Looks like I'm Banning Rogues from My Games

1127 posts / 0 new
Last post

No, not unless you can speak Gelatinous Cube.       Besides the wizard is closer and the cube is rather hungry at the moment.  



The clever rogue grabs the wizard by the scruff of the neck and dangles the tasty morsel over the pit until the cube schlorps into it.
See, I speak Gelatineous Cube.   

There is no such thing as "DM fiat." All D&D games are negotiations between players and DMs.

If your second sentence is true, shouldn't the first one be "Everything is DM fiat."?



Nope.  "Fiat" implies an autonomous decision.  "Negotiation" is more accurate. 



Yes, but part of those negotiations involves giving the DM the authority to make autonomous decisions.  The name for that is DM Fiat.

Yes, but part of those negotiations involves giving the DM the authority to make autonomous decisions.  The name for that is DM Fiat.


Let's discuss lifeboat politics elsewhere.  For this thread, do we agree that the OP seems to be kvetching over nothing much? 


No, not unless you can speak Gelatinous Cube.       Besides the wizard is closer and the cube is rather hungry at the moment.  



The clever rogue grabs the wizard by the scruff of the neck and dangles the tasty morsel over the pit until the cube schlorps into it.
See, I speak Gelatineous Cube.   





That's a great example of improvised play, but the wizard isn't going to dangle willingly.  Roll to hit...  that's your action for this round. 

Such an action however shouldn't be codified into a power.   


There is no such thing as "DM fiat." All D&D games are negotiations between players and DMs.

If your second sentence is true, shouldn't the first one be "Everything is DM fiat."?



I don't think either idea is true.  While all D&D games are negotiations between players and DMs, the negotiations involves following the rules the vast majority of the time.   DM Fiat is the times when the DM deviates from those rules.



Or the rules don't exist or are not clear on the matter.
In your game, how do you resolve situations where a character attempts to trick an NPC using non-magical means?


For intellegant creatures it would depend largely upon what has come before. Like say the creature has actually watched the trap been set up or the fighter just stabbed him, he probably wouldn't go after the rogue instead or he would avoid the trap.

For unintellgant creatures I would probably allow a roll against intellegence or will depending on the situation.

In all cases it would depend on the monster in question and the idea the rogue has and the degree to which it is roleplayed. I.e. rogue does awesome roleplay then evil villain may just go after rogue anyways reguardless of what I siad above. 
Yeah. Why is it OK for a rogue to trick a rich noble into being poorer (pick pocket his coin pouch)? Or trick the castle guard into believing the rogue works for the king (bluff)? But not OK to trick the ogre into stumbling into a trap it wasn't aware of?


Nothing in the statement implies that the rogue couldnt' trick the ogre into stumbling into a trap he was aware of or the Lich from walking into the trap that the linch had set up himself.
There is no such thing as "DM fiat." All D&D games are negotiations between players and DMs.

If your second sentence is true, shouldn't the first one be "Everything is DM fiat."?



I don't think either idea is true.  While all D&D games are negotiations between players and DMs, the negotiations involves following the rules the vast majority of the time.   DM Fiat is the times when the DM deviates from those rules.



Or the rules don't exist or are not clear on the matter.



Yes, technically that's true, but I personally don't view that the same as the DM overriding a rule for some reason.  When the rules are unclear or non-existant, the DM is forced to make a ruling.  To me that's not the same as if the DM says, "I don't think this rule should apply in this circumstance, so I'm changing it."
This is okay for non intellegant creatures, but there is no valid reason an intellegant creature should have to fall for such a thing. Nor do I like the idea of such a creaturing being tricked into having to charge forward and into a trap. This should be part of the roleplaying part of the game. Anything like magic shouldn't be given to martial classes and forcing a monster/npc to act in a certain way without being magically compelled is just a breakdown in logic.

I don't think "your father was a kobold's ****" or "stupid oger can't even catch a little halfling" are magical effects...

I mean, what's a bluff check for if you can't convince someone your a lepercaun and if he catches you he get's a pot of gold?


It's the UNintelligent that are immune to tricks.  You can fool albert einstein but you can't fool an avalanche...


