|
8 months ago ::
Nov 13, 2012 - 7:43AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Mar 31, 2012
|
Here is a thought on how to differentiate rogues and fighters:
ROGUE
Rogues use dirty tricks, guile, shock and mobility to beat the enemy in combat. In 4e terms they move like strikers and attack like (mostly) single target controllers. Maneuvers often focus on applying conditions. (For pre 4e players- effects like prone, daze, stun, blind, immobilize, poison) They reduce the enemy's efficiency through resource denial and debuffing. They have strong maneuverability options to further control the ways in which an enemy can engage them.
FIGHTER
Fighters focus on reducing the enemy to 0 HP, using maneuvers that deal extra damage and extra attacks. They also have maneuvers that limit the enemies ability to deliver damage by reducing it, preventing it, or avoiding it. This can help take some of the pressure off the cleric by giving a form of proactive healing via damage denial for parties that don't want to include clerics. In 4e terms they combine the striker's damage and the defenders protection. Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 13, 2012 - 7:49AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
Nah. I like my fighters to be able to do both but preferring damage because they don't need to use tricks to survive. The rogue on the other hand must resort to trickery and placing conditions to compensate for their combat deficiency.
Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds.
Constitution Based Class for Next!
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 13, 2012 - 7:51AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
A rogues fighting style should be primarily about deception.... and its impact I think is more nuanced than just control and every fighting style exploits more than one gambit... and involves control of a sort.
5 fighting gambits with approximate mental analogos.
Force (intimidation)
Deception (bluff)
Response/Adjustment (Diplomacy)
Instinct (?)
Analysis.(Perception/Insight)
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 13, 2012 - 8:22AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Aug 13, 2004
|
Each encounter should have a set DC.
If a rogue beat the DC with a thievery check, he steals the victory.
"They are making it clear that when modern design and common sense come into conflict with tradition, tradition wins." - thecasualoblivion
"Vancian isn't broken, you just have to set your game to the wizard's clock!" - Oxybe
"In many ways, making a new edition of D&D is alot like trying to sell a car to the Amish." - Dwarfslayer
"Encounters are the heart of the AD&D game" - PHB AD&D 2nd edition.
"you shouldn't even bother trying to become like me." - Gary Gygax (Elfcrusher confirmed)
"Feel free to claim I said anything you like. How's someone going to call you out on it? Are they going to be all like, 'I know all of the things that Gary said, and that's not one of them?'"
- Gary Gygax
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 13, 2012 - 8:24AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Mar 31, 2012
|
Each encounter should have a set DC.
If a rogue beat the DC with a thievery check, he steals the victory.
nice one  .
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 13, 2012 - 8:33AM
#6
|
|
|
You guys have some weird preconceptions of rogues.
Rogues lie, cheat, and steal, but not in the middle of a fight (with some exceptions). They can use tricks in a fight, but they don't rely on them.
The difference between the Rogue and the Fighter is that a Fighter uses martial prowess to defeat his enemies, but a Rogue uses his brain. The Rogue uses stealth, poisons, and traps because he can and not because he has to. A Fighter is better than a Rogue in a direct fight, but the Rogue is not above exploiting weaknesses.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 13, 2012 - 10:10AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Aug 13, 2004
|
You guys have some weird preconceptions of rogues.
Rogues lie, cheat, and steal, but not in the middle of a fight (with some exceptions). They can use tricks in a fight, but they don't rely on them.
The difference between the Rogue and the Fighter is that a Fighter uses martial prowess to defeat his enemies, but a Rogue uses his brain. The Rogue uses stealth, poisons, and traps because he can and not because he has to. A Fighter is better than a Rogue in a direct fight, but the Rogue is not above exploiting weaknesses.
It's funny, as character classes are based on preconceptions.
Your preconceptions are not better that ours !
Fighters not using their brains vs. rogues using their brain in a fight is a preconception.
It's not supported by any edition, as the default attack feature is backstab or sneak attack.
I also prefer trickster rogues, but the fact is that they never existed in any edition before.
They just switch between skill solo mode and weapon combat mode with a twist.
"They are making it clear that when modern design and common sense come into conflict with tradition, tradition wins." - thecasualoblivion
"Vancian isn't broken, you just have to set your game to the wizard's clock!" - Oxybe
"In many ways, making a new edition of D&D is alot like trying to sell a car to the Amish." - Dwarfslayer
"Encounters are the heart of the AD&D game" - PHB AD&D 2nd edition.
"you shouldn't even bother trying to become like me." - Gary Gygax (Elfcrusher confirmed)
"Feel free to claim I said anything you like. How's someone going to call you out on it? Are they going to be all like, 'I know all of the things that Gary said, and that's not one of them?'"
- Gary Gygax
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 13, 2012 - 10:17AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
[
Fighters not using their brains vs. rogues using their brain in a fight is a preconception.
An idiotic one.. and the fighter being a dunce is rather game reinforced nerdastic goo.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 13, 2012 - 11:21AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Feb 24, 2008
|
[
Fighters not using their brains vs. rogues using their brain in a fight is a preconception.
An idiotic one.. and the fighter being a dunce is rather game reinforced nerdastic goo.
End of the world, I agree with Gar on something. I'm going outside to see the supernova that should be hitting the planet at any moment.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 13, 2012 - 12:00PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2012
|
I've always wanted to see the Rogue more of a (using 4e terms here) Martial Controller/Martial Striker whereas the Fighter would be a Martial Striker/Martial Defender.
When the Rogue "sneak attacks" (what a horrid name for it though) someone it shouldn't be just damage but some debilitating effect also. Slow, Blind, Deafened, Silenced, Force Movement, Sickened, and Paralized are all things that can happen based on martial attacks described correctly.
Throwing some sand in the eyes of the enemy as you stab with a one handed finesse weapon? Damage + Blinded.
Stabbing your enemy and then jabbing the enemy with your free hand in the throat? Damage + Silenced.
The Rogue isn't all about killing, sometimes you need your target alive.
Meanwhile the Fighter doesn't care about all that stuff... Using brute force or finesse to make the enemy dead is a form of making them blinded or silenced. The Fighter doesn't try to take prisoners, the fighter leaves his enemies on the battlefield dead.
Or whatever *shrug*
|
|
|
