Anyone else tired of the miserly begrudging Rogue design of 5E?

[fjw70]

Nope. I love the rogue.

 

[FrogReaver]

Unless we are talking about a SS CE Fighter or a GWM PM Barbarian/Fighter then a rogue fares very well with even a battle master fighter in DPR.

 

[AmerginLiath]

Every class has been made competent in combat, since that's 50-90% of game play.

By the book, combat is literally a THIRD of the game. In most cases, it’s actually far less because of the detail involved in dungeon crawling and social engagement. If your game is spending that much time in combat, you’re going to shortchanging a number of the classes in the same way that a game that spent 50-90% of game play canoodling in noble salons would be shortchanging the fighter and barbarian. The rogue is built, alongside the Ranger, to have the sort of extra strength in the Exploration Pillar that classes like the Fighter does in the Combat Pillar and the Bard or Paladin does in the Interaction Pillar. Yes, every class is competent in battle, but you’re ignoring their competing competancies elsewhere in the system and acting as if different levels of combat ability is the only factor in class design.

In the same way that ignoring the CR rules are going to result in encounter that run differently than the game’s design expects, so too does running a game almost entirely in one style/Pillar of play result in a game that runs differently and changes the power dynamics between classes that are meant to be balanced overall in how they contribute differently across different sorts of encounters. As much as I loathe to use the phrase...you’re playing it wrong.

(and it’s your right to do so, being your table; but you can’t then make an argument against the system-as-designed if you’re ignored that system-as-designed to emulated a different mode of game)

 

[CTurbo]

I don't think the Rogue is THAT hurting for damage. If you can reliably pull of sneak most every turn, you'll be doing decent damage. I know that's easier said than done but some(Swashbucklers) can do it better than others.

I can agree that there could be SOME sort of feat support for those who wish to make a DPR focused Rogue. Sentinel is a poor choice because a Rogue doesn't want to end it's turn standing beside an enemy.

If anything, the biggest problem with the Rogue class is, it's actually kind of difficult to play properly(in combat) compared to most classes. Rogues are meant to hit, run, and hide. Cunning Action and Evasion are really strong features. Uncanny Dodge is good, but it's only once per turn so getting hit by multiple enemies can be bad. I'd rather have Defensive Duelist since turning a hit into miss is better than turning a hit into half damage, but hey, it's free.

So yeah I'd be on board with a feat or two that boosts the Rogue's DPR whether it be giving the Rogue a 2nd attack, allowing a 2nd Sneak attack per turn, giving it more d6s, turning the d6s into d8s, or taking away some d6s but making it more reliable.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Wait, what? A rogue will be 1 hp/level behind the fighter. That's not exactly squishy. And with the high dex, he'll be what, 2 points behind in AC? Whoopee.

Shhh! ..the fighter'll hear you!
....we're trying not to hurt his feelings...

 

[Mistwell]

Look, all of you people who keep going over to CapnZapp's house and crumpling up his house rules page for the Rogue class and forcing him at rapier point to not enact these house rules for his game, y'all need to cut it out. If CapnZapp wants to houserule the rogue for his own private games, please let him do it.

 

[LordEntrails]

No.

I want to play a rogue in combat.

No you don't. You said so in the first post. You want to play something that hits like a fighter or a sorcerer in combat and is named "rogue".

So do it. It would have been much more useful and less click bait if you had titled your post something like; "Here's my idea on making the Rogue more of an Alpha strike Combat class, Critiques Please".

But instead you tried to indicate that the Rogue class RAW is deficient. It's only deficient in your view because you don't want it to do what it does. You want it to do something else.

 

[LordEntrails]

Look, all of you people who keep going over to CapnZapp's house and crumpling up his house rules page for the Rogue class and forcing him at rapier point to not enact these house rules for his game, y'all need to cut it out. If CapnZapp wants to houserule the rogue for his own private games, please let him do it.

I'm all for him making his own houserules and using them. I just think it's.... whatever... for him making a click bait title and OP.

 

[Hussar]

Hang on a tick. [MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION], aren't you the one who went on at rather length about how 5e combats aren't challenging enough and that your PC's are steam rolling your encounters?

And now you want to make the PC's even stronger in combat?

Something is not adding up here.

 

[cmad1977]

Hang on a tick. [MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION], aren't you the one who went on at rather length about how 5e combats aren't challenging enough and that your PC's are steam rolling your encounters?

And now you want to make the PC's even stronger in combat?

Something is not adding up here.

Yup.
Also the classics
‘GWM is broken! Melee is too strong!’
And
‘SS is broken ranges combat is too strong!’

Classic tracks man...