Generally, when people compare the numbers, they also take into account skill points and saves. The issue also is, comparing the rogue to a Fighter is a poor metric; a fighter is rarely in competition for the 'rogue' role. More often, I find the rogue is compared to the Vivisecionist Alchemist, or the Bard or other such characters more in direct competition for the slot. And on multiple levels, the rouge falls flat of both of them.Tabletop RPGs attract a wide, diverse range of players.
Some groups get together and spend 6 hours where they enter "rooms" with monsters, roll initiative, and generally see a combat resolved in 2-3 rounds because all the characters have amazing action economy and over half the party can produce tremendous DPR.
Some groups get together for 6 hours and never roll initiative once.
Some groups have the player who wants to be the "roguish type" and then they read the flavor text of the vivisectionist and say "no way in Cheliax do I want to be that kind of person..."
There are plenty of tables where a core rogue will outshine an archaeologist bard aplenty, especially if they exercise the self-control to stay away from using a trait to supercharge luck bonuses.
First of all, Even removing combat from the equation, those other classes do "rogue" better than the class called 'the rogue'. Spells and extracts, and nearly as many (or more) skills between the two, go a very long way.
And secondly, there are players scared off from a class because they're afraid of reflavoring? Really? Mechanically, it has nearly everything that makes up a 'rogue' conceptually, and a ton more. There's nothing in the rules that say you have to play the class based on the fluff in the book. If your players aren't creative enough to look past the two sentence description above the class, and play the class how they want, then I feel sorry for your games.
I compared the two because they did the same thing to change those classes.
In 3.5: Only rogues can find a trap with a DC higher than 10.
In PF: Anyone can find any traps, only rogues can disarm magical traps, and get half their level as a skill bonus to do so.In 3.5: Only players with Track can follow tracks with a DC higher than 10. (I know no one who took Track that didn't get it for free as a ranger)
In PF: Anyone can follow any tracks, and Rangers get half their level as a skill bonus to do so.Do you see the parallel?
Indeed!
Even though Ranger has always been one of my favorite classes, I was glad to see everyone being able to track. And Ranger is still a solid class.
Yeah, because they totally couldn't before Pathfinder came out.
People just think that only Rangers track because...Track is a horrible feat and the only way anyone ever "took" it was if it came for free or their animal companion got it as a racial bonus feat, etc...
|
First of all, Even removing combat from the equation, those other classes do "rogue" better than the class called 'the rogue'. Spells and extracts, and nearly as many (or more) skills between the two, go a very long way...
My point is it entirely depends on one's perspective. Vivisectionist alchemist is not a magic bullet for everyone who want to play a roguish figure. If you have a concept of a charming yet roguish rake who sneaks into the governor's ball pretending to be someone he isn't, bullies a rival into a duel and adeptly disarms him, then finally delves into the dungeon and stabs the cyclopean guard in the eye (sneak attack), it's not the vivisectionist. You lose out on Bluff, Diplomacy, Disguise, Intimidate and depending on the table's level range, the talents to get the combat style going you want to play with. At some tables, the rogue class is the strongest class to fulfill a concept of the rogue stereotype in the level range that's being played.
Certainly, someone can play an alchemist, quaff some infusions or extracts, but what if in their mind, they want everything their character does to be innate, and not just something drunk and gained from a few magic bottles?
Sure, he could look at his fellow gamers and say "okay guys my character is drinking his mutagen and a couple extracts, but I'd like to pretend he just didn't, and it's instead Gord's innate talents that are making him successful tonight..."
But... really? The dude should just play a rogue and not stress out that he could've done better DPR for a few rounds if he reskinned a vivisectionist.
And secondly, there are players scared off from a class because they're afraid of reflavoring?
