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.
That is not completely true. I'll have more on that later after confirming it with play time.
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".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.
That lower int Bard will equal the Rogue's skill points at level 6 and surpass them at 10. Versatile Performance is kinda silly.
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.
This is a simple discussion. You brought up counter points and I counter countered them with my own arguments.
1. A Bard is getting +6 in the form of Battle Dance, Inspire Courage and Heroism to his attack rolls and +4 damage. This is a huge accuracy boost and is worth more than the just more damage the Rogue gets situationally.
2. The Rogue is a solo act in it's entirety. A Bard has spells which encourage team play such as Heroism, Invisibility(For his less sneaky compatriots) and others.
3. A Rogue with 14 Charisma is quantifiably less effective than a Bard with 14 Charisma. I didn't say the Rogue couldn't take those stats, but that the Bard makes FAR better use of it. Pointbuy is a huge factor in determining what characters should or can't do. A Rogue gets a paltry benefit from Charisma ergo, most Rogues shouldn't invest in Charisma.
4. Combat Trick can only be taken once as does the Bonus Feat that you can take at 10th. Both of these are incredibly valuable and Marthkus and I have found the Rogue to be starving for feats to make Sneak Attack viable. I would say it's quite disingenuous to say that it is an easy thing to take.
That lower int Bard will equal the Rogue's skill points at level 6 and surpass them at 10. Versatile Performance is kinda silly.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".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.
Only if you count perform as valid ranks. Which they aren't. Each versatile performance nets you one relevant skill point. Even then not all the skill available to access are skills the rogue would want. You need equal int if you want to eclipse the rogue.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just a couple of notes:
1. Rogues can use Arcane Strike to its full potential by taking minor magic talent.
Bards get it first level and don't have to blow a feat on it.
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.
Still a better benefit than Sneak Attack, to which the same argument can be applied.
3. Why does the bard automatically have higher CHA than a rogue? Why is this a fact that isn't up for debate?
It's not that the Bard necessarily has higher CHA. It's that the Bard gets so much more out of it. The Rogue gets a skill boost - and admittedly, a boost to his most important skill, UMD. The Bard, meanwhile, by boosting his CHA not only gets more performance rounds but also raises his spell DCs and Spells-per-Day.
4. Somebody else already mentioned Shadow Strike.
You have to sacrifice a feat slot for something you should be able to do in the first place. This is a serious mark against the rogue.
EDIT: Damn! I started this at B&N and came home and missed all the responses. I got Ninja'd on all of this.
Complete characters are better examples. As a PC you must do both.The ultimate skill rogue vs. The ultimate skill bard
The Ultimate combat bard vs. The ultimate combat rogue
Oh man, I hope you're seriously not expecting people to make a 'character' here. This is about numbers -- not which class makes a better backstory. I mean, I sure do appreciate when they name builds in the DPR olympics cutesie things like "Freddie the Falchion Fighter" or "Hoshi and his Man-eating Horse" but beyond that we're detracting from the important stuff.
Oh man, I hope you're seriously not expecting people to make a 'character' here. This is about numbers -- not which class makes a better backstory. I mean, I sure do appreciate when they name builds in the DPR olympics cutesie things like "Freddie the Falchion Fighter" or "Hoshi and his Man-eating Horse" but beyond that we're detracting from the important stuff.Complete characters are better examples. As a PC you must do both.The ultimate skill rogue vs. The ultimate skill bard
The Ultimate combat bard vs. The ultimate combat rogue
Yes this thread is not for complete characters (that will be a different thread later). But comparing non-character builds is relatively worthless.
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.
This is a simple discussion. You brought up counter points and I counter countered them with my own arguments.
1. A Bard is getting +6 in the form of Battle Dance, Inspire Courage and Heroism to his attack rolls and +4 damage. This is a huge accuracy boost and is worth more than the just more damage the Rogue gets situationally.
2. The Rogue is a solo act in it's entirety. A Bard has spells which encourage team play such as Heroism, Invisibility(For his less sneaky compatriots) and others.
3. A Rogue with 14 Charisma is quantifiably less effective than a Bard with 14 Charisma. I didn't say the Rogue couldn't take those stats, but that the Bard makes FAR better use of it. Pointbuy is a huge factor in determining what characters should or can't do. A Rogue gets a paltry benefit from Charisma ergo, most Rogues shouldn't invest in Charisma.
