Why do you need to chase someone you can sleep hex?
*scratches head*Unfortunately in this case, the person you are chasing starts 180 feet away from you. Feel free to get that level 1-2 witch within 30 feet so you can!
Expeditious Retreat. Catch up.
Also, can't you just say which scenario it is and warn of spoilers? I want to look this sort of stuff up because I've always wondered how these chases don't get nipped in the bud immediately.
Yeah. You said this was current season? I've played all but like...3 so far this season?
I'll admit I'm relatively new to PFS (only 1 level 7) but I don't think there's been a single chase either.
|
Expeditious Retreat. Catch up.
Round 1 you spend casting Expeditious Retreat.
Round 2 begins, you still need to jump through the window or bluff the guard to "catch up".
1: Jump Through Window (Acrobatics DC20) or Bluff Guard (Bluff DC15)
Barnel, the man your party is chasing (better hope he's not an elf once you get a closer look for that slumber hex), tries to move ahead.
And successfully does! Now he's even further away...
Also, can't you just say which scenario it is and warn of spoilers?
Very well.
This is from 3-18 God's Market Gamble.
And, honestly I'm not trying to be a jerk by posting a chase. I'm simply trying to relay that I believe a certain one of our designers REALLY loves chases (I mean, he invented them).
I sat down to play with him once, and what does he run? A chase.
Read his adventures. What's in them? Chases.
My point is, this can color your perspective of the game. If you're playing a campaign where there's a chase scene every other Friday, you can see why you might not think the Rogue class is too shabby.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Expeditious Retreat gives you a +6 for all the chase checks since you get a +2 for each 10 feet you move faster than 30.
That means taking the easier path each time is never higher than a DC9 for that chase.
Seems to me that magic is taking the cake here again. Alchemists, Bards and Inquisitors all get Expeditious Retreat too.
My point is, this can color your perspective of the game. If you're playing a campaign where there's a chase scene every other Friday, you can see why you might not think the Rogue class is too shabby.
I don't see how even then. There are plenty of classes that can complete that chase. Any skill monkey class can complete that chase. Hell, with a bit of luck, even one of the 4+Int classes NOT BUILT FOR SKILLS can finish it, though it's hard for Str based characters to do so (since half the skill challenges are Dex based or have some arbitrary DC boost to the Non-Dex option. Srsly, DC 23 Climb vs DC 15 Sleight of Hand? Come awn, son.).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seems to me that magic is taking the cake here again. Alchemists, Bards and Inquisitors all get Expeditious Retreat too.
You've named my three favorite classes. We all totally take Expeditious Retreat as one of our first two spells/extracts at 1st level too, right?
I'd hate to think the rogue is being measured up against every class and every possibility here, but I've seen things ranging from sorcerers casting Charm to witches tossing Slumber Hex to folks casting Expeditious Retreat. You know how you really beat the chase? You cast Expeditious Retreat on the rogue and play the team version of Pathfinder.
I'm guessing most folks will pass at building a PC and attempting the chase (since it would clearly show a weirdly build level 1 PC that most folks wouldn't make).
I'm not trying to say rogues are better than seeker sage sorcerers (or whatever), the point is that different people play Pathfinder differently, which means when people say "I think the rogue is too powerful", they need to explain what kind of game they are playing. When others say "the rogue sucks and is dead weight", they should likewise explain what their games are like in better detail if they hope to get the attention of designers and some sort of relief to their ailments.
25-pt buy, level 16 game that is pure combat in open fields in the Abyss? Yeah, the typical rogue is awful at that.
15-pt buy, low level urban adventure riddled with chases, infiltration and a lot of situations with no magic? Yeah, the rogue's pretty darn good.
Not only did I see that chase I linked above a few weeks back, I just remembered I ran it a few months on the forums here, too!
And another chase I ran, this one authored by Jason himself, can be found here. As expected, the rogue was the one who made it to the bad guy they were chasing.
