What's the deal with the rogue hate?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

301 to 350 of 607 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Mysterious Stranger wrote:

What is really needed are some good talents like the these. If your only allow actual rogues to choose these talents will fix a lot of problems with the rouge, including the rouge not being able to do anything that someone else can’t do better. Since there are fighter only combat feats the precedent is already been set.

Accurate Sneak Attack: The rogue gains +1 to hit with sneak attack. At 5th level the rogue gains an additional +1. The bonus increases +1 per four levels after 4th to a maximum of +5 at 17th level. This talent can be combined with one other talent that modifies sneak attack.
...

To address accuracy issues, I'd probably have something like the option to exchange 1d6 of SNA for +1 to hit. (max +5) and an advanced talent that instead targets touch AC. Rogue class only of course.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
Ashiel, a +1 TH per SA dice when sneak attacking would effectively put the Rogue at full BAB+5 when Sneak Attacking. He'd be hitting stuff as reliably as a fighter or Barbarian...when Sneak Attacking.
Where are you getting the +5 over full BAB from Ashiel's post?

Maybe he means when they actually hit the conditions where they would traditionally get Sneak Attack, because that would give them a total of +10 to hit (which 15 BAB +10 to hit would be +25), but that's not really looking at the big picture.

Every martial in core has +20 from BAB and then MASSIVE modifiers to attack rolls thereafter. Barbarians get an extra +4 to hit during a rage and have rage powers that can push it ever higher (before counting courageous weapons pushing it higher). Rangers have quarry every 10 minutes for +4 to hit and auto-confirm, then you can toss instant enemy for +10 to hit and damage, Paladins can easily land +10 to hit or better during a smite and have access to spells like Divine Power (unsanctioned knowledge) and anything you can squeeze in with weapon bonds plus auto crit-confirming with a 1st level spell, and all of those martial classes have a real BAB (+20/+15/+10/+5) and will be hasted, so they are often going to hit with an extra attack or two (A ranger with a +10 Str at 20th level, instant enemy, a +5 weapon, and haste is hitting at +31 on their worst attack before quarry or buffs like heroism or good hope).

I don't think there is a problem with allowing rogues to effectively have a martial's to-hit bonus with roguish weapons only (daggers, rapiers, shortbows, etc). It's certainly no worse than flurry of blows (but truly, what could be worse in any sense of the word?). Rewarding them with bonus accuracy when they further act like rogues seems to me like a good thing, not a bad thing.

And we're again talking about a class who has no spellcasting ability and whose only out of combat utility is easily replaced by a headband of intellect. A class whose entire contribution to the party in core is their ability to physically attack things for what looks like big damage on paper (but is actually grossly under the bar when compared to other martials). The rogue has little to no support functionality either (they surely have no cool buffs or ways of making their allies thankful they are part of the group instead of a ranger or something).

That's okay though...I'm still writing up the rogue revision that I'm going to post up here in pdf form, and I plan to address all of those problems with rogues. Here's a preview of some of the options for the rogue I'm writing.

Rogue Revisions Preview:
Ruthless Attack: When making an attack with a light weapon, one-handed weapon wielded in one hand, unarmed strike, or a ranged weapon against an opponent within 30 ft. the rogue strikes with increased accuracy and lethality.

The rogue receives a +1 bonus on the attack roll and deals an extra +1d6 damage. This extra damage is not multiplied on a critical hit. At 5th level and every 4 levels thereafter the bonus to hit increases by +1 and the damage increases by +1d6 (+2/+2d6 at 5th, +3/+3d6 at 9th, etc).

If a rogue is attacking an opponent that is denied their Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or if the rogue flanks her target, she doubles her bonus to hit and damage from ruthless attack against the foe.

Rogue Talent: At 1st level a rogue chooses one rogue talent from the following lists that she meets the prerequisites for (if any). At 2nd level, and every 2 levels thereafter she may choose an additional talent that she qualifies for. Talents are sorted into subgroups (such as assassination or subversion) for organization, themes, and synergies. The rogue is not restricted to any specific list when choosing her talents.

At each new level of experience, a rogue may give up a rogue talent she has selected to pick a new talent that she qualifies for. If she gives up a talent that is required for another talent, all talents that required the forgotten talent become inactive until their prerequisites are once again met (the rogue may also give up inactive talents as usual).

If using the retraining rules found in Ultimate Campaign, a rogue may retrain a talent in the same way as she would retrain feats.

Talents marked with an asterisk (*) improve or modify a rogue's ruthless attack, typically by allowing the rogue to trade damage dice for new effects. Any choices (such as how many damage dice are traded) must be made before the attack is made.

Assassination
Assassin's Gambit (Ex): As a standard action, the rogue makes a single melee attack with a weapon against an opponent's touch AC. If the attack succeeds, the rogue rolls double damage (similar to a critical hit) and doubles any ruthless strike damage dice that she would roll against the opponent (or triples if she would already double her damage dice, such as for flanking or denied Dexterity bonus). If the damage would be enough to reduce the rogue's target to less than 0 hit points the target is slain. If it is not, the rogue deals no damage (or any additional effects reliant on a successful attack). A rogue must be 8th level to select this talent.

Assassin's Reach (Ex): Once per round when you kill an opponent with assassin's gambit you may use assassin's gambit once again as an immediate action against a different opponent. In addition, you may now use assassin's gambit with a thrown weapon as long as the target is within 30 ft. You must have the assassin's gambit talent to select this talent.

Assassin's Conviction (Ex): When using assassin's gambit, you now treat the damage dice from ruthless attack as if they rolled maximum damage. You must be 16th level and have the assassin's gambit talent to select this talent.

Backstab (Ex): When the rogue is flanking an opponent or attacking a foe who has been denied their Dexterity bonus to AC with a melee attack, the rogue increases her weapon's threat range by the attack bonus of her ruthless attack (so a rogue attacking with a weapon that threatens a critical hit on a roll of 19-20, with a +4 bonus from ruthless attack, instead threatens a critical hit on a roll of 15-20). If the attack is made with a dagger the rogue automatically confirms the critical hit. The increased threat range is applied after effects that multiply threat range (such as the Improved Critical feat or the keen weapon property).

Bleeding Attack* (Ex): When the rogue would deal damage with her Ruthless Attack ability, she may sacrifice a number of ruthless attack dice (up to the total for the attack). For each sacrificed die, the rogue instead inflicts 2 points of bleed damage to the target. The bleed damage can be stopped with a Heal check (DC 10 + ½ the rogue's level + the rogue's ruthless attack bonus) or an effect that heals hit point damage. Bleed damage doesn't stack.

