What's a rogue to you? Question on the relevance of a class.

[Mercutio01]

Personally, I like the idea of luck points, honor points, action points, etc. These offset the randomness of crappy rolls, or when the dice just aren't on your side. It also allows for a greater chance for RP situations. Using a luck point, and then telling the GM exactly how the luck manifested.

I think you can have those things without making an entire class based around them. I also like the idea of action points/fate points/luck/determination/hero points/whatever name designers give the concept, but I don't like the idea of an entire D&D class based on the use of such points.

Well, I guess I'll clarify a bit--it's not that the idea bothers me (in fact, it's something I'd like to play, and have done so in systems like Mutants & Masterminds), but that the balancing point would be ridiculously hard to do in a class-based system, and I'm not convinced that it could really be successfully balanced. I think, for D&D, action points as they were introduced and used in Eberron or in 4E (although I'm not sold on milestones) is about as much as I'd want to see in D&DNext.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Rogue is the troubleshooter and skill monkey who fights smart -- attacking weakpoints, skirmishing in and out of melee to avoid damage. Confident in his own skill at dodging and somersaulting past enemy blades and that it's superior than relying on bulky armor. He may be a flashy combat acrobat, he may meld with the shadows, only striking when unseen.

I mostly like rogue for the flashy dextrous acrobatic warrior role, though. In 3E I play martial rogues (feats instead of SA) more often than I do "traditional" rogues, and consider the swordsage just as much, "the rogue I always wanted" as I and others consider it "the monk we always wanted."

 

[WheresMyD20]

It's only important if combat takes up the bulk of game time, like it does in 3e & 4e. If 5e takes a large chunk of combat time and redistributes it to exploration and roleplaying, then sacrificing combat ability for better exploration and roleplaying skills makes sense.

Prior to 3e, thieves were pretty ineffective in combat. If you chose to play a single-class thief you had to accept that you weren't going to do a whole lot in fights. You could, however, play a fighter/thief and be decent in combat and still be an effective "skill monkey". The thief had such a low XP cost to level that it wouldn't slow down level gain too much.

 

[Oni]

Part of me still wants to combine skill guy with fighty guy and get Action Hero guy. Seriously I think mushing the rogue/thief and fighter into one class makes a lot of sense. With a combination of feats and skills you could make anything from a heavily armoured knight skilled in diplomacy and courtly intrigue to a sneaky backstabber. I think it would do a lot for balance, a couple of the major complaints you always hear are 1) the fighter is useless outside of combat, and 2) the rogue/thief is useless in combat. The problem is that flies in the face of longstanding tradition.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I'm repeating myself, but this is what a rogue is:

Acrobat
Bandit
Burglar
Chameleon
Charlatan
Cutpurse
Driver
Investigator
Knife Master
Pirate
Poisoner
Rake
Roof Runner
Sanctified Rogue
Scout
Scroll Scoundel
Sniper
Spy
Survivalist
Swashbuckler
Thug
Trapsmith

 

[tuxgeo]

The D&D 3.5E splatbook "Complete Scoundrel" contained a passel of "Luck" feats, each of which provided opportunities to make a "luck reroll" in specified circumstances, and each of which gave the player one or more luck rerolls per day. Some of the better ones have Prerequisites of being Level 3 or Level 6 or Level 9, or having one or two "Luck" feats already.

Examples:
"Lucky Start" (No Action): Reroll Initiative. [Gain 1 luck reroll per day.]
"Make Your Own Luck" (Immediate): Prerequisite: Level 6, one other Luck feat; Reroll a Skill check in a skill in which you have at least 1 rank. [Gain 1 luck reroll per day.]
"Unbelievable Luck" (No Action): Prerequisite: Any other luck feat; As long as you have one luck reroll remaining for the day, you have a constant +2 luck bonus on your save with the lowest base. [Gain 2 luck rerolls per day.]

