Thoughts on Rogues

[Khrysaor]

One of the common themes of "other classes are better rogues than rogues" is that some archetype of another class can do what rogues do only better or with other utility. Understand that those archetypes were implemented to give those classes a more rogue feel. Most non-archetype classes don't get the things a rogue gets, but some do get comparable mechanics or others can mimic things through spells.

On a different note;

So what defines a rogue....

Sneak attack, trap finding, evasion, rogue talents, trap sense, uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge, d8 hit points, one good save, 3/4 BAB, 8+INT skills.

As a class that gets no spells and should only have one good save (reflex) I personally think they got ripped off with hit die and BAB. If not to change both to d10 hit die and full BAB at least give the rogue full BAB when it uses sneak attack like the monk gets it when flurrying. As a class designed around precision damage they should also get access to all critical feats and critical mastery that has been limited to fighters.

Uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge, and sneak attack all infer the rogues place as a melee combatant. Also why they should have full BAB and d10 hit die.

Outside of combat the only rogue defined skills are going to be perception and disable device to compliment trap finding. This leaves 6+INT skills per level to give flavor to your character or to help you fill a role needed in your group. Not all rogues stealth around, perform great feats of acrobatics, pick pockets, or any other trope pasted to the rogue. This is just the flavor of your character.

Rogue talents, of which the rogue gets more than anyone and there are enough good ones to take despite the many more useless ones, also add to the flavor of the class, but there should have been a mechanic like Ki to govern the daily usage not just once per day.

All that said I still think in the current incarnation the rogue is fun to play and can be functional in a party. Functional is not optimal, but it works. With that though, the changes I would implement to increase functionality to level the field a little would be:

D10 hit die
Full BAB or BAB equal to rogue level when sneak attacking
A pool of points to put towards daily use rogue talents.

Scoundrel's Luck: starting at second level the rogue gains a pool of luck points equal to half their class level + CHA modifier. A rogue can use these points to utilize certain rogue talents. The rogue can also use these points to gain a luck bonus to any class skill equal to the rogues level for one round. Using this ability is a free action unless otherwise stated. Starting at 5th level the rogue can also gain a +1 luck bonus to saving throws vs. the next saving throw they must make. This bonus increases by +1 for every 4 levels past 5. Using this ability is an immediate action.

[Atarlost]

Taube wrote:

gnomersy wrote:

There can never be a weakest class because I'll ban hammer anyone who infringes on the weaklings roles! Sounds like some quality DMing.

Let me ask you a simple question: If I ask you to not bring any non-kosher food to my place when gaming, would you comply to my request or not?

In the same vain, if I ask you to not ruin another players fun, why should that be any different?

They're not in the same vein at all.

Denying someone pork rinds does not critically impact their ability to have fun. There are Cheetos. Limiting their pizza topping options is a bit more serious, but measured against a serious religious observance that's acceptable. There may be groups that cannot operate without alcohol, but I don't think the kosher wine restrictions apply to beer and if worst comes to worst there are kosher wines other than Manischevitz. In any case, even foodless gaming lies within the acceptable parameters of the host-guest relationship.

What you're proposing is telling a player they cannot have fun because someone has chosen to play a rogue. That does not lie within the host-guest relationship. That's like opening up a game of scrabble and then saying that one player's words cannot be built off of by other players. That's being a terrible host and a jerk.

[K177Y C47]

The rogue's biggest flaw and honestly the thing that condemned them mediocrity from the get go is how their rogue talents are handled...

EVERY SINGLE OTHER CLASS that has a mechanic similiar to "talents" (Discoveries, rage powers, arcana's, ect.) have their powers seperated out by minimum class levels. This allows the developer's to go "Oh! This is a cool ability! But it is a little too powerful to have for a 1 level dip... I know! Lets require 6 levels in this class to stop dippers!" instead of developing around a level 1 character... until level 10. I am not sure why the rogue is the only class to have a "basic" and "advanced" talent system, but it seriously stifles the ability of the developers to create anything interesting or powerful for the rogue...

