I've seen some recent posts casting shade on the CRB Rogue, and it's not that I don't 100% argee with everyone saying that the cRogue is pure garbage, but I would like to post up the only core Rogue that I have played. I didn't get to play him all the way through, but what I did play of him I didn't feel like I was trailing too far behind the Fighter.
The Fighter and I were good flanking buddies, played smart, and I didn't have any problems.
Izzek
Scout cRogue
Tengu
+2 Dex, -2 Con, +2 Wis
*Glide replaces Gifted Linguist*
15pt buy (w/ racials):
15,15,13,10,12,8
20pt buy (w/ racials):
17,15,13,10,13,7
25pt buy (w/ racials):
17,16,13,10,14,8
Traits:
... Armor Expert
... Know the Land
... Pragmatic Activator
... Warded Against Nature
Feats:
1. Combat Reflexes
3. Nature Magic
5. Endurance
7. Dirty Fighting
9. Greater Dirty Trick
11. Iron Will
Rogue Talents:
2. Weapon Training (Split-Blade Sword)
4. Wild Magic
6. Underhanded Trick (Imp. Dirty Trick)
8. Combat Trick: Quick Dirty Trick
10. Offensive Defense
Tengu Wings would have been level 13, and Dirty Trick Master was going to be at 15.
What would you do to improve this?
That's three traits and a Drawback... technically Warded Against Nature is a Drawback, although I have yet to see its downside/negative effects in my experience.
This game was a 15pt buy. One of those campaigns with extra restrictions to make it more difficult. Thus, core Rogue. I had to beg and fight for Scout... even that was not guaranteed from the start. I was "rewarded" with the permission to take the archetype when I hit level 4. Lol.
Stat bumps were:
4. Con +1
8. Str +1
Never got to see level 12... the Fighter caught a curse that slowly turned him into a mindless construct, which was fine, but the GM kept forcing stupid stuff on the Fighter to constantly make him roll Fortitude saves until he failed one. Like, it's mildly warm this morning and you're sweating in your armor... Fortitude save. The bread you ate is two hours too old, Fortitude save. You see a spider, Fortitude save.
Then the GM would choose the effects of the curse, although I'm pretty sure it's supposed to be up to the player... given that the player is the one rebuilding their own body. The Fighter wasn't having fun anymore and the game ended.
Since your rouge and the fighter are good team for flanking I suggest to put some teamwork feat to help
I was thinking about retraining Dirty Fighting for Combat Expertise and grabbing Gang Up, with the fighter... but then the curse came along and the Fighter had to grab some feats to get some rerolls on some of these obnoxious Fortitude saves he was constantly making.
So teamwork feats got pushed back further and further, then the game ended.
What would you do to improve this?
What improvements are on the table? Class, race, feats, items? General build theme? Appears to be a strength build. First things that stand out to me is a Slayer would likely be much more consistent and allow better leeway with stats. High HD and Good Fortitude saves means you can afford for your Con to be lower, this means you can raise Intelligence to balance out the skills game. There's a combat style for Dirty Trick that preserves that portion of the build. Splitblade is cool. Slayer can afford to ditch the Armor Expert trait for Deathtouched(+2 vs Mind Affecting). Makes 3 attacks vs 2.
If Izzek ever sees the table again, he can undergo an entire rewrite since that specific table's restrictions will be gone. I completely agree that a Slayer would have been SO much better suited for this build, but we had like 5 classes to choose from (and we already had a Cleric and a Fighter).
I had originally started that campaign as a Bard, but he got his guts yanked out of his mouth by a zombie. And the way the campaign was set up, if your character died, you pretty much have to assume ownership of the nearest living, non-hostile NPC. Izzek was a graverobber in the crypt where my Bard died. The party was in full retreat after the zombie horde made it past the Bard's Grease and tore the Bard apart. I assumed control of Izzek and followed the party out of the crypt.
