Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kobold Stew" data-source="post: 7682636" data-attributes="member: 23484">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.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. You are correct that nothing in the Mastermind requires a high Intelligence. That's part of my point. It's a bad label. I listed a variety upthread: thug, criminal mastermind, con artist, non-magical non-fighter.  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.  I'm not disputing that the arcane trickster can be an Intelligence build; again, see upthread. 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! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  I hope this is clearer for you.</blockquote>

Verification