Slashdot Mirror


Rogues Get Some Respect

GamerGod is running an article taking a look at the role of the Rogue in Dungeons and Dragons Online. In their estimation, the Rogue class finally gets to do its thing in an online game. From the article: "What rogue would be worth his salt if he didn't have any traps to disarm or locks to open? What truly sets D&DO apart from the competition is the need to find and disarm various traps, snares, and pitfalls. Again, the game's set-up and design makes this an invaluable part of game play. No regeneration of spell points results in limited heals, and no regeneration of hit points makes getting blasted with a trap actually MEAN something." Been playing the preorder Beta this weekend, and it does a surprisingly good job of recreating the PnP experience. Review upon release.

68 comments

  1. Not a color anymore? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    But the more pressing question is: will people everywhere learn how to spell "rogue" and stop saying "rouge"?

    1. Re:Not a color anymore? by Kazzahdrane · · Score: 1

      "Lol warrior noob rouges pwn you" I laughed for hours at the guy who told me that in WoW. It was just evidence to support my theory that ~80% of WoW rogues were dickheaded 14 year olds. (possibly a higher percentage depending on your country/server).

    2. Re:Not a color anymore? by MasterDirk · · Score: 1

      I'm not going to rant (this time) about how every RPG (PnP or C) always has the same classes and variants of the same races (seriously, why do priests always heal? I've never met a priest who heals better than a doctor). That aside, why do they always call them rogues? Now, english isn't my first language, but I am fluent in it. Rarely do I encounter the word "rogue" outside of the RPG-sphere. You never hear that a rogue has been terrorising London, picpocketing and backstabbing...

      I did a quick synonym.com search, and came up with a definition and some alternative names...

      • rogue -- (a deceitful and unreliable scoundrel)
      • knave
      • rascal
      • rapscallion
      • scalawag
      • scallywag
      • varlet

      I want to be a svallywag, deceiting and acting generally unreliably towards my fellow players. Let the assasins (or some such) put poisoned blades into their enemies's backsides, and I'll make off with the loot.

      --

      "Programming is like sex: one mistake and you have to support it for the rest of your life."

    3. Re:Not a color anymore? by Supurcell · · Score: 1

      That's why I stick to the Role-Playing servers. The title the game gives your "class" has very little meaning. Everybody is an individual. You define what you are. Anybody that takes part in combat can be called a warrior/fighter, whether you take part by spell or sword is of no consequence. Any abandon can be called a rogue, they don't have to be able to hide in shadows.

    4. Re:Not a color anymore? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rouge roguer, rouge roguer, send coward right over. : p

    5. Re:Not a color anymore? by lowmagnet · · Score: 1

      Rogues are only good for ambushing people whilst manaing up. I'm a hunter, so I drop a trap before drinking now.

      --
      Heute die Welt, morgen das Sonnensystem!
    6. Re:Not a color anymore? by Pxtl · · Score: 1

      Which makes more sense than tacking on extra tasks that need to be done just so rogues can be useful. To me, the whole idea of adding on complexities to a game to justify the existence of a class seems rather stupid.

    7. Re:Not a color anymore? by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      It's not tacking on added tasks, it's returning the class to it's intended form before it was slaughtered by EQ.

  2. PnP or DnD? by Hell+O'World · · Score: 1

    I thought we were talking about a game.

    1. Re:PnP or DnD? by Kazzahdrane · · Score: 2, Informative

      Are you trying to be funny? PnP - Pen and Paper DnD - Dungeons and Dragons Zonk is saying that the new game does a good job of recreating the Pen and Paper experience in the form of an online game. Apologies if you made a joke and I just didn't get it though.

    2. Re:PnP or DnD? by oGMo · · Score: 1
      DND = Drag'n'Drop
      D&D = Dungeons and Dragons

      There is no abmiguity here, so the joke isn't funny to people who know even a little about the topic at hand.

      (PNP is Plug'n'Play; PnP is just something Zonk used for "pencil and paper", though many people also simply say "tabletop". Usually you don't need either one, since the context is clear.)

      --

      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage

    3. Re:PnP or DnD? by quantax · · Score: 1

      Yea, Zonks little comment at the end seems like praise devoid of meaning, as if I recall, the best part about PnP D&D is that you were sitting around with friends, having a good time, hopefully not taking it too seriously. I want to know how an MMORPG is going to recreate the PnP environment, as the statement means more than just replicating all the PnP calculations on the computer, it means recreating the atmosphere that made it fun to goto someones unfurnished basement for the night and play a somewhat goofy game but you loved every minute of it. Neverwinter Nights was fun, and it had a shitload of the PnP rules within it but by no means, even with an active DM running the session, was it comparable to a PnP game beyond the fact that the games ruleset was the same. Its the difference between online poker and sitting down with friends and playing, it just aint the same. I have not played the beta, perhaps someone who has could jump in with their take on Zonk's statement.

