FUCK ROGUES

>Classes should be:
>Fighter
>Cleric
>Ranger
>Caster (and this one should be nerfed to death)

Too much bloat. It's more like
>Muggle
>Wizard

I honestly believe this whole autistic shitfest started with the very, very stupid decision to call a class 'fighter' when every fucking class in this fucking game can fight, because that's most of what the whole fucking point of it was.

I'm pretty sure there's enough thematic and mechanical versatility in the magic-user category to split it at least once. Lumping all the magic together into a single class tends to get out of control.

You know what, you are right, we don't really need a ranger or a cleric, those are juts specializations of certain casters and fighters.

Ranger is literally a ranged fighter, and cleric is literally a healing magic specialist. There is so much bloat right now, its disgusting really.

Classes in general are bad, for a lot of people being a class means that you only know things within that class and are utterly ignorant of anything else outside of it.

>lumping everyone who fights into one class
>lumping all magic into one class

That's retarded. Rename Fighter into "Man at Arms" and people would be less angry about it.

Describing classes in the role they will militarily is easiest for 'martials'. Do the same for religious classes for what role they fill in the church and do it for magic users based on source.

You're both fucking retards who just enjoy bloat. Both caster and fighters are just specialized versions of being a PC at all. They should be consolidated. Fucking hell you people are retards.

Except lots of classes can have access to disable device

I would say to just split it into 4 categories, and then let people mix and match. You have fighting, skills, healing, and magic. Then any given character gets 2.

>>Muggle
>>Wizard
This is pretty much what Ars Magica is and it's great. The mechanics are a bit wonky though.

Actually meant to say
>Muggle
>Caster

It all boils down to whether they solve most problems with magic or not. Flavor the magic however you like and offer sub-classes like druid, shaman, wizard, etc. Same for muggles.

Don't you then have exactly the same situation as before, only you've renamed classes "subclasses" and lumped them together into two categories for no reason?

It's always funny when Veeky Forums has these kinds of threads. It shows off that while a lot of Veeky Forums likes to think they have any mind for game design they show off that they can't design their way out of a paper bag.

MTG threads are good for this too. Thanks for the laughs guys.

You guys are very hilarious, my le sides are busted from laughing at your dank irony, but rogue is still a pointless class that can and should have its abilities folder into other stuff and only exists because of legacy mechanics and nerds wanting to pretend they're the charismatic self serving asshole they wouldn't dare to be in real life. Hold that shit.

>2017
>still playing systems with classes
D&D really did ruin everything.

Veeky Forums doesn't understand how tabletop games actually function, it's a place for people who can't find a group to salivate over power fantasies of being a wizard.

It always comes back to reality-warping main character and his merry band of muggle tagalongs.

>Name 1(one) thing that would be worse by a game not having rogues or a similar type of character, you can't.
>you can't.
Yes I can.
They don't just pick locks you know. Besides, since they are tooled to be able to do so anyway, why should I try and be a good lock picker when I can get the guy who's already really good at it to do it? Treasure is a huge part of DnD you know?
>>Their only other contributing factors are doing damage and being fast, something other classes already do. This part of rogue can and should just be part of fighter
So this is partially true, rogues do contribute less in combat than other classes, but the way in which the rogue deals that damage IS different. It's in one huge chunk, and is usually from an bonus granting direction, so it's almost granted that the rogue can cut a tough guy down to size given the right opportunity.
This is actually important because of how Hit Points work. Each enemy or PC is 100% combat effective until they fall below 1 HP. If you can take one foe out quickly, then you do more effective damage against the opponents party of villains than you would if you actually dealt MORE damage spread out to all of the villains without killing any of them.
Also, the fighter couldn't sneak into possition and move as freely wearing heavy armour like they do. And who else would keep the villains' attention while the rogue gets to work? It's a team game after all.
This kind of gameplay gives the feeling of a character who stays calm and out of sight until the right moment presents itself. It's kind of like....
>>The biggest That Guy magnet of all time, every single rogue has the exact same motivation of "lol I'm going to steal things and hit on ladies while you guys do all the work"
Well, yeah, you're spot on there.

You know, unless magic isn't that strong.

There's no real reason why the combat part of rogues aren't just fighter abilities or a subclass other than "we need the rogue to do something when he's not a walking swiss army knife so his player doesn't check out of the game"

Tell me where a rogue backstabbed you.