And, here's the funny thing. I've GM'd 4 adventures on here since 2011. And 2 had chases. And it wasn't some intentional plot to make rogues look amazing in a thread come 2014.
The last chase before the one I spoilered above? Began in a bath house when the PCs were naked. Totally naked. No spell component pouches.
So hey - my perspective is, a lot of the Pathfinder I play is very well suited to rogues. I totally get most of the folks balking at the chase don't like rogues and probably don't play the game the same way.
My only point in all this is to infer a bit about how the Paizo team themselves play, and how they see the rogue. This colors their viewpoint, so if you want to have a conversation about rogues, you'll need to paint it in a richer language that provides more details about why rogues aren't appearing to do much in your particular games.
Especially because their main design guy... he's the King of Chases.
I'm guessing most folks will pass at building a PC and attempting the chase (since it would clearly show a weirdly build level 1 PC that most folks wouldn't make).
Not really. I won't make a full build because it's pointless and all we need is skills, but here, have a quickie.
Level 1 Male Human (Focused Study) Bard (Archaeologist or one with the trait in question)
Stats:
Str: 11
Dex: 16 (14+2)
Con: 14
Int: 12
Wis: 12
Cha: 14
9 skills/level (6 class, 1 Int, 1 Human, 1 FCB)
Acrobatics +7 (1 rank, 3 Dex, 3 Class skill)
Bluff +6 (1 rank, 2 Cha, 3 class skill)
Diplomacy +9 (1 rank, 2 Cha, 3 class skill, 3 Skill Focus)
Disable Device +7 (1 rank, 3 Dex, 3 Class skill)
Escape Artist +7 (1 rank, 3 Dex, 3 Class skill)
Perception +5 (1 rank, +1 Int, +3 class skill)
2 Knowledges +5 (Arcana, and one other depending on campaign, most likely)
Sleight of Hand +7 (...you get the idea)
Before you ask, yes, Focused Study is a very specific build option, but I tend to take it on any build that may conceivably take Skill Focus in the future (my Snake Style Monk has it too, Sense Motive and Perception +6 for free? Mmmmm...)
1: Jump Through Window (Acrobatics DC20) or Bluff Guard (Bluff DC15)
2: Climb Ivy Wall (Climb DC10) or Dodge Slippery Bathers (Reflex DC15)
3: Climb Fence (Climb DC18) or Unlock Gate (Disable Device DC12)
4: Greet Hostess (Diplomacy DC12) or Shove Through (CMB DC17)
5: Take A Deep Breath (Swim DC12) or Slippery Stones (Acrobatics DC20)
6: Excuse Me Coming Through (Escape Artist DC18) or Get Out Of The Way (Intimidate DC13)
7: Squeeze Under (Escape Artist DC18) or Giddy Up (Handle Animal DC13)
8: Ledge to Ledge (Climb DC23) or Pinky Grips (Sleight of Hand DC15)
9: Watch Your Step (Perception DC15) or Quick Feet (Acrobatics DC20)
10: FINISH LINE!
Now, of course, a lot of this is left up to chance since it's level 1, but he has about as much chance of passing these challenges as a Rogue will. Bit higher on Cha based stuff, MAYBE a bit lower on Dex based stuff.
I only went with 2 Knowledges because IME only a few come up in any given campaign, and other people generally have some (Rangers have Nature, Monks/Clerics have Religion, etc.) that you can get away with your ability to make them untrained.
Thank you for letting us know Kudaku, i don't understand why they placed something like that in a companion book since we are going to have a mummy's mask player's guide when the adventure path begins.
Maybe they want to place different traits in the guide?We've been putting the campaign traits for our APs in the tie-in Player Companions for awhile (though they appear in the free Player's Guides as well).
Varisia, Birthplace of Legends has a player's guide and campaign traits for Shattered Star; People of the North has campaign traits for Reign of Winter; and Demon Hunter's Handbook has the campaign traits for Wrath of the Righteous.Make no mistake, the Trap Finder trait is a campaign trait for Mummy's Mask - nothing more, nothing less.