      --
      "What can a thoughtful man hope for mankind on Earth, given the experience of the past million years? Nothing." -Bokonon
    4. Re:PnP or DnD? by DrEldarion · · Score: 2, Interesting

      hopefully not taking it too seriously

      This where MMORPGs fail in my eyes compared to PnP. Besides the fact that a significant portion of the people you're playing with take the game FAR FAR too seriously, the games don't have anywhere near the flexibility that PnP has to allow for actually having fun rather than another day of stats++.

      Once when I was playing Shadowrun with a couple friends, we decided just to screw around for a bit. My character ended up getting killed because I angered a lady in a high apartment - she threw her toaster down at me, and I botched the roll.

      Sure, MMOs give you the fantasy experience, but if I can't have random shit happen like getting killed by flung appliances, it loses a lot of the fun that PnP is capable of bringing you. No MMO has ever given (or likely will ever give) me half as much fun as that day brought.

      MMOs are too static. Neverwinter Nights had the right idea with allowing human DMs into the mix. I know it seems like it would cut into profits, but if game companies hired a platoon of creative people just to interact with their players, I think people would stick around playing the game far longer.

      Have humans controlling the big boss fights. You think you've gotten an enemy on "farm" status? Sorry, he just completely changed his strategy. Of course, maybe he wants to bargain with you first this time. How would you like your pick of certain items just for NOT killing him? Who says he won't kill you anyways after you've taken it and aren't expecting to be attacked?

      Have humans controlling in-city events. An army of zombies has spawned and they're attacking the city - it's your job to defend it. You think you've gotten them all? Some are actually hiding in buildings waiting for the excitement to die down.

      Etc. It could make games AMAZINGLY fun.

    5. Re:PnP or DnD? by quantax · · Score: 1

      Its funny you hit upon that line in my response as thats probably one of my biggest problems these days with the multiplayer games in general is that people take it way too damn seriously, to a degree that it actually becomes stressful to play. Given that I've just come home from working all day in an office with its own stresses due to deadlines, etc, why the hell would I want to actually pay money to experience further stress from players who for some reason think their character's level is going to affect their ability to get into college or find a job. Though its not entirely in good spirit, I always have a nice moment of schadenfreude if a team I am playing on beats another team of people who are taking the very game seriously; if that same team I am on loses, then we just laugh at our mistakes and give it another go. What happened to the days of just having fun for the hell of it?

      --
      "What can a thoughtful man hope for mankind on Earth, given the experience of the past million years? Nothing." -Bokonon
    6. Re:PnP or DnD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of what I am about to say is available on the DDO public forums so I don't think there is anything here that anyone else couldn't get by just looking and reading....

      Dungeons and Dragons Online: Stormreach is mostly instanced adventures, complete with "The voice of the Dungeon Master" giving hints and filling in details where the graphics engine couldn't or doesn't. A group is gathered in a tavern for example, then chooses an adventure. The adventures are instanced, so you don't have competition for spawns. The game has voice chat built-in so you can just chat with your party if you choose. Experience is awarded ONLY by completing the main adventure goals or sub-objectives within an adventure, which takes away a lot of the grind you see in other games.

      As a result of these and other things in gameplay, the game FEELS more like pen and paper. Note that you can end up in a bad group as well as a good group, the same as any pen and paper game, so while it's possible to be in a boring group, you can also find some great groups of people who know how to play.

      I won't say any more right now due to NDA, but I was pleasantly surprised when I got into the stress test and further experience with the game has reinforced my initial impression that this is a game worth buying. At an estimated price of $50 based on what EBgames has listed, and a guess of $15/month, it's worth checking out. Since Player vs. Player isn't going to be in release, it may not be for everyone, but if playing in a group is your idea of fun, then you will probably have fun with it.

  3. This is good stuff by Kazzahdrane · · Score: 1

    I wasn't looking at playing another MMORPG for a long time, probably checking out Star Trek Online in a couple of years, but the work Turbine is putting into the Rogue class is making me have second thoughts. I've never been very attracted to playing a rogue in RPGs, but it looks like they're giving rogues a lot of freedom. If they do that with all the classes and make them all as seemingly interesting to play, I might give the game a go. Fancy posting some first impressions, Zonk?

    1. Re:This is good stuff by obeythefist · · Score: 1

      Ehh? I can quite easily see it being just another class, and from what I have read the new MMORPG is heavily party-only (no soloing). They added traps so rogues would be a requirement in a party instead of a you-can-come-too class.

      In a tabletop game the rogue has capabilities that enable interesting roleplaying scenarios and outside of the box style plans.

