Rogue Questions and Answers

User Forest Green very thoughtfully dropped a bunch of great questions about the rogue in the comments. Since I think a lot of folks will have similar queries, I'm dropping them here as a separate entry.

Also, I'd like to highlight how awesome it is to get questions. I can't always get to them, but they are a huge help in refining a design. Game design is a little like science, in that today's answer to a challenge is truly today's answer. Tomorrow, we may find a better fit. When we do, we should celebrate our advancement in understanding games rather than fixating on vilifying the past. Mistakes are part of the creative process. The best designers I know focus on improvement.

On to the questions:

1. Are the apprentice and novice hit points supposed to be the same (i.e. no increase when moving to novice)? The cleric was 10 at apprentice and 10 at novice too, however, the magic user and fighter both increase hit points from apprentice to novice.

Good catch! I've adjusted them to have the same hit points at apprentice and novice levels so that the same encounter balance guidelines apply to both tiers. That should keep content creation under control and mean an intro adventure is always an intro adventure - you don't have to worry about handling apprentice or novice characters.

2. I like the rogue gets proficiency in ‘small shields’, suggesting medium and tower shields might be returning.

Yes! Tentatively giving small shields +1 AC and wider access, medium shields +2 AC, and tower shields +2 base, +4 situationally with group defensive benefits for tanky characters. Example - Tower shields can be deployed as a terrain piece that grants cover.

3. I like the cunning strike’s confounding attack, particularly the idea of slipping behind them, or ricocheting a sling stone to make them look elsewhere.

Thanks! It needs a little refinement, but it nudges the rogue hopefully into a clear niche as the stealth class.

4. To confirm, does the +4 proficiency bonus get added to attacks? I presume so, hence the note about using daggers and clubs now being viable. That is an interesting way of balancing the lower weapon damage from simple weapons with the fighter.

Yes, and correct about another balancing factor versus fighter. I am also looking at giving all martial classes a base higher proficiency, with fighters 1 point behind rogues.

5. What about using the weapon damage die as an initiative roll where lowest goes first (like a speed factor)? Non-damaging actions, like casting bless, could default to a d6, for example.

I have a lot of thoughts about initiative. I'd like to avoid something that requires players figuring out what they want to do before they take an actual turn. In my experience, it can slow the game down. In my ideal system, there is much more of a back and forth between players and DM.

Having run a LOT of OSE and Shadowdark the past year plus, I like team initiative and around the table, but as a DM I sometimes wish I could be more dynamic in how I present a situation.

6. Would the brawler option get a second attack, like blade does, to balance the lower damage die? Or another non-damage option, like grappling, when fighting bare knuckle?

I was thinking of pushing grappling into the unarmed fighter, but stuff like misdirection or forced movement might make sense for the unarmed rogue. I'll think on this, but I do agree that something a little spicier would be nice,

7. With confounding attack lasting ‘until your next turn’, would that last long enough to give you advantage on your next turn for the purposes of sneak attack, or not?

The intent is that it does not. In the core rules I've written, durations that expire on your turn clear at the start of your turn. That could very well be wrong.

As I think about it, it might make more sense to let that apply to your next turn so you can alternate sneak attacks in most situations.

8. How would confounding attack work with other mechanics, for example, could a fighter, for example, use half of their action to find the rogue then still have one attack they could take, or would the fighter have to use their full action, not be able to attack and then the rogue could hide again on their next turn?

It depends on the creature. When I post more monsters you'll see how this works, but in short - most creatures that are expected to face off against multiple characters have extra actions or a way to stack up a few benefits.

My main worry is finding a way to create stealth rules that are easy enough to use all the time in combat. I'm not sure I have that quite yet,

9. For cunning action, would enemies targeting the rogue get advantage, or similar, like an opportunity attack, if the rogue paused to pick a lock, or disable a trap during combat? Would position and protection from others then be key to protecting the rogue while they secured the exit (or way forward)?

I'd like to purge opportunity attacks out of the game, except for creatures and classes that are specifically designed to for counter play. It is interesting to think about protecting the rogue in this situation, though. I'm tempted to layer that on to specific traps or devices, to capture the difficulty and danger in handling them.

10. It is interesting how favoured fortune has a kind of ‘roll to cast’ decision making on when to use it because of the risk of losing it. Could the rogue get this (or maybe a lower bonus that scales up) from a lower level and have to roll below their level on a d20 to keep it, (therefore it would be more likely to be lost at lower level and therefore weaker earlier on)?

Interesting idea, especially since a higher level rogue already has a higher bonus. Going to put some serious consideration into this idea. I'd like to balance it so that, at best, there's still a 25% chance of losing the feature.

11. With steady eye, I like the idea of a knife wielder going up against a fighter who is wearing full plate: the thief finding the gaps between the armour pieces for at least half damage.

Thanks! Exactly what I was going for.

12. With skills, I may have missed it, or not recalled from an earlier post, but how will skill areas be chosen? Will there be a certain area of knowledge particular to the class and/or background, or selected one by one like in 5e? I like the flexible ShadowDark way of just giving advantage to a roll that fits with class and background, but perhaps you want to be more specific on what is chosen.

I'm leaning now toward specific skills, but I have to admit I waver back and forth all the time. Specific skills are nice from an adventure design POV, but I found that Shadowdark's backgrounds were a lot more fun in play. I have a concept for combining them, where backgrounds give specific verbs they help with, and if you can use that verb to describe what you are doing then you get the bonus.

My only complaint about Shadowdark is that using advantage for all skills felt a little too flat, but it's a minor gripe.