test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Why does a dagger hit harder than a greatsword?
rkv13
Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users Posts: 217 Bounty Hunter
I think we can all admit that the Rogue is currently (as of BW3) the most powerful class by far. Some might even say they're overpowered. While I lack sufficient experience with the class to say yea or nay on that, I do believe that a small nerf is in order on a particular point.
In the very first combat in which all classes are engaged is fighting the zombies outside of Neverwinter. When I played a Rogue I was able to kill each one with 2 strikes from Sly Flourish, sometimes one with a crit (which happen more often with a Rogue than any other class). Meanwhile my GWF required 3 strikes to kill the same zombies. While I understand that Sly Flourish is a single-target attack, and therefore it might seem logical to have it deal higher damage than the GWF's AoE at-will, I believe it should deal less damage for a couple of reasons.
First, Sly Flourish is very fast, and in the time it takes the GWF to swing 3 times the Rogue can attack 5 or 6 times. This means that even if SF dealt less damage than the GWF at-will per-hit they can still pump out more damage on a single target over any amount of time.
Second, Rogues use daggers. Obviously anyone who gets hit with a dagger is going to be far less hurt than someone who gets hit with a greatsword. I know for a fact many of you are thinking that a Rogue can strike with greater precision using a dagger than a GWF can with a greatsword, so it's arguable that they could do more damage per-hit. However the difficulty of striking accurately enough to make that difference ought to require more care and patience than the rapid slicing that you see in-game.
In my honest opinion, I believe the rapid striking Rogue At-Will powers ought to deal significantly less damage than they currently do. With their encounter and daily powers untouched the Rogue remains a significant threat, but they can no longer simply stand toe-to-toe with an enemy and out-damage them. Rogues were never, in any D&D Edition, designed to play that way. They are the stealthers, sneaking around and picking the opportune moment to strike before running away and letting more robust classes stand and fight.
In the very first combat in which all classes are engaged is fighting the zombies outside of Neverwinter. When I played a Rogue I was able to kill each one with 2 strikes from Sly Flourish, sometimes one with a crit (which happen more often with a Rogue than any other class). Meanwhile my GWF required 3 strikes to kill the same zombies. While I understand that Sly Flourish is a single-target attack, and therefore it might seem logical to have it deal higher damage than the GWF's AoE at-will, I believe it should deal less damage for a couple of reasons.
First, Sly Flourish is very fast, and in the time it takes the GWF to swing 3 times the Rogue can attack 5 or 6 times. This means that even if SF dealt less damage than the GWF at-will per-hit they can still pump out more damage on a single target over any amount of time.
Second, Rogues use daggers. Obviously anyone who gets hit with a dagger is going to be far less hurt than someone who gets hit with a greatsword. I know for a fact many of you are thinking that a Rogue can strike with greater precision using a dagger than a GWF can with a greatsword, so it's arguable that they could do more damage per-hit. However the difficulty of striking accurately enough to make that difference ought to require more care and patience than the rapid slicing that you see in-game.
In my honest opinion, I believe the rapid striking Rogue At-Will powers ought to deal significantly less damage than they currently do. With their encounter and daily powers untouched the Rogue remains a significant threat, but they can no longer simply stand toe-to-toe with an enemy and out-damage them. Rogues were never, in any D&D Edition, designed to play that way. They are the stealthers, sneaking around and picking the opportune moment to strike before running away and letting more robust classes stand and fight.
Post edited by rkv13 on
0
Comments
@underpowered: saywhowhahuh???
As I said, exploiting armor takes careful precision that one simply cannot realistically achieve by swinging madly at an opponent's face. I know it's a fantasy setting/game, but this small level of realism is hardly undue.
(.-.)
Fireballs and force blasts have an origin point, and therefore can be mitigated by imposing a barrier, such as a shield, in their path.
Poison... depends on how it's delivered. Snake bite? Block it. Poison dart? Block it. Poison cloud? No way.
Staby Staby > Slashy Slashy
The honourable mind is much easier to manipulate,
A swift mind solves problems before they occur,
Accept your fate, or lie, pretend,
Death collects you in the end,
The light that reveals is the glare that blinds,
Knowledge brings power, and with power you can
grab truth by the throat and shape it as you wish,
A large enough debt turns even a friend into an enemy,
Danger is the price of wealth.
