GM Oscuro's upcoming treat for Rogues

[Fallen]

H>cman divert magus
[Roll result: 167 (open d100: 39) Bonus: 21]
You throw your voice behind a triton magus and the magus's attention is diverted by the noise!
A triton magus strides southeast, a wary look on its face.
Roundtime: 2 sec.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
*

[Fallen]

NOTE: THIS IS NOT OUT YET

[droit]

2 seconds. Nice.

[Fallen]

>>I do hope it works from hiding, and in fact gets a severe bonus from it (heck, I'd say it should really only have an effect if the critter sees nobody currently in the room; i.e. requires hiding).

It can only work from hiding/invisibility.

>>And at risk of being called out for being negative... it's neat, but I'm not convinced how practical it will be, which is what I said at the time it was brought up several months ago. In a swarming area (which is really the only place where it is required), chances are extremely high that something else will walk in anyway after you follow something to the next room. Maybe if you could specifically guide a critter several rooms away (which would require "cman divert magus southeast" instead), it would have more practicality.

I'm trying to add a way to specify the direction, but it could require a rewrite of the creature movement system, in which case I won't do it.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team


*

[Fallen]

>>However, it is funny that you use tritons as your example. I suggest that you might want to look into their ability to summon other tritons from adjacent rooms with a horn call. If it isn't possible to "push" a critter into a specific room, existing mechanics show that it's quite possible to "pull" a critter into a specific adjacent room. If nothing else, copy the existing triton mechanics, trigger them in the specified room, with only the targeted critter recognizing it and moving to that room. Unless that requires adding specific hooks to every critter it applies to, which I suppose would also be a fair reason not to do it.

I always look at similar systems when I code something new, however, this works in a fundamentally different way than anything else I've seen. I appreciate the suggestion, though.

>>And I do appreciate the advance notice with the (implied) invitation to comment on it before it goes live, whereupon changes would be more difficult/annoying to make. That has my wholehearted support and appreciation.

Comment away.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
*


.

[TheEschaton]

Why do people's comments always sound so snarky and douchebaggy?

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I can definitely see how this would be useful.

Looks like I picked a good time to start playing Issi again.

[droit]

Why do people's comments always sound so snarky and douchebaggy?

Because 75% of them are made by Grendeg.

[Swami71]

Does it work on other players?

[Drew]

Because 75% of them are made by Grendeg.

Let's not leave out ASPEN.

[Latrinsorm]

I was going to say, "but I'm not convinced how practical it will be" has to be a Grendeg comment, right?

I am really excited that this might possibly open the door for other new CMANs, which potentially means more for warriors, which could conceivably have a chance of being awesome.

[nub]

I was going to say, "but I'm not convinced how practical it will be" has to be a Grendeg comment, right?

I am really excited that this might possibly open the door for other new CMANs, which potentially means more for warriors, which could conceivably have a chance of being awesome.

Hopefully they just focus on rogue's for now.

[BigWorm]

massive rogue boner

[Fallen]

If Oscuro kicks it into gear again expect a lot more good things.

[Makkah]

Anyone know what addition he made to Batter? Supposedly it's used on liches in the Scatter.

[BigWorm]

If Oscuro kicks it into gear again expect a lot more good things.

Oscuro rocks

[Fallen]

Anyone know what addition he made to Batter? Supposedly it's used on liches in the Scatter.

I'm going to assume to batter the lich phylactories faster than what people can normally do.

[droit]

I'm going to assume to batter the lich phylactories faster than what people can normally do.

Yep.

[Makkah]

Oh... darn. Boring.

[Amaron]

Oscuro is awesomeness.

[Endlin]

A drop in the bucket. But a very welcome one.

[Danical]

I approve.

I see this as being used when you hide and something walks in; you want to neutralize that 1 creature.

[droit]

Depending on stamina cost, this plus a haste imbed could clear out even a swarmy room. I hope it induces at least some RT on the target so they don't instantly return to the room.

[Asrial]

Does it work on other players?Yes.

'get the fuck out of my sight or I'm going to slit your throat!

In all seriousness.. this would be a pretty awesome maneuver for ambushing rogues.

[Danical]

How fucking rad would it be if you could use this on dickhole players.

[Asrial]

Depending on stamina cost, this plus a haste imbed could clear out even a swarmy room. I hope it induces at least some RT on the target so they don't instantly return to the room.I can't imagine this working on a crowded room...

Though.. creatures ARE pretty stupid.. I guess I can see them walking off one by one at mystery noises.

[Danical]

There might also be a penalty for the number of characters in the room . . .

[Lord Orbstar]

even without the mechanical benefits or use to thin out a room, it is cool from a roleplay standpoint.

/approve on

[radamanthys]

Awesome if it helps FoF, too. But I'd assume rogues typically train MoC, so I figure it's not as much of a big deal as with sorcs? Perhaps I'm wrong, though.

[Stanley Burrell]

Wonder if it will factor in how good certain races (Gnomes) are at say ]] and stuff?

[Asha]

This is a great skill for low - mid level characters.

[Kithus]

I'm just curious if it'll be given to rangers as an option as well. I'd actually train CM to use this in warcamps.

[Fallen]

I highly doubt it, as it was posted in the rogue folder, and not the CM folder. But who knows?

[Asha]

Should be a guild skill. Not many CM points really to spread around at the trains I would be using it since I'd need them for AS+ / RT- CMs or other CMs.

[Kithus]

For those unable, unwilling or uninterested in reading the GS boards. It will be rogue only. What a surprise, another cman that rangers should have and won't.

[Asha]

You should be able to cast whispering Willow on a creature and it do that!

[Ryvicke]

For those unable, unwilling or uninterested in reading the GS boards. It will be rogue only. What a surprise, another cman that rangers should have and won't.

While I agree in principle that Rangers having a usable CMAN list would be fun--is this something you think they should code before say... 650? or Voln/CoL? or more hunting?

I kind of cringe anytime anyone mentions making Rangers better on the officials. I'm pretty sure if they (dev GMs) dropped in and looked at half of us hunting they'd nerf the shit out of Rangers or ranged or both.

[Kithus]

While I agree in principle that Rangers having a usable CMAN list would be fun--is this something you think they should code before say... 650? or Voln/CoL? or more hunting?


Oscuro is already coding the cman for rogues. I just think it should be extended to rangers. Semis should never have a skill exclusively for their use.



I kind of cringe anytime anyone mentions making Rangers better on the officials. I'm pretty sure if they (dev GMs) dropped in and looked at half of us hunting they'd nerf the shit out of Rangers or ranged or both.


As compared to what? Immo mages, pure bards, any type of empath? Rangers are good bud they could use diversity. It's sad that neither their lores (except for weed mage builds) or cmans are really worth using.

[Kitsun]

Isn't Mass Calm just better than this CMAN at crowd control? Or just using Nature's Fury to kill everything and control through killing.

[Kithus]

Isn't Mass Calm just better than this CMAN at crowd control? Or just using Nature's Fury to kill everything and control through killing.

Grimswarm are immune to mass calm and nature's fury is essentially a waste of mana if you aren't massively overtrained in spells and summoning lore.

[Ryvicke]

Grimswarm are immune to mass calm and nature's fury is essentially a waste of mana if you aren't massively overtrained in spells and summoning lore.

While these two things are true... rangers have what I believe to be one of the most effective camp crowd control spells there is: 610.

I'm a firm believer that solo'ing camps as a Ranger is some of the easiest and fasting hunting in the game. It has actually ruined me for other hunting.

[Drew]

Isn't Mass Calm just better than this CMAN at crowd control? Or just using Nature's Fury to kill everything and control through killing.

