Goblin Squad Member
|
Oh yeah, as a person who plans on playing a merchant I can say that I will likely be playing a hybrid Rogue/Wizard, and will likely pick up a fair bit of both stealth and perception in whatever form it takes. If I can see the bandits before they can see me, then I can avoid them and go my way in peace. Simple enough concept.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The old information was that they might not have stealth at all, because it might be too easy to defeat client side. A glass half full type might say that the stealthy types just got a major buff, actually. Which is a good thing; better than it was.
If all of the calcs for who is stealthed and who is not need to be done on the server, rather than the client, there may be technical limitations that are driving the sight/targeting distance. It's still better than it was before.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The Rogue role feature is Sneak Attack. Just like Fighters' Weapon Specialization, slotting a Sneak Attack precludes slotting another role feature.
There are multiple different versions of Sneak Attack, depending on the style of fighting you plan to do as a Rogue. Each of them triggers on the Flat-Footed state, which can be applied by feats like Feint (and automatically in other situations if you don't have Uncanny Dodge). The standard version of the feat is currently called "Cut-Throat" and additionally gets Sneak Attack against any target that isn't targeting the Rogue. This essentially represents both flanking and attacking an unaware target from the tabletop: if you don't have the Rogue selected, you're not able to give him enough attention to keep him from poking you in your vulnerables. Additionally, we're looking into alternate versions of the feat like Daredevil and Opportunist that get Sneak Attack in different ways.
Like the generic attacks for Opportunity, many light weapons include attacks with a special effect on any Flat-Footed target, and Rogues will likely be the primary users of these attacks. But when Sneak Attack is available, every attack does additional base damage (making even simple weapons like daggers as good or better than a Fighter's weapons), and has a chance to apply stacks of the Afflicted damage-over-time (DoT) effect. This should mean that, in straight-up combat, a Rogue is a suboptimal damage dealer, but becomes the best source of physical damage in the game when Sneak Attacking.
Rogues have counterparts to the Fighter's Master of Opportunity feats, which are reactive feats that do something extra on any attack if the target is Flat-Footed. For example, Bleeding Attack grants the Bleeding DoT effect and Befuddling Strike grants extra stacks of the Oblivious debuff (a penalty to attack and Perception).
One way to get Sneak Attack is to keep targets unaware of you, and the Stealth skill can help with this. Whenever you're in Stealth stance (your typical crouched, sneaky walk), the distance at which other players can see and target you is based on a comparison of your Stealth total and their Perception total. This ratio scales from 90% of the normal distances (for minimum Stealth vs. maximum Perception) to 10% of the normal distances (for maximum Stealth vs. minimum Perception), with equally matched characters resulting in a 50% reduction of sighting and targeting distances.
We expect these distances to be moderated by the server: the system doesn't even inform your client that there's someone around until you can see them, and attacks won't work if the server knows they're too far away for you to target. This means that the system should be resistant to client hacking. On the client side, we do expect to apply a translucency effect to a stealthed character when they're between their visible and targetable ranges, so if you're paying attention you might see the Rogue before flipping through targets happens to select him but it won't be an automatic thing.
Stealth breaks when you begin attacking, and then individuals further away might understand why your target was suddenly freaking out. But by that point, you've likely gotten off a few solid hits and can run away and enter stealth mode again, should you so desire.
In order to facilitate getting away, Rogues gain easy access to feats that grant Evades: extremely fast runs or jumps backwards that do not provoke Opportunity. These make it very easy for a Rogue to extricate himself from melee, particularly if he slowed or immobilized the target before leaping away. They also make it much easier for Rogues to get out of area of effect attacks than others.
Conversely, however, Fighters have multiple feats that grant Leap/Charge: an extremely fast run or jump towards the target. They can use these to get into a melee fight quickly, and keep up with a Rogue that's trying to get away. A Rogue on Fighter battle likely becomes a very deadly dance.
In short rogues are a pretty badass class that is not dependent on stealth to activate sneak attacks. They are not a very good class for 1 vs. 1 if you have "cut throat" version of sneak attack, but I'm sure you can think of a few situations where they are far more valuable than a fighter.
Stealth is a pretty sweet ability likely available to bards, monks, ranger, and rogues that should get you 50% closer to opponents with the same level in perception and 50%+ closer to targets without perception before they have any chance of noticing your presence, which they likely won't if you have the brains not to come from the front. It also means they can't see you until they get that close, which they probably never will if they are running around unstealthed so that you can hear them and easily move away.
