Class review: The Rogue (The Assassin more like)

[Hiro Protagonist II]

I get classes being more geared toward/optimal at that particular role, but I don't think that role should be what that class inherently does.

 

Why not? That's what the role of the class is. It's a DPS heavy hitter and it's designed that way by the dev's.

[mutonizer]

 

I get classes being more geared toward/optimal at that particular role, but I don't think that role should be what that class inherently does.

 

Why not? That's what the role of the class is. It's a DPS heavy hitter and it's designed that way by the dev's.

 

 

 

Quite agree. The class has it stands has a very solid concept for a pure DPS class and lots of various debuffs that can be used as well.

My only real beef (aside from all bugs and core mechanics issues) is with it is the name really, mostly because I think it'll generate confusion (and later on frustration) with players lacking experience with PoE mechanics but also because of what the name "Rogue" evokes in an heroic fantasy setting, which as little to do with what the class actually is and does. I proposed Assassin but that was just to make a point really.

[Lephys]

Why not? That's what the role of the class is. It's a DPS heavy hitter and it's designed that way by the dev's

"That's what the role of the class is" cannot be the reason why the role of the class should be that. That would be a paradox.

 

You misunderstand my meaning. There's a difference between a class being a heavy hitter, and a class's role literally being "DPS." A Wizard can do a lot of damage-per-second, too, with the right spells. However, the function of a wizard isn't "generate oodles of damage per second." It's "cast spells that do lots of different things." You can easily build a Wizard to not-maximize DPS. If you use a Rogue's class uniqueness, you deal oodles of DPS. You can't Sneak Attack differently. All you can do is more damage.

 

Again, there's nothing wrong with a class being prone to deal more damage, in general. But, I find it less-than-ideal for a class's core mechanic to be "boost DPS."

 

I think it's, at the very least, weaker than the other classes' functions (as well as more restrictive). The Ranger is a Heavy Hitter, too, and its animal companion doesn't restrict it to a damage boost.

[Captain Shrek]

All classes in PoE were intended to be designed for combat. That goal has failed. Priest for example is a distinctly inferior damage dealer, ironically relegated back to a "healing battery" role. 

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

Why not? That's what the role of the class is. It's a DPS heavy hitter and it's designed that way by the dev's

"That's what the role of the class is" cannot be the reason why the role of the class should be that. That would be a paradox.

 

You misunderstand my meaning. There's a difference between a class being a heavy hitter, and a class's role literally being "DPS." A Wizard can do a lot of damage-per-second, too, with the right spells. However, the function of a wizard isn't "generate oodles of damage per second." It's "cast spells that do lots of different things." You can easily build a Wizard to not-maximize DPS. If you use a Rogue's class uniqueness, you deal oodles of DPS. You can't Sneak Attack differently. All you can do is more damage.

 

Again, there's nothing wrong with a class being prone to deal more damage, in general. But, I find it less-than-ideal for a class's core mechanic to be "boost DPS."

 

I think it's, at the very least, weaker than the other classes' functions (as well as more restrictive). The Ranger is a Heavy Hitter, too, and its animal companion doesn't restrict it to a damage boost.

 

Why NOT? There is no paradox as much as you say it is.

 

And I didn't misunderstand your meaning. And stop changing the definition of a heavy hitter and DPS class. PoE takes a lot from 4E and one of the DPS classes is the Rogue. It's also a heavy hitter. It's also called a striker.

 

Just because you don't find it ideal doesn't mean it's wrong. It is what it is and designed to be by the dev's. You're now against the dev's on their design?

 

Also, if the class needs to be tweaked, Obsidian will tweak it. As it stands, the Rogue does it's job. It does it's role of being a heavy hitter DPS class.

[Lephys]

Well, not that this means the Priest can in no way be poorly balanced or never needs any tweaking, but "inferior" is a relative term. The Priest could do less damage than all the other classes, and still be doing adequate damage. Combat effectiveness depends on much more than sheer damage.

 

That being said, I agree that no class should be restricted to "you don't really do much damage at all." I don't know from any empirical evidence that that's the case with the Priest. But, if it is, it shouldn't be. Doesn't mean he (the Priest) can't be "inferior" to every single other class (in damage output, alone), and still be just fine.

