Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pming" data-source="post: 6461377" data-attributes="member: 45197">Hiya.  In another thread, someone mentioned "The rogue is supposed to be a top martial damage dealer". I'm curious as to when this idea started. I'm thinking it started either around the "2.5e" Skills & Powers, or 3e, because when I started playing, the Thief class was absolutely NOT even near the "top damage dealer" except in one specific, not-so-easy-to-get-off situations (re: when he successfully made a Move Silently and Hide in Shadows check from a position where he could actually be able to even attempt that...and then hit with his Backstab).  Thieves, when I started playing the game, had but d4 for HP and the second worse AC in the game...in the thick of combat was not where a thief wanted to be, that's for dang sure! A thief was a good "range" fighter, however. If there was a big bad monster, the fighter would be right up there, the cleric right behind him, then the thief standing next to the magic-user a safe distance away. When did this change?I have other theories as to why some folks think of "rogue = best damage", but for fear of starting a flame war I'll remain silent.  How many others out there think the thief should be doing as much or more damage than the fighter?^_^Paul L. Ming</blockquote>