Playtest (A5E) Level Up Playtest Document #3: Rogue

Welcome to the third Level Up playtest document. This playtest contains a candidate for the first 10 levels of game’s rogue class.

You will also need to refer to the previous fighter playtest document for information on Traditions and Maneuvers, as we haven’t repeated that information in this document.

Download the playtest document

Are you ready to level up your 5E game? Welcome to Level Up, the standalone 'advanced 5E' backwards compatible tabletop RPG coming in 2021!

A crunchier, more flexible version of the 5E ruleset which you know and love. If you love 5E but would like a little more depth to the ruleset, Level Up is the game for you!

What this is
This is a playtest document. We’d love you to try out the rules presented here, and then answer the follow-up survey in a few days.

What this is not
This is NOT the final game. It’s OK if you don’t like elements of these rules; that’s the purpose of a playtest document. Be sure to participate in the follow-up survey in a few days. All data, positive or negative is useful.

What we use this for
Your survey responses help form the direction of the game as it goes through the development process.

Don’t forget!
Sign up for the mailing list for notifications of playtests, surveys, and news, and to make sure you get notified on Kickstarter when the project launches in 2021.

Continue reading...

 

[Stacie GmrGrl]

I agree that rogues shouldn't all be trap-based (especially for people who use rogue as a stand-in for expert) but the traps aren't an archetype. Since this is supposed to be backwards compatible, "actual thieves," assassins, ninjas, and con artists are already archetypes (Thief, Assassin, Mastermind) have already been covered. If this were a true new edition that didn't have to be completely backwards compatible, I'd agree with you entirely.

OTOH, trap-finding (along with lock-picking, pocket-picking, climbing sheer walls, and listening at doors) has been part of the rogue since Basic.

Not a bad idea to just make this game it's own edition of 5e.

 

[Faolyn]

@Jessica Wolfman You brought up a niche that couldn't be filled by the current playtest options & were given reasons why it was a badly shortsighted niche that should not be filled. You aren't arguing that "basically every situation but being ganged up on with no nearby ally & too scary/far off to approach to melee range" is a good limitation for sneak attack so it seems you recognize that it's an indefensible position trying to defend a boneheaded ability in core and instead chose to argue irrelevant details if your comment really justified a response or not.

You read things into my post that I didn't write. My entire intent was to say "hey, these choices aren't an exact match for my 5e character, but that's OK I'll pick something else." I would say the exact same thing if I were trying to convert a D&5e character to a completely different system, like GURPS or Fate. I'd probably say the same thing if I were trying to convert her to 3.x.

You chose to argue for... I don't even know why, because I wasn't even making any of the arguments that you're claiming I was. I wasn't even expect a response on that, beyond possibly a "hey, if you're playing a Swashbuckler, I figured out a hack for a particular maneuver is surprisingly good for that, even if it doesn't appear so."

Since you didn't seem to get what I said the first however many times: I am playing a multiclassed character with a distinct personality and fighting style. She's a Swashbuckler in class only--her actual in-character profession is duelist, cool cheek scar and all, and she certainly doesn't swing around the rigging of a boat. I at no point ever expected Level Up to fully be able to replicate this character exactly. I made an off-hand comment about this. Apparently you have a problem with Swashbucklers or with sneak attack--I can't even figure out what your problem is, or what "boneheaded ability" you mean--and decided to use me as an excuse to talk about it.

My personal opinion on crit ranges and fighters--assuming that's what you're talking about--is just my personal opinion. Which I'm allowed to have, and you attacking me for my opinion is uncalled for.

 

[Faolyn]

Also love the idea of a 4th Combat Tactic that allows any weapon to have the finesse property.

I have to say, I'm having a hard time imagining a finesse greataxe or glaive. Perhaps limit this to weapons that aren't heavy or require two hands.

 

[Morrus]

@Jessica Wolfman You brought up a niche that couldn't be filled by the current playtest options & were given reasons why it was a badly shortsighted niche that should not be filled. You aren't arguing that "basically every situation but being ganged up on with no nearby ally & too scary/far off to approach to melee range" is a good limitation for sneak attack so it seems you recognize that it's an indefensible position trying to defend a boneheaded ability in core and instead chose to argue irrelevant details if your comment really justified a response or not.

