First, I'm just playing the devil's advocate here, I'm not really in invested in the idea. I kind of like it. It is an extension of the rogue UMD skill as far as I can tell. I agree that it would be nice to have a feat where fighters could pick up a few skills. Being able to cast shield is mighty nice for a rogue.
Rogues already had the use magic item bit, it's a small step from there. Reminds me of the Grey Mouser from Fritz Leiber...
It's a neat little bit, not every rogue has to take them (and not every DM has to allow them), and it doesn't break the system.
I must say that I really don't like them, and the same goes for the magic rage powers of the barbarian but, as a friend told me, it's easier for me who hate them to ignore them when I play a rogue, than for someone who like them to play a rogue character and not have the possibility to take them.
I actually like the Rogue magic trick, not sure if I can the same for the barbarian, but for me its all about style (what some would call fluff). The logic works something like this, Rogues know how to use magic items. When 3.0 came out I hadn't played any other edition so I always asked other players and GM's why? At the low end I got because there rogues, they've always got that, at the more logical end I got, its because the Rogue is basicaly the very intelleigent or thife type in D'n'D, they have no magical or supernatural powers but they live and exist in a magical universe. Any intelleigent character would lean all they can about magic to deal with it, even if they couldn't cast it themselves. So they know how to use magic items.
That made sense to me, and following that logic, a Rogue who observes a Wizard long enough would logically say "Okay he does this with his hands and throws a little bit of Gwenroot and does a little bit of damage to that zombie. Hell I can do that." Eventually he gets it right and the Wizard would say something like.
"Hey you stole my spell?"
"Well yeah, I'm a Rogue, thats what I do."
In a magic heavy universe, Rogues lean how to do stuff like this. I would extned that to do the same with psionics, and sense I use WOW RPG I'd would also give them the option to be the only other class that can gain the Knowldedge Tech.
I agree generally with the folks above in saying that rogues get this, rather than it being a feat in general, because of their dealings in magical devices and whatnot.
That being said however, I would prefer there to be a very narrow list of spells the Rogue can choose from for this power. I don't like it being open ended to "any spell on the sorc/wiz list". While none of them are particularly over powered, alot don't really fit the theme, while others are really More useful than their level would otherwise indicate.
I would rather the list be limited to a small handful of spells that are "rogueish" so to speak.
Detect Secret Doors
True Strike
Mount
Alarm
Floating Disc
Disguise Self
Exp Retreat
Magic Weapon.
(list not exaustive, am open to other ideas, of course).
The smaller the list the better, since then you don't have to worry about some "really good" spell sneaking in.
(a really good spell being one that isn't bad for a wizard, but that makes 2/day a purdy sweet deal for the rogue to get his paws on).
I'm torn about Mage Armor.
It would be very useful- but almost too useful.
twice a day, +4 armor bonus that lasts half-rogue level in hours?
(note: I didn't include Identify or Grease in the above list, and they are the only 2 spells that are level 1 that are modified in P3. I don't think Identify fits the description of a rogue ability, imo, and grease is "too" useful for a rogue. Also, imo. :) )
Opinions?
-S
I must say that I really don't like them, and the same goes for the magic rage powers of the barbarian but, as a friend told me, it's easier for me who hate them to ignore them when I play a rogue, than for someone who like them to play a rogue character and not have the possibility to take them.
This is a great way of looking at things. There are 2 pieces, the game balance issues and the game flavor issues. If an issue is a flavor issue then as you suggest, don't use it, someone will like it.
If there is a problem with game balance then it definitely needs to be resolved. I don't see a game balance issue with this ability*, a rogue can take 'minor magic' at 2nd level and 'major magic' at 4th level. It's a nice class power, but overall would you take minor magic at second level instead of say "Finesse Rogue"? Probably not.
The only issue I have with game balance is the question of spell lists. If major magic gives the rogue full access wizard's spell list then can he use wizard wands and scrolls? What about Staves? This makes major magic a much more useful feat and maybe a bit OTT.
I would rather the list be limited to a small handful of spells that are "rogueish" so to speak.
I think it was done this way for simplicity. My only issue is really regarding the access to the spell list for the purpose of scrolls and such.
I'm torn about Mage Armor.
It would be very useful- but almost too useful.
twice a day, +4 armor bonus that lasts half-rogue level in hours?