Bloodbath* (Ex): Bleed damage caused by the rogue's Bleeding Attack talent now stacks with itself. A rogue must have Bleeding Attack to select this talent.

Poison Use (Ex): The rogue can create and apply poisons to her weapons without risking accidentally poisoning herself. At 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, and 20th level, a rogue's weapon remains poisoned for an additional attack before she must apply new poison to her weapon (or she may apply poison to an additional piece of ammunition with a single dose).

Poisoner (Ex): The rogue can mix deadly poison from common cheap components with no noteworthy value. Each day the rogue may create any combination of the following poisons without expending resources. She creates 3 plus her Int modifier doses per day. The saving throw DC of her poisons are equal to 10 + ½ her ranks in Craft (Alchemy) + her Int modifier.

POISONS TO BE ADDED

Duelist
Duelist talents emphasize agility, speed, and avoidance in combat. Most talents in this group center around avoiding hits and making the most of your physical dexterity.

Deadly Finesse (Ex): The rogue gains the Weapon Finesse feat as a bonus feat even if she doesn't meet the prerequisites. Additionally, when making attacks with a light weapon or a one-handed weapon wielded in one hand, the rogue may add her Dexterity modifier to damage rolls instead of her Strength modifier.

Agile Avoidance (Ex): The rogue gains a +1 dodge bonus to her AC and Reflex saves while wearing light armor or no armor and unencumbered. At 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, and 20th level the dodge bonus increases by +1. If the rogue is wearing no armor, the rogue doubles the dodge bonus to AC gained from this ability.

Dual Wielding
DESCRIPTION TO BE ADDED
Defensive Edge (Ex): The rogue gains the Two-Weapon Defense feat as a bonus feat even if she does not meet the prerequisites. At 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, and 20th level the shield bonus provided by Two-Weapon Defense improves by +1.

Einhander
Einhander emphasizes a one-handed combat style suited for rogues who forgo using a second weapon or shield in their other hand(s), preferring the balanced mastery of a single focused weapon.

Fencing Stance (Ex): The rogue may now enter or leave fencing stance as a swift action. While in the fencing stance, the rogue declares one light or one-handed weapon in a single hand as her chosen weapon. She cannot make attacks with weapons other than her chosen weapon while in fencing stance as if she wasn't wielding them, and loses the AC benefits of any shield that she carries or wields while though she can still benefit from special abilities of any weapon or shield she is holding (such as for an item's special abilities like a defending weapon or a fortification shield) and the Two-Weapon Defense feat if applicable.

While in fencing stance, the rogue may still use any free hands (typically a hand not wielding the chosen weapon) to manipulate objects, use magic items (such as potions, scrolls, wands, etc), cast spells, or hold things (including other weapons), and deliver touch attacks.

Once per round the rogue may choose a different weapon that she could wield as her new chosen weapon as a free action.

While in fencing stance, the rogue gains DR 1/- and a +1 bonus to attack rolls with her chosen weapon. The damage reduction and bonus to attack rolls is lost if the rogue would be denied her Dexterity bonus to AC. At 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, and 20th level, her DR and attack bonus increases by +1 (up to DR 6/-, and +6 to hit at 20th level).

Fencing Parry (Ex): While in fencing stance, if an opponent would hit the rogue with a melee attack the rogue may replace her armor class against the attack with an attack roll using her chosen weapon as an immediate action. If the attack would have missed against her new AC, the attack misses. The rogue must have the fencing stance talent to select this talent.

Fencing Lunge (Ex): When in fencing stance, the rogue may declare a single opponent as her chosen foe once during her turn as a free action. The rogue treats her reach and threatened area as if they were 5 ft. greater when using her chosen weapon, but only for her chosen foe. At 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, and 20th level she may choose an additional opponent to be considered a chosen foe, improving her reach and threatened area against each one. The rogue must be at least 4th level and have the fencing stance talent to select this talent.

There is also plans in the works for talents for dual wielding, applying multiple doses of poisons, tactician rogues, mobility enhancements (tagging out with allies, slipping through space, wild acrobatics, etc), some support for arcane, divine, and psionic rogues, and so on.


Aelryinth wrote:
Snickersnack wrote:
You're no quoting the abilities/feats you think you are. Got links?

Oh, made them up on the spur of the moment. We're talking about Rogue fixes, right?

==Aelryinth

Sorry, I thought you were quoting those from somewhere (as if to say, "Morons, take these to make your rogue good!"). I tried looking them up and everything..... lol


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
Ashiel, a +1 TH per SA dice when sneak attacking would effectively put the Rogue at full BAB+5 when Sneak Attacking. He'd be hitting stuff as reliably as a fighter or Barbarian...when Sneak Attacking.
Where are you getting the +5 over full BAB from Ashiel's post?

Maybe he means when they actually hit the conditions where they would traditionally get Sneak Attack, because that would give them a total of +10 to hit (which 15 BAB +10 to hit would be +25), but that's not really looking at the big picture.

Every martial in core has +20 from BAB and then MASSIVE modifiers to attack rolls thereafter. Barbarians get an extra +4 to hit during a rage and have rage powers that can push it ever higher (before counting courageous weapons pushing it higher). Rangers have quarry every 10 minutes for +4 to hit and auto-confirm, then you can toss instant enemy for +10 to hit and damage, Paladins can easily land +10 to hit or better during a smite and have access to spells like Divine Power (unsanctioned knowledge) and anything you can squeeze in with weapon bonds plus auto crit-confirming with a 1st level spell, and all of those martial classes have a real BAB (+20/+15/+10/+5) and will be hasted, so they are often going to hit with an extra attack or two (A ranger with a +10 Str at 20th level, instant enemy, a +5 weapon, and haste is hitting at +31 on their worst attack before quarry or buffs like heroism or good hope).

I don't think there is a problem with allowing rogues to effectively have a martial's to-hit bonus with roguish weapons only (daggers, rapiers, shortbows, etc). It's certainly no worse than flurry of blows (but truly, what could be worse in any sense of the word?). Rewarding them with bonus accuracy when they further act like rogues seems to me like a good thing, not a bad thing.

And we're again talking about a class who has no spellcasting ability and whose only out of combat utility is easily replaced by a headband of...

I really enjoy those new rogue talents and how Ruthless Attack works. That seems like a much more viable system, and using a dagger (low damage compared to other available weapons) is strengthened in Backstab.

Please apply to Paizo to fix the rogue.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
Ashiel, a +1 TH per SA dice when sneak attacking would effectively put the Rogue at full BAB+5 when Sneak Attacking. He'd be hitting stuff as reliably as a fighter or Barbarian...when Sneak Attacking.
Where are you getting the +5 over full BAB from Ashiel's post?

