| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wait.
Are you saying those that struggle with Rogues are those that are not "playing right" because they don't have extensive system mastery, and min-max the crap out of them, but straight up complain if any other build, comparing itself to the Rogue, is even min-maxed at all?
Look, love it, or hate it, there is not a single role, effect, or skill, that the Rogue can do better than anyone else.
Nothing.
Not even Sneak Attack.
I don't see many threads where (in actual play) folks "struggle" with rogues.
Of course, some level of system mastery helps every build. Heck, many call out the Wizard as the most powerful class in the game, but dayammm you can make a worthless wizard really easy. Rogues are practically foolproof in comparison.
So? Oracles can beat clerics and sorcs can beat wizards.
And, it's rather hard to build a better trapfinder.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If it was a contest about who got the most wishes, yeah, I'll put my money on the Wizard, too. Considering it's not...So put your money where your mouth is. Whip up your best Rogue build. We'll see how it matches up to a Bard. Otherwise you're just making meaningless noise.and no doubt, your Bard will get magic... ROGUES AREN'T SPELL CASTERS. Why do people keep trying to compare them? Put your best Bard up against my level 20 Wizard and his 800,000/25,000 = 32 wishes... Oh? The Bard loses? What a shocker!
Yes, it most certainly ends this exact way:
Rogue can do XYZ better than a Bard. 8+Int skills, make a specific build (as I did the other night) that a Bard can't replicate with its 6+Int (given that it only gets the bonus skills in 9 specific skills not on that build).
The result/answer - Bards just sub spells for some of the skills it can't ..... blah blah blah... "the wizard gets its 32 wishes to make up for ITS shortcomings compared to a rogue."
Then set them both in the Mana Waste and watch the Rogue kick the Bard's ass from the Western Ravage to the Sea. Hands down. Without magic, the Rogue is better. A little worse on Knowledge skills, given. But otherwise, the "Arcane Bard" has nothing on it without the magic.
|
I don't see many threads where (in actual play) folks "struggle" with rogues.
Of course, some level of system mastery helps every build. Heck, many call out the Wizard as the most powerful class in the game, but dayammm you can make a worthless wizard really easy. Rogues are practically foolproof in comparison.
So? Oracles can beat clerics and sorcs can beat wizards.
And, it's rather hard to build a better trapfinder.
I've had quite a few new players struggle with Rogues, actually. Failing just about every save often hampers someone's fun.
I'll agree, a lot of T1 classes have a LOW floor, like painfully so. The Rogue doesn't have a low a floor, but it also doesn't have nearly as high a ceiling.
And honestly, Archaeologist Bard is just as good, and gets those perception bonuses all the time. And gets magic so in case it can't disable a magic trap, it can dispel, which kind of does make it better at actually dealing with a trap once found. It can even pick up Trap Spotter to be just as good as the Rogue there, too.
So put your money where your mouth is. Whip up your best Rogue build. We'll see how it matches up to a Bard. Otherwise you're just making meaningless noise.and no doubt, your Bard will get magic... ROGUES AREN'T SPELL CASTERS. Why do people keep trying to compare them? Put your best Bard up against my level 20 Wizard and his 800,000/25,000 = 32 wishes... Oh? The Bard loses? What a shocker!
Neither are Barbarians... But we still consider them to be on par with spell-casting classes of similar role, such as Paladin and Ranger. Even combat classes with better spell casting, such as Magus and Oracle of Battle will have a hard time overshadowing Barbarians in combat.
(Not to mention the huge out-of-combat utility that Spell Sunder brings to the table!)
In fact... I'd rather have a Halfling Barbarian than a Halfling Rogue in my party!
