Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Zardnaar" data-source="post: 7598154" data-attributes="member: 6716779">You are over rating damge. Rogues get out of combat stuff, deal less damage than fighters, AD&amp;D arguably did it better, less damage but when you do get it its really gonna hurt. 3E Rogue in an AD&amp;D context is a great class, sucks in the 3E context. By that I mean if you convert the 3E Rogue to AD&amp;D and run it more or less as is. I think the 5E Rogue is well designed, some 5E feats not so much.&nbsp;Unless you are playing AL though there are 3pp feat that open up options and they are really cheap, like get 2-3 PDFs for around $5. D&amp;D has never had good balance in feat design, personally I would probably prefer not to use them but players are kind of addicted to them. Probably why they made them optional in 5E, you're basically bitching and moaning about the feats after you have purposefully signed onto breaking the game with optional rules. Its like complaing 2E sucks becasue you are using optional rules from the DMG or other sourcebook.Similar thing with Sorlocks, MCing has always been problematic even in the lame 4E version of it where it was really letting you find a better paragon path to use. Fairly pointless though if you don't make it to level 11. That no one has manged to make a good system in 20-30 years of trying with MCing and feats or things like feats in 2E kind of leads me to believe it can't be done as you will never cover all the permutations. If you have 10 feats, 10 races, 10 classes that is 1000 different options, 5E has IIRC 38 archetypes, some amount of races, 20-30 odd feats (more?), throw in multiclassing over 20 levels and yeah you have millions of options. &nbsp;If you like that level of crunch play 3E, play Pathfinder, or 4E, but you just can't cover it the 5E designers didn't even try that much as it can't be done. Its like complaining your car can't drive to the moon. Its up to you how you play your D&amp;D, I didn't like 4E so I ended up going back to 2E and it was fun again because the balance was better and the trade off was no feats and less powerful spells.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Zardnaar, post: 7598154, member: 6716779"] You are over rating damge. Rogues get out of combat stuff, deal less damage than fighters, AD&D arguably did it better, less damage but when you do get it its really gonna hurt. 3E Rogue in an AD&D context is a great class, sucks in the 3E context. By that I mean if you convert the 3E Rogue to AD&D and run it more or less as is. I think the 5E Rogue is well designed, some 5E feats not so much. Unless you are playing AL though there are 3pp feat that open up options and they are really cheap, like get 2-3 PDFs for around $5. D&D has never had good balance in feat design, personally I would probably prefer not to use them but players are kind of addicted to them. Probably why they made them optional in 5E, you're basically bitching and moaning about the feats after you have purposefully signed onto breaking the game with optional rules. Its like complaing 2E sucks becasue you are using optional rules from the DMG or other sourcebook. Similar thing with Sorlocks, MCing has always been problematic even in the lame 4E version of it where it was really letting you find a better paragon path to use. Fairly pointless though if you don't make it to level 11. That no one has manged to make a good system in 20-30 years of trying with MCing and feats or things like feats in 2E kind of leads me to believe it can't be done as you will never cover all the permutations. If you have 10 feats, 10 races, 10 classes that is 1000 different options, 5E has IIRC 38 archetypes, some amount of races, 20-30 odd feats (more?), throw in multiclassing over 20 levels and yeah you have millions of options. If you like that level of crunch play 3E, play Pathfinder, or 4E, but you just can't cover it the 5E designers didn't even try that much as it can't be done. Its like complaining your car can't drive to the moon. Its up to you how you play your D&D, I didn't like 4E so I ended up going back to 2E and it was fun again because the balance was better and the trade off was no feats and less powerful spells. [/QUOTE]

Verification