Rogues automatically suceed at Hard Tasks

log in or register to remove this ad


You're just stating how it is as justification for it being that way. Why should the rogue be the "skill expert?" Skills are something everyone has. Why should rogues be better at it than anyone else? They have many other niches they can fill that are far less boring and controversial.

I find that the Rogue class being the best at skill use far from controversial. After all... that's why we HAVE a Rogue class. A class that is designed specifically to be the best at using those skills they are trained in. That's what the class is about. It's not just breadth of knowledge, it's also depth.

In fact... I'd almost posit that Rogues perhaps shouldn't even have as much breadth in trained skills, as that seems more in line with the Bard-- what with all the Bardic Knowledge as such. Rogues know MORE about the skills they are trained in, Bards know more stuff altogether. (Although admittedly if you use a set skill list the bard's need for depth within a party is minimized, as you'll usually end up with at least some member of the party covering most of the skills on the list in some form or fashion.)


The real problem here is that the "take 10" minimum is too high. It leaves the rogue with a huge gap between the checks they can succeed at automatically (where they have to roll a 10) and the checks that have a maximum success of 50% (where they have to roll an 11).

The Knack ability can mitigate this problem, but I would be inclined to start with a lower minimum roll so low-level rogues only auto-succeed on DC 14 or 15 checks.


On the one hand, auto-lockpicking without a chance of failure is kinda annoying as a DM and anticlimactic as a player.
On the other hand, having the story hit a wall because the rogue failed to pick a lock is pure frustration, especially if it happens half the time.

Maybe a "1" still fails. 2-9 become a 10 but you have that small chance of flubbing.


They have many other niches they can fill that are far less boring and controversial.


It would be cool, for example, if they let rogues trade sneak attack damage for special attacks the same way fighters can give up combat superiority dice. Things like inflicting Bleed damage, blinding foes, disrupting spellcasting and other dirty tricks are things I'd like to see them be able to do. I'd also like to see them get choices of other cool special abilities, like evasion, hide in plain sight, disguise, forgery, and use magic device, to name a few. Those things are, IMO, alot cooler and more distinctive than "I can take 10 on any skill!"

Eh, the rogue is already too much of an assassin for my taste, don't push it even farther that way. So I would find that controversial.

I like the rogue as a dungeon troubleshooter, so just letting them succeed on basic skill checks works very well for me. Now if a rogue can succeed on basic stealth almost all of the time so he can finally be a scout, then I'll be pretty happy.


I'd make rogues to have +2 to skills, instead of +3.
It gives you some incentive to put a high score in, say, wisdom, to search for traps or say, Charisma, to bluff people. With a guaranteed +3, your score is usless unless it's a +4, which seems way too high.

It also makes rogues competent (the equivalent of a score of 15), but not overwhelmingly so (+3 is the equivalent of 17, the lowest of steet rats is the equivalent of almost the most competent person in the world). It's fair to assume that a rogue knows a bit of chemistry to build blind powders, but saying he is better at chemistry than anyone, but the Nobel Prize, is maybe too much.
Last edited:

Remove ads