| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
RotRL does have quite a bit of traps in it, from my recollection. That being said, if you can convince the GM to let you take the trait from Mummy's Mask that gives you trapfinding (I can't remember the name of it currently) there is almost no reason to do it.
If you don't want to play a rogue, don't. Simple as that. Don't let the rest of the party tell you what to play. They all got to choose what they wanted, don't feel beholden to their wishes if you don't like it.
Make your sorcerer and have fun. They all had a chance to play a rogue if they thought it was important, but they all decided to skip on it too.
Some AP's are rather trap heavy (I don't know if this is one of those). Some GM's add traps to anything published if it doesn't already have 'enough' traps for their taste. Some GM's up the danger from traps if they aren't lethal 'enough' for their tastes.
I don't know your GM or the AP yet. It could be that the group is feeling a real need for a rogue because of experiences. Ask them if this is the case.
Some groups (especially some really long term groups) take it as a given that there will be a rogue, cleric, fighter, and wizard in every group. You don't have anything else until those slots are filled. Kinda weird to me, but some folks play that way.
Could be no one in the group has any stealth or other skills and they really want a sneaky skill monkey.
Could be they really want to see the unchained version of rogue in play to see how much it is improved.
There could be a multitude of reasons, ranging from at least semi-legit to silly for wanting a rogue in the group. Won't know until you ask why.
However, I don't think being a rogue in and of itself is likely to be a major contributor to an 'unfun' situation.
Most players are willing to work with you on setting up flanking and stuff if you discuss it with them. Won't be an automatically done type of think for many players though.
.
.
...
I was planning on a simpler concept (blasty sorc) Yes I know a core evoker sorc is sub-par, but I wanted to avoid lots of d20 rolls and maths ...
Blaster has as much die rolling and math as almost any class except a two weapon martial or magus.
If you want little match be a SoD, debuff, or buff caster.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Be an Archaeologist Bard. They lack anyone with decent Charisma, and the Bard is just a better Rogue with this archetype. He gets Rogue talents, Uncanny Dodge and even access to advanced talents (including Improved Evasion!). Literally the only thing he doesn't have is sneak attack, but would you rather do a variable amount of damage under extenuating circumstances that often force you to put yourself in harm's way to even attempt, or would you rather have 6 levels of spellcasting?
There's literally no reason to ever play Rogue outside of a niche-Horizon Walker build, and even then I think the Ninja can still do the same thing but better anyway. Ninja, Bard, Alchemist and now even the Investigator (and arguably the Inquisitor) all do Rogue better than Rogue does Rogue. Since your team is in need of Charisma, it's down to the Ninja and the Bard. And since spells are better than what the Ninja gets, Bard is the clear winner here.
Yeah, the Rogue is an important part of a traditional dungeoneering party, due to spotting/disabling traps, picking locked doors and treasure chests open, spotting secret doors, scouting ahead for trouble, and so on.
I've never tried playing a Rogue before, it could be fun, especially if you use a character concept other than the traditional shifty thief (for example, adventure-archaeologist Indiana Jones is basically a Rogue, as are your stock gumshoes and Film-Noir private detectives, and vigilante superheroes, and traditional swash-buckling adventurers like Robin Hood and Zorro, and so on....)
If you'd really rather play a spell-caster, I'd be surprised if you couldn't fix up a Sorcerer or Wizard with the spells to open locks, reveal hidden things, detect magic, and do many of the other things a Rogue would traditionally be responsible for.
And, there's always the option of multi-classing....
Edit to Add: And what Kaouse said: the Bard covers much of the Rogue's territory, and provides another nice alternative.
