Ehm... What's with Obsidian's hatred for rogue NPCs?

[Smorensky]

No. Seriously? I know they wanted to make a game as close to the original IE games, but this is a bit too close

 

It's like Shadows of Amn all over again... You find one rogue to add to party, he dies, only faster this time around ... The first other guy you find with mechanical skill is a mage (who said Nalia )... And afterwards not a single rogue NPC in sight for the rest of the game...

 

I demand equal rights for rogue NPCs!!! That includes a full time rogue NPC, with paid vacation, paid overtime, personal story, decent skill spread and a retirement plan that does not involve horribly gruesome death, at least not without player's consent

[Voss]

I do think they slightly screwed the pooch on this one, at least in terms of mechanics.  If you're main character doesn't specialize in mechanics (taking relevant backgrounds at least, if not classes with a bonus as well), you're not going to be able to deal with a fair number of traps and doors.  At least not without running some poor fool over the trap first.  Shoving some skill points off on durance isn't enough, you really need someone good at it from day zero. 

[Rosveen]

To be fair, lockpicking and trap disarming aren't locked to a specific class anymore, so rogues aren't a necessity. They're basically just a different type of fighter. And I don't care if they're available or not, because my first character is always a rogue.  

[Hellraiser789]

Personally, would love to see them add a Rogue, Barbarian, and a Monk NPCs in a future expansion pack..that'd be awesome. And if they wanted to add even more NPCs, that'd be great too, although unlikely IMO (3 more NPCs is already almost a 40% increase from the original so...)

 

But totally agree - Rogue NPCs have been getting the shaft for awhile now, sadly.... Poor Yoshimo. 

[Urthor]

Because Rogues are boring characters.

 

 

The fact the left out classes are Monk/Barbarian/Rogue isn't an accident.  They're the classes most moored in fantasy stereotypes and hardest to make interesting whilst still being remotely familiar.  Or in the case of Rogue, completely overdone across multiple games, such that it's pretty fair Obsidian decided to exclude a Rogue companion because anything they would have written that seemed vaguely roguey would have already been done before.

 

40+ times.  

 

But yea they're likely to be in the expansion pack

Edited April 1, 2015 by Urthor

[Epsilon Rose]

You're looking at it all wrong. They actually really love rogues and couldn't bear the thought of one being marred by sub-optimal NPC stat spreads. As such, the only ways to get a rogue are to play one or hire one you build yourself. 

 

_{Why is there a spider jerusalem emote?}

Edited April 1, 2015 by Epsilon Rose

[Hellraiser789]

Because Rogues are boring characters.

 

 

The fact the left out classes are Monk/Barbarian/Rogue isn't an accident.  They're the classes most moored in fantasy stereotypes and hardest to make interesting whilst still being remotely familiar.  Or in the case of Rogue, completely overdone across multiple games, such that it's pretty fair Obsidian decided to exclude a Rogue companion because anything they would have written that seemed vaguely roguey would have already been done before.

 

40+ times.  

 

But yea they're likely to be in the expansion pack

 

Just because something has been done before doesn't make it bad.... But I do get where you're coming from. Just wish they could've found a way to include one. Also, granted my RPG experiences may be limited, but I haven't seen too many games with Barbarian or Monks....Although, yes, they can be very stereotypical, but thats not a bad thing. Heck, Minsc was, for all intents and purposes (and should've been IMO) a Barbarian and everyone loved him.

[Hellraiser789]

You're looking at it wrong. They actually really love rogues and couldn't bear the thought of one being marred by sub-optimal NPC stat spreads. As such, the only ways to get a rogue are to play one or hire one you build yourself. 

 

_{Why is there a spider jerusalem emote?}

 

And it does make sense to hire a "rogue" character. They are a sketchy lot who tend to do anything for money....

[eRe4s3r]

Indeed, look at the bright side....