Female Halfling Barbarian (Invulnerable Rager, Urban Barbarian) 10
CN Small humanoid (halfling)
Init +6; Senses Perception +19
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 25, touch 18, flat-footed 19 (+6 armor, +6 Dex, +1 size, +1 natural, +1 deflection)
hp 100 (10d12+30)
Fort +15, Ref +14, Will +10; +2 vs. fear, +4 morale bonus vs. spells, supernatural abilities, and spell-like abilities while raging but must resist all spells, even allies'
DR 10/lethal, 5/—; Resist fire 2, extreme endurance
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee +1 cold iron scimitar +18/+13 (1d4+7/15-20) and
. . +2 silversheen scimitar +19/+14 (1d4+8/15-20) and
. . scimitar +17/+12 (1d4+6/15-20)
Ranged +1 adaptive composite longbow +19/+14 (1d6+1/19-20/×3)
Special Attacks rage (25 rounds/day), rage powers (beast totem, beast totem, greater, beast totem, lesser, superstition +4, witch hunter)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 10, Dex 22, Con 16, Int 14, Wis 12, Cha 9
Base Atk +10; CMB +9; CMD 26
Feats Combat Reflexes, Dervish Dance, Improved Critical (scimitar), Raging Vitality, Weapon Finesse
Traits indomitable faith, suspicious
Skills Acrobatics +19, Climb +4, Diplomacy +12, Intimidate +12, Linguistics +10, Perception +19, Perform (dance) +1, Ride +10, Sense Motive +15, Stealth +20, Swim +4; Racial Modifiers +2 Perception
Languages Abyssal, Celestial, Common, Draconic, Elven, Halfling, Infernal, Sylvan, Undercommon
SQ controlled rage, crowd control
Combat Gear oil of magic weapon (2), alchemist's fire (4), holy water (2); Other Gear +2 mithral chain shirt, +1 adaptive composite longbow, +1 cold iron scimitar, +2 silversheen scimitar, scimitar, amulet of natural armor +1, belt of physical might +2 (Dex, Con), bracers of falcon's aim, cloak of resistance +4, clear spindle ioun stone, ring of protection +1, wayfinder, 1,510 gp
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Beast Totem +3 AC (Su) +3 Natural Armor while raging.
Beast Totem, Greater (Su) Pounce ability and 1d8 claw damage while raging
Beast Totem, Lesser (Su) Gain 2 d6 claw attacks while raging
Combat Reflexes (7 AoO/round) Can make extra attacks of opportunity/rd, and even when flat-footed.
Controlled Rage (Ex) May gain lesser bonus split as desired, but without normal drawbacks.
Crowd Control +5 (Ex) If 2+ foes adjacent, +1 to hit & AC. Unslowed by crowds & bonus to intimidate.
Damage Reduction (10/lethal) You have Damage Reduction against non-lethal damage
Damage Reduction (5/-) You have Damage Reduction against all attacks.
Dervish Dance Use Dex modifier instead of Str modifier with scimitar
Energy Resistance, Fire (2) You have the specified Energy Resistance against Fire attacks.
Extreme Endurance (Fire) (Ex) At 3rd level, the invulnerable rager is inured to either hot or cold climate effects (choose one) as if using endure elements. In addition, the barbarian gains 1 point of fire or cold resistance for every three levels beyond 3rd. This ability
Fearless +2 racial bonus vs Fear saves.
Ioun stone (clear spindle) Sustains bearer without food or water.
Rage (25 rounds/day) (Ex) +4 Str, +4 Con, +2 to Will saves, -2 to AC when enraged.
Raging Vitality +2 CON while raging, Rage does not end if you become unconscious.
Superstition +4 (Ex) While raging, gain bonus to save vs magic, but must resist all spells, even allies'.
Wayfinder (empty) A small magical device patterned off ancient relics of the Azlanti, a wayfinder is typically made from silver and bears gold accents. With a command word, you can use a wayfinder to shine (as the light spell). The wayfinder also acts as a nonmagical (magnetic) compass, granting you a +2 circumstance bonus on Survival checks to avoid becoming lost. All wayfinders include a small indentation designed to hold a single ioun stone.