Wasn't using Ashiel's changes, as she notes...I was using Base Rogue.

Has more in common with the Kirthfinder modification then anything else.

Change SA to Cunning: +1 Precision dmg when using a light or finessable weapon. +1 Th and +1d6 instead when you qualify for a sneak attack.

Thus, escalating damage with lighter weapons that fit the image. When you do get Sneak Attack, you really, really get sneak attack. It won't surpass what a Melee gets, but it should rival it promptly.

==Aelryinth

Liberty's Edge

When you want to rebuild a class, rate the current and the edited abilities. Make sure the overall average rating doesn't change, or just barely.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
TorresGlitch wrote:
When you want to rebuild a class, rate the current and the edited abilities. Make sure the overall average rating doesn't change, or just barely.

That wouldn't make a stronger class, that would make a different class that was weak in different ways. Rogue has to be stepped up in a lot of ways, and making it just the same strength really isn't gonna pull it off. At this point, I'm writing the Rogue off as a class until Unchained comes out, and then I'll voice my opinions about that.


TorresGlitch wrote:
When you want to rebuild a class, rate the current and the edited abilities. Make sure the overall average rating doesn't change, or just barely.

That would make rebuilding it completely pointless though. You rebuild the class so it becomes more or less powerful, not to stay on the same level.

Shadow Lodge

Skill Bonus (ex): For a select set of skills, rogues gain an untyped bonus of +10 +1/rogue level. This bonus applies to Acrobatics, Bluff, Climb, Disable Device, Disguise, Escape Artist, Perception, Sense Motive, Sleight of Hand, and Stealth.

This would not be a talent, a feat, or anything of the type. This would be an inherent part of being a rogue.

This, and fixing how stealth works would go a long way towards making the rogue shine at his areas of specialty and insuring that other classes don't do those things as well as the rogue does. I don't really think the rogue needs to be turned into a DPR machine, that's not the role he is meant to fill.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

correct. The Rogue is way down on the totem pole. You don't make a Rogue or Fighter class that's the equal of what they are now...you pick a target, say, Inquisitor or Barbarian, and aim to equal that class. Or a notch above them, like a paladin.

Can you just imagine what you'd have to do to a party to have a rogue or fighter as flexible and useful as a cleric?

===Aelryinth


I have mentioned fixes before that can make the rogue better. My favorite fix involves selecting a multiplier greater than one would make people start playing rogues. Let us call this Multiplier X.

The rogue has access to black market sources and other way of making his gold go farther. Multiply the wealth of the rogue by X. This will not apply to any items that are not used solely for himself (no giving the rogue money to buy the communal CLW wand).

When X is large enough, people may start playing a rogue. Make X two and start giving a rogue double WBL would make me think more seriously about it.

My fix for fighter is similar. Pick a number Y and multiply the BaB chart by this number for all attacks and iteratives (rounding fractions down). Make Y 3/2 or 2 would make the fighter king of BaB and people will like fighters more. Yes their saves still are a problem, but they will be best at what they are supposed to do, fight and use and resist combat maneuvres.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

in earlier editions the whole attacks thing was determined by class, not BAB. It was an excellent balance point.

Should go back to it. Rogues...pretty much sure the only thing that would really fix them is to make skills powerful and important, and rogues the absolute best at using them...while not giving away their toys to other magical classes.

Lastly, these are the two completely non-magical classes in the game. There should be benefits for not having magic, instead of just 'not being able to use magic.'

Without those balance factors, you've got an uphill climb.

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:
Lastly, these are the two completely non-magical classes in the game.

I'm assuming you mean rogues and fighters...?

Cavaliers, Slayers, Brawlers, Barbarians, Monks?


thegreenteagamer wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
Lastly, these are the two completely non-magical classes in the game.

I'm assuming you mean rogues and fighters...?

Cavaliers, Slayers, Brawlers, Barbarians, Monks?

Barbarians and monks are not completely non-magical, though they can be built as such.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Abraham spalding wrote:
thegreenteagamer wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
Lastly, these are the two completely non-magical classes in the game.

I'm assuming you mean rogues and fighters...?

Cavaliers, Slayers, Brawlers, Barbarians, Monks?

Barbarians and monks are not completely non-magical, though they can be built as such.

Unless you are using some sort of archetypes, monks are always going to have supernatural abilities. And if we're talking magical in terms of reality (rather than the Ex, Su, Sp, Spells direction) then every class is magically by mid levels, especially barbarians. :o

Aelyrinth wrote:
Rogues...pretty much sure the only thing that would really fix them is to make skills powerful and important, and rogues the absolute best at using them...while not giving away their toys to other magical classes.

All things can be accomplished through skills, yet nothing is. The biggest problem IMHO is that realistically if there would be a problem, as with in reality, there's probably a skill for that. Which means that if there is a skill for that and as a rule we didn't allow magic to do those things, magic would be reduced to pretty much combat-only blasting (transmuting into a small animal would allow you to hide more effectively, or track more effectively, so those things are out as an example).

I think it's less about having different ways to do things and more about the limits on mundane skills even when they are no longer mundane. Let's look at the Heal skill as an example. Here you have a skill that has reached its upper limits at DC 20, and particularly high check results for things like treating diseases or poisons only gives a +20% bonus on the chance to save against the disease. The option to restore Hp is both exceedingly limited in how frequently you can use it and how useful it will ever be.

It's mostly the fault of the skill that it isn't useful, because even when someone has legendary levels of Heal you're still limited to what a mundane person based in reality could do with the skill. Contrast with Neverwinter Nights PC game based on 3E where the Heal skill got a bit of an upgrade. In that game, you used a Healer's kit (which provided a bonus to your check ranging from +1 to +20 depending on how amazing the tools were) and you healed your check result in HP, healed poisons, healed diseases, etc. It was in fact so awesome that I used the Heal skill on my wizards, and when I was playing a Cleric I still defaulted to the skill most of the time because its effect was more noteworthy.

Secondly, there's rarely much incentive to really crush a DC. For example, if you're a Rogue or a Ranger with +1/2 your level to a skill (such as with Trapfinding or Track) an advantage is only gained if A) you're forced to not take 10, or B) it allows you to hit a DC that is beyond your level-range in practicality (but not by too much).

In my d20 rewrite I'm going to attempt to tackle both of these issues head on. Some skills with be added or removed, and far more often there will be successes-based DCs, a mechanic that already exists in d20 but is rarely shown much love. For example, here's a sample prototype ability that one of the werewolves in one of my MapTools games is testing for me.

