Goblin Squad Member
|
Invisibility spells/items could be implemented as largish bonuses to Stealth, with the commensurate bonus-to-Perception spells/items. This allows for lesser and greater forms of the spells. A rogue-illusionist vs. a cleric of law should be a pretty decent match.
Vision cone:
Maybe, as long as you're not doing tunnel-vision. Just with normal peripheral vision and eye movement, the human field of view is around 270°. Hold your arms straight out to your sides and wiggle your fingers. You can probably detect movement even though you couldn't count fingers or read out there. Then allow eye-movement, and finally, head turning. Then consider sound, and realize that even felt-padded feet make some sound, and a non-industrialized area gets very quiet. Then there's scent and ground vibration... really, humans (and humanoids) didn't survive this long by growing so large and armoured that we can afford to be unaware of everything outside of our central, detailed vision.
Of course, there could easily be perception-debuffing effects to certain attacks, representing blood loss, seeing 'stars', etc.
Also, re-watch the 'Red Wedding' scene from Game of Thrones. No attacker was invisible, yet many key political figures were gruesomely assassinated in very little time. That's flat-footed/flanked status at work, along with a lot of bluff skill to get the targets in position with their guard down. Take a buddy so the victim can only target one of you at a time. The rogue being targeted fights defensively while the untargeted one takes advantage of the flanking.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What does seem likely, and why we set the numbers the way we did, is that having a reasonably high Stealth, even against someone with good Perception, means that you're not visible at all until you've already gotten inside max attack range with a ranged weapon, and you're probably close enough that you can leap/charge from further away than they can actually target you. In the total Max Stealth vs. No Perception situation, you've basically reduced their "can target you" range to melee range, even if they see you a few meters past that.
Right here, Areks and Qallz. He says in most cases you can charge into melee from a farther range than the enemy can target you, if your Stealth is reasonably high. You can go straight from stealth into melee against most targets. Is that not what you wanted?
I'll just point out, the key words, high stealth, good perception, and probably. It doesn't sound like most of the time to me. Sounds to me about the time you are going to jump, they target you and thus foil sneak attack.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm giving my thumbs up for this kind of stealth mechanic. I've never liked that complete invisibility-stealth in other games. I think what the devs are planning will be so much more fun than just jumping out of nowhere. You need more planning and more strategy and cunning to be a rogue, which is the way it should be. Every situation is new and you have to carefully balance your options. I think it feels right.
The stealth mechanic seems to have gray areas and will bring much more variety and fluctuation to combat than a simple "invisibility-stealth". That's why I'm giving it my support.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Being in Stealth does not equal being incorporeal. You most certainly should be affected "normally" (saves and all) if under stealth and you are in the middle of an AOE effect.
Just because someone may not see you doesn't mean you aren't physically there.
Invisibility stealth is not progress. Indeed, Invisibility is its own separate condition which enhances Stealth and thus should not be the basis for Stealth.
Special: If you are invisible, you gain a +40 bonus on Stealth checks if you are immobile, or a +20 bonus on Stealth checks if you're moving
Firmly believe that maintaining that principle is not detrimental to gameplay. Part of Stealth should also include the player's own ability to use the foliage/landscape to move in closer to their target. That said, having Stealth convey a state where a character could possibly walk in circles around a "target" and the target never see him would only seem appropriate if the character in stealth has both Invisibility and Silence applied to them.
Even then a character in stealth, depending on terrain, will still leave footprints and thus a means to detect them. I know that if I were walking on a sandy/soft dirt open space or through a meadow of thick soft grass and I glanced back and saw another set of footprints forming in a line toward me, or the grass matting to the ground in like manner OR parting as if flowing around something...I would use those clues to guide any area attack I had available to me.
Classic single "classed" Rogues don't go incorporeal via their own skill options via Pathfinder rules. Therefore using only their own "class" skill options they should never exist in a state to where they are completely undetectable without the aid of magic.
