What is a rogue to you?

[Kzach]

In AD&D there was always the 'thief' until 3e co-opted the class and called it a 'rogue'. In my mind, however, rogue is the catch-all term for thieves, swashbucklers and assassins, but none of these three are the same thing, they simply share similar basic attributes.

For me, a rogue will always be a thief. Thieves are my favourite class to play and always have been, throughout any game whether pen & paper or video. But it seems that, more and more, the 'thief' concept within the rogue sphere is slowly dying off and being replaced with what I would call swashbucklers and assassins.

Part of this is the focus on combat that both 3e and 4e brought to the table but also it seems to have a lot to do with newer gamers bringing in newer concepts of the class, most of which seem to be born of video games like World of Warcraft. Now... I know that's a contentious issue and I don't subscribe to the theory that 4e is a WoW clone, however I do understand it to be a well-documented fact that WoW and other video games did have an influence on the development of both 3e and 4e.

So... where has my beloved rogue (read: thief) gone?

My primary purpose as a rogue (thief), in AD&D games was to a) cause mischief, b) steal whatever wasn't bolted down*, and c) sneak into wherever he shouldn't.

Then of course there was the miscellany of spying and trap detection/disarming, and the occasional (ie. NOT every single turn), brutally effective BACK (ie. NOT from any direction) stab. I wasn't a combat-wombat. I didn't wade into battle with my flashing rapier. I didn't stab people with dark magic. I just had fun.

I miss playing thieves. Yes, I was THAT guy who always played a kender or a dexterous elf. But dammit if everyone at the table didn't love me for it.

So I guess my ultimate question is in regards to how 5e will treat the rogue (thief) and since we (the people) have all the power and say in what makes up this new edition, I'd like to hear from everyone what THEY think a rogue is and how it should be represented in the new edition. Obviously, I want to see the return of a real thief who isn't completely overshadowed by the swashbuckler and assassin branch of the class.

*Provided he didn't also have bolt cutters.

 

[Hassassin]

I like rogues versatile. A rogue may be a pickpocket, an assassin, a swashbuckler or a scout.

The only thing most rogues have in common is their sneakiness.

 

[Yora]

I think the skill-expert role is clearly a non-warrior class. If you're a lightly armored and fast frontline warrior, that's a fighter with rogue, thief, or whatever as a secondary class.
Sneak attack is a cool thing, but should be intended for stealth attacks, not regular combat.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I like rogues as thieves and scoundrels. Think they work best with an out of combat focus (ie the old percentage based thieves skills). But would like to see plenty of options for thieves developing into guildmasters and engaging in commerce. When I think thief, i think either urban adventure or a dungeon crawl trap finder.

 

[Mattachine]

"Rogue" came into play in second edition, with thief as as subclass of rogue.

In any case, the thief archetype you describe is something I played in AD&D, and something my players used, as well. On the other hand, myself and others also liked playing stealthy, skilled adventurers that weren't even a little bit larcenous, and AD&D had no other options for that. We simply ignored the alignment restriction and went from there--it was weird to see "thief" on a character sheet and not actually play a thieving PC, though.

Names/terminology matters. I loved in when 3e dropped "thief" from the class name, but kept it in the description of the class, and the suggested character themes.

 

[CM]

I guess I'm not sure what is stopping the 3e/4e rogue from causing mischief, stealing things, and breaking into places.

Spend your feats on additional skill training and skill focus, and focus on magic items that improve your social, mobility, and escape options and you'll have a pretty close approximation of an old-school thief.

As for backstab, I can't say I really miss facing rules. There might be a way to approximate it though. Perhaps a backstab option might allow the thief only to sneak attack when an opponent provokes an opportunity attack by moving away from the thief, or when a target the rogue has flanked makes an attack that does not include the rogue as a target (almost like a 4e mark).

Edit:
I forgot to mention, this seems like possibly a DM/campaign issue as well. If the adventure doesn't have enough opportunities for the thief-rogue to shine, it might start to feel like a second-class citizen.

 

[Splurch]

My favorite class is also the rogue but I really like to play different ones each time. My hope with this theme system it is set up with rogue as base class then thief, assassin, and swashbuckler are themes. Sometimes I play a second story style thief, a con man, or a sneaky killer, so a rogue to me is all of the above.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I guess I'm not sure what is stopping the 3e/4e rogue from causing mischief, stealing things, and breaking into places.

Nothing but in 2e and 1e that was their domain (it was the concept) and they were built around that (they were not designed to be super stealth fighters or anything like that). I just prefer them built around the noncombat stuff and having more exclusive access to thief skills (others had lower base percentages at these but were nowhere close to the thief).

 

[ferratus]

A thief is a bit too narrow of a name to be a class. Even in 2e you had several kits which did away with the thieving (acrobat, bounty hunter, swashbuckler, scout). There is also a need for lightly armored scoundrels such as pirates.

So I think the distinction of rogue being a class and thief being a subclass or build is the way to go.

The big debate here is whether the rogue should be an effective combat fighter, a dextrous ninja assassin. I don't think he particularly should be, because that should be the job of the assassin. The assassin should be the nimble fighter who can take on templars and kill quickly and efficiently with sneak attacks. What the assassin doesn't do, the monk or the ranger can do instead.

So what combat role does that leave the thief? I would posit that the role of the thief in combat is to cheat. In other words, his attacks should cripple or incapacitate his opponents rather than kill.

 

[Minigiant]

Before I got into D&D, when introduced to the thief I was confused. Why would someone bring a thief on a raid of a dragon hoard? Later I learned it was to disarm traps and open chests. I still wondered why you'd bring such a softness down there still.

As time elapsed and editions passed by, my beliefs on the now rogue changed but only a bit.

To me a rogue is an expert of a few essential adventuring skills who chose to forgo formal weapons training, arcane learning, or divine spiritualism, but is still competent in the weapons and armors available to the common man. A rogue excels at the skills that a fighter, mage, or cleric has no time to master and still provides some aid in the usual battles an adventurer will see.