Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
#695023 13/10/20 11:41 PM
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Gamertown USA
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Gamertown USA
No need for the class. Just pick the skills for proficiency and the tools. With the same stats, the difficulties looked the same. I am sure that shouldn't be the case, right?

Joined: Oct 2020
B
stranger
Offline
stranger
B
Joined: Oct 2020
Rogues in D&D aren't necessarily better at lockpicking and disarming traps. They are more in line with a mobility/stalker melee because of their expanded bonus action choices.

They can become better at skullduggery than anyone else, and they get more skills than anyone else.

Watching a rogue be played all the way to 20th level recently, I can tell you they need no extra love.

Having said that, rogues currently can't select their expertise skills which is where they would typically choose to make lockpicking a double proficiency.

Last edited by Blizz't; 13/10/20 11:58 PM.
Joined: Jan 2018
W
veteran
Offline
veteran
W
Joined: Jan 2018
As Blizz’t said, 5E is such that anybody can perform the basic utilities of a rogue, but that isn’t all that they have to offer. Rouges are a fun class, and absolutely have their place.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Gamertown USA
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Gamertown USA
Man, now I feel dated. LOL Well, at least there is a bug/missing feature there.

Joined: Oct 2017
G
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
G
Joined: Oct 2017
Originally Posted by Warlocke
As Blizz’t said, 5E is such that anybody can perform the basic utilities of a rogue, but that isn’t all that they have to offer. Rouges are a fun class, and absolutely have their place.


In my opinion this is a good design choice in 5E. I don't like feeling like I must include a particular class. I think it's good that other classes can fill that role if you don't want to play a rogue but at the same time it does not make the rogue useless because being the trap guy is not the only thing they bring to the game.

Joined: Jan 2018
W
veteran
Offline
veteran
W
Joined: Jan 2018
Originally Posted by GamerSerg
Originally Posted by Warlocke
As Blizz’t said, 5E is such that anybody can perform the basic utilities of a rogue, but that isn’t all that they have to offer. Rouges are a fun class, and absolutely have their place.


In my opinion this is a good design choice in 5E. I don't like feeling like I must include a particular class. I think it's good that other classes can fill that role if you don't want to play a rogue but at the same time it does not make the rogue useless because being the trap guy is not the only thing they bring to the game.


Precisely.

Joined: Oct 2015
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2015
I personally don't like it much. I like my characters feeling special, needed and unique. If anybody can do anything what is even the point of having classes? But whatever, It's mainly about role playing and so I can role play that my rogue is unique and special and that nobody else can do what they do.

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Warlocke
As Blizz’t said, 5E is such that anybody can perform the basic utilities of a rogue, but that isn’t all that they have to offer. Rouges are a fun class, and absolutely have their place.


Post 3. Who had post 3 as the one where rogues would turn into make-up?

Lol, just having fun with ya man. For whatever reason, it's very easy to reverse the U and the G when typing and the problem is that since it's still a word, the built in spell checker doesn't highlight it :P

Joined: Jan 2018
W
veteran
Offline
veteran
W
Joined: Jan 2018
Originally Posted by Osprey39
Originally Posted by Warlocke
As Blizz’t said, 5E is such that anybody can perform the basic utilities of a rogue, but that isn’t all that they have to offer. Rouges are a fun class, and absolutely have their place.


Post 3. Who had post 3 as the one where rogues would turn into make-up?

Lol, just having fun with ya man. For whatever reason, it's very easy to reverse the U and the G when typing and the problem is that since it's still a word, the built in spell checker doesn't highlight it :P


I stand by my statement. My characters are fabulous, bedazzled, and ready to hit the town.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Rugby, UK
Cleric of Innuendo
Offline
Cleric of Innuendo
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Rugby, UK
Originally Posted by Osprey39
Post 3. Who had post 3 as the one where rogues would turn into make-up?

Rogue/Rouge became a common 'deliberate mistake' on internet RPG forums quite a few years ago. It is now at the point where it is hard to tell if the spelling is a genuine mistake or a nod to the meme. It is on a par with pronouncing gnome with a hard G, the chances are that the person doing so is aware of the 'mistake'.