Mage armor isn't that good. By 4th level when the rogue gets this spell he will likely have either studded leather +1 or a mithril chain shirt which gives a +4 Armor bonus. Sure it would be nice to go armor free but the duration isn't good enough to go all day and you would be using 1/2 of the power on it. Shield on the other hand would rock for a rogue. Rogues don't get shield proficiency so the +4 shield bonus is a huge boost to their AC.
If you wanted to make a rogue spell list grease should definitely be on it.
(note: I didn't include Identify or Grease in the above list, and they are the only 2 spells that are level 1 that are modified in P3. I don't think Identify fits the description of a rogue ability, imo, and grease is "too" useful for a rogue. Also, imo. :) )
Opinions?
-S
Read the ability.
They do NOT gain access to the spell lists.
They get the wiz/sorc spell list to choose from for ONE first level spell, which they get to use twice a day, as a spell like ability.
SLA's don't grant access to items, I don't think.
(major SLA = 1st level spell. Minor = 0 level spell).
And while Mage Armor is roughly equivalent to other armors, at lower levels at least it'd allow the rogue to forgo the more expensive armors and put the money to other uses. Not sure if it's OP or not, but it's bordering. (definately a spell that loses effectiveness in the mid-to-late game though).
Flavorwise I'd prohibit any spell that affected someone else in a harmful manner. i.e. any spell that wasn't (harmless) in the "saving throw" line. (or None- if the spell was actually not harmful).
Grease is a definite must have for rogues. Which is why I excluded it. It's too powerful. Even the nerfed version is just too awesome for rogues. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I can't see it not being one of the best if not The best choice for a rogue to take with this power. It's something he'll likely use every adventuring day, twice a day.
Will he take it at 4th level? Maybe not.
The rogue gets 4 "minor talents".
(2, 4, 6 8.. at 10 they get a major one).
Is it worth half of them to get a 1st level spell?
Now that, I'm not sure of.
(there are some good talents out there, afterall).
-S
Read the ability.
Ack... my bad, I don't know what I was thinking
And while Mage Armor is roughly equivalent to other armors, at lower levels at least it'd allow the rogue to forgo the more expensive armors and put the money to other uses. Not sure if it's OP or not, but it's bordering. (definately a spell that loses effectiveness in the mid-to-late game though).
Eh... mage armor is pretty worthless at 4th level where you get it. It's only marginally better than masterwork studded. I suppose if you have a rogue with a very low strength.
Flavorwise I'd prohibit any spell that affected someone else in a harmful manner. i.e. any spell that wasn't (harmless) in the "saving throw" line. (or None- if the spell was actually not harmful).
I'm not sure why you think grease is so deadly in the hands of a rogue versus a sorcerer or wizard. If it was that crazy potent then rogues could just dip a level of sorcerer and get it 4 times/ day plus the (finesse-able) claws for 1d6/1d6 damage.
I must say I'm in the camp of the rogue not needing such things. However, if it something that others may want or need. Then perhaps they should look at something like the bard's spell casting abilities. The bard is basically a rogue (as far as skills) and has the spell casting to boot. Also, I think the PHB bard list has spells that are appropriate for both classes. Just a thought.
I don't see the appeal here, a 1 level wizard or sorcerer dip would pick up more spells plus some decent SLAs and blow open the class for magic item use. You have to take 2 levels of bard to get 1st level spells and the bardic abilities are of questionable use as a one level dip.
Sorcerer with draconic or abyssal bloodlines is my choice right now because give 2 attacks/ round at full BAB. Regardless, why are you 'not in the camp' of rogues getting this ability? Do you seriously think it's broken or is this just a flavor issue?
I don't see the appeal here, a 1 level wizard or sorcerer dip would pick up more spells plus some decent SLAs and blow open the class for magic item use. You have to take 2 levels of bard to get 1st level spells and the bardic abilities are of questionable use as a one level dip.
One way to make it more appealing; discourage the "1 level dip". I make my players plan ahead, take skills / feats before hand and find appropriate training to change class. It makes for more logical / planned transitions and cuts out the "1 level of this, 1 level of that" routine. As for logic, the transition between using magic devices, including scrolls, and eventually picking up a few spells makes sense. No real need to come up with lots of reasons for the change. Compared to the time necessary to get up to speed as an apprentice wizard with an all around knowledge of magic... easy.
Ehh... it's still not appealing to me.
I go back and forth over the concept of one level dips. The problem is that at low levels they tend to be quite powerful but at higher levels they are generally not worth the loss of higher level abilities.
Why can't Monks have this? Why not Barbarians? Why not Fighters? It just seems to be put in for the Grey Mouser enthusiasts and nothing else.
