Why does the bard eclipse the rogue?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

451 to 500 of 549 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>

Alexander Augunas wrote:
Therefore, while wearing the magic item you qualify for the feat you want.

Not only that but if you weren't wearing that item you couldn't pick the feat.

The idea that what you are wearing when you happen to ding effecting your feat options is silly.


About as silly as the idea that wearing a pair of boots can make you fly in the first place, eh? ;)


Marthkus wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Therefore, while wearing the magic item you qualify for the feat you want.

Not only that but if you weren't wearing that item you couldn't pick the feat.

The idea that what you are wearing when you happen to ding effecting your feat options is silly.

I cast magic missile.


At this point we are off-topic. It has been shown that the rules allow for magic item to increase your score and therefore allow you to qualify for feats. I don't remember what let to this debate, but I think we should go back to that point and continue from there.


To be fair, the original post wasn't even deserving of a thread, considering all it takes is a quick browse through the online resources to find out that, no, there is no class that totally mimics another class in every way (Marthkus' definition of "eclipse").
And even if we weren't totally sure... It was solved on page 1 (2?).

So... I think a little "off-topic" is fine. ;)


wraithstrike wrote:
At this point we are off-topic. It has been shown that the rules allow for magic item to increase your score and therefore allow you to qualify for feats. I don't remember what let to this debate, but I think we should go back to that point and continue from there.

Oh the point was completely tangential.

Talking about whether a rogue can even put ranks into fly via a magic item.

Which I wouldn't even do as a rogue. Flying is a fairly worthless spot to be. Very hard to flank, no cover to make use of. Outside of combat the bonus from the spell and the rogues dex bonus plus taking 10 (because out of combat) means you have little need for the actual fly skill out-of-combat.


Marthkus wrote:
Which I wouldn't even do as a rogue. Flying is a fairly worthless spot to be. Very hard to flank, no cover to make use of. Outside of combat the bonus from the spell and the rogues dex bonus plus taking 10 (because out of combat) means you have little need for the actual fly skill out-of-combat.

And yet pretty much crucial after about level 10 when loads of things you will meet can and do fly all the time.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Marthkus wrote:
The idea that what you are wearing when you happen to ding effecting your feat options is silly.

It's not that, really. Think of it in these terms; you've worn an item that makes your Strength higher for so long, you are used to that level of strength and operate on that level of strength. In practical terms, if you removed the item, you'd "feel" weak (despite it being your natural Strength score).

So when it comes to what you can train in (what feat you can get), you use the Strength score that you are used to using all the time, the one modified by the magic item.


And, since this discussion was brought on because of the Fly skill, if you spend enough time using magic boots that allow you to fly, it makes sense that you'd get the hang of flying, doesn't it? (ie: Raising the skill.)


Alexander Augunas wrote:
Nathanael Love wrote:
I think Versatile performance is being overrated. . . yes, it "gives" the Bard more skill points-- but if we took it out and made performance simply a single skill where ranks in it you could do any performance it would be effectively the same and those arguments wouldn't be made. All Versatile performance really does is remove a skill point tax that existed in 3.5 where a Bard HAD to invest many of his skill points in multiple performance skills.

Some thoughts:

— Versatile Performance doesn't let you use one Perform skill in place of another; it allows you to use one Perform skill in place of other, more powerful skills. For example, Versatile Performance allows you to use Perform (sing) as a Perform skill or as either Bluff or Diplomacy. That means you're investing one rank into Perform (sing) and effectively spreading that ranks to cover two additional skills (Diplomacy and Bluff). So ultimately you net +2 skill ranks per level from this trade, or +1 skill rank if you want to count Perform (sing) as a tax. (It isn't because some performances, like countersong, rely on your Perform ranks.)

— Your argument basically reads, "Versatile Performance is overrated. It gives the bard more "skill points," but if we took out versatile performance and merged all of the Perform skills together no one would make that argument." Of course no one would make that argument: versatile performance wouldn't have been a thing and as noted above, the ability doesn't allow you to use Perform skills interchangeably; it allows you to use the selected Perform skill as an entirely different skill.

Quote:
The lack of good rogue archetypes isn't inherent to the rogue class. Until publication stops this is a problem that is very solvable, and which I expect/hope will be addressed-- either in ACG if there are any archetypes for core classes there, or in the next major rules hard cover (Ultimate Skills? just guessing a book centered on those kinds of characters/systems)
All problems...