4. Combat Trick can only be taken once as does the Bonus Feat that you can take at 10th. Both of these are incredibly valuable and Marthkus and I have found the Rogue to be starving for feats to make Sneak Attack viable. I would say it's quite disingenuous to say that it is an easy thing to take.
Good, I know some people on these boards get touchy, just wanted to clarify my position. I'm going off to do other things, just wanted to put in one more thing:
4. Rogue can take Finesse Rogue talent, Weapon Training talent, and Combat Trick all as standard talents. Plus the Rogue will get three feats over the six levels it takes to get those talents. Now, for all I know there are probably archetypes or something for the bard that will give the feats for free as well. I don't play bards so I haven't done much digging into the class.
That being said, this seems more like a back-and-forth between you and Markthus so I'll kindly leave you to it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Remember that Versatile Performance changes the necessary stat to Charisma. A bard can go heavy on strength and dump dexterity if she picks Dance early and still go crazy with the Acrobatics. The Rogue doesn't have that option.
Yes this thread is not for complete characters. But comparing non-character builds is relatively worthless.Oh man, I hope you're seriously not expecting people to make a 'character' here. This is about numbers -- not which class makes a better backstory. I mean, I sure do appreciate when they name builds in the DPR olympics cutesie things like "Freddie the Falchion Fighter" or "Hoshi and his Man-eating Horse" but beyond that we're detracting from the important stuff.Complete characters are better examples. As a PC you must do both.The ultimate skill rogue vs. The ultimate skill bard
The Ultimate combat bard vs. The ultimate combat rogue
I don't think I understand what you mean by "non-character builds". Could you please elaborate?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's the overall package. What the Rogue brings personally and to the party simply do not compare to the Bard.
1) Skills: Bards end up better. This has been covered. Rogues are okay early.
2) Personal combat: Bardsong actually buffs personal to hit. This is incredibly important to a 3/4 BAB class. The Rogue is the only class that does NOT get something to buff his ability to hit. Even the Monk gets to flurry.
Add Haste and Heroism on top of this, and the Bard will soundly thrash the rogue in DOT. Add Arcane Strike for some cheap extra damage on top of this.
Oh, and Bard damage is not reliant on sneak attacking. It's all from class, not items.
3) Uniqueness. The unique things of the Rogue used to be finding traps, skills, and sneak attack. Other classes now get all of those things, and more besides.
Bards are basically unique in what they are. They are THE best 5th wheel class in PF, able to jump into any of the five roles if designed properly.
4) Healing. The bard can HEAL. This is incredibly nice from a personal and party stand point.
5) The bard has magic and can make magic items.
6) The bard can buff the party, either with class abilities or spells.
7) The bard makes a great party face with strong social skills, and doing so dovetails with his spellcasting. Buffing Cha buffs ONLY skills for a Rogue, he gets no other benefit.
8) Two good saves, including the very, very important will save, vs Reflex save good. Sure, they get evasion and uncanny dodge, but really, how important are either of those against fort save attacks and charm spells? In 1E where you could avoid the frequent fireballs, they were great. In PF, not so much.
==Aelryinth
Just a couple of notes:
1. Rogues can use Arcane Strike to its full potential by taking minor magic talent.
Bards get it first level and don't have to blow a feat on it.
Wait, they do? What book is that in? Honestly, I didn't see that anywhere.
Remember that Versatile Performance changes the necessary stat to Charisma. A bard can go heavy on strength and dump dexterity if she picks Dance early and still go crazy with the Acrobatics. The Rogue doesn't have that option.
Which is actually a bad thing when trying to eclipse the rogue.
Wait, they do? What book is that in? Honestly, I didn't see that anywhere.Just a couple of notes:
1. Rogues can use Arcane Strike to its full potential by taking minor magic talent.
Bards get it first level and don't have to blow a feat on it.
He is referring to the Arcane Duelist archetype
Wait, they do? What book is that in? Honestly, I didn't see that anywhere.Just a couple of notes:
1. Rogues can use Arcane Strike to its full potential by taking minor magic talent.
Bards get it first level and don't have to blow a feat on it.
Folks be comparing multiple archetypes to the vanilla rogue.
The Bard has an archetype option called the Arcane Duelist which gives you Arcane Strike at 1st level for Bardic Knowledge.
