Well they do take 10 on stealth checks sooner than most.My rogues laughs at these silly casters, fighters, and whoever else when he sneaks up on them while they sleep, coup de grace them, and walks away :3.This too, is done better by other classes.
Rogues are not the "sneakiest" of classes.
Eh... You can take 10 on stealth while someone's sleeping. Ideally.
Vanish. First level invisibility spell that lasts long enough for a stealth check who needs to take 10 when you have +20?
That's a precious resource for a class with limited known spells. No fast stealth and no fast movement will make using those 5 rounds effectively rather difficult.
|
while I admit that compared to fighters rouges are viable there is a class archetype combo that does both of their jobs but better, and I mean other than the ninja and the ranger (because neither of them do traps unless you go trapper ranger and if you go trapper ranger you don't get sneak attack)
alchemist (vivisectionist, trap breaker or crypt breaker)
they get spells (ala potions), mutagen, sneak attack, trap finding and a few related abilities,
if I want to play a rouge I'll play a bard, ranger, alchemist or ninja (depending on the aspect I want to go)
that said,
in a gestalt camping rouges shine quite nicely
When does that happen?Well they do take 10 on stealth checks sooner than most.My rogues laughs at these silly casters, fighters, and whoever else when he sneaks up on them while they sleep, coup de grace them, and walks away :3.This too, is done better by other classes.
Rogues are not the "sneakiest" of classes.
lvl 10 when all rogues must take skill mastery.
Eh... You can take 10 on stealth while someone's sleeping. Ideally.Well they do take 10 on stealth checks sooner than most.My rogues laughs at these silly casters, fighters, and whoever else when he sneaks up on them while they sleep, coup de grace them, and walks away :3.This too, is done better by other classes.
Rogues are not the "sneakiest" of classes.
The sleeping target is not when you need it.
And no, our group wouldn't let you take 10 on that. I don't see why you could...
I'm going to draw the analogy back to feinting. NO-ONE else has a real reason to invest into feinting like a rogue. Yet when a rogue does not only does her combat potential rise, but she is boosting a social skill.
UMD is similar. It's not like sneak attack for feinting, but rogues do have skill mastery and a complete lack of casting ability, meaning they get FAR more out of UMD than anyone else (even other mundanes do to a glaring weakness for ranged options). Skill mastery means rogues have actual class features to back up this skill, making it a tactic that their class supports not just something a well built commoner can do just as well.
Sure they do. Plenty of folks benefit from feinting. Bards for one do it stupid well and why not if they're a melee bard? Why not feint and get to strike at a lower AC?
How to put this eloquently?
You're feinting to get access to your main class feature. No one else really has to bend over backwards to get their main class feature to function properly. You feint to get up to par.
UMD is similar. You require it's use to be useful in the multitudes of situations where you're powerless.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can take 10 on most skills whenever you are not in any immediate danger or distracted.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
lvl 10 when all rogues must take skill mastery.When does that happen?Well they do take 10 on stealth checks sooner than most.My rogues laughs at these silly casters, fighters, and whoever else when he sneaks up on them while they sleep, coup de grace them, and walks away :3.This too, is done better by other classes.
Rogues are not the "sneakiest" of classes.
My Ranger/Fighter does it at 5th.
One level dip in Pathfinder Delver.
My Ranger/Fighter does it at 5th.
One level dip in Pathfinder Delver.
Neat! When the Slayer comes out I might consider a dip in this.
I'm going to draw the analogy back to feinting. NO-ONE else has a real reason to invest into feinting like a rogue. Yet when a rogue does not only does her combat potential rise, but she is boosting a social skill.
UMD is similar. It's not like sneak attack for feinting, but rogues do have skill mastery and a complete lack of casting ability, meaning they get FAR more out of UMD than anyone else (even other mundanes do to a glaring weakness for ranged options). Skill mastery means rogues have actual class features to back up this skill, making it a tactic that their class supports not just something a well built commoner can do just as well.
Sure they do. Plenty of folks benefit from feinting. Bards for one do it stupid well and why not if they're a melee bard? Why not feint and get to strike at a lower AC?
How to put this eloquently?
You're feinting to get access to your main class feature. No one else really has to bend over backwards to get their main class feature to function properly. You feint to get up to par.
