Opuk0 |
Yes, yet another Rogue rework, it's like the class is so bad that anyone can rework them to actually be useful, fancy that. I'm not touting that mine is the end all be all of Rogue reworks, just another one for forum goers to go look over, see if they like or dislike it, and hopefully give some feed back on.
Quick disclaimer, some of these changes are from Lemmy's own rogue rework thread over on giantintheplayground
Lemmy's thread for reference
And here is the google docs for my own
Let me know if the link doesn't work as I have had trouble with it in the past.
The biggest goal in the rework is, first of all, making talents actually useable as I'm sure we all know Paizo often mistakes Rogue Talents for Rogue Nerfs, honest mistake really! Secondly, I wanted to try and make the Rogue more Rogueish so to speak. Often it seems that people feel the Rogue should either be an assassin of the night more akin to a ninja than necessary, or a social juggernaut that can schmooze his way into any social gathering. Personally, I prefer my Rogues as quick and opportunistic and flexible, able to adapt to most situations with a mixture of wits, skill, and a touch of luck that's helped them stay alive for so long.
I never like to say anything's finished, cuz it never really is, especially for an endeavor as big as a Rogue rework, so I'll be updating this on and off as I get feedback/new ideas
Aralicia |
My immediate thoughts :
Wall Slide : it certainly as a cool factor, but a 20 level progression for an effect that can be emulated with a 2k item is meh (note that I think the same thing of the monk's slow fall. It is cool, but isn't powerfull enough to require a 20 level progression. Maybe only 5-10 levels)
Level 5's "Rogues can deal..." : you should name it (or better, keep the way it was described in Lemmy's post (Shadow Strike as bonus Feat)
Lucky Break : Seems okay, if a bit powerful. At level 20, it can give a +10 bonus to an attack roll. Thanksfully, the rogue isn't full BAB.
Lucky Dog [no auto-miss] : Since only attack rolls automatically miss no a 1, and the rogue isn't really a hit machine, chance are that he'll fail anyway (or else he's against a low AC for this level, and one automiss probably won't really matter).
Lucky Dog [Lucky Break to AC] : I'm okayish with the +AC, but why so late ? since Lucky Break is a progressive bonus you could have this option sooner.
Lucky Dog [Lucky Break Recharge] : My only reaction would once again be "why so late" ? If you make a rechargeable pool, give an option to recharge it sooner. After all the gunslinger and the swashbuckler have a similar feature, at level 1.
(On the subject of Rogue reworks, I suddenly got the vague idea of a skill-based version of martial versatility. "- How did you do that ? - I heard someone talk about it, once. I thought I could make it work.")
Magda Luckbender |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In 1st and 2nd Edition AD&D a Thief had the Backstab ability. An attack from behind that the target was not aware of got +4 to hit and inflicted 2x or more damage. At levels 1-4 it was 2x, level 5-8 was 3x, 9-12 was 4x, level 13+ was 5x. In a Dual Weapon attack both attacks were multiplied. Because of that multiplier, the worst fear of every arcane caster was an Invisible Backstabbing Thief. A strong high level thief dual-wielding magic weapons could easily inflict enough damage to instantly kill most arcane casters, since all damage bonuses were also multiplied. It was much deadlier than Sneak Attack.
3rd edition did away with Facing, and Backstab became Sneak Attack. Thus began the nerfing of the Rogue.
Also, in 1st and 2nd edition dual-wielding was the strongest combat style. After edition 3.0+, of course, dual-wielding became a very weak combat style, which it still is.
P.s. Historical note: I once had a Magic User (now called a Wizard) die as a result of an Invisible Backstabbing Thief. It happened thusly:
My PC knew there was an invisible thief about and went to great effort to avoid a backstab. The lethal blow happened because my character stood against a wall. Specifically, I pointed to a 5' square on the map and said, "My character stands here, back to the wall".
The GM said, "This is really where you stand?"
I responded, "Yes, right there".
The GM said, "You picked the wrong place to stand! You stood in front of a secret door, and the thief is just the other side of it. Unfortunately for you, the secret door open towards the thief. You just got backstabbed for XXX damage. You're dead."
The GM, to whom I was married, then showed me the GM map, with the secret door marked on it right where I had stood. Ouch!
Bandw2 |
DM Under The Bridge wrote:What be the backstab?Play the AD&D thief, or if you are particularly vicious, the assassin. Save yourself the work.
They were good once! *shakes cane*
Hmmm, perhaps it would be best to revive an old powerful mechanic, the backstab?
if i remember you auto crit if you hit or some such and the enemy has to make a save to not die. BUT you must be behind your target.
edit: the die part was part of the assassin actually, i played more assassins than thieves.
bookrat |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The backstab wasn't as good as people think it was. Sure, it scaled with levels, but the enemy couldn't be aware of you at all, and all combatants were default aware of all their surroundings. So once combat started, you couldn't use the backstabb feature. For an NPC, it worked great. For a PC, it was horrible.
