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
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What should Rogues do?
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="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6027907" data-attributes="member: 6696971"><p>Oh how I hate the vague and limiting design space of "The Fighter should be the baseline melee combatant. And by baseline I mean dominate while others (Rangers, Barbarians, Paladins, Rogues, Fighter/Mages) merely contribute to melee combat. In order to justify this gross disparity, he shall be rendered (relatively) inept out of combat. So then: Primary protagonist in combat but Sloth (but, hey, he loves Chunk!), out of combat." That is not limiting at all. </p><p></p><p>Because of that stupid paradigm, we're locked into B.A. Baracus (minus the mechanics acumen) or Fezzic as the only possible Fighter archetype. And thus Rogues cannot be good at melee combat. Horrible. And limiting.</p><p></p><p>If you build the Fighter (and all the classes) in such a way that makes him (them) do things (combat, social, exploration) in interesting, diverse ways (roles) then you can build a wide swath of archetypes (that recognizably express themselves within the fiction) and have niche protection. You have design focus that allows for coherency in implementation. The moment you start narrowing the scope of classes while using vague designations of - ultimate protagonist in combat and then peripheral or inept out of combat - or - peripheral or inept in combat and ultimate protagonist out of combat - you wind up with (i) moderately effective niche protection but (ii) exceedingly limited archetype representation. Further, If that is your design space for the classes then you better make certain that (iii) some classes don't destroy both of those concepts by way of their resource schemes and become niche invaders/stealers, whatever they want to be, and ultimate protagonists in and out of combat.</p><p></p><p>If they fail at both (i) and (ii) and then all for (iii) this edition will be a disaster. Beyond that, if there isn't a broad swath of archetype representation (for Rogues) specifically, I'm all but certain that my group won't be playing this edition (even in passing) as one of my 3 main PCs litmus tests for an edition is how well Rogue's build resources allow him to encapsulate his favored archetypes. I'm not sure how many "guys like him" are out there but I suspect its more than a few.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 6027907, member: 6696971"] Oh how I hate the vague and limiting design space of "The Fighter should be the baseline melee combatant. And by baseline I mean dominate while others (Rangers, Barbarians, Paladins, Rogues, Fighter/Mages) merely contribute to melee combat. In order to justify this gross disparity, he shall be rendered (relatively) inept out of combat. So then: Primary protagonist in combat but Sloth (but, hey, he loves Chunk!), out of combat." That is not limiting at all. Because of that stupid paradigm, we're locked into B.A. Baracus (minus the mechanics acumen) or Fezzic as the only possible Fighter archetype. And thus Rogues cannot be good at melee combat. Horrible. And limiting. If you build the Fighter (and all the classes) in such a way that makes him (them) do things (combat, social, exploration) in interesting, diverse ways (roles) then you can build a wide swath of archetypes (that recognizably express themselves within the fiction) and have niche protection. You have design focus that allows for coherency in implementation. The moment you start narrowing the scope of classes while using vague designations of - ultimate protagonist in combat and then peripheral or inept out of combat - or - peripheral or inept in combat and ultimate protagonist out of combat - you wind up with (i) moderately effective niche protection but (ii) exceedingly limited archetype representation. Further, If that is your design space for the classes then you better make certain that (iii) some classes don't destroy both of those concepts by way of their resource schemes and become niche invaders/stealers, whatever they want to be, and ultimate protagonists in and out of combat. If they fail at both (i) and (ii) and then all for (iii) this edition will be a disaster. Beyond that, if there isn't a broad swath of archetype representation (for Rogues) specifically, I'm all but certain that my group won't be playing this edition (even in passing) as one of my 3 main PCs litmus tests for an edition is how well Rogue's build resources allow him to encapsulate his favored archetypes. I'm not sure how many "guys like him" are out there but I suspect its more than a few. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What should Rogues do?
Top