I've played with hundreds of players. Yes, there are folks out there who look at the flavor text of a class, see a handful of references to torture and will refuse to play it on principal. I'm not sure my first instinct is to judge them lacking creativity - I simply respect their choice since they should have the freedom to play and interpret the game however they want to.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Vivisectionist alchemist is not a magic bullet for everyone who want to play a roguish figure. If you have a concept of a charming yet roguish rake who sneaks into the governor's ball pretending to be someone he isn't, bullies a rival into a duel and adeptly disarms him, then finally delves into the dungeon and stabs the cyclopean guard in the eye (sneak attack), it's not the vivisectionist. You lose out on Bluff, Diplomacy, Disguise, Intimidate and depending on the table's level range, the talents to get the combat style going you want to play with. At some tables, the rogue class is the strongest class to fulfill a concept of the rogue stereotype in the level range that's being played.
You could've been right, then you gave an example a bard or alchemist can both do.
Another thing is, bard and alchemist also both have a pretty good sized skill pool without any spells. Spells and abilities just make it better.
Certainly, someone can play an alchemist, quaff some infusions or extracts, but what if in their mind, they want everything their character does to be innate, and not just something drunk and gained from a few magic bottles?
That's probably one of the most painful things about playing pathfinder. Magic items and magic do a lot for your character and are actually expected to an extent.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You could've been right, then you gave an example a bard or alchemist can both do.
I am right.
You're welcome to build a 4th level bard, alchemist and rogue and measure them up to 1) Disguise/Bluff/Diplomacy their way through the party, 2) Possess the five combat feats to beat the noble in a fair duel and 3) Still have sneak attack damage.
That's probably one of the most painful things about playing pathfinder. Magic items and magic do a lot for your character and are actually expected to an extent.
I'll refer to my point. Every table is different. Some tables lean heavily on roleplay and at those tables, you just can't start quaffing a mutagen or casting Charm Person in the middle of a dinner party. At other tables, it's more about getting to a certain numeric modifier on a skill, using spells/magic as needed to augment and rolling the dice to achieve the same net result.
Diverse groups exist out there. There's plenty where the rogue class does a better job of emulating the classic rogue. You can't make Gord with an Alchemist or Bard and have it feel authentic.
You could've been right, then you gave an example a bard or alchemist can both do.I am right.
You're welcome to build a 4th level bard, alchemist and rogue and measure them up to 1) Disguise/Bluff/Diplomacy their way through the party, 2) Possess the five combat feats to beat the noble in a fair duel and 3) Still have sneak attack damage.
What exactly are we comparing this to? 1) Both classes can get a good bonus to each of those skills. 2) What are the 5 combat feats to beat a noble in a fair duel? 3) Vivisectionist.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
You could've been right, then you gave an example a bard or alchemist can both do.I am right.
You added to the criteria specifically to make yourself correct though. Stabbing someone in the eye doesn't require sneak attack, and you don't need five combat feats(which devoured all your rogue talents and have to be human to have by 4 as a rogue) to beat someone in a fair duel and/or disarm them. Bard/Inquisitor/Vivisectionist all have enough to get disarm(not sure why they want it, but they can), have other benefits, have four skill points per level(sneak/bluff/disguise/diplomacy) and stab someone in the eye.
Some tables lean heavily on roleplay and at those tables, you just can't start quaffing a mutagen or casting Charm Person in the middle of a dinner party.
That's great! You don't have to use those options to be as good as the rogue though. They do make you better at a lot of things though, and its great to have those options in pathfinder.
Don't get me wrong, I know there are plenty of groups out there, just that your examples aren't really justifiable. Just the same, I know you can have fun with a rogue, and I'm sure there has got to be some situation it works best, but if that situation is depriving other people of their abilities that's not a very big win.
Now about that trait that gives trapfinding...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you have a concept of a charming yet roguish rake who sneaks into the governor's ball pretending to be someone he isn't, bullies a rival into a duel and adeptly disarms him, then finally delves into the dungeon and stabs the cyclopean guard in the eye (sneak attack), it's not the vivisectionist.
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 at combat, compared to other classes, and he can't stab the cyclopean guard in the eye (and kill him) because a)he has trouble hitting, b)rogues can't kill anything with one sneak attack, c)can't survive the rest of the combat with a giant.
So the rogue isn't the right class for your concept because he can't do things well unless the DM hand hold him and make the opposition well below his level.