      In a combat oriented MMORPG, the D&D rogue doesn't have the same combat firepower as any frontline fighter class or offensive magic user. So, they have clearly added this to make sure Rogue players get lots of parties (otherwise they'd be unplayable or severely at disadvantage compared to other players).

      I imagine, cynical maybe, that rogues will spend all their time in parties setting off traps in dungeons and picking locks (every second door will presumably be locked). Not my idea of fun, I'm afraid.

      --
      I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
  4. Thoughts on necessity of rogues in a group. by WizardofWestmarch · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The problem I have with this is it may make rogues TOO required. If you can skip the traps entirely but it make the dungeon take longer (read: the long way around) I don't have a problem with it. Otherwise you risk everyone rolling rogue because they are so needed.

    1. Re:Thoughts on necessity of rogues in a group. by Kazzahdrane · · Score: 1

      Perhaps clerics will get their "detect traps" spell (I'm sure it's called something like that), an alternative to having a rogue but using up one of the cleric's spells when they could have another healing one. Stuff like that is fine by me, but yeah there's a problem of making a class *too* useful. Still, I'm hoping they make all the classes just as useful in cool ways as the rogue, so that they are well balanced and groups have different makeups.

    2. Re:Thoughts on necessity of rogues in a group. by WizardofWestmarch · · Score: 1

      Yeah that I can get behind 100%, with clerics having to use up a spell that could have gone to healing, and other similar tricks from other classes.

      and I DEFINETLY agree there needs to be similar abilities/needs from other classes. Make it so there are a lot of ways to complete any given dungeon based on what group make up you have.

    3. Re:Thoughts on necessity of rogues in a group. by buffer-overflowed · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, we always had a rogue or rogue-like in every PnP D&D game. There is a certain percentage of people that like the way of the stabbity.

      There's also race/class combos, since certain races get certain default abilities, a good substitute for a rogue would be an elven ranger or a bard(the gods of shmoozing, bard's were the UBER class in D&D 3.0, you had to throw deaf-dumb-blind-senseless things at them by the time they hit level 6 if you went strictly by the book, and they didn't entirely fix that in 3.5). And casters have various detect spells, but that'll consume spell points. And I have no idea how they're doing Sorcerers.

      I'm not sure how they're doing things. If they manage to recreate the PnP experience, then you can get past anything with anything just by being clever. By their nature, MMOs are much more confined though. Can you cast "detect traps" and then chuck a loose stone at the trigger plate for example?

      --
      The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."
    4. Re:Thoughts on necessity of rogues in a group. by Kazzahdrane · · Score: 1

      Looks like you'll get your wish then, what I've read about the game suggests that dungeons will be much more interactive than simply: enter room-clear room-move on to next room. Puzzles and traps ahoy, and hopefully NPCs in the dungeons that can be negotiated with ;)

    5. Re:Thoughts on necessity of rogues in a group. by miyako · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And thus arises one of the main problems of the MMO. When I DM a game, I can alter the dungeon so that it works better with the skills of the players. If I have a group of rogues playing, I can add several traps on doors, and some areas that require quick reflexes- I can do it on the fly and still keep the overall feel of the game. If I want to make it harder on the group I can forego the traps and maybe throw in magical beasts that would be better handled by a magic user.
      If I have a dungeon with a lot of traps and the party doesn't happen to include a rogue, then I can quickly alter the dungeon so that traps are replaced with simple puzzles or melee encounters that better play to the skills of the players. If there are no rogues and I want to weaken the party to make an encounter more dramatic, then I can throw in a couple of traps- knowing the party is unlikely to be able to detect or disarm them.
      This isn't really possible in MMOGs. While it's theoretically possible to create multiple versions of a dungeon and then use the one most fitting for the given parties makeup- it would double or triple the amount of work that goes into designing the quest- and it would probably be exploited easily too.

      --
      Famous Last Words: "hmm...wikipedia says it's edible"
    6. Re:Thoughts on necessity of rogues in a group. by GebsBeard · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Its really hard to believe that this kind of customization can't be handled by typical MMOs, especially with the rise of instancing. You'd think they could take a party, weight their various stats, abilities and items and even keep a running log of their playing tendencies (ie which commands are used the most frequently) and customize the encounters and challenges based on these metrics. I guess they just haven't evolved to that point yet, although reading the article it sounds like DDO might be headed in that direction. The only way to cut through the cheerleading is to actually play it for a while.

    7. Re:Thoughts on necessity of rogues in a group. by WizardofWestmarch · · Score: 1

      The code complexity to do this right, not to mention having to work out what statistics to take into account for such a system and how to properly measure them, would delay the development of already long taking and complex games by a great degree I would have to think, which is why the odds of seeing such a system anytime soon are not high.

