|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All this is true except the word "objective". Marthkus showed a much better Rogue build. Your comparo was clearly biased.
Possibly so. That's why my offer is for a Rogue advocate to make one rather than making one myself.
And, so? There are Oracle builds that beat a Cleric at buffing and healing. Is the Cleric now obsolete? There are Sorc builds that are better at blasting than the wizard, and so forth.
They don't generally do everything the build does better. I can make builds that do in fact do that with basically any Rogue build.
The point is, do I want a "foppish minstrel who relies upon magic to do everything" or a "clever, dashing, sneak thief who can go all day and is self reliant"?
I can make that second one as any one of a number of classes.
It's a ROLEplaying game, not a NUMBERplaying game.
True. Which is why there's little reason to play a Rogue, since you can play other classes in the same role, with better numbers.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And, so? There are Oracle builds that beat a Cleric at buffing and healing. Is the Cleric now obsolete? There are Sorc builds that are better at blasting than the wizard, and so forth.
There's a pretty big difference between comparing full casters because they tend to be useful in so many ways and that's a pretty niche oracle build requiring a specific race/class/mystery combo. Meanwhile, a lot of builds for rogue are pretty subpar and TWF feels like a trap because it drops your hit to low. Rogue is literally subpar at his job and several others compared to others and he doesn't have much if anything to fall back on.
The point is, do I want a "foppish minstrel who relies upon magic to do everything" or a "clever, dashing, sneak thief who can go all day and is self reliant"?
Ironically the self reliant thief isn't very self reliant. More importantly, that's something everyone wants a choice between, and it sucks if one option is objectively inferior. A bard without his magic still comes up on skill points. Even if you only exclude spells, he's got far more skill points and performance is pretty nifty for dozens of things. That's pretty damning.
It's a ROLEplaying game, not a NUMBERplaying game
Its a roleplaying game with numbers it it. This isn't about some roleplayer vs rollplayer argument. If you want to throw that in, then I should tell you something really important to remember. People who want the rogue to do well are people who want to play the rogue. People who complain aren't just complaining, they want things fixed. The fact that he sucks, is a problem! You can't just pretend there aren't any mechanics attached to this game and use 'roleplaying' as an excuse. People want things to be mechanically effective and live up to their concept. The fact the rogue sucks in combat, isn't the best at skills, and his rogue talents are boring and subpar, is a pretty big problem if you want to play a rogue or have fun. I don't what its labeled, because I look at the content of the class to decide if I would have fun playing it. I can play a barbarian, a slayer, or a fighter, and say I'm a rogue. I can roleplay a rogue just fine. The fact the rogue sucks, gets in the way of me playing the rogue concept, with a rogue.
Actually that's Marthkus' logic. BNW is pointing out the flaws in your "I can use UMD argument." which... you yourself evidently don't believe. So... that's interesting to note.You can cast one cantrip once per day, using spell like rules(sorcerer-esque). Okay? Not quiet the same thing.It's the same as a Commoner who can burn all his resources to be almost as good as a Rogue is one, count 'em ONE of the rogues many, many talents and skills.
The Wizard can use magic, the Commoner can use magic. They are thus equal by BNW's logic.
Did I ever say that? Is calling UMD useful the same thing as saying it's as good as a wizard?
Now a rogue with Bruce Wayne money could be as good as a wizard.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And, so? There are Oracle builds that beat a Cleric at buffing and healing. Is the Cleric now obsolete? There are Sorc builds that are better at blasting than the wizard, and so forth.
The point is, do I want a "foppish minstrel who relies upon magic to do everything" or a "clever, dashing, sneak thief who can go all day and is self reliant"?
It's a ROLEplaying game, not a NUMBERplaying game.
The Cleric isn't obsolete because healing is only one thing it can do, and it's such an old school opinion to judge Clerics by their ability to heal. You want to check true versatility, look at a Cleric's spell list. A Cleric could never heal anyone and still be a strong party member due to party buffs and such.
And as for your second point, do you not alter your flavor from the book at all? Are all Clerics pious and wear clerical vestments? All Rangers are living along the edges of society with a wolf animal companion? All Barbarians Conan the Barbarian?
It's a roleplaying GAME not a roleplaying EXERCISE IN CLASSIC FANTASY TROPES.
