Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="two" data-source="post: 1681593" data-attributes="member: 9002">That's pretty much why I think it's weak.&nbsp; It requires a lot of work (not &quot;some thought,&quot; more like a lot of thought) to be combat-ready, and even the most munchkinized rogue is often faced with foes who can't be sneak attacked (for various reasons) and are then pretty much made irrelevant to combat, outside of magic item use.&nbsp; It's not always possible to flank (and rogues dont' always want to get that close), and some beasts are immune even when flanked.&nbsp; Feint only workes in melee, and barring a PRC only allows one attack a round, etc.There is no other class like this.&nbsp; It's like giving a bunch of monsters 100% magic immunity, rendering Wizards useless against them.As said before, Rogues requires good tactical play as well, because if you are not careful, flanking vs. a bad guy can mean a full attack vs. the rogue next round which&nbsp; can mean lots of pain (rogues have poor hit points in general, an average AC typically, not great AC).&nbsp; For some reason, many rogue builds don't prioritize constitution over, for example, intelligence, which I think is asking for it big time.Traps are a real problem.&nbsp; There is no way around it; D&amp;D pretty much makes a rogue required when traps are about.&nbsp; This is pretty lame, and can be gotten around by using the leadship feat at level 6 or 9 to get a rogue cohort (who can disarm traps, use items, and keep from being killed).&nbsp; Or by a nice GM who doesn't use a lot of traps on rogue-deficient parties (or rent-a-rogue, when needed).As for versitile, Bards win hands down.&nbsp; Same BAB as the rogue, slightly fewer skill points, but spell casting, Use Magic Device as a class skill, etc.Again, nothing wrong with a Rogue2/some fighting class X or even rogue4/other stuff6.&nbsp; Can be potent.&nbsp; Just wanted to point out that Rogue10 puts all his eggs in the &quot;sneak attack&quot; basket, which if unavailable gets wearisome.&nbsp; A rogue2/fighter4/barbarian2 can lay some damage down in a variety of ways vs., for example, undead.&nbsp; A pure rogue8 is unhappy, and only marginally effective vs. undead.For a new player, a straight rogue build is full of potholes, unlike for example a barbarian build or even a fighter build.&nbsp; That's kinda all I was saying.&nbsp; I'd definately multiclass a rogue as a newer-ish player.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="two, post: 1681593, member: 9002"] That's pretty much why I think it's weak. It requires a lot of work (not "some thought," more like a lot of thought) to be combat-ready, and even the most munchkinized rogue is often faced with foes who can't be sneak attacked (for various reasons) and are then pretty much made irrelevant to combat, outside of magic item use. It's not always possible to flank (and rogues dont' always want to get that close), and some beasts are immune even when flanked. Feint only workes in melee, and barring a PRC only allows one attack a round, etc. There is no other class like this. It's like giving a bunch of monsters 100% magic immunity, rendering Wizards useless against them. As said before, Rogues requires good tactical play as well, because if you are not careful, flanking vs. a bad guy can mean a full attack vs. the rogue next round which can mean lots of pain (rogues have poor hit points in general, an average AC typically, not great AC). For some reason, many rogue builds don't prioritize constitution over, for example, intelligence, which I think is asking for it big time. Traps are a real problem. There is no way around it; D&D pretty much makes a rogue required when traps are about. This is pretty lame, and can be gotten around by using the leadship feat at level 6 or 9 to get a rogue cohort (who can disarm traps, use items, and keep from being killed). Or by a nice GM who doesn't use a lot of traps on rogue-deficient parties (or rent-a-rogue, when needed). As for versitile, Bards win hands down. Same BAB as the rogue, slightly fewer skill points, but spell casting, Use Magic Device as a class skill, etc. Again, nothing wrong with a Rogue2/some fighting class X or even rogue4/other stuff6. Can be potent. Just wanted to point out that Rogue10 puts all his eggs in the "sneak attack" basket, which if unavailable gets wearisome. A rogue2/fighter4/barbarian2 can lay some damage down in a variety of ways vs., for example, undead. A pure rogue8 is unhappy, and only marginally effective vs. undead. For a new player, a straight rogue build is full of potholes, unlike for example a barbarian build or even a fighter build. That's kinda all I was saying. I'd definately multiclass a rogue as a newer-ish player. [/QUOTE]

Verification