Play your sorcerer and do variant multiclassing to rogue from Unchained. Guess what you get at character level 3? Trapfinding! :)
| 21 people marked this as a favorite. |
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _________
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ./ It’s a trap! \
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _,,,--~~~~~~~~--,_ . . . .\ ._________/
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,-‘ : : : :::: :::: :: : : : : :º ‘-, . . \/. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .,-‘ :: : : :::: :::: :::: :::: : : :o : ‘-, . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . ,-‘ :: ::: :: : : :: :::: :::: :: : : : : :O ‘-, . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .,-‘ : :: :: :: :: :: : : : : : , : : :º :::: :::: ::’; . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .,-‘ / / : :: :: :: :: : : :::: :::-, ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ;\ . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . /,-‘,’ :: : : : : : : : : :: :: :: : ‘-, ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ;;| . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . /,’,-‘ :: :: :: :: :: :: :: : ::_,-~~,_’-, ;; ;; ;; ;; | . . . . . . .
. . . . . _/ :,’ :/ :: :: :: : : :: :: _,-‘/ : ,-‘;’-‘’’’’~-, ;; ;; ;;,’ . . . . . . . .
. . . ,-‘ / : : : : : : ,-‘’’ : : :,--‘’ :|| /,-‘-‘--‘’’__,’’’ \ ;; ;,-‘ . . . . . . . .
. . . \ :/,, : : : _,-‘ --,,_ : : \ :\ ||/ /,-‘-‘x### ::\ \ ;;/ . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . \/ /---‘’’’ : \ #\ : :\ : : \ :\ \| | : (O##º : :/ /-‘’ . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . /,’____ : :\ ‘-#\ : \, : :\ :\ \ \ : ‘-,___,-‘,-`-,, . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . ‘ ) : : : :’’’’--,,--,,,,,,¯ \ \ :: ::--,,_’’-,,’’’¯ :’- :’-, . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .) : : : : : : ,, : ‘’’’~~~~’ \ :: :: :: :’’’’’¯ :: ,-‘ :,/\ . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .\,/ /|\\| | :/ / : : : : : : : ,’-, :: :: :: :: ::,--‘’ :,-‘ \ \ . . . . . . . .
. . . . .\\’|\\ \|/ ‘/ / :: :_--,, : , | )’; :: :: :: :,-‘’ : ,-‘ : : :\ \, . . . . . . .
. . . ./¯ :| \ |\ : |/\ :: ::----, :\/ :|/ :: :: ,-‘’ : :,-‘ : : : : : : ‘’-,,_ . . . .
. . ..| : : :/ ‘’-(, :: :: :: ‘’’’’~,,,,,’’ :: ,-‘’ : :,-‘ : : : : : : : : :,-‘’’\\ . . . .
. ,-‘ : : : | : : ‘’) : : :¯’’’’~-,: : ,--‘’’ : :,-‘’ : : : : : : : : : ,-‘ :¯’’’’’-,_ .
./ : : : : :’-, :: | :: :: :: _,,-‘’’’¯ : ,--‘’ : : : : : : : : : : : / : : : : : : :’’-,
/ : : : : : -, :¯’’’’’’’’’’’¯ : : _,,-~’’ : : : : : : : : : : : : : :| : : : : : : : : :
: : : : : : :¯’’~~~~~~’’’ : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : | : : : : : : : : :
Seeker sorcerer gets trapfinding I think. As does urban ranger and a few others.
You said, "this group does not appear big on teamwork" and yet the GROUP has asked you to play a rogue. By not playing a rogue, you appear to be the one who is not big on teamwork.
At the very least, you might foster an increase in teamwork by acquiescing to their request. And you might also decrease the teamwork by ignoring the group's request.
I think you should play the Unchained rogue, if for no other reason than to have to opportunity to see how it really stacks up against core classes. Sure, it looks better on paper, but is it actually any better?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You said, "this group does not appear big on teamwork" and yet the GROUP has asked you to play a rogue. By not playing a rogue, you appear to be the one who is not big on teamwork.
At the very least, you might foster an increase in teamwork by acquiescing to their request. And you might also decrease the teamwork by ignoring the group's request.
I think you should play the Unchained rogue, if for no other reason than to have to opportunity to see how it really stacks up against core classes. Sure, it looks better on paper, but is it actually any better?
Are you suggesting that someone play something they don't have any interest in playing for 5/6ths of an AP for 'teamwork'? Also, in my opinion the group is definitely the problem teamwork-wise if they plan to force a new player into a role.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmnnn - so, the group is pushing hard for a rogue AND they aren't big on teamwork (according to OP)? I think I know what "role" the rogue is going to play...
