Lord Pendragon
First Post
If you're using the rogue's dex to bridge the gap between attack bonuses, shouldn't you consider the fighter's strength bonus to widen it again?Shard O'Glase said:
D&D 3E/3.5 Fixing the newly broken rogue class (thanks to Andy and 3.5)
Shard O'Glase
First Post
not unless they're a 1/2 orc.
Basically my point is with finesse the only difference is BAB where as for the monk its usually BAB and stats, and at level 10 the spread is only a 3 point difference or 15%. If your a 1/2 ling you get a +2 to hit thanks to your dex boost and only the 1/2 orc gives the same for a fighter type, and being small you get another +1 to hit droping the miss range even more.
rogues really just don't miss that much more than fighters do. In 3.5 a fighter can get the greater weapon focus feat to spread the advantage a bit more again. But the rogue will likely take weapon focus short sword, so its only a 5% boost over the rogue and the rogue will be usign a combat effecitve style in 3.5 with the imporved two weapon chain.
I figure a combat optimized pure rogue goes something like this.
level 1
two weapon style
level 3
weapon finesse
level 6 weapon focus
short sword
level 9
improved 2 weapon
level 15
greater two weapon.
At level 10 they will be
BAB 7/2
two weaponing it for
5/5/0/0
weapon focus
gets that to
6/6/1/1
weapon finesse
gets that to a aditional += t0 that of the fighters unless we're a 1/2ling or elf and then its an additioanl +1over the non 1/2 orcs fighter stat boost.
If 1/2 ling then we have another +1 so then each of the 1st two swings is at -15% but there are two of them, and then another 2 at again 15% below the fighters next attack. If we're talking level 11 well the fighter gets 3 attacks to the rogues 4, but that final fighters attack is actually lower than the rogues last two shots in chance to hit since they both get a bab here and hey the rogue gets another 1d6 on that sneak attack.
Personally I think the 1/2ling with his 15% less chance to hit with 2 swings and a nice solid bonus 5d6 per hit over the fighter and his +to damage from str & specialization etc will come dang close in damage output more often than the fighters will like.
Basically my point is with finesse the only difference is BAB where as for the monk its usually BAB and stats, and at level 10 the spread is only a 3 point difference or 15%. If your a 1/2 ling you get a +2 to hit thanks to your dex boost and only the 1/2 orc gives the same for a fighter type, and being small you get another +1 to hit droping the miss range even more.
rogues really just don't miss that much more than fighters do. In 3.5 a fighter can get the greater weapon focus feat to spread the advantage a bit more again. But the rogue will likely take weapon focus short sword, so its only a 5% boost over the rogue and the rogue will be usign a combat effecitve style in 3.5 with the imporved two weapon chain.
I figure a combat optimized pure rogue goes something like this.
level 1
two weapon style
level 3
weapon finesse
level 6 weapon focus
short sword
level 9
improved 2 weapon
level 15
greater two weapon.
At level 10 they will be
BAB 7/2
two weaponing it for
5/5/0/0
weapon focus
gets that to
6/6/1/1
weapon finesse
gets that to a aditional += t0 that of the fighters unless we're a 1/2ling or elf and then its an additioanl +1over the non 1/2 orcs fighter stat boost.
If 1/2 ling then we have another +1 so then each of the 1st two swings is at -15% but there are two of them, and then another 2 at again 15% below the fighters next attack. If we're talking level 11 well the fighter gets 3 attacks to the rogues 4, but that final fighters attack is actually lower than the rogues last two shots in chance to hit since they both get a bab here and hey the rogue gets another 1d6 on that sneak attack.
Personally I think the 1/2ling with his 15% less chance to hit with 2 swings and a nice solid bonus 5d6 per hit over the fighter and his +to damage from str & specialization etc will come dang close in damage output more often than the fighters will like.
Hypersmurf
Moderatarrrrh...
... except that there were no barbarian levels in his build
-Hyp.
Sonofapreacherman
Explorer
Darkalone.
I never said skills are useless. I said characters can get by with very few.
