Redundant Rogue Talents? And Major Magic.

[neofax]

Just like the Fighter's weaknes is it's horrendous Reflex and Will saves. Why would the Rogue stand out here?

Lightning Reflexes and Iron Will(along with their Improved counterpart). Rogues do not have the feats to pull this off unless they are willing to sacrifice other feats. The best they can do is invest in Ioun Stones, Headbands/Belts, Cloak of Resistance or not be targeted in the first place.

Also I'm not so sure about MAD, it depends on what kind a rogue you want. A devoted trapfinder/thief needs high dex, some con, good int, a little wisdom and can pretty much dump the rest. A charming rogue needs charisma of course, but might not need as much int.

The Rogue needs to invest on all his abilities as he is the skill monkey. This is where they shine.

And really the ideal fighter needs high str, good dex and con, decent int (13), average wisdom and can dump cha unless you want him to be good at intimidation etc. That's pretty MAD to me. Not as bad as say Paladins though.

Fighter only needs to invest in Str and Dex. Why would he need Con as he already has 1d10 HP and Fortitude is his best saving throw? He would be better to invest in better armor in the long run.

 

[pawsplay]

Lightning Reflexes and Iron Will(along with their Improved counterpart). Rogues do not have the feats to pull this off unless they are willing to sacrifice other feats. The best they can do is invest in Ioun Stones, Headbands/Belts, Cloak of Resistance or not be targeted in the first place.

Actually, a rogue with Iron Will and slippery mind is mathematically advantaged. Assume CR 15 and APL 15. A "good" base Will is +9, a "poor" is +5. Wizard and rogue both have average Wis in this example, and, oh, a +2 resistance bonus to saves. DC of the saving throw is 25.

Wizard (+11 bonus) needs a 14 or better to succeed, or a 35% chance of success.
Rogue (+7 bonus) needs a 18 or better to succeed, or a 15% chance of success. but the chance of failing both saves is only 72.25%, which translates into 38.75% chance of success on at least one save. Further, every increase (such as Iron Will) helps the Rogue more.

 

[Glade Riven]

Little bit of a masochist, are we, Transbot?

It is possible...I am considering playing a character with two 9s and a 7 for core stats in the next game I play.

I enjoy making the hard cases work. My longest running character was a DEX-based Elf Paladin under 3.5, which most would consider far from optimal.

Granted, some ideas I have may depend on DM discresion - such as whether or not I can use the feat Martial Study from Bo9S to gain a martial maneuver or two (especially as a rogue talent), or whether or not I can take Combat Trick more than once so long as it isn't a duplicate feat (many of the rogue talents are combat feats anyways). Even limited to just Paizo material, though, there should be plenty of opportunity to make an effective combat rogue (effective being the key term, rather than dominant) between Core and AGP.

Plus, unless I have a DM that railroads everything into mostly combat encounters, I don't see an issue. Good Roleplaying can make up for anything.

On another note, I wouldn't be burning any feats on skills...as the rogue, I shouldn't need to. With limitations on how many skill points = level, a decent INT modifier and maxing out what I want shouldn't be a problem.

EDIT: Feeling Inspired

 

[Walking Dad]

there are numerous threads on it. the rogue is probably the weakest class in the game.
...

I thought they agree in various threads that the monk is the weakest class. Not that I agree...

 

[Jadeite]

The monk got brass knuckles and the Zen Archer archetype. The barbarian got some rather nice archetypes and rage powers. The rogue got the urban ranger which killed the rogue and took his stuff.

 

[Glade Riven]

Should be interesting if it is rectified in Ultimate Combat...

Still, though, Brugar wants to know why he would want to Tank like a fighter. He just wants to stab people in the back and go through their pockets for loose change. And if the meat sheild wants to walk into a pit trap, that's his business.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I still think Monk is the weakest class, though Rogue certainly is a close second. Figures, they're my two favorite classes and archetypes.

The only thing surer than those two being at the bottom is that no matter how definitively they suck, there will still be 5x as many "fix the fighter" threads regardless.

 

[Jadeite]

I still think Monk is the weakest class, though Rogue certainly is a close second. Figures, they're my two favorite classes and archetypes.

The only thing surer than those two being at the bottom is that no matter how definitively they suck, there will still be 5x as many "fix the fighter" threads regardless.

Not to mention all the threads about bards being useless ...

In my opinion, rogues have two major flaws in Pathfinder:
1. They don't hit.
2. They aren't that good in stealth.
They were also very soft targets but with the change to offensive defense at least this problem got much smaller.

Any other class with a good or medium BAB has some ways to increase its chance of hitting. Some people could argue that rogues have the option to flank an enemy or catch him flatfooted, but any other character can do so, too, on top of their other bonuses.
So too fix the rogue, he'd need improved stealth to bring him on par with the ranger, as well as some rogue talents that increase his chance of hitting.

 

[Walking Dad]

...

1. They don't hit.

...

I like the Trailblazer solution. They give the Rogue the same attack bonus as a fighter in situations where he could do sneak attack damage. (That does not include more attacks for high bab.)

 

[Particle_Man]

Not to mention all the threads about bards being useless ...

In my opinion, rogues have two major flaws in Pathfinder:
1. They don't hit.

Hence the popularity of the sword of subtlety. Especially since it can eventually be made into a +5 sword with an additional +4 bonus on sneak attacks (so a +9 sword, in a way).