Nature's Fury is relatively useless on like level stuff until you are like Droit powered up. Outside a few exceptions pretty much everything 50+ shakes mass calm.

[StrayRogue]

Lol @ Ranger whines. They're the most complete profession. They also have numerous ways of thinning out swarms (OMG BUT NOT GRIMSWARM WAH WAH). Rogues do not have anything.

Excellent skill, totally rogue-worthy, useful and welcome.

[Fallen]

As Kithus Mentioned:



>>What are the chances this will be available to rangers as well? They hide just as often as rogues and their CMAN list is god aweful.

It won't be. Rangers already have substantially good methods of dealing with swarms. This is a Rogue's way of picking off a target from a swarm (or sending away a dangerous creature) and dealing with it individually.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

[Fallen]

Further information. Also, yay gnomes.



>>I hope this wouldn't be a 5 rank maneuver. I'd just make it 1 rank, or 2 if it had to be. I wouldn't even make it a maneuver in the first place and just tie it into hiding skill (and maybe something else if appropriate), but I suspect that wouldn't fly.

It's a 5 rank maneuver to take advantage of the system that's already set up. However, the CMP cost is only 2/3/4/5/6.

>>The success rate should be fairly high. I'm basically thinking of Scatter critters right now, where basically every rogue maneuver is useless against the critters -- even with the bonuses from a WSPEC'd weapon. If it had similar success rates to those other maneuvers... well, there wouldn't be much point.

It is for many. INF bonus is directly added to the attack roll and gnomes get a bonus for being good ventriloquists. Also, you only need a 101 endroll to send the target away. Higher endrolls just result in longer RT, but it's only a nominal amount anyway - just enough to make up the difference for you using Divert and then sneaking into the next room.

>>I would not want to see bonuses and penalties tied into armor. If an armor/hiding penalty is ever implemented, it should be done consistently and with regard to overall balance, but not piecemeal with new maneuvers. I think of this because of the large bonus in Oscuro's clip, which made me wonder what would start giving bonuses and penalties that wasn't worked into the core factors of such a maneuver.

There aren't armor based effects and stance doesn't play a role either.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team

[Fallen]

>>Oscuro, will this maneuver work on players? - Sardinus/Evarin

No PvP, only PvC. I'm considering CvP, but it'll take substantial effort, so I want specific creatures in mind before I add the code.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team


I would argue that there are spells which can cause a player to move to justify this maneuver working, but it isn't my battle.

[Kithus]

They also have numerous ways of thinning out swarms. Rogues do not have anything.



Rogues have access to the best swarm control in the game, e-wave. You know if they train right.

[AnticorRifling]

Mages should get this since we can use 916.

[StrayRogue]

Rogues have access to the best swarm control in the game, e-wave. You know if they train right.

You've never played a rogue have you?

In a swarm what saves your life is not ewave, it's full plate.

[Kithus]

You've never played a rogue have you?

In a swarm what saves your life is not ewave, it's full plate.

You haven't played since GS3 right Stray?

[StrayRogue]

No, not since 2 hours ago.

[waywardgs]

You've never played a rogue have you?

In a swarm what saves your life is not ewave, it's full plate.

Tip: It's easier to play a warrior by selecting "warrior" at the character creation screen.

[StrayRogue]

Tip: It's easier to play a warrior by selecting "warrior" at the character creation screen.

And don't rogues know it. They get the best CM and the best snare-breaker skill in the game. Rogues get little more than LFM and ineffective guild skills of their own.

[Ryvicke]

And don't rogues know it. They get the best CM and the best snare-breaker skill in the game. Rogues get little more than LFM and ineffective guild skills of their own.

Ineffective? You get that awesome slightly gay vanish where you put stuff in your mouth and it disappears.

[waywardgs]

And don't rogues know it. They get the best CM and the best snare-breaker skill in the game. Rogues get little more than LFM and ineffective guild skills of their own.

Point conceded. I haven't bothered with guild skills in something like 50 trains.

[StrayRogue]

Fast edit is fast:

Just got ambushed by four bandits. I was lucky, and they didn't manage to trap me.

[Whistler's Pass, Forest]
As the wood continues on, tall evergreens and oaks stand proudly in vigilance over the winding trail. A thin blanket of mist rises up from the dense forest floor, lingering in mid-air.
Obvious paths: north, southwest

>You feel fully energetic again.
>A half-elven bandit leaps out of his hiding place!
A half-elven bandit swings a short sword at you!
AS: +313 vs DS: +308 with AvD: +25 + d100 roll: +94 = +124
... and hits for 2 points of damage!
Talk about a close shave!
That was too close.

>A halfling rogue leaps out of his hiding place!
A halfling rogue swings a broadsword at you!
AS: +338 vs DS: +308 with AvD: +36 + d100 roll: +89 = +155
... and hits for 5 points of damage!
Hard blow, but deflected.
Not much damage.

>stance offYou are now in an offensive stance.
>mstrike

An elven robber leaps out of his hiding place!
An elven robber swings a bastard sword at you!
AS: +328 vs DS: +308 with AvD: +31 + d100 roll: +38 = +89
A clean miss.
>A half-elven bandit swings a short sword at you!
AS: +313 vs DS: +281 with AvD: +25 + d100 roll: +14 = +71
A clean miss.
>
You concentrate intently, focusing all your energies.
With instinctive motions, you weave to and fro striking with deliberate and unrelenting fury!
You swing a guardless oak-handled greatsword at an elven robber!
AS: +435 vs DS: +266 with AvD: +48 + d100 roll: +12 = +229
... and hit for 62 points of damage!
Deft slash to the elven robber's left leg digs deep!
Bone is chipped!
The elven robber is stunned!
You swing a guardless oak-handled greatsword at a halfling rogue!
With no room to spare, the halfling rogue blocks the attack with his reinforced shield!

Your flurry of strikes leaves you off-balance and out of position.
Roundtime: 8 sec.
>
[ MStrike Cooldown: +0:01:00, 0:01:00 remaining. ]
l>A halfling mugger leaps out of his hiding place!
A halfling mugger swings a scimitar at you!
AS: +350 vs DS: +308 with AvD: +30 + d100 roll: +38 = +110
... and hits for 1 point of damage!
Love tap upside your head!
>
[Whistler's Pass, Forest]
As the wood continues on, tall evergreens and oaks stand proudly in vigilance over the winding trail. A thin blanket of mist rises up from the dense forest floor, lingering in mid-air. You also see a halfling mugger, an elven robber that appears stunned, a halfling rogue and a half-elven bandit.
Obvious paths: north, southwest
>
A halfling rogue slips into hiding.
>A half-elven bandit swings a short sword at you!
AS: +313 vs DS: +255 with AvD: +25 + d100 roll: +58 = +141
... and hits for 3 points of damage!
Poked in the tummy.
Hehehe.

>at mugg...wait 1 seconds.
>at mugg...wait 1 seconds.
>[Roll result: 158 (open d100: 64)]
A halfling mugger feints to the right, and you spot the ruse too late as you twist awkwardly to block the blow that never came!

Roundtime: 5 sec.
>A half-elven bandit swings a short sword at you!
AS: +313 vs DS: +277 with AvD: +25 + d100 roll: +81 = +142
... and hits for 3 points of damage!
Love tap upside your head!

>at mugg...wait 5 seconds.

>A halfling rogue leaps out of his hiding place!
A halfling rogue swings a broadsword at you!
You barely dodge the attack!

>A half-elven bandit swings a short sword at you!
AS: +313 vs DS: +281 with AvD: +25 + d100 roll: +70 = +127
... and hits for 2 points of damage!
Thrust glances off your knee.
Might be stiff tomorrow, but it's okay now.

