Urgh, DPR. What a flawed way of calculating what does and doesn't suck.
Urgh, DPR. What a flawed way of calculating what does and doesn't suck.
Well... the rogue doesn't do much besides DPR in a fight, does he ?
And he's not good at that by the way...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Urgh, DPR. What a flawed way of calculating what does and doesn't suck.
Yes I agree, but if someone comes along and claim the rogue hasn't a combat problem, then I would like to see some hard proof.
And if combat isn’t what the class brings to the table, then what does she bring to the table? Skills?
Let me provide an edited quote from a post by Sean K Reynolds
[...] skills aren't magical, and allowing nonmagical skills to suddenly achieve supernatural results with high skill bonuses starts breaking expectations of what a real person could do. I'm all in favor of analyzing the game, drawing a line at level X, and saying, "real Earth humans don't get past level X, and therefore beyond level X (and skill rank X) you can start to do things that Earth people would consider superhuman, impossible, or even magical," even with a nonmagical class like fighter or rogue. [...]
This is Sean’s personal opinion, but I agree with him. The problem is however that skills don’t let you do things that “Earth people would consider superhuman, impossible, or even magical”.
TOZ once posted a simply brilliant one liner on the Subject. (It’s actually one of my favorite posts of all time, but I can’t find it.) It boils down to him wanting skills to do more at higher levels than simply adding a bonus to the check. I agree and it would help the game and especially the mundane classes.Until the rules on skills change, combat ability matters. It doesn’t have to be DPR it can just as well be battle fields control, buffs, utility, but the rogue class doesn’t offer any of this.. Bards on the other hand offers all of this, so does all casting classes.
Here is the simple truth: If you are not a caster you should be able to kill things, if you can’t what the h*ll do you bring to the table? Especially during battle? Lets’ face it. This game is a lot about battle.
BTW
1)Is it really possible to full attack during the surprise round?
2)The Ranger vs the rogue: The rogue does get 8 skills per level and the ranger ‘only’ gets 6, but the ranger get d10 HD and the rogue only get d8HD so when the rogue needs 14 con, the ranger can settle for 12 con and instead raise his int to 12 and thus getting 7 skills per level. Not to mention that the Ranger can use evasion, or any of his abilities, in medium armor or even mithral heavy armor so he can add his favored class binus to skills and have 8 skills per level. Playing human and it is 9 skills per level. Seriously: I love skills, my new druid is human and has int 12 and I still think he is skill starved, but 6 skills + int mod per level is actually enough to make a skill monkey. Especially if you play human and/or raise your int to 12. And I haven’t even started comparing the rogue to my favorite class, the Bard.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
BTW
1)Is it really possible to full attack during the surprise round?
Not for the rogue.
I guess it's may be possible for a class/creature with pounce (as a charge can be done with a standard action when you're limited to standard action).2)The Ranger vs the rogue: The rogue does get 8 skills per level and the ranger ‘only’ gets 6, but the ranger get d10 HD and the rogue only get d8HD so when the rogue needs 14 con, the ranger can settle for 12 con and instead raise his int to 12 and thus getting 7 skills per level. Not to mention that the Ranger can use evasion, or any of his abilities, in medium armor or even mithral heavy armor so he can add his favored class binus to skills and have 8 skills per level. Playing human and it is 9 skills per level. Seriously: I love skills, my new druid is human and has int 12 and I still think he is skill starved, but 6 skills + int mod per level is actually enough to make a skill monkey. Especially if you play human and/or raise your int to 12. And I haven’t even started comparing the rogue to my favorite class, the Bard.
Absolutely.
Actually, in a "basic" group, you will certainly have a face, a knowledge guy and a dexterity guy. Skills aren't something unique to rogues, every single class in the game can invest in the same skills.You don't need 8 skill points per level to fill a role by yourself with no problem.
To be honest, I believe that even a fighter can fill a particular skill role in a group perfectly, despite having only 2+INT skill points.
