If you're 2nd in dps then you must not be very good either. There's no reason to bring AoE dps along if they are outperformed by single target dps. So either the class is underpowered or everyone who uses it is a bad player
This makes no sense.
Edit: where did I say rogues were out dpsing me in dungeons? Assuming that's the single Target dps u are referring to. CW is the only class that tops my gwf currently. Maybe you are bad?
INB4, INB4
0
cerebral79Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 0Arc User
This thread is mainly dissecting GF's and GWF's purposes/failures in PvE/dungeons. The 2 fighter classes are "manageable" in pvp... however in PvE they're useless and basically eventually will never get into a dungeon.
my GF is way more than manageable he tears people apart at 60 with good gear (and the right spec).
0
dr132Member, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 21Arc User
my GF is way more than manageable he tears people apart at 60 with good gear (and the right spec).
ditto, mine does pretty well assuming i'm not forced to take on most of the enemy team on my own...as for dungeons and the rest of the game, i've soloed every quest and tend to be pretty useful in dungeons with decent numbers across the board. as far as people having problems getting aggro away from the clerics and others i see that as a play style problem, if you're a GF you need to lead and be the first into the fight, mark your enemies in the mob before the fight starts and be the first to start dealing damage, use aoe attacks and the mob will focus on you to begin with. if your team's worthwhile they'll be behind you and keep you alive and the mob will fall apart pretty quick.
Sigh, GWFs being "off-tanks" is completely OPTIONAL. You're just another goof who instantly thinks GWFs are off-tanks and therefore should have little damage. The mere fact that GWFs have 2 forms of tier gear; a dps set, and a tank set, clearly shows the class has 2 options, 1 being a striker, and second being off-tank (think of it like a warrior in WoW).
Now, the biggest problem here, is a GWF who gears towards dps (berserker/avatar set), still does **** damage. Why on earth is a damage dealing class, building as a striker, dealing such terrible damage? Should TR's be doing more single target damage then a GWF? Yes of course... I don't think their single target encounters should be doing 4x the damage of a GWF's single target encounter... that's a little overboard, but it should be stronger never-the-less. Biggest problem with GWF's currently, is their at-wills... they seriously hit like wet noodles. How does a dagger, do more damage per-hit from an at-will, do more damage then a giant 2her? From a theoretical stand point, that just doesn't make sense.
First of all, I'm not a "goof", so keep your name-calling to yourself.
I'd like to address this idea you have that the classes in this game are capable of more than one role. Is this really true? At this point in the game development, the classes only have one paragon path. The game is basically funneling you to one area of expertise, even if it gives you different methods of doing it. Trickster Rogues have stealthy armor, burst-based armor, and crit-based armor; but it all serves the purpose of single-target DPS. The same is true of the different feats paths we can choose. Regardless of whether we choose equipment/builds with stealth or critical severity in mind, we still exist solely to accomplish one task.
Now I haven't played a GWF but when I look at it's class powers, skills such as Determination, the paragon path of Swordmaster, and even the feats it can take; I'm just not seeing how being an off-tank is "optional". It is literally the point of the class (at least right now). Can you be an off-tank with more of a focus of dealing damage? Sure! But you're probably going to be disappointed at the result, as you clearly are. I think that things are working as intended, and that people simply want to be a huge hulking brute with a big sword and plated soldiers and don't really want to think about what the class was actually made to do.
As far as how does a dagger do more than a two-handed sword? Well, this is fantasy. None of it makes sense. Realistically, someone wielding a sword the size of your average GWF's would be at such a disadvantage in a fight it's not even funny. But this isn't the real world. GWFs are capable of swinging those impractical hunks of metal around like toothpicks because it's fun. It doesn't make sense, you're right, but if you want a realistic weapon simulator DnD probably isn't for you. Still, I believe the rational is that daggers are small and precise, designed to assassinate single-targets, while great swords are meant to be swung and cut down multiple enemies at once representing the GWF's AoE potential.
A rich rogue nowadays is fit company for any gentleman; and the world, my dear, hath not such a contempt for roguery as you imagine. - John HAMSTER
I Leveled a GWF to 60 as my first character, thought it might be cool... lol what a sobering revelation I had when I went into pvp for the first time, and I got killed by a control wiz 1v1 before I even landed a hit. I thought, well **** I need more gear... so I got gear... stuck it out, and got the full epic pvp gear set. Now I land exactly 2 hits before I die... so much better. There's a few changes I think need to happen in order to "Ballance" pvp/pve for the fighter classes.
1: The GWF's "unstopable" mechanic... totally worthless. CANNOT use it to break knockdown CC's and if you get knocked down.. you're dead. For a class that has NO evade mechanic or block, this skill really should be a "break all CC" and take 50% less dmg. Reason being... it lasts about 5 seconds at most, and if we can't kill anyone in 5 seconds we're dead anyways. Oh and btw... this is all IF the skill doesn't bugg out, yea it bugs periodically and REFUSES to activate unless you re-log/ go through a load screen. There have been full pvp arena matches where I have been 100% usless because my "class mechanic" was broken... imagine if rogues stealth bar wouldn't ever recharge? how much *****ing would there be on the forums?
2: The skill animation for GWF skills is way too slow. A pommel strike "Takedown" if you will... is supposed to be a FAST surprise strike compared to normal attacks, but the GWF has this HUGE telegraphed wined up, and almost always misses because A: it's melee range and you have to be RIGHT up in their grill, and B: Every other class has a Block/dodge roll which prevents them from receiving the dmg/effect of the ability. I find this totally bull**** for one reason... CW abilities will still connect on you even if you run around a corner and LoS as long as you were in sight when they started casting. The LoS check should occur at the start AND actuation of any CW ability, OR the knockdown effect should still connect even if they "evaded" as long as the time stamp for the takedown ability occurred before the dodge. It's fine if they maintain the post-dodge position, but the takedown effect and dmg should still connect.
3:GF's block ability... should have no meter. Just change it so that if a CC ability deals 10% or more of the GF's life pool in one hit, that it will take effect.... i.e. if GWF hit him with "Takedown" and somehow the dmg would have been greater than 10% (which it almost never is), and ANY dmg ability that hits for more than 15% of the GF's life wouldn't be blocked, but would count as a "defelection" (50% reduction), and his guard would "break" for 2 seconds during which he can't block.
4: ALL CLASSES need pre-saved feat/power trees at least 2 of them so you can switch between pvp/pve builds (NOT changeable in pvp/dungeon instances, maybe require an NPC in Protectors Enclave). Cuz a GWF might want to run "off tank" for pve, but might want more dmg for pvp. Or a CW who specs single target cc, dmg for pvp might want more AoE's for pve. And no one wants to spend hundreds of thousands in astral diamonds just to do that... and let's be honest, this is a fairly standard feature in most MMO's, the fact that Cryptic wants micro transactions for a power reset is tacky. All power/feat resets should be the same currency. Even if the option to have access to the NPC that switches between presets is a micro transaction feature.