Right, so versatile performance lets Bard invest points in Perform oratory then use that as diplomacy. . . still just reducing a tax on his skill points since perform oratory is a useless/fluff skill in basically every way except that Bard needs it to make his abilities work.

And its not as though the Bard is gaining tons of extra skill points this way-- a few extra skills overall since once he has one perform that gives a certain skill, taking another perform with one or more overlapping linked skill is useless.

For instance--

Has Act (Bluff and Disguise)-- now comedy, sing, and string are all effectively no gain investments

About the best combo it looks like he can get are Acrobatics, Bluff, Disguise, Diplomacy, Handle Animal, Intimidate, Fly, Sense Motive for four skill points, so I guess every bard needs to take exactly those performs to actually gain effective skill points.

And to clarify, I am saying that this bard is getting effectively 8 skill points for investing 4 skill points, not 12 because ranks in four performs themselves are useless. And it doesn't grow to even 8 until 16th level-- and the 5th versatile performance literally cannot gain an additional skill point.


One should be able to learn the equipment they have, be it a sword, a bow, or a magical carpet. A character learns weapons based on base attack and feats, they learn flight via the skill.


Actually it is better than that. A human bard who takes the focused study option gains three free skill focus feats. Picking three of your versatile performance skills means they all apply to your skills. Grab Oratory, Act and Dance and you are gaining those bonuses to Diplomacy, Bluff, Acrobatics, Fly, Sense Motive and Disguise. You have just gained in effect 6 feats from one option.

It gets better still. Next you pick up the Bracers of the Glib Entertainer for 7.9k. A +5 competence bonus to perform checks translates into a +5 bonus to 6 different skills. That is the equivalent of 15k worth of competence boosting magic items for half price and using only a single slot. Probably more given the main diplomacy/bluff booster is a double cost slotless ioun stone.


Why is Perform being treated as a "useless" skill?
Sure, it doesn't slay enemies, but it's basically the difference between some twit who thinks he can sing (zero ranks) and Pavarotti (max ranks). And out of those two options, which one gets more favors? Which one is invited to see the royalty/nobility? Etc. Etc.

Is Beethoven's "Perform: Keys" useless?
Is "The Bard's" (Shakespeare's) "Perform: Oratory" useless?


Yes because it is largely eclipsed by the far more useful skills of bluff and diplomacy.

Sovereign Court

davidvs wrote:
Amazing Rogue feat #2 - Mana Slight: (Prerequisite: minor magic rogue talent) The Rogue may end an ongoing spell effect by grasping its magical energies and severing their connection with its caster. The Rogue must be sharing the same map location as the caster (in the square or tumbling through it) and must succeed at a Slight of Hand skill check opposed by the caster's Concentration check.

That is pretty damn cool. Well done!

Sovereign Court

Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
AMAZING ROGUE FEAT 1: prereq trapfinding ability, trapsense, trap spotter: You gain +3 on all Perception and Disable Device checks. This bonus can stack with the bonus from Skill Focus, if applicable. The rogue also apply his trapsense bonus to all initiative checks, attack rolls made as part of an attack of opportunity, and all saving throws. Also, whenever a rogue with this feat comes within 60 feet of a trap, hazard or secret door, she receives an immediate Perception skill check to notice it. The use of Disable Device is always a standard action for you, regardless of the task or difficulty, and if you beat the DC by 5, it becomes a move action, and you figure out how it works, how to bypass it without disarming it, and you can rig a trap so her allies can bypass it as well. Finally you can disable a trap at a range of 60 feet if you can manipulate the trap in any way, whether via spell such as mage hand or telekinesis or via ranged attack against an AC equal to the DC of the trap; if you lack the a way to precisely manipulate or disable the trap via ranged attack, you can set it off via spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons and many evocation spells.

added the bolded section above.... to make it more amazing and make trapsense more relevant; now the feat builds on trapfinding, trap spotter and trapsense...

Shadow Lodge

Marthkus wrote:
How is the bard taking 10 on all of his skills by level 5?

IIRC, Lore Master at level 5 lets you take 10 on all skills you have ranks in whenever you choose. Still, the fact that Skill Mastery can be taken 2x means that Rogue and Bard are tied in yet another department, so the Bard only wins on 4 and they tie on 4.