UMD is similar. You require it's use to be useful in the multitudes of situations where you're powerless.
What if the rogue did sneak attack on every attack with no restrictions? Would that seem too strong to you?
There is a reason rogues have to bend over backwards to make their damage less situational.
Bards have little reason to feint. No reason to invest the two feats for it, and virtually no reason to waste a standard action on it. It does next to nothing for them and to argue otherwise is ridiculous.
Rogues have sneak attack, skill mastery, and opportunist to synergies with flanking.
My rogues laughs at these silly casters, fighters, and whoever else when he sneaks up on them while they sleep, coup de grace them, and walks away :3.
That aside. Rogues are plenty spiffy. IMO they are better than monks if nothing else at all.
(also, like marthkus I do wonder if TWF is a trap for rogues, I think a one handed fighter wielding a wand /throwing dagger or such in the off hand is just as good if not better, but people rage when you build non-TWF rogue builds for some reason)
Umm... casters don't sleep somewhere you can sneak up and sneak attack them at any point after level 5. And if you Rogue can somehow manage to get into my oracle's demiplane... well I would love to see him try to actually get to where my oracle sleeps.
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.
shadowstrike is a feat you MUST take if you want to so much as break even on using your class feature (you know, one of the core things the entire class revolves around?). you're not taking it to increase your damage, or attacks, or anything. you're taking it to ACTUALLY USE YOUR CLASS FEATURE WITH ANY SORT OF RELIABILITY.
that is a tax. and only a tax for races without darkvision at that, making it a STUPID tax.
a fighter can avoid taking weapon spec if they really want to; their damage will be respectable anyway, and their abilities function at all times. the rogue MUST find some way to ignore concealment or will be shut down by anything with it or in any situation that grants it, or their ability is barred from them. they also MUST find a way to reliably make the enemy lose their dex bonus (feinting, shatter defenses, flanking, stealth abuse, etc.) or their ability is barred from them. no arguing, you simply can't use it.
oh, and that ability? its their main source of damage to try and stay afloat compared to every other class.
not a single other class is so restricted in their core abilities, other than perhaps the monk having to juggle their moneysponges (AoMF, monks robe, bracers) and never ever ever being allowed to wear armor.
you shouldn't need the thing in the first place--you're a freaking rogue! darkness is where you should be strongest, not where you're kneecapped!
|
So uh... high level ninja is very bad for the party when they encounter a mirror of opposition; far more so than any rogue. Just sayin'. First time I've ever had one of my own characters score the equivalent of a TPK on everything other than itself.
Anyway, there are only a few things a rogue will have over a ninja. A.) the rogue is slightly better at handling mundane traps; B.) the ninja cannot disarm magical traps, a rogue can; C.) A rogue does not need to have a ludicrously high charisma score in order to take full advantage of most class mechanics. I'd call the ninja vastly superior even when taking these things into account.
I'm going to draw the analogy back to feinting. NO-ONE else has a real reason to invest into feinting like a rogue. Yet when a rogue does not only does her combat potential rise, but she is boosting a social skill.
UMD is similar. It's not like sneak attack for feinting, but rogues do have skill mastery and a complete lack of casting ability, meaning they get FAR more out of UMD than anyone else (even other mundanes do to a glaring weakness for ranged options). Skill mastery means rogues have actual class features to back up this skill, making it a tactic that their class supports not just something a well built commoner can do just as well.
Sure they do. Plenty of folks benefit from feinting. Bards for one do it stupid well and why not if they're a melee bard? Why not feint and get to strike at a lower AC?
How to put this eloquently?
You're feinting to get access to your main class feature. No one else really has to bend over backwards to get their main class feature to function properly. You feint to get up to par.
UMD is similar. You require it's use to be useful in the multitudes of situations where you're powerless.
What if the rogue did sneak attack on every attack with no restrictions? Would that seem too strong to you?
No.
That would give the rogue SOME advantage over an alchemist. Not much, but something.
Still less damage than a barbarian, who can also do stuff other than damage in combat. Balanced out by the fact that the rogue has more out-of-combat potential than a barbarian.
Don't forget that Alchemists can use Eternal Potion on a potion of Greater Invisibility along with Alchemical Allocation to not use up the potion (I'm not going to explain how I'm going to assume people know.) This means that Vivisectionist Beastmorph Alchemists actually can be pretty much perma-pouncing full-sneak attacking natural weapon using living killing machine.
