Rogue Mastermind Archetype Up, Courtesy of Extra Life

They stole my my help as a bonus action idea...

 

[Kobold Stew]

I feel we're not really communicating effectively here. I do understand your perspective, but I don't agree it makes for more interesting characters. I even put a disclaimer at the end of my last post.

Well then you run into the problem of being dependent on numerous attributes for your abilities to be effective, so now instead of the Dex attribute being primary and the rest being a matter of concept... I have two or more attributes I have to account for in keeping up to be effective.

Don't magnify the problem ("two or more"). There is nothing wrong with a build needing to balance between two major stats, and the more interesting builds, in my opinion, allow for choice in that.

And, for me, the more interesting classes require striking this balance: Barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, and to some extent Wizard. The Arcane Trickster does fit here, but at the expense of one of the few non-magical classes in the game.

I recognize that for many players diversity of builds is of less interest than it is for me.

Eh, when I look at the mastermind abilities they aren't about being agile and having great reflexes but they also don't key off a secondary attribute which to me seems the best of both worlds.... My rogue can be intelligent based if I want him to be, I just raise or start Int high... but I don't have to in order to play the mastermind rogue (which again seems less about book smarts and more about being clever/cunning) and be effective in combat.

You are correct that nothing in the Mastermind requires a high Intelligence. That's part of my point. It's a bad label.

Though I do have to ask... what rogue archetypes are you trying to play where Dex/stealth/nimbleness/etc. isn't a part of the concept?

I listed a variety upthread: thug, criminal mastermind, con artist, non-magical non-fighter.

First the wizard schools don't in any way change the primary casting attribute so I think you're making some strange comparisons here...

The point was about heterogeneity.

I'm also trying to understand how the cleric is an example of this as well... As an example the trickster Cleric doesn't gain any advantage from being Dex primary and probably suffers if he makes that choice... same for the War domain and Strength. The abilities in these domains are similar to mastermind in that they are pretty independent of the cleric's actual stats in the secondary ability.

You've missed the point. I can build viable clerics with a higher dexterity than wisdom (e.g. archer/crossbow-cleric) that don't have anything to do with the Trickster domain.

Finally if you do consider the Trickster domain cleric a Dex build or the War domain cleric a strength build then the Arcane Trickster should easily be considered an Int build since he gets more advantage from a high Int than the cleric in those domains gets from Strength or Dex being primary.

I'm not disputing that the arcane trickster can be an Intelligence build; again, see upthread.

I'm a little confused here so I'll ask again... exactly what Rogue archetype are you trying to recreate where Dex should be lower than a 14? And at that point are you probably looking for a different class in the same way you had to take ranger as opposed to fighter in 4e to be a decent archer?

There is no need to suggest I'm not answering you. Let's be positive, please. Non-magical skill monkey/knowledge monkey is another possibility that naturally fits rogue but doesn't need Dex as primary. If you were around for the play test, you'll know that there were rogue builds that combined Dex and Cha, and one that was just Str. They backed away from that, for what I see as a simpler to play and less differentiated final product.

I'm very happy that the Dex rogue is there; I just wish there were more variety in the possible outcomes. I accept that you disagree! I hope this is clearer for you.

 

[Imaro]

I care about a particular aesthetic, and the cost of the drawback is minor compared to the expense of the aesthetic. I don't know that there is any way to quantify its importance to me to you.

Is it? I'm not so sure that's an accurate statement...

I rather have a tradeoff between choosing to invest in Int/Wis/Cha over choosing to invest in Dex. That means trading away some basic combat competences for some other worthwhile features. There will always be plenty of combat monsters playing D&D, Mastermind looks like a good start at bringing something else to the table. I just wish they had went a little bit further.

You still have the choice of that trade off in the game... it just doesn't affect the core competencies of your abilities. The problem with the method you suggest is how does the DM challenge your Int rogue whose traded out his combat competencies for other features without boring those who have much greater combat competencies and vice versa? Again I'm not seeing why it matters if you are getting abilities that align with the archetype you want to play and you can still choose to go higher in the attributes that fit your concept.... aren't those the ascetics right there?

