Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 awestriker Jul 21, 2009 16:52:01	I am currently a level 7 character, having started out at level 1. Current raw monetary gain (for me) so far: 1 GP. Current non-consumable magic items gained so far: Neck Slot: +3 Cloak of Distortion Head Slot: Goggles of Aura Sight and Ignore Concealment Head Slot (currently unequipped): Effect is "Add 1 to your Speed" Current rituals: Traveler's Chant, Unseen Servant, and "the Ghetto Ritual" (it fuses items together into some sort of neat gadget i.e. Lens of Truth + monocle = Monocle of Truth) Current magic items our party's rogue has gained so far: Weapons: One dagger each of +4 Flaming, +(at least 3)? Subtle, and a couple of others Also, our party's other bard has somehow gained enough gold to master 30 rituals (on top of the 2 he started out with.) What can I do about this?
#2 shinkirou Jul 21, 2009 16:58:53	Bite your DM while growling "gimme the money" over and over again.
#3 salla Jul 21, 2009 16:59:04	Someone in a L7 party has a +4 magic weapon, which is a L16 magic item. Ask your DM when you ran over his puppy, because seriously, that's ridiculous on a whole lotta levels.
#4 prince_of_parkness Jul 21, 2009 16:59:45	What do you expect us to say? You are obviously being jibed, so talk to your DM and the party. Don't be rude, just ask them why your character has nothing.
#5 rav514 Jul 21, 2009 17:51:56	Ok guys, while i agree the gm isnt "distrubiting the wealth" properly, (god when did we become communists?); I blame the rogue. Hear me out. I've played many many many rogues. Most if not all were borderline if not complete kleptomanics (not to mention egomaniacs) who viewed the rest of the party as his personal idiotic (risking your life for glory??? glory doesnt pay the bills) bodyguards who where allowed to be in "MY" party only to help me complete what ever gm hair pulling/ head planting into table scheme i had to completely unravel the gm's plot. The plot thing is always unintentional but why should i go **** off a dragon for gold when the castle treasury isnt hidden and a hell of a lot closer and i can blame a rival lord or something instead of running from ****** off dragon. However i ALLWAYS, ALLWAYS, kept my party with the best gear i could "AQUIRE". And yes, i'd even resort to BUYING it if i had too. God that always hurt. There are 2 reasons i did this. 1. If i needed the party to do something, almost everyone will do anything to keep the "bank" happy. 2. How could they accomplish the tasks i set them if they dont have the best gear? Heck, i sold my entire party (but me) into slavery once just to buy them out later at a reduced rate after making a killing on their gladiator fights. Washed up gladiators are cheap and i made a killing on them throwing their last fights. They were pretty ****** but got over it quickly when i pointed out that their new shiny magic items came from the money i won off of their fights. (with a healthy cut for me ofcoarse.)
#6 erendor Jul 21, 2009 20:19:11	Ok guys, while i agree the gm isnt "distrubiting the wealth" properly, (god when did we become communists?); I blame the rogue. Hear me out. I've played many many many rogues. Most if not all were borderline if not complete kleptomanics (not to mention egomaniacs) who viewed the rest of the party as his personal idiotic (risking your life for glory??? glory doesnt pay the bills) bodyguards who where allowed to be in "MY" party only to help me complete what ever gm hair pulling/ head planting into table scheme i had to completely unravel the gm's plot. The plot thing is always unintentional but why should i go **** off a dragon for gold when the castle treasury isnt hidden and a hell of a lot closer and i can blame a rival lord or something instead of running from ****** off dragon. However i ALLWAYS, ALLWAYS, kept my party with the best gear i could "AQUIRE". And yes, i'd even resort to BUYING it if i had too. God that always hurt. There are 2 reasons i did this. 1. If i needed the party to do something, almost everyone will do anything to keep the "bank" happy. 2. How could they accomplish the tasks i set them if they dont have the best gear? Heck, i sold my entire party (but me) into slavery once just to buy them out later at a reduced rate after making a killing on their gladiator fights. Washed up gladiators are cheap and i made a killing on them throwing their last fights. They were pretty ****** but got over it quickly when i pointed out that their new shiny magic items came from the money i won off of their fights. (with a healthy cut for me ofcoarse.) What the heck? Your writing is a bit hard to understand, but it sounds like you're saying "I've played lots of terrible rogues"? Are you related to the OP? Also, to the OP, it sounds like your DM has actually given your party far too many powerful magical items. +3 stuff is level 11, and you're supposed to get one level 11 item over the course of level 7. It's possible he's trying to make up for giving you such overpowered stuff by limiting the amount of other items.