      Though something like a PSO or maybe GA could have some interesting results, given enough (read: LOTS) of testing.

    8. Re:Thoughts on necessity of rogues in a group. by miyako · · Score: 1

      I think it is certainly possible for a MMO to handle this. I think it is unlikely that a MMO will implement it in the neat future though- for several reasons. The first is that, while it's possible to chose a dungeon (or even a given room) to match the abilities and play style of the players, it would lead to either much easier or much harder dungeons (either all the obstacles are tilted towards or away from the parties abilities). It could be interesting to create a dungeon that uses abilities that the party has but rarely uses (for example, a wizard who focuses on attack spells and generally ignores buffering spells facing a situation where it may be nessesary to change playstyle)- but then players would complain because the game loses the monotonous aspects that MMO players seem to like.
      The other problem is that a lot of dungeons would become really predictable. A lot of people tend to play with the same party- so dungeons would tend toward similarity because they would all be weighed toward the skills of the players.
      I guess it could be workable- it just seems like most MMOs are very similar- and I have a hard time seeing a game doing this.

      --
      Famous Last Words: "hmm...wikipedia says it's edible"
    9. Re:Thoughts on necessity of rogues in a group. by Hast · · Score: 1

      Also an important aspect of MMOs seem to be cooperation. So it really makes more sense to have a dungeon present a specific challenge. If the adventurers don't match up then they'll have to overcome that or find additional players to help them out.

      Kind of the point of the game really. (Well, theoretically anyways.)

    10. Re:Thoughts on necessity of rogues in a group. by BlueHands · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The feature you implement in PnP is a common one and has always seemed like the wrong answer to me.

      The party should be able to realize when the challenge before them is the wrong one for the current group. When the world adjusts for the player you lose many valuable artifacts to enhancing realism - consistency, consequences and the thrill of the unknown.

      --
      I mod everyone down who says "I'll get modded down for this." I hate to disappoint.
    11. Re:Thoughts on necessity of rogues in a group. by miyako · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The #1 rule of being a DM is "Make the game fun".
      If the game is not fun, then you have no players to play in your consistant, consequence filled, realistic world. A lot of it comes down to how good of a DM you are. An excellent DM can probably create a quest beforehand that needs very little modification for the players, and a poor DM will refuse to change the quest no matter what. Most DMs fall inbetween however- and admit that they are not perfect and cannot forsee how the players will play- and they therefore admit that at times minor things must be changed to keep the overall game going.
      In the grand scheme of things, replacing a trap on a door with a spell that can be broken by the groups cleric because the rogue died in a freak accident earlier on in the game to keep the group going can make things much better for the player and the DM.

      --
      Famous Last Words: "hmm...wikipedia says it's edible"
    12. Re:Thoughts on necessity of rogues in a group. by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Unfortuanately that would make it too contrived. You wouldn't be exploring a living, breathing world, rather than exploring some ancient historical cave, you'd be exploring an artificial cave made up just to suit you. As if there was a god following you around setting you challenges like in Jason and the Argonauts or something.

      It would get a bit dull in the end if the world didn't have any continuity, but was just a series of contrived 'challenges'.

    13. Re:Thoughts on necessity of rogues in a group. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm..Jason and the Argonauts MMO, that might be an idea. :)

  5. About time! by masterzora · · Score: 1

    Hallelujah! I think we just found the first MMORPG I'll ever play!

    --
    Remember, open source is free as in speech, not free as in bear.
    1. Re:About time! by Cerberus7 · · Score: 1

      I was gonna say kinda the same thing, only instead of "ever" I was going to say "never." It sounds great, and all, and it appeals to me as my preferred class in tabletop rpgs is a thief, or fighter/thief. However, it still doesn't make me want to start plunking down a monthly fee for the experience. If I was putting monthly money into a game, I'd play it non-stop just to get my money's worth out of it, and that's just not something I want to do.

      --
      I don't know about you, but my servers run on the power of cotton candy and happy thoughts. -Anonymous Coward
    2. Re:About time! by drsquare · · Score: 1

      You pay monthly for Internet access, does that mean you're at the computer 24/7? Does paying rent mean you never leave the house?

    3. Re:About time! by Cerberus7 · · Score: 1

      It's more to do with the relationship with how I currently game. I buy a game for $30-$50, play when I want, for how long I want, or as infrequently I want. I can take over a year to finish the game if I want, and it still only cost me my initial $30-$50.
       
      In an online game, I can do the same, except I'm paying $15 a month, or whatever, and all the time I'm not playing other people are advancing past me. After I've spent the equivalent for a conventional game, my relative position depends on how much time I've put into it. I don't play enough to warrant the extra expense in money and time over the course of a year to justify.
       
