To be more accurate, the stealth bar recharge when you don't get hit but take like 5-7 seconds to recharge fully. If you get hit, your stealth bar is reduced.
So then what do you think is the goal the devs are striving for with this mechanic? Seems to me like you REALLY want to get away from your oppenents then, rather than standing toe-to-toe and sly flourishing their face off. The longer you stay in the opponent's face fighting and taking hits, the longer it takes for Stealth to recharge. Stealth is a Rogue's bread and butter, a major boon to their offense and their primary defense, so when it's down I think the Rogue ought to be either behind the target while it's focusing on a GF or other target, or running and dodging away until it refills.
It always suprises me how badly off people guess sword weight. My heaviest sword weighs around 6-7lbs, is very rigid and about 5 foot long. It is over twice in weight compared to my longswords, but still easy enough to swing around for me.
And I can say that there is rather slim chance of a dagger fighter to move in against a guy with longsword (and these can be blindingly fast in good hands) or even true zweihanders without complete suprise, they are not slow to strike. Longswords also seem to be faster to handle than katanas, as their weight is better balanced for thrusting and changing direction of movement, while losing some cutting power ofcourse.
It is too bad, that not many games represent european style sword fighting even closely like it should be done. Even our GWF only seems to deliver the weakest blows, at level 13 I didn't see a single downward strike (fendente/oberhau). And nothing of the finesse is ever portrayed in games, just wild swings in huge arcs... But I guess that's what people want and expect to see.
So really not even slightest realistical reason to make dagger a better duelling weapon than a sword, but like someone said, it is a well accepted fantasy cliche, so we have it here. Even in confined space, halfswording with a longsword is easily more efficient than using a dagger. (Got to test that in practise next time we do some free sparring.)
None the less, I'm happy at fantasy stabbing with daggers, even though all my RP rogues have always used either long/*******/greatsword, whatever the name in said gaming system, if rules have allowed it at all.
edit: thanks for pointing that out quorforged!
edit2: and it seems I should have used hand-and-half instead of that other commonly used term...
0
quorforgedMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited April 2013
FYI, your post probably got truncated because of the umlaut in zweihander. For some reason, any non-standard characters cause the forums software to abort posts.
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...
We're talking about sheer killing power, we're not making sandwiches or performing surgery. One cuts bread in order to properly accommodate for meat and cheese. We're not wanting to put meat and cheese into our enemies to delicately eat them. We want to make sure they don't live anymore. A giant spiked club sounds pretty good for that job.
A surgeon uses a scalpel so as to deal the patient the /smallest/ amount of damage possible while being as accurate as possible. Rogues are not wanting to transplant a spleen to make sure their enemies feel better. They want to stab them in the heart so they die.
More on the topic.
I haven't seen enough gameplay to give an accurate answer for this, but I'm just curious why there's logic to be looked for in an MMO where a 65 pound halfling can get back up after being smashed by a 230 pound half orc madly swinging a greatsword.
Dagger wielding Rogues dealing more damage than a greatsword wielding Fighter is nothing new to D&D. I mean, a greatsword typically dealt around 2d6, depending on the edition, while a dagger dealt 1d4. But with the abilities of the Rogue considered (like Sneak Attack), a dagger becomes an immensely more dynamic than what it was on its face.
A Katana will cut you in half much easier then a sword with a 8 to 10 foot long blade.
well not rly. Beside two-handed swords(in medival) was often blunt - since hiting breaking armor might be hard, but even if armor will hold sheer power of hiting with almost 2 m long pice of steel can kill human. Even if your armor holds - your bones and internal organs probably wont.
well not rly. Beside two-handed swords(in medival) was often blunt - since hiting breaking armor might be hard, but even if armor will hold sheer power of hiting with almost 2 m long pice of steel can kill human. Even if your armor holds - your bones and internal organs probably wont.
