Add Fast Stealth to rogue bonus feats.

[Kitsunestume]

TY, Fix'd

[thaelis]

What hypotheical build is causing balance concerns about 'dipping' into rogue?

The idea behind people saying they want it to be level 10+ Rogue I believe is so that they would have to 'sacrifice' something in order to get this ability. i.e. Crippling strike, Improved evasion etc

At the end of the day I think it comes down to what is fun. Would Rogues getting my special Ranger ability make me sad and cry over being outdone? Unlikely. Would it make it more fun and less tedious to be a snail...oops I mean Rogue? Probably.

[Cornuto]

The idea behind people saying they want it to be level 10+ Rogue I believe is so that they would have to 'sacrifice' something in order to get this ability. i.e. Crippling strike, Improved evasion etc

At the end of the day I think it comes down to what is fun. Would Rogues getting my special Ranger ability make me sad and cry over being outdone? Unlikely. Would it make it more fun and less tedious to be a snail...oops I mean Rogue? Probably.

You've still got longstrider to taunt them with.

[Lugwy]

What hypotheical build is causing balance concerns about 'dipping' into rogue? The main reason I dislike the 10th level requirement that at 10th level crippling strike is an almost must-have for rogues (unless you want to completely give up on Epic Precision.) So you're in reality pushing it to a level 12 pure rogue requirement -- and closing off rogues from major PRC build paths.

Mostly for some semblance of logic. It takes some specialized skills, equipment, gear, and conditions (or being a ninja) to keep up with a fellow running full-tilt while trying to be sneaky about it.

So, at the very least, I'll be behind it as a talent...provided it's the version that gives a stiff penalty if you're running while stealthing.

And, of course, if I get to use the following image to sum up the quicky stealthies:

[Kitsunestume]

Mostly for some semblance of logic. It takes some specialized skills, equipment, gear, and conditions (or being a ninja) to keep up with a fellow running full-tilt while trying to be sneaky about it.

So, at the very least, I'll be behind it as a talent...provided it's the version that gives a stiff penalty if you're running while stealthing.

And, of course, if I get to use the following image to sum up the quicky stealthies:

For extra fun, used a maxed Rush and Quick Recovery!

[Lugwy]

You mean Quick Rest? I do (plus Marathon), and it's hilarious. Sonic ain't got nothing on it.

[cmosier]

So what I'm hearing... Wizards/ Sorcerers can call meteors. Clerics can summon powerful outsiders. Druids can change into greater elementals. Paladins can cause 200 damage to evil and undead. Fighters are can cause 100 damage pretty regularly. Monks get insane attacks per round. But a fast moving stealthy rogue is too far?

[Kitsunestume]

Gets even more derpy if you have a Volt in the squad.

*cough, cough*

Back on topic . . .
I am curious to know, How are others considering this ability? The thread started off with rather supportive comments, as when in a group running through dungeons the trap-springer is left behind while the party runs through the traps.
The more conservative voices seem to be considering it's power in inter-character conflict, or that it would be contending with the role of rangers for the ability to quickly engage to smack someone with a single massive damage attack.

Is my understanding roughly in like with reality here?

[Lugwy]

So what I'm hearing... Wizards/ Sorcerers can call meteors. Clerics can summon powerful outsiders. Druids can change into greater elementals. Paladins can cause 200 damage to evil and undead. Fighters are can cause 100 damage pretty regularly. Monks get insane attacks per round. But a fast moving stealthy rogue is too far?

Willing suspension of disbelief.


EDIT: Also a double standard because, I dunno, we hate rogues?

[cmosier]

I understand where ranger lovers are coming from. Rangers never adapted well to computer games, going all the way back to Eye of the Beholder. Rangers have a lot RP opportunities that are hard to implement without a constant DM. I just don't see this as a reason to deny the feat or even set it to a 10+ feat.

Perhaps a good balance would be to give the Ranger the ability to remove traps. Something I've always felt they should have anyway. Or maybe offer it as a ranger feat.

[Kitsunestume]

Perhaps a good balance would be to give the Ranger the ability to remove traps. Something I've always felt they should have anyway. Or maybe offer it as a ranger feat.

Just to take a page from Cornuto:

Pathfinder[/URL]] Learn Ranger Trap

You learn how to create one kind of ranger trap.


Prerequisites: Survival 5 ranks.
Benefit: Select one ranger trap. You may use this trap a number of times per day equal to your Wisdom bonus (minimum 1). The DC for your trap is equal to 10 + 1/2 your character’s level + your Wisdom bonus, and it lasts 1 day per two character levels.
If you are not a ranger, you can only set extraordinary traps with this feat; like all extraordinary ranger traps, this decreases the trap DC by 2.
Special: A ranger may use ranger traps a number of times per day equal to 1/2 his ranger level plus his Wisdom bonus.

[cmosier]

I really need to make time for an alt. Not just to meet the newer players but to play with some of these classes. Sorry for the thread jack. Just typing thoughts.

[bipolar bear]

how about a feat cost.. you need dodge and mobility to get spring attack.. how about requireing dash and maybe another?

[thaelis]

I understand where ranger lovers are coming from. Rangers never adapted well to computer games, going all the way back to Eye of the Beholder. Rangers have a lot RP opportunities that are hard to implement without a constant DM. I just don't see this as a reason to deny the feat or even set it to a 10+ feat.

Perhaps a good balance would be to give the Ranger the ability to remove traps. Something I've always felt they should have anyway. Or maybe offer it as a ranger feat.

I wouldn't want Disable Traps as a class skill. I wouldn't even have 10 spare skill points to put in it let-alone the 23 necessary to be a decent trap disabler (High-level dungeons have DC's 33-34 to disable, 43-44 to recover). And I imagine my Intelligence is higher than most Rangers.

I'd be fine with them getting this ability at level 2 on the presumption that at some point in the future Rangers will get some lovin' too

[Farmboy2003]

That ranger trap feat sounds really nice, and is something I've thought about suggesting myself since the whole trap business in NWN2 is a fickle mistress that requires a fuckton of skillpoints. But that's another thread.

Cornuto, I think it's fair to drag other classes into such an argument when it is about giving abilites to one class, that the other has to itself.

I think what gets me the most is this: There's 3 really nice things to have when you're a sneaker:

1. HiPS (And I think Kit's right about it being less prevalent than we think)
2. The ability to deal great amounts of damage
3. fast movement.

I'd like to see a balance where only epic level characters have access to all three. FX my ranger will get access to SA after lvl 21, as I want bane of enemies. A ranger going only for HiPS will only have 2d6 of SA. If the fast movement feat for rogues were to be available at say lvl 17, the 4 level dip for HiPS as SD would need a lvl 21 character. A 10/10 rogue/assassin or a 10/4 rogue/SD will have all three with this suggestion fx.

I'm also under the impression that epic precision isn't that needed here as you can SA undead? but maybe not constructs and others?

And I think it's honestly a luxury problem if your party is soo good that you don't have time to sneak up and stab something