You don't need 8 skill points per level to fill a role by yourself with no problem.
To be honest, I believe that even a fighter can fill a particular skill role in a group perfectly, despite having only 2+INT skill points.
The stonelord paladin I once played had his own role despite only having 2 sp /level. He was the guy who could swim and climb in full plate. In addition to that he only had 1 point in profession (miner) for rp reasons.
Urgh, DPR. What a flawed way of calculating what does and doesn't suck.Well... the rogue doesn't do much besides DPR in a fight, does he ?
And he's not good at that by the way...
So... you don't acknowledge that a high initiative rogue can take twf, quarterstaff mastery and rock the specialisation, and now use that humble magic stick to beat a flat footed foe over and over with sneak attack damage dice flowing like wine and add the +2 damage from spec on to every hit?
How much damage per round do you need? How many d6s with a nice dab on top do you want?
This option for the rogue was just mentioned a short time ago. With quarterstaff mastery there is no need to dip fighter to get spec, they can stay pure rogue (if they like) and never cut back on the sneak.
Of course if you also want damage with less feat investment, there is also take a two handed weapon like a g-sword or b-sword, or take a high crit weapon like the great axe, heavy pick or scythe. I've known the falchion to also have good results for rogues and ninjas. Give the rogue heavy damage tools and you will find they do a lot better.
My next char after my latest monk is going to be the staff rogue, so I'll let you know how staff spec, without fighter dipping compromising my sneak attack dice pool, goes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd be interested in seeing a staff rogue build. Has anyone posted one before?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let us stick to the original question.
I believe in using math. In the below equation I only measure what the value of a particular class is to success in a TYPICAL paizo Adventure Path.
Using the triangle inequality, it can be proved that (with the changes to traps, trapfinding, new trapfinding trait, and archetypes that do what the rogue used to do alone):
All other PC classes > Rogue >= All NPC classes
Now, given the rogue is worse than all other PC classes, but NO WORSE than all NPC classes, does that mean he sucks?
I have only proven he is the least productive of the PC classes. Now, how would we change that? There was a time when Gary Gygax made a thief who fared much better than todays rogue in the metagame.
What did the thief have going for him that todays rogue does not:
1) Experience progression -- thieves leveled up faster than anyone and twice as fast as wizards
2) Wealth -- thieves were encouraged to grab more wealth than 'their fair share' -- if not, they lost experience -- rogues had more money than their counterparts to buy magic items -- to put it in modern terms, thieves exceeded the WBL of their peers
3) If the thief missed a deadly trap that ONLY HE COULD SEE WITHOUT EXPENDING RESOURCES, All the King's Horses and All The Party Clerics couldn't put the dead back together again.
4) We didn't have to worry about full attacks! A thief could jump out of the shadows and backstab with a longsword and dagger and completely kill a single enemy.
5) Encroachment on the thief niche. There was none. If you didn't belong to the thieves guild, you didn't learn the skills.
In these olden days in martial combat Fighting types>>clerical types and monks>>thieves and assassins>>wizards in hit points and martial value. Rogues have been upgraded in hps and relative fighting power to be equivalent to clerical types, and still suffer in any comparison with other classes.
How could this be fixed? Rogues need to be steadily given more things that people like until they are not the least productive of all the PC classes. What would I do? Sneak attack has to be better--it has to work vs concealment (smoke grenades defeat the rogues best combat ability), it has to multiply with criticals, and it has to be geometric (up the size of the damage dice at certain levels). Another possible improvement is allow the rogues to have more money due to 'creative side enterprises'. Handwave all the sneaking gems from the party fund and give them a bonus to their accumulated wealth. Skills--it has been pointed out that versatile performance makes bards better at skilled. Obviously the rogue needs 10 skill points per level, take vp from the bard, or give it to the rogue. Off my soap box.