 

At least my hired Rogue doesn't betray me in an extremely importune moment right before a major battle where you really could have used that party member *curse you Yoshimo* and my Rogue also isn't called Imoen... so that's a big win-win

[Smorensky]

Indeed, look at the bright side....

 

At least my hired Rogue doesn't betray me in an extremely importune moment right before a major battle where you really could have used that party member *curse you Yoshimo* and my Rogue also isn't called Imoen... so that's a big win-win

 

 

You're looking at it all wrong. They actually really love rogues and couldn't bear the thought of one being marred by sub-optimal NPC stat spreads. As such, the only ways to get a rogue are to play one or hire one you build yourself. 

 

_{Why is there a spider jerusalem emote?}

 

Both of these!!!! ROFL!!!

 

Well I understand why there are no monk or barbarian NPCs, they were added as stretch goals during the kick-starter campaign, if I recall corectly, but rogues are still a mystery...

...

...

...

 

Discrimination!!!!!!!! AAAAHHHH CALL THE ROGUE'S RIGHT ASSOCIATION!!!

 

 

Now on the serious side, I know not having a rogue as a companion isn't rly a problem in this game like it was in BG2, but still having one around with an interesting backstory couldn't hurt... Come to think of it I do remember some rogue characters that were totaly different... NWN2 MoTB - One of Many (The Child) also he did have a severe multiple personality disorder   and oddly enough there is Cole from Dragon Age: Inquisition.

 

Regardless, I did have a terible SoA dejawu once I realized Heodan died and I couldn't help but scream: "OMG THEY KILLED KENNY!!!"

[Blovski]

Indeed, look at the bright side....

 

At least my hired Rogue doesn't betray me in an extremely importune moment right before a major battle where you really could have used that party member *curse you Yoshimo* and my Rogue also isn't called Imoen... so that's a big win-win

Pfff try it when you've dualled Yoshimo to a fighter with 4x backstab. Sad times. I think in terms of thieves BG II is arguably making up for the first Baldur's Gate, where you have no less than FOUR straight thieves (with a *lot* of skill overlap and two of which come so late in the game as to never logically get taken), none of which are evil.

[Lohi]

Rogue in this game is not the same that you see in other games.  Don't play this game as if it's yet another D&D clone.  ANY character can be the lock picker and trap disarmer.  There's a companion you run across early that has mechanic points and is not a rogue (he had 3 mechanical points when I found him, it may vary for others).  You can let that person be the mechanical guy and not worry about rogues, or be your own mechanical specialist.

[Voss]

Rogue in this game is not the same that you see in other games.  Don't play this game as if it's yet another D&D clone.  ANY character can be the lock picker and trap disarmer.  There's a companion you run across early that has mechanic points and is not a rogue (he had 3 mechanical points when I found him, it may vary for others).  You can let that person be the mechanical guy and not worry about rogues, or be your own mechanical specialist.

It is a D&D clone, and rogues especially are exactly the D&D trope- damage dealers that are inherently sneaky and inherently better at traps/locks.  It intentionally tries to stomp on some aspects of D&D, but only as an extreme(ly petty) reaction to it.  

 

2nd, Even though Durance comes with ranks in mechanics, he can't keep up.  There are quite a few places you travel where you can't keep the companions high enough in mechanics to deal with the traps/locks & generally finding things. The bonus from class and background are required to deal with the challenges presented.

Edited April 1, 2015 by Voss

[rf5111918]

It also doesn't make sense to me not have a rogue NPC when there are other classes that seem to complement rogues really well, like the cipher, the druid, and the wizard. The spellcasters can cause status effects that the rogues can really exploit. 

[eRe4s3r]

 

Indeed, look at the bright side....

 

At least my hired Rogue doesn't betray me in an extremely importune moment right before a major battle where you really could have used that party member *curse you Yoshimo* and my Rogue also isn't called Imoen... so that's a big win-win

Pfff try it when you've dualled Yoshimo to a fighter with 4x backstab. Sad times. I think in terms of thieves BG II is arguably making up for the first Baldur's Gate, where you have no less than FOUR straight thieves (with a *lot* of skill overlap and two of which come so late in the game as to never logically get taken), none of which are evil.

