Is Rogue a problematic class?

[Visigani]

Commoner

Class Features
The following is a class feature of the commoner NPC class.

 

[Visigani]

But commoners can take the chicken infested flaw and levels in the survivor class. Clearly they're easier to break than monks.

My bad, I was under the impression that I was talking to people who had at least a limited understanding of the game.

Mod Note: Folks, we expect you to comport yourselves with civility and respect. Don't be insulting when you don't have to. Thanks. ~Umbran

When the SRD states, pretty clearly that it's a non-player class (and hence is impossible to break on account of the DM is the only one who should be playing non-player characters (you know, on account of it being non-player)).. well, what can I say... you get in on that cleverness and make it your own!

I'll go roll me up an intermediate deity to play with the pally, cleric, fighter and warmage. You know, because it's balanced.

 

[Hassassin]

Monks have an AC bonus and more hit points, so of course commoners are easier to break.

 

[kitcik]

Monks are tier 5. By your logic, this implies that the vast majority of classes are "unbalanced." This does not seem to make sense. Are you saying a party of tier 3/4 characters is "unbalanced vs the game?" IMHO, a party of tier 3/4 characters is balanced vs the game whereas a party of monks would suck by mid-levels and die a horrible death to supposedly CR-appropriate challenges.

 

[cjosephs1s]

Well the monk is kinda a jack of all trades type thing. It does a little of this and a little of that and gets a little of this and a little of that. So maybe replace the word "balanced" with something else like "support role".

That's how the rogue is as well. Its a "support role" While neither excel particularly well in a party with specialty characters such as wizard, cleric, warblade or other specialty classes because these other classes do things better than the monk or rogue for the most part.

Think of as a gestalt campaign and you're trying to pick two classes that go well together. You wouldnt' pick two classes that overlap a bunch of abilities would you? You'd want to pick two classes that benefit each other in a good way for the most part for the majority of the build. So if you're in a regular single progression campaign you wouldnt' want to pick monk or rogue if there are others in the party that already have these abilities would you? Maybe this new way of looking at Monk/rogue will help.

 

[kitcik]

So only play monk/rogues in parties with no full casters and no ToB classes - that way you get demolished by CR appropriate challenges?

 

[Dandu]

I think there's the crux of it; monks are considered weak, not because they can't kill druids, but because they have a hard time performing against a lot of the enemies the rules say they should be able to handle.

 

[cjosephs1s]

Agreed. I have seen variant Monk classes that are a lot better than the one in the PHB but are from non WotC sources. Some of these at least seem to look like they would perform better as they get a fighter BAB and some more martial type abilities.