warrior / rogue skill trade based on theme

[Ark]

was thinking of the overall theme of classes and thought of something.

perhaps hamstring from rogue and sure-footed from warrior should trade places?

the rogue being better at escaping and trying to avoid getting cornered and warriors trying to hold people in place and 1v1 them.

food for thought -Ark

[Kaylan Chargeender]

Hamstring is more akin to crits strike, as its a targeted attack, so it fits the rogue better.

IF a warrior wanted to do that, taunt works better for how warriors fight.

food for thought -Ark

Food sent back as undercooked.

[Ark]

taunt only seems good because almost everyone plays it wrong when they are hit with taunt. I will say its good for a 20 point skill as it is interesting, unique, and serves a purpose. but its not a good hard engage especially if your target has at least one other ally close by that is also competent. besides taunt is a discipline skill, not a path skill.

I can see the reasoning why rogue has hamstring, and if you were just looking at the rogue tree it does not seem out of place.

however if you look at it from the point of view that you have a 1v1 engage (hamstring) and a counter to that (sure footed) then said one needs to be in rogue, the other in warrior. pick where they go, the majority would probably put the engage in warrior, and the avoidance in rogue.

rogue also already has a bunch of avoidance skills (much to my annoyance) such as dodge and dive for cover. there is a precedent set for them avoiding attacks and running away. (hamstring does this in an indirect way, sure footed in a much more obvious and direct way) and sure footed has a medium armor restriction (because its a rogue skill)

a warrior on the other hand does not really mind being rooted (there supposed to stand and fight anyway, most of their skills reflect this) and the idea has always been that if the warrior can stick on you and 1v1 they will win. hamstring would better serve this purpose then sure footed, (enables them to stick on anything they can effect) as even if they get rooted they could root the other person in place as well and still 1v1 them.

besides I know a lot of people hated giving the warrior another resist, because they are so over powered.

[Kaylan Chargeender]

wow...i meam wow...it must be an antigravity based argument...

[Ark]

Thank you for your vague and unspecific post that provides little to no help to anyone who would
like to investigate and fix the problems you may or may not (I really can't tell) be referring to.

If you'd like to provide specific examples of any such problems, with steps to fix them, I would be happy to investigate.


Sincerely,
A player who wishes someone would actually tell him what the problem wyrmwrath is talking about so that he could
find what is wrong and fix it.

[Wyrmwrath]

as in held up by anti gravity...since the argument has no solid, real, factual foundation and basis....

taunt only seems good because almost everyone plays it wrong when they are hit with taunt.

Ok this should be good. Please Ark, tell the rest of us how we are ALL screwing up RPing being taunted.

I will say its good for a 20 point skill as it is interesting, unique, and serves a purpose. but its not a good hard engage

and you define "a good hard engage" how?

especially if your target has at least one other ally close by that is also competent.

Not relevant since you were talking about one on one situations

besides taunt is a discipline skill, not a path skill.

Not sure how that is relevant when talking about which is better for a task. But yes, on this you are correct.

however if you look at it from the point of view that you have a 1v1 engage (hamstring) and a counter to that (sure footed) then said one needs to be in rogue, the other in warrior.

and we are back to anti gravity land. I do love how your argument switches form group fight use to one on one fights depending on how you need to support your arguments. Still, you have yet to show why warrior has any need for hamstring. I can see how a rogue might find sure footed handy, since they are hit and run types. I do NOT see them NEEDING it.

pick where they go, the majority would probably put the engage in warrior, and the avoidance in rogue.

Even if this were true, which im fairly sure its not, the majority CAN BE...and frequently is wrong. "everybody does/wants it" is NOT a solid argument.

and sure footed has a medium armor restriction (because its a rogue skill)

Or...or...more likely...because its not logical that a warrior in heavy armor would be light enough on his feet, since it cant be a rogue skill...since rogues don’t have it.

a warrior on the other hand does not really mind being rooted (there supposed to stand and fight anyway, most of their skills reflect this)

Says that guy that has never played he archetypical warrior. I can assure you ...you are wrong. a warrior DOES mind, and still needs footwork and mobility to be effective. He just doesn’t need to run like a scared greyhound...I mean rogue

Hamstring would be HANDY for SOME warrior uses, but in general as a warrior your at the head of a group moving into a cave/stronghold OR at the portal of such a place trying to prevent entry ...when not fighting in the open and moving to block critters and baddies form getting to the healers and empaths. So sure footed is WAY more useful.

besides I know a lot of people hated giving the warrior another resist, because they are so over powered.

1) if your looking at the path only, parry is the only other "resist"
2) please...stop imbibing whatever it is your glutting on before posting, its making you say crazy things like warrior is overpowered. and its likely hurting your brain cells and liver.