So if you have a high stealth level it would be quite fair to assume you will get away from many fights you don't want, and get the jump on your target a significant portion of the time.
If you don't see the value of that in a game with open world PvP, feel free not to train it. If you don't see the value of rogues with or without stealth, feel free not to play one. At this point I'm somewhat concerned classes without speed or stealth will be terrible in most PvP situations outside formations.
I can guarantee you won't get WoW style spoon with your target then open up with an attack that hits like a truck because that is simply not balanced in an Open World environment. It may be balanced in arena PvP but I have too many memories of completely obliterating opponents much higher level than myself and avoiding every single fight I didn't want to be in unless I was unstealthed when they happened by to think that's anywhere close to balanced here.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If a member of the community believes he or she sees a problem with a game element then that member is only being dutiful to report their take on what they understand, and that is what Qallz has been doing as far as I can see (after all the deletions). Qallz should not be forced into a defensive position just because he strongly wishes stealth to work well: All of us should want every game element to work well.
That said, it might be that there is a different context intended than some of us are considering that Stealth skills are designed. If the stealthier is intended to only use stealth to flank or backstab while his target is preoccupied the 75 feet change from invisible to translucent may be less significant when we consider that it is more important to still be invisible to the rest of the target's party.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Please reference Dark Age for how to do stealth proper.
ok... there it seems that "stealth" in addition to making you invisible also includes:
-turning mobs around-safe fall and wall climbing
-teleporting burst attack (except through locked doors)
-assassination
-i'm also assuming there are very powerful attacks that require stealth.
all of these will be covered by different mechanics in PFO. What remains sounds very much like WoW stealth to me. What's the great thing I'm missing?
googling a bit more, I find that there is a stealth detection 'ticker' of 1-2 seconds so that assassins can move from detection range to melee between ticks. Well.. PFO could easily go with a 3 sec ticker here (1 'move action'), is that what you want?
The only thing I understand you are dissatisfied with is the 10% and 50% numbers. Would you think the system much better if they changed those to 3% and 15%, or 5' and 30' ?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So what type of stealth system would you rather see, Qallz?DAoC nailed it imo. For anyone who's played that, you know what I'm saying.
For those of us who last played DaoC during its heyday, and didn't play a stealther then, nor did any PVP, could you please tell us what you're praising?
Basically, you had your Ranger and Assassin type classes. Both would get points to spend on stealth, but Assassins would get more (because they needed more) and it would allow them, assuming they put in a normal amount, to get within a few feet of their opponent without getting spotted. There were some classes with anti-stealth features who could see them from a bit further away also. On top of that, movement speed was reduced quite a bit when stealthed, and you only got faster as you progressed in level and threw more points into stealth, but, you'd never get go full run speed. etc. It was a pretty damn good system, both for the stealthers, and for the non-stealthers.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I can only assume that disguise is now to be the primary skill of choice for assassins operating in a urban environment. Unless there will be free running in this game.
I think you will be able to see after reading that, why urban assassins will still be very viable.
Note: The character from that game is also a very strong case for non-evil assassins IMO. Given the code he follows if would say he's lawful-neutral at worst.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Disguise always was the primary skill for assassins. Stealth is a 2ndary skill. Bcause of exactly what was mentioned above, being that settlements are expected to house 1000's of players and some NPC's thrown in the mix, how likely are you, even with max stealth, to get around and to your target unnoticed.
The other thing to remember, and I think not everyone is understanding, the system described is a form of skill vs skill. They gave examples of the 3 "extremes" (10/0, 5/5, 0/10) but what about the in-betweens? If I have 3 ranks in stealth and you have 0 in perception, I wouldn't be at the 90% would I? Granted I think having equal ranks, no matter what the actual skill rank is, would be the 50%. But then it would go from there, something like in my 3/0 example would be 60 or 70%? I am not sure the exact numbers I am just trying to put numbers in so people can "see" better. I know I work better with numbers.
The last thing I wanted to note, I think these numbers are assuming both stealthier and target are facing each other and maybe moving towards each other. What about if the rogue was behind the target? If I read the blog right, at the 10% or 50% or whatever distance the rogue can be "seen" at only makes them translucent and able to be seen and targeted and attacked. What if the rogue was behind the target and he didn't turn around? Then sure the rogue is translucent and able to be seen, doesn't mean the target will get a pop-up saying "turn around, rogue detected." You will still be able to run up and "backstab" since you are still unnoticed. Unless everyone is going to be doing constant 360 degree surveillance while they are in the woods harvesting and "questing" which I doubt.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Unless everyone is going to be doing constant 360 degree surveillance while they are in the woods harvesting and "questing" which I doubt.