However, these were feats, not class features, so anybody could take them. If 5E were to incorporate something like that into the Rogue, it might make for the envisioned lucky guy.

 

[Blackwarder]

The D&D 3.5E splatbook "Complete Scoundrel" contained a passel of "Luck" feats, each of which provided opportunities to make a "luck reroll" in specified circumstances, and each of which gave the player one or more luck rerolls per day. Some of the better ones has Prerequisites of being Level 3 or Level 6 or Level 9, or having one or two "Luck" feats already.

Examples:
"Lucky Start" (No Action): Reroll Initiative. [Gain 1 luck reroll per day.]
"Make Your Own Luck" (Immediate): Prerequisite: Level 6, one other Luck feat; Reroll a Skill check in a skill in which you have at least 1 rank. [Gain 1 luck reroll per day.]
"Unbelievable Luck" (No Action): Prerequisite: Any other luck feat; As long as you have one luck reroll remaining for the day, you have a constant +2 luck bonus on your save with the lowest base. [Gain 2 luck rerolls per day.]

However, these were feats, not class features, so anybody could take them. If 5E were to incorporate something like that into the Rogue, it might make for the envisioned lucky guy.

Cool! A lucky theme!

Warder

 

[Sunseeker]

The Rogue has 3 primary segments which I believe all should get coverage at starting level, and allow for further specialization into later in game.

These are Skills, Stealth, and Damage(yes I see the rogue as a "striker").

The Rogue is not trained in any formal school, but their lack of formal training leads to a diversity of "handy" skills. They may not be able to tell you which Pope said some great line of Piety, but they will be able to tell you who to talk to in a pinch, and how much that'll cost.

The Rogue is the go-to-guy for everything sneaky. From bartering to get a lower price or directing you to the black market, the Rogue can do this and has the least likely chance of getting you caught.

The Rogue is also a strike-from-behind/shadows, dirty-fighting guy. No magic needed, the rogue can still stick you where it hurts all the time, anytime. This should yield high damage, serious conditions or penalties. They tend to run away when they're in front of an enemy though.

So yeah, that's how I see rogues, with those three main aspects.

 

[Rhenny]

Like some of what others have said, I see Rogues as the most versatile of classes. Like characters in the book series "Thieves World" or The Grey Mouser (Fritz Lieber) books, the rogue should have options that depend on his or her ability strengths. Of course, they should be dexterous, but in addition...

Strong rogues could be good in melee (yet still weaker than warriors).

Intelligent rogues could be good at tinkering and disabling and unlocking..and maybe even dabbling in minor magics.

Charismatic rogues could be the "con artist" type or the "face"

I've often toyed with the idea of running a completely rogue party. If there is enough differentiation with options and abilities, I think this is the one class that works for a complete party.

In 3.5 and 4, muliti-classing with rogue made it possible to build a party of PCs that all had some roguishness to them. One short 4e campaign I did run for two friends had one of them as a ranger with rogue muliticlass feat, and a wizard with rogue muliticlass feat. We had lots of fun running all sneak, explore, roleplay, and ambush type adventures. Neither of my players cared that they both could do similar things because it made it possible for them to work together more efficiently. In addition, they had other powers/abilities that distinguished them as different.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I thought AD&D rogues were pretty anemic myself. They had such crummy thief skill % at all but quite high levels that you could never COUNT on being able to pull anything off. At 9th level you had a 70% PP chance, no pick pocket on earth could get away with being that pathetic, you'd be strung up inside a day!

Actually, a 9th level half elf with a high enough dex has a 90% chance. And he doesn't have to pull it off. He just has to not get caught. Even at 70%, he has a 1% chance of getting caught picking a 4th level character's pocket, and no chance at all on victims below 4th - I.E., his usual victims - level zero merchants and shopkeepers. And if he does get caught, he has other skills to escape capture. Sometimes it's fun to get caught. Oh, and he can attempt a pickpocket twice a round.