The door of the crypt slammed shut behind us, the party and the new me (some random graverobber) are standing in the church that sent the party down there... they were NOT happy to discover that they had a graverobber down in their crypt. They knew about the zombies, that's why they sent the party down there. But a GRAVEROBBER?!
I got to rewrite Izzek to be the same level as my dead Bard, but had to keep the name, race, and class.
Anyways, I mainly posted to show a core Rogue that was weirdly effective and fun. A strength-based cRogue, holding down the front line with the Fighter. You probably wouldn't recognize Izzek as a Rogue, at all, since he was wearing Mithral Breastplate and 2H swinging a Split-Blade Sword. Kunai and Morningstar are hanging from his belt. Longspear on his back.
I mainly used a Longspear at first (always effective with Combat Reflexes). The Fighter with his a Bardiche. The party just marched around like a porcupine. It took a minute for me to afford a mwk Split-Blade Sword. Lol.
The nature magic stuffs was for self-reliance and backstory/flavor. I probably could have done without it, just used UMD, and spent the feats to better optimize him for combat. As stated, though, I didn't feel like I was behind. And not having to ever rely on others for my food and water was nice.
Most people think that the crogue it's trash but for me he is 1 of the most valuable in a group.
Rogue can: disable tramps, scout the terrain whiteout been seen, kill lonely adversary, take information in town, have a great advantage in flanking opponent and much more.
I say if someone can master the use of a class you will the most loved in your group
Most people think that the crogue it's trash but for me he is 1 of the most valuable in a group.
Rogue can: disable tramps, scout the terrain whiteout been seen, kill lonely adversary, take information in town, have a great advantage in flanking opponent and much more.
There is nothing here that you said that is unique to the cRogue.
There is nothing here that you said that is unique to the cRogue.Most people think that the crogue it's trash but for me he is 1 of the most valuable in a group.
Rogue can: disable tramps, scout the terrain whiteout been seen, kill lonely adversary, take information in town, have a great advantage in flanking opponent and much more.
If you can't master a classic class, how can you say that other classes and archetype based in the rogue are more unique?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you can't master a classic class, how can you say that other classes and archetype based in the rogue are more unique?There is nothing here that you said that is unique to the cRogue.Most people think that the crogue it's trash but for me he is 1 of the most valuable in a group.
Rogue can: disable tramps, scout the terrain whiteout been seen, kill lonely adversary, take information in town, have a great advantage in flanking opponent and much more.
Because they're not based on the Rogue as written in the book. They're based on the rogue. As in little r. As in what a rogue is meant to be thematically rather than the trap option listed in the core rulebook meant to trick players into thinking it's the best class for it's theme when the Bard and Ranger can do it's job better. And that's before stepping out of core where the Alchemist, Inquisitor, Investigator and Slayer(Who is more like a Fighter/Ranger than a Ranger/Rogue) all manage to have distinctive draws. Saying these classes are like the Rogue because they're actually good at the things the Rogue is supposed to be good at is like being handed a delicious sandwich and a turd sandwich and being told that you can only appreciate the good sandwich if you eat lots of crap. It's like saying the delicious sandwich is based on the crap sandwich when that's only true if you squint your eyes really hard and might actually be blind instead. Unfortunately the smell makes it clear that the rogue has nothing to do with the good sandwich.
The Rogue has 3 "features". Trapfinding, Bad Situational Damage, and a mediocre ability at a broad range of skills. The Rogue is the high school dropout of rogues. A failure in class design. It's entire kit is at odds with itself and encourages suicidal behavior(Especially the Scout archetype). Which might actually be secretly brilliant since it means your character will die faster and you can make a better one.
So you mean that it was wrong for d&d to create the rogue because other classes can do all the job.
Pathfinder for trying to improve it.
You guys only think is in maximum damage in a game because you only play AP games
Sneak attacks : Slayers do a better job. The brute number of sneak dices isn't the only factor, how to it is on equal footing, and in that aspect full BAB + studying is better than 3/4 with no external ones.
