Pathfinder Is Still Bad

[Psychic Robot]

Except that Rogues are nerfed, because in a petty attempt to spite this board they went and removed almost every means of actually rendering enemies vulnerable to sneak attacks. They then nerfed skills even further to kick them while they were down.

you're an idiot

Fighters doing more damage than Rogues is both nothing new, and was more true in 3.5, where they weren't nerfed either.

ignoring power attack leaping shocktrooper combat brute nonsense I'm pretty sure that a TWF rogue can theoretically outdamage a fighter. feel free to prove me wrong though.

[Shadow Balls]

Wasn't it Frank specifically, not TGD? Anyway yeah that was fucking stupid.

It was someone from here. It might have been him.

[Psychic Robot]

if I recall correctly frank & k both posted on the paizo forums but were driven off and didn't return. jason bulmahn has no interest in "spiting them"; he (probably) thought that doing precision damage with a splash weapon was full retard (because it is) and changed the rules accordingly.

[Aryxbez]

In other news, Pathfinder beat D&D in the ICv2 poll again. Of course, that says more about the state of D&D (poor) than the state of Pathfinder.

http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/21403.html

Whoa, why in the hell is Dragon Age RPG in 4th place?? Although I've heard little of the game in 3rd place on here, not sure how that game holds up (think Koumei played/ran a game of Dark Heresy?)

That's Ranger from 8-bit theater. Full name: Generic Half-Elven Dual-Class Ranger. His other 'half' is half-Human half-Half-orc. His other class is also Ranger. This allows him to dual-wield his dual-wield so he can quad-wield. Bows. And he has some kind of improved rapid/multi shot deal where each bow fires three arrows at a time. It's very silly and also a lot of arrows.

That's pretty awesome actually, I could enjoy playing a character who's firing 12 something arrows a round, hell yeah. Sounds like a nice character practical enough character concept around mid levels or so. Perhaps "even" in Pathfinder land, since I believe Frank mentioned they made a bunch of ranged feats?

[ModelCitizen]

if I recall correctly frank & k both posted on the paizo forums but were driven off and didn't return. jason bulmahn has no interest in "spiting them"; he (probably) thought that doing precision damage with a splash weapon was full retard (because it is) and changed the rules accordingly.

I'm not saying blink and acid flasks were nerfed out of some personal grudge, but as far as I can tell the only reason the devs cared or even knew about them was Frank's Same Game Test thread. They "fixed" a niche build they'd just found out about that no one claimed was a problem, and then didn't work on the real problems that force rogues into weird niche builds to be good. I would have no problem with nerfing blink or not reprinting Pounce abilities if they also fixed feint and the full attack action and surprise rounds.

[Psychic Robot]

I agree, but my beef was that he claimed that paizo is out to spite frank & k/TGD. the last thing we need around here is more egotistical tinfoil hattery.

[virgil]

That's pretty awesome actually, I could enjoy playing a character who's firing 12 something arrows a round, hell yeah. Sounds like a nice character practical enough character concept around mid levels or so. Perhaps "even" in Pathfinder land, since I believe Frank mentioned they made a bunch of ranged feats?

Frank noticed and commented on it here when I brought up an archer I made for a campaign as an example of a non-caster being capable of keeping up at the double-digit levels (back when all there was the PF core book). It still had flaws against wallmancers and grapplers, but he was capable of doing rogue damage (or more, depending) quite readily and had enough of an AC that it could be missed.

[Psychic Robot]

yeah the ranged power attack feat is pretty nice

[virgil]

The real power came from Multishot and Rapid Shot being allowed to stack. Combined with a seeking ghost touch bow, and having Strength get higher priority over Dexterity, it worked well. I was the only person I personally knew that ever made their archer have Strength equal to or slightly greater than Dexterity, most letting it fallow at 10 or something.

[A Man In Black]

ignoring power attack leaping shocktrooper combat brute nonsense I'm pretty sure that a TWF rogue can theoretically outdamage a fighter. feel free to prove me wrong though.

No, it can't, in Pathfinder, unless you open up 3.5 splat access or lower the target AC/add a shit-ton of free to-hit buffs. Even then, it's close. The fighter's boring +1s to-hit/damage don't look like much, but as long as to-hit/AC are on the RNG for the middle attacks, they're about as good as sneak attack.

What can I say, I like boring math.

[Mask_De_H]

Except that Rogues are nerfed, because in a petty attempt to spite this board they went and removed almost every means of actually rendering enemies vulnerable to sneak attacks. They then nerfed skills even further to kick them while they were down.

Fighters doing more damage than Rogues is both nothing new, and was more true in 3.5, where they weren't nerfed either.

But that's wrong, you fucking retard.