What if the rogue did sneak attack on every attack with no restrictions? Would that seem too strong to you?There is a reason rogues have to bend over backwards to make their damage less situational.
Bards have little reason to feint. No reason to invest the two feats for it, and virtually no reason to waste a standard action on it. It does next to nothing for them and to argue otherwise is ridiculous.
Rogues have sneak attack, skill mastery, and opportunist to synergies with flanking.
I had partially written up a large response but I'm just gonna sum it here.
At the end of the day, the Rogue gets to be good if everything is perfect, the stars align and he has just the right consumables.
Just good.
Meanwhile there are folks doing everything he does better even when things aren't perfect for them.
And I mean everything important.
Those classes don't care about UMD or feinting because they don't need it. Thus it doesn't matter in a comparison. Those resources spent on making those work get put elsewhere.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
B.) the ninja cannot disarm magical traps, a rogue can;
Yes he can.
B.) the ninja cannot disarm magical traps, a rogue can;
Well then... *Takes Seeker Archetype out back and Old Yeller's it*.
Guess trapfinding is a just a trait now... good to know.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why the rogues does not have access to roguish thing in combat?
Sort of a universal problem for the game to be honest. Some mechanics work better than others, but primarily your just full attack spamming.
Yes he can.Ouch.
I Suppose that paizo does not take some classes seriously.
On the other hand, trapfinding keeping other classes from disarming magical traps is a real downer and was probably unnecessary. Sort of silly a wizard who knows all about traps, with 20 ranks in craft trap, profession trapmaster, arcana, spellcraft, perception, and disable device, can look at a trap and say "Yep! That's a trap" but can't disable it through any mundane means.
Too many pages in a short time to comb through, but from the OP:
Smack Attack at 1.75 damage is subpar as far as feats are concerned.
Weapon Specialization gives +2 (and can be multiplied on a critical)
Greater Weapon Specialization gives another +2 (again, multiplied on critical)
Power Attack gives +2 (or +3) for every 4 BAB, which is again, multiplied on a critical.
So, from level 1-8, the Rogue gets +7 to damage for the cost of 4 feats, while the Fighter gets +10 for the cost of 3, but the Fighter's is multiplied on a critical. And this isn't counting weapon training, or an additional +3 if it were a two-handed weapon. So a Rogue would get +14 in ideal conditions, while the Fighter would get +13 all the time, regardless of conditions. As soon as one thing prohibits the Rogue from having ideal conditions more than 95% of the time, the Fighter pulls even. At 90% of ideal conditions, the Fighter pulls ahead.
An appropriate comparison would actually be to the Precise Strike teamwork feat.
Yes he can.
B.) the ninja cannot disarm magical traps, a rogue can;Ouch.
I Suppose that paizo does not take some classes seriously.
It was a bit of a disappointing move.
What did they kick to the Rogue to repay them for taking their last 'thing' off them?
|
While I'm more on the side of rogues are a little too weak, To be fair tho, when it comes to rogue must admit that I only really like two archetypes and they are racial ones and happen to fill specific niches:
-Trickster (Kitsune) : really potent way to play a trickster, even more so with the kitsune rogue talents.
-Filcher (Halfling): Being able to steal items worn by opponents with almost no penalties is pretty insane and could change the tides of battle in your favor. Kinda makes me think of Kenders funny enough.
I would support this except teamwork feats are really bad imo on everyone but the inquisitor.
They're better on a cavalier.
|
As an anti Rogue advocate, I take such a guilty pleasure in these threads.
I've never seen an argument that supported the Rogue against anything that competes for its slot.
And this trait...it's wonderful.
BZ, I do respect you as I'd imagine you've seen a lot of builds and guides and such with your archive, but I really do wonder what your basis for the Rogue's viability is having seen what's very easily the apex of most other classes (*COUGH*ALCHEMIST*COUGH*)
Yes he can.
B.) the ninja cannot disarm magical traps, a rogue can;Ouch.
I Suppose that paizo does not take some classes seriously.
It was a bit of a disappointing move.
What did they kick to the Rogue to repay them for taking their last 'thing' off them?
The reactions to this being a trait is fairly indicative of the fact that rogues are not well off by any means. It honestly feels like there are a number of classes that can do the rogue's "job" better than a rogue, and are much more fun to play and versatile.