Female Halfling Barbarian (Invulnerable Rager, Urban Barbarian) 10
CN Small humanoid (halfling)
Init +9; Senses Perception +19
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 28, touch 18, flat-footed 22 (+6 armor, +6 Dex, +1 size, +4 natural, +1 deflection)
hp 120 (10d12+50)
Fort +17, Ref +17, Will +10; +2 vs. fear, +4 morale bonus vs. spells, supernatural abilities, and spell-like abilities but must resist all spells, even allies'
DR 10/lethal, 5/—; Resist fire 2, extreme endurance
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee +1 cold iron scimitar +21/+16 (1d4+10/15-20) and
. . +2 silversheen scimitar +22/+17 (1d4+11/15-20) and
. . 2 claws +20 (1d6/×3) and
. . scimitar +20/+15 (1d4+9/15-20)
Ranged +1 adaptive composite longbow +22/+17 (1d6+1/19-20/×3)
Special Attacks pounce, rage (26 rounds/day), rage powers (beast totem, beast totem, greater, beast totem, lesser, superstition +4, witch hunter)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 10, Dex 28, Con 20, Int 14, Wis 12, Cha 9
Base Atk +10; CMB +9; CMD 29
Feats Combat Reflexes, Dervish Dance, Improved Critical (scimitar), Raging Vitality, Weapon Finesse
Traits indomitable faith, suspicious
Skills Acrobatics +22, Climb +4, Diplomacy +12, Intimidate +12, Linguistics +10, Perception +19, Perform (dance) +1, Ride +13, Sense Motive +15, Stealth +23, Swim +4; Racial Modifiers +2 Perception
Languages Abyssal, Celestial, Common, Draconic, Elven, Halfling, Infernal, Sylvan, Undercommon
SQ controlled rage, crowd control
Combat Gear oil of magic weapon (2), alchemist's fire (4), holy water (2); Other Gear +2 mithral chain shirt, +1 adaptive composite longbow, +1 cold iron scimitar, +2 silversheen scimitar, scimitar, amulet of natural armor +1, belt of physical might +2 (Dex, Con), bracers of falcon's aim, cloak of resistance +4, clear spindle ioun stone, ring of protection +1, wayfinder, 1,510 gp
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Beast Totem +3 AC (Su) +3 Natural Armor while raging.
Beast Totem, Greater (Su) Pounce ability and 1d8 claw damage while raging
Beast Totem, Lesser (Su) Gain 2 d6 claw attacks while raging
Combat Reflexes (10 AoO/round) Can make extra attacks of opportunity/rd, and even when flat-footed.
Controlled Rage (Ex) May gain lesser bonus split as desired, but without normal drawbacks.
Crowd Control +5 (Ex) If 2+ foes adjacent, +1 to hit & AC. Unslowed by crowds & bonus to intimidate.
Damage Reduction (10/lethal) You have Damage Reduction against non-lethal damage
Damage Reduction (5/-) You have Damage Reduction against all attacks.
Dervish Dance Use Dex modifier instead of Str modifier with scimitar
Energy Resistance, Fire (2) You have the specified Energy Resistance against Fire attacks.
Extreme Endurance (Fire) (Ex) At 3rd level, the invulnerable rager is inured to either hot or cold climate effects (choose one) as if using endure elements. In addition, the barbarian gains 1 point of fire or cold resistance for every three levels beyond 3rd. This ability
Fearless +2 racial bonus vs Fear saves.
Ioun stone (clear spindle) Sustains bearer without food or water.
Pounce (Ex) You can make a full attack as part of a charge.
Rage (26 rounds/day) (Ex) -4 Str, -4 Con, +2 to Will saves, -2 to AC when enraged.
Raging Vitality +2 CON while raging, Rage does not end if you become unconscious.
Superstition +4 (Ex) While raging, gain bonus to save vs magic, but must resist all spells, even allies'.
Wayfinder (empty) A small magical device patterned off ancient relics of the Azlanti, a wayfinder is typically made from silver and bears gold accents. With a command word, you can use a wayfinder to shine (as the light spell). The wayfinder also acts as a nonmagical (magnetic) compass, granting you a +2 circumstance bonus on Survival checks to avoid becoming lost. All wayfinders include a small indentation designed to hold a single ioun stone.
You mean that SLA that lasts for 10 minutes and my familiar that has the capability of applying the wand on me and requiring no action of my own?How are you getting your toad/rat/crow to activate a wand for you? I don't believe any of the base familiars are capable of activating wands, you need an improved familiar for that.
So still stuck on two set up rounds followed by a round making a single attack. Welcome to irrelevance.
Also, how much gold are you spending on that wand? And since your familiar is a separate creature, are you spending a charge to make it invisible as well?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"something like: Rogues do ok in campaigns I've played in"
yeh, BBT and Justin are just Rogue haters. In a campaign in the Mana Waste, a rogue would rule most of the other classes. Especially a dwarf or half-orc with dark vision as a racial ability coupled with any sort of additional range sniping. The reasons guns work so well there is because without magic, mundane things rule. A rogue is a mundane class. And discussing mundane vs. arcane, which is better? In an arcane setting? The arcane. Duh. In a mundane setting a 20th level wizard becomes a low hit point NPC.