Sorry, had to be said.
I actually also thought the GF damage felt low during the tutorial. Until I got to the bridge where you start fighting groups of mobs. At that point, the GWF was clearing packs far faster than the other classes, so I don't think hits/enemy is really the right way to analyze things.
It's more likely the case that the GWF has an issue with single target damage at first. I think the at-will they pick up at 15 helps there, as it is a single target sword attack.
Granted getting cut in half kills you faster then a dagger in the liver. But those of you who know alot about physics know that your going to have to be one hell of a strong person with one hell of a sharp sword to cut someone in half. A Katana will cut you in half much easier then a sword with a 8 to 10 foot long blade.
Um, yeah. Trickster Rogues are underpowered in what world again!? LOL
Which should still dissipate over/around/under the shield. Or in the worst case, set fire to the wooden shield.
('-')
From a 'realistic' stand point it is nearly impossible to argue whether a greatsword or a dagger is the deadlier of weapons. A greatsword has reach over a dagger but is heavier and slower which requires the wielder to be much stronger to bring the weapon to bear. A dagger is light and thus quick but then requires the wielder to be swift and precise to be deadly. The real point is that you can't argue these things. Human, and in this case humanoid, bodies are fragile. A sharp stick can be just as deadly as a sword which in turn can be as deadly as a heavy rock. In a fictional setting there may even be extraneous rules that allow for better resilience vs certain objects. But in a video game it is hardly valuable to argue the legitimacy of one weapon being more powerful than another. Think of it this way, do you think 'realistically' you could stab a person dozens of times while they are also hitting you dozens of times with a large sword where BOTH of you are dealing damage, sometimes critically, constantly over the course of a minute or more?
Rogue: High single target damage, low aoe damage, low AC, and low HP.
Gwf: Low single target damage, high aoe damage, mid range AC, and high HP.
Thank you! Finally a post that understands the different roles for strikers, defenders, controllers, and leaders. Well done sir, well done.
@healhamsta: fair enough, but we could argue the physics of it all day and neither of us would be right cuz neither of us are physicists xD
@seraphimdo: you're absolutely right, and I don't disagree with any of your points. Talking strictly about gameplay balance, I still think a Rogue's encounter powers more than make up for the nerf I presented, but the hard numbers would have to be worked out by the devs. I'm merely offering a possible direction they could take in tweaking the Rogue class if (and likely when) further testing reveals them to have an advantage over the other classes. No point buffing the DC to match the TR and open up a whole new can of imbalances with the other classes.**
**that last sentence is also @ androidpk
@draezendirehand: I don't disagree that that is what the devs are aiming for, but from the vibe I got out of BW3 I feel that the balance is tipped in TR's favor in overall damage potential. Strictly personal opinion.
No, it won't.
Regarding the topic at hand, the idea of wielding daggers for insane carnage is a modern RPG construct. A dagger is either a last-resort weapon, or something you use you assault an unsuspecting--and preferably unarmored--opponent. You don't walk into a sword fight with a dagger. The idea of a dagger-wielder having tremendous amounts of agility which allows them to overcome their severe mechanical disadvantage is a romantic myth, like chain-mail bikinis. That's just not how combat plays out. But since the concept of the dagger-wielding acrobat rogue has become a staple trope for the fantasy genre, that's what we're stuck with.
...not that I'm chomping at the bit or anything.
I cringed when I saw that katana comment... xD
You're absolutely right, and that's kinda my point insofar as the "realism" arguments go. Still, mechanical balance must come first so don't get too riled up about breaking reality.
lol of course not! xD
in the pvp world could only do 50 per attack against a wizard where against demons 300+ would of thought demons had tougher skin then a wizard lol
1) One does not has to be a disciple/employed in the field to be right about the field. If an artist said Calcium is good for your bones, would you still believe him?
2) You be making broad assumptions, me has received rudimentary training in particle physics & keep up with modern theories in me spare time. So technically me be considered a rudimentary physicist.
3) All server hamsters has a basic grasp of physics. How else would we efficiently run in our wheels? (.-.)
