D&D 5E Split the Assassin from the Rogue back into its own class

[DND_Reborn]

I guess one mechanic for an artificing rogue would be if each infusion "consumes" a sneak attack die.

Interesting thought.

It makes me wonder if SA dice could be used in other fashions. I mean, I don't mind a Rogue class, but it bothers me that most people play them as so focused on combat and the SA damage. I like to play Rogues who are primarily skill experts, who can fight, but are usually more part of a party due to their skills. I like them more like the "Expert" sidekick class.

 

[Minigiant]

Interesting thought.

It makes me wonder if SA dice could be used in other fashions. I mean, I don't mind a Rogue class, but it bothers me that most people play them as so focused on combat and the SA damage. I like to play Rogues who are primarily skill experts, who can fight, but are usually more part of a party due to their skills. I like them more like the "Expert" sidekick class.

Well that's kinda my point.

The Thief and the Assassin shouldn't be the same class.
But everyone is saying "Keeping the Killer in the Rogue".
If you say the "All nonspellcasting nonwarrior are Rogues, then every street urchin who dreams big and adventuring scholar looking for experiences and lost treasure is also STABBY "THE KILLER" MCMURDERFACE.

Well you can't have your cake and eat it too.

 

[Staffan]

That would have been a better approach IMO. A tinker-type who learns to infuse objects with magic, but can't actually cast spells would have been a much better approach, both thematically and balance-wise.

That is how artificer casting works, lore-wise: "You have studied the workings of magic and how to channel it through objects. As a result, you have gained the ability to cast spells. To observers, you don’t appear to be casting spells in a conventional way; you look as if you’re producing wonders using mundane items or outlandish inventions."

So an artificer doesn't "cast" cure wounds, they apply an alchemical poultice. They don't "cast" fireball, they throw a grenade. This was a clearer distinction in 3e, where the artificer list was like 75% buff spells and they all came with the minor limitation that you couldn't cast them directly at a living target, but you instead infused an item with magic that would buff the wearer. Essentially, while you would mechanically cast shield of faith, you'd really be jury-rigging a temporary ring of protection.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

But everyone is saying "Keeping the Killer in the Rogue".

Because it's a combat focused game. If you take away sneak attack from the rogue you have to give them some other way of being really good at killing people. In early editions rogues where bad at combat, but you had to take one anyway since they where the only character who could open locks and disarm traps. This was almost universally called BAD DESIGN.

 

[Minigiant]

Because it's a combat focused game. If you take away sneak attack from the rogue you have to give them some other way of being really good at killing people. In early editions rogues where bad at combat, but you had to take one anyway since they where the only character who could open locks and disarm traps. This was almost universally called BAD DESIGN.

Who said take Sneak Attack from the rogue?

Just level spell slots have levels and progression, so could Sneak attack.

An assassin could be a Full Sneak Attacker
A rogue would be 3/4 SAer
An expert could be a 1/2 SAer
A fighter with a thug subclass could be a 1/3 sneak attacker.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Who said take Sneak Attack from the rogue?

You.

Just level spell slots have levels and progression, so could Sneak attack.

An assassin could be a Full Sneak Attacker
A rogue would be 3/4 SAer
An expert could be a 1/2 SAer
A fighter with a thug subclass could be a 1/3 sneak attacker.

So what way of killing people are you giving classes without full sneak attack? If it's not just as good no one will play them (unless you force them to with the only this class can overcome this obstacle trick).

Note that the expert is an NPC class specifically because it is not as good at killing.

 

[DND_Reborn]

That is how artificer casting works, lore-wise: "You have studied the workings of magic and how to channel it through objects. As a result, you have gained the ability to cast spells. To observers, you don’t appear to be casting spells in a conventional way; you look as if you’re producing wonders using mundane items or outlandish inventions."

So an artificer doesn't "cast" cure wounds, they apply an alchemical poultice. They don't "cast" fireball, they throw a grenade. This was a clearer distinction in 3e, where the artificer list was like 75% buff spells and they all came with the minor limitation that you couldn't cast them directly at a living target, but you instead infused an item with magic that would buff the wearer. Essentially, while you would mechanically cast shield of faith, you'd really be jury-rigging a temporary ring of protection.

Yeah, I get the lore-wise aspect, but I don't want them infusing spells either. It is like with psionics. You could do psionics "spell-like" or create something new/ unique for them. Artificers should be the same to really separate them from spell casters.

The hard part is so much was given to spells, it cramps everything else.

Anyway, the thread digresses...

 

[Minigiant]

You.

No I didn't.

I said the Thief and Assassin shouldn't really be the same class. That street urchins would not automatically upgrade into Agent 47.

But I never said take away Sneak attack.

So what way of killing people are you giving characters without full sneak attack? If it's not just as good no one will play them.

There are many options to make a character combat viable but not really on Sneak Attack.

Any good game designer can do it.
Heck, I thought up 3 while typing this post.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

That street urchins would not automatically upgrade into Agent 47.

It's called levelling up. It's pretty central to D&D.

There are many options to make a character combat viable but not really on Sneak Attack.

1) Attack more times;
2) Magic;
3) ?

 

[Minigiant]

It's called levelling up. It's pretty central to D&D.

1) Attack more times;
2) Magic;
3) ?

1. Cultural Weaponry
2. Noble Weaponry
3. Precise Attack
4. Skirmish Attack
5. Battle Command
6. Heedless Strike
7. Acrobatic Defense
8. Weapon Tosser

I'm at 8 ideas now
And that's before you steal ideas in TCOE or go magic