D&D 5E Building a better Rogue

[Remathilis]

What you're implying, there, is that the game only has room for three classes: a Combat + Exploration class, a Combat + Social class, and presumably, a Social + Exploration class.

Obviously, that is nonsense.

You're right, so its a good thing I wasn't implying that.

Each of the three pillars are a slide scale, and each class mixes and matches from the three pillars at different levels. The fighter has high combat, but low social/explore. Rogue has High E, lower S/C. Cleric is moderate S/C, lower, E. Wizard is mostly even across all three pillars. I could illustrate this by assigning arbitary numeric values ("fighters are a 7/10 in combat") but we'd just argue numbers all day.

My point is right now, Fighters have their E/S scale too low, and that needs upping.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

I can hardly think of more esteemed masters of the genre.

That's your problem.

Just because you don't like it doesn't make it bad, though.

Take these words. Examine them closely. Apply them to your own position.

The quality of an RPG is the integrity of its underlying model.

An RPG can have a perfectly consistent underlying model and still be crap if it's a chore to play. The quality of an RPG is how fun it is.

 

[Tony Vargas]

You're right, so its a good thing I wasn't implying that.

I'm glad you weren't trying to imply that...

Each of the three pillars are a slide scale, and each class mixes and matches from the three pillars at different levels. The fighter has high combat, but low social/explore. Rogue has High E, lower S/C. Cleric is moderate S/C, lower, E. Wizard is mostly even across all three pillars.

So if the Ranger is currently Combat + Exploration, that's no impediment to the fighter getting some exploration perks.

My point is right now, Fighters have their E/S scale too low, and that needs upping.

Can't disagree with that.

 

[Tony Vargas]

An RPG can have a perfectly consistent underlying model and still be crap if it's a chore to play. The quality of an RPG is how fun it is.

That's more an opinion about it than a quality of it. But, yeah, 'has a consistent underlying model,' if that actually means something, isn't necessarily a determinant of fun. Maybe it is for Saelorn, though...

 

[Remathilis]

I'm glad you weren't trying to imply that...
So if the Ranger is currently Combat + Exploration, that's no impediment to the fighter getting some exploration perks.

Can't disagree with that.

No, though I think the ranger is higher on the E than C side, so I wouldn't want a fighter to get abilities as powerful as Primeval Awareness.

 

[Tony Vargas]

No, though I think the ranger is higher on the E than C side, so I wouldn't want a fighter to get abilities as powerful as Primeval Awareness.

The Ranger's had a lot of controversy, but, it does get styles and spells that synergies with them, in combat, so it doesn't seem too lacking in that pillar.
Primeval awareness is only one ability, the ranger has a number of them...
...Like you said getting down to numbers would be too much. And, this isn't the fighter's thread, anyway.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

That's your problem.

Okay, so you've established that you hate good fantasy authors and your opinion on the genre is entirely worthless. Either that, or you're just a troll. In either case, there's no point in continuing the conversation.

The quality of an RPG is how fun it is.

Being fun to play is what makes it a good game. The underlying model is what make it an RPG.

 

[CapnZapp]

Could you please discuss Fighters and Rangers in a thread not about Rogues?. Thx

 

[Ilbranteloth]

A few changes I would like to make:
1) Make ranged roguery less desirable. Or make it a specific sub-class. Rogues should be stabby.
2) Create a reason to make daggers preferable (at least in some way) to short swords. (Oh, and delete rapiers from the game. Thanks.) Greyhawk Initiative with the optional "roll your weapon's damage die" rule would do this, for example.
3) Make the effectiveness of stealth less dependent upon DM interpretation. The biggest buzz kill for rogue pleasure is a DM who simply doesn't like what he (or she) views as "unrealistic" stealth, and therefore basically never lets you sneak around. Magical fireballs? Sure. Martial healing? Sure. Sneaking up behind somebody locked in desperate combat with your ally? Never.

I allow that, although I usually require the ally to use the Help action to distract them. But these types of allowances or restrictions should be known ahead of time.

I agree with the ranged stuff. For ranged sneak attack I allow dagger and sling. They fit the concept better in my opinion than one wielding a heavy crossbow or bow. Although I would probably allow hand crossbow.

 

[Tony Vargas]

A few changes I would like to make:
1) Make ranged roguery less desirable. Or make it a specific sub-class. Rogues should be stabby.
2) Create a reason to make daggers preferable (at least in some way)

It'd probably have to revolve around SA. Range limit on applying SA. No SA with martial weapons? IDK. Getting pretty specific with /dagger/ (traditional D&D dagger, bladded stabbing weapon 12-15", shortsword, bladed stabbing weapon 18-24" - no, don't even ask about 16-17" bladed stabbing weapons, please, just don't... I'm sorry I brought it up, OK...)

Anyway, maybe d4 weapons can roll 2d4 on an SA? Or maybe the rogue can just roll 2d4 with a dagger on some even-more-easily-me condition than granting SA?

3) Make the effectiveness of stealth less dependent upon DM interpretation.

So-not-5e. ;(
DM must be always be involved.

I allow that, although I usually require the ally to use the Help action to distract them. But these types of allowances or restrictions should be known ahead of time.

I agree with the ranged stuff. For ranged sneak attack I allow dagger and sling. They fit the concept better in my opinion than one wielding a heavy crossbow or bow. Although I would probably allow hand crossbow.

I suppose we could get jiggy with stealth penalties. Carrying any item that's more than 2' long. Stealth penalty. Carrying anything with lots of little bits inside it (like a quiver of arrows) stealth penalty. 4' long items (rapiers were prettty lonnng) big stealth penalty. Spear/staff? Heavy Crossbow? Fuggeddaboudit (as they say in Thieves' Cant).