Success Variance wrote:
Howl of Terror (Ex): The creature unleashes a ferocious howl. Non-allies of the creature must make a Will save or be shaken. Those who fail the DC by 5 or more are frightened. Those who fail the DC by 10 or more are panicked. The duration of the fear effect is 5 rounds. Howl of terror can be used once every 10 rounds.

As you can see, unlike the binary nature of most abilities where it is either X or Y (such as with a mummy's aura), this ability gets progressively worse the more you fail your saving throw. The reverse is also something I plan to do with most skills, where banking progressively higher check results results in increases to your overall productivity with the skill (similar to how Knowledge skills work now, where going above and beyond the needed DC results in additional info).

These things are beyond the scope of my rogue rewrite though and will be addressed more fully in my d20-core.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Completely unrelated, but my halfling rogue just hit 12th level last night while traveling in the Mana Wastes. I don't recommend it if you can avoid it. Pretty sure we all would have died without the gunslinger bullet spamming the beasts.


Ashiel wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
Ashiel, a +1 TH per SA dice when sneak attacking would effectively put the Rogue at full BAB+5 when Sneak Attacking. He'd be hitting stuff as reliably as a fighter or Barbarian...when Sneak Attacking.
Where are you getting the +5 over full BAB from Ashiel's post?

Maybe he means when they actually hit the conditions where they would traditionally get Sneak Attack, because that would give them a total of +10 to hit (which 15 BAB +10 to hit would be +25), but that's not really looking at the big picture.

Every martial in core has +20 from BAB and then MASSIVE modifiers to attack rolls thereafter. Barbarians get an extra +4 to hit during a rage and have rage powers that can push it ever higher (before counting courageous weapons pushing it higher). Rangers have quarry every 10 minutes for +4 to hit and auto-confirm, then you can toss instant enemy for +10 to hit and damage, Paladins can easily land +10 to hit or better during a smite and have access to spells like Divine Power (unsanctioned knowledge) and anything you can squeeze in with weapon bonds plus auto crit-confirming with a 1st level spell, and all of those martial classes have a real BAB (+20/+15/+10/+5) and will be hasted, so they are often going to hit with an extra attack or two (A ranger with a +10 Str at 20th level, instant enemy, a +5 weapon, and haste is hitting at +31 on their worst attack before quarry or buffs like heroism or good hope).

I don't think there is a problem with allowing rogues to effectively have a martial's to-hit bonus with roguish weapons only (daggers, rapiers, shortbows, etc). It's certainly no worse than flurry of blows (but truly, what could be worse in any sense of the word?). Rewarding them with bonus accuracy when they further act like rogues seems to me like a good thing, not a bad thing.

And we're again talking about a class who has no spellcasting ability and whose only out of combat utility is easily replaced by a headband of...

interesting ashiel. Don't agree with everything stated, but interesting changes.


I think, while there are many more complex ways for people who want more multifaceted Fighters, Fighters are only a little behind other melee classes, and thus would be pretty easily fixed. Doubling the bonuses to Weapon Training and giving all Armor Training some DR bonuses (Armor Training 1 adds DR 1/- when wearing Medium or Heavy Armor; 2 adds DR 2/-, etc.) in addition to the current benefits would make them the best at melee, I think.

Then give them 4 + Int skill ranks per level.

Some want more capability out of combat for Fighters than 2 extra skill ranks per level would provide. Some of those ideas are fine (like an Intimidate bonus of 1/2 fighter level) and reasonable; but they aren't necessary to bring fighters up to par.

Rogues need significantly better talents, plus some way, like the Ninja alternate class (some consider it technically a Rogue), to do things like turn invisible for short periods. Ashiel's working on better talents. I've only looked quickly at them, and maybe some will seem a bit off, but they're the direction that has to be taken for Rogue viability.

Rogues (non-Ninja, anyway) are farther behind than fighters, and more complex to fix.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

thegreenteagamer wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
Lastly, these are the two completely non-magical classes in the game.

I'm assuming you mean rogues and fighters...?

Cavaliers, Slayers, Brawlers, Barbarians, Monks?

cavs and brawlers are subsets of fighters by design, and slayers are basically figher/thieves. Barbs have rage, which explicitly grants supernatural powers, and monks get plenty of supernatural abilities, ki being the supernatural opposite of rage.

So, yes, fighters and rogues are the only base non-magical classes. Rogues can take a talent to gain magical abilities, but it's underpowered.

==Aelryinth

Shadow Lodge

Deadmanwalking wrote:
Sacred Geometry was a single Feat. The rules for, and oversight over, class design are a whole lot different.

From what I can tell, the rules for class design basically say "If it ain't a spellcaster, F!&% IT!"


Kthulhu wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Sacred Geometry was a single Feat. The rules for, and oversight over, class design are a whole lot different.
From what I can tell, the rules for class design basically say "If it ain't a spellcaster, F@#* IT!"

More specifically, it's something like "If you want to do something cool, it requires

1: a feat
2: a spell
3: a class feature
4: a magic item
5: you eating an Attack of Opportunity."

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Sacred Geometry was a single Feat. The rules for, and oversight over, class design are a whole lot different.
From what I can tell, the rules for class design basically say "If it ain't a spellcaster, F~!@ IT!"

Slayer begs to disagree with you.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Sacred Geometry was a single Feat. The rules for, and oversight over, class design are a whole lot different.
From what I can tell, the rules for class design basically say "If it ain't a spellcaster, F~!@ IT!"
Slayer begs to disagree with you.

Slayer begs for a way to be truly meaningful outside combat.


So tired of this debate. Really.

ROGUE does not = Super Saiyan D&D Ninja

I repeat

ROGUE does not = Super Saiyan D&D Ninja

The only problem I see people complaining about the Rogue, is that it boils down to "They're not wizards."

You can't compare any class to a Wizard. The Wizard's job is solely to make everyone else look feeble in combat. Wizards have a spell for, practically, everything.

People expect the Rogue to be this martial master of combat, except I NEVER saw the Rogue like that. Not in any edition of D&D was the Rogue ever on par with any class combat-wise.

Why not? Because that's just not what they do.