Reaping Strike: At Will (360deg AoE, weak to med dmg)
Wicked Strike: At Will (270 deg Cleave, med dmg)
Weapon Master Strike: At Will (huge AoE debuff and decent dmg)
Mighty Leap: Encounter (AoE dmg (arguably pretty weak dmg))
Not So Fast: Encounter (AoE dmg, Slow)
Roar: Encounter (Frontal Cone push-back and dmg)
Spinning Strike: Daily Power (AoE dmg, can move around)
Avalanche of Steel: Daily Power (good dmg AoE, AND AoE knockdown)
Slam: Daily Power (good dmg, mobile AoE, and with correct feats, bonus dmg)
GWF does not lack for AoE abilities, the problem is most of them are weak dmg or Dailies.
While in an "off tank" capacity it might be enough dmg for a mob control dmg build, this would render the class 100% worthless in pvp, and there's nothing to say that a TR couldn't kill the mobs just as fast via single target dmg.
Everything in this game is either exploit or painful when it comes to lategame. It's so bad i dont even know what the heck the devs are doing? They got the combat right, some minor glitches and such thats still ingame and painful but overall nice. However thats about the only thing they got right. This game will fail when it comes to happy customers, but i do guess they made an ok profit out of this title at'least. So they can create a new <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> game.. yay :O
The GWF should do the MOST damage in the game per hit (encounter and at wills); the very idea of the class is to sacrifice everything for damage (all out strength, all out weapon size, w/e is more destructive/damaging is what defines the class). In other words, they should be at the top of the damage meter with ease YET what we see is they are near the bottom. How could this very simple class been messed up so badly?
Rogues: should do the least damage in the game ESPECIALLY when compared to a GWF. Rogues are trying to cause damage with glorified knives...which aren't even long enough to be able to penetrate through the hides of some of the monsters in DnD let alone do any meaningful damage. I disagree with the OP about that rogues should do alot of damage; the only reason he would have to say this is because if they didn't do good damage then they would be useless in groups however the alternative is even worse; to save rogues from obsolescence they have made them godly, dynamically abandoned any realism and doomed the GWF to be obsolete instead...how does this make any sense?? Even with the GWF extra aoe damage, Rogues are still BY FAR the highest damage dealers in the game makes the game laughable and ridiculous with what should be the weakest class in the game walking around as kings (esp. in pvp). Just look at pen and paper DnD: rogues had the fewest attacks, lowest to-hit bonuses, least damaging weapons, and the primary stats of the class never increased damage. Their usefulness in groups came from utility (disarming traps, stealth work, subterfuge, and supplemental damage). Their damage was rarely meaningful and ONLY if they got to apply their sneak attack bonuses which was very conditional and rightfully so. And even with sneak attack, they always fell short of the high damage fighters, ESPECIALLY all out strength great weapon types. And this says nothing about rogue survivability which is also all wrong in this game: rogues had a tiny amount of hit points and dropped almost as quickly as being looked at during team fights. This was balanced by higher reflex saves vs. aoe and traps in addition to their utility such as strategic positioning and sneakiness. Yet in this game we see rogues with fairly high hit point pools and general all round good survivability when just running recklessly into the fray; what could be more dumb than this??
This is all really common sense. Just try to stay true to DnD (and reality) and the balancing will be just fine. All GWF really needs (and needs badly) is a damage buff across the board; nothing should hit harder than them (encounters) and their at wills should pump out the highest dps in the game not to mention their aoe damage should be WAY higher than it currently is. Rogues need a big damage nerf which could be done several ways. I would suggest lowering their damage to sub-meaningful unless they have combat advantage, are stealthed, or are behind their target; this would simulate sneak attack damage which, at its best, should never surpass GWF damage. As is, a rogue can go toe to toe with a GWF and just flat out dps him down without even using stealth; the idea of that is just insanely ridiculous. A GWF should crush a rogue 1 v 1 for a joke. The only way a rogue should have a chance vs. a GWF 1 v 1 is if the rogues has a vast gear superiority, the GWF is already at 1/2 health and/or is partially afk. In otherwords, a rogue should NEVER be able to 1 v 1 a GWF. The very idea of a GWF is a slayer of rogues by the dozens; a GWF should laugh at the idea of fighting even two or 3 rogues; they are trying to beat him at his own game after all!! The stupidity of the current state of the game here can be well summarized by a joke I heard in game: "A rogue walks into a bar. There was no counter." There is a counter; its the GWF. The devs needs to inject a little realism and consistency so we can take this game more seriously and therefore better enjoy and recommend it.
Of course, there are lots of other problems with these 2 classes, such as GWF having no ranged attack while the rogue can throw daggers (in DnD, the fighter would be much more affective at doing this as well) and the fact that a GWF must sacrifice his best encounters if he wants to be able to slow or stun his target enough to damage it with his at wills while the target is trying to run therefore forcing gimp set-ups further exacerbating his low damage problem or facing the alternative of making it impossible to run down a kitting target which he can't kill anyway because his damage is so weak that he'll die before the wizard in cloth armor does....meanwhile, the rogue can slot his best encounters and still chase down kiters while keeping his full damage potential. Oh and then there is the rogue teleport ability which enables him to get up to ledges which he should never have but if it made sense for anyone to have it then it would be the GWF who is already hopelessly at the mercy of kiters...I'll stop here but BELIEVE ME I have more to say.
First of all, I'm not a "goof", so keep your name-calling to yourself.
I'd like to address this idea you have that the classes in this game are capable of more than one role. Is this really true? At this point in the game development, the classes only have one paragon path. The game is basically funneling you to one area of expertise, even if it gives you different methods of doing it. Trickster Rogues have stealthy armor, burst-based armor, and crit-based armor; but it all serves the purpose of single-target DPS. The same is true of the different feats paths we can choose. Regardless of whether we choose equipment/builds with stealth or critical severity in mind, we still exist solely to accomplish one task.
Now I haven't played a GWF but when I look at it's class powers, skills such as Determination, the paragon path of Swordmaster, and even the feats it can take; I'm just not seeing how being an off-tank is "optional". It is literally the point of the class (at least right now). Can you be an off-tank with more of a focus of dealing damage? Sure! But you're probably going to be disappointed at the result, as you clearly are. I think that things are working as intended, and that people simply want to be a huge hulking brute with a big sword and plated soldiers and don't really want to think about what the class was actually made to do.
As far as how does a dagger do more than a two-handed sword? Well, this is fantasy. None of it makes sense. Realistically, someone wielding a sword the size of your average GWF's would be at such a disadvantage in a fight it's not even funny. But this isn't the real world. GWFs are capable of swinging those impractical hunks of metal around like toothpicks because it's fun. It doesn't make sense, you're right, but if you want a realistic weapon simulator DnD probably isn't for you. Still, I believe the rational is that daggers are small and precise, designed to assassinate single-targets, while great swords are meant to be swung and cut down multiple enemies at once representing the GWF's AoE potential.
Since i've been reading your earlier posts I had already figured that you haven't actually played a GWF. Instead you're talking about something you have next to no idea about like you're a wizard at it. Do me a small favour okay? Play one and then comment. Until then, please listen.
