Do you make changes with 3e Rogues?

[Storminator]

I run a PBeM where all the PCs are at least part rogue. These guys are old school thieves all the way. Search, Disable, Pick Pockets, Climb, Hide, MS, Open Lock, and each with a point here and there to flesh out the skill set. They are everything a 1E thief was meant to be. And with a level of Barbarian here and one of sorcerer there, they are much cooler.

And two of them have INT as the top stat. The higher the level the more that INT point builds up.

I run another PBeM with 5 PCs, all one level higher than the rogues. The rogue party has far more total skill points, and it's a much bigger part of their game.

PS

 

[Swack-Iron]

After playing rogues, my players alway complain that no other class has enough skill points.

After playing both a Rogue and a Monte Cook Ranger, I've come to realize that one of the most subtle but brilliant designs of the 3e system is the balance between available skill points and number of skills on your class skill list. Both of these classs have a lot of skill points, but there are far more skills then they can possibly spend them on, which makes every level a (fun) struggle to decide where to spend them.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

Well, there have been a couple replies to this already, but...

The difference being...?

The politician has better access to the really expensive stuff to steal, obviously

 

[Storminator]

After playing both a Rogue and a Monte Cook Ranger, I've come to realize that one of the most subtle but brilliant designs of the 3e system is the balance between available skill points and number of skills on your class skill list. Both of these classs have a lot of skill points, but there are far more skills then they can possibly spend them on, which makes every level a (fun) struggle to decide where to spend them.

You really see this with the ranger and the barbarian. Both have 4 skill points, but they are not equal. Not at all.

PS

 

[Piratecat]

I agree. I think the Sneak Attack mechanism is good, but I'd like the option of switching it out for something else. Evasion, on the other hand, absolutely needs to stay.

EDIT: Actually, to merge my two posts together, it'd be nice to have some sort of "Political Backstab" mechanism for a high-Charisma Rogue who isn't much interested in melee.

One of the fascinating things that Wulf's company Bad Axe Games did when they did their half-orc book is allow feats and prestige classes to trade in rages-per-day for other rage-related abilities, similar to how Defenders of the Faith powers divine feats with turning attempts. I'm looking forward to Bad Axe's halfling book; I'd like to see feats and PrC's that take a certain amount of sneak attack damage and turn it into something else.

Incidentally, John, I agree that the 3e rogue is (for me) preferable to the 1e or 2e thief. I've been playing a rogue/cleric in Sagiro's game for 7 years, 4 years as 2e and 3 years as 3e (including playtest.) I'm finding the flexibility of the 3e version to be more fun.

 

[reapersaurus]

Finally, who else thinks we could change the name back to 'thief'?

I haven't read the other posts yet, but I for one applaud Wizards for deciding to change that ridiculously-limiting, 2-dimensional term of "Thief" for the class.

Any class name that insinuates that a sneaky-type, skills-based character steals things as a default NEEDED to be eradicated.

 

[Graf]

There are wonderous magic that grant +10, +15, to skills. These cost next to nothing for high level adventurers. (2000 gp for +10 to Hide)

So to prevent this I altered the price of wonderous items that grant bonuses to skills, and capped them at +10.

I have to admit that this could get out of hand. It requires a good DM or a world where you can't just turn money into magic items.

I think the offical answer is "slots & skill diversity limit this". sure your fighter can get books & cloak of elven kind, gloves of climbing, a medallion of spot, etc.
He'll be a pretty ineffectual fighter though (what about armor?) and a rogue of almost any level will be much better than he with the same equipement.

This is why you need to watch out for items like the Catrod from MoF (used to be the Catstaff in 2e.... the most unbeleivably broken item I think I ever saw). It gives too high bonuses to too many skills.
(IMC its only +5 and to less skills, oh and its a little bit cursed).

FYI Another good idea is to require carrying the item for a week to attune it. That way people don't have back-up stealth suits.

 

[johnsemlak]

Re: Re: Do you make changes with 3e Rogues?

I haven't read the other posts yet, but I for one applaud Wizards for deciding to change that ridiculously-limiting, 2-dimensional term of "Thief" for the class.

Any class name that insinuates that a sneaky-type, skills-based character steals things as a default NEEDED to be eradicated.

It wasn't Wizards of the Coast who made the change. The term rogue was introduced by AD&D 2nd ed, under TSR.

I still like the term thief, as the most interesting 'rogues' i've seen usually conform to the sneaky thief archetype. However, if players want to create rogues that don't conform to that archetype, I guess 'thief' is innappropriate.

I'm old-school probably, though. I still say magic-user. I always thought a wizard should only be a truly powerful magic-user.

 

[Fenes 2]

IMC, I have almost no items that grant a skill bonus. (Ok, I have not that many magic items anyway, but those are even rarer...)

 

[Lurks-no-More]

Rogues get to use slings in my games.
I can't think of any city-savvy burglar or cutpurse going around with a bow slung over his shoulder, but what about a leather strap wrapped around his belt? Just pick up some rocks, and you have instant armament.