| 21 people marked this as a favorite. |
I love rogues, personally. Don't get all the "rogues suck" angst.
They are awesome! Whee!
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
Me too, I think that they are thoroughly underestimated, and if played correctly can be a great deal of fun. I don't go with the common opinion you will find here that unless something is optimized to within an inch of it's life then it is useless. I like to play for fun. In our game several sessions ago, we were in Taldor helping a minor noble and staying in their mansion. Like the good little follower of Calistria, my rogue spent a considerable amount of time wrapped up in a 'puppy pile' of virile male guards and servants. Of course the fact that the assassins would have to get through my locked chamber door without alerting any of the men in my characters bed and have to fight through all of them to get to me had nothing to do with it. The cleric in our group was not amused, and our other party member a barbar thought it quite funny.
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
Quick, lets misunderstand what the OP is saying and talk about how rogues are fun even though he didn't say a thing about them not being fun!
Much more seriously, I don't think there's any resignation, official or not, but I do think there's a lack of good content and I don't think that's entirely intentional, though it might feel like it sometime.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Quick, lets misunderstand what the OP is saying and talk about how rogues are fun even though he didn't say a thing about them not being fun!
I don't think there's any resignation, official or not, but I do think there's a lack of good content and I don't think that's entirely intentional, though it might feel like it sometime.
GET OUT OF MY MIND!!!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well this will only end in tears.
Some prevention goes a long way.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
To the OPs original question:
No.
Because Paizo works to provide game balance for their content. They want things to be balanced and be fun.
No.
My own opinion:
I think that many GMs don't set their games up to allow player rogues to us their skills and abilities. It would be the same as having a Druid in the party for an urban campaign.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My own opinion:
I think that many GMs don't set their games up to allow player rogues to us their skills and abilities. It would be the same as having a Druid in the party for an urban campaign.
What's the problem with a druid in an urban environment?
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I hope so. If they're not going to fix him at least stop making him hold everyone else back.
|
To the OPs original question:
No.
Because Paizo works to provide game balance for their content. They want things to be balanced and be fun.
No.My own opinion:
I think that many GMs don't set their games up to allow player rogues to us their skills and abilities. It would be the same as having a Druid in the party for an urban campaign.
RedDog? More like lapdog...(joking)
Paizo has stripped the abilities that define a rogue and piecemealed them into a ton of different classes, with each ability getting easier and easier to get as more products are produced until now, you can get Trapfinding for a trait. They have undermined the rogue so badly it is ridiculous and given almost everything that makes them rogueish to just about any class that wants them.People would be screaming if you could take a trait and suddenly Channel Energy, Rage, make Alchemist Bombs, gain an Animal Companion...etc.
Much more seriously, I don't think there's any resignation, official or not, but I do think there's a lack of good content and I don't think that's entirely intentional, though it might feel like it sometime.
I dont know MrSin. We've been clamoring for good Rogue talents for awhile and traps like Trap Spotter* and Rumormonger keep getting through.
*Isn't as good as it seems if you read how Perception works.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The OP like many others seem to think that the rogue has been buried in a coffin of irrelevance, said opinion to be founded by cratefuls of theorycrafting who base their conclusions on spreadsheets rather than play.
We don't misunderstand what the OP is saying. We simply flat out don't agree with it.
I'm not sure exactly what there is to disagree about.
What does the Rogue bring to the table that another class doesn't?
You can pooh-pooh and dismiss people's evidence, both anecdotal and factual all you like, but it doesn't make it go away.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
We don't misunderstand what the OP is saying. We simply flat out don't agree with it.
Quick, lets not talk about what MrSin was and tell him he's wrong and tell the OP he's wrong!
I uhh... didn't say a thing about theorycraft or even the rogue's ability to perform. Just refered to the way people sometimes think "man I feel like the rogue is underperforming" gets mixed up with "you can't have fun with a rogue!". Of course, you can have fun with a commoner, but that doesn't mean the commoner is a good balanced choice and that another class can't do his job and more.
I think there is a trait that lets you channel energy somewhere.To the OPs original question:
No.
Because Paizo works to provide game balance for their content. They want things to be balanced and be fun.
