Some of us might not agree that they are worthless.
In particular, I happen to like fast stealth and effortless sneak. I have found both quite useful.
Hide in plain sight - I find it annoying that it is a single terrain. But some campaigns are mostly a single terrain.
Not sure if already mentioned, but there are alternatives to the multi talented option. You can access it on the PRD
Fast Stealth = Expeditious Retreat
Hide In Plain Sight = Blur
Misdirection < Glibness
Effortless Sneak < Invisibility
Using your goalposts a Bard is better at this than a Chameleon. And they have more skills by level 6 due to Versatile Performance. And they can Inspire Courage. And they know other spells than these...
So? I did say "Altho that's true, one can say that about any class. One of the strengths of PF is that every niche can be filled by several classes"
What BNW said is that the Rogue is no better than any other class that has Stealth as a class skill. This is demonstrably false.
Sure, a Bard can invest precious Known spells out of a very small portfolio and burn precious spell slots duplicating those abilities. So?
It's true that if you prefer spells (utility and variety) over sneak attack (pure damage) then yes, a Bard can indeed be a better "rogue" for many things than a rogue can. Again, so?
"Altho that's true, one can say that about any class. One of the strengths of PF is that every niche can be filled by several classes."
A Sorc or Witch can be better than a Wizard for some aspects of arcane spell casting. A Oracle or Druid better than a Cleric. A Barbarian or Ranger better than a Fighter. And so forth.
"Altho that's true, one can say that about any class. One of the strengths of PF is that every niche can be filled by several classes."
What BNW said is that the Rogue is no better than any other class that has Stealth as a class skill. This is demonstrably false.
True. Rogue can be better at slteath than some other classes. Now, I doubt they can be better at stealth than any of the Rogue replacement.
Just because I can make a sickle specialist doesn't meant it will be any good at what it is supposed to do. And like that sickle specialist a stealth rogue is just worse than a Bard, Alchemist, Sorcerer, Inquisitor, Wizard or the 3 classes from the ACG that are functional rogues.
EDIT:
I've been looking into the other classes. And this has just been a depressing job, as it seems every class does my job better than I do. No matter how I build my rogue, it feels another class is better at my core skills than I am, like I'd be a better Rogue if I weren't actually a rogue.
That sentiment is mine too, and I am trying to help someone with low system mastery in this edition avoid taking "Rogue" and "Sneak Attack" because they were awesome in previous editions and not nearly as good comparatively anymore.
Folks, I've just double-checked the original post and at no point did it say,....
Since there has been no response from the original author in 4 days, I suspect this is just a trolling launch point by someone that wanted to glitch about rogues some more.
Folks, I've just double-checked the original post and at no point did it say,
"I am too ignorant to understand how wrong I am in wanting to play a rogue. I sure hope somebody who thinks he knows better than me will try to shame me by pointing out how wrong it is to want such a thing!"
The game starts up this week now, and I'm no closer to make a decent rogue than I was a week before. The 'best' build I had was a Rogue 1/Bard 1(Dervish of dawn)/ Rogue 3/ Shadow Dancer 2 mess of a build with a BAB so low I doubt I'd hurt anything.
So he's at least willing to consider the Super Combo Fragile Magus cursed with halitosis
He's noticed that the rogue is kinda weak. He's asking "hey, am i missing something? What the hell?" and the resounding answer is "its not you, dont worry, you're right"
Give advice on playing a rogue.
We are. Play a rogue not the rogue.
|
stealth-focused magus with double halitosis or whatever, he'd say so. Give advice on playing a rogue.
LOL... "everyone within 5 ft of the magus must roll a Fort save equal to 10 + 1/2 magus level + the absolute value of the magus' negative Cha mod or be nauseated; creatures with scent can locate the magus at five times the normal range, but are subject to the effect of the double halitosis within 15 feet of the magus, not 5 feet"
@ OP,
Shaman Bond has recently written a guide for the Rogue and I urge you to go read it now. While it's not perfect, it does keep the focus on trying to find a niche that Rogue's can do best without trying to convince you to play other classes. Otherwise, I fear your thread is simply going to devolve into how other classes and archetypes can do every little thing better than the Rogue.
|
|
to the OP: if you're depressed about rogues sucking at their job, and you're a purist that is unwilling to deviate from taking a rogue to do a rogue's job, check out that thread I started a while ago.
