Grimrock

Arch0n wrote:

Saxi wrote:True but dex should improve a rogues fighting skills and evade should actually do something. That is the whole dynamic of a rogue, making them pump strength and ignore dex defeats the purpose of the rogue class. It is made worse by the lack of duel wield that puts a nail in the coffin making rogue melee pointless.

I've read all your posts. It sounds like you want to play a different game.

You keep saying how "pointless" rogues are because the mechanics aren't conforming to your preconceived notions, you want dual wield, you want the code rewritten to respect "RPG 101" (whatever that is)... none of that is going to happen. In fact, Dex rogues are far from pointless in any respect, despite your desire to min/max.

Might I suggest another game, or swapping out your rogue for a mage.

It isn't about mix/maxing. I prefer melee rogues, not missile weapons. Rogues are suppose to dish out a ton of dmg and evade equally well. From the looks of it though, they do neither well unless you put them in back, give them a bow, and make them Arnold Schwarzenegger. Considering dual wielding rogues are extremely popular, I doubt I am alone in this.

It's their game, they are free to do whatever they like, in fact they could make mages use dual daggers and fighters use a diaper catapult. But it looks more of an oversight than a choice.

My rogue isn't focused on daggers, but if my fighter gets hurt I throw a dagger and shield on her, swap her to the front lines, and let her take the heat for a while. Her small HP pool means she doesn't stay out front forever, but her evasion is good enough to last her a while as long as I'm not dumb enough to just stand there and trade blows.

The Dodge skill tree helps a lot, in case anybody was neglecting that.

Also, evasion is bad if your party gets cornered. When an enemy attacks you about 15 times in 10 seconds, it's guaranteed you'll take at least 2-3 of those hits, which is enough to kill a rogue (on hard at least). It's a different story if you're kiting. If an enemy only even gets maybe 3-4 opportunities to even TRY to attack before it goes down, odds are your rogue will dodge them all, while your beefy 6 dex minotaur will take every single hit to the face. Even with all his heavy armor, that'll take a chunk out of his HP.

And Saxi sounds like he wants rogues to be one-stat monsters like they are in your typical RPG, where they are incredibly overpowered because dexterity increases accuracy, evasion, damage, critical hits, and number of attacks per round.

I wanted to clarify as well that Dex is still very useful for rogues in terms of melee accuracy (which is important even for back rank rogues with daggers since with enough Assassination they can strike from the rear ranks). So again, hardly a useless skill, just needing some clarification (which we've gotten).

I dunno if people have realized this...as I skipped over a couple of pages, but leveling up in the skill increases your damage no matter what skill it raises. my lizardman Rogue has like...12 strength and maxed dexterity and he still hits around 30-40 per bolt with crossbow, and he has Volley which means two shots. sure without the + to str he may not quadruple up in damage, but he still goes up in attack power every couple of levels.

Though unclear, I don't mind the distinction between DEX and STR for a ranged attacker (sidebar: I, like many others, made the mistake of building a DEX rogue for the back row as well). What doesn't sit well with me is the thinking that if you want a ranged attacker from the back row and then look at the stat options for the races that best supports this, the obvious choice is a Minotaur. A Minotaur?

That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Using a bow requires finesse, all of the Minotaurs I know are brutish oafs who would more often draw the string back so far as to snap the thing in half than deftly place an arrow in the squishy spot of the target.

SwitchVII wrote:Though unclear, I don't mind the distinction between DEX and STR for a ranged attacker (sidebar: I, like many others, made the mistake of building a DEX rogue for the back row as well). What doesn't sit well with me is the thinking that if you want a ranged attacker from the back row and then look at the stat options for the races that best supports this, the obvious choice is a Minotaur. A Minotaur?

That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Using a bow requires finesse, all of the Minotaurs I know are brutish oafs who would more often draw the string back so far as to snap the thing in half than deftly place an arrow in the squishy spot of the target.

Good reason for dexterity / accuracy to affect ranged attacks. Maybe a dev can chime in about the reason it wasn't implemented this way?

SwitchVII wrote: all of the Minotaurs I know are brutish oafs

So, how many Minotaurs do you know? Mind introducing any?

Seriously though, that's a good point. Has it occurred to people, though, that only 12 points into Assassination you can attack with melee from the back row? Even if it does take you a little longer to level to begin with, quickly getting a third melee fighter (and in the back row for added defence) is not to be sniffed at. I'm using a combined dagger wielding/situational ranged rogue, and although I'm not sure exactly how the damage adds up, his quick attacks, lack of ammo, and suitability for swapping into the front row are pretty good.

amnnor wrote:
That's not true, there is a point for dexterity and for rogues, it just isn't what you want it to be. You seem to want to only have to pump one stat for each class. AH has made a game where you have to think a little more in how you divvy your stats.

Actually, the opposite is true. Currently stats are very one-dimensional: archer doesn't need dex, mage needs nothing but willpower, but every other class has no use for wp/energy as it regens faster than they can use it. Only melee need a mix of dex and str. Vit is good all around but only to a point and loses effectiveness the better you are at dodging manually. Making other stats more attractive would go a long way to improve the char system and make experimenting with builds more fun.

At least in real life stength is the main factor with a bow. That's why english longbowmen existed, because the bowmen trained from youth and had to be very strong to be able to use the bow. I think that makes a lot of sense for a minotaur to be the ultimate bowman.

bugnomore wrote:

amnnor wrote:
That's not true, there is a point for dexterity and for rogues, it just isn't what you want it to be. You seem to want to only have to pump one stat for each class. AH has made a game where you have to think a little more in how you divvy your stats.

Actually, the opposite is true. Currently stats are very one-dimensional: archer doesn't need dex, mage needs nothing but willpower, but every other class has no use for wp/energy as it regens faster than they can use it. Only melee need a mix of dex and str. Vit is good all around but only to a point and loses effectiveness the better you are at dodging manually. Making other stats more attractive would go a long way to improve the char system and make experimenting with builds more fun.

I wouldn't say the opposite is true, but I would agree that currently it appears a back row rogue focusing on throwing or missile weapons doesn't need dexterity. That doesn't mean dexterity is not important for all rogues.

Also, take into account that petri mentioned that high skill level is likely being underestimated compared to stat levels.