| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like the Scoundrel more for the tactical choices (feints, -2 reflex, demoralize and rogue feats that needs legendary deception) than to cause damage so I would probably have something at lvl human 1 like:
STR 12
DEX 18/16
CON 12
INT 10
WIS 10
CHA 16/18
And at lvl 20 end with:
STR 18
DEX 24/22
CON 18
INT 10
WIS 16
CHA 20/22
Because you gain 4 boosts every 5 levels I find pretty easy to be alternating between STR/WIS/CON.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with Kyrone.
I love the scoundrel build. I also recognize that it is not a build for Best solo DPR, nor for solo tactics as a whole. I think a lot of people will think the Bard is the best class choice for doing Intimidate and deception shenanigans, but the class ability of the scoundrel is absolutely brutal and you actually get the skill feats to work some nastiness with it. You will just never match either other rogue type for damage.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
1. Generous boosts and the half-boosts after 18 mean that the numbers tighten with higher levels. I know, unsatisfying for lower level play, but MAD does fade.
2. For combat, the other two rackets are superior, solo or in a group.
Feint goes vs. Perc which is universally high for monsters so don't expect a crit to help your buddies. The action is likely better used getting into a flank, though there are the few enemies where Feint works and flanking doesn't.
And for reasons you pointed out as well.
3. Doesn't that make them bad? If you prioritize combat, yes. So only for 90%+ of the players. But I do know of campaigns that have so much social emphasis that being able to tie a Rogue's skill dominance w/ an 18 Charisma makes for a formidable PC.
4. So don't take Scoundrel if you want to build a combatant. Example Scoundrel usage was: barrister, diplomat, or politician. Not typical adventurer material, which makes me think Scoundrels aren't great for adventuring. And they aren't. (It's too bad because I see the word "scoundrel" as having a dangerous edge to it, but it can be just a manipulative con artist too.)
5. There had to be a non-magical face option for PF2, even if mainly for niche games or NPCs. Scoundrels can fill many roles in a PF2 universe because GMs don't want every politician or snake-oil salesman to be oddly good at stabbing & beating, or spellcasting.
6. As you pointed out, if you're taking your main ability in Cha, you should have a high Cha. I'd go further and say never take Scoundrel unless you want maximum Charisma (so 18, except Dwarfs at 16). Take it only if you want to be the maximum face possible at the cost of combat prowess (et al). Otherwise the bonus skill isn't worth it on a class that can get nearly all the skills and the so-so racket doesn't unlock any extraordinary feats. And even as a face, the combat rackets can stay right on your heels, so that really, really has to matter.
But I do think you'd be the best face, having the max stat and sweeping up all the social Skill Feats rapidly.
7. A Scoundrel is redeemable in combat. The solutions aren't straightforward and most require an MCD or trickery. Demoralize would matter more, as would other Skill tricks for combat. Trying to build a weapon-based combatant (other than perhaps w/ a Whip doing maneuvers) means you should've chosen a different Racket.
8. Overall, I think a useful player could make a useful PC w/ Scoundrel. I would warn against it in PFS or a small group where PCs should fulfill multiple roles, but in a group w/ enough firepower in a campaign w/ a sizable (perhaps dangerous!) social component: a Scoundrel could flourish.
Cheers
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Scoundrels can do fine adventuring...but there's a reason they get two Skills to the other Rackets one. You can still go Dex 18 and be fine in combat (and likely should), then grab Cha 16 and emphasize Cha skills really hard, maybe multiclassing into Bard or Sorcerer eventually.
Being a tad worse in combat (which you are) but a bit better in Skills (which you can be) is a different emphasis than many characters, but it's workable, and you're not bad at combat, just slightly worse than other Rogues (who are, for the record, quite good).
Hypothetical question - assuming a game that does not seem like it will get to level 13 and beyond - would a Human scoundrel with high strength and low Dex with medium armour be something that could work ?
So a world where that expert armour proficiency issue is never a thing...
I was going to (and still probably will) make a request for advice post on just such a scoundrel that I am looking to build to recreate an old PC for a friends homebrew game ...
