|
1 year ago ::
May 01, 2012 - 1:41AM
#601
|
Date Joined:
Jan 12, 2012
|
There's a pretty simple reason, really, why no one asked themselves 'Why?'. It's because the Knock spell was published before the Thief class was created. Opening locks was a Wizard ability first. It's not a Rogue ability Wizards stole.
Opening locks is a Wizard ability that Rogues stole, if you're looking at it as classes stealing from each other.
Ah, fair enough. I retract my assertion that it was an attempt to have the Wizard do the Rogue/Thief's work.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 01, 2012 - 1:53AM
#602
|
|
|
'sokay. There's been a decades-long discussion over what the point of the thief class was really supposed to even be. It's a list of things that anybody should be able to learn to do - why do you need a class for it? Before they created the thief class, fighters, clerics, and magic-users just climbed walls, picked locks, listened at doors, and snuck up and backstabbed people as necessary.
Personally, I'd rather they make the thief a fighter subclass. No way that will happen, but I can dream.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 01, 2012 - 2:31AM
#603
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
'sokay. There's been a decades-long discussion over what the point of the thief class was really supposed to even be. It's a list of things that anybody should be able to learn to do - why do you need a class for it?
4e pretty much made that true... any class can be the thief, with background and skill investment (ok any class who can exploit Dex nicelly).. admittedlly they are permanent investment and you have relatively few of that resource to invest with and the character who took rogue could almost be seen as getting this free.... except the he invested obvious concept space in it.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 01, 2012 - 2:34AM
#604
|
|
|
Heck, let me revise. It's a list of things any adventurer should just be able to do, without investment. Want to climb a cliff? What level are you, what equipment are you using, what's your ability score, and what's your roll? Off you go then.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 01, 2012 - 2:45AM
#605
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
Heck, let me revise. It's a list of things any adventurer should just be able to do, without investment. Want to climb a cliff? What level are you, what equipment are you using, what's your ability score, and what's your roll? Off you go then.
Oh I do agree a chunk of the thiefs capabilities stepped on the generalized adventurer space.
Specialization in skills now still makes the guy who did so enough better at climbing and enough better at sneaking that one might mistakenly think if you didnt specialize? you really cant do them, possibly exacerbated by the skills being overly front loadable.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 01, 2012 - 7:21AM
#606
|
Date Joined:
Apr 27, 2012
|
'sokay. There's been a decades-long discussion over what the point of the thief class was really supposed to even be. It's a list of things that anybody should be able to learn to do - why do you need a class for it?
4e pretty much made that true... any class can be the thief, with background and skill investment (ok any class who can exploit Dex nicelly).. admittedlly they are permanent investment and you have relatively few of that resource to invest with and the character who took rogue could almost be seen as getting this free.... except the he invested obvious concept space in it.
This was one of the things about 4e I liked. I think anybody should be able to get any skills they want.
I liked a lot of the details of 4e. Not all of course. I didn't like the structure and I didn't like the martial stuff but otherwise there were many good things.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 01, 2012 - 8:00AM
#607
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
Heck, let me revise. It's a list of things any adventurer should just be able to do, without investment. Want to climb a cliff? What level are you, what equipment are you using, what's your ability score, and what's your roll? Off you go then.
Oh I do agree a chunk of the thiefs capabilities stepped on the generalized adventurer space.
Specialization in skills now still makes the guy who did so enough better at climbing and enough better at sneaking that one might mistakenly think if you didnt specialize? you really cant do them, possibly exacerbated by the skills being overly front loadable.
If you think about it, every class steps on generalized adventurer space. Why have a fighter class when adventurers can pick up a weapon and fight? Why have wizards when anyone can learn a spell/magic? The answer is specialization.
Anyone can be a thief. Rogues are the specialists that make the generalized thieves look like amateurs. Anyone can climb, but rogues are the specialists that make the generalized adventurer look slow as he scales a wall with a rope, being passed by the rogue who isn't using one. Fighters are the maestros of weaponry, making the cleric, who though competent with his weapon, look like a child with a butter knife.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 01, 2012 - 9:17AM
#608
|
|
|
I like that vision. I think D&D has always strived for that to be the case, but has generally fallen short. If Next can do that, much rejoicing will be had.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 01, 2012 - 9:35AM
#609
|
|
|
Maxperson: I just think the Rogue is a list of very basic adventuring tasks that all the other adventurers suddenly got worse at when the Thief showed up, so that the Thief could be given a 'niche' as the guy who did them better.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 01, 2012 - 9:48AM
#610
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
Heck, let me revise. It's a list of things any adventurer should just be able to do, without investment. Want to climb a cliff? What level are you, what equipment are you using, what's your ability score, and what's your roll? Off you go then.
Oh I do agree a chunk of the thiefs capabilities stepped on the generalized adventurer space.
Specialization in skills now still makes the guy who did so enough better at climbing and enough better at sneaking that one might mistakenly think if you didnt specialize? you really cant do them, possibly exacerbated by the skills being overly front loadable.
If you think about it, every class steps on generalized adventurer space. Why have a fighter class when adventurers can pick up a weapon and fight? Why have wizards when anyone can learn a spell/magic? The answer is specialization.
There are many reasons someone might be very good climber ... or very good at stealth.... not just being a "thief" back in my experience in 1e land you were wired to the class and all its baggage.
In more recent times that is not as true, and once I start investing enough either by chosing background or spending feats etc, at some level I am really multiclassing, but there is quite a bit of space before that.
|
|
|
