Rogue Mastermind Archetype Up, Courtesy of Extra Life

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

 

[Aldarc]

I just don't like the aesthetics of a puny 8 strength/ 8 dexterity character whose able to handily trounce a warrior with 18's in strength and dexterity in combat because of Charisma or Intelligence...

Ever watch the gladiator fight in Life of Brian?

 

[TwoSix]

What are AT's? Eh... I'm not sure I like the idea of casters also drawing on their magical ability score for physical combat. I think their versatility is what they are paying for in having to keep up more than one stat... and usually their magic (at least in so far as the paladin and ranger are concerned more than make up for a slight dip in their main attack stat.

Arcane Tricksters. And I wasn't talking about casters like Wizards or Warlocks using it, I was talking about subclasses of Fighters or Rogues getting it. So they wouldn't be gaining much versatility, they would simply have a different aesthetic.

I just don't like the aesthetics of a puny 8 strength/ 8 dexterity character whose able to handily trounce a warrior with 18's in strength and dexterity in combat because of Charisma or Intelligence...

See, I totally love it. Two of my last Pathfinder characters were a swordsman who relied on his preternatural intuition (high-Wisdom) for his combat skill, and a magical princess who used her overwhelming cuteness to encourage enemies to leave her alone. (Charisma bonus to AC and saves.) I think it's a question of what tropes you're trying to emulate, I have a strong dislike for S&S tropes so I'm always pushing in a more modern fantasy direction.

 

[Imaro]

Ever watch the gladiator fight in Life of Brian?

That's a Monty Python comedy right? Sorry but that's not what I'm usually going for in my D&D games.

 

[Imaro]

Arcane Tricksters. And I wasn't talking about casters like Wizards or Warlocks using it, I was talking about subclasses of Fighters or Rogues getting it. So they wouldn't be gaining much versatility, they would simply have a different aesthetic.

Ah... ok should've realized you were speaking about Arcane Tricksters. Well AT's and EK are casters and I think the whole casts spells and fights with Int thing could be potentially unbalancing.

See, I totally love it. Two of my last Pathfinder characters were a swordsman who relied on his preternatural intuition (high-Wisdom) for his combat skill, and a magical princess who used her overwhelming cuteness to encourage enemies to leave her alone. (Charisma bonus to AC and saves.) I think it's a question of what tropes you're trying to emulate, I have a strong dislike for S&S tropes so I'm always pushing in a more modern fantasy direction.

See I would have no problem with the swordsman who relied on preternatural intuition to enhance his combat skill through abilities that allowed his Wisdom to enhance it (but not actually be his combat skill). At a certain level I feel you have to have a baseline level of physical ability for a physical fight. The other character you give seems to me better represented by either her talking her way out of a fight before it happens or being able to redirect attacks, misdirect enemies, etc using Cha checks... but I don't want Charisma as a substitute for Dexterity as a combat attribute.

 

[sleypy]

Even when people say things aren't about combat........they're always really about combat. You gotta read between the lines.

What you're saying is partially correct. Different people will draw the line at difference places.

For me, I strongly dislike the idea of mental stats replacing Strength or Dexterity on attack rolls and damage rolls. However, if the help action gave the ally bonuses to damage based on Intelligence, I would like something like that.

I like almost everything about the mastermind. It would be more appealing if its unique features keyed off Intelligence. It would make choosing Intelligence as a primary score more compelling without making it strictly better.

 

[Aldarc]

That's a Monty Python comedy right? Sorry but that's not what I'm usually going for in my D&D games.

Instead, you prefer your "puny 8 strength/ 8 dexterity character whose able to handily trounce a warrior with 18's in strength and dexterity in combat because of Charisma or Intelligence..." to be bards and wizards?

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Instead, you prefer your "puny 8 strength/ 8 dexterity character whose able to handily trounce a warrior with 18's in strength and dexterity in combat because of Charisma or Intelligence..." to be bards and wizards?

How so? I believe you are making a lot of arbitrary, and possibly faulty, assumptions. What makes you think bards and wizards are handily able to beat comparable warrior-types? Because, at least in 5e, my considerable experience would lead me to believe otherwise.

 

[Imaro]

Instead, you prefer your "puny 8 strength/ 8 dexterity character whose able to handily trounce a warrior with 18's in strength and dexterity in combat because of Charisma or Intelligence..." to be bards and wizards?

Well first off in 5e this isn't a given, most warriors are going to trounce a wizard or bard with an 8 Dex (especially a warrior with high Dex and high initiative, see how that works unless of course the caster substitutes their casting ability for Dex)...

Second... yeah, magic does make sense to me... and it keeps all stats relevant.

 

[Aldarc]

How so? I believe you are making a lot of arbitrary, and possibly faulty, assumptions. What makes you think bards and wizards are handily able to beat comparable warrior-types? Because, at least in 5e, my considerable experience would lead me to believe otherwise.

What do you mean by "how so"? In case you haven't noticed, I'm the one asking a question. I was curious.

 

[Imaro]

What do you mean by "how so"? In case you haven't noticed, I'm the one asking a question. I was curious.

You worded the "question" with certain assumptions as if they were givens. If they weren't why word it like that?