Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jeff Wilder" data-source="post: 4462201" data-attributes="member: 5122">It takes a careful balance, but IMO one of the best things about a rogue is the ability to scout, especially at low levels.&nbsp; (&quot;Balance&quot; because it becomes all too easy to hog the DM's time, and IME the player often has to be just as careful not to allow that to happen as the DM does.)While remembering that Hide doesn't make you invisible to stuff with darkvision or other enhanced perception abilities, you can otherwise Hide in shadowy illumination.&nbsp; (That leads to another &quot;pet peeve tangent&quot; ... rogues not being able to sneak attack in shadowy alleys.&nbsp; Buh?)&nbsp; Or by using cover.So, you might scout ahead of the group 40 or 60 feet, especially if you have darkvision or low-light of your own.&nbsp; You can confer with the group whenever there's a choice of paths to follow.&nbsp; When you find the bad guys, you can leave marks for the group and use Hide and Move Silently to set yourself up within 30 feet for a sneak attack.&nbsp; Then you wait to launch your attack until your buddies storm the castle.One of the very few things I actively dislike about Pathfinder is that they've amped the rogue to where he's a combat machine, rivaling and almost certainly exceeding the fighter in the ability to take down most foes.&nbsp; (They've given the rogue more HPs, expanded what he can sneak attack, and -- worst of all -- given him a combat feat every other level, just like the fighter.&nbsp; Better, because the rogue has extra nasty options.)&nbsp; The reason I dislike this is that it's taken a lot of the &quot;sneaky&quot; and &quot;mobile&quot; out of the rogue's combat tactics.In 3E, you definitely need to use sneaky and mobile.&nbsp; That, IMO, is the fun of the rogue in combat.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jeff Wilder, post: 4462201, member: 5122"] It takes a careful balance, but IMO one of the best things about a rogue is the ability to scout, especially at low levels. ("Balance" because it becomes all too easy to hog the DM's time, and IME the player often has to be just as careful not to allow that to happen as the DM does.) While remembering that Hide doesn't make you invisible to stuff with darkvision or other enhanced perception abilities, you [i]can[/i] otherwise Hide in shadowy illumination. (That leads to another "pet peeve tangent" ... rogues not being able to sneak attack in shadowy alleys. Buh?) Or by using cover. So, you might scout ahead of the group 40 or 60 feet, especially if you have darkvision or low-light of your own. You can confer with the group whenever there's a choice of paths to follow. When you find the bad guys, you can leave marks for the group and use Hide and Move Silently to set yourself up within 30 feet for a sneak attack. Then you wait to launch your attack until your buddies storm the castle. One of the very few things I actively dislike about Pathfinder is that they've amped the rogue to where he's a combat machine, rivaling and almost certainly exceeding the fighter in the ability to take down most foes. (They've given the rogue more HPs, expanded what he can sneak attack, and -- worst of all -- given him a combat feat every other level, just like the fighter. Better, because the rogue has extra nasty options.) The reason I dislike this is that it's taken a lot of the "sneaky" and "mobile" out of the rogue's combat tactics. In 3E, you definitely need to use sneaky and mobile. That, IMO, is the fun of the rogue in combat. [/QUOTE]

Verification