No matter how charasmatic you are, you are never going to fool einstein or someone who doesn't believe in lepercauns that you are indeed a lepercaun. Just like the most charasmatic person ever could not trick me or fool me into believing they had seen a ghost (even if they had actually seen a ghost)

Such abilities will not work on Gelatinous cubes or other creatures like mindless undead who are immune to charm spells.

I don't think anyone said or implied it would....

We shall see .  IMO, the rules must say that it doesn't work that way.  Otherwise some players will insist that it does.

Wait, so I can't stand on the other side of a hole and scream "Here cubey cubey!  Come get some tasty adventurer!" and, in doing so, "trick" it into coming after my tasty self so that it falls down the hole?

I mean, there's been published adventures where stuff like that goes on.  Why is that such a hard concept to grasp?

Sure you can. Even if you're a fighter or a wizard. Why should something like that be a special rogue ability?

It shouldn't be.  But in the same way a wizard can hit things with a sword, or a fighter in plate can sneak.
i.e. Rogues should taunt much better then anyone else.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

No matter how charasmatic you are, you are never going to fool einstein or someone who doesn't believe in lepercauns that you are indeed a lepercaun. Just like the most charasmatic person ever could not trick me or fool me into believing they had seen a ghost (even if they had actually seen a ghost)

People can be (and are) fooled every day about things.  Heck, we have TV shows like Punked about this very phenomenon.

@mikemearls The office is basically empty this week, which opens up all sorts of possibilities for low shenanigans

@mikemearls In essence, all those arguments I lost are being unlost. Won, if you will. We're doing it MY way, baby.

@biotech66 aren't you the boss anyway? isn't "DO IT OR I FIRE YOU!" still an option?

@mikemearls I think Perkins would throat punch me if I ever tried that. And I'd give him a glowing quarterly review for it.

So just to ask, how is this diffrent from bluff check to make a feint?

The key difference here is that a feint doesn't force the villain to do anything. Nobody here is saying that people can't use tricks and taunts on a villain, just that there needs to be limits to how stupid you can force somebody to act with an insult.

Taunting a villain to the point they take a penalty to hit anybody else because they are distracted would be good. Even a taunt that says a villain must attack the rogue or can't attack would be workable as a higher level power, if it had limitations that kept the rogue from spamming it. However, a taunt that force the villain to make a suicide run across lava or through half a dozen opportunity attacks, doesn't work.


Yes, but part of those negotiations involves giving the DM the authority to make autonomous decisions.  The name for that is DM Fiat.


Let's discuss lifeboat politics elsewhere.  For this thread, do we agree that the OP seems to be kvetching over nothing much? 




Yes and no.  I'm with the OP in that I don't think there should ever be a non-magical ability that can override intelligent creatures in all situations.  I have no problem with a rogue roleplaying some sort of taunt and then using an ability to make the ogre charge, though.  However, there will be circumstances where the ogre (or other intelligence creature) won't charge no matter what the rogue says or does, and I have no problem telling the player that the attempt just fails. 
So just to ask, how is this diffrent from bluff check to make a feint?

The key difference here is that a feint doesn't force the villain to do anything. Nobody here is saying that people can't use tricks and taunts on a villain, just that there needs to be limits to how stupid you can force somebody to act with an insult.

Taunting a villain to the point they take a penalty to hit anybody else because they are distracted would be good. Even a taunt that says a villain must attack the rogue or can't attack would be workable as a higher level power, if it had limitations that kept the rogue from spamming it. However, a taunt that force the villain to make a suicide run across lava or through half a dozen opportunity attacks, doesn't work.




People yes, but not me specifically. The statement isn't that you can't do that to people, the statement is that you can't do that to me personally.
The other thing is that a fighter can taunt a creature just as well as a rogue can. Perhaps if the fighter has killed the villans brother then the fighter should be able to taunt the villan more than the rogue.

Yes, technically that's true, but I personally don't view that the same as the DM overriding a rule for some reason.  When the rules are unclear or non-existant, the DM is forced to make a ruling.



You see, I think that situation is so common as to constitute roughly 90% of all D&D play, so commenting on it as a particular case hardly seems worth mentioning.  Is a thornbush 1/2 cover, 3/4 cover, full cover?  Depends on the season, the precipitation in the air, how frequently this particular thornbush was watered...etc.  D&D provides a numeric framework for the negotiation, but it's not as though rules themselves are ever gritty enough to obviate that process.  Nor should they be.  If I wanted a rules-centric experience, I'd be playing chess, not D&D.
 

