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)

[Neonivek]

That is one expensive arrow. I wonder what is more expensive. That arrow or an arrow of slaying.

[Amperzand]

Good question. I can't help but feel this is more effective in many situations, because AOE.

[Neonivek]

Given the weight. It probably would be better off being like a baton.

I mean it is a 15 pound arrow.

[Harry Baldman]

Load it into a ballista and you'll be fine.

Come to think of it, a ten-foot sphere of complete obliteration would be invaluable in a siege scenario.

[Amperzand]

Either "Hey, did y'all like having a wall? My bad." or "Hey, did y'all like having a high-level commander? My bad."

[Yoink]

It'd be good for breaching doors, I guess, but it'd probably be super expensive to bombard a city with 'em.
That was my first thought, too.
 

[Neonivek]

Load it into a ballista and you'll be fine.

Come to think of it, a ten-foot sphere of complete obliteration would be invaluable in a siege scenario.

Well in Pathfinder they still are alive. You just teleported them away. It also only includes creatures, not so much objects.

And a DM COULD argue that it requires a save (And magic items are terrible in terms of saving throws) but yeah as written all creatures in 10ft of it get sucked into the astral plane.

And in DnD 3.5 yep! outright destruction!

[highmax28]

Gonna kind of make one last say on the Str rogue thing and mention a few things:

If you're in a position as a dex rogue and AC is ever needed, you're playing it wrong, your big stupid fighter (aka tank) isn't doing his job, or your party's field controller/buffer sucks. You're a glass cannon, you're designed to do a lot of damage but not risk the hit. If your field controller isn't making your life easier or your tank isn't being a tank, and you're taking hits, you shouldn't have gone in yet.

As a rogue going strength, I gurarentee as well that skills aren't your main priority anymore as you're going for damage output. And that also depends on your int score and how you plan to play your rogue. You can be like my rogue I made and be absolute shit at slight of hand and stealth, but you can talk your way to convince a guy to give you the shirt off his back for useless shit.

As for the two weapon thing, rogues can dual weild and get two sneak attacks off, can't they? I read in a rogue build somewhere that it was the most viable option because it's hard to do an archer rogue and get sneak attack off in pathfinder (whereas in 4e and 5e, you get sneak attacks almost every time you attack. It's nuts).

And honestly, as a strength rogue, you want to go before the enemy as all rogues do, but the higher init doesn't help when you're supposed to be coordinating your attacks as the tank moves in and smacks someone. Then you come in. Which is why yes, a high init can be great, but as a rogue, you don't want to go first and going last might even be a viable option.

And if you're a rogue, unless you work well with your party as someone said before, you're not getting ranged attacks with sneak attack, so you're crippling yourself if you think a +1 To ranged helps in that sense.

For the strength build though, let's look at the flaws. Yes, lower skills and potentially lower AC if you roll with a naked rogue with a 40 dex, but again, AC shouldn't be a worry. And you get a disadvantage with rolls assuming you take heavier Armor, which is a -3, right? That's not that big of a problem actually if you still keep your dex up to snuff (thinking 16/17/18 dex) and pumping skills into it. Your skills aren't limited by your dex mod at all, it just makes it better. That's how a rogue works with their ungodly amount of skill points. You're also scaling it to things that are highly perceptive, but things with that perception will either have scent or some other supernatural vision, so your stealth checks would be rendered useless anyways. If you're a good rogue, you'll have gear to compensate for the dex problem with stealth and such anyway, such as greater shadow Armor (which is fantastic. My Druid had it and he ran around doing stealth shit with Barry the stealth bear). And as the party rogue, getting gear shouldn't be a problem, be it you're a strength or dex rogue. Either by conning people or stealing it right from the source, you're still a rogue and will do things that rogues do.

[Kadzar]

As for the two weapon thing, rogues can dual weild and get two sneak attacks off, can't they? I read in a rogue build somewhere that it was the most viable option because it's hard to do an archer rogue and get sneak attack off in pathfinder (whereas in 4e and 5e, you get sneak attacks almost every time you attack. It's nuts).

Looking at the SRD's for 3.5 and Pathfinder, it seems like like you actually can get sneak attack with every hit. That seems weird to me, since in 4e and 5e you can only do it once a round (well, 4e is limited to once a round, 5e is once a turn, so you could technically get off another sneak attack on an opportunity attack, but those are a lot more rare in 5e since they're basically only when someone tries to move out of your reach, or something like a Battlemaster Fighter maneuver that lets you attack on someone else's turn). But, then, as highmax mentioned, you usually will get to use sneak attack every round in those games, since sneak attack has no limits on targets and your attack modifier is going to be pretty much the same as everyone else so long as you're all maxing your relevant ability scores.

Also, the whole, "is a Rogue getting to use DEX for damage overpowered?" thing seems weird from the 4e/5e perspective, since in those games a Rogue uses DEX for attack and damage by default (in 4e because those are what its powers use, and in 5e because they can only use finesse and ranged weapons for sneak attack, both of which use DEX for attack and damage by default). It's possible there might be some combinations from that that might be broken in 3.5/Pathfinder that I don't know about, but, as has been said, sneak attack does more damage than you get from Ability bonus, and 3.5/Pathfinder have higher damage ceilings than 4e/5e, so I don't really understand what the big fuss is about.

