt or cavern. I'll always welcome a rogue in my party if they take that talent (and the lead in the marching order).
I'm failing to see the point of this thread. Who cares if X is better than Y (or vice versa) when Z is better than both?
Aye, would help if there were at least a given reason why we have to compare to fighter and not anyone else.
Trap Spotter is a godsend in a dungeon crawl. Unless you like spending forever searching every square inch of crypt or cavern. I'll always welcome a rogue in my party if they take that talent (and the lead in the marching order).
On the other hand, why isn't trapspotter a part of trapfinding instead of an investment? That said, I'm used to scanning every room we walk into with detect magic and whatever else anyone wants to scan it with.
Trap Spotter is a godsend in a dungeon crawl. Unless you like spending forever searching every square inch of crypt or cavern. I'll always welcome a rogue in my party if they take that talent (and the lead in the marching order).Crypt Breaker Alchemist, does this.
Archealogist has rogue talents as a class feature, so they can choose to take it too(among other rogue things, though not many rogue talents are "OMG MUST HAVE" imo.) Their bonus to perception/disable device also isn't conditional, and they can boost it in a pinch using archaeologist luck.
While I generally agree with most of your postings broken zenith, this is one of those cases where I disagree with you. I will do my best to explicit why.
It is important to note that, the way I understand pathfinder is built, is that it's a combat-first game. Combat usefulness always comes first, with non-combat generally being a low-risk situation (if you cant fight, you die, if you cant skill, you fail, which doesnt necessarily mean death).Is each level of sneak attack worth an extra feat?:
Yes and no. No if you choose a general feat, yes if you choose a situational one. The problem I've always had with sneak attack is it's situational nature. A number of creatures cant be hurt by sneak attack. Many cant loose dex to AC. You're just left with flanking, which is hard to pull off in a system that has attacks of opportunity. Plus, you're rolling dice, so your 10d6 has as much chance of being 10 damage as 60.
A feat like "weapon focus/specialization" is ALWAYS useful. Regardless of the situation. Others... may not be. But the fighter has the choice.
So I say: fighter wins if it doesnt hyper-specialize.
Is a point of BAB and 4 health worth 24 skill points?:
I'd also like to note that all other 3/4 bab classes have reliable ways to make themselves as likely to hit as a fighter. Monks have FOB (not great, but still there), magus's have arcane pool, clerics buffs (IE divine favor/power/others), inquisitors have judgments. As I understand it, the game design is assuming the foes of a rogue will always have their dex denied to AC ( to make them match up)... which doesnt work with a TON of monsters/NPCs. This greatly limits the combat usefullness of a rogue, since it is much more situational (and limited) than other classes. A magus can always change around it's arcane pool, same for an inquisitor's judgments. However, the class features of the rogue are static & unchanging.
Now, are skill points useful in combat? They CAN be, if you've made an investment in feats & have significant system...
This.
With the right build, in the right party, with a good amount of system mastery, a rogue can be a powerhouse, but it's super situational. Worse there are a ton of trap feat lines that just take the class and hit it with a big suck stick (i'm looking at you powerful sneak).
Heck, the classic rogue stereotypes are typically trap rogue builds.
|
@Williamoak - Excellent post, and well reasoned. As a GM and player, I always try to make skills relevant and important in combat. However, I understand that this is often difficult to pull off, and for many GMs and players skills are completely divorced from combat. As always, it depends on the game.
@MrSin & Master of Dark Triad - If you see no reason to comment on the thread, then there is no reason for you to comment on the thread.
EDIT: I don't mean that as an insult, sorry. I'm just saying that's fine if you aren't interested in the thread. Some people are interested in the topic, some aren't. If you don't see a reason behind the thread, then feel free not to post in it.
|
The wand of invisibility isn't a rogue class feature. Shocking I know.ooo do tell, my rogue w/ wand of invisibility sure would LOVE to hear. (or read, as it were)Leave the poor rogue alone; try sneaking into a dragon’s den without a burglar next time and see how your clunking dwarven fighter gets along stealing the dragons hoard. … Gets hot in that armour don’t it?
Poor example.
This task is done far better by a number of classes.
except use magic device is a trained class skill. Shocking I know.
except use magic device is a trained class skill. Shocking I know.The wand of invisibility isn't a rogue class feature. Shocking I know.ooo do tell, my rogue w/ wand of invisibility sure would LOVE to hear. (or read, as it were)Leave the poor rogue alone; try sneaking into a dragon’s den without a burglar next time and see how your clunking dwarven fighter gets along stealing the dragons hoard. … Gets hot in that armour don’t it?