Let's get this straight folks:

---A rogue is the guy who just heisted a secure vault and managed to pin it on someone else for the crime
---A rogue is the guy that knew how to get around the city to get the information you needed without leaving a trail
---A rogue is the guy who was not there for half the battle, but that's because he set up some elaborate environmental trap on half the enemies and took them down without lifting a finger
---A rogue is that McGuyver kind of guy, his mastery over mundane tools and magical tools (as most Rogues should max out UMD) gives him an edge in almost any situation as long as they are creative enough
---A rogue is the guy who disguised himself as the guards and infiltrated to assassinate the guy that intended to make the PCs lives hell by using all the military and political power he had
---A rogue is the guy that had the right sort of contacts to pretty much get whatever it is you needed
---A rogue is the guy that rose through the ranks of an organization for the sole purpose of spying and betraying them
---A rogue is the guy that was off rescuing victims, mentally mapping passageways, sabotaging ambushes and traps, misleading and misdirection enemies into danger, and basically speeding up your dungeon bashing game so that a quest that would have taken a month to finish, he just helped you do it in a week
---A rogue would have stolen enough money to hire, bribe, or blackmail others into doing the dirty work for them

If you guys want to play a real Rogue, then make one and try to get through an entire session without ever drawing a weapon and jumping into combat. Try to solely solve every situation with ONLY SKILL CHECKS.

If you fail to do that for one adventure...you simply fail at playing a Rogue and fail at realizing where their specialty lies.

A real Rogue would complete a venture with the minimal amount of combat. If ever.


15 people marked this as a favorite.

So tired of this debate. Really.

EXPERT does not = Super Saiyan D&D Ninja

I repeat

EXPERT does not = Super Saiyan D&D Ninja

The only problem I see people complaining about the Expert, is that it boils down to "They're not wizards."

You can't compare any class to a Wizard. The Wizard's job is solely to make everyone else look feeble in combat. Wizards have a spell for, practically, everything.

People expect the Expert to be this martial master of combat, except I NEVER saw the Expert like that. Not in any edition of D&D was the Expert ever on par with any class combat-wise.

Why not? Because that's just not what they do.

Let's get this straight folks:

---An expert is the guy who just heisted a secure vault and managed to pin it on someone else for the crime
---An expert is the guy that knew how to get around the city to get the information you needed without leaving a trail
---An expert is the guy who was not there for half the battle, but that's because he set up some elaborate environmental trap on half the enemies and took them down without lifting a finger
---An expert is that McGuyver kind of guy, his mastery over mundane tools and magical tools (as most Experts should max out UMD) gives him an edge in almost any situation as long as they are creative enough
---An expert is the guy who disguised himself as the guards and infiltrated to assassinate the guy that intended to make the PCs lives hell by using all the military and political power he had
---An expert is the guy that had the right sort of contacts to pretty much get whatever it is you needed
---An expert is the guy that rose through the ranks of an organization for the sole purpose of spying and betraying them
---An expert is the guy that was off rescuing victims, mentally mapping passageways, sabotaging ambushes and traps, misleading and misdirection enemies into danger, and
---An expert would have stolen enough money to hire, bribe, or blackmail others into doing the dirty work for them

If you guys want to play a real Expert, then make one and try to get through an entire session without ever drawing a weapon and jumping into combat. Try to solely solve every situation with ONLY SKILL CHECKS.

If you fail to do that for one adventure...you simply fail at playing a Expert and fail at realizing where their specialty lies.

A real Expert would complete a venture with the minimal amount of combat. If ever.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Barachiel Shina wrote:
People expect the Rogue to be this martial master of combat, except I NEVER saw the Rogue like that.

I wonder if rogue are only outclassed in combat

Hard to Fool (Ex)
Benefit: Once per day, a rogue with this talent can roll two dice while making a Sense Motive check, and take the better result. She must choose to use this talent before making the Sense Motive check.

Empathy (Ex, Su): When attempting a Sense Motive check, the investigator makes two d20 rolls and takes the higher result. If an investigator uses inspiration on a Sense Motive check, he rolls the inspiration dice twice and takes the higher result. Once per day, the investigator can expend one use of inspiration to target a single creature that he can see and hear within 30 feet. Upon doing so, the investigator detects the surface thoughts of the target's mind, as if he concentrated for 3 rounds while using the detect thoughts spell, unless the creature succeeds a Will saving throw. The DC of this save is 10 + 1/2 the investigator's level + his Intelligence modifier. If the target fails, the investigator can continue to detect the surface thoughts of the target creature for a number of rounds equal to 1/2 his investigator level. An investigator must be at least 5th level to select this talent.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Barachiel Shina wrote:

---A rogue is the guy who just heisted a secure vault and managed to pin it on someone else for the crime

---A rogue is the guy that knew how to get around the city to get the information you needed without leaving a trail
---A rogue is the guy who was not there for half the battle, but that's because he set up some elaborate environmental trap on half the enemies and took them down without lifting a finger
---A rogue is that McGuyver kind of guy, his mastery over mundane tools and magical tools (as most Rogues should max out UMD) gives him an edge in almost any situation as long as they are creative enough
---A rogue is the guy who disguised himself as the guards and infiltrated to assassinate the guy that intended to make the PCs lives hell by using all the military and political power he had
---A rogue is the guy that had the right sort of contacts to pretty much get whatever it is you needed
---A rogue is the guy that rose through the ranks of an organization for the sole purpose of spying and betraying them
---A rogue is the guy that was off rescuing victims, mentally mapping passageways, sabotaging ambushes and traps, misleading and misdirection enemies into danger, and basically speeding up your dungeon bashing game so that a quest that would have taken a month to finish, he just helped you do it in a week
---A rogue would have stolen enough money to hire, bribe, or blackmail others into doing the dirty work for them

If you guys want to play a real Rogue, then make one and try to get through an entire session without ever drawing a weapon and jumping into combat. Try to solely solve every situation with ONLY SKILL CHECKS.

If you fail to do that for one adventure...you simply fail at playing a Rogue and fail at realizing where their specialty lies.

A real Rogue would complete a venture with the minimal amount of combat. If ever.

The rogues are not particularly great at those, not more than several other clases.


10 people marked this as a favorite.
Barachiel Shina wrote:

So tired of this debate. Really.

ROGUE does not = Super Saiyan D&D Ninja

No one ever said that's what they are or should be.

Barachiel Shina wrote:

I repeat

ROGUE does not = Super Saiyan D&D Ninja

I repeat: No one ever said that's what they are or should be.

Barachiel Shina wrote:
The only problem I see people complaining about the Rogue, is that it boils down to "They're not wizards."

No, it doesn't. If that's what you take from people pointing out the flaws of the Rogue class, you're obviously not paying attention. You're just being condescending. Get off your high horse.

Barachiel Shina wrote:

People expect the Rogue to be this martial master of combat, except I NEVER saw the Rogue like that. Not in any edition of D&D was the Rogue ever on par with any class combat-wise.

Why not? Because that's just not what they do.