      Yeah, the same could be said for 'net access, but rent/mortgage is kinda pushing it. You gotta have a place to live, and the cost is more about the area you live in than anything else. My Internet connection costs me about $30/month, and it's worth every penny to me. $15/month for one game isn't worth it. Heck, $10/month for a single game isn't worth it. If online games ever get down to the $2-$5/month mark, I might start thinking about it. At that price, it equates a conventional game bought at full price to 10-25 months worth of playing.

      --
      I don't know about you, but my servers run on the power of cotton candy and happy thoughts. -Anonymous Coward
  6. Prior art by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

    "What truly sets D&DO apart from the competition is the need to find and disarm various traps, snares, and pitfalls."

    It's been done in Phantasy Star Online, if I remember correctly.

    1. Re:Prior art by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      PSO was pay-to-play but not really massive as you're restricted to four players per "instance" and the only area where more players can hang around is the lobby. Kinda like Guildwars with a monthly fee.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    2. Re:Prior art by falcon5768 · · Score: 1
      disarming traps and picking locks and chests was done in FFXI too. Thiefs are the only class who can pick locks though about everyone could disarm a trap.

      WoW also had rouges who did these things, really this is just a BS story made to sell DnD.

      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    3. Re:Prior art by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Thiefs are the only class who can pick locks though about everyone could disarm a trap."

      FFXI? What locks? What traps? The only locked things are chests and coffers, and I've yet to hear of anybody opening those things without a corresponding key.

    4. Re:Prior art by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      > The only locked things are chests and coffers,
      > and I've yet to hear of anybody opening those
      > things without a corresponding key.

      Thieves can use thieves' tools, living keys, or skeleton keys to open them, but a lot of the time you get a mimic or cursed, and you don't even get the contents when that happens.

      Chris Mattern

    5. Re:Prior art by obeythefist · · Score: 1

      The only player-assist thing that rogues can do in WoW that other players can't is open lockbox drops.

      D&D is going to have locked doors and traps, things that WoW doesn't have (apart from little PvP trap things, not the same as your classical PnP poison spiked pit trap with snakes in it).

      --
      I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
    6. Re:Prior art by falcon5768 · · Score: 1
      CoP added a lot of doors that can be picked by thiefs to advance in quests (you couldd open them with a key, but it ment killing some mobs, including ones who cast doom on you and getting lucky to get the drop, while a thief could just pick it), as well as traps that can be disarmed.

      Your right though, the original game only had chests and coffers.

      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    7. Re:Prior art by jeffasselin · · Score: 1

      You just TRY going through Blackwing Lair without a few rogues to disable Suppression Devices before broodlord.

      --
      If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
    8. Re:Prior art by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I can't believe the number of times we wiped in a WoW instance because we couldn't disarm traps...

      Wait, what traps?

  7. Sounds great, excpt for the Turbine part by MBraynard · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Turbine's involvement with this project is problematic. While AC was very revolutionary for it's day and had a tremendous amount of creativity (and creative use of an extremely limited game engine), Turbine did not do a good job of avoiding pain in the rear issues for players.

    There are a lot of routine tasks that outside third parties made applications to help with. I'm not talking about gold farming, but more like efficient self-spell casting. For every thirty minutes to hour of play in AC, you had to spend approximately 5 or more minutes 'buffing' yourself with spells - at least, when done efficiently with the third party app, the buffing was done very efficiently. Doing it manually could take up to twice as long and could also require you to waste spell slots on your casting bar. When the app was buffing you, you could take that as an opportunity to chat with your party - doing it manually? no chatting.

    So every month Turbine would BREAK this app with their update. Finally the developer got tired of fixing it every month and quit. This also blew other apps for quickly sizing up what treasure is valuable (Turbine would often dump 200+ pieces of treasure in front of you and expect you to take 1 minute to sort through all of it - 95% trash - before it decomposed on you).

    If I ever was going to go back to AC, the lack of Decal (and Turbine's decision not just not to incorporate these applications into the game but to permanently break the third party apps) means I definitly can't go back and I am not alone.

    1. Re:Sounds great, excpt for the Turbine part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      AC is ancient and should be used as an example of how succesful Turbine could be at creating an MMO. They just released another expansion for the game, and it is still going strong. AC2 on the other hand was a flop and they just shut the AC2 game worlds off completely. While AC2 had the pretty graphics, and better engine they really broke gameplay.

      Combine the experience gained from thier success, and thier failure, and you have a good shot at making a game (or two) that will be the better for it. The Turbine devs have stated over and over again they are trying very hard to stick to DnD rules and convert them to the MMO scope in the best way possible while still makeing the game real time, interactive, and most importantly fun.

      Turbine must be doing something right, they've landed the rights to build not only the DnD MMO, but the Middle Earth MMO as well.