#7 prator_the_golden Jul 21, 2009 21:57:43	Have you considered selling some of the overpowered magic items for gold? 1 GP isn't enough to buy food for everyone, let alone travel on for weeks at a time. Your treasure-distribution system is messed up. Without more details, I can't definitely say that this is definitely your fault, or the DM's fault, for the fault of one or more party members, but you're clearly not following the wealth-by-level guidelines in the Dungeon Master's Guide at all.
#8 awestriker Jul 21, 2009 22:46:18	I forgot to mention that in between sessions, everyone is allowed access to an extra-dimensional armory that contains every published magic item that we have the sourcebook for. @Shin: Err... that is not the type of person I am. @Salla: Actually, we have several DMs that switch out from week to week. And none of them own a puppy. Also, said member had at least the Flaming and Subtle daggers at Lv.5. @PoP: I've tried that. Several times. None have worked, except the goggles (the Aura Sight enchantment was stacked with the Ignore Concealment property after I showed him the AV entry). Most of the requests are for armor, weapons, and shields, although the Star of Corellon (I have SotF) is a priority also. @P_the_G: Probably the DM's faults or the rogue's fault. He gets mounds of treasure from inn vaults and doesn't share. Neither does the wizard. (yes, that's right. The wizard.) The one that was in charge this week is a huge Zelda fan, so I also have 30 bombchus and 2 really, really heavy books that are not ritual books. Maybe they're the right size to be the other bard's. Ah, yes, and a 2H hammer (guess what?) that I'm not interested in. That is something I think I'll sell. Edit some more: Maybe you guys can help with something else. I'm looking for a good Heroic Tier paladin encounter power that doesn't use Wisdom for rider effects or Strength to hit. Alternatively, I could persuade the DMs to let me switch my WIS/DEX, but I need the initiative to be an effective half-tank. Why? I posted this on CharOp and they have been largely unresponsive.
#9 kouk Jul 21, 2009 23:44:38	Well... I don't know. I wouldn't stay in a group like that. Though if you're perfectly OK with that apparently normal for your group method of wealth distribution, then I guess you have nobody to blame but yourself for not killing the Rogue (or Wizard) in his sleep and taking his stuff. This doesn't seem like a serious campaign though (I hope).
#10 DoctorBadWolf Jul 22, 2009 8:08:26	heh. rav, sounds like my halfling bard/barb/ranger from way back. had one helluva twisted sense of humor. his persona only worked because of the group dynamic, of course. i'd never try that in a group that didn't get a kick out of it even when it was directed at their character.
#11 whiteknuckletight Jul 22, 2009 8:47:53	[...]The one that was in charge this week is a huge Zelda fan, so I also have 30 bombchus[...] I mean no offense, but what's the average age in your group, and how serious is this game? If I was in your place, I'd talk to the party and the DMs about wealth distribution rules (as in "RTFM"). And if that doesn't work, trying to solve the problem in character at the gaming table, ie. confronting the characters.
#12 voska66 Jul 22, 2009 15:43:40	I had DM who was like that. He liked keeping the party broke. We complained and grumbled at first but it was one of the better games of D&D I've had. It was back in 2nd edition. It kept things interesting as we did anything for bit a cash and had to be resourceful. I remember my Character was a 9th level ranger and had next to no gold and a +1 rapier was my only magic item.
