Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
4E Rogue for non-4E enthusiast
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="kennew142" data-source="post: 4068661" data-attributes="member: 18490"><p>You still haven't explained how the 4e rogue tells you how you have to play the character. You assert that it is true. Exactly what in the 4e rogue information we've been given indicates that rogues (or any character for that manner) will be forced to counter every threat with force? They have bluff, insight and streetwise on their class skill list. We don't know for sure what the last two skills are, but given that streetwise is a CHA based skill, it would make little sense for it to be useful only in combat. As for bluff, it would be hard to imagine that this skill is only for combat.</p><p></p><p>I would also argue that it is objectively bad design to nerf a character class in combat just so you can make it better in non-combat areas.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't you been arguing that this design is a step backwards for the rogue? I fail to see how it is a step backwards for the class to not be completely ineffectual in such a major component of the game as combat? Especially when there is no evidence whatsoever for your assertion that the class has lost any non-combat effectiveness. I guess you could argue that they don't have diplomacy (the non-magical mind control skill) anymore. They still have bluff, which can be used to trick opponents. At least that's the way the skill works now, and it's the denotative meaning of the word.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It is a straw man argument because you are arguing that it is a step backwards in the design of character classes in 4e. It can't be a step backward if the previous edition is just as bad, or worse, in the same ways. You claim that the class has been nerfed in non-combat situations and that all rogue players will be forced to deal with every encounter using force. None of these arguments can be logically construed from the preview material given. Therefore, you are arguing against a false construction of the 4e rogue class that you have created. It is the very definition of a straw man argument.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="kennew142, post: 4068661, member: 18490"] You still haven't explained how the 4e rogue tells you how you have to play the character. You assert that it is true. Exactly what in the 4e rogue information we've been given indicates that rogues (or any character for that manner) will be forced to counter every threat with force? They have bluff, insight and streetwise on their class skill list. We don't know for sure what the last two skills are, but given that streetwise is a CHA based skill, it would make little sense for it to be useful only in combat. As for bluff, it would be hard to imagine that this skill is only for combat. I would also argue that it is objectively bad design to nerf a character class in combat just so you can make it better in non-combat areas. Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't you been arguing that this design is a step backwards for the rogue? I fail to see how it is a step backwards for the class to not be completely ineffectual in such a major component of the game as combat? Especially when there is no evidence whatsoever for your assertion that the class has lost any non-combat effectiveness. I guess you could argue that they don't have diplomacy (the non-magical mind control skill) anymore. They still have bluff, which can be used to trick opponents. At least that's the way the skill works now, and it's the denotative meaning of the word. It is a straw man argument because you are arguing that it is a step backwards in the design of character classes in 4e. It can't be a step backward if the previous edition is just as bad, or worse, in the same ways. You claim that the class has been nerfed in non-combat situations and that all rogue players will be forced to deal with every encounter using force. None of these arguments can be logically construed from the preview material given. Therefore, you are arguing against a false construction of the 4e rogue class that you have created. It is the very definition of a straw man argument. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
4E Rogue for non-4E enthusiast
Top