Discussing classes out of context of the campaign is really pointless. And haters are gonna hate.
|
You mean that SLA that lasts for 10 minutes and my familiar that has the capability of applying the wand on me and requiring no action of my own?How are you getting your toad/rat/crow to activate a wand for you? I don't believe any of the base familiars are capable of activating wands, you need an improved familiar for that.
So still stuck on two set up rounds followed by a round making a single attack. Welcome to irrelevance.
Monkey Familiar with the Valet archetype from Animal Archive.
|
Then set them both in the Mana Waste and watch the Rogue kick the Bard's ass from the Western Ravage to the Sea. Hands down. Without magic, the Rogue is better. A little worse on Knowledge skills, given. But otherwise, the "Arcane Bard" has nothing on it without the magic.
Actually, the Rogue is worse. The Rogue is very item dependent.
Archeologist's Luck is Extraordinary, so it functions fine in the Mana Wastes, as does his use of the Arcane Strike feat. The Bard will even have better saves.
|
Yes, it most certainly ends this exact way:
Rogue can do XYZ better than a Bard. 8+Int skills, make a specific build (as I did the other night) that a Bard can't replicate with its 6+Int (given that it only gets the bonus skills in 9 specific skills not on that build).
The result/answer - Bards just sub spells for some of the skills it can't ..... blah blah blah... "the wizard gets its 32 wishes to make up for ITS shortcomings compared to a rogue."
Okay, here's the thing: The argument is not precisely that Bards can do absolutely anything better than Rogues. They can't without the use of magic. You're right about that much (though it's only a very few Rogue builds that avoid the Versatile Performance skills).
The argument is that, whatever rogue you build there is some other Class that does it better. If you avoid the skills Bards get bonuses on, you run into Urban Rangers or Trap Breaker Alchemists or Slayers or Investigators, who can do better on the skills in question via a variety of Class Features.
Then set them both in the Mana Waste and watch the Rogue kick the Bard's ass from the Western Ravage to the Sea. Hands down. Without magic, the Rogue is better. A little worse on Knowledge skills, given. But otherwise, the "Arcane Bard" has nothing on it without the magic.
If your argument requires an Anti-Magic field to work...you have a problem. Warriors are better than Wizards in an Antimagic Field...that doesn't make them a good Class.
Which, for the record, is not what the Mana Wastes are. Magic still works there just...somewhat unreliably and with side effects.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In a campaign in the Mana Waste, a rogue would rule most of the other classes.
And in a campaign anywhere else, he would be the least effective party member.
Ultra-specific scenarios don't make a good argument.
Discussing classes out of context of the campaign is really pointless. And haters are gonna hate.
No one here hates Rogues. We just don't delude ourselves into ignoring their glaring flaws.
The problem here is not even that other classes overshadow Rogues, but that least half a dozen of them can do it without even trying.
|
|
"something like: Rogues do ok in campaigns I've played in"yeh, BBT and Justin are just Rogue haters. In a campaign in the Mana Waste, a rogue would rule most of the other classes. Especially a dwarf or half-orc with dark vision as a racial ability coupled with any sort of additional range sniping. The reasons guns work so well there is because without magic, mundane things rule. A rogue is a mundane class. And discussing mundane vs. arcane, which is better? In an arcane setting? The arcane. Duh. In a mundane setting a 20th level wizard becomes a low hit point NPC.
Discussing classes out of context of the campaign is really pointless. And haters are gonna hate.
I don't hate the rogue. I hate that the rogue is the weakest class in the game. I hate that the rogue is presented as the skillful stealthy class that can spy, be charming, and stab you in the back, but are one of the worst classes at actually carrying out that role.
Just because it is possible to make a rogue that is effective with system mastery does not mean they are fine.
The arcane vs mundane question has no bearing, and is supported by SKR.
|
|
So put your money where your mouth is. Whip up your best Rogue build. We'll see how it matches up to a Bard. Otherwise you're just making meaningless noise.and no doubt, your Bard will get magic... ROGUES AREN'T SPELL CASTERS. Why do people keep trying to compare them? Put your best Bard up against my level 20 Wizard and his 800,000/25,000 = 32 wishes... Oh? The Bard loses? What a shocker!Neither are Barbarians... But we still consider them to be on par with spell-casting classes of similar role, such as Paladin and Ranger. Even combat classes with better spell casting, such as Magus and Oracle of Battle will have a hard time overshadowing Barbarians in combat.
