Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Proficiency vs. Ability vs. Expertise
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Esker" data-source="post: 7641955" data-attributes="member: 6966824"><p>I like these. </p><p></p><p>The free movement one seems redundant with dash, since half movement at double speed is the same as full movement at regular speed. I guess if you let it extend to other types of movement restrictions that aren't technically "difficult terrain" (things like plant growth, or effects like spirit guardians that halve speed), it'd have some non-redundant uses, though.</p><p></p><p>Misdirect is a nice "poor man's dodge". If the rogue can do a weaker dodge for no resources while the monk can do a full dodge with resources, it makes for a nice contrast without stepping on the monk's toes.</p><p></p><p>I like take aim as is: it removes the need to have a place where you can hide to get advantage, but unlike hide, you can't use it after your attack for a defensive benefit, so hide still has a use.</p><p></p><p>Unbound is great too, and seems very thematic. Might want to give it to the monk, too.</p><p></p><p>I think the only issue I have is that between the boost to ranged rogues and the nerf to finesse weapons, you're skewing the mechanics in favor of staying at range as a rogue, which is a shame, since in my experience having played both melee and ranged rogues, it's more fun to be getting in there, using uncanny dodge, cunning action disengage, and evasion. Misdirect is a nice defensive toy, but it'd be nice if you had something in there for melee rogues' offense too. I can see not wanting to just grant blanket advantage, but maybe let them make a contested INT check or something for advantage?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yeah, but at higher levels you've basically left the rogue's bonus alone (higher proficiency, lower expertise) while bringing up everyone else's via increased proficiency. So the gap is reduced. You're making the rogue less of a skill monkey, which you said was a goal, so fine; as long as the extra benefits you grant elsewhere are equal or better in value.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Your example rogue had to put an ASI into STR to catch up to the fighter. Not letting them surpass the fighter even with their merely average strength means that </p><p>it's harder to make a rogue that's a really great climber or grappler. They may eventually be equally good at these things as a STR-based fighter, but they'll never be as good as the fighter at hurting things, even with your enhancements to cunning action (especially since you've taken away their DEX-bonus-to-damage if they're melee). Since a big part of the reason to play a rogue instead of a fighter is being able to do all sorts of cool things out of combat, or in combat that aren't attacking, it feels like a shame to me to weaken that distinctiveness, especially when I'm still not convinced it's addressing a real problem.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yeah, hence the 10% chance (the rogue has to roll a 1 or a 2 to fail). I like the idea of house ruling that natural 1s are always failures on skill checks (like they are for attack rolls), so that nothing is ever a completely foregone conclusion, but really, if your character is an expert in something, they should be nearly always succeeding at that thing unless they're trying to do something above what is typical for their level. And they should have some chance of doing really extraordinary things.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But you're talking "most creatures" who are level-matched to the character. And needing a 5 or better to succeed is still only 80% success; again, once they find a way in that's out of sight, vs creatures who aren't actively looking, and putting themselves at substantial risk if they fail. By comparison, a fighter archer at level 5 with 18 STR has a +9 to-hit, which means they hit AC 14 with only a 5. And nothing especially bad happens to them if they miss. Is that too high too?</p></blockquote><p>[/QUOTE]</p>
[QUOTE="Esker, post: 7641955, member: 6966824"] I like these. The free movement one seems redundant with dash, since half movement at double speed is the same as full movement at regular speed. I guess if you let it extend to other types of movement restrictions that aren't technically "difficult terrain" (things like plant growth, or effects like spirit guardians that halve speed), it'd have some non-redundant uses, though. Misdirect is a nice "poor man's dodge". If the rogue can do a weaker dodge for no resources while the monk can do a full dodge with resources, it makes for a nice contrast without stepping on the monk's toes. I like take aim as is: it removes the need to have a place where you can hide to get advantage, but unlike hide, you can't use it after your attack for a defensive benefit, so hide still has a use. Unbound is great too, and seems very thematic. Might want to give it to the monk, too. I think the only issue I have is that between the boost to ranged rogues and the nerf to finesse weapons, you're skewing the mechanics in favor of staying at range as a rogue, which is a shame, since in my experience having played both melee and ranged rogues, it's more fun to be getting in there, using uncanny dodge, cunning action disengage, and evasion. Misdirect is a nice defensive toy, but it'd be nice if you had something in there for melee rogues' offense too. I can see not wanting to just grant blanket advantage, but maybe let them make a contested INT check or something for advantage? Yeah, but at higher levels you've basically left the rogue's bonus alone (higher proficiency, lower expertise) while bringing up everyone else's via increased proficiency. So the gap is reduced. You're making the rogue less of a skill monkey, which you said was a goal, so fine; as long as the extra benefits you grant elsewhere are equal or better in value. Your example rogue had to put an ASI into STR to catch up to the fighter. Not letting them surpass the fighter even with their merely average strength means that it's harder to make a rogue that's a really great climber or grappler. They may eventually be equally good at these things as a STR-based fighter, but they'll never be as good as the fighter at hurting things, even with your enhancements to cunning action (especially since you've taken away their DEX-bonus-to-damage if they're melee). Since a big part of the reason to play a rogue instead of a fighter is being able to do all sorts of cool things out of combat, or in combat that aren't attacking, it feels like a shame to me to weaken that distinctiveness, especially when I'm still not convinced it's addressing a real problem. Yeah, hence the 10% chance (the rogue has to roll a 1 or a 2 to fail). I like the idea of house ruling that natural 1s are always failures on skill checks (like they are for attack rolls), so that nothing is ever a completely foregone conclusion, but really, if your character is an expert in something, they should be nearly always succeeding at that thing unless they're trying to do something above what is typical for their level. And they should have some chance of doing really extraordinary things. But you're talking "most creatures" who are level-matched to the character. And needing a 5 or better to succeed is still only 80% success; again, once they find a way in that's out of sight, vs creatures who aren't actively looking, and putting themselves at substantial risk if they fail. By comparison, a fighter archer at level 5 with 18 STR has a +9 to-hit, which means they hit AC 14 with only a 5. And nothing especially bad happens to them if they miss. Is that too high too?[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Proficiency vs. Ability vs. Expertise
Top