D&D 5th Edition What should Rogues do? - Page 4


What's on your mind?

+ Log in or register to post
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 64
  1. #31
    Registered User
    Enchanter (Lvl 12)



    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    2,255
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore Manbearcat
    My communities:

    Stuff that makes them versatile enough to capture the archetype of McGuyver, Sherlock Holmes, the Dread Pirate Roberts, Han Solo, Bilbo Baggins, Jesse James, James Bond, Zorro, Face, Carlos Hathcock (credited as the most skilled, and one of the most accomplished, USMC sniper of all time).

    So then:

    Thieves
    Sneaks
    Scoundrels
    Master Technicians
    Master Logicians
    Spies
    Swashbucklers
    Silvertongues
    The Schemers/leaders of bandits/thugs
    Assassins

    It would be nice if Rogues had a baseline competency in more than two of these roles (and the skill-sets that they incorporate) and the ability to either diversify their competency as they level or to specialize. I see the rogue as the Jack of All Trades/Renaissance Man as much, or more, than the Bard (whereas the Bard has lore and music, the Rogue has other skill-sets and then they overlap in several areas)

    They appear to be going the Scheme route. Having the above roles as Schemes and then accruing further Schemes and/or specializing would likely be a Rogue build setup that pleases my friend who plays these archetypes.

 

  • #32
    Registered User
    Magsman (Lvl 14)



    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Edenvale, San Jose, CA
    Posts
    3,756
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore Tony Vargas
    My communities:

    Quote Originally Posted by Remathilis View Post
    :facepalm:

    While we're at it, lets merge the cleric (who is a boring healbot anyway) with the wizard and only need two classes! Won't that be fun!
    Hardly. The cleric and wizard - most casters, really - are perfectly capable and 'complete' classes, able to handle a breadth of adventuring challenges both in and out of combat.

  • #33
    Member
    Thaumaturgist (Lvl 9)



    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    12210
    Posts
    714
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore GreyICE
    Quote Originally Posted by Remathilis View Post
    I want to agree, but combat's too vital to D&D to have a class sit there twiddling its thumbs. I'd like to see rogues have a few additional options to replace backstab; acrobatic/swashbuckler dueling, avoidance/cowardly/get-me-outta-here maneuvers, decent dual-wielding, archery, etc. Rogues shouldn't be strikers per se, but they need something to do while the fighter slashes, the cleric heals, and the wizard nukes from orbit.
    Well they're either Strikers, Defenders, Leaders, Controllers, or worthless.

    Defender and Leader make zero sense, so I guess it's either they do horrific stacking debuffs with poisons and shut down enemies or deal lots of damage, or they're worthless.

  • #34
    Registered User
    Magsman (Lvl 14)



    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Edenvale, San Jose, CA
    Posts
    3,756
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore Tony Vargas
    My communities:

    Quote Originally Posted by GreyICE View Post
    Well they're either Strikers, Defenders, Leaders, Controllers, or worthless.

    Defender and Leader make zero sense, so I guess it's either they do horrific stacking debuffs with poisons and shut down enemies or deal lots of damage, or they're worthless.
    There are no roles in 5e design. Roles make it easy to design contributing classes, and all too easy to judge if such design has been successful (as your post illustrates). Since 5e wants to return to the feel of classic D&D, and classes that would be judged 'worthless' under the role paradigm are part of that feel...

    Unfortunately, the fighter and rogue are both pretty easy to find wanting under the 'Three Pillars' paradigm, as well...

  • #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Crazy Jerome View Post
    What is a backstab?

    Stabbing something in the back.

  • #36
    Member
    Thaumaturgist (Lvl 9)



    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    12210
    Posts
    714
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore GreyICE
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Vargas View Post
    There are no roles in 5e design. Roles make it easy to design contributing classes, and all too easy to judge if such design has been successful (as your post illustrates). Since 5e wants to return to the feel of classic D&D, and classes that would be judged 'worthless' under the role paradigm are part of that feel...

    Unfortunately, the fighter and rogue are both pretty easy to find wanting under the 'Three Pillars' paradigm, as well...
    Roles have been in D&D since the very first edition. They're not about to leave any time soon.

    I mean look at the original big 4. You had the Fighter (Striker) the Wizard (controller) the Cleric (leader) and the Rogue (Striker).