PFO, in my opinion, would benefit immensely more if the devs found new ways to present certain mechanics that force players a little bit out of their comfortable "I know this mechanic because I've mastered its use in 5 other MMOs" zone.
Keeping it as close to as it is in PF and veering away from how it has been done in 5 or however many past MMOs to me is preferable. Just because it was comfortable in those games to me is not enough reason to implement it here in lieu of doing it a more PF'y way.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Due to how we're splitting different hexes onto different server processes and plans to include more tree cover than is common in other MMOs, our vision range isn't going to be hundreds of yards. But that's likely a whole other discussion that we'll talk more about when we have the tech for hexes developed further, and I probably shouldn't have used hard numbers in the blog since it's still somewhat in flux.
Well there are posters who know there stuff so I shut-up and listen to them in these mechanics threads. I think the current stealth system is robust and flexible for interesting gameplay variable outcomes from players and in particular forcing skill-training choices with consequence that narrows down how intense belt any given part of gameplay you want to be more effective at, at a cost.
If you add the above terrain and time of day CONTEXT modifiers you have all the power and flexibility between different situations you need meaning good tactics sometimes win and sometimes the context tilts favour to stealth or perception but NOT ALL THE TIME is the key and players can make interesting decisions and counter decisions according to where and what time they are on the move.
Night + Forest = Stealth >> Perception
Night or Forest = Stealth > Perception
Day + Open = Perception >> Stealth
Day or Open = Perception > Stealth
Modified by Stealth Skill value VS Perception value; where equal the above applies roughly.
So knowing the lay of the land and the timetable of your target or "who is aiming at you" messes with which people you have in your group for or against.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Sounds to me about the time you are going to jump, they target you and thus foil sneak attack.
If you also saw the post about Flatfooted and know the PnP rules, you'd know that sneak attack could still work in this situation.
For the record, I plan to play a rogue, and the current design seems very good for my (PnP influenced) view of the rogue role. While the heavies charge, I'll pounce on the AoE caster and force him to stop targeting my mates (or maybe on the healer to stop him targeting his own buddies).
Stealth-as-invisibility would make it way too easy for traders/smugglers, for moving troops in position or reinforcing besieged settlements.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
1. Articulate your concept. "So, based on the blog and comments, it sounds like..."
2. Draw out implications. "If that's the case, then X..."
3. Problematize it. "That would be a problem because Y..."
4. Solicit discussion. "Do I have this right? Devs, could you address Z to help clear this up?"
New subtopic: appearance and visibility of 'detected' stealthers
1. Based on Stephens answers and comments, it sounds like 'typical viewing distances' are limited by foilage and natural cover. I did not interpret is like foilage will give mechanical bonuses to stealth, but that actual on-screen visibility will be limited because trees are rendered in front.
2. If that's the case, then foilage hides non-stealthers just as well as stealthers, and when they pop out from behind the tree they will be as (in)visible as if the tree wasn't there.
3. i.e. foilage does not increase the chances to sneak up on someone unless they happen to pass just next to said tree. In the worst case, visible name tags could even extend past the tree trunk and give away the position.
4. Do I have this right? Devs, could you adress the following to help clear this up:
a) How will 'detectable' but stealthy characters appear? Will nametags etc be hidden? Will appearances be standardized/anonymized? Will avatars be transparent to the point that quick sweeps may overlook a stationary stealther?
b) Will there be varying degrees of detection so that you could f.ex. detect *someone* at 50% range but not ID them until 20% ??
c) Targeting. Will tab-targeting cycle through only on-screen targets, on-screen + off-screen unstealthed targets, or all targets?
d) Cover. Will it be implemented (no need to go into how)? Will characters in cover be untargetable?
e) Concealment. Will it be implemented so that certain areas give stealth bonuses? Will there be /hide commands or similar?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You probably won't be able to determine detail with perception. Then you'd have to render an avatar differently for different people. I don't know if that's technically feasible. You get more detail by engaging them and breaking stealth. ( I think)
Doubtful: each avatar form will remain the same, but the skin can be a uniform shadow, unarticulated by detail. Very simple.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No. Once detected, the element of surprise is gone. The player can react and move, run, cast an AOE to damage me first, which IMO SHOULD have a chance to de-stealth you.Areks:
What it sounds like you are asking for is the ability to be guaranteed one flat-footed attack from stealth, if the stars align. Would an effect that makes all opponents flat-footed for one round after they detect you be sufficient, provided that that was enough time to run up from the detection radius and start stabbing?
