Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hellcow" data-source="post: 4122690" data-attributes="member: 15800">I'm inclined to agree. Setting aside multiclassing, the core rogue class abilities are focused in a particular direction - although even there, even without any feats, any consideration of race or skills, looking purely at combat, I can make two first level rogues with completely different ability sets.But mentioning just what's come up at DDXP, I'll point to the fact that many of the things that were previously "rogue" - critically, trap monkey - are now tied to the Thievery skill. So you don't need to have a rogue in your party just because you're scared of traps; you just need someone else who has the Thievery skill. It could be the ranger; he probably has a high Dex, and it fits with a "scout" character. It could be a wizard, who has taken an interest in complex devices. In practice, in 3E you'd do this by having your wizard take a level of rogue to get the trapfinding feat. In 4E, he just needs training in Thievery, and there's a number of options for pulling that off (admittedly, it's not the norm for a wizard - but neither is it hard to do). And that's not actually touching on true 4E multiclassing. The four roles do fit with the classic "fighter-cleric-thief-MU" paradigm, but the fact of the matter is that you don't need a thief in the thief slot - and again, there's lots of ways to make two fighters feel unique.</blockquote>