One aspect was going to be what the minimum recommended Charisma is? Sounds like 16? As mentioned perception looks like a relatively high save (or at least not one you can just bowl over using assurance like others)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually think an 18 Dex on a scoundrel is overrated and agree with the assessment that you are better off with an 18 Cha that you keep maxed the whole time, while Prioritizing intimidation and deception with feats and increases. Having a Dex of 16 lets you start with a the same defense as having a Dec of 18 as long as you boost STR to 12, which is a good idea anyway.
By level 2, with Expert deception you are rocking a +10 vs a perception DC in 16-18 range, and on a success, you have until the end of your next turn to get an attack in, and you are not expected to make the classic rookie rogue mistake of pushing too far into the enemies lines and easily exposing yourself to a counter flank. I'd recommend starting with nimble dodge and then Distracting Feint at level 2 and your Blaster caster ally is going to love you forever and ever. By level 3 you can be expert in Intimidate as well and if and when you drop the Demoralize, then Feint, you've pretty much dropped one of the meanest one-two debuff punches in the game.
I was actually looking at 16 strength and 16 charisma.
I guess I don't like the idea of such low "base" damage. But perhaps I am overvaluing that +2
Also part of the that is mirroring the base of the character I am trying to replicate but that doesn't need to be fixed
Does distracting feint actually help the Scoundrel themselves or is it more of a general debuff. I guess it helps with trip?
And reducing perception DC would presumably make further feinting easier? Can you feint someone who is already flat footed to extend the duration
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hypothetical question - assuming a game that does not seem like it will get to level 13 and beyond - would a Human scoundrel with high strength and low Dex with medium armour be something that could work ?
So a world where that expert armour proficiency issue is never a thing...
I was going to (and still probably will) make a request for advice post on just such a scoundrel that I am looking to build to recreate an old PC for a friends homebrew game ...
One aspect was going to be what the minimum recommended Charisma is? Sounds like 16? As mentioned perception looks like a relatively high save (or at least not one you can just bowl over using assurance like others)
Why not a Ruffian (w/ Cha & emphasis on Cha skill/feats)?
Perception is so consistently high, I don't think you can use Assurance against anything you actually fear. (I did a quick skim when considering it myself.)
Assurance needs to attack lowest saves, where at level it squeaks by when it does work. (Though that's a decent amount of the time, and being automatic is pretty sweet.)
W/ a good Charisma, you'll Feint fine, but seldom trigger that bonus for your friends. And it's not like only Scoundrels can Feint, though since flanking gives the same bonus w/o a roll (and includes a friend), I can't see the value of selecting one's Racket around Feint.
Why not a Ruffian (w/ Cha & emphasis on Cha skill/feats)?Honestly, yeah, I'd just do this. Lets you get an 18/16. You can't take all the cool scoundrel stuff, but I think the ruffian has the best debuff of the group for their double debilitation, being able to hand out clumsy and further penalize enemy ACs.
Note that with Ruffian, I think the "simple weapons" ability is a trap... Just use a Rapier or Short Sword with Strength, as it's better than any simple non-agile/non-finesse weapon you'll find.
The simple weapons aren't an improvement over martial weapons, but it does give some breadth. You could get a good blunt weapon for skeletons or a longspear when you want reach.
Also it could be funny to have a Ruffian/MCD Cleric of Nethys w/ the d10 staff smackdown. Nice vs. an enemy immune to crits or precision damage.
(I don't think Nethys would approve of such mundane means though!)
I think the core issue is that players are still stuck in the whole...Cha is only good for Diplomacy mindset. Cha's a bad stat if the players don't want to use it. You can feint and flat-foot enemies or create distractions for pickpocketing with Deception, you can also make money with Bargain Hunter via Diplomacy. Nevermind the social options of both. There's plenty of upsides to Intimidating and enemy in combat as well, as Frightened applies to AC as well.
If you're worried about mad with all these ability points we get, go Cha and Dex and enjoy more attacks being vs flat-footed than ruffian or thief, and have an easier time creating situations for Pickpocketing while also making money with Performance.