Everyone? no. But you can be guaranteed that any organized guild sending a harvesting team will have guards, and one of those guards will have someone who has maxed out perception, and they will be spinning around like a radar dish looking for stealthy interlopers.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And that is their choice and perfectly acceptable. I was just saying that not EVERY group will have that. I would expect the biggest and highly organized groups to have scouts and 360 degree "radar" but not everyone is, or wants to be that big and organized. remember, Larger groups are easier to track. Think large supply convoy with guards vs seal team 6.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And that is their choice and perfectly acceptable. I was just saying that not EVERY group will have that. I would expect the biggest and highly organized groups to have scouts and 360 degree "radar" but not everyone is, or wants to be that big and organized. remember, Larger groups are easier to track. Think large supply convoy with guards vs seal team 6.
Exactly, rightfully so.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Unless everyone is going to be doing constant 360 degree surveillance while they are in the woods harvesting and "questing" which I doubt.Everyone? no. But you can be guaranteed that any organized guild sending a harvesting team will have guards, and one of those guards will have someone who has maxed out perception, and they will be spinning around like a radar dish looking for stealthy interlopers.
One thing that has not been mentioned is how visible a revealed stealthed player is. My guess is that they will not make stealthed players glow bright red and set off a fire alarm once they are within the range of your perception. If your sentry is spinning around like a radar dish they could possibly miss seeing stealthed player approaching. Also, if I'm stealthed and I see someone spinning like a radar dish, I'm going to adjust my strategy and approach based on that, because even with maxed perception, if they aren't using stealth themselves, I'll see them before they see me. So I'm probably going to come from the angle that puts that big barn directly between me and them until our group is close enough to start our ambush.
@Andius: It's likely that players will be able to see their name plates when they're in range, so they might as well be glowing red and setting off a fire alarm. lol I don't know though.
I'm surprised none of the official GW people have weighed in on this thread. Hint hint. ;)
Particularly in regards to my assertions about stealth, how far away people are rendered normally, and the percentabes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Andius: It's likely that players will be able to see their name plates when they're in range, so they might as well be glowing red and setting off a fire alarm. lol I don't know though.
I'm surprised none of the official GW people have weighed in on this thread. Hint hint. ;)
Particularly in regards to my assertions about stealth, how far away people are rendered normally, and the percentabes.
I would love to see nameplates hidden when in stealth crouch, even if you have become visible. It can pop up for a user that targets you (as it means they have "seen" you) but the visual difference between a shady figure approaching and that of a brightly colored name tag "Sir Stabsalot of Killington" popping into existence could mean the difference of many yards. Especially for otherwise engaged characters!
I would love to see nameplates hidden when in stealth crouch, even if you have become visible. It can pop up for a user that targets you (as it means they have "seen" you) but the visual difference between a shady figure approaching and that of a brightly colored name tag "Sir Stabsalot of Killington" popping into existence could mean the difference of many yards. Especially for otherwise engaged characters!@Andius: It's likely that players will be able to see their name plates when they're in range, so they might as well be glowing red and setting off a fire alarm. lol I don't know though.
I'm surprised none of the official GW people have weighed in on this thread. Hint hint. ;)
Particularly in regards to my assertions about stealth, how far away people are rendered normally, and the percentabes.
Yea, if nameplates become visible in range, that's just adding insult to injury. Not that I plan on playing a stealther at this point.. That ship has sailed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would like to avoid nameplates all together...
The problem is in identifiability of avatars. I am in the pro-nameplate camp. Hiding them is more trouble than the realism provides value for.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would like to avoid nameplates all together...The problem is in identifiability of avatars. I am in the pro-nameplate camp. Hiding them is more trouble than the realism provides value for.
I understand and agree with many of the points made by the pro-nameplate crowd. I will admit I am not really sure what camp I really am in.
@Qallz, very nice avatar choice. If that had been available whein I first chose, I might have chosen it.
Thanks. It signifies my transition from Stealther to Sorcerer, which is what I play in the TT games anyways.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Qallz
Having playing DAoC when it was just Shrouded Isle, at RR7.2 my shadowblade was one to be feared. I loved it. But in DAoC stealth=invisible. In PFO it doesn't. In PFO you are visible, so in open area sneaking up to some one as close as 20 yards is extremely hard. Now add terrain into the mixture. You have trees, bushes, grass, etc. to help conceal you. You also have distractions going on. Its not likely some one is just standing out there looking for a stealther(not that they couldn't be.)
