The Rogue Guide ?!?!??

[Saeviomagy]

To make sure I grok this fully, a Rogue's ability to deal more damage than a Fighter has nothing to do with a Rogue's ability to be a better Striker than a Fighter?

Did I miss the point where Rogue was transferred over to Defender?

I meant that the fact that you've "generally seen rogues and rangers outdamaging fighters" tells us more about who you play with than the classes themselves.

At release, with only the core 3 books, fighters built to deal damage significantly outdamaged rogues built to deal damage.

And unless I've missed something, that hasn't changed. I don't think a rogue has ever topped the damage charts. Fighters have done so repeatedly.

 

[Mengu]

And unless I've missed something, that hasn't changed. I don't think a rogue has ever topped the damage charts. Fighters have done so repeatedly.

Brash Strike and Battle Fury Stance put serious fuel in the fighter striking machine, not to mention various other daily damage stances, and hewing charge for charger builds, and some of the best damage PP's. But what kind of rogue are you comparing it with? I'd like to see such a heroic or low paragon fighter build, if for no other reason than to see if a rogue can surpass it in some way.

 

[outsider]

It's probably still possible to build a Fighter that does similar damage to a Rogue. It's not as bad as it used to be though. Really, Rogues look pretty solid when you compare them to any class but Ranger or Fighter. That has more to do with the Ranger and Fighter than it does the Rogue though.

 

[Saeviomagy]

It's probably still possible to build a Fighter that does similar damage to a Rogue. It's not as bad as it used to be though. Really, Rogues look pretty solid when you compare them to any class but Ranger or Fighter. That has more to do with the Ranger and Fighter than it does the Rogue though.

Agreed, but I daresay it's a contributor to the lack of popularity of the class amongst the mechanically inclined, which in turn causes issues in terms of getting handbooks finished.

I'd like to see such a heroic or low paragon fighter build, if for no other reason than to see if a rogue can surpass it in some way.

http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/22105109/DPR_King_Candidates_2.0 has what optimization has come up with so far.

Actually looking at it fighters aren't top of the heap these days. I guess the last round of nerfs worked!

Rangers and avengers dominate every level, with showings by sorcerors, warlocks and swordmages sprinkled throughout.

rogues are pretty much middle of the pack until they totally disappear at epic (the sole rogue contender there has a "sorry this build doesn't work"... posted by Mengu74: that's not you, is it?).

 

[Mengu]

Whoops! Browser Settings Incompatible has what optimization has come up with so far.

Yeah, I'm not fond of the tricks you have to pull to score on that thread. Morninglord or frost cheese with either twin strike or catch 22 multiple attacks are pretty much required. Or you go with silly mounted chargers.

And the thread doesn't have latest errata incorporated with the pit fighter and daggermaster nerfs as well as the fey charge fix (which is why swordmages were scoring so high).

I kind of wish there was a more conventional comparison that doesn't use the most borked stuff, alas, that's not in the spirit of optimization.

rogues are pretty much middle of the pack until they totally disappear at epic (the sole rogue contender there has a "sorry this build doesn't work"... posted by Mengu74: that's not you, is it?).

Ya.

I think in general I can eek out a bit more damage from the rogue than from the fighter even with all the fighter tricks. On a per encounter basis, they might come out about the same, depending on where the leader assistance goes, and depending on how much the party likes to trigger the fighter's CC. On a nova basis, I'm pretty sure the rogue will have the fighter beat.

I find rogues to be pretty diverse and exciting, and not in the least weak in my experience. They are full of tricks. Don't think they deserve any bad rep, with the exception of a few builds that are all gimmick no substance.

 

[renau1g]

Here's the link to LDB's handbook:

Whoops! Browser Settings Incompatible

I love rogue's as well, they're still one of my favourite classes, although I've got tons of love for the barbarian, I love rages...

 

[Istar]

Yeah I see he has got going now, he was stuck for a while, well seems the curse is not upon him, yet.............

 

[Saeviomagy]

Yeah, I'm not fond of the tricks you have to pull to score on that thread. Morninglord or frost cheese with either twin strike or catch 22 multiple attacks are pretty much required. Or you go with silly mounted chargers.

And the thread doesn't have latest errata incorporated with the pit fighter and daggermaster nerfs as well as the fey charge fix (which is why swordmages were scoring so high).

I kind of wish there was a more conventional comparison that doesn't use the most borked stuff, alas, that's not in the spirit of optimization.

I think the best use of those kind of threads is if wizards reads them and fixes the holes appropriately.

I agree it would be nice if there could be a master list of "cheese" to be avoided and builds done accordingly, but I think consensus on what is cheese would be hard to come by.

I think in general I can eek out a bit more damage from the rogue than from the fighter even with all the fighter tricks. On a per encounter basis, they might come out about the same, depending on where the leader assistance goes, and depending on how much the party likes to trigger the fighter's CC. On a nova basis, I'm pretty sure the rogue will have the fighter beat.

I find rogues to be pretty diverse and exciting, and not in the least weak in my experience. They are full of tricks. Don't think they deserve any bad rep, with the exception of a few builds that are all gimmick no substance.

I agree entirely: they're my favourite striker (tied with the avenger because of it's incredibly unique approach to the role). Unfortunately the original rules surrounding them were sufficiently borked that they lost that crucial first impression, and that's show in later support overall.