Sovereign Court

Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
SPIDER SENSE: prereq trapfinding ability, trapsense, trap spotter: You gain +3 on all Perception and Disable Device checks. This bonus can stack with the bonus from Skill Focus, if applicable. The rogue also apply his trapsense bonus to all initiative checks, attack rolls made as part of an attack of opportunity, and all saving throws. He also gains a dodge bonus to AC equal to his trapsense bonus - this stacks with the dodge feat and other sources of dodge bonus to AC, as per the dodge AC bonus stacking rule. Also, whenever a rogue with this feat comes within 60 feet of a trap, hazard or secret door, she receives an immediate Perception skill check to notice it. The use of Disable Device is always a standard action for you, regardless of the task or difficulty, and if you beat the DC by 5, it becomes a move action, and you figure out how it works, how to bypass it without disarming it, and you can rig a trap so her allies can bypass it as well. Finally you can disable a trap at a range of 60 feet if you can manipulate the trap in any way, whether via spell such as mage hand or telekinesis or via ranged attack against an AC equal to the DC of the trap; if you lack the a way to precisely manipulate or disable the trap via ranged attack, you can set it off via spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons and many evocation spells.

Ok, I finally found a suitable name... :P

Also added the bolded section above.... to make it more amazing and make trapsense more relevant; now the feat builds on trapfinding, trap spotter and trapsense...

Shadow Lodge

Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
...
This is a tad too much for a single feat. You are getting from 1 feat a +3 on 2 different skills, a bonus that scales up to +6 on Initiative checks, AC, Saving Throws, and AoOs, better trap spotter, and ranged disable device all in 1 feat. Just getting 1 of these bonuses other than the skill thing is worth a feat. I'd say tone it down a notch, like this
Spider Sense wrote:

Spider Sense:

Prerequisites: Trapfinding, Trapsense+1, Trap Spotter Rogue Talent, character Level 3, Skill Focus Disable Device or Perception.

Benefits:You gain a bonus to initiative checks equal to your Trapsense bonus.

Special:If you are a rogue with this feat, you may apply your Trapsense bonus to Disable Device and Perception checks to find traps, and to AC against any foe you have successfully sneak attacked on your previous turn. In addition, you extend your Trapspotter rogue talent by 50%.

Any class that adds 1/2 level to Perception and Disable Device checks and can disarm magical traps counts as having Trapfinding for the purpose of this feat.

This makes the feat a half-way decent feat for anything that gets Trapsense and Pseudo-Trapfinding, being better improved initiative at higher levels, and is an amazing feat for rogues. Follow up with
Improved Spider Sense wrote:

Improved Spider Sense:

Prerequisites:Trapfinding, Trapsense+3, Sneak Attack 5d6, Trap Spotter rogue talent, Offensive Defense rogue talent

Benefit:You may apply your Trapfinding bonus to saves a number of times per day equal to 3+your dexterity or strength modifier. This choice must be made when you gain the feat and cannot be changed. In addition, you may apply any 1 rogue talent you know to sneak attack in addition to Offensive Defense.

and you have a feat tree that is great for rogues, isn't too much for one feat, and is almost rogue exclusive.


EvilPaladin wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
How is the bard taking 10 on all of his skills by level 5?
IIRC, Lore Master at level 5 lets you take 10 on all skills you have ranks in whenever you choose. Still, the fact that Skill Mastery can be taken 2x means that Rogue and Bard are tied in yet another department, so the Bard only wins on 4 and they tie on 4.

"At 5th level, the bard becomes a master of lore and can take 10 on any Knowledge skill check that he has ranks in. A bard can choose not to take 10 and can instead roll normally. In addition, once per day, the bard can take 20 on any Knowledge skill check as a standard action. He can use this ability one additional time per day for every six levels he possesses beyond 5th, to a maximum of three times per day at 17th level."

It's only on knowledge skills.

Shadow Lodge

Marthkus wrote:

"At 5th level, the bard becomes a master of lore and can take 10 on any Knowledge skill check that he has ranks in. A bard can choose not to take 10 and can instead roll normally. In addition, once per day, the bard can take 20 on any Knowledge skill check as a standard action. He can use this ability one additional time per day for every six levels he possesses beyond 5th, to a maximum of three times per day at 17th level."

It's only on knowledge skills.