"Hey, that hallway looks like it could be trapped - send in the rogue" (trap goes boom, rogue dies).
"We need someone to scout ahead - send the rogue" (monster surprises rogue, rogue gets eaten).
"Hey look - a locked chest - everyone stand waaaaay back, and Mr. Rogue, you open the chest." (Trap on chest goes boom, rogue dies, party collects treasure.)
Now, I'm not saying OP's group is like that - but I've been in groups that played very much like the above - in one group, rogue's had a 100% death rate (then I broke the streak by playing a rogue myself - but I was most emphatically NOT a trap finder type).
Don't be their canary in the coal mine. Play what you want to play. I liked the suggestion of being a Bard - you can buff, you can be the party face, and you aren't really the "trap finder". RotRL can definitely make use of a party face at times, for sure.
When a trap rears it's ugly head, time for some teamwork to figure it out instead of the old hackneyed cliché of "send in the rogue" (and hope you - the rogue - doesn't get killed). If they don't have a rogue to sacrifice - well, so much the better. Try not to be that sacrifice.
Go ahead and play a rogue. Just don't play like a typical rogue.
Take firearm proficiency and Amateur Gunslinger. Prestige into Shadow Dancer. Max out Stealth and stock up on stealth boosting magic. Use hide in plain sight to do flat footed touch AC sneak attacks every round. Use the Sniping rules to maintain stealth while firing.
Be a Cutpurse. Max out slight of hand. Use hide in plain sight to plant traps on enemies. Use Steal maneuvers to take all their stuff during combat.
Take craft trap. Make deployable turrets.
Get an anvil enchanted with a 3x per day Shrink effect. Sovergn glue a chain and maniacle to it. Stealthily snap it onto to enemies during combat. Dismiss the shrink.
Basically if you try to be a typical two blade stab by rogue you're going to feel subpar a lot of the time.
If you get creative with stealth and slight of hand you can do some amazing things with a rogue. The not so hidden truth is that rogues aren't a combat class. The problem is that people try to play them like one. If you play them more like a wizard you'll have more fun.
There are all sorts of archetypes that allow for trapfinding, but this campaign is core-only (with one exception). So that limits things back down to the rogue.
Outside of the trap thing, they might just feel that they could use a debilitation specialist on the field, and some more skills off the field. *shrug*
The important thing is that you play what you're comfortable playing. If you don't want to play a rogue, express that. Ask if the GM will allow you to play an archetype from another book so that you can pick up trapfinding. That will allow you to play another class while meeting the need of the group (assuming that's their concern).
From a power level perspective, Unchained Rogue should be pretty strong in a core-only group. It will involve rolling dice, though. I think the only classes that don't involve dice rolling are buffing-bard and save-or-suck caster.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Guys.
OP said core only.
Unless he means CRB+UM+UE+APG+etc that means no archetypes or traits or anything else outside the CRB.
If your party has issues with teamwork, a non-archetyped rogue is going to probably have a bad time.
They are almost completely dependent on getting the flank.
If the group is using traits, I'd ask the gm to allow the trap finder trait, then you can play whatever class you want and still be the 'trap' guy, at least to a point. I am exceptionally opposed to forcing a player to play a specific class to cover a role, and since the gm is limiting things to core only (which makes it harder) I would ask for a reasonable accomodation to allow the party to have everything covered without forcing someone to play something they dont want to.
|
Rise of the Runelords AP, Anniversary edition.
Core only, except Unchained rogue allowed.
20 point buy.
Level 3.
Slow advancement (more than 4 players, though not everyone shows up each session.)
Rest of party includes:
Druid, Ranger, Cleric, Wizard, Fighter.
Halfway or more through book 1.
With out using arch types of any kind Bards can do traps. Even magic traps. It takes two things 1 trait: Vagabond Child, and 2 second level spell Aram Zey's Focus. You could also do it as a wizard.