Wait, they do? What book is that in? Honestly, I didn't see that anywhere.Just a couple of notes:
1. Rogues can use Arcane Strike to its full potential by taking minor magic talent.
Bards get it first level and don't have to blow a feat on it.
Folks be comparing multiple archetypes to the vanilla rogue.
The Bard has an archetype option called the Arcane Duelist which gives you Arcane Strike at 1st level for Bardic Knowledge.
Exactly, which is why we need to be comparing set things like say, ultimate combat Bard versus ultimate combat Rogue and ultimate skill Bard versus ultimate skill Rogue. We'll leave out ultimate party support Bard versus ultimate party support Rogue, because we already know who wins that round.
Exactly, which is why we need to be comparing set things like say, ultimate combat Bard versus ultimate combat Rogue and ultimate skill Bard versus ultimate skill Rogue. We'll leave out ultimate party support Bard versus ultimate party support Rogue, because we already know who wins that round.Wait, they do? What book is that in? Honestly, I didn't see that anywhere.Just a couple of notes:
1. Rogues can use Arcane Strike to its full potential by taking minor magic talent.
Bards get it first level and don't have to blow a feat on it.
Folks be comparing multiple archetypes to the vanilla rogue.
The Bard has an archetype option called the Arcane Duelist which gives you Arcane Strike at 1st level for Bardic Knowledge.
Well, I'd say Bards will make far better full combat focused characters than Rogues do. Dervish Dancer is pretty epic.
Skill wise, the Bard gets a scaling benefit from Versatile performance and has the added utility of Inspire Competence to make his other party members better at their skills as well. Heroism grants a +2 to all skill checks which is also really good for a skillful character.
So he simply has more to offer than just skill points compared to the Rogue.
2/3 casting > Rogue talentsIt's worth a mention that while rogue talents are generally terrible, they can take Combat Trick (ala a combat feat) in place of them.
More feats are potentially <= 2/3 casting in certain (but not all) cases.
You can only take it once or twice if you take the Swashbuckler archetype.
|
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.
Are you really saying that comparing two classes built for the same purpose and seeing how they perform isn't a good gauge for how the classes perform compared to each other?
....You don't really want an answer do you?
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.
Are you really saying that comparing two classes built for the same purpose and seeing how they perform isn't a good gauge for how the classes perform compared to each other?
....
You don't really want an answer do you?
You missed the point entirely.
But to be fair I misunderstood what you where saying.
When you said, "have a third party build" I took that to mean they would also build the rogue(s) and bard(s).
Exactly, which is why we need to be comparing set things like say, ultimate combat Bard versus ultimate combat Rogue and ultimate skill Bard versus ultimate skill Rogue. We'll leave out ultimate party support Bard versus ultimate party support Rogue, because we already know who wins that round.Wait, they do? What book is that in? Honestly, I didn't see that anywhere.Just a couple of notes:
1. Rogues can use Arcane Strike to its full potential by taking minor magic talent.
Bards get it first level and don't have to blow a feat on it.
Folks be comparing multiple archetypes to the vanilla rogue.
The Bard has an archetype option called the Arcane Duelist which gives you Arcane Strike at 1st level for Bardic Knowledge.
Well, I'd say Bards will make far better full combat focused characters than Rogues do. Dervish Dancer is pretty epic.
Skill wise, the Bard gets a scaling benefit from Versatile performance and has the added utility of Inspire Competence to make his other party members better at their skills as well. Heroism grants a +2 to all skill checks which is also really good for a skillful character.
So he simply has more to offer than just skill points compared to the Rogue.
Seriously though. Complete characters should be compared. I have no idea what lop-sided-never-would-actually-play-this builds would actually prove.
Not that I am particularly interested in proof at this moment. I started this thread to refresh me on why people thought the bard eclipsed the rogue.
|
|
Oh, no, I'm saying have one guy build the encounters and a "default" party. Then let someone on the Rogue side and someone on the bard side present their best build(s) using the same standards and see how they stack up. It's going to give you the best gauge for comparison. It's also one of the tests used in building new classes and material.
Oh, no, I'm saying have one guy build the encounters and a "default" party. Then let someone on the Rogue side and someone on the bard side present their best build(s) using the same standards and see how they stack up. It's going to give you the best gauge for comparison. It's also one of the tests used in building new classes and material.
