Things the rogue class said..and didn't say

[Ktulu]

Looking at the Rogue, a friend and myself started some more speculating. There were some interesting things the class said & didn't say.

For one, we already know that 4e will have action points. However, with no mention of them in the article. The same goes for simple weapons.

I concur that there will be a chart at the beginning of the classes section that shows everything every class gets per level. We already know that each class gets the same BAB, Saves, & AC boost each level. I'll bet all classes have simple weapon proficiency, so it was not necessary to list that the rogue gets Club, staff, sickle, etc.. That will be mentioned in the class chart, along wtih how many action points each class gets per level and how the skills increase.

Also, the rogue appears to clearly start with 4 powers; 2 at will, 1 encounter, and 1 per day. Assuming they want a decent amount of powers, but not too many to overwhelm, I believe this chart will be the same for every class, and will likely look like this:

Powers/feats
level /will /enc. /day
1 2...........1...........1
2 feat
3 2...........2...........1
4 feat/ability increases
5 2...........2...........2
6 feat
7 3...........2...........2
8 feat/ability increases
9 3...........3...........2
10 feat
…..etc..


That seems to be a believable chart, in which every other level you gain a power, Since you start with 2 at will, that means you wouldn't need another, reasonably, until level 6-7, since you'd also have 2 encounter and 2 per day abilities by then.

Also, I'd imagine that per encounter & per day abilities can be taken more than once, allowing for tumble to be taken again, for two uses in an encounter. This means that less powers would be required for each class to be versatile and unique, along with the ability to take other powers from other classes (through whatever multiclass/training system provided).


This seems as though it would work quite well for each class. The wizard has his magic missile & chill touch at will, plus a mage armor per encounter, and an area effect ability per day at first level. That's a fairly varied list that keeps the wizard doing damage throughout an encounter.

Thoughts?

Ktulu

 

[Toryx]

I'm doubtful that every class will have proficiency in simple weapons. Assuming that the dagger is still a simple weapon (and frankly, I think that if WotC said it wasn't, they'd be fools) why would the Rogue class list a dagger amongst it's proficient weapons? There'd be no need to list the dagger if every class was proficient in it.

I also suspect that we can't assume that weapon proficiencies are the same as they have been in the past.

Otherwise the chart looks pretty reasonable, though it's hard to say with what little details we have.

 

[Ktulu]

The dagger does call that theory into question. However, the idea that a club isn't listed as a weapon the rogue could use is either a major clerical error, or a gross misunderstanding on their part.

but, if you said that anyone, regardless of class, can use a club (because, seriously, it's just a piece of wood), staff, gauntlet, etc... then you don't have to repeatedly list the weapons they're proficient in. However, because the rogue has some abilities tied specifically to the dagger, maybe they're just listing it to remind?

I don't think that simple/military/superior will be how any class has proficiency; I think each class will have a list, as will each race (Elven Weapon Training: You gain proficiency with the longbow and the shortbow. ;see elf article in ampersand). If each race gets a weapon prof. & the class list provides theirs; I think that covers most of what anyone would need. However, you're still missing the really simple stuff that anyone could use; clubs, staves, gauntlets, sickle, etc... If they stated that everyone has these, that provides a heafty list of weapons each class has access to.

Ktulu

 

[arscott]

I'm pretty sure your power distribution is flawed too.

Based on what we know, it's far more likely that characters will get powers at each level. Consider:

We've been told that an epic level wizard will be able to cast 25th level spells. This suggests that spell level corresponds to character level.

We also know that there are even numbered power levels (as evidenced by tumble, a 2nd level power).

If both of those things are the case, it's pretty clear that rogues get new powers at second level. Probably other even levels as well.

 

[Hella_Tellah]

...the really simple stuff that anyone could use; clubs, staves, gauntlets, sickle, etc...

I don't think staves, clubs, gauntlets and sickles are all that easy to use, though. I've got a dent in my forehead from getting hit with a pole in a kung fu class (which I sucked at, just to deflect any "internet tough guy" comments) because of my ineptitude. To me, it's unrealistic that everyone and his grandmother is proficient in weapons at all. Even the idea that every commoner is proficient in one simple weapon seems a stretch, because I worked pretty hard at being proficient with unarmed strikes and quarterstaves for about a year, and I still suck.