Ok i didn't know that, thank you for telling me.
Why do you do that? promoting the AP line through the player companion line?
Why do you do that? promoting the AP line through the player companion line?The last few Player's Companion Guides have all tied into the AP released at the same time. Personally I like that when they make an AP for a previously underdeveloped part of the game world that they also release a supplement for the players that fleshes things out a bit more.
I get that and i like it too, what i don't understand is why they place the campaign traits for an AP in both the companion released for this AP and the player's guide for the AP.
Is it somehow using funds from each products' budget to increase the crunch development effort, which gets shared between each product?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You know how you really beat the chase? You cast Expeditious Retreat on the rogue and play the team version of Pathfinder.
Nope: Expeditious Retreat = Personal spell.
You know how you really beat the chase? You cast Expeditious Retreat on the rogue and play the team version of Pathfinder.Nope: Expeditious Retreat = Personal spell.
*Unless you're an Alchemist with Infusion.
So, at the and of this chase does the guy you're chasing meekly surrender or does he fight like a beast at bay? Because if there's any chance of the latter the rogue is probably going to live longer if he only goes fast enough to give the appearance of trying. You're presuming a dex rogue to be better at the skills involved in the chase so there's no non-sneak combat capability.
Fighting without backup calls for nova capability and rogues don't have any. On top of that they're poor fighters to begin with and their main shtick needs friends. Feint doesn't compensate because of the action costs. They're the worst chasers outside the NPC class section because winning a chase means being alone with the guy you were chasing.
False.
|
|
So, at the and of this chase does the guy you're chasing meekly surrender or does he fight like a beast at bay? Because if there's any chance of the latter the rogue is probably going to live longer if he only goes fast enough to give the appearance of trying. You're presuming a dex rogue to be better at the skills involved in the chase so there's no non-sneak combat capability.
Fighting without backup calls for nova capability and rogues don't have any. On top of that they're poor fighters to begin with and their main shtick needs friends. Feint doesn't compensate because of the action costs. They're the worst chasers outside the NPC class section because winning a chase means being alone with the guy you were chasing.
Man, I get really tired of people grouping rogues into some of these categories. It depends on the player and the build.
I have been in a chase where I was the rogue and caught up solo. And I nova'ed. After trying diplomacy for a couple rounds. I *did* solo the encounter for about 4 rounds.
Keep your hang ups about rogues off my class.
Senior Developer
|
I get that and i like it too, what i don't understand is why they place the campaign traits for an AP in both the companion released for this AP and the player's guide for the AP.Why do you do that? promoting the AP line through the player companion line?The last few Player's Companion Guides have all tied into the AP released at the same time. Personally I like that when they make an AP for a previously underdeveloped part of the game world that they also release a supplement for the players that fleshes things out a bit more.
To some extent, it is creating a tie-in between two products (the AP and the Player Companion). You'll note that we tend to release a campaign setting book tied to the AP around the same time as well, as well as face cards, item cards, map folios, pawns, and even minis. We are in the business of selling books (and accessories), after all. :)
As for the campaign traits being in two places, they're in the free AP Player's Guide because we don't want to force people playing the AP to buy the companion, but if someone sees the traits in the companion and that encourages them to buy the AP, then all the better!
This is all I could find, sorry.
The Trap Spotter rogue talent is a good way to gain an auto-spot ability for traps in the game. Normally, you can't autospot traps like this. A player has to specifically state that they're looking for traps.
- James Jacobs on the Paizo Rules Questions forum: Dec 6, 2009
Another good (better?) way... Ranger with the Trapper and Dungeon Rover archetypes. You get the equivalent to Trap Spotter at level 1 (Rogue can not access that until 2nd), and it applies to more than traps. And you get 5 more feet of range on it at level 8. Add in Trapfinding from the Trapper archetype and you are just plain better at finding traps in the environment where you will find the vast majority of them... underground.