(Not to mention the huge out-of-combat utility that Spell Sunder brings to the table!)
In fact... I'd rather have a Halfling Barbarian than a Halfling Rogue in my party!
** spoiler omitted **...
OK. So now a Rogue has to be as good as a Bard (with its magic) AND as good as all fighter classes too? Why not just promote rogues to godhood and make one class called "Rogues Fixed by Godhood Anointing." Wow. People really don't understand the role of a rogue is NOT to be one thing, do they? They are a mundane jack of all trades. They don't lose their abilities because they get hit with anti-magic shells. They don't get to be as good as fighters because they have 8+ skills that (again, don't go down in anti-magic) make up for a fighter class's 2 or 4+ skills.
And for the record; having Rage is sort of like having Ki is sort of like having a whole set of spell like abilities, even if they don't go down in magic. A rogue has ONE "spell like ability" called Sneak Attack. And it goes down in light/vision. The easiest way to "fix" a rogue is to get them greater invisibility. Problem solved. Every attack does an extra 10d6. Range them out to 130 feet (range of see invisible beaten), sniper goggles, and kill at will (original sneak attack range 30 doesn't matter since they qualify because of invisibility). Or stick them in melee with someone who doesn't have see invisible. Sorry. Lower levels of Rogues have to learn how to use Dim Light to sneak until they can cast this... (dwarf or half-orc darkvision helps the rogue against anyone who doesn't have it, for the same reason as invisibility does)
So there. With ONE mid level spell and a pair of goofy 22k goggles we have completely fixed the Rogue.
OK. So now a Rogue has to be as good as a Bard (with its magic) AND as good as all fighter classes too?
Rogues should be as good as other balanced classes. Period. It doesn't matter if they use magic or not.
Between Foxy Slicey there and an equally optimized Bard, Alchemist, Paladin or Inquisitor, I'd have a hard time choosing which character to pick, but between any of them and a Rogue, the Rogue would be staying out of the game every time.
Justin Sane:
The Balor has greater teleport, can fly, dominate monster at will, greater dispel at will to counter spell. Good luck with that.
You speak as if a Rogue would fare any better... He wouldn't.
|
|
OK. So now a Rogue has to be as good as a Bard (with its magic) AND as good as all fighter classes too?Rogues should be as good as other balanced classes. Period. It doesn't matter if they use magic or not.
Between Foxy Slicey there and an equally optimized Bard, Alchemist, Paladin or Inquisitor, I'd have a hard time choosing which character to pick, but between any of them and a Rogue, the Rogue would be staying out of the game every time.
Well, that is entirely your opinion and you are welcome to it. I'm not going to play a Bard who I have to make into the party's trap finder skill monkey rogue. I am not going to play an Alchemist... wait, how does this get compared to a Rogue? Skill monkey trap finder again? Both of these two can be better utilized other ways... and can't "detect traps" trump these guys doing this? I am not going to try to play a pure fighter (paladin) rogue... mostly because the LG yahoo nonsense gets on my and everyone else's nerves. As for the Inquisitor - they are kind of like the anti-rogue, aren't they? Again, how does this compare?
Your opinion is "they should be as good as everyone else" - My opinion "they already are." Each their own. haters gonna hate.
I don't knock Bards for not being full casters, not being full BAB fighters, not being full saves, not being ... whatever I like better than bards. But for some reason Rogues get hated on for not being everything? Just doesn't make sense to me.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You speak as if a Rogue would fare any better... He wouldn't.Justin Sane:
The Balor has greater teleport, can fly, dominate monster at will, greater dispel at will to counter spell. Good luck with that.
At least the Bard would have a better shot at saving vs the dominate. but hey, the Rogue would be able to take Slippery Mind for the ability to fail the save twice.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your opinion is "they should be as good as everyone else" - My opinion "they already are."
And the whole point of this discussion is seeing who is right about that.
haters gonna hate.
Again, no one here hates Rogues.