Rogues get Use Magic Device as a class skill. Those other classes do not. This indicates that rogues are at least slightly better at (faking?) magic than those other classes.
I think it is better if a rogue wants to have some magic to take a level as a spell user instead of wasting two feats for two spells.
Someone said a 1 level dip wasn't very powerful. I think a 1 level dip as an evoker would be pretty useful considering you get
1. a bonded item so you have an extra spell you can use every day.
2. You get energy ray so you have a d6 attack that you can choose the energy type of AND sneak attack with. Is the SA damage of the same type as the ray though. Potentialy a 9th level rogue/ 1 evoker could do a 5d6 attack that was bleeding damage as well.
Seems ok to me.
Why can't Monks have this? Why not Barbarians? Why not Fighters? It just seems to be put in for the Grey Mouser enthusiasts and nothing else.Rogues get Use Magic Device as a class skill. Those other classes do not. This indicates that rogues are at least slightly better at (faking?) magic than those other classes.
Exactly... it's a logical step. It would be a pretty rare game where the rogues didn't take advantage of "use magical device"... although it brought the Grey Mouser to mind (for me) it's got a solid grounding in the game. And for me it makes more sense than someone deciding to "pick up a level" of wizard or sorceror as a whim. Suddenly you know everything that some guy studied years to learn... Which is why I make my PCs prep for it ahead of time when they do decide to multiclass. In fact, for rogues, this might be a good logical step before they multiclass... nice.
It does make sense to me that a rogue, rather than study magic and spellbooks, and learning how magic works, will just memorize the words to one useful spell.They don't need to know how it works, just that it does.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Ehh... it's still not appealing to me.
I go back and forth over the concept of one level dips. The problem is that at low levels they tend to be quite powerful but at higher levels they are generally not worth the loss of higher level abilities.
That's generally been my feeling on the 1-level dips. Since the 3.0/3.5 transition did away with the uber-super 1-level dips, multiclassing has its own benefits and rewards but also its own drawbacks. I think it's a problem that sorts itself out, and while I understand that some folks just don't like the concept of multiclassing with just 1 level of something, I don't really buy the standard explanations I've been offered on anything other than a matter of taste level. To each their own...
I don't like it.
I'm not a huge fan either, but I don't like that Use Magic Device even exists. Once that's a given (and I know it's not going away), then this isn't any worse.
Fighter devices are called.. weapons.. and armor.
Appropriate feats already have that covered.
Thieving devices are likewise already covered in the Lockpicking and whatnot skills.. (or whatever it's been collapsed into these days..)
-S
I don't particularly care if Rogues have the ability or not. for me it's just nonsensical. Despite the argument that Rogues can use magic items intended for others, I think it still largely comes out of nowhere.Why can't Monks have this? Why not Barbarians? Why not Fighters? It just seems to be put in for the Grey Mouser enthusiasts and nothing else.
I do like the explanation that they 'stole' the spells. That's cute logic.
I guess I just don't see why it's a Rogue thing and not an anybody thing. I guess I don't associate Rogues with magic, anymore than I associate Fighters with magic.
I agree. It's just nonsensical.
I don't like it.
I don't particularly care if Rogues have the ability or not. for me it's just nonsensical. Despite the argument that Rogues can use magic items intended for others, I think it still largely comes out of nowhere.Why can't Monks have this? Why not Barbarians? Why not Fighters? It just seems to be put in for the Grey Mouser enthusiasts and nothing else.
I do like the explanation that they 'stole' the spells. That's cute logic.
I guess I just don't see why it's a Rogue thing and not an anybody thing. I guess I don't associate Rogues with magic, anymore than I associate Fighters with magic.
I agree. It's just nonsensical.
I don't like it.
It's been in the game since the Greyhawk supplement to the original D&D when Thieves were introduced as a class. If you don't like it, don't use it. *shrug* The ability to learn a couple of spells by rote is just an extension of the ability to read arcane scrolls (and in later editions arcane devices). And gain, if you don't like it, don't use it. Personally I find it more reasonable than a rogue suddenly taking a level as wizard out of nowhere and learning two tons of magical theory, etc. but YMMV.
I like it. And for other classes, there are a lot of feats in splatbooks like the complete ..., that give something similar. I like them, too. IMO, you don't have to stress your imagination to believe that in a world, that's so full of magic like the typical d&d campaign, there are some gifted individuals that can learn something of this stuff without proper training. ;) It's a matter of taste, of course, and in some campaigns it's propably less appropriate than in others.