Absolutely meaningless. Just because you are playing it that way - and 16 years is not really that long, mind you - it does not mean that your way is typical. It is not "the right way". It is not "wrong" either. Just your way of playing, and that is all right and good for you.
This is not a valid argument, unless you can prove it's not common enough to be a valid generalization. It's fair to say that people don't like to eat crap. The fact that some people, with a disorder called coprophagia, happen to like it, doen't make the argument less valid.
Yes, I'm pretty sure someone, somewhere, has a campaign built around artisan crafters where Craft: basketweaving is a much better skill than Perception. That doesn't invalide the argument that perception is a better skill. In a similar way, I'm pretty sure there are some people who claim you only can find traps in your own square. Just like there is people, somewhere, hidden in a cellar, that says you can only find hiding people in your own square. That doesn't change the fact that the rules say -1 per 10feet, so a character with +39 perception (a god-like perception) can detect any non-GM-Hacked trap from 50 feet.
If you have a concept of a charming yet roguish rake who sneaks into the governor's ball pretending to be someone he isn't, bullies a rival into a duel and adeptly disarms him, then finally delves into the dungeon and stabs the cyclopean guard in the eye (sneak attack), it's not the vivisectionist.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 at combat, compared to other classes, and he can't stab the cyclopean guard in the eye (and kill him) because a)he has trouble hitting, b)rogues can't kill anything with one sneak attack, c)can't survive the rest of the combat with a giant.
So the rogue isn't the right class for your concept because he can't do things well unless the DM hand hold him and make the opposition well below his level.
Now, I can see giving Backstab instead of Sneak Attack (using sneak attack rules for qualifying): X2 till level 5, x3 till level 5 to 8, x4 Level 9 -12, x5 after 13th.
If we increase everything in this new Backstab: that would be decent.
Smite Evil and Favored Enemy are better than trapfinding. They are more common, and most people given a choice would take either one over trapfinding. You will NEVER see either one as a trait.
Unless your GM pitches you a misdirecting story I dont see how your favored enemy could not come up. <---This assumes the player is at least average, and over 95% of most games have you going against team evil.
Even if you play a game that is trap heavy there are ways to bypass the traps. Trapfinding is nice, but not a requirement.
|
|
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?
1. The PC is known about town, and must quickly improvise a mundane disguise to sneak into the duke's ball. His guards are looking for someone to sneak in, and thus are making copious use of Detect Magic to shake down each person as they enter. Unnamed Hero uses his +9 Disguise.
2. Multiple times, he needs to use his Bluff to convince patrons of his social status and his false identity. Unnamed Hero uses his +9 Bluff a half-dozen times, and +10 Bluff with the ladies from his Charming trait.
3. He finally spots the girl who is supposed to marry the duke and instead moves in to woo her. Wooing her is something of a skill challenge that involves winning 2 of 3 Diplomacy rolls in the DC20-DC25 range. She finds him attractive, and he gets +13 to each of the rolls.
4. The duke catches on to said newcomer. The hero has a couple Sense Motive skill checks to make to see if the duke's promises to other attendees is in fact genuine. He discovers they are not. He then slips some evidence he needed to plant on the duke with his +11 Sleight of Hand before he challenges the duke. The duke refuses the challenge from a lesser rival, the hero uses his +9 Intimidate to force the duke's hand and reveals the incriminating plant.
5. Now in the courtyard, both the hero and duke are handed mundane masterwork rapiers. The duke isn't that bad at fencing. He's a level 3 aristocrat/level 2 fighter with a 14 Str and 14 Dex, with Weapon Focus (rapier), Combat Expertise and Improved Feint of his own. The winner is the first one to hit the opponent with non-lethal damage 3 times, or to disarm and then pick up his opponent's weapon. Our hero luckily has +9 on his disarm, 19 CMD versus being disarmed and +10 on his Sense Motive rolls against the duke's feints.
