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: 187942" data-attributes="member: 478">Rogues are good with skills. They are the best in this area by far, but skills is probably the weakest area to be good in, because there are so many ways to get decent skills, especially magic items.Rogues are also quite good in combat, but the only thing they really can do is deal some good damage in favoring situations. How often those situations arise depends on the campaign, but I'd say that in about 50% of the fights, the rogue can make good use of sneak attacks, maybe a little more.Rogues, however, are nowhere even close to a pure fighter in any other area of combat (besides dealing damage). They can never take as many hits as a fighter can and do not have the high reliability and endurance of the fighter class in combat.The rogues' out of combat dominance over the fighter can be lowered, if the fighter actually spends some feats on out of combat stuff or has a decent intelligence score or better yet, both! Most fighters use all their available resources up to become better at fighting. Those fighters should not complain about their lack of out of combat abilities. The rogues have to spend a considerable amount of their resources on combat stuff to become decent in combat, so why could the fighter not do the same for out of combat abilities?For example, a human fighter with Int 14, who spends a few feats on Cosmopolitan should have enough good skills to become a decent character in out of combat scenarios, while still retaining enough to be the reliable enduring fighter everyone knows. Get a few items, which further increase his skills and he's all set! He will not be as good as the rogue with skills, but the rogue will not be as good in combat OTOH.And yes, combat abilities are probably weighted with more importance than out of combat abilities!ByeThanee</blockquote>

Verification