On the first point, never attribute to malice what can easily be attributed to stupidity. On the second, what PR said: high-end Fighters (Dungeoncrashers, Dragoons and/or Frenzied Berserkers) with the Power Attack/Leap Attack/Shock Trooper/Combat Brute chain could pump out silly damage by double digits, but a Flasked Avenger can keep up until the entire feat chain comes online (I think).

Man In Black: Can we count Ninjas as Rogues? Because a Ninja with Ki points in the chamber has shades of the old Boot Blade Bullshit style of 3.X Rogue in him.

[A Man In Black]

Man In Black: Can we count Ninjas as Rogues? Because a Ninja with Ki points in the chamber has shades of the old Boot Blade Bullshit style of 3.X Rogue in him.

Well, I wasn't, because I did the math before Ninjas.

[Psychic Robot]

No, it can't, in Pathfinder, unless you open up 3.5 splat access or lower the target AC/add a shit-ton of free to-hit buffs. Even then, it's close. The fighter's boring +1s to-hit/damage don't look like much, but as long as to-hit/AC are on the RNG for the middle attacks, they're about as good as sneak attack.

What can I say, I like boring math.

I meant in 3.5

[Shadow Balls]

I agree, but my beef was that he claimed that paizo is out to spite frank & k/TGD. the last thing we need around here is more egotistical tinfoil hattery.

Nice job being autistic (lol see what I did there).

In case you have missed the subtle social cues, K isn't exactly someone that I get along with on any level. Frank I haven't gotten along that much better with, and the Den itself has too many faux elitists for me to have any loyalty to it as a group.

So take that egotistical tinfoil hat and shove it up your ass.

On the first point, never attribute to malice what can easily be attributed to stupidity. On the second, what PR said: high-end Fighters (Dungeoncrashers, Dragoons and/or Frenzied Berserkers) with the Power Attack/Leap Attack/Shock Trooper/Combat Brute chain could pump out silly damage by double digits, but a Flasked Avenger can keep up until the entire feat chain comes online (I think).

No, Rogues are still behind damage wise. Perhaps not by a large margin, but they are. Then PF comes along and nerfs both of them.

[Pseudo Stupidity]

Everyone stop talking about Rogues, the only thing that matters in PF is the fucking Ninja. It does literally everything the Rogue does (except trap sense, which is worthless and gets replaced by an equally worthless ability), it just does it all better and then adds some surprisingly awesome flavor abilities. That being able to walk over anything power is fucking cool and something powerful thieves should be able to do.

Way to go and release one cool ability, Paizo. Next thing you know you might, I don't know, do that more than once and with higher level abilities. After that the ninja just stops getting cool shit, you idiots.

[Shadow Balls]

Monkeys. Typewriters. Shakespeare.

[Kaelik]

Alternatively, we can keep talking about Rogues because we are comparing 3e to Pathfinder, and the 3e Ninja is a waste of everyone's fucking time, so please stop throwing a shit fit every single time someone say Rogue.

[Pseudo Stupidity]

Except nobody in Pathfinder who wants to be a rogue plays a rogue, because there is a class that is the same exact thing except better. You're better off comparing the 3e rogue to the Pathfinder ninja, because everyone and their mom knows the Pathfinder rogue is a bad joke.

You know, except the poor folks who take the trap class that is the rogue after the ninja was released. There is literally no reason for the Rogue class to exist when the ninja is the same fucking thing but better (again, except for trapfinding, which is laughably bad).

It can not be stressed enough that the only 3 differences between the Rogue and Ninja in PF is that the Ninja gets a ki pool for free and gets some stupid "I hide my trails really well" power compared to a "find traps really well" power. The ninja also gets to pick talents off a larger list that includes literally every rogue talent (and will rarely do that because rogue talents suck compared to the ninja ones).

Are the pathfinder devs retarded for not just saying they released a rogue fix instead of an alternate class? Yes (this is the reason people still play rogues, the word ninja carries way too much baggage that rogue players don't want). Is the pathfinder rogue relevant to anything at all now because a class that does the same thing, but better, replaced it? No.

It's like if 3.5 had a "Fighter 2" class that was the fighter (literally the same damn thing) but better in every conceivable way. You wouldn't talk about the original fighter class anymore because it's outdated.


I guess you can say the ninja added the complexity of "you have a ki pool," but even ignoring the ki pool you are better than the rogue by virtue of having more, and better, choices. Also better proficencies, and even a higher starting gold for some reason.


So no, you shouldn't talk about rogues because Paizo managed to correct their mistake, albeit in a hilariously stupid way that sort of fucks it up. I told a rogue player to pick ninja before and he flat refused, even though the ninja is better in every fucking circumstance imaginable (he's actually better in a hallway full of traps because he can freak-walk over the floor without setting off pressure traps).

tl;dr: Rogues don't exist anymore, everyone who wants to be a rogue is a ninja because they are better rogues than rogues even if you don't put in any extra effort.

[Kaelik]

Stop being an idiot and learn to read.