An ability to detect you before you strike allows the quarry to actively participate, have fun, and have a chance.
The idea that your target should not have a chance directly contradicts the supposed appeal of player versus player, that of having an intelligent opponent. If by 'intelligent' we mean 'one who choses well' and your concept of stealth denies any chance of the target making an informed decision, then your version of PvP is self-contradictory. You want an ignorant opponent to slaughter without his even having a chance.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Does this mean there is some relation between the number of keywords on a weapon/armor and its tier? Essentially some sort of hidden mapping between item quality and tier? I'd also assume that the major keywords are only available to top quality pieces.I'm not sure of the relationship between number of keywords and tier. But I thought there was a previous tidbit of a tier 2 weapon having 1 major and some number of minors, doing something north of 60.
I must have missed this reference. Do you have a link? It's been stated top end physical resistance is 63 with 4 minor and 2 major, but that's armor.
edit: typo
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No. Once detected, the element of surprise is gone. The player can react and move, run, cast an AOE to damage me first, which IMO SHOULD have a chance to de-stealth you.Areks:
What it sounds like you are asking for is the ability to be guaranteed one flat-footed attack from stealth, if the stars align. Would an effect that makes all opponents flat-footed for one round after they detect you be sufficient, provided that that was enough time to run up from the detection radius and start stabbing?An ability to detect you before you strike allows the quarry to actively participate, have fun, and have a chance.
The idea that your target should not have a chance directly contradicts the supposed appeal of player versus player, that of having an intelligent opponent. If by 'intelligent' we mean 'one who choses well' and your concept of stealth denies any chance of the target making an informed decision, then your version of PvP is self-contradictory. You want an ignorant opponent to slaughter without his even having a chance.
Stephen has already said a fight will take a few minutes and rogues are less than optimal melee-ers.
I reject the argument that my target is denied an informed decision. That decision should be a reaction not a forethought, thus not contradictory.
I have said nothing about wanting the ability to eviscerate my target. Quite the contrary, I offered to do less damage if this were changed in my favor.
I want to be able to surprise my enemy and startle them that way they have to react under pressure. If they react well and I die, I am fine with that.
You clearly have a misinformed understanding of the basic premise of my argument. I suggest you re-read some of my arguments in previous posts otherwise any more reply by you might seem equally ignorant. ALL of us advocating here have stated that we don't want an alpha strike.
"You want an ignorant opponent to slaughter without his even having a chance."
I'm not quite sure how you came to that conclusion, but everyone advocating for what we (Morbis, Qallz, Bludd, me) are advocating have repeatedly said the opposite.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Areks In my opinion you and your band do not realize the implications of what you are arguing for. In my understanding of what Stephen described, you are requesting a real nerf without gaining squat. In my opinion then, it is you who are arguing in unavoidable ignorance. As one example Stephen indicated that about half the viability of the stealther will come from traits and skills that, incidentally, have not been revealed to us.
It looks to me like you are giving away the farm. Making decisions uninformed will in the best case return a 'lucky' decision. It cannot be a good decision, and most likely is a complete mistake.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Look, if you're in a ghillie suit, and patient as hell, yea, you might be able to get much closer than a person would ordinarily. But you're not going to just casual stroll up to people like you're wearing that Harry Potter cloak.
I do hope there are condition modifiers. It would be be cool if a rogue can't just stroll around stealthed in broad daylight, but at night, with broken ground/concealment, they can sneak into your back pocket.
#1- Not looking for that. Just looking for the possibility of being able to sneak right up on someone. Not a sure thing.