Katana has some better cutting qualities, mainly curved shape (smaller contact on the target during cutting, more to do with horse back use though, I've been told), and less flexible blade. For same purposes, europeans used falchion. Those dull swords were usually sharpened for about last third of the blade, as that is the part you'd use to cut or thrust anyway. Middle of the sword was often held by your own hand to use weapon bit like a short spear. Blade close to hilt and crossguard is used for parrying and even blocking enemy attacks, and would not stay too sharp anyway.
Thrusting was certainly more used than with katana, and I'd imagine katana would never be used in parrying like european swords are used. But again, I know quite little about katana really. Several original manuals also recommend sharpening the crossguard and pommel of your sword, so you can grab the blade with both of your hands and use the sword as an poleaxe (more like pickaxe really) in armored combat. Not sharpened blade certainly makes it more valid, although it is safe to grab sharp blade when it is not moving. Holding the grip is easy.
All DPS classes should do the same damage, regardless AOE or Single DPS. So let normalize rogue, GWF and any DPS classes added in the future to only 1 class, named Striker. Problem solved!
The initial post asked why a dagger is doing more damage than a 2handed sword. You asked this question, I think, to get general agreement from the rogue community about this supposed imbalance. Seeing as how you're asking a bunch of rogues if they should get nerfed, you shouldn't be too surprised with the response you received.
You asked if this fact was realistic? I'm sorry, but some of the previous posts had this correct. This is a game. They simplified and dumbed it down as much as they could so that people could still "believe", yet enjoy play. If you want realism, you should take another step back and look at the supposed realism of the GWF.
They're able to swing big swords around and have it go completely through several targets, all while doing the (basically) same amount of damage to each target? Does this seem realistic to you? I'm no physicist, but my meager grasp of physics tells me that this isn't really realistic. Let me put it another way if you don't quite grasp the concept... If a speeding car rams with enough force into a brick wall, it'll burst through that brick wall. It's momentum will be severely diminished though. So that same car going a few inches further along it's trajectory, and smacking into another wall that's exactly the same height, weight, thickness, etc as the first isn't as likely to burst through that wall. If by some miracle it does manage to burst through that 2nd wall. It then runs into a third wall exactly the same as the first two. The chances of the car bursting through that third wall goes from slim to nearly none. So, injecting realism into your argument, the GWF should in fact, be doing less and less damage to each target beyond the first. Ergo, they need a nerf.
Daggers, traditionally are pinpoint weapons if I'm not mistaken. They require skill and experience to guide them where they need to go. The exact same could be said of swords, yes. So the skill levels of the users being equal, which should be doing more damage in a more realistic setting? Let's compare...
Swords used against armored targets. Plate and/or chainmail. Sword swings against armor tend to do less damage? Am I correct? Armor is meant to spread out the force of an impact over a larger surface so that the kinetic force that should be concentrated along the edge of a blade is "dampened" and spread out.
Dagger used against armored targets. Daggers were some of early man kinds attempts to bypass armor. The kinetic force of the strike is concentrated on a tiny point as opposed to a long edge. Chainmail is fairly weak protection against this sort of attack as I understand it. Plate is much better because of the general lack of openings in the armor. Plate unfortunately has "gaps" in it's defenses due to the requirement of joints for movement. A dagger could be used against those joints to do damage, but so could a sword applied to said joint.
The earlier responses about which one should be doing more damage being situational, are totally correct. Sure, you don't bring a dagger to a sword fight normally, but if said fight takes place in the mud or in water or tight quarters... A dagger to a sword fight is hella the right thing to bring!
I'm not 100% sure what the original poster mean to accomplish in here really. He could have just made this post to troll the rogue community, if so then he succeeded admirably.
"If you're going to ride my HAMSTER... At least pull my hair" Taking the trash out, one badguy at a time. "Satisfaction guaranteed or twice your trash back."
from the previous posters talk of joints, i assume said gaps would be places like the armpits where hitting someone with a dagger would be far easier than a sword (and to a even greater extend a greatsword)
in modern day weaponry terms the dagger is akin to a sniper rifle - a precise attack while the greatsword is a shotgun an area attack sure to hit.
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.
Did you really just use the tutorial as a justification for class rebalance? Please just go away.
