Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
Playing the Game
Play by Post
Living Worlds
Living EN World
'Feat' Rogue
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="Trouvere" data-source="post: 3954184" data-attributes="member: 37250"><p>When that initial comparison was made, it was between the rogue and Rystil's hypothetical rogue variant with no sneak attack but with various extra class features grafted in, so the skill points didn't enter into it. Then the comparison was reversed to be between the feat rogue and the regular rogue, where skill points again are the same, and then it was switched again to compare fighter and rogue, where the comparison is feats vs. sneak attack... which finally brought us to feat rogue vs fighter. The skill advantage over the fighter remains whether we're talking rogue or feat rogue, so it was specifically the sneak attack and the feats that were being compared. Maybe the obverse comparison is BAB/HP vs SP.</p><p></p><p>One of Rystil's objections (perhaps the main one?) is that you can readily frontload extra feats and skill points and whatnot in a build like Feat Rogue 4 / Fighter 16, which would net you 42 extra skill points, evasion, uncanny dodge and trapfinding, for the loss of 1 BAB and 13 HP. It does seem like a pretty good trade-off, to say the least (although other front-loading multiclassing is possible with core classes... heck, the Fighter itself is a 2-level dip <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> ) Suppose we were to houserule that, just as you can't combine Cleric with Cloistered Cleric or Ranger with Urban Ranger, or Fighter with either Thug or Sneak Attack Fighter, or Feat Rogue with Rogue, you also can't combine Feat Rogue with Fighter, because they're essentially the same thing?</p><p></p><p>Honestly, I'm not particularly invested in the Feat Rogue. It would just make a more elegant solution for the particular build I have in mind. The question that bothers me is whether there is any way to build a skillful character who doesn't have anything to do with sneak attack or intrinsic spellcasting (so not normal rogue or bard). The suggestion to just NOT use the sneak attack doesn't satisfy me, if only because there's at least the conceit that the base classes are roughly balanced as written, such that purposefully ignoring a class feature for RP purposes is a major gimping. It'd be like playing a bard and just not bothering to sing. Presumably that's why the feat rogue exists at all. I can see that the Feat Rogue is an SRD way to build a non-SA skillfull rogue mechanically, even if by name and (single line of) fluff it points in a different martial direction of a fighter with actual skills. That's an okay build, but I don't care about that - the extra feats enable the regular feats to be used for any purpose. If there were an SRD/UA variant character other than the Feat Rogue, I'd be happy with that too. I'm not so desperate to have it that I want to encourage anyone to effectively create a new base rogue class, though!</p><p></p><p>Anyway, I'm definitely beginning to repeat myself in this thread, so I'm going to bow out. I'm sure I have better things to do with my time with Christmas approaching. Can't quite figure out what.... but there we go. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/paranoid.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":uhoh:" title="Paranoid :uhoh:" data-shortname=":uhoh:" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Trouvere, post: 3954184, member: 37250"] When that initial comparison was made, it was between the rogue and Rystil's hypothetical rogue variant with no sneak attack but with various extra class features grafted in, so the skill points didn't enter into it. Then the comparison was reversed to be between the feat rogue and the regular rogue, where skill points again are the same, and then it was switched again to compare fighter and rogue, where the comparison is feats vs. sneak attack... which finally brought us to feat rogue vs fighter. The skill advantage over the fighter remains whether we're talking rogue or feat rogue, so it was specifically the sneak attack and the feats that were being compared. Maybe the obverse comparison is BAB/HP vs SP. One of Rystil's objections (perhaps the main one?) is that you can readily frontload extra feats and skill points and whatnot in a build like Feat Rogue 4 / Fighter 16, which would net you 42 extra skill points, evasion, uncanny dodge and trapfinding, for the loss of 1 BAB and 13 HP. It does seem like a pretty good trade-off, to say the least (although other front-loading multiclassing is possible with core classes... heck, the Fighter itself is a 2-level dip ;) ) Suppose we were to houserule that, just as you can't combine Cleric with Cloistered Cleric or Ranger with Urban Ranger, or Fighter with either Thug or Sneak Attack Fighter, or Feat Rogue with Rogue, you also can't combine Feat Rogue with Fighter, because they're essentially the same thing? Honestly, I'm not particularly invested in the Feat Rogue. It would just make a more elegant solution for the particular build I have in mind. The question that bothers me is whether there is any way to build a skillful character who doesn't have anything to do with sneak attack or intrinsic spellcasting (so not normal rogue or bard). The suggestion to just NOT use the sneak attack doesn't satisfy me, if only because there's at least the conceit that the base classes are roughly balanced as written, such that purposefully ignoring a class feature for RP purposes is a major gimping. It'd be like playing a bard and just not bothering to sing. Presumably that's why the feat rogue exists at all. I can see that the Feat Rogue is an SRD way to build a non-SA skillfull rogue mechanically, even if by name and (single line of) fluff it points in a different martial direction of a fighter with actual skills. That's an okay build, but I don't care about that - the extra feats enable the regular feats to be used for any purpose. If there were an SRD/UA variant character other than the Feat Rogue, I'd be happy with that too. I'm not so desperate to have it that I want to encourage anyone to effectively create a new base rogue class, though! Anyway, I'm definitely beginning to repeat myself in this thread, so I'm going to bow out. I'm sure I have better things to do with my time with Christmas approaching. Can't quite figure out what.... but there we go. :uhoh: [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Playing the Game
Play by Post
Living Worlds
Living EN World
'Feat' Rogue
Top