The new hiding/armor changes.

[Rathgar]

As we all know armor will drastically effect hiding ability. As a rogue I'm interested in how this will play out.

From what Warden said, essentially anything above Brig, and you're gonna get penalized heavily, so chain and upper end scale will probably not be worth getting into relative to hiding failure. And good old plate is way out of the question. On the other hand there will be bonuses for hiding in lighter armors.How will this effect rogues? Whats your opinion?

[Warriorbird]

They'll be less completely unstoppable.

[Ignot]

Sounds like it will come hiding rogues from wearing heavy armor. pretty plain and simple if you ask me. I never did imagine rogues sneaking around in freakin platemail anyways so I like the change.

[TheEschaton]

Wait, did this change get rolled in finally?????

[Xaerve]

I don't think so...

[Rathgar]

No, but I've got sources whose got sources that say these and a few lesser changes will be implemented by Christmas this year...

[Latrinsorm]

For a good laugh, log in with PsiNet and type ?goals. They're taken from the 2006 goals directly put out by Simu.

[The Ponzzz]

I've been waiting for this to go live for a long while. I've been using nothing over cuir leathers as my rogue for many many levels now.

[fallenSaint]

They don't exactly seem to be in a big hurry with it by any means.

[StrayRogue]

Probably because a lot of rogues will up and quit. There is no way, short of changing the combat system, they can support younger, DS hungry rogues to use brig. In my 40-60's, sans the easiness of the EN hunting grounds, heavier armour saved my ass more times than I can count. A rogue WILL get hit in these levels, and a lot.

Anything less than chain will result in serious injury, if not death.

To me this change would be as cripplingly stupid, boring and irritating as breakage.

[Drew]

I hope they don't penalize chain too heavily.

Even though they technically should, since chain is much louder than plate IRL, but in GS it's the lesser armour.

[TheSmooth1]

Warden seems to think making everything suck will make people want to play GS.

Pretty much everything that was fun, good, or cool was nerfed when Warden arrived. Though this is a needed change, it's just another nail in the coffin if they don't uptweak something else to lessen the blow. Which won't happen.

[Rathgar]

I think the GS producers or whoever realize that the customers they have now are their "long and steady" ones. And any new players they might possibly get...well never played in pre-nerf so ignorance is bliss for them.

Plus, theres a whole nother category of people who just play to make a few bucks. And althought their overhead might be cut a bit they'll still play because they've got A.) nothing better to do B.) they can still make a bit of money.

[bgoodsoil]

the value of FGBs gonna go through the roof if that happens. The market'll be flooded with high-end MBPs. I think it's silly that folks can hide in metal armor too...but if I had saved up for literally years to buy some armor only to have it nerfed I'd be pissed. I think StrayRogue is right--I could see people quitting over something like that. Oh well, glad my old brig hasn't sold! At the same time the whole hiding system is kinda odd. I remember hunting in the spider temple--a bare stone hallway and I just...disappear? Why don't all those rogues just cast 617 anyways?

[Gan]

fgb is going through the roof...

Thats what I read out of it. Since I'm selling the rogue (who's trained for brig now anyways), the effect it'll have will be negligible on me. Think I'll hang onto my fgb for a while and see what the market does if this is rolled out by years end.

Thats also going to jump the price on my swcp scalemail.

[Bigby]

Hm, I think after the CMAN review changes and especially that change to shadow mastery this armor-hide change will probably come out toward the end of this year or perhaps early next.

And no it won't be so bad for rogues because remember CMAN defense will be based on dodge skill which rogues can triple in with ease. I think it'll balance out.


...Anyone got FGB for sale?

[Tea & Strumpets]

Warden seems to think making everything suck will make people want to play GS.



Yeah, Warden is a complete imbecile. He'll continue to ruin the game in his quest to balance some mythical spreadsheet.

[BLZrizz]

Gemstone is about choosing amongst professions with characteristic strengths and weaknesses. Warriors are the masters of heavy armor and weapons, Rogues are stealth. This is part of the natural order of the fantasy world.

The concept of Rogues in full plate is full out broken. Just because you got used to it and somehow feel as if you're now entitled to it doesn't make it less so.

