Archery: Rogues vs Rangers

[Zaetar]

Claxon wrote:

So thoughts:
1) Other things being broken are not justification to allow new broken things
2) Animal companions lose effectiveness around level 10. They aren't ever really effective offensively unless you can get Boon Companion. Because a Ranger must split loot with an animal companion to enhance its combat effectiveness it makes the ranger less effective. At level 12 average is 27 for monsters. An animal companion with boon companion is likely going to have a to hit of 14 (9 from BAB and 5 from strength for a wolf) without any gear to help him. That's a 35% chance to hit. While good at low levels they honestly just don't scale enough to remain useful unless you're willing to...

1) You mean allow old stuff that became broken due to new stuff?

2) You still play 2 PCs, You get everything that companion gives. The ranger itself focuses mainly in combat, while making use of spells on both himself and his companion.

There is nearly nothing you can compare the rogue i mentioned with, to keep saying it's broken or OP. I already mentioned obvious ways to counter it, and basically any other rogue or stealth-based PC. There can be permanently invisible characters and npcs but i cant hide by myself and do the same? Now, that's unfair.

Note that being stealth doesnt mean im completly invulnerable to damage because they cant see me. A DM can make many many moves against invisible characters, and the stealth build, no matter how many ranks i got in it will not be 100% perfect, and i'll not land sneak attacks on all the attacks.

This would only let me full attack and try to remain invisible. What if the DM makes an npc send its pet to find me?
What if the npc shoots area spells to make me pop up?
What if the npc has a sense to which i dont have a counter in that moment?
What if the situation is so s**pid, that making a HiPS stealth check will not be allowed? This isn't Skyrim after all.
What if something appears from behind and im the nearest target?

Do you even think that something like that is easy to pull out?
The build is a late bloomer, meaning it will only be effective after at least level 10 or 12. Also by "full attack" it doesnt mean 5 shots right out of the bat, I need level 20 for that. We dont play campaigns starting at more than level 4 or 5, we mostly start out at level 1.

So please tell me how in the world is that talent broken. People will be casting all sorts of spells, pouncing around, hitting like there is no tomorrow and then there is me hiding and trying to manage some sneak attacks through all that.

It's not making it unfair for the PCs just to counter one. Its plain challenge, simple as that. If you want to see it the former way, do it, you are quite the negative person. If you want to do the latter, then it encourages me to keep playing till it fails and I die. Another different matter is being a lazy butt DM making no effort whatsoever on trying to play a challenge, because from another point of view, the DM is also a player in the game and the other people is his challenge. Being DM is not for lazy people that think "it's not worth it", its for people that is up to create and deal with imaginative and smart strategies.

You keep seeing things from your point of view, I understand it. From your pov it makes sense. But it starts not making sense when you see it from my pov, and if you mix both then yours makes no sense AT ALL. I can keep listing more "broken" stuff that happens to come from paizo, but i can bet anything that you'll keep defending your anti-3pp position because of some non-existing reason.

[Imbicatus]

Look not everyone plays the game the same way. That fine. Some of us don't care for 3pp products. It's not a question of balance, but a question of does this fit in my game. For several people, that's no for any number of reasons. If you don't like that, don't play in those games, and run your own however you see fit.

[Zaetar]

It just pisses me off how people can contradict themselves. I want something and they say no, but they use something that is the same or worse.

Doesnt make any sense.

[The Bald Man]

I thought this was a thread ranger vs rogue archers; not the validity of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd party.

To the OP. I believe you will have more fun with the Ranger over the rogue. Rogue has a hard time hitting and with ranged attacks a hard time getting sneak attacks. Ranger will be getting more attacks at a better bonus.

Ranger has a lot of skill points for near the versatility of the rogue.

[Yuukale]

Claxus, you said that it's possible to get SA on every attack, I don't know many, besides:

1- oracle with special sight to use fog/darkness to blind opponents
2- magus arcana at 6 to allow SA

what else is there to allow SA on every attack?

The hellcat stealth only allows for sniping, having two shots at best with the combat trick, right?

[Wei Ji the Learner]

With the Ranger, if you don't want the pet (because pets aren't 'your thing' or character reasons or whatnot) there are a bunch of archetypes out there that Rangers can use that don't involve a pet. So too, for Slayer.

[Claxon]

Yuukale wrote:

Claxus, you said that it's possible to get SA on every attack, I don't know many, besides:

1- oracle with special sight to use fog/darkness to blind opponents
2- magus arcana at 6 to allow SA

what else is there to allow SA on every attack?

The hellcat stealth only allows for sniping, having two shots at best with the combat trick, right?

The OP is asking about the 3rd party talent which would allow him to make a full attack while sniping. With the way sniping works, if he successfully uses stealth then he gets sneak attack on each attack.

I'm arguing for why such a talent would be overpowered and shouldn't be allowed.

Now, if he were to use the Paizo feat by the same name Master Sniper, which only allows for two attacks on while sniping that is perfectly reasonable and balanced. It's good, and makes sniping an OK option, even if it wont be the king of DPR. The bonus of no one being able to locate you to harm you is a pretty great bonus. You basically just need a way to get hide in plain sight (Hell Cat Stealth) and you've got a good character setup.

[Claxon]

Zaetar wrote:

1) You mean allow old stuff that became broken due to new stuff?

2) You still play 2 PCs, You get everything that companion gives. The ranger itself focuses mainly in combat, while making use of spells on both himself and his companion.

There is nearly nothing you can compare the rogue i mentioned with, to keep saying it's broken or OP. I already mentioned obvious ways to counter it, and basically any other rogue or stealth-based PC. There can be permanently invisible characters and npcs but i cant hide by myself and do the same? Now, that's unfair.

