Do Rogues just flat out suck?


Advice

51 to 100 of 1,118 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

taldanrebel2187 wrote:
My personal opinion is "Rogues have declined" because most DMs don't run Stealth correctly.

There is no one "correctly" the rules are necessarily, more than a little vague and open to interpretation. Part of the reason stealth works so much better for NPCs is that the dm knows exactly how it works to him and can act accordingly.

Also any time the bad guys are using stealth there's terrain to their advantage, rather than something you have to take with you.

Quote:
-Scent does not reveal the precise location of someone, merely their presence. It has very short-range functionality

Thats all you need really. Once you know that something is there combat starts, there goes the surprise round. The critter takes a move action to note your direction, moves next to you, and in all likelyhood with no cover or concealment between two adjacent squares your stealth automatically fails.

Quote:
-Rogues should be able to hide and steal more easily

But they can't, and thats a problem when their main class feature is hiding and stealing. Any other class with hide as a class skill does it just as well (or better...) any class that can take a trait to get hide as a class skill does it as well.

Quote:
-Bad DMs resort to combat too quickly and encourage murder-hobo driven scenarios (Paizo is absolutely guilty of this as well) In the "real world" most good people prefer to avoid fighting. And most people aren't bad.

Rogues have the same problem with diplomacy as they do with stealth: they're not actually better at talking down anyone than any other diplomat.

Quote:
-The design of the Rogue class has been fundamentally broken by archetypes. Sorcerers and Rangers with trapfinding? Sorry Paizo, I call shenanigans..

Well, that does kind of mean the rogue IS superfluous now doesnt it?

Quote:
The problem here is that not many cloak-and-dagger solutions are allowed for PFS modules. In a combat-driven paradigm, like most of modern PFS, Rogues are frankly subpar.

PFS if anything is the only campaign I've seen outside of a purely social one where the rogues even have a chance: with oddball skill checks like sleight of hand and expectations of diplomacy coming up way more than i've seen in home play.


Fair enough if that's what your after then i would go ranger .
Rogues are not ment to out do fighter types in combat they just can't do it in the same way you wouldn't pick a fighter to be a skill monkey


Headfirst wrote:

If you think rogues suck, it's because you're trying to play them like another class.

Try this build on for size: Play an elf rogue. Get your Dex to at least 18, but try to keep everything else around 12. Don't dump anything. Trade out the elven magic trait for the silent hunter trait. For your other traits, pick up warrior of old and threatening defender.

Your first level feat should be combat expertise. At 2nd level, you're using a rogue trick to gain weapon finesse, because you're going to be using a rapier whenever you have to put your composite longbow away. At 3rd level, you want improved feint. Now you've got all the melee help you need, so all of your subsequent feats should be chasing down ranged effectiveness: point-blank shot, precise shot, rapid shot, manyshot, focused shot, etc. Read up on all the different flavors of arrows there are to buy!

For your 2nd and 3rd rogue talents, ignore the crappy sneak attack ones. Instead, go for minor magic (touch of fatigue) and then major magic (vanish). Every level, put your favored class bonus into the elf racial bonus that increases the uses per day of these spells.

For your skills, concentrate on the classic rogue stuff: acrobatics, bluff, disable device, disguise, escape artist, perception, sleight of hand, stealth, and use magic device. Now actually go and read up on everything you can do with those skills. Seriously, go read them again. I'll bet even an experienced player is going to discover something he didn't know at least one of those skills does.

And now you're all set. You can dish out incredible damage at short range or in melee, plus you have long range capabilities. After the battle, when the fighter, cleric, wizard, and most other classes are sitting there twiddling their thumbs, waiting for the next fight, you can get to work using bluff, disable device, and disguise to turn a town upside down!

Enjoy!

Dude, there isn't going to be one thing about your damage that will be incredible. It will be mediocre at best. You'll hit a moderate to low amount of the time and hit for ok damage even with sneak when you do.

As for skills. Still not going to be all that great at them. The character you just described is literally the epitome of a 3.x bard. Jack of all trades, screw master, you're really not even that good at any of em.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Thats all you need really. Once you know that something is there combat starts, there goes the surprise round. The critter takes a move action to note your direction, moves next to you, and in all likelyhood with no cover or concealment between two adjacent squares your stealth automatically fails.

