Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 5982328" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Zorro, D'artagnon, The Dread Pirate Roberts (Wesley), Inigo Montoya, etc.&nbsp; The infamous, lightly-armored, nimble, graceful, agile, skirmisher, who uses a Finesse weapon in one hand and nothing in the other (or a buckler).&nbsp; In its most bare essentials, the archetype must possess a certain panache and guile, be a master swordsman, and move with the uncanny grace and agility of an Olympic Floor Exercise Gold Medalist.&nbsp; In editions prior to 3e, the mechanical infrastructure supported this archetype with limited success (at best).&nbsp; In the last 2 editions, the archetype has been a natural fit for the Rogue class, supported by its proficiencies, features, powers, feats, paragon paths, prestige classes.&nbsp; The Fighter mechanics&nbsp; of the last 2 editions supported it nominally (with some specific builds being better than others), but for the most part, the Rogue's mechanics more organically supported the archetype.The current base Rogue mechanics appear to be premised upon more 1e and 2e conventions rather than the more broad interpretation of the class (which supported martial archetypes as well as the subterfuge archetypes of the spy, cut-purse, cat-burglar, thief acrobat, etc) found in 3e and 4e.&nbsp; That being said, the current base Fighter is also an odd fit as it appears to presuppose a leveraging of heavy armor proficiency and Strength as primary attribute, which obviously is at odds with two of the fundamentals of the archetype.&nbsp; Given what we have seen of the 2 classes (Rogue and Fighter) in the playtest thus far, do you guys think that its more likely that WotC will work out a future Rogue build that supports this archetype (obviously through currently unavailable means as the martial platform upon which the archetype is built is unrepresented in this 5e playtest Rogue), or do you think the trend will be overturned and it will best be created via the&nbsp; Fighter class with the proper Background and Theme (or whatever&nbsp; incarnation it will be by release)?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 5982328, member: 6696971"] Zorro, D'artagnon, The Dread Pirate Roberts (Wesley), Inigo Montoya, etc. The infamous, lightly-armored, nimble, graceful, agile, skirmisher, who uses a Finesse weapon in one hand and nothing in the other (or a buckler). In its most bare essentials, the archetype must possess a certain panache and guile, be a master swordsman, and move with the uncanny grace and agility of an Olympic Floor Exercise Gold Medalist. In editions prior to 3e, the mechanical infrastructure supported this archetype with limited success (at best). In the last 2 editions, the archetype has been a natural fit for the Rogue class, supported by its proficiencies, features, powers, feats, paragon paths, prestige classes. The Fighter mechanics of the last 2 editions supported it nominally (with some specific builds being better than others), but for the most part, the Rogue's mechanics more organically supported the archetype. The current base Rogue mechanics appear to be premised upon more 1e and 2e conventions rather than the more broad interpretation of the class (which supported martial archetypes as well as the subterfuge archetypes of the spy, cut-purse, cat-burglar, thief acrobat, etc) found in 3e and 4e. That being said, the current base Fighter is also an odd fit as it appears to presuppose a leveraging of heavy armor proficiency and Strength as primary attribute, which obviously is at odds with two of the fundamentals of the archetype. Given what we have seen of the 2 classes (Rogue and Fighter) in the playtest thus far, do you guys think that its more likely that WotC will work out a future Rogue build that supports this archetype (obviously through currently unavailable means as the martial platform upon which the archetype is built is unrepresented in this 5e playtest Rogue), or do you think the trend will be overturned and it will best be created via the Fighter class with the proper Background and Theme (or whatever incarnation it will be by release)? [/QUOTE]

Verification