Power creep... victimizing Rogues everywhere.
I'm a chillaxian.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, at the and of this chase does the guy you're chasing meekly surrender or does he fight like a beast at bay? ... They're the worst chasers outside the NPC class section because winning a chase means being alone with the guy you were chasing.
Depending on the adventure, a whole slew of things may happen from combat to surrender to... other.
I've seen most of the rogues at the end do quite decently in one-on-one combat, either soloing the guy they were chasing to his surrender condition, or being effective for a few rounds to stall him until more members of his party catch up.
Huh, who would've thought all these folks would be down on the rogue and hardly play adventures with chases or complex skill challenges.
Most of the games I play involve more skill check rolls than in-combat attack rolls - by a sizable margin. I'm not saying this is the "right" way to play Pathfinder, it's just one of many ways that folks enjoy the game!
Does that mean that the sentiment of the rogue being underpowered correlates with folks who play adventures that are skewed towards arena-style combat and away from skills?
Because, yeah... the rogue's a poorer choice in those games.
Well, unless it's The Champion's Games by Tito Leati - which prominently features sneaking around and infiltrating an arena's underbelly. An outstanding adventure, BTW.
(And, as an aside, that's the adventure where our party rogue went ahead alone and completely decimated one of the major bosses while he was flat-footed. As another aside, the rogue was 1 of the 2 PCs from the party of 5 that survived that meat-grinder - because evasion is OP)
YOU ARE ALL CHAMPIONS!! RAWWRR.
|
|
Yep. It is.You don't own me! Cheliaxian!
Nah, nah bro, I don't own you. I own the class. I'm all up in it. People look at me and are like, "Damn, Wraithkin, you own that rogue class."
I'm all like, "Cool, cool."
That said, you are a halfling are you not? Where do you hail from? Because depending on those factors... I could. OH SNAP!
|
|
Nope because Rogues don't actually do that well in the skill game either.
Is this theory, or applied experience?
Because, in applied experience (150 gaming sessions in the past 9 months), I've been seeing rogues straight out own the skill game.
If applied experience, share stories! Pathfinder (and tabletop gaming) is about the stories!
Wraithkin - you play rogues more often than anyone should. You may even hold the record for Pathfinder sessions played as a rogue all-time. Is this your applied experience? They don't do well at the skill game? :)
(Yes, I'm evil. It's hard not to be when I have a pirate avatar)
I get that and i like it too, what i don't understand is why they place the campaign traits for an AP in both the companion released for this AP and the player's guide for the AP.Why do you do that? promoting the AP line through the player companion line?The last few Player's Companion Guides have all tied into the AP released at the same time. Personally I like that when they make an AP for a previously underdeveloped part of the game world that they also release a supplement for the players that fleshes things out a bit more.To some extent, it is creating a tie-in between two products (the AP and the Player Companion). You'll note that we tend to release a campaign setting book tied to the AP around the same time as well, as well as face cards, item cards, map folios, pawns, and even minis. We are in the business of selling books (and accessories), after all. :)
As for the campaign traits being in two places, they're in the free AP Player's Guide because we don't want to force people playing the AP to buy the companion, but if someone sees the traits in the companion and that encourages them to buy the AP, then all the better!
Thank you for answering.
|
|
That said, you are a halfling are you not? Where do you hail from? Because depending on those factors... I could. OH SNAP!
Cheliax. Of course, once the boss sent me out of the country on business, I never went back. Now I'M the boss.
Phenominal. An escaped slave. *steeples fingertips*
No, seriously, I don't own it or anyone. I don't have slaver characters. Not even in the evil campaign. I just love me some rogue. They are the best class. Evah. Strictly mechanically speaking of course.
|
|
Nope because Rogues don't actually do that well in the skill game either.Is this theory, or applied experience?
Because, in applied experience (150 gaming sessions in the past 9 months), I've been seeing rogues straight out own the skill game.
