Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Any D&D/D20

Shadowrun

World of Darkness

Palladium

Other (feel free to post about it)

[Rolan7]

The funny thing about Rogues is that even though everyone builds them with Dexterity.

They benefit greatly from strength builds.

That is until Pathfinder created the Unchained Rogue... Which most DMs don't allow because they don't understand the Unchained classes (which are essentially the Pathfinder creators attempting to create a superior version of the original class)

Turns out I really want to chat about rogues, apparently??  I just finished playing a ranger so I guess martial stuff is in my head.

Strength does increase their attack damage, true, but it's less important than dexterity.  They need DEX for (I'm bored):

Armor class is vitally important.  They have d6 HD, need to be within 30ft to sneak attack and closer to flank, and they're restricted to light armor if they want evasion (and armor check penalty ruins their important skills)

Reflex saves, since they rely on evasion and greater evasion to survive spells (d6 HD).  Also touch AC versus spellcasters.

Their skills.  Almost as important as INT, because they get 8+INT anyway.  With maxed ranks in hide/tumble/escape artist/open lock, more DEX gives an important edge.

Initiative.  They do NOT want to be flatfooted, ever.


Then consider that they typically need decent CHA (for UMD if nothing else, but also bluff), WIS for scouting, a reasonable INT, and all the CON they can get for when things go wrong at all (or when spellcasters go "TROLO no evasion not even a ray attack just save or die").  Strength only gives them bonus damage per swing (overshadowed by sneak attack) and attack bonus.  Weapon finesse works with all their weapons (and unneeded for bows), so it's really just that damage bonus.  They do get 3/4 BAB, which means a few attacks per round, but it's hard to justify IMO.

Now...  There is a fighter variant in RAW that gets sneak attack instead of bonus feats, near the bottom of this list:
www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm
With full BAB, d10 HD, and no armor restrictions, likely using double-handed weapons...  Yeah, strength and "sneak attack" (via flanking) would be a deadly combo.  Mainly they lose all the rogue skills (2+INT and cross-class) because they're literally a fighter.  But they get HD, AC, BAB, hell fort is even a much better save than reflex.  And they can drop DEX safely.
Honestly, full sneak attack seems like a decent trade-off for the fighter bonus feats.  Weapon focus (+2 dam) is nice but kinda eclipsed by this, as long as you can flank.  Whereas weapon specialization (+1 att) is pretty lame.

[Cthulhu]

If you're really worried about your strength bonus to damage on top of the other giant bonuses you get, you can just get weapon finesse.

[Neonivek]

Yes but Rogues also get benefits that remove their need to EVER have a dex bonus (Seriously if you need your dex bonus for your skills... your doing Rogue wrong ). Not to mention their reflex save stays nice and high thanks to it being their dominant stat AND later on stops mattering period because they always succeed (Improved Evasion!)

They can keep their AC higher than a rogue can without losing their bonus thanks to Mithril.

All this for a rogue that will do much MUCH higher damage than a normal rogue AND will be able to do damage in all situations.

As for "Flatfooted" rogues are never flat footed... Uncanny Dodge.

Basically you are stacking bonuses a Rogue either doesn't need or that a Rogue suppliments SO much that it never becomes a factor.

If you're really worried about your strength bonus to damage on top of the other giant bonuses you get, you can just get weapon finesse.

Weapon Finesse is a feat tax... and only allows you to use Dex to hit.

---

THEN AGAIN! there is also Merit in not even bothering to go Medium armor and sticking to light... but not raising your AC.

Most enemies later on... Will just flat out hit you every time regardless of your armor (This was fixed in 5e) and only missing if they roll 1s.

[Cthulhu]

Part of the problem we're running into here is that 3.X is awful and broken and will never be balanced.

[Neonivek]

Part of the problem we're running into here is that 3.X is awful and broken and will never be balanced.

Yeah... yeah... Everything I said was based on 3.5

Pathfinder has two fixes for this
1) Rogues actually have strength based archtypes... So... Yeah there is that
2) Unchained Rogues deal damage with finesse weapons based on their dex bonus.