Don't get me wrong, I like what they did with the mastermind. Just seeing it opens up a lot more possibilities.

Oh, I didn't assume you did or didn't like it... I am moreso curious about what is gained in tying the abilities to a trade off in combat competencies as opposed to giving you abilities that work for the most part irregardless of a trade off... especially in a game whose default is as combat heavy as D&D.

 

[Imaro]

I feel we're not really communicating effectively here. I do understand your perspective, but I don't agree it makes for more interesting characters. I even put a disclaimer at the end of my last post.

I don't think I stated it did or didn't make more interesting characters...

Don't magnify the problem ("two or more"). There is nothing wrong with a build needing to balance between two major stats, and the more interesting builds, in my opinion, allow for choice in that.

Even so just splitting between 2 means a large decrease in number of feats taken compared to classes that aren't MAD or in a reduced capability in combat due to attributes being generally lower...

And, for me, the more interesting classes require striking this balance: Barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, and to some extent Wizard. The Arcane Trickster does fit here, but at the expense of one of the few non-magical classes in the game.

If that's what you enjoy I can't argue with it... I'd rather be effective in combat and have my interesting abilities around my archetype... the abilities are where the diversity comes in for me, not what score they force me to increase... but to each his own.

I recognize that for many players diversity of builds is of less interest than it is for me.

But MAD is not a requirement in a build for it to be diverse... the Mastermind and the Assassin are Dex builds and I'd say they are pretty diverse in what they allow one to accomplish... Maybe this is where you are loosing me, You're stating X is necessary for diversity in builds but it's not...

You are correct that nothing in the Mastermind requires a high Intelligence. That's part of my point. It's a bad label.

I'd say the abilities it grants fit pretty well under the label... Reading over them reminds me of a Nathan Ford type character from Leverage...

II listed a variety upthread: thug, criminal mastermind, con artist, non-magical non-fighter.

Thug is a fighter (though you could do a strength build on a Rogue)... we have a mastermind build coming out, con-artist is a background and non-magical non-fighter is not really an archetype...

I The point was about heterogeneity.

You've missed the point. I can build viable clerics with a higher dexterity than wisdom (e.g. archer/crossbow-cleric) that don't have anything to do with the Trickster domain.

Are they viable? Or does a battlemaster fighter with the Archery style, maneuvers, longbow access, etc. totally overshadow/outclass them and now they are just mediocre spell casters and mediocre archers? Is that an interesting choice, because if these are viable and an interesting choice... well then I don't see the issue in you making a Strength rogue...

IThere is no need to suggest I'm not answering you. Let's be positive, please.

I think you're either reading more into what I posted or getting defensive here... I was making it clear that I knew I had asked this question earlier in my post and was asking it again... nothing negative and not inferring anything about an answer I hadn't read yet...

INon-magical skill monkey/knowledge monkey is another possibility that naturally fits rogue but doesn't need Dex as primary. If you were around for the play test, you'll know that there were rogue builds that combined Dex and Cha, and one that was just Str. They backed away from that, for what I see as a simpler to play and less differentiated final product.

But all of these are as viable as your archer Cleric above...

II'm very happy that the Dex rogue is there; I just wish there were more variety in the possible outcomes. I accept that you disagree! I hope this is clearer for you.

Well mark me down as someone who is more interested in the actual abilities of the subclass/archetype being diversified and allowing me to play the archetype to form while staying combat effective without forcing me to split between two different ability scores for concept (though nothing stops me from doing this if I want to)... But yeah, I think it's pretty clear where both of us stand on the issue.

 

[sleypy]

Is it? I'm not so sure that's an accurate statement...

