1. Quite often, unless the player has leapt through an enormous amount of optimization hoops.
2. I don't, but how I think of them and how they are often do not mesh. (Although I have been thinking of my rogue more that way as time goes on.)
3. Almost never, unless the player takes charge of things despite his character.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When someone else plays a rogue or monk, do you think of them as sidekicks?
When you play them, do you think of your character as one?
How often do find them as the acknowledge leaders of the party? Unacknowledged?
No.
No.
In my experience, PC parties don't tend to have singular leaders, officially or otherwise. The exceptions are too few to formulate a pattern.
Note: These questions seem loaded and subtly inflammatory to me, but perhaps that wasn't your intent; I'm still a bit irritated by last month's block of "omg rouges sux" threads that may or may not still be going on right now (hooray, Ignore). I'll keep an open mind.
When I played a fighter early on (APG came out a little after the campaign started), I wasn't even the sidekick, I was the comic relief.
The rogue in our current campaign has proved himself very useful out of combat, though I do often spend my turn getting into flank with him and making my one attack. It's kind of alright since even my second iterative rarely hits, let alone the third.
I think it comes down to the player. Having an uber-build is no substitute for good decision making (tactically and strategically) and a decent GM will tailor encounters to suit the party anyway.
When I played a fighter early on (APG came out a little after the campaign started), I wasn't even the sidekick, I was the comic relief.
The rogue in our current campaign has proved himself very useful out of combat, though I do often spend my turn getting into flank with him and making my one attack. It's kind of alright since even my second iterative rarely hits, let alone the third.
If you're bent on helping the rogue sneak attack at the cost of a move, that might be worth taking Vital Strike since it supports your model. Depends on what weapon you're using, though.
Alternately, encourage the rogue to take Gang Up and get another frontliner in there--even a cheap summon.
|
I'm playing a halfling ranger in a 3.5 game, and my Strength is meh. I feel a lot like the druid's sidekick, yeah.
1) No... because being a sidekick requires you to be aware of what's happening to you. All the monks and rogues I've seen so far had no clue how hard they were getting screwed. They just floundered about. They tended to be inexperienced players who eventually switched to a different class/new character.
2) I don't play them. Although playing a competent sidekick can be fun, in the right group.
3) Leadership (in my experience) tends to be determined by player confidence/alertness/assertiveness/personality, not by a character's brute power. Characters with good detection/investigation skills and the player skill to use them well, do tend to have more influence.
When someone else plays a rogue or monk, do you think of them as sidekicks?
When you play them, do you think of your character as one?
How often do find them as the acknowledge leaders of the party? Unacknowledged?
Sometimes
The Adventures of Arden Galazar(3.5 Warmage) was the nickname for one of our campaigns. I played a Rogue.
Never unless I'm running a 1 on 1 game.
Your secondary should be hitting at worst 10% less often than the Rogue's primary. Since by the time you have a second attack the Rogue is down 2 points of BAB and 1 point of Weapon Training. By the time you have three attacks he's down 3 or 4 points of BAB 2 points of Weapon Training another 2 points from Gloves of Dueling and 1 point for greater weapon focus. And that ignores that you should consistently have at least +1 more in your to hit stat because you aren't as MAD. So you should have around +9 or +10 to hit on the rogue which means your tertiary would hit roughly as often as his primary.
Different campaign, this time around I'm an inquisitor. I don't know what the rogue's exact numbers are, but I'm currently sporting +22/+14/+9 at level 15 with power attack, furious focus, greater magic weapon, and heroism; +4 with judgement, +2 with greater bane, +3/+5 if I have time to cast Divine Favor/Power on myself beforehand (which we usually don't).
f you're bent on helping the rogue sneak attack at the cost of a move, that might be worth taking Vital Strike since it supports your model. Depends on what weapon you're using, though.
I thought about it, but +1d6 for my heavy pick is not all that great for me.
Different campaign, this time around I'm an inquisitor. I don't know what the rogue's exact numbers are, but I'm currently sporting +22/+14/+9 at level 15 with power attack, furious focus, greater magic weapon, and heroism; +4 with judgement, +2 with greater bane, +3/+5 if I have time to cast Divine Favor/Power on myself beforehand (which we usually don't).Ah okay that makes much more sense, that being said consider a quicken rod by level 11 or so they're affordable and perfect for squeezing in a Divine Favor.
At level 11, a lesser rod of quicken would be ~43% of your wbl, so I guess we have different ideas of 'affordable'. Especially since I like to keep my ac up.
Monks and rogues having difficulty is a player thing. You can finish any published adventure with either class. Simply put most people that struggle with them either simply don't know how to play them or picked the wrong playstyle for their group. (Such as a twf rogue in a group with no flanker).