Two fighters at a bar, Fighter 1: "I was surrounded by rogues!"
Fighter 2 "What did you do?" Fighter 1: "Luckily I had a single smoke grenade!!"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe in using math.
*Snip*
Using the triangle inequality, it can be proved that (with the changes to traps, trapfinding, new trapfinding trait, and archetypes that do what the rogue used to do alone):
All other PC classes > Rogue >= All NPC classesNow, given the rogue is worse than all other PC classes...
Wha??? You said you believe in math... but you didn't actually use any. All you said was "this statement can be proven. *Pause* Now that this has been established..."
I for one am very interested in this particular bit of math. Less for the math itself and more for how you intend to assign the the changes to trapfinding as mathmatical variables.
(Text is a poor conveyer of tone, so let me say that I'm not being sarcastic here. I'm genuinely interested.)
So... you don't acknowledge that a high initiative rogue can take twf, quarterstaff mastery and rock the specialisation, and now use that humble magic stick to beat a flat footed foe over and over with sneak attack damage dice flowing like wine and add the +2 damage from spec on to every hit?
How much damage per round do you need? How many d6s with a nice dab on top do you want?
This option for the rogue was just mentioned a short time ago. With quarterstaff mastery there is no need to dip fighter to get spec, they can stay pure rogue (if they like) and never cut back on the sneak.
assuming you start within 5 ft of your target.
I had to prove the rogue sucked at first level or the N=1 case using the formula for productivity.
Then I had to use the formula for productivity of a PC and derive the productivity of all PCs at arbitrary level. That is the formula for the Nth case.
Using the formula and extending to the N+1 case, or the next level case, I proved that the formulas for each class still held using mathematical relationships.
Obviously these were quite lengthy. I admit my formulas do not account in any way for how fun it is to play a rogue and only apply to Paizo APs and not homebrews.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe in using math.
By the math the rogue is "good enough". I prefer empirical evidence of the creature running around in the wild.
What happens on the battlemat is that the rogue is hosed by the move or damage dichotomy of martials... the difference being that the rogue doesn't have to be within 5 feet of a foe, they need to be within 5 feet of a full on sneak attack. This doesn't always happen. The gang up feat can help, but like many rogue options its burning feats just to get at the start of the race.
Forgive me. From your text, it sounds as if you are using forumulas that have already been posted and are 'known entities' on the board. Unfortunately, I am unaware of them. Would anyone mind posting a link?
Forgive me. From your text, it sounds as if you are using forumulas that have already been posted and are 'known entities' on the board. Unfortunately, I am unaware of them. Would anyone mind posting a link?
The damage formula is h(d+s)+tchd.
h = Chance to hit, expressed as a percentage
d = Damage per hit. Average damage is assumed.
s = Precision damage per hit (or other damage that isn't multiplied on a crit). Average damage is again assumed.
t = Chance to roll a critical threat, expressed as a percentage.
c = Critical hit bonus damage. x2 = 1, x3 = 2, x4 = 3.
|
I believe in using math.By the math the rogue is "good enough". I prefer empirical evidence of the creature running around in the wild.
What happens on the battlemat is that the rogue is hosed by the move or damage dichotomy of martials... the difference being that the rogue doesn't have to be within 5 feet of a foe, they need to be within 5 feet of a full on sneak attack. This doesn't always happen. The gang up feat can help, but like many rogue options its burning feats just to get at the start of the race.
That's why Scout is the best rogue.
Forgive me. From your text, it sounds as if you are using forumulas that have already been posted and are 'known entities' on the board. Unfortunately, I am unaware of them. Would anyone mind posting a link?The damage formula is h(d+s)+tchd.
h = Chance to hit, expressed as a percentage
d = Damage per hit. Average damage is assumed.
s = Precision damage per hit (or other damage that isn't multiplied on a crit). Average damage is again assumed.
t = Chance to roll a critical threat, expressed as a percentage.
c = Critical hit bonus damage. x2 = 1, x3 = 2, x4 = 3.
