If he needs that 2 extra points on bluff, he could also take the mindchemist, which also gives him the ability to add twice his INT bonus on all knowledge checks; effectively giving him skill points equal to his INT bonus*5. That is on top of how his infusions more than make up for 18 skill points; invisibility alone is +20 stealth.
He can't take 10 on bluff.
We're not looking at knowledge skills, that was never in the rogues sphere.There is nothing preventing a rogue from getting invisibility cast on them or using an item. Also the rogue is taking 10 on stealth, he is not.
We're not looking at knowledge skills, that was never in the rogues sphere.
How about bluff or forgery? Its possible to add song and sense motive to that too, and take skill focus(that's a lot of skill points there) but that's a little more situational and silly. Kinda' wish the rogue had more skill abilities like that.
If he needs that 2 extra points on bluff, he could also take the mindchemist, which also gives him the ability to add twice his INT bonus on all knowledge checks; effectively giving him skill points equal to his INT bonus*5. That is on top of how his infusions more than make up for 18 skill points; invisibility alone is +20 stealth.He can't take 10 on bluff.
We're not looking at knowledge skills, that was never in the rogues sphere.
There is nothing preventing a rogue from getting invisibility cast on them or using an item. Also the rogue is taking 10 on stealth, he is not.
Is it really needed to be able to take 10 ? I mean, when you have enough bonuses into skills, you eventually succeed to pretty much all of them, even with a natural "1".
If he needs that 2 extra points on bluff, he could also take the mindchemist, which also gives him the ability to add twice his INT bonus on all knowledge checks; effectively giving him skill points equal to his INT bonus*5. That is on top of how his infusions more than make up for 18 skill points; invisibility alone is +20 stealth.
Mindchemist also stacks with vivisectionist. This gives yet another class to be a better rogue than the rogue. Plus, vivisectionist gets to use Knowledge (nature) in place of heal, so that double Int bonus does extra work.
A 2 level dip into magus gives you spellstrike. You lose 1d6 of sneak attack and a couple levels of extracts in exchange for an extra attack on a full attack (whee arcane mark spellstrike! (or brand if you grab the hexcrafter archetype)). The spire defender archetype gives you dodge and combat expertise as bonus feats, which is probably useful for qualifying for something.
|
The player's guides are free. Where are you getting your information?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.
I believe he is making the mistake of interpreting 'Campaign traits perfectly suited for characters taking part in the Mummy’s Mask Adventure Path.' from the product description to saying these traits are ONLY for that AP. I see nothing suggesting this is the AP player guide.
I believe he is making the mistake of interpreting 'Campaign traits perfectly suited for characters taking part in the Mummy’s Mask Adventure Path.' from the product description to saying these traits are ONLY for that AP.
To be fair, they are labeled as campaign traits which are usually reserved for things related to an AP, and not as social/race/etc. which are much more general. Then again, if caravan driver is a race trait...
You know there is a difference between not valuing rogue advantages and saying that other class builds are just the the rogue+more.
One is saying that other classes make better "rogues", while the other is saying rogues are an NPC class.
So if rogues had the advanced talent "fart smells like roses" and no other class could replicate that (except with prestidigitation but lets ignore that), that would mean nobody makes a better rogue than the rogue?
1. There is prestidigitation. Rogues can use a talent to make "farts small like roses" via minor magic.
2. There is a world of difference between better rogue and rogue+more. The former is subjective and campaign/GM dependent while the latter is an objective standard.
1. There is prestidigitation. Rogues can use a talent to make "farts small like roses" via minor magic.
Or anyone could spend 12.5 gp on the scroll. Not sure if its a good use of your prestidigitate, but then again farts don't usually come up in my game.
If he needs that 2 extra points on bluff, he could also take the mindchemist, which also gives him the ability to add twice his INT bonus on all knowledge checks; effectively giving him skill points equal to his INT bonus*5. That is on top of how his infusions more than make up for 18 skill points; invisibility alone is +20 stealth.He can't take 10 on bluff.
We're not looking at knowledge skills, that was never in the rogues sphere.
There is nothing preventing a rogue from getting invisibility cast on them or using an item. Also the rogue is taking 10 on stealth, he is not.