No.My own opinion:
I think that many GMs don't set their games up to allow player rogues to us their skills and abilities. It would be the same as having a Druid in the party for an urban campaign.RedDog? More like lapdog...(joking)
Paizo has stripped the abilities that define a rogue and piecemealed them into a ton of different classes, with each ability getting easier and easier to get as more products are produced until now, you can get Trapfinding for a trait. They have undermined the rogue so badly it is ridiculous and given almost everything that makes them rogueish to just about any class that wants them.
People would be screaming if you could take a trait and suddenly Channel Energy, Rage, make Alchemist Bombs, gain an Animal Companion...etc.
It gives you one more use of it, doesn't grant you the pool to begin with.
That said you can get an Animal Companion with a feat. And a feat is worth about 2 traits.
Well this will only end in tears.
Some prevention goes a long way.
*steals the box of tissues*
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo has stripped the abilities that define a rogue and piecemealed them into a ton of different classes, with each ability getting easier and easier to get as more products are produced until now, you can get Trapfinding for a trait. They have undermined the rogue so badly it is ridiculous and given almost everything that makes them rogueish to just about any class that wants them.
People would be screaming if you could take a trait and suddenly Channel Energy, Rage, make Alchemist Bombs, gain an Animal Companion...etc.
I said in the other thread why this was a terrible comparison, but I'll restate it.
A trait (or even a Feat) that grants Rage, Bombs, Smite, Favored Enemy, etc. is far worse than a trait that grants Trapfinding, for two reasons.
1.) All of those things are about 1000x more powerful than Trapfinding.
2.) Those things are what makes each class what they are, they're the defining features of the class.
Are you really arguing Trapfinding is on par with Smite, Bombs, Rage, etc. as being the powerful and defining feature of the Rogue? Because that's SAD. Not your argument, but the result of it.
If that's true, it means the Rogue was dead LONG since. Think about it. If Trapfinding is the only thing keeping the Rogue relevant, if it's the thing the class has that compares to the Paladin's ability to f#&% up evil, or the Barbarian's ability to BE A BARBARIAN...wow.
If Trapfinding, piddling little ability that it is, is what makes the Rogue the Rogue...it's time to let the poor guy rest in peace.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What does the Rogue bring to the table that another class doesn't?
I don't think that's a relevant point. You can have a class that only duplicates other classes' abilities yet is very powerful. If a class had high BAB, arcane spellcasting, divine spellcasting, channel energy, rage, smite and sneak attack, then that class wouldn't bring anything to the table that another class doesn't -- but it would still be a sufficiently powerful -- even overpowered -- class.
So, unique abilities don't determine the viability of a class. That's a false argument.
If you want to argue that the rogue is obsolete, by all means, but use the correct arguments, like his abilities are too weak. Lack of unique abilities is irrelevant.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Quick, lets misunderstand what the OP is saying and talk about how rogues are fun even though he didn't say a thing about them not being fun!
Much more seriously, I don't think there's any resignation, official or not, but I do think there's a lack of good content and I don't think that's entirely intentional, though it might feel like it sometime.
The OP like many others seem to think that the rogue has been buried in a coffin of irrelevance, said opinion to be founded by cratefuls of theorycrafting who base their conclusions on spreadsheets rather than play.
We don't misunderstand what the OP is saying. We simply flat out don't agree with it.
Well I base my conclusions on actual play. Yes the rogue is dead. I can make a functional rogue, but that does not mean there are not classes that can do all that my rogue would do and more (cough alchemist).
Paizo has stripped the abilities that define a rogue and piecemealed them into a ton of different classes, with each ability getting easier and easier to get as more products are produced until now, you can get Trapfinding for a trait. They have undermined the rogue so badly it is ridiculous and given almost everything that makes them rogueish to just about any class that wants them.
People would be screaming if you could take a trait and suddenly Channel Energy, Rage, make Alchemist Bombs, gain an Animal Companion...etc.I said in the other thread why this was a terrible comparison, but I'll restate it.
A trait (or even a Feat) that grants Rage, Bombs, Smite, Favored Enemy, etc. is far worse than a trait that grants Trapfinding, for two reasons.
1.) All of those things are about 1000x more powerful than Trapfinding.
2.) Those things are what makes each class what they are, they're the defining features of the class.
Are you really arguing Trapfinding is on par with Smite, Bombs, Rage, etc. as being the powerful and defining feature of the Rogue? Because that's SAD. Not your argument, but the result of it.