If applied experience, share stories! Pathfinder (and tabletop gaming) is about the stories!
Wraithkin - you play rogues more often than anyone should. You may even hold the record for Pathfinder sessions played as a rogue all-time. Is this your applied experience? They don't do well at the skill game? :)
(Yes, I'm evil. It's hard not to be when I have a pirate avatar)
I have to admit, I don't own skills all the time. When I play with that egyptian fellow, he has a character that has an INSANE perception. Then again, that's pretty much the only skill that character rolls. Billy Idol can kick my butt at knowledge rolls, of course he's using that one bardic performance.
I still have a great skill set and I use them on all sorts of characters. I don't overly focus generally, but when I've chosen to, my characters have excelled at skills I've focused on. I find myself with more skills that people overlook and are super useful in a pinch in addition to the run of the mill stuff and that has saved our butts more times than I can count. We're not always the highest on all the skills, but we have skills in spades and often more than enough to carry the table when we need a roll.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nope because Rogues don't actually do that well in the skill game either.Is this theory, or applied experience?
Both.
In theory, 8 skill points base is overkill. It hits the point of diminishing returns on skills points (2 is way too few, 4 is enough, 6 is great, and 8 is cool to have, but not as "wow" compared to the last tier down).
With 6 skill points a level, you'll generally have all the skills you need for any character concept, at least as you start leveling up (one rank wonders like Climb and Swim might eat into your available points at first level, but after that you're gold), and 6+Int classes don't usually sacrifice as much to get that many as the Rogue does.
Hence why Bards and Inquisitors have spells and bunch of other useful abilities, the Ranger and Slayer have full BaB and a bunch of other things, but the Rogue pretty much ONLY has his skills and a few other minor abilities going for him.
In practice, I have never seen those two extra skill ranks matter in the long term, especially not enough to justify the hit the Rogue takes to everything BESIDES skills.
|
|
Both.
Stories?
There's a theory put forth that rogues don't do well in the skill game.
I'm absolutely willing to buy that rogues don't do well in the skill game, but I need examples and stories, not generalized talk.
What adventure? What level? What point buy? What was the GM's style? What did the rogue do, or not do?
If the designers do something, they can trickle out rogue talents. Stories help inspire such things. A story like "Yeah, I heard on the forums that rogues are supposed to sneak ahead and scout rooms, and so I took my level 6 rogue and got into the room with the big bad wizard and tried to assassinate him... except, apparently the wizard had tremorsense and killed me instead, with a Hold Person spell. My Will save was +9 even!".
Hmmm... maybe a rogue talent that lets stealth fool tremorsense should be on the plate in an upcoming supplement... or a talent that allows two rolls for a Will save (hey, wait a second...)
|
|
Both.Stories?
There's a theory put forth that rogues don't do well in the skill game.
I'm absolutely willing to buy that rogues don't do well in the skill game, but I need examples and stories, not generalized talk.
What adventure? What level? What point buy? What was the GM's style? What did the rogue do, or not do?
*IF* the designers do something, they can trickle out rogue talents. Stories help inspire such things. A story like "Yeah, I heard on the forums that rogues are supposed to sneak ahead and scout rooms, and so I took my level 6 rogue and got into the room with the big bad wizard and tried to assassinate him... except, apparently the wizard had tremorsense and killed me instead, with a Hold Person spell. My Will save was +9 even!".
Hmmm... maybe a rogue talent that lets stealth fool tremorsense should be on the plate in an upcoming supplement... or a talent that allows two rolls for a Will save (hey, wait a second...)
I like my willful evasion concept. =P But I like your Tremorsense talent. Lightfeet - as long as a rogue is not more than lightly encumbered, when moving half speed he is not detectable to tremorsense or other methods of detecting someone through vibrations.
Though, that might be too lose of wording and people would try to abuse it for echolocation.
Nah, nah bro, I don't own you. I own the class.