>at muggYou swing a guardless oak-handled greatsword at a halfling mugger!
AS: +435 vs DS: +262 with AvD: +36 + d100 roll: +1 = +210
... and hit for 64 points of damage!
Feint left spins the halfling mugger around!
Jagged slash to lower back.
The halfling mugger is stunned!
Roundtime: 5 sec.

>You begin to lose touch with your internal sources of strength.
>l[Whistler's Pass, Forest]
As the wood continues on, tall evergreens and oaks stand proudly in vigilance over the winding trail. A thin blanket of mist rises up from the dense forest floor, lingering in mid-air. You also see a halfling mugger that appears stunned, an elven robber that appears stunned, a halfling rogue and a half-elven bandit.
Obvious paths: north, southwest

>An elven robber pulls out a small statue and rubs it!
A faint silvery glow surrounds an elven robber.

A halfling rogue swings a broadsword at you!
You evade the attack by a hair!
>A half-elven bandit swings a short sword at you!
AS: +313 vs DS: +269 with AvD: +25 + d100 roll: +32 = +101
... and hits for 1 point of damage!
Glancing blow to your right leg!

>at rogue...wait 1 seconds.
>at rogueYou swing a guardless oak-handled greatsword at a halfling rogue!
AS: +419 vs DS: +276 with AvD: +38 + d100 roll: +25 = +206
... and hit for 78 points of damage!
Vertebrae in neck disintegrate from impact!
Neck sinks into shoulders.

[You have 13 kills remaining.]
The halfling rogue falls to the ground and dies.
Roundtime: 5 sec.

[Whistler's Pass, Forest]
As the wood continues on, tall evergreens and oaks stand proudly in vigilance over the winding trail. A thin blanket of mist rises up from the dense forest floor, lingering in mid-air. You also see a halfling mugger that appears stunned, an elven robber, a halfling rogue that appears dead and a half-elven bandit.
Obvious paths: north, southwest
An elven robber swings a bastard sword at you!
AS: +328 vs DS: +269 with AvD: +31 + d100 roll: +22 = +112
... and hits for 2 points of damage!
Light slash to your abdomen!
Barely nicked.

A half-elven bandit swings a short sword at you!
With no room to spare, you manage to parry the blow with your oak-handled greatsword!

>at band
You swing a guardless oak-handled greatsword at a half-elven bandit!
AS: +419 vs DS: +232 with AvD: +44 + d100 roll: +10 = +241
... and hit for 57 points of damage!
Large gash to the right arm, several muscles torn.
The half-elven bandit is stunned!
Roundtime: 5 sec.

An elven robber swings a bastard sword at you!
AS: +328 vs DS: +269 with AvD: +31 + d100 roll: +41 = +131
... and hits for 3 points of damage!
Weak slash across chest!
Slightly less painful than heartburn.

[Whistler's Pass, Forest]
As the wood continues on, tall evergreens and oaks stand proudly in vigilance over the winding trail. A thin blanket of mist rises up from the dense forest floor, lingering in mid-air. You also see a halfling mugger that appears stunned, an elven robber, a halfling rogue that appears dead and a half-elven bandit that appears stunned.
Obvious paths: north, southwest

You feel recovered from your whirlwind flurry of strikes.
>mstrike
An elven robber swings a bastard sword at you!
AS: +328 vs DS: +288 with AvD: +31 + d100 roll: +59 = +130
... and hits for 3 points of damage!
A feeble blow to your right arm!

A half-elven bandit swings a short sword at you!
You barely manage to fend off the attack with your greatsword!

You concentrate intently, focusing all your energies.
With instinctive motions, you weave to and fro striking with deliberate and unrelenting fury!
You swing a guardless oak-handled greatsword at a halfling mugger!
AS: +419 vs DS: +262 with AvD: +36 + d100 roll: +83 = +276
... and hit for 82 points of damage!
Flesh ripped from back, muscles exposed.
The halfling mugger is stunned!
You swing a guardless oak-handled greatsword at an elven robber!
AS: +419 vs DS: +275 with AvD: +48 + d100 roll: +46 = +238
... and hit for 65 points of damage!
Left kneecap smashed into pulp.
An elven robber falls to the ground grasping his mangled left leg!
The elven robber is stunned!

Your flurry of strikes leaves you off-balance and out of position.
Roundtime: 10 sec.

[ MStrike Cooldown: +0:01:00, 0:01:00 remaining. ]

[Whistler's Pass, Forest]
As the wood continues on, tall evergreens and oaks stand proudly in vigilance over the winding trail. A thin blanket of mist rises up from the dense forest floor, lingering in mid-air. You also see a halfling mugger that appears stunned, an elven robber that appears stunned, a halfling rogue that appears dead and a half-elven bandit.
Obvious paths: north, southwest

A half-elven bandit swings a short sword at you!
You evade the attack by a hair!

A half-elven bandit swings a short sword at you!
AS: +313 vs DS: +288 with AvD: +25 + d100 roll: +54 = +104
... and hits for 1 point of damage!
Thrust glances off your knee.
Might be stiff tomorrow, but it's okay now.

at band...wait 1 seconds.


A halfling mugger swings a scimitar at you!
AS: +330 vs DS: +288 with AvD: +30 + d100 roll: +28 = +100
A clean miss.

You swing a guardless oak-handled greatsword at a half-elven bandit!
AS: +419 vs DS: +232 with AvD: +44 + d100 roll: +98 = +329
... and hit for 110 points of damage!
Awful slash nearly decapitates the half-elven bandit!
That's one way to lose your head.

[You have 12 kills remaining.]
The half-elven bandit falls to the ground and dies.
Roundtime: 5 sec.

[Whistler's Pass, Forest]
As the wood continues on, tall evergreens and oaks stand proudly in vigilance over the winding trail. A thin blanket of mist rises up from the dense forest floor, lingering in mid-air. You also see a halfling mugger, an elven robber that appears stunned, a halfling rogue that appears dead and a half-elven bandit that appears dead.
Obvious paths: north, southwest

Your internal strength fully recovers from your most recent attempt to tap into it.

A halfling mugger swings a scimitar at you!
AS: +330 vs DS: +288 with AvD: +30 + d100 roll: +95 = +167
... and hits for 6 points of damage!
Tap to the arm pricks some interest but not much else.

An elven robber swings a bastard sword at you!
AS: +268 vs DS: +265 with AvD: +31 + d100 roll: +7 = +41
A clean miss.

cman surgeYou focus deep within yourself, searching for untapped sources of strength.
You feel a great deal stronger.

[ Surge of Strength: +0:01:30, 0:01:30 remaining. ]
[ Surge of Strength Cooldown: +0:05:00, 0:05:00 remaining. ]

An elven robber swings a bastard sword at you!
AS: +268 vs DS: +292 with AvD: +31 + d100 roll: +54 = +61
A clean miss.

at mug
You swing a guardless oak-handled greatsword at a halfling mugger!
AS: +435 vs DS: +246 with AvD: +36 + d100 roll: +84 = +309
... and hit for 143 points of damage!
Massive blow smashes through ribs and drives the halfling mugger's heart out the back.

[You have 11 kills remaining.]
The halfling mugger falls to the ground and dies.
Roundtime: 5 sec.

[Whistler's Pass, Forest]
As the wood continues on, tall evergreens and oaks stand proudly in vigilance over the winding trail. A thin blanket of mist rises up from the dense forest floor, lingering in mid-air. You also see a black tourmaline, a halfling mugger that appears dead and an elven robber that is lying down.
Obvious paths: north, southwest

An elven robber swings a bastard sword at you!
AS: +268 vs DS: +292 with AvD: +31 + d100 roll: +14 = +21
A clean miss.