Your last paragraph is offensive to D&D monsieur. "Well, this is fantasy." - I'd forgive you for this sort of blase statement if you were writing in 1337 speak, but clearly you have some intelligence as you're fairly literate. So we all know "This is fantasy" but I do think you'll find a good fantasy, a sucessful fantasy, especially like Dungeons and Dragons goes a very far way in explaining itself. It goes very deep into history, mechanics, alignments, planar theories, and many, many more things... In every. I repeat. /EVERY/ official D&D game prior to this a 2 Handed sword "Large" catagory weapon will deal more outright damage than a "tiny" catagory weapon.
Typically 2d6 (Greatsword) vs 1d4. (Dagger). That's a potential of 12 damage as opposed to 4 in most settings...
Also. You say "someone wielding a sword the size of your average GWF's would be at such a disadvantage in a fight it's not even funny." - Not quite. Weapons of this nature exist in history and at similiar sizes, obviously only certain people in history could wield them and would instead use them to create distance.. Interesting to note most of them would have been blunt to instead bash in armour. Regardless, If you've ever been in a swordfight, even a fight with your hands you'll know how important having superior reach on someone is.
Please don't argue for the sake of it.
GWF's will receive a few buffs soon. It's a game of patience now my friends.
"There is no room for '2' in the world of 1's and 0's, no place for 'mayhap' in a house of trues and falses, and no 'green with envy' in a black and white world. ~Ravel
Scaling the rooftops of the Protectors Enclave since Beta Weekend #1.
The GWF should do the MOST damage in the game per hit
No. As a GWF player, I can tell you right now in a logical way that GWF should not deal the MOST damage, but of course, much more than what we do right now. GWF is a class with a huge weapon, smashing enemies, I agree that we need more dmg, because there is no reason that we should deal less dmg than a god **** cleric or a GF, however, rogues hit enemies in the "vital spots" usually meaning their encounters and crits are stronger, but that would mean their at-wills should be logically weaker than ours, but right now, their stupid dagger throw, a ranged attack is stronger than GWF's only single dmg at-will without any crit. GWF put themselves in danger to deal dmg, and they should get rewarded for that risk.
TL;DR GWF needs more dps, but no changes to rogues.
The GWF should do the MOST damage in the game per hit (encounter and at wills); the very idea of the class is to sacrifice everything for damage (all out strength, all out weapon size, w/e is more destructive/damaging is what defines the class). In other words, they should be at the top of the damage meter with ease YET what we see is they are near the bottom. How could this very simple class been messed up so badly?
Rogues: should do the least damage in the game ESPECIALLY when compared to a GWF. Rogues are trying to cause damage with glorified knives...which aren't even long enough to be able to penetrate through the hides of some of the monsters in DnD let alone do any meaningful damage. I disagree with the OP about that rogues should do alot of damage; the only reason he would have to say this is because if they didn't do good damage then they would be useless in groups however the alternative is even worse; to save rogues from obsolescence they have made them godly, dynamically abandoned any realism and doomed the GWF to be obsolete instead...how does this make any sense?? Even with the GWF extra aoe damage, Rogues are still BY FAR the highest damage dealers in the game makes the game laughable and ridiculous with what should be the weakest class in the game walking around as kings (esp. in pvp). Just look at pen and paper DnD: rogues had the fewest attacks, lowest to-hit bonuses, least damaging weapons, and the primary stats of the class never increased damage. Their usefulness in groups came from utility (disarming traps, stealth work, subterfuge, and supplemental damage). Their damage was rarely meaningful and ONLY if they got to apply their sneak attack bonuses which was very conditional and rightfully so. And even with sneak attack, they always fell short of the high damage fighters, ESPECIALLY all out strength great weapon types. And this says nothing about rogue survivability which is also all wrong in this game: rogues had a tiny amount of hit points and dropped almost as quickly as being looked at during team fights. This was balanced by higher reflex saves vs. aoe and traps in addition to their utility such as strategic positioning and sneakiness. Yet in this game we see rogues with fairly high hit point pools and general all round good survivability when just running recklessly into the fray; what could be more dumb than this??
This is all really common sense. Just try to stay true to DnD (and reality) and the balancing will be just fine. All GWF really needs (and needs badly) is a damage buff across the board; nothing should hit harder than them (encounters) and their at wills should pump out the highest dps in the game not to mention their aoe damage should be WAY higher than it currently is. Rogues need a big damage nerf which could be done several ways. I would suggest lowering their damage to sub-meaningful unless they have combat advantage, are stealthed, or are behind their target; this would simulate sneak attack damage which, at its best, should never surpass GWF damage. As is, a rogue can go toe to toe with a GWF and just flat out dps him down without even using stealth; the idea of that is just insanely ridiculous. A GWF should crush a rogue 1 v 1 for a joke. The only way a rogue should have a chance vs. a GWF 1 v 1 is if the rogues has a vast gear superiority, the GWF is already at 1/2 health and/or is partially afk. In otherwords, a rogue should NEVER be able to 1 v 1 a GWF. The very idea of a GWF is a slayer of rogues by the dozens; a GWF should laugh at the idea of fighting even two or 3 rogues; they are trying to beat him at his own game after all!! The stupidity of the current state of the game here can be well summarized by a joke I heard in game: "A rogue walks into a bar. There was no counter." There is a counter; its the GWF. The devs needs to inject a little realism and consistency so we can take this game more seriously and therefore better enjoy and recommend it.
Of course, there are lots of other problems with these 2 classes, such as GWF having no ranged attack while the rogue can throw daggers (in DnD, the fighter would be much more affective at doing this as well) and the fact that a GWF must sacrifice his best encounters if he wants to be able to slow or stun his target enough to damage it with his at wills while the target is trying to run therefore forcing gimp set-ups further exacerbating his low damage problem or facing the alternative of making it impossible to run down a kitting target which he can't kill anyway because his damage is so weak that he'll die before the wizard in cloth armor does....meanwhile, the rogue can slot his best encounters and still chase down kiters while keeping his full damage potential. Oh and then there is the rogue teleport ability which enables him to get up to ledges which he should never have but if it made sense for anyone to have it then it would be the GWF who is already hopelessly at the mercy of kiters...I'll stop here but BELIEVE ME I have more to say.
I see a lack of actual D&D experience in this post. How people play classes at your table is likely different than how they are played at another table (more true for 3.5 than 4th in my experience). You're trying to bring into consideration the reality of the size of the blades in a video game based on a pen and paper game where a stone from a sling can slay even the largest of beasts if properly optimized for it. In 4th edition D&D, the Rogue is among top tiered striker classes, generally just falling behind the OP Ranger in terms of DPR.
Even in 3.5, Rogues did not have the lowest BAB since there were 3 tiers of BAB, which increased in +.5, +.75 and +1 increments; the Rogue fell under the .75 progression, which was pretty average among classes. This .75 progression could be bypassed, with the exception of level 1, by multi-classing with Swashbuckler and taking the Daring Outlaw feat. I would say it was appropriate to give single class Rogue's .75 BAB progression due to the huge skill point pool and the fact that having a heavy hide skill and tumble skill for positioning can be used to further optimize your attack bonus since hiding and tumbling have always been move equivalent actions. You could build higher BAB Rogues in 3.5, but it lowered your skills, as was appropriate. If you compared damage of a two-handed Fighter to a dual-wielding combat Rogue, the DPR of the two was easily averaged at about the same, assuming both were optimized without min-maxing cheese (then it could go either way depending on DM discretion with RAW and RAI). The only time there would be a heavy discrepancy in potential DPR was if the Rogue was actually built as a skill monkey instead of as a combat character, which appears to be how they were built in your experience. The only true bane of the precision damage classes in 3.5 was critical immune enemies and to a degree, uncanny/improved uncanny dodge, but there were many items/feats/class features that allowed precision damage to bypass these immunities.