My bet/hope for how weapon proficiencies work is a combination of automatic proficiencies for heroic classes and a feat tree. Each class has a list of weapons with which they are proficient, a list which never includes "all simple weapons" or "all military weapons"--even the fighter starts with a list of about ten weapons. From there, players can take a feat tree: simple > military > superior. One feat to be able to pick up most common weapons and use them. Two to have enough training to hold your own as a well-trained infantryman. Three to be a master of weaponry. Granted, I don't know how much better each class of weapon is from the previous, but if they're roughly equivalent to simple/martial/exotic, that system seems fair.

 

[Darth Cyric]

Classes are getting attack powers at odd levels and utility powers at even levels, apparently.

Whenever feats are gained (odd or even), it's silly to conclude that it's tied to power gains in any way, shape or form.

 

[Mistwell]

I am guessing there is no penalty for failing to be proficient with a "simple" weapon, but bonuses available if you are proficient with a particular weapon.

"Proficient" will likely mean "eligible for bonuses with that weapon that non-proficient users are not eligible for".

For example, perhaps a feat like Weapon Focus will grant you a +1 to attack with all weapons you are proficient with. That way, anyone can use a dagger at no penalty, but if you want Weapon Focus: Dagger, you will need Weapon Proficiency: Dagger first.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I don't think staves, clubs, gauntlets and sickles are all that easy to use, though. I've got a dent in my forehead from getting hit with a pole in a kung fu class (which I sucked at, just to deflect any "internet tough guy" comments) because of my ineptitude. To me, it's unrealistic that everyone and his grandmother is proficient in weapons at all. Even the idea that every commoner is proficient in one simple weapon seems a stretch, because I worked pretty hard at being proficient with unarmed strikes and quarterstaves for about a year, and I still suck.

Well, if you genuinely have difficulty using a club, I guess it's no surprise that after a year a quarterstaff is still a mystery to you

The thing is though, you're confusing martial arts training (which is very focused and limited, generally) with proficiency. If you believe that you couldn't ignore your "training" (and I use the term advisedly, assuming you've been taught twirly martial arts bo-staff nonsense) and beat the snot out of someone with that six-foot long pole, then it's only your mind that's holding you back.

I mean, what? Really. Proficiency (in previous editions) is knowing how to use something decently. Unless someone has led an outrageously sheltered life, they know how to use a knife, how to use a club/handaxe (not to throw it, admittedly), how to smack someone with a pole (some some kind of double weapon BS, just a big pole for hitting), a medium-length spear and so on.

Now, one thing is different in 4E - previous editions always differentiated "proficiency" and "BAB" or "THAC0". 4E apparently has a universal BAB progression and/or uses a lot of non-BAB attacks. So perhaps proficiency means something else entirely. I really hope this is the explanation, because frankly, any other explanation sounds idiotic.

 

[erf_beto]

I know this is getting offtopic, and maybe I'm the only one who thinks this way (and the designers probably mentioned this somewhere, but I'm forgetting), but I'm still not sold on the "every class has the same number of at will/per day/per encounter powers at level X". Maybe every class have the same total number of powers (day+enc+will) at the same level, but IF (big IF) powers are balanced on each level and take into account the number of times you can spam it, then a daily 5th level fireball "could" be as awesome as a per encounter 5th level scorching ray. That said, I still think some classes could take advantage of more daily powers (like the wizard of old, saving his big guns throughout the dungeon), while others take advantage of renewable per encounter powers (like sorcerers blasting things and 'taking five' afterwards) or even having more at will abilities (like the old fighter, power attacking every round). Yes, we have a mix of those, so fighters would shine brighter once in a while, and wizards wouldn't be useless after fireballing, but each could be dedicated to one aspect of the game.

I guess letting the player choose would be too much, but anyway, keeping it simple like "every class knows half level plus 3 powers" could work, right?

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

That's an interesting idea. I could very easily picture getting different balances of daily, at will, and per encounter. It might cause problems in multi-classing, but very interesting none the less.

I did notice that the rogue builds each got two per encounter powers.

And I am anticipating that proficiency does not work the way we think proficiency works.