I did a quick comparison and for the most part, I succeed on Bluff checks on a roll of 3 or higher. I can live with that. I could wear a Circlet of Persuasion(I have the leftover gold for it) and succeed on a 1. Remember the bonus need only be so high. Now being able to take 10 is all but superficial. I actually wouldn't waste a skill mastery on Bluff if I were you with that bonus. Plus rolling is fun.
This Alchemist can make all knowledge checks untrained with a +5 bonus. He has enough skill points to dabble in just about everything. Mindchemist would give me a huge boost over it. He'd be making all knowledge checks untrained with a +9 bonus to it. I'm not worried about the comparison of Knowledge skills, they're just something extra the Alchemist will be doing over the Rogue.
He's a great trapfinder.
This alchemist is taking 10s on Stealth checks as well if he likes. That one level dip in Pathfinder Delver is really cool. And actually I have 102 skill points. I miscalculated. So you've got 8 skill points on me =P.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*Sigh*
*Deep breath*
I admit that I was wrong.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*Sigh*
*Deep breath*
I admit that I was wrong.
*pats on back*
We're gonna get you through this.
Now the healing may begin. Join me in my hopes that the Rogue will get a bunch of goodies in the ACG.
This alchemist is taking 10s on Stealth checks as well if he likes. That one level dip in Pathfinder Delver is really cool. And actually I have 102 skill points. I miscalculated. So you've got 8 skill points on me =P.
Gack. Miscalculated again. 112 Skill Points. Human extra =P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Humans too OP
Fear us and our 38 extra skill point potential!
More serious. Use trap rules and Rogue nice. Watch
Rogue level 4 is Sniper and Bandit. High initiative so surprise foes lots.
Has Rogue Talents of Cunning Trigger and Quick Trapsmith.
Sneak around wearing this CR 2 trap. It costs 2,000 gp of WBL 6,000 gp.
0 BASE CR
-1 Perception DC 15
-1 Disable DC 15
+1 Attack bonus +15 (ranged attack) OR Reflex Save DC 25 (might be option also)
+0 Manual Reset
+3 Average 30 HP damage to one target (6d10)
Surprise round double move and trigger trap, sneak attack with trap range 40 feet.
Other rounds take 5 foot step, set trap full action, trigger trap swift action. (Beware. Quick Trapsmith not say but set trap probably provoke AoO.)
Ninja can't do this trick better.
Only need Dexterity high.
Trap rules allow scaling higher levels. At level six CR 3 trap adds touch attack. More levels get more to hit or damage.
Show me fourth level fighter with +15 to hit and 6d10 damage.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sneak around wearing this CR 2 trap.
Good luck getting a GM to allow that in-game.
Given that you didn't link to an actual trap which means I assume you're using trap creation rules intended for the GM I'm going to go ahead and say there are some pretty god awful sickening things you can do if you let your players use any custom item/race creation ruleset and in my experience no DMs are likely to let you do so.
Trap rules say more than once for PCs to design traps.
Me cheese as legal as PC Wizard learn how design all magic weapons when take one feat.
Are the forums buggin out for other people too?
By the way, here you go Marthkus.
Auto spots and disables most traps. Takes 10s on Disable Device. Can Stealth respectably, but can use Invisibility in a pinch. Might acquire shadow armor.
** spoiler omitted **
I just have to point out that improved two weapon feint does not require two weapon feint. So it would be better to grab improved feint until you get improved two weapon feint.
Ok so my post disappeared so I think my claim was that
1. Rogues have a better bluff than bards
2. Rogues do more damage than bards
3. Rogues have more skill points than bards for a long time** spoiler omitted **
Now you didn't post a bard, but it's basically the same idea SO let's assume basically the same items for the rogue (rapier instead of dagger, +2 shortbow instead of light mace)
1. This rogues takes a 10 on bluff for a (10ranks+10feats) 33 total before any magical items. SO this rogue still better at bluffing2. You have 92 skill points. This rogue has 110. SO rogue still has more skill points
3. Damage. This rogue's to hit = 7BAB+1enh+6dex = 14 before any buffs. Damage on hit is 6d6+10(1d6weapon+5d6SA+3arcanestrike+6dex+1enh) Damage on hit is the same. Rogue to-hit is higher, your build has more attacks. Buffs require action economy or preparation to pull off and are difficult to compare to. Although I would say haste+mutagen puts...
