test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
I dont know what this class is, but it is no Rogue
bejita231
Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users Posts: 18 Arc User
Ive never played a rogue before that basically just charges in like a fighter, mashing all his at wills and encounter powers in random succession without a care in the world for positioning or priority, and puting out 100% of his dps, this is the playstyle of a GWF that somehow got mixed up with a rogue
Can i please have the rogue back? a class that relys on actually cunning and needing to be behind a target to do good damage? this class just takes no skill at all and feels very boring and overpowered, GWF also needs its own help, it does nothing well cant tank and cant damage, its a completley worthless class
Please switch the roles of these classes back to working as intended, thanks
Can i please have the rogue back? a class that relys on actually cunning and needing to be behind a target to do good damage? this class just takes no skill at all and feels very boring and overpowered, GWF also needs its own help, it does nothing well cant tank and cant damage, its a completley worthless class
Please switch the roles of these classes back to working as intended, thanks
Post edited by bejita231 on
0
Comments
You're playing it wrong. The TR has a nice selection of stealth manuevers and abilities to get back into stealth.
Character is what a man is in the dark
I think it's safe to say that this game is not the DnD you grew up with (or your parent's for that matter).
Ranger: Eagerly awaiting this class with it's Ranged/2 weapon attack power of Twin-strike/Rapid-shot and Nature focus.
Bard: 4th edition bards aren't awful looking forward to the healing vie Majestic word.
One example of a dps oriented GWF built:
http://nw-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?159741-Kartofflens-GWF-destroyer-compendium
Rogue in dnd was NOT this. It was the bard(yes originally bards were rogues), its the guy who knows how to unbalance his opponent and slide a knife into the armpit, its the guy who tosses down grease to make a getaway.
Think rog as the class who will utlize enemies mistakes rather than the 'guy who can go invisible without magic' guy.
The ingame rogue is Trikster rogue a battle-rogue based on melee damage that uses stealth as part of dodge defences.
The way this class is in game is just fine.
Its not a bard, an assassin, a thief or a pirate, witch also are rogues who hopefully will be implemented in this game in the near future. If anything this rogue is closest to the swachbuckler, but again it is not.
So please stop compairing this class to what ever your past experiance with assassins-creed-style-games tells you a rogue should play like, its like your asking why the greatweapon fighter doensn't play anything like a barbarian.
You do realize that you're giving up an INCREDIBLE amount of damage by NOT attacking with combat advantage and using your stealth skills.
So either you're an unbelievably terrible player, or you've just gotten out of the tutorial and are coming to rant after 4 levels.
I actually really like the trickster in this game thusfar. The animations are awsome. If you pop out of stealth, your char goes buck wild, and at the end she does some sort of backhand with her dagger to finish the target off.
Early on, 2 useful 'roguey' abilities...(I forgot the names), but you poof/stealth jump and strike the target, and the other is you poof/stealth and teleport behind the target for a backstab. Pretty roguey to me. Not to mention, you can stay stealth and use your at wills without breaking stealth. Whats not roguey about that?
Being behind your target and backstabbing them is not the only definition of a rogue class or how to play a rogue class, but it certainly is OK to desire that. But to say that this is not a rogue class is crazy. This is way more of a rogue class than the rogue in WoW, rogue in Rift,and I might even say the Thief in GW2.
The discussion is less about how to play in game, as much as what a Rogue is in DND pnp.
Rogues in DND are more versatile. in 3.5 and earlier, INT was a rogues primary stat. While there were melee dps builds, rogues were primarily out of combat use. They in fact had weak attack rolls. RANGERS were the dw melee dps kings. Rogues were about traps, lockpicking, perform, jump, acrobatics, slight of hand, spot, search, listen, etc. class skills, not combat feats.
While in combat, rogues often either used bows from distance to make attacks of opportunity, which were effectively "combat advantage". and sneak attacks. or melee rogues with finesse, etc.
4e turned rogues into WoW clone rogues, as you would see in a CRPG. DPS machines.
Part of the problem is of course all those Role play class skills have little use, or are hard to really translate into computer rpgs, which are so combat focused.
Calling the tricksters was poor choice on WOTC's part. As that implies Arcane trickster. which is very much, not a dps machine.
That's what I was referring to. The OP is missing exactly what he's looking for. I'm not sure why you're trying to turn this into another "Wah, this ain't no tabletop D&D" thread.
Thats what every sequel game turns out to be. The avid GW1 players are pining that Gw2 is not Guild Wars anymore, and is nothing like GW1. Its a new game. Its set in the universe of the franchise, but its a new game. People should understand that before buying. Same thing as Diablo 3. It isnt like Diablo 2, but its a new game.
If the devs wanted to create the same game, they would just throw in a new graphics engine, redo all of the current content, add some more content, and sell it to us as the same game but enhanced just as they would a brand new game. Probably spend as much time enhancing an old game compared to creating a new one.
Its a new game.
While this is true, the OP makes a valid point. Take a Rogue and a GW and have them just stand face to face using nothing but At wills and encounter powers and the Rogue will win with about 50% health left, I am guessing. I know because this has happened to me a few times :-\ I can 1 v 1 clerics, CWs and GFs and win about half the time. I have never been able to 1v1 a TR and win. As many people say, they are currently doing too much damage.
Now, obviously, in a D&D universe, if youu had a GWF and a TR just go head to head, face to face in an all out battle the TR should NEVER win. they are supposed to rely on trickery and stealth.