Their are a few things to look at first. First will you have fun playing this character? Second what would you play instead of a rogue? Third what job role dose the group need filled?
My best suggestion is play a bard, or unchained rogue. Both will fill the role the group is looking for. The bard will do a better job for the group. The unchained rogue will be more powerful. It's just personal preference.
Just a sample of what you can do with a unchained rogue.
Human
Str 8
Dex 18
con 14
Int 14
Wis 10
Cha 12
Skills: 8(Base)+2(Int Mod)+1(skilled)= 11 skill points per level.
Feet's & Rogue Talents
1: Human Feet: Two Weapon Fighting
Martial Weapon: Kukri (The one extra threat range is for improved critical or keen brining it down to 15-20)
Rogue Finesses
2: Rogue Talent: Surprise Attack
3: Double Slice
Rogue Finesses: Kukri (Full dex to damage on both attacks.)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
TCG, you have way too much spare time. Go start a PbP homebrew campaign merging PF, Cthulu, and the old d6 Star Wars rules in the Gammaworld universe. That might keep you busy for a while.
.
.
Also, we don't know the system mastery level of the group. They may honestly not know there are other ways to take care of those classic 'roles' in the party.
Another thing would be knowing the actual roles of the rest of the party. The druid, fighter, ranger, and cleric could all be melee machines. The druid and cleric could be offensive casters. PF lets you make almost any class fill almost any role to the point where just the class name doesn't really tell you very much about the character anymore.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some seem to be missing that the OP specified Core only, except for the unchained rogue.
Some decent advice above in some posts that didn't ignore the directive of Core only except add Unchained Rogue . . .
Before all that, try to find out why the previous Rogue left.
...
Before all that, try to find out why the previous Rogue left.
Wouldn't it be ironic if he/she got tired of playing a rogue?
A group I occasionally (board) game with had this kind of problem, always trying to get the 'new guy' to pull Rogue detail. Having 'Rogued' before, they grilled me during my last catastrophic Catan fiasco. My advice was to widen the range of skills allowed to Rogues, raid 3pp for options, understand the bluff and other ways to create SA opportunities and help the next new Rogue to more fully exploit the class' often bewildering array of RP and combat options. Currently the 'I only play Wizards' member has become the regular Rogue. He did watch me play my 15 year Rogue in a friend's 3.0 game (very intermittent game) and took notes. Lots of them.
A few months ago, Dragon Riders(?), with three core players from the group, griping about how overpowered the Pf Rogue is. I see it as someone actually knowing how to play an admittedly weak class in virtually everything scene the group is in. He also tends to hog the limelight, but now he isn't restricted by his daily spell slots.
Play what you like. I know you said core, but I bet they'd like you play any rogue-type. I'm playing a dirty trick slayer with trapfinding in Emerald Spire and loving it. Having quick dirty trick + greater dirty trick at level 6 is fun, fun, fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Play whatever you want. Take Leadership and get a rogue cohort.
You should find out why the previous player of a rogue left.
Core only includes Arcane Trickster. It would allow you to add sneak attack to some blasting spells. If you wanted to play a blaster, it is possible this route would allow you to do both. I would suggest going Arcane Trickster via Wizard rather than Sorc though, you will want the Int for the skill points.
I've seen a sage sorc (though it isn't core) arcane trickster that used mostly ray spells from invisibility to add his sneak attack damage to the ray. Was pretty effective most of the time.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
TCG, you have way too much spare time. Go start a PbP homebrew campaign merging PF, Cthulu, and the old d6 Star Wars rules in the Gammaworld universe. That might keep you busy for a while.
This isn't amateur hour. I googled that and pasted. lol
ASCII It's a trap
I wouldn't play in this game if they forced you to stay Core. I'm sure that's no problem to the three people playing a Wizard, Cleric, and Druid, but the Rogue is completely nonfunctional without archetypes like the Thug or Scout.
I wouldn't play in this game if they forced you to stay Core. I'm sure that's no problem to the three people playing a Wizard, Cleric, and Druid, but the Rogue is completely nonfunctional without archetypes like the Thug or Scout.
