So my player who was going to be a tiefling rogue has decided she wants to play a human ranger instead.
My oldest son (her boyfriend) was going to play a half-orc bard, but was also interested in an inquisitor. He'll switch to a rogue if needed, but I'm trying to decide if we really even need to. So far as I can tell, Disable Device and Sleight of Hand are the key skills the rogue has that we don't have covered otherwise.
I've gone through the 1st couple paths, and it seems that Disable Device is the more useful skill of the two. A bard or an inquisitor can pick up either one with traits easily enough (or both I suppose), but it'll restrict what else he can do. Plus, it'll tie up the skill points.
Looking for opinions on if either/both of these skills are necessary in the campaign. I'm also curious if there is anything else unique to the rogue that I'm forgetting that would be important.
Disable Device is almost guaranteed to be useful at some point, mostly for opening locks. Traps exist, but I don't recall many in RotRL. There's a Mummy's Mask trait (Trap Finder) that gives everything important, should you allow it. It seems a bit OP to me, though it's clearly there so that you don't need a rogue.
Sleight of Hand is useful mostly in urban campaigns, which RotRL generally isn't. In CoT it's probably very handy; not so much here.
Most rogue abilities have been stolen by other classes now, so much so that many people would claim that they're obsolete.
Sleight of hand is far more a role-playing tool and opportunistic exploit for a clever player. I think you could go the whole AP without noticing no one has it. Disable device on the other hand... It's a PF AP, and very much like every D&D and 3.x module before it, there be traps. (I don't think I'm spoiling anything with that admission.)
Do you need a rogue to get by? Nope, rogues are just a bit better at it because it's a class skill for them (and only them.) A bard should be a viable second choice. Indeed other than Disable Device, Swim (of all things) is the only class skill rogues have that bards do not.
If your group is from the MinMax clan then a rogue is probably obligatory but otherwise other characters can put skill points into it, even the skill focus feat if so motivated.
For what it's worth my group (currently just finished Catacombs of Wrath and at 3rd level) is Wizard, Cleric, Fighter, Bard. The group actually talked about this during character creation and decided they could get by without a rogue (without any AP-based advice from me.)
Party of 5 - wizard, cleric, ranger, bard & barbarian...
I'm thinking the bard taking Vagabond Child should be sufficient then - we are definitely NOT a min/max type of group...
I do recall a trap on the rope bridge, & I'm sure some lock-picking will come up - your posts pretty much re-affirm what I was already thinking. Probably a rank or two should be ok, what with the class bonus & a decent DEX, IMO.
Thanks!
It's not really necesary, but I think it's worth mentioning that there is a particularly nasty trap in part 5 that could potentially wipe the party if their saves are bad (polymorph trap).
Party of 5 - wizard, cleric, ranger, bard & barbarian...
I'm thinking the bard taking Vagabond Child should be sufficient then - we are definitely NOT a min/max type of group...
I do recall a trap on the rope bridge, & I'm sure some lock-picking will come up - your posts pretty much re-affirm what I was already thinking. Probably a rank or two should be ok, what with the class bonus & a decent DEX, IMO.
Thanks!
That trapped rope bridge should be no problem even without disable device, as long as your players consider that a rickety old rope bridge is liable to collapse under too much weight. My players figured it out without any trouble and without spotting the trap -- they just decided they should take it slowly, and only two at a time. Of course, the party cleric ignored the party's warnings and stepped out onto the bridge while two were already on it, and hilarity ensued.
There is another trap which is far worse than that in the Thistletop dungeon levels -- it's nasty enough to kill a player if they don't spot it first. It almost took my party's rogue to the negatives -- he was acting brashly and definitely was NOT looking for traps at the time.
That one is also obvious should you describe the corridor - it's the one part of the hallway which is "clean" compared to the dust and footsteps elsewhere. So any player who falls to that one wasn't listening and deserves to be sliced and diced.
Perhaps point your son to the archaeologist bard (from Ultimate Combat) and see if it strikes his fancy, since he was already looking at a bard? It's particularly thematically appropriate for this AP, and would solve any trap issues that the AP may or may not have.
Alternately there's the trapper archetype that your ranger could consider; that's what my group is using.
|
My party didn't have a rogue (Redeemed Paladin of Iomedae, Thassilonian obsessed Cyphermage, Reach Cleric of Shelyn, and Ranged Inquisitor of Erastil with a Firepelt companion) and didn't see it as a loss so far (currently on the last chapter of Book 2). They are really good at checking every nook and cranny, and some traps did work on the party...
2 levels ago the Inquisitor dipped a level into Ranger (Handle animal as a class skill for his Fur Domain pet) and picked Trapper to get Disable Device and Trap Finding. So far it has worked very well with open locks. Traps aren't nearly as good as spells, but if your son's girlfriend doesn't want the hassle of spells, this could help.
Sleight of Hand is completely unnecessary, and Disable Device is not needed either.
A careful party should be able to work around the (very few) traps in this AP without Disable Device. In fact, my party just finished doing just that.
I've pretty much decided Sleight of Hand isn't necessary, &a couple ranks (at most) for Disable Device should be sufficient. The Archaeologist Bard is looking veerrrryy interesting...
Along a related note, is Bluff all that necessary for this AP? Not to say it can't come in handy occasionally, but it seems to me that Diplomacy would be far more useful.
Obviously, Bluff can come in handy if trying to use a feint action...
But is it that useful otherwise? Telling lies, etc?
Bluff and Dip often achieve much the same thing, but the RP and characterisation is very different. In general, it's a matter of how the player wants to do things. Ideally you'd have both; Dip is good for things like gathering information, but you can end up telling everyone what you want, which may be ill-advised. Bluff is perhaps more fun and probably better when dealing with the underworld. Forget feinting unless you're a rogue.