We don't mess around on these boards.  When we want to deny something, we go right for the big guns, like denying the concepts of deceit and manipulation.
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.

No matter how charasmatic you are, you are never going to fool einstein or someone who doesn't believe in lepercauns that you are indeed a lepercaun. Just like the most charasmatic person ever could not trick me or fool me into believing they had seen a ghost (even if they had actually seen a ghost)

People can be (and are) fooled every day about things.  Heck, we have TV shows like Punked about this very phenomenon.



What about Marc Anthonys speech in Shakespears "Julius Caesar"? He turned an entire mob around to his way of thinking just by talking to them, and they were hostile to him when he started. There are many examples in history and literature of charismatic people getting others to do what they want.
The other thing is that a fighter can taunt a creature just as well as a rogue can. Perhaps if the fighter has killed the villans brother then the fighter should be able to taunt the villan more than the rogue.



I don't see taunting is something inherently roguish.  At least not rogue the class.  Rogue the background perhaps.  Any class should be able to taunt really well if that's the way the character is set up.
The other thing is that a fighter can taunt a creature just as well as a rogue can. Perhaps if the fighter has killed the villans brother then the fighter should be able to taunt the villan more than the rogue.



I don't think anyone would argue otherwise.  Fighter gets advantage on that charisma check. 
It's just more likely the rogue has a hard-coded bluffing skill, and a higher charisma bonus to boot, if he or she was built that way.  Again, this isn't anything that any character couldn't do already.  This "new" mechanic is simply offered up as a suggestion to the Balnce Blowhards who apparently needed it spelled out for them.


If your DM allowed it, sure.  There's a huge difference between stating it explicitly in the rules and leaving it up to the DM, though.  Personally, I wouldn't play in a game that allowed anyone to non-magically mind-control anyone just by talking; I'm fairly certain that most of the DMs I've played under would not allow it, either.




You know, in Cybernetics (1948) and the Human use of Human Beings (1950-1954), communication and control are classified as one and the same. There are some good reasons for that (and many of those principles hold true in communication theory today). 

My point is, every time you send a message, verbally or otherwise, to a creature with the intention of achieving a particular result you are engaging in a system of control. Linguistic communication is a form of mind-control. Some are better at using it as such than otherwise (see cult leaders vs. most of us). But we are all engaging in the same system. Allowing rogues to use that system to actually control the actions of creatures is perfectly logical, so long as that control is not automatic; as I said, some of us are better at it than others, some targets are harder to control than others, and just because you try and use communication to control that does not mean that you will succeed. But hey, the control is not automatic--the NPC gets a saving throw. 

This is okay for non intellegant creatures, but there is no valid reason an intellegant creature should have to fall for such a thing.


Really?

Guess you don't like, well, basically every movie and book ever, where one character manipulates and fools another.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
We don't mess around on these boards.  When we want to deny something, we go right for the big guns, like denying the concepts of deceit and manipulation.



The best part - if the people who do not believe in deciept and manipulation are able to convince those of us who DO believe in it, they have proved OUR point by manipulating us into agreeing with something we obviously do not agree with. Cool

Yes, technically that's true, but I personally don't view that the same as the DM overriding a rule for some reason.  When the rules are unclear or non-existant, the DM is forced to make a ruling.



You see, I think that situation is so common as to constitute roughly 90% of all D&D play, so commenting on it as a particular case hardly seems worth mentioning.  Is a thornbush 1/2 cover, 3/4 cover, full cover?  Depends on the season, the precipitation in the air, how frequently this particular thornbush was watered...etc.  D&D provides a numeric framework for the negotiation, but it's not as though rules themselves are ever gritty enough to obviate that process.  Nor should they be.  If I wanted a rules-centric experience, I'd be playing chess, not D&D.



I think you're putting more there than is actually present in a game.  I've never once in 30 years seen a DM try to figure out what season it was and whether a bush had been watered regularly when trying to figure out cover.  Those are considerations that the vast majority of people just don't make. 