Poor example.
This task is done far better by a number of classes.
Which also isn't a rogue class feature. Its something anyone can have and quiet a few do.
Edit: Which is actually a large part of rogues issue. They aren't that much, if at all, better at skills than other classes.
|
|
@Atarlost: Thanks for the relevant, succinct post. I disagree that combat and non-combat cannot be weighed against each other, but that's a mater of opinion I suppose. My one question is do you think advanced rogue talents are worse than feats? Given that every non-advanced rogue talent can be turned into a feat, their other merits don't seem relevant.
Only two non-advanced rogue talents can be turned into worthwhile feats, and only combat trick would be worthwhile if the rogue weren't struggling with unaugmented medium BAB: bards and inquisitors and oracles usually don't go for it.
As for advanced talents, I can think of a couple that are probably better than a feat and there's Feat, but I'm biased towards low level performance. If going to 20 I certainly would feel myself scraping the barrel at the end.
offensive defense is better than any feat I know of. level 5. sneak attack 3d6, yay I get +3 dodge to my ac each round I sneak attack!
|
i am sorry but how can you state that a fighter dose more damage than a rogue? rogues can take most of the feats a fighter can to boost damage. Fighters don't have sneak attack. so a STR 18 rogue with power attack versus a STR 18 Full bab class with power attack a rogue is still doing more damage due to sneak attack. anyone who cant get a flank on with a rogue is just useless at tactics not to mention there are plenty of ways to remove someones dex bonus so you just get sneak attack anyway.
woopty doo that a fighter gets weapon specialization with minor multiclassing with divine spell casting class and a well placed prestige class and rogues can have Weapon specialization too.
all the Rogues are underpowered arguments are totally untrue.
By Level 20, Fighters get 5 more Bab and 20 more HP. Rogues get 120 more skill points.
Or, per level, is .25 BAB and 1 HP worth 6 skill points?
I'd gladly trade a single point of BAB and 4 HP for 24 skill points, and I'd be hard pressed to think of a fighter build that wouldn't be benefitted by doing this at least a couple of times. Skills are useful in combat - perception, acrobatics, climb, stealth, handle animal, even intimidate and bluff can all add significantly to the combat abilities of a melee character.
Consider all of those times you are deciding between 1 HP or 1 Skill Point for your favored class bonus. What if that were 1 HP and 1/4 BAB or 6 Skill Points?
Looked at another way, if 1 HP and 1 Skill Point are roughly equivalent (both potential favored class bonuses), then is .25 BAB worth 5 Skill Points?
Still not buying it? Over four levels, would you rather have +5% to hit and 4 HP OR a +5% to succeed at 24 different skills (or a +10% to succeed at 12 different skills, or a +20% to succeed at 6 different skills, or a +40% to succeed at 3 different skills)? That seems obvious.
(Emphasis mine).
Nominally, you are correct, but in practice, the Fighter has Feats giving him a better AB, He has higher STR giving him a Better AB, He has better weapons and weapon Training giving him a better AB, He has better Con (plus more feats, and probably Magic) giving him better HPs. So that by the time he reaches level 20, 20HP and 5AP are easily affordable. While the Rogue could also invest in (some) of the same improvements, doing so would mean not investing in Rogue Core competencies; he would forever be a wannabe Fighter without being able to contribute meaningfully.
In reality the Rogue is going to concentrate on DEX and (probably) INT, so he won't be able to keep up with the Fighter in terms of AP or HP, and will fall further and further behind. By the time he reaches 20th level, the difference in AP and HP between the two of them is going to be a lot wider than what you suggest.
In fact you are really comparing apples and oranges; stick a 20th level rogue up against a 20th level Fighter in a pvp combat, and my money would go on the Fighter. Any way you cut it, this is what he's made for, and he has all the trappings of his preofession to go with it by this time.