#13 rav514 Jul 22, 2009 16:02:24	What the heck? Your writing is a bit hard to understand, but it sounds like you're saying "I've played lots of terrible rogues"? Are you related to the OP? Also, to the OP, it sounds like your DM has actually given your party far too many powerful magical items. +3 stuff is level 11, and you're supposed to get one level 11 item over the course of level 7. It's possible he's trying to make up for giving you such overpowered stuff by limiting the amount of other items. Let me spell it out since you missed it. IMO, it generally falls on the rogue to aquire and distribute the wealth. Unless ofcoarse your plaining a rogue who doesnt steal which would lead me to asking you "Why are you playing a rogue?". I'm not saying there are not good reasons its just a little odd. Its not that they are not getting magic items, its they are getting magic items more powerful than they should have which is the rogues job to covert into liquid assets. So to sum up. A rogue should be stealing and converting stuff into assets the party can use, and giving those assests to the party so the party "overlooks" his bad behaviors. . DoctorBadWolf heh. rav, sounds like my halfling bard/barb/ranger from way back. had one helluva twisted sense of humor. his persona only worked because of the group dynamic, of course. i'd never try that in a group that didn't get a kick out of it even when it was directed at their character. Yeah, it takes an experienced group of players who understand your just Roleplaying. It's a lotta fun as along as you know where the line you cant cross is. My party never complained about my "terrible" behavior cause well, i bribed them very, very well. Actually, most times we start a game they ask me to play a rogue if im not the gm. THey seem to enjoy the craziness and they never quite get funded as well by other people as they do when im the rogue.:D
#14 Arbitrary_Aardvark Jul 23, 2009 12:59:44	Let me spell it out since you missed it. IMO, it generally falls on the rogue to aquire and distribute the wealth. Unless ofcoarse your plaining a rogue who doesnt steal which would lead me to asking you "Why are you playing a rogue?". I'm not saying there are not good reasons its just a little odd. Its not that they are not getting magic items, its they are getting magic items more powerful than they should have which is the rogues job to covert into liquid assets. So to sum up. A rogue should be stealing and converting stuff into assets the party can use, and giving those assests to the party so the party "overlooks" his bad behaviors. Other people's milage may vary. Most groups I've played in the rogue took very little for himself. Many people like rogues because they like the sneaking, and they like the ability to be the only one in the party who can handle traps etc. They don't take pickpocket, and they don't steal from the party. I've been in groups which imploded because the players couldn't deal with the fact that the rogue had been robbing them blind. They couldn't do anything in character, because the rogue was so good (and had tons of bluff), but it ****** them off so much that they talked to the rogue's player. He said that since it was in his character concept to be a jerk (he even stole all the equipment from a PC who had died, sold it, and lied when she was raised), and since their characters had no knowledge about it, that they shouldn't complain. So all the other players quit, and now the rogue's player can play solo sessions with the DM who doesn't have any other players. I've been in parties where the wizard (you know, the one with identify) has been in charge of distributing loot. In one campaign which recently finished, my character, who is a non-stealing rogue (in the sense that he had no stealing skills) was defacto in charge, since he was so good at diplomacy he was the one who traded useless items for ones people wanted. I didn't skim anything off the top, but made sure that the characters who I needed for my protection were well supplied, and the ones who annoyed me a little less so. I would say that, by the end, this had redistributed the wealth to the point that some characters had about 85% of the wealth they would have had without my meddling, and others had about 120%. Of course, this was probably about at the same level of disparity caused by the party finding magical items which were sufficently valuable as to double a characters net wealth, and by some characters commisioning the wizard to make items, and others not.
#15 salla Jul 23, 2009 13:13:31	Let me spell it out since you missed it. IMO, it generally falls on the rogue to aquire and distribute the wealth. Unless ofcoarse your plaining a rogue who doesnt steal which would lead me to asking you "Why are you playing a rogue?". I'm not saying there are not good reasons its just a little odd. Its not that they are not getting magic items, its they are getting magic items more powerful than they should have which is the rogues job to covert into liquid assets. So to sum up. A rogue should be stealing and converting stuff into assets the party can use, and giving those assests to the party so the party "overlooks" his bad behaviors.D "Rogue" does not mean "Thief."
