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
Community
Playing the Game
Play by Post
Living Worlds
Living EN World
'Feat' Rogue
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="Trouvere" data-source="post: 3952559" data-attributes="member: 37250"><p>Crikey. These postings are getting too long!</p><p></p><p>No, no. Not the Orsal model. The regular feats, or at least some of them.</p><p> 'cos it's not a rogue, it's a skillful fighter! Why does the fighter get options while the rogue doesn't? Well, that's just the way the game is, and can't really be questioned. Ignore the regular rogue, and the fact that the variant bears the rogue name. The feat rogue is a fighter who's weedier because he's worked a bit on his other skills. What's confusing about that? Feat Rogue could be called Skillful Weedy Fighter, and the question goes away, but that name is horrible.</p><p></p><p>Having said that, I've been saying that the variant allows building Extra Roguey Rogue too. Ignore the particular origins of the actual 18 or 19 feats the feat rogue gets. The end result of having extra available is that a few (in fact, the 7 or 8 regular ones, not the bonus ones) are freed up to potentially develop some other capabilities, such as making Extra Roguey Rogue, because of course nearly every character except a dedicated full caster needs a few combat feats... Bards and Paladins included.</p><p></p><p>It can also be used to make the Skillful Weedy Fighter, but is that such a bad thing? Why's that an undesirable edge case, or even undesirable if it turns out to be the normal use of the variant? They both seem to me to be sensible build choices. The SWF can be built by multiclassing out of Fighter as of now, but the more roguish rogue can't, I don't think. Incidentally, it wouldn't necessarily have to be extra stealthy... just extra something... extra Bluffy, extra trap-breaky, extra Knowledge (local)y, whatever.</p><p></p><p>I don't quite understand your suggestion to just ignore the sneak attack. It's a pretty big elephant! If I'm going to pretend that class features don't exist, well, then, I'd just make a bard or cloistered cleric who never casts or sings. There has to be a more elegant way than that!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Trouvere, post: 3952559, member: 37250"] Crikey. These postings are getting too long! No, no. Not the Orsal model. The regular feats, or at least some of them. 'cos it's not a rogue, it's a skillful fighter! Why does the fighter get options while the rogue doesn't? Well, that's just the way the game is, and can't really be questioned. Ignore the regular rogue, and the fact that the variant bears the rogue name. The feat rogue is a fighter who's weedier because he's worked a bit on his other skills. What's confusing about that? Feat Rogue could be called Skillful Weedy Fighter, and the question goes away, but that name is horrible. Having said that, I've been saying that the variant allows building Extra Roguey Rogue too. Ignore the particular origins of the actual 18 or 19 feats the feat rogue gets. The end result of having extra available is that a few (in fact, the 7 or 8 regular ones, not the bonus ones) are freed up to potentially develop some other capabilities, such as making Extra Roguey Rogue, because of course nearly every character except a dedicated full caster needs a few combat feats... Bards and Paladins included. It can also be used to make the Skillful Weedy Fighter, but is that such a bad thing? Why's that an undesirable edge case, or even undesirable if it turns out to be the normal use of the variant? They both seem to me to be sensible build choices. The SWF can be built by multiclassing out of Fighter as of now, but the more roguish rogue can't, I don't think. Incidentally, it wouldn't necessarily have to be extra stealthy... just extra something... extra Bluffy, extra trap-breaky, extra Knowledge (local)y, whatever. I don't quite understand your suggestion to just ignore the sneak attack. It's a pretty big elephant! If I'm going to pretend that class features don't exist, well, then, I'd just make a bard or cloistered cleric who never casts or sings. There has to be a more elegant way than that! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Playing the Game
Play by Post
Living Worlds
Living EN World
'Feat' Rogue
Top