- Disabling traps : Other classes are more resilient in the case disabling trap fails. I'd bet on a Ranger over the Rogue for that part (unless the latter is Unchained)
- Scouting the terrain without being seen : when it doesn't work, the character is isolated and it's probably among the least self-reliant when it comes to survivability. Same thing on trying to kill lone adversary, which anyway doesn't happen that often.
- Taking information in a town : Vigilantes, Enchanters or else stand a better chance because of external bonuses. The class has to start from scratch.
- Flanking advantage attempt : Put an elemental, and no flanking benefits. One of the classes which suffer the worst on that aspect. I respect way more Rogues who setup the sneak by themselves instead of relying on someone else.
You say this are do by different class, but the rogue do all this whit his class alone so party member can focus in other things lake who will go melee, who is the arcane caster and who will heal.
The Rogue has 3 "features". Trapfinding, Bad Situational Damage, and a mediocre ability at a broad range of skills. The Rogue is the high school dropout of rogues. A failure in class design. It's entire kit is at odds with itself and encourages suicidal behavior(Especially the Scout archetype). Which might actually be secretly brilliant since it means your character will die faster and you can make a better one.
It's seems that you only play warrior, mage or divine
And never played for long a rogue, when we played 3.5d&d a rogue could do a lot from lvl1 to lv20 whit a cr-1 to +4
You guys only think is in maximum damage in a game because you only play AP gamesIt's seems that you only play warrior, mage or divine
And never played for long a rogue, when we played 3.5d&d a rogue could do a lot from lvl1 to lv20 whit a cr-1 to +4I would refrain to use blanket statements as fact without proof, it's no better than a strawman argument.
Don't suppose what I'm often playing without doing some research. Same thing as saying I'm only playing specific classes. Nope, I played everything. Otherwise I wouldn't do that statement. Comparing Pathfinder with 3.5 is like comparing a mouse with a cat. What works in one isn't always true for the other.
But to say that other class can do better when you have a class that can do it all it's like telling other party member to occupy that role
Don't take me bad it's my opinion
For me the rogue it's a class for people who like to play whit cunning mind, to prove his skills in dungeons and in live, an opportunistic, a thief, a spy; not a killing machine.
It's there some big bad word I'm sorry but I really don't like when people say bad things to a class I play from 2edition and 3-3.5
Also in Pathfinder I see that they do a great job putting special ability before lv 10.
The biggest problem with the cRogue and the UnRogue, alike, is Sneak Attack. It's a trap. And for THE class that is supposed to be good at avoiding traps, every rogue seems to fall for Sneak Attack... every freaking time. Stupid rogue.
I would gladly trade away Sneak Attack, in its entirety, for any ONE of these:
A) bonuses to accuracy
B) the unique ability to TWF without penalties to accuracy
C) actual bonuses to skills (like the Capstone ability, but at level 1)
D) the Ranger's Hide in Plain Sight ability, before level 5.
E) the unique ability to reroll any skill check, before level 10.
F) Medium Armor Proficiency with Shields
G) the ability to actually make use of Stealth sniping ranged combat... even without the extra Sneak Attack damage, just let me full attack with a bow and reasonably maintain Stealth.
Precision Damage is absolutely useless without the ability to be precise.
I actually prefer strength-based builds for core Rogues and Ninjas, honestly. With a race that grants proficiency with a decent weapon, I think they are at least less bad.
And yes, the Fighter caught a curse... was cursed? Regardless of the grammar, the Fighter was given a condition that made him rebuild parts of his body every time he failed a Fortitude save. I have found this curse of consumption before in a set of alternate rules, and the person who has the curse can choose from a list of modifications to make during the rebuild. Some are quite beneficial, actually.
However, the GM ensured that the Fighter had to make an ungodly amount of Fortitude saves, just to play the probability of the Fighter failing at least some of them. Then the GM made all the decisions on what modifcations were made. With each failure, and each subsequent modification, the chance of becoming a mindless construct increased.