You seem to be asking for 'balance' by having one class removed from the top spot of the DPS charts and have your preferred class take its place. You are requesting that one class become trivial so another may replace it. This is not how you 'balance' classes. The things I personally feel that the Rogue is in need of is some nerfing to their CC abilities and their survivability does seem a bit high for their DPS. In 3.5 the Rogue and Fighter were d6 and d10 respectively, which did actually make Rogues substantially squishier if hit, but in 4th edition (which this game is based off of), the Fighter started with 15+Con score with 6 additional HP per level whereas the Rogue got 12+Con score with an additional 5 HP per level. 4th edition HP pools between the Fighter/Rogue did not have nearly as big of a discrepancy as was in 3.5 since HP pools across the board seemed to have become substantially higher in 4th. The extra survivability of the Fighter class was intended to come from the heavier armor and not necessarily a higher HP pool as not taking damage was the best mitigation available; however, this system became fundamentally flawed (especially in 3.5) as lighter armor offered better maneuverability, which offered better damage avoidance than standing in one place hoping the enemy does not get a good roll. In 3.5, damage was also so much higher than HP in general that building around damage and then focusing on enough maneuverability to never be hit by full attack actions was overall better than building for survivability. This flaw seems to have translated too well into this game where the squishier classes have much better mechanics for avoiding the heavier damage altogether than do the heavier armored classes, and I personally feel this is what primarily needs to be looked at before any other balancing.
Just a few minor, less important nitpicks before I must head out: 1) Rogues were more often better with throwing weapons in 3.5 because they used Dex to hit and Str for damage and Sneak Attack could be applied from within 30-ft (throwing weapons were not really practical outside of 30-ft. unless you were built around it). A Rogue that fought with daggers was also inherently better at throwing in that they did not need to swap actions to throw since daggers had a 10-ft. range increment. 2) A two-weapon Fighter did NOT counter Rogues, especially not in 2v1 situations where Rogues could tumble around all day utilizing flanking/combat advantage. The Fighter would be down in 1 round, 2 if lucky unless he had a way to be immune to combat advantage or sneak attack. If optimized both could down one another in a single round, but more often than not the higher Dex would offer the Rogues first initiative.
0
ioannides5Member, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
First of all, I'm not a "goof", so keep your name-calling to yourself.
I'd like to address this idea you have that the classes in this game are capable of more than one role. Is this really true? At this point in the game development, the classes only have one paragon path. The game is basically funneling you to one area of expertise, even if it gives you different methods of doing it. Trickster Rogues have stealthy armor, burst-based armor, and crit-based armor; but it all serves the purpose of single-target DPS. The same is true of the different feats paths we can choose.
Regardless of whether we choose equipment/builds with stealth or critical severity in mind, we still exist solely to accomplish one task.
Now I haven't played a GWF but when I look at it's class powers, skills such as Determination, the paragon path of Swordmaster, and even the feats it can take; I'm just not seeing how being an off-tank is "optional". It is literally the point of the class (at least right now). Can you be an off-tank with more of a focus of dealing damage? Sure! But you're probably going to be disappointed at the result, as you clearly are. I think that things are working as intended, and that people simply want to be a huge hulking brute with a big sword and plated soldiers and don't really want to think about what the class was actually made to do.
As far as how does a dagger do more than a two-handed sword? Well, this is fantasy. None of it makes sense. Realistically, someone wielding a sword the size of your average GWF's would be at such a disadvantage in a fight it's not even funny. But this isn't the real world. GWFs are capable of swinging those impractical hunks of metal around like toothpicks because it's fun. It doesn't make sense, you're right, but if you want a realistic weapon simulator DnD probably isn't for you. Still, I believe the rational is that daggers are small and precise, designed to assassinate single-targets, while great swords are meant to be swung and cut down multiple enemies at once representing the GWF's AoE potential.
Dude go play a GWF and re-think your ideas here. The swordmaster path for GWFs are basically pure damage... there's next to no defensive skills that go with it. By your logic, GWFs should be strikers, not offtanks. Also, yes, rogues don't have the luxury of fulfilling different roles... because it's a rogue. In what game do u see a rogue doing anything but DPS? However, you DO see the "warrior" type class being able to either tank or dps. Again, this is clearly shown by our paths... A GWF using the destroyer path, which seems to be similar to a fury-warrior tree in WoW, should be doing substantial amount of damage.. it only makes sense, its what the **** spec/tree is ment for.
Now as to the dagger/2h discussion, I understand it's fantasy, but regardless there should be some sort of ideal realism...This is the only game I've ever played where a dagger hits harder than a 2hander. Rogues should be getting their dps from frequent, quick attack.. that's what daggers are ment for! They shouldn't be both hitting incredibly faster, and harder then any other class.. that's just broken game design.
They have to fix broken skill and feats first. We don't know how strong the classes are supposed to be when so many skills/feats just flat out don't work like they should. Hell there is a cleric skill that if used lowers the entire group's damage when its supposed to buff it.
this! there are so many feats and powers across all classes not working right, also alot of gear, stats, and set bonuses not working either. Fix these first since we've not seeing how the classes play correctly to know what truly may need balancing yet.
Also, rogues using lashing blade instead of wicked reminder for the armor debuff in groups are fail.
Smoke Bomb is another nice option to have on your bar for bosses to stop adds from killing someone, assuming your group is smart enough to lock the adds down after you've stunned them.
0
ta1ch0u1Member, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited May 2013
another patch and still no addressing of agro control or class balance
First of all, I'm not a "goof", so keep your name-calling to yourself.
I'd like to address this idea you have that the classes in this game are capable of more than one role. Is this really true? At this point in the game development, the classes only have one paragon path. The game is basically funneling you to one area of expertise, even if it gives you different methods of doing it. Trickster Rogues have stealthy armor, burst-based armor, and crit-based armor; but it all serves the purpose of single-target DPS. The same is true of the different feats paths we can choose. Regardless of whether we choose equipment/builds with stealth or critical severity in mind, we still exist solely to accomplish one task.
Now I haven't played a GWF but when I look at it's class powers, skills such as Determination, the paragon path of Swordmaster, and even the feats it can take; I'm just not seeing how being an off-tank is "optional". It is literally the point of the class (at least right now). Can you be an off-tank with more of a focus of dealing damage? Sure! But you're probably going to be disappointed at the result, as you clearly are. I think that things are working as intended, and that people simply want to be a huge hulking brute with a big sword and plated soldiers and don't really want to think about what the class was actually made to do.
