Shattered Kingdoms

Oh yes, if backstab is overpowered then we should obviously take away their OTHER abilities and have them rely solely on that! That's no better than adding a big fat failure chance.

You know, while we're at it, let's increase the damage of voodoo. We should double, maybe triple it. Definitely enough to kill a max hp barb. I mean, if a Shaman levels to GM and prepares by, you know, casting voodoo on them, he definitely deserves his chance to one-shot other GMs!

By the way, we should totally take finger of death out of the game, since it's ridiculously imbalanced and doesn't take like three rounds to cast and most definitely doesn't have a low and easily accessible saving throw.

I don't think that anyone is really arguing that rogues are especially difficult to kill. From what I can tell, the argument is that rogues when under the effects of certain buffs, can drop pretty much anyone, pretty much instantly. Also, the main difference between charge/cleave/ambush and rogues is that rogues can not only land a double backstab, but can then continue to circle stab, hitting their opponent's weak spot for massive damage.

Zellidon's post is pretty spot-on as far as ways for all of these classes to avoid backstab/circle stab long enough to disable the rogue (Unless you take tribunals into account of course)

The only class that is really screwed against rogues is warlocks, and that's if the rogue has a SS breaking weapon. But warlocks suck against prepped opponents anyway, so whatever.



If you get backstabbed by a rogue, it's because you're either too bad to prevent it, or you didn't see it coming.

Not all classes are created equal. And they shouldn't be perfectly balanced. You have to look at them individually. A rogue is an assassin. Weaker in regular combat situations, with the skill to find a method to kill that leaves them unexposed, and unscathed. A bard is an entertainer. Sure, they war on people too, but the help file says that they have well rounded skills, jack of all trades is the phrase, I believe. A bard trains his entire life to this extent. A rogue trains his entire life to be able to create the potential for the one hit kill. Would you say it's imbalanced that a vicious gangsta rapper with a piece isn't as skilled in a gun fight as let's say a special forces commando? Both want to live and will defend themselves, or attack others if they feel it necessary. Difference is, one of them is an entertainer with a gun(read scimitar) and the other is a lethally trained killer. Now let's say the rapper feels his person threatened by the lone commando, they could then get a group together of different classes of people, with different skills. Skills that mesh and work together to cover the weaknesses of the other members. The commando might see this, and decide to come back later when Sir Gangsta Mouf is on his own, and at a disadvantage. That's the beauty of multiple class/race/alignment combos, and the grouping system. That's the beauty of all that coding that checks for the unique combinations in which everyone trains there character's stats, and enchants their armor. Would you think it unfair that a sorc could defeat another of the same level and attributes, and with the exact same armor, based only on the number and type of enchants on their EQ? No, you'd say "dumbass shoulda spent 45 more minutes on his suit." Enough stuffs been nerfed already, let's just make every new character a genderless, raceless, kingdomless, clone of every other character with their only skill being: One shot kill (Innate).

If I see one more argument against game-balance that is based on the fact that things aren't balanced in real life, I'm going to shoot myself in the foot.

I liked ITG better.

Trust me, you only liked ITG better because he deleted before reading your posts in this thread.

I liked him better because I had an creepy uncle named Ric, and he was Bald. You remind me of him. And I was just using the RL stuff as an example. If you don't think that the people who create everything fictional: novels, movies, games, MUDs, whatever don't use the concepts and mechanics of real life when they construct these make-believe worlds then you're only fooling yourself, and maybe you should aim higher than your foot, Bald-Ric.

Rogues are not imbalanced. Honestly the only reason that people are whining about them is because someone who knows what they're doing is playing one and killing people who largely (no offense baldric) -don't- know what they're doing. Dago isn't even in a tribunal, which makes rogues a crapton more dangerous.

I agree with the fact that not all classes are equal: It's obvious. Necromancers, for example, are arguably the most powerful in terms of raw potential: But they also make a lot of enemies just by existing, and those enemies happen to be the ones that can neutralize said necromancer if played correctly. Granted, landing a proper holy word/BoG and surviving is harder and more risky than sitting in the back with o all kill at your side, but nothing worthwhile ever came easy, right?

@fourtimefelon:
I honestly don't have the patience to explain to you that game balance is a good thing. I also don't have the patience to point out all the logical failings that crop up in each of your walls of text. You may have the last word.

@edoras:
I don't think it's fair to say that Ardith and I are complaning because Dago is effective. I play Dago, and I'm allied with Ardith. There isn't really anybody else complaining in this thread. I just think it's kind of stupid how easily I can gank people.