But for some reason Rogues get hated on for not being everything? Just doesn't make sense to me.
Rogues get criticized (not hated) because they are mechanically ineffective.
If you're going to claim we hate Rogues without even knowing any of us, just because we point out their flaws, I'm going to claim you hate Rogues because you are trying to disguise their flaws, making it so that they stay weaker than other classes.
I am not going to play an Alchemist... wait, how does this get compared to a Rogue? Skill monkey trap finder again?The arguments have been show in several rogues threads. The ignorance about things like could explain why you think the rogue is Ok.
It's always like this... When it's pointed out that several other classes can do better 80% of what a Rogue does, plus a lot of stuff the Rogues can't do at all, Rogue-defenders will act as if the remaining 20% is the only part that matters.
Or have 4500 invested into a clear spindle and a way finder.
Well fear effects and getting plane shifted to hell is really bad.
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.But an invisible Bard can do more damage than an invisible Rogue. Who cares where the damage comes from?
Me, of course. A wizard can outdamage all of them, but sometimes I don't want to play a wizard.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I HATE ROGUES SO MUCH THAT I SPEND MY TIME TRYING TO MAKE THEM MORE EFFECTIVE!!! WISHING FOR STUFF TO BE BETTER AND PUTTING EFFORT INTO IMPROVING IT IS A CLASSIC SIGN OF HATRED!
Wait... What?!
maouse, stop. they need to be ON PAR WITH THEIR PEERS (i.e. every other 3/4 BAB class not named monk) they dont need to be better than everyone, but they DO need to be mechanically functional after say, 9th level (then their low BAB-without-inbuilt-boosters really starts to hurt and their two bad saves are a death sentence)
as it stands they are not--in fact they are overshadowed in any role you try to put a rogue in due to their impersonators having access to most of the rogue's identity, similar skills (both skill points and/or ways to get around them/amplify them via their handy-dandy spellcasting), and greater utility.
a rogue can sneak up and pick a lock.
an archaeologist, cryptbreaker, etc. bard can do the same, with the same bonuses (or better), and be invisible for good measure. having detect magic on-tap all day every day means he can scan for magical traps without needing a perception check--just look for the auras.
a rogue can try and sneak attack someone with their 3/4 BAB and no accuracy boosters (meaning you'll likely miss)--oh, you're in the dark? no sneak attack. your enemy has blur? no sneak attack. is there a person or cover between you and your target? no sneak attack. period. you're now stuck doing base damage + strength (dex if you're going agile wpn+weapon finesse or dervish dance).
a bard doesn't have to worry about any of that. he can just activate bardic performance (or archaeologist's luck) and say , haste (or allegro) for some great bonuses on the turn they're closing and then smack the target for base damage + str (or dex as above) + morale/luck bonus, as well as:
-the bard has access to arcane strike due to its spellcasting
-the bard also has the accuracy to use power attack without crippling themselves (thanks to their inbuilt accuracy buffs)
-the bard also has a multitude of buffs to further increase themselves (and/or their allies as well)
you could shout 'but the rogue has UMD!' sure. he can spend money to try and break even with the bard, but the bard can do all that for free from the get-go, and stull has higher accuracy to boot.
i could go on for alchemists, investigators, slayers as well, but i hope you're getting my point.
the rogue isn't the best at anything--it's not even particularly good at anything (no moreso than someone who's invested in the same skill, or has access to spellcasting). if people want to play a 'sneaky assassin' type, they're better off playing an alchemist or slayer. if they want to play the 'dashing rogue' type, they're better off as a bard. if they want to play the 'skill/trapmonkey role', they're better off with a bard, investigator, or alchemist.
this should be the... fourth? time this has been told to you in the past few days.
if i have to prove it to you i will build identical rogue/slayer/investigator/bard/alchemist's and PROVE that the others are superior. none of this 'oh well i could just do X' shroedinger's class stuff; the same build with the same things taken at each level (where possible). at the end of each build i'll present a list of the things they have over the rogue (or that the rogue has over them should that occur), and at the VERY end i'll tally up who's got the most everything.
just pick a race and level and i'll have them done by the evening or early tomorrow if you reply late in the day. (hint: pick a race with darkvision if you dont want the rogue and alchemist to not require the feat-tax of shadowstrike)
|
|
Monkey Familiar with the Valet archetype from Animal Archive.I am not seeing anything there which would allow it to activate a wand. It is treated as having your crafting feats but that doesn't qualify you to activate anything.