I resemble that remark.
|
|
like my willful evasion concept. =P
I'd so be all over Stalwart (Will) as a talent on a rogue.
They'd probably need to make it a talent chain to maintain some sense of balance with core talents. Unless they boost some core talents first (perhaps the 1/day ones to 3/day).
(For others - I use the term "balance" with regards to the rogue to itself, not balance vs other classes or balance vs rage powers, etc).
Both.Stories?
There's a theory put forth that rogues don't do well in the skill game.
I'm absolutely willing to buy that rogues don't do well in the skill game, but I need examples and stories, not generalized talk.
What adventure? What level? What point buy? What was the GM's style? What did the rogue do, or not do?
Less "not do well in the skill game" but more "not do any better in the skill game than another class could, and be significantly worse in other areas".
The game I used for my survey results (which you never commented on, for shame) was a large party. Rolled stats, GM style was...hard to describe. TBH he wasn't a very good GM, but we were running Serpent's Skull so that didn't affect the challenges we faced any, which included a fair number of traps and other skill points.
The Rogue rolled pretty well on stats (stats at time of death were 12 19 14 15 13 13) so that wasn't the problem.
He had pretty good skill checks (level 5), +10 UMD/Perception/Kn. Dungeoneering/Kn. Local, 12 Escape Artist, +13 Stealth, 15 Disable Device, etc.
(I have his char sheet in front of me now, but it's in Google Drive and I can't share it for him.)
He was played, mostly, as the sneaky skill guy, as a Rogue should be if the class' abilities and description are any indicator. He tried to use TWFing Sneak Attacks for combat.
His downfall was combat. Every. Single. Combat. He nearly died. Like "Within 2 HP of 0" almost died. He was a full time job for the Cleric.
And it wasn't like he was stupid, you know? He'd go for the flank, he never went off alone (when he went Stealth Scouting, my Monk went with him), wouldn't ever try to engage first...but a couple of solid hits would put him down. Will saves were also a problem, especially in the first book, but not to any deadly extent.
They were the reason for his final demise, however (at level 5). I actually have a write-up of the "Farewell, Stalwart Companion" chapter of the Campaign Journal but that's not necessary to understanding what happened.
The nitty gritty:
Spriggans had a bell that lets them control people or something, I'm not exactly sure. My Monk was the only one who passed the Will save. They bring everybody along and pop out of the bushes, revealing themselves.
They use the bell again, which causes a Fear effect. Again, everyone rolls like s@!&, and they run away in fear. Except poor old Geralt, who actually passed his Will save the second time.
Why is this a bad thing? Because now he's in the center of a group of 6 angry Spriggans, all Enlarged. Poor bastard never stood a chance. If he moved, he took an AoO. If he stayed, he'd get pounded by all 6 anyway. So he tried to move.
Splat.
To be fair, that encounter was nearly the end of my Monk as well (I ran to the center to give him a healing potion, hoping Snake Style would give me enough of an edge to hold them off), so it wasn't an easy one to solo, but the combination of his bad Will save, bad luck, and poor combat ability meant he was pretty much toast.
We continued on from there. He rolled up a Paladin, despite us having a readily available Raise Dead scroll.
We never missed his skills. Between the Bard, me, and the Ranger (who replaced the Sorcerer due to shenanigans involving the GM not liking that he said he was the son of Asmodeus...like I said he wasn't a good GM. Long story short Arkanis got snatched by Asmodeus, we were all saved by Sarenrae, and his GMPC Cleric got a nice shiny toy from the deal. Gag me.), we had most things covered at least once over, many of the more common skills covered multiple times. I put some ranks in Disable Device on my Monk and we went on our merry way until the game fell apart because the GM didn't like a call I made in the game I was running.
Probably my favorite "Rogues suck" story, even though it's my first.