Any class can do lockpicking / trap-disarming.
Rogues can pick magical locks/traps. Anyone can deal with mundane ones. But guess what counters magical traps? Dispell Magic. By the time you have to worry about dangerous magical traps you should have someone able to cast it either as a spell or via a wand.
If you want 3.5 flavor go for PF and half of the classes have an archetype to get the same bonuses as the rogue.

Thinking that only the rogue can deal with traps/locks is as silly as thinking a wizard only works as blaster or that melee characters can't zone control.

had a guy who wasn't playing a rogue but stole our shit anyway
he fucked off from the party and now we're gonna find his thief ass and since his motivation was to buy a house we're going to burn down his house.

How did he stole your shit?

I actually have to have a good INT score because we have no skill monkey

I glad 5th made it so if no one wanted to play one you did have to force someone or deal with a NPC. They just do it better as they can times 2 so many skills. Unlike clerics as the only real healers in the game.

I think the main issue with rogues (or at least this type of rogue) is that they get sneak attack. Frankly it makes no sense that any random chode can't get sneak attack unless they are a rogue. If a PC sneaks up behind someone completely undetected and slit someones throat they should get sneak attack PERIOD no matter what fucking class they are no matter what they are trained in, it doesn't matter, you just slit a guys throat by sneaking.

I understand why companies give rogues this ability, otherwise they would be all but useless in combat. But instead of sneak attack they could have gone for a more thematic type of mechanic. Perhaps something akin to combat tricks that they can use to stun or daze a target, which if you think about it accomplishes the same goal (takes one person out of the fight) but isn't some contrived "I stab him in the vulnerable spots" No shit, that's what literally anyone is trying to do in combat at ALL times unless otherwise noted, they are trying to damage the vulnerable spots. These aforementioned "combat tricks" also fit more into the flavor of the class I believe. They are skilled at getting inside someones defenses and striking in ways the opponent does not expect thus allowing them to become dazed or stunned. Street thieves (which is what rogues have historically been described as in many systems) are not trained in biology, they don't know more than the obvious week points that everyone else knows. But they would know how to move quickly and take someone by surprise from having to do just that when they are trying to burgle, mug, or steal.

During a long rest on his watch.
Probably should've seen it coming since he was always a scumbag.

I love the rogue archetype, but I actually agree. Fantasycraft still has a couple "rogue" classes, but anybody can have the skills, most of the sneak attack, etc.

The Burglar is the closest; they get good defense and initiative bonuses, have 8 skill points per level, and get bonus melee or covert feats. However, they are the only class that gets all the uncanny dodge and evasion abilities (one other class gets the uncanny dodge ones).

The Assassin is kinda close, more of a fighter/rogue focused on social ability and melee fighting. Both the burglar and the assassin can take a class ability that gives them 1d6 sneak attack.

Then the Scout which is basically a ranger, but is the only class to get sneak attack progression (5d6 over 20 levels), all other sneak attack bonuses coming from feats (which of the three classes, the burglar has most access to), backgrounds, and some skills.

As long as I can make a fast/agile/stealthy/perceptive/athletic character who wears light armor and uses light weapons and can deal a ton of precision damage and make many attacks, I'm happy.

Everyone can fight.

Fighters fight best.

Everyone can solve puzzles and get through dungeon challenges.

Wizards solve puzzles like this best.

Everyone can sneak, pick locks, and assassinate targets.

Rogues do this best.

Even if they're in a rough spot, having the classic 3 class archetype is lovely.

>TFW rogue picks fight with barbarian and gets his shit pushed in

it's not the same though, the dispel magic thing uses up a slot (or a charge), may not work, and even if it does, it's only temporary

>implying wizards aren't the best at everything

>>Their existence means that no other class can learn how to open a locked door or be skilled in mundane things so they can have a niche even though in practice that doesn't make any sense, making them the aquaman of classes

Does it suck playing older editions?
Cos I got a Paladin right now who refutes that silly little claim.

>Assuming I'm not a charismatic self serving asshole in real life

We can't all be NEETs user

>he doesn't ban core

>>Their existence means that no other class can learn how to open a locked door or be skilled in mundane things so they can have a niche

That's point of the DND classes. Clerics can't use edge weapons or cast high level spells. Druids can't wear metal armour. Wizards can't cast healing spells or use sword. Fighters can't spell or hide in shadow.

It's arbitrary and nonsensical but it's goes hand-in-hand with the game

Dark Heresy (along with Warhammer Fanasty) is the only class base system that make sense.