      While I agree AC became painful to play without Decal (I stopped playing before WoW came out anyway), the game has had enough appeal to last this long, and that is a damn good sign for Turbines future.

      http://lotro.turbine.com/
      http://www.ddo.com/

    2. Re:Sounds great, excpt for the Turbine part by MBraynard · · Score: 1
      Whell, SOE sure learned a lot from EQ2 and SWG - are you looking forward to signing up to their next learning experience?

      Look, just saying, if you are a hard core DND guy you are probably going to at least try the demo. Everyone else should probably find something else.

    3. Re:Sounds great, excpt for the Turbine part by will_die · · Score: 2, Informative

      This was hardly a case of turbine going out of thier way to break that software.
      The way the program worked was by using an offset, and that had to found out every time there was new compile of the code, this happened mostly on a monthly basis because they released a new version with new content and features.
      To explain why it would take so long for people who did not play AC, designed what around 6-7 years ago. You had around 10 pieces of clothing you could wear, and a weapon. Spells exists that could buff each of thoses pieces of clothing and your weapon so you had all thoses spells that people could cast, in addition you had around 6-7 spells that you could cast on your overall body. You could duplicate most of thoses using items but that cost large amounts of money want wanted to be uber you took thoses magic classes.
      Also IIRC around 3+ years ago they upped the time on thoses spells to around 1-2 hours in length.

    4. Re:Sounds great, excpt for the Turbine part by MBraynard · · Score: 1
      You had to cast (IIRC) about 8 spells on each of those ten pieces of armor. Then you had to cast about another 20 spells on yourself, then maybe another couple on your casting implement, plus a bunch of mana management spells to make all of that possible.

      Yes, there was an offset, but Turbine could have easily accomdated by making Decal PART of the game or better incorporating it. They didn't realize that the decal was what made their game playable.

  8. Backstab by Dachannien · · Score: 1

    In their estimation, the Rogue class finally gets to do its thing in an online game.

    Apparently, leading the pack in terms of damage output isn't enough anymore.

    Still, traps can be fun little additions that generally get neglected in MMOGs, and you generally wouldn't expect the fighter to take the delicate approach, at least not in a D&D game.

    1. Re:Backstab by f0rtytw0 · · Score: 1

      I play a rogue in WoW (like 90% of the population =/ but I always play rogues) and one of the most useless "skills" I have is find and disarm traps. Why is this useless? I have yet to encounter a trap except for one quest which was given right after learning the "detect traps" skill. I am glad D&D online is doing that and actually making the rogue class usefull. Why aren't there more traps in WoW?

      --
      this is the most important sig ever! In your face 446154!
    2. Re:Backstab by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1
      For the exact reasons spelled out by other posters:

      Putting in traps for the sake of making a single skill useful means adding in content that negatively affects n-1 classes, where n is the total number of classes in the game.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    3. Re:Backstab by Grab · · Score: 1

      But it also negatively affects *realism*. You want to stop someone going through point X in a dungeon, do you (a) install a large monster, or do you (b) put in a door which triggers an alarm when opened, so that your bodyguards are ready and waiting further down the corridor?

      The reason traps make sense is that they're an automated way of stopping people getting in. Build them once, and that's it. Stopping people going through by putting in a monster lair is all very well, but it kind of impacts on *your* ability to get *out*. :-/ And of course, what does the monster live on? bcos you can't assume you'll get enough intruders to keep it fed. A credible Evil Overlord needs to give thought to those kind of things...

      Yeah, I'm taking the piss a bit, but only slightly. For an RPG to work, the NPCs need to be making realistic decisions. As soon as you get some geezer going "You'll never escape my Scorpion Pit of Doom!! Muhuhuhuhaaaa!!!!" then you can safely kiss goodbye to suspension of disbelief.

      Grab.

    4. Re:Backstab by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      "Apparently, leading the pack in terms of damage output isn't enough anymore."

      Since when do Rogues get to backstab with every attack? They need to be undetected, and it only works against humanoids. Furthermore, fighters and their ilk have plenty of damage-buffing skills and feats.

      Yes, a backstab can be a devastating attack. However, it's usable only in rare situations.

      "you generally wouldn't expect the fighter to take the delicate approach, at least not in a D&D game."

      Depends on the player. Not all fighters are foolhardy; I would expect the least foolhardy to live the longest... at least that's how it's worked in all the D&D games I've played (from the original to 3rd edition PnP, as well as single-player and online).

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    5. Re:Backstab by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      But it also negatively affects *realism*. You want to stop someone going through point X in a dungeon, do you (a) install a large monster, or do you (b) put in a door which triggers an alarm when opened, so that your bodyguards are ready and waiting further down the corridor?