That's not to say that Rogues are useless in combat; they have their place; it's just not the Fighters place. In fact, when it comes to combat, the Rogue needs the Fighter (to take the Heat, distract the enemy while he slips into position), but the Fighter doesn't really need the Rogue (though he won't complain if the Rogue helps). I have grown tired of the number of posts saying "Why are people complaining, my Rogue rocks..." or something similar; nobody is saying you can't have a blast playing a Rogue, or that he's no good at what he does, rather the problem is that others now do his functions better. Several people have mentioned archetypes that does one or more functions of the Rogue better, and some of his functions have always been controversial
Take for example trapfinding. Now unlike combat, this is a situation that only the Rogue usually participates in (unless you are lucky enough to have a GM who has taken the time to think about the traps and how they affect play); If they are in an adventure at all, they are usually considered a speed-bump on the road to the main event. If the GM stops to role play the Rogue disarmimg the trap, the rest of the group starts getting bored, if he doesn't, the Rogues trapfinding is reduced to rolling a dice. it has reached the point where most GM's skip traps altogether.
In terms of skills, The Rogue no longer has the monopoly on skills that he used to: one of the side effects of condensing the skill list is that 4 players getting 2 skills each can cover the main skill base without needing a Rogue; Not only that but many classes get boosts to certain skills which push them ahead of the Rogue.
So now, the only contribution the Rogue is not surpassed by is Sneak Attack. There are other class archetypes that can get it, but the Rogue is the only one optimized for it (I include Ninja as an alternate Rogue in this statement). This by itself does not make up for all his other losses. It's very situational, and does not work against some monsters, unlike the Fighters Feats.
i am sorry but how can you state that a fighter dose more damage than a rogue? rogues can take most of the feats a fighter can to boost damage.
Because fighters hit more often, crit more often, and do so with more static damage modifiers.
i gotta say, as of the post-revision investigator it pretty much takes all the rogue issues and kills them.
dev corrected that studied combat lasts for int mod rounds (instead of 1/2 int mod in the doc), and adds it's bonus to attacks and damage for its duration (admittedly it requires a standard action to use on someone, which is dropped to a move with a talent, and further still to a swift action by spending an inspiration point).
solves their lack of attack bonus and gives tasty always-on static damage, both of which the rogue sorely wants.
studied strike also lets you "pop" that buff for spike damage (like a slower scaling but not as cripplingly hard to use sneak attack)--generally it's recommended to use this on the last round of the buff, since popping your once-per-target-per-24-hours (which for some unholy reason was deemed a good idea and they're not negotiating it).
so they get lots and lots (and lots) of skills from being int-centric, lots of ways to increase those skills (inspiration is really helpful, and talent expand your list of skills it can apply to), a respectable attack and damage (at/after level 4, before then they have issues but are still a capable skillmonkey), and get the rogues "roll lots of dice" fun in a neater package.
- - - - -
meanwhile, slayer takes all the rogue combat stuff we wanna see and tacks it onto the ranger chassis--full bab, sneak attack (albeit slower), favored target/quarry for even further attack/damage increases (as well as several other skill bonuses towards them). their skill points-per-level are smaller, but not too horribly. they can reach dimensional savant by 13 with a dip, making flanking a piece of cake and netting you a free attack from opportunist (you are your own ally, whoch you are flanking with)
tack that people of the sands trait onto either hybrid and you've got your trapmonkey as well.
|
|
i am sorry but how can you state that a fighter dose more damage than a rogue? rogues can take most of the feats a fighter can to boost damage. Fighters don't have sneak attack. so a STR 18 rogue with power attack versus a STR 18 Full bab class with power attack a rogue is still doing more damage due to sneak attack. anyone who cant get a flank on with a rogue is just useless at tactics not to mention there are plenty of ways to remove someones dex bonus so you just get sneak attack anyway.
And there is the 'ur doin it wrong' argument.
@Williamoak - Excellent post, and well reasoned. As a GM and player, I always try to make skills relevant and important in combat. However, I understand that this is often difficult to pull off, and for many GMs and players skills are completely divorced from combat. As always, it depends on the game.
Thanks for the response. While I do agree that skills can be useful (in combat & out), and I generally try to emphasize their use, the problem is the risk/reward relationship. You fight well, you dont die, you dont skill well, you're not guaranteed death. Then skill system also has serious flaws. Skill use in combat is EXTREMLY difficult to pull off if you arent specialized.
I tried using acrobatics once to avoid an AOO (first time my GM saw it happen) and it failed miserably. I checked the numbers, and since it went against CMD, I would have had to have max ranks & excellent dex to even pull it off. Same goes for escape artist to avoid grapple.