Not running full speed straight down the middle of a road in broad day light, screaming a battle cry, in full plate, with a flaming talking sword that won't shut up, in full view of their line of sight, with a neon name tag flashing over my head. I definitely don't want an automatic magical cloak that makes me invis.
#2- THIS!
That would be ideal. If that cannot be implemented, I would still like a chance at being able to sneak into their back pocket based on the amount of training I've had to put into steath vs the amount of training they've put into awa-skills.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Areks In my opinion you and your band do not realize the implications of what you are arguing for. In my understanding of what Stephen described, you are requesting a real nerf without gaining squat. In my opinion then, it is you who are arguing in unavoidable ignorance. As one example Stephen indicated that about half the viability of the stealther will come from traits and skills that have not been revealed to us.
It looks to me like you are giving away the farm.
Again, as I have stated multiple times, I am not debating the unknown. I am debating the mechanics of what we do know. I stated from the beginning that the disclosure of Rogue feats may very well make all of this debate be for nothing.
What we are requesting is the possibility for rogues to have the element of surprise, not a mechanical representation of "surprised" characters.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Alright, but the <element of surprise> varies widely from <being undetectable> until the attack is launched.
I would rather have high burst damage in my opening from a reasonably close, untargetable range in stealth than give that up for the sake of invisibility. Most situations I can think of in PvP will return higher value (in my system of values) to that more powerful backstab than being able to get up-close-and-personal undetectably.
As for the 'surprise': if my target goes into panic when I am detected-but-untargetable then I can launch my attack with confidence but if he is only figuring out his counter I can evade back into undetectable range and reconsider.
Granted if me and five buddies can get up close unseen and simultaneously launch our weaksauce backstabs we might get real advantage... but at such a cost.
I'd rather the rogue skills worked well as a whole than nerf it sight-unseen.
In sum: it should be tweaked once we see how it plays: I urge you guys to not pass judgment prematurely.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Areks: now you are saying that you want to be able to surprise your target, even if you get no mechanical advantage for doing so. Is that accurate, and woud you be happy if there was a method other than stealth (e.g. Dimension Door) that you could be all "Suddely, Areks!"?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Stealth as written will give the element of surprise if used in conjunction with charges/leaps/dimension door to bring you into melee range instantly from your undetectable range.
...not to mention observing your quarry from an undetectable distance and slipping into cover to await their passing, a shadow among shadows.
|
Goblinworks Game Designer
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Morning everybody! Tackling a few of these...
It seems reasonable that some melee Stealth characters will want to slot "Leaping Assault" abilities that rapidly close with enemies, to maximize the time they can be melee'ing the enemy in the 1st "Flatfooted" round... Whether that is a Rogue ability or is from some other Class Role that becomes popular to "multiclass" for this type of build doesn't really matter.
A "Charge" that is based on the tabletop rule (gets you quickly to the target, gives a small melee attack buff and small defense debuff) is currently planned as a generic Utility, which means anyone can take it, but slotting it uses up one of your limited Utility slots which you could use on other Rogue stuff (e.g., Tumble, Feint, etc.). Fighters will have access to this, of course, but also get weapon attacks that include a charge + attack.
BTW, any more info on what Flatfooted would do? You can't take advantage of Opportunity if you are FF?
As conceived, Flat-Footed is like Opportunity: a state that only does something if there's someone around who can capitalize on it. If there are no Rogues around, you don't have to worry about being Flat-Footed as much, just like you don't have to worry about Opportunity as much when you're not up against a Fighter. So I'm hesitant to give it any non-capitalization mechanics.
If you are all of the sudden damaged, and there is a rogue in your face, you are preoccupied. You may not alert your friends right away until you overcome the surprise factor.
Surprise is a non-measurable factor as everyone reacts differently. Some may be able to fight back and alert their friends. Others might panic and run. Others might freeze.
Taking the surprise factor away isn't something that is trivial and shouldn't be treated as such.
That's all I'm asking.
Ah, I getcha. I'll discuss this with the team. I do think, though, even as described, you're probably going to get this in a lot of cases.