The bard gets the use of two skills for one skill point, and since he gets half of his class bonus to knowledge skills he does ot have to fully invest in those, so a bard could very well have more skills that he is good at.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would be nice to have a rogue archetype based around the idea of using traps in combat. Like the trapper ranger, but more in-depth with better trap abilities.
Imagine if a rogue could collect traps over the course of a campaign and use those traps repeatably on enemies?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But solution work.So does giving the monk an amulet that lets him turn into a dire tiger.
I think we can all agree that doesn't really fix the problem.
Actually I like this idea. Could this monk tiger us pounce to flurry?
I am still working my way through this thread and reading with interest but while trap finding has become more obsolete as a game 'need' because of the lessening number of traps, it could be bought back into main stream simply by making the rest of season 5 and season 6 of PFS heavier on traps, and doing the same with the next few APs.
Most people don't play PFS so PFS won't bring them back into relevance. On top of that, there are enough ways to bypass traps that being a rogue was never a need anyway. It was just convenient in order to save resources.
So does giving the monk an amulet that lets him turn into a dire tiger.
Monk solution need spell Beast Shape II. Is fourth spell level, seventh caster level. Costs 56,000 gp for item. That tenth level wealth.
Solution for Monk problem for levels 10 and up less elegant than solution for Rogue problem for levels 4 and up.
(Also uses two feats for monk craft amulet. Rogue fix not cost feats.)
UPDATE: Why use claws, Some Random Dood? Monk-tiger still have monkish Unarmed Strike and can flurry with fuzzy Dire Tiger kneecaps.
Actually I like this idea. Could this monk tiger us pounce to flurry?But solution work.So does giving the monk an amulet that lets him turn into a dire tiger.
I think we can all agree that doesn't really fix the problem.
To flurry with a natural attack requires 2 feats, weapon focus and feral combat training.
|
Most skill tricks were horrible. Most of them should have been simply uses of the skills in question. Limiting them to people who learned a special skill trick leads to similar results as rumor monger. Stuff like that would weaken rogues and other mundane characters as it reduced the usefulness of skills.
Most skill tricks were horrible. Most of them should have been simply uses of the skills in question. Limiting them to people who learned a special skill trick leads to similar results as rumor monger. Stuff like that would weaken rogues and other mundane characters as it reduced the usefulness of skills.The same can be said for feats. There are horrible feats, still the concept is not bad.
I think skill tricks can be doe right, but It woudl require a certain amount of work form the devs so the trikcs works and are good. I do not think the dev ever wants to do that work though.
I've always felt (and suggested in other threads before) that the best way to reward the "skill" classes was to have each skill have actual abilities that are unlocked once a PC has invested enough ranks in them. Something like abilities at 5/10/15/20 ranks and to buff the "skill" feats to be something more like:
Acrobatic
You are skilled at leaping, jumping, and flying, even in combat.
Prerequisites: Dex 13
Benefit: You get a +2 bonus on all Acrobatics and Fly skill checks. If you have 10 or more ranks in one of these skills, the bonus increases to +4 for that skill.
If you have 4 Ranks in Acrobatics or Fly, you gain the following benefit: Whenever you move, you may move through 5 feet of difficult terrain each round as if it were normal terrain. This feat allows you to take a 5-foot step into difficult terrain. When you have 8 ranks in Acrobatics or Fly, you may instead move through up to 15 feet of difficult terrain instead.
If you have 8 Ranks in Acrobatics or Fly, you gain the following benefit: You may stand up from prone as a swift action.
If you have 12 Ranks in Acrobatics or Fly, you gain the following Benefit: As an immediate action, you may make an Acrobatics Check and use the result in place of a Reflex Save. You can take this action after you make a Reflex Save and know the result.
*Sigh*
*Deep breath*
I admit that I was wrong.
*pats on back*
We're gonna get you through this.
Now the healing may begin. Join me in my hopes that the Rogue will get a bunch of goodies in the ACG.
Unlikely, since they nerfed the Investigator rather than indicate that Rogues would be brought up to a better baseline. The Rogue fans should have supported the first iteration of the Investigator as the class that the Rogue should have been.