Oh, I missed that. Hmm, I guess the rogue wins here, getting to take 10 on most skills 7 levels before the Bard can. Nice catch. That brings it to Rogue1, Bard4, Tie3, since the bard will have less reliable skills. Now, if you throw in cantrips like Prestidigitation, Mage Hand, and Detect Magic, that opens things, but since those weren't in my original comparison, I'll give the point to rogues.


EvilPaladin wrote:
Marthkus wrote:

"At 5th level, the bard becomes a master of lore and can take 10 on any Knowledge skill check that he has ranks in. A bard can choose not to take 10 and can instead roll normally. In addition, once per day, the bard can take 20 on any Knowledge skill check as a standard action. He can use this ability one additional time per day for every six levels he possesses beyond 5th, to a maximum of three times per day at 17th level."

It's only on knowledge skills.

Oh, I missed that. Hmm, I guess the rogue wins here, getting to take 10 on most skills 7 levels before the Bard can. Nice catch. That brings it to Rogue1, Bard4, Tie3, since the bard will have less reliable skills. Now, if you throw in cantrips like Prestidigitation, Mage Hand, and Detect Magic, that opens things, but since those weren't in my original comparison, I'll give the point to rogues.

*celebrates*

So bard doesn't completely eclipse the rogue even by that kind of comparison. Now two important questions: "Can the rogue handle encounters?" and "Is what the rogue has over the bard worth it?"

So far in RotRL the answer to the first question is yes.

The second question is honestly something I care less about. I'm one of those people that think the fighter is fine and that the barbarian and paladin is OP. I won't say bards are OP though. I don't believe that. They are well rounded and can do a lot of awesome things. Now if bards had full sneak attack, pounce, at-will greater invisibility, taking 10 on all skills at 5, then I would call them OP.


Marthkus we already know the bard does not totally eclipse the rogue. I had no idea you meant that in the most literal sense. I figured you meant can a person do better with bard than a rogue most of the time, even if the goal is to do rogish things. That could have been answered on page 1.


wraithstrike wrote:
Marthkus we already know the bard does not totally eclipse the rogue. I had no idea you meant that in the most literal sense. I figured you meant can a person do better with bard than a rogue most of the time, even if the goal is to do rogish things. That could have been answered on page 1.

Yes well I wasn't looking for that because many people on these forums are of the opinion that Spell > anything not spells, and would claim that druids are better rogues than rogues. The analyses would have just stopped at the bards spells with; "Oh the rogue can't cast spells, I guess the bard is better at everything!"


And those people would be right. At least as far as scouting goes the Druid utterly outclasses the rogue from about level 6.


andreww wrote:
And those people would be right. At least as far as scouting goes the Druid utterly outclasses the rogue from about level 6.

Case in point.


How exactly do you think that the rogue competes with someone who can fly, swim through the ground or turn into a small innocuous animal for multiple hours at a time?


andreww wrote:
How exactly do you think that the rogue competes with someone who can fly, swim through the ground or turn into a small innocuous animal for multiple hours at a time?

Stealth checks.

I don't have to worry about people wanting to eat a small animal.


So that thing that requires you to have cover or concealment, that doesn't work very well in clearly lit areas, that can be defeated with a perception check which anyone is able to make. Meanwhile few people are likely to want to eat a cute stray cat that wanders into the kitchens or notice the earth gliding small earth elemental.

At this point it seems like you have simply lost all sense of perspective.

Shadow Lodge

Marthkus wrote:
So bard doesn't completely eclipse the rogue even by that kind of comparison. Now two important questions: "Can the rogue handle encounters?" and "Is what the rogue has over the bard worth it?"

Well, the answer to #1 is most of the time, in a proper party, yes.

#2 is a bit different, and more of a matter of opinion. I say yes because Rogues have full sneak attack progression and benefits on top of it, but others aren't to crazy about the extra dice rolling.

Quote:
I won't say bards are OP though. I don't believe that. They are well rounded and can do a lot of awesome things. Now if bards had full sneak attack, pounce, at-will greater invisibility, taking 10 on all skills at 5, then I would call them OP.

I doubt anyone could call the Bard OP as written. In fact, when someone asks for an example of PF balance, my first response is bard.