I take it the 300 mark only reachable by characters that have the dedication bonus to a "class" role that has stealth as a "class" role skill?
It'd probably be easier for them, but I don't know that it's impossible to find 100 points of bonuses in general feats, magic items, and such. Particularly long term, those kind of things are likely to find their way in. We haven't designed a lot of skill boosters yet, so I can't say for sure what the ratios of Rogue options to Generic options will be like.
Does this mean there is some relation between the number of keywords on a weapon/armor and its tier?
Yep. In addition to its use in getting better attack rolls, a Tier 2 weapon always has the "Masterwork" major keyword, and every Tier 3 weapon has a specific Tier 3 major keyword (e.g., Vorpal). The minor keywords are awarded by upgraded versions of the item at any tier. So a Tier 1 weapon with two levels of upgrade has two additional minor keywords over the minimum, while a Tier 2 weapon with two levels up upgrade also has two additional minor keywords and Masterwork. The minimum level usually includes a damage type keyword (e.g., Bludgeoning, Slashing, or Piercing), so three levels of upgrade get you all four normal minor keywords.
Additionally, special recipes get you extra minor keywords like "Cold Iron" and "Silver" which aren't usually used by your attacks to do more damage, but which allow you to bypass special damage reductions on creatures (like fey and lycanthropes).
I assume this implies that cloth armor never gets bonuses to physical resistance due to keywords?
There are probably a few builds that can manage to eke out a little bit of physical resistance, even with cloth, but the general idea is that cloth is awful against physical damage but can be enchanted to be the best against energy damage.
More rambling, but at one point you mentioned 20 stamina for an example level 4 fighter. 3 attacks means ballpark 6-7 stamina per attack.
As previously described, 20 Stamina is the usual cost for a 1.5 second attack, which lets you use up your 60 total Stamina to make three attacks (and have a second and a half left over for moving and to account for potential lag).
But we're doing some fiddling with the Stamina mechanism based on the last playtest, which we'll hopefully be able to talk about soon, so I wouldn't get too locked into that assumption :) .
a) How will 'detectable' but stealthy characters appear? Will nametags etc be hidden? Will appearances be standardized/anonymized? Will avatars be transparent to the point that quick sweeps may overlook a stationary stealther?
Nametag will almost certainly be hidden when you're in the "seeable but not targetable" range using Stealth. I don't know yet; it's likely it will just be a translucency filter on your actual model rather than swapping it out, but programming hasn't implemented this part yet. The idea of the translucency is that, yes, against a busy background you might be overlooked (but this is a useful but nonessential part of the design, since now that the client knows about you, we have to design with the expectation that someone might hack his client to disable stealth translucency).
b) Will there be varying degrees of detection so that you could f.ex. detect *someone* at 50% range but not ID them until 20% ??
We'll need to see how much of a load the basic stealth detection puts on the server first, lest a programmer stab me for my audacity at making the check even more complicated :) . But if it's not a problem, it's possible that we could further gradate the levels of stealth visibility to targetable range.
c) Targeting. Will tab-targeting cycle through only on-screen targets, on-screen + off-screen unstealthed targets, or all targets?
Uncertain at this time. For general purposes, though, even when stealth isn't a concern, you want to cycle only targets on screen so you don't accidentally acquire someone behind you that you didn't mean to aggro with your attack, so we're shooting for that.
d) Cover. Will it be implemented (no need to go into how)? Will characters in cover be untargetable?
We'd like to, but we're uncertain how good it will be at this time. The goal is to do real line of fire checks on most things. Going into cover probably won't detarget you, but may prevent you from being acquired in the first place (if we can do a line of fire check for acquiring targets with tab), and ideally it will prevent ranged attacks from hitting you directly.
e) Concealment. Will it be implemented so that certain areas give stealth bonuses? Will there be /hide commands or similar?
