Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mephista" data-source="post: 6687943" data-attributes="member: 6786252">You've just been complaining about it being there at all!&nbsp;Deadly poison.&nbsp; Its even in the name.&nbsp; Sharpsword Oil works just like more poison that any class can take; coat a weapon in it, it hurts more.&nbsp; The rest have nothing to do with alchemy, they're tactics on the battlefield.&nbsp;&nbsp; Plus?&nbsp; Card game.&nbsp; People will play warlocks with all mechs and no demons or warlock spells.&nbsp; Not the best example.&nbsp;*rubs eyes* DA's Rogue-Artificers aren't alchemists or deal with throwing bombs, they're trap specialists, which is a Rogue thing.&nbsp; Chemists aren't rogues.&nbsp; Demon hunters are Ranger archetypes that exist in a setting with gunpowder, but if you want to stretch it, I'll give you this one, though I protest your definion of &quot;rogue&quot; as anyone that's sneaky with light or no armor; they even have the bow-focus rangers are known for.&nbsp; Tower Might heroes are called artificers, make golems, and wear armor made of rare alloys they create.&nbsp; Demon hunters are your one debatable example, which lack any number of rogue qualities beyond &quot;light armor and mobile.&quot; The rest are either artificers as D&amp;D defines it, or a trap master, which we already said was a rogue thing, but doesn't involve throwing explosives like you said.&nbsp; Its plain you're reaching here.&nbsp; It doesn't fit.&nbsp;Modern Fantasy has no such expectations.&nbsp; Rogue isn't even an archetype for the modern fantasy genre!&nbsp; You said tumbling and balancing, not athletics/acrobatics.&nbsp; Climbing and jumping are things an acrobat should know how to do, but not necessarily other things covered under Athletics.&nbsp; As for other Acrobatic stuff, I liked a host of other abilities that tied in, you don't need more.Why not other skills?&nbsp; Because there's not much need for them; you can get Expertise and Reliable Talent on them, whereas jumping and climbing need a bit of help due to low Strength scores on a rogue. Why those kits?&nbsp; Because they're iconic, the others are unrelated to rogues in general.&nbsp; It makes no sense to ask for them.&nbsp;That acrobat is an Entertainer background.&nbsp; Scholar is the Sage background.&nbsp; Scouts are part of the Ranger class.&nbsp; Ruffian can be a Strength-based rogue subclass that comes in the future for being intidiating and non-finesse weapons, but, again, there is no Gather Information rules in 5e.&nbsp; You're really focused on things that have no rules at all - its a blank spot in the game.&nbsp; Bards can't even gather information.I have to conclude that your'e mixing up classes now and stepping on others toes.&nbsp; You're describing alchemist and rangers in a lot of cases, as if they should all fit under Rogue.&nbsp;&nbsp; They don't.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mephista, post: 6687943, member: 6786252"] You've just been complaining about it being there at all! Deadly [I]poison[/I]. Its even in the name. Sharpsword Oil works just like more poison that any class can take; coat a weapon in it, it hurts more. The rest have nothing to do with alchemy, they're tactics on the battlefield. Plus? Card game. People will play warlocks with all mechs and no demons or warlock spells. Not the best example. *rubs eyes* DA's Rogue-Artificers aren't alchemists or deal with throwing bombs, they're trap specialists, which is a Rogue thing. Chemists aren't rogues. Demon hunters are Ranger archetypes that exist in a setting with gunpowder, but if you want to stretch it, I'll give you this one, though I protest your definion of "rogue" as anyone that's sneaky with light or no armor; they even have the bow-focus rangers are known for. Tower Might heroes are called artificers, make golems, and wear armor made of rare alloys they create. Demon hunters are your one debatable example, which lack any number of rogue qualities beyond "light armor and mobile." The rest are either artificers as D&D defines it, or a trap master, which we already said was a rogue thing, but doesn't involve throwing explosives like you said. Its plain you're reaching here. It doesn't fit. Modern Fantasy has no such expectations. Rogue isn't even an archetype for the modern fantasy genre! You said tumbling and balancing, not athletics/acrobatics. Climbing and jumping are things an acrobat should know how to do, but not necessarily other things covered under Athletics. As for other Acrobatic stuff, I liked a host of other abilities that tied in, you don't need more. Why not other skills? Because there's not much need for them; you can get Expertise and Reliable Talent on them, whereas jumping and climbing need a bit of help due to low Strength scores on a rogue. Why those kits? Because they're iconic, the others are unrelated to rogues in general. It makes no sense to ask for them. That acrobat is an Entertainer background. Scholar is the Sage background. Scouts are part of the Ranger class. Ruffian can be a Strength-based rogue subclass that comes in the future for being intidiating and non-finesse weapons, but, again, there is no Gather Information rules in 5e. You're really focused on things that have no rules at all - its a blank spot in the game. [I]Bards[/I] can't even gather information. I have to conclude that your'e mixing up classes now and stepping on others toes. You're describing alchemist and rangers in a lot of cases, as if they should all fit under Rogue. They don't. [/QUOTE]

Verification