I seem to have forgotten why. When I looked over the archetypes for the bard, I was unable to remember.
What should I be looking at again?
I working on a case for the rogue, but to do that properly that requires fully understanding the rogue replacement classes and options. This will take quite some time to formulate, as I want to test my theories in actual game play before trying to present them as novel or true.
More Skills
Performances > Sneak Attack
2/3 casting > Rogue talents
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because the bard, by his very nature, seeks attention while the rogue is most successful when he avoids drawing attention to himself?
Not sure what you're asking.
Archaeologist is brought up a lot, but it loses versatile performance and therefore the skill advantage. Also lacks sneak attack, which then confuses me as to the value of having rogue talents and advance talents.
What should I be looking at again?
What do you want your rogue to do? This of course would affect your options as to how you want to build your rogue, but would also affect how to build a bard.
In general, though, if you want a skill monkey, bards effectively get more skills due to bardic knowledge and versatile performance. Look at the skills you want and see how many of them can be covered under the appropriate bard attributes -- for example, you can save skill points by maxing out Perform (Comedy) instead of both Bluff and Intimidate if you're looking for a social rogue.
If you're looking at a trapfinder, you probably want the archeologist archetype.
If you want a high damage skirmisher, ranger may actually be your preferred choice, but you can also get similar effects with the various buffs plus an archetype like sandman for sneak attack.
In any case, you'll be able to fill in the secondary roles with your bardic spells.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, I'm looking for why the bard eclipses the rogue.
It must do everything the rogue can and more. What it does that the rogue cannot is not counted against the rogue until the rogue is eclipsed.
For example, bardic knowledge is firmly in the "and more" category. It doesn't help the bard eclipse the rogue mechanically because the rogue was never going to be a knowledge skillmonkey.
Archaeologist is brought up a lot, but it loses versatile performance and therefore the skill advantage. Also lacks sneak attack, which then confuses me as to the value of having rogue talents and advance talents.
Sneak Attack is too situation and easily negated to be a big deal. A 20th level rogue's Sneak Attack can be thwarted by a 1st level spell.
Sneak Attack is too situation and easily negated to be a big deal. A 20th level rogue's Sneak Attack can be thwarted by a 1st level spell.Archaeologist is brought up a lot, but it loses versatile performance and therefore the skill advantage. Also lacks sneak attack, which then confuses me as to the value of having rogue talents and advance talents.
Blur is 2nd level. Is there another spell you're talking about?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, I'm looking for why the bard eclipses the rogue.
It must do everything the rogue can and more. What it does that the rogue cannot is not counted against the rogue until the rogue is eclipsed.
For example, bardic knowledge is firmly in the "and more" category. It doesn't help the bard eclipse the rogue mechanically because the rogue was never going to be a knowledge skillmonkey.
Well if you are looking for exact class feature parity you won't find it. If however, like most folks who play, you are looking to fill a niche or a particular role for a given character then you could build a Bard to do any particular thing better than a Rogue AND have better backup/support options.
Blur is 2nd level. Is there another spell you're talking about?Sneak Attack is too situation and easily negated to be a big deal. A 20th level rogue's Sneak Attack can be thwarted by a 1st level spell.Archaeologist is brought up a lot, but it loses versatile performance and therefore the skill advantage. Also lacks sneak attack, which then confuses me as to the value of having rogue talents and advance talents.
Obscuring Mist
Sneak Attack is too situation and easily negated to be a big deal.Archaeologist is brought up a lot, but it loses versatile performance and therefore the skill advantage. Also lacks sneak attack, which then confuses me as to the value of having rogue talents and advance talents.
That's a conversation for later.
The point is that the archaeologist is invalided as a rogue eclipsing option. There may be points about rogue replacement, but on the whole this archetype is inferior to the base bard when it comes to replacing and eclipsing the rogue.
It's gains in trap-finding are more or less irrelevant with the trapfinding trait and Trapspringer’s Gloves (which is not something the rogue needs in addition to trap-finding to handle traps, I mean this as a point for the bard).
Obscuring MistBlur is 2nd level. Is there another spell you're talking about?Sneak Attack is too situation and easily negated to be a big deal. A 20th level rogue's Sneak Attack can be thwarted by a 1st level spell.Archaeologist is brought up a lot, but it loses versatile performance and therefore the skill advantage. Also lacks sneak attack, which then confuses me as to the value of having rogue talents and advance talents.
