Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Volund" data-source="post: 7187123" data-attributes="member: 6872597">I don't view the narrative description in the PHB as relevant to the rules. It's just there to jump start the story-telling. "Sneak Attack" is just a more artful way of saying "Rogue Special Attack". You get to add d6 under certain circumstances and beyond that the player gets to describe it any way they want to. While there is fluff text about the rogue "making one precise strike...exactly where the attack will hurt the most", that could just as easily refer to a kick to the groin as anything else. If someone wants to think of their rogue specifically aiming for weak spots in armor they can, but there is nothing in the rules that requires it. The 5e combat mechanics overall are deliberately vague and I would say they don't model anything in particular other than a specified damage type. As long as my d20 hits the AC, I can describe my barbarian slashing his sword into a gap in an enemy's armor, or say that my dexterous thief made a nimble move to avoid the enemy's spear and then pierced his chainmail with a rapier thrust, or that my strong rogue slashed his scimitar across the back of his victim's neck. I roll my damage and it's the next player's turn and nobody stops to wonder where or how I actually hit the monster. I hit it because my d20 roll said I did.I think the design decision was to make sure every class had an attack roll using their primary stat so that the game would be fun and easy to play. Once I sit down at a table with dice and minis to pretend to be a rogue and pretend to have adventures with dragons and magic and demons I am way past the point where I can object that the way combat works is ridiculous. Of course it is. It's ridiculous that characters get better at attacking but not defending. It's ridiculous that you add your Dex mod to light and medium armor even if you are unconscious or blind. It's ridiculous that the most athletic characters typically have the worst initiative bonus. Let me introduce you to my UA Hexblade/Swashbuckler who sneak attacks with Charisma instead of Dexterity or Strength. How does it work? Who cares? I roll my dice and get back to role-playing the fun parts like using my skills to explore, solve puzzles and interact with NPCs.Looking over your discussion points, you want the rogue to "make sense" by conforming to a particular description of the class in the PHB, and feel that strength-based rogues don't match this description. Having the class match a particular rogue-ish archetype you have in mind is obviously important to your enjoyment of the game, and if dexterous rogues who slip knives into armor gaps are the only kind of rogues you want to have in your world I wouldn't question that because I want the game to be fun for you the same as it is for me. However I would push back on the assertion you seem to be making in this thread, which is that other people seeing the rogue differently and being able to play it using other abilities besides Dex is a design flaw of the class. I never read the PHB descriptions to mean you have to play a character a certain way. The description of the character, the flavor of their abilities, the narrative so to speak, is entirely mutable because they aren't the actual rules. The classes are just a set of mechanical rules that you agree to play under but the character can be almost anything you want it to be despite the descriptions in the text. I have a Thief who would not knowingly steal from anyone and would describe himself as a "scout." If I wanted to, I could play a character according to the Barbarian rules but have him be from a noble family in the largest city in the kingdom, having attended the finest schools only to be kicked out because of anger issues. He might be the most refined fellow you ever met until he gets mad and goes berserk, but in 5e he could still be a "barbarian." I think this sort of adaptability is what makes 5e such a fun system to play. I'm not saying you are wrong. I'm just saying that your play style seems to require a certain degree of in-game coherence about the use of abilities that I personally do not require in order to enjoy the game and I'm replying from that perspective.</blockquote>

Verification