Something like that though is unneeded to decide whether a class can mechanically eclipse the rogue. You either can or you can't.
An analyse on which class is better not what I am looking for. If the bard cannot mechanically eclipse the rogue then there is room for an argument.
From what I see here, there is a possibility. I like to construct an argument based on that margin for the rogue that amounts to more than the standard defense of, "learn2RPnoobs! Rogue ROCKS!" or "I had fun with it, so it's fine".
Oh, no, I'm saying have one guy build the encounters and a "default" party. Then let someone on the Rogue side and someone on the bard side present their best build(s) using the same standards and see how they stack up. It's going to give you the best gauge for comparison. It's also one of the tests used in building new classes and material.Something like that though is unneeded to decide whether a class can mechanically eclipse the rogue. You either can or you can't.
An analyse on which class is better not what I am looking for. If the bard cannot mechanically eclipse the rogue then there is room for an argument.
From what I see here, there is a possibility. I like to construct an argument based on that margin for the rogue that amounts to more than the standard defense of, "learn2RPnoobs! Rogue ROCKS!" or "I had fun with it, so it's fine".
I'd be really interested in hearing your results when you get them. Hopefully we're missing something simple or maybe theres a hidden gem of an option out there and it won't take build gymnastics to get there.
|
|
Umm... What on Earth does "eclipse" mean if it doesn't mean that the one class is better at doing what the other class does?
You're using this nebulous term that lacks any good definition or meaning to anyone but you.
What specifically, are you trying to establish? What are the parameters necessary to establish that a class has been "eclipsed"?
If it's not based on how the class performs in the situations it's supposed to handle compared to the other class being discussed, than what is it based on?
Umm... What on Earth does "eclipse" mean if it doesn't mean that the one class is better at doing what the other class does?
You're using this nebulous term that lacks any good definition or meaning to anyone but you.What specifically, are you trying to establish? What are the parameters necessary to establish that a class has been "eclipsed"?
If it's not based on how the class performs in the situations it's supposed to handle compared to the other class being discussed, than what is it based on?
The clearest example if comparing the fighter to the warrior.
Obviously some leeway will be given to the eclipser to compensate for the fact that the rogue is technically a "PC class".
Regardless it's the first step to building a positive case for the rogue. If the rogue can be mechanically eclipsed in such a way, then there is no room to argue for the rogue.
it won't take build gymnastics to get there.
I can't make many promises there. Just an assurance of my phobia to most non-CRB material.
From a game mechanic point of view the rogue is way behind the archeologist bard. They both have very similar in a lot of respects. Same base attack bonus, HP, and armor use. Same weapon proficiencies except the rogue is proficient in hand crossbow, while the bard gains long sword and whip. The bard has two good saves to the rogue’s one. So far the bard is slightly ahead.
Skills the rogue seems to have the edge, but not really. Yes the rogue gets 8 skill points to the bards 6 and that seems to be an advantage, but not really. The archeologist gets a straight bonus to perception where the rogue only gets it to find traps. This makes means the archeologist can have equivalent perception to a character 1.5 times his level. Most rouge’s will have a good knowledge local so the bards bonus to all knowledge skills does have some bearing. At this point they are about even at least until 10th level. At 10th level jack of all trades kicks in and allows the bard to make any skill roll untrained.
Next up is rogue talents. True a rogue gets more talents and gets them earlier than an archeologist. There are some good rogue talents, but for the most part they are pretty weak so the advantage is not that much. If the archeologist really wants a talent he can spend a feat on extra rogue talents. What the archeologist gets instead is luck. Luck is the rarest bonus in the game which means it stack with almost everything. A bonus on all your attacks, saves and skills more than makes up for getting less rogue talents. With the trait Fates Favored and the feat Lingering performance this becomes a major bonus. Either playing a race with a bonus to the number of rounds of performance as a favored class bonus, or the feat extra performance means you will probably have more rounds of luck than you need.
So at this point the only thing the rogue has that the bard does not is sneak attack. The bards answer to this is spells. At 1st level a rogue gets +1d6 when he can manage to get a sneak attack. The bard can have spells like charm person, sleep, and hideous laughter instead. At 4th level the rogue is now doing +2d6 sneak attack. The bard on the other hand is casting spells like blindness, hold person, or invisibility. At 7th level the rogue is up to 3d6 sneak attack. The bard at this point has spells like charm monster, fear and thundering drums. This is also not taking into account the bards utility spells. For example bards have access to heroism as a second level spell. This is a spell that gives a +2 bonus to all attacks, saves, and skill that last 10 minutes per level.
