Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nivenus" data-source="post: 5797468" data-attributes="member: 71756">That depends on the assassin, though, doesn't it?Personally, I'd be fine - if they bring back alignment (please?) - with making assassins a nongood-exclusive class.I definitely agree that killing for money is not a particularly virtuous career choice and indeed, straddles along the dark of the gray. But I don't think assassins need necessarily be evil. I think plenty of lawful, chaotic, or simply unaligned adventurers could find plausible reasons for playing the class.EDIT:It depends, to a certain extent, how much rogues resemble 1e/2e rogues  vs. 3e/4e rogues. The former were actually pretty horrible at combat, with the occasional sneak attack to make up for their poor HD and weapon proficiencies. The latter, however, were damage demons who dealt more damage than fighters when put in the right position.If rogues are like 3e/4e rogues first and foremost, than the assassin does begin to seem redundant, unless you decide to make it a magical ninjutsu-style class as 4e did. Personally, I'd be fine with making assassins a sub-class of rogue... but I'd also be fine making paladins a sub-class of cleric and wizards and warlocks sub-classes of a generic mage class. So my opinions are a bit heterodoxical.</blockquote>