Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 4069351" data-attributes="member: 18">Yet another silly binary poll sigh. "I wanted to get people to get off the fence lolz!" is no longer a real excuse for these <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />I voted Hate, because the poll is silly and binary, and it thus amplifies the already considerable dislike I feel towards certain elements of the new Rogue.I mean, let me lay them out: Role: Doesn't mention anything outside of combat. Surely it should be titled "combat role", then? The whole text seems hyper-focused on combat, which is kinda lame.Weapon proficiencies: Limited and BIZARRE. What, every Rogue EVER knows how to use hand crossbows and shuriken, weapons that might not even be in quite a number of campaigns? And not shortbows? Unless it's extremely easy to acquire more WPs, this is a really stupid decision. I particularly loathe the shuriken, myself.Skills: If that's it, ever, then that's kind of stupid. If not, then meh. Also limits the concept of a Rogue somewhat by forcing certain (albeit sensible) skills upon them, making them, by default, Thieves ("Special Ops"-types aren't likely to know about nicking stuff or picking pockets).Sneak Attack: You can sneak attack with a crossbow or a sling (of all things!) but not a bow, which is more accurate than either? Say what? Damage is kinda weak, too, but not much weaker than most interpretations of 2E I guess. Does it even work with throwing knives?The abilities are mostly likeable, assuming there's an in-combat way to recharge the "per encounter" ones.So yeah, possible to fix all that with house rules, but I never had to house-rule ROGUES of all people before!</blockquote>

Verification