The surprise round still happens if you're not alone. Scent might give you the ability to act in the surprise round, but you can still lose initiative.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Quote:
-Scent does not reveal the precise location of someone, merely their presence. It has very short-range functionality
Thats all you need really. Once you know that something is there combat starts, there goes the surprise round. The critter takes a move action to note your direction, moves next to you, and in all likelyhood with no cover or concealment between two adjacent squares your stealth automatically fails.

That's... not necessarily accurate. You may run it that way as a GM, but that's a choice in how you run. Just because a creature knows something is in the vicinity does not mean they consider you a threat and try to attack you.


Headfirst wrote:


And now you're all set. You can dish out incredible damage at short range or in melee, plus you have long range capabilities. After the battle, when the fighter, cleric, wizard, and most other classes are sitting there twiddling their thumbs, waiting for the next fight, you can get to work using bluff, disable device, and disguise to turn a town upside down!

Enjoy!

What exactly is incredibly damage at melee range?

What exactly are those long range capabilities?

How many hit points does that rogue actually have? can he survive in Melee ranger? what is his CMD, his AC his saves?


TOZ wrote:
Sarrah wrote:
I built a L11 rogue not too long ago that could do 300+ DPR.
Words are wind.

Dude, this threads are Dejavu.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Actually, there is a good rogue build. It is Str Thugh/Scout (of course) that have a couple of levels as a fighter for armor and weapon proficiencies and a couple of feats.

Then that silly feat/(trait?) that let you use blugoening weapon to deal non lethal damage and the sap master/sap adept. Cornugon smash for considerably more fun.

It have good DPR and AC, and the usal skill points of rogue.

That is the only really mechanically superior rogue build I have seen. it is absurly silly fluffwise though.


BigNorseWolf wrote:

Quote:
-Rogues should be able to hide and steal more easily

But they can't, and thats a problem when their main class feature is hiding and stealing. Any other class with hide as a class skill does it just as well (or better...) any class that can take a trait to get hide as a class skill does it as well.

DEV A: look, lets make the rogue the king of skills and stealh

DEV B: Great, I agree,but lets make bard better at skills and give the rangers bonus to stalth and hide in plain sight, that shoudl make everyone happy. ANd just because, the ninja and the alchemist will be better at sneak attack.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
Dude, this threads are Dejavu.

All of this has happened before, and all of this will happen again.

Shadow Lodge

7 people marked this as a favorite.

I was expecting a troll post from the title, but since there was a serious question here's my serious 2cents:

The rogue class is not what you want it to be. There I said it. You have played a lot of other games (probably including several video games) where the class titled rogue is in fact an archer or a super powered teleporting nightcrawler ninja assassin. This is not the case in pathfinder. The rogue suffers a lot from an identity crises. Lots of players see the title "rogue" and think ooh that's a super sneaky ninja assassin, or master archer, or bad ass hitman, etc. But in pathfinder, rogue isn't any of these things.

Like all classes in pf, rogues are customizable. You can make any class into an archer for example, but you will not be the best at archery unless you chose one of the best archer classes. The issue with rogues, is that players of rogues almost invariably try to make them into something that another class is better at, then complain that they are subpar.

In pathfinder a rogue is an individual with a wide breadth of skills. They have quick reactions, have a knowledge of traps, and they are dirty fighters that strike hardest when their opponents guard is down. This archetype is personified by characters like Han Solo. These are the goofy guys, they have a lot of skills and tricks up their sleeves. They are the comic relief characters. As such they tend to not be the best at anything, but they can try everything (so that they can fail and get laughed at). If this is the character that you are trying to make, then the rogue class does this the best. If it is not, then there is likely a different class that does it better. It's perfectly fine to chose a suboptimal class for pathfinder, I do so all the time. Just be conscious that you are making a decision to be suboptimal so as not to be disappointed later on.


taldanrebel2187 wrote:
I really dislike making threads like this, but I've been looking at making a ranged Rogue build and frankly it seems like they... well, basically suck completely. Paizo seems to have sort of dropped the ball on this.