Calm down please, You're being unnecessarily aggressive.

 

[RSIxidor]

I have to say, I'm having a hard time imagining a finesse greataxe or glaive. Perhaps limit this to weapons that aren't heavy or require two hands.

I think that's a reasonable enough limitation. Limiting to only what's in the PHB rules is meh but this is a nice middle ground. (but should still allow two-handed ranged weapons, of course)

 

[Faolyn]

I think that's a reasonable enough limitation. Limiting to only what's in the PHB rules is meh but this is a nice middle ground. (but should still allow two-handed ranged weapons, of course)

Fortunately, rogues can sneak attack with ranged weapons. Are there any other classes or archetypes that give benefits for finesse weapons?

 

[RSIxidor]

Fortunately, rogues can sneak attack with ranged weapons. Are there any other classes or archetypes that give benefits for finesse weapons?

I think the only other thing is the Defensive Duelist feat, which requires finesse weapons but is also pretty bad.

 

[Faolyn]

I think the only other thing is the Defensive Duelist feat, which requires finesse weapons but is also pretty bad.

Is it bad? I took it for a character in another game but I barely got a chance to use it before the game folded. It's basically Parry, a trait which can raise the CR of a monster. (I make more monsters than PCs, so I'm less aware of how powerful PC options are.)

 

[RSIxidor]

Is it bad? I took it for a character in another game but I barely got a chance to use it before the game folded. It's basically Parry, a trait which can raise the CR of a monster. (I make more monsters than PCs, so I'm less aware of how powerful PC options are.)

Bad is perhaps not the right word. I'm bad at saying things are bad just because I don't personally like the option.

It gives you an ability that eventually works a bit like the Shield spell, but the Shield spell lasts for an entire round off of the one reaction and always gives a +5 to AC. Of course, the Shield spell usually requires you to spend a resource and you can only do it as many times as you have that resource.

So my personal take is that it doesn't give enough of a defense boost at low levels and at high levels is underwhelming compared to other reactions you might find. But, you can do it at least once a round assuming you aren't using your reactions for other things, so it's a bit of a tradeoff.

If you know that you won't get a lot of attacks or other effects out of your reactions (such as a DM that never provokes opportunity attacks while you're playing a melee character), it can be nice to have as an option.

That's comparing it to another defensive ability. If comparing to other feats, I personally tend to go for damage-boosting feats. But that's not what everyone likes.

As for the monster CR, that makes some sense as monsters often only have the default reaction options. Getting any reactions at all improves their survivability. I suppose for PCs its just that there are so many reactions, as well as so many feats, that are generally considered as just really quite good that I don't consider this one.

In summary, ignore me and choose the things that you enjoy.

Aside, If Level Up is going to tackle feats at all, I'd hope they'd raise the power level of this one slightly. Maybe give it a die roll on top of the proficiency bonus, or have the increase be a static number or based on something else from the character statistics.

 

[Horwath]

My 2 cents.

I mostly liked rogue as whole but some things IMHO could be different.

1st, I am probably one of the rare that hates expertise dice. It's just a needless hassle to add to skill checks.
Is expertise too much for a skill monkey to have? Double proficiency is just much cleaner and better to use.

Just replace dice with default expertise.

2nd, Trapsmith as mentioned. Not all rogues should/must have this. It's somewhat useful feature.
It would be nice if it can be traded for extra knack or two or 2nd Innocent facade option.

Also 10 minute time preparation seem kind of long for just few extra d6's

maybe scale the damage with time spend on preparing the trap and maybe add AoE effect for longer trap preparation.

I.E.
1 action prep time. One less d6 from you sneak attack damage.
1 minute; sneak attack damage,
10 minutes; 1d6+sneak attack damage,
1hr; 2d6+sneak attack damage,
8hrs; 3d6+sneak attack damage,

then you can double the time for 5ft AoE or triple for 10ft AoE

this would also mean that improved trapsmith would be molded in with base 3rd level ability.