Note that being stealth doesnt mean im completly invulnerable to damage because they cant see me. A DM can make many many moves against invisible characters, and the stealth build, no matter how many ranks i got in it will not be 100% perfect, and i'll not land sneak attacks on all the attacks.

This would only let me full attack and try to remain invisible. What if the DM makes an npc send its pet to find me?
What if the npc shoots area spells to make me pop up?
What if the npc has a sense to which i dont have a counter in that moment?
What if the situation is so s**pid, that making a HiPS stealth check will not be allowed? This isn't Skyrim after all.
What if something appears from behind and im the nearest target?

Do you even think that something like that is easy to pull out?
The build is a late bloomer, meaning it will only be effective after at least level 10 or 12. Also by "full attack" it doesnt mean 5 shots right out of the bat, I need level 20 for that. We dont play campaigns starting at more than level 4 or 5, we mostly start out at level 1.

So please tell me how in the world is that talent broken. People will be casting all sorts of spells, pouncing around, hitting like there is no tomorrow and then there is me hiding and trying to manage some sneak attacks through all that.

It's not making it unfair for the PCs just to counter one. Its plain challenge, simple as that. If you want to see it the former way, do it, you are quite the negative person. If you want to do the latter, then it encourages me to keep playing till it fails and I die. Another different matter is being a lazy butt DM making no effort whatsoever on trying to play a challenge, because from another point of view, the DM is also a player in the game and the other people is his challenge. Being DM is not for lazy people that think "it's not worth it", its for people that is up to create and deal with imaginative and smart strategies.

You keep seeing things from your point of view, I understand it. From your pov it makes sense. But it starts not making sense when you see it from my pov, and if you mix both then yours makes no sense AT ALL. I can keep listing more "broken" stuff that happens to come from paizo, but i can bet anything that you'll keep defending your anti-3pp position because of some non-existing reason.

1) I'm confused here because I'm not sure what you're talking about. The talent you want is broken regardless of any other material besides the required material to take it. The fact that the penalty will only be -10 and mix maxing your stealth can make the irrelevant.

2) Playing two characters isn't relevant if the 2nd character isn't effective. And you keep talking about spells as though they're a big bonus to a ranger. They get so few spells per day and such a weak spell list that it isn't much of a bonus. Yes rogues could still use a boost even after unchained. No, allowing this talent isn't the way to do it.

Having to build in a counter to deal with a powerful character means something is obviously not balanced. I'm not saying you shouldn't do things that occasionally challenge players by forcing them out of their box. But I am saying that if every encounter requires Wind Wall to prevent the archer rogue from decimating the encounter then there is a problem. Also, there isn't a way (to my knowledge) for a character to become permanently invisible. You can permanently invisible objects, but not creatures.

Also please note there is an important difference between invisible and hidden. Your character would be invisible. If he were merely invisible spells could defeat that easily. Being hidden means that don't know your location. If they don't know your location, they can't attack you. They can't make any targeted attacks against you. The only thing they could do is guess where you are and use AOE attacks. But that doesn't make you noticeable to the enemy.

This isn't a 3rd party issue. It's an issue of balance. You keep claiming I'm anti third party when I'm not. I'm against allowing broken 3rd party material. I'm also against 1st party broken stuff. Like spell perfection.

Regardless, I'm done arguing this with you because it is obviously not fruitful to do so.

[Zaetar]

The thing is that you keep saying it's broken, when it's not.
There are plenty of things that are even more deadly than this, but only because its 3pp you say it's broken. What if paizo published it instead?

In the team's balance a rogue or slayer with this talent will still be in the bad side of the balance, with the other players still being more useful and powerful. This would only allow you to land a full attack of sneak attacks IF you manage to hide first.

For that you need the so important HiPS that would either give you more penalization (Hellcat Stealth), devour the little amount of feats you have (Shadowdancer level, Eldritch Heritage) or take talent slots for terrain mastery and HiPS for those terrains.

What you fail to see is that the talent doesnt balance itself. It balances with the build you choose.

Starting with the talent itself, it adds you another -20, so you really cant use this unless you optimize this really really well. If you lose the check, you lose the entire attack (not hitting with sneak attack) due to losing stealth. And if you optimize this for stealth really really well you'll be on the losing end of everything else.

First and foremost you lack HiPS, you can get it either:
-By taking lots of feats for it, you reduce your damage output, your chances to land the arrows or your capacity to counter senses. Or a bit of each.
-By taking lots of talents, you lose debuffs, extra damage, and feats.
OR
-By using magic to compensate the lack of HiPS you'd need to spend lots amounts of money, negotiate with the DM if you want them crafted, make another player craft it. In any case high levels and lots of money are involved.

The build itself leaves holes for weaknesses, lots of them, so it cant be optimized to a 100%. Unlike many other builds from other classes.

And the fact that you are hidden (not invisible) doesnt mean the enemy cant attempt to find you, nor that you are immune to area of effect spells that could damage or hinder you. Dont forget that while you snipe, you dont move...that means that shooting risks them finding you because you dont move, and if you do move you cant shoot.

You can throw at me all the solutions to everything, but it's not a fighter it's a rogue/slayer, you cant have everything so there is your weakness, a big one. And basically, the moment you get a bad roll, you ruined everything. They'll know where you are, where to search if you hide again, where to shoot AoES, etc. That pretty much balances what the talent gives you.

There are plenty of broken things if you look at them by and for themselves, instead in conjunction with other things.