It's made to have fun, and I can make a Bard as a general with Perform Oratory, leading troops with inspiring speeches and aiding their allies with magical assistance. Not every Bard has to be a fop, I don't know why people have this belief that they do.
|
For the non-archetyped bard comparison, I had literally played that rogue before. So I knew everything that it had for it. So I used it with a bard comparsion of what I would do to make a Bard that tried to be definitively better than that rogue. I do admit that Marthkus's rogue build is objectively better than mine, and in fact, did a rough adjustment in this post. The archaeologist one I used his build, and did my best to make a character who would match it. Aside from what you might think, I actually had hoped both times the rogue would come out, so yes maybe I was biased. Towards the rogue. Who lost.Well, since you seem interesting, a little while back I did a direct, objective comparison of a non-archetyped bard and non-archetyped rogue, side by side, and a side by side direct objective comparison of an archaeologist bard and a non-archetyped rogue, and found that while the rogue may not be totally eclipsed by the Bard/Archaeologist in every possible way, they still are inferior in almost every way, and only won out in one incredibly small...All this is true except the word "objective". Marthkus showed a much better Rogue build. Your comparo was clearly biased.
And, so? There are Oracle builds that beat a Cleric at buffing and healing. Is the Cleric now obsolete? There are Sorc builds that are better at blasting than the wizard, and so forth.
The point is, do I want a "foppish minstrel who relies upon magic to do everything" or a "clever, dashing, sneak thief who can go all day and is self reliant"?
It's a ROLEplaying game, not a NUMBERplaying game.
1:Yes, there are Oracles that heal better than clerics, but the oracle builds can't do everything a cleric can and more, nor can they come as close as a lot of classes can come close to the rogue when they try. Same with Wizards and Sorcerers.
2:Or maybe I want a "Clever, dashing, stealthy con artist who can also double as a badass cat burglar and can charm reality into doing his bidding", or a "Foppish Minstrel without magical powers who can use a variety of magical items", or any other number of things that can fit with a roguish bard or bardic rogue, or roguish rogue or bardic bard for that matter. You can flavor a lot of things as a lot of things. Also, I personally have never seen a bard higher than 2nd level ever run out of spells, or performance rounds for that matter. Including in some adventuring days that had many fights and lasted from dawn to dusk in-game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually,Marthkus & Scavion, I didn't even include you in my mental list of "constant rogue complainers'.
*Returns to the depths of the ocean*
I just got out of the "We need to post less aggressively thread." Which is true and it'd be helpful if we could cut back on using absolutes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually that's Marthkus' logic. BNW is pointing out the flaws in your "I can use UMD argument." which... you yourself evidently don't believe. So... that's interesting to note.You can cast one cantrip once per day, using spell like rules(sorcerer-esque). Okay? Not quiet the same thing.It's the same as a Commoner who can burn all his resources to be almost as good as a Rogue is one, count 'em ONE of the rogues many, many talents and skills.
The Wizard can use magic, the Commoner can use magic. They are thus equal by BNW's logic.
Did I ever say that? Is calling UMD useful the same thing as saying it's as good as a wizard?
Now a rogue with Bruce Wayne money could be as good as a wizard.
Then please kindly stop using the Rogue's ability to use UMD to get X when defending the class. UMD is something any class can do and while yes Rogues get Skill Mastery (in 3.5 I'd rule it works since Warlock uses the same language as Rogues, in PF I would probably not because UMD has its own reason for not being able to take 10 on it that Skill mastery doesn't cover), since that doesn't even occur until level 10 they are not especially good even at UMD.
Then please kindly stop using the Rogue's ability to use UMD to get X when defending the class. UMD is something any class can do and while yes Rogues get Skill Mastery (in 3.5 I'd rule it works since Warlock uses the same language as Rogues, in PF I would probably not because UMD has its own reason for not being able to take 10 on it that Skill mastery doesn't cover), since that doesn't even occur until level 10 they are not especially good even at UMD.
Psst: The wording for UMD is not different from 3.5. At least not in the parts you are referring too.
And no, I won't ignore unique things the rogue can do (taking 10 on UMD) when comparing it to other classes. That would be a dishonest comparison.
Then please kindly stop using the Rogue's ability to use UMD to get X when defending the class. UMD is something any class can do and while yes Rogues get Skill Mastery (in 3.5 I'd rule it works since Warlock uses the same language as Rogues, in PF I would probably not because UMD has its own reason for not being able to take 10 on it that Skill mastery doesn't cover), since that doesn't even occur until level 10 they are not especially good even at UMD.Psst: The wording for UMD is not different from 3.5. At least not in the parts you are referring too.
And no, I won't ignore unique things the rogue can do (taking 10 on UMD) when comparing it to other classes. That would be a dishonest comparison.
Eh I'm inclined to disagree not on 3.5 vs PF because I don't care to try to look up the 3.5 rules.
But Skill mastery explicitly calls out stress and distress as the things it negates and UMD flat out states it cannot be taken 10 on. A generous reading of the rules might allow you to do it but it's definitely a gray area.
Skill mastery's wording also did not change from 3.5.