You also interchange yards and feet, which is a big difference. 20 yards is 3 times further than 20 feet. So when we get down to percentages, its huge difference. 10% of a 100 yards is about 33 feet where 10 of 100 feet is 10 feet. All this aside, remember that the percentage has no context in distance yet. There is also modifiers we probably don't know about yet.
All in all, I have been worried about the stealth mechanic. This last blog has a lot of stuff I like in it. While Qallz may be extreme, his reasons are not to be discarded. But I'm sure after play testing GW will do a great job.
@Qallz
Having playing DAoC when it was just Shrouded Isle, at RR7.2 my shadowblade was one to be feared. I loved it. But in DAoC stealth=invisible. In PFO it doesn't. In PFO you are visible, so in open area sneaking up to some one as close as 20 yards is extremely hard. Now add terrain into the mixture. You have trees, bushes, grass, etc. to help conceal you. You also have distractions going on. Its not likely some one is just standing out there looking for a stealther(not that they couldn't be.)
You also interchange yards and feet, which is a big difference. 20 yards is 3 times further than 20 feet. So when we get down to percentages, its huge difference. 10% of a 100 yards is about 33 feet where 10 of 100 feet is 10 feet. All this aside, remember that the percentage has no context in distance yet. There is also modifiers we probably don't know about yet.
All in all, I have been worried about the stealth mechanic. This last blog has a lot of stuff I like in it. While Qallz may be extreme, his reasons are not to be discarded. But I'm sure after play testing GW will do a great job.
I agree with a lot of what you said, I was hoping stealth in PFO would be as viable as it was in DAoC (I had a 50 inf on Mordred btw, loved it). It's not just DAoC though, I hate to bring it up, but WoW, the most popular MMO of all time, had a stealth system relatively similar to DAoC as well (they probably took it from DAoC).
As it is now, I don't really think stealth will be all that viable for anyone (except to some extent bow-weilders). I honestly think it'll be a joke. And, as to your point about GW getting it right after play testing, I wouldn't take that on faith, because right now it's so wrong that the damage may be irreparable later... which is why I'm making so much noise about it.
Considering how many people are condoning stealth in the ridiculous state that it's in though, I have very little hope of seeing a positive shift into a viable stealth system. I'm a Sorcerer now.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Qallz
I agree that being seen at 30 feet away is too far for some one who is maxed out in stealth against some one who has no perception. In its current state, perception is an equal counter to stealth. I believe this needs to change some what. I don't believe stealth=invisible, but I do believe that some one trained to get close with out notice should be able to stand next to you before you notice if your not trained to notice that. It is a specialized type skill. While perception is the ability to see things, it isn't specialized the same way. Sense motive seems to be a more appropriate skill. Any "class" that would have stealth as a class skill should go against that instead of just perception. That or get a bonus to those percentages. Some form to show that its an innate feature of the "class" role, not just some thing they picked up. The ordinary perception shouldn't be on equal footing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Am I the only person here who thinks it's possible--maybe even likely--that the dev team at GW aren't complete morons, and might, you know, have some kind of plan?
And maybe, just maybe, Qallaz's hand-wringing tears of anguish are a bit premature? Going out on a limb here, but wouldn't "Uh, hey, am I understanding this right? This sounds like a problem because of...," be way more reasonable than "OMFG devs FAIL obviously stealth is teh suck and no one will ever use it!"
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Am I the only person here who thinks it's possible--maybe even likely--that the dev team at GW aren't complete morons, and might, you know, have some kind of plan?
And maybe, just maybe, Qallaz's hand-wringing tears of anguish are a bit premature? Going out on a limb here, but wouldn't "Uh, hey, am I understanding this right? This sounds like a problem because of...," be way more reasonable than "OMFG devs FAIL obviously stealth is teh suck and no one will ever use it!"
No. You are not the only one that thinks judging mechanics from very vague descriptions and un play tested ranges is premature. Nor the way that it was pointed out.
We do all certainly have passion for the things that we want to see work well in-game, don't we?
We all want "crunchy" numbers and statistics to chew on. Look what happens when they give us some. :)
Which is why I'm wondering why we haven't heard a thing from GW in regards to this thread.