Ifrit with the feat fire-sight and smoke sticks makes for a great archer. Sniper goggles at higher levels are a must.

Generally rogues just suck. If you are really optimized you can have a competent character.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Paizo screwed the pooch on this one. I'm guessing none of the developers actually play rogues. How this happens while screams of "Rogue Sucks!" ring out all over the forums for years I really don't know.

Maybe the developer that plays rogue was trying out something new and different, the synthesis summoner!

I heard third or fourth hand that they are at least aware of the issue(aka not 100% blind and Deaf)and are planning some sort of fix based on talents or something but who the heck knows how that is gonna turn out.

Till then just house rule for fix's for the rogue.Yeah it sucks but thems the breaks.

Grand Lodge

Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Headfirst wrote:
If you think rogues suck, it's because you're trying to play them like another class.
Dude, there isn't going to be one thing about your damage that will be incredible. It will be mediocre at best. You'll hit a moderate to low amount of the time and hit for ok damage even with sneak when you do.

My first sentence says it all.

Stop trying to play a rogue like he's a fighter or a barbarian! You're not going to dish out as much ranged damage as a ranger, either, so get over it. You're not supposed to be the top damage in the group, otherwise the class would be called "murderer" or "killer" instead of "rogue." When I say you do "incredible" damage with your attacks, I mean relative to any other non-martial class that uses the same weapon.

So what DO you do as a rogue? Out of combat, you're a facilitator. You open the doors, remove the traps, and scout ahead. You know a guy who knows a guy that will buy all the stuff your party can't sell on the open market. When everyone else is spending their downtime drinking and healing, you can rustle up some extra cash doing what you do best.

I'm just going to ignore the other part of your reply. How is a rogue "not all that great" at skills? Rogues have great Dex and aren't very MAD, so they can afford decent Int and Cha. With 8 skill points per level and the fact that like 90% of skills are Dex, Int, or Cha-based, how does that not make rogues the optimal skill monkeys?

Grand Lodge

15 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Headfirst wrote:
So what DO you do as a rogue? Out of combat, you're a facilitator. You open the doors, remove the traps, and scout ahead. You know a guy who knows a guy that will buy all the stuff your party can't sell on the open market. When everyone else is spending their downtime drinking and healing, you can rustle up some extra cash doing what you do best.

Great, you're an NPC.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Headfirst wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Headfirst wrote:
If you think rogues suck, it's because you're trying to play them like another class.
Dude, there isn't going to be one thing about your damage that will be incredible. It will be mediocre at best. You'll hit a moderate to low amount of the time and hit for ok damage even with sneak when you do.
I'm just going to ignore the other part of your reply. How is a rogue "not all that great" at skills? Rogues have great Dex and aren't very MAD, so they can afford decent Int and Cha. With 8 skill points per level and the fact that like 90% of skills are Dex, Int, or Cha-based, how does that not make rogues the optimal skill monkeys?

Bards. Ninjas. Wizards.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Headfirst wrote:
So what DO you do as a rogue? Out of combat, you're a facilitator. You open the doors, remove the traps, and scout ahead. You know a guy who knows a guy that will buy all the stuff your party can't sell on the open market. When everyone else is spending their downtime drinking and healing, you can rustle up some extra cash doing what you do best.
Great, you're an NPC.

Ok man,you made me spew some mountain dew on that one. You're a NPC!

Priceless!


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Headfirst wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Headfirst wrote:
If you think rogues suck, it's because you're trying to play them like another class.
Dude, there isn't going to be one thing about your damage that will be incredible. It will be mediocre at best. You'll hit a moderate to low amount of the time and hit for ok damage even with sneak when you do.
I'm just going to ignore the other part of your reply. How is a rogue "not all that great" at skills? Rogues have great Dex and aren't very MAD, so they can afford decent Int and Cha. With 8 skill points per level and the fact that like 90% of skills are Dex, Int, or Cha-based, how does that not make rogues the optimal skill monkeys?
Bards. Ninjas. Wizards.

Inquisitors. Rangers . alchemist.


rorek55 wrote:
Sarrah wrote:

Rogues, when built correctly, are the 2nd highest damaging class in the game. It is just that most people do not know how to build rogues.

