Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Imp" data-source="post: 3593937" data-attributes="member: 40094">I have been thinking about this a bit and have come to the same conclusion.&nbsp; It seems like rogue and fighter are not really separate archetypes (or whatever term we're using) but rather two ends of the generic &quot;fantasy hero&quot; continuum.&nbsp; (The rogue isn't nearly as fragile or ineffectual as the AD&amp;D thief.)&nbsp; I want a guy that does nothing but dedicate himself to weapons!&nbsp; I choose fighter!&nbsp; I want a guy who adapts well to a variety of challenges and knows a lot of clever tricks!&nbsp; I choose rogue!&nbsp; I want to simulate the Grey Mouser/ Fafhrd/ Conan/ Bilbo/ Odysseus!&nbsp; Looks like I gotta use both.&nbsp; But you'll always have people who want to be the monomaniacal weapon master or the hyper-capable jack-of-all-trades.&nbsp; So do you allow for this by having two classes representing either end of the scale, or one class that allows a bunch of customizations?&nbsp; Is there really a difference?...on traps.&nbsp; Trapfinding is kind of boring, but trap-disabling, or trap-bypassing (which should be by far the more common scenario) ought to involve more teamwork.&nbsp; The trap skill should involve sussing out the mechanics of a trap.&nbsp; Disabling it, or taking part in disabling it, should be something other players can help with.Bridge, chasm, door on other side, walls on either side 30' away.&nbsp; Rogue-type checks it out, finds a trap.&nbsp; The bridge is made of pressure plates.&nbsp; The pressure plates cannot be removed without dismantling the bridge.&nbsp; But there are suspicious little holes in the walls on either side and the rogue thinks they're arrow traps.&nbsp; The party can try prematurely triggering the plates (by tossing enough weight on them, which the strongman can do; or the rogue can trigger them and jump back, getting a bonus on the reflex save) or the rogue can point out the holes to the archer, who can plug 'em with arrows, or to the druid, who stone-shapes over them, or etc. and so on.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Imp, post: 3593937, member: 40094"] I have been thinking about this a bit and have come to the same conclusion. It seems like rogue and fighter are not really separate archetypes (or whatever term we're using) but rather two ends of the generic "fantasy hero" continuum. (The rogue isn't nearly as fragile or ineffectual as the AD&D thief.) I want a guy that does [i]nothing[/i] but dedicate himself to weapons! I choose fighter! I want a guy who adapts well to a variety of challenges and knows a lot of clever tricks! I choose rogue! I want to simulate the Grey Mouser/ Fafhrd/ Conan/ Bilbo/ Odysseus! Looks like I gotta use both. But you'll always have people who want to be the monomaniacal weapon master or the hyper-capable jack-of-all-trades. So do you allow for this by having two classes representing either end of the scale, or one class that allows a bunch of customizations? Is there really a difference? ...on traps. Trapfinding is kind of boring, but trap-disabling, or trap-bypassing (which should be by far the more common scenario) ought to involve more teamwork. The trap skill should involve sussing out the mechanics of a trap. Disabling it, or taking part in disabling it, should be something other players can help with. Bridge, chasm, door on other side, walls on either side 30' away. Rogue-type checks it out, finds a trap. The bridge is made of pressure plates. The pressure plates cannot be removed without dismantling the bridge. But there are suspicious little holes in the walls on either side and the rogue thinks they're arrow traps. The party can try prematurely triggering the plates (by tossing enough weight on them, which the strongman can do; or the rogue can trigger them and jump back, getting a bonus on the reflex save) or the rogue can point out the holes to the archer, who can plug 'em with arrows, or to the druid, who stone-shapes over them, or etc. and so on. [/QUOTE]

Verification