With your DM approval some of these SHAMELESS BOOSTS can turn the tide I think... ;)
Summary of the shameless stuff created by me are as follows (but the threads has countless additional good suggestions)
rogue talents:
Selective Proprioception (Ex): By tricking her own sense of hand-eye coordination, a rogue with this ability can attack directly while invisible and not become visible.
Enforcer (Ex): Drawing on her past experience with pressure points, pain receptors and dark alleys, a rogue with this ability can inflict a nonlethal damage sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment or total concealment. If the rogue misses because of concealment or total concealment, she can reroll her miss chance percentile roll one time to see if she actually hits. This nonlethal damage can be inflicted as usual with a weapon that deals nonlethal damage (like a sap, whip, or an unarmed strike), or she can also use a weapon that deals lethal damage to deal this nonlethal damage with the usual –4 penalty.
Luck Pool (Ex): A rogue gains a pool of luck points she can use to accomplish seemingly incredible feats. The number of points in the rogue's luck pool is equal to 1/2 her rogue level + her Intelligence modifier. As long as she has at least 1 point in her luck pool, she treats any stealth skill check as if she was one size smaller. At 10th level, she treats any stealth skill check as if she was two sizes smaller.
By spending 1 point from her luck pool, a rogue can make one additional attack at her highest attack bonus, but she can do so only when making a full attack. In addition, she can spend 1 point to increase her speed by 20 feet for 1 round. Finally, a rogue can spend 1 point from her luck pool to give herself a +4 insight bonus on Disable Device and Perception checks for 1 round. Each of these powers is activated as a swift action. A rogue can also use a luck point to add a 1d6 bonus to any die or dice roll, and this choice can be made after the result of the roll is known, including the decision on how many luck points should be used. If the luck point is used to add 1d6 point to a damage roll, this damage is multiplied on a critical hit.
The luck pool is replenished each morning after 8 hours of rest or revelry, as determined by the rogue on the night before; these hours do not need to be consecutive. If the rogue possesses levels in another class that grants points to a ki pool, rogue levels stack with the levels of that class to determine the total number of luck points in the combined pool, but only one ability score modifier is added to the total. The choice of which score to use is made when the second class ability is gained, and once made, the choice is set. The rogue can now use luck points from this pool to power the abilities of every class she possesses that grants a ki pool or luck pool.
Practice Makes Perfect: A rogue that selects this talent gains no rogue talent at this level. The next time he gains a rogue talent, he gains three rogue talents instead, effectively gaining 3 rogue talents over the course of 4 levels instead of the usual 2 rogue talents. If taken before 10th level, this cannot yield future advanced rogue talents.
Feat:
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.
The OP is only using the Core handbook.
The previous poster posted lots of 3rd party material not even the d20 srd has on their website.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
True. Rogue can be better at slteath than some other classes. Now, I doubt they can be better at stealth than any of the Rogue replacement.
What BNW said is that the Rogue is no better than any other class that has Stealth as a class skill. This is demonstrably false.
How many of those are Core only?
How many have trap finding?
True. Rogue can be better at slteath than some other classes. Now, I doubt they can be better at stealth than any of the Rogue replacement.
What BNW said is that the Rogue is no better than any other class that has Stealth as a class skill. This is demonstrably false.
How many of those are Core only?
How many have trap finding?
Although the Op did mention core only, he then choose non core feats and archetypes, so other suggestion could be on the table.
B the way, I do agree that hte Op is suspicious, and until the Op appears again I would say this was more like a flamebait.
Fast Stealth = Expeditious Retreat
Hide In Plain Sight = Blur
Misdirection < Glibness
Effortless Sneak < Invisibility
Using your goalposts a Bard is better at this than a Chameleon. And they have more skills by level 6 due to Versatile Performance. And they can Inspire Courage. And they know other spells than these...
Fast Stealth = spell lvl 1
Hide in Plain Sight = spell lvl 2Misdirection =spell lvl 3
Effortless Sneak= spell lvl 2
Sure, the Bard CAN do it with spell. But it will cost him a lot to do so and he can't do it as much as a rogue per day.
But my main point was no, the Rogue stay with as much skills as the bard at level 6. With Versatile performance, he will get the equivalent of 10 skill per level.... but 2 of those skill will go in the ''oh so usefull'' perform. So he will get the exact same amount as the rogue. except that the Rogue don't have to waste time to retrain the useless skills.
|
Fast Stealth = spell lvl 1
Hide in Plain Sight = spell lvl 2
Misdirection =spell lvl 3
Effortless Sneak= spell lvl 2Sure, the Bard CAN do it with spell. But it will cost him a lot to do so and he can't do it as much as a rogue per day.