#16 antistes Jul 23, 2009 16:48:06	Trust me, you did. I was there. There was a bar, it was next to a monastery, you were really drunk. Long story.
#17 DoctorBadWolf Jul 23, 2009 20:11:41	Let me spell it out since you missed it. IMO, it generally falls on the rogue to aquire and distribute the wealth. Unless ofcoarse your plaining a rogue who doesnt steal which would lead me to asking you "Why are you playing a rogue?". I'm not saying there are not good reasons its just a little odd. Its not that they are not getting magic items, its they are getting magic items more powerful than they should have which is the rogues job to covert into liquid assets. So to sum up. A rogue should be stealing and converting stuff into assets the party can use, and giving those assests to the party so the party "overlooks" his bad behaviors. .Not everyone plays their rogue that way. I've played one that was an investigater/bounty hunter/contract killer for his government. He was a law abiding citizen. He had the pickpocket skill though, but it was so he could plant things, gather evidence without anyone being the wiser, etc. then again, there's also my bard/barb/ranger: Yeah, it takes an experienced group of players who understand your just Roleplaying. It's a lotta fun as along as you know where the line you cant cross is. My party never complained about my "terrible" behavior cause well, i bribed them very, very well. Actually, most times we start a game they ask me to play a rogue if im not the gm. THey seem to enjoy the craziness and they never quite get funded as well by other people as they do when im the rogue.:D pretty much the same experience for me. my bard used deceit, theft, blackmail, extortion, intimidation, as well as the usual bard skill set to get things done. There were occasion "party conflicts" in the sense that sometimes characters had confrontations, but never player to player disputes over it. I distrobuted the wealth, the monk made sure no one stole from anyone else within the group, and everyone went home happy. Of course, most of the characters were actual employees of my character, so that helped things. :P
#18 DoctorBadWolf Jul 23, 2009 20:20:49	Trust me, you did. I was there. There was a bar, it was next to a monastery, you were really drunk. Long story. Hey what ever happened to the monkey?
#19 awestriker Jul 23, 2009 22:58:36	@Kouk: Really, it depends on who's DMing. The guy who did last week? Definitely non-serious. @WhiteKnuckle: Little-to-no RP. @Voska: While the Zelda fan does indeed like not giving out gold, I can't quite say the same of the other DMs... hey wait a minute... The average age of the group is VERY, VERY hard to figure out for a few reasons. One: I'm not sure if I even know if I've seen everyone in the group yet. I've been in this for about half a year (over the course of two mini-campaigns) and one of the guys has shown up exactly ONCE. And even then, he brought his video games. Two: Our group gets new people fairly often. I'll need to ask how much I can get for the hammer. Also, I didn't actually enter the campaign until Level... wait what was it? I think it was 3 or 4... Arrgh.
#20 mccowen Jul 24, 2009 11:43:24	The average age of the group is VERY, VERY hard to figure out for a few reasons. One: I'm not sure if I even know if I've seen everyone in the group yet. I've been in this for about half a year (over the course of two mini-campaigns) and one of the guys has shown up exactly ONCE. And even then, he brought his video games. Two: Our group gets new people fairly often. I'll need to ask how much I can get for the hammer. Also, I didn't actually enter the campaign until Level... wait what was it? I think it was 3 or 4... Arrgh. "Arrgh" is right. Let me turn the question around: what makes you want to continue playing in this game? It has no continuity of story, no continuity of characters, and no continuity of DM style (or, likely, skill). Is there something you're really enjoying?
#21 reiphil Jul 24, 2009 11:50:50	You're level 7... with +3, +4 items? Cash one in for thousands of gold.