No one expects Rogues to be The Ultimate Masters of Combat, but EVERY class in the game has to be effective in combat. Combat is a huge part of the game.

Barachiel Shina wrote:

Let's get this straight folks:

---A rogue is the guy who just heisted a secure vault and managed to pin it on someone else for the crime
---A rogue is the guy that knew how to get around the city to get the information you needed without leaving a trail
---A rogue is the guy who was not there for half the battle, but that's because he set up some elaborate environmental trap on half the enemies and took them down without lifting a finger
---A rogue is that McGuyver kind of guy, his mastery over mundane tools and magical tools (as most Rogues should max out UMD) gives him an edge in almost any situation as long as they are creative enough
---A rogue is the guy who disguised himself as the guards and infiltrated to assassinate the guy that intended to make the PCs lives hell by using all the military and political power he had
---A rogue is the guy that had the right sort of contacts to pretty much get whatever it is you needed
---A rogue is the guy that rose through the ranks of an organization for the sole purpose of spying and betraying them
---A rogue is the guy that was off rescuing victims, mentally mapping passageways, sabotaging ambushes and traps, misleading and misdirection enemies into danger, and basically speeding up your dungeon bashing game so that a quest that would have taken a month to finish, he just helped you do it in a week
---A rogue would have stolen enough money to hire, bribe, or blackmail others into doing the dirty work for them

None of that is exclusive to Rogues, and Rogues aren't particularly good at any of that... They aren't any better than other skilled classes and they certainly don't have any more money than any other class in the game.

Barachiel Shina wrote:

If you guys want to play a real Rogue, then make one and try to get through an entire session without ever drawing a weapon and jumping into combat. Try to solely solve every situation with ONLY SKILL CHECKS.

If you fail to do that for one adventure...you simply fail at playing a Rogue and fail at realizing where their specialty lies.

A real Rogue would complete a venture with the minimal amount of combat. If ever.

Oh, great... Yet another "There is nothing wrong with the class, you all are just incompetent" claim...

Rogues are not the best at skills. They aren't the only ones allowed to be clever. They don't get extra WBL. They can't do anything that at least half a dozen classes can't do better.

Grand Lodge

14 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Is that another poster sticking their fingers in their ears, and yelling "NAH NAH NAH NAH I can't hear you!! Rogue is best at everything you doody head haters!!"?

Neat.

That is really insightful.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

Those are the sort of arguments people joke about making.

"You all just don't get Rogues. I'm the only one who does, despite years and years of people playing the game."

Those are not things a Rogue does. Those are things the player does. The mechanics of the Rogue do nothing but trap hapless players into a subpar class because it's "the sneaky guy". We have Slayers now, you can stop trying so hard.


Nicos wrote:
Barachiel Shina wrote:
People expect the Rogue to be this martial master of combat, except I NEVER saw the Rogue like that.

I wonder if rogue are only outclassed in combat

Hard to Fool (Ex)
Benefit: Once per day, a rogue with this talent can roll two dice while making a Sense Motive check, and take the better result. She must choose to use this talent before making the Sense Motive check.

What's the reason for making this useable only once per day? Is there some advantage to doing it that way that compensates for the damage it does to suspension of disbelief?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
JoeJ wrote:
Nicos wrote:
Barachiel Shina wrote:
People expect the Rogue to be this martial master of combat, except I NEVER saw the Rogue like that.

I wonder if rogue are only outclassed in combat

Hard to Fool (Ex)
Benefit: Once per day, a rogue with this talent can roll two dice while making a Sense Motive check, and take the better result. She must choose to use this talent before making the Sense Motive check.

What's the reason for making this useable only once per day? Is there some advantage to doing it that way that compensates for the damage it does to suspension of disbelief?

Well, that would involve the Rogue having nice things.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Barachiel Shina wrote:

So tired of this debate. Really.

ROGUE does not = Super Saiyan D&D Ninja

I repeat

ROGUE does not = Super Saiyan D&D Ninja

The only problem I see people complaining about the Rogue, is that it boils down to "They're not wizards."

You can't compare any class to a Wizard. The Wizard's job is solely to make everyone else look feeble in combat. Wizards have a spell for, practically, everything.

People expect the Rogue to be this martial master of combat, except I NEVER saw the Rogue like that. Not in any edition of D&D was the Rogue ever on par with any class combat-wise.

Why not? Because that's just not what they do.

Let's get this straight folks:

---A rogue is the guy who just heisted a secure vault and managed to pin it on someone else for the crime
---A rogue is the guy that knew how to get around the city to get the information you needed without leaving a trail
---A rogue is the guy who was not there for half the battle, but that's because he set up some elaborate environmental trap on half the enemies and took them down without lifting a finger
---A rogue is that McGuyver kind of guy, his mastery over mundane tools and magical tools (as most Rogues should max out UMD) gives him an edge in almost any situation as long as they are creative enough
---A rogue is the guy who disguised himself as the guards and infiltrated to assassinate the guy that intended to make the PCs lives hell by using all the military and political power he had
---A rogue is the guy that had the right sort of contacts to pretty much get whatever it is you needed
---A rogue is the guy that rose through the ranks of an organization for the sole purpose of spying and betraying them
---A rogue is the guy that was off rescuing victims, mentally mapping passageways, sabotaging ambushes and traps, misleading and misdirection enemies into danger, and basically speeding up your dungeon bashing game so that a quest that would have taken a month to finish, he just helped you do it in a week
---A rogue would...

The rogue is garbo at all of those things.

As an aside, I love things like this posted unironically, it's most of what I yearn for in these threads; it's like the "KATANAS IN DND ARE TOO WEAK!" copy paste.

Although as an aside, I'd love to see you build a Rogue who could do all of that better than their superior friends (Alch/Invest/Inquis).

I'd be willing to stat up a counter who could do all that AND work in combat, but post like this are always 'well it works in my game!' in tone.

I apologize that I'm unable to play a rogue, I guess I'm just a bad ROLLplayer.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Even more silly, for the deniers, is they focus on one particular concept.

A Rogue could just as easily be a LG bastion of good, and focus on "fair play" in combat.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 15 people marked this as a favorite.

Well... We all know the 5 stages of Rogue threads, right?

Stage 1:
Rogue Advocate: Rogues are the best strikers in the game! Sneak Attack deals a quadrillion damage every round!
Poster Who Actually Checks The Math: No, they aren't. They don't even hit often enough for Sneak Attack to be anything to write home about... And their awful saves, AC and CMD means they are likely to be neutralized before they even have a chance to try.