I cannot remember but I think Rogues (definitely the unchained ones) also remove that weapon finesse Feat Tax (As in a Feat that is compulsory that seemingly only exists to remove one possible feat)

[Rolan7]

Part of the problem we're running into here is that 3.X is awful and broken and will never be balanced.

We *just* dodged an edition fight, come on
Though yes 3.5e's very imbalanced.  Much like Pathfinder.

@Neo
I contend that if you're investing in skills, you usually want them as high as at all possible.  Besides a few exceptions like tumble, skills are generally opposed, so every point makes them more reliable.  And the rogue *needs* to pass that hide check, at least most of the time.  They're squishy.

Doubly so for reflex saves...  When a single save is the only thing protecting your d6 HD butt from dragonfire, max it!!  Especially with evasion.

I did forget about uncanny dodge, oops!

The AC thing is kinda true, but our GM has been pretty good about letting AC stay relevant.  Whereas our opposed skills haven't usually "maxed out", at least not when it matters.  Also, touch AC is really important against ray spells.  Casters have terrible BAB, and probably get overconfident since touch AC is usually very low.

Anyway, we're talking about +3 damage per 2 STR over 3 hits...  And that's at level 15, excluding haste or something (and assuming all hits).  That's *good*, but not nearly as important as DEX.  I'd overall rate rogue stats in this order:  DEX, CON, CHA, INT, WIS, STR.  It's good, but they *need* a bit of everything else.  I guess spot/listen could be dumped, but then you're dumping will-saves, which are otherwise a chink in their armor (no ray, no reflex).  I might be overrating CHA (it's hard not to), but maybe they don't have a paladin or bard to be party-face.  Or maybe the rogue might need to talk their own dang self out of some things

As an aside, since I think we were mostly using core...  There are ways to use dex for damage, though they're limited or involve class levels.  This page is amazing:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?125732-3-x-X-stat-to-Y-bonus
My favorite is "deadeye".  It only applies to ranged attacks within 30ft, but that's the range limit on sneak attacks anyway.
(I love the errata, which changes the BAB requirement from 14... to 1.  A typo, we assume )

[Cthulhu]

Is it an edition fight if we all agree?

[Neonivek]

As I said Rogues auto succeed at reflex saves Essentially.

And if your facing off against serious breath attacks... You won't save against it. You should be using elemental resistance.

I guess spot/listen could be dumped

You aren't dumping anything. Rogues over-compensate. Besides, you do NOT want to split your stats that much.

Any skill you deem important will be more than high enough... with or without the dex bonus... because you are a Rogue... and you break the skill curve sideways and can sneak past ancient dragons at level 5.

 

but maybe they don't have a paladin or bard to be party-face.  Or maybe the rogue might need to talk their own dang self out of some things

Notice how in your version the freeken rogue has to do everything... 3.5 design...

I am glad we don't have that anymore... Well except in Pathfinder where it is arguably worse, arguably better.

Is it an edition fight if we all agree?

It isn't an edition fight xD

I am saying that Rogues in 3.5 benefit from a strength build.
-----

Also man I forgot how boring the non-caster classes were in 3.5...

[Rolepgeek]

Just started a 5E campaign for my friends in college. Was not expecting to run a campaign (I had a setting idea I'd been wanting to use and no one else was willing to DM, and we were all wanting to play), especially not in a system I had never used before. I'm used to 3.5, (which is still better than 4E), and 5E, especially stuff like the caps on ability scores, just felt odd to me. But as I use it, it actually seems pretty good. Open-ended, but with enough structure that it's not difficult to adjudicate unexpected circumstances, and simple enough that you can just jump right in. Probably not ideal for the optimization and shit that everyone wants to do online, but for in-person play with people who aren't familiar, it's been working great.

So far they've gotten about halfway through a half-sunken thousands-of-years old watchtower, collapsed the kobold tunnel that led to the lower areas, killed the lizardfolk in charge of said kobolds, and gotten the dwarf knocked unconscious twice.

[NullForceOmega]

Is it an edition fight if we all agree?

It's an edition fight when it gets heated, this has been avoiding an actual argument so you're all fine for now.  As long as everyone keeps their head on straight you can discuss things along this line.