As far as how does a dagger do more than a two-handed sword? Well, this is fantasy. None of it makes sense. Realistically, someone wielding a sword the size of your average GWF's would be at such a disadvantage in a fight it's not even funny. But this isn't the real world. GWFs are capable of swinging those impractical hunks of metal around like toothpicks because it's fun. It doesn't make sense, you're right, but if you want a realistic weapon simulator DnD probably isn't for you. Still, I believe the rational is that daggers are small and precise, designed to assassinate single-targets, while great swords are meant to be swung and cut down multiple enemies at once representing the GWF's AoE potential.
The GWF got a 60% damage nerf when the game got in open Beta. This means that the GWF was designed to do competitive damage and is a striker at hart, but got nerfed to the ground.
I played a GWF till 60 and there is only one paragon tree that is designed for beiing a tank. The two others are strikers. The first 20 feats are striker to because the tank-feats are not worth speccing to be honest. The striker-feats are so much better.
The statements that OP made and a lot of GWF players have after playing the cclass are completely legit. When you know that the problem has its origin in the nerf of 60% damage reduction: You feel there is something wrong with the class. There is just not enough damage output.
The only viable way to play the GWF in end game is with your own guild/friends and have realy good gear. Those are the ppl that dont realy complain and so are those that didnt go all the road to 60..
I'm ok w/ killing the 2x circle stacking of Clerics (and I play a cleric) but if they do that you need to reduce the -40% healing we take from our own heals. Its stupid that I have to pop so many pots cus I'm taken neg heals from my own spells. I could see like 20% or something but 40 is way to high IMO.....
I've also had no problem SOLO healing any of the T1 or T2 content. infact I take both a GWF, and GF with me in my party and we do full clears. So I don't see why your all *****ing, sure there is some tweaking that needs to be done but I bet 50% of the people are just used to the WOW cookie cutter builds (1click and it does it all for me) and this whole I need to spend points and feats is something new to them and your going to have a HUGE mix of damage from other classes. Each person isn't going to be built the same so get over it.
0
ioannides5Member, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
I'm ok w/ killing the 2x circle stacking of Clerics (and I play a cleric) but if they do that you need to reduce the -40% healing we take from our own heals. Its stupid that I have to pop so many pots cus I'm taken neg heals from my own spells. I could see like 20% or something but 40 is way to high IMO.....
I've also had no problem SOLO healing any of the T1 or T2 content. infact I take both a GWF, and GF with me in my party and we do full clears. So I don't see why your all *****ing, sure there is some tweaking that needs to be done but I bet 50% of the people are just used to the WOW cookie cutter builds (1click and it does it all for me) and this whole I need to spend points and feats is something new to them and your going to have a HUGE mix of damage from other classes. Each person isn't going to be built the same so get over it.
Derp. us GWFS are complaining because we can't even do what the class was designed to do, and not cuz of skill or gear... but because the developers broke the class.
Derp. us GWFS are complaining because we can't even do what the class was designed to do, and not cuz of skill or gear... but because the developers broke the class.
I've seen lots of GWFS that were 2nd in DPS and doing just fine on lots of runs. Sure every class can use some tweaking (LOTS more than others) but no class is 100% broken. If you feel that way Re-ROLL or Re-Skill
I've seen lots of GWFS that were 2nd in DPS and doing just fine on lots of runs. Sure every class can use some tweaking (LOTS more than others) but no class is 100% broken. If you feel that way Re-ROLL or Re-Skill
and the GWFs should be 1st in dps considering they are an AOE class, the fact that TR who are a SINGLE target can do 2x -3x the damage of an AOE class is what GWF are getting angry about, add in the fact that the GWF AOE is hardcapped at 5 mobs and just rotates around to what mobs it hits so you only do a tiny bit of damage at a time to each mobe = class broken. TR are the kings of single target and should be... but you should never deal enough damage to a single target at a time to double, triple , or more the total dps of an AOE class. Also the fact that GWF are not even the highest AOE class in the game and even CW out dps them whos PRIMARY is controll secondary is dps, and GWF are STRIKER first defender second that is what they are billed for ... wait for it ... = broken class.
from the neverwinter wiki
Great Weapon Fighter
Role:
Damage Dealer
Secondary Defender
so that tells me we should be doing more damage than say ...
Control Wizard
Role:
Controller
and as aoe it should be comparable or greater in damage than a single target TR when fighting groups.
Trickster Rogue
Role:
Striker
Ability Scores
0
michaelangelo09Member, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 5Arc User
edited May 2013
i have a TR and a GWF character my TR GS is 7.9k and my GWF is 10.7 aaaaaaaannnnnnnd my TR is stronger -_-
judicas = Not saying I don't agree w/ you here but its not 100% broken like everyone else would like to say it is. And I won't turn down a GWF or GF for a group if they know their class. Because someone that knows their class vs someone that can't dps, stands in red, and over pulls random stuff, is usless to me and just cost me gold.
Wrost thing is that, when playing GWF you are approaching to damage deal score of TR or CW in dungeons, after all, people still choose TR or CW than GWF. Why? Simple. CW can control and knock mobs making it much easier fight. TR can kill every boss alone so others in party can protect cleric. What you can do as GWF? Silly waving sword, and pretend that you have a job in a group?
yes vamps people might bring a GWF or a GF to a group.... as maybe a 5th 6th pick ... if EVERYTHING else wasn't available or just because they feel sorry for it, GWF its even harder because for them to get out of red they have to plan, lose dps to run out vs any non fighter class can slide, roll, teleport at the last second. the sickening lack of mobility from animations as well as the shift mechanic and their tab mechanic forcing them to be hit is ridiculous. Not only that but if they are not specced for massive crits then the Tab function of the class is useless as yes it increases speed of attacks but drops the damage of the attacks.
Successful dungeon runs in T2 generally rely on one of the following combinations:
- Two clerics who aren't terrible
- One cleric and two CW's who are reasonably competent
- One cleric and one CW who is really, really good
A good CW can carry a group, if they focus on CC. A good cleric cannot do so without help. A good tank doesn't have the tools to do so.
This is not to state that other combinations can't clear T2's. Good, geared-up players on voice chat can make almost anything work. But those are the combos I see work when you rely on the LFG queue.
- Snit (Cleric, Dragon Server)
0
mewbreyMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 517Bounty Hunter
edited May 2013
I find it confusing that the great-weapon fighter does not do more damage for each target being hit rather than having it reduced, would it not make more sense and encourage being an aoe class? Example:-
Weapon-Master Strike:
Deals 300-350 Damage, each target hit beyond the first will increase the damage by 12% up to 10 targets.
When hitting 1 mob target would take 300-350
When hitting 5 mobs all targets would take 480-560
When hitting 10 mobs all targets would take 660-770
When hitting 15 mobs all targets would take 660-770
Power level increase = Increase maximum target by 1 and increase damage stack by 1.5% Final result would be [Deals 300-350 damage, each target beyond the first will increase the damage by 15% up to 12 targets.]
Obviously just using easy numbers to work with for exsample, but it makes more sense to do it this way, and sure the great-weapon fighter would not have huge single target damage but that was not the intention of the class anyhow. But to battle the issue of people wanting to do single target on a GWF when the paragon class is added that's intended to do single target they can work in skills that work for that.