0
senseijohnMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 90
edited April 2013
A dagger to the base of the spine will kill you just as fast (if not quite as dramatically) as having your head severed or your body sliced in half. Dead... is dead.
It's true in the real world too... a 22 caliber hollowpoint to the head will do as much damage as a .44 magnum to the torso. In general, unless the two are completely disproportional (ie. an arrow vs a mortar shell), in general precision will win of brute force - if precision gets there first.
Comments
Balancing a class around mid 30s is usually a bad idea.
So then what do you think is the goal the devs are striving for with this mechanic? Seems to me like you REALLY want to get away from your oppenents then, rather than standing toe-to-toe and sly flourishing their face off. The longer you stay in the opponent's face fighting and taking hits, the longer it takes for Stealth to recharge. Stealth is a Rogue's bread and butter, a major boon to their offense and their primary defense, so when it's down I think the Rogue ought to be either behind the target while it's focusing on a GF or other target, or running and dodging away until it refills.
Dat signature... you got me... xD
And I can say that there is rather slim chance of a dagger fighter to move in against a guy with longsword (and these can be blindingly fast in good hands) or even true zweihanders without complete suprise, they are not slow to strike. Longswords also seem to be faster to handle than katanas, as their weight is better balanced for thrusting and changing direction of movement, while losing some cutting power ofcourse.
It is too bad, that not many games represent european style sword fighting even closely like it should be done. Even our GWF only seems to deliver the weakest blows, at level 13 I didn't see a single downward strike (fendente/oberhau). And nothing of the finesse is ever portrayed in games, just wild swings in huge arcs... But I guess that's what people want and expect to see.
So really not even slightest realistical reason to make dagger a better duelling weapon than a sword, but like someone said, it is a well accepted fantasy cliche, so we have it here. Even in confined space, halfswording with a longsword is easily more efficient than using a dagger. (Got to test that in practise next time we do some free sparring.)
None the less, I'm happy at fantasy stabbing with daggers, even though all my RP rogues have always used either long/*******/greatsword, whatever the name in said gaming system, if rules have allowed it at all.
edit: thanks for pointing that out quorforged!
edit2: and it seems I should have used hand-and-half instead of that other commonly used term...
I buy that... I then also expect my clerics to heal. Bazinga!
LOL! Nice one Sheldon... xD
This is exactly how I feel whenever I look through these forums.
We're talking about sheer killing power, we're not making sandwiches or performing surgery. One cuts bread in order to properly accommodate for meat and cheese. We're not wanting to put meat and cheese into our enemies to delicately eat them. We want to make sure they don't live anymore. A giant spiked club sounds pretty good for that job.
A surgeon uses a scalpel so as to deal the patient the /smallest/ amount of damage possible while being as accurate as possible. Rogues are not wanting to transplant a spleen to make sure their enemies feel better. They want to stab them in the heart so they die.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0
More on the topic.
I haven't seen enough gameplay to give an accurate answer for this, but I'm just curious why there's logic to be looked for in an MMO where a 65 pound halfling can get back up after being smashed by a 230 pound half orc madly swinging a greatsword.
Dagger wielding Rogues dealing more damage than a greatsword wielding Fighter is nothing new to D&D. I mean, a greatsword typically dealt around 2d6, depending on the edition, while a dagger dealt 1d4. But with the abilities of the Rogue considered (like Sneak Attack), a dagger becomes an immensely more dynamic than what it was on its face.
Katana has some better cutting qualities, mainly curved shape (smaller contact on the target during cutting, more to do with horse back use though, I've been told), and less flexible blade. For same purposes, europeans used falchion. Those dull swords were usually sharpened for about last third of the blade, as that is the part you'd use to cut or thrust anyway. Middle of the sword was often held by your own hand to use weapon bit like a short spear. Blade close to hilt and crossguard is used for parrying and even blocking enemy attacks, and would not stay too sharp anyway.