>at rob

You swing a guardless oak-handled greatsword at an elven robber!
AS: +435 vs DS: +227 with AvD: +48 + d100 roll: +29 = +285
... and hit for 105 points of damage!
Shield arm removed at the shoulder!
The robber's reinforced shield falls to the ground.
The elven robber is stunned!
Roundtime: 5 sec.

[Whistler's Pass, Forest]
As the wood continues on, tall evergreens and oaks stand proudly in vigilance over the winding trail. A thin blanket of mist rises up from the dense forest floor, lingering in mid-air. You also see a reinforced shield, a black tourmaline and an elven robber that appears stunned.
Obvious paths: north, southwest

You feel recovered from your whirlwind flurry of strikes.

at rob...wait 1 seconds.

at ro

You swing a guardless oak-handled greatsword at an elven robber!
AS: +435 vs DS: +175 with AvD: +48 + d100 roll: +1 = +309
... and hit for 123 points of damage!
Amazing slash to the elven robber's belly!
Nothing quite like that empty feeling inside.

[You have 10 kills remaining.]
The elven robber rolls over and dies.
A faint silvery glow fades from around an elven robber.
Roundtime: 5 sec.



What saved me wasn't ewave. It was plate. I didn't even take a minor. Had I been ewave trained, and in brig, I'd likely have been stunned, wounded and beat-up harder. I got caught in one of those bind-traps earlier today. Took a few minors, but survived with about 100 health (out of 190) to spare. A brig-wearing rogue would have died.

[Kithus]

Had you been in brig, with spells, you'd have had more DS. That said bandits are probably the worst example. They're designed to straight up kill anyone who isn't spell tanking expect plate wearers. Those net traps are the reason I stopped doing bandit tasks. Beyond that they take you unawares, which typically isn't something you allow to happen as a stealther.

[Endlin]

Most of the rangers that post here already think they play the best class in the game. If you really believe that, how do you justify your so called need for more cmans?

Just sayin...

[Stunseed]

Most of the rangers that post here already think they play the best class in the game. If you really believe that, how do you justify your so called need for more cmans?

Just sayin...

As someone who plays a Ranger, there should be a little more balance in the cmans offered versus other semi's. Or they could open up the list to everyone with a variable cost for each cman, still leaving the Rogue/Warrior/Monk to have their own. Let a fucking Wizard get surge if he wants, if they're willing to shoot themselves in the foot for the TP's.

[StrayRogue]

Let everyone else have access to everyone's spells then.

[droit]

I think we just need to accept that we get shitty maneuvers because we have an awesome spell list despite what Kithus thinks. Sure, there are a couple holes that need to be filled (650 and 630 reviews, 609 as an attack spell), but overall, our spells kick ass, even for people who don't overtrain. 619 past the mid-levels is rather useless (though not for bandits), but I contend that the reason people get such lukewarm results from 635 isn't that the spell is underpowered but that for some dumb reason, the conventional wisdom became to stop training spells at 640 or 650 instead of continuing to 1x. Basically, you're all undertrained for it, so quit bitching.

Our maneuvers are defensive only. Get used to it, and learn how to use our offensive/setup spells effectively.

[Stunseed]

< Let everyone else have access to everyone's spells then. >

If you're willing to pay a retarded price, rock out with the cock out.

I still believe in square-only cmans, but anyone who can 2x a weapon skill should be able to learn wspec. Semi's already pay an increase of cman points to learn a skill.

Rogues/Warriors have access to two spell circles, though. :)

[Endlin]

It'd be crazy to give surge to rangers or wizards.

And yeah that is a little like saying... Open up the ranger circle to squares.

[Stunseed]

Would you pay 252 MTP's for a Ranger spell? That is a rogue's cost times four, which is what you would basically be asking a Wizard to spend in CM training to get work towards surge.

[Endlin]

Willing to pay it or not.. I don't think a square should have the option in the first place.

I feel the exact same way about pures (and sorta semi's) being able to learn disarm and feint.

[Fallen]

Willing to pay it or not.. I don't think a square should have the option in the first place.

I feel the exact same way about pures (and sorta semi's) being able to learn disarm and feint.

I wouldn't have a problem with pures not being able to learn any CMs, but at the same time, we should be able to gain defense in it like everyone else can spells. Right now, the only effective way to protect yourself from CMANs is to train in them.

[Latrinsorm]

Would you pay 252 MTP's for a Ranger spell? That is a rogue's cost times four, which is what you would basically be asking a Wizard to spend in CM training to get work towards surge.I would definitely get 1601 on my warrior. What rogue wouldn't want 601? I'm also tempted by the notion of going far up the 300s circle, but I'd have to spend more time with the numbers.

In any event, the more everyone can do things (even at various costs), the less professional distinction exists. I contend that this is a relevant concern.
I wouldn't have a problem with pures not being able to learn any CMs, but at the same time, we should be able to gain defense in it like everyone else can spells. Right now, the only effective way to protect yourself from CMANs is to train in them.With the advent of cubes and similar items, hasn't this argument lost some steam?

[BigWorm]

I would definitely get 1601 on my warrior. What rogue wouldn't want 601? I'm also tempted by the notion of going far up the 300s circle, but I'd have to spend more time with the numbers.

In any event, the more everyone can do things (even at various costs), the less professional distinction exists. I contend that this is a relevant concern.With the advent of cubes and similar items, hasn't this argument lost some steam?

It never had steam. Pures want to be immune to everything. They think that because they can basically be immune to spells, that squares must be immune to cmans, which definitely isn't the case. Even if you are a square, if you aren't trained in a maneuver, you are vulnerable to it.

[Fallen]

With the advent of cubes and similar items, hasn't this argument lost some steam?

Not even remotely. That would be like saying the primary outside aid you can get for spells is Elemental Bias... but you could only find it via treasure drops, and it only lasts 5 minutes regardless of training.

[Fallen]

It never had steam. Pures want to be immune to everything. They think that because they can basically be immune to spells, that squares must be immune to cmans, which definitely isn't the case. Even if you are a square, if you aren't trained in a maneuver, you are vulnerable to it.

If I dont wear outside spells, creatures like Seers can ward me. Not to mention stuff that is actually at my level, or above my level. Even if you are a pure, if you aren't spell tanking, you are vulnerable to spells.

[BigWorm]

If I dont wear outside spells, creatures like Seers can ward me. Not to mention stuff that is actually at my level, or above my level. Even if you are a pure, if you aren't spell tanking, you are vulnerable to spells.

I find that very surprising. I wear no TD spells that are outside those accessible to sorcerers (401, 406, 414, 101, 107) and seers can barely ward me. If I toss on either 613 or 310, I am pretty sure I can't be warded by seers. I know that I am getting a CvA advantage from plate, but shouldn't you be getting scaling bonuses for spell ranks that I don't have?

[BigWorm]

And that is not including the TD bonus from 712

[Kithus]

I think we just need to accept that we get shitty maneuvers because we have an awesome spell list despite what Kithus thinks.


The buff spells are perfect. I wouldn't change anything except better blessing lore benefits (sneaking RT on the sneaking spell). It's the attack spells I don't think have enough oomph if you aren't trained in a massive amount of summoning lore.



I contend that the reason people get such lukewarm results from 635 isn't that the spell is underpowered but that for some dumb reason, the conventional wisdom became to stop training spells at 640 or 650 instead of continuing to 1x. Basically, you're all undertrained for it, so quit bitching.