Eventually, you turn into a robot and kill your friends... and when it became obvious that was the GM's sole intent with this curse, and that no matter what we did to mitigate it, it was inevitable... the game ended.
But to say that other class can do better when you have a class that can do it all it's like telling other party member to occupy that role
But the thing is that other classes can do it all. And even when they can't do everything, they do those specific things (gathering information, sneaking ahead) better than the rogue.
Rogue can: disable tramps,
Trapfinding Slayer Talent.
kill lonely adversary,
Any damaged-focused class should be able to do so, but rogues that rely on flanking for damage can't. The slayer fares better.
scout the terrain whiteout been seen, take information in town,
Slayers apply their Studied Target bonus to the following skills:
Bluff, Disguise, Intimidate, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive, Stealth, and Survival.
They are better than a rogue at those skill challenges whenever they get to apply ST (although not by much). The only thing the Slayer lacks is Diplomacy as a class skill.
So you mean that it was wrong for d&d to create the rogue because other classes can do all the job.
Pathfinder for trying to improve it.
No. I never said that. I said they did a crappy job designing the Rogue originally and updating it for Pathfinder. Which they did.
You guys only think is in maximum damage in a game because you only play AP games
Nope. In fact, I spent a large portion of my time here on these boards maximizing the rogue's other abilities because maximizing their damage is pointless. I've been on both sides of the screen in a wide multitude of games both homebrew, modules, pathfinder society scenarios, APs, one shots, you name it. I've noticed that unless your GM is fudging dice, a Rogue typically dies somewhere 8th-12th level as their poor saves fail them vs a save or die.
It's seems that you only play warrior, mage or divineAnd never played for long a rogue, when we played 3.5d&d a rogue could do a lot from lvl1 to lv20 whit a cr-1 to +4
I've literally played rogues for the last 17 years of my life. We must have played different editions of 3.5 because a Rogue was awful in 3.5 too. You dipped Rogue for qualifying prestige classes or trapfinding, but it was one of the worst classes to remain in alone. Not only that, but there were numerous enemies in 3.5 that straight up let them completely ignore everything that a Rogue does.
What you depict from A) to G) makes me remind : my schtick won't always work, I need to spend more in either making sure it works better, or having a decent secondary habit.
Or an entire toolbox altogether.
Sneak attack is misleading: People see the high damage bonus and expect an easy killing spree, but then it works only sometimes. Which is actually fair, because roughly +2 damage per hit per level would be a bit much. Still it disappoints people who expect consistency.
If a player doesn't want to deal with sneak attack, fine - there is the phantom thief archetype for that. It really stands out among the numerous archetypes, because it makes even a long-time player think: How to contribute to combat without bloody sneak attack?! Personally, I enjoyed both the thought process and the result.
The best thing is: A good share of the result works for rogue without this archetype, too. You lose some goodies, but get sneak attack back, for the occasional damage spike.
Any Rogue can be useful without Sneak Attack... Combat Reflexes, Longspear, Aid Another. And as long as they can keep themselves from stealing from the party, they will be a welcome addition.
Take your spear, and go protect the archer/caster/horses... your only job is to AoO anyone that gets within 10' of the things more important than yourself, and to use Aid Another every single round.
That exact strategy made my Kobold Cleric one of the most loved characters in the party... not the spells, not the healing, not the dazing channel... Aid Another and Bodyguard with a Longspear.
I am 100% completely out of sympathy for people who can't make an effective Rogue. It doesn't take any special knowledge or mastery of the game. It takes the same feat that everyone takes at level one, and a 5gp Longspear. Aid Another is free... it is the one thing in Pathfinder that doesn't require a feat to do. Take advantage of it.
Rogues can be effective, just like any other character can be effective. But apart from Evasion, rogues have mediocre/poor defences (AC, hp, saves) and have to get into melee range to be effective in combat. This means they tend to die a lot.
cRogues are often very MAD, needing something meaningful in every stat if they're expected fill in the classic Rogue roles of scout/face/skill-monkey/combatant (this requirement is something of a hangover from the classic Fighter/Cleric/Wizard/Rogue party where all the others get only 2 skill points). So unless you have at least a 20-point buy, something has to give.