      Alarm traps are crap. You can just pick up your monsters with the Hand of Evil and drop them on any intruding heroes. What you want to do is to fortify your dungeon walls, and have the only approaches be via very long, snaking corridors with nothing in them. End with an iron or magical door which opens on your dungeon - with a rolling rock trap just outside it. Cue the heroes realising that there's nowhere to run to...

      Dungeon Keeper aside, though, your point about realism is well taken. Dungeon economies are rarely well thought through. The best dungeon I ever saw, in fact, was Balthus Dire's citadel of chaos. The place was open. You could walk right in if you wanted. The place was full of visitors and transients: after all, any evil overlord still needs merchants to come along and trade for food, and he needs to have an open door to new recruits - orcs are all very well, but you win nothing these days without human auxiliaries. You'd blend right in until you drew your sword and started yelling about decency and justice...

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    6. Re:Backstab by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well Rogues are only the damage dealing class in MMO's because earlier designers couldn't figure out how to make a class focussed primarily on skills (detect traps, bluff, persuade etc) work in a a basically static, multiplayer vs npc game - whilst not requiring one in every team.

      In DND they were very situational damage against soft targets, against anything heavily armored they were much weaker - daggers (particularly dual wielded) doing minimal damage - and pricking an enemy for 1 pooint of damage 5 times a round as compared to hits for 50-60 from the fighter classes.

      Bards were another class that had a lot of these support skills - that didn't translate so well in a MMO.

    7. Re:Backstab by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      Rogues were never supposed to be uber-damage dealers. This happened because SOE could not implement rogues correctly, and had to give them something to make the class viable. The rogue as it is being implimented in DDO is what they were supposed to be in the first place.

  9. System requirements? by kongjie · · Score: 1
    Off-topic:

    I searched their site for any indication of system requirements. Evidently they don't think it's important to indicate what platforms their game runs on...I had to go to Amazon to find out. PC-only, Mac users out of luck.

    1. Re:System requirements? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No shit, Sherlock!

    2. Re:System requirements? by bradbeattie · · Score: 1

      I think Blizzard did one thing right in making WoW cross-platform. I really would love to play DDO, but unless they release it for the Mac, I'm not going to bother.

    3. Re:System requirements? by falcon5768 · · Score: 1

      I got to agree, though with the impending Intel move, this might change a bit, but The only reason I play WoW is cause i could on the mac, just like the only reason I play FFXI is cause its on the PS2 too (and was almost on the Mac till for some reason it got canned). The sad thing is the common excuuse is they wont make enough money, when Blizzard and other companys have shown time and again, thats completely false.

      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

  10. Nexus... by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    In Nexus, Rogues are the most overplayed class for completely different reasons.

    First of all, it sounds cool, especially when you go and read in the description: "The magical fighter, unmatched in single combat."

    Rogues do the most damage to a single target, knocking it down twice to three times as fast as a Warrior can. This is balanced by Warriors being capable of hitting in all four directions, and being able to actually take quite a few hits.

    Rogues don't get hit much. When they do, it hurts a LOT, but usually they just don't.

    Interestingly, Warriors are the ones who can detect traps, and there are a lot of them. However, traps are flawed in that most of the time, you can simply beat your way out of a trap. In fact, since most traps are ambushes, where a player gets surrounded by creatures, and Rogues have an "ambush" spell which teleports them to the opposite side of a creature, Rogues simply don't care about traps.

    No, the time you want to detect traps is not to avoid them -- useless, because they can't be disarmed and only the Warrior can see them -- it's when you want to spring them, intentionally, to get a particular creature to spawn, or to get lots of creatures to spawn. For instance, the fastest way to collect Ambers is to take a Warrior into the Mythic Rabbit cave, have him (or her) find ambushes and spring them, and immediately slaughter the four creatures which spawn to surround them -- remember, Warriors have a four-way attack.

    And the reason you want a Rogue in your group is to take care of single creatures, and because they aren't much of a burden -- lower max HP means it's easier to die, but it's also much easier to keep the Rogue healed, especially because if they get in trouble, they can jump out of the combat and wait for a heal. But you also want a Warrior, because they're easier to keep alive, even if it takes more mana to keep them healed, and they utimately end up dealing more wholesale damage. They also, typically, are the ones with the Taunt spell.

    A full group works like this: a Poet and a Mage are up on a ledge which has only one way in, and the Poet has summoned a pet to block that way. Creatures won't aggro the pet, so it's effectively a wall, so your warrior doesn't have to taunt things away from the casters -- which is good, because Mages are at least as vulnerable as Rogues. Your Warrior is down in the pit, with a massive crowd of Mythic Rat Sentries attacking them. While there are subtler skills to being a Warrior, most of your time is spent simply holding spacebar (attack) and watching your health, so that you can use a Yellow Scroll to teleport you home if your Poet is about to let you die. The Poet and Mage usually cooperate on keeping everyone's Armor, Sanctuary, and Valor buffs on -- anything else is path-specific and entirely up to the fighters. The Mage's main job is to paralyze all creatures in the area -- which wears off after awhile. The Poet's job is to Scourge all the creatures, which doubles or triples the amount of damage dealt to them, and to keep everyone healed. And the rogue is running around the outside of the mob attacking the warrior (or not attacking, since they're all paralyzed), contributing damage and killing the weak rats (who run away) or any that get too close to the casters (since the pet won't last forever).