At 1x spells I will likely end up with 670/130 or 660/140. That's 1x spells if we're not completely ignoring the 100s, which should be considered an abnormal path. Unless you're talking about rangers just going 650/130, which I agree is undertraining. At 82 I'm 650/130, catching up to a full 1x after some MIU ranks I wanted. Thus far the effects I'm seeing from 635 are lackluster and probably will remain so without dumping 100 ranks in summoning lore. That said I've no problem with 635 how it is but I wish blessing lore had more oomph and we had a few more offensive manuvers for those who choose to be more physical than magical.



Our maneuvers are defensive only. Get used to it, and learn how to use our offensive/setup spells effectively.

I've had very little use for our offensive/setup spells. I just 608 constantly and 117 for vvrael warlocks with WoF up. Our other offensive spells have never really impressed me much and I've had very little need for them as a sniper. I will say, Droit, that your mileage will greatly vary from other rangers who aren't 1x summoning lore and 2x spells. Definately a post cap training plan.

Again my biggest issue is that the incentives to train in lores are very insignificant until you start talking about the pure path. When it comes to weed mage/pure rangers I think the path is broken along with pure bards and immo wizards. All of them have threshold based extra damage rotations that make the setup overpowered and need to be nerfed.

[Fallen]

I do, and I can still be warded. Nice to know that your non-pure is nearly immune to spells in his hunting area, though.

[Danical]

yay Oscuro!

Also, yay gnomes! (lol)

[Endlin]

The buff spells are perfect. I wouldn't change anything except better blessing lore benefits (sneaking RT on the sneaking spell). It's the attack spells I don't think have enough oomph if you aren't trained in a massive amount of summoning lore.



At 1x spells I will likely end up with 670/130 or 660/140. That's 1x spells if we're not completely ignoring the 100s, which should be considered an abnormal path. Unless you're talking about rangers just going 650/130, which I agree is undertraining. At 82 I'm 650/130, catching up to a full 1x after some MIU ranks I wanted. Thus far the effects I'm seeing from 635 are lackluster and probably will remain so without dumping 100 ranks in summoning lore. That said I've no problem with 635 how it is but I wish blessing lore had more oomph and we had a few more offensive manuvers for those who choose to be more physical than magical.



I've had very little use for our offensive/setup spells. I just 608 constantly and 117 for vvrael warlocks with WoF up. Our other offensive spells have never really impressed me much and I've had very little need for them as a sniper. I will say, Droit, that your mileage will greatly vary from other rangers who aren't 1x summoning lore and 2x spells. Definately a post cap training plan.

Again my biggest issue is that the incentives to train in lores are very insignificant until you start talking about the pure path. When it comes to weed mage/pure rangers I think the path is broken along with pure bards and immo wizards. All of them have threshold based extra damage rotations that make the setup overpowered and need to be nerfed.

Pretty much all you just said was: "I don't have the training yet to make the most use of my spell circle. And... I do fine without it anyway. So I think we should get more offensive cmans. Even though I think far enough post cap, we're overpowered."

[BigWorm]

I do, and I can still be warded. Nice to know that your non-pure is nearly immune to spells in his hunting area, though.

I still get hit with weapon fire from adepts and seers can ward me with MnS (i.e. web), but not their attack spells.

[DaCapn]

About divert itself:
It's a cool improvement and concept. It makes good sense. Hopefully he'll keep rolling. I kind of feel like it would only be mildly effective at best, though. A couple of case-by-case thoughts:
- In Pinefar it could almost be useful: it swarms in some areas and polar bears trundle in and sniff you out of hiding. Too bad you have to be able to hide in the first place (dirtkick wins out).
- For the sake of swarms themselves: It's shoveling snow in a snowstorm. Push one creature from a room of 5 into a room of 4 and you're back where you started.
- When you're outnumbered 2-to-1 vs casters: Against arch wights for example, when two chant their incantation at the same time you can divert one away and work on the other safely.
- Gas cloud producing creatures: If there's a couple creatures in the room or the cloud frightens you, divert the cloud-caster to the next room and follow it to disperse the cloud safely.

What I wish divert was:
A mass effect where the success margins caused n creatures to be diverted leaving a minimum of one behind (i.e. it wouldn't leave you with an empty room). That would be a lovely thing and I would use a fixskills immediately.

Regarding 410:
All mass damage spells are better and so is 909 for starters. It is great that 410 exists for rogues and I've come to be of the philosophy that it's required. It's just too bad that some "mutant" training is required to get any kind of crowd control as a rogue and it is not the case for any other profession (probably unfair to bundle warriors since redux/plate is really damage control).

CM vs. TD:
It's kind of apples and oranges to compare being warded to cman defense. Just for the most basic of starters, TD isn't stance-dependent. But anyway, for one of my rogues this was typical with a physical build (didn't ignore any occurrences unless they were duplicated so this isn't pick-and-choose, I scrolled through one log):


[Roll result: 196 (open d100: 80)]
A Grimswarm giant soldier rushes towards you and connects with a shoulder check!
The giant soldier manages to knock you flat on your back! 19 hits!
Roundtime: 13 sec

[Roll result: 131 (open d100: 52)]
A Grimswarm giant guard seizes an opening and brings the blunt end of her troll-claw down on your knee!
You crash to the ground, clutching your knee!
Roundtime: 5 sec

[Roll result: 179 (open d100: 82)]
A Grimswarm giant huntmaster jabs his finger right at your eye!
You scream in pain as a Grimswarm giant huntmaster's finger penetrates your eye!

[Roll result: 114 (open d100: 87)]
A Grimswarm giant guard kicks her leg at your groin and connects! Waves of pain instantly shoot through your body. The pain causes you to cry out!
...9 damage!
Roundtime: 5 sec.

[Roll result: 167 (open d100: 66)]
A Grimswarm giant guard swings the blunt end of her dagger at your throat!
You grab your throat completely unable to speak!

[Roll result: 109 (open d100: 37)]
A Grimswarm giant huntmaster raises his heel high, bringing it down solidly on your foot!
You howl in pain, hopping around and clutching your foot!
Roundtime: 5 sec.

[Roll result: 64 (open d100: 19)]
A seasoned Grimswarm giant raider crouches, sweeps a leg at you and connects!
A seasoned Grimswarm giant raider whacks your legs to no effect!

(At the time near master in sweep, about 6 guild ranks of cheapshot, and no groin kick. Defense there might be due to some small race bonus? Not sure. More likely it sustained a leg injury since I was sword/board at the time, though.)

[Kithus]

Pretty much all you just said was: "I don't have the training yet to make the most use of my spell circle. And... I do fine without it anyway. So I think we should get more offensive cmans. Even though I think far enough post cap, we're overpowered."

I suppose with your reading comprehension barely meeting that expected of most fifth graders you might have come to that conclusion. Most people should know that ranger lore benefits, until you've got a boat load of summoning lore, are total ass. They lack the good scaling and threshold benefits of bards and paladins lores. I have an expected amount of training for my spells. I do believe we should get more useful cmans because right now rangers are lagging behind bards in that department.

As for the OP pure build, it should be nerfed. Right along with pure bards and immo wizards. I've said that quite a few times. The way immo, 1030 and 616/635 utilize lores is broken. The problem is least severe in rangers because at least they do have to be well post cap to really pull it off.

[Kithus]

Another update from Oscuro about Divert:



>>How much effect will influence have?

It adds directly to the success roll. For example, if your INF bonus is 10 and your endroll was 135, then 10 of that was from INF. If your INF bonus was 15, all-else-equal, that endroll would be 140.

= - GM Oscuro - =

[Fallen]

>>Will it add a negative number if your influence bonus is negative?

Yes, a negative INF bonus will hurt you.

>>If I used the CMAN in Old Ta'Faendryl to divert constructs out of the room I was in so I could drag a dead adventurer out. Would that be considered a legitimate use of the CMAN? Or would that fall more in line of an unintended consequence of implementing the CMAN.