[highmax28]

Actually, in 4e, the damage is much higher than pathfinder if you're not counting critical hits. The reason being is that 4e critical hits just maximize damage, but a lot of the daily powers for the heavy damage dealers (ie berserker/barbarian, vampire, sorcerer, etc) revolve around things like the kineticist where it's a lot of damage in one burst, whereas most damage done in 3.5 and pathfinder is from several attacks doing regular amounts of damage.

I did 200+ damage in one turn as a berserker in 4e, which is a cap I've only beaten in pathfinder twice, and both were from landing a critical hit more than once (I insta-killed a Titanic centipede as a two weapon ranger that had a weapon with an 18-20 crit range innately).

5e tried to go and do the multiple attacks thing, which works, but to an extent. It's not massive or heavy damage, but it's still pretty consistent with big hits. I do admit, I like 4e a lot for many reasons, but I'm hoping with 5e, they expand on it and give back the huge customization and such that 4e had. I'm hoping they finish the mystic soon, because psionics were awesome. And that they also re-release the vampire and blackguard classes (not the 3.5 one, the 4e one)

[My Name is Immaterial]

Didn't they release a blackguard subclass for paladins? It was called Oath Breaker, but it was basically blackguard.

[highmax28]

Didn't they release a blackguard subclass for paladins? It was called Oath Breaker, but it was basically blackguard.

I differenciate blackguard and anti-paladin only because the playstyle was different. It was the difference between the Dark Knights in final fantasy III and Cecil the Dark Knight in final fanasy IV. Both similar, but have some differences.

For one, the oathbreaker paladin is an anti-paladin is merely an evil aligned paladin with powers that cater to evil rather than good. Blackguards were any alignment in 4e and though they weren't necessarily evil, they were slaves to their darker sides (they used vices to power their attacks). And blackguards have one really cool effect I remember where they did extra damage based on temporary HP that they gained (and they gained A LOT of it with their abilities). It reminded me of the souleater ability dark knights had in Final Fantasy III, and they were really cool.

I do like some of the things 5e said and used to bunch everything together, like making the avenger a paladin variant and such, but it really made things just stuck closer together. I miss my berserker, which was a barbarian that had good defences and when he wasn't raging, was amazing at tanking. The only way to get close to recreating it is to make a barbarian, take sentinel, and stock up on a buttload of gear, which isn't too bad, but it really makes the berserker impossible to return.

One class I also feel should make a comeback is the Skald, which is a bard that instead of directly buffing their allies as individuals, it revolved around singing songs or telling stories and used it as an aura effect, which allowed people to heal in it or gain awesome bonuses, like a bonus to damage rolls. They kind of have that, but it doesn't fit right with me.

Oh, and here's my current progress on my elementalist for 5e. Its long, its conmplicated, but I HOPE it works enough for now.

Spoiler: Elementalist (click to show/hide)

https://www.mediafire.com/?z353to5668nd367

[BlackFlyme]

I thought Rogues only got Sneak Attack once per target per round. Seems the Official Pathfinder Messageboards say otherwise. At least, the threads I did read into do. If true, the Rogue is much better than what I've heard others claim.

I also remember a thread where people were desperately trying to convince the devs to allow Paladins and Antipaladins to be any-Good/Evil, respectively. As a compromise, we got an Antipaladin archetype that can be any-Evil, but is weaker than a normal Antipaladin.

And Skald is awesome in Pathfinder, but effectiveness requires party co-ordination. A Pathfinder Skald can't really help a party of mages that well compared to a party of martials.

[highmax28]

I thought Rogues only got Sneak Attack once per target per round. Seems the Official Pathfinder Messageboards say otherwise. At least, the threads I did read into do. If true, the Rogue is much better than what I've heard others claim.

I also remember a thread where people were desperately trying to convince the devs to allow Paladins and Antipaladins to be any-Good/Evil, respectively. As a compromise, we got an Antipaladin archetype that can be any-Evil, but is weaker than a normal Antipaladin.

And Skald is awesome in Pathfinder, but effectiveness requires party co-ordination. A Pathfinder Skald can't really help a party of mages that well compared to a party of martials.

Skalds are aimed for melee in 4e. The one I had ran around with a spear and used the reach effect to keep herself distanced from the others but still buff her allies.

I'm not big on a lot of pathfinder classes because you're either broken as hell and stay that way or you're a wiffle bat that can't do anything to save his life. Thats my kineticist and my ranger right there

[Jimmy]

Yeah, in Pathfinder Sneak Attack applies to every attack roll that qualifies for its prerequisites. That means if you have 1 extra attack per round from TWF, you get to deal all those extra d6 sneak attack dice on that extra hit. This is why TWF on a Rogue can be a viable strategy. The downside is that Rogues suffer from lower BAB from the outset, and then you stack penalties on top of this for using TWF. All those extra d6 don't mean a thing if you can't beat the target's AC. Plus this requires a full attack, meaning you're left standing in melee range of the enemy afterwards. That's another major reason why investment into AC on a Rogue isn't meaningless. Whilst still important that you aim for bonuses such as Concealment, if you want to use a Full Attack you're going to be finishing within melee range, and on the enemy's turn they can take a Full Attack against you too.