Are Rogues Useless?

[Humanophile]

My problems with every "spellcasters rule everyone else" rant/thread are twofold.

First, like anything else magic is a resource, and in almost any conflict between two parties, the one that has resources that cannot be countered is at a major advantage. Which sets the fighter and rogue back on their feet again; let your mage and cleric blow their wad early in the day with all the persistent buffs they like, your enemy will probably have a dispel magic ready for anyone who seems too good, and then you'll have to wait a whole day or else gobble up consumables while everyone else saves up for the big stuff. Granted, clerics are less at risk here, but the shortcomings of that class have been gone over repeatedly. Same somewhat for the next issue, too.)

(As a semi-aside, has anyone officially converted the Supression weapon ability from the PsiHB to a magic format? I could see a lot of melee machines drooling over one of these things, and at a relatively reasonable cost by the time you need to worry about your target being so swaddled in protective magic the floor couldn't hit him if he fell. It's not hard to do, but I'd like to see it in a de facto book.)

Second, especially anti-wizard sentiment seems to really, really skew things in favor of the wizard. In a balanced campaign, you have G amount of gold and E amount of experience, no matter who you are. If you want the spell selection to do anything you want to try, in addition to needing a goodly amount of prescience, you'll need to divert a lot of that gold into scribing costs. That's gold a nonwizard could spend on items to round out weak spots or concentrate on strengths. If you want items, you'll either need to spend lots of gold (see above problem), or less gold and some experience, which will put you behind the power curve to some degree. Same idea if you want to manufacture items to sell. Add the fact that most of the items you make will be consumable, and not as effective as personally cast spells (wands, anyone), and the item junkie wizard takes on the whole junkie charm of trading off more and more long-term potential for nifty short term fixes. Which while it rules in one-on-one arenas, drags muchly in any real campaign.

...Not that I'd mind a lower magic D&D, just that if I do want a game where magic isn't the new technology, I'd play something else where the idea isn't so embedded.

 

[Zhure]

I only find the Wizards outshining the Rogue at "sneaky stuff" if the DM isn't doing his job well.

I frequently put out red-herrings: draw out combat maps, post guards, roll initiative. Sometimes it's real, sometimes it's just a non-combat, or a parley situation. You'll find the casters marshalling their resources a lot more when you do this, but a Rogue can still tumble up and prepare to unleash Sneak Attack.

Invisible flying Wizards surrounded by Silence? They had to get a Cleric or a Bard to cast Silence for them. A Wizard surrounded by Silence is generally a dead Wizzy. Most of his spells either won't work or he had to prepare them at a higher level and taken the Silent Feat. Sorcerers are at least a little better off, since they don't have to prepare.

The example of a sixth level Wizard using Fly and Invisibility to scout ahead baffled me. This "scount" can do both for slightly less than an hour, but he's used ALL his (base) 3rd levels spells and half his 2nd level spells. If he is forced to resort to combat, that's most of his potent offense and defense tied up for one hour of effect. Best-case with an INT of 21 he's used half his 3rd level spells and 1/3rd of his 2nd level spells.

This self-same scout Wizard by default "knows" only four 3rd level spells, one of which is Fly. Fly is a great spell, but Dispel Magic is a must-have, especially since this Wiz wants to emulate a Rogue and wants to be able to shut down magical traps. That means he has two more third level spells... he's almost as bad off as a Sorcerer. Since our scout Wiz will be doing a lot of scouting, he's probably either preparing these two every day, or he's leaving the slots open for later preparation (a good tactic if used sparingly). Either way, that's one less fireball, or GMW, or Haste, all of which can be far more devastating.

Now at higher levels it's true a mage can outshine a Rogue in limited circumstances, but the same could be said of the Rogue using UMD. Burn on of the Rogue's Feats as Skill Focus: UMD and he's got a 25+CHA Mod skill at 20th level. He can use a Rod of Resurrection and a Wand of Fireballs with alacrity.

Greg

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Ah, finally someone who points out the value of use magic device...

What is better in scouting? A Wizard with Fly and Invisibilty (casted from memory or wand), or a Rogue with Fly and Invisibilty (casted from wizard or wand)?

I think the best way to improve everyone in a party is buffing each other, not only casting everything for yourself. That`s probably the best thing in 3.Edition - Teamwork is the best way to improve the party`s abilities...

