Garrod the Clever
Type: Rogue
Kin: Human
Level: 1
STR: 11
CON: 11
DEX: 14
SPD: 10
INT: 15
WIZ: 11
LK: 9
CHR: 8
Adds: +2
Talents: Roguery (INT+5)
As you can see I made some good rolls, not phenomenal ones but some good ones especially when it came to the Roguery talent. Overall, however, Garrod is rather ordinary; his average attribute is 11. You might wonder about his poor Luck and my decision to make Garrod a Rogue (Rogues are lucky right?). It's simple; thanks to Roguery and Garrod's high IQ, Garrod's Luck is effectively 20 regardless of what I rolled. So are his Intelligence (on which Garrod's Roguery talent is based) and Charisma. This means that for ALL Intelligence, Luck, AND Charisma Saving Rolls the only way for Garrod to fail a Level 1 SR is to fumble (i.e. roll a 3 on 2D6). To make a L2 SR on these attributes, Garrod need only get a 5 or greater on 2D6. Not bad. Garrod will be hard pressed to meet a challenge he cannot overcome even at first level.
Restricting Roguery to affect only one attribute will mitigate this power, but still make it interesting, useful, and a good way to separate Rogues from other types. In the case of Garrod, only Saving Rolls on Intelligence would be made with a base score of 20. When faced with challenges to be overcome with Luck or Charisma, Garrod may come up short. Another alternative, should you not want to choose only one attribute, would be to add the Roguery talent bonus to each attribute separately rather than basing it on the highest of the three. Therefore Garrod's effective INT, LK, and CHR for Saving Rolls would be 20, 14, and 13 respectively. Still and edge for sure, but not a ticket for automatic success.
To make a L2 SR on these attributes, Garrod need only get a 5 or greater on 2D6. Not bad.
ReplyDeleteActually he should need just a 4 for the "add your level to turn a failure into a success" rule, so he has about a 92% chance of success.
Even better. ^_^
Another alternative, should you not want to choose only one attribute, would be to add the Roguery talent bonus to each attribute separately rather than basing it on the highest of the three.
IMHO that's a great House Rule.
Actually he should need just a 4 for the "add your level to turn a failure into a success" rule
DeleteAh yes, I often forget that applies to first level characters.
Let me be the one to disagree with your dislike of the Roguery Talent as it is written.
ReplyDeleteWho ever said a rogue had to be lucky? And smart? And Charming?
Many characters, both people we know and fictitious ones, are rather unlucky. But through a tenacious charm and/or a quick wit, things work out in the end. Likewise, there are indeed those who rely on charm and/or luck to overcome lacking insight. And Using one's head and hoping for good fortune when you can't charm someone is never a bad tactic.
Your rules here overly limits the Type for no real practical reason as the game is played out. Warriors absorb incredible amounts of damage. Wizards cast spells with amazing ease. Why can't the Rogue have something that comes easy to him?
Let me be the one to disagree with your dislike of the Roguery Talent as it is written.
DeleteGreat!
No one said a Rogue had to be any of those things Tom; although the 5th edition rules did suggest that Luck was the "major" attribute of Rogues. It is possible that when your roll your attributes none of those three (INT, LK, CHR) could be very high in which case the effect of Roguery at the start is minimized.
My major issue with the rues as written is that with Roguery two of those three attributes become unimportant. The only one you really need to invest in is Intelligence since it controls what spells the Rogue can cast. There is no need to spend AP to increase Luck or Charisma because all of your Saving Rolls on those attributes will be based on your Rogues Roguery talent (which can use INT as it's base). That is a huge advantage over Warrior and Wizards that, at least to me after running some 7th edition Rogue characters and seeing others in action, seems way out of line with the abilities of those other two types.
To be clear I'm all for giving Rogues some extra bells and whistles. As I've said before I found 5th edition Rogues somewhat lacking. But it's the sheer number of things that come easily to a Rogue using the current rules for the Roguery talent.
First off, lemme start by saying that your argument so far has been the sexiest and most seductive "rule's tweek" that I have seen in the half-decade that the 7th edition of T&T came out. It is even more charming than the "Experience Point Inflation" debacle that led to the release of 7.5. So hat's off you if this idea floats in the upcoming edition.
ReplyDeleteNow, down to tabletop. I've ran 12 rouges seriously, with a handful of others, to date, and not noticed once in 214 sessions any sort of imbalance. Indeed, I have to work in extra scenes to let Rogues as written actually shine. The prevailing rogue in RPG the RPG world it seems, is the D&D thief. Everyone picks Talents in "cat burglary," "lock cracking" and "acrobatics." In these extra scenes I have to include a premise that someone who isn't a rock scientist or an Olympian is worth while, usually involves a puzzle or a contrived social dilemma.