[Rathgar]

Gemstone is about choosing amongst professions with characteristic strengths and weaknesses. Warriors are the masters of heavy armor and weapons, Rogues are stealth. This is part of the natural order of the fantasy world.

The concept of Rogues in full plate is full out broken. Just because you got used to it and somehow feel as if you're now entitled to it doesn't make it less so.

It's not that people are disagreeing with this. Everyone knows that Rogues ==leather sneaky ninja and Warriors == Big burly tank, that is standard fantasy fare.

What people DON'T like is having something that SHOULDN'T have been implemented in the first place and having that taken away. I agree with the warriors that say Rogues are a souped up version of warriors. Redux+Plate+hide&ambush all at the same time? Yeah that isn't fair.....but we'll just have to wait and see.

I actually like the idea of my rogue being in cuir leather or brig, and the challenge of a monster being able to actually hit me and do some damage for once. But, will Rogues quit over all this? No, probably not. They'll probably just change their training.

[Sean]

magic rogues might become a fad again.

[Stanley Burrell]

Two things that would make sense to me to offset a penalty:

1) Weight of armor.

2) Armor ranks above 0 RT encumbrance for ≥ chain.

To me, personally, it makes more sense to hide with greater ease in, say, ...wooden... hauberk as opposed to some clanky seaborgium torso chain.

Disclaimer: I do not know the quantitative clankiness of seaborgium. BUT I ASSUME THAT IT IS EXTREMELY CLANKY AND THAT GOD HATES WARRIORS.

[Rathgar]

God's natural Laws.

1.) Gravity

2.) For every reaction there exists an equal but opposite reaction.

3.) Warriors == the suck.

[Stanley Burrell]

lol

[grapedog]

rogues can hang out in plate, but they should be the out in the open...

the ones who want to be sneaky get reduced armor...and the benefit of choosing when to attack.

makes sense to me...how the GM's let it get so bad as to be commonplace at high levels to wear plate is ridiculous.

[StrayRogue]

Gemstone is about choosing amongst professions with characteristic strengths and weaknesses. Warriors are the masters of heavy armor and weapons, Rogues are stealth. This is part of the natural order of the fantasy world.

The concept of Rogues in full plate is full out broken. Just because you got used to it and somehow feel as if you're now entitled to it doesn't make it less so.

Rogue's are not broken. The combat system is. Or your backward view on fantasy archetypes.

But please, play a square with little DS and no armour. See how far you'll get.

[Drew]

If hide and ambush worked like it did in GS3 + pushdown, this idea might have some weight.

[Bigby]

Hide and ambush still gives you the insane critting and DS pushdown, unless they totally changed it on me.

Anyhow, all I know is I've seen people insta killing constructs like nothing with a ora dagger then going back into the saftey of hiding all while being in super safety plate. As a warrior who must constantly stay out in the open to get swung at this just doesn't seem right.

...But I agree Rogues should be compensated somewhat to offset not being in plate. But not a whole lot, seeing how they can always type hide and effectively be immune to almost all attacks.

[Drew]

Hide and ambush still gives you the insane critting and DS pushdown, unless they totally changed it on me.

Anyhow, all I know is I've seen people insta killing constructs like nothing with a ora dagger then going back into the saftey of hiding all while being in super safety plate. As a warrior who must constantly stay out in the open to get swung at this just doesn't seem right.

...But I agree Rogues should be compensated somewhat to offset not being in plate. But not a whole lot, seeing how they can always type hide and effectively be immune to almost all attacks.


Wait till, the end game, or level 50. Staying hidden in most hunting grounds (super easy EN ones excepted) is near impossible.

[StrayRogue]

Staying hidden was never the problem for me. Getting hit, which is inevitable, was. Considering I had nice armour, plentiful redux and more than average HP/DS, I did fairly well. Had I been in brig I would not have walked away from as many fights as I did.

[Rathgar]

Staying hidden was never the problem for me. Getting hit, which is inevitable, was. Considering I had nice armour, plentiful redux and more than average HP/DS, I did fairly well. Had I been in brig I would not have walked away from as many fights as I did.