-----
-----
It can even be argured that cherrypicking is a non-existent problem. That 1 or 2 levels of a character are going to follow you throughout yoru adventuring career, with XP penalties to boot.
I never said skills are useless. I said characters can get by with very few.
The same can be said for *any* adventuring character. But among those characters, rogues should be the one character class most attuned to such dangers, as they are the ones who regularly scout ahead into it.Darklone said:
Bully for them. But a fencer does not automatically a rogue make.Darklone said:
The principle is the same. I shouldn't have to spell out as much.Darklone said:
Who is talking about fighters? Not me. This is a rogue thread.Darklone said:
-----
Lost you there. The barbarian was never a part of the package. Go back and check if you like. While the character is suboptimal from a BAB standpoint, they possess a host of abilities and are exceedingly resourceful… unrealistically so.WizarDru said:
-----
Why bother when you pick it up in 2 levels with the monk. The point I make about cherry picking levels is simply that a bad DM makes it easy. A good DM makes it realistically difficult. The rules into and of themselves don't prevent cherry picking powergaming.sithramir said:
It can even be argured that cherrypicking is a non-existent problem. That 1 or 2 levels of a character are going to follow you throughout yoru adventuring career, with XP penalties to boot.
Last edited:
Sonofapreacherman
Explorer
Before this gets even further out of hand, my biggest problem with the revised rogue is that the class fails to live up to its niche now. In much the same way that the ranger previously failed to lived to the niche of wilderness warrior, now the rogue fails to live up to their niche as the sneakiest party member.
On a conceptual level, before any mechanical changes were made to the rogue, the designers really needed to keep in mind that rogues are the quintessential trapfinders and defusers. They didn't do that here. The ability to detect traps is now equally shared with barbarians. Rogues are meant to be the most perceptive of the character classes, seeing the opportunities that other miss and exploiting them, whether that means breaking into a house or sliding a dagger between your ribs. Conversely, they also know how to protect themselves against such dangers (by logical reverse application of their skills). Now barbarians can protect themselves during melee even more so than rogues.
While the rogue has by no means lost everything that makes them unique, they have lost a lot. Sure, they can inflict obscene amounts of damage with a successful sneak attack. Nobody is really contesting that. But if sneak attack damage is all that sets the rogue apart now... then that's pretty damn pathetic (concept-wise). You can point to their skill points, but the ranger and bard have closed that gap on that as well. Making rogues superior trap finders and uncanny dodgers, who are at least *on par* with barbarians, is the least that can be done. Adding abilities like Hide in Plain sight is the most.
I'll say this much. Making revisions to a game that has been revised this recently isn't going to make me popular, but I see no point in wasting time. The rogue got marginalized in this edition. I'd like to start correcting that.
On a conceptual level, before any mechanical changes were made to the rogue, the designers really needed to keep in mind that rogues are the quintessential trapfinders and defusers. They didn't do that here. The ability to detect traps is now equally shared with barbarians. Rogues are meant to be the most perceptive of the character classes, seeing the opportunities that other miss and exploiting them, whether that means breaking into a house or sliding a dagger between your ribs. Conversely, they also know how to protect themselves against such dangers (by logical reverse application of their skills). Now barbarians can protect themselves during melee even more so than rogues.
While the rogue has by no means lost everything that makes them unique, they have lost a lot. Sure, they can inflict obscene amounts of damage with a successful sneak attack. Nobody is really contesting that. But if sneak attack damage is all that sets the rogue apart now... then that's pretty damn pathetic (concept-wise). You can point to their skill points, but the ranger and bard have closed that gap on that as well. Making rogues superior trap finders and uncanny dodgers, who are at least *on par* with barbarians, is the least that can be done. Adding abilities like Hide in Plain sight is the most.
I'll say this much. Making revisions to a game that has been revised this recently isn't going to make me popular, but I see no point in wasting time. The rogue got marginalized in this edition. I'd like to start correcting that.