We would like to, but don't yet know our tech options as far as sticking stealth bonuses on terrain features (especially since most of the underbrush will likely be procedurally generated and we'd need to attach the modifiers to whatever procedurally places them in some way). There will probably not be a /hide, but anyone can crouch into stealth mode, which will shorten your silhouette even if your Stealth is so low you can still technically be seen.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
DB- No. What I am saying is I am fine with the mechanical effects as they are presented, except for being able to be visually and audibly detected. I don't believe "mechanics" are a substitue for player reaction.
People react differently to being startled. Some are calm under pressure, some panic. That cannot be efficiently translated in game by mechanics because it is player dependant. Maybe through effects triggered by biometric equipment a player could wear but we are no where NEAR that and further discussion on that possibility is counter-productive as it isn't currently a viable option.
Suffice it to say, startling a player is an advantage that we don't really have in PfO from the current mechanics described and I believe a lot of people that want to play rogues want that "possibility". We don't want to do it for sure, all the time, no questions asked. We just want it to be a possibility.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There are probably a few builds that can manage to eke out a little bit of physical resistance, even with cloth, but the general idea is that cloth is awful against physical damage but can be enchanted to be the best against energy damage.
would it be possible to enhance this with a Mage Armor or Magic Vestments spell, or a class ability like a monk's ac bonus? A lot of us monk enthusiasts would like to find a way to be wearing plain cloth armor but still be able to not die to physical damage while fighting in melee.
|
Goblinworks Game Designer
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
would it be possible to enhance this with a Mage Armor or Magic Vestments spell, or a class ability like a monk's ac bonus? A lot of us monk enthusiasts would like to find a way to be wearing plain cloth armor but still be able to not die to physical damage while fighting in melee.
Monks, as with everything, are likely to be the exception to the general rules for how things work ;) .
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you are all of the sudden damaged, and there is a rogue in your face, you are preoccupied. You may not alert your friends right away until you overcome the surprise factor.Surprise is a non-measurable factor as everyone reacts differently. Some may be able to fight back and alert their friends. Others might panic and run. Others might freeze.
Taking the surprise factor away isn't something that is trivial and shouldn't be treated as such.
That's all I'm asking.
Ah, I getcha. I'll discuss this with the team. I do think, though, even as described, you're probably going to get this in a lot of cases.
I appreciate you taking it into consideration. As I stated before, I'll reserve my judgement of the skill's accuracy for once I see it in action.
Based off of written word, I have no idea how long it will take me to close the distance from being spotted to being in melee range and I also have no point of reference to judge "targetable", "ranged", and "melee" distances. So I apologize if my concern seems a bit exaggerated, but again, thank you for continuing the dialogue until you see my point, regardless if you agree or not.
It's really refreshing and appreciated!
Based off of written word, I have no idea how long it will take me to close the distance from being spotted to being in melee range and I also have no point of reference to judge "targetable", "ranged", and "melee" distances.
If you are all of the sudden damaged, and there is a rogue in your face, you are preoccupied. You may not alert your friends right away until you overcome the surprise factor.Surprise is a non-measurable factor as everyone reacts differently. Some may be able to fight back and alert their friends. Others might panic and run. Others might freeze.
Taking the surprise factor away isn't something that is trivial and shouldn't be treated as such.
That's all I'm asking.
Ah, I getcha. I'll discuss this with the team. I do think, though, even as described, you're probably going to get this in a lot of cases.
At end game, where most stealthers have gotten stealth to the 300 mark, and the average Joe has gotten it to the 200 mark, it's likely you won't ever get into melee range without first being spotted.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
At end game, where most stealthers have gotten stealth to the 300 mark, and the average Joe has gotten it to the 200 mark, it's likely you won't ever get into melee range without first being spotted.
Again, you are ignoring concealment from terrain and movement abilities that let you charge in to attack.
Again, you are ignoring concealment from terrain and movement abilities that let you charge in to attack.At end game, where most stealthers have gotten stealth to the 300 mark, and the average Joe has gotten it to the 200 mark, it's likely you won't ever get into melee range without first being spotted.
At 300 stealth vs. 200 Perception, those factors wouldn't matter, because people would be able to see you from about 1/3rd of normal distance anyways. So, going back to my example where I said character models render at 100 yards away (though I'd really like the devs to weigh in, so we have an actual scale to work off of here) that's ~33 yards or 100 feet away.
If people can see you from 100 feet away and you're trying to get within melee range, you can have all the charge abilities you'd like, but chances are you'll get snared, rooted, or otherwise CC'd, then blown away cuz you're just a squishy Rogue.
I'd like to petition that we take tanking ability away from the tank, magic use away from the mages, and healing away from the clerics to make things fair. If we're taking stealth away from the rogues then those all seem to be reasonable requests.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Every time people start screaming when we touch mechanics with a long history of abuse in MMOs, I think we're on the right track.
I have no issue with abuses, whatever they may be, being addressed so long as the basic premise behind the mechanic remains.
It remains my opinion that if you take the "suprised player reaction" out of the stealth equation, it is compromising the primary intent of the mechanic.
The flat-footed / sneak attack possibility is a result of the suprised state of the target. If the player isn't suprised, rogues should not have the mechanical advantage.
I would certainly hope that my comments have not been perceived as "screaming", as that was not my intent.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...If people can see you from 100 feet away and you're trying to get within melee range, you can have all the charge abilities you'd like, but chances are you'll get snared, rooted, or otherwise CC'd, then blown away cuz you're just a squishy Rogue...
If you cannot be targeted, what does it matter? They are spamming tab and their panic is rising. Then your buddy appears at their back and unloads a major crit.
oohhhh... but you guys talked the devs into a serious nerf months before alpha even started.. my bad. What was I thinking?
...If people can see you from 100 feet away and you're trying to get within melee range, you can have all the charge abilities you'd like, but chances are you'll get snared, rooted, or otherwise CC'd, then blown away cuz you're just a squishy Rogue...If you cannot be targeted, what does it matter? They are spamming tab and their panic is rising. Then your buddy appears at their back and unloads a major crit.
Oh, I guess you're right. Ok, stealth will work pretty well then. Looks good.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
AoE's remain the problem even in my scenario.
Not really. With AoEs a fixed resource due to magical turbulence, what mage is going to want to waste lobbing random fireballs at a target who MAY be there when if they guess wrong on the targeting reticule placement then any subsequent aoe will do less damage? That's not even counting the fact that rogues are traditionally (functionally) immune to AoE's anyway thanks to evasion.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Morning everybody! Tackling a few of these...
It seems reasonable that some melee Stealth characters will want to slot "Leaping Assault" abilities that rapidly close with enemies, to maximize the time they can be melee'ing the enemy in the 1st "Flatfooted" round... Whether that is a Rogue ability or is from some other Class Role that becomes popular to "multiclass" for this type of build doesn't really matter.A "Charge" that is based on the tabletop rule (gets you quickly to the target, gives a small melee attack buff and small defense debuff) is currently planned as a generic Utility, which means anyone can take it, but slotting it uses up one of your limited Utility slots which you could use on other Rogue stuff (e.g., Tumble, Feint, etc.). Fighters will have access to this, of course, but also get weapon attacks that include a charge + attack.
BTW, any more info on what Flatfooted would do? You can't take advantage of Opportunity if you are FF?As conceived, Flat-Footed is like Opportunity: a state that only does something if there's someone around who can capitalize on it. If there are no Rogues around, you don't have to worry about being Flat-Footed as much, just like you don't have to worry about Opportunity as much when you're not up against a Fighter. So I'm hesitant to give it any non-capitalization mechanics.
Ah, I getcha. I'll discuss this with the team. I do think, though, even as described, you're probably going to get this in a lot of cases....If you are all of the sudden damaged, and there is a rogue in your face, you are preoccupied. You may not alert your friends right away until you overcome the surprise factor.
Surprise is a non-measurable factor as everyone reacts differently. Some may be able to fight back and alert their friends. Others might panic and run. Others might freeze.
Taking the surprise factor away isn't something that is trivial and shouldn't be treated as such.
That's all I'm asking.