I built a L11 rogue not too long ago that could do 300+ DPR.

Can you post that here please?

I also like to see that build.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Headfirst wrote:
If you think rogues suck, it's because you're trying to play them like another class.
If you're going to tell me I'm doing something wrong, you're going to need to give me something a LOT better than that build

What's wrong with that build? It doesn't do as much damage as a fighter or ranger?

Guys, if you want to do as much damage as a fighter or ranger, here's a novel idea: Play a fighter or a ranger.

I guess if you really had a hard-on for damage output, you could take gravity bow as your major magic spell instead. Now your composite longbow does 2d6 base damage.

The point is that you've got options, especially outside of combat. When the fighter cleaves some poor ogre in half in one hit, don't get jealous. That's his job. Your job was finding the trap on the door, disarming it, then quietly picking the lock so the party could get into the room unnoticed, thus gaining the surprise round which is what allowed the fighter to get that free charge attack in the first place.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Headfirst wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Headfirst wrote:
If you think rogues suck, it's because you're trying to play them like another class.
Dude, there isn't going to be one thing about your damage that will be incredible. It will be mediocre at best. You'll hit a moderate to low amount of the time and hit for ok damage even with sneak when you do.
I'm just going to ignore the other part of your reply. How is a rogue "not all that great" at skills? Rogues have great Dex and aren't very MAD, so they can afford decent Int and Cha. With 8 skill points per level and the fact that like 90% of skills are Dex, Int, or Cha-based, how does that not make rogues the optimal skill monkeys?
Bards. Ninjas. Wizards.
Inquisitors. Rangers . Alchemists.

Witches. Investigators.


Headfirst wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Headfirst wrote:
If you think rogues suck, it's because you're trying to play them like another class.
If you're going to tell me I'm doing something wrong, you're going to need to give me something a LOT better than that build

What's wrong with that build? It doesn't do as much damage as a fighter or ranger?

Guys, if you want to do as much damage as a fighter or ranger, here's a novel idea: Play a fighter or a ranger.

I guess if you really had a hard-on for damage output, you could take gravity bow as your major magic spell instead. Now your composite longbow does 2d6 base damage.

The point is that you've got options, especially outside of combat. When the fighter cleaves some poor ogre in half in one hit, don't get jealous. That's his job. Your job was finding the trap on the door, disarming it, then quietly picking the lock so the party could get into the room unnoticed, thus gaining the surprise round which is what allowed the fighter to get that free charge attack in the first place.

And you have low hit points, terrible saves. The bard is better face, that can replace you in the trap/scout niche plus spells. The ranger is as good as scouting, detecting and disarming traps plus spells. The inquisitor can be a better face even with cha 5, have better saves more DPR, spells and other nice things.

And they all get better saves.

Grand Lodge

Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Headfirst wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Headfirst wrote:
If you think rogues suck, it's because you're trying to play them like another class.
Dude, there isn't going to be one thing about your damage that will be incredible. It will be mediocre at best. You'll hit a moderate to low amount of the time and hit for ok damage even with sneak when you do.
I'm just going to ignore the other part of your reply. How is a rogue "not all that great" at skills? Rogues have great Dex and aren't very MAD, so they can afford decent Int and Cha. With 8 skill points per level and the fact that like 90% of skills are Dex, Int, or Cha-based, how does that not make rogues the optimal skill monkeys?
Bards. Ninjas. Wizards.

I'm not sure I understand your reply. Are you implying that bards, ninjas, and wizards are better skill monkeys than rogues?

Bards have fewer skill points and simply trade Cha for Dex in their priority of ability scores. Their bonus to all knowledges helps out, but once again, stop trying to play a rogue like he's another class. He's not a bard, so don't try to crank up diplomacy and be the party face. Max out those Dex-based skills and get to work.

Ninjas are just Asian rogues, dude. In fact, if you have levels in rogue, you can't even take levels in ninja; they're effectively the same class.

Wizards? 2 skill points per level and 7 total class skills? I'm sorry, but are we talking about the same game here?