The finial advantage of the archeologist bard is synergy. Many of the archeologist abilities can be combined with his spells to get truly obscene. Consider a 12th level archeologist activating his luck while he has heroism active. That is +6 on all attacks, saves, and skills.
@Mysterious Stranger
You have a lot of problems there. I'll just name a few.
1) Archaeologist will not have equal int to the rogue. This furthers the divide to significant levels when it comes to skill points. Assumptions about a rogue with knowledge(local) is quite the leap. Since it is a skill almost completely encompassed by diplomacy's gather information feature.
2) The assumption of offensive spellcasting means a focus on Cha, which is either hurting the skill point situation more, or is cutting into the bards combat stat.
3) Favored class bonuses not going to skill point furthers the divide even more (we're up to 5+ per level). (and yes, I do not advocate favored class bonus HP for the rogue, but more on that later).
4) Not having sneak attack OR inspire courage is rather damning. Inspire courage may not be great for personal damage, but it's supporting factor can't be ignored.
5) Rogue talents without sneak attack are rather worthless to have. For the rogue things like skillmastery, fast stealth, and the like are both in combat and out of combat tools because of sneak attack. Not to mention most of the real gems like Bleeding attack, opportunist, crippling strike, are only useful with sneak attack. Removing those from the list causes the archaeologist to have trouble finding useful options to fill even his delayed progression.
Spell casting does a lot of heavy lifting for the archetype, but on the whole it is not a rogue replace-er (but to say that requires a positive argument for the rogue which I am still working on, we can at least say that the class comes no where close to mechanically eclipsing the rogue. A base bard is closer).
Remember that Versatile Performance changes the necessary stat to Charisma. A bard can go heavy on strength and dump dexterity if she picks Dance early and still go crazy with the Acrobatics. The Rogue doesn't have that option.Which is actually a bad thing when trying to eclipse the rogue.
How so? A Bard has every reason to pump Charisma between spells and versatile performance; it makes the talky stat useful in other situations.
The Rogue doesn't have that. The only reason the Rogue should pump charisma is because the Rogue is supposed to pump charisma. Outside of a spattering of Rogue talents the Rogue doesn't get anything to aid in diplomacy and, more importantly, it doesn't do anything to make Charisma relevant elsewhere. You have to sacrifice combat ability if you want to be more social. The Bard doesn't have to make that choice.
Remember that Versatile Performance changes the necessary stat to Charisma. A bard can go heavy on strength and dump dexterity if she picks Dance early and still go crazy with the Acrobatics. The Rogue doesn't have that option.Which is actually a bad thing when trying to eclipse the rogue.How so? A Bard has every reason to pump Charisma between spells and versatile performance; it makes the talky stat useful in other situations.
The Rogue doesn't have that. The only reason the Rogue should pump charisma is because the Rogue is supposed to pump charisma. Outside of a spattering of Rogue talents the Rogue doesn't get anything to aid in diplomacy and, more importantly, it doesn't do anything to make Charisma relevant elsewhere. You have to sacrifice combat ability if you want to be more social. The Bard doesn't have to make that choice.
The need for Cha causes the bard to be MAD if they want to eclipse the rogue because they need to have equal int. So that means the bard will take their hit to DEX or they will have to dump stat other areas (like wis or str).
Here's how I see the two arrays working out before race mods.
str dex con int wis cha
rogue:
10 16 14 14 10 10
bard:
10 15 14 14 8 14
I figure the bard might as well take the hit to their wisdom, since they have a natural advantage with those saves.
Bard +pagent of the peacock= 16 skillpoints per level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bard +pagent of the peacock= 16 skillpoints per level.
I'll only except that if they have versatile performance(acting)
Rogue is a better class to dip one level in than bard IMHO.
Do you have a rogue build that cannot be matched or eclipsed by a bard?
I'd really be interested (and impressed actually) to see one.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do you have a rogue build that cannot be matched or eclipsed by a bard?
I'd really be interested (and impressed actually) to see one.