Sovereign Court

EvilPaladin wrote:
...

you cleaned the Spider Sense feat very well, but you cleaned it a bit too well, IMO; you made it suitable to fit with existing Core and APG books, but I was going for over the top on purpose, in order to boost the rogue; yours is nice in the confine of existing rules, but it adds a feat tax and forces the rogue down a certain path even a little bit more (offensive defense); mine completely boosts an existing regular rogue (all I ask is trap spotter so I can mind blowingly take it from 10 feet to 60 feet LOL. I really like what you did as they are balanced to someone who finds the rogue already powerful enough compared to bards; mine is good for people who can't bring themselves to play a rogue anymore ;)

I'm still gonna steal some of your cleaning efforts though... (i.e. format and some scaling... muhahahahah! :) )

Revised version follows...

Sovereign Court

SPIDER SENSE:
Prerequisites: Trapfinding, Trapsense +1, Trap Spotter Rogue Talent.
Benefits: You gain a bonus to all initiative checks, attack rolls made as part of an attack of opportunity, a dodge bonus to AC, and all saving throws equal to your Trapsense bonus.
You gain +3 on all Perception and Disable Device checks. This bonus can stack with the bonus from Skill Focus, if applicable.
Finally, you come within 60 feet of a trap, hazard or secret door, you receive an immediate Perception skill check to notice it. The use of Disable Device is always a standard action for you, regardless of the task or difficulty, and if you beat the DC by 5, it becomes a move action, and you figure out how it works, how to bypass it without disarming it, and can rig a trap so your allies can bypass it as well. Finally you can disable a trap at a range of 60 feet if you can manipulate the trap in any way, whether via spell such as mage hand or telekinesis or via ranged attack against an AC equal to the DC of the trap (such as shooting an arrow, throwing a dagger or firing a ray spell); if you lack the way to precisely manipulate or disable the trap via ranged attack, you can set it off (which means traps that reset automatically are not disabled and will reset as per their individual description) via spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons and many evocation spells by successfully making a ranged attack to target a specific grid intersection. Treat this as a ranged attack against AC 5.


Marthkus wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Marthkus we already know the bard does not totally eclipse the rogue. I had no idea you meant that in the most literal sense. I figured you meant can a person do better with bard than a rogue most of the time, even if the goal is to do rogish things. That could have been answered on page 1.
Yes well I wasn't looking for that because many people on these forums are of the opinion that Spell > anything not spells, and would claim that druids are better rogues than rogues. The analyses would have just stopped at the bards spells with; "Oh the rogue can't cast spells, I guess the bard is better at everything!"

If you are asking can other classes do subsets of what a rogue is traditonally supposed to be doing then I agree, but I don't think a class can do everything a rogue can do all at once better than a rogue.

As an example if you build a rogue focused on X, Y, and Z. Another class can likely do X better, at least be equal in Y, and be close enough in Z that the small amount it is behind is basically a nonfactor.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

PDK,

your 'Spider Sense' raises an interesting question. By 6th level, Clever Explorer (from Archeologist) dupicates Trapfinding. Now I wonder if it qualifies as Trapfinder.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

andreww wrote:

So that thing that requires you to have cover or concealment, that doesn't work very well in clearly lit areas, that can be defeated with a perception check which anyone is able to make. Meanwhile few people are likely to want to eat a cute stray cat that wanders into the kitchens or notice the earth gliding small earth elemental.

At this point it seems like you have simply lost all sense of perspective.

You do realize that polymorph effects, including wild shape, only give a +10 to Disguise right? Just changing to a small cat gives you a -2 for different race. One could argue for the -10 size category difference as well but since the druid is actually, say, Tiny I don't think that should apply. Many druids dump charisma and few I've seen put ranks in Disguise so we're at a +8 + Cha mod(often -2) against the Perception of any passerby. Lots of people are likely to notice something odd about that cat.

Also your earth elemental never gets tremorsense so she has to pop up out of the ground to see where she is going. Ever time she surfaces to get her bearings is a chance for someone to see her so she'll need Stealth anyway.

Don't get me wrong, you can do some amazing scouting things as a druid if you build for it, but the implication that all druids are better scouts just as a side thing is false.


From the Disguise skill:

Quote:
If you don't draw any attention to yourself, others do not get to make Perception checks. If you come to the attention of people who are suspicious (such as a guard who is watching commoners walking through a city gate), it can be assumed that such observers are taking 10 on their Perception checks.

I don't think many people are particularly suspicious about cats.

As far as tremorsense goes no you don't get it but you can cast echolocation and tremor boots are only 10k. Yes the druid scout wants stealth as well and frankly stealth is a skill I suspect most druids pick up given just how well suited they are to the role.

