Oh, but the rogue did. It was called defensive roll(ex), which you could use once per day.
A suboptimal choice and one only available at high levels (as compared to this 5e rogue ability available at 2nd level).
And some people still complained about it.
Your case appears to be that the people who disliked 4e martial dailies are hypocritical because they are essentially the same as mechanics that existed in prior editions, which is absurd. The actual percentage of martial-type characters who had such an ability, no matter how hard one looks for them, is probably below 5%. And those who had them, had them by choice, since it was entirely possible to play a character without them. Certainly, few if any people were clamoring for more of this stuff, which is why, when the playtest presents us with low-level basic characters with poorly conceived mechanics that the designers should know better than to write, it is a big deal.
Tallifer said:
They model the simple narrative device that heroes only do a particular amazing and heroic feat once or twice in a novel, saga or movie. If Jackie Chan, Steven Segal or Jean Claude van Damme did the same stunning move against every opponent in every situation, most people would complain about how boring it all is. They also model that ordinary humans can only muster so much adrenalin and energy in a day; that fortuitous situations and opportunities to pull off a certain trick only arise now and then.
Fatigue mechanics are great. Daily powers, which place a starkly unreasonable limit on one ability while leaving all the character's other capabilities unaffected, are not representing adrenaline, energy, fatigue, or anything else in those action movies. They are representing the coyote chasing the roadrunner off a ledge, and realizing that he is out of movement-related powers a little too late.
I am all for abilities that meaningfully capture this idea, such as a legitimate fatigue mechanic, or action points, which represent that superhuman effort but have the virtue of not being time-limited resources and being optional for people who don't like them.
This makes no sense considering all the extra and amazing powers which wizards and clerics have. Sleep and Charm have utterly dominated some of our encounters in Pathfinder.
There are specific spells that can be unbalancing. Lots of them. This does not mean that "spells" are inherently unbalancing, or that the frequency of use is a balancing tool.
The issue with these kinds of spells is twofold. First, non-spellcasters should have similarly powerful abilities (i.e. disabling or killing someone with one roll), but the health system is too forgiving in this regard. Second, the spells have no real limits other than the daily restriction. Both are readily fixable, though I haven't exactly seen 5e nail it in this regard.
Many game worlds are modeled on swords and sorcery tales in which a hero like Tarzan or John Carter can occasionally do amazing things without any magical aid. Tolkien was not as interested in the description of melee, but I like to think that Aragorn and Beorn could do likewise and not just swing and hit repeatedly.
Yes, many epic heroes have had quasi-superpowers. You know what they didn't have? Occasions where they tried to use them, but couldn't because they had already done something similar that day. Those characters are so superhuman precisely because they
never stop coming. In other words, I'm not just talking about the daily aspect being unrealistic, I'm talking about it being anti-dramatic and anti-fun.