Never understood the need to call something bad because it isn't a min-maxers wet dream or you just can't find a reason to roleplay an a character that excells in social aspects.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How much strength do you really need? Strength is going to add at most 4 points of damage, since you're not going past 18.
I was planning on doing a Scoundrel with 18 Dex, 16 Cha, and 12 Str and going for the Aldori archetype.
Well part of the reason for scoundrel is because, by any definition this character is a scoundrel. Of course there wasn't really a scoundrel sub class in the same way
The stats were partially musing on a legacy idea. He was from a 15 point buy core + apg only game.
I thought Braggart best fit him so picked cavalier and we only played at level 1!
His stats were originally: 16, 12, 14, 10, 8, 14 (might have the 10 and 12 the wrong way around). If i hadn't been content limited he always would have been a Daring Champion so I suppose I would be happy with switching him to Dex
*
What are the details on the Aldori archetype?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What are the details on the Aldori archetype?
I don't have the book yet, but as I understand it you need proficiency in the Aldori Dueling sword (an advanced weapon, which is d8, 1 handed, and finesse) and it ties your proficiency in the Aldori sword to your class proficiency (so expert at 5, master at 13).
Obviously the natural entry would be fighter, but if you wanted to play an Aldori who was a rake, a cad, a heel, etc. the scoundrel rogue feels more appropriate than any other choice.
For a rogue that would need two weapon proficiency general feats though wouldn't it?
For a rogue that would need two weapon proficiency general feats though wouldn't it?
Which is doable at level 1 if you're human, and you can still come back around and spend your level 5 ancestry feat on Natural Ambition (Then level 9 on Multitalented).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also it could be funny to have a Ruffian/MCD Cleric of Nethys w/ the d10 staff smackdown. Nice vs. an enemy immune to crits or precision damage.
I made up a Ruffian/MCD storm druid: Snag a Primeval Mistletoe and you get a free Shillelagh every 10 min.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This looks quite nice, but to make it fully operational you need a source of a cantrip (so an Elf, a Multiclass, Minor Magic)
You definitely want the multiclass. Otherwise you won't be able to advance your spell proficiency.
Stuff like minor magic is really only there for utility spells. That said, scoundrel-sorc is pretty fun.
I realised that a bunch of my scoundrel questions are kind of based on stat spread so decided to post here. Will move it if necessary.
**
My old character was a Cockatrice Cavalier - in it for the Braggart Ability. In one game (the one he would be being rebuilt for) he had to be a traditional cavalier as it was Core + APG.
(Another he was Daring Champion).
The inspiration was parts Gilderoy Lockhart, Zapp Brannigan, Harry Flashman and Jaime Lannister. So a complete Scoundrel whose main focus was charm and deception
In the game he was played from level 1 he introduced himself as a "Paladin" and was trading off the respect and prestige. Rich Parents gave me a Breastplate at level 1 but this isn't necessary to keep
He took part in a raid on a storehouse and expertly bounded across a rooftop and stealthed with some amazing rolls
So this is what is now pointing me towards the Scoundrel as a new chassis
An interesting wrinkle is the final act of our game involved escaping on a boat that was attacked and downed by an Aboleth (which opens up a good excuse for Sorcerer multi class dedication if I want to)
*
This game was always intended to be a low level, lower magic game. This is why I am not interested in the debate over proficiency scaling of armour at level 13. It will simply never get there
(Also no Champion Dedication as he is decidedly not "Good". By any stretch of the imagination)
It will start at Level 2
As far as I can tell this game is likely to be highly urban based and we would have to come up with how we have been earning money in the time since we last played etc.
*
I can use a Human general feat to get the breastplate and can closely mimic my old scores by getting 16, 12, 14, 10, 10, 16.
Higher strength opens up some other maneuver options in theory...
But this could easily be changed to one of the other suggestions above with higher dex and lower strength. This could open up 12, 18, 12, 10, 10, 16 or something similar...