Sovereign Court

Matthew Morris wrote:

PDK,

your 'Spider Sense' raises an interesting question. By 6th level, Clever Explorer (from Archeologist) dupicates Trapfinding. Now I wonder if it qualifies as Trapfinder.

I removed all references to rogue for that reason: if you meet the prereqs you can take it! :)

Mind you it must be the actual "Trapfinding" ability... if the archeologist has something that works like it, I would only accept it as a prereq filler if it has a line that says "this ability stacks with other classes that provide trapfinding, etc."

Reading 'Clever Explorer', I would say 'no, this is not the trapfinding ability'. It doesn't even have a level stacking rule or any insight on magical traps...


wraithstrike wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Marthkus we already know the bard does not totally eclipse the rogue. I had no idea you meant that in the most literal sense. I figured you meant can a person do better with bard than a rogue most of the time, even if the goal is to do rogish things. That could have been answered on page 1.
Yes well I wasn't looking for that because many people on these forums are of the opinion that Spell > anything not spells, and would claim that druids are better rogues than rogues. The analyses would have just stopped at the bards spells with; "Oh the rogue can't cast spells, I guess the bard is better at everything!"

If you are asking can other classes do subsets of what a rogue is traditonally supposed to be doing then I agree, but I don't think a class can do everything a rogue can do all at once better than a rogue.

As an example if you build a rogue focused on X, Y, and Z. Another class can likely do X better, at least be equal in Y, and be close enough in Z that the small amount it is behind is basically a nonfactor.

I will admit to a pretty big problem with rogues; they have to be built a certain way and have little build flexibility if you want to be useful at least in core.

For example, you pretty much have to build a bluff focused build because of the "create a diversion to hide" mechanic in stealth. Unless you are using Hellcat Stealth, but I tend to avoid non-PRD splat.

So when you say "if you build a rogue focused on X, Y, and Z" that isn't ideal, truthfully for optimize rogues X, Y, and Z aren't variables. It's more like "combat(feinting), scouting, and social encounters(bluff/disguise/diplomacy)". Two of those synergies very well, while being good at scouting still helps you in combat.

Sovereign Court

The quickest way to get "Spider Sense" is to be a rogue. It will be very hard to get all three prereqs with other classes and might require a level dip.

The only way I know one can get trapfinding is as per the following thread:

1) 1st level rogue (a bunch of archetypes give that up)
2) 3rd level urban ranger
3) 1st level trapper ranger
4) 1st level seeker oracle*
5) 1st level seeker sorcerer*
6) 1st level crypt breaker alchemist
7) The 2nd level bard/alchemist/wizard spell Aram Zey's focus (too bad the duration is only 1 minute per level)

*those two get trapfinding in everything but the name, and I am only listing them because they include the following language "If the seeker also possesses levels in rogue or another class that provides the trapfinding ability, those levels stack with his oracle or sorcerer levels for determining his overall bonus on these skill checks."


Simon Legrande wrote:

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.

Actually, no they can't.

1. Minor/major magic grants the rogue a spell-like ability. It does not allow them to cast arcane spells. A bard can take Arcane Strike, but the rogue cannot because he doesn't cast arcane spells. They can use to it qualify for Item Creation, but not Arcane Strike anymore than a Cleric, Druid, or Succubus can take Arcane Strike.

3. Bards get way more from Charisma than Rogues do. There is essentially nothing that the Rogue gets other than a handful of skills that rely on Charisma. Meanwhile, Bards get Charisma-based spellcasting, extra rounds of performance, higher save-DCs on their abilities, synergy with a variety of skills, and synergy with their versatile Performance, which allows them to use their Charisma modifier on checks such as Acrobatics, Fly, and Sense Motive.

4. Shadow strike is a feat tax that should be unnecessary but is an absolute must-have to get any use at all out of your primary class feature at higher levels (even then, you can find yourself wrecked by total concealment and/or fortification effects). The earliest you can take Shadow Strike without burning a Rogue Talent on it (but honestly you probably should since there's not many good talents) is 3rd level (2nd if you waste your combat talent rogue talent on it).

The worst part is that you're expending more resources to supplement an ability that already has problems. You must be able to flank to get sneak attack to function reliably in combat. There are many combats where a rogue either just won't deal sneak attack damage effectively, or trying to do so will result in them getting killed. When they aren't sneak attacking they might as well be twiddling their thumbs for what cruddy damage they do.