Last edited:
Sejs
First Post
Agreed. I'd give rogues Camoflage at 7th, and then add Hide in Plain Sight to the list of 10th Lvl+ special abilities.
I really don't understand where they thought giving rangers HiPS and Camo and then not giving the same abilities to the supposed 'king of sneaking' was a good idea.
Kae'Yoss
First Post
Sejs said:
Hide in Plain Sight should belong to the rogue if it belongs to the ranger, but camouflage isn't for rogues IMO. Camouflage is a wilderness thing, and I always thought of rogues as city dwellers, or dungeon delvers.
Sonofapreacherman said:
I strongly disagree.
So what is his niche?
Sneaking around in all imaginable enviroments? Still got it
Having a vast selection of class skills and many many skill points? Check
Unleashing the hells with his sneak attack? You better bet the farm on it.
Finding and disarming trap? You know who you're gonna call!
The ranger might outsneak him in the wilderness, but as soon as you're in the city or in the dungeon, the ranger's new powers won't work again. But the rogue's abilities work everywhere.
Absolutely not. Barbarians can react to traps really good (they get the same bonuses as rogues, though rogues tend to have the higher dex and the better base ref bonus). The rogues are still the only ones that can find the nasty traps and disarm them withouth them going off.
Most sneaky? Yes. Most perceptive? Not necessarily. Monks aren't bad at it either, because they need high wisdom which represents perceptiveness.
And skills cannot also be reverse applicated. If that were so, the BAB would be applied to your armor class (if you know better how to attack, you know better how to defend). If skills represented action and anti-action, there wouldn't be seperate skills for the respective two things: Move Silently and Listen are two different skills, though with your reasoning you should know what to listen for. Still, you are able to have one of these things maxed out and not a single rank in the other.
They haven't lost much. They still have their sneak attack, their huge list of class skills, their truckload of skillpoints, the exclusive contract on finding and disabling all but the easiest of traps, and a nice blend of special features.
The fact that several classes have approached the rogues doesn't change that. And the rogue is still the master of these things (still the only with sneak attack, still the most skill points, still the most class skills, still the only trapfinders and -disarmers, still the only one with both uncanny dodge AND evasion, still the only one all those special features.
It's not the revising it again that's making you unpopular. It's the trolling that makes us break out the flasks of acid.
niteshade6
First Post
I've seen ACs much higher then 45 in 3.0. In Living Greyhawk I've seen somebody get up to the 60s even.
This is at lvl 9, and with beads of karma in effect for cleric spells. The character is a wizard 1/ranger 1/ rogue 6/ devoted defender 1
Breakdown....
Mithril Breastplate with magic vestment (+9)
Shield with magic vestment (+9)
shield spell from scroll (+7)
Haste (+4)
Dexterity (+3)
Expertise (+5)
Fighting defensively (+3)
Bark Skin (+4)
Shield of Faith (+4)
Defending weapon with Greater Magic Weapon (+4)
Devoted Defender Bonus (+1)
Total AC=63
It takes about a round with everyone helping for the ac to get that high, and usualy it's unnecesary. But once it's up it pretty much guarantees invulnerability from attacks for him and the person he's defending.
in 3.5 of course he loses a significant amount of ac, but he still has enough to make him unhitable most of the time.
This is at lvl 9, and with beads of karma in effect for cleric spells. The character is a wizard 1/ranger 1/ rogue 6/ devoted defender 1
Breakdown....
Mithril Breastplate with magic vestment (+9)
Shield with magic vestment (+9)
shield spell from scroll (+7)
Haste (+4)
Dexterity (+3)
Expertise (+5)
Fighting defensively (+3)
Bark Skin (+4)
Shield of Faith (+4)
Defending weapon with Greater Magic Weapon (+4)
Devoted Defender Bonus (+1)
Total AC=63
It takes about a round with everyone helping for the ac to get that high, and usualy it's unnecesary. But once it's up it pretty much guarantees invulnerability from attacks for him and the person he's defending.
in 3.5 of course he loses a significant amount of ac, but he still has enough to make him unhitable most of the time.