My GM sees no grey area. When I asked him why he responded with, "I read the ability." even after pointing out and explaining the supposed counter arguments.
It's not a grey area. It's an area some people get confused about. The staff CL thing is a grey area. Being able to select UMD with skill mastery is not. Misreading "even if" as "if and only if" is also not a grey area.
/rant
I won't continue this line of discussion.
Then please kindly stop using the Rogue's ability to use UMD to get X when defending the class. UMD is something any class can do and while yes Rogues get Skill Mastery (in 3.5 I'd rule it works since Warlock uses the same language as Rogues, in PF I would probably not because UMD has its own reason for not being able to take 10 on it that Skill mastery doesn't cover), since that doesn't even occur until level 10 they are not especially good even at UMD.Psst: The wording for UMD is not different from 3.5. At least not in the parts you are referring too.
And no, I won't ignore unique things the rogue can do (taking 10 on UMD) when comparing it to other classes. That would be a dishonest comparison.
Eh I'm inclined to disagree not on 3.5 vs PF because I don't care to try to look up the 3.5 rules.
But Skill mastery explicitly calls out stress and distress as the things it negates and UMD flat out states it cannot be taken 10 on. A generous reading of the rules might allow you to do it but it's definitely a gray area.
Precisely, the reason I'd allow it in 3.5 is because the Warlock class gets an ability that allows you to take 10 on UMD even when distracted. However, that is not the reason you cannot take 10 on UMD. Thus in order to allow the Warlock class feature to actually do something, I'd allow Rogues Skill Mastery which uses the same language to work on UMD. However, that is 3.5. There is no Warlock to indicate that taking 10 is possible on UMD in PF.
Precisely, the reason I'd allow it in 3.5 is because the Warlock class gets an ability that allows you to take 10 on UMD even when distracted. However, that is not the reason you cannot take 10 on UMD. Thus in order to allow the Warlock class feature to actually do something, I'd allow Rogues Skill Mastery which uses the same language to work on UMD. However, that is 3.5. There is no Warlock to indicate that taking 10 is possible on UMD in PF.Then please kindly stop using the Rogue's ability to use UMD to get X when defending the class. UMD is something any class can do and while yes Rogues get Skill Mastery (in 3.5 I'd rule it works since Warlock uses the same language as Rogues, in PF I would probably not because UMD has its own reason for not being able to take 10 on it that Skill mastery doesn't cover), since that doesn't even occur until level 10 they are not especially good even at UMD.Psst: The wording for UMD is not different from 3.5. At least not in the parts you are referring too.
And no, I won't ignore unique things the rogue can do (taking 10 on UMD) when comparing it to other classes. That would be a dishonest comparison.
Eh I'm inclined to disagree not on 3.5 vs PF because I don't care to try to look up the 3.5 rules.
But Skill mastery explicitly calls out stress and distress as the things it negates and UMD flat out states it cannot be taken 10 on. A generous reading of the rules might allow you to do it but it's definitely a gray area.
You only have the inverse of that ability in PF.
"Unwavering Skill (Ex): You can always take 10 or 20 on class skills, even if threatened or in a hazardous situation. You can't use this ability with skill checks that don't normally allow you to take 10 or take 20."
|
|
Sorry, but it is specificly noted that you can't take 10 on UMD. Again, can not.
Skill Mastery does not let you take 10 in the selected skills. What Skill Mastery does is letting you take 10 in the selected skills if you otherwise could not because of stress and distractions that would normally prevent her from doing so.
The rogue becomes so confident in the use of certain skills that she can use them reliably even under adverse conditions. Upon gaining this ability, she selects a number of skills equal to 3 + her Intelligence modifier. When making a skill check with one of these skills, she may take 10 even if stress and distractions would normally prevent her from doing so.
The distraction part is a totally separate thing. It tells you to select a number of skills equal to 3 + Int mod. It says nothing about you may only select skills that allow you to take 10.
The distraction part is a totally separate thing. It tells you to select a number of skills equal to 3 + Int mod. It says nothing about you may only select skills that allow you to take 10.Sorry, but it is specificly noted that you can't take 10 on UMD. Again, can not.
Skill Mastery does not let you take 10 in the selected skills. What Skill Mastery does is letting you take 10 in the selected skills if you otherwise could not because of stress and distractions that would normally prevent her from doing so.
The rogue becomes so confident in the use of certain skills that she can use them reliably even under adverse conditions. Upon gaining this ability, she selects a number of skills equal to 3 + her Intelligence modifier. When making a skill check with one of these skills, she may take 10 even if stress and distractions would normally prevent her from doing so.
And it doesn't allow you do take 10 to skills that doesn't allow the "take 10" neither.
By RAW, UMD can't be used with take 10. Rub-Eta explained what the talent allows you to do.