*
In principle I like Scoundrel over Ruffian (that has been suggested above) as being flat footed for the rest of the turn plus the next seems very strong even without the critical effect. And unless I have misread you can try again in the same turn if you fail as long as you have the actions
*
My questions:
- I assume 16 is fine for charisma? I can see Perception can get quite high on some foes but I'd like to think I don't need 18 at the start
- What are useful early skill feats? I like Lie to Me. Are there may early ones that also help in combat that I might have overlooked?
- I would be going for Charlatan or Noble as a background most likely. What are the thoughts on those skill feats? The noble one seems unnecessary if you have good Diplomacy. And Charming Liar seems unlikely to pull off against anyone you would want it to work on as Perception DCs seem relatively high...(all whiteroom stuff of course)
- I am torn between Nimble Dodge and You're Next as AC is obviously very useful but You're Next helps with debuffing but if far more situational. So it is probably Nimble Dodge
- What are the true benefits of Distracting Feint. So if you have an ally who targets reflexes it would be useful. I haven't fully digested the new edition yet. What else does Reflex and Perception govern in combat?
Trip and Disarm for Reflex? Further Feints for Perception. Anything else?
I ask because I am wondering if I should take this or Sorcerer dedication due to the aftermath of Aboleth influence
- What Sorcerer cantrips/spells/abilities would best support a Scoundrel build? An attack to give an alternate option? Shield? Or are the rogue feats more useful here?
- For that matter how do people looking at Scoundrel consider equipping them beyond the rapier? A shield plus nimble dodge gives very good AC. And Agile second weapon would allow as many benefits from flat footed as possible...
- what later feats (if any) are pretty much essential for a Scoundrel character (class or skill feats)? I am trying to conceptualise how many multiclass feats I can potentially take if I use this character in a higher level game
We have a player very positive about Thief, so we looked into other Rogue options for future, as Thief performs very well as a martial. My thoughts on Scoundrel are:
1.) Str+Cha Scoundrel who gets medium armor looks very nice. You trip, you feint, you intimidate, you grab, and you stab once per turn. Only thing I don't like about this combination is that you need Champion Dedication to get that Expert Armor, but I hope that by the time most people hit lvl 13, there will be other, not-champion way to get better armor scaling for STR builds.2.) Cha+whatever, using Cantrips as your primary method of attacks. Get that Electric Arc and enjoy a turn that is a combination of Cantrip+skill manuever, or even a full round of manuevers followed up by 1 manuever+cantrip. This looks quite nice, but to make it fully operational you need a source of a cantrip (so an Elf, a Multiclass, Minor Magic) and to start using Sneak Attack properly you need to be at least lvl 4 with with Magical Trickster.
Both approaches seem interesting, but they also clearly want more options to be printed in order to be fleshed out. So far, the Scoundrel seems like it is this close to be competetive with her sister rackets.
And of course, you can also just accept that you will not be doing much damage with your Finesse weapons and go for turns consisting of 3xManuever, 2xManuever+Aid, 2xManuever+Strike
Your option 1 was what I was looking towards and (in my case) no concerns about the level 13 armour issue
Actually that is a point, is PFS still being level capped at level 12? Does anyone know (not that I have a lot of access to it but would be interesting)
If you are sure the character will never go to the point where the armor proficiency of extra does not matter, the CHASTR chasis focused on debuffing and sneak attacking is imho pretty interesting to try out. Distracting Feint into Trip into Grab or Strike is a fun and rewarding combat routine.
Well we last managed a game in this homebrew world something like two years ago. And that was in a world where the potential GM and his wife (one of the players) were not expecting a baby that will probably have arrived by the time we try to play
So I would be surprised if we play at all and then even more-so if we ever level
I would still like this character for one shot potential as well as potential PFS games
Even the level 13 thing shouldn't be a huge issue if I start with 12 dex and put boosts in at 5 and 10 (for a game that gets to 13). Or do dex caps now affect skills and finesse/ranged attack rolls?
I don't say they are the weakest rogue because their -2 in reflex saves debuff is amazing and totally unique to them, it not only helps casters to land their offensive spells but help martials land the trip maneuver as well.