*Resumes tears of anguish, and assumes the new name Qallaz*.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Am I the only person here who thinks it's possible--maybe even likely--that the dev team at GW aren't complete morons, and might, you know, have some kind of plan?
And maybe, just maybe, Qallaz's hand-wringing tears of anguish are a bit premature? Going out on a limb here, but wouldn't "Uh, hey, am I understanding this right? This sounds like a problem because of...," be way more reasonable than "OMFG devs FAIL obviously stealth is teh suck and no one will ever use it!"
Nope, you're not alone.
I'm actually impressed and glad they're making stealth just that, as opposed to invisible.
Stealth, disguise, distraction, subterfuge...put them all together and a rogue will be pretty handy. Add in the inevitable rogue based skills and the rogue just became awesome. Might not be the best solo archetype to run (combat wise), but that just reflects PnP and gets us away from the burst from the shadows mentality MMOs have given us the last decade or more.
@Qallz
I agree that being seen at 30 feet away is too far for some one who is maxed out in stealth against some one who has no perception. In its current state, perception is an equal counter to stealth. I believe this needs to change some what. I don't believe stealth=invisible, but I do believe that some one trained to get close with out notice should be able to stand next to you before you notice if your not trained to notice that. It is a specialized type skill. While perception is the ability to see things, it isn't specialized the same way. Sense motive seems to be a more appropriate skill. Any "class" that would have stealth as a class skill should go against that instead of just perception. That or get a bonus to those percentages. Some form to show that its an innate feature of the "class" role, not just some thing they picked up. The ordinary perception shouldn't be on equal footing.
And yea, Perception shouldn't be so damn good at spotting stealthers. There should be one-two "classes/roles" that are designed from the ground up to be anti-stealthers. Like anti-stealther tank, or anti-stealther mage, or even a lightweight chainwearing dual-weilding fighter-type, whatever. But everyone being able to throw points into Perception and get a major ability to see stealthers is just wrong.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The thing is, if you're throwing points (xp) into perception and maxing it out, you're not putting it into HPs or combat related skills or whatever. This is the beauty of a classless system. You get to do what you want, but if you try to do too much, you become the jack-of-all trades and master of none.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Am I the only person here who thinks it's possible--maybe even likely--that the dev team at GW aren't complete morons, and might, you know, have some kind of plan?
And maybe, just maybe, Qallaz's hand-wringing tears of anguish are a bit premature? Going out on a limb here, but wouldn't "Uh, hey, am I understanding this right? This sounds like a problem because of...," be way more reasonable than "OMFG devs FAIL obviously stealth is teh suck and no one will ever use it!"
Well said. This is exactly what I wanted to post but I couldn't figure out a way to say it that wouldn't get me in trouble .
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The thing is, if you're throwing points (xp) into perception and maxing it out, you're not putting it into HPs or combat related skills or whatever. This is the beauty of a classless system. You get to do what you want, but if you try to do too much, you become the jack-of-all trades and master of none.
And just to throw another wrinkle into the mess - the Pathfinder Perception skill is influenced by Wisdom. Will characters need to have Wisdom raised above starting values to max out Perception? If that's the case, Rangers and Druids (when we see them) might end up being good anti-stealthers.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The thing is, if you're throwing points (xp) into perception and maxing it out, you're not putting it into HPs or combat related skills or whatever. This is the beauty of a classless system. You get to do what you want, but if you try to do too much, you become the jack-of-all trades and master of none.
Bingo. If they make it so that you can max out perception, and never be surprised...but you're so under-developed you can't do anything about it: design win. Meaningful choice.
Qallz, that's what you're not thinking through. Whether or not you can max stealth or perception is a completely meaningless concern--it's the trade-offs that we should be asking about.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The thing is, if you're throwing points (xp) into perception and maxing it out, you're not putting it into HPs or combat related skills or whatever. This is the beauty of a classless system. You get to do what you want, but if you try to do too much, you become the jack-of-all trades and master of none.And just to throw another wrinkle into the mess - the Pathfinder Perception skill is influenced by Wisdom. Will characters need to have Wisdom raised above starting values to max out Perception? If that's the case, Rangers and Druids (when we see them) might end up being good anti-stealthers.
Great point! I PnP I only play rogues or fighters, and wisdom usually ends up being my dump stat. Fighters don't have enough skill points to put much into perception, and I generally play the face of the party rogue, so charisma is more useful in those cases.
All good fun though, people need to make decisions that have repercussion and ramifications for the life of their character!