That scenario is perfectly legitimate. Unintended consequences would be something like forcing creatures into rooms they shouldn't be allowed into like sanctuaries, but I'm pretty sure I covered that well.

= - GM Oscuro - =

Rogue Team
Cleric/Empath Team
.

[StrayRogue]

Eeek.

Influence (INF): 57 (-2) ... 57 (-2)

[Danical]

Anyone ask what the benefit for being a gnome is?

[yesicj]

A white beard, a red hat, and a fox to ride around on.

[BigWorm]

Eeek.

Influence (INF): 57 (-2) ... 57 (-2)

While that's particularly bad, you are definitely not the only rogue who tanked INF.

[DoctorUnne]

It is great that 410 exists for rogues and I've come to be of the philosophy that it's required.

Required for what? I know plenty of rogues who do fine without 410, myself included.

As for TD vs. CMANs, the other thing about TD is a low success margin will ruin your day with several different spells. I don't think that's true for CMANs, with the exception of charge maybe?

[nub]

I thought this was kind of cool point Kithus made, I mean seriously, you will not be affected, not sure why you don't want rogue's to be better than they are now (which is not that great)


No more offensive guild skills. If you want a new skill pay for it with points.

Keith/Kithus aka "Thumper"

Keith's Emoticons:
;) Joke or sarcasm
=P Just razzin you a little
>=( Grr, I'm all fake mad
=,( You made me pretend sad
0=) Expecting an e-mail from Izzea

[DaCapn]

Required for what? I know plenty of rogues who do fine without 410, myself included.

I'm of the opinion that I have more options and do better. I did fine with my TWC build with mstrike and all that (you play something along those lines correct?) but I switched to THW ambushing with 410 and it trumped the shit out of TWC. Granted that character is much lower level. But I've also switched to a build with 410 with my other rogue in his 60's and found a great improvement. It's another apples and oranges scenario which is more subject to personal preference and context. It really depends upon your style (do you prefer aggression, attrition, or misdirection, etc?) and what are you hunting in the first place?

I'm not making it out to be some steadfast rule by any means but personally, I won't go back.

[Endlin]

I suppose with your reading comprehension barely meeting that expected of most fifth graders you might have come to that conclusion. Most people should know that ranger lore benefits, until you've got a boat load of summoning lore, are total ass. They lack the good scaling and threshold benefits of bards and paladins lores. I have an expected amount of training for my spells. I do believe we should get more useful cmans because right now rangers are lagging behind bards in that department.

As for the OP pure build, it should be nerfed. Right along with pure bards and immo wizards. I've said that quite a few times. The way immo, 1030 and 616/635 utilize lores is broken. The problem is least severe in rangers because at least they do have to be well post cap to really pull it off.

I know people can get passionate about the classes they play, but getting insulting over a mechanics discussion is stupid. Especially when you're in the rogue folder crying about "Rangers need more cmans!!!111" So relax Aragorn.

And I still can't help but point out that the bard and ranger cman list is practically identical. Please point out the glaring inequality?

I can compare lists even at my reading level...

[Stunseed]

Bards/Paladins have charge, which is a huge defensive one Rangers do not.

Bards have cheapshots which use the Ambush skill to be effective. I would think that Rangers would be a better fit. I also think ALL professions should have Side-by-Side.

Not Kithus here, but there are differences.

[BigWorm]

I suppose with your reading comprehension barely meeting that expected of most fifth graders you might have come to that conclusion. Most people should know that ranger lore benefits, until you've got a boat load of summoning lore, are total ass. They lack the good scaling and threshold benefits of bards and paladins lores. I have an expected amount of training for my spells. I do believe we should get more useful cmans because right now rangers are lagging behind bards in that department.

As for the OP pure build, it should be nerfed. Right along with pure bards and immo wizards. I've said that quite a few times. The way immo, 1030 and 616/635 utilize lores is broken. The problem is least severe in rangers because at least they do have to be well post cap to really pull it off.

Oh, I get it. You're the ranger version of Grendeg.

[Danical]

From a bard-

Bards have charge, Rangers don't.

Nelemar makes this a problem.

[Danical]

Bards/Paladins have charge, which is a huge defensive one Rangers do not.

Bards have cheapshots which use the Ambush skill to be effective. I would think that Rangers would be a better fit. I also think ALL professions should have Side-by-Side.

Not Kithus here, but there are differences.

beat me to the charge punch!

[Stunseed]

I just can't believe I'm posting for Kithus. This head cold must be serious business.

[Endlin]

And rangers have spells that help them hide, shadow mastery, and side by side.

I really don't see bards having charge as a glaring inequality...

Also, where are you getting that cheaphots use ambush? That would be news to me.

[Danical]

And rangers have spells that help them hide, shadow mastery, and side by side.

Since shadow mastery is a wash, rangers also necessitate spell training to be on par with the rogue professional stealth bonus and the ability to 3x S&H.

Obviously, once you past cap, semis will outpace squares and pures because they'll have the points to do what they shouldn't precap.

[Stunseed]

Side-by-side is worthless by yourself.

This is a cman discussion, not spells. Otherwise, I'd point to Soulpieced who can make a sonic tower shield that grants DS like a buckler AND they can shield bash.

I played a Ranger from 0 to 100 and past and never went more than 1x hiding, never acquired shadow mastery and post-cap have barely any ranks of stalk/hide. Take it as you will.

[Kithus]

Here's a list of manuvers that aren't shared by all three semi professions. The bolded manuvers aren't available to either of the other semis.

Ranger:
Shadow Mastery (smastery)
Dirtkick (dirtkick)
Sweep (sweep)
Hamstring (hamstring)
Garrote (garrote)
Side by Side (sidebyside)


Paladin:
Shield Charge (scharge)
Charge (charge)
Specialization I (wspec1)
Side by Side (sidebyside)
Crowd Press (cpress)
Combat Toughness (toughness)
Truehand (truehand)
Bull Rush (bullrush)
Surge of Strength (surge)


Bard:
Dirtkick (dirtkick)
Sweep (sweep)
Hamstring (hamstring)
Charge (charge)
Garrote (garrote)
Cheapshots (cheapshots)
Spin Attack (sattack)


It's not surprising that paladins win out here. They're supposed to be the most physical semi. What is surprising is that Bards, the most magical semi, have more total cmans available to them that aren't shared by all three and more manuvers unique to them among the semis. The only manuver that rangers get, that the other semis don't, is shadow mastery. Which we all know was nerfed pretty hard and costs a boat load of stam to maintain.

I'd argue rangers could use one more solid stealth manuver. That said I honestly think they should get silent strike to compliment melee stealth builds.


Edited to add:
I have almost the total opposite experience from Stun. I've been 2x hide from the get go and use it constantly. As an archer I don't actually have to train CM but one of my post cap plans is getting enough ranks for smastery. I understand the logic of the zero hide crowd, it just doesn't suit my playstyle or my character.

[Stunseed]

< I understand the logic of the zero hide crowd, it just doesn't suit my playstyle or my character. >

Stun has balls, and redux :)

Jay-kay.

[Danical]

That said I honestly think they should get silent strike to compliment melee stealth builds.

lulz, they don't have Silent Strike? That just seems really weird from a thematic perspective.

Bards also have relatively cheap polearm cost so hence the access to Cman Charge but . . . why? I've never thought of a bard using a polearm. I can see cheapshots though, again, from a thematic perspective.

[Endlin]

That said I honestly think they should get silent strike to compliment melee stealth builds.


lol

[Danical]

lol

Why the lulz?

Anyone that uses archery can snipe. Anyone.

