Mage Vs. Wizard & Thief Vs. Rogue

[Zlaja]

What's the difference between these classes? I just don't get it.

Also, which do you prefer and why?

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

The terms "wizard" and "rogue" were adopted in AD&D 2nd edition as two of the four umbrella terms for class categorization. The wizard group included the mage class (called magic-user in the other five editions of D&D) as well as the illusionist and other specialist wizards, while the rogue group included the thief class and the new bard class. Similarly, the warrior group included the fighter, paladin, and ranger classes, while the priest class included the cleric, druid, and specific cleric classes.

Prestigious codexers will prefer magic-user to either mage or wizard, while also preferring thief to rogue.

 

[Nano]

Primary difference between the first two is that wizards like to incorporate urine into their spellcasting.

Personally, I prefer calling myself a wizard.

 

[Tweed]

 

[whydoibother]

Mage Vs. Wizard & Thief Vs. Rogue

What's the difference between these classes? I just don't get it.
Also, which do you prefer and why?

A wizard is contrasted to a sorcerer, a druid, or a shaman. He is the arcane magic wielder, who studies his way into higher powers. The sorcerer has innate ability to summon some power, probably without great control. The shaman/druid harmonize with power to use it, the warlock bargains for it.
A mage is just a generic "the magic wielder", and is used when the other types aren't present and there's no need to differentiate between them. I prefer systems that have various ways to achieve magic power, so I prefer wizard to mage.

The thief-rogue distinction is more about the skillmonkey vs ninja assassin tropes. A thief has non-combat abilities and utility, where as a rogue is a damage dealer. Some RPG systems, or other media like film, have no use for a skillmonkey, and just want an assassin. These should go with rogue. I prefer systems that have more out-of-combat interactions, so I like thief.

 

[NecroLord]

A Paladin and a Barbarian walk into a bar...

 

[Zlaja]

The thief-rogue distinction is more about the skillmonkey vs ninja assassin tropes. A thief has non-combat abilities and utility, where as a rogue is a damage dealer

So, including both an assassin class and a rogue class in a game is actually weird 'cause they're really the same thing?

 

[whydoibother]

A Paladin and a Barbarian walk into a bar...

The Rogue passes the DEX check and ducks under it.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

A Paladin and a Barbarian walk into a bar...

The Rogue passes the DEX check and ducks under it.

The Paladin doesn't and falls.

 

[whydoibother]

The thief-rogue distinction is more about the skillmonkey vs ninja assassin tropes. A thief has non-combat abilities and utility, where as a rogue is a damage dealer

So, including both an assassin class and a rogue class in a game is actually weird 'cause they're really the same thing?

I'd prefer if you have a Thief main class, and from there the player can focus on being a Duelist/Thug fighter build, a dagger/bow stealth Assassin type, or a skillmonkey specialist of using magical devices, picklocks, traps, alchemy, Batman utility belt build.

 

[NecroLord]

The thief-rogue distinction is more about the skillmonkey vs ninja assassin tropes. A thief has non-combat abilities and utility, where as a rogue is a damage dealer.

I don't know about that.
In 3E and 3.5 a Barbarian deals damage which easily eclipses that of the Rogue. Rogue's main way of dealing damage was sneak attack, but it was useless in certain scenarios - when fighting undead, constructs, things which are immune to critical hits, when fighting in low light environments, uncanny dodge, concealment.
A thief and rogue are pretty much the same thing. In AD&D it was implied that a Thief is a dishonorable, larcenous individual, but could also be a "steal from the rich to feed the poor" hero. A rogue could be an assassin, an infiltrator, a backstabbing prick, a swindler, etc.
Semantics...

 

[Jasede]

Don't bother reading that guy's posts.

 

[whydoibother]

 

[whydoibother]

The thief-rogue distinction is more about the skillmonkey vs ninja assassin tropes. A thief has non-combat abilities and utility, where as a rogue is a damage dealer.

I don't know about that.
In 3E and 3.5 a Barbarian deals damage which easily eclipses that of the Rogue. Rogue's main way of dealing damage was sneak attack, but it was useless in certain scenarios - when fighting undead, constructs, things which are immune to critical hits, when fighting in low light environments, uncanny dodge, concealment.
A thief and rogue are pretty much the same thing. In AD&D it was implied that a Thief is a dishonorable, larcenous individual, but could also be a "steal from the rich to feed the poor" hero. A rogue could be an assassin, an infiltrator, a backstabbing prick, a swindler, etc.
Semantics...

Was this a design decision, though, or just incompetence when balancing? The Thief was designed to be a non-combat class, that would reluctantly fight. The Rogue was designed to be a combat class, utilizing stealth and dexterity in melee.
That's the vibes, anyways. The flavour text, the lore, the pre-written characters, the visual art. The balance lets you down in that regard, since some classes are just not as good as others in their own field of work.

 

[just]

trick question
theres no difference
they're all faggots

 

[lukaszek]

rogue is book/movie archetype and should be viewed as such. Unless you look at specific system like dnd.
Questionable morality but with good heart etc

 

[Zlaja]

Questionable morality but with good heart

So, rogue has a good heart, but thief can swing both ways and be evil?

 

[lukaszek]

Questionable morality but with good heart

So, rogue has a good heart, but thief can swing both ways and be evil?

thief is just a vocation with no strings attached, well except for having bad reputation if everyone knows it.

if i were to guess, most common thievery vocation for good heart rogue trope would be a smuggler?

 

[Norfleet]

Rogue's main way of dealing damage was sneak attack, but it was useless in certain scenarios - when fighting undead, constructs, things which are immune to critical hits, when fighting in low light environments, uncanny dodge, concealment.

You know, whoever ca,me up with the rule that "undead and constructs don't have vulnerable spots to sneak attack" clearly was not an engineer, since constructs ABSOLUTELY do have vulnerable spots. Like, what exactly is your mechanical menace going to do when I jam its gears? Oh, right, it's going to fall over on its face as a total mobility kill. Sure, it doesn't feel any PAIN from this, but it's still not going to be giving us any more trouble. Your construct is always just one jammed gear, perforated hydraulic line, or smashed magical crystal battery away from being a brick.

 

[ELEXmakesMeHard]

Perfection.

 

[darkpatriot]

They started using the term Rogue because it is a more general term than Thief, and not everyone who wanted to play the class envisioned their character as a person that went around stealing things.

Even though all Player Characters gain wealth primarily through stealing from people and things they kill, anyway.

 

[Norfleet]

Yeah, but at the point at which you're doing that, you've progressed from being a thief to being a robber.

 

[Harthwain]

Mage and Rogue are catch-all terms.

Mage can be a wizard or a sorcerer (to give an example). The former has training/education and can even be part of the academia. The latter is largely self-taught and often signifies, in some settings, that magic is less reliable.

Rogue can be a thief or an assassin (to give another example). A thief means a rogue who is focused on stealing things. Assassin, obviously, is more skilled at killing people. Both are rogues. But, as others said in this thread already, you can also not be specialized in a particular field, so a rogue is better term for these particular situations.

 

[LarryTyphoid]

"Wizard" sounds cooler than "mage". Non-nerds don't even know what a "mage" is. "Magic user" also sounds inelegant to me; reminds me of shounen manga, where they can never come up with a unique name for the characters who possess the trademark ability besides "x user" (stand user, ki user, etc). In my opinion, if you use magic, you're a fucking wizard.

 

[Palomides]

Archmage sounds cooler than all of them.