I played a theif for a solid three years in one 2e campaign, and I used the backstabb ability all of once. Not by choice, but by opportunity. There just was so few opportunities to use the ability. With a standard party, you had to be far enough away from them so their noise doesn't reveal you (dangerous to split from the party), and then they had to wait on you to sneak up and pray that you rolled high enough to hit (and weren't seen) and that the GM adjutocated that the bad guys weren't expecting an attack. And then, that's the only attack all combat that you get backstab. If you're unlucky enough where someone else decides to attack before you, then the combatants are now aware and you can't use the ability at all that combat.
I will note that the original 1e theif didn't have the "unaware" requirement until the DMG was printed. It's not in the PHB. I'm fairly certain that when Gygax was running his games, he got annoyed at the thief making all these backstabs and then wrote in the "opponent must be unaware" into the DMG in order to stop it from happening.
bookrat |
idk, i stealthed a lot in combat so that they weren't aware of me, and i got a few backstabs in near the start of battle before they realized some guy was attacking the enemies from their flanks and rear.
That's be a house rule, then. By RAW (at least 2e RAW), once combat started, they were considered "aware" and therefore immune to backstab. Give me a bit, and I'll find it in my old 2e PHB. Last time I played one, I remember heavily perusing the books trying to find a work around to it.
Bandw2 |
Bandw2 wrote:idk, i stealthed a lot in combat so that they weren't aware of me, and i got a few backstabs in near the start of battle before they realized some guy was attacking the enemies from their flanks and rear.That's be a house rule, then. By RAW (at least 2e RAW), once combat started, they were considered "aware" and therefore immune to backstab. Give me a bit, and I'll find it in my old 2e PHB. Last time I played one, I remember heavily perusing the books trying to find a work around to it.
oh wait, it wasn't in ADnD? then yeah i never saw that rule happen.
DM Under The Bridge |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The backstab wasn't as good as people think it was. Sure, it scaled with levels, but the enemy couldn't be aware of you at all, and all combatants were default aware of all their surroundings. So once combat started, you couldn't use the backstabb feature. For an NPC, it worked great. For a PC, it was horrible.
I played a theif for a solid three years in one 2e campaign, and I used the backstabb ability all of once. Not by choice, but by opportunity. There just was so few opportunities to use the ability. With a standard party, you had to be far enough away from them so their noise doesn't reveal you (dangerous to split from the party), and then they had to wait on you to sneak up and pray that you rolled high enough to hit (and weren't seen) and that the GM adjutocated that the bad guys weren't expecting an attack. And then, that's the only attack all combat that you get backstab. If you're unlucky enough where someone else decides to attack before you, then the combatants are now aware and you can't use the ability at all that combat.
I will note that the original 1e theif didn't have the "unaware" requirement until the DMG was printed. It's not in the PHB. I'm fairly certain that when Gygax was running his games, he got annoyed at the thief making all these backstabs and then wrote in the "opponent must be unaware" into the DMG in order to stop it from happening.
I never had trouble with it, nor those AD&D players I know. I have heard the opinion online that it was hard to pull off, but I grew up around scoundrels and ne'er-do-wells, and they and I got pretty inventive in securing the backstab. To put it another way, since there was facing, misdirection was easier. At low levels, before magic, you used bottles, coins, food and rocks to secure the backstab. A mechanic heavily copied by stealth games. The thief worked well with an otherwise "loud" party, and you were best buddies with illusionists and wizards, but that was part of the design.
DM Under The Bridge |
Ha ha, weak? Stolen GP to XP meant you were easily higher level than other classes if you actually roleplayed a thief; and the classes had different xp requirement to level, e.g:
thieves do go up levels faster than everyone else (a thief with 160,000 xp is tenth level [10d6], a fighter with the same xp is 7th level [7d10])
http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-archive/threads/113398 6
Thieves were quite essential, because if you didn't have them the traps killed you. Sometimes even if you had a thief the traps killed you, but at least you had a chance to get through a dungeon. ;)
Chatting about the thief takes me back.
Gorbacz |
Design which forces you to have a member of class X to progress is crap design. Especially if the most appealing ways to circumvent it involve stuff like using henchmen as expendable trap detectors.
Design which leads you to arguing about who is facing which way in order to determine if a class can use its ability is poor design, too.
Gygax might have been a great storyteller and funmaker, but he sure wasn't the sharpest blade in the armory as far as wrangling rules is concerned.
And I too remember that I've had so much fun with bunch of my Australian friends at Trevor's shack in 1968 when we played Tomb of Horrors. I also remember wearing those rose glasses which were so damn hot an accessory at the time!
DM Under The Bridge |
This thread is for discussing the offered Rogue tweaks, if you would all like to continue talking about backstab, please do so in another thread.
I bring up the backstab because if you want to tweak and house rule, you might want to look to other systems and versions for ideas. Like the backstab, like luck feats and special luck abilities in 3.5 Complete Scoundrel you can bring into your class.
I see your google document and that you have lucky break, that is cool. There is a lot more you can borrow and concentrate upon from older sources. Things for your new rogue that are like that and fit with what you are doing, and are further departures from the rogue of pathfinder.
Good luck!