A single feat gets past that for melee attacks (Shadow Strike). Beyond that, obscuring mist thwarts nearly any ranged attacker equally.
Obscuring MistBlur is 2nd level. Is there another spell you're talking about?Sneak Attack is too situation and easily negated to be a big deal. A 20th level rogue's Sneak Attack can be thwarted by a 1st level spell.Archaeologist is brought up a lot, but it loses versatile performance and therefore the skill advantage. Also lacks sneak attack, which then confuses me as to the value of having rogue talents and advance talents.
Goz Mask, scroll/wand of gust of wind.
Interesting situation though, without batmaning, such an occurrence would probably have to be handled with skirmishing tactics.
*makes note*
What the rogue currently has that makes it "special" is trap finding and a generous assortment of skills.
Problem is that trapfinding isn't unique to the rogue anymore, isn't really required (due to how traps are handled in PF), and traps aren't even all that dangerous (most being a chance to take some damage or a save vs some poorly scaled inconvenient effect like poison or spell), heal/cleanse and move on type stuff.
Their skills can be handled by ANY class with proper ability scores, traits, and skill ranks. Even a barbarian can be the party face if traited for it (and be a master of intimidation if he wants to be).
The damage aspect (sneak attack) is laughable since the rogue can't reliably deliver it, it scales poorly, and the class is among the squishiest in the game. That and the 3/4 BAB is very hard to make up for compared to others with the same sort of BAB (clerics/bards/summoners/druids/alchemists all have native buffing ability) Sneak attack is also not exclusive to the rogue now doesn't help it either.
Bards can do all of the skill things that a rogue can, can buff the party, can cast spells, and build for solid reliable damage. Once they get some levels behind them they have such amazing action economy that its quite obvious that the bard is better.
Hell in the most current adventure path Paizo even made trapfinding a campaign trait. Yes, that means that the iconic rogue ability to find and disable traps is worth about the same as half of a feat.
I think it is more a case of everything a rogue can do, outside a few very specific builds, some other class can do better. That other class is often the Bard but not always.
Hmmm this has been telling. I expected more concrete arguments for the bard eclipsing the rogue.
Without eclipsing the rogue there is room for an argument for the rogue. An exploration of that possibility will come later.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the Bard is just the most often brought up because it is so similar, but just so superior, to the rogue that it's an easy comparison. They're 3/4 BAB lightly-armored skill monkeys with a motif based around out thinking rather than overpowering opponents. But when it comes down to it, whatever aspect of that character you want to focus on, the bard does it better.
I want a whole mess of skills! Bard gets more.
I want to be sneaky! Bard has Stealth and a whole slew of Illusion spells to buff herself.
I want to be a master spy, a silver-tongued beguiler unmatched in disguise and intrigue! Bard has better CHA, better skills, spells to enhance herself (like she needs it) and I mean come on, seriously, we all know Bards are hands-down the best Party Face characters. Glibness, Disguise Self, Charm Person all make the rogue obsolete before we even do a Skill-for-Skill comparison.
I want to be a lightly-armored skirmisher! Bard might eclipse the rogue only slightly here, but she'll have cooler weapon proficiency (Especially for Finesse - the whip rocks) and performance is hands-down a better bonus than Sneak Attack. It's not situational, it actually boosts accuracy, and it improves the whole party.
I want to be an expert in disarming traps! A) Why would you want to focus on the lamest part of dungeon crawling? and B) Archaeologist Bard will take that focus and still keep pace in the skills department.
I think the Bard is just the most often brought up because it is so similar, but just so superior, to the rogue that it's an easy comparison. They're 3/4 BAB lightly-armored skill monkeys with a motif based around out thinking rather than overpowering opponents. But when it comes down to it, whatever aspect of that character you want to focus on, the bard does it better.
I want a whole mess of skills! Bard gets more.
I want to be sneaky! Bard has Stealth and a whole slew of Illusion spells to buff herself.
I want to be a master spy, a silver-tongued beguiler unmatched in disguise and intrigue! Bard has better CHA, better skills, spells to enhance herself (like she needs it) and I mean come on, seriously, we all know Bards are hands-down the best Party Face characters. Glibness, Disguise Self, Charm Person all make the rogue obsolete before we even do a Skill-for-Skill comparison.