OH! He was talking about the DPR forumula?!?
Sorry for the confusion. I thought he was saying something new. "Rogues suck because DPR" isn't anything groundbreaking. It sounded like he was including the ability the trapfind and other factors in. I was curious how he was assigning those features a mathematical value.
I *am* surprised to see him say that every other class beats Rogue in DPR. Granted, the only classes a Rogue without sneak attack is going to be competing with are the wizard/sorcerer/witch/arcanist without spells, but I'd think a (non-archetyped) Rogue *with* sneak attack would be decently equivelent to a (non-archetyped... maybe even archetyped) melee bard. Of course, the bard brings more to the table than DPR, but aparently we're measuring the value of each class based soley on DPR in this example so...
@Mystically Inclined
The value of trapfinding is roughly that of a 2nd level spell.
And even a core (non-archetyped) melee bard should have higher DPR than a core (non-archetyped) melee rogue because of things like inspire courage, arcane strike, haste, heroism and good hope, although i haven't run the numbers. If i find the time (and energy) i might do a few builds and compare their DPR later today and post them.
I *am* surprised to see him say that every other class beats Rogue in DPR. Granted, the only classes a Rogue without sneak attack is going to be competing with are the wizard/sorcerer/arcanist without spells, but I'd think a (non-archetyped) Rogue *with* sneak attack would be decently equivelent to a (non-archetyped... maybe even archetyped) melee bard. Of course, the bard brings more to the table than DPR, but aparently we're measuring the value of each class based soley on DPR so...
Actually, no. You've just more or less proven what you are objecting to, all by yourself. In the paragraph above.
Every martial class equals or exceeds the rogue at the primary martial job, which is DPR. The only classes that "equal" the rogue at DPR are also spellcasters, which of course are better at the primary spellcasting job, and also at the secondary caster job of problem-solving/skill-monkey because of the magical boosts they can get. And of course primary spellcasters such as the wizard aren't expected to participate in DPR, but there's no way that the rogue can match them.
And the bard, in particular, is as good or better than the rogue at all of the jobs the rogue can reasonably be asked to do.
That's why Scout is the best rogue.
How well does he hold up at higher levels? The one sneak attack seems a little linear.
Forgive me. From your text, it sounds as if you are using forumulas that have already been posted and are 'known entities' on the board. Unfortunately, I am unaware of them. Would anyone mind posting a link?The damage formula is h(d+s)+tchd.
h = Chance to hit, expressed as a percentage
d = Damage per hit. Average damage is assumed.
s = Precision damage per hit (or other damage that isn't multiplied on a crit). Average damage is again assumed.
t = Chance to roll a critical threat, expressed as a percentage.
c = Critical hit bonus damage. x2 = 1, x3 = 2, x4 = 3.OH! He was talking about the DPR forumula?!?
Sorry for the confusion. I thought he was saying something new. "Rogues suck because DPR" isn't anything groundbreaking. It sounded like he was including the ability the trapfind and other factors in. I was curious how he was assigning those features a mathematical value.
I *am* surprised to see him say that every other class beats Rogue in DPR. Granted, the only classes a Rogue without sneak attack is going to be competing with are the wizard/sorcerer/witch/arcanist without spells, but I'd think a (non-archetyped) Rogue *with* sneak attack would be decently equivelent to a (non-archetyped... maybe even archetyped) melee bard. Of course, the bard brings more to the table than DPR, but aparently we're measuring the value of each class based soley on DPR in this example so...
Bonuses to hit add a huge value more than damage top a DPR formula.
And not to mention, Bards add Damage as well further boosting their DPR.
If you miss, you deal 0 damage after all (exceptions are a few monk styles deal 1d6 element damage when miss).
Add they innately can use Arcane Strike feat (+1 damage as a swift action, that increases as he levels). Next, they gain Haste and personal haste a level earlier (Allegro).