[Elerond]

All classes in PoE were intended to be designed for combat. That goal has failed. Priest for example is a distinctly inferior damage dealer, ironically relegated back to a "healing battery" role. 

 

All classes were designed so that they have useful role in the combat. Priest were designed to be support characters, which is role they do quite well in my opinion, even though I feel that chanters and paladins are better choice for support character, because of their passive de/buffs, where priest is much bit too high maintenance support character for my taste. 

 

But I have find out that with my play style priest is most effective when I use them as debuffer that makes rest of my party much more deadlier. Healing spell I have find out to be somewhat useless, because I don't usually need restore endurance to any of my characters before fight has ended and then endurance regenerates in seconds to full.

[Lephys]

Why NOT? There is no paradox as much as you say it is.

... I'm going to explain this, even though you're going to ignore it:

 

At some point in time, that's NOT how the Rogue was, because there wasn't a Rogue design. Then, one day, an Obsidian person came up with the Rogue, based on some notion of what the Rogue class should be. The reason that's what they came up with for what it should be can't be "because that's what the current design is," because there was no current design. That would be a paradox. Something can't be how it is until it's made that way, so it can't be made that way with the reason being "because it's that way."

 

And I didn't misunderstand your meaning. And stop changing the definition of a heavy hitter and DPS class. PoE takes a lot from 4E and one of the DPS classes is the Rogue. It's also a heavy hitter. It's also called a striker.

I'm not changing the meaning of anything. Stop insisting that things have extraordinarily specific meanings that suit you, and not different meanings like they actually have.

 

DPS literally means "damage per second." So, if a class's role is restricted to merely DPS, then all that class does is what other classes do (all classes deal damage per second), only to a greater extent than the other classes. You could just give the Rogue a base attack damage and attack speed that was twice everyone else's, and the class would meet its goal. And that wouldn't be particularly interesting at all. So, I just feel that the class could be spruced up a bit.

 

I realize that the current PoE Rogue is not just that, and is more interesting than that. However, I don't think the interestingness of the class owes much at all to the "When you have conditions on you, my DPS increases" mechanic that makes the Rogue a Rogue, and not just some other class who happens to do a lot of damage per second.

 

That, and "heavy hitter" only means that the Rogue is designed to be capable of hitting very hard. That doesn't say anything about an ability to constantly dole out the most damage for every given second of combat. Nor does it say that the core mechanic of the Rogue must be constrained to bonus damage.

 

Just because you don't find it ideal doesn't mean it's wrong. It is what it is and designed to be by the dev's. You're now against the dev's on their design?

You're right. It doesn't mean that. And I don't follow your point here. You're acting as though it's absurd to be "against the devs." Like it's a binary thing. When the devs make a change to their own design (like shuffling character stat effects around), does that mean they are against their own design?

 

When is it not wrong to simply evaluate/constructively criticize a given design iteration? Did they, or did they not, ask for our feedback on all things beta build? Is that not the very purpose of the beta?

 

I don't understand why that's LOL-worthy. I really, really worry about you... I'm not even kidding. Your behavior is worrisome.

Edited October 2, 2014 by Lephys

[swordofthesith]

Sneak attack isn't the problem. It's the damage multiplier stacking.

 

You can go one of two ways with this Sens, you can nerf the damage multiplier or you can nerf the vast amount of conditions needed to green light Sneak Attacks. I am more in favor of reducing or making the conditions needed to score a sneak attack harder. Keep the damage potential through the multiplier, just make the multiplier harder to score in melee. ^_^

[swordofthesith]

 

Sadly, I don't think simply tweaking a value here and there can solve this problem.

The "easiest" way I can think of that would not affect game mechanics or how any other class performs is to limit the weapons available to Rogues to, for example, fast weapons only. This will instantly get rid of crazy damage ramp up and bring down Rogues to a more reasonable level of damage when they don't use abilities as well as make them better against weakly armored targets and less effective against armored targets, which is something that seems in tune for the concept of the class: low damage fast weapons, with incredible critical hit potential and utility (from debuffs). Doesn't solve the problem completely, but rather hides it a bit under the rug.

Another way to smooth things over would be to calculate critical hit multipliers after DT calculation, but before DR. This won't make dramatic changes, but will push things to a more acceptable middle ground damage wise.