As for playing rouges in D&D5; I played one in PnP last year and gave the character up because it didn't play out as I was used to rogues playing. At some point in the past, the rogue shifted from a sneaky trap-disarmer and lock-picker into a damage-dealer. It became all about the sneak attack with only a nod or two towards the old job of clearing out dungeon passageways and gaining access to locked rooms and chests.

I think part of the problem was that I hadn't played a rogue for some time (I think 3/3.5e), but that also 'dungeons' have moved from classic if unfeasible underground labyrinths to more open area settings. You still get the occasional crypt or tunnel system, of course, but the rogue's true calling has faded over the editions and as gaming and scenarios have matured.

Joined: Sep 2016
K
stranger
Offline
stranger
K
Joined: Sep 2016
I'm for one is really happy about this change compared to BG1&BG2. I don't want to play as a rogue, and I don't want Astarion forced into my party to unlock chests or disarm traps.

We have a limited 4-sized party, and after Act 1 we won't be able to keep using any of the side-lined party members according to Larian. They might change their mind about it, but Astarion is definitely not one of the companions I intend to keep if I'm forced to choose.

Last edited by KurtHaakan; 14/10/20 11:32 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Baldur's Gate with 5e rules without a Rogue class? Seriously? laugh


.i.
Joined: Oct 2020
F
stranger
Offline
stranger
F
Joined: Oct 2020
If the OP means that everyone can 'rogue' just because they can pick locks and disarm some traps, or possibly even because they can disengage and hide as well, all of those statements are true in the EA of BG3. Even the 5e rules support most of it because they are all decided on a D20 roll against a known DC (difficulty check) between 1-30. With lower DC checks even a party member with a negative modifier has a chance to succeed, but that does not make them a rogue. A rogue is so much more than a lock picker and a trap finder even though he should be doing those things as well because if he or she is a good rogue they would be out front sneaking around and scouting the area, planning ambushes and devising battlefield tactics. Every PC in the current build of the game that is not a rogue can sneak and hide, but they do it badly. Your party should never be surprised in combat if you can absolutely help it because of the disadvantage on dice rolls and a rogue played well will not only fill this role for you, but while the enemy is advancing on your party and focusing all of its efforts to kill Cale, your crafty rogue will be doing what he does best, killing them all from the shadows.

Joined: Sep 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
One of the WORST things about earlier games based on older rulesets was that if you didn't have a rogie in the group, you couldn't play them.

In Dungeons And Dragons online, this led to me needing to put a single rogue level on all my past life grinds, so even when playing a Favoured Soul or Druid I would need a single rogue class and invest all my skill points in Disarm Traps and Search.

Even for open locks, you needed at least one rogue, or later on artificer level and a single hard point, and then use gear / buffs to get your DC high enough.

Most of the content would result in being completely unplayable without a trapper. The same cpuld be said about healers, but the game eventually had 5 classes that could heal - Clerics, Favoured Soul, Druids, Bards, and Artificers (potion throwing), and ultimately everyone raised their UMD skill high enough to use heal scrolls and the game devolved into 'bring your own heals' because of how fed up people got with both waiting for healers and healing itself (being blamed any time someone died). Clerics are honestly 100% unenjoyable to play as healers anyway compared to actually using their offensive abilities.

The way that BG3 currently is, you can play the game well with ANY selection of classes. Healing can all come from food and potions, and any class can specialize in sleight of hand, altgough you will want a dexterity build for it.

Also in older rulesets you needed dexterity for stealth and open locks, intelligence for search and disable device, and wisdom for spot ... It was all just ridiculous and difficult to make one specialized utility character that could be the 'trap monkey' but not deal as much damage and overall be the weakest squishiest character in your group.


Last edited by DumbleDorf; 14/10/20 02:38 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
I think it's fine and well that everyone can do Sleight of Hand and Stealth, it's good design. But as a primary rogue player, I really, really want them to give us the Expertise that we rightfully deserve, so we can at least be a little BETTER at those things (or whichever skills we choose) than all the pretenders.

Joined: Sep 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Firesnakearies
I think it's fine and well that everyone can do Sleight of Hand and Stealth, it's good design. But as a primary rogue player, I really, really want them to give us the Expertise that we rightfully deserve, so we can at least be a little BETTER at those things (or whichever skills we choose) than all the pretenders.


That would be fine and actually I don't get why the expertise feature is missing.

Even currently, astarion fails a lot on disarming traps, so expertise would be a good addition.

