D&D 3E/3.5 Fixing the newly broken rogue class (thanks to Andy and 3.5)

[bret]

at 10th level a rogue should only be missing 15% more often than the fighter. considering that the rogue will likely be doing more than 15% more damage per hit this balances out fairly nicely for damage, which it shouldn't IMO.

Sorry, but you should be looking at the ratio of the number of hits, not the difference in the hit percentage.

Consider if the fighter needs a 11 to hit with their first attack. They will hit 50% of the time on their first attack and 25% on their second. If the rogue requires three more, that would be a 14 which means they hit 35% and 10% of the time.

In this case, the fighter is hitting 15 times for every 9 hits by the rogue (almost a 2 to 1 ratio) and also has a much better chance of confirming criticals. The rogue can get lucky and do significant damage, but the fighter is the one that will consistently dish out damage.

After 10th level, the gap becomes wider as the fighter gets their 3rd atttack at 11th level and 4th attack at 15th. The rogue gets their third attack at 15th -- the same time as the fighter gets their fourth. An extra attack makes a huge difference in how much damage a character can pump out. If the fighter is specializing in a weapon, they are probably picking up Improved Critical and (with 3.5) the Greater Weapon Focus/Specialization as well.

Every trick that the rogue plays to improve their to-hit, the fighter can match or better. In every group I've been in, the fighter gets first pick of weapons and therefore is likely to widen the gap further.

How often the rogue will hit compared to the fighter will also depend heavily on what the AC of creatures you are fighting is. When it gets to the point where the rogue is only hitting on a natural 20, the fighter is hitting four times for every hit by the rogue.

I haven't had time to run a Rogue/Fighter up to high levels. The one dwarven Ro/Fi I was running had the campaign fold much too early. From what I can tell, taking just 4 levels of Fighter can make a significant difference for the rogue -- three more feats, allowed to specialize in a weapon, better weapon selection, and will have a higher BAB which gets you to multiple attacks sooner. This would tilt the results.

 

[DMauricio]

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.

I'll agree with you on that one.
I've allowed Rogues to use Hide in Plain site as one of their special abilities at 10th level.

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!

ditto all those points. I've not found a drop in usefulness for the rogue since converting to 3.5

Sure, I'm not going to catch up to the front-rank fighters with sheer damage output in every single scenario.
But if I really wanted to go "blow for blow" with the big mean nasties out there, I would've played a barbarian or a fighter.

Sure I'm not going to be all that useful against undead
But if I really wanted to be the ghost hunter type character, I would've played a cleric, or paladin, or even a ranger with undead as a favoured enemy.

But I have to say that playing a rogue, I'm still the best at conning NPCs out of their gold (even if the bard has benefits, I got more skill points and skill mastery to boot)

And though the monk is my equal at sneaking (and he's probably better at spotting) he can't exactly find those devious traps... (though a dwarf might - mind you they can't do squat to disarm magical traps - unless they have rogue levels or a dispel magic handy)

And to make matters even better, I can now use a long-spear to deliver my sneak attacks without wasting a feat to get proficiency(so long as someone is giving me flanking bonuses) so I don't have to worry about any nasty return hits (providing the enemy survives my sneak attack)

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.

hmmm... we could just cast the revised flame arrow spell... and use a full attack!. woot for arcane archers with flame arrow!



Dom

 

[bret]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Fixing the newly broken rogue class (thanks to Andy and 3.5)

[ re: My comment about armor with the Fortification property on it ]

I disagree. Not every NPC would fear rogues most. Others might prefer to protect themselves from other classes, which they fear more. Wizards and clerics come to mind.

And from a metagame view, don't you think nerfing the rogue in every big battle is a little harsh?

Actually, the NPCs would take Fortification to prevent Criticals more than to stop Sneak Attacks. It does protect against someone more dangerous than the rogue -- the fighter with Improved Critical or Paladin with Bless Weapon. That it also stops sneak attacks is just a bonus. Just one critical from a Fire Giant or Dragon prevented by fortification is enough to convince many of the value of that enchantment.

Also, I didn't say that the rogue was prevented from using Sneak Attack every battle. I said that there were plenty of ways to prevent it and gave examples. Sorry if I wasn't clear there.
There are a lot of ways that you can stop sneak attacks. Any amount of concealment, Fortification on armor or shield, and several types of creatures including Elementals that are easily summoned. The rogue should expect to hit these types of creatures on a fairly regular basis.