6. Later, after handily defeated the duke and using Sleight of Hand at +11 to palm the duke's +1 rapier he was cheating with, the hero disappears into the crowd and begins sneaking past assorted guards to get into the basement using his +11 Stealth. Three separate times he has to make Stealth checks to beat guards, perhaps failing once and having to instead resort to using his +9 Bluff to convince the guard he is lost.
7. Now in the basement, our hero comes upon the room with locked chest with the Macguffin he seeks. Unfortunately his +9 Perception vs traps does not detect the tripwire in the room, and BLAM a 5d6 fireball goes off. Luckily his +9 Reflex is good for the DC15, coupled with Evasion and he fully ducks the evil trap.
8. Finally, our hero spots the guardian of the item in question. This monster is of course balanced such that it's expecting someone who is not well armed. For a level 4 PC soloing an encounter with zero gear, you're looking at a monster with ~25HP, AC14 and attacking at +5 for 1d8+4 or so. For kicks, let's say the monster has DR5/magic too so the nicking of the duke's rapier was essential to our success. Our rogue sneaks up with his +11 Stealth, gets his surprise round at +8 to hit versus his flat-footed opponent, likely hits for 3d6+1, goes first in round one and his a second time for another 3d6+1 before settling into a couple rounds of combat before whittling away the remaining 5-7HP.
9. Wiping away his sweat, he kneels at the chest and discovers a complex mechanism. If not disabled correctly, it will destroy the Macguffin within. Luckily his +15 Disable Device is just what he needs to be absolutely sure he can disable the trap without failing by more than 5 and he makes his way back to fresh air with the Macguffin in hand.
Unnamed Hero
Human Rogue 4
CG Medium humanoid (human)
Init +4; Senses Perception +7
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 14, touch 14, flat-footed 10 (+4 Dex)
hp 31 (4d8+8)
Fort +3, Ref +8 (+1 bonus vs. traps), Will +1
Defensive Abilities evasion, trap sense, uncanny dodge
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee +1 rapier +8 (1d6+1/18-20/×2)
Special Attacks sneak attack +2d6
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 10, Dex 18, Con 14, Int 13, Wis 10, Cha 14
Base Atk +3; CMB +7 (+9 disarm); CMD 17 (19 vs. disarm)
Feats Agile Maneuvers, Combat Expertise, Improved Disarm, Skill Focus (Diplomacy), Weapon Finesse
Traits charming, vigilant battler
Skills Acrobatics +11, Appraise +5, Bluff +9 (+10 vs. characters who could be attracted to you), Climb +4, Diplomacy +12 (+13 vs. characters who could be attracted to you), Disable Device +15, Disguise +9, Escape Artist +8, Intimidate +9, Perception +7 (+9 to locate traps), Sense Motive +8 (+10 on opposed rolls to counter a feint in combat), Sleight of Hand +11, Stealth +11, Swim +4
Languages Common
SQ rogue talents (combat trick, finesse rogue), trapfinding +2
Other Gear +1 Rapier, Thieves' tools, masterwork, 50 GP
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Agile Maneuvers Use DEX instead of STR for CMB
Charming +1 Bluff/Diplomacy/save DC for a language-dependent spell vs. targets who could be sexually attracted to you.
Combat Expertise +/-1 Bonus to AC in exchange for an equal penalty to attack.
Evasion (Ex) If you succeed at a Reflex save for half damage, you take none instead.
Improved Disarm You don't provoke attacks of opportunity when disarming.
Sneak Attack +2d6 +2d6 damage if you flank your target or your target is flat-footed.
Trap Sense +1 (Ex) +1 bonus on reflex saves and AC against traps.
Trapfinding +2 Gain a bonus to find or disable traps, including magical ones.
Uncanny Dodge (Ex) Retain Dex bonus to AC when flat-footed.
Vigilant Battler +2 to Sense motive when making opposed rolls to counter a feint in combat.
Don't get me wrong, a certain kind of bard will do pretty well fulfilling the stereotype and soloing this "adventure". I don't think an alchemist would make it. Like I consider a bard to be a rogue/wizard, I'd think an investigator (rogue/alchemist) and slayer (rogue/fighter) would do alright, just not as well.
you do realize this trait is a campaign trait for the Mummy's Mask AP coming out next month, right?