I've heard of stealth being useful, IF you had hide in plain sight (which the rogue can get).
Knowledge only get used at the beginning of combat, like perception. It's complicated by the fact that most GMs I've played with consider such an action a "standard action".
Ride & fly is essential.
I've never seen feinting (bluff) used, ever.
Most of the others are pretty non-combat oriented.
While I agree it depends on the game, the system built around combat use for skills is difficult & requires a fair amount of system mastery. I've yet to see a single build in play that made significant use of any skill in combat (beyond perception, stealth & knowledges) which is pretty indicative of the limits of skills in combat.
Also, it's still situational thing, which is more a problem than an advantage for 90% of players.
Look, I understand what you're trying to do broken zenith, but you just wont get the consensus you're looking for. Your basic arguments are predicated on the notion that something situational (more skills, rogue talents, sneak attack) is of equal value to something consistent & reliable (flat numbers in combat). For most people that isnt the case. I know I will recommend anybody that plays at my table with low/moderate system mastery to play something else, because it takes a LOT of effort to master (and I dont want them to leave the table pissed off). I've spent WAY too much time on these forums for the last 6 months. I've made builds of every class I've found fun-looking & satisfying. Except rogue. It takes someone with way more system mastery than I to pull it off.
And if it wasn't tied to you landing attacks and didn't encourage putting yourself into flanks and didn't do nothing against anyone who can't be sneak attacked that would be better than any feat I know of unfortunately that's not the case. That's why it's one of the few good Talents but frankly it's not the best thing ever.offensive defense is better than any feat I know of. level 5. sneak attack 3d6, yay I get +3 dodge to my ac each round I sneak attack!
also you'd best hope you have dark vision, because rogues cant sneak attack in the dark (because it grants concealment) for some reason.
that's right, your sneak-thief can't accost someone in a dark alley unless they're blessed enough to not be human.
it requires feat-taxes (darkstrike or the moonlight stalker line) or expensive items (headband of ninjutsu) to fix the problem in 5-7 levels (if you REALLY work towards just that and nothing else) that needed to be fixed from the start for free.
offensive defense is great, except you have to put yourself in danger to do it, and if any of the guy you're flanking with's buddies are also attacking your flank-buddy fighter, they can simply turn and grind you to pulp--OD only applies to that target of sneak attack.
Apologies if this is off-topic, but do any of you think the Slayer (from the upcoming Advanced Class Guide) might totally invalidate the rogue as a whole? (combat wise, they do lack trapfinding after all) Their sneak attack/favored enemy isn't as good as either parent class, but they get both in addition to full BAB, higher HD, and a very respectable skill pool as well as a better Fort Save.
Apologies if this is off-topic, but do any of you think the Slayer (from the upcoming Advanced Class Guide) might totally invalidate the rogue as a whole? (combat wise, they do lack trapfinding after all) Their sneak attack/favored enemy isn't as good as either parent class, but they get both in addition to full BAB, higher HD, and a very respectable skill pool as well as a better Fort Save.
the investigator and slayer both do that (in their own ways) rather neatly, actually. i brought it up earlier this page.
Apologies if this is off-topic, but do any of you think the Slayer (from the upcoming Advanced Class Guide) might totally invalidate the rogue as a whole? (combat wise, they do lack trapfinding after all) Their sneak attack/favored enemy isn't as good as either parent class, but they get both in addition to full BAB, higher HD, and a very respectable skill pool as well as a better Fort Save.the investigator and slayer both do that (in their own ways) rather neatly, actually. i brought it up earlier this page.
Ah, I see. I should have read a bit more carefully before posting. Sorry for the redundancy and thanks for weighing in. :)
It is still better than -most- feats
But if its not better than the 7 best feats for your character then it may as well be worse than all of them.
So now, the only contribution the Rogue is not surpassed by is Sneak Attack. There are other class archetypes that can get it, but the Rogue is the only one optimized for it (I include Ninja as an alternate Rogue in this statement). This by itself does not make up for all his other losses. It's very situational, and does not work against some monsters, unlike the Fighters Feats.
The ninja I can see with vanishing trick/invisible blade. But how is the rogue optimized for sneak attack?