Those darn ninjas.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZoBjhV-Xak
Ok buddy... whatever you say...
Those darn ninjas...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVlGm-s7Lz8
~~~~
By lore, you can say that rogue is easily able to slip to the shadowfell and when comes out of the shadow, the dagger is the weapon of choice for its speed.
Also because dagger is more accurate to handle - just behind needle - so it can find vital points more easily.
~~~~
Secondly, GWF is a defender not an assassin. When he strikes, it is used as a smash to keep opponents away. Due to defense the GWF strikes less and defends more.
If it was a barbarian, he would do more damage with battle cries risking his head with zero defense like rogue.
~~~~
Hence rogue as any striker like barbarian or sorcerer - does more damage than wizard(controller) or fighter(defender) or anyone but striker.
That aside daggers don't hit harder, they hit weak spots more accurately and more quickly. Rogue focuses on massive single target DPS, GWF does mid AoE DPS + decent defenses, CW... is really powerful.
Lol, well, because rogue's attack from the shadows, like ninja's do,
to assassinate someone, where you can't see them.
Think about it, you could avoid someone swinging a greatsword at you, in the sense that you can see them,
and then run to get out of the way,
but someone who's attacking you while you're not looking,
and aiming at your back, too,
well, they're probably going to kill you much faster.
If we're going by real life standards, lol, in a game, lol.
Which raises the question of why Rogues doesn't just carry around a great sword if they can turn themselves & their equipment invisible.
(Not to mention to boatload of gear inside their backpacks.)
Hawk:Do this. closing thread
frankieraye: I'll see if we can replace the woman with a stick figure and the tiger fangs with marshmallows./Issues like these need to get escalated quickly to minimize the damage.
Kantorek: Yeah.. you should try it. It's awesome.
Sihndra: Nope- not currently possible under any circumstances. Sorry.
LokisDottir: I mean...not haunting the forums, nope nope.
Konariraiden: You don't know what you are up against. You will lose.
Part of turning yourself invisible is using the PROPER TOOLS !
Lightweight armor... (thus the class restrictions)
Lightweight agile nimble yet deadly weaponry...
etc...
trojan horse type of thinking....
ok.. just think "PROPER TOOLS" again...
and ask yourself...
If you wanted to feed 30 people at a party with 1 loaf of bread and a handful of fruit.
Are you better off slicing the fruit with a little paring knife to make many accurate slices to set on top of each slice of bread. . . Or would a more powerful +3 club of ogre power SMASH THE FRUIT TO A MILLION PIECES AND FEED MORE PEOPLE ! :cool:
A word popped up ... "ACCURACY"
small dagger.... accuracy.... critical hits etc... I will not get into the gory details but its the "tools of the trade"...
ok to beat a dead horse...
big sword cuts bigger than a small scalpel...
will a surgeon use a 2 handed sword to more easily perform open heart surgery ? Hmmmm now were getting somewhere...
If you are crying for a nerf because of this reason, go troll somewhere.
Daggers should do less damage if and only if Rogues are overpowered.
Greatswords should do more damage if and only if GWF are underpowered.
I can't say much on either subject with much confidence. But arguments on those bases are the only ones worth considering.
Please stop.
Okay, I am totally on board with the idea that games play fast and loose with reality--in fact, most games and movies pretty much dismiss reality altogether. I am also on board with the idea that you can't just nerf things because in real life they are impractical. I am totally OK with rogues continuing to employ daggers as weapons of mass destruction, even if it is absurd. I can suspend disbelief.
However: please stop perpetuating myths, like the katana guy who poster earlier.. The alleged speed and accuracy of daggers is computer-game-thinking. It's movie-logic. It has no correlation with reality in any way.
We're not getting anywhere. Stabbing someone with a dagger is not open heart surgery. Not even close. Your analogy with the sliced fruit is similarly bizarre and abstract.
However, I don't think you will understand why they are different because you are imagining reality through the filter of video game and movie combat. If you were to actually face-off against someone armed with a longsword, and with only a dagger or two to defend yourself with, you would walk away with a very different understanding of what the capabilities of daggers and knives really are.
Actually, you wouldn't walk away because you'd be dead. And probably missing an arm or two.