But the great-weapon fighter was sold as an AOE god, why does it lose damage when doing AOE? This would make it so they don't step on single target striker's toes and yet be able to fill their role as aoe strikers / off-tanks.
Comments
Edit: where did I say rogues were out dpsing me in dungeons? Assuming that's the single Target dps u are referring to. CW is the only class that tops my gwf currently. Maybe you are bad?
my GF is way more than manageable he tears people apart at 60 with good gear (and the right spec).
ditto, mine does pretty well assuming i'm not forced to take on most of the enemy team on my own...as for dungeons and the rest of the game, i've soloed every quest and tend to be pretty useful in dungeons with decent numbers across the board. as far as people having problems getting aggro away from the clerics and others i see that as a play style problem, if you're a GF you need to lead and be the first into the fight, mark your enemies in the mob before the fight starts and be the first to start dealing damage, use aoe attacks and the mob will focus on you to begin with. if your team's worthwhile they'll be behind you and keep you alive and the mob will fall apart pretty quick.
First of all, I'm not a "goof", so keep your name-calling to yourself.
I'd like to address this idea you have that the classes in this game are capable of more than one role. Is this really true? At this point in the game development, the classes only have one paragon path. The game is basically funneling you to one area of expertise, even if it gives you different methods of doing it. Trickster Rogues have stealthy armor, burst-based armor, and crit-based armor; but it all serves the purpose of single-target DPS. The same is true of the different feats paths we can choose. Regardless of whether we choose equipment/builds with stealth or critical severity in mind, we still exist solely to accomplish one task.
Now I haven't played a GWF but when I look at it's class powers, skills such as Determination, the paragon path of Swordmaster, and even the feats it can take; I'm just not seeing how being an off-tank is "optional". It is literally the point of the class (at least right now). Can you be an off-tank with more of a focus of dealing damage? Sure! But you're probably going to be disappointed at the result, as you clearly are. I think that things are working as intended, and that people simply want to be a huge hulking brute with a big sword and plated soldiers and don't really want to think about what the class was actually made to do.
As far as how does a dagger do more than a two-handed sword? Well, this is fantasy. None of it makes sense. Realistically, someone wielding a sword the size of your average GWF's would be at such a disadvantage in a fight it's not even funny. But this isn't the real world. GWFs are capable of swinging those impractical hunks of metal around like toothpicks because it's fun. It doesn't make sense, you're right, but if you want a realistic weapon simulator DnD probably isn't for you. Still, I believe the rational is that daggers are small and precise, designed to assassinate single-targets, while great swords are meant to be swung and cut down multiple enemies at once representing the GWF's AoE potential.
1: The GWF's "unstopable" mechanic... totally worthless. CANNOT use it to break knockdown CC's and if you get knocked down.. you're dead. For a class that has NO evade mechanic or block, this skill really should be a "break all CC" and take 50% less dmg. Reason being... it lasts about 5 seconds at most, and if we can't kill anyone in 5 seconds we're dead anyways. Oh and btw... this is all IF the skill doesn't bugg out, yea it bugs periodically and REFUSES to activate unless you re-log/ go through a load screen. There have been full pvp arena matches where I have been 100% usless because my "class mechanic" was broken... imagine if rogues stealth bar wouldn't ever recharge? how much *****ing would there be on the forums?
2: The skill animation for GWF skills is way too slow. A pommel strike "Takedown" if you will... is supposed to be a FAST surprise strike compared to normal attacks, but the GWF has this HUGE telegraphed wined up, and almost always misses because A: it's melee range and you have to be RIGHT up in their grill, and B: Every other class has a Block/dodge roll which prevents them from receiving the dmg/effect of the ability. I find this totally bull**** for one reason... CW abilities will still connect on you even if you run around a corner and LoS as long as you were in sight when they started casting. The LoS check should occur at the start AND actuation of any CW ability, OR the knockdown effect should still connect even if they "evaded" as long as the time stamp for the takedown ability occurred before the dodge. It's fine if they maintain the post-dodge position, but the takedown effect and dmg should still connect.
3:GF's block ability... should have no meter. Just change it so that if a CC ability deals 10% or more of the GF's life pool in one hit, that it will take effect.... i.e. if GWF hit him with "Takedown" and somehow the dmg would have been greater than 10% (which it almost never is), and ANY dmg ability that hits for more than 15% of the GF's life wouldn't be blocked, but would count as a "defelection" (50% reduction), and his guard would "break" for 2 seconds during which he can't block.
4: ALL CLASSES need pre-saved feat/power trees at least 2 of them so you can switch between pvp/pve builds (NOT changeable in pvp/dungeon instances, maybe require an NPC in Protectors Enclave). Cuz a GWF might want to run "off tank" for pve, but might want more dmg for pvp. Or a CW who specs single target cc, dmg for pvp might want more AoE's for pve. And no one wants to spend hundreds of thousands in astral diamonds just to do that... and let's be honest, this is a fairly standard feature in most MMO's, the fact that Cryptic wants micro transactions for a power reset is tacky. All power/feat resets should be the same currency. Even if the option to have access to the NPC that switches between presets is a micro transaction feature.
Reaping Strike: At Will (360deg AoE, weak to med dmg)
Wicked Strike: At Will (270 deg Cleave, med dmg)
Weapon Master Strike: At Will (huge AoE debuff and decent dmg)
Mighty Leap: Encounter (AoE dmg (arguably pretty weak dmg))
Not So Fast: Encounter (AoE dmg, Slow)
Roar: Encounter (Frontal Cone push-back and dmg)
Spinning Strike: Daily Power (AoE dmg, can move around)
Avalanche of Steel: Daily Power (good dmg AoE, AND AoE knockdown)
Slam: Daily Power (good dmg, mobile AoE, and with correct feats, bonus dmg)
GWF does not lack for AoE abilities, the problem is most of them are weak dmg or Dailies.
While in an "off tank" capacity it might be enough dmg for a mob control dmg build, this would render the class 100% worthless in pvp, and there's nothing to say that a TR couldn't kill the mobs just as fast via single target dmg.
The GWF should do the MOST damage in the game per hit (encounter and at wills); the very idea of the class is to sacrifice everything for damage (all out strength, all out weapon size, w/e is more destructive/damaging is what defines the class). In other words, they should be at the top of the damage meter with ease YET what we see is they are near the bottom. How could this very simple class been messed up so badly?