#22 rav514 Jul 24, 2009 12:49:19	Salla Quote: "Rogue" does not mean "Thief." I dont believe i ever said rogue = thief. Rogue is a scoundral who will usually do anything to advance his goals. Steal, bribe, blackmail, intimidate, etc. Even Robin hood stole, and he was about as goody two shoes as a rogue gets. If your going to play a rogue, and not steal when your party needs you too; in this case because their underfunded; why not be a bard instead? Or a ranger? Or just about any other class. Its like being right handed and only using your left hand. NOTHING IS WRONG WITH THAT, ITS JUST HANDICAPPING YOURSELF A LITTLE. There are only a few things that set the rogue class apart from the others. 1. The mentality the comes with being a rogue. I.e. a scoundral 2. The Theivery skill 3. Sneak attack damage Everything else can be done by just about any other class out there. YOu can even take feat to get one, two, or all of those and still play another class. So the only real reason to play a rogue is to BE A ROGUE and the image of being a rogue. If you dont want to be a scoundral, play something else. Note: I have never advocated behavior that was disruptive to the gaming group. Stealing from the party is just plain wrong. I may have taken a cut of bets i placed for them like any other booky would have done, but never steal their money or items. That's over the line i mentioned. The players never had problem with me. Their characters sometimes did, but thats roleplaying. I worked very hard to placate them so we all got along and continued to have fun. In Summary, IMO it falls on the rogue to finance the party WHEN----> [all other means fail]. "Didnt get enough gold to get that new sword? Ohh look, i found one in the alley, must have fallen off of the wagon." "Don't have enough gold to woo the barmaid? Here i got plenty. And No, i dont know why that merchant at the end of the bar is screaming about a thief somewhere, he must be drunk." Doing whatever it takes to keep that party happy with him IS THE ROGUE'S JOB.
#23 shard_of_suzail Jul 24, 2009 19:14:45	It's a funny thing, but i`ve seen this "rogues takes from the party funds, other characters are loot starved" phenomena in games i`ve played in. Why couldnt they just call them "assassins" and thus put a stop to all this thievery?
#24 salla Jul 24, 2009 19:22:33	I dont believe i ever said rogue = thief. Rogue is a scoundral who will usually do anything to advance his goals. Steal, bribe, blackmail, intimidate, etc. . This is also wrong. Rogues do not have to do this. Classes do not have personalities attached to them. There is nothing stopping a rogue from being disciplined and law-abiding. A rogue *can* be a scoundrel. He does not *HAVE TO* be one. and Robin Hood was a ranger, because rogues don't use longbows.
#25 eazy_e Jul 24, 2009 19:27:44	A knight errant is a rogue.... It really just mean unaligned. I would leave the group.
#26 rav514 Jul 25, 2009 11:27:51	This is also wrong. Rogues do not have to do this. Classes do not have personalities attached to them. There is nothing stopping a rogue from being disciplined and law-abiding. A rogue *can* be a scoundrel. He does not *HAVE TO* be one. and Robin Hood was a ranger, because rogues don't use longbows. HAve you read the dictionary? Here is rogue from websters.com Main Entry: 1rogue Pronunciation: \ˈrōg\ Function: noun Etymology: origin unknown Date: 1561 1 : vagrant, tramp 2 : a dishonest or worthless person : scoundrel 3 : a mischievous person : scamp I also never said a rogue HAD TO DO ANYTHING. I said it was ODD if he didnt and was HANDICAPPING HIMSELF. Here's the quote from my post. Its like being right handed and only using your left hand. NOTHING IS WRONG WITH THAT, ITS JUST HANDICAPPING YOURSELF A LITTLE. I even said "nothing is wrong with that". Heck nothing stops a fighter from being a pacifist or a cleric from being an aethist either. In the Situation you decided to play such odd character, as a gm i let you play what you want, but try to steer you to something a little closer to optimal. But you can play YOUR character anyway you want. However, if your not going to use ALL OF YOUR ABILITIES, to help the party, then i would suggest to you to play something that trades out the abilities you dont what for abilities you do want. If you dont want to, thats fine, but dont blame me if the rest of your party doesnt think your pulling your weight. I would also appreciate it if you stop misquoting me or accusing me of statements i didnt make. EDIT: Neither of us have any idea what robin hoods actuall class would have been, i would have made him as a rogue, you as a ranger, some ppl believe he was a soldier and an earl. Thats fine too. Lets leave that alone. [Classes do not have personalities attached to them. The classess suggest coarses of action, :fighters fight, clerics pray, mages cast spells, rogues be decietful. Nothing binds those classes to follow that, but hey, if you want to run head first into a wall, thats fine also. Good luck with it.
