Is "skilled guy" a good character class?

[Dandu]

If you're going to pull out all the stops in a rogue assassin vs wizard contest, the wizard probably will win at mid to high levels due to the insane things spells allow you to do.

We could have a 1v1 where each participant lists their plan of attack/defense in order to test this theory.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Considering the rogue was an NPC designed (by another DM) to soften up- not outright kill- the PC Mage, I don't see the point in the exercise: of course the Mage will win.

But they're not invulnerable. Spells have time limits. Characters have limits on how many items they can use. A smart Mage will tailor his main defenses for the threats he's most likely to face- like how a tank has it's thickest armor in front and on top- and will be less defended against atypical threats. (That's why you have allies instead of adventuring solo...)

And the Mage-hunting rogue will tailor his efforts- equipment choices, buffs, timing and place- to be the atypical threat. Like aiming at a tank's rear or underbelly armor. (That's why they have guilds, as opposed to 100% DIY...)

All the Mage levels and magic gear won't help much when you're ambushed in an anti-magic zone, for instance.

 

[Dandu]

All the Mage levels and magic gear won't help much when you're ambushed in an anti-magic zone, for instance.

Actually, I have a build that uses a Shrink Item metal cone hat that enlarges when an AMF is near to cover the wizard, which breaks line of effect and allows him to teleport out. Said wizard also has a golem that is PAO'd into... either buttons on his coat or a comb in his pocket iirc that will turn back into a golem should the hat not be enough.

There's a few much more creative ways of dealing with AMF, as well as the incredibly straightforward method of casting the spell Invoke Magic, which specifically allows you to cast a 4th level or lower spell within an antimagic field.

 

[Tovec]

Are you serious? Have you actually played D&D?

It's an interesting theory / analogy re: how the designers might've wanted it to work, but...

Fighter (melee) = rock
Rogue (skills) = scissors
Wizard (magic) = nuclear bomb

My daughter hates it when I use the nuclear bomb in R/P/S.

Hehe, nuclear bomb. You big cheater When you do that does she pull out the lead lined fridge to Indiana Jones 4 you? No? Didn't think so.
Add that one to the list of things Dannyalcatraz.

Magic is pain in the ass, agreed and severely messes with the system comparative to the other two but in concept design it makes sense the way I have explained it.

And yes as explained below, all three can get access to magic and magic items and work as part of a team. My point was that during a fight the fighter's job is to protect the wizard against the rogue, the rogue is to avoid getting hit and to get to the enemy wizard and the wizard's job is to take out the fighter on the other team. More or less anyway.

 

[Dandu]

I disagree with your analysis as parties were intended to spend as much time, if not more, facing monsters than rogues.

The original paradigm was that fighters would be up front taking and dealing damage, wizards would be in the back casting Fireball, and rogues would tumble into position and backstab whatever the fighter was attacking when they were not chatting up contacts or finding traps.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Actually, I have a build that uses a Shrink Item metal cone hat that enlarges when an AMF is near to cover the wizard, which breaks line of effect and allows him to teleport out.

Not bad...assuming:

1) you're not in an area that prevents teleporting. And there are lots of those in published settings/adventures, so it's not like you'd only see this from a RBDM.

2) you still have that T-port available (ignore 2 if it's a contingency, of course.

3) you don't mind potentially never seeing the party again.

4) etc.

For every tactic, there is a countertactic.

The rogue in question- well, one of them, at least- was not just a random foe or part of a set piece, he was an assassin hired by a bitter rival. He spent 2 years of campaign time observing his target and preparing...and aaaaalmost completed his mission. He DID die trying, though.

 

[kitcik]

I don't normally do these long blow-by-blows but I'll make an exception.

No disrespect, but any rogue who hunts mages that hasn't planned for his prey's abilities is not playing up to their intelligence score or the kinds of contacts they should have. For every measure, there is a countermeasure. With magic, of course.

The mage has a higher intelligence score and more magic.

A smart Mage will tailor his main defenses for the threats he's most likely to face- like how a tank has it's thickest armor in front and on top- and will be less defended against atypical threats. (That's why you have allies instead of adventuring solo...)

And the Mage-hunting rogue will tailor his efforts- equipment choices, buffs, timing and place- to be the atypical threat. Like aiming at a tank's rear or underbelly armor. (That's why they have guilds, as opposed to 100% DIY...)

A smart mage will tailor his defenses against things that are actually threats, not against things he/she can defeat by simply reacting to them.

All the Mage levels and magic gear won't help much when you're ambushed in an anti-magic zone, for instance.

Like an antimagic field.

Hehe, nuclear bomb. You big cheater When you do that does she pull out the lead lined fridge to Indiana Jones 4 you? No? Didn't think so.
Add that one to the list of things Dannyalcatraz.

Magic is pain in the ass, agreed and severely messes with the system comparative to the other two but in concept design it makes sense the way I have explained it.

I actually think you & I are basically in agreement here.

I disagree with your analysis as parties were intended to spend as much time, if not more, facing monsters than rogues.

The original paradigm was that fighters would be up front taking and dealing damage, wizards would be in the back casting Fireball, and rogues would tumble into position and backstab whatever the fighter was attacking when they were not chatting up contacts or finding traps.

I can't XP you, but you have hit the nail on the head once again.

Not bad...assuming:

1) you're not in an area that prevents teleporting. And there are lots of those in published settings/adventures, so it's not like you'd only see this from a RBDM.

2) you still have that T-port available (ignore 2 if it's a contingency, of course.

