Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="yakuba" data-source="post: 6504771" data-attributes="member: 6698582">1) Niche protection. a 4e rogue has no exclusive skills that a non-rogue can't have. The 1e thief is the unique source for some types of non-combat utilities.2) Reliability of damage. As you've agreed, a 1e thief is only likely to sneak attack once per combat. Moreover, compared to the 1e specialized fighter the thief is only doing modestly more damage in that one attack than the fighter is doing every single round even with sneak attack. The 4e rogue's sneak attack has a much softer condition which can, in general, be met at worst every other round, and can in practice often be met nearly  round.Thus the 4e rogue has reliably high damage versus the unreliable damage of the 1e thief.The 4e rogue can be relied on for high damage output, the 1e thief cannot. That is why the 1e thief is not a striker. In the 4e DMG monster role parlance you could properly call the 1e thief a lurker.I'd also add that although the 4e PHB does indicate defenses and mobility and lower toe-to-toe survivability in defining the striker, many people, myself included, only think of the striker as a damage dealer regardless of survivability. Even in the 4e context both the Barbarian and Slayer have high survivability and they are Strikers.</blockquote>