Scott Rouse blog - Rogue ability

[mmu1]

Well, I hope they cut a bit back on the words "cool" and "fun", because I read them a bit too often. But to my luck, the rest of the blog posts are usually pretty interesting (and convincing) too me.

I wonder also if the sentence would have sounded better to you if he would have used the name used for the attack/maneuver. (I mean, Sneak Attack sounds a bit better than "the cool nameless attack that lets me deal extra damage when I take a specific position").

It might also be a problem that the Designers are just too much inside the design ideas, and are thus describing this more from the designer view than from the view a normal player would describe it. It's possible that it feels a lot less "gamist" when actually done in play.
But that's might not be the case (and I suspect so). I suppose these abilities are more like spells for non-spellcasters. Spells in D&D are interesting, but a individual spell is usually inflexible and are pretty "gamist" thing. If it feels to gamist/artificial, this might be the first real design flaw I can see with D&D 4. But I remain optimistic, because too many other things sound interesting and well thought out to me...

It's certainly possible that in context, it will end up working just fine. However, I do think that as these sneak peeks come out, we're definitely seeing more abilities which are increasingly "artificial" (probably a better term than "gamist", I don't really like the whole GNS idea but it's just gotten so ubiquitous) - they might have no real meaning outside the new edition's combat mechanics, and no use other than the specific combat situation they're designed for.

3E does that too, sure, but I'd have liked to see the trend go in the opposite direction.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

When a term is co-opted by a particular group, it becomes jargon and identified with that group regardless of its origins.

Unless one uses the word in a different sense than the definition of the jargon term, and especially if one is unaware of the meaning of the jargon term. Or should I start going around telling non-biologists that they're using the word "selection" wrong.

 

[Someone]

We finally broke out into the room and then we had to call it because a few players had to pick up kids in the daycare.

So you can't play 4th edition unless you have children?


(Well, this logic isn't as mangled as other statements I've seen lately)

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Best....monster name...ever....I'm STILL chuckling. Thank you Elvenshae!

Welcome!

I'm rather proud of it, myself. It has an appropriately MMORPGish ring to it, doesn't it?

 

[The Little Raven]

Yep.

Though it's possible the hobgoblins were trying to gain experience by grinding adventurers over and over again.

...or perhaps just their bones to make their bread?

Oh yeah, and while this is off-topic, you did a bang-up job on Changeling.

 

[Simia Saturnalia]

Welcome!

I'm rather proud of it, myself. It has an appropriately MMORPGish ring to it, doesn't it?

It really is. (Bizarre descriptor) (noun)(Earth animal) is pretty much the formula.

 

[The Little Raven]

Just that I don't want to see 4E moving even farther in that direction - and with a lot of these "spells for non-casters", it's exactly what it seems to be doing.

In what direction? Providing enough interesting abilities for all characters of all types so that they can always be cool within their role? Making combat maneuvers easier to learn and categorize to keep you on par with spellcasters in particular ways?

If those are the direction you're talking about, I don't see anything wrong with that.

 

[TwoSix]

In what direction? Providing enough interesting abilities for all characters of all types so that they can always be cool within their role? Making combat maneuvers easier to learn and categorize to keep you on par with spellcasters in particular ways?

If those are the direction you're talking about, I don't see anything wrong with that.

I'm more interpreting it as he wants fewer abilities, but those abilities are more flexible in their application.

I don't actually agree, but I'm a dirty, dirty gamist.

 

[FadedC]

I think the 15' foot move is potentially an important part of their defined class roles. Previously a big problem that rogues had was that they would run up to the enemy, do a bunch of damage and then have to pray that the enemy did not turn around and tear them into meaty chunks because they had little defence and low hit points.

Now with the rogue designed to be a striker and the fighter as a defender, the rogue has a way to attack while still having the defender be the only one in melee range to the enemy. Thus their class rolls are maintained.

 

[Barastrondo]

...or perhaps just their bones to make their bread?

That's actually pretty close to how I'll run hobgoblins, weirdly enough. I'm the weird guy out who doesn't use hobgoblins in their militaristic fashion that is so popular, but rather uses all the goblinoids as more classically fey-type goblins. Froud and Diterlizzi-type stuff.

Oh yeah, and while this is off-topic, you did a bang-up job on Changeling.

Thanks very much!