If that's true, it means the Rogue was dead LONG since. Think about it. If Trapfinding is the only thing keeping the Rogue relevant, if it's the thing the class has that compares to the Paladin's ability to f@*+ up evil, or the Barbarian's ability to BE A BARBARIAN...wow.
If Trapfinding, piddling little ability that it is, is what makes the Rogue the Rogue...it's time to let the poor guy rest in peace.
Fighters can get rage powers via Viking archetype. Barbar still good.
Animal companions are a feat or two, both druids and rangers are still good.
I think paladins get channel energy, clerics are still good.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Anyone with a trait, a ring, the ability to use skills and deal damage can in fact entirely replace a rogue... well unless you want to start a rumor of course...
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
BAH.
Had a great time with my rogue last night and today.
Actually, today, in a party consisting of a Barbarian 7, Druid 8, Wizard 7, and my Rogue 8, I was actually the primary damage dealer. All three of my party members gave me flanks at one time another, and my 'lightly' armored two-weapon fighting rogue was drawing attacks (with his 29-30 AC, after Offensive-Defense!)
Alternating the Offensive-defense and bleeding attacks gives me a great ability to strike for good damage (5d6+7 with a sneak and my Agile gladius, or 6d6+2 with my Merciful one).
He was actually taking point throughout the adventure to maximize his ability to search for traps (even though he doesn't have trap-spotting), and the fact that he had one of the best ACs in the party... even when caught 'flatfooted' (due to uncanny dodge).
Rogues, when played well, can be very versatile... he is both a good attacker AND a solid face (not to mention a trap finder/remover).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Any class when played well can be versatile, the well-played rogue is just less useful then the well-played X, Y, Z, Q, P, !, and ~.
That's not the point Rynjin. Are there things from the Rogue that other classes do with varying degrees of effectiveness? Sure. But there is no class that brings the complete Rogue package. It's also one of the most multi-class friendly classes out there.The OP like many others seem to think that the rogue has been buried in a coffin of irrelevance, said opinion to be founded by cratefuls of theorycrafting who base their conclusions on spreadsheets rather than play.
We don't misunderstand what the OP is saying. We simply flat out don't agree with it.
I'm not sure exactly what there is to disagree about.
What does the Rogue bring to the table that another class doesn't?
You can pooh-pooh and dismiss people's evidence, both anecdotal and factual all you like, but it doesn't make it go away.
Vivisectionist alchemist
Has full sneak attack.
Has more skill points.
Has mutagens and extracts instead of rogue talents, evasion, and uncanny dodge.
Or if you want another example, the ninja. <just the better rogue>
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's not the point Rynjin. Are there things from the Rogue that other classes do with varying degrees of effectiveness? Sure. But there is no class that brings the complete Rogue package. It's also one of the most multi-class friendly classes out there.
I've got an Alchemist who can literally do everything the Rogue can do short of 3 feats the Rogue will get over him while getting 6 levels of Extract casting.
But I'd love to see what your Rogue does more than my Alchemist.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What does the Rogue bring to the table that another class doesn't?I don't think that's a relevant point. You can have a class that only duplicates other classes' abilities yet is very powerful. If a class had high BAB, arcane spellcasting, divine spellcasting, channel energy, rage, smite and sneak attack, then that class wouldn't bring anything to the table that another class doesn't -- but it would still be a sufficiently powerful -- even overpowered -- class.
So, unique abilities don't determine the viability of a class. That's a false argument.
If you want to argue that the rogue is obsolete, by all means, but use the correct arguments, like his abilities are too weak. Lack of unique abilities is irrelevant.
You are missing the point. Other classes can do EVERYTHING a rogue can do + more at the same time. That's one character does everything the rogue can do AND MORE.
BAH.
Had a great time with my rogue last night and today.
Actually, today, in a party consisting of a Barbarian 7, Druid 8, Wizard 7, and my Rogue 8, I was actually the primary damage dealer. All three of my party members gave me flanks at one time another, and my 'lightly' armored two-weapon fighting rogue was drawing attacks (with his 29-30 AC, after Offensive-Defense!)
Alternating the Offensive-defense and bleeding attacks gives me a great ability to strike for good damage (5d6+7 with a sneak and my Agile gladius, or 6d6+2 with my Merciful one).