Yes, but I think people's logic here is. Hiding would also have prevented some attacks/spells/manuevers from hurting you, so while a warrior would get hit by these attacks a rogue would not, and thus a rogue does eventually get hit they should get hit harder since they are not getting hit often and when a warrior gets hit it should be less since they are getting hit often. Balance... or whatever. :)

[BLZrizz]

Rogue's are not broken. The combat system is. Or your backward view on fantasy archetypes.

But please, play a square with little DS and no armour. See how far you'll get.

Rogues being stealthy and warriors being experts in weapons and armor is backwards?

If Rogues aren't receiving enough "compensation" on the stealth end of the scale, then the game mechanics should be adjusted for it. But that doesn't mean they should be in plate armor.

[StrayRogue]

Yes of course it's backwards. It's A-typical. Stereotypical. Unoriginal. BACKWARDS.

[Drew]

Yes, but I think people's logic here is. Hiding would also have prevented some attacks/spells/manuevers from hurting you, so while a warrior would get hit by these attacks a rogue would not, and thus a rogue does eventually get hit they should get hit harder since they are not getting hit often and when a warrior gets hit it should be less since they are getting hit often. Balance... or whatever. :)



Rogues don't have the same amount of protection as warriors. Especially before capping which is a tiny part of the game they have a good amount less redux and most rogues are in metal breastplate. MBP is nice, but it's not full plate. Rogues also don't have berserk which is a much better stun breaker than stunmans. They are more likely to be hit by a CS attack than a warrior unless they've trained in spells. Because of the redux and armour difference they are also more likely to be stunned when they are hit.

[Necromancer]

Rogues absolutely have more protection than warriors. No other offensive mechanic in the game renders one virtually immune to any non-area-of-effect attack. Hiding allows you to bypass all TD/DS/maneuver checks for a period of time right before what is, in all reality, a lethal blow 85%+ of the time. The balance for it was supposed to be the rogue being caught in offensive in front of any other creatures for a longer period of time (One whole second!!) than most swingers. But as long as rogues are sitting in super heavy armor, that balance mechanic is virtually nullified.

Imagine a spell that you could cast to give you 5 seconds of virtual immunity to targetted attacks and then that released a death blow 85% of the time immediately afterwards. Talk about no balance! And yet...rogues employ it constantly. Sure a sorcerer can implode, but she can also be killed right before it.

[AestheticDeath]

While I see what you are saying, I think you are dramatizing it a bit. Getting into hiding isnt always that easy, staying in hiding isnt always that easy, and not all rogues even bother hiding. In GS3 when I actually payed attention to other people playing the game I knew alot of warriors who used stalking and hiding just as much as rogues did. I don't see why it would have changed any in the move to GS4.

Anyhow if for some reason they do implement the changes to armor and put rogues in brig or lower for hiding reasons, perhaps they should also change it so warriors can only single in stalking and hiding.

They basically have what most people think should be their defining traits, warriors in heavy armor with the most redux possible, and rogues ambushing from hiding.

Also why are warriors able to 3x in dodge as well as shield and armor?

And rangers play into it somewhere, unless this is strictly about squares or something. They will be losing the augmented chain a lot of rangers seem to recommend.

[Stunseed]

< They will be losing the augmented chain a lot of rangers seem to recommend. >

This one won't.

[Stanley Burrell]

Anyone want to take dibs on when the coding for a hidden ambush will roll out?

Read as: Additional hiding bastardization.

[AestheticDeath]

So you will be hiding in chain? Or you dont hide at all? if not its kind of a moot point.

[StrayRogue]

Rogues absolutely have more protection than warriors. No other offensive mechanic in the game renders one virtually immune to any non-area-of-effect attack. Hiding allows you to bypass all TD/DS/maneuver checks for a period of time right before what is, in all reality, a lethal blow 85%+ of the time. The balance for it was supposed to be the rogue being caught in offensive in front of any other creatures for a longer period of time (One whole second!!) than most swingers. But as long as rogues are sitting in super heavy armor, that balance mechanic is virtually nullified.