Most AP campaign traits have a few things in common (barring a couple of the campaigns)
1) They are in many cases better than a standard trait
2) They are almost always not allowed in PFS.
1. There are campaign traits in the APG so it is possible to see them outside of campaigns.
2. PFS is not the standard. It has houserules so that those parcitipating wont deal with too much table variance. If MM had come out before the APG, it would likely be in there also. Ultimate Campaign also has campaign traits, so being a campaign trait does not automatically make it "too good". Reactionary is not a campaign trait, but it seems to be one of the more popular ones. Following that any trait granting perception as a class skill would probably be at the top also, and that the one in Ultimate Campaign that does that is also not a campaign trait.
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 **...
You built a bunch of tasks tailored to your build, and assumed the rogue auto-succeeded. That is not impressive.
How about having someone make, but not reveal the tasks, you and another person make builds, and then as soon as you announce the builds are ready, the task are revealed?
|
|
You built a bunch of tasks tailored to your build, and assumed the rogue auto-succeeded. That is not impressive.
It's a series of challenges that are classic "rogue" ones.
If you're not a fan of something that's Dumas-inspired, take some classes through a series of challenges faced by Cugel, The Grey Mouser, Gord or Bilbo.
My build isn't some sort of super-optimizing, it's meant to be "classic rogue".
If your comment is a classically built rogue does rogue best, well then... that's the point. :)
You built a bunch of tasks tailored to your build, and assumed the rogue auto-succeeded. That is not impressive.It's a series of challenges that are classic "rogue" ones.
If you're not a fan of something that's Dumas-inspired, take some classes through a series of challenges faced by Cugel, The Grey Mouser, Gord or Bilbo.
My build isn't some sort of super-optimizing, it's meant to be "classic rogue".
If your comment is a classically built rogue does rogue best, well then... that's the point. :)
That could be swashbuckler according to some people, and it does not have to be about super-optimizing. You cherry picked. A similar challenge that is more of a blind challenge is more suitable was my point. ;)
Goal posts:
1) Do noticeable damage. Monsters shouldn't able to ignore you.
2) Be a decent skill monkey
3) The goal is not to make a rogue that is the best at something. The goal is to make a functional character that is rarely useless in fight.
Restrictions:
1) No strength build rogues
2) You can't assume flanking
3) Must have a viable range attack option
4) 20 point buy
Bonus:
1) Use feats and talents in the PRD
2) Use a race from the CRB
NEW CHALLENGE: Make so that another class can't do EVERYTHING you do+ more
|
you do realize this trait is a campaign trait for the Mummy's Mask AP coming out next month, right?
Most AP campaign traits have a few things in common (barring a couple of the campaigns)
1) They are in many cases better than a standard trait
2) They are almost always not allowed in PFS.1. There are campaign traits in the APG so it is possible to see them outside of campaigns.
2. PFS is not the standard. It has houserules so that those parcitipating wont deal with too much table variance. If MM had come out before the APG, it would likely be in there also. Ultimate Campaign also has campaign traits, so being a campaign trait does not automatically make it "too good". Reactionary is not a campaign trait, but it seems to be one of the more popular ones. Following that any trait granting perception as a class skill would probably be at the top also, and that the one in Ultimate Campaign that does that is also not a campaign trait.
But in a home campaign, any GM could easily say no to whatever they want to say no to.
So I don't understand your point.
EDIT: To be more clear... If you are playing Skulls and Shackles, it wouldn't make much sense to take the Carrion Crown campaign traits. So the GM could easily say no for RP reasons as well as power reasons.
Your point buy is off on the Rogue mate.
Str 10
Dex 18(10 points + Human Bonus)
Con 14(5 points)
Int 13(2 points + ability increase?)
Wis 10
Cha 14(5 points)
22 points.
I see you've also chosen the level at which the Rogue functions at it's peak.
