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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8726948" data-attributes="member: 18">I think what you're proposing is a pretty bad idea for two simple reasons:1) It would make the Rogue truly useless in the Combat pillar of the game. Combat is the most well-developed pillar of the game, and most well-balanced, where all classes genuinely do get to participate. What you're proposing would prevent the Rogue from genuinely participating. They'd be barely more than a bystander or a "Help action" robot (so like a familiar with a lot of HP...).2) It still wouldn't make the Rogue a "skill monkey", because the Rogue wouldn't have the stats to support the skills, all they'd be doing would be treading on the toes of other classes. I mean, a skill-monkey Rogue maybe has high INT and CHA, so that gives them a lot of skills, but once they've got those skills, what else? They'll just be mediocre at everything else. Other PCs will likely be better - the Rogue will just be good enough to be kind of annoying."More proficiencies" is not the fix. Proficiency in a skill just isn't that great. Gaining Expertise is a bit better, but then all that happens is you completely stamp on the Feat of other PCs with those skills. So you took Arcana Expertise, and now the Wizard can eat it. You took Nature Expertise, and now the Druid and Ranger can get stuffed, and so on.Yet you'd still get outclassed completely whenever magic entered the picture. So you wouldn't even be that great. Just really annoying.This is basically taking a wrecking ball to 5E class design and hoping the rubble makes a building.</blockquote>

Verification