    3E had a few classes that blurred the line. Clerics were Striker/Leader/Controllers, Druids were Striker/Leader/Controller/Defenders. While Paladins and Monks were kind of Half-strikers. This... this didn't turn out to be very good design. Most of the classes that didn't cause problems had clear roles and could fill them successfully.

  • #37
    Quote Originally Posted by GreyICE View Post
    Roles have been in D&D since the very first edition. They're not about to leave any time soon.

    I mean look at the original big 4. You had the Fighter (Striker) the Wizard (controller) the Cleric (leader) and the Rogue (Striker).

    3E had a few classes that blurred the line. Clerics were Striker/Leader/Controllers, Druids were Striker/Leader/Controller/Defenders. While Paladins and Monks were kind of Half-strikers. This... this didn't turn out to be very good design. Most of the classes that didn't cause problems had clear roles and could fill them successfully.

    I hope classes are not pigeonholed into "Roles" in 5th Ed.

  • #38
    Member SILVER SUBSCRIBER
    Enchanter (Lvl 12)



    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Israel netanya
    Posts
    1,348
    Reviews
    Read 3 Reviews
    I Defended The Walls!D&D NextD&D

    Ignore Blackwarder
    I'm not a big fan of the rogue being defined by his combat roll, I'm fine with classes like the fighter, paladin, ranger being the guys who are excellent combat classes, I would like the rogue to be the guy who define out of combat and out of the box playing.

    Warder
    I LIKE COMBAT AS WAR!!!!!!

    the essence of D&D is "The thrill of victory the agony of a natural 1" - Mike Mearls, Gen Con 2012

    Starting From the Ground Up - ACKS Economic system
    Starting From the Grounds Up, Part II - ACKS Economic system

  • #39
    Registered User
    The Great Druid (Lvl 17)



    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,502
    Reviews
    Read 2 Reviews
    Cortex+ZEITGEISTWotBSI Defended The Walls!

    Ignore Neonchameleon
    My communities:

    Quote Originally Posted by GreyICE View Post
    I mean look at the original big 4. You had the Fighter (Striker) the Wizard (controller) the Cleric (leader) and the Rogue (Striker).
    The 1e rogue wasn't a striker. He was utility. He actually was worse at hitting people than the cleric.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steely_Dan View Post
    I hope classes are not pigeonholed into "Roles" in 5th Ed.
    What do you have against clear and consistent design goals? Not having them is how we ended up with the messes that were the 3e monk and CoDzilla.

  • #40
    Registered User
    Superhero (Lvl 15)

    Li Shenron's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Edition-shifting
    Posts
    10,793
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Forgotten RealmsPlanescapeRokuganD&D

    Ignore Li Shenron
    My communities:

    Quote Originally Posted by Neonchameleon View Post
    Much as I'd absolutely love to agree with you, combat is too central to D&D (and from the playtests takes too long) for this to work. If you put a non-combatant who tries to stay out of fights as much as possible alongside a class literally called "fighter" then you automatically have party tension and someone is really not going to get what they want.
    Combat is as central as we want it to be

    I am going to overreact a bit now, so don't take this too seriously -> If someone wants combat to be so central to D&D that we must twist each class identity to make them all equally effective in combat to a "fighter", then why not rather removing the Rogue from D&D, and the Bard too?
    "There is no survival without order, there is no evolution without chaos."
    "You have to see past the RAW to understand the rules of the game."
    "And rules are OVERRATED by the way!

  • + Log in or register to post
    Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

    Similar Threads

    1. Trope Trumping I: A Rogues' Rogues' Gallery
      By steeldragons in forum General RPG Discussion
      Replies: 1
      Last Post: Friday, 15th July, 2011, 07:05 PM
    2. What is it about rogues?
      By Asmor in forum General RPG Discussion
      Replies: 58
      Last Post: Thursday, 16th April, 2009, 11:32 PM
    3. Min/max'ing Rogues!
      By SadisticFishing in forum Older D&D Editions and OSR Gaming
      Replies: 63
      Last Post: Wednesday, 23rd May, 2007, 12:25 PM
    4. Can Assassins kill rogues of any level? or are rogues 4 level higher immune?
      By Sir ThornCrest in forum Older D&D Editions and OSR Gaming
      Replies: 2
      Last Post: Friday, 4th February, 2005, 08:23 PM
    5. [NWN] Rogues
      By d12 in forum Miscellaneous Geek Talk & Media Lounge
      Replies: 0
      Last Post: Thursday, 7th November, 2002, 08:23 PM

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •