Roguey-types and options

[Dom]

Face to face is a fighters game. As a rogue you will never have a "fair fight" with a fighter. Or at least you shouldn't. You're gonna have to pull some trickery out of your bag.

 

[Wraith]

Face to face is a fighters game. As a rogue you will never have a "fair fight" with a fighter. Or at least you shouldn't. You're gonna have to pull some trickery out of your bag.

Or just be better with a stick. I've smoked things I probably shouldn't have quite often, simply on account of being better with a longsword and tiny round shield than they are with claws.

2's add up if your opponent can't hit you.

 

[Gilwing]

The question I have to ask, if someone finds themselves predominately using archery with their rogue, is why are they giving up the extra prof multiplier damage you get with a bow. How is a rogue with a bow more effective than a fighter could possibly hope to be?

My 'pure' archer character is a fighter and the extra damage certainly adds up when you have 6+ profs.

I'm of the opinion that the rogue and fighter damage for bows needs to be swapped.

Can I ask why?

 

[Mobius]

¿'Cuz she hates Fighters and wants to take back one of the only useful rules changes they've seen in years? No, kidding (mostly).

I think across most fantasy genres, archers are seen as the nimble class. As David said, "if you have a 'pure' archer character they are going to be more fast and agile, plus it gives a real incentive for them to keep arching vs just picking up a weapon and starting to swing." If you look at many of the archers in most games, they're Dexterity not Strength based, whereas in Alliance it's the Fighters (str analogs) not Rogues (dext analogs) who benefit the most from the 2-handed prof archery damage. Now, from a systemic point of view, I think the system should be kept the way it is since Fighters already get the rusty end of every shaft, but from a "mood" angle, it does have a certain appeal.

 

[Dreamingfurther]

Not to derail this thread...

But fighters are actually still, and always have been imho one of the strongest classes... They have per day skills (slays, parrys, evicerates) that CANNOT be duplicated by per day magic items, unlike scholars. With enough dragon/goblin/whatever stamps you can literally duplicate every spell a scholar casts every day.

The ability to keep swinging endless damage based on profs is un-scaled. So many fights in the Alliance end up as line/tunnel, or otherwise un-roguable fights in which fighters get to really do all the heavy lifting and shine. Stick 20-30 cloaks per day on a Fighter and suddenly that character is a powerhouse because a high level fighter by that point should be swinging 15's or so and now can't be stopped without absurd amounts of effects. Stick the same number of cloaks on any other class and the impact is quite a bit lower. Simply because no other class has such a powerful unscaled, simple to use, endlessly repeatable affect.

Fighters also 95% of the time are the ones who actually cut down whatever is being fought, and it just so happens that puts them in an excellent position to sweep up whatever treasure actually was on the mob they were fighting... Spells and other skills always seem flashy... But they don't seem so flashy when they run out after 1 or 2 fights, but the fighters can just keep swinging at least...

 

[SkollWolfrun]

Fighters also 95% of the time are the ones who actually cut down whatever is being fought, and it just so happens that puts them in an excellent position to sweep up whatever treasure actually was on the mob they were fighting... Spells and other skills always seem flashy... But they don't seem so flashy when they run out after 1 or 2 fights, but the fighters can just keep swinging at least...

Huh, any big battle I've seen, the fighter tends to be the last guy getting loot because they are usually the ones having to push the bad guys back. So unless it is the last wave of the fight, the rogues & casters are rolling up the loot while the fighters are still fighting.

 

[Druk]

Huh, any big battle I've seen, the fighter tends to be the last guy getting loot because they are usually the ones having to push the bad guys back. So unless it is the last wave of the fight, the rogues & casters are rolling up the loot while the fighters are still fighting.

Ssshhhh! Sean, the fighters still think that all the bad guys only carry 2 copper in loot.

I have to agree that, IMO, rogues and scouts should have the advantage with archery and/or thrown weapons, fighters can always grab a stick and hit things when the going gets tough, having an option other than running or hollering is not really a bad thing.

 

[Deadlands of Old]

I wouldn't swap it.

I'd just give them parity, both profs and back stabs get 1.5 profs for archery.

 

[Dreamingfurther]

Yea, that would work well also, and it wouldn't 'nerf' anyone. You actually like this idea Garry?

 

[Dan Nickname Beshers]

He plays a scout.

 

[Dreamingfurther]

lol I know Gary plays a scout... I play an adept... I'm certain Gary cares more about game flavor/balance than getting a few more points of damage on his main PC when/if he uses a bow. Allowing rogues to be 'just as good' with bows would be more of a game flavor thing imho.

But my main archer character is actually a fighter due to the current rules. It would be much more awesome if he could be a Rogue because that is much more what his playstyle is like. Especially since he uses a heavy x-bow for the extra damage he has 0% close up defense... :grrr:

 

[James Trotta]

I think rogues are OK as they are. They're supposed to be a class where you need to catch the other guy in a bad spot. A rogue isn't supposed to get caught in a bad situation. If they do they have dodges and evades and maybe alchemy or a few spells or some stun limbs or whatever. If a rogue decides not to buy spells and stun limbs then they just need to be even more careful to catch the other guy and not get caught themselves. That's the rogue's game if they're solo.

