FinalHavenLarp.com

I'm enjoying the debate. I'm going to agree to a certain extent with Josh in that I would take a rogue over a warrior, but only because of the overall passive fighting style of the LARP. If it is a one on one fight, the warrior should win. During a mass combat, which is more typical at the game, there is a tendency to sit back and allow people to charge. Once charged, the rogue engages the warrior, gets off a massive hit much of the time, and then retreats. The warrior waits with the group and only engages when the rogue returns, once again to deal a great amount of damage. With this fighting style, the rogue will win eventually, even if it's just parrying the warrior to death.

Just my opinion

i would just like to piont out that the math problem apears to be...

rouge and warrior walk up to one another.

they begin machine gunning.

rouge drops

=rouge is weak and warrior is overpowered

when does this happen? im laughing slightly at the thought of combat being played out this way

but this is the only way that math works to balance, if its presented like this. wich is that flaw i said i was going to exploit. i found out how the math balances and what it cant account for and now i know what paths and disciplines are actually "better" than others

I don't think you can use DPS as a factoring point for combat. It doesn't work that way in a LARP.


What I would suggest is figure out how many hits from a weapon will drop a base stated person.

For example if a sword will kill a person in five blows then you know that a weapon does 1 point of damage and a person has 5 hit points.

From this you can adjust damage and hit points for your purpose.

If it was was DPS alone sure.

But your example is no different from comparing DPS to soak.

if I wanted a ratio of 5 to 1, I could use the DPS to calculate the amount of time someone can with stand the DPS. This is the same as the number of hits since its real people.

DPS is a perfectly good method of mathing the default condition.

there are of course other factors, builds and what not.

Beyond DPS, the skills and form of damage a warrior deals is different from that of a Rogue too. If the warrior walks up to said Rogue and swings 1 or 2, "1 Crush."

This not only surges but disrupts the Rogue, who then usually will back off and try again. Now assuming they are unwise and stay in battle now their standing toe to toe with dualing 2's or single weapon for 3's and 4's. Now theres often the option to have a warrior with 2's and a shield, And i don't even wanna get into trying to take on a shield as a Rogue without being disrupted.

The Average Rogue swings 1's and has a soak almost, if not Half the size of a warriors. Some have the option to "1 vorpal root/-1 LP" but not all have the Skill + Balls + Soak to stand against a warrior for that. They'd rather just run an try again later.

I guess my point is this, Warriors who think Rogues are OP because of the skills, should have thought about building one rather then a tank or power house. Warriors have a purpose with their skills on the field that are as equally importent and useful, as a Rogues. 3's I mean come on. what isn't to like about cuting down things with 15 soaks in 5 hits and not having to worry about taking a hit or two.

I will say Wariors and Rogues are the most Combat Efficient compaired to the other Paths, but then you take into account disciplines which is what makes Characters different and Jack of all Trades, and the deals off. People could take Sage, druid lvl. 4 and have all these usefull skills with Mimic Totem and be just as useful as a warrior for crush, or Soak; and they'd even have a form of Charged damage "10."

It's all about the way you spend your points and how skilled you yourself, are in a battle. nothing needs changing, its about what a player can do with whats given to us.

warrior max base damage has always been the same as base crit strike

pre change 3-3

post change 4-4

i feel that if one drops both should drop

Or, for fun, the Sage with assassin- which noone expects, waits at the back cleaning his or her fingernails, and then walks up to the warrior and swings "1 Vorpal Magic Knockout".

Which.... as far as I know, can only be stopped by using a shield, or resist magic. Because even if blocked by a weapon, the magic makes the "vorpal knockout" section surge and happen. And even if parried, the knockout still happens as per how I understand the new rules.

By the same token, would a vorpal poison attack work like vorpal knockout if parried?? Or is that true of KO because of the unique quality of knockout vs. "current armor level"?


On the battlefield, I see this as things should be with combat oriented characters.

-Warriors: the breakwater, to stall and hold the assault for the:

-Empaths: to be the artillery and/or damage control (sleeping or diseasing dangerous targets, etc)

and

-Rogues: for on the spot threat neutralization with critical strikes and knockouts, or with disciplines like "Assassin", to hustle around and take out lone threats, like enemy casters.

High soak and high damage output together in any character throws things "off", in my opinion.

Leave weapon specializations in the 4th level of disciplines, to show that to be that dangerous in a martial lifestyle, you have to specialize in a chosen field.

It would be like making the activated ability to throw 'vorpal' or 'crush' available to any character of a given Path, rather than just those dedicated to barbarian and swashbuckler disciplines, respectively. Or suddenly making Master Sages be able to "resist magic".

+1 weapon damage above and beyond a basic "rage" should stay more unique, or it becomes generic, especially when, like this case, it applies to any type of melee weapon under the sun.

adding "magic" to a call does not make it surge, only numberless calls surge

1 vorpal poison = no surge
1 vorpal magic poison = no surge
magic poison = surges

if you make a path thats sole purpose is to sit and soak up damage no one will play it, its not fun.

i am all for lowering warriors damage back to 3 IF critical strike lowers with it

I don't really have a problem with a warrior designing their build around being a combat monster and getting to swing for 4 with a high soak. They're Warriors. It's what they do. They can't cast spells, get hints, raise the dead, throw massive lightning balls or knock people out. They tank... that is all.