Then have the rogue feats that require legendary in deception, while other rogues can get them as well they don't have much usage of the skill as scoundrels have.
I really like the combination of the flavour and the mechanics of Ruffian and Scoundrel
Thief - not so much
There are already a lot of people who are tempted to play rogues as “steal everything that isn’t nailed down” types. Codifying that whilst thematic and iconic jars with me a little
I also can’t really picture why a thief of all people would be able to apply Dex to damage. I mean is idea supposed to be they are the quickest? I understand mechanics but thematically where does this idea come from?
Just a side point and a distraction from the overall point
Scoundrel seems to have more options to get sneak and for a longer period of time . The base assumption here seems to be that flanks are going to be easy to get. They might be easier as AOOs are not universal but they are still there, movement is slightly reduced and then space and allied positioning is a thing ...
Thief - not so much
My takeaway from this racket is that they are trained in thievery and finesse weapons. There is no need for it to be a 'steal everything that's not nailed down' racket. They are as easily a lock/trap smith or any profession, like scout, that might encounter a lock or trap.
I also can’t really picture why a thief of all people would be able to apply Dex to damage. I mean is idea supposed to be they are the quickest? I understand mechanics but thematically where does this idea come from?
They are trained in a skill requiring manual dexterity and the racket requires dex only? Of the three, you can be sure they have a main stat of dex and training that requires quick and deft hand movement. Seems like a pretty good match to me.
Thief - not so muchMy takeaway from this racket is that they are trained in thievery and finesse weapons. There is no need for it to be a 'steal everything that's not nailed down' racket. They are as easily a lock/trap smith or any profession, like scout, that might encounter a lock or trap.
I also can’t really picture why a thief of all people would be able to apply Dex to damage. I mean is idea supposed to be they are the quickest? I understand mechanics but thematically where does this idea come from?They are trained in a skill requiring manual dexterity and the racket requires dex only? Of the three, you can be sure they have a main stat of dex and training that requires quick and deft hand movement. Seems like a pretty good match to me.
Thanks for this insight
I guess my view is coloured by actually playing with someone (1E) who has taken the stealing everything approach to rogues. To the extent of carrying around a dozen kobold short swords in a bundle and dropping them at the beginning of combat (presumably because they wanted an extra 12 or so GP)
The Dex to damage thing is perhaps more struggling conceptually with how that even works. It was introduced seemingly as a game balance thing (something to combat MAD). And that i guess it why it is still around
I guess it is supposed to be attacking quickly but in this edition that is reflected by agile weapons allowing multiple attacks more easily
There is presumably a nuance that I haven’t got my head around as to why Dex to damage makes sense for a flavour / theme type idea. I just haven’t got there yet...
Thief - not so muchMy takeaway from this racket is that they are trained in thievery and finesse weapons. There is no need for it to be a 'steal everything that's not nailed down' racket. They are as easily a lock/trap smith or any profession, like scout, that might encounter a lock or trap.
I also can’t really picture why a thief of all people would be able to apply Dex to damage. I mean is idea supposed to be they are the quickest? I understand mechanics but thematically where does this idea come from?They are trained in a skill requiring manual dexterity and the racket requires dex only? Of the three, you can be sure they have a main stat of dex and training that requires quick and deft hand movement. Seems like a pretty good match to me.Thanks for this insight
I guess my view is coloured by actually playing with someone (1E) who has taken the stealing everything approach to rogues. To the extent of carrying around a dozen kobold short swords in a bundle and dropping them at the beginning of combat (presumably because they wanted an extra 12 or so GP)
The Dex to damage thing is perhaps more struggling conceptually with how that even works. It was introduced seemingly as a game balance thing (something to combat MAD). And that i guess it why it is still around
I guess it is supposed to be attacking quickly but in this edition that is reflected by agile weapons allowing multiple attacks more easily
There is presumably a nuance that I haven’t got my head around as to why Dex to damage makes sense for a flavour / theme type idea. I just haven’t got there yet...