Some obviously better than others.

[Drew]

The cman system was not terribly well thought out at the time, my guess is that whoever did it said "Hmm, bards have the highest AS in the game (which was true at the time), they are more physical than rangers." I don't think the pure bard class had been near fleshed out at that time.

[Latrinsorm]

I would bet it was pretty well thought-out, Coase was involved after all. My guess is politics had more to do with it than mechanics.

[Danical]

I would bet it was pretty well thought-out, Coase was involved after all. My guess is politics had more to do with it than mechanics.

Such is life. :(

[nub]

You know, I've been reading the officials while at work sometimes... and holy shit Kithus, you're a dickhead. How can so many people not like you in a text based game? Are you like this in real life, do just as many people not like you?

[nub]

" GM Oscuro's upcoming... 04-07-2010 06:49 PM same to you , pal "

At least I had the balls to let you know who I was, pussy.

[Gibreficul]

I'm not seeing me as learning this maneuver, but OMG, it would come in handy when you're trying to drag past a construct.

As for rogues, yes, they NEED something. I know I'm biased, but, c'mon now, they've been given nothing but LFM and a steady dose of random nerfs for a decade.

I agree that heavy armor saves a rogue more than anything else can. CvA alone and a rogue's inherent weakness to CS spells dictates that plate CvA (Either MBP at -18, up to full plate at -21) Is huge relative to even hauberk at -9.

What you all NEED to realize is that rogues aren't really squares when you start to look at training costs and opportunities for them. For the past year or so, I've been referring to rogues as semi-semis. Up to cap, they're just fine and dandy going a purely physical training route, but post cap at some point, most rogues will go the spells route, not to cast ewave in the field, but to cast 425 and 430 and effectively raise their sustained AS/DS. They don't have the luxury of 3x armor or PF like warriors, they don't have the luxury of a class-based spell list. They don't have the luxury of affordable crowd control of any type, currently, as MOC costs 10/3 per rank, and limited to 1x. If you consider stunmaneuvers a reliable method of dealing with status effects, you've never played a rogue. Any buff for rogues is greatly appreciated, regardless of if I'll be taking advantage of it or not.

Kithus, you're a fucking fool. :die:

[Kitsun]

Kitsun, you're a fucking fool. :die:


...what the fuck did I do?

[Kithus]

You know, I've been reading the officials while at work sometimes... and holy shit Kithus, you're a dickhead. How can so many people not like you in a text based game? Are you like this in real life, do just as many people not like you?

http://briefcase8.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/09/care-o-meter.gif

[Asha]

...what the fuck did I do?

rofl

I can just imagine you reading the whole post and enjoying the read then that shocker at the end just coming out of nowhere.

[Endlin]

I actually went back through the thread to see what she said...

Then I was like, oh... She's a tool for not saying... Anything?

[Kitsun]

Yeah, I actually went through the whole thread to see what I said. I didn't participate for the last 60 posts or so.

[Endlin]

I'm going to guess he meant Kithus?

[Ryvicke]

Kitsun is taking a lot of mistaken heat lately.

[Asha]

LOL 'she'

[Kitsun]

LOL 'she'

It happens so often I don't even bother correcting people.

[Endlin]

OH are you a dude? My bad.

[Latrinsorm]

Up to cap, they're just fine and dandy going a purely physical training route, but post cap at some point, most rogues will go the spells route, not to cast ewave in the field, but to cast 425 and 430 and effectively raise their sustained AS/DS. They don't have the luxury of 3x armor or PF like warriors, they don't have the luxury of a class-based spell list.This struck me as an odd thing to say for the post-cap regime. Surely a rogue can manage 2x armor and PF by cap if a warrior can manage 3x in each, so we're only talking about a difference of 140 redux points, which is maybe .020 redux factor, which is pretty much nothing. The only other things I can think of are training down action penalty and stamina, but by cap even wee races shouldn't be having stamina concerns (200 ranks = 100 stamina) and warriors can only get one further tier of reduction in MBP with their 100 extra ranks.

[Asha]

It happens so often I don't even bother correcting people.

Not your day, dude.

[Gibreficul]

I'm going to guess he meant Kithus?

:yeahthat:

Sorry Kithor. I knew something didn't look right.

:oops:

[Gibreficul]

This struck me as an odd thing to say for the post-cap regime. Surely a rogue can manage 2x armor and PF by cap if a warrior can manage 3x in each, so we're only talking about a difference of 140 redux points, which is maybe .020 redux factor, which is pretty much nothing. The only other things I can think of are training down action penalty and stamina, but by cap even wee races shouldn't be having stamina concerns (200 ranks = 100 stamina) and warriors can only get one further tier of reduction in MBP with their 100 extra ranks.

You're missing the point. Warriors are GIVEN about +20 AS from bonding and warcries that a rogue can't make up any other way than 425, which is also available to the warrior just for a much higher cost. 425 and 430 on a rogue, post cap keep them barely par for the course.

[Fallen]

Doesn't negating DS via the ambush pushdown more than make up the difference?

[Gibreficul]

Doesn't negating DS via the ambush pushdown more than make up the difference?

If you're going to talk about ambushing from hiding, you should visit the crit adder before the DS pushdown. If something is already in offensive, there's no such thing as a pushdown. That said, there's not much difference between HIDE/AMBUSH and FEINT or Swiftkick + OpenAmbush other than the crit adder. Even the RT (3 seconds to hide or feint) is the same. (swiftkick pretty much sucks) Only more AS can overcome things like critters with big DS spells up like WoF and wiz shield no matter if you're in the open, or attacking from hiding.

[Fallen]

If you're going to talk about ambushing from hiding, you should visit the crit adder before the DS pushdown. If something is already in offensive, there's no such thing as a pushdown. That said, there's not much difference between HIDE/AMBUSH and FEINT or Swiftkick + OpenAmbush other than the crit adder. Even the RT (3 seconds to hide or feint) is the same. (swiftkick pretty much sucks) Only more AS can overcome things like critters with big DS spells up like WoF and wiz shield no matter if you're in the open, or attacking from hiding.

Except that you're talking about stamina costing Cmans as setup versus ambush which does not. I thought you could push past offensive DS via negating EBP DS, or am I off on that?

[Gibreficul]

Except that you're talking about stamina costing Cmans as setup versus ambush which does not. I thought you could push past offensive DS via negating EBP DS, or am I off on that?

You're not pushing down DS, you're negating stance with an ambush. Thus, the best an ambush is going to do is force a full offensive stance on the target. I guess you're off this time.

[Fallen]

I guess you're off this time.

I will readily admit I'm not intimately familiar with the finer points of ambush mechanics.

What about proposing a CMAN that allows negation of a percentage of EBP defense in exchange for a lessened crit modifier? It would have to be aimed, with a low stamina cost. A good setup for a turtled pure from hiding.

Also, question for you. Before and up to cap, what percentage would you say you can hit your targetted area (let's say eye) with am OHE? Normally, and if optimized for aiming.

[Gibreficul]

I will readily admit I'm not intimately familiar with the finer points of ambush mechanics.

What about proposing a CMAN that allows negation of a percentage of EBP defense in exchange for a lessened crit modifier? It would have to be aimed, with a low stamina cost. A good setup for a turtled pure from hiding.

Also, question for you. Before and up to cap, what percentage would you say you can hit your targetted area (let's say eye) with am OHE? Normally, and if optimized for aiming.

Cman dirtkick already drops EBP % by 35% at 5 ranks, and perception bonus by 60. It's one of the unsung heros of the cman list if you ask me. It takes 3 seconds, can inflict 8 seconds RT on the target, is low stamina cost and is fully effective from a defensive stance.

