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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thanee" data-source="post: 1380181" data-attributes="member: 478">I'm pretty sure, that I have seen good rogues being played, and even played some myself (mostly 3.0, tho, as in 3.5 I prefer the sorcerer, which is still at the top end of the class comparison scale IMHO <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />). I never have seen a good monk and probably never will.BTW, I agree, that there is no weak class, I didn't say so, but there certainly is a weakest class - and I believe it's one of the two I listed in 3.5 (most probably the monk, altho the class is somewhat better now than the 3.0 one).The reason, why I list the rogue is mainly, that 3.5 lets other classes into some of the rogue's field of expertise (skills) - namely the bard and ranger - while giving the rogue nothing of value (actually even taking away some by shifting the uncanny dodge to level 4 - very tough for the multiclassing rogues, that just want 3 levels of the class).Now, the bard and ranger really needed some changes, but that's another issue. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />The rogue still is a potent combat class with the sneak attacks (under the right circumstances only, however), but I doubt it can compete with the power attacking barbarians/fighters now.Therefore, the only thing the rogue has going for her, is the trapfinding stuff, which doesn't seem much.ByeThanee</blockquote>

Verification