You are right. I was thinking it gave spell use. The Monkey is capable of holding the wand, but isn't capable of speech to speak the command word.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hodor. Hodor hodor hodor hodor hodr. HODOR! Hodor hodor...sneak attack hodor hodor hodor. Hodor magic hodor hodor hodor. Hodor magic HODOR sneak attack.
I find the most common problem in character creation is deciding a play a class then trying to make the class fit with a concept. I'm guilty of this in particular with new classes. I find my best characters are the one were I have decided what I want my character to be then I look to the classes to see what build meets that concept.
So for example I could up with character. A seedy information broker, my character is the one people come to for information. I'm inspired by Vary's the Spider from Game of Thrones but I don't want to aristocrat and more in the shadows. With this basis I start defining what I want my character to able. He should be decent at combat as his profession requires him to defend himself but he no warrior. He should have the high presence of con man and be street smart. Quick on feet and knows when to run instead of fight. Capable of disappearing into the crowds.
With this I start looking at races, classes, archetypes, prestige class and combinations to make this concept come alive. In this case the rogue is ideal for this concept. It has the skills, the combat ability, and the rogue talents. I'd pick archetype that ditches trap finding as that's not what this concept is about. I take the half elf and swap out Adaptability for Integrated and Keen Sense for Wary. I take the Spy Archetype. I'd pick the rogue talent that help my ability to bluff, diplomacy, and intimidate. I plan for late in the Game, level 8 probably of going with the Spy Master.
|
Yeah. I never got why people think the class needs "fixing". I never played a rogue that I thought was broke because it couldn't cast magic like a bard, cleric, wizard, sorcerer, witch... etc... I never complained when someone in the group had a skill higher than mine (ahem, bard INT based skills). I never complained that I didn't hit things as often as the fighter (though, often I did because I either got us both flanking bonus or they were left flat footed for me after one attack). I just kept on playing my CHARACTER.What does saying you played your character mean for the relevance of rogues? That people who don't like to build a character and find someone who is better then them at almost everything don't play their characters? Or that they should be forced to play a class that they think is unplayable* in order to play their characters? I personally don't have these problems, but others on the messageboards, and in fact, others I have met face-to-face, have expressed these problems due to actual experience.
and no doubt, your Bard will get magic... ROGUES AREN'T SPELL CASTERS. Why do people keep trying to compare them? Put your best Bard up against my level 20 Wizard and his 800,000/25,000 = 32 wishes... Oh? The Bard loses? What a shocker!
I for one don't want Rogues to be spell casters. I want them to have an Ex ability that gives them an attack bonus. There isn't one. I'd like there to be a way that a rogue can get reliable sneak attack all day that they gain from their class[like getting Improved Feint as a free prerequisite-free feat]. I'd like them to not need to pay a feat tax or spend money to not be rendered near-useless by a first level spell. However, they can't boost their attack bonus, don't have a way to get reliable sneak attack all day, and they can be rendered near-useless by a first level spell.
I also think that they are underpowered slightly in a CRB-only game[which I have never played, but have speculated on before], and that when you add the number of books/splatbooks Paizo has released and add in the fact that the rogue gets the least Power Creep of all the classes, and the rogue becomes quite underpowered in comparison. This does not keep me from playing them, nor does it make playing them less fun. It does make me wish they had more accuracy, didn't need a feat/magic item to sneak attack creatures with concealment, and had an in-class way to successfully get a sneak attack off without needing an archetype[that gives up Uncanny Dodge, and thus makes them more prone to low-AC at the start of fights], because I have had problems with this in actual play.
And I put this in a spoiler tag because IMO this doesn't really add anything to the discussion to say that I like rogues even though I wish they were more powerful.
|
|
@Deadmanwalking:
Move the goalposts much? You posted a dervish build so I showed you a dervish that does more damage under your false pretense of bards dealing more damage than rogues when both are invisible.
I posted a link to an entire thread where this exact same discussion had happened before in the hopes you would read it and maybe decide not to do it again, actually.
The linking a build was part of what I did, but not the main point.
This was all the debate was about. Stop trying to convolute this to anything else that I never said.
