Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 5397602" data-attributes="member: 5834">reYeah. He should. Or he is a waste of a character slot. The game is designed around combat. Period. If you are not an effective combatant, you are some guy that watches everyone else be effective while you wait for the next lock or trap.This role doesn't matter in modules. You can live completely without a character of this type through modules, adventures, and any standard game and not miss a beat. Unless every module is the Tomb of Horrors the rogue is obsolete.Decent means not fun to play for the majority of players. Why play a "decent 2nd tier combatant" when you can play a great second tier combatant like a fighter with a couple of rogue levels to find traps.Does it a cost a standard action to use? All it takes is one or two rounds for a well-designed fighter, paladin, or barbarian to make mince meat of just about anything they face. Toss in an arcane caster opening up right from the get go. And that rogue casting vanish just wasted his spell-like ability.No full attack action while sniping is there? Why spend all that time hiding and trying to hide again when the melee type runs out in the open without hiding and kills what you're fighting faster than you could dream of doing it.Poor design choice. The game is about combat. The glory is in damage dealing, not being the guy who finds the occasional trap or who scouts ahead, tells you where the guys are that need to be killed, then shoots his pea shooter while the cannons and tanks smash everything down.If you're flanking with a figher, even the amount of time it takes you to get into flanking position is probably long enough for the fighter to take most of the enemies hit points and possibly move on to the next guy.So you take the time to pull off dirty trick to set up your sneak attack, and I repeat again that the fighter has already destroyed the mob by the time you set it up more than likely. High level fighter dish out insane damage and hit far, far, far more often the rogues. So do paladins and barbarians.The game is combat-oriented. You might be able to work in one or two encounters an entire adventure where the rogue gets to be Mr. Troubleshooter. And that is if you even bother to try as a DM and your party doesn't mind sitting there while the rogue makes skill rolls.Then as soon as combat hits, all your big, bruising melee and powerful arcane casters bring the hammer. While rogue guy maneuvers into flanking range hoping he gets a round of attacks off before the fighter, paladin, or barbarian crush the monster.At least classes like the cleric, oracle, and bard bring massive utility to the table.Rogues bring almost nothing.And Dirty Trick matters not much at all once the fighters start picking up critical feats that can blind, stun, stagger, deafen, and exhaust what they are fighting with a crit (which is pretty often with Improved Crit and four or give attacks a round) while doing insane damage with any crit as well.I have not seen one campaign where it was a necessity to have a class with more than a few levels of rogue. I haven't had a single player since 3.0 came out play a rogue past lvl 4. Just isn't worth it. Still not worth it in Pathfinder. The rogue is a poorly designed class that isn't worth playing unless you have a DM that goes out of his way to create scenarios where the rogue shines.But the natural style of play in most groups I've played in is fairly straighforward. And the majority of players want to be effective combatants or at the very least provide highly visible utility like healing or magical buffing. The rogue does neither. He doesn't even have a defining talent that makes you go "Wow, that is awsome" like say a barbarian with Come and Get It and Fiend Totem. Or anything of the kind.I doubt Paizo play-tested the rogue in average groups. Or took the time to see how they compare to other classes, which is why they continued to give the Rogue the sacred cow trapfinding ability of past editions. They know the class is weak and the only reason to play one is to deal with traps. Otherwise it is pointless. 3E made the worst rogue of any edition of D&D to date. It is by far the least played class in my group due to its low combat effectiveness and weak survivability. Once you reach the high level game which we almost always do reach 10th level plus, the rogue is amongst the first to suffer the negative effects of AoE fear, strange fortitude or will based gaze attacks, AoE spell effects like Mass Holds or Wail of the Banshee. They have amongst the lowest hit points in the group. They fall for just about every illusion that exists. They usually don't hit anywhere near as well as the other classes because of their low BAB, especially once you start fighting big bad evil guys with ACs designed to survive fighter types.All in all a poorly designed class which all my players avoid like the plague. Some guys have tried a few rogues, then they get past 5th level and start feeling like chumps. Not enough feats, not enough cool abilities, not enough opportunities to shine in a game oriented almost solely around combat.</blockquote>

Verification