[Ark]

there were a lot of comments so im just going to get to the ones I care to respond to at the moment.

most people play taunt as follows. when they are struck with taunt, they charge the person/monster/whatever and start beating on it, I did this a lot and there is even a youtube video of a WH fight that I do this in. however taunt only states you have to direct actions. you can still back away and maneuver as long as you are directing your actions towards that person (ie back around a tree or what have you but maintain actions towards the person that taunted you)

taunt can also very in skill effectiveness based on how many people are in a group, root does not.

a hard engage is hard to define but in simple terms is: forcing a fight, this is usually accomplished by preventing the target or targets from maneuvering / running / or escaping (rogues and empaths for example should try to avoid getting hard engaged at all costs)

the reason taunt does this badly is fairly obvious, the person can still fully maneuver and attempt to avoid combat. the reason root does this well is also fairly obvious as it prevents any type of movement or escape. taunt also looses effectiveness based on group size (there are still 1v1 fights in group fights)

also there is no archetypical warrior, as warrior is simply defined as: a person specializing in combat or warfare. there are however personal opinions of what a warrior should be, and that is also reflected in the warrior skills in game.

side notes:
-the medium armor content was kind of a joke based on facts.
-the warrior being over powered was obviously sarcastic, I don't think such a thing.
-I would barely call parry a resist these days, everything is loop holing its way through anyway.

[Kaylan Chargeender]

most people play taunt as follows. when they are struck with taunt, they charge the person/monster/whatever and start beating on it, I did this a lot and there is even a youtube video of a WH fight that I do this in. however taunt only states you have to direct actions. you can still back away and maneuver as long as you are directing your actions towards that person (ie back around a tree or what have you but maintain actions towards the person that taunted you)

I agree that NPCs seem to react like this, but I never have as a PC, and do not recall such being the case the one time I saw another PC taunted.

Even so, its better for a warrior than root by far, unless the warrior is archer based or some similar divergent warrior build.

taunt can also very in skill effectiveness based on how many people are in a group, root does not.

completely disagree. Taunt always has the same essential effect, root does not. This is because taunt only has way fewer(i think two) methods to resist it, and both are uncommon. Root has at least double that, that I can think of.
I will agree taunt is less effective in a group since so few players know how to fight with an ally that can taunt. but since you were speaking about one on one situations, the group value of either isnt relevent.

a hard engage is hard to define but in simple terms is: forcing a fight, this is usually accomplished by preventing the target or targets from maneuvering / running / or escaping (rogues and empaths for example should try to avoid getting hard engaged at all costs)

the reason taunt does this badly is fairly obvious, the person can still fully maneuver and attempt to avoid combat. the reason root does this well is also fairly obvious as it prevents any type of movement or escape.

thats actually just called engaging, or traping or cornering a foe. neither root or taunt does this as root last 10 seconds and at that point the foe is facing you and can prevent further roots; with taunt the foe can just back away/flee.
If the situation is one where the foe has reason to NOT flee, taunt is more effective as it has no time limit.(that I saw in the rules anyhow)

taunt also looses effectiveness based on group size

size of the group isnt relevent, the combat skill of the group members is.

(there are still 1v1 fights in group fights)

There really arent unless your group is fighting another group and they have killed all but one and let you fight the last guy alone...which is still not a one on one since they can help you.

also there is no archetypical warrior, as warrior is simply defined as: a person specializing in combat or warfare.

Actually there are, as an archetype has zero to do with definition of a thing, but speaks of the TYPICAL way that thing is percieved.

for example, the archetypical wizard is Gandalf/Dumbledore(sp)/Elminster, yet Harry dresden is also a wizard. Archetypical warriors are Boromir/Jamie Lanister/Thor
Non archetypical would be Drizzt/Legolas/Captain America

-the medium armor content was kind of a joke based on facts.

ah, must have not had my inviso fact lenses on.

-I would barely call parry a resist these days, everything is loop holing its way through anyway.

Then that just means sure footed is the ONLY resist a warrior has, and isnt adding "another" like stated earlier.

[Marcus]

I have seen players and NPCs alike use/respond to Taunt exactly as Josh described. It's hugely misunderstood just like "Fear", and "Repel". Fear is always responded to with running away in abject terror, which in only suggested in the roleplaying notes for the skill as a possible facet. Moreover, Repel is considered to be Fear that works expressly against supernatural creatures, however it says under Fear that you can not attack OR Defend, but every single creature I have ever hit with Repel kept fighting me at full strength, and I only "assume" they were taking my damage as "Crush"- I have no absolute proof of that.

[GM-Mike]

Again, see my other post. That is flat out wrong and I can only assume you are remembering the times where it did not work and not the countless times that it did. I will add here though, that as NPCs, we are going to roleplay the skill as running away in abject terror instead of sticking around and taking crush. To me, and I know others do this to, I run away and lower my repop number by one as, unless it is a really powerful NPC, a "fear" effect is a death sentence. I see no reason to stick around in combat to get beat on just for the sake of being beat on. I'd rather admit defeat and lower my number by one and save myself for the next fight.

[GM-Taki]

I'll confirm Mike's description on the part of the Winter Haven staff as well. The standing order on an effect like "repel" or "fear" is to take it if it applies to the creature and withdraw. Depending on the combat we may or may not lower our re-pops by one, but that is usually a field call. If something remains engaged it's likely because "repel" was not effective on that particular creature.

As to the original post, I can see both Rogue and Warrior getting some utility out of Sure Footed and Hamstring, but I don't know that I'd try to apply the themes Ark is suggesting. Just because Rogue has some damage resistance / effect avoidance doesn't necessarily call for them to have a monopoly on those skills, just as Warrior shouldn't corner the market on engagement. I do see where you've gotten the "theme" idea, but would rather see some measure of diversity within the paths instead of creating distinct hyper-specialists.