Imagine a spell that you could cast to give you 5 seconds of virtual immunity to targetted attacks and then that released a death blow 85% of the time immediately afterwards. Talk about no balance! And yet...rogues employ it constantly. Sure a sorcerer can implode, but she can also be killed right before it.

Play a rogue some time.

[Latrinsorm]

In GS3 when I actually payed attention to other people playing the game I knew alot of warriors who used stalking and hiding just as much as rogues did. I don't see why it would have changed any in the move to GS4.Most warriors weren't particularly happy to be knockoff rogues. I can only think of one warrior who was actually publicly displeased with the hiding warrior path dropping in effectiveness.
Also why are warriors able to 3x in dodge as well as shield and armor? Because warriors are the "quintessential fighting class", not the "quintessential tank class".
Anyhow if for some reason they do implement the changes to armor and put rogues in brig or lower for hiding reasons, perhaps they should also change it so warriors can only single in stalking and hiding.Rogues get all three ranks of S/H for less TPs than warriors get two. The exact same is true, vice versa, for armor use.

It never ceases to amaze me how people bring up all the skills warriors "can" acquire without noting how quickly these costs add up. 3x dodge, 2x S/H, and 2x ambush alone cost a warrior 42/30. There's simply no competition from warriors in this area.
They are more likely to be hit by a CS attack than a warrior unless they've trained in spells.I'm interested as to the reasoning behind this point. Everything else is pretty clear.

[bgoodsoil]

I don't know the first thing about warriors or about how rogues would compare to them but I do have some experience playing rangers and rogues. I've got a level 39 ambushing ranger and I played my buddy's level 58 ambushing rogue long enough to get him through an entire level hunting in the stronghold. We were both wearing brig and both swinging falchions and both hunting like level critters. I'm not for or against anything, these are just some observations from that if you're interested.

A lot of defense comes from shields, dodge, armor and spells...

-Shields are about the same for both.

-Training in dodge is very expensive for rangers, mobiles don't make us extra dodgey it just makes us even with rogues.

-Rangers are already limited in armor by high training costs and spell hindrance. Aug is really stretching it for us, most rangers seem to stay in brig. This change would put rogues in the same boat that rangers are already in.

-Rangers get wall of thorns--rogues don't.

As far as hiding goes, rangers get spells but rogues can triple pretty cheap.

So if you were comparing a like level rogue and ranger the wall of thorns could be seen to cancel out the MBP.

Is there anything I'm leaving out? rogues get cmans much cheaper and they get access to much better cmans. rangers, again, get spells. rogues have the guild, rangers have...a mudhole in the woods that we can get lost in.


While hunting inside and outside of the stronghold with the rogue in swcp brig over half the hits I took resulted in a level 1 injury. That can turn into a 2 or 3 pretty fast. There was a very real danger of dying on an average hunt. I thought it was fun but if you're just interested in leveling you may only want danger when going after something over your head. Depends on your perspective on that. Of course, if I got hit at all it was usually my fault. I'd go into hiding and get impatient and swing before waiting for the critter to take an action. If they blocked or I didn't get a stun I was caught flatfooted in offensive.

[Necromancer]

No one is saying that hiding/stalking entirely circumvents death, but the point that it is an offensive ability with more defensive capability than just about any other actual defensive ability still stands.

[Latrinsorm]

Is there anything I'm leaving out?Redux. Also, the stronghold is a fairly notorious hunting ground for pulping characters of all classes.

[Danical]

Redux. Also, the stronghold is a fairly notorious hunting ground for pulping characters of all classes.

NOT PURE KILLERS!!!

[Drew]

I'm interested as to the reasoning behind this point. Everything else is pretty clear.



Comparing average rogue build to average warrior build, a rogue will be in MBP vs a warrior in full plate so the warrior will have a CvA advantage.

[Drew]

NOT PURE KILLERS!!!



Haha, ace.

