Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Grognerd" data-source="post: 7485627" data-attributes="member: 6968425">I don't disagree with you. Fortunately a new archetype is decidedly not stealing (pun intended) from another class, and it is most certainly not "something slightly outside of their role." Maybe, just maybe, it is inspired more by something that has been in their role for years? Such as, for example, the fact that when I started playing AD&D 1e with my thief lo those many years ago, I had no problem Backstabbing with a Longsword. So maybe there is precedent within the class role for a thuggish thief? And no... you can't do that RAW since you can't use a non-finesse weapon for a Sneak Attack. Does this add other elements? Absolutely. Because in the evolved D&D that is 5e, you are not completely abandoning or rewriting a class when you choose an archetype. You are emphasizing certain elements inherent to it. If you would prefer to multiclass rather than use a new archetype, great. No one is arguing against that. (At least not here.) But coming to a thread that is explicitly stated to be about an archetype and complaining about the existence and function of archetypes is far from productive. By your argument, both the Eldritch Knight and the Arcane Trickster should not exist. You also seem to be implying that this is made just because "a player wants something." If I was the type to make homebrew willy-nilly, then this probably would not be the first homebrew archetype I've done since 5e came out. It is possible - this may shock you - that I have seen a need for something in actual play that 1) does not violate the core of the Rogue class, 2) does not go outside the purview of the Rogue, 3) does not steal the thunder from another class, and yet 4) isn't in RAW. You are also making the fallacious assumption that a player originated this process. They didn't. I saw a need and looked at a fix. I haven't played a rogue since that 1e thief, way before it was even called a rogue. But that doesn't mean I can't perceive what I consider to be a problematic gap in the class archetype selection and address it.Addressing your last part first: I'm not sure what you are thinking, but this archetype in no way makes the rogue better at fighting than a fighter. Since I'm addressing neither druids nor rangers, the shooting comment is irrelevant. Second, addressing your first part: you obviously have only looked at the OP. As I mentioned, I revised it and made changes. Check out the current iteration and then let me know what you think. Your concerns have all been previously addressed.</blockquote>

Verification