[Zark]

This, so much this

K177Y C47 wrote:

The rogue's biggest flaw and honestly the thing that condemned them mediocrity from the get go is how their rogue talents are handled...

EVERY SINGLE OTHER CLASS that has a mechanic similiar to "talents" (Discoveries, rage powers, arcana's, ect.) have their powers seperated out by minimum class levels. This allows the developer's to go "Oh! This is a cool ability! But it is a little too powerful to have for a 1 level dip... I know! Lets require 6 levels in this class to stop dippers!" instead of developing around a level 1 character... until level 10. I am not sure why the rogue is the only class to have a "basic" and "advanced" talent system, but it seriously stifles the ability of the developers to create anything interesting or powerful for the rogue...

[PathlessBeth]

Well, the witch has that issue with hexes. But then, the 'normal' witch hexes remain potent at high levels, and the witch would be a strong class even with all hexes removed completely.

[K177Y C47]

137ben wrote:

Well, the witch has that issue with hexes. But then, the 'normal' witch hexes remain potent at high levels, and the witch would be a strong class even with all hexes removed completely.

Witch's hexes are a bit odd. First, they seperated ou into 3 tiers instead of 2, givign a bit more leeway in design. The biggest thing though, is that they are all Su and therefore, is "perfectly reasonable" to copy spells. Not saying this is right, but Paizo has shown that Su means a lot more than Ex...

[Arachnofiend]

You have to remember supernatural gets cancelled out in an anti-magic field while extraordinary does not.

Because of this one instance in which Ex has an advantage over Su, Paizo is obligated to ensure that all Su abilities are superior to the always-on Ex. Because, you know. Balance.

[Ashiel]

Marthkus wrote:

WBL only works when making characters. In practice PCs don't get tons of money upon level up to spend at ye local magic mart (only goes up to 16K anyways).

Wands are also not the only thing you use. Staff DCs are fairly high and have scaling caster level. Scrolls are cheap and easy to use too.

1st level wands are also relatively cheap.

If you're following the treasure value / equipment value rules for NPCs and encounters, you'll find that WBL exists at more than character creation.

[Kain Darkwind]

Giving the rogue an ability to increase their armor class rather than their BaB and HD seems to be more fitting with the concept of the agile, dodging rogue.

[Kudaku]

The potentially problematic witch hexes usually also scale with level. As an example the Flight curse is available at level 1 but doesn't actually grant the ability to Fly until level 5.

[EvilPaladin]

Kain Darkwind wrote:

Giving the rogue an ability to increase their armor class rather than their BaB and HD seems to be more fitting with the concept of the agile, dodging rogue.

I've actually been contemplating a rogue talent that gives DR as long as you're motion is uninhibited [as in, no Difficult Terrain/Slow effect/Caltrops/Underwater/etc] to represent the rogue actually dodging out of blows that do hit. That way you have the agile dodging aspect going along with the mechanic that protects you from when you do get hit[and probability dictates that you will]. That combined with this and physically, the rogue's defenses are pretty well-off[assuming you fix the accuracy problems].

[Khrysaor]

Kain Darkwind wrote:

Giving the rogue an ability to increase their armor class rather than their BaB and HD seems to be more fitting with the concept of the agile, dodging rogue.

I only suggested full BAB and HD because of things like Offensive Defense like the above poster linked. The rogue has a built in method of gaining a scaling AC bonus with a single talent. Giving a second means could cause more problems than you think it'll solve. The improved BAB creates a more likelihood of landing a sneak attack.

For a class that's main form of damage is sneak attack and having many rogue talents that modify sneak attack they need a higher BAB to successfully land them. Especially when sneak attack comes with all the other stipulations to allow them.

As for a bigger hit die; hit points are an abstraction of how much damage you can take. In reality a great sword cleaving into a person kills them. As a GM that great sword does 2d6 + STR damage and you describe it how you like, but as you level your hp goes up and you're better able to deflect blows or more easily dodge attacks. I think the DR method listed above would actually be a better method than the increased hit die though.