I'd say the alchemist is just as good, if not better in dealing damage with sneak attack. Add in the trait and they have trap finding too.
|
|
offensive defense is great, except you have to put yourself in danger to do it, and if any of the guy you're flanking with's buddies are also attacking your flank-buddy fighter, they can simply turn and grind you to pulp--OD only applies to that target of sneak attack.offensive defense is better than any feat I know of. level 5. sneak attack 3d6, yay I get +3 dodge to my ac each round I sneak attack!
Shadowstrike- concelment? no problem
offensive defense- When a rogue with this talent hits a creature with a melee attack that deals sneak attack damage, the rogue gains a +1 dodge bonus to AC for each sneak attack die rolled for one round.
no, you gain the AC, period, for that round.
|
|
It is still better than -most- featsBut if its not better than the 7 best feats for your character then it may as well be worse than all of them.
but.. it is.. I just can't take it at 7 :P. either way, its gets better the higher your level. imo taking it at 1 is same as taking dodge almost, but taking it at 5 is a free +1 heavy steel shield.
Shadowstrike- concelment? no problem
Dat feat tax. Can't take it at level one either.
no, you gain the AC, period, for that round.
If I remember correctly it was errata'd at some point(but I might be mixing that up with its FAQs). As it is atm, it gives a dodge bonus against the one foe you hit, but dodge bonuses usually stack, but this one might not. Edit: Oh! They omitted against the one foe thing. Did they ever get back on that?
|
|
So now, the only contribution the Rogue is not surpassed by is Sneak Attack. There are other class archetypes that can get it, but the Rogue is the only one optimized for it (I include Ninja as an alternate Rogue in this statement). This by itself does not make up for all his other losses. It's very situational, and does not work against some monsters, unlike the Fighters Feats.The ninja I can see with vanishing trick/invisible blade. But how is the rogue optimized for sneak attack?
I'd say the alchemist is just as good, if not better in dealing damage with sneak attack. Add in the trait and they have trap finding too.
I have made several feint/mobile(scout) rogue builds that can net themselves nice sneak attacks.
its easier to do with ninjas though,
also, rogues can take a ninja trick and gain darkvision (as a feat)
Ah, I see. I should have read a bit more carefully before posting. Sorry for the redundancy and thanks for weighing in. :)Apologies if this is off-topic, but do any of you think the Slayer (from the upcoming Advanced Class Guide) might totally invalidate the rogue as a whole? (combat wise, they do lack trapfinding after all) Their sneak attack/favored enemy isn't as good as either parent class, but they get both in addition to full BAB, higher HD, and a very respectable skill pool as well as a better Fort Save.the investigator and slayer both do that (in their own ways) rather neatly, actually. i brought it up earlier this page.
Slayers can get Trapfinding with a talent or trait if they care for it.
|
|
Shadowstrike- concelment? no problemDat feat tax. Can't take it at level one either.
no, you gain the AC, period, for that round.If I remember correctly it was errata'd at some point(but I might be mixing that up with its FAQs). As it is atm, it gives a dodge bonus against the one foe you hit, but dodge bonuses usually stack, but this one might not.
dat feat tax, Fighters, wep spec- Aw man, I HAVE to take a FEAT to increase my damage???? TAX!! imo feats are never "Tax" unless you obtain a USELESS feat, to gain a good feat followed in a tree.
the errata is a "we are not sure what to say"
they LEAN towards one thing, but never state one way or another. I have never seen it played as vs that specific target. But either way, its still a good talent. (just, not quite as good if vs specific target)
and no, they never got back around to finalizing it.
and no, they never got back around to finalizing it.
Yarr, I was about to ask. Its actually one of the few that work out pretty well in my experience. A good example of a bad rogue talent would be rumormonger, imo.
|
|
Uh no it was faq'd and the way it's intended to be played according to SKR is quite apparently dodge bonus vs your target only and doesn't stack. The FAQ was posted like 4 posts up seriously.offensive defense is great, except you have to put yourself in danger to do it, and if any of the guy you're flanking with's buddies are also attacking your flank-buddy fighter, they can simply turn and grind you to pulp--OD only applies to that target of sneak attack.offensive defense is better than any feat I know of. level 5. sneak attack 3d6, yay I get +3 dodge to my ac each round I sneak attack!