As an anti Rogue advocate, I take such a guilty pleasure in these threads.
I've never seen an argument that supported the Rogue against anything that competes for its slot.
And this trait...it's wonderful.
BZ, I do respect you as I'd imagine you've seen a lot of builds and guides and such with your archive, but I really do wonder what your basis for the Rogue's viability is having seen what's very easily the apex of most other classes (*COUGH*ALCHEMIST*COUGH*)
Keep in mind its a campaign trait, so they tend to be a bit overpowered and aren't pfs legal (of that matters to you)
sneak attack?
why couldn't we replace that with dirty fighting? (plus heal ranks to damage at all times)
I would support this except teamwork feats are really bad imo on everyone but the inquisitor.They're better on a cavalier.
Cavalier has his own problems though. You can only add the ones you get as a bonus feat when you level. One of them is at level 9 too, and one of your best choices is at level 10...
Why play a Rogue when you can be a Trapper Ranger right?One have to wonder what aws the thought behind
"lets make rangers better than rogues at traps"
They are not really better at traps, just equal, but due to their other abilities, it results to "why play a rogue", and most traps are not enough of a threat to up the rogue's value anyway. They(traps) can be defeated/bypassed without disabling them by mundane methods and/or magic.
In short you would have to make traps more deadly, and restrict the ways in which they can be defeated. And you would have to take trapfinding away from other classes, but even that only forces people to play rogues more, it does not necessarily make them better.
Keep in mind its a campaign trait, so they tend to be a bit overpowered and aren't pfs legal (of that matters to you)
Oh its a campaign trait? I hope that doesn't mean they plan to load mummy's mask with horribly constructed traps...
|
|
Oh, and Inquisitors Magus, Paladins, Rangers, Sorcerer, and Wizards, all have Keep Watch as first level spell.
So, that whole "sneaking up whilst they sleep" thing is moot as well.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why play a Rogue when you can be a Trapper Ranger right?One have to wonder what aws the thought behind
"lets make rangers better than rogues at traps"
Related to it, does nobody had a probem with
"lets make bard better with skills than rogues. And let them have spells a better saves too."
The problem is not that the bard is too good, but that the rogue should be better. One problem(game wide benefit in my opinion) is that cross-class skills are gone. Some skills such as diplomacy, perception, and stealth were really 2 different skills in 3.5, so now the rogue have 8 skill points per level does not mean as much. You can have 6 skills points in PF and be just as effective as having 8 in 3.5.
I think the rogue should have gotten special uses out of skills that were almost or equal to magic as he put more ranks into the skill, even if the uses were on a X/day basis. As an example if you have 10 ranks in diplomacy you can get an affect equal to charm monster. Maybe at 15 ranks it could also be as good as dominate. I would change the duration to be shorter, but it would still be good.
Oh, and Inquisitors Magus, Paladins, Rangers, Sorcerer, and Wizards, all have Keep Watch as first level spell.
So, that whole "sneaking up whilst they sleep" thing is moot as well.
I tend to pack a wand of it if I can't pick it up another way. So nice for when the GM ask who's turn it is to keep watch. Who's turn? Everyone's! Also a good time to do all sorts of other things, depending on what your DM thinks turns off the spell. Also one of the few ways you can create an actually sleepless character.
There are a number of other things you can use too. Such as an outsider familiar.
|
|
Keep in mind its a campaign trait, so they tend to be a bit overpowered and aren't pfs legal (of that matters to you)
I don't think being a campaign trait really factors into strength a lot except in some certain circumstances (Touched by Divinity, Finding Haleen, Subject of Study, Teacher's Pet), which to me makes me think that it shouldn't be consider outside of normal traits. Heck, more powerful traits (Defensive Strategist, Second Chance, Mindless Cruelty for [Half-]Orc Barbarins) are also crazy strong in their own ways. Once a trait is out there, it's a part of the game (RIP Heirloom Weapon), but the Devs have shown what trapfinding is worth, and that's a trait. It's the last thing they had to do to show that the Rogue is dead.
Everything else has gotten so much more powerful in later books that needed it aside from the Fighter.