For the rest of you who seem to be attempting to flex your sarcasm muscles for the first time and just listed other classes you think are better skill monkeys than rogues:

No, a class with fewer skill points per level, but with one little boost to a single skill does not make that class a more optimal skill monkey. Yes, inquisitors will be better at intimidate and monster knowledge. Yes, rangers will have a higher survival skill. Yes, alchemists will have better craft (alchemy).

You know what this reminds me of? The endless debate about fighter DPS versus paladin, ranger, and barbarian DPS. Rogues are the fighters of skills, if that makes any sense. Other classes might shine in one specific area, but overall, rogues are the most reliable skill monkeys.

Shadow Lodge

Headfirst wrote:
Wizards? 2 skill points per level and 7 total class skills? I'm sorry, but are we talking about the same game here?

What do they use to cast again?


Headfirst wrote:


Bards have fewer skill points and simply trade Cha for Dex in their priority of ability scores. Their bonus to all knowledges helps out, but once again, stop trying to play a rogue like he's another class.

DO not forget that they have a lot of virtual skill points due to versatile performance, in the end the bard have at least the same amount of skill points.


Headfirst wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Headfirst wrote:
So what DO you do as a rogue? Out of combat, you're a facilitator. You open the doors, remove the traps, and scout ahead. You know a guy who knows a guy that will buy all the stuff your party can't sell on the open market. When everyone else is spending their downtime drinking and healing, you can rustle up some extra cash doing what you do best.
Great, you're an NPC.

Sigh. I guess I should have expected this sort of reply.

Apparently, all anyone cares about is how each class stacks up in DPS. This isn't an MMO, children.

If you want a tabletop RPG that plays more like an MMO, where every single class does exactly the same damage, go play 4th Edition D&D.

Oh! Wow,you really just went there? With THIS kind of crowd around you? Dude come on.

It's obvious that you have a (thing) with the rogue and that's fine. So do I. Love em! It's not that the rogue is unplayable,it is perfectly playable,its just not very effective even in a non-optimized kinda game.

They need to fix that so folks can play a rogue and still be effective compared to other people. Right now..they are not.Right now they get out damaged by healing focused clerics in our games. That just is NOT pretty.

The whole children and mmo talk is just a sure way to draw some heavy fire your way. Why not try and keep things friendly?


Headfirst wrote:
You know what this reminds me of? The endless debate about fighter DPS versus paladin, ranger, and barbarian DPS. Rogues are the fighters of skills,

Totally true. But not sure how that is a good thing.

Grand Lodge

TOZ wrote:
Headfirst wrote:
Wizards? 2 skill points per level and 7 total class skills? I'm sorry, but are we talking about the same game here?
What do they use to cast again?

Good luck with everything, man. :)

Contributor

Drink unto the sweet ambrosia of enlightenment and make informed decisions for yourself.

Grand Lodge

Goldenfrog wrote:
The whole children and mmo talk is just a sure way to draw some heavy fire your way. Why not try and keep things friendly?

Then you guys (not necessarily you) should stop making ridiculous arguments about how rogues should be super damage dealers or why wizards are better skill monkeys. :)

Liberty's Edge

Headfirst wrote:
Good luck with everything, man. :)

Hey, I'm trying, but rolling 5's on my skill checks really sucks.

Grand Lodge

Alexander Augunas wrote:
Drink unto the sweet ambrosia of enlightenment and make informed decisions for yourself.

Exactly the case I'm making. The example in that link has the rogue wasting a feat on martial weapon proficiency so he can try to power attack with a greatsword.

Guys, if you want to do tons of damage with a greatsword, play a fighter. I'd say the same thing to some halfwit coming here and complaining that his sorcerer can't keep up in melee with a barbarian. He's not supposed to fight like that!


Headfirst wrote:
Goldenfrog wrote:
The whole children and mmo talk is just a sure way to draw some heavy fire your way. Why not try and keep things friendly?
Then you guys (not necessarily you) should stop making ridiculous arguments about how rogues should be super damage dealers or why wizards are better skill monkeys. :)

You dimiss in combat prowess (not only DPR, but Hp, saves and AC) and that is fine if rogue actually would have been the king of out of combat. But they are not.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
Headfirst wrote:
Goldenfrog wrote:
The whole children and mmo talk is just a sure way to draw some heavy fire your way. Why not try and keep things friendly?
Then you guys (not necessarily you) should stop making ridiculous arguments about how rogues should be super damage dealers or why wizards are better skill monkeys. :)
You dimiss in combat prowess (not only DPR, but Hp, saves and AC) and that is fine if rogue actually would have been the king of out of combat. But they are not.