Now before we start bringing game mechanics back in, I'd like to point out that this just makes sense. People who devote their whole lives to combat training can dish out and take more than people who don't. I know years of RPG and video game experience suggest to us that there has to be some sort of offensive combat class and a separate defensive combat class, but that's not the only way to go.

Though Rogue has gotten more offensively powerful in recent years, they were never portrayed as being a match for a Warrior in combat. Hell, I can remember the Rouge path being attributed to "Merchants and Politicians" at one point, and while I'm not opposed to its current incarnation, it's useful to remember that Warrior was the exclusive path/platform for combat. I believe the quote was warriors were "meant for combat, for the fierce exhilaration of face-to-face conflict... those of the warrior path generally have an innate distrust for the doings of magic…it just seems like cheating."

So, with that said, let's turn to the mechanics.

First off, considering the nuances of combat, the variant skill of the humans fighting, the use of shields and long weapons, the ability for people to physically parry, the availability of ranged weapons and the presence of mechanical "negation" skills (Such as Parry and Evade), I don't really think "DPS" is a useful measurement for combat skills. It is, at best, "Maximum potential DPS", and even then the list of qualifiers is so long it's almost impossible to arrive at a probable number. If the DPS used for balancing in no way resembles the DPS seen in reality, it's not a good gauge.

Second, I think Mike's description of combat is pretty accurate. Warriors are NOT getting one max-power swing off every second, and while there are instances where machine-gunning can happen, the reality is that combat has an ebb and flow that favors the high-end single shot.

Lastly, I'd agree with Brian that there seems to be more of an emphasis on build and mechanics. I've got a fair bit of min-maxing in my blood, to be sure, but the human factor is such a significant intervening variable I'm not sure how much of an effect the fine-tuning of rules will have on actual gameplay. What I do know is that emphasizing quality roleplaying and keeping true to a guiding philosophy of low calls, simple rules and quick advancement have been crucial to our success thus far.

That's enough for the moment, I suppose. Carry on.

On average how many times do you think a warrior successfully strikes their opponent in a combat scene?

On average how many times do you think a rouge successfully strikes their opponent in a combat scene?

If you multiplied that average amount of strikes times the average amount of damage, you will find the number you are looking for.

If the warrior's number is out of wack compared to the rouges there is a problem and vice versa.

Who wants to do an experiment?

You know any calculation of avergages is a dps in sheeps clothing. You can throddle strikes per combat the sne way

Dps. Is a yuck rule of thumb. It is the beginning of the calculation not the end. Like tempature it is the raw measurement. It might be 50 degrees but what us the wind chill sunlight humidity etc.

All factors ranged magic what ever can be factories using Dps as the base. Then you frame each type of attack with frequency and severity. This give you an average over time for all the attack and damage types.

Again. The better fighter always wins.

i will just say that when the rules came out i went for the 4 damage, seemed really cool at the time.

played it for the full event, swung 4 MANY times, in many combats

. . .asked to change my build after the event, did, and never looked back, max i swung after was 2.

there are so many cool skills and options in this game, to give them ALL up to swing 4 damage is a big investment.


lets look at something else

rouge crit strike 12 in 15 sec, 24 in 30 sec, 48 in 60

empath 15 in 30, 30 in 60

some claim the fact that empath is ranged is a boon, yet many people pay lots of money in game to be able to swing it through a weapon.

im sure there are alot of good comebacks against this, but as my only proof i point to the PC base, we have 3 empaths, maybe, in game. its gotten so rough we have had to get NPC empaths to raise the dead.

Zeira wrote:On average how many times do you think a warrior successfully strikes their opponent in a combat scene?

On average how many times do you think a rouge successfully strikes their opponent in a combat scene?

If you multiplied that average amount of strikes times the average amount of damage, you will find the number you are looking for.

If the warrior's number is out of wack compared to the rouges there is a problem and vice versa.

Who wants to do an experiment?

I just want to point out that this presumes that the Warrior and Rogue should have comparable combat ability. Do we then have to give the Warrior comparable ability to pick locks and knockout? Or give Rouge comparable healing or magic? The paths are specialists by their very nature, and the Warrior specializes in combat. I'm not sure the Rogue should balance against them any more than Healer or Sage should.

Korrigan Drochlann wrote: I just want to point out that this presumes that the Warrior and Rogue should have comparable combat ability. Do we then have to give the Warrior comparable ability to pick locks and knockout? Or give Rouge comparable healing or magic? The paths are specialists by their very nature, and the Warrior specializes in combat. I'm not sure the Rogue should balance against them any more than Healer or Sage should.

+1, thumbs up, signed, etc.

i absolutly love this post and quoted it just so everyone could see it twice

lol, they got nerfed anyway. oh well, at least rouge is still there as the new best melee character, but most of us knew that anyway