I want to be a lightly-armored skirmisher! Bard might eclipse the rogue only slightly here, but she'll have cooler weapon proficiency (Especially for Finesse - the whip rocks) and performance is hands-down a better bonus than Sneak Attack. It's not situational, it actually boosts accuracy, and it improves the whole party.
I want to be an expert in disarming traps! A) Why would you want to focus on the lamest part of dungeon crawling? and B) Archaeologist Bard will take that focus and still keep pace in the skills department.
No
Hmmm this has been telling. I expected more concrete arguments for the bard eclipsing the rogue.
Without eclipsing the rogue there is room for an argument for the rogue. An exploration of that possibility will come later.
I think if you make a rogue build Lots of folks here can help you make the weakness of the rogue concrete.
The bard eclipses the rogue, but you can make rogue builds that focus on the few things that a bard is not better at. Yes you can also make bard builts that is totally awesome and that focus on the Many Many things that rogues cannot do.I look forward to see the result of the exploration.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Bard doesn't eclipse the rogue but the bard bring more to the party than the rogue and if there is both in the party the rogue benefits from the bard being in the party.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's not so much that Bards are great. (Bards are great, though!)
It's more that the Rogue is so terrible. Try this: Build an Expert Class Character with the same name, stats, and skills as your Rogue. Switch out character sheets, and see how long it takes the rest of your group and DM to notice the change. When you realize that your Rogue is hardly more useful than an NPC, you'll probably want to try a Bard...
The bard eclipses the rogue, but you can make rogue builds that focus on the few things that a bard is not better at.
We may be using different definitions of eclipsed mechanically.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Marthkus I wish you success in your endeavor. I have seen amazing rogues that were valuable party members at levels 1-17. I have seen rogues that absolutely could not be duplicated/eclipsed with a bard, if only because the best rogue player I know won't touch any sort of spellcaster.
A few basic things the rogue has that the bard lacks:
2 extra skill points/level - this is important if you really want skills. Sure the bard has a bunch of skill simulators, but those choose where the points go for you. Sometimes you want the freedom to distribute 14 skill points per level however you want.
Evasion/Improved evasion
Uncanny dodge and improved version
Skill mastery - especially powerful if your GM allows it to be taken with UMD
Sneak attack and trap stuff have already been mentioned.
Skill mastery - especially powerful if your GM allows it to be taken with UMD
I cannot even begin to tell you how angry it makes me that this is a debate.
The way you phrased it, just makes it that much more perfect, because nothing in skill mastery says you CAN'T take it with UMD! But I digress (for more of my ranting on this topic check the rules forums). The ability for people to have multiple interpretations of the rules is something I will account for by listing the interpretation our group considers valid and the ones I will be using to make the analyses.
Aram Zey's focus (which is on the bard spell list) is nice if the entire dungeon isn't covered in mechanical traps that you can't dispel, avoid, soak etc.
Trap finding is a minor ability for the rogue. The most it does is free up the gloves slot/save 4K gold and maybe a trait.
What some archetypes are required to give up for it is absurd.
The bard eclipses the rogue, but you can make rogue builds that focus on the few things that a bard is not better at.We may be using different definitions of eclipsed mechanically.
i should have Said the rogue is eclipsed by the bard and others around level 7 at the latest. And then Said but...
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The bard's abilities compound in value with every level gained where the Rogue's abilities are often a diminishing return on investment. Spells often augment skills or replace the need for them entirely, and skills are less and less valuable as magic becomes more available.
Bard's can very reliably deliver bonuses to attack and damage via performances, Sneak Attack is highly conditional.
The Rogue's biggest edge is during the first 7 levels of play, where the Bard is still losing his standard action to begin a performance. After that, the gap widens substantially in the Bard's favor.
The Bard often accounts for substantially more damage in a given round than the Rogue. The standard Rogue's Sneak Attack caps at 35 average damage a hit, and the Rogue has almost no inherent ability to boost his to-hit. Meanwhile the Bard gets more and more ways to boost his accuracy and damage, and shares those bonuses with the party. Every extra attack made because of the Bard casting haste is additional damage directly attributable to the Bard. Every attack that would have missed had it not been for a bardic performance or other buff is again, directly attributable to the bard. Bards are usually responsible for far more damage being dealt in a given campaign than the Rogue can hope for.
The Bard can get effectively around 80 or more skill points beyond the Rogue.
Personally I feel like Alchemist steps more on the rogues toes than the bard does... (sneak attack, trapfinding, poison use, high skills).