To compare, in the Skull and Shackles game I'm running, we have a Goblin Vivisectionist, made by a complete newcomer to Pathfinder (though to be fair, long time player of 1E and 2E) who kicks Geralt's ass all over. Extracts and Discoveries (especially Spontaneous Healing) have saved his life more times than I can count, though he's come near death many few times so far (level 3 now). His skills are about the same (though his Stealth is a lot higher, obviously), he's got the same Sneak Attack, but he's got a lot more oomph behind him.
I like my willful evasion concept. =P But I like your Tremorsense talent. Lightfeet - as long as a rogue is not more than lightly encumbered, when moving half speed he is not detectable to tremorsense or other methods of detecting someone through vibrations.
Though, that might be too lose of wording and people would try to abuse it for echolocation.
The worst part about this Talent is the same thing wrong with a bunch of Talents, it's at best on par with a Feat that does similar (Dampen Presence, but it works for Blindsense/Sight isntead).
It wouldn't be OP at all to extend that to work on Tremorsense AND Blindsense/sight. We need more Talents that are better than Feats.
There's a theory put forth that rogues don't do well in the skill game.
The only factoid I saw on this were the points that the Bard, what with Bardic Knowledge and Versatile performance, can often have more skills than a rogue, even with the same int*. ymmv
On that note, since a alchemist gets 4 skp and a decent list of skills, and Int is the Prime stat- they can also have about as many as a rogue. ymmv
The Inquisitor gets 6 Skp along with the Ranger and a decent list of skills. But neither can afford to put any more points in INT than the rogue can. Still, since in many campaigns their class features will be better- they can get so very close to "out skilling the rogue" and be better elsewhere. Of course, again- ymmv.
* of course some of the better archetypes give up these features.
There's a theory put forth that rogues don't do well in the skill game.
The only factoid I saw on this were the points that the Bard, what with Bardic Knowledge and Versatile performance, can often have more skills than a rogue, even with the same int*. ymmv
On that note, since a alchemist gets 4 skp and a decent list of skills, and Int is the Prime stat- they can also have about as many as a rogue. ymmv
The Inquisitor gets 6 Skp along with the Ranger and a decent list of skills. But neither can afford to put any more points in INT than the rogue can. Still, since in many campaigns their class features will be better- they can get so very close to "out skilling the rogue" and be better elsewhere. Of course, again- ymmv.
* of course some of the better archetypes give up these features.
Keep in mind the Alchemist, Bard, and Inquisitors all have spells that can replace or enhance some skill uses, which the Rogue lacks.
Less "not do well in the skill game" but more "not do any better in the skill game than another class could, and be significantly worse in other areas"....We never missed his skills. Between the Bard, me, and the Ranger ..., we had most things covered at least once over, many of the more common skills covered multiple times.
.
Sure, but note you had a ranger instead of a fighter plus a bard, and a monk.
Take the classic party of Fighter, cleric, Wizard and Rogue. The Wizard has high Int, and sure, he'll have the Ks nailed. But the fighter and the cleric can barely put ranks in their needed personal skills.
And, like you said, no matter who was in Geralts place would have been squished. Note that it was his making the second will save that killed him.
But yeah, if someone wants to give up a little DPR to play a Ranger (instead of a fighter), some blasting to play a bard instead of a Sorc, etc- then the rogue can be dispensed with. Or heck like you guys did- instead of one fighter tank, have a Monk and a ranger.
Even without counting in spells, they have class features that make them better in combat than the Rogue, while still retaining similar (or sometimes even greater) skill capability than the Rogue.
Not it may not be the vivisectionist but neither is the rogue, yes the rogue might be able to sneak into the governor's ball pretending to be someone he isn't (although other classes would probably have more chances to do that) but he can't beat the rival at a duel (unless the rival is an NPC class or rogue) because he sucks..I spent the 5 minutes in HeroLab to illustrate. Which other class will rise to this challenge?
** spoiler omitted **...
Later the rogue goes to the next quest/mission, and find himself hopelessly fighting sneak-attack inmune tremor-sensing earth elementals.