[Drew]

Necromancer, I don't think you've played a rogue at levels higher than 30 or 40 for very long. There are very very few places where hide is the super duper effective weapon that it is at lower levels. Your complaint reminds me of the complaints I see in the ranger folder every now and again about 619 (mass calm). It's an amazing spell up to about level 35, but after that everything shakes it, still we get people complaining every now and again because they see a level 20 ranger using it in arch wights. Hide is very similar, my main is a ranger and I've got 70 ranks in armour to wear augmented chain, which is not at all cheap for a ranger, plus I spend the points to double hiding, it's not unbalanced, it's quite expensive.


Changing the hiding-armour rules because some capped rogues can hide well in full plate is missing the forest for the trees.

[Rathgar]

Changing the hiding-armour rules because some capped rogues can hide well in full plate is missing the forest for the trees.

Thats just it, a change like this will only effect a handful of players toward endgame, for the vast majority of rogues they won't feel much of an effect.

[StrayRogue]

Endgame? I was in MBP since level 40.

[AestheticDeath]

Thats just it, a change like this will only effect a handful of players toward endgame, for the vast majority of rogues they won't feel much of an effect.

I think you have that backwards.

[Drew]

Thats just it, a change like this will only effect a handful of players toward endgame, for the vast majority of rogues they won't feel much of an effect.




This would only be true if the penalty was something like this hide penalty in brig = 0. In chain hauberk = 2%, in MBP = 4%, in augBP = 16%, in half plate =32% in full plate = 64%.


That would really be a change to keep rogues out of full plate, and wouldn't affect most rogues and rangers as it is (well, just barely affect them).

That said, I highly doubt these are the kind of penalties Warden has in mind.

[Rathgar]

Probably more along these lines...

Brig =0 In chain hauberk = 15%, in MBP = 30%, in augBP = 50%, in half plate =75% in full plate = 99%.

[Stunseed]

So you will be hiding in chain? Or you dont hide at all? if not its kind of a moot point.

608 makes hiding changes cry.

[AestheticDeath]

Perhaps to get you in hiding. But then you have to stay hidden. Plus he may implement some change to nerf that if he is seriously trying to hinder hiding in heavier armors.

[Stunseed]

Well, to be honest there are a myriad of things a ranger can throw at a victim 608. 615 will ground an opponent allowing the soft RT hide, or 609 will incur the RT and perception loss needed to slide in. Dirtkick is quite effective, as well.

Or smack a creature in the head twice. Whichever.

[Stanley Burrell]

It never ceases to amaze me how people bring up all the skills warriors "can" acquire without noting how quickly these costs add up. 3x dodge, 2x S/H, and 2x ambush alone cost a warrior 42/30. There's simply no competition from warriors in this area.I'm interested as to the reasoning behind this point. Everything else is pretty clear.

Don't be stupid and pretend that nothing in the game exists, 'specially at the higher levels, that could give two shits about dodge when busting out CS.

Dodge voids and make 3x-ing IN dodging training plausible while still remaining "masters of weapons" and you'll upgrade warriors from Shitty to "Mud."

[Rathgar]

If they roll in the hiding changes, warriors will be upgraded from shitty to tillable soil.

[Warriorbird]

How much less do Rogues die than Warriors in endgame? Yeah, that.

[Rathgar]

You don't understand, Gemstone is much a business as it is a game. Yes, it's obvious that Rogues== super warriors, especially in the higher levels, but how much of a financial hit will Simu take if they nerfed rogues? This isn't WoW where the game has 10 million customers and where one can easily switch over to another class and go from 0 to 60 in 3.5 days.

But then again, rogues are mostly played as money makers for people like Tsin and others who are in the game more for RL $$ then anything else. I think the vast majoirty of the pbase are semis and pures. Is it any wonder why the monk class was switched from square to semi? Or the Savant class and an entirely new class of spells,mental spheres minor major, is a pure ?

[Rathgar]

And I know the above is super cynical but just the way I see Simu operate their business... just makes me feel like I'm in a used car dealership 24/7.

[Stunseed]

< Is it any wonder why the monk class was switched from square to semi? Or the Savant class and an entirely new class of spells,mental spheres minor major, is a pure ? OR why Harry Potter is so popular? etc. >

Are you by any chance wearing a tinfoil hat?

[Rathgar]

It's been upgraded to lead.