The Thief was rubbish in AD&D 1e as well. The only reason to drag one along was to open doors and deal with traps, but they could barely do that reliably until at least 10th level.
Rogues do not HAVE to get into melee range to be effective in combat.
They can be just as effective as a lot of other 3/4 BAB classes when it comes to ranged combat. Even most ranged combat happens within range of their precious Sneak Attack... especially if the Rogue does literally anything to position themselves.
Take the Heritage Weapon equipment trait for a Longbow, because crossbows are lame.
Probably still benefit from taking the Armor Expert trait and wearing Mithral Breastplate when you can afford it or find it.
Erastil has a trait that kind of works like Precise Shot, if you feel the need for it.
You can use Rogue Talents to pick up Weapon Focus, and another combat feat of your choice, and the Talent that gives you a 20 initiative in the surprise round... that is more support for ranged combat than some other classes that give ranged combat a shot.
There are multiple classes with "ranged" archetypes that just give you Precise Shot, and that's apparently enough to make the archetype intended for ranged combat. So even core Rogue is better set up for archery than, say, a Bard.
Making archery work with sneak attack probably means sniping, and that's not all that effective. Oh, you can SA without sniping if your friendly sorcerer color sprays or glitterdusts the enemy, but cleaning up's not a high bar to meet. If the rogue isn't using sneak attack then they're worse than a bard who at least has inspire courage (probably).
Rogues do not HAVE to get into melee range to be effective in combat.
They can be just as effective as a lot of other 3/4 BAB classes when it comes to ranged combat. Even most ranged combat happens within range of their precious Sneak Attack... especially if the Rogue does literally anything to position themselves.
There are multiple classes with "ranged" archetypes that just give you Precise Shot, and that's apparently enough to make the archetype intended for ranged combat. So even core Rogue is better set up for archery than, say, a Bard.
Uh...what. Every other 3/4th BAB class has an accuracy booster. Rogues do not. Rogues can't even sneak attack at range reliability. They get maybe 1 shot with sneak attack. They can't make use of Deadly Aim which is the biggest damage booster for archery.
What makes classes good at Archery, is that they get bonuses to accuracy or damage on their ranged attacks. A Bard will always be a better archer because they actually get a bonus to hit and damage through Inspire Courage or Heroism for example.
Yeah, I wasn't really comparing it with magic... obviously the class with magic does it better. I don't have to be reminded that magic solves everything in PF1.
And why would the Rogue be sniping? See, only a Rogue distracted by Sneak Attack is going to focus on sniping. Sniping is obviously not worth investing in. No, you want your full attack with eighteen million arrows, just like every other archer. Sniping. Lol.
Be a Half-Orc. Now you have Darkvision. And an Orc HornBow!
1. Point Blank Shot
2. RT: Weapon Training Orc HornBow
3. Precise Shot
4. RT: Snap Shot
5. Rapid Shot
6. RT: ???
7. Iron Will
8. RT: Combat Trick: Clustered Shots
9. Deadly Aim
10. RT: ???
11. Improved Initiative
Yeah, but even without casting a single spell the bard's better at shooting thanks to inspire courage. They can get one or two bonus feats via any of several archetypes, which is all the base rogue gets.
One side note, I'd get manyshot rather than clustered shots. Many types of DR can be beaten by fancy arrows or alchemical gear.
And if you sink 4 feats and 3 talents into archery to make you competitive, you're not going to shine at your other jobs. The bard could have done essentially that, not least because having a good Will save means not having to take Iron Will, and still having +1 over the rogue at 7th level.
What other jobs are we talking about for the Rogue?
Archery is a feat intensive path to follow. The Rogue spending Talents is a resource available to the Rogue and it would be stupid not to dedicate these resources to archery to be as effective as possible as soon as possible. At least the class has resources to be spent on archery, not every class has these resources built into the chassis.