I mean, if you want a sneaky rogue who ambushes, the Vivisections (w/ or w/o beastmorph) is infinitely better at sneak attack than the rogue.
If you want a trap guy who is good at dungeon crawls, Cryptbreaker and grabbing the Cognitagen discovery is powerful.
Personally I feel like Alchemist steps more on the rogues toes than the bard does... (sneak attack, trapfinding, poison use, high skills).
I mean, if you want a sneaky rogue who ambushes, the Vivisections (w/ or w/o beastmorph) is infinitely better at sneak attack than the rogue.
If you want a trap guy who is good at dungeon crawls, Cryptbreaker and grabbing the Cognitagen discovery is powerful.
I'm well prepared for deconstructing the alchemist argument. It's bards that I was having trouble analyzing.
The points against the alchemist are irrelevant without positive rogue proof reinforced with play time experience, so I will get into that much later.
Aram Zey's focus (which is on the bard spell list) is nice if the entire dungeon isn't covered in mechanical traps that you can't dispel, avoid, soak etc.Trap finding is a minor ability for the rogue. The most it does is free up the gloves slot/save 4K gold and maybe a trait.
What some archetypes are required to give up for it is absurd.
My bards dip Pathfinder Delver if they need to be a Rogue replacement. Delaying one level to maintain all your bard goodies is way better than losing Inspire Courage and a bunch of the other nice stuff.
A Combat Focused Bard>A Combat Focused Rogue(I'll add that he was totes abusing natural attacks to get to the point where I had to sacrifice skills ability to get a leg up over him)
Linky to an in thread comparison. And her opponent was here. The Damage on Aeisha's full attack is actually incorrect, she can Arcane Strike for another +2 to make her damage 1d6+15. Crits on a 15-20.
In this comparison, a Bard is far better at Combat but loses slightly in skills. But then it still has 6/9ths casting. And access to Heroism is an incredible skill booster. And then we remember skills use is pretty crappy past 5th level.
Skill Focused Bard>Skill Focused Rogue
While it is a terrible waste of time to focus on skills, a Bard simply does it better while still maintaining a use in combat. Still amps his allies in combat. Has abilities that synergize with skill use like Inspire Competence and Heroism. Whereas a Skill Focused Rogue will gain diminishing returns on his skills as soon as he begins to rank ones his party member has, the Bard can simply amplify that party member's skills.
Oh good you're here. Please link me the alchemist build, so I don't have to go searching for it again.
NOTE: I wouldn't wipe my arse with that particular rogue.
i should have Said the rogue is eclipsed by the bard and others around level 7 at the latest. And then Said but...The bard eclipses the rogue, but you can make rogue builds that focus on the few things that a bard is not better at.We may be using different definitions of eclipsed mechanically.
No
Oh good you're here. Please link me the alchemist build, so I don't have to go searching for it again.
NOTE: I wouldn't wipe my arse with that particular rogue.
Neither would I, but that was the pure number crunch to get the Rogue's attack/damage as high as possible and an optimized Bard still crushed it.
Just a couple of notes:
1. Rogues can use Arcane Strike to its full potential by taking minor magic talent.
2. A dervish dancer bard's performance only affects the bard. Yes it will make the bard better in combat but then there is no benefit to the rest of the party.
3. Why does the bard automatically have higher CHA than a rogue? Why is this a fact that isn't up for debate?
4. Somebody else already mentioned Shadow Strike.
It also looks to me that people are combining bard abilities/archetypes that don't actually go together. Maybe I'm wrong there, I didn't exactly comb through every book.
Just a couple of notes:
1. Rogues can use Arcane Strike to its full potential by taking minor magic talent.
2. A dervish dancer bard's performance only affects the bard. Yes it will make the bard better in combat but then there is no benefit to the rest of the party.
3. Why does the bard automatically have higher CHA than a rogue? Why is this a fact that isn't up for debate?
4. Somebody else already mentioned Shadow Strike.It also looks to me that people are combining bard abilities/archetypes that don't actually go together. Maybe I'm wrong there, I didn't exactly comb through every book.
1. You need your talents and feats for other things. More on that later.
2. I have nothing to say about this. Dervish bard does not have versatile performance so it can't eclipse the rogue.3. Bards having higher cha is actually a point against bards.