[BlackFlyme]

Evil campaigns are odd. There's still the push in the back of your mind to be a hero. Will avoid specifics for the sake of spoilers.

Heckled at a priest's sermon. Could have done more, but it was either too difficult/dangerous or counter-intuitive. We didn't even think of some of the options the DM informed us about, after it was over.

I punched out a bar maid because she was in my way. Also swinging a knife at me for threatening the barkeep, but that's not important.

We were ambushed by about a dozen people who didn't like us becoming a part of the town's guard. We made them all share the same 15'x10' cell.

Turns out another prisoner was also a were-boar, and burst through the bars. Not in the same cell as the ambushers. It mostly just wanted to escape, so it went running up and down one hallway as we stupidly ran back up and down a room that connected to both entrances, trying to chase it rather than split up to funnel it.

I want to become a full-fledged Vampire at some point, rather than just be a Dhampir. Checked with the Necromancer to see if it was an option among the undead-creating spells, but it is not.


What do people think of the Psionics in Pathfinder? I've heard some good stuff about it, despite being Third-Party.

[Neonivek]

Evil campaigns are odd. There's still the push in the back of your mind to be a hero.

It hurts because of how "vague" the alignments are in terms of how strict or loose they are (And when a normal human being is neutral... then alignments don't mean anything).

So that sort of part of your mind to be a hero? Yeah it is something that REAL villains have.

Think Dr. Doom just kills babies in Latvaria? There is a VERY good reason why Latvaria puts up with his nonsense.

It is kind of why I never EVER want to run an evil campaign unless the players are playing intentional parodies... Because evil campaigns are already parodies, just no one realizes it.

----

I'll give you an example... in Reboot Enzo is having a birthday party that is the biggest thing in the entire system (Enzo is the child of... essentially the super rich ruler of the city AND is the only child in the city)

So Megabite hears of this... and what does he do? He forces himself on stage, and tries to upstage everyone by shredding some serious guitar even having a rock battle with Bob... and then gives Enzo his guitar and leaves without trouble.

----

But let us get into ACTUAL dungeons and dragons. Count Von Strahd is an evil Vampire who basically screwed everyone!

Yet within his domain there are a group of Gypsy Expyies who he strongly favors. For no reason other than admiration he grants them rights and privileges he doesn't extent to anyone else... and would likely even come to their rescue should anything particularly dire threaten them.

[MrRoboto75]

Lex Luthor stole forty cakes

[BlackFlyme]

The subtleties of alignment

You absolutely have to be an Evil character with few, if any redemptive qualities in this adventure. You're almost legit cartoon villains in Hell's Vengeance, aside from the intro sequence, where you're just thugs. I find this to be the problem. I know villains can be heroic, and heroes can act villainous, but you are out-and-out assholes for no reason other than for payment in this one. There's nothing to care about that's presented so far beyond cash. It's made clear that we are not friends of the town, and have no reason to treat the citizens nicely beyond the baron telling us not to kill them.

Maybe motivations get better later on, I don't know.

Though nonlethal being required in just about every combat is different from many other adventures.

Lex Luthor stole forty cakes

That's as many as four tens.
And that's terrible.

[Jimmy]

I've been in a group of players that ranged the entire spectrum, supporting a Lawful Neutral Monk, Chaotic Evil Fighter, True Neutral Wizard Chaotic Neutral Rogue, and Neutral Good Cleric. We all managed to remain surprisingly effective as a group, with the Rogue and Fighter finding a seedy watering hole whenever we needed underground info on the local area, the Cleric and Monk turning in any quests or bounties to the local authorities or temples, and the Wizard organising the group and acting as party bookkeeper and quartermaster.

Alignment is never a reason for conflict in the group if the players understand that it's intended to be a team effort from the outset. The DM's job is to ensure they realise that PvP isn't the goal of the game. The best way to do this? In my opinion, it's by ensuring your group's united in their goal of working together to stick it to the DM. Focus their hate on yourself, and you'll go a long way to building a strong group. I'm very fortunate to both have natural talent and plenty of practice in making people hate me, so I'm thoroughly enjoying being the DM this time around.