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...

 

[Horwath]

I feel like the Ranger is living in a design Dead End.

Look at Pathfinder 2nd edition. The Ranger became redundant almost instantly. The Ranger doesn't need to exist in most modern RPGs.

If the Ranger didn't have an association with Aragorn I doubt it would still be around.

I really wish that a modern RPG would just bite the bullet and remove dead ends like the Ranger. I think fans overreacting is a big reason we still have a bunch of design dead ends in RPGs.

I would rather remove fighter than ranger

 

[dave2008]

I would rather remove fighter than ranger

That's just crazy talk

 

[Arilyn]

I'm torn on the ranger notion. On the one hand, I 100% agree that the ranger as a class doesn't really need to exist. On the other, the 5e ranger is one of the worst classes by poll so it would be great to see what a revamping can do.

Agreed, a good revamp could make the class more relevant, which would be a good thing in my book. I'm a ranger fan.

 

[Greg K]

I think trap smith is awesome for those that want it, but not every rogue is going to want it. It could be an option thing like, pick your shtick form these preparation-based "attacks" : trap-smith, poisoner, con job (for the talky rogue).

Agreed. I saw trap smith and thought it is a good idea, but not as a set class ability. In my opinion, it should be be either one of several ability options from which to choose given that it is not appropriate for all rogues or it should be part of a Rogue Trapmaster archetype.

 

[Stacie GmrGrl]

I agree! I think Level Up could pass on the ranger class......it already exists in 5e. Do something original instead! Like a real poisoner/alchemist/potion maker.

That would be super cool.

I'd be okay with something different. I think an Alchemist or something from the game Iron Heroes would be pretty cool. Maybe a class that's super tanky, that specializes in defensive tactics, marking targets, and does unique things with armor and shields.

Or a true Warlord class. If 4e had one thing right, it's the Warlord.

 

[Morrus]

I'm quite excited about Anthony Alipio's current draft of the ranger. No spells, lots of exploration pillar abilities. I'll be very interested to see the reaction to it when we put it out for playtest. But this is the rogue thread!

 

[Horwath]

I'm quite excited about Anthony Alipio's current draft of the ranger. No spells, lots of exploration pillar abilities. I'll be very interested to see the reaction to it when we put it out for playtest. But this is the rogue thread!

very excited for spell-less ranger with improved exploration stuff.

And we post about it in rogue thread as there is lots of "rangery" stuff in rogue and fighter class.

 

[Faolyn]

I'm quite excited about Anthony Alipio's current draft of the ranger. No spells, lots of exploration pillar abilities. I'll be very interested to see the reaction to it when we put it out for playtest. But this is the rogue thread!

I for one am excited for a spell-less ranger!

For rogues--I like the trap abilities (hey, you set a thief to catch a thief!), although if you're actually doing archetypes in 5LU rather than just the base classes, you might want to save the more advanced trap abilities for an archetype instead.

 

[RangerWickett]

I haven't seen Anthony's version, so I hope it wows us. Despite my username, I also don't think ranger needs to be a full class.

(My preference would be for a game to have multiple shorter 'tracks' like "fire magic," and "animal companion." You'd pick two at each level, and could bounce around. It would work to silo various subsystems of rules, and let characters grab bits of them without having to fully commit to a class that might have bits you don't need. Like, if you want to rage, you wouldn't need to also have wilderness talents. If you want to be good at scampering around the battlefield, you wouldn't need to also have sneak attack.)

 

[NotAYakk]

Sniper: You gain a +2 bonus to damage rolls you make with ranged weapons

This stacks in unfortunate ways with the similar fighting style. It should grant that fighting style.

The type of damage dealt (bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing) is determined by the nature of your trap.

Bah, no fire traps or poison needles?

Once a creature has fallen victim to one of your traps, it can automatically spot others.

I see the balance reason; but a time limit (for the next hour) could be useful.

Improved Critical

Meh on the stacking. I wonder if we can tie to to advantage, like "when your two attack dice on advantage are within 1 point of each other". That would tie into the rogue advantage-sneak-attack thing and avoid the awkward stacking and add a fun minigame.

The other thing you could consider is adding a reaction attack to the Rogue. In order for the Rogue to keep up with a charop character, they have to pick up a way to make a sneak attack on their turn and as a reaction.

The typical ways to do it (haste, make an attack with hasted action, ready an attack for obvious trigger off-turn) are medium-hard to pull off, and are often treated as "cheese". If you moved that mechanic into the baseline rogue...

Example (names are not serious):

Sneaky Death:

Starting at level 5, a rogue is a master of sneaky death. Pick one of the following options:

Nya nya you missed me: If a creature within 5' makes an attack that misses, you can expend a reaction to attack that creature.

I got you covered: You can spend a bonus action to offer protection to a creature you can see (including yourself). Whenever that creature is attacked, you can expend a reaction to attack the attacker first with a weapon (limited by the reach or range of your weapon) with advantage.

... you knock them down: You can spend a bonus action to set up a foe within 5'. The next time that creature is attacked by someone else before the start of your next turn, if you are still within 5' you can expend a reaction to increase the attack's damage by your sneak attack dice.

All 3 are mechanics where you get a chance to expend sneak attack dice on your off-turn.

Improved Trapsmith

It seems wrong that your needle-in-lock deals 4d6 piercing damage and applies a poison, instead of dealing just poison damage way back at a lower level.

---

I am loving the "expertise with attached fluff and mechanics".

Expertise Training

It is like other expertise dice, but worse. Sad.

Maybe combine with Extra Skill Training? So you get a skill training and an expertise die (not always in the same skill)