That said, the core problems are not with the Rogue, which is really a good and in itself, balanced class that does it's job...as an Assassin. The core problems are with the combat mechanics as a whole with the whole Graze/Hit/Crit system, which the Rogue just exacerbates because of the class design. Once these are solved, somehow, I think the Rogue class will behave just fine though as it is currently, it just simple breaks the entire combat mechanics, period.

 

 

As a fun closing note, I tried a run with nothing but Rogues and a Priest, all Orlans but the Priest, who was wood elf.

• 2 Rogues were my acting tanks, with maxed out INT/RES, in full plate with hatchet, shields and Cautious Attack, Hold the Line
• 2 Rogues were melee DPS, 1 with Pike, other with dual stilettos (PER/MIG), in leather and Weapon Focus, Savage Attack
• 1 Rogue was Ranged DPS and debuffer with Hunting Bow (RES/PER), Weapon Focus, Vicious Fighting
• 1 Priest

They pretty much tear **** apart non stop. Rogues make incredible tanks when used properly, with Escape allowing them to position right when they're needed, and their debuffs (especially Blind/Weaken) allowing them to really survive proper. Add onto that their crit potential, damage multipliers, constant sneak attacks, adept evasion and it was one of the best party I've run so far.

 

 

As usual, try to stick to discussions and comments directly related to the class itself, not so non class related game mechanics.

 

Cheerios.

 

Great write up Mut! I couldn't imagine the imbalanced horror of a rogue party in PoE. I was kicking ass and taking names with just the BB Rogue and my PC. I would also recommend to restrict Rogues to low DT, fast weapons too, in attempt to balance out their DPS potential. ^_^

[Hiro Protagonist II]

... I'm going to explain this, even though you're going to ignore it:

 

At some point in time, that's NOT how the Rogue was, because there wasn't a Rogue design. Then, one day, an Obsidian person came up with the Rogue, based on some notion of what the Rogue class should be. The reason that's what they came up with for what it should be can't be "because that's what the current design is," because there was no current design. That would be a paradox. Something can't be how it is until it's made that way, so it can't be made that way with the reason being "because it's that way."

 

 

Oh Lephys,. you're going to write a wall of text even though I'm going to ignore it? LOL. Yeah good one. Looks like you have nothing better to do than write walls of text to people who you think will ignore it anyway. Maybe test out the beta and report some bugs? Be a bit more productive with the beta than writing walls of text to people who you think will ignore them.

 

At some point in time, that IS how the Rogue was, because that's how the Rogue was designed. Maybe see WoW and 4E for starters. Maybe earlier than that with kits. And how do you know an Obsidian person came along based on the notion of what a Rogue should be? Who in Obsidian did this? Ah FAIL again Lephys.

 

And more gobbledygook. Stop with the gobbledygook.

 

 

 And I didn't misunderstand your meaning. And stop changing the definition of a heavy hitter and DPS class. PoE takes a lot from 4E and one of the DPS classes is the Rogue. It's also a heavy hitter. It's also called a striker.

I'm not changing the meaning of anything. Stop insisting that things have extraordinarily specific meanings that suit you, and not different meanings like they actually have.

 

DPS literally means "damage per second." So, if a class's role is restricted to merely DPS, then all that class does is what other classes do (all classes deal damage per second), only to a greater extent than the other classes. You could just give the Rogue a base attack damage and attack speed that was twice everyone else's, and the class would meet its goal. And that wouldn't be particularly interesting at all. So, I just feel that the class could be spruced up a bit.

 

I realize that the current PoE Rogue is not just that, and is more interesting than that. However, I don't think the interestingness of the class owes much at all to the "When you have conditions on you, my DPS increases" mechanic that makes the Rogue a Rogue, and not just some other class who happens to do a lot of damage per second.

 

That, and "heavy hitter" only means that the Rogue is designed to be capable of hitting very hard. That doesn't say anything about an ability to constantly dole out the most damage for every given second of combat. Nor does it say that the core mechanic of the Rogue must be constrained to bonus damage.

 

You are changing the meanings when those meanings have real world meanings in context of certain games. See I can talk like you to. And in Lephysland, this would make perfect sense to you.