 

 

Tis worth mentioning that the thing I miss most in PoE, aside from you know.. some better and more class abilities, is that we can't dual class and that elves/dwarfs etc don't get specific multi-class (with no penalties) options. This cuts down your party composition options severely imo. Yoshimo was absolutely awesome as fighter/thief dual class and Imoen wasn't so bad either as Thief/Mage, since INT did get you massive stat boosts for Thief skills and was nice to have on a Mage anyway. And in DnD you could boost thief skills via spells. Which meant you had more option to get past a trap.

 

In PoE though the writing imo put itself in a dead-end when it comes to Rogues. Class wise the class is ok I guess, backstab is neat does good dmg and when the Thief damage skill isn't entirely broken anymore maybe the class is even useful, but lore wise it makes no sense to even have a dedicated Rogue as an option. Seems to me that is only "in" because Obsidian figured that they can't break the Fighter/Mage/Rogue system from DnD without getting some ire from fans. Imo better to have a "Rogue" (ie, mechanics and sneak) on a Druid. Makes lore wise even less sense, but at least you get a Rogue that can make some serious difference in battle.

This wishy washy approach to Rogues and the entire stealth mechanic is also plainly visible in the game. There are no rooms that fully 100% trapped in such a way as to literally stop your progress (Irenicus Dungeon in BG2 had more traps than PoE has in the entire game). And let's not even begin to mention that traps in PoE are completely inconsequential.. yeah they can kill one of your dudes or gals, but in BG2 a trap could imprison you, curse you and level drain you, and reversing THAT was not done via resting ;p in BG2 trap finding and disarming was a major part of the game, if you ran through certain traps with your tank your tank would find itself a km under the earth, quite literally (tis was Imprison does ,p) or as a stone stature, pretty to look at but not very useful to draw aggro ;p

 

In PoE though, these states do not literally not exist. So traps are.. not really scary. Even in Expert mode, my solution to traps was to just use a level 1 adventurer.. yes I am evil. ^^

[Blovski]

 

 

Indeed, look at the bright side....

 

At least my hired Rogue doesn't betray me in an extremely importune moment right before a major battle where you really could have used that party member *curse you Yoshimo* and my Rogue also isn't called Imoen... so that's a big win-win

Pfff try it when you've dualled Yoshimo to a fighter with 4x backstab. Sad times. I think in terms of thieves BG II is arguably making up for the first Baldur's Gate, where you have no less than FOUR straight thieves (with a *lot* of skill overlap and two of which come so late in the game as to never logically get taken), none of which are evil.

 

 

Tis worth mentioning that the thing I miss most in PoE, aside from you know.. some better and more class abilities, is that we can't dual class and that elves/dwarfs etc don't get specific multi-class (with no penalties) options. This cuts down your party composition options severely imo. Yoshimo was absolutely awesome as fighter/thief dual class and Imoen wasn't so bad either as Thief/Mage, since INT did get you massive stat boosts for Thief skills and was nice to have on a Mage anyway. And in DnD you could boost thief skills via spells. Which meant you had more option to get past a trap.

 

In PoE though the writing imo put itself in a dead-end when it comes to Rogues. Class wise the class is ok I guess, backstab is neat does good dmg and when the Thief damage skill isn't entirely broken anymore maybe the class is even useful, but lore wise it makes no sense to even have a dedicated Rogue as an option. Seems to me that is only "in" because Obsidian figured that they can't break the Fighter/Mage/Rogue system from DnD without getting some ire from fans. Imo better to have a "Rogue" (ie, mechanics and sneak) on a Druid. Makes lore wise even less sense, but at least you get a Rogue that can make some serious difference in battle.