Stage 2:
Rogue Advocate: This game is not about combat! Rogues are not a combat class! You guys focus too much on DPR! Rogues are the kings of skill! And skills are awesome!
Poster Who Actually Checks The Math: Rogues are not that good out of combat either... Alchemists, Bards, Inquisitors, Investigators, Rangers, Slayers, every single full caster in the game and even a few Barbarian builds have better out of combat utility (the list goes on). And all of them are vastly superior in combat too.

Stage 3:
Rogue Advocate: When you play a Rogue, you play it clever! The Rogue will have more money and have contacts with the criminal underworld or something!
Poster Who Actually Checks The Math: Uh... "Cleverness" is not a Rogue class feature, nor do players suddenly get smarter just because they are playing a Rogue. Oh, and you don't have to play a Rogue to role-play a roguish character.

Stage 4:
Rogue Advocate: SHUT UP! STOP OPPRESSING ME AND TELLING ME I'M HAVING BADWRONG FUN!!! YOU JUST HATE THE CLASS, YOU DPR-OBSSESSED ROLLPLAYER!
Poster Who Actually Checks The Math: Dude... I never said anything even close to that. And you're the one who brought up DPR.

Stage 5:
Rogue Advocate: F##% YOU! GO HOME AND TEAR YOUR BOOK APART! I'M OUT!
Poster Who Actually Check The Math: Drama queen...

Sometimes, Rogue advocates skip stage 1 or switch it around with stage 2. But otherwise, it's always the same...

Silver Crusade

9 people marked this as a favorite.

Lemmy, your comments are harsh and outdated, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

It's now:

Lemmy wrote:

Stage 2:

Rogue Advocate: This game is not about combat! Rogues are not a combat class! You guys focus too much on DPR! Rogues are the kings of skill, and skills are awesome!
Poster Who Actually Checks The Math: Rogues are not that good out of combat either... Bards, Inquisitors, Rangers, Alchemists, INVESTIGATORS, every single full caster in the game and even a few Barbarian builds have better out of combat utility. And all of them are vastly superior in combat too.

Seriously, keep up with the times. A new class has come along to steal the rogue's lunch, and it didn't even leave the crust of the sandwich it just swiped.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
N. Jolly wrote:

Lemmy, your comments are harsh and outdated, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

It's now:

Lemmy wrote:

Stage 2:

Rogue Advocate: This game is not about combat! Rogues are not a combat class! You guys focus too much on DPR! Rogues are the kings of skill, and skills are awesome!
Poster Who Actually Checks The Math: Rogues are not that good out of combat either... Bards, Inquisitors, Rangers, Alchemists, INVESTIGATORS, every single full caster in the game and even a few Barbarian builds have better out of combat utility. And all of them are vastly superior in combat too.
Seriously, keep up with the times. A new class has come along to steal the rogue's lunch, and it didn't even leave the crust of the sandwich it just swiped.

Ah, right... I adapted it slightly, but forgot to add the new classes... I'll fix that.

Sczarni

I have seen some broken rogue builds in pfs by players who wanted to prove rogues did not outright suck. Yes, they were more one trick ponies but in combat, they killed by proxy.

I tolerate the hate for rogues and fighters because I know people need something to hate on and rogues and fighters generally are the easiest targets. I ppersonally will never play a rogue but it is simply out of what I would want to do with a melee or ranged character. My level 12 vanilla 2 handed weapon fighter is the only pfs pc I have past lvl 9 right now and he is by far the one build I have had the most fun with.

I understand that people want to have six or more skill ranks per level, have just about every knowledge filled with ranks, and still be uber effective in and out of combat. I hhave more fun when I build around a concept or idea than trying to overpower up the max from the start. Yes, I do tweet some for pfs because of not knowing you are playing with each week but I build around concepts I think will be fun to play.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ulfen Death Squad wrote:
I have seen some broken rogue builds in pfs by players who wanted to prove rogues did not outright suck. Yes, they were more one trick ponies but in combat, they killed by proxy.

I'm skeptical.

I have yet to see any Rogue build that is "broken" (well, at least "broken" in the sense of "too effective", I've seen plenty that are "broken" in the sense of "not functional"). Please, do post them. I'd love to be proven wrong on this matter.

Ulfen Death Squad wrote:

I tolerate the hate for rogues and fighters because I know people need something to hate on and rogues and fighters generally are the easiest targets. I personally will never play a rogue but it is simply out of what I would want to do with a melee or ranged character. My level 12 vanilla 2 handed weapon fighter is the only pfs pc I have past lvl 9 right now and he is by far the one build I have had the most fun with.

I understand that people want to have six or more skill ranks per level, have just about every knowledge filled with ranks, and still be uber effective in and out of combat. I have more fun when I build around a concept or idea than trying to overpower up the max from the start. Yes, I do tweet some for pfs because of not knowing you are playing with each week but I build around concepts I think will be fun to play.

It's not hatred. Calling it hate is completely missing the point.

The vast majority of players who criticize Rogues and Fighters don't do it because they hate the class. If we did hate them, we wouldn't care that they are underpowered...

We criticize those classes out of frustration and disappointment, not hate. We want them to be effective enough to stand side by side with other balanced classes without being overshadowed by them.

Acknowledging flaws is not hate. It's just honesty. My sister is awful with numbers. I would never ask her to help me with anything math-related... Acknowledging that fact doesn't make me love her any less.

Finally, let me add 2 things...

1- No one is saying you can't have fun playing a Rogue. In fact, it's very possible to have fun playing a Commoner. I did it a couple times... And yet, how much fun a player has with a class is irrelevant to how balanced or effective that class is.
2- Playing a Rogue doesn't mean you're any more focused on character concept than the guy playing a Slayer. It simply means that you're willing to play a subpar class. Playing an underpowered class has no effect whatsoever in your ability to roleplay an interesting character. Class is not concept. Concept is not class. You don't need the word "Rogue" written down on your character sheet to roleplay a sneaky scoundrel, nor does writting down that word make you any better at roleplaying that character concept.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

One specific build does not make a class OP or even decent. I would go as far as to say that if you require a cookie-cutter build to make a class good then it has problems.

