Well the reason I always imagined rogues being able to crit is they have faster hands, so put a dagger in a quick pair of hands and BAM shot too the throat while the opponent never saw it coming.So too me it's all about the speed and being able to be faster than your opponent can react.
Wait, are you QQing about ROGUES? sup with the Palas and DKs?That's what I was thinking reading this post. My Ret Paladin and DK both 2-shot most anything if I get crit lucky.
+50 Points.I <3 Secret of Mana. Still have my Super-Nintendo and game. ;D
Seems like you're trying too hard to point out some sort of flaw in the "logic" of a design system. I am also not sure why you felt the need to bring up Secret of Mana. I mean, sure, video game design is never entirely well balanced in console games, but I think we see this problem even still today. It's not so much that balanced game design was less appreciated "back-in-the-day" it's just that online gaming, with patches and fixes, put the static construction of consoles in starker contrast than in years past. Again, not really sure this matters all that much in regards to the evolution of crits. A better analogy would be the lack of creative development in gaming, or the way Secret of Mana and/or Final Fantasy were ripped off for decades hence just like how everyone now abuses the concept of a crit without really caring to justify or explain it. It's no so much ignorant content design, but lazy. It's easy to use what's popular and effective without trying to make it feel correct in terms of your game.Honestly though, crits make sense. It's a devastating hit. It's does not always have to be an attack that connects with a vital organ, it could simply be any move that manages to snake by their defenses and leave a more severe wound than usual. You're complaining that crits do not make sense when you're using an outdated definition. Does wow even define what a crit is other than 1.5-2x extra damage? In which case, anyone could crit, it's just a matter of getting lucky and your opponent leaving an opening for a particularly vicious attack.What does combat spec have to do with anything? You still crit. Congrats, you're another rogue who thinks he's unique.
Well, at least for you guys, I roll combat with my rogue.Its ok. Not everyone can be perfect. I roll Assassination XDA more on topic point. I like the article but I still think there is a link between the thief's "Fluff" and Crit hits. A thief is someone that is most likely hiding behind something waiting for the most opportune time to strike his target. Whether it is putting a dagger/sword/bullet through someones skull/heart or simply waiting for the residents of a particular dwelling to leave their home before he makes off with that invaluable family heirloom.
In addition to what has already been said, in the classical RPG settings, the association between Dexterity/Agility and simultaneously, chance to dodge and to critically hit actually makes sense.I think it makes sense for someone that is well dextrous to be precise to inflict attacks on vital spots. It also makes sense that this same degree of body coordination turn this person into someone more able to dodge attacks.
In D&D (whichever version we're talking about here, I believe), your chance to crit is entirely dependent upon a die roll, not any modifier based on attributes. (To be sure, in later versions this could be modified based on weapon type or feat.) Although some sort of rationale was used to justify having a crit, I think the reason it was included was for the sake of excitement. I think that this was also the case for the early crpgs - could you imagine how much duller Dragon Warrior would have been without the chance that you could get that cool slashing sound effect and end combats faster?Agility = finesse = quick, precise, and devastating attacks. A part of the problem we have with this as well, of course, is that agility is included on lighter armors and strength on heavier armors. But whatever - that's about all the justification needed I think for the inclusion of a fun mechanic that adds variety to a play experience, which is also fun. Having a choice between the strong and steady warrior v. the lighter hitting but potentially spikier damage from an agile character is pretty fun.The Final Fantasy 1 thief was an abortion of character design. The game's system wasn't robust enough to justify the class's existence.As for early game mechanics balancing, I believe that they were much better thought out than you might believe. Back then, of course, games were much more difficult - even crpgs, where you could usually grind your way for hour after boring hour to supremacy. The 4 item limit in Secret of Mana, for example, put a limit on the amount of time you could last in a fight, which made resource management much more entertaining. This was also the case in the original Dragon Warrior 2, where there was a hard cap to level at the end of the game, and it provided just enough power to be able - maybe - to get to the end of the last dungeon (after 3 sub-boss fights) and beat the two forms of the final boss. Maybe. Much of that depended on how lucky you were with nursing that Wizard's Ring and husbanding your MP. I also have fond memories of wondering whether 99 heal potions would be enough in Final Fantasy 1 for any given later dungeon. (This was of course back in the day before most of you were born, when we didn't have fancy flash save options.)Want to make the system a little less objectionable along these lines? Give all non-caster classes 2 melee AP for every point of strength, and 1 melee and ranged AP for every point of agility, along with the crit and dodge. It would be both interesting and probably frightening to see the gearing choices made.
Wait, are you QQing about ROGUES? sup with the Palas and DKs?That's what I was thinking reading this post. My Ret Paladin and DK both 2-shot most anything if I get crit lucky.No, both of you are wrong. This is a RPG related post and not a QQ post about which comps suck at arena.But you could have figured that out on you own.Well I think the hardest part of any RPG is to manage the vague things of life, stats and class balance.If I'm a mage can I shatter your knees, forcing you to fall to the ground with no chance to fight me?Shall it be possible to run over you with my mammoth, squashing you to dust?If I can mindcontrol you as a priest why can't I disarm you?If you are thinking straight as an roleplayer you could always come up with an unique idea to beat your opponent in any situation.What about conjuring water instead of in my bags but in front of you causing you to slip?The answer is you can't do that because it would be unfair. Unfair against those who wouldn't think of it or a way to counter it.Stats are also not easy to handle. What does a value of 100 strength mean? Does it mean your charater is strong or weak? Can you easily push rocks around or not? Why is it less useful as a caster to have more strength?What about lifepoints? Sure you can take more 'normal' hits but what if you receive a fatal blow to the head with a hammer or a sword? What about a crushing blow to your arms or your legs? How much lifepoints do you lose in those cases? All if your head is chopped off or smashed in? Half because your legs are crippled?The answer is you lose X hp based on strength and attack power (and other stats) because it is too unfair for both non roleplayers (that want to enjoy a online game) and roleplayers (that die to the critters in the starting area). ;)
I remember when rogues were actually useful.How often do you see "LF1M CC for X instance"?Invited too many DPS to a group? Kick the rogues!Rogues at PvP are now lol.-Rogue rerolled warlock.
I remember when rogues were actually useful.How often do you see "LF1M CC for X instance"?Invited too many DPS to a group? Kick the rogues!Rogues at PvP are now lol.-Rogue rerolled warlock.Yep thats why my rouge is hibernating at the moment and I'm playing priest. :'C
i am tired and read that soooooooo wrong o.O