Every martial class equals or exceeds the rogue at the primary martial job, which is DPR.
Agreed absolutely on the full BAB classes. I think the Rogue (with sneak attack assumed, which is a generous assumption) has a good chance against some of the other 3/4 BAB classes. Then again I'm imaginging that this comparison takes place during the period of the game that I actually get to play regularly, which is levels 1-10. I'm sure the Rogue sufferes a great deal more when the other 3/4 BAB classes (all of whom have spells) get their higher level buffs.
And of course primary spellcasters such as the wizard aren't expected to participate in DPR, but there's no way that the rogue can match them.
Well that's why I was getting so excited in the above posts. I'd thought someone had come up with a mathematical forumula that compared the classes using more factors than DPR. When I found out that Samduc Dawnbringer was just using DPR as a basis of comparison, then this statement in particular became suspect: "All other PC classes > Rogue >= All NPC classes." How is he comparing the full caster classes with the Rogue? Is the Rogue sneak attacking? Are the full casters using spells? Which spells?
And the bard, in particular, is as good or better than the rogue at all of the jobs the rogue can reasonably be asked to do.
Yeah. When the Bard isn't competing with the Rogue at the Rogue's own game, then it's the Alchemist. Then again, I still think that the Rogue has the skill edge on the Bard in levels 1 to 10 9.
And of course primary spellcasters such as the wizard aren't expected to participate in DPR, but there's no way that the rogue can match them.Well that's why I was getting so excited in the above posts. I'd thought someone had come up with a mathematical forumula that compared the classes using more factors than DPR. When I found out that Samduc Dawnbringer was just using DPR as a basis of comparison, then this statement in particular became suspect: "All other PC classes > Rogue >= All NPC classes." How is he comparing the full caster classes with the Rogue? Is the Rogue sneak attacking? Are the full casters using spells? Which spells?
He's not using DPR as a method of comparing spellcasters with the rogue, but he doesn't need to. I mean, hell, a ranger is a better caster than a rogue.
"Can you cast a spell? -- Congratulations, you're better than the rogue!"
|
I still think my Archer Rogue is a pretty decent build (just Rogue4/Fighter1 for now). I've noted in an earlier post why I think this is the case.
By the way, I just scrapped a two-weapon Ranger build. I looked at what a Ranger's future advancement is like and it was nothing exciting for me. He's really all about tracking and outdoors (and I don't see a lot of that in PFS play which is all I play now). I changed him to a Zen Archer....I think this will be a cool, fun build.
@XMorsX
Rangers DO NOT get full animal companion, they choose from a limited list that denies the better options and the animal companion is at -3 level on the progression table.
Don't get me wrong, they are better than the rogue but you are wrong on that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
IMHO, the sad thing is that Rogue DPR is basically fine. their DPR is what is supposed to be, mediocre but situationally good.
The problems is that rogue doe snot really have more combat options. Rogues are supposed to be clever combatants but they always flank + sneak attack, always (unless you are scout, but then charge + sneak attack)
The bard can attack, the bard can use performance, the bard can cast spells (every one is a unique in combat option) "Do I cast haste or I cast something else?"
Player: I am playing a rogue to be a smart combatant, that prefer his wit over his brawn.
DM: Ok, so what do you do
Player: I try to flank then stand still and full attack. In like every turn, of every fight. Ever.
For example The rogues should have rogue talents that make him the king at the steal maneuver. THe rogue should have rogue talents that let him fool his enemies into moving to a disadvantageous position.
In this game Fighters ans Monks have all the good maneuver builds and are considered the next weakest after the Rogue. I find that at this point in the game Rogue is a class for multiclassing. I have never seen a single class Rogue that wouldn't have been improved by having some Rogue and some not-rogue levels above level 3. I like this class and find myself still playing Rogues, they just all multiclass now.
