I think it's interesting that a lot of this stuff remains true for spellcasters in 5E. Let's take one of the more problematic spells, because it allows intrusion on the Rogue's niche, Knock.
5e SRD
3rd
We can see this is fairly similar. I think the move away from player empowerment to DM empowerment has disproportionately effected (or continues to disproportionately effect I guess, your call of your view of non martial and martial empowerment in 2/3/4) martial classes over spell-casters.
You're entitled to your opinion of the tiering of classes. The example spell you suggested doesn't really back it up however.
Actually any class can unlock doors in 5th, just create a background that lets you or use the criminal background.
It doesn't make him obsolete -it just gives different levels of player empowerment. Knock ALWAYS unlocks the door. Thieves tools may unlock the door. The difference is very stark.
This is hardly the only example - invisibility for stealth, paticularly as a lot of the invisibility dispels seem to have been removed in 5th. Spider climb is another great example.
Obviously there is plenty of room to disagree but it seems clear to me that knock makes the player more empowered than thieves tools based on the criteria in Tony Vargas post
It doesn't make him obsolete -it just gives different levels of player empowerment. Knock ALWAYS unlocks the door. Thieves tools may unlock the door. The difference is very stark.
This is hardly the only example - invisibility for stealth, paticularly as a lot of the invisibility dispels seem to have been removed in 5th. Spider climb is another great example.
Obviously there is plenty of room to disagree but it seems clear to me that knock makes the player more empowered than thieves tools based on the criteria in Tony Vargas post
If you have 4 locks to open, and player A can automatically open 1 but not the other 3, and player B is not guaranteed to open them, but has a good chance at all 4, I would not call player A being more empowered than Player B. Especially in the context of the game, where are other significant factors that can be detrimental to the party by using player A's method (like alerting the whole place you're there), or that player A has to have had first learned the spell in question, and then prepped it, and then even have slots available to cast it, and it uses up a slot that could be needed for a much more important spell later on.
And the basic math doesn't really back up the whole empowered thing either. If your chances to overcome X is 100%, 0%, 0%, 0% (because wizard probably isn't carrying thieves tools), and player B has chances of 60%, 60%, 60%, 60%, repeat as needed, then player A certainly isn't more empowered.
Player picks a class, feats, weapons, spells, makes/buys/ items, etc, and what they do, how they stack up, and how crazy-broken they all turn out to be are all a function of 'RAW.' The DM can 'house rule' (shame! horror!) or pull out the banhammer, but the player had a lot of control over what his character was & could do - and not entirely 'within reason.'
3.5 was the height of the phenomenon (4e balance muted the effects), but it was even true further back, though to an increasingly lesser extent. 2e 'Player Option' supplements opened up some stuff along those lines. Before that, there was always spell choice, spells being a fairly push-button way of evoking specific results for the player.
Of course, the DM could always respond by ratcheting up the challenges faced, even if he wasn't willing to challenge the RAW, thus pushing relative effectiveness back down
Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...eation-Pitfalls-to-Avoid/page13#ixzz4787RRqSX
But with bounded accuracy... a rogue with expertise and reliable talent is a walking, unlimited, Knock spell... and invisibility spell... without any of the drawbacks or having to use a daily resource.
Yup. To me, working as intended. Dedicating a good chunk of your resources to being good at something should make that your thing.But with bounded accuracy... a rogue with expertise and reliable talent is a walking, unlimited, Knock spell... and invisibility spell... without any of the drawbacks or having to use a daily resource.
As noted above, the discussion is about player con trolley. Knock is an option that 100% works a player picks of a menu. Thieves tool requires GM permission as the GM sets the DC. Maybe the lock is arcane locked and the DC is to high. Maybe it isn't. Either way the player with knock has more control as measured above.