He was actually taking point throughout the adventure to maximize his ability to search for traps (even though he doesn't have trap-spotting), and the fact that he had one of the best ACs in the party... even when caught 'flatfooted' (due to uncanny dodge).
Rogues, when played well, can be very versatile... he is both a good attacker AND a solid face (not to mention a trap finder/remover).
Erm, I'm glad you're having fun, but if 5d6+7 is outdamaging a level 7 Barbarian...Mr. Barbarian needs to step it up. His STATIC damage should be exceeding your average damage by now.
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
Rogues, when played well, can be very versatile... he is both a good attacker AND a solid face (not to mention a trap finder/remover).So can you give me some tips?
To start with, lower your standards.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's not the point Rynjin. Are there things from the Rogue that other classes do with varying degrees of effectiveness? Sure. But there is no class that brings the complete Rogue package. It's also one of the most multi-class friendly classes out there.I've got an Alchemist who can literally do everything the Rogue can do short of 3 feats the Rogue will get over him while getting 6 levels of Extract casting.
But I'd love to see what your Rogue does more than my Alchemist.
I don't play classes against classes. That's not the way the game is structured. Every other class that wants to copy the rogue, has to use spells, traits, feats, archetypes, magic items, and other manipulations to compare themselves against a vanilla rogue.
There's nothing wrong about that, it shows effort put into character creation and concept. But put that same kind of effort into a rogue that HAS all of those things at base, and there's very little you can't do with it. People who DO make that effort with the rogue tend to be among the best and most memorable players of the game.
You can be a memorable player for any one of many reasons. "I can play a rogue" is not the most exciting of them, though I admit that's just my opinion.
But in terms of effectiveness, Rogue is far less effective then its imitators. Unlike the above statement, this one is a fact.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's nothing wrong about that, it shows effort put into character creation and concept. But put that same kind of effort into a rogue that HAS all of those things at base, and there's very little you can't do with it. People who DO make that effort with the rogue tend to be among the best and most memorable players of the game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't play classes against classes. That's not the way the game is structured. Every other class that wants to copy the rogue, has to use spells, traits, feats, archetypes, magic items, and other manipulations to compare themselves against a vanilla rogue.There's nothing wrong about that, it shows effort put into character creation and concept. But put that same kind of effort into a rogue that HAS all of those things at base, and there's very little you can't do with it. People who DO make that effort with the rogue tend to be among the best and most memorable players of the game.
I don't either. The Alchemist can simply bring more to the game than the Rogue. Saying that other classes might have to use Archetypes in order to do this is like saying a Wizard might need to use a spell to kill all the enemies. Pretty obvious eh?
Archetypes open up the range of possible character builds a class can be. Unfortunately for the Rogue, the Alchemist can completely encompass his class if built well. The Rogue cannot in kind do something more over the Alchemist.
Ultimately, the Alchemist comes out numerically better than the Rogue in all areas but 3 feats.
This is an utter failure in the Design of the Rogue. Theres simply not a reason to take a Rogue now unless you just want to make a mechanically inferior character. Those 3 feats aren't going to trump 6 levels of casting.
|
|
If you want to argue that the rogue is obsolete, by all means, but use the correct arguments, like his abilities are too weak. Lack of unique abilities is irrelevant.You are missing the point. Other classes can do EVERYTHING a rogue can do + more at the same time. That's one character does everything the rogue can do AND MORE.
No, you're missing the point. Your last sentence argues that other classes are *more powerful*. And that's exactly what I advocated that the argument *should* focus on -- not on whether the rogue has any unique class abilities or not, but on whether he's weaker than other classes. The power differential is the issue, not the uniqueness.
Many would argue that 10 feats does not trump 9 levels of spells.
|
|
This is an utter failure in the Design of the Rogue. Theres simply not a reason to take a Rogue now unless you just want to make a mechanically inferior character. Those 3 feats aren't going to trump 6 levels of casting.
All the Rogue has left is Sneak Attack which if your not doing ranged results in a dead character. As the rogue has neither the hp or AC to survive. Or Rogue Talents that are a mixed bag of good, bad or situational. I read up on the Ninja today and it so much more interesting, useful and quite frankly awesome than the Rogue.
Many would argue that 10 feats does not trump 9 levels of spells.
I'd argue it doesn't even trump 4 levels of spells.
If we're being honest... you can have literally *all* the feats with no spells and I'd take 9 levels of spells any day.