Read the OP post again
I did? The Unchained Rogue is still pretty garbage without archetypes. Meanwhile this party is rocking the three strongest Core classes and the best Core martial (also a Fighter). If they want to deal with traps and they don't want the OP to play a good Rogue then the Cleric can prepare Summon Monster.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You have very strong opinions
You have very strong opinions
It's a legitimate concern when the game is set up so that the current players have decent classes(plus a fighter) and the new guy gets shoehorned into eating ****. I wouldn't play either, quite frankly.
It doesn't have to be this way. The player could play something like the seeker sorcerer archetype and make the party happy while playing what they want to play. The only reason they can't fill out a role while still having fun is a more or less arbitrary strict insistence on "Core only" despite this coming at the cost of a player's enjoyment. I don't see what is wrong about having a strong opinion about how unfair and unfun this is.
You have very strong opinionsIt's a legitimate concern when the game is set up so that the current players have decent classes(plus a fighter) and the new guy gets shoehorned into eating ****. I wouldn't play either, quite frankly.
It doesn't have to be this way. The player could play something like the seeker sorcerer archetype and make the party happy while playing what they want to play. The only reason they can't fill out a role while still having fun is a more or less arbitrary strict insistence on "Core only" despite this coming at the cost of a player's enjoyment. I don't see what is wrong about having a strong opinion about how unfair and unfun this is.
Or at minimum one level of rogue then level up another class.
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
You said, "this group does not appear big on teamwork" and yet the GROUP has asked you to play a rogue. By not playing a rogue, you appear to be the one who is not big on teamwork.
Teamwork is "hey can I have a flank" "hey, can you memorize this one spell for me" or "I need a heal!". Not. "You must play this class"
At the very least, you might foster an increase in teamwork by acquiescing to their request. And you might also decrease the teamwork by ignoring the group's request.
No.
This is the mantra of bully victims everywhere. 'Oh, if I'm nicer to them they'll just stop right?' Has that EVER worked?
I think you should play the Unchained rogue, if for no other reason than to have to opportunity to see how it really stacks up against core classes. Sure, it looks better on paper, but is it actually any better?
Its a definite improvement.
Yah, everything about this screams "dip rogue and go full barbarian" to me. :)
Play what you want. At least 3 characters can already use Cure Light Wound wands, so they can heal the fighter up after the trap goes off. :-P
I'm playing in a 5th Edition conversion of RotRL right now, and while our rogue is helpful, she isn't vital. We have other ways to deal with locks (axes). Sneaking is always useful, but the ranger can do that.
There ARE large groups of monsters in RotRL, so blasting IS useful!!!!
If they want a trap guy, get a cryptbreaker/ vivisectionist alchemist, Or just dip a level in trapper ranger on whatever you want to play. Or just get the trait from risen from the sands.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If they want a trap guy, get a cryptbreaker/ vivisectionist alchemist, Or just dip a level in trapper ranger on whatever you want to play. Or just get the trait from risen from the sands.
Core only (and by that I mean CRB only).
Hence the problem.
If it wasn't core only the OP could play a Seeker Sorcerer(or a dozen other things) and this would be a non issue.
Just be a dwarf then. Or move through the dungeon slowly while looking.
|
If you don't want to play a Rogue, don't play a Rogue.
By 'core only' do you mean 'only core classes' or do you mean 'nothing from anywhere but the core book'? And are Traits allowed?
If the only restriction is on what Classes you can play, Archaeologist Bard or Seeker Sorcerer have your back, and allow you to do the things you 'need' a Rogue for with little effort and a very different play style. Aram Zey's Focus is also an excellent spell that allows anyone with Disable Device to serve as an effective trapfinder.
If you're stuck with the core book only, your options are more limited, but a Bard or Sorcerer willing to burn 1st level spells can manage traps just fine via Summon Monster I and disposable badgers, and the aforementioned adamantine weapon for door-breaking.
In short, I'd be nice to the party and make sure you can handle traps and locks. But that in no way necessitates playing a Rogue if you don't wish to.