Liberty's Edge

Barachiel Shina wrote:

Let's get this straight folks:

---A rogue is the guy who just heisted a secure vault and managed to pin it on someone else for the crime
---A rogue is the guy that knew how to get around the city to get the information you needed without leaving a trail
---A rogue is the guy who was not there for half the battle, but that's because he set up some elaborate environmental trap on half the enemies and took them down without lifting a finger
---A rogue is that McGuyver kind of guy, his mastery over mundane tools and magical tools (as most Rogues should max out UMD) gives him an edge in almost any situation as long as they are creative enough
---A rogue is the guy who disguised himself as the guards and infiltrated to assassinate the guy that intended to make the PCs lives hell by using all the military and political power he had
---A rogue is the guy that had the right sort of contacts to pretty much get whatever it is you needed
---A rogue is the guy that rose through the ranks of an organization for the sole purpose of spying and betraying them
---A rogue is the guy that was off rescuing victims, mentally mapping passageways, sabotaging ambushes and traps, misleading and misdirection enemies into danger, and basically speeding up your dungeon bashing game so that a quest that would have taken a month to finish, he just helped you do it in a week
---A rogue would have stolen enough money to hire, bribe, or blackmail others into doing the dirty work for them.

I can't do any of that.

Liberty's Edge

NerfPlz wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Sacred Geometry was a single Feat. The rules for, and oversight over, class design are a whole lot different.
From what I can tell, the rules for class design basically say "If it ain't a spellcaster, F~!@ IT!"
Slayer begs to disagree with you.
Slayer begs for a way to be truly meaningful outside combat.

Not in any game that actually uses skills. Which are pretty relevant in several ways even with spells about (using spells in social situations is generally not a good plan, for example).


NerfPlz wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Sacred Geometry was a single Feat. The rules for, and oversight over, class design are a whole lot different.
From what I can tell, the rules for class design basically say "If it ain't a spellcaster, F~!@ IT!"
Slayer begs to disagree with you.
Slayer begs for a way to be truly meaningful outside combat.

Explain if you don't mind.


Barachiel Shina wrote:

So tired of this debate. Really.

ROGUE does not = Super Saiyan D&D Ninja

I repeat

ROGUE does not = Super Saiyan D&D Ninja

The only problem I see people complaining about the Rogue, is that it boils down to "They're not wizards."

You can't compare any class to a Wizard. The Wizard's job is solely to make everyone else look feeble in combat. Wizards have a spell for, practically, everything.

People expect the Rogue to be this martial master of combat, except I NEVER saw the Rogue like that. Not in any edition of D&D was the Rogue ever on par with any class combat-wise.

Why not? Because that's just not what they do.

Let's get this straight folks:

---A rogue is the guy who just heisted a secure vault and managed to pin it on someone else for the crime
---A rogue is the guy that knew how to get around the city to get the information you needed without leaving a trail
---A rogue is the guy who was not there for half the battle, but that's because he set up some elaborate environmental trap on half the enemies and took them down without lifting a finger
---A rogue is that McGuyver kind of guy, his mastery over mundane tools and magical tools (as most Rogues should max out UMD) gives him an edge in almost any situation as long as they are creative enough
---A rogue is the guy who disguised himself as the guards and infiltrated to assassinate the guy that intended to make the PCs lives hell by using all the military and political power he had
---A rogue is the guy that had the right sort of contacts to pretty much get whatever it is you needed
---A rogue is the guy that rose through the ranks of an organization for the sole purpose of spying and betraying them
---A rogue is the guy that was off rescuing victims, mentally mapping passageways, sabotaging ambushes and traps, misleading and misdirection enemies into danger, and basically speeding up your dungeon bashing game so that a quest that would have taken a month to finish, he just helped you do it in a week
---A rogue would...

Because disguise and bluff are rogue only skills, yes. I see your point. Oh, and rogues have magical barriers to protect against Detect Alignment and such.. with high BAB. Ok. Gotcha. Oh, and the traps? Those traps are so very hard to avoid.. so hard to avoid they barely go off. Ever. Because no one sets them off. If they do, they better watch out for the 5d4 damage they do! Lethal!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

then you sir need better traps:)


captain yesterday wrote:
then you sir need better traps:)

How often can you prepare traps for an encounter that actually do what they're supposed to? How many times are you caught off-guard or without enough time to prepare or you're not exactly sure where the encounter will take place?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lemmy wrote:

Well... We all know the 5 stages of Rogue threads, right?

The order may vary but the list have proven to be true thread after thread.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Barachiel Shina wrote:

---A wizard is the guy who just heisted a secure vault and managed to pin it on someone else for the crime - and the patsy even remembers doing it and confessed!

---A wizard is the guy that knew how to get around the city to get the information you needed without leaving a trail -- or getting up from his comfy chair by the fire!
---A wizard is the guy who was not there for half the battle, but that's because he set up some elaborate environmental trap on half the enemies and took them down without lifting a finger or ever exposing himself to danger.
---A wizard is that McGuyver kind of guy, his mastery over mundane tools and magical tools (as he can casually max out UMD and doesn't need to roll for most toys) gives him an edge in almost any situation as long as they are creative enough...assuming his spellbook doesn't have THAT covered for much, much less gold.
---A wizard is the guy who disguised himself as the guards by actually becoming one of them via magic, and infiltrated to assassinate the guy that intended to make the PCs lives hell by using all the military and political power he had so he died at one of the hands of his own underlings.
---A wizard is the guy that had the right sort of contacts to pretty much get whatever it is you needed. You know, like entities on other planes and stuff, sages, academia, and all those underworld figures who want him to find out stuff for them, or make toys for them.
---A wizard is the guy that rose through the ranks of an organization for the sole purpose of spying and betraying them. Has the magic to ward his thoughts and conceal his alignment, divert suspicion and learn things without having to actually be there, too.
---A wizard is the guy that was off rescuing victims, mentally mapping passageways, sabotaging ambushes and traps, misleading and misdirection enemies into danger, and basically speeding up your dungeon bashing game so that a quest that would have taken a month to finish, he just helped you do it in a week. Mostly by just using Summoned creatures.
---A wizard would have stolen enough money to hire, bribe, or blackmail others into doing the dirty work for them. Or, you know, just charmed or dominated them for more reliable and quick service.

FTFY.

==Aelryinth

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
captain yesterday wrote:
then you sir need better traps:)

That can still be disabled by many other classes, or archetypes, or with the right trait, or spell, or scroll, or wand.

Oh, and those are only needed for magical traps, as anyone, with a rank in Disable Device, can disable nonmagical traps.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

wraithstrike wrote:
NerfPlz wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Sacred Geometry was a single Feat. The rules for, and oversight over, class design are a whole lot different.
From what I can tell, the rules for class design basically say "If it ain't a spellcaster, F~!@ IT!"
Slayer begs to disagree with you.
Slayer begs for a way to be truly meaningful outside combat.
Explain if you don't mind.

He's referring to lack of narrative power, as Kirth puts it.

==Aelryinth

301 to 350 of 607 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / What's the deal with the rogue hate? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.