#27 olandew Jul 26, 2009 19:29:55	3rd edition classes were just labels attached to a series of mechanics. Actually, same for 4th edition. BUT, you are missing something from within your own post. The second, secondary definition is scoundrel. If we were to be jerks about it, we would point out that a vagrant, which is the first in your list, means one who has no established residence and wanders idly from place to place without lawful or visible means of support. Nowhere in this does it curtail being a thief. lack of law could entail prostitution, or some other from of debauchery. Likewise, tramp means a woman of loose morals. Same site too... In any event, Rogues in 3e are not required to take Sleight of Hand. In fact, none of my rogues ever took the thievery skills. My rogues were typically mischievous spelunkers. Which, just so you know, was the third definition, minus the mountaineering. As to 4e... well, since evidently your group does not follow the wealth by level chart, or loot by level correlation that is derived from following the chart, then you really cannot complain too heavily about a lack of items. I do apologize if I sound callous, but it may be time to find a more reliable group.
#28 rav514 Jul 26, 2009 21:00:06	3rd edition classes were just labels attached to a series of mechanics. Actually, same for 4th edition. BUT, you are missing something from within your own post. The second, secondary definition is scoundrel. If we were to be jerks about it, we would point out that a vagrant, which is the first in your list, means one who has no established residence and wanders idly from place to place without lawful or visible means of support. Nowhere in this does it curtail being a thief. lack of law could entail prostitution, or some other from of debauchery. Likewise, tramp means a woman of loose morals. True, but a label has a definiation with it. Which means, anyone sitting at you table who knows your playing a rogue will have an impression of what you can do, unless they havent looked up the word or you dont tell pple what class you are playing. Further more, as salla pointed out earlier, you dont even have to have a lack of law. These are the expectation the rest of your party is going to have. What i have been saying is having certain skills, and not using them to the advantage of you party, is being a bad team player. You are not required to do anything. But if you dotn want to deal with the perceptions that come wit hthe label wizards put on your class, dont play it.
#29 salla Jul 26, 2009 21:03:00	These are the expectation the rest of your party is going to have. And in many cases, they're going to have to abandon them quickly because not everybody plays a class to stereotypes.
#30 rav514 Jul 27, 2009 9:09:14	And in many cases, they're going to have to abandon them quickly because not everybody plays a class to stereotypes. You're probably right about that, we probably shouldnt tell ppl what class we are just to aviod those expectation but i believe that wont happen. You end up with situations just like this. The rogue has stuff and im poor. It just becomes natural converstion durring character creation, not to mention we've probably trained ourselves to ask. "Hey, what are you making so i dont make the same character?" I know i've personally gone, "ok, your making a rogue, so i dont have to worry about theivery, stealth, and being a striker." We shouldnt assume that just because pc #1 is making a rogue that he will do that, but we do. Wizards even promotes this line of thinking by assigning roles, and saying to have a balanced party you need 1 of this, this, and this role. How do you know unless you ask? This is somewhat true in 3.5 and even more so in 4e.
#31 azrael_the_dark Jul 27, 2009 11:18:39	It takes a little bit to understand all of Rav's posts, but we've seen far worse. So far, he's not wrong. If I got it all correctly, he just said that in some groups the rogue's player likes to "live by the stereotype", so he's richer than the rest of the group. I can't recall the point where Rav said that everyone has to play the same character. ;) In what he's saying, he's correct. The stereotype of the "stingy rogue" exists, and it's true that some people enjoy playing it. We're not speaking about a majority or minority of players, just of a generical part. It's more absolutistic and biased to think that every single rogue played this way means that the player is a disruptive mo**n.