In my experience as a player and as a DM, perhaps 5% of the time I come across a rule that is vague or a situation with no rule to cover it, and that's being generous.  The other 95%+ of the time the rules are clear and I can just tell the players what happens based on that rule.
Personally, I wouldn't play in a game that allowed anyone to non-magically mind-control anyone just by talking; I'm fairly certain that most of the DMs I've played under would not allow it, either.

Really?  What game have you been playing?  'Cause I've been playing D&D.

Seriously, what did you think the Charisma score was for?

Oh, the usual.  Bluff, diplomacy, that sort of thing.  Mostly, the check allows you to successfully convey an idea without betraying your ulterior motive, but it absolutely does not allow you to dictate the actions of another intelligent creature.  (It has plenty of other uses, of course - etiquette, performance, powering your magical abilities - but those aren't relevant to the topic at hand.)

If you make a great diplomacy check as you beg for your life, you might convince your captor that you would be more useful alive than dead, but it's entirely up to that individual how he or she would want to act on it.  There is nothing that you can possibly say to any unknown ogre to get it to charge somewhere unless it already had the idea of charging; it's certainly not something that you could do reliably, with any sort of specific efficiency as could be described with bonuses or a save DC.

The metagame is not the game.
Personally, I wouldn't play in a game that allowed anyone to non-magically mind-control anyone just by talking; I'm fairly certain that most of the DMs I've played under would not allow it, either.

Really?  What game have you been playing?  'Cause I've been playing D&D.

Seriously, what did you think the Charisma score was for?

Oh, the usual.  Bluff, diplomacy, that sort of thing.  Mostly, the check allows you to successfully convey an idea without betraying your ulterior motive, but it absolutely does not allow you to dictate the actions of another intelligent creature. 


Ok, so how about an intimidate check:

SURRENDER OR DIE!!!

Monster surrenders.

NO!  THAT WAS UNREALISTIC
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Personally, I wouldn't play in a game that allowed anyone to non-magically mind-control anyone just by talking; I'm fairly certain that most of the DMs I've played under would not allow it, either.

Really?  What game have you been playing?  'Cause I've been playing D&D.

Seriously, what did you think the Charisma score was for?

Oh, the usual.  Bluff, diplomacy, that sort of thing.  Mostly, the check allows you to successfully convey an idea without betraying your ulterior motive, but it absolutely does not allow you to dictate the actions of another intelligent creature.



Right.  Charisma and social skills were there to influence situations, not become non-magical mind control.  Diplomacy being the biggest problem, but one in which I would simply Fiat failure if there was just no way the skill was going to change the mind of the person being talked to.

If you make a great diplomacy check as you beg for your life, you might convince your captor that you would be more useful alive than dead, but it's entirely up to that individual how he or she would want to act on it.



You might, but there was no way that you would end up as his best buddy simply because your diplomacy score was through the roof.  The rules made that possible.....I said no.

   

You might, but there was no way that you would end up as his best buddy simply because your diplomacy score was through the roof.  The rules made that possible.....I said no.

It worked for the Dread Pirate Roberts in The Princess Bride.

@mikemearls The office is basically empty this week, which opens up all sorts of possibilities for low shenanigans

@mikemearls In essence, all those arguments I lost are being unlost. Won, if you will. We're doing it MY way, baby.

@biotech66 aren't you the boss anyway? isn't "DO IT OR I FIRE YOU!" still an option?

@mikemearls I think Perkins would throat punch me if I ever tried that. And I'd give him a glowing quarterly review for it.

You might, but there was no way that you would end up as his best buddy simply because your diplomacy score was through the roof.  The rules made that possible.....I said no.

It worked for the Dread Pirate Roberts in The Princess Bride.




That was a fantastic movie, but it didn't make for good D&D in my opinion.  It was a movie of silly comedy.  There are those people who enjoy that sort of silly style of play, but I'm not one of them. 
I don't see taunting is something inherently roguish.


That can usually be applied to anything a martial class does.  If swinging a sword somethign anybody can learn to do?  Absolutely.  How about parrying? Or shield bashing?  Sure.  because martial classes -- currently fighters and rogues -- are limited to the conceivable.  And if it's conceviable than I can conceive of any member of any class potentially doing anything those classes can do.