4. I have a phobia of most things outside of the CRB and by the time a rogue can afford this feat, it's late enough in the game to have easy access to darkvision. It's real use comes to countering blurr. Concealment like that though is trouble for everyone and is likely to be dispelled.
|
|
Just a couple of notes:
1. Rogues can use Arcane Strike to its full potential by taking minor magic talent.
2. A dervish dancer bard's performance only affects the bard. Yes it will make the bard better in combat but then there is no benefit to the rest of the party.
3. Why does the bard automatically have higher CHA than a rogue? Why is this a fact that isn't up for debate?
4. Somebody else already mentioned Shadow Strike.It also looks to me that people are combining bard abilities/archetypes that don't actually go together. Maybe I'm wrong there, I didn't exactly comb through every book.
Comparisons like this are always very hard to actually have a discussion about because there's so many moving parts.
"A Bard can do X!" "Oh yeah, well a Rogue can do Y if he's got this archetype!" "Well a Bard can do Y better with this archetype here!" "Ah hah! You're now not as good at X as a Rogue with this other archetype!"
And it goes on and on.
Here's a thought: try and give the discussion some direction. Pick a level of play or a range of levels and five purposes, and a party consisting of 3 NPCs, a Fighter, a Cleric, and a Sorcerer. Then make either one general Rogue and one general Bard and compare them and the party to all five purposes, or make a Rogue and Bard for each purpose and run the comparison that way. That's the only way to break away from the constantly moving goalposts discussion.
My prediction: The Bard will handily win at at least 3 of the 5 challenges, and very likely all of them.
I'd suggest having a neutral party build the NPCs and mediate the challenges while a representative from each camp creates the Bard(s) and Rogue(s).
Just a couple of notes:
1. Rogues can use Arcane Strike to its full potential by taking minor magic talent.
2. A dervish dancer bard's performance only affects the bard. Yes it will make the bard better in combat but then there is no benefit to the rest of the party.
3. Why does the bard automatically have higher CHA than a rogue? Why is this a fact that isn't up for debate?
4. Somebody else already mentioned Shadow Strike.It also looks to me that people are combining bard abilities/archetypes that don't actually go together. Maybe I'm wrong there, I didn't exactly comb through every book.
I'm not.
In this comparison we can quantifiably see how the Bard trumps the Rogue in damage while still bringing 6/9ths casting and comparable skills. If you keep Inspire Courage it's more difficult to calculate how much damage that brings to the party. It can be situationally better or worse. In a party of casters however, I'd probably say adding another caster instead of a Rogue will probably do you better. In a party with weapon attack focus like Paladin, Alchemist, Cleric, and Bard, the Bard is probably going to be a lot more valuable than a Rogue in that slot would.
1. That's fine. Still less damage in the comparison I posted.
2. Indeed, but now the Bard by himself is outputting more damage than the similarly melee focused Rogue.
3. Because Pointbuy. What is your array for the Rogue? A Bard's is usually 14 combat stat 14 con 14 Charisma for spells with 5 floating pointbuy to taste.
4. Feat taxes hm. Unfortunate. Most builds I see don't take Shadow Strike because of how nasty a feat tax it is. And generally how every feat you get needs to go towards a method of getting Sneak Attacks to be worthwhile at all in the party.
3. Because Pointbuy. What is your array for the Rogue? A Bard's is usually 14 combat stat 14 con 14 Charisma for spells with 5 floating pointbuy to taste.
4. Feat taxes hm. Unfortunate. Most builds I see don't take Shadow Strike because of how nasty a feat tax it is. And generally how every feat you get needs to go towards a method of getting Sneak Attacks to be worthwhile at all in the party.
3. So the bard is either having 2 less in the combat stat or -2 skill points for not having 14 int. Not to mention the temptation to pump cha with leveling bonuses. Bards having higher cha is a weakness when trying to eclipse the rogue.
4. So much truth. If they made it an item like sniping goggles THAT would be something.
I'd suggest having a neutral party build the NPCs and mediate the challenges while a representative from each camp creates the Bard(s) and Rogue(s).
This proves little. Advocates make the builds to show what they are advocating.
It's like taking the Iconics and trying to make general class comparisons.
While it may be hypocritical to bring this up, (I don't intend on doing it myself) posting builds helps these arguments progress.
Somebody make:
The ultimate skill rogue vs. The ultimate skill bard
The Ultimate combat bard vs. The ultimate combat rogue
etc.
I mean, I can sit here and post all day about how vanish and invisibility trivialize stealth at most levels, how broken illusion spells are, and the superiority of + to-hit vs. sneak attack dice till I'm blue in the face, but builds make this easier.