#32 rav514 Jul 27, 2009 12:19:12	It takes a little bit to understand all of Rav's posts, but we've seen far worse. So far, he's not wrong. If I got it all correctly, he just said that in some groups the rogue's player likes to "live by the stereotype", so he's richer than the rest of the group. I can't recall the point where Rav said that everyone has to play the same character. ;) In what he's saying, he's correct. The stereotype of the "stingy rogue" exists, and it's true that some people enjoy playing it. We're not speaking about a majority or minority of players, just of a generical part. It's more absolutistic and biased to think that every single rogue played this way means that the player is a disruptive mo**n. EXACTLY!! I was starting to think i was typing in chinese or something. Back to the OP. We have a rogue who is gathering wealth and equipment but not sharing it with the rest of the party. The OP is about how the fighter has nothing. The rogue is playing a somewhat sterotypical rogue; aquiring wealth and not sharing. This act, in my mind, makes him a bad team player. Maybe an excellent roleplayer, but a bad team player. So to the fighter, i would suggest he start gently questioning the rogue on where the rogue is getting his stuff from. The fighter has absolutely zero incentive to ignore any of the rogues activities. This action will lead to three high probability outcomes; 1. The rogue will give the fighter his "stay out of my bussiness" speech. 2a. The rogue start giving the fighter stuff to shut the fighter up. 2b. The rogue tries to kill the fighter. Option 2b is dependent of the gm and the alignment of the rogue. Some gm's wont tolerate players attempting to kill each other. Good rogues should not be killing party members except under weird curcumstances. Well, really no one should kill a party member except under weird circumstances.
#33 DoctorBadWolf Jul 27, 2009 18:24:34	I dont believe i ever said rogue = thief. Rogue is a scoundral who will usually do anything to advance his goals. Steal, bribe, blackmail, intimidate, etc. Even Robin hood stole, and he was about as goody two shoes as a rogue gets. If your going to play a rogue, and not steal when your party needs you too; in this case because their underfunded; why not be a bard instead? Or a ranger? Or just about any other class. Its like being right handed and only using your left hand. NOTHING IS WRONG WITH THAT, ITS JUST HANDICAPPING YOURSELF A LITTLE. There are only a few things that set the rogue class apart from the others. 1. The mentality the comes with being a rogue. I.e. a scoundral 2. The Theivery skill 3. Sneak attack damage Everything else can be done by just about any other class out there. YOu can even take feat to get one, two, or all of those and still play another class. So the only real reason to play a rogue is to BE A ROGUE and the image of being a rogue. If you dont want to be a scoundral, play something else. Note: I have never advocated behavior that was disruptive to the gaming group. Stealing from the party is just plain wrong. I may have taken a cut of bets i placed for them like any other booky would have done, but never steal their money or items. That's over the line i mentioned. The players never had problem with me. Their characters sometimes did, but thats roleplaying. I worked very hard to placate them so we all got along and continued to have fun. In Summary, IMO it falls on the rogue to finance the party WHEN----> [all other means fail]. "Didnt get enough gold to get that new sword? Ohh look, i found one in the alley, must have fallen off of the wagon." "Don't have enough gold to woo the barmaid? Here i got plenty. And No, i dont know why that merchant at the end of the bar is screaming about a thief somewhere, he must be drunk." Doing whatever it takes to keep that party happy with him IS THE ROGUE'S JOB. I want to group with you, man. Sounds like a blast. Your rogue and my bard would get along great. "Hey, I'm going to smooth talk my way into the castle guard's trust (and because she's hot, probably her bed), you mind 'aquiring' some courtly clothes for the rubes in the group who don't own any? You need a pardon for what?! HAHAHA Ok, I'll see what I can do." I assume that would be even better with input from the rogue, but either way, oh man that group would be well funded and well connected. Everyone outside the group be damned. :P
#34 DoctorBadWolf Jul 27, 2009 18:26:58	This is also wrong. Rogues do not have to do this. Classes do not have personalities attached to them. There is nothing stopping a rogue from being disciplined and law-abiding. A rogue *can* be a scoundrel. He does not *HAVE TO* be one. and Robin Hood was a ranger, because rogues don't use longbows. Robin Hood was multiclassed and you know it. He was most definitely a thief, and had good charisma. he was a rogue/ranger. EDIT: forgot to add the ":P" to make it evident that I'm not trying to start a fight over this. Enjoy.