 

And a DPS class can mean heavy hitters or strikers. And that's what they are with certain games. So stop trying to change the meanings. And there's no point giving the rogue a base attack damage more than other classes. Certain conditions have to be met to get that extra damage. i.e. Sneak Attack.

 

So go back to the update and read about heavy hitters. Maybe you'll learn something.

 

 

You're right. It doesn't mean that. And I don't follow your point here. You're acting as though it's absurd to be "against the devs." Like it's a binary thing. When the devs make a change to their own design (like shuffling character stat effects around), does that mean they are against their own design?

 

When is it not wrong to simply evaluate/constructively criticize a given design iteration? Did they, or did they not, ask for our feedback on all things beta build? Is that not the very purpose of the beta?

 

I don't understand why that's LOL-worthy. I really, really worry about you... I'm not even kidding. Your behavior is worrisome. 

 

Changing the class role is not constructive criticism. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean the role needs to be changed. The rogue is what it is and does it's job well. It's a DPS, heavy hitter class. That's what it does. That's what it's been designed to do. And Obsidian have shown nothing that they'll change it. Accept it. You accepted it when the heavy hitter update came out. No good reason not to accept the role the rogue has now. But we've had this debate in the Fighter/Rogue thread in the other forum. You lost that round too.

 

What I will do is post constructive criticism and suggestions in improving the rogue. Whether it's through skills, powers, talents, game mechanics including stealth, to improve the rogue. And if I source different rule sets to improve the rogue which I think will help with PoE, I will. What I won't do is stand idly by and see someone like you who has NFI trying to change the role of the rogue to something that it's designed not to be.

 

And no need to worry about me. I don't need your worry. Go worry about someone else. You're behaviour on the other hand, well just look at the other threads you've trolled.

Edited October 3, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[Lephys]

@Hiro, so you've NEVER criticized any design that the developers have produced? Because that would be preposterous? Under what conditions is it okay to say "hey, I think this could use a tweak."?

 

Actually-on-topic:

 

You can go one of two ways with this Sens, you can nerf the damage multiplier or you can nerf the vast amount of conditions needed to green light Sneak Attacks. I am more in favor of reducing or making the conditions needed to score a sneak attack harder. Keep the damage potential through the multiplier, just make the multiplier harder to score in melee. ^_^

I think you're on to something. What if you started the multiplier lower, but left it at 2-or-more afflictions? Then for every subsequent affliction, the multiplier could increase. That way, IF you wanna put 7 afflictions on a single foe (whatever the cost of that would be in any given combat situation), your Rogue will annihilate that enemy. I mean, obviously you'd still want to keep it in check. No x7 or anything.

Edited October 3, 2014 by Lephys

[Captain Shrek]

 

All classes in PoE were intended to be designed for combat. That goal has failed. Priest for example is a distinctly inferior damage dealer, ironically relegated back to a "healing battery" role. 

 

All classes were designed so that they have useful role in the combat. Priest were designed to be support characters, which is role they do quite well in my opinion, even though I feel that chanters and paladins are better choice for support character, because of their passive de/buffs, where priest is much bit too high maintenance support character for my taste. 

 

But I have find out that with my play style priest is most effective when I use them as debuffer that makes rest of my party much more deadlier. Healing spell I have find out to be somewhat useless, because I don't usually need restore endurance to any of my characters before fight has ended and then endurance regenerates in seconds to full.

 

 

Not really no. Let's say you make a party of 8 Wizards. What chance do you really have in the game? Would you be able to enjoy it? I doubt it.

[Elerond]

 

 

All classes in PoE were intended to be designed for combat. That goal has failed. Priest for example is a distinctly inferior damage dealer, ironically relegated back to a "healing battery" role. 

 

All classes were designed so that they have useful role in the combat. Priest were designed to be support characters, which is role they do quite well in my opinion, even though I feel that chanters and paladins are better choice for support character, because of their passive de/buffs, where priest is much bit too high maintenance support character for my taste. 

 

But I have find out that with my play style priest is most effective when I use them as debuffer that makes rest of my party much more deadlier. Healing spell I have find out to be somewhat useless, because I don't usually need restore endurance to any of my characters before fight has ended and then endurance regenerates in seconds to full.

