Yes of course when there is no rogue to open the locked dungeon door everyone should just turn around and go home thats much more fun!
D&D 5E I want a return to long duration spells in D&D Next.
Yes of course when there is no rogue to open the locked dungeon door everyone should just turn around and go home thats much more fun!
Maybe they can try something else, just as - when there is no wizard to cast fireball - something different has to be done to beat up on the room full of trolls.
When it comes to locked doors, hammers, chisels and crowbars come to mind. I mean, in the real world people get through locked doors all the time without having to pick them or magically open them!
Neonchameleon
Legend
You keep mentioning this strawman. But it is a strawman unless the door is literally unbreakable. Mind showing me all those unbreakable doors?
Of course if it were a wall of force and you didn't have a wizard you'd have to turn round and go home. Mysteriously in actual play the wizard has the problem you say the rogue does - but doors can be opened by the fighter and an axe.
Not sure why you have an issue with something that isn't true.
Can't Fireball = Rogue's can use scrolls, staves and wands and other magic items.
Can't Teleport = Rogue's can use scrolls, staves and other magic items
Can't go Invisible = Ring of Invisibility, scrolls, staves, and wands.
The rogue is more than capable of doing all these things.
What edition are you talking about? And what levels? Not to mention the item dependency that contrasts with the wizard.
In B/X an AD&D a thief has to be 10th level to use scrolls, and can't use other items.
Even in 3E, a 3rd level wizard can sub for a rogue, whereas I don't think a 5th level rogue has the same guarantee of using a fireball wand or scroll. The DC for a 5th level scroll is 25, for a wand is 20. The skill bonus for a 5th level rogue will be 9 ranks + 6 (say) for CHA. Which is 50% for the scroll, and better for the wand, but the wand is a big investment of a rogue's treasure. Whereas learning and then memorising a spell is a trivial investment of a wizard's resources.
I'm talking about 3rd edition and the UMD skill.
Item dependency can't be an argument because everyone gets items so if we are going to start moving the goalposts then I know not to continue with this conversation.
I always find it funny how wizards depend entirely on spells to do what they want to do but the minute another class finds a way to do the same thing, but with items, then it becomes an argument about item dependency.
If you are going to start arguments like this then you need to leave those goalposts exactly where they are.
Yes of course its a strawman there couldn't possibly be anyone else in the dungeon right make as much noise as you want. It couldn't possibly be that the place will just empty out and kill us all.
As much of a strawman as this mythical wizard we keep hearing about that flies around in everyones campaign invisible, invulnerable and soloing all the encounters while the rest of the party sits outside in beach chairs waiting for thier cut of the loot.
keterys
First Post
Everyone gets treasure. Saying that someone can burn a significant amount of their treasure, that everyone can do, doesn't say much about what's special about their actual class.
Especially when the rogue needs to spend more of his treasure on his weapon(s) and armor than the wizard for basic functionality, so is behind the ball to start.
It's less obvious in a group that is not diverse and uses more random treasure. The DM goes "You find a wand of bark skin" and no one can use it, so the rogue goes "Well, I need a 10 on the die, but guess I'll take it". In my experience, that's fairly rare and that's effectively party treasure anyways. The rogue can eventually pick up, say, a wand of fireball, but it'll be with a horrible DC 14 and only 5d6 damage, at a point when the campaign has moved onto DC 22 12+d6 damages (or flat out save & suck).
But, sure. In infinite treasure land, the rogue does awesome with use magic device. In infinite treasure land, use magic device is so awesome that _everyone in the party takes it_.
Neonchameleon
Legend
Come back here with those goalposts!
Your first statement was that you had to stop because you couldn't get through the door without picking the lock. It was an absolute limit (the way a Wall of Force is to a non-wizard).
Now you are complaining that breaking the door will make things more dangerous. The implication being that taking a risk means you absolutely must stop.
You are also implying that breaking a door will make enough noise to alert the entire dungeon when e.g. combat and steel clashing against steel won't. Your first combat in a dungeon (unless it's a pure flat-footed gank) will alert the enemy far more than hacking through a door ever would.
Fundamentally, going in without a rogue doesn't make things impossible. But it should make your chances of remaining unnoticed lower - just as going in without a fighter makes combat more dangerous. But you can get through combats without a fighter and get through doors and traps without a rogue.
The difference seems pretty stark to me. Spells are an unlimited resource for a wizard. Items are a very finite resource for any PC. I mean, if we're going to talk about items then the Knock spell and Invisiblity spell are both unnecessary, because a wizard who wants to be able to sneak like a rogue can just use a Chime of Opening or a Ring of Invisibility.
My comparitive unfamiliarity with 3E meant that I didn't factor in the pox save DC. Which only reinforces my scepticism about Use Magic Device (=, as far as I can see, spend my treasure on pretending to be a caster - why not just retire the PC and build a caster!?).
Similar Threads