The reason we are talking about Rogues is because!!!!!!!!!!!!

WHOLLY SHIT THERE IS A GAME THAT IS NOT PATHFINDER THAT WE ARE COMPARING TO!

We are talking about the 3e Rogue. Stop throwing a shit fit when people say Rogue, because they are talking about the 3e Rogue, because we are comparing to 3e.

The guy asked the fucking question "why is the rogue considered a good benchmark of usefulness/'balance' by The Den's 3.X, while Pathfinder fan says it's underpowered?"

Which obviously fucking means we are talking about the 3.x Rogue.

SO SHUT THE FUCK UP.

When people say Rogue, they are talking about 3e, so you can stop whining about how their mouth should be around Ninja cock, because they are fucking talking about 3e.

[Juton]

On Trapfinding:

It's not a superstar ability, in fact if you are concerned with just your character's survival your character will probably be longer lived if they don't have trapfinding than if they do. As long as someone in the party does, or you can find and deal with traps in some other way, as long as you won't get assigned to trap bitch duty. But someone in the party does need to deal with traps, and I think it's kind of bullshit that that job is limited to Rogues only (at least in core), it forces a Rogue into a job they might not want, and if another character wants to pick up the slack the only they can do that is dipping a level in Rogue. Trapfinding should go away and never comeback.

[Pseudo Stupidity]

You're comparing the pathfinder rogue to the 3.5 rogue.

The entire conversation has been about how PF nerfed rogues. As a few examples: AMIB and Maxius were both talking about the PF rogue.

But wait, guess what, while they nerfed rogues they released a goddamn replacement class (granted they did this later and in an incredibly stupid way, but that's how they do it around there).

There is a comparison of the 3.5 fighter and rogue going on here, and then some people saying the PF rogue can't keep up with a PF fighter (but guess what, the ninja surpasses the fighter by an ass ton).

My goal is to get people to shut the fuck up about the PF rogue because it is not worth talking about as it has been replaced. Make fun of Paizo for doing that replacement in a poor way, or for not even noticing they did such a thing (they probably didn't), but shut the fuck up about the PF rogue.


GET THE FUCK OUT OF A THREAD THAT ISN'T ABOUT 2E, SHADZAR 3.5, KAELIK.

To contribute: The PF fighter is a fucking joke compared to the PF ninja in every single way. Ninja rapes the face off of anything vulnerable to invisbility + sneak attack and actually has some utility; the fighter is less effective in every single way. Fighters can't compare with the katana + wakizashi ninja at all. 4d6 + 2d8 + strx2.5 is overwhelmingly strong at second level.

Is there any reason for ninjas to pump dex beyond what you need for twf? I mean, you don't really need finesse since the katana is ballin (unless you want dual wakizashis) and you want strength anyways to do more damage. You get mirror image as a swift action, so who gives a fuck about AC?


Juton, fortunately the rogue replacement removes trap-finding, meaning your MC doesn't feel bad for never throwing traps at you with a rogue in the party! It's an elegant, and again unintended, fix.

[Kaelik]

Hey dumbfuck! Why is the rogue considered a good benchmark of usefulness/'balance' by The Den's 3.X, while Pathfinder fan says it's underpowered?

Please answer without talking about 3.X Rogues, even though that's what I fucking asked in the question.

[Pseudo Stupidity]

Do I need to add in "PF" when I say rogue in a damn PF thread? What bothered me was the people talking about the PF rogue (who should not exist). The 3.5 rogue talk was fine, but folks such as Maxius and AMIB talked about the PF rogue.

I was not directing rage at the 3.5 people, but at the PF people because the PF rogue is ass and even Paizo is ashamed of it and they aren't ashamed of VoP.

[ishy]

Not everyone plays with the new paizo material though. To even be aware of the ninja being better than the rogue, requires someone telling you, or reading through the books that even the pf fans seem to hate because they are so shitty. Not to mention that I know plenty of people who read a class name like ninja and then skip reading it because they don't like playing ninja's.
So discussing and learning about why the pf rogue sucks can still be helpful.

- Edit: Especially if you have a DM who doesn't know the system as well, who you'd have to convince that the pf rogue actually sucks. I know that one of my Dm's nerfed the 3.5 core rogue so hard it basically became unplayable, so any argument showing why the pathfinder rogue sucks is helpful. Seeing as the pf rogue is still better than the 3.5 one after the nerf

[Shadow Balls]

I find it interesting that not so Pseudo Stupidity is going on about how everyone plays Ninjas now, because they replaced Rogues when he was one of the main ones bitching at me about a similar principle in a different context. Either the whole everyone is a caster thing, or everyone uses item x because they'd be stupid not to. It might have been both.

Now it's fair to say that class B is class A's unofficial bugfix. But you have to be consistent. You don't get to bitch at someone for making an argument, and then make the same damn argument about a different thing.