More things for the rest of us to steal >:(
Thief - not so muchMy takeaway from this racket is that they are trained in thievery and finesse weapons. There is no need for it to be a 'steal everything that's not nailed down' racket. They are as easily a lock/trap smith or any profession, like scout, that might encounter a lock or trap.
I also can’t really picture why a thief of all people would be able to apply Dex to damage. I mean is idea supposed to be they are the quickest? I understand mechanics but thematically where does this idea come from?They are trained in a skill requiring manual dexterity and the racket requires dex only? Of the three, you can be sure they have a main stat of dex and training that requires quick and deft hand movement. Seems like a pretty good match to me.Thanks for this insight
I guess my view is coloured by actually playing with someone (1E) who has taken the stealing everything approach to rogues. To the extent of carrying around a dozen kobold short swords in a bundle and dropping them at the beginning of combat (presumably because they wanted an extra 12 or so GP)
The Dex to damage thing is perhaps more struggling conceptually with how that even works. It was introduced seemingly as a game balance thing (something to combat MAD). And that i guess it why it is still around
I guess it is supposed to be attacking quickly but in this edition that is reflected by agile weapons allowing multiple attacks more easily
There is presumably a nuance that I haven’t got my head around as to why Dex to damage makes sense for a flavour / theme type idea. I just haven’t got there yet...
I'd say that Dex to damage comes from landing more precise strikes, but that's really what Sneak Attack is for. Perhaps the idea comes from leaving a different kind of blow? You know now I think on this, I'm actually not sure.
As for why it's called the Thief, though, but gets some non-thiefy options, I chalk it up to...
I feel like Slayer or Assassin might have fit better, but maybe would conflict with future class/archetype names. Could be a simple as it gets the vibe across without taking up a name that might be used later on.
Also a thief with Expert Smuggler would be really good at concealing daggers perhaps, and while other fancy weapons have finesse, a thief with a set of daggers is pretty iconic.
On paper the scoundrel debilitations look weaker. But a chunk of it could be all “white room “ related
When it comes to level 10 gameplay we could find that stopping reactions is very very good . Stopping AOO - potentially saves someone. Stopping shield raise/block - dramatically reduced defences.
I don’t know all the reaction and of course they are situational but I think most foes will have one by that level
The stopping flanking is situational I agree but against groups of enemies is -2 to hit if they could get flanking
Extra damage is great if it is going to put the opponent down ...
But is always going to look better in forum discussion where raw numbers and dps win the day in almost all discussions ...
It could be read either way it seems. It says “while a creature is flat footed by your feint”. And if you do a feint it is technically flat footed
It doesn’t say “gets a -2 on anyone to whom it is flat footed”
It is implied but a strict RAW of the feat alone would give it that negative against everyone .
Read in conjunction with the scoundrel ability is where the doubt creeps in
Has it been added to the rules questions thread ? And raised as a separate rules question on that board to see what the general consensus may be?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stopping AoO is both very good and very not, in a way; very few bestiary monsters have that reaction. However, that logic goes out the window as you'd expect if the GM is building humanoid enemies with class levels, as a Fighter at level+4 with a reach weapon could count among the most lethal boss fights if you don't have a way of stopping him from doing his thing.
However however, I don't think there's any way to know he has AoO before he uses it at least once. Which could be very bad.
|
|
However however, I don't think there's any way to know he has AoO before he uses it at least once. Which could be very bad.
It's a fair assumption when fighting humanoid opponents in heavy armor. Knowing that AoO is a common thing among trained soldiers seems a reasonable bit of IC knowledge.
Of course, sometimes that assumption will be wrong, but that's all part of the fun. :)
As shroudb points out the scoundrel has 2 situational abilities for situations they already have or can acquire protection against. Hitting an opponent so they can't flank is highly situational and the rogue has some inbuilt flanking protection.
Denying reactions is situationally powerful but they have mobility and an ability at 12 to use a reaction to counter reactions.
Both the thief and ruffian offer substantial damage increases and damage stacks.
If damage is your primary interest in the tongue, then the scoundrel is probably not for you. That is ok.