They're not supposed to be the king out of combat. They're not diplomats. They're not crafting machines. They're not knowledge libraries. They don't heal, they don't teleport, they don't research.

They tumble, hide, and steal. They break in, pocket the goods, and escape. They're Dex-based skill monkeys.

In other words: they're ROGUES. :)


I guess this could all be level dependent. Yeah, at level 1, any BAB = class level type character will generally win in combat by default here. Why? Because, they're optimized for combat. Rogue's aren't.

Come 10th level you've got a couple of attacks, 3 with rapid shot, each capable of doing an extra 5d6, right there, you've got more damage than a wizard's fireball plus some because of weapon damage and magic weapon/stat bonuses. Grab Deadly Sneak and you're garrenteed to do at least average damage (1's and 2's are treated as 3's)

Be an Ifrit, Wildfire Heart racial trait + Improved Initiative + Rogue's Dex bonus = I'm going first and you're flat-footed.

At this point (without magic items) you should be doing a minimum of 45 points of damage. 3 attacks = 15d6 lowest possible number being 3 means 3x15.

An Urban Barbarian at this point will have the same number of attacks, but will be a little more likely to hit, and may do a little more damage with a composite bow, but will be much less likely to catch his opponent flat-footed.

When it gets right down to it, rogue's are very situational, but when those situations come up, they can shine the brightest.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If I could build a rogue with the same level of out of combat range that I have now but came within 30% of the damage our barbarian could dish out at will(or almost at all)I would be thrilled.

To be honest I don't care that other class's have so many rogue options.In my groups no one ever picks those,what I hate is that combat is a HUGE part of our games and I am left swinging a wet noodle and praying the monsters don't mind the wet part because if they do I'm gonna die real fast.

If I could badass kill 1 monster for every 3 or 4 our barbarian did I would be ok with that. After all look at all the other stuff I can do!

As it is now though,I'm not even playing the same game he is.I'm playing OD&D with D6 damage and he is playing 4E and smacking down gods!

Sure I can actually do better damage(still not good though) with options that remove a lot of my out of combat ability.......but WTH would I want to do that? Especially to still end up on the wet noodle end?

"PPPPPPPAAAAAAIIIIIIZZZZZOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!" Screamed like Kirk yelled Khan.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Headfirst wrote:

My first sentence says it all.

Stop trying to play a rogue like he's a fighter or a barbarian! You're not going to dish out as much ranged damage as a ranger, either, so get over it. You're not supposed to be the top damage in the group, otherwise the class would be called "murderer" or "killer" instead of "rogue." When I say you do "incredible" damage with your attacks, I mean relative to any other non-martial class that uses the same weapon.

So what DO you do as a rogue? Out of combat, you're a facilitator. You open the doors, remove the traps, and scout ahead. You know a guy who knows a guy that will buy all the stuff your party can't sell on the open market. When everyone else is spending their downtime drinking and healing, you can rustle up some extra cash doing what you do best.

I'm just going to ignore the other part of your reply. How is a rogue "not all that great" at skills? Rogues have great Dex and aren't very MAD, so they can afford decent Int and Cha. With 8 skill points per level and the fact that like 90% of skills are Dex, Int, or Cha-based, how does that not make rogues the optimal skill monkeys?

I know how to play a rogue thank you. He's ok at opening doors, worse than a bard, ranger, or alchemist at removing traps, and are terrible at scouting ahead. They're no better than just about anyone at stealth, and there are a number of classes (rogue, bard, sorcerer, inquisitor, etc) that do it flat out better. Just about anyone who can cast the invisibility spell will be better than him. Not to mention if you do get caught you're pretty much dead as rogues require team work in order to deal even sub optimal damage.

Optimal skill monkey = bard. /Thread.

A ton of spells that can give you bonuses on them that can be cast as you see fit. Still 6 + int. Every few levels you take a different perform that allows you to use that perform instead of said skills. So you're using your charisma mod at the end for about 10-12 skills and max ranks.