One on One straight up fights just aren't the rogues strength.

Right. They aren't exactly the strength of any class other than fighter (and to a lesser amount templar and scout)... but everybody should have at least some capability to survive one that doesn't center on "Yeah, hope you can outrun the NPC, or shout loud enough to attract your friends." I get the whole thing about class balance not necessarily meaning that every class can function equally well in all situations... I just don't think that a generic situation like getting caught alone should result in an answer of "You're SOL." There's a difference between "shining in a particular situation" and "being able to get out of it alive."

 

[Gunnar]

I agree with James. The original pairing of our classes were to be more of a specific 'rock-paper-scissors' type situation. If you really want to stand and fight as a rogue, pick up some other options in order to do so (run the fighter into traps you've just set up, or gas them into the ground or figure out a way to doubleback and get them to turn) - or fluidclass to scout if you really still want to stand.

Alternately, there really isn't anything wrong with running as a rogue . Its par for the course.

-Ali

 

[jpariury]

If I am face to face with my enemy I have already ****** up.

Seriously, that's why you buy them breakfast.

Once you have them eating out of your hand (literally), everything else is just style and panache.

 

[Gilwing]

John R- There is no "Ranger" class in The Alliance. Legolas is a Ranger (as an example), not a Rogue.

Dave and others- People keep saying Dmg and class. Class has nothing to do with it, its the skills. It's backstab that doesn't get the + to bows, not the class. If they purchased profs, they would get it. What a fighter is doing when they drop there weapons and load up on a bow is take them self out of the front line (for the most part). They have made them self a support class, shooting over the heads of there allies (not a bad thing some times) and one less fighter in the thick of things.

What the real discussion should be is why is a half fighter/caster getting less armor max then a Rogue (who is not even a "fighter" class)?

James- I agree with you.

 

[Deadlands of Old]

Yea, that would work well also, and it wouldn't 'nerf' anyone. You actually like this idea Garry?

Well, yes. I believe I was the one who initially brought up the idea to make backstabs do 1 pt of damage, and have assassinates and terminates available, through ranged weapons. I believe my comment was "so why does the most dexterous class in the game suck at using the most dexterous based weapons in the game?"

Then someone independently decided to suggest bows/crossbows do 1.5 for each prof, and no one was really against making archery better, considering how thoroughly underpowered it was.

To address Dan’s point, rogues and fighters would still be better at archery than scouts, because they have a total number of backstabs or profs which is higher than a scout of equal level, but yes, scouts would benefit, which is totally my reason for suggesting it. My pc throws 20’s with a crossbow right now, but I would utterly win the game if I threw 24’s, even though I would still round down to 20’s. But back to something relevant…

Conceptually, I figure rogues and fighters should be equally good as archers. My thought is that fighters are theoretically stronger, so they could fire larger bows with greater poundage. So their arrows would provide a bigger wallop. Rogues are more nimble, so while they can’t pull an 80 lbs bow they could pull a lighter one with much better precision.

But either way, through sheer armor piercing, organ popping force or via shots through eyeballs, you end up with dead targets. So I say make them equal.

 

[SkollWolfrun]

I have a bit of experience with bows.
Bows & crossbows are dependent upon the aimer's eye, the steady hand, the bow's draw weight & the strength & stability of the shooter (or mechanics in the case of a crossbow).
Strength & stability =/= dexterity.

I'm not disagreeing with the premise that rogues are basically Alliance's ranger, just pointing out that saying a rogue's dexterity should make him a better archer is sort of misplaced. You could say a scout by name of class should make him the better archer.

 

[Inaryn]

Dave and others- People keep saying Dmg and class. Class has nothing to do with it, its the skills. It's backstab that doesn't get the + to bows, not the class. If they purchased profs, they would get it. What a fighter is doing when they drop there weapons and load up on a bow is take them self out of the front line (for the most part). They have made them self a support class, shooting over the heads of there allies (not a bad thing some times) and one less fighter in the thick of things.

We have no less than 3 fighters in SF that use bows often, if not all the time as their preferred method of attack. They pretty much just wreck anything they start shooting at... and that's independently. If they're all together and focus firing, whatever they're aiming at is pink mist.

Two handed damage in a weapon you can keep blocking with when you whip out a short sword? I've seen a pretty hefty "yes please!"

 

[Davion]

Last market day in Wayside, I was caught in a one one one situation with a much more powerful creature. I pulled out a magic item, asked him if he wanted it, he said yes. I told him he could have it if he left me alone. I threw it behind him and when he turned around I mowed him down.

Risky, but we're rogues, this is supposed to be how we think.

Also, does anybody else find it a little ironic that a "Rogue" really only works well in a team?

 

[Dreamingfurther]

Realistically every class in this game only really works 'well' in a team... It really is a team game.