IMHO, the sad thing is that Rogue DPR is basically fine. their DPR is what is supposed to be, mediocre but situationally good.
The problems is that rogue doe snot really have more combat options. Rogues are supposed to be clever combatants but they always flank + sneak attack, always (unless you are scout, but then charge + sneak attack)
Player: I am playing a rogue to be a smart combatant, that prefer his wit over his brawn.
DM: Ok, so what do you do
Player: I try to flank then stand still and full attack. In like every turn, of every fight. Ever.
Well said. How clever is the rogue in a round? If he managed to sneak attack, he was somewhat clever. If he managed to full attack and sneak attack he was clever. If he managed neither or did not hit his target, he was not clever at all.
Now, we are simplifying a bit. I think for the rogue it is important to get in position to make sure the fight starts on the parties terms. Unfortunately magic spells are what truly set this up more than clever rogues skills. Add a clever disguise and the rogue is in the middle of a bunch of mages in dark hoods sneak attacking them every round as one of them is quite cool. Unfortunately Pathfinder is a battle map game more than a story game--those things do not happen so much.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Two fighters at a bar, Fighter 1: "I was surrounded by rogues!"
Fighter 2 "What did you do?" Fighter 1: "Luckily I had a single smoke grenade!!"And then the Fighter found out they had Shadow Strike/headbands of ninjitsu.
I mean, he still made it to the bar, but he had to get more healing first.
It's sad that Rogues need to spend 15000gp (or a feat) to counter a 20gp consumable. -.-'
*Reads the headband of Ninjutus* Well.. dang. That is NOT bad. Expensive, but...
+2 to attacks when it really counts (sneak attacking)
Feint as swift 1/day, which amounts to 1 free round of sneak attacking full attack. On top of that, you get a +2 bonus when making the feint.
You can sneak attack an opponent with full concealment, which shadow strike does not allow you to do.
That's... pretty sweet. I have a level 9 Ninja with 20k gold who was wondering what high priced item to buy. If he gets this and the +1 attack Ioun stone, that's another +3 to attack. That would seriously help.
BTW
1)Is it really possible to full attack during the surprise round?
No this is not possible for any class as you only get a single move or standard action in a surprise round.
Also note that there is a flawed version of the +1 Ioun stone that also gives +1 morale instead of +1 competence.
Since the headband gives insight, you could get a +4 to hit when it matters.
Also shows that if Rogues got more than WBL, as they did back in 2e (effectively), that they might not be so bad.
IMHO, the sad thing is that Rogue DPR is basically fine. their DPR is what is supposed to be, mediocre but situationally good.
The problems is that rogue doe snot really have more combat options. Rogues are supposed to be clever combatants but they always flank + sneak attack, always (unless you are scout, but then charge + sneak attack)
The bard can attack, the bard can use performance, the bard can cast spells (every one is a unique in combat option) "Do I cast haste or I cast something else?"
Player: I am playing a rogue to be a smart combatant, that prefer his wit over his brawn.
DM: Ok, so what do you do
Player: I try to flank then stand still and full attack. In like every turn, of every fight. Ever.
Why should the rogue be mediocre in combat?
No this is not possible for any class as you only get a single move or standard action in a surprise round.BTW
1)Is it really possible to full attack during the surprise round?
Bandits can. I believe that there are archetypes of other classes that can get full round surprise rounds as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nope, they are still terrible even then as actually getting sneak attack dice remains a real problem.
Stealth just doesn't work as written and tumbling into a flank is at best a crap shoot against anything vaguely threatening even when you focus on it and you don't have the resilience to remain in melee even if you get into position.
I was thinking of Scout archetype so you get SA on a charge, and then Gang Up so at least if you're all fighting one BBEG you get your SA. Generally though, yes, it will be hard to make a rogue work.
I was thinking to trying to do it in an upcoming game. Most of my group is pretty optimization light, so it would be a way for me to have fun tweaking without stomping on their fun.
