|
11 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 8:37AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Dec 27, 2011
|
I've seen a number of threads for discussing specific classes in D&D Next, so I decided to start one for the rogue.
Since the rogue is in the playtest, I'll start by reviewing its stats as of now.
First is the rogue's sneak attack. As of the current playtest, Sneak Attack deals 1d6 x level extra damage per round when the rogue has advantage. Hiding takes an action, so if the rogue wants to get Sneak Attack from his stealth, he needs to wait a round to do so. This balances the two choices of attacking now without advantage, or hiding and attacking next round with Sneak Attack. I will admit, I'm not sure 1d6 x level is the right number. dealing 20d6 extra damage every other round at 20th level seems a bit much.
Next, let's look at skill mastery. I've heard a lot of people complain about this feature's tendency to unbalance skill checks, creating a huge gap between automatic success and possible failure. I must say, I agree with that sentiment. Maybe if the rogue instead had advantage (however it will be implemented) on checks using skills he is trained in.
Finally, we have the rogue Scheme. The only one shown in the playtest is the Thief, and the skills don't quite match up. Open Locks makes sense, but Stealth seems like something all rogues should be trained in, regardless of scheme. And Find/Remove Traps? Wouldn't that be for a possible "Treasure Hunter" Scheme? I think this one should be Pick Pockets. The guy IS a thief, after all.
So what I want to know is, how do you think the rogue should be designed? Should he get maneuvers? Should some skills, like Stealth, be automatically trained skills? What weapons should the rogue use? How well should the rogue be able to hide? How often should he get Sneak Attack?
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 9:04AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
First is the rogue's sneak attack. As of the current playtest, Sneak Attack deals 1d6 x level extra damage per round when the rogue has advantage. Hiding takes an action, so if the rogue wants to get Sneak Attack from his stealth, he needs to wait a round to do so. This balances the two choices of attacking now without advantage, or hiding and attacking next round with Sneak Attack. I will admit, I'm not sure 1d6 x level is the right number. dealing 20d6 extra damage every other round at 20th level seems a bit much.
My game has the playtest rogue's sneak attack DM adjudicated. I don't know how high the +1d6 goes at this point. At my table it won't go to 20d6 at level 20 regardless of what gets published.
Again adjudicated. Technically with move/attack/move, it has been argued in this forum that a rogue can attack as an action then use stealth to gain hidden as part of the move. I let the rogue do this only in cases of much chaos. It is actually interesting to see how much the players try to make chaos in a battle. But for the most part the DM has to determine whether a stealth check is allowed.
Next, let's look at skill mastery. I've heard a lot of people complain about this feature's tendency to unbalance skill checks, creating a huge gap between automatic success and possible failure. I must say, I agree with that sentiment. Maybe if the rogue instead had advantage (however it will be implemented) on checks using skills he is trained in.
I am okay with the 0 to 50 chance design. To me it gives the rogue a flair of overconfidence. And can shift the moment from easy peasy to high stakes. Which strokes my romantic notion of Rogue play.
Finally, we have the rogue Scheme. The only one shown in the playtest is the Thief, and the skills don't quite match up. Open Locks makes sense, but Stealth seems like something all rogues should be trained in, regardless of scheme. And Find/Remove Traps? Wouldn't that be for a possible "Treasure Hunter" Scheme? I think this one should be Pick Pockets. The guy IS a thief, after all.
Schemes, I am not totally onboard with. Seems to me it would follow a smooth class design basis if they left it out and made roguesque schemes like Thief, Highwayman, Troubador, Assassin into Specialties..aka Themes.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 9:33AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Dec 27, 2011
|
Hmm... You have a point about the Skill Mastery effect. As for Stealth, the rules in the playtest (I think) state that if you have cover you can hide as an action, and if you move completely out of sight (i.e. behind wall) then you can make a Stealth check as part of that move. However, moving behind blocking terrain means you can't get a shot either, so you'd need to wait until next round anyway. I like what you suggested about Schemes too Although I would suggest having them be Backgrounds. As it is now, the Rogue Scheme "Thief" basically is an extra Background, granting you training in three skills.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 9:49AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Aug 27, 2009
|
This is one of the things the rogue player in our playtest was not happy with. I, (and most of my players) strongly agree that characters should be able to do something "effective" every round. The stealth mechanism as is, denys that. My player also remarked that if hiding behind other characters is viable, there is little reason to playing rogues of any size other than small. Allowing the rogue to hide and attack each round (I.E. stealth as a move action) only made the option the only one the rogue would ever want to do. As it stood, the Next rogue seemed a bit flat as yet in the playtest.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 9:59AM
#5
|
|
|
First is the rogue's sneak attack. As of the current playtest, Sneak Attack deals 1d6 x level extra damage per round when the rogue has advantage. Hiding takes an action, so if the rogue wants to get Sneak Attack from his stealth, he needs to wait a round to do so. This balances the two choices of attacking now without advantage, or hiding and attacking next round with Sneak Attack. I will admit, I'm not sure 1d6 x level is the right number. dealing 20d6 extra damage every other round at 20th level seems a bit much.