The key, however, is that you need to make an effort to get a non-fighter to swing a sword as well as a fighter, because that's the fogither's focus and for the non-fighter, it's at best a sideshow.

The rogue appears to be reimagined as someone who is so skillful that he can make his skills useful in combat.  So he can bluff so well, he can trick hsi opponents into falling into traps. He can tumble so well he can effortless move around the battlefield.

Can other classes do that?  Yes, at the DM's discretion.  But a rogue who learns the skill trick (my name for them) "Feint Foe to Fall" has specifically leanred to do that regularly through body language, eye contact, facial expressions, and potentially language.  

If you don't think a rogue can do that -- becuase it's not sufficiently "rogueish" or because it feels magical -- then just bar that skill trick from the rogue's potential repertoire.  Mearls wrote "These abilities are much like maneuvers, but they use the rogue's skill dice rather than what we're currently calling expertise dice."  That indicates to me that, just as fighters have to choose maneuvers to learn, a rogue must choose skill tricks.

And if you want a non-rogue to do it, let them try, but just make it more difficult for the wizard to tumble around the battlefield, because it's not something he spends his time trying to do.  
The other thing is that a fighter can taunt a creature just as well as a rogue can. Perhaps if the fighter has killed the villans brother then the fighter should be able to taunt the villan more than the rogue.



I don't see taunting is something inherently roguish.  At least not rogue the class.  Rogue the background perhaps.  Any class should be able to taunt really well if that's the way the character is set up.




Kender.  


So this is the relevant part of the legend and lore article."You can think of these as nonmagical effects that would still require a saving throw or an ability contest to resist. For instance, Shalandra the rogue might contest her Charisma against an ogre's Wisdom. If Shalandra wins, she can trick the ogre into charging forward and blundering into a trap."

This is okay for non intellegant creatures, but there is no valid reason an intellegant creature should have to fall for such a thing. Nor do I like the idea of such a creaturing being tricked into having to charge forward and into a trap. This should be part of the roleplaying part of the game. Anything like magic shouldn't be given to martial classes and forcing a monster/npc to act in a certain way without being magically compelled is just a breakdown in logic.

This makes the third time the rogue has been messed up, going from bad to worse to somehow even worse. And would also make the first time I have ever banned a class from a game, but I have no desire to deal with a non-magical hypnotist while running a game. If my villian wants to attack the wizard cuase the wizard just burned him with burning hands, he should have the complete option (as an intellegent creature) to completely ignore the rogue no matter what. 

I think this would also qualify as my first "ragequit" for Next, though it is caused by the issue occuring three times in a row with the rogue always causing problems. 



I diden't read the whol tread.
but taunting is somthing done in many fantasy movies and books.
The line that he does charge forward charging into a trap does sond a bit strange,would somthing like the target hafing to attack the rogue be more aceptable ?

or maybe somthing like the marked abilitie from 4th edition where the target would get a penalty to hit against anybody exept the taunting rogue becouse the irritating rogue is distracting him.

 
These are not thedroids you are looking for.
Yes and no.  I'm with the OP in that I don't think there should ever be a non-magical ability that can override intelligent creatures in all situations.  I have no problem with a rogue roleplaying some sort of taunt and then using an ability to make the ogre charge, though.  However, there will be circumstances where the ogre (or other intelligence creature) won't charge no matter what the rogue says or does, and I have no problem telling the player that the attempt just fails. 

Sure.  There needs to be a balance.

You can't taunt someone to try and cross lava to attack you.  You can't taunt things that don't know your taunting them.  And i would even say you shouldn't be able to taunt someone into taking an OA to get to you (well, perhaps if you crit).  Giving mind control at-will to rogues is a bit much.

But you can taunt some guards who's are just standing around into leaving his post, and lead him into an ambush.  Or into a trap they arn't aware of.

Again, this should be something anyone can try, but rogues are just much better at it.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

Has nobody in this thread ever fenced, or played chess, or any game in which you set up a trap, then taunted some opponent into walking into it?
  Hell, I've been able to do that in FPS games which don't even have dialog options.  Games like Bioshock absolutely depended on the technique (nothing deals with a hallway full of splicers like a bunch of trap rivets and a loud noise or two),.