I think I do, but I am going to play with it for awhile and then make a very long post showing all the particulars.
Even though there are campaign particulars, I've learned after spending enough time on the forums that what you try to claim should have some basis in actual play.
Rogue is a better class to dip one level in than bard IMHO.
What does one level of Rogue give you that is better than Arcane Strike and Enlarge Person?
Actually I don’t see that the archeologist will have any less INT than the rogue. When I build an archeologist INT is an important stat. Also using your favored class bonus for extra performance means I actually can have more archeologist luck, which only adds to the skills. When I use favored class bonus for increased skills I get +1 on a single skill that is it. With extra rounds of performance I can get a +5 on all attacks, saves and all skills for 60 rounds. Add Greater heroism and that is +9, and can use any skill untrained. Now admittedly this is at 20th level. Also gather information takes time so you may not be able to use it.
I will concede that focusing on offensive spells is probably a mistake for an archeologist. But they have a lot of spells that can bypass the need for combat altogether. An archeologist with the right spells can be nearly undetectable and can bypass all but the toughest security systems. How is the rogue going to match someone who is can teleport, become invisible, assume gaseous form, and ignore more divinations spells? At this point the rogue can no longer compete.
Dance of a Hundred cuts can give you a +5 to hit, damage and AC. Dance of a Thousand cuts gives you all that plus the benefits of haste. Both of these spells stack with archeologist luck. So that is +10 to hit and damage, +5 AC and an extra attack. Add in greater invisibility for an additional +2 to hit and ignoring the enemy’s dexterity bonus. So I end up with a no other bonus is +27/+27/+22/+17 to hit and +10 to damage. Use Dervish dance for Dexterity to hit and damage with a keen scimitar and you will do a lot more damage than a rogue.
As to the rogue talents archeologist already get the equivalent of fast disarm and quick disable for free so has even less need of rogue talents.
Another area the bard has a major advantage on is using magic items. As a spell caster with a pretty diverse spell list I can use wands and scrolls to further supplement my abilities. A bard can use wands of cure light wounds with no chance of failure. A rogue doing the same thing requires significant investment in UMD. Speaking of UMD this is one way an archeologist bard can also gain a significant advantage. You have already stated the rogue does not need, nor should put much into CHA. A bard on the other had will which means he will have a higher UMD. This opens up not only bard spells, but spells from other classes.
Let's see... A solo Rogue is much weaker than a solo Bard, since he can't reliably use SA without a flank partner and still have to deal with his horrible saves. The Bard, OTOH, can still count on Bardic Performance and spells.
In a party, Sneak Attack simply can't compare with a Bard casting Haste and activating his Bardic Performance to boost all his allies. Not to mention other options such as using Dimension Door to allow the Fighter to full attack the enemy, use Liberating Command to free a grappled ally, cast Silence so the enemy spell caster can't cast, etc.
But it's not just Bards... Inquisitor, Alchemist, Ranger, Magus and every single full caster in the game also obsolete Rogues. Hell, even a few Barbarian builds can overshadow Rogues, because Rogues are just that bad.
Let's see... A solo Rogue is much weaker than a solo Bard, since he can't reliably use SA without a flank partner
It's really funny that you said this RIGHT AFTER someone posted a feint build.
12th level is not a good comparison point. The higher level we go, the larger the disparity will be.
1. Bards come full stride into 4th level spells and Inspire Courage continues to be incredible.
2. Gold solves all problems so the higher level you are, the more likely you've been able to system mastery your problems away through clever purchases.
3. Your ability to gain sneak attacks is completely dependent on your cloak. You also have 2 feats that function only if you have that cloak already. An item you shouldn't have till 12th level. And this is only if you haven't purchased any other protective items. The wealth guidelines state that you should only have 25% of your wealth in armor/protective gear.
4. To top it off, I'll also say that you have no ranged option and nothing to do should an enemy be beyond your reach.
/critique
Adding to that, feinting can be shaky with low-intelligence creatures and doesn't work at all if your target is mindless. You could also come up against enemies that are not susceptible to precision damage, like elementals.
Let's see... A solo Rogue is much weaker than a solo Bard, since he can't reliably use SA without a flank partnerIt's really funny that you said this RIGHT AFTER someone posted a feint build.
You mean the one who can't reliably feint without a flanking buddy before he can afford a Cloak of Displacement?