You still have the choice of that trade off in the game... it just doesn't affect the core competencies of your abilities. The problem with the method you suggest is how does the DM challenge your Int rogue whose traded out his combat competencies for other features without boring those who have much greater combat competencies and vice versa? Again I'm not seeing why it matters if you are getting abilities that align with the archetype you want to play and you can still choose to go higher in the attributes that fit your concept.... aren't those the ascetics right there?

Your response indicates that the statement actually is accurate. The things you site as problems, in your last post, aren't problems at all to me, and those things you don't see as significant are significant to me. It's really that simple.

Despite being told to the contrary, I see more traps in campaigns that have rogues in the party. There are more knowledge based challenges in parties with wizards. There will be moments made harder, but there will also be moments made easier. Accomidating characters in a game that support the three pillars shouldn't be a overwhelming task.

Oh, I didn't assume you did or didn't like it... I am moreso curious about what is gained in tying the abilities to a trade off in combat competencies as opposed to giving you abilities that work for the most part irregardless of a trade off... especially in a game whose default is as combat heavy as D&D.

A subclass doesn't have to meet the demands of the defaults for D&D. There may be intrigues and investigations in Eberron or other adventure. The default expectation can and likely will change. Subclasses will (hopefully) fill those niches as well as the default.

 

[Imaro]

Your response indicates that the statement actually is accurate.

No it doesn't because I'm still having a hard time understanding what the aesthetic is that you value... again the Mastermind grants abilities that have nothing to do with being nimble or dexterous without sacrificing combat ability... what is missing from this that doesn't meet the criteria of your desires for aesthetics?

EDIT: In other words what is the gain in your method that is not gained in the other method without MAD?

 

[Shasarak]

My first thoughts: Wow, that guy has got a big head.

 

[sleypy]

No it doesn't because I'm still having a hard time understanding what the aesthetic is that you value... again the Mastermind grants abilities that have nothing to do with being nimble or dexterous without sacrificing combat ability... what is missing from this that doesn't meet the criteria of your desires for aesthetics?

EDIT: In other words what is the gain in your method that is not gained in the other method without MAD?

If what I have already said doesn't clarify it. Nothing I say in the future will make any difference.

 

[Imaro]

If what I have already said doesn't clarify it. Nothing I say in the future will make any difference.

*shrug*... Uhm. Ok.

 

[sleypy]

*shrug*... Uhm. Ok.

I'll try this one more time, but I feel like we will just keep going around in circles.

• The mastermind features are described as being about intelligence and charisma which is good.
• I prefer to having a good intelligence or charisma ability scores contribute to features describe as being based off those stats. (That is what is missing.)
• I would have liked the sub-class to have gutted rogue more and add more mastermind features.
• Wanting mental scores to contribute to mental features might lead to the sub-class being MAD, however, that is an ancillary concern to me. I really don't care if the issue exists or how it ultimately gets dealt with.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I'll try this one more time, but I feel like we will just keep going around in circles.

• The mastermind features are described as being about intelligence and charisma which is good.
• I prefer to having a good intelligence or charisma ability scores contribute to features describe as being based off those stats. (That is what is missing.)
• I would have liked the sub-class to have gutted rogue more and add more mastermind features.
• Wanting mental scores to contribute to mental features might lead to the sub-class being MAD, however, that is an ancillary concern to me. I really don't care if the issue exists or how it ultimately gets dealt with.

Wait. But all of the Mastermind features that use stats are based off of Charisma and Intelligence, according to the PHB.

Disguise kit: Charisma.
Forgery: Intelligence.
Gaming: presumably Intelligence (Chess) or Charisma (Poker) although I guess you could pick Horseshoes (Dexterity).
Mimic accents: useful mainly for Charisma (Deception).
Master of Tactics: no stat dependency
Insightful Manipulator: no stat dependency (but does give info relative to your own stats; maybe more useful if your stats are low-ish so you get greater discrimination)
Misdirection: no stat dependency
Soul of Deceit: Charisma (Deception)