And wow. This is one contrived piece. You've designed an "adventure" of which a Rogue has all the necessary pieces. I'll applaud you at that.
Human Inquisitor(Heretic) 4 of Cayden Cailean
Conversion Inquisition
CG Medium humanoid (human)
Init +5; Senses Perception +9
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 15, touch 13, flat-footed 12 (+3 Dex, +2 Deflection)
hp 31 (4d8+8)
Fort +6, Ref +4, Will +6
Defensive Abilities
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee +1 rapier +6 (1d6+3/18-20/×2)
Special Attacks Judgement
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 14, Dex 16, Con 14, Int 13, Wis 14, Cha 9
Base Atk +3; CMB +5 (+7 disarm); CMD 20 (22 vs. disarm)
Feats Combat Expertise, Improved Disarm, Skill Focus (Diplomacy),
Traits Child of the Streets, Trap Finder
Skills Bluff +11, Diplomacy +14, Disable Device +11, Disguise +6(+16 with Disguise Self), Intimidate +11, Perception +9, Sense Motive +11, Sleight of Hand +10,
Languages Common
SQ
Other Gear +1 Rapier, Thieves' tools, masterwork, Leather Armor
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Combat Expertise +/-1 Bonus to AC in exchange for an equal penalty to attack.
Improved Disarm You don't provoke attacks of opportunity when disarming.
Stern Gaze Gain a bonus equal to half your level on Intimidate and Sense Motive(+2)
Cunning Intiative At 2nd level, an inquisitor adds her Wisdom modifier on initiative checks, in addition to her Dexterity modifier.
Monster Lore The inquisitor adds her Wisdom modifier on Knowledge skill checks in addition to her Intelligence modifier, when making skill checks to identify the abilities and weaknesses of creatures.
Track an inquisitor adds half her level on Survival skill checks made to follow or identify tracks.
1. +7 Disguise(Guidance), as soon as he gets through he bumps it up to +16
2. Bluff check is a +11
3. Diplomacy is a +14
4. Sleight of Hand is a +10, Intimate is a +11
5. Before the fight, he prays to Cayden Cailean to let him show what a jerk off this Duke is and Shield of Faiths. In Fight, our Inquisitor has a better CMD by far with a better chance of not being disarmed. His Sense Motive is also better. 1st Judgement is spent here.
6. Sleight of hand is a +10, Invisibility lets him pass all the guards with ease.
7. Our perception is better and if not, we can heal the damage we take with 2 1st level Cure Light Wounds.
8. We're more likely to get the jump but it takes slightly longer to fight down the monster. 2nd Judgement is spent here.
9. +12 Disable Device with Guidance.
you do realize this trait is a campaign trait for the Mummy's Mask AP coming out next month, right?
Most AP campaign traits have a few things in common (barring a couple of the campaigns)
1) They are in many cases better than a standard trait
2) They are almost always not allowed in PFS.1. There are campaign traits in the APG so it is possible to see them outside of campaigns.
2. PFS is not the standard. It has houserules so that those parcitipating wont deal with too much table variance. If MM had come out before the APG, it would likely be in there also. Ultimate Campaign also has campaign traits, so being a campaign trait does not automatically make it "too good". Reactionary is not a campaign trait, but it seems to be one of the more popular ones. Following that any trait granting perception as a class skill would probably be at the top also, and that the one in Ultimate Campaign that does that is also not a campaign trait.But in a home campaign, any GM could easily say no to whatever they want to say no to.
So I don't understand your point.
EDIT: To be more clear... If you are playing Skulls and Shackles, it wouldn't make much sense to take the Carrion Crown campaign traits. So the GM could easily say no for RP reasons as well as power reasons.
In a home gain a GM can do anything he wants so that argument is not really valid. As for the skulls and shackles argument you have a point. I could say a GM might allow you to reflavor the feat, but then we are back into GM territory. This thread however assumes the feat is in play and since it allows for rogues to take on other archetypes and still have trapfinding it could be a boon for a rogue. It is not like most people that play rogue use trapfinding as the primary reason to do so. If they do the lack of trapfinding only holds back the other rogue archetypes. Now they can "have their cake and eat it to" as the saying goes.