Let me ask you this:

How many ways does your normal adventuring party have of dealing with a rogue?

 

[Sonofapreacherman]

KaeYoss.

What niche?

The rogue used to be quintessential evader of traps. Not anymore. The barbarian's highly lauded *instincts* are just as good at it.
The rogue used to be the undisputed master of skills. Not anymore. The bard and ranger have closed the skill point gap on rogues considerably.
The bard used to be the one character who could somehow get out of any pinch better than all others. Not anymore. The barbarian beats the rogue to it in melee.

The rogue no longer holds dominion over these familiar grounds. They are forced to hang all their hopes on Sneak Attack in order to be unique. A pathetic lot for a character to be sure. Now they now have to largely share their uniqueness, diminishing their niche significantly.

These changes are no different than when version 3.0 allowed *any* character who took the Track feat, and bought up ranks of Wilderness Lore, to follow prey with the exact same expertise as a ranger. Sure, it cost more to buy up that skill (except for the barbarian and druid), but it was possible. That problem was corrected in 3.5 with Woodland Stride and Swift Tracker. Now a similar encroachment problem has been created with the rogue. It was a bad call.

And skills cannot also be reverse applicated.

They not only can, they already are. That would be the point of giving rogues Uncanny Dodge in the first place, to reverse apply sneak attack, except that now barbarians arrive there first. Bad form. Rogues should get there first, and at the very least, the same time as barbarians.

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.

Yet again, another misuse of the word “trolling”. I reply to challenges and defend my statements. The word you are searching for is not *trolling*. It's articulate.



-----

Caliban.

This thread is no longer about whether or not my particular revision of the rogue is best. Take my revision or take another. Whichever you prefer. But the rogue already needs to be revised again. That is the problem. Identifying broken rules most certainly belongs in the rules forum.

 

[Darklone]

-----

Caliban.

This thread is no longer about whether or not my particular revision of the rogue is best. Take my revision or take another. Whichever you prefer. But the rogue already needs to be revised again. That is the problem. Identifying broken rules most certainly belongs in the rules forum.

Have you noticed the huge percentage of people around here who agree with you about the brokeness of the 3.5 rogue?

Apparently not.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

You know, as a rogue I'd be far less concerned about barbarians getting uncanny dodge (which they always did,) or bards and rangers getting an extra 2 skill points (they had great skill lists already), and be more concerned about the general elimination of exclusive skills.

Think about it.

Now we can look forward to the fighter with ranks in Use Magic Device.

It's a brave new world, ladies and gents. A brave new world.

 

[hong]

Now we can look forward to the fighter with ranks in Use Magic Device.

Somehow I doubt that you're going to be seeing a lot of fighters spending their two skill points per level on a cross-class skill.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Somehow I doubt that you're going to be seeing a lot of fighters spending their two skill points per level on a cross-class skill.

You'll find more of those than people who are worried that the rogue is now broken.

 

[Caliban]

Caliban.

This thread is no longer about whether or not my particular revision of the rogue is best. Take my revision or take another. Whichever you prefer. But the rogue already needs to be revised again. That is the problem. Identifying broken rules most certainly belongs in the rules forum.

No, rewriting a class to suit yourself (which is what you are doing) belongs in house rules. period.

 

[bret]

Somehow I doubt that you're going to be seeing a lot of fighters spending their two skill points per level on a cross-class skill.

Lets, see. Fighter gets 11 + 7 feats during their life. You could put one of those general feats into Skill Focus: UMD.

The rules for UMD appear to have changed slightly. On a roll of 1, you can not attempt to use the device again for 24 hours. You have mishaps if you miss by 10 when activating blindly, evidently mishaps no longer occur when using a wand that you know about. Scrolls can still backfire.

So a fighter 1 who used their general feat for Skill Focus UMD could have 2+3+Char bonus to skill. Assuming charisma 10, they could activate the wand about one time in 4.
Not great odds, but not horrible either.

Assuming no charisma bonus, the fighter would need 7 ranks to hit the 50% mark, so level 11. By that time, wands really aren't that impressive anymore. On the other hand, lightning bolts are still a good way to clear out the scrubs.
In my experience, after a while the fighters tend to decide that they've got enough ranks in their class skills and start buying cross-class skills or multiclassing. I could see a fighter deciding to pick up UMD in 3.5 assuming they are willing to give up one of their general feats.