Seriously, this is well established territory, gang.
    
Okay look at it this way, fighter confess to killing villains brother as villain is standing over the party cleric, villain turns and attacks fighter. No roll, nothing required. It makes sense this is what would happen.

I don't mind manipulation. Just forced manipulation in all circumstances. So if the fighter killed the villains brother there should be no chance of success.

In regards to bluff if my villain knows the pc is lying the pc can never succeed on a bluff check. If the villain is already likely to believe the bluff then the character gets a bonus.

Another issue is there is now a system to handle when the rogue does this but for every other class it is still dm fiat
Okay look at it this way, fighter confess to killing villains brother as villain is standing over the party cleric, villain turns and attacks fighter. No roll, nothing required. It makes sense this is what would happen. I don't mind manipulation. Just forced manipulation in all circumstances. So if the fighter killed the villains brother there should be no chance of success. In regards to bluff if my villain knows the pc is lying the pc can never succeed on a bluff check. If the villain is already likely to believe the bluff then the character gets a bonus. Another issue is there is now a system to handle when the rogue does this but for every other class it is still dm fiat



I agree, the game requires DM fiat in these situations.  


Okay look at it this way, fighter confess to killing villains brother as villain is standing over the party cleric, villain turns and attacks fighter. No roll, nothing required. It makes sense this is what would happen. I don't mind manipulation. Just forced manipulation in all circumstances. So if the fighter killed the villains brother there should be no chance of success. In regards to bluff if my villain knows the pc is lying the pc can never succeed on a bluff check. If the villain is already likely to believe the bluff then the character gets a bonus. Another issue is there is now a system to handle when the rogue does this but for every other class it is still dm fiat

Sure.

But the rogue can say it even if he never met the villian's brother.


Though i will agree that it would be good to have a better chance if you have knowlage about the person.  Like if you know the orc has a wife, you get +2 to taunting.  If the orc has a wife and 3 kids, you get +4.  If the orc has a wife, 3 kids and 2 miscarrages, you get +6.  If you know his favorite food, that's another +2.  Ect...

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

Ya know, this thread has inspired me to make a character like the main character in "The Mentalist". Surely he is a mighty wizard, because he manipulates people into doing stupid stuff every episode. Sometimes, realism takes a back seat to entertainment.

Magic Dual Color Test
I am White/Green
I am White/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both orderly and instinctive. I value community and group identity, defining myself by the social group I am a part of. At best, I'm selfless and strong-willed; at worst, I'm unoriginal and sheepish.
Okay look at it this way, fighter confess to killing villains brother as villain is standing over the party cleric, villain turns and attacks fighter. No roll, nothing required. It makes sense this is what would happen. I don't mind manipulation. Just forced manipulation in all circumstances. So if the fighter killed the villains brother there should be no chance of success. In regards to bluff if my villain knows the pc is lying the pc can never succeed on a bluff check. If the villain is already likely to believe the bluff then the character gets a bonus. Another issue is there is now a system to handle when the rogue does this but for every other class it is still dm fiat




It isn't forced manipulation in all circumstances. There is a saving throw. And, the narrative situation will result in advantage or disadvantage on any given roll on the basis of DM fiat. That allows a DM to strongly swing probable outcomes on the basis of holistic logic. 

All of the situations you describe are not as cut and dry as you are making them out to be. You are investing too much of your own self image into your projection of another’s actions. Not everyone will attack someone blindly just because they believe that person has done them wrong. And, some people are good enough at bluffing that they can convince you that they are telling the truth even though you walked into the situation knowing that they are lying. I have watched someone do that with my own two eyes. She was a brilliant liar, and she convinced her boyfriend that she was not cheating on him even though he knew that she was. She had a story to explain everything, and she told her story with enough conviction that she convinced him... at least for a few more months.


Finally, it is not a problem that the rogue gets a unique system to perform some cool systems of trickery while other people must still rely on basic skill rolls. After all, that is the area of the game where the rogue is supposed to shine. That is why fighters get unique maneuver that nobody else gets (like the ability to mitigate the damage a foe does to your ally) and why spellcasters get spells. Now, the rogue too can get his unique abilities... and they don't even have to be damage based!