Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Votan" data-source="post: 5098557" data-attributes="member: 18680">These arguments are difficult without context.  If the rogue is routinely getting sneak attack damage then that is an average of +35 to damage. To get your number, the creature has an AC in the range of 39 to 41.  How does this stack up?  There are 4 monsters in the PF SRD at CR 20:Balor AC 36Ancient Gold Dragon AC 39Pit Fiend AC 38Tarn Linnorm AC 36Of course, a 20th level rogue should have a +5 weapon (now needs a 13 to hit the Gold Dragon), has master strike, and flanking gives a +2 bonus (and she should be able to arrange that about 75% of the time with tumbles).  Sneak attack damage cuts through DR if the party doesn't have the right weapon.  Tumbling makes flanking easy.  I am not saying that the skill based class is better than the combat class but you seem to dismiss a lot of the abilities of the rogue.  Now this can happen for several reasons.  If nobody knows how to construct or play a rogue it may feel suboptimal.  House rules (the little variations we all make to the game) can matter too.  For example, I had a DM who interpreted sneak attack as needing to be set up like a 2E backstab (only woks from behind on a completely unaware opponent).  Needless to say, that game saw no pure class rogues.  But I do think that the class, as per the rules as written, is better than you are giving it credit for.</blockquote>