thecasualoblivion
First Post
If you need to disengage or run away, that is a VERY thin line to walk in terms of being bad at fighting.
Rogue Design goals . L&L May 7th
If you need to disengage or run away, that is a VERY thin line to walk in terms of being bad at fighting.
I'm sure rogue players won't be obligated to run away. You can stand him in the front line to your heart's content. He might die, but at least he's not cowardly!
That thin line gets thicker when massive minotaurs and being outnumbered 3 to 1 is involve.
Ridley's Cohort
First Post
I find it interesting to have an explicit design goal that the Rogue may be better off bidding her time for the Big Hit from behind.
It has never quite worked out for any version of the Rogue IMHO. Not that it could never be done, but most people could not figure out how to run their Rogue effectively.
It has never quite worked out for any version of the Rogue IMHO. Not that it could never be done, but most people could not figure out how to run their Rogue effectively.
StreamOfTheSky
Adventurer
I don't like the emphasis on sneaky backstabbing at all...
I want rogues to head more towards flashy combat acrobat / "ninja as portrayed in media and anime." Fast moving, skirmishing, and able to effortlessless maneuver past the front lines to get to softer or more important targets.
*Sigh*
I want rogues to head more towards flashy combat acrobat / "ninja as portrayed in media and anime." Fast moving, skirmishing, and able to effortlessless maneuver past the front lines to get to softer or more important targets.
*Sigh*
thecasualoblivion
First Post
We houseruled it so you could set up a Backstab by not attacking on your turn back in 2E, and the end result wasn't so much an effective combatant so much as one who sucked less.
I'll believe it when I see it, and Rogues being second rate combatants is not an acceptable outcome.
GX.Sigma
Adventurer
I hope some kind of "wait for it... wait for it... wait for it... INSTA-KILL DEATH STAB!!" play is possible and fun. Stealth rules, as far as I know, have always sucked in tabletop games, so it'll be interesting to see if they can make that as fun and suspenseful as it is in video games.
Edit:
Edit:
I think that would be a fighter. Remember, fighters don't have to be "defenders" in D&D Next. I definitely believe that character will be possible with some combination of classes and theme.
Frostmarrow
First Post
Point 4 seems retrofitted to the new "auto-success to a degree" game mechanic.
–Now that we have this new game mechanic we'd better go back and change the design goals to reflect this.
I don't mind but I'm worried they might be tricking themselves.
–Now that we have this new game mechanic we'd better go back and change the design goals to reflect this.
I don't mind but I'm worried they might be tricking themselves.
There was an earlier L&L discussion on various dice mechanics.
Point 4 seems like a perfect occasion for a dice mechanic to be used.
For example a re-roll mechanic, an extra die rolled and added to the total, or roll 2d10 instead of d20.
These kinds of things could make the rogue 'feel' different when it came to skills from other classes.
Daztur
Adventurer
Indeed. However if more auto-success keeps modifier bloat in check it's still a good thing. The basic d20 system just doesn't work well if the modifiers are too small or too big so giving other ways for characters to be cool instead of continually upping the modifiers seems good to me.
