Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Minigiant" data-source="post: 9375931" data-attributes="member: 63508">False.TSR went out their way to make backstab hard to do.WOTC forced you to have a flanker and made a bunch of monsters immune in 3e.In 2e and 3e, If your rogue or thief decided that they were going to hold back and take sides to fight a heavily armored CR appropriate knight as your fighter for the other knight1) The rogue or thief would not kill the knight.2) The Rogue or thief Be killed by the knightThe rogue or thief has not ever been a fighter substitution in D&D. The rogue is not a warrior class.The rogue has only outdamaged to fighter or other warrior classes in 4e. The road has never out tank the fighter or any Warrior classes.I agree that this is an error in design. More design errors I agree. Rogues and fighters suffer the most from the modern desire to have low numbers and simple characters.But none of this goes to the core problem.What do rogue character players want?If it's too outdamage the fighter sorry that's never going to happen and then D&D or most D&D adjacent games.If it's to outskill most other classes you might be able to get designers to back that and support that If it's to have more skill options than most other classes you might be able to get designers to back that and support that</blockquote>