Mustrum Ridcully

 

[Darklone]

Ouch

Frostmarrow: Spot DC 20 tells you that there is something invisible AROUND, not WHERE it is.

But guys: Play "realistic"! *waiting till the laughter ends*

Have you ever seen a palace in real life? How many rooms? How many floors? Compare it to the average palace or house in your games. Sure we got a sorcerer with knock in our group. And invisibility and fly. And all the other nifty stuff. He would never dare enter a hostile fortress without the rogue. He's good to be there as reinforcement if the rogue fails at a nice door or stop something with silence from being heard (door bashed in) or something else. But he's out of spells in a minute if he wants to do it alone.

 

[WizarDru]

Allow me to chime in with an agreement that Rogues are not invalidated by spellcasters at higher levels, and to speak from experience. Can they be? Yes. Are they, in general? No.

Let's look at a few factors:

Party Resource: This has been hit several times, but bears repeating. No PC is an island. In any case where you feel the need to compare a wizard directly against a rogue, make sure to factor in the benefits from the rest of the party. Don't discuss a wizard protected by silence, unless you assume a rogue with the same ability. A wizard can cast a fireball, but usually expects SOMEONE to slow down the opposition so he can. When the pack of Girallons drops on the group, no amount of damage dealing will make up for low hit points on the wizard's part.

Limited Spells versus Unlimited Abilities: Can a wizard or cleric duplicate most of a rogue's talents with magic? Yes. Is it cost-effective to do so? Not usually. The opportunity cost of such spells is prohibitive and requires specific preparation, usually 12-24 hours prior to their anticipated use. Rogues abilities are available whenever and wherever needed. Sorcerors generally don't take the spells that duplicate some of the rogue's abilities for their precious few slots, unless the character is specifically developed around that concept.

Underrated talents: Disable Device and Use Magic Device. Only a rogue can disable a magic trap. A spellcaster could probably dispel the trap...but will generally have a harder time of it, unless he burns a precious greater dispelling (at the levels we're discussing). Never mind that a wizard isn't likely to detect and identify the trap in the first place, unless he's burning detect magics all over the place. The rogue's ability to use both arcane and divine spellcasting items, regardless of requirement is signifcant. The rogue can trick an item into thinking she is different race, different alignment and has abilities she clearly doesn't have. Wands and scrolls greatly enhance the rogue's effectiveness, and increase their unpredictability. This also allows the rogue to cover weak spots in the group. When the cleric goes down, the rogue can use a wand or scroll to heal them. Need magical backup? Wand of magic missles, online. And so on.

Skills, skills and more skills: Fighters get feats, clerics get saves, and rogues get skills. When the rogue rolls the dice and says: "Hmm....bad roll. My spot worked out to....a 42." You'll understand the power of those skill points. Sense motive is good both in and out of combat. The same applies to Bluff. Diplomacy shouldn't be overlooked, either. Rogues can become masters of non-combat situations, if they choose that route. Wizards and fighters will never be as adept at this, nor were they meant to be.

Versatility: Rogues are excellent at filling gaps and covering a wide set of roles, depending on the needs of a group or game. With their abilities, combined with a wise selection of feats, they can be highly effective, both in and out of combat. A hasted rogue with Spring Attack, Improved Initiative and expertise, for example, is a scary thing. By the same token, a rogue with a high Use Magic Device, Bluff, and Knowledge Arcana could easily bluff her way into a mage's guild.


It seems to me, MOH, that what you're actually asking is: "My party is getting by without a rogue, so what makes them valuable?"

My answer would be that you're using characters to shore up the lack of a rogue just fine, so it's a non-issue for you. Having a bard in the group covers many of the rogues abilities for you, and the sorceror probably helps cover those deficiencies as well. Under no circumstances should you ever HAVE to have a rogue in your group, any more than any other class. But in some situations, they will be much more handy than others. A good game doesn't require any type of character, specifically...but each class has it's shining moments. The rogue is equally valuable as the wizard/sorceror, cleric and fighter.

This sounds more like a campaign flavor question than anything else. Ask my players whether they rather give up their Rogue/Shadow Dancer for another wizard or fighter. I'm pretty sure they appreciated her during the pit traps in Nightfang Spire, and had wished she'd examined the lethal dragon trap there, too.