bedir than
Full Moon Storyteller
My speculation is that the pdf's url is going to be "the big one"
For me, it's more of a case that there are different classic rogue archetypes that should all be equally playable and therefore equally common. If dual wielding has no opportunity cost, will there ever be any circumstance in which a player would not play a dual wielding rogue? Any other archetypes could be dead in the water.I play a LOT of rogues and while I never found that dilemma to be frustrating, I never found it to be interesting, either. OTOH, As a DM, I have had to remind rogue players that they couldn't disengage after attacking with two weapons. (Many of my players are either less experienced with the game or just more... casual about the rules than I am). I'd rather not have to do that. YMMV.
I... really don't see that being the case here, but I get your concern. It would help if they could wield two handed weapons (oh no! so broken! /s) or had something else to do with an empty off-hand (filch?).For me, it's more of a case that there are different classic rogue archetypes that should all be equally playable and therefore equally common. If dual wielding has no opportunity cost, will there ever be any circumstance in which a player would not play a dual wielding rogue? Any other archetypes could be dead in the water.
Most people can't disengage after attacking once, let alone twice, although swashbuckler rogues or those with the mobile feat could still do both I suppose. If you mix too many colours together though, you just end up with everything being brown.
As someone who has been playing for 30+ years, I think this edition does a great job of representing many different 'classic' types of rogue. While I agree that you could give added support to other archetypes, I'm not sure what form that could or should take. I don't see people complaining about the rogue in general - it's one of the more popular classes and great fun to play. Similarly, I have seen plenty of dual-wielding rogues, even at the cost of the bonus action, which suggests to me that the cost does not always outweigh the benefit. It's more a case that dual-wielding rogue players would rather avoid the cost. The death of the single dagger sneaky rogue would be a shame.I... really don't see that being the case here, but I get your concern. It would help if they could wield two handed weapons (oh no! so broken! /s) or had something else to do with an empty off-hand (filch?).
Honestly, if there's anything threatening your 'other archetypes', I think you'll find it's lack of support for THEM, not a tiny boost to dual-wielding.
My friend ran a post-apocalypse Marvel game for me in 3e for my birthday. We met a memory scrambled Wolverine, and I was carrying a heavily painted-over Captain America shield. It was great.we not only did this but we ran an Xmen light game that way
I’ve no problem with advanced fighting styles, but I think it’s place to be careful.But OVERSIZED WEAPONS!!!!
- Archery
- Defense
- Dueling
- Great Weapon Fighting
- Protection
- Two Weapon Fighting
Advanced Fighting Styles
- Close Quarter Fighting
- Combat Superiority
- Combat Agility
- Monkey Grip
- Phalanx Fighting
- Quick Draw Fighting
- Tempest
- Zen Archery
Agreed. Giving rogues a benefit to having a free hand vs dual wielding vs using a bow would really open the class up for the people who can’t help but try to win character creation.I... really don't see that being the case here, but I get your concern. It would help if they could wield two handed weapons (oh no! so broken! /s) or had something else to do with an empty off-hand (filch?).
Honestly, if there's anything threatening your 'other archetypes', I think you'll find it's lack of support for THEM, not a tiny boost to dual-wielding.
I don't care if my rogue can dual weild but if the ranger doesn't get that ability then I will be more than a little upset.That's just it, we never saw it as 'wasteing' infact it was a hard choice to Cunning action OR two weapon fight from turn to turn, and now the choice is "I can do both"
it feels like a free extra that wasn't needed
I don't care if my rogue can dual weild but if the ranger doesn't get that ability then I will be more than a little upset.
this is what I mean, most rogues are using short swords or knife as concept, so there is no cost to just adding a second one. RIght now somewhere around half maybe a little less then half the rouges I see wield two weapons, and when they do they have to choose how to spend that bonus action. If this goes through I expext 90% or more of rouges to fight with 2 light weapons.I... really don't see that being the case here, but I get your concern. It would help if they could wield two handed weapons (oh no! so broken! /s) or had something else to do with an empty off-hand (filch?).
Honestly, if there's anything threatening your 'other archetypes', I think you'll find it's lack of support for THEM, not a tiny boost to dual-wielding.