Keep in mind the Alchemist, Bard, and Inquisitors all have spells that can replace or enhance some skill uses, which the Rogue lacks.
There's a theory put forth that rogues don't do well in the skill game.
The only factoid I saw on this were the points that the Bard, what with Bardic Knowledge and Versatile performance, can often have more skills than a rogue, even with the same int*. ymmv
On that note, since a alchemist gets 4 skp and a decent list of skills, and Int is the Prime stat- they can also have about as many as a rogue. ymmv
The Inquisitor gets 6 Skp along with the Ranger and a decent list of skills. But neither can afford to put any more points in INT than the rogue can. Still, since in many campaigns their class features will be better- they can get so very close to "out skilling the rogue" and be better elsewhere. Of course, again- ymmv.
* of course some of the better archetypes give up these features.
They do (inquisitor to a much lesser extent). But they have limited slots. My inquisitor could not afford to take many of these due to needing buff spells. And of course the rogue can cast spells by means of Talents or UMD.
Later the rogue goes to the next quest/mission, and find himself hopelessly fighting sneak-attack inmune tremor-sensing earth elementals.
The wizard finds himself fighting vs a foe in a AMF. Come on.
Impossible, unless their a strix my enemies that have AMF on can never reach me, also it means my enemies are casters...
Sure, but note you had a ranger instead of a fighter plus a bard, and a monk.
Well, the Ranger wasn't in play until AFTER the Rogue had died, and we weren't really reliant on Geralt to begin with.
Take the classic party of Fighter, cleric, Wizard and Rogue. The Wizard has high Int, and sure, he'll have the Ks nailed. But the fighter and the cleric can barely put ranks in their needed personal skills.
Indeed, but I think only going by the classic four man party is way limiting. It cuts out the factors that REALLY obsolete Rogues, namely the classes that can do his job, but other things too.
And, like you said, no matter who was in Geralts place would have been squished. Note that it was his making the second will save that killed him.
Indeed it was, though if he hadn't failed the first one he wouldn't have been in that scenario.
If his AC or HP had been better he could have escaped as well (I had no problem getting in or out as my Monk, it was the fighting while standing over his corpse that got me beat down).
But yeah, if someone wants to give up a little DPR to play a Ranger (instead of a fighter), some blasting to play a bard instead of a Sorc, etc- then the rogue can be dispensed with. Or heck like you guys did- instead of one fighter tank, have a Monk and a ranger.
Exactly the point I was trying to make, once you stray from the classic 4 man party (and let's be honest, when was the last time you had a party of Fighter/Wizard/Cleric/Rogue without at least ONE substitution?) the downfalls of the class become apparent. He doesn't really serve a necessary role, since either another class, or multiple classes in tandem can cover the role, with no issue.
I will say that game also had another "Rogue" (Rogue/Fighter/Red Mantis) later, but she came in 2 sessions before the game fell apart, so I can't really speak to long term effectiveness there.
Short term, good at stealth, better at combat than Geralt, but seemed redundant with the Ranger in the party. Definitely not a skill monkey.
Keep in mind the Alchemist, Bard, and Inquisitors all have spells that can replace or enhance some skill uses, which the Rogue lacks.
They do (inquisitor to a much lesser extent). But they have limited slots. My inquisitor could not afford to take many of these due to needing buff spells. And of course the rogue can cast spells by means of Talents or UMD.
Also keep in mind the Bard or Inquisitor can save on UMD ranks (increasing their skill lead slightly) since the spells could be on their spell list.
Even without counting in spells, they have class features that make them better in combat than the Rogue, while still retaining similar (or sometimes even greater) skill capability than the Rogue.
The basic bard is better in combat than the rogue, who has sneak attack? It is to laugh. Ranger, sure ep vs Foes, Inquisitor- no doubt as long as the Bane and Judgements holds out. Bard? Come on.
The bard makes everyone else better in combat.