The Bard versions are better when they are used, though, and that's usually more important. And, as an aside, an Archaeologist can get any of those they want on top of Bard spells.
But my main point was no, the Rogue stay with as much skills as the bard at level 6. With Versatile performance, he will get the equivalent of 10 skill per level.... but 2 of those skill will go in the ''oh so usefull'' perform. So he will get the exact same amount as the rogue.
So by 6th he's even. By 10th he's solidly in the lead. And that's not even counting Bardic Knowledge which makes him win at all the Knowledge skills for what the rogue invests in one or two Knowledges.
except that the Rogue don't have to waste time to retrain the useless skills.
A Bard who plans ahead should be training out a grand total of maybe a couple of Ranks by that point. Oh the horror.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Bard versions are better when they are used, though, and that's usually more important. And, as an aside, an Archaeologist can get any of those they want on top of Bard spells.
And the Archeologist lose Versatile Performance and... all the Bardic Song. I don't say it's not good, it is good. But in my opinion far less effective for a group than a ''normal bard''
A Bard who plans ahead should be training out a grand total of maybe a couple of Ranks by that point. Oh the horror.
If you start a quest a lvl 1 and the DM don't give you the ''3 full day to retrain'' or the quest is Core Only, it will go up really fast. I mean: Diplomacy, Sense motive, bluff, intimidate, acrobatic are all skills that you want really high and that will get replace by a versatile...
|
And the Archeologist lose Versatile Performance and... all the Bardic Song. I don't say it's not good, it is good. But in my opinion far less effective for a group than a ''normal bard''
Unless your party already includes an Evangelist Cleric or another Bard. In that case Archaeologist gets even better. That's probably why Tark included both an Evangelist Cleric and an Archaeologist Bard in the sample party in his Forge of Combat essay. The Archaeologist Bard in that sample party fills the role originally filled by the rogue.
|
|
And the Archeologist lose Versatile Performance and... all the Bardic Song. I don't say it's not good, it is good. But in my opinion far less effective for a group than a ''normal bard''
Agreed, actually. I was just noting.
If you start a quest a lvl 1 and the DM don't give you the ''3 full day to retrain'' or the quest is Core Only, it will go up really fast. I mean: Diplomacy, Sense motive, bluff, intimidate, acrobatic are all skills that you want really high and that will get replace by a versatile...
Not really, no. Not if you plan well. At 1st you just don't put points into your 2nd level Versatile Performance and keep the other skills you're going to use Versatile Performance for at a rank or so at most. This is really pretty easy to do, all things considered. You don't need Intimidate at all, can fake Diplomacy with your Cha and ignore Sense Motive for the first level, put only a rank or so in Bluff and make do with Pageant of the Peacock between 4th and 6th (or max out Bluff and have that be the only retraining you do of more than a rank), and put only a rank in Acrobatics. And so on and so forth.
It's pretty easy for the most part.
|
|
On the acrobatics issue it really isnt a skill you are likely to bother investing anything in. Opponent CMD scales faster than your skill rank bonus. Even dex primary characters taking skill focus acrobatics and using a competence boost item often face 50%+ failure rates against a wide range of monsters when trying to tumble. Being effectively limited to half speed while doing it also makes it a generally poor option.
It's a little bit better than that, IMO. Still, it's something that's pretty easy to do without.
|
|
Folks, I've just double-checked the original post and at no point did it say,....Since there has been no response from the original author in 4 days, I suspect this is just a trolling launch point by someone that wanted to glitch about rogues some more.
My sentiments exactly. I got that feeling right from reading the opening post.
The OP talks of no experience in 3, 3.5 or PF. Yet much of what they are saying smacks of system knowledge i.e. BAB so low that the PC won't be capable in combat.
This whole thread was a grand attempt of trolling on Rogues.
This whole thread was a grand attempt of trolling on Rogues.
TC shouldn't have bothered. Rogues practically troll themselves.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So... hi there.
A bit of thread necromancy here, but I felt I should post an update to this, being the Original poster and all.
I'm not sure what happened with the internet, but I watched this thread for days and never saw a single reply. Eventually, I stopped coming back here to check the thread as it didn't seem I was getting anywhere. I came on today, looking for some new ideas for the same rogue, and found...well, this. I don't know why I never saw any of these replies, so my apologies for not answering anyone.
