I thought rogue was to be a front line class

[Arden]

The build 301 endurance to health multiplier has them as 4 instead of 5? 

[Gromnir]

our recollection is that the front-line classes were identified as barbarian, fighter and monk. now keep in mind that front-line may mean something different to you than to Gromnir or to the developers. we plan to build our rogue as a melee combatant wielding the most damaging weapon we can find, but am not thinking that will make him a "front-line" combatant as we is gonna have him flanking whenever possible.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[rjshae]

I'd rather not see the rogue become a front-line essential--their class should better suited to ambush, infiltration, disruption, and assassination. I.e. roles where sneakiness and spike damage capability are useful.

[Lephys]

Yeah. He may be in the front, but I wouldn't say he fights in the typical "line" with the others. He's like a specialist. 8P

[Gfted1]

In case you haven't seen this update Arden:

 

Update #71: The Heavy Hitters: Rogues and Rangers.
 

[Gromnir]

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66380-update-81-the-front-line-fighters-and-barbarians/

 

right there at the start o' the update.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Arden]

Thanks for straighten me out on that everyone!

[GreyFox]

Why is the fighter the only front liner with a 5 multiplier? What does he get to compensate for that...

[Elerond]

Why is the fighter the only front liner with a 5 multiplier? What does he get to compensate for that...

 

Higher deflection and abilities that rise deflection and DT. So basically they should take less damage than other front liners.

[BlueLion]

I think I'm one of few that love the Rogue. Granted it needs more options with regards to talents/skills etc but I'm using him to swoop in and kill a distracted enemy then retreat once he's drawn aggro. It's actually quite fun.

Edited September 27, 2014 by BlueLion

[GreyFox]

 

Why is the fighter the only front liner with a 5 multiplier? What does he get to compensate for that...

 

Higher deflection and abilities that rise deflection and DT. So basically they should take less damage than other front liners.

 

 

I see, the wiki has been updated tremendously lately but seems like they will also be doing less damage than other front liners too so they will also be fighting for longer yes?

[gkathellar]

I think I'm one of few that love the Rogue. Granted it needs more options with regards to talents/skills etc but I'm using him to swoop in and kill a distracted enemy then retreat once he's drawn aggro. It's actually quite fun.

 

I love it as a ranged combatant. Just as the fighter needs more tricks available to it for ranged combat, the rogue needs more to help it melee..

[AlperTheCaglar]

It's ironic that the "rogue" class as a glass melee cannon is a recent phenomenon. I don't dislike it, but rogue used to be synonymous with thieves once, a totally mediocre melee combatant whose skills lied in stealth, infiltration and the very seldom succesful backstab.

 

Baldur's Gate 2 or Icewind Dale thieves had interesting things going for them, especially in BG2 where thieving, burglary and disarming (also setting up traps) were a treat and very rewarding.

Edited September 28, 2014 by AlperTheCaglar

[Doppelschwert]

It's ironic that the "rogue" class as a glass melee cannon is a recent phenomenon. I don't dislike it, but rogue used to be synonymous with thieves once, a totally mediocre melee combatant whose skills lied in stealth, infiltration and the very seldom succesful backstab.

 

Baldur's Gate 2 or Icewind Dale thieves had interesting things going for them, especially in BG2 where thieving, burglary and disarming (also setting up traps) were a treat and very rewarding.

 

Josh commented somewhere that renaming thieves to rogues in transition from DnD 2 to DnD 3 was meant to reflect the change of focus of the class. Apart from that, the rogue in PoE can still do all that stuff you listed from IWD/ BG2.

 

Given that combat and non-combat skills are strictly separated in PoE, they had to give the rogue some role in combat.

[AlperTheCaglar]

 

It's ironic that the "rogue" class as a glass melee cannon is a recent phenomenon. I don't dislike it, but rogue used to be synonymous with thieves once, a totally mediocre melee combatant whose skills lied in stealth, infiltration and the very seldom succesful backstab.

 

Baldur's Gate 2 or Icewind Dale thieves had interesting things going for them, especially in BG2 where thieving, burglary and disarming (also setting up traps) were a treat and very rewarding.

 

Josh commented somewhere that renaming thieves to rogues in transition from DnD 2 to DnD 3 was meant to reflect the change of focus of the class. Apart from that, the rogue in PoE can still do all that stuff you listed from IWD/ BG2.

 

Given that combat and non-combat skills are strictly separated in PoE, they had to give the rogue some role in combat.

 

 

Yeah haven't tried rogue yet, but in my ideal world of RPGs, it is OK to have a group member who is inept or bad at combat.

 

Vic in Fallout 2 comes to mind, where until late game, he was a liability, and unlike Sulik's insane burst shorts, was terrible when you first picked him up. And yet I loved Vic, his comments, his role in the party-- what he lacked in combat he made up with character.

 

That is not to say the rogue should be nerfed, or buffed, but I liked how thieves or bards in Baldur's Gate 1/2 struggled in combat but made it up with other things throughout your adventures. But I suppose no one in the post console world would ever accept the old school liability thief, I'm at peace with that.

[rjshae]

 

Given that combat and non-combat skills are strictly separated in PoE, they had to give the rogue some role in combat.

 

Yeah haven't tried rogue yet, but in my ideal world of RPGs, it is OK to have a group member who is inept or bad at combat.

 

Vic in Fallout 2 comes to mind, where until late game, he was a liability, and unlike Sulik's insane burst shorts, was terrible when you first picked him up. And yet I loved Vic, his comments, his role in the party-- what he lacked in combat he made up with character.

 

That is not to say the rogue should be nerfed, or buffed, but I liked how thieves or bards in Baldur's Gate 1/2 struggled in combat but made it up with other things throughout your adventures. But I suppose no one in the post console world would ever accept the old school liability thief, I'm at peace with that.

 

Given how the skill tree is flattened down to a meager 5 in PoE and there are no longer any conversation skills, Rogues definitely need a more expanded role in combat than they had in the IE series.

[dyrhet]

There are plenty of games where having  characters who are no good at combat can be neat and compelling but a game primarily concerned with combat (which includes PoE and almost all of the infinity engine games) ain't them.

[sibakruom]

Given how the skill tree is flattened down to a meager 5 in PoE and there are no longer any conversation skills, Rogues definitely need a more expanded role in combat than they had in the IE series.

 

 

There were no general or conversation skills in the IE games either (barring IW2, I think), and it was already clear back then that Thieves needed something more. There's a reason there was no single-class Thief companion available past the mid-game in BG2.

[rjshae]

 

Given how the skill tree is flattened down to a meager 5 in PoE and there are no longer any conversation skills, Rogues definitely need a more expanded role in combat than they had in the IE series.

 

 

There were no general or conversation skills in the IE games either (barring IW2, I think), and it was already clear back then that Thieves needed something more. There's a reason there was no single-class Thief companion available past the mid-game in BG2.

 

Right, but IWD2 probably represented the pinnacle of the IE series development and hence a model of the future trend. Despite it being a primarily combat-oriented game, it managed to implement 16 of the then-current D&D skills.