IMHO, the sad thing is that Rogue DPR is basically fine. their DPR is what is supposed to be, mediocre but situationally good.
The problems is that rogue doe snot really have more combat options. Rogues are supposed to be clever combatants but they always flank + sneak attack, always (unless you are scout, but then charge + sneak attack)
The bard can attack, the bard can use performance, the bard can cast spells (every one is a unique in combat option) "Do I cast haste or I cast something else?"
Player: I am playing a rogue to be a smart combatant, that prefer his wit over his brawn.
DM: Ok, so what do you do
Player: I try to flank then stand still and full attack. In like every turn, of every fight. Ever.Why should the rogue be mediocre in combat?
I did not say mediocre in combat I say mediocre in damage. Your typical god wizard or support cleric is mediocre in DPR but have lots of other really useful tricks.
I am personally fine with rogues DPR but I am really sad that is all they can bring to combat.
Bandits can. I believe that there are archetypes of other classes that can get full round surprise rounds as well.No this is not possible for any class as you only get a single move or standard action in a surprise round.BTW
1)Is it really possible to full attack during the surprise round?
Ambush (Ex)
At 4th level, a bandit becomes fully practiced in the art of ambushing. When she acts in the surprise round, she can take a move action, standard action, and swift action during the surprise round, not just a move or standard action.
NO full attacks.
*Reads the headband of Ninjutus* Well.. dang. That is NOT bad. Expensive, but...
+2 to attacks when it really counts (sneak attacking)
Feint as swift 1/day, which amounts to 1 free round of sneak attacking full attack. On top of that, you get a +2 bonus when making the feint.
You can sneak attack an opponent with full concealment, which shadow strike does not allow you to do.That's... pretty sweet. I have a level 9 Ninja with 20k gold who was wondering what high priced item to buy. If he gets this and the +1 attack Ioun stone, that's another +3 to attack. That would seriously help.
Please, read feint again.
It's not a full attack, but only on the next attack, that's different.And if it was necessary to clarify for other posters, it only works for one melee attack too (so another way to do sneak attack that can't be applied with ranged combat).
|
Please, read feint again.
You are skilled at making foes overreact to your attacks.
Prerequisites: Combat Expertise, Improved Feint, base attack bonus +6, Int 13.
Benefit: Whenever you use feint to cause an opponent to lose his Dexterity bonus, he loses that bonus until the beginning of your next turn, in addition to losing his Dexterity bonus against your next attack.
Ambush is cool, but I think I would want to be a Bandit/Diviner/Arcane Trickster rather than a single class Bandit. Always acting in the surprise round and getting a standard, move and swift would be sweet for an Arcane Trickster.
Bandits can. I believe that there are archetypes of other classes that can get full round surprise rounds as well.No this is not possible for any class as you only get a single move or standard action in a surprise round.BTW
1)Is it really possible to full attack during the surprise round?
Ambush (Ex)
At 4th level, a bandit becomes fully practiced in the art of ambushing. When she acts in the surprise round, she can take a move action, standard action, and swift action during the surprise round, not just a move or standard action.
NO full attacks.
What, exactly, is the difference between having a standard, a move, and a swift, and having a full round?
I floated with my group the possibility of a rogue taking some off the top, but they were opposed. I figured these days you would need to be open about it, as Pathfinder is all about WBL. They want a rigorous loot spreadsheet to account for every bit of treasure found.
I remember in the old days I was a paladin hit and knocked unconscious and lost my holy avenger after falling unconscious in a nasty encounter. The party fled carrying me, but the thief snuck back and picked up the sword before fleeing the massive forces of evil. He then felt bad for me and told me he found a great deal on a holy avenger on the 'black market' and sold it to me at a great price (half market value). Later I noticed it had some scratches on it exactly where there were scratches on my lost sword. We laughed and laughed.
Those were the days it was 'profitable' to be a thief.