Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Any good Homebrew Monk Variants? [3.5e]
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 4996643" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>That seems like some very tortured and circular logic to me. How do you know that they didn't restrict sneak attack because rogue as damage dealer wasn't their design goal? You seem to be saying that we know rogue as damage deal was their design goal because it could have actually been primarily a damage dealer had they designed it differently.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, this is very tortured logic. You elsewhere say that the two things are apples and oranges, so how can you say that they aren't on even footing. I can think of many situations where combat utility is inferior to skills, and vica versa.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Arguably, so is a fighter's combat utility. All you prove in saying that is that magic dominates high level play; you don't prove that rogues aren't designed to be the 'skillful' class just because at higher levels the skills are increasingly trumped.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But if they are intended to be balanced in combat, then you have a serious problem because both the rogue and the monk vastly exceed the fighters utility out of combat.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think where we differ is that I look at the design goal of 3e - rogues are intended to be the skillful class - and I see a failure in execution and make changes to bring the result at the table in line with the design. I see that for the most part, they fulfill the role of fragile damage dealers. I see no evidence that they fail at that if your campaign doesn't get overly focused on powerful undead. I see the 'damage dealing' as primarily a rogues secondary role, added to the class primarily to make up for the disparity in combat prowess that developed between rogues and fighters in higher level 1e play. However, had they actually intended rogues to become primarily a damage dealing class, they would have given in full BAB progression. 'Damage dealing' is a rogues secondary shtick to make it shine a little bit in combat, and its clearly intended because of the restrictions on sneak attack and special abilities like oppurtunist to have rogues in a support role during combat.</p><p></p><p>I don't even get where you get that 'sneak attack' is their primary ability. It's their most useful ability if you spend most of your time in combat, but the class also gets trapfinding as a silo power, trap sense, evasion, uncanny dodge, skill mastery, lots of class specific skills like use magical device, and tons of skill points. Whether you see 'sneak attack' as a primary power probably depends on the ratio of attack rolls to skill checks you plan on making.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 4996643, member: 4937"] That seems like some very tortured and circular logic to me. How do you know that they didn't restrict sneak attack because rogue as damage dealer wasn't their design goal? You seem to be saying that we know rogue as damage deal was their design goal because it could have actually been primarily a damage dealer had they designed it differently. Again, this is very tortured logic. You elsewhere say that the two things are apples and oranges, so how can you say that they aren't on even footing. I can think of many situations where combat utility is inferior to skills, and vica versa. Arguably, so is a fighter's combat utility. All you prove in saying that is that magic dominates high level play; you don't prove that rogues aren't designed to be the 'skillful' class just because at higher levels the skills are increasingly trumped. But if they are intended to be balanced in combat, then you have a serious problem because both the rogue and the monk vastly exceed the fighters utility out of combat. I think where we differ is that I look at the design goal of 3e - rogues are intended to be the skillful class - and I see a failure in execution and make changes to bring the result at the table in line with the design. I see that for the most part, they fulfill the role of fragile damage dealers. I see no evidence that they fail at that if your campaign doesn't get overly focused on powerful undead. I see the 'damage dealing' as primarily a rogues secondary role, added to the class primarily to make up for the disparity in combat prowess that developed between rogues and fighters in higher level 1e play. However, had they actually intended rogues to become primarily a damage dealing class, they would have given in full BAB progression. 'Damage dealing' is a rogues secondary shtick to make it shine a little bit in combat, and its clearly intended because of the restrictions on sneak attack and special abilities like oppurtunist to have rogues in a support role during combat. I don't even get where you get that 'sneak attack' is their primary ability. It's their most useful ability if you spend most of your time in combat, but the class also gets trapfinding as a silo power, trap sense, evasion, uncanny dodge, skill mastery, lots of class specific skills like use magical device, and tons of skill points. Whether you see 'sneak attack' as a primary power probably depends on the ratio of attack rolls to skill checks you plan on making. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Any good Homebrew Monk Variants? [3.5e]
Top