Being effective with archery is something that will or can be used every encounter. You are still better with traps than pretty much everyone else, and dedicating more resources to something that never happens is stupid in my opinion. High Dex, probably are among the most stealthy and make a decent scout even without dumping resources into being a scout.
You can still do all the situational Rogue crap, but you also can shoot an Orc HornBow.
I suspect you could do all that better with a ranger. Free archery feats, full BAB, good Fort save, more proficiencies, AC, spells. Not as good a face, but see Bard for that. And trapfinding isn't much compensation, never mind that it can be done with a trait, GM permitting.
I suspect you could do all that better with a ranger. Free archery feats, full BAB, good Fort save, more proficiencies, AC, spells. Not as good a face, but see Bard for that. And trapfinding isn't much compensation, never mind that it can be done with a trait, GM permitting.
Oh yes, absolutely. I'm not saying that the cRogue is going to be awesome at archery. But if a Rogue uses their Talents to support being an archer, I see it no different than the Ranger's free combat style feats... in terms of resources spent, at least.
The Ranger is generally better at everything compared to the Rogue... either one (cRogue or UnRogue). They can TWF better. Scout/Stealth better. Better Perception for everything, because face it you never see traps. Better saves and proficiencies, and the list goes on.
I would have been thrilled if the NPC graverobber I was lucky enough to take control of happened to be a Tengu Ranger instead of a cRogue! Lol. That would have been awesome, but not nearly as challenging or intellectually stimulating, honestly. I really had to explore my options when building Izzek as a core Rogue.
It was designed for Core to do a niche job and in that setting it's adequate.
I think it's a failure of design if the only unique thing(Trapfinding) you bring to the table is accomplished by a single level in your class. In Core, there's no reason to be a Rogue beyond 1st level and that's a travesty.
Ranks in Perception do not require any levels in cRogue. Lol. And the trait Vagabond Child can get any class Disable Device.
The Rogue’s biggest failure is Sneak Attack. It's not because it's situational. It's not because it's out of the Rogue’s control. It's because Sneak Attack sucks. And everything except Dispelling Attack that relies on or triggers off of Sneak Attack, usually sucks just as bad.
The Slayer's Studied Target is a better ability, even if they didn't get any Sneak Attack damage on top of it. In fact, Studied Target probably would have ended up even better if they hadn't muddied the waters with giving the Slayer any stupid Sneak Attack in the first place. Freebooter's Bane is great, even without Sneak Attack.
Two of the neatest archetypes available for the Rogue wisely discard their reliance on Sneak Attack, and they are both better off because of it. I cannot stress enough how terrible Sneak Attack is as a backbone for ANY build/character/class. It just leads to other, equally terrible ideas... like Feinting. And ludicrous shenanigans to hopefully lock in your precious Sneak Attack. It's a trap.
And Rogues are supposed to be good at avoiding traps.
They did the exact same thing to the Cleric with Channel Energy. They wasted the whole class filling it up with tons of 1D6 increases to an ability that you shouldn't waste resources on, ever... with very few exceptions. Just like Sneak Attack. But I guess this isn't really a discussion on how boring the class features given to the Cleric are.
Sneak attack can add a fair bit of damage. But if you don't like it, and you find yourself playing a character who started as a rogue I'd multiclass. The sunk cost fallacy is after all a fallacy.
Scout + Dispelling Attack is the one thing that a Rogue can do. The only. Could have been built into the class without the need for Sneak Attack or spending Rogue Talents. If the Rogue goes full kamikaze, it triggers Dispel on a charge. Granted, I think that half the Rogue Talents should have been baked into the chassis of the class.
Fast Stealth... that should just be a perk of being a Rogue at level one. Fast Getaway is something that should come online automatically around level 4... or just give them free scaling Spring Attack like the Warrior Poet Samurai... even just giving them normal Spring Attack at level 4 would have been better than, well, Rogues suck.
UnRogue sucks a little bit less with Finesse Training and Debilitating Injury, but still lacks any flavor or sustenance. It's like eating an old boot. Oddly enough, really adds a lot of flavor in gestalt, though. But it takes Unchained and gestalt to make the Rogue interesting and effective.
Be a Half-Orc. Now you have Darkvision. And an Orc HornBow!
1. Point Blank Shot
2. RT: Weapon Training Orc HornBow
3. Precise Shot
4. RT: Snap Shot (...)
I don't see proficiency with the Orc Hornbow.
Respectfully, no. Trapfinding is not the cRogue's only unique ability when looking purely at the Core book and rules. Back then Rogues were the only ones with Sneak Attack.I think it's a failure of design if the only unique thing(Trapfinding) you bring to the table is accomplished by a single level in your class. In Core, there's no reason to be a Rogue beyond 1st level and that's a travesty.
It was designed for Core to do a niche job and in that setting it's adequate.
But despite what emo teens that listen to NIN all day long and think that playing a Rogue makes them hard and edgy believe, Sneak Attack is not a unique ability. It's just bonus damage, nothing special. Everyone can do HP damage. Doing the same thing others do in but a more conditional way is not a niche, it's of the opposite of one.
And that's pretty much the entire problem - if you leave pseudo-flavor that's solely based on the name of the class/ability aside, the Rogue doesn't have a niche, and apart from Trapfinding never, ever had one in Pathfinder. Rogue is and always was at the recieving end of other classes singing "anything you can do, I can do better".
Whatever it is you're trying to do, Rogue is not the best class for it. Even if you want to build a dex-based character without spells who's good at stealth and skills in general, can disable magic traps, and targets an enemy's vital points with their attacks and get extra d6s on damage rolls when doign so, Rogue is not the best class for that.
I think you're off with your "initial strike" theory, as I doubt Rogue was ever anything but horrible for that. I'm pretty sure the Rogue's intended niche was that of a martial character who's good at skills. But Bard is better at that role even in CRB only, and depending on the skills, and the desired combat/skill balance, Ranger too. Then later came Alchemist, Inquisitor, Hunter, Investigator, Hunter, Slayer, Occultist, and Vigilante.
Rogue is build around pseudo-niches. It may be the only class (not counting Ninja) with 8 skill ranks per level, but that's not a niche. It may have previously been the only class with Sneak Attack, but that's not a niche, just a specific form of bonus damage. UnRogue may be the only class with build in dex-to-damage, but that's not a niche, just a specific form of bonus damage.
UnRogue threw sand in many peoples eyes, improving the Rogue and giving it seemingly unique abilities, but in reality doing nothing to grant it a niche. Dex-to-damage is not only just another source of bonus damage, it's not exactly unique in a game with Slashing/Fencing/Starry Grace, and the Agile enchantment, either. Debilitating Injury may look like it solves the Rogue's accuracy problem, but that's an illusion: The average attack roll of an unRogue striking a bewildered target is on average throughout levels one to twenty exactly the same as a Fighters (including Weapon Training), always being being one above or below except at 4th level. That means you basically have the same hit chance, only Rogue needs to land an attack (that qualifies for SA) first! All medium BAB classes apart from Rogue, Ninja, and Mesmerist have abbilities that compensate for their BAB, and none of them require hitting with an unmodified attack first
Missing from the list: Mesmerist, Rogue, Ninja.