You can ignore it. It doesn't make it less true. That build is flat out bad in every respect.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Headfirst wrote:
Rogues have a role, and if built right, they can rock that role all day.

Sure, just tell me what that role is and how to do it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

From the PFSRD:

Life is an endless adventure for those who live by their wits. Ever just one step ahead of danger, rogues bank on their cunning, skill, and charm to bend fate to their favor. Never knowing what to expect, they prepare for everything, becoming masters of a wide variety of skills, training themselves to be adept manipulators, agile acrobats, shadowy stalkers, or masters of any of dozens of other professions or talents. Thieves and gamblers, fast talkers and diplomats, bandits and bounty hunters, and explorers and investigators all might be considered rogues, as well as countless other professions that rely upon wits, prowess, or luck. Although many rogues favor cities and the innumerable opportunities of civilization, some embrace lives on the road, journeying far, meeting exotic people, and facing fantastic danger in pursuit of equally fantastic riches. In the end, any who desire to shape their fates and live life on their own terms might come to be called rogues.

Role: Rogues excel at moving about unseen and catching foes unaware, and tend to avoid head-to-head combat. Their varied skills and abilities allow them to be highly versatile, with great variations in expertise existing between different rogues. Most, however, excel in overcoming hindrances of all types, from unlocking doors and disarming traps to outwitting magical hazards and conning dull-witted opponents.

Nowhere in here does it say anything about being masters of combat, don't try to play them that way, play them so that if a situation comes up, they can handle it.

Heck, one time I played an Int based rogue and he did extremely well out of combat. In combat, sure he was subpar, but I didn't build him for combat, and despite that he could dish out some decent damage. All he had to do was tumble behind the enemy and backstab. He was an excellent scout, I was never seen or heard. I earned our party surprise rounds on far more than one occasion. I was rarely if ever hit not because I had a high AC, but because I avoided unnecessary confrontations. I didn't charge up to smack a giant in the kneecap then try to run away.


Bah,the whole other class can do rogue better argument only matter if you are playing in a group that...they actually do that.

Not that it isn't a valid point but it's just not in my experience that it happeneds outside of the boards.

The wet noodle syndrome however is a horrible affliction that effects every rogue not in a party of clueless newbies. Countless rogues are effected every day as this much ignored issue strikes down rogue after rogue across our fair land.

With only a small donation of 1 copper piece sent to Paizo with the Save our Rogues heading on the email might make all the difference if enough of us really care.

The next Rogue to fall could be you!

Please email today!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

@OP: they're subpar for combat, their shtick is taken or improved upon by both other classes and its own children (the slayer and investigator) and magical trap removal is now a TRAIT, taking that from them in a most insulting manner.

their main damage mechanic (sneak attack) is hilariously limiting like NO OTHER CLASS' FEATURES, and simply can't be used in most situations without heavy feat taxing (looking at you, shadowstrike feat) to even attempt to use. generally people have to resort to outlandish methods to get even SOME of their sneak attacks off (such as relying on hiding in an invisible tiny hut conjured from a wand to solve all their problems)

they also lack in survivability--both in HP and saves.

.

as for the rogue's spawn:

ninjas serve much the same role as rogues, but combat is much less of a hassle due to vanishing trick and invisible blade--it allows them the opportunity to use their core combat feature without having to jump through flaming hoops made of tigers like the rogue does.

slayer is pretty much completely better in straight combat (full BAB, easier-to-use core combat mechanic), and even the investigator trumps it on the battlefield with to-hit bonuses and static damage bonuses from studied combat (both of which the rogue is BEGGING for), AND "roll lots of dice" sneak attack-esque fun via studied strike.

.

honestly though? rogues can be fixed fairly easily if paizo would simply stop kneecapping the rogue talents (and un-kneecap the older ones). most of them impose penalties on the rogue's already subpar to-hit (only exacerbating his combat uselessness), are useable only once per day making their usefulness absolutely nil, actually make you WORSE at doing things (rumormonger, for example), or any combination of the above.

take out the attack penalties and daily limits and you'll find them at least nearing competent.

give them the same love they're giving the barbarian's rage powers and they'd be golden. though a second good save wouldn't hurt.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Headfirst wrote:


No, a class with fewer skill points per level, but with one little boost to a single skill does not make that class a more optimal skill monkey.

