D&D 4E The 4E Rogue...love it or hate it?

[Fallen Seraph]

I love it, I am worried about a couple things but I am sure they are things that will be settled with the final PHB.

 

[Primal]

I do not like the very specific weapon proficiencies.

I do not like the "mandatory" skills: Stealth and Thievery. (I am also pretty sure I'm not going to like the skill system in general, but we're only dealing with the rogue class at the moment, right?)

I do not like the build options. "Choose one from Menu A."

I do not like catching your opponents flat-footed (oh, sorry...I mean, "First Strike") as a class ability.

I don't like sneak attack being limited to once/round, and I really don't like it being limited to light blades, crossbows, and slings.

I don't like Tumble being an ability instead of a skill, and I really don't like it being a per-encounter ability.

I do like the fixed hit points and Positioning Strike ability. Sadly, that's about it.

I feel the same on all your points *except* the last one -- I don't like static HPs. I'd also add another thing I dislike: it seems the combat rules will be *much* more complex than in 3E. It's not inherently a bad thing, but wasn't one of the design goals to streamline combat? I don't think that losing some dice rolls (such as confirming for criticals) will do that, if you're adding whole new tactical layers to it.

 

[Simon Marks]

I'd also add another thing I dislike: it seems the combat rules will be *much* more complex than in 3E. It's not inherently a bad thing, but wasn't one of the design goals to streamline combat? I don't think that losing some dice rolls (such as confirming for criticals) will do that, if you're adding whole new tactical layers to it.

Streamlined is not the same as simple.

Streamlined, without drag.

Simple, without complexity.

You can have one without the other. (Or, in fact, both)

 

[frankthedm]

It is positively Nerfalicious! Sneak attack is finally made sane again. No more improved invisible TWF death hurricanes. Noticeable damage, but not so ridiculous it will make a fighter hang up his Zweihänder.

 

[Colmarr]

I do not like the build options. "Choose one from Menu A."

I've seen this argument a few times now and have to admit that I don't understand it. The 4e rogue offers 2 distinct combat "approaches", which will then presumably be further diferentiated by choice of powers (such as choosing between Deft Strike and Positioning Strike). Just from that alone, and at only 1st level, there are already at least 4 possible rogue combat builds.

How many were there for a first level 3e rogue? I've never played one, but I can only think of 2 - the flanker and the feinter.

So "straight out of the box", 4e is offering more choice to rogue players, not less. Care to expand on why I'm wrong, or exactly why it is that the build options irritate you?

 

[frankthedm]

I've seen this argument a few times now and have to admit that I don't understand it. The 4e rogue offers 2 distinct combat "approaches", which will then presumably be further diferentiated by choice of powers (such as choosing between Deft Strike and Positioning Strike). Just from that alone, and at only 1st level, there are already at least 4 possible rogue combat builds.

Well, some folks react bad to offers of hand holding.

Also, by having two groupings of abilities, it allows special abilities to be separated by the class divide. This can ensure certain potent abilities can be granted, but also ensures they can never be combeod. Thus a quick rogue could get Alpha strike and a brawny rogue could get Omega strike, but nobody gets the Alpha-Omega combo.

 

[Jdvn1]

I don't like required skills and limitations on weapons.

I do like the builds, the powers, the fixed hp/level... just about everything else. Overall, more like than dislike.

I don't know why people dislike builds. They make making characters easier and faster, and they don't restrict you in anyway as you can choose to go an entirely different route and ignore builds. They're a tool to make character building easier (and, NPC building easier!) and also help new players make decent decisions.

The only argument I could see about builds is, "They'd be better as Web Enhancements," though I'm not sure about that, as new players are less likely to look for and use web enhancements.

 

[nick012000]

How many were there for a first level 3e rogue? I've never played one, but I can only think of 2 - the flanker and the feinter.

Don't forget the two weapon fighter and the archer.

 

[Wormwood]

Leaning toward liking it.

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

Don't like it one bit, it's a step back towards 2e the game that caused me to abandon ship for several years. But meh I've got my 3e have what you like, just don't expect everybody to jump on the bandwagon with you.

I've noticed the 4e polls showing roughly a quarter to half the responders don't like it. Assuming this carries over into the wider gaming audience (a huge assumption I know) 4e could lose a huge segment of the existing player base. Yet I don't know where they expect to replace it from given how niche PNP RPGs are and the lack of marketing to draw attention.