=================
Bards don't have this problem. They have 6 + Int skill points, versatile performance, and they fight better than rogues because of Inspire Courage, Arcane Strike, and spells.


Feinting isn't an end, it's a means to an end (damage). No one else cares about feinting. It either eats your whole feat load or ruins your full attack and everyone else hits better than the rogue anyways.

Having bluff is nice, of course, but feint is absolute garbage for anyone who doesn't have sneak attack and lack invisibility and that it's "good" for them is a signal of how difficult it is to make sneak attack work.

If the only working rogue is scout and social then the bard is better. The bard has the various invisibility, silence, charm, and illusion spells to reinforce his stealth and stealths as well as a rogue without them. The bard can interpret what he sees without needing to ask the wizard (and hope he describes what he saw in enough detail). The bard is at least as good a face. And in combat the bard buffs.


Atarlost wrote:

Feinting isn't an end, it's a means to an end (damage). No one else cares about feinting. It either eats your whole feat load or ruins your full attack and everyone else hits better than the rogue anyways.

Having bluff is nice, of course, but feint is absolute garbage for anyone who doesn't have sneak attack and lack invisibility and that it's "good" for them is a signal of how difficult it is to make sneak attack work.

Around mid combat a max level rogue with the right rapier(agile) is looking to do 22d6+30 damage + 10 bleed + 4 strength damage, all without flanking at +32 to-hit with one buff against "dex denied AC". If the rogue didn't have a miss chance that would be 117 damage per round and 4 strength damage. If a caster had a spell like that it would be considered OP (32% of the monsters health and 4 strength damage). The rogues 15% miss chance at this level helps balance that out. And all that from a class that people call "non-combat".

Now flanking mid combat with two buffs (haste heroism) puts our rogue at +35/35/35/30/25 doing 11d6+15 and 2 strength damage per hit with +10 bleed per round against the 36 AC on average which yields 229.35 damage and 8.2 strength damage per round. There is a reason why this is situational and why feinting is more likely to happen than this.

Sure probably not the same effect as the bard's supporting powers, but far from useless.


Ashiel wrote:
Simon Legrande wrote:

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.

Actually, no they can't.

1. Minor/major magic grants the rogue a spell-like ability. It does not allow them to cast arcane spells. A bard can take Arcane Strike, but the rogue cannot because he doesn't cast arcane spells. They can use to it qualify for Item Creation, but not Arcane Strike anymore than a Cleric, Druid, or Succubus can take Arcane Strike.

3. Bards get way more from Charisma than Rogues do. There is essentially nothing that the Rogue gets other than a handful of skills that rely on Charisma. Meanwhile, Bards get Charisma-based spellcasting, extra rounds of performance, higher save-DCs on their abilities, synergy with a variety of skills, and synergy with their versatile Performance, which allows them to use their Charisma modifier on checks such as Acrobatics, Fly, and Sense Motive.

4. Shadow strike is a feat tax that should be unnecessary but is an absolute must-have to get any use at all out of your primary class feature at higher levels (even then, you can find yourself wrecked by total concealment and/or fortification effects). The earliest you can take Shadow Strike without burning a Rogue Talent on it (but honestly you probably should since there's not many good talents) is 3rd level (2nd if you waste your combat talent rogue talent on it).

The worst part is that you're expending more resources to supplement an ability that already has...

Minor magic absolutely does qualify you for arcane strike. The prerequisite FAQ is not limited to PrC's. SKR made it a point to say that minor magic and arcane strike was nearly used as an example in that very FAQ.


Ashiel wrote:
Simon Legrande wrote:

1. Rogues can use Arcane Strike to its full potential by taking minor magic talent.

1. Minor/major magic grants the rogue a spell-like ability. It does not allow them to cast arcane spells. A bard can take Arcane Strike, but the rogue cannot because he doesn't cast arcane spells. They can use to it qualify for Item Creation, but not Arcane Strike anymore than a Cleric, Druid, or Succubus can take Arcane Strike.

Even though I don't recommend it, rogues DO qualify for arcane strike via minor magic because the SLA is an arcane spell. Even qinggong monks qualify for arcane strike if they take an arcane spell as an SLA. The FAQ on that is wonky, but that is how it works.

451 to 500 of 549 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Why does the bard eclipse the rogue? All Messageboards