The Rogue doesn't have the feats to be really good at all of the things she should be really good at it. Therefore, the Rogue has to pick a couple things at most to optimize. If a Bard or an Alchemist were to choose to focus on those same things the Bard/Alchemist would come out better.
I actually have been thinking recently if the Bard is just entirely too versatile and can effectively replace anyone in the roster. You could easily make an entirely functional team out of different Bard archetypes without having any big holes to fill.
3. So the bard is either having 2 less in the combat stat or -2 skill points for not having 14 int. Not to mention the temptation to pump cha with leveling bonuses. Bards having higher cha is a weakness when trying to eclipse the rogue.
Debatable weakness. That 14 Charisma gets me 2 more spells. -2 Skill Points is hardly worth 2 spells yeah?
Just a couple of notes:
1. Rogues can use Arcane Strike to its full potential by taking minor magic talent.
2. A dervish dancer bard's performance only affects the bard. Yes it will make the bard better in combat but then there is no benefit to the rest of the party.
3. Why does the bard automatically have higher CHA than a rogue? Why is this a fact that isn't up for debate?
4. Somebody else already mentioned Shadow Strike.It also looks to me that people are combining bard abilities/archetypes that don't actually go together. Maybe I'm wrong there, I didn't exactly comb through every book.
I'm not.
In this comparison we can quantifiably see how the Bard trumps the Rogue in damage while still bringing 6/9ths casting and comparable skills. If you keep Inspire Courage it's more difficult to calculate how much damage that brings to the party. It can be situationally better or worse. In a party of casters however, I'd probably say adding another caster instead of a Rogue will probably do you better. In a party with weapon attack focus like Paladin, Alchemist, Cleric, and Bard, the Bard is probably going to be a lot more valuable than a Rogue in that slot would.
1. That's fine. Still less damage in the comparison I posted.
2. Indeed, but now the Bard by himself is outputting more damage than the similarly melee focused Rogue.
3. Because Pointbuy. What is your array for the Rogue? A Bard's is usually 14 combat stat 14 con 14 Charisma for spells with 5 floating pointbuy to taste.
4. Feat taxes hm. Unfortunate. Most builds I see don't take Shadow Strike because of how nasty a feat tax it is. And generally how every feat you get needs to go towards a method of getting Sneak Attacks to be worthwhile at all in the party.
I'm not trying to start an argument or flame war here, I'm just bringing up point some people may be missing. If I think I see what Markthus is doing, you need to only be counting the things a bard CAN possibly do that a rogue CAN'T also.
1. How much damage is from things the bard only can do?
2. Granted. It just needs to be noted that the bard has become more of a solo act and less of a party buffer.
3. Rogues, given the same amount of points, can buy the same attributes. To say that a rogue can't take the same stats as a bard is a bit disingenuous.
4. Combat feat, a talent could be used to pick it up. In fact, there are two talents that could be used. Also, those talents could be used to pick-up other feats and mitigate the feat tax.
The ultimate skill rogue vs. The ultimate skill bard
The Ultimate combat bard vs. The ultimate combat rogue
Complete characters are better examples. As a PC you must do both.
Debatable weakness. That 14 Charisma gets me 2 more spells. -2 Skill Points is hardly worth 2 spells yeah?
3. So the bard is either having 2 less in the combat stat or -2 skill points for not having 14 int. Not to mention the temptation to pump cha with leveling bonuses. Bards having higher cha is a weakness when trying to eclipse the rogue.
If you are trying to eclipse the rogue those spells fall into the "and more" category which is irrelevant if you can't "do everything the rogue does".
While it may be hypocritical to bring this up, (I don't intend on doing it myself) posting builds helps these arguments progress.
Somebody make:
The ultimate skill rogue vs. The ultimate skill bard
The Ultimate combat bard vs. The ultimate combat rogue
etc.
I mean, I can sit here and post all day about how vanish and invisibility trivialize stealth at most levels, how broken illusion spells are, and the superiority of + to-hit vs. sneak attack dice till I'm blue in the face, but builds make this easier.
Pretty much this. Otherwise when the Combat Bard destorys the Rogue at combat, the Rogue support will cry "but look at how high our skill ranks are, even though you could duplicate those with spells."
And vice versa.
Ultimate Combat and Ultimate Skill builds for each class. Two classes enter. One class leaves. Let's settle this.