D&D 5E (2014) Would a "lucky guy" class fit your setting?

Why not just turn the Halfling's Lucky ability into a feat?

Otherwise what you are talking about sounds almost certain to be a human rogue. Now they might not be the sort of Rogue that focuses on high Dex, sneaking and backstab (something the Rogue class sadly did not manage to eject or even get built in such a way a subclass could be stuck in that isn't totally reliant on this concept), but the chances are pretty high that the character we are talking about is the one who is highly proficient in certain skills.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Why not just turn the Halfling's Lucky ability into a feat?

Otherwise what you are talking about sounds almost certain to be a human rogue. Now they might not be the sort of Rogue that focuses on high Dex, sneaking and backstab (something the Rogue class sadly did not manage to eject or even get built in such a way a subclass could be stuck in that isn't totally reliant on this concept), but the chances are pretty high that the character we are talking about is the one who is highly proficient in certain skills.
What skills? Gardening? Not exactly comparable to the stealthy lockpicking acrobat. In what sense is the character you're describing a "rogue"? Do you also think that the wizard should push Intelligence and spellcasting into a subclass so people can build "wizards" who don't do those things?
 

What skills? Gardening? Not exactly comparable to the stealthy lockpicking acrobat. In what sense is the character you're describing a "rogue"? Do you also think that the wizard should push Intelligence and spellcasting into a subclass so people can build "wizards" who don't do those things?

Even though its pretty clear you are trying to intentionally be an ignorant ass, I'll address your question as though you were a sincere person who actually doesn't quite understand.

The Rogue is the only class in the book that is, to some extent, focused on maximizing their skills without resorting to overtly using magical powers. That means several character concepts are kind of forced into that mold.

The Courtier/Politician - Focuses on Persuasion, Deception, Insight, History and possibly Performance
Detective - Focused on Investigation, Perception, Insight, Intimidation and possibly Sleight of Hand or Stealth
Scholar - Focused on Investigation, History, Arcana, Religion, Insight, and possibly Sleight of Hand or Persuasion
Archeologist/Explorer - Focused on History, Religion, Investigation, Survival, Athletics, and Sleight of Hand

Basically just because you lack the creativity to think of Rogue as being anything but a thief or assassin with a very specific set of skills does not mean the class should be limited to that. There are all sorts of character concepts that revolve around having the most skills, being the best at using their skills, wearing lighter clothing allowing more freedom of movement, using generally smaller, lighter, better concealable weapons and yet they don't necessarily imply a lock-picking speedster with Dexterity 22 that uses Stealth and Acrobatics constantly and is wholly concerned with stabbing people in the back.

But much about the class does a phenomenally poor job of supporting these concepts because literally all combat factors are 100% entirely reliant upon Dexterity alone making every munchkin like you out there focus solely on Dexterity and Dexterity-based skills and dumping all other stat.
 

Even though its pretty clear you are trying to intentionally be an ignorant ass, I'll address your question as though you were a sincere person who actually doesn't quite understand.

Well, it wasn't clear to me, and it's not clear to me that you are the one with abundant understanding and good will here.

The Rogue is the only class in the book that is, to some extent, focused on maximizing their skills...

The 'lucky guy' archetype we are talking about here isn't a character that has focused on maximizing their skills. Compared to the Courtier, Detective, Scholar, Explorer, Cat Burglar, or Street Urchin, this is a character who is ordinary and has no obvert skills. They haven't spent time training. They are obviously less skilled than other's around them, and if they have something they do that is better than the rest of the team, it's usually something innocuous like cooking, farming, or domestic chores. They are the 'normal' character that the skilled character often adopts at the beginning of the story, only to discover they have some inexplicable knack that makes them useful or even essential.

Examples:
Richard in 'Neverwhere'
Saka in 'Avatar: The Last Airbender'
Sam Gamgee from 'The Lord of the Rings'
Arthur Dent in 'Hitchhiker's Guide'
Ron Stoppable from 'Kim Possible'
Jimmy Olsen in Superman
Xander in Buffy the Vampire Slayer
Pretty much any protagonist in a European Fairy Tale who have the clever upstart trope. They've usually got nothing but luck and wits going for them.
Pretty much any member of a 'band of five' or other anime team that serves as 'team mascot' or 'heart'. They aren't as skilled as anyone else on the team, but nonetheless the team needs them to function well.
Pretty much any comic protagonist that saves the day despite incredible ineptness, including Mr. Magoo, Inspector Clouseau, etc. Any example of The Fool, where the foolishness is real and not merely feigned to disguise their true wisdom and power.
Pretty much any comic relief or sidekick paired with a superhero. Dr. Watson depending on how he's portrayed. Anyone travelling with Dr. Who. Etc.

In D&D terms, any character which should be a mere Commoner on the basis of training but which inexplicably is able to function as a hero. Over time, these characters often eventually acquire more explicit powers, but initially they are usually surviving by luck and useful because they have a habit of guessing right, or accidently opening secret panels, and generally bumbling into a solution.

Basically just because you lack the creativity to think of Rogue as being anything but a thief or assassin with a very specific set of skills does not mean the class should be limited to that.

Where did you get that idea from?

The point is, the class we are talking about here is not a Rogue of any sort. We're not talking about 'The Batman'. We're talking about that character that has no apparent skill or superpowers but still gets the better of super-villains anyway.
 
Last edited:

Even though its pretty clear you are trying to intentionally be an ignorant ass...


What is pretty clear is that this sort of thing is over the line for Rule #1 - Keep it civil.

We expect everyone to show basic respect to their fellow posters. If you don't feel they deserve such respect, you probably shouldn't be conversing with them at all.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top