Monks got Style Feats and Qui/H. Ghost, Barbarians got the Superstition line and Totems, even Paladins got swift action spells to help their econoy. Everything that needed a buff got it. What did Rogues get? Obfuscate Story
While another individual attempts to give an account of an event, the rogue makes an opposed Diplomacy check to deftly interject comments or statements over the course of the storytelling that cause the individual to muddle his ability to recall accurate or specific details. If the rogue succeeds, her target remains unaware that the rogue's interjections caused the confusion. However, if she fails, the target is allowed a Sense Motive check (DC equal to the rogue's failed Diplomacy check) to figure out that she made deliberate attempts to confuse the story.
There's not enough sarcasm for this, this takes what should have already been possible by RP and such, and gives a mechanic behind it. That's...that's impossibly terrible. Also for those of you who want top tier Advanced Talents, there's also Rumormonger
A rogue with this talent can attempt to spread a rumor through a small town or larger settlement by making a Bluff check. She can do so a number of times per week equal to her Charisma modifier (minimum 0). The DC is based on the size of the settlement, and it takes a week for the rumor to propagate through the settlement. If the check succeeds, the rumor is practically accepted as fact within the community; succeeding by 5 or more over the DC decreases the time it takes the rumor to propagate by 1d4 days. A failed check means the rumor failed to gain traction, while failing by 5 or more causes the opposite of the rumor or some other competing theory involving the rumor’s subject to take hold.
All classes have some bad features, but these actively take away from the Rogue by putting mechanics to something that should be a part of the class. I can count non feat Rogue Talents I'd take on no hands.
Wow really? What trait is that?From Pathfinder Player Companion: People of the Sands:
** spoiler omitted **
Thanks..When I take over the world I will allow you to join Team Wraithstrike aka Legion of the Many Eyed Shadow. I always wanted an inquisitor that had trapfinding without multiclassing.
I don't particularly want to get into a DPR game here, and rather focus on the three points I mentioned in the original post.
I enjoyed your point in your OP, and agree with them and this. It's interesting, the Min/maxers hold everything up vs DPR- but then say the Fighter is underpowered as it can't do anything *but* DPR. huh?
Then, if they need to compare rogue, they insist upon the rogue not being allowed Sneak Attack. Huh? I guess we can't allow Fighters iterative attacks then.
Next is a goodie- they say the Core monk and core rogue is underpowered, and try toprove that by comparing them to archetypes from others sources. huh? In other words, in comparing Rogue, those of us who like the class aren't allowed to suggest archetypes, but then they say the rogue is useless due to Trapper Ranger and Archaeologist bard. huh?
They post thread after thread after thread stating the rogue, fighter and monk are underpowered, then claim that the fact they have so many threads complaining about them proves they are.
That being said, a dev promised me some cool new rogue talents are on the way, and I will be happy to see them.
smh @ this guy..
If you have paid attention to any of these thread DPR is not the problem from those of us that say the monk needs more help. We(most of us) have said the rogue does enough damage for a secondary combatant.
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.
If you are still watching this post and nobody has corrected you the math has been done. The fighter comes out ahead. The only rogue that does more damage is the one that focuses on nonlethal damage because it double the value of the sneak attack die IIRC.
Other than that I would like for you to build a level 10 rogue. 20 pt buy, All the hardcover books and post a build.
There is a DPR formula to compare it to a CR 10 monster.
That trait is not a campaign trait from the upcoming Mummy's Mask campaign. It is from a Player Companion book.
|
|
Yes he can.
B.) the ninja cannot disarm magical traps, a rogue can;
Annnnddd rogue is now officially useless.
so the bottom line is...we're comparing a Tier 4 class to a Tier 4 class. sounds about evenly weaksauce to me. It doesn't however, match the title of the thread, which is "The Rogue is Not Underpowered".
Now, try comparing a rogue with some other martial class, like Barbarian, ranger or Paladin...oh wait, those are still Tier 4. OK, how about Rogue vs. a Tier 3 class like Magus, Inquisitor or Alchemist?
Or, *snicker* Rogue vs. Summoner. Go on, argue that Rogue is equal to Summoner. Go on, I want to see that.
That trait is not a campaign trait from the upcoming Mummy's Mask campaign. It is from a Player Companion book.
Traits > Campaign Traits > Mummy's Mask >
Trap FinderThe player companion book is doubling as the players guide to the mummy's mask.