Thrusting was certainly more used than with katana, and I'd imagine katana would never be used in parrying like european swords are used. But again, I know quite little about katana really. Several original manuals also recommend sharpening the crossguard and pommel of your sword, so you can grab the blade with both of your hands and use the sword as an poleaxe (more like pickaxe really) in armored combat. Not sharpened blade certainly makes it more valid, although it is safe to grab sharp blade when it is not moving. Holding the grip is easy.
Quite different weapons really.
We did.
('-')
You may have finished debating last week but it made for an interesting and entertaining read this week.
Exactly. so stop crying and stop trolling.
Additionally. Understand their ROLES.
Rogue = Single Target DPS
Great Weapon Fighter = AOE DPS.
They fulfill their roles adequately.
pick the role you want to play and stop comparing apples to oranges.
Why shouldn't greatsword hit a vital spot?
Not being able to become invisible with great sword, that sounds much more reasonable IMO...
"It's not the size that counts, it's how you use it!"
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
The initial post asked why a dagger is doing more damage than a 2handed sword. You asked this question, I think, to get general agreement from the rogue community about this supposed imbalance. Seeing as how you're asking a bunch of rogues if they should get nerfed, you shouldn't be too surprised with the response you received.
You asked if this fact was realistic? I'm sorry, but some of the previous posts had this correct. This is a game. They simplified and dumbed it down as much as they could so that people could still "believe", yet enjoy play. If you want realism, you should take another step back and look at the supposed realism of the GWF.
They're able to swing big swords around and have it go completely through several targets, all while doing the (basically) same amount of damage to each target? Does this seem realistic to you? I'm no physicist, but my meager grasp of physics tells me that this isn't really realistic. Let me put it another way if you don't quite grasp the concept... If a speeding car rams with enough force into a brick wall, it'll burst through that brick wall. It's momentum will be severely diminished though. So that same car going a few inches further along it's trajectory, and smacking into another wall that's exactly the same height, weight, thickness, etc as the first isn't as likely to burst through that wall. If by some miracle it does manage to burst through that 2nd wall. It then runs into a third wall exactly the same as the first two. The chances of the car bursting through that third wall goes from slim to nearly none. So, injecting realism into your argument, the GWF should in fact, be doing less and less damage to each target beyond the first. Ergo, they need a nerf.
Daggers, traditionally are pinpoint weapons if I'm not mistaken. They require skill and experience to guide them where they need to go. The exact same could be said of swords, yes. So the skill levels of the users being equal, which should be doing more damage in a more realistic setting? Let's compare...
Swords used against armored targets. Plate and/or chainmail. Sword swings against armor tend to do less damage? Am I correct? Armor is meant to spread out the force of an impact over a larger surface so that the kinetic force that should be concentrated along the edge of a blade is "dampened" and spread out.
Dagger used against armored targets. Daggers were some of early man kinds attempts to bypass armor. The kinetic force of the strike is concentrated on a tiny point as opposed to a long edge. Chainmail is fairly weak protection against this sort of attack as I understand it. Plate is much better because of the general lack of openings in the armor. Plate unfortunately has "gaps" in it's defenses due to the requirement of joints for movement. A dagger could be used against those joints to do damage, but so could a sword applied to said joint.
The earlier responses about which one should be doing more damage being situational, are totally correct. Sure, you don't bring a dagger to a sword fight normally, but if said fight takes place in the mud or in water or tight quarters... A dagger to a sword fight is hella the right thing to bring!
I'm not 100% sure what the original poster mean to accomplish in here really. He could have just made this post to troll the rogue community, if so then he succeeded admirably.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
"If you're going to ride my HAMSTER... At least pull my hair"
Taking the trash out, one badguy at a time.
"Satisfaction guaranteed or twice your trash back."
in modern day weaponry terms the dagger is akin to a sniper rifle - a precise attack while the greatsword is a shotgun an area attack sure to hit.
Did you really just use the tutorial as a justification for class rebalance? Please just go away.
It's true in the real world too... a 22 caliber hollowpoint to the head will do as much damage as a .44 magnum to the torso. In general, unless the two are completely disproportional (ie. an arrow vs a mortar shell), in general precision will win of brute force - if precision gets there first.