Last edited by DumbleDorf; 14/10/20 02:48 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Rugby, UK
Cleric of Innuendo
Offline
Cleric of Innuendo
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Rugby, UK
Originally Posted by Felmid
A rogue is so much more than a lock picker and a trap finder even though he should be doing those things as well because if he or she is a good rogue they would be out front sneaking around and scouting the area, planning ambushes and devising battlefield tactics. Every PC in the current build of the game that is not a rogue can sneak and hide, but they do it badly. Your party should never be surprised in combat if you can absolutely help it because of the disadvantage on dice rolls and a rogue played well will not only fill this role for you,

I think that role, certainly above-ground, is what the ranger class is supposed to do. The ranger is, after all, essentially a scout. Underground, the ranger can still continue to be the scout, especially with the right choice of favoured terrain. I don't see any advantage that the rogue gets in this any more.

Originally Posted by Felmid
but while the enemy is advancing on your party and focusing all of its efforts to kill Cale, your crafty rogue will be doing what he does best, killing them all from the shadows.

Killing, whether from the shadows or not, is not great behaviour for a scout. The best reconnaissance is the reconnaissance that leaves your enemies none the wiser that someone is interested in them. The easiest enemy to dispatch is the enemy that doesn't know they are in danger. Recent editions have certainly made the sneak attack (formerly the backstab) easier to implement, but it was quite hard to position for in the earlier games, and only used a limited range of weapons. I think the relaxing of those restrictions is an acknowledgement that most players see the rogue primarily as a damage-dealer and want more opportunities to Sneak Attack.

That is what the new-look rogue seems to be built around. They are now much more assassin than burglar, with the Sneak Attack being their dominant feature. PnP rogues have the Expertise feature which emphasises the skill monkey part of their role, but none of those skills is exclusive to the class. They have become highly-skilled generalists with murderous damage-dealing instead of their old primary role of scouts and trap and lock-defeaters.

Last edited by Sadurian; 14/10/20 02:52 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
My ranger ended up with 9 non-skill proficencies during character creation which was nice, which included stealth and sleight of hand. So he covered a lot of areas which is useful in the lead character - you never know when one of your companions is going to get fed up with you and leave.

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by vyvexthorne
I personally don't like it much. I like my characters feeling special, needed and unique. If anybody can do anything what is even the point of having classes? But whatever, It's mainly about role playing and so I can role play that my rogue is unique and special and that nobody else can do what they do.


The rogue's sneak attack is pretty special. The hit and run abilities with those extra bonus actions are superb. Fights are a lot more common than a locked chest too wink

Joined: Oct 2017
G
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
G
Joined: Oct 2017
Originally Posted by vyvexthorne
I personally don't like it much. I like my characters feeling special, needed and unique. If anybody can do anything what is even the point of having classes? But whatever, It's mainly about role playing and so I can role play that my rogue is unique and special and that nobody else can do what they do.


Not saying anybody can do anything. Classes still have things that make them unique and needed you just have more choices. You need a frontline melee person but it could be a fighter or a barbarian or a paladin. You need a healer but it could be a cleric, druid or paladin. You need someone to be the stealth / slight of hand guy but it could be a rogue or a ranger or maybe a warlock. There are still lots of things that make your rogue feel nobody else can do what they do like sneak attack and several other unique class features. Letting other classes have skill with locks doesn't make Rogue less special, they are just special for different reasons now.

The thing is that having someone to deal with locks and traps is so absolutely essential that you must have someone in your party who can address that need. If only one class can really do it well then you are almost forced to bring that class in every group, every time. I look at it like healing which is also something every party needs but it is not limited to one class. Sure Clerics might be best at it but you don't have to bring a Cleric. Druids and Paladins can also provide healing. So if we can have multiple classes with access to healing spells why is it so wrong to have multiple classes who could be good with an essential skill like locks/traps? Not every class can be good at it, you do need to be Dexterity focused and take a background that provides proficiency.

Especially in a computer game where you have a limited selection of companions to choose from and they could leave you. If I don't particularly like the rogue companion I'm going to be unhappy if I feel that I have to include him because he is the only one who can get us past the traps and unlock the loot. And what if we don't get along and he leaves, now I'm completely stuck?


Last edited by GamerSerg; 14/10/20 03:29 PM.
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  Dom_Larian, Freddo, vometia 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5