3) you don't mind potentially never seeing the party again.

4) etc.

For every tactic, there is a countertactic.

The rogue in question- well, one of them, at least- was not just a random foe or part of a set piece, he was an assassin hired by a bitter rival. He spent 2 years of campaign time observing his target and preparing...and aaaaalmost completed his mission. He DID die trying, though.

Which rogue feature / item are you using to create the no-teleport zone?
I just don't see the argument here to be honest. You are basically saying, "If I have the ultimate rogue with every possible thing I can think of I can possibly defeat your standard mage." What if the mage was in a no sneak attack zone? LOL.

The original post said:
"{Rogues} are also good against the wizard due to that pesky evasion and hide/move silently/stealth.

If attacked by a rogue {wizards} are in trouble (sneak attack) but they can lay into a fighter with a more than fair chance of winning."

It did not say "It is theoretically possible for a rogue to successfully sneak attack a wizard."

Rogues are not "good against wizards" and their "pesky evasion" is worthless against any decent mzge, as is their hide & move silently.

A wizard is generally not in trouble when attacked by a rogue.

Nothing you have said in any of your arguments has refuted these last two statements.

You have simply made the argument that it is possible to build a rogue that could potentially threaten a wizard. That is not the same thing as refuting those statements.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The mage has a higher intelligence score...

Not necessarily.

...and more magic.

Of his own? Yes. More total specialized magic than someone specifically tasked with and geared for taking him down with ample time to figure out his strengths and weaknesses? Not necessarily.

A smart mage will tailor his defenses against things that are actually threats, not against things he/she can defeat by simply reacting to them.

Nobody is 100% prepared for every threat 24/7.

You know how modern vampire movies have fewer vampire hunters who start off at sunset or later? A smart mage-killer thief doesn't attack his target right as he's starting his adventuring day. And he certainly doesn't look like a threat.

Which rogue feature / item are you using to create the no-teleport zone?

The brains to know how to choose the time and place to launch his attack, garnered by using contacts within his Guild and the personal use of skills like Streetwise, etc., to gather info on the party. if the party is going into a space with such magical strictures, it means the target will be in a magical "chokepoint"- and thus more vulnerable.

I just don't see the argument here to be honest. You are basically saying, "If I have the ultimate rogue with every possible thing I can think of I can possibly defeat your standard mage." What if the mage was in a no sneak attack zone? LOL.

Not what I'm saying.

What I'm saying is that an intelligently played intelligent rogue PC can be a challenge for an intelligently played intelligent Wizard.

The rogue in question wasn't über equipped. In the hands of the DM, he was well played, decently equipped and patient. He did not attack the Wizard the first time they met, he waited 2 years for his opportunity and waited until the Wizard was at his most vulnerable.

And while he did not succeed, he came damn close...

 

[Vespucci]

I disagree with your analysis as parties were intended to spend as much time, if not more, facing monsters than rogues.

The original paradigm was that fighters would be up front taking and dealing damage, wizards would be in the back casting Fireball, and rogues would tumble into position and backstab whatever the fighter was attacking when they were not chatting up contacts or finding traps.

I agree with the guts of your position. This is not a PvP game.

However, the original paradigm was that fighters would be up front taking and dealing damage, and wizards would be in the back casting fireball, when the party got into a fight they couldn't avoid. Otherwise, everyone would be spending their time avoiding traps, exploring dungeons, and - most importantly - getting and spending loot. (Chatting up contacts falls under the spending loot category.)

Farming that "out-of-combat stuff" out to one guy was part of a design decision (conscious or unconscious) to make the game more about combat.

 

[Dandu]

Not bad...assuming:

1) you're not in an area that prevents teleporting. And there are lots of those in published settings/adventures, so it's not like you'd only see this from a RBDM.

Cone hat cuts off line of effect from Dimension Lock and other anti-teleportation spells. If you're talking about a situation where DM fiat says "teleportation does not work, no ands, ifs, or buts," you could always escape by burrowing through the earth via polymorphing into the correct form, etheralness, or something else creative.

2) you still have that T-port available (ignore 2 if it's a contingency, of course.

Or a scroll!

3) you don't mind potentially never seeing the party again.

1. Who said anything about retreating? Teleport out refers to teleporting out from under the cone hat. You can still end up in the field of battle. For example, if you're being ambushed in the open plane, you could TP up a few hundred feet and rock the battlefield with spells from the high ground.

In fact, if you stow some Shrink Item'd boulders in your spell component pouch and use the rules saying retrieving spell components is a free action, as is releasing held items, you could conceivably start dive bombing the fool who used an AMF on you, since the Shrink Item will wear off once it hits the AMF.

4) etc.

I figure the Greater Stone Golem covers what comes up in "etc".

For every tactic, there is a countertactic.

The rogue in question- well, one of them, at least- was not just a random foe or part of a set piece, he was an assassin hired by a bitter rival. He spent 2 years of campaign time observing his target and preparing...and aaaaalmost completed his mission. He DID die trying, though.

I can believe that. I'm not saying a rogue couldn't do it, but I do believe that if you're going to take it to the max, the side with more spellcasting power comes out on top. Someone who can Plane Shift to a plane where 1 year of time equates to 1 round on the Material Plane and who has spells that allow him to play a game of 20 questions with deities is going to be hard to surprise.

Granted, very few people actually play this way...

Nobody is 100% prepared for every threat 24/7.

Batman, if TV tropes is to be believed.