Allow me to properly, and without sarcasm, explain why Wizards are better skill monkeys than Rogues, especially as the game progresses. Let me again state that rogues are probably a fine class at low level, low combat games, that are also low in the viability of magic. However, none of those things are the norm for your standard Pathfinder game.

Moving on, let's assume that both characters are the same Race. Elf. That neither will put favored class bonus into skills because they need constitution. They are only receiving the base class skill #+ int per level of points.

An Elf Wizard, maxing out his Int to 20: +7 skill points per level.
An Elf Rogue, sitting at about 14, maybe even 16 on his int. +10 or 11 skill points per level.

And if we're only looking at skill points, then the Rogue really does win. Unfortunately, that's not how the game works. Beyond skill points, the rogue doesn't gain any abilities b as the game goes on to increase his proficiency in any skill, other than his ability scores. What does the wizard get? A familiar, and 9 levels of spells, including, everyone's favorite source of solving problems; Summoning.

Skills, in of themselves, are not valuable. Their value, and by proxy a skill monkey's value, comes from what they allow the party to achieve. Knowledge (local)? Find out about the local underground markets to get some cheap gear. Stealth and Perception? Sneak around and find a way to get a surprise on the enemy. Diplomacy? Get information and allies. Bluff and Disguise? Infiltrate the Ball as an aristocrat, so you can dig up some dirt on the corrupt Mayor. Disable Device? Open the locked door, locked chest, or remove the trap. Climb and Swim? Overcoming obstacles in your path.

Wizards and Bards, and many other spellcasting classes have many ways available to completely negate the risky skill rolls.

  • Scouting?: Imp familiar. Faerie Dragon familiar. [Insert X familier here]. Invisibility on yourself. Summon a Dretch demon or a Mephit
  • Gathering Information?: A whole slew of divination spells and all that int synergy that wizards have. If you need to directly negotiate with someone? Charm Person. Charm Monster. Summon a Lantern Archon to make some diplomacy checks for you.
  • Infiltration? Invsibility. Disguise Self. Glibness for Bards. Simulacrums. Etherealness. Dimension door.
  • Overcoming obstacles? Fly. Alter Self. Beast/Dragon/Plant/Vermin Shape.
  • Locked Doors, Chests, Traps? Knock.

All of that before you even get to the skill points that a wizard has to spend, and traits that make skills class skills, or that give you the trapfinding trait.


Sindalla wrote:

From the PFSRD:

Nowhere in here does it say anything about being masters of combat, don't try to play them that way, play them so that if a situation comes up, they can handle it.

Take a stopwatch to the average Pathfinder game session.

Start the watch at the very beginning of the game.

Stop the time during any combat.

At the end of the game stop the time and look at it.

I think you might be amazed at just how much of the time was spent in combat.


Goldenfrog wrote:

Bah,the whole other class can do rogue better argument only matter if you are playing in a group that...they actually do that.

Not that it isn't a valid point but it's just not in my experience that it happeneds outside of the boards.

The wet noodle syndrome however is a horrible affliction that effects every rogue not in a party of clueless newbies. Countless rogues are effected every day as this much ignored issue strikes down rogue after rogue across our fair land.

With only a small donation of 1 copper piece sent to Paizo with the Save our Rogues heading on the email might make all the difference if enough of us really care.

The next Rogue to fall could be you!

Please email today!

I've only brought it up because I've had to do it with a so called "optimized" rogue.

  • Doors
    Quote:


    "You fail to unlock the door"

    "I knock down the door"

  • Traps
    Quote:


    "You fail to disarm the trap"

    "I walk back, rip the door off its hinges, and throw the dooronto the stretch of floor"

    "It sounds hollow when the door hits the floor"

    "I press down on it with the my greatsword"

    "It falls open"

    He didn't even spot the trap. You should have seen the poor kids face. You don't like it when you have to walk through and do their job for them, but the party has to move forward.

  • 51 to 100 of 1,118 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Do Rogues just flat out suck? All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.