[AestheticDeath]

Simu wont take a financial hit if they nerf rogues. Tell me why they would?

And how long have you played? Why would you say the majority are semis and pures?

[Stanley Burrell]

tinfoil hat

Good alter idea, btw.

[Trinitis]

But then again, rogues are mostly played as money makers for people like Tsin and others who are in the game more for RL $$ then anything else. I think the vast majoirty of the pbase are semis and pures. Is it any wonder why the monk class was switched from square to semi? Or the Savant class and an entirely new class of spells,mental spheres minor major, is a pure ?

Why? Because monks are Semi's. They use a form of magic. It's physical magic at it's purest form..but it's still a magic.

And what would a Savant be?

Noun

savant (plural savants)

1. A person of learning; one who is versed in literature or science.

I dono about you, but that don't sound like a person who spends his days running around in heavy armor, swinging large swords.

Personally, I think the player base is fairly well balanced. Your argument that most of the player base is semi and/or pures is somewhat skewed though.

Rogue - Square(or semi depending on training)
Warrior - Square
Ranger - Semi
Bard - Semi
Paladin - Semi
Cleric - Pure (Or Semi)
Empath - Pure (or Semi)
Wizard - Pure (or Semi)
Sorcerer - Pure (or..no just pure)

see a pattern? :)

[AestheticDeath]

Keep in mind these numbers only represent the people who have their titles shown. And rogues for one more often than most professions have it hidden I would think. But thats my assumption.

But we have 85 squares, 76 semis, 114 pures.

who prof rogue
Brave Adventurers Questing:
Total: 41

>who prof warrior
Brave Adventurers Questing:
Total: 44

>who prof ranger
Brave Adventurers Questing:
Total: 21

>who prof bard
Brave Adventurers Questing:
Total: 17

>who prof pala
Brave Adventurers Questing:
Total: 17

>who prof cleric
Brave Adventurers Questing:
Total: 28

>who prof empath
Brave Adventurers Questing:
Total: 36

>who prof wiz
Brave Adventurers Questing:
Total: 30

>who prof sorc
Brave Adventurers Questing:
Total: 20

[Bigby]

If you want a very rough estimate about the population between the profs, you can check out the official forums and look at the amount of posts between each prof folder.

[Latrinsorm]

I think the vast majoirty of the pbase are semis and pures. Is it any wonder why the monk class was switched from square to semi?The monk class has always been proposed as a semi class. The square/semi/pure distinction doesn't have as much oomph as it used to, as it's pretty easy to make an argument that rogues are less "squarish" than paladins. It's still wrong, of course, but it's at least feasible.

It's odd to say that the "vast majoirty" are semis and pures, what with semis and pures comprising 70% of the playable classes. AD's scan results in 69.1% being semi/pure; doesn't this suggest (if accurate) that semis/pures are no more or less appealing than squares?
you can check out the official forums and look at the amount of posts between each prof folder.Everyone knows that the plural of sorcerer is "argument", which skews the numbers big time.

[Celephais]

If you want a very rough estimate about the population between the profs, you can check out the official forums and look at the amount of posts between each prof folder.


Everyone knows that the plural of sorcerer is "argument", which skews the numbers big time.

Yeah that's a terrible way to look at the numbers... Hell apply that same stupid argument to these forums, looks like rogues are the same as wizards (rogue have more threads, wizards have more posts). It also looks like warriors are more common than clerics or empaths.

[Sean of the Thread]

If you want a very rough estimate about the population between the profs, you can check out the official forums and look at the amount of posts between each prof folder.

That's pretty retarded.

[AestheticDeath]

Yeah some people are just way more verbal than others.. And if you take someone who thinks their preferred class is broken, over someone who is happy, you will get a lot more talking going on.

[liquiddrool]

At least I saved my fixskills. Now to find that claid.

[graysun]

My OHE ambusher has a nice set of chain mail (AsG 13) and some greaves to go with it (up to AsG 15).

Anyone have a sense of how badly armor classes above brig will be penalized in the new system?

It seems like this will make the 5th rank of shadow mastery (1 sec. sneak RT) more valuable for hiders in heavier armor.