And just to show how un-unique the concept of a damage bonus that increases with level is:
Alchemist: Mutagen
Investigator: Studied Combat & Studied Strike
Warpriest: Sacred Weapon damage
Ranger: Favored Enemy
Medium: Spirit Bonus (Champion Spirit)
Fighter: Weapon Training
Monk: scaling unarmed damage
Vigilante: Fist of the Avenger, Lethal Grace, Take 'em Alive
Brawler: scaling unarmed (and close weapon group) damage
Slayer: Studied Target
Swashbuckler: Precise Strike
Kineticist: blast damage
Limited abilities with enough uses to last most combats:
Bard: Inspire Courage
Magus: Arcane Pool
Alchemist: bomb damage
Skald: Inspired Rage
Warpriest: Sacred Weapon
Occultist: Transmutation Implement's Legacy Weapon
Bloodrager: Bloodrage
Barbarian: Rage
Unchained Barbarian: Powerful Stance
Highly limited abilities:
Inquisitor: Judgement
Paladin: Smite Evil
Paladin: Divine Bond (weapon)
Cavalier: Challenge
Fighter: Warrior Spirit advanced weapon training
And that's without archetypes. Molthuni Arsenal Chaplain Warpriest's Weapon Training, Warrior Poet Samurai's Graceful Strike, Freebooter Ranger's Freebooter’s Bane, and so on.
Many of these abilities also increase attack rolls, which can also work as an additional damage bonus via Power Attack/Piranha Strike/Deadly Aim.
Half-Orcs treat any weapon that has "Orc" in its name as a martial weapon. The Heritage Weapon equipment trait gives you proficiency with a martial weapon... pick the Orc HornBow.
Same exact way you get fun Elf weapons as an Elf Rogue (or Half-Elf).
Half-Orcs treat any weapon that has "Orc" in its name as a martial weapon. The Heritage Weapon equipment trait gives you proficiency with a martial weapon... pick the Orc HornBow.
I presume you mean Heirloom Weapon? It only grants proficiency with one specific weapon. So unless someone in your party has Craft Magic Arms and Armor, in order to have your bow enchanted, you need to give it away for days.
Sorry, that does not sound like a practical method, at least not in most campaigns.
So by that rationale, Fighter doesn't have a unique niche in Core, until level 3/Armor Training.
Well, duh? It's even worse than you present it, because Armor Training isn't a niche (it doesn't make your character different from others except on paper). The Fighter's only niche has always been very feat hungry builds. Archery Fighter probably has a niche for reliable damage in CRB only, and in full Pathfinder, maybe thrown builds (Ricochet Toss) or something like that.
In Core, rogue is the only one that deals Precision damage. Period. Lots of classes get bonus damage; in Core specifically, rogue is the only one with that damage source.
Who cares? There is literally zero mechanical reason to want to do precision damage. And since it's not in any way tied to actually making precise attacks, there is no real flavor reason, either. The only benefit is for people who value a single word on their character sheet more than how the character actually behaves mechanically.
if you wanted to build a dex-based character without spells, good at stealth and skills in general, disables magic traps, and deals Precision damage
You just listed five things that need to be desired exactly that way to have Rogue qualify as the best class for the player, two of them being deliberate limitations. It doesn't take a genius to realize that a class that's only good for one super specific playstyle is not a good class. The CRB was first drafted in what, 2007? 2008? I could have told you the above back then! It's not like Pathfinder is the first RPG ever made...
Again, I'm making the point of purely CRB, before expanded classes and Archetypes and such, to illustrate why cRogue was carried over the way it was from 3x.
It was forseeable that there would be more classes than just the one from the CRB (as 3.5 had the same thing), so "it was only designed for CRB only" is no excuse.
Derklord, I don't know if you are basing that on a FAQ or something... but I would not play at a table that insisted on being so impossibly anal about a stupid trait. Nothing against you or your opinions. You have a much more intricate knowledge of the rules than I do.
Sure, the trait does NOT say "that specific TYPE OF weapon".
But if anyone expects me to dedicate my time to play their game, and then they tell me that I can be proficient with this Orc HornBow, but not all Orc HornBows (assuming that I meet the Strength requirements for its Strength rating)... I would laugh in their face and leave the table for good.
What pleasure does it bring people being such anal tyrants? Is it fun for them to tell people No?
Does it change any-F!CK!NG-thing if the player taking the trait is proficient with all Orc HornBows instead of just one? Does it make the game SO MUCH harder to GM?
That specific weapon... eat my @$$. It's proficiency with the type of weapon, and we all know it.