Rogues: should do the least damage in the game ESPECIALLY when compared to a GWF. Rogues are trying to cause damage with glorified knives...which aren't even long enough to be able to penetrate through the hides of some of the monsters in DnD let alone do any meaningful damage. I disagree with the OP about that rogues should do alot of damage; the only reason he would have to say this is because if they didn't do good damage then they would be useless in groups however the alternative is even worse; to save rogues from obsolescence they have made them godly, dynamically abandoned any realism and doomed the GWF to be obsolete instead...how does this make any sense?? Even with the GWF extra aoe damage, Rogues are still BY FAR the highest damage dealers in the game makes the game laughable and ridiculous with what should be the weakest class in the game walking around as kings (esp. in pvp). Just look at pen and paper DnD: rogues had the fewest attacks, lowest to-hit bonuses, least damaging weapons, and the primary stats of the class never increased damage. Their usefulness in groups came from utility (disarming traps, stealth work, subterfuge, and supplemental damage). Their damage was rarely meaningful and ONLY if they got to apply their sneak attack bonuses which was very conditional and rightfully so. And even with sneak attack, they always fell short of the high damage fighters, ESPECIALLY all out strength great weapon types. And this says nothing about rogue survivability which is also all wrong in this game: rogues had a tiny amount of hit points and dropped almost as quickly as being looked at during team fights. This was balanced by higher reflex saves vs. aoe and traps in addition to their utility such as strategic positioning and sneakiness. Yet in this game we see rogues with fairly high hit point pools and general all round good survivability when just running recklessly into the fray; what could be more dumb than this??
This is all really common sense. Just try to stay true to DnD (and reality) and the balancing will be just fine. All GWF really needs (and needs badly) is a damage buff across the board; nothing should hit harder than them (encounters) and their at wills should pump out the highest dps in the game not to mention their aoe damage should be WAY higher than it currently is. Rogues need a big damage nerf which could be done several ways. I would suggest lowering their damage to sub-meaningful unless they have combat advantage, are stealthed, or are behind their target; this would simulate sneak attack damage which, at its best, should never surpass GWF damage. As is, a rogue can go toe to toe with a GWF and just flat out dps him down without even using stealth; the idea of that is just insanely ridiculous. A GWF should crush a rogue 1 v 1 for a joke. The only way a rogue should have a chance vs. a GWF 1 v 1 is if the rogues has a vast gear superiority, the GWF is already at 1/2 health and/or is partially afk. In otherwords, a rogue should NEVER be able to 1 v 1 a GWF. The very idea of a GWF is a slayer of rogues by the dozens; a GWF should laugh at the idea of fighting even two or 3 rogues; they are trying to beat him at his own game after all!! The stupidity of the current state of the game here can be well summarized by a joke I heard in game: "A rogue walks into a bar. There was no counter." There is a counter; its the GWF. The devs needs to inject a little realism and consistency so we can take this game more seriously and therefore better enjoy and recommend it.
Of course, there are lots of other problems with these 2 classes, such as GWF having no ranged attack while the rogue can throw daggers (in DnD, the fighter would be much more affective at doing this as well) and the fact that a GWF must sacrifice his best encounters if he wants to be able to slow or stun his target enough to damage it with his at wills while the target is trying to run therefore forcing gimp set-ups further exacerbating his low damage problem or facing the alternative of making it impossible to run down a kitting target which he can't kill anyway because his damage is so weak that he'll die before the wizard in cloth armor does....meanwhile, the rogue can slot his best encounters and still chase down kiters while keeping his full damage potential. Oh and then there is the rogue teleport ability which enables him to get up to ledges which he should never have but if it made sense for anyone to have it then it would be the GWF who is already hopelessly at the mercy of kiters...I'll stop here but BELIEVE ME I have more to say.
Since i've been reading your earlier posts I had already figured that you haven't actually played a GWF. Instead you're talking about something you have next to no idea about like you're a wizard at it. Do me a small favour okay? Play one and then comment. Until then, please listen.
Your last paragraph is offensive to D&D monsieur. "Well, this is fantasy." - I'd forgive you for this sort of blase statement if you were writing in 1337 speak, but clearly you have some intelligence as you're fairly literate. So we all know "This is fantasy" but I do think you'll find a good fantasy, a sucessful fantasy, especially like Dungeons and Dragons goes a very far way in explaining itself. It goes very deep into history, mechanics, alignments, planar theories, and many, many more things... In every. I repeat. /EVERY/ official D&D game prior to this a 2 Handed sword "Large" catagory weapon will deal more outright damage than a "tiny" catagory weapon.
Typically 2d6 (Greatsword) vs 1d4. (Dagger). That's a potential of 12 damage as opposed to 4 in most settings...
Also. You say "someone wielding a sword the size of your average GWF's would be at such a disadvantage in a fight it's not even funny." - Not quite. Weapons of this nature exist in history and at similiar sizes, obviously only certain people in history could wield them and would instead use them to create distance.. Interesting to note most of them would have been blunt to instead bash in armour. Regardless, If you've ever been in a swordfight, even a fight with your hands you'll know how important having superior reach on someone is.
Please don't argue for the sake of it.
GWF's will receive a few buffs soon. It's a game of patience now my friends.
Scaling the rooftops of the Protectors Enclave since Beta Weekend #1.
No. As a GWF player, I can tell you right now in a logical way that GWF should not deal the MOST damage, but of course, much more than what we do right now. GWF is a class with a huge weapon, smashing enemies, I agree that we need more dmg, because there is no reason that we should deal less dmg than a god **** cleric or a GF, however, rogues hit enemies in the "vital spots" usually meaning their encounters and crits are stronger, but that would mean their at-wills should be logically weaker than ours, but right now, their stupid dagger throw, a ranged attack is stronger than GWF's only single dmg at-will without any crit. GWF put themselves in danger to deal dmg, and they should get rewarded for that risk.
TL;DR GWF needs more dps, but no changes to rogues.
I see a lack of actual D&D experience in this post. How people play classes at your table is likely different than how they are played at another table (more true for 3.5 than 4th in my experience). You're trying to bring into consideration the reality of the size of the blades in a video game based on a pen and paper game where a stone from a sling can slay even the largest of beasts if properly optimized for it. In 4th edition D&D, the Rogue is among top tiered striker classes, generally just falling behind the OP Ranger in terms of DPR.
Even in 3.5, Rogues did not have the lowest BAB since there were 3 tiers of BAB, which increased in +.5, +.75 and +1 increments; the Rogue fell under the .75 progression, which was pretty average among classes. This .75 progression could be bypassed, with the exception of level 1, by multi-classing with Swashbuckler and taking the Daring Outlaw feat. I would say it was appropriate to give single class Rogue's .75 BAB progression due to the huge skill point pool and the fact that having a heavy hide skill and tumble skill for positioning can be used to further optimize your attack bonus since hiding and tumbling have always been move equivalent actions. You could build higher BAB Rogues in 3.5, but it lowered your skills, as was appropriate. If you compared damage of a two-handed Fighter to a dual-wielding combat Rogue, the DPR of the two was easily averaged at about the same, assuming both were optimized without min-maxing cheese (then it could go either way depending on DM discretion with RAW and RAI). The only time there would be a heavy discrepancy in potential DPR was if the Rogue was actually built as a skill monkey instead of as a combat character, which appears to be how they were built in your experience. The only true bane of the precision damage classes in 3.5 was critical immune enemies and to a degree, uncanny/improved uncanny dodge, but there were many items/feats/class features that allowed precision damage to bypass these immunities.