This wishy washy approach to Rogues and the entire stealth mechanic is also plainly visible in the game. There are no rooms that fully 100% trapped in such a way as to literally stop your progress (Irenicus Dungeon in BG2 had more traps than PoE has in the entire game). And let's not even begin to mention that traps in PoE are completely inconsequential.. yeah they can kill one of your dudes or gals, but in BG2 a trap could imprison you, curse you and level drain you, and reversing THAT was not done via resting ;p in BG2 trap finding and disarming was a major part of the game, if you ran through certain traps with your tank your tank would find itself a km under the earth, quite literally (tis was Imprison does ,p) or as a stone stature, pretty to look at but not very useful to draw aggro ;p

 

In PoE though, these states do not literally not exist. So traps are.. not really scary. Even in Expert mode, my solution to traps was to just use a level 1 adventurer.. yes I am evil. ^^

 

Dual classes were very nice but I see why they wouldn't fit into PoE's systems. Dualled Avenger druid/Fighter was delightful. Having played BGs 1+2 with no thieves (and also solo'd it with a swashbuckler), I'm really glad they haven't got any Tower of Durlag places that just kill you without a thief and I always felt like the AD&D games put you in a very awkward position where thieves were a necessity rather than useful (hence, Imoen and Nalia are so popular because they can thief *just* enough to meet your requirements rather than having interesting skills like dispel illusion and stealth for backstabs). It was interesting having workarounds with resistance/scrolls if you knew what the trap would be.

 

I kind of think the traps and endurance system combined leave you just facetanking traps you can't disarm with your stupidly high con character of choice. I do think there's room for a good Rogue NPC in the world.

[eRe4s3r]

Yeah that is true But I guess my point was that if you go away from the Rogue having Rogue skills exclusively then why even bother having a Rogue class? In PoE the Rogue is optimally someone you made from scratch (as you can't raise mechanics high enough on people you recruit after reaching level 5) so the game still forces you to "carry the skills" somewhere along or make a dedicated "Adventurer" with mechanics on 10. And in normal gameplay you end up having mechanics on a char where you probably didn't want them (My "rogue" was the mage guy as very early I decided to stick mechanics on him).

 

So I dunno if I like this system more or less. I guess I must be the only one who did enjoy traps in BG2, as they made Rogues (And sneaking around) infinitely more valuable. I started Firkraak fight with traps laid out everywhere and a backstab (sadly he is immune to crits) so there was that

[pi2repsion]

Think about it:

 

You've decided to go with 8 companions and have the pick of the 11 classes.

There are two healing classes in the game, Priest (more healing than damage) and Druid (more damage than healing). Unless you want to force every group that uses companions to bring along the same healing companion if the player doesn't play a healer, you need both of these.

There are two tank oriented classes in the game, Fighter and Paladin. Unless you want to force every group that uses companions to bring along the same tanking companion if the player doesn't play a tank, you need both of these.

The game has exactly one crowd control/debuffer class, the Wizard; while others can do a bit, nobody else coming even close, and while it isn't essential to have those abilities, it is highly valuable, and if there's no Wizard companion nobody but those that play Wizards have access to this, which will make a huge difference in game difficulty between those that play Wizards and those that don't. So a Wizard companion is an obvious choice and we are at five out of eight.

The game introduces two classes that while inspired by other CRPGs are original creations and not direct analogues to the AD&D 2ed BG1/BG2 world that many players know, the Cipher and the Chanter. (Yes, the Chanter is somewhat like the IWD Bard, but bear with me). These classes are works of the imagination of the devteam unconstrained by players' expectations, they were stretch goals in the kickstarter, and they are very versatile, so it would be a really poor development team that didn't see the value in providing those as companions and that makes seven out of eight.