Okay, so the debate is all about who does more damage. Fine.
So nice of you to choose a ranged focus too that isn't overly useful to rogues who rely on things like feinting, and flanking.
You're the one who just said this debate is all about who does more damage. Less than three sentences ago. By that premise, why are you even mentioning this?
You said follow the link which I did. It led me right to a build that was ripe with CWI. I created a build and posted. You followed up with the non CWI suggestion. I don't need to play this game with you any more. Argument made. Argument lost. Changing the goal posts is a new argument.
Actually...I've since posted a build that does more damage and won that argument.
But I think an argument involving CWI is flawed on both sides and tried to change it to a more constructive one. You were apparently not interested.
That's exactly what happened there. You said the argument. I asked you to provide evidence. You linked a build. I posted a rebuttal.
I linked a thread, and said as much. A thread in which I posted, I believe, 4 or 5 builds. The link was to the first one, so you could go through all of them, and the Rogue builds I built them in synch with. Y'know, to get an idea of how neither that build nor this argument was an isolated incident.
My post mentioned specifically that there were multiple builds in question, and asked you to look at the thread, not one post.
Should I have been clearer about that intent? Probably. I was tired and rushed and perhaps stated things less than ideally...but my intention was never "Look at this one build, it proves everything."
I don't knock Bards for not being full casters, not being full BAB fighters, not being full saves, not being ... whatever I like better than bards. But for some reason Rogues get hated on for not being everything? Just doesn't make sense to me.
Rogues aren't hated on for not doing everything, but for not doing anything. At least not as well as other classes do.
They are compared to other Classes with plenty of skills because that's the most valid comparison to make. It's not like comparing Bard to Wizard, or Barbarian, but to Ranger or Inquisitor. Classes it has a lot in common with. All three of those are fairly evenly balanced...then you compare them to Rogue and, well, Rogue isn't.
This whole thread makes me want to go play HârnMaster (where there are no classes).
With this I start looking at races, classes, archetypes, prestige class and combinations to make this concept come alive. In this case the rogue is ideal for this concept. It has the skills, the combat ability, and the rogue talents. I'd pick archetype that ditches trap finding as that's not what this concept is about. I take the half elf and swap out Adaptability for Integrated and Keen Sense for Wary. I take the Spy Archetype. I'd pick the rogue talent that help my ability to bluff, diplomacy, and intimidate. I plan for late in the Game, level 8 probably of going with the Spy Master.The difficulty with this is that the rogue is actually pretty terrible at this concept. You are trying to mix face skills with stealth and deception while at the same time have a degree of combat viability. That brings all sorts of issues:
1. First you are pretty MAD. If you want to do much in combat then you need either Strength or Dexterity. As a melee character you cannot afford to dump Constitution and given a low will save you cannot afford to dump Wisdom. You want to play the face so Charisma needs to remain decent and you actually need a lot of skill points to pull off this sort of character. I would suggest at a minimum Bluff, Diplomacy, Sense Motive, Disguise, Disable Device, Escape Artist, Knowledge: Local, Stealth, Perception and Sleight of Hand. That means using your FCB and having an Intelligence of at least 12, 14 if you also want UMD.
2. Linked to this the Rogue talents which boost social skills are generally awful. Most of them offer you the chance to roll a single skill check twice a very limited number of times per day. That is a terrible option given you are getting no more than four of them.
3. Lots of other classes will be able to meet this role far better than the Rogue because magic is simply far more versatile than mundane skill use or feats. Wizards, Seeker Sorcerers and Bards all end up with as many if not more skill points and can fill in any gaps with...
This gets at an underlying assumption that is rampant on these forums that bothers me - that magic is like toilet paper. It's cheap, disposable, and pervasive in developed areas. In my campaign, and the settings I choose (e.g. Aventyr, these days), magic is special. Except in certain unusual locations or countries, normal people don't have magic. So, that provides a certain advantage to rogues and fighters so long as they're not wielding a flaming sword. Everyone is ok with the guy running around with the pointy hat saying they're a wizard, but once they start blowing things up is when they may not be welcome - or the torches and pitchforks start coming out. Someone spectacular through mundane means has real value in such a setting. My suggestion is to create a niche for all players, no matter what they play (or how little they optimize), despite Paizo not protecting the specialty of one of their primary classes.