This is great, and a prime example of the back-and-forth of crowdforging. It also should be a reminder to all of us that it is counterproductive and faintly ridiculous to take a hardened position and argue vociferously about it at this stage of development. Witness how much is still being decided about how stealth will work and it's in-game advantages. Objects may block line of sight and terrain may give buffs to stealth; they're still working on it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
AoE's remain the problem even in my scenario.Not really. With AoEs a fixed resource due to magical turbulence, what mage is going to want to waste lobbing random fireballs at a target who MAY be there when if they guess wrong on the targeting reticule placement then any subsequent aoe will do less damage? That's not even counting the fact that rogues are traditionally (functionally) immune to AoE's anyway thanks to evasion.
There's also the fact that spells like fireball are refresh abilities. (In typical MMO parlance, that's roughly the equivalent of using a long cooldown to maybe hit a stealthed opponent.)
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The flat-footed / sneak attack possibility is a result of the suprised state of the target. If the player isn't suprised, rogues should not have the mechanical advantage.
You are using terms from the D20 tabletop game. I wonder if you realize those mechanics don't work the way you're describing them.
"Flat-footed" is a condition that occurs only once in any combat. Here's it's definition:
"A character who has not yet acted during a combat is flat-footed, unable to react normally to the situation. A flat-footed character loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) and cannot make attacks of opportunity."
"Sneak Attack" is a character ability that does additional damage on a successful attack. Here's it's definition:
"The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target. This extra damage is 1d6 at 1st level, and increases by 1d6 every two rogue levels thereafter. Should the rogue score a critical hit with a sneak attack, this extra damage is not multiplied. Ranged attacks can count as sneak attacks only if the target is within 30 feet."
There is no game mechanic in Pathfinder tabletop where a Rogue can put the "Flat-footed" condition on a character engaged in combat. In other words, you can't use the Stealth skill to overcome the Perception skill of a target and render the target "Flat-footed". If a Rogue wins a Perception vs. Stealth skill test against a character after that character has acted in combat, the Rogue has no inherent mechanical advantage vs. the target. The Rogue may receive concealment bonuses against being hit, but the Rogue cannot Sneak Attack the target as a result of winning that test.
This is a common misperception.
So if we were to keep within the spirit of the Pathfinder tabletop rules, what you would be arguing for is essentially a first-strike capability that only applies when the target is not engaged in combat.
Rogues in Pathfinder tabletop primarily inflict Sneak Attack damage by flanking. They rarely engage in ambush Sneak Attacks against Flat-footed opponents. They are designed to work in tandem with another character. This is strongly in keeping with the mechanics we're building for the online game. Primarily you will inflict Sneak Attack damage by taking advantage of conditions inflicted on your targets by your teammates.
[edited to change skill names]
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It remains my opinion that if you take the "suprised player reaction" out of the stealth equation, it is compromising the primary intent of the mechanic.
The flat-footed / sneak attack possibility is a result of the suprised state of the target. If the player isn't suprised, rogues should not have the mechanical advantage.
It very much sounds like you're arguing for a twitch-based mechanic here.
My character is flat-footed or not, depending on his skills, slotted passives, the environment, what other characters are doing, etc. My player being flat-footed on the other side of the monitor should be less important than the character's state.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Every time people start screaming when we touch mechanics with a long history of abuse in MMOs, I think we're on the right track.I have no issue with abuses, whatever they may be, being addressed so long as the basic premise behind the mechanic remains.
But Areks, what you're arguing for is NOT the premise behind the mechanic. You're arguing for the recent MMO convention of invisible rogues: a high(er) level can just stand in front of someone and be invisible until they initiate their chain-stuns. You're not de facto wrong to desire invisible rogues, but you're absolutely wrong about the premise behind stealth.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Ryan: I think people were refering to the ability to stealth and gain an attack during the surprise round as it applies to tabletop Pathfinder, thus automatically catching them 'flat footed'. Note that I'm not campaigning for the equivalent of invisibility up to melee range myself, just pointing that out.