What is left over? The Barbarian, Monk, and Rogue, who provide different ways of dealing physical melee damage and the Ranger, who provides physical ranged damage. Of the classes already picked for companions that focus on physical damage, two are likely to used as melee damage dealers if they aren't tanking (Paladin and Fighter, either as pure melee or offtanks) and two could go either way with the class having no clear preference where melee or range is concerned (Chanter and Cipher). This just screams Ranger. When you add that the Ranger is the only pet class in the game, we reach the point where only a moronic designer would pick the Barbarian, Monk, or Rogue over the Ranger for the eighth slot.


Now, if this was D&D where rogues were needed for lockpicking, trap finding, and stealth, then the lack of a rogue companion would be strange, but given the rogue class abilities, that everybody can pick stealth and mechanics skills, and the limitation of making 8 companions with the 11 chosen classes, it really isn't. Barbarian, Monk, and Rogue are the classes that are needed the least when giving people flexibility in group composition and that's why they had to go given the constraints.

[Smorensky]

Well so far the system seems to work, but I agree "the skills" could use a bit more diversity, as there is so very few of them. But I still won't stop fighting for NPC rogue rights!

[Hellraiser789]

Think about it:

 

You've decided to go with 8 companions and have the pick of the 11 classes.

There are two healing classes in the game, Priest (more healing than damage) and Druid (more damage than healing). Unless you want to force every group that uses companions to bring along the same healing companion if the player doesn't play a healer, you need both of these.

 

There are two tank oriented classes in the game, Fighter and Paladin. Unless you want to force every group that uses companions to bring along the same tanking companion if the player doesn't play a tank, you need both of these.

 

The game has exactly one crowd control/debuffer class, the Wizard; while others can do a bit, nobody else coming even close, and while it isn't essential to have those abilities, it is highly valuable, and if there's no Wizard companion nobody but those that play Wizards have access to this, which will make a huge difference in game difficulty between those that play Wizards and those that don't. So a Wizard companion is an obvious choice and we are at five out of eight.

 

The game introduces two classes that while inspired by other CRPGs are original creations and not direct analogues to the AD&D 2ed BG1/BG2 world that many players know, the Cipher and the Chanter. (Yes, the Chanter is somewhat like the IWD Bard, but bear with me). These classes are works of the imagination of the devteam unconstrained by players' expectations, they were stretch goals in the kickstarter, and they are very versatile, so it would be a really poor development team that didn't see the value in providing those as companions and that makes seven out of eight.

 

What is left over? The Barbarian, Monk, and Rogue, who provide different ways of dealing physical melee damage and the Ranger, who provides physical ranged damage. Of the classes already picked for companions that focus on physical damage, two are likely to used as melee damage dealers if they aren't tanking (Paladin and Fighter, either as pure melee or offtanks) and two could go either way with the class having no clear preference where melee or range is concerned (Chanter and Cipher). This just screams Ranger. When you add that the Ranger is the only pet class in the game, we reach the point where only a moronic designer would pick the Barbarian, Monk, or Rogue over the Ranger for the eighth slot.

 

 

Now, if this was D&D where rogues were needed for lockpicking, trap finding, and stealth, then the lack of a rogue companion would be strange, but given the rogue class abilities, that everybody can pick stealth and mechanics skills, and the limitation of making 8 companions with the 11 chosen classes, it really isn't. Barbarian, Monk, and Rogue are the classes that are needed the least when giving people flexibility in group composition and that's why they had to go given the constraints.

 

You make a great point. Hopefully a future expansion will add more NPCs and we can get a rogue NPC that way.

[DocDoomII]

And if modding is easier than the old Infinity Engine games, we could have a lot of new NPCs.

I remember stumbling upon quite a lot of NPC mods for BG I and BG II.

[pi2repsion]

You make a great point. Hopefully a future expansion will add more NPCs and we can get a rogue NPC that way.

That seems very likely as both Paradox and Obsidian have expressed a strong desire to make at least one expansion/dlc adventure and a sequel.

 

Let's just say that between Cities: Skylines and Pillars of Eternity, Paradox has had a very good month, and Obsidian probably doesn't mind sales figures that are off the chart either.