PS: My points were just to counter your points that you labeled 1 and 2.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ninja isn't a rogue archetype...
Yep, it is. James Jacobs sez so.
Ninja is an entirely different class.
Ninja? Scout? Sapmaster? I mean, in the "Rogues are teh suxxor threads' everyone is pointing out that the Ninja is the best rogue by far.
Nope, it's a rogue archetype.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ninja isn't a rogue archetype...Yep, it is. James Jacobs sez so.
Pretty sure that his exact words were closer to an alternate class is LIKE an expanded archetype, and is in many ways the base class (such as qualifying for archetypes) but it's not really an archetype, it is an alternate class.
Pretty sure that his exact words were closer to an alternate class is LIKE an expanded archetype, and is in many ways the base class (such as qualifying for archetypes) but it's not really an archetype, it is an alternate class.Ninja isn't a rogue archetype...Yep, it is. James Jacobs sez so.
"Ninja is an alternate rogue. Technically, it's an archetype but one that does a lot more than, say, the pirate or scout does."
"Ninja is an alternate rogue. Technically, it's an archetype but one that does a lot more than, say, the pirate or scout does."Pretty sure that his exact words were closer to an alternate class is LIKE an expanded archetype, and is in many ways the base class (such as qualifying for archetypes) but it's not really an archetype, it is an alternate class.Ninja isn't a rogue archetype...Yep, it is. James Jacobs sez so.
Counter point: "Ninja is an alternate rogue. Technically, it's an archetype but one that does a lot more than, say, the pirate or scout does." see different class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ninjas are rogues.
Ninjas *also* suck.
Ninjas are rogues.
Ninjas *also* suck.
eh ninjas actually do things.
|
|
Your point buy is off on the Rogue mate.
Str10
Dex15 (7pts; +2 human, +1 @ 4th)=18Con14 (5pts)
Int13 (3pts)
Wis10
Cha14 (5pts)
--
20pt buy
And wow. This is one contrived piece. You've designed an "adventure" of which a Rogue has all the necessary pieces. I'll applaud you at that.
Pick 2-3 chapters from any iconic rogue's tale, whether the rogue is Arya Stark, Gord, The Grey Mouser, Vlad Taltos, etc. Pathfinder chapters themselves for Gad, Rodrick or even Radovan come to mind. Run through 3 of their chapters with the same challenge. The short scenario I posted actually favors a swashbuckling Edmond Dantes more than a purer rogue, and was mostly a lifted mishmash of Monte Cristo and Conan.
I absolutely love inquisitors and appreciate you taking the time to read the "adventure" and build out a roguish inquisitor. He keeps up in an admirable fashion despite having to "cheat" a bit in his duel by casting spells and using judgements. He's certainly lacking on the charisma front, but still curries influence with his wise words. I can imagine Solomon Kane tackling the "adventure" and being built almost just as you built him.
I think the fact that you can build multiple characters to tackle the mechanics of such an "adventure" is a good thing, but still the rogue does it in a sense that fulfills the imagery of an iconic rogue best. In the fictional/literary sense, nobody does rogue better than rogue.
but still the rogue does it in a sense that fulfills the imagery of an iconic rogue best. In the fictional/literary sense, nobody does rogue better than rogue.
That is an opinion, and how the mechanics are setup in game to include DC's will affect who does what better. That is why I said a similar challenge should be done with blind DC's. That way nobody can cherrypick their way into a build. You dont know what the DC for diplomacy or intimidate will be. You dont know what the DC for finding and or disabling a trap or lock will be. You dont know how skilled you will have to be in combat.
If nobody wants to build the challenge I will do so. I just need two participants to build characters. All I need is a consensus on levels and allowable materials.
I would say CRB, APG, Ultimate magic, ultimate combat.
2 traits.
20 point buy
core races.
level 5.
WBL
anyone have a problem with this?
edit: I dont know if you will build new characters or use the old ones so there is no way I can skew the advantage to either side.