I think just investing in skills is not enough to grant more abilities. Everyone invest in skills, particulary wizards, it woudl not be a fix to rogues if it increase the power of everyone. BEsides with just ranks there is no diference between a paladin with 8 ranks in acrobatics that have dex 10 and a stone full plate and the dex 20 rogue with skill focus (acrobatics) and elven boots.
Of course there is people that do not care about rogues and prefer to improve skills, to each their own.
I was not offering it as a fix to Rogues, as fixing Rogues would basically require a whole new "chassis" to make any progress. It was merely an attempt to fix Skills so they are not overshadowed by spells that give massive bonuses to them.
|
I would be surprised if the Next AP (featuring mummies and pyramids) does not have a plethora of traps and other nasty things the rogue (or other trap enabled class) would be able to shine in.
Personally I like the rogue; it is fun to play in low level campaigns. It mixes well as a dip and I enjoy having them in my games when I’m running them. Shame the rogue has no real unique class abilities as everything they can do another class has access to do at least as well. But I still like them.
I’m not saying you can’t do without them or anything like that but Pathfinder seems to have blunted the traps making them an inconvenience more than a threat; as mentioned previously traps are generally save or suck now which is a shame. There was a time when a trapped chest was something treated with caution and respect with the rogue given space to work while the rest of the party looked on with respect as the nimble rogue slid his delicate tools in tiny never seen before slots and manipulated the mechanism to achieve the treasure inside. …
Now it’s just. I open the chest; oh it’s trapped. I open it anyway …
Regards
Sic
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would be surprised if the Next AP (featuring mummies and pyramids) does not have a plethora of traps and other nasty things the rogue (or other trap enabled class) would be able to shine in.
I hope that if they do then they at least aren't the boring kinds of traps. Those ones that go off, you heal, and you walk away from for instance.(Then again, we still have race traits that aren't actually related to being a particular race.)
A load of traps doesn't actually make the rogue effectively more powerful. Niche protection and the like actually just make everyone else suffer more. Its a sort of false deal where they took something away from everyone. Its also a sort of skill check where you usually go "I roll... Okay next", which isn't everyone's idea of exciting and isn't really an amazing display.
So whatever happened to the fighter-rogue comparison thing anyway?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would be surprised if the Next AP (featuring mummies and pyramids) does not have a plethora of traps and other nasty things the rogue (or other trap enabled class) would be able to shine in.
So whatever happened to the fighter-rogue comparison thing anyway?
People pointed out how silly it is to say "Rogues aren't underpowered, they're just as good as another underpowered class!"
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Truth; Just the trapper rolling the die while everyone else looks on is not very entertaining for the party. Although I find not dying a blast so I’m willing to sit out while the trapper does it.
As discussed previously or in another thread a dungeon filled with traps is just a whole load of die rolls away from being done; but then that’s any character really. A Minotaur is just a whole load of dice rolls from being dead for the fighter, wizard etc. …
As for the comparison; it got sidetracks as it always does with rogue haters and lovers having a “discussion” Pistols at dawn style.
I though it was a well thought out original post with some valid points; many people disliked comparing sneak to feats and some of those had some valid points too. Would it make me want to play one or stop me considering playing one in the future. No. But then I would not want to play a fighter either.
I would play an Alchemist, Bard, Ranger etc with a rogue flavor. Rogue is a good class but you have to take it as it is. Which is a class with nothing unique to it whereby you will find yourself overshadowed by other classes unless you find yourself in the right situation or group.
It’s combat skills are average, full BAB classes are better obviously, even clerics are better if they have a round or two to buff themselves and have better armour options. Skills a little above average, Bards do it better with less investment and Rangers are close on their heels and with the right traits can gain the social skills; all in all nothing is golden with the rogue.
In the right group they can shine; in the right adventure likewise but they tend to be the poorer cousins of adventurers which is a shame as they are one of the most versatile of the classes. They seem to have been relegated to the Bards status in 3.5 and that’s the party’s 5th wheel. Let into the party but the wizard is laughing up his voluminous sleeves while the rogue sneaks off followed by the invisible party.
As stated previously I like the rogue; but it’s compared to liking the runt of the litter because it’s cute. I would love for the class to be cool and effective but it’s just not the case. It’s small and dies way too easy which is a shame as it had great potential.
Regards
Sic