You seem to be asking for 'balance' by having one class removed from the top spot of the DPS charts and have your preferred class take its place. You are requesting that one class become trivial so another may replace it. This is not how you 'balance' classes. The things I personally feel that the Rogue is in need of is some nerfing to their CC abilities and their survivability does seem a bit high for their DPS. In 3.5 the Rogue and Fighter were d6 and d10 respectively, which did actually make Rogues substantially squishier if hit, but in 4th edition (which this game is based off of), the Fighter started with 15+Con score with 6 additional HP per level whereas the Rogue got 12+Con score with an additional 5 HP per level. 4th edition HP pools between the Fighter/Rogue did not have nearly as big of a discrepancy as was in 3.5 since HP pools across the board seemed to have become substantially higher in 4th. The extra survivability of the Fighter class was intended to come from the heavier armor and not necessarily a higher HP pool as not taking damage was the best mitigation available; however, this system became fundamentally flawed (especially in 3.5) as lighter armor offered better maneuverability, which offered better damage avoidance than standing in one place hoping the enemy does not get a good roll. In 3.5, damage was also so much higher than HP in general that building around damage and then focusing on enough maneuverability to never be hit by full attack actions was overall better than building for survivability. This flaw seems to have translated too well into this game where the squishier classes have much better mechanics for avoiding the heavier damage altogether than do the heavier armored classes, and I personally feel this is what primarily needs to be looked at before any other balancing.
Just a few minor, less important nitpicks before I must head out: 1) Rogues were more often better with throwing weapons in 3.5 because they used Dex to hit and Str for damage and Sneak Attack could be applied from within 30-ft (throwing weapons were not really practical outside of 30-ft. unless you were built around it). A Rogue that fought with daggers was also inherently better at throwing in that they did not need to swap actions to throw since daggers had a 10-ft. range increment. 2) A two-weapon Fighter did NOT counter Rogues, especially not in 2v1 situations where Rogues could tumble around all day utilizing flanking/combat advantage. The Fighter would be down in 1 round, 2 if lucky unless he had a way to be immune to combat advantage or sneak attack. If optimized both could down one another in a single round, but more often than not the higher Dex would offer the Rogues first initiative.
Dude go play a GWF and re-think your ideas here. The swordmaster path for GWFs are basically pure damage... there's next to no defensive skills that go with it. By your logic, GWFs should be strikers, not offtanks. Also, yes, rogues don't have the luxury of fulfilling different roles... because it's a rogue. In what game do u see a rogue doing anything but DPS? However, you DO see the "warrior" type class being able to either tank or dps. Again, this is clearly shown by our paths... A GWF using the destroyer path, which seems to be similar to a fury-warrior tree in WoW, should be doing substantial amount of damage.. it only makes sense, its what the **** spec/tree is ment for.
Now as to the dagger/2h discussion, I understand it's fantasy, but regardless there should be some sort of ideal realism...This is the only game I've ever played where a dagger hits harder than a 2hander. Rogues should be getting their dps from frequent, quick attack.. that's what daggers are ment for! They shouldn't be both hitting incredibly faster, and harder then any other class.. that's just broken game design.
this! there are so many feats and powers across all classes not working right, also alot of gear, stats, and set bonuses not working either. Fix these first since we've not seeing how the classes play correctly to know what truly may need balancing yet.
And I don't advocate nerfing them either.
Also, rogues using lashing blade instead of wicked reminder for the armor debuff in groups are fail.
Smoke Bomb is another nice option to have on your bar for bosses to stop adds from killing someone, assuming your group is smart enough to lock the adds down after you've stunned them.
The GWF got a 60% damage nerf when the game got in open Beta. This means that the GWF was designed to do competitive damage and is a striker at hart, but got nerfed to the ground.
I played a GWF till 60 and there is only one paragon tree that is designed for beiing a tank. The two others are strikers. The first 20 feats are striker to because the tank-feats are not worth speccing to be honest. The striker-feats are so much better.
The statements that OP made and a lot of GWF players have after playing the cclass are completely legit. When you know that the problem has its origin in the nerf of 60% damage reduction: You feel there is something wrong with the class. There is just not enough damage output.
The only viable way to play the GWF in end game is with your own guild/friends and have realy good gear. Those are the ppl that dont realy complain and so are those that didnt go all the road to 60..
I've also had no problem SOLO healing any of the T1 or T2 content. infact I take both a GWF, and GF with me in my party and we do full clears. So I don't see why your all *****ing, sure there is some tweaking that needs to be done but I bet 50% of the people are just used to the WOW cookie cutter builds (1click and it does it all for me) and this whole I need to spend points and feats is something new to them and your going to have a HUGE mix of damage from other classes. Each person isn't going to be built the same so get over it.
Derp. us GWFS are complaining because we can't even do what the class was designed to do, and not cuz of skill or gear... but because the developers broke the class.
I've seen lots of GWFS that were 2nd in DPS and doing just fine on lots of runs. Sure every class can use some tweaking (LOTS more than others) but no class is 100% broken. If you feel that way Re-ROLL or Re-Skill
and the GWFs should be 1st in dps considering they are an AOE class, the fact that TR who are a SINGLE target can do 2x -3x the damage of an AOE class is what GWF are getting angry about, add in the fact that the GWF AOE is hardcapped at 5 mobs and just rotates around to what mobs it hits so you only do a tiny bit of damage at a time to each mobe = class broken. TR are the kings of single target and should be... but you should never deal enough damage to a single target at a time to double, triple , or more the total dps of an AOE class. Also the fact that GWF are not even the highest AOE class in the game and even CW out dps them whos PRIMARY is controll secondary is dps, and GWF are STRIKER first defender second that is what they are billed for ... wait for it ... = broken class.
from the neverwinter wiki
Great Weapon Fighter
Role:
Damage Dealer
Secondary Defender
so that tells me we should be doing more damage than say ...
Control Wizard
Role:
Controller
and as aoe it should be comparable or greater in damage than a single target TR when fighting groups.
Trickster Rogue
Role:
Striker
Ability Scores
- Two clerics who aren't terrible
- One cleric and two CW's who are reasonably competent
- One cleric and one CW who is really, really good
A good CW can carry a group, if they focus on CC. A good cleric cannot do so without help. A good tank doesn't have the tools to do so.
This is not to state that other combinations can't clear T2's. Good, geared-up players on voice chat can make almost anything work. But those are the combos I see work when you rely on the LFG queue.
Weapon-Master Strike:
Deals 300-350 Damage, each target hit beyond the first will increase the damage by 12% up to 10 targets.
When hitting 1 mob target would take 300-350
When hitting 5 mobs all targets would take 480-560
When hitting 10 mobs all targets would take 660-770
When hitting 15 mobs all targets would take 660-770
Power level increase = Increase maximum target by 1 and increase damage stack by 1.5% Final result would be [Deals 300-350 damage, each target beyond the first will increase the damage by 15% up to 12 targets.]
Obviously just using easy numbers to work with for exsample, but it makes more sense to do it this way, and sure the great-weapon fighter would not have huge single target damage but that was not the intention of the class anyhow. But to battle the issue of people wanting to do single target on a GWF when the paragon class is added that's intended to do single target they can work in skills that work for that.
But the great-weapon fighter was sold as an AOE god, why does it lose damage when doing AOE? This would make it so they don't step on single target striker's toes and yet be able to fill their role as aoe strikers / off-tanks.