It is my theory that everyone will get comparable damage buffs. The Fighter will continue to get bigger bonuses to his damage that work all the time. The fight-priest will get bigger damage buffs than Crusader Strike to match the Fighter's output. The Wizard and laser cleric will continue to get higher damage spells. I think they know what they're doing and they're keeping everyone's damage pretty even, given the frequency it is applicable. The Fighter and cleric-buff damage is on all the time, so it progresses the slowest, the Rogue's damage is only with advantage, so they get faster damage progression. And pure casters have their damage limited per day, so they'll get the fastest increases.
Next, let's look at skill mastery. I've heard a lot of people complain about this feature's tendency to unbalance skill checks, creating a huge gap between automatic success and possible failure. I must say, I agree with that sentiment. Maybe if the rogue instead had advantage (however it will be implemented) on checks using skills he is trained in.
I think Skill Mastery, at least given the DCs in the Caves of Chaos, might as well be called "You don't fail ever." Seriously, look at the difficulties--the only checks the Rogue can potentially fail are finding the two traps (the pit in the kobold cave and the net in the orc cave), since they need a 13, and the Rogue only has +2 to that. Everything else is crazy easy. The Rogue's minimum result for stealth and lock picking for example, is 16. No lock has a DC higher than that, so the Rogue doesn't even need to roll. And the chances of enemy's spotting them is so slim, I don't even make the Rogue roll for stealth unless the enemy beats a 16 (which has not happened yet). Skill Mastery is crazy good.
Finally, we have the rogue Scheme. The only one shown in the playtest is the Thief, and the skills don't quite match up. Open Locks makes sense, but Stealth seems like something all rogues should be trained in, regardless of scheme. And Find/Remove Traps? Wouldn't that be for a possible "Treasure Hunter" Scheme? I think this one should be Pick Pockets. The guy IS a thief, after all.
The name Thief is a throwback to the old days when "Rogue" didn't exist, only "Thief" did. It's really more of a "Burglar" or "Tomb Robber." Imagine raiding a high security facility with guards, locks, and traps. That's what the Thief steals from.
So what I want to know is, how do you think the rogue should be designed?
In my ideal world (that I know will never be), the Rogue and Fighter would be combined into some kind of overarching "martial" class.
In my far more realistic world, the Rogue would get all kinds of special ways to screw with enemies, possibly tied to the Sneak Attack mechanic. Maybe let them trade Sneak Attack damage for special effects (blind, bleed, confuse, etc.). I am not a fan of maneuvers, personally, but they'll probably get those, too.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 10:20AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Nov 30, 2010
|
a example of how a Rogue should be on D&DNext, that would make new people wanted to try it in a single image: Spoiler:
Show
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 10:29AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Nov 21, 2009
|
On sneak attack. Without knowing more about how HP will scale with level and threat, it is hard to say what the appropriate damage is for this at higher levels. As for advantage, the shine of the dis/adv mechanic is wearing off for me. In general I think it needs to be more tightly controlled (basically, it could only be granted by specific, defined circumstances or come directly from a class feature or spell).
On Skill Mastery. I have been thinking that this might benefit from a sliding scale. So at level 1, you wouuld have skill mastery 4 (roles below a 4 are treated as a 4). Than at say level 4 it goes up to 6 and so forth.
On schemes. The idea of schemes as a build choice that all rogues makes has potential, but right now it is not clearly different from a background. Also, for purely aesthetic reasons I cannot quite define, I really dislike the word "schemes" in this context.
On Stealth. A swashbuckling or "face" rogue probably has no interest in stealth, so I don't feel this is core to the rogue. However, for themes (at some point I will get used to calling these "specialties," but I am not there yet) or schemes where stealth is important a benefit besides adding it to your trained skill list (which is really the realm of backgrounds) could be created.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 10:36AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
I think most would be in agreement that the Rogue needs some fine tuning. But as for pictures defining a good rogue example, I never needed anything after her: 
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 10:49AM
#9
|
|
|
I think the rogue should steal about 100% of the 4e theif's stuff. That is a good place to start at least. Allow the rogue to be built as a scout, acrobat, assassin, archer, etc as the player chooses. skill mastery might be cool as changing the d20 to a d12+8.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 29, 2012 - 10:50AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Dec 27, 2011
|
@TheStoryteller I know 20d6 might be mathematically correct, but what I'm saying is that I don't want my players to have to roll 20 dice every other round. It would slow the game down enormously. On Skill Mastery, my point is that it might be too good, letting you bypass all but the trickiest scenarios. Then again, maybe it will work well enough to stay in the finished version. I have mixed feelings about that one... Thanks for explaining the Thief Scheme. I was thinking of the "pickpocket" style of thief. I like that idea about converting Sneak Attack damage into effects. It would be pretty cool to have a rogue that can strike with surprise, blinding an enemy, then stun him, etc. allowing him to deal Sneak Attack more often. Also, WotC has expressed an interest in doing something like this, so I wouldn't be too surprised if this is close to the end result. @Mexrage LOL, that's funny. That one image would get D&D every fan of Assassin's Creed running to buy the books. 
|
|
|