I'm not sure if I can answer everyone, but I'm going to answer some of this.
I'll start by saying my character is a vanilla half-elf rogue, and right now she is a level three. Her stats (a 20 point build) ended up being more min/maxed than I expected for story reasons; STR 7, DEX 19 (17, +2 with racial bonus), CON 14, INT 14, WIS 14, CHA 7. I wont' go into full details, but her background has her having only recently been freed from prison, where she is quite weak and horribly scarred from torture(minus' to STR and CHA).
Feat wise, I started off using her skill focus (half elf) to pump up her perception, and grabbed Weapon finesse at level 1. It was rough at first, but I used her level 2 rogue talent to grab combat trick to grab Dervish dance (this game allowed only one trait, and I used heirloom weapon to have scimitar proficiency). Level 3, I grabbed Combat Reflexes, and will pick up Improved Feint next level with combat trick again (the DM said this was fine, and I was not going to argue it!). I have read that it's a trap, though in this case the DM keeps dropping hints on how amazing it is, and that I should grab this ASAP. If the DM recommends it highly for his world, how bad can it turn out?
So far, she kicks a lot of butt in our game. I've taken down some of our bigger opponents so far with a well placed back stab. Her AC is 17 (wearing masterwork studded leather armor right now, no shield) and it's a little low compared to the rest (all with heavy armor and shields). I will likely have to pick up Dodge at level 5 to boost my defenses, and invest in better armor ASAP. Out of combat, I'm a talented skill monkey and find myself being the face more often than I should with a 7 CHA. Thankfully the DM takes our own IRL talking skills into account, and I've been known to fake a connection to the royal family to the king himself, so I can sell a story QUITE well.
From there, who knows? I debate a few options for her future skills, like some support (Trap Spotter and Esoteric Knowledge seem helpful, especially with all the knowledge checks we do), some ninja tricks (Vanishing trick sounds wonderful, and the possibility of smoke bombs and dark vision are tempting) or a dip into a caster class. Arcane magic is encouraged by the campaign setting, for what it is worth. I like how Magus looks on paper, with a two level dip letting me add spells like shocking grasp through my sword while I backstab... add in magical knack for +2 caster level, and that could add up nicely.
Anywho, that's where I am with the character. I'm quite happy with how she's turned out, despite my earlier panic induced worries of me doing everything wrong lol. Again, my apologies for not responding here for so long. Thank you all for your time!
Oh, forgot to address one thing in my rambling. Some people suggested I am trolling, and I cannot stress enough that is NEVER my goal. I despise internet trolls and take offense at being considered one. As the last post tried to explain, there was some bizarre internet failure where I never saw a reply for days, and eventually stopped checking. It's likely an error of some kind on my part... regardless, I never aim to 'troll' people.
As for knowledge of the systems, I have never played D&D 3.0, 3.5 or pathfinder before this game. I had played second edition for some time, and did one game of 4th edition. I had some knowledge of the system from talking to friends to reading web comics (I'm sure I'm not the only here who reads Order of the Stick and the like) but I had never played any of those systems. Knowing about a system and trying to USE that knowledge are very different. Plus, I did state in the opening post I had read up on the rules for two weeks before coming here, so yes, I had some knowledge of things in theory, but I had no actual experience.
Hopefully that clears that up.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The idea that "other classes are better rogues than rogues" is an unfortunate by-product of an every-player-for-themselves mentality. It's not a contest. The best parties are the ones that work together, rather than each member attempting solo heroics alongside each other.
Sure, an invisible bard or sorcerer is better than a rogue of the same level at sneaking around. But an invisible rogue is best of all. Rogue or Sorcerer? No! Rogue and Sorcerer.
This is just an example of course, that can be extended to any scenario where one class's abilities are "better" than another's for the same task. Try combining them, and most importantly remember that all parts of a combination don't need to originate with the same character.
you could put a few dips into fighter for some feat requirements and BAB progression, also bonus feats so you shouldn't end up behind.
just know that level 1-5 are where the Rogue is going to shine most.
|
|
First off, I'd like to note that if the character is working for you and your group, that's great don't change a thing...though you might want to be a bit wary, as Rogues tend to get comparatively less good as the party rises in level (ie: they're good at low levels but not higher ones).