Shadowstrike- concelment? no problem
offensive defense- When a rogue with this talent hits a creature with a melee attack that deals sneak attack damage, the rogue gains a +1 dodge bonus to AC for each sneak attack die rolled for one round.
no, you gain the AC, period, for that round.
no, it was never fully stated (as in, they were considering leaving out the omitted specific target), and the printed versions still have omitted the vs specific target. either way, its worth the talent.
|
|
I have never seen it played as vs that specific target. But either way, its still a good talent. (just, not quite as good if vs specific target)That's how I'd run it if I had a player take it.
you are the first I have met(well, no MET, but seen state they would), Why would you take it and make it worse if the rogue is already "one of the worst classes"? (not that I believe that mind you)
you are the first I have met(well, no MET, but seen state they would), Why would you take it and make it worse if the rogue is already "one of the worst classes"? (not that I believe that mind you)I have never seen it played as vs that specific target. But either way, its still a good talent. (just, not quite as good if vs specific target)That's how I'd run it if I had a player take it.
Because the FAQ says they believe it should only function vs the target? Because it makes no sense that sneak attacking one dude would make it harder for all his friends to stab you to death?
Believe me friend, I'm all for powering up the lesser classes, but rules be rules yeah?
Looking forward to seeing what goodies will be in the ACG for all the other classes.
I'm really hoping they do something crazy like letting the Rogue get both Favored Target and Studied Combat or something through archetypes.
|
And if it wasn't tied to you landing attacks and didn't encourage putting yourself into flanks and didn't do nothing against anyone who can't be sneak attacked that would be better than any feat I know of unfortunately that's not the case. That's why it's one of the few good Talents but frankly it's not the best thing ever.offensive defense is better than any feat I know of. level 5. sneak attack 3d6, yay I get +3 dodge to my ac each round I sneak attack!
also you'd best hope you have dark vision, because rogues cant sneak attack in the dark (because it grants concealment) for some reason.
that's right, your sneak-thief can't accost someone in a dark alley unless they're blessed enough to not be human.
it requires feat-taxes (darkstrike or the moonlight stalker line) or expensive items (headband of ninjutsu) to fix the problem in 5-7 levels (if you REALLY work towards just that and nothing else) that needed to be fixed from the start for free.
offensive defense is great, except you have to put yourself in danger to do it, and if any of the guy you're flanking with's buddies are also attacking your flank-buddy fighter, they can simply turn and grind you to pulp--OD only applies to that target of sneak attack.
This is an example of the problems with the rogue. They ave these really cool class abilities that can be used to gain a situational advantage. They look fun to use, so you roll one. And then you start to really look at the mechanics of how you get those cool class feature to actually work. Then you start to experience the times where you can't use those cool abilities because there are many more situations where you can't use them than when you can. So you work and scour as many rulebooks as you can to find traits, feats, and archtypes to fix those problems, and with sufficient system mastery you can make it work.
But with enough system mastery to make the rogue work, you have the knowledge to make any other class much more powerful without the inherent weakness of Sneak Attack immunity.
Lets look at some classic "Rogue" examples from fiction:
The Gray Mouser: He was a former wizard apprentice, is very flashy, and fights with two weapons. Urban Ranger with human favored enemy seems to fit with favored community "Lankhmar" fits, as does Sandman bard or Vivisectionist Alchemist if you want to play up the stuff he learned from the wizard.
Jimmy The Hand: He is a street thief from krondor. Is is a finesse fighter, but not a backstabber, can disarm and set any trap, pick any lock, and knows every inch of the city from its sewers to its rooftops. Urban Ranger/Trapper.
Bilbo Baggins: A commoner who is thrust into the adventure without any training, who only manages to get out through VERY quick thinking, dumb luck, an artifact level magic item, and direct intervention by a wizard. Rogue seems just about right.
So now, the only contribution the Rogue is not surpassed by is Sneak Attack. There are other class archetypes that can get it, but the Rogue is the only one optimized for it (I include Ninja as an alternate Rogue in this statement). This by itself does not make up for all his other losses. It's very situational, and does not work against some monsters, unlike the Fighters Feats.The ninja I can see with vanishing trick/invisible blade. But how is the rogue optimized for sneak attack?
I'd say the alchemist is just as good, if not better in dealing damage with sneak attack. Add in the trait and they have trap finding too.
I have made several feint/mobile(scout) rogue builds that can net themselves nice sneak attacks.
its easier to do with ninjas though,
also, rogues can take a ninja trick and gain darkvision (as a feat)
Yes, but a rogue would have to spend an extra feat/talent to get a ki pool first. Then they can spend a feat/talent to get darkvision or any other ninja trick.