The eye is ultimately the hardest spot to hit. It's easiest to hit with a dagger, hardest to hit with, probably a handaxe. (If you're using a big OHE, aiming for the head/neck is far more effective than the eyes.) I'd say an 80% success rate to the eyes is probably par for the course. Truth be told, I'll miss a leg shot sometimes with Gib, whose training should allow me to surgically disassemble anything that crits. There's obviously some random nature to the aiming system. Rule of thumb I follow is if I miss the left eye, I'm going for the right eye next. If I miss again, I'm going for a knockdown of some sort, and then reverting back to the left eye, then the right. If all that fails, and SOMETIMES it does, I pull out the handaxe and start aiming for the head and neck.

[Fallen]

I was thinking more of an aimed CMAN used from hiding rather than dirtkick, which I assume pulls you from hiding. This would actually be a modified swing.

I was curious about aiming, as I wonder if it would be useful to have CMAN where you lower you crit weighting and/or AS, and gain accuracy in aimed shots on a per swing basis.

[Baelog]

Looking for a CMAN that reduces EBP?

Skill Name: Truehand
Mnemonic: truehand
Hostile: Yes
Stamina Cost: Base 10. Additional stamina costs are determined by the Base Weapon Speed of your attack. A stamina penalty of +1 per second of base speed is applied for each second under 5 and +2 for each second over 5. For two weapon combat, an effective Base Weapon Speed is calculated by taking the primary weapon's base speed, adding half the secondary weapon's base speed (rounded up), and adding 1 to the result. The minimum stamina cost is 10.
Other Requirements: Cannot be used from hiding.
Available to: Warriors, Rogues, Paladins.
Prerequisites:
None
CMP Cost:
Rank 1: (Squares) 2 (Semis) 3
Rank 2: (Squares) 4 (Semis) 6
Rank 3: (Squares) 6 (Semis) 9
Rank 4: (Squares) 8 (Semis) 12
Rank 5: (Squares) 10 (Semis) 15
Description: Increases the chance to hit your target for one swing. At Rank 1, Truehand changes the standard attack d100 roll to 20 + d80 and reduces the target's chances of evading, parrying, and/or blocking your attack by 10%. Each additional rank adds 10 to your combat roll (d80, d70, d60, d50, d40) and reduces your opponent's evasion, parry, and blocking ability by a further 10%.

Pros: 5 ranks gives you a 50% reduction in EBP AND gives you an automatic +60 to your combat roll

Cons: Cannot be used from hiding, unfortunately

I imagine with Dirtkick + Truehand you can negate the EBP of a creature entirely

Another way to reduce a target's EBP is Sigil of Distraction from the Guardians of Sunfist. I don't know exactly how much it takes off from EBP,
but it only costs 10 stamina and 5 mana and targets everything in the room, and doesn't have any Roundtime associated with it, so you could use it and instantly hide.

Sigil of Intimidation also drops targets AS and DS, I believe past the Stance Offensive mark in the DS drop.

Just a few ways you could negate EBP and knock down some DS.

[Fallen]

As you pointed out, neither can be used from hiding. The idea would be to provide rogues with the means to better land strikes when ambushing from hiding. They aren't warriors, they shouldn't be out in the open for too long.

[Baelog]

I will agree that Rogues are probably better off in Hiding instead of standing in the open, but it seems that Simu doesn't think Rogues need Truehand from hiding, since they restricted it, or that it would be somehow unbalanced.

[StrayRogue]

There was no hiding restriction when the skill was released. It was unbalanced when combined with both ambushing and hiding.

Personally I think silent strike should be passive, cost little to no stamina, and have a very low chance of failure. Snipers do well in swarms because they are never around to get hit. Currently a rogue trains with the knowledge that he WILL take damage at some point, whereas I suspect the class ethos is that rogues should be lightly armored, nimble, and be more geared to avoiding damage.

[Celephais]

My personal opinion on the direction things have gone with regards to rogues is the death of the OHE ambusher, ranged weapon use is relatively overpowered in comparison to OHE/B ambushing, I think it's long overdue for a bit of a buff. The biggest issue, IMO, being the RT of all melee forms. 5/6 seconds of hard RT is a lifetime, when most casting/ranged all sit at 3 seconds.

[Baelog]

Stray is correct. Rogues are generally supposed to be lightly armored, as in leather, very nimble and dodgy classes normally equipped with light blades.

I don't understand why they don't introduce CMAN Backstab yet. Improved DF and possibly AvD for smaller weapons, higher chance of crit and more pushdown than just regular ambushing for a single target.

Silent Strike does need to be reworked to give Rogues a better chance of staying hidden from the swarm while picking them off. Maybe that's why the new CMAN for Rogues is being released.

Evade Mastery should provide more percentage to Evading all around so it might be an actual advantage to wearing soft leather as a Rogue...say, 35% Evade bonus for Soft Leather? More?

[Fallen]

There was no hiding restriction when the skill was released. It was unbalanced when combined with both ambushing and hiding.

Personally I think silent strike should be passive, cost little to no stamina, and have a very low chance of failure. Snipers do well in swarms because they are never around to get hit. Currently a rogue trains with the knowledge that he WILL take damage at some point, whereas I suspect the class ethos is that rogues should be lightly armored, nimble, and be more geared to avoiding damage.

I could see SS work like surge or shadow mastery, but obviously a lower cost. As you said, it makes sense when you consider snipers. Hell, they could add it to shadow mastery to help justify the cost.

[Stanley Burrell]

As you pointed out, neither can be used from hiding. The idea would be to provide rogues with the means to better land strikes when ambushing from hiding. They aren't warriors, they shouldn't be out in the open for too long.

So being able to hide like a damn Rogue, in the first place, and then AMBUSH blah-blah-blah leg, followed by hammering CMAN TRUEHAND with a TWC Rogue is broken? Cool.

[Fallen]

So being able to hide like a damn Rogue, in the first place, and then AMBUSH blah-blah-blah leg, followed by hammering CMAN TRUEHAND with a TWC Rogue is broken? Cool.

In one on one combat, perhaps. 2 or more? No. Plus, I don't think the stamina costs from TH are sustainable.

[Stanley Burrell]

In one on one combat, perhaps. 2 or more? No. Plus, I don't think the stamina costs from TH are sustainable.

>hide

>giggle

>AMBUSH massive kobold king leg.

RT

A massive kobold king enters the room!

>hide

>giggle

>AMBUSH first massive kobold king leg

>CMAN TRUEH

>CMAN TRUEH

>CMAN TRUEH

>CMAN TRUEH

>CMAN TRUEH

>CMAN TRUEH

>loot

>loot

>loot

>loot

>loot

OR:

>NW

A massive kobold king, a massive kobold king, a massive kobold king, a massive kobold king, a rolton.

>INFO

60 less TPs to train in elemental than Warriors.

>STANCE DEFE

Some stuff swings at you. Clean misses.

>INCANT 410

>CMAN TRUE

>CMAN TRUE

>CMAN TRUE

>CMAN TRUE

>MANA

>INCANT 410

>CMAN TRUE

>CMAN TRUE

>CMAN TRUE

>HIDE

>AMBUSH ROLTON HEAD

>LOOT

>LOOT

>LOOT

>LOOT

>Actually able to DISARM SCALE TRAP

>Get coins from my box

OR:

Also here: Some undead shit.

>SKILL

You are 3x in perception. You can brawl.

>INFO

Your DEX isn't retarded.

>PREP/CAST Voln Fu @ everyone's face

>loot

>loot

>loot

>loot

[Fallen]

I agree that rogues aren't living up to their potential if they don't train spells, but many don't. You can safely say the vast majority of rogues do not know 410.