The idea that "other classes are better rogues than rogues" is an unfortunate by-product of an every-player-for-themselves mentality. It's not a contest. The best parties are the ones that work together, rather than each member attempting solo heroics alongside each other.
Of course the best parties work together. But here's the thing, a Bard is infinitely better for the rest of the group than a rogue is, and most of the other possibilities are at least somewhat better as well. The Rogue tends to require support from others without providing any while the other options require less and provide more.
Sure, an invisible bard or sorcerer is better than a rogue of the same level at sneaking around. But an invisible rogue is best of all. Rogue or Sorcerer? No! Rogue and Sorcerer.
Actually, an Invisible Rogue isn't any better than an Invisible Bard at all. Both can be Dex focused and have it as a class skill. Which is sorta the problem. And since in most games, you aren't allowed two characters you do in fact have to pick one.
This is just an example of course, that can be extended to any scenario where one class's abilities are "better" than another's for the same task. Try combining them, and most importantly remember that all parts of a combination don't need to originate with the same character.
Of course not...but how is not having some of them yourself a good thing?
And they take spell slots whoever's doing them. Which is better, a character who provides additional spell slots to the party, or one who the Sorcerer needs to spend spell slots on to make effective?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
An invisible bard doesn't get sneak attack. If that's what you're going for in a character rather than the things bards do instead, an invisible rogue is, in fact, better than an invisible bard.
Whether it's a good or bad thing to make a character who depends more on support from other party members is a primarily philosophical question. There's no right or wrong answer there, only different approaches and concerns.
|
|
How do you figure?
Math. Bardic Performance + Buff Spells = More damage than Sneak Attack. Mostly because of the Bard actually getting bonuses to hit.
The Rogue might get more damage on the first hit...but they fall rapidly behind the Bard thereafter.
I could do a DPR calculation if you really want, though full builds are sorta needed for that (Power Attack is actually a good Feat for Bards but not for Rogues, for example).
Do the math for me. I wanna see these numbers you claim.
Well he does require numbers to compare against. A Strength Rogue for example abandons most pretense of the Rogue concept for damage. A dextrous rogue is more along the lines of it's heritage and falls behind fairly quickly when compared against similar dextrous characters built with other classes.
Are they Two Weapon Fighting or Single Weapon? Two handed?
Level is important too. I've already analyzed that the Rogue is fine till about after 4th level is where it drops off considerably compared to other characters. Mainly because of spell progression, but even a Trapper Ranger's Full BAB+Power Attack is considerable compared against the Rogue's Sneak Attack and 3/4ths BAB.
|
|
Do the math for me. I wanna see these numbers you claim.
Sure. Look at this thread.
Those are Archaeologist builds, and both they and the Rogues are visible, but sneak attack damage is figured in, and so the principle holds more-or-less true.
|
|
I could do a DPR calculation if you really want, though full builds are sorta needed for that (Power Attack is actually a good Feat for Bards but not for Rogues, for example).nice edit.
Indeed. Sorry it was a bit late. I linked a thread, but I'd also be perfectly content to do a Bard build if you post a Rogue one.
|
|
That's not how it works. You made a claim. Now you need to back up said claim and provide numbers.Indeed. Sorry it was a bit late. I linked a thread, but I'd also be perfectly content to do a Bard build if you post a Rogue one.I could do a DPR calculation if you really want, though full builds are sorta needed for that (Power Attack is actually a good Feat for Bards but not for Rogues, for example).nice edit.
Follow the link.
|
|
The idea that "other classes are better rogues than rogues" is an unfortunate by-product of an every-player-for-themselves mentality. It's not a contest. The best parties are the ones that work together, rather than each member attempting solo heroics alongside each other.
Sure, an invisible bard or sorcerer is better than a rogue of the same level at sneaking around. But an invisible rogue is best of all. Rogue or Sorcerer? No! Rogue and Sorcerer.
As stated, a invis Rogue is no better than an invis Bard except the Bard still has spells and performance.
Honestly, playing a Bard would be better for the team in just about every way due to how useful performance is. I mean even in combat, you can still sing while invis since they still can't see you, so you don't have to stop performing while invisible.
The "other classes are better rogues than Rogues" is due to other classes just being better at the classic niche of the Rogue. Part of that is due to Magic trumping not Magic. Part of this is due to the Rogue's class features not really supporting what the Rogue wants to do.
And as for everyone saying "The Rogue just needs to use smart tactics", that's not really exclusive to the Rogue, anyone can do that.