>liking Warhammer rpgs
shit taste

That's OD&D pre-blackmoor supplements.
You had Fighting-Man, Magic-user and then Cleric which was pretty much a mix of fighting-man and magic-user.

"Skills" is a stupidly large area of expertise as is general "magic." Neither of those actually describe what character does or what they contribute only that one guy has lot of talent in things and the other can do thing magically.

Healing is also stupidly restrictive. It's boils down to hitting the "fix this shit" bottom over and over again, essentially playing the game on automatic. You could make it into a little minigame thing with a bunch of extra mechanics but that goes into shadowrun matrix territories of asking ether the healer or the rest of the party to sit out of the game while the other does all their fancy stuff.
Healing has only been as big a deal in D&D because natural healing times were unpleasantly slow and haven't usually scaled with HP increases. But they have become tradition so videogames and careless people use the shit out of them.

In pretty much all adventuring parties everyone fights. In 3e D&D and beyond rogues and mages have had just as much if not more martial capacity than normal fighters. Sure they don't use weapons but they bring about the same effects.

No my friend, it is YOU who has the shit taste.

You sound like a angry child.

Uses for rogues

>superior trap finding and evading
>superior stealth and acrobatic ability
>skills in fucking general you goddamn dumbfuck
>sneak attack bonuses that actively encourage teamwork and regular flanking
>depending on edition a plethora of extra abilities that make them absurdly useful for certain situations

No they aren't a tool box just like how no class should be one. It's a game meant to be played with a group and if the only rogues youve ever played with have been idiots who just steal constantly then it sounds like a personal problem.

For all of warhammers problems the RPGs are fine.

And I like the way they handle the classes. It's a good hybrid of classic class and level and point buy. You get a clear sense of direction with progress with option without being overtly artificially restrictive.

Explain faggot

>Someone on Veeky Forums doesn't like a thing.

Not sure what you expect him to tell you... Certainly not a detailed articulate response

Other than adepts who are piss poor at combat.

Invaluable little skil monkies and possibly my favourite class, but just... So BAD in a fight.

And if you say "well, they're good at what they do" that's true, and in dark heresy, books can and will kill the shit out of you, bullets from that gangers stub gun or the mutants wrench are much more likely to do you in.

I expect him to tell me what he dislikes

Not him, but I'm not a fan of the lore/world. Whatever you want to call it. Seems he's just baiting lazily though, since he's just trying to start shit.

Rogue is a mindset, not a class.

I can't really fault you for that. The Warhammer and 40k universes require a particular taste. Mechanically though, I struggle to think of a better system (Even though I have a rather low-level of experience with ttRPGs).

POINT OF ORDER, THE CLASS WAS CALLED FIGHTING MAN

Now you're just being sexist!

You forgot monk, people often forget monk was its very own thing at one point and not just yet another martial

>Imagine there's no classes
>It's easy if you're not cliche
>No trap options below us
>Above us only roleplay
>Imagine all the games that could exist today

>Imagine there's no D&D
>It isn't hard to do
>Nothing to loot or gain XP from
>And no casters too
>Imagine all the games shared across the world

>You may say I'm a faggot
>But I'm not the only one
>I hope some day you'll roleplay with us
>And roleplaying games will be as one.

>Imagine no imbalance
>I wonder if you can
>No need for shitposting or errata
>A brotherhood on Veeky Forums
>Imagine all the games being played in peace

>You may say I'm a faggot
>But I'm not the only one
>I hope some day you'll roll with us
>And roleplaying games will be as one.

Your fault. Should have kept a close look on your stuff.

Only if the rogue is an idiot.

>I'm going to straight fight against a pure melee tank class
>Ops I died, how did this happen? :(

>Their existence means that no other class can learn how to open a locked door or be skilled in mundane things
Have you tried not playing D&D?

Rogues are fine. It is the fighter is the one that's an anachronism and obsolete.

The fighter is a melee tank. He is a bit more versatile than the barbarian.

if you choose thieves tools as a proficiency and have sufficient dex, any class can unlock doors, maybe not as good as a rogue, but enough to get by "standard locks"

in combat, their sneak attacks give them some rather powerful burst damage, almost as much as a munchkined paladin, and doesnt eat up resources
and the rules mean that they can use positioning even when playing theatet pf the mind, since you can pull off a sneak attack if the target is engaged with a friendly
this gives them a surgical role in combat not quite taken by other classes, especially when combined with their stealth