    You can form a combination of just about any number of just about any of these, and it'll be effective. The MOST effective is a group of all four classes, but you can get away withoout a Poet if your Mage is good enough (they have their own heal spell). Rogues are nice to have around, and they're best for taking on a boss, but they're no substitute for a Warrior taking on a huge mob. Then too, Warriors can get surrounded, Rogues can't, and while the boss isn't dangerous at all, it's slower.

    To me, that's good balance. A skilled player of any class is valuable enough in a unique enough way to feel worthwhile. I like the idea of TFA,

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  11. You don't need a rogue! by forgotten_my_nick · · Score: 1

    Just a 10' pole to find traps. I always wondered how people carried those in the tabletop game (especially the halflings).

  12. Ahh turbine... by Rhys · · Score: 0

    Turning something that's defective with the game (too many traps; no way to deal with them except using a rogue) into a "feature" with spin. That's about what I'd expect from them really.

    Oh, and expect all the sociopathic assholes (and griefers) to play rogues. Then they can inflict maximum pain on everyone else but know they'll always get party invites (since you have to have a party) because every party MUST have a rogue.

    --
    Slashdot Patriotism: We Support our Dupes!
    1. Re:Ahh turbine... by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      You don't /need/ a rogue to get through traps. Watch IGN's video archives regarding this game. A set of repeating blades slice out of the walls and floor in a specific pattern. The player memorizes the pattern and makes his/her way through the trap without injury.

      They go inside to encounter a large ogre(not sure what it is, just that it's about 4 times the size of the cleric).

      They mix it up a little, before the cleric flees out through the trap once more. The trap skewers the player for quite a bit of damage, but at least it hurt the ogre worse, killing it.

      Disabling traps is helpful, but not necessary.

      No PVP at the moment. No need to deal with people trying to gank using rogues.

      This all doesn't mean Turbine is somehow better for these implementations, because these implementations bring problems of their owns. I'm just lending some information to clear up your post.

  13. Try before you buy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Make sure you play DDO to level 2 or 3 before you give up any of your money. The combat system is awful. Spellcasting is almost pointless, because the game is so melee focused. You can sometimes literally circle strafe a mob and never take any damage while still dealing damage and occasionally getting +2 to hit for facing the mob's back. Not to mention the buggy collision detection.

    Later you run into one of the games other problems. Eventually you can no longer solo most dungeons. Plus you run out of quests before you reach the next level, meaning you have to repeat dungeons you've already completed. So instead of grinding mobs out in a field for a few minutes, you have to do an entire dungeon which generally takes a minimum of 30 minutes (not counting time spent to get a party together), for an ever decreasing amount of XP.

    And finally, one of the hallmarks of a great DnD campaign, an overarching story line that peels away as you complete quests, does not exist in any form in this game. Almost all the quests might as well be standalone and completely random for how much they relate to each other.

    Also, while multiclassing may be a nice feature, without prestige classes (and a max level of 10) it's rather pointless. 3.5 multiclassing was basically balanced around having prestige classes, as multiclassing base classes generally hurts your character.

    1. Re:Try before you buy by C0rinthian · · Score: 1
      Make sure you play DDO to level 2 or 3 before you give up any of your money. The combat system is awful. Spellcasting is almost pointless, because the game is so melee focused. You can sometimes literally circle strafe a mob and never take any damage while still dealing damage and occasionally getting +2 to hit for facing the mob's back. Not to mention the buggy collision detection.
      This is actually consistent with normal D&D character scaling. In the early levels, casters are quite weak compared to melees, but as they progress the casters end up on top. Significantly.
      Later you run into one of the games other problems. Eventually you can no longer solo most dungeons.
      Ironically, this is one of the features of the MMO. It is not solo friendly. (Personally, I think that's a good thing, but that's just my opinion)
      Plus you run out of quests before you reach the next level, meaning you have to repeat dungeons you've already completed. So instead of grinding mobs out in a field for a few minutes, you have to do an entire dungeon which generally takes a minimum of 30 minutes (not counting time spent to get a party together), for an ever decreasing amount of XP.
      Again, our opinions may differ, but I like the fact that just mindlessly killing mobs is not a way to advance. I always thought that was a very stupid and boring game mechanic.