The problem is mainly that the Rogue's "at will" powers just DESTROY so they can just mash mouse button 1 and own face. I was watching a youtube vid of a rogue that was playing level 10-20 pvp in OB. She was level 10 before porting in. Her gear was all green and no enchants. Her AT WILLs were critting for 500-600. I mean come on. My level 30 GWF at will power crits for 300-400 on a Rogue and I have 4 pieces of gear with +power and +crit.
Actually what is important now is to fix all issues with classes balance (it's a beta, so we should expect some issues), try to think about game improvement (add a bard buffer secondary caster or secondary melee? Really nice for me). Ranged rogue or ranger? Fine. And so on. GWF is under powered? Fix. Rogue is a sort of light armor dps but doesn't need position or cunning? Fix. But it's clear that we have to test all classes and not only at low levels. I'm not yet expert with rogue but it seems more a swashbuckler assassin than a trickster. I mean, it's ok for a rogue to be like that, but more for an assassin spec. Trickster should entangle, bluff, debuff, and so on.
I agree bard with lots of buffs and summon companions like a small 4-mins duration of a wolf or spider etc like they did in the rpg's, if they gonna add all those classes the rpg has , then this game iis gonna be epic with party forming and raids and GvG's
IGN: Obscura Rouge 60 , GS 9k
Handel @Kysis020
Also, sadgfh, there's a reason no one plays 4th edition. It's terrible.
Actually... you're incorrect. Original (1st edition), the rogue (called a THIEF) was all about backstab in combat. You had to be BEHIND a person for backstab to work... and he had hide in shadows and move silently, but they were fairly limited. They had a d6 for hit points - the second weakest hit dice in the game (better only than wizards) and their whole focus was to NOT get hit and NOT engage in a straight up battle. But there REAL usefulness was in their trap disarming and wall climbing, back when dungeons had traps that KILLED and obstacles like SHEER walls that only the rogue could climb without tools. But the traps were the most important things. In 1st edition, a trap could take out the whole party or prevent the party from getting the loot... remember CHEST traps... and to some extent locks.
Traps in MMO's are laughable at best and at worse, they are like gnats - annoying, but you can ignore them. They do this for balance, but it GREATLY diminishes the usefulness of a rogue/thief. Whereas, in first - and 2nd to some extent - you wouldn't DARE go into a dungeon without a thief, now it's thieves are "dps"... not the trap experts and lock experts that make them the vital, necessary party member.
As far as "bard" in 1st edition... remember... you had to level up as fighter... then switch classes to a thief (loosing your fighter skills until you got your thief level higher level than your fighter level... and THEN ... finally... switch to bard... and while you kept the hit points, your THAC0 and saves didn't stack, you used the best save from your various classes. By time the bard got usable magic... the wizard was casting WISH.
(a) Give the rogue traps. Tricksters should have more gadgets and ranged options. Scoundrels are the melee guys.
(b) Put secret rooms/shortcuts in dungeons that can only be accessed with the Rogue's Thievery skill, add more treasure for Rogues.
(c) Make stealth last longer, a rogue might hide in a pile of horse manure for 3 days before he slits his target's throat.
(d) Make better use of Charisma so rogues who use it can feel more useful. Give Intimidate/Persuade options in dialogue, I've not seen an example of this yet. Oh, and FYI Charisma is my last priority, but its popular among other TR's.
(e) Make Dexterity an actual main stat that most rogues will want to invest in. Give them Weapon Finesse, basically. Right now I hear everyone saying go STR + CHA which you obviously wouldn't do in 4e if you know anything about the system. Though I suspect these people are taking way more hits than they would if they invested in DEX as it is,
(f) Not sure if you've made any cloaks of invisibility or feather fall boots, but those work great for rogues making quick getaways, something they are totally gimped at in this game. If I start a fight with an ogre and some guy aggros 20 orcs then runs past me, I can't get away from them all short of someone else intervening. In D&D Rogues should be good at escaping bad situations.
Anyway, that's all for now.
If you do not use your abilities wisely, and position yourself for combat advantage, you are not doing 100% of your potential DPS.
However, at least early on, you do not need 100% of your potential DPS to do well.
I bet R.A. Salvator probably gave them a good chewing out after probably investing in a game based on his latest novels only to find out they excluded the class of the main protagonist in his stories. He was probably really wanting to play a Dual-Wielding Drow Ranger named Driz'zt Do'Urden with a panther companion. If they do release a Ranger soon it won't even be the Dual-Wield, it will be the Archer. Hopefully they release more classes soon. I like my Rogue but I'd like to recreate my Human Sorceress, Dwarven Warlock, or Razorclaw Druid characters on here eventually.
The animations/spells you obtain are just epic and your stabs/sideward slices feel like they're hitting your enemy hard, I don't see the problem.
heh wow, that's going back a lot further than I had tried to illustrate, but you are right, and I remember making a character in the hopes of one day becoming a bard(whole party was killed off before any of us reached 7)
But point is, that nowdays, and even then to some extent, 'rogue' was a 'tree' that thief, assassins, bards, and(in some rulesets) ninja's came from. Fighter, or warrior was another tree(berserker, soldiers, etc) and so on. Thing is people hear 'rogue' and think 'thief' and unlike original(or even ddo which does have nasty traps that CAN and often DO wipe out the entire party) thief and/or rogue are like you say, dps, since the idea of backstabbing is silly. (DDO sorta solved this issue by making it sneak attacks, and a rog can get said sneaks on enemies not fighting him, or if he trips, blinds, etc the target, which in neverwinter is pretty much how it is - like another poster said, stop thinking like the original idea of a theif hiding in shadows in the hopes of doing his one and only attack, and think of the trickster rogue as a thug, or assassin - IE: more likely to be in the fight rather than 'looking' for a place to stick his knife.