 

 

Not really no. Let's say you make a party of 8 Wizards. What chance do you really have in the game? Would you be able to enjoy it? I doubt it.

 

 

How do you make party of 8 wizards?

 

Party of 6 wizards does reasonable fine, as you can do front line and back line wizards whose spells compliment each other. 

 

I would say that party of 6 priest is could have some what more harder times, but maybe not as at least currently you can combine same buffs and debuffs from multiple priest which means that you can drop enemy's accuracy to 0 and rise you own accuracy so that you do only critical hits in one spell casting turn, which means that enemy can't hit you and you should be able to dispatch them relative quickly. 

[Captain Shrek]

Have you tried it out elerond? I suggest that you do it and let me know how it goes. Would be awfully nice of you.

[Elerond]

Have you tried it out elerond? I suggest that you do it and let me know how it goes. Would be awfully nice of you.

 

Party of 6 wizards? It went relative well as I said. Although I cheated better gear and XP boost.

 

Your front line wizards can use heavier armors and protective spells that make them quite durable And they can use cone spell effectively kill enemies.

 

Back line can work as long range battery throwing AoE damage and debuff spells.

 

Your party need lot of micromanagement as default attacks of wizards aren't that effective, so you need to relay on your spells quite lot.

 

I didn't play whole beta through but only Ogre quest. 

[Captain Shrek]

Then admittedly the design has succeeded. If any given combination of classes can trump the game, it would seem Josh has managed what he wanted to get in this regard.

[morhilane]

I took some data with a self-made Rogue because the number have been bugging me.

 

Might at 10.

Race: Hearth Orlan.

Stat: maxed Perception&Dexterity left everything else at 10.

Talent: the one that convert more hits into crits with dirty fighting.

Weapon: the arbalest (for bigger numbers).

 

The damage value is before the DR/DT in the combat log, classified by string that comes before it. I fought Medreth's group and a bunch of Lions (elder and not) with the party. Reckless Assault was on all the time.

 

The results

 

Grazes without sneak attack

28.3

17

Grazes with sneak attack

73.4

52

 

Normal hits without sneak attack

48.4

47.2

49

69.4

61

 

Normal hits with sneak attacks

109.6

122.6

 

Criticals without sneak attacks

136

 

Critical with sneak attacks.

175.5

 

Reckless Assault (x1.20 damage) and weapon quality (x1.25) is applied everywhere. Criticals are supposed to be +50% damage. Grazes are supposed to be -0.50% damage. Sneak attacks are supposed to be +25% damage (or 20%?).

 

How can the grazes with sneak attacks deal more damage than a normal hit when the sneak attack bonus is supposed to be half the grazes damage reduction?

[Sensuki]

Sneak attacks are x2 multiplier, I am pretty sure.

[morhilane]

Sneak attacks are x2 multiplier, I am pretty sure.

 

Going by this post by Sawyer, it should be +50% multiplier for SA (yet I'm pretty sure I've read +25% in a post somewhere, oh well), but it really looks like x2 is what is used currently in the game.

[Sensuki]

That is what the tooltip said it did in the last patch.

[JFSOCC]

I've been thinking about this for a bit, perhaps sneak attack damage multipliers can be scaled to the number of conditions the target has on it.

Another thing I'd like to see is ways to play the rogue differently, so that it isn't limited to the one role it seems to fulfil now. Perhaps there could be some combat feats that help playing a debuffer, essentially downgrading the enemy threat. A little variation in play, so that the rogue won't have to become known as 'that DPS' class.

Edited October 10, 2014 by JFSOCC

[morhilane]

Perhaps there could be some combat feats that help playing a debuffer, essentially downgrading the enemy threat.

 

They already are debuffers (to single target). They get Blinding Strike (Blind), Crippling Strike (Hobble) before level 8. The wiki list two others strikes that apply Weakened state that are probably gained at later levels has well.

[JFSOCC]

yes but the focus is still largely on DPS, and conditions are mainly used for qualifying for sneak attacks.

[morhilane]

Giving them more debuffing abilities isn't going to change their DPS focus, no talents are going to take that away from them. If you want to play a rogue has a debuffer you can: focus on applying the debuff on targets that need it as opposed to do it to maximize sneak attacks.