The dwarf fighter has 12 healing surges. The human rogue has 6 surges.
During the day's first combat, the rogue tries to be a rogue and gets dogpiled and blows his second wind or one from healing word while dropping into the negatives. The party wins.
The Fighter uses 1 healing surge to get to full. He now has 11. The rogue uses 4 to get back. He now has 1.
So the fighter is going to have to rest with all these surges because the rogue got unlucky in combat?
Not 100% how the healing surge bit works. Can someone explain what can alleviate this situation without saying, "the rogue shouldn't have gotten hit."?
The dwarf fighter has 12 healing surges. The human rogue has 6 surges.
During the day's first combat, the rogue tries to be a rogue and gets dogpiled and blows his second wind or one from healing word while dropping into the negatives. The party wins.
The Fighter uses 1 healing surge to get to full. He now has 11. The rogue uses 4 to get back. He now has 1.
So the fighter is going to have to rest with all these surges because the rogue got unlucky in combat?
Umm, what? I don't quite understand the question.
What it seems like you are asking is if the rogue uses 4 healing surges, does the fighter have to use 4? The answer: No, of course not. You choose when your surges activate.
Hope that helps.
Taking damage is the Defender's job, that's why they have so many healing surges. Strikers have to get in and out quickly, or they're going to be hurting.
Long story short; the Rogue needs to be played like a Rogue, not a Fighter.
So the fighter is going to have to rest with all these surges because the rogue got unlucky in combat?
Yes. Well, technically, only the rogue has to rest; the fighter can run laps around the camp for 6 hours if he'd prefer.
Ways to avoid this situation:
During the day's first combat, the rogue tries to be a rogue and gets dogpiled
Well, he wasn't trying to be a rogue very well, since one of the main rules in 4e is:
"the rogue shouldn't have gotten hit."
You should have the fighter use his mark and Combat Superiority to force the enemies to focus on himself rather than the rogue. The rogue should remember to shift wisely and use hit and run tactics.
As for healing, there are a few spells and abilities that Leaders can use to heal the rogue using their own healing surges instead of his, or something like Cure Light Wounds, which would heal him without any healing surges.
The fighter has way more healing surges because he's supposed to be getting the monsters to hit him all the time. If your fighter hardly got attacked at all, he may have been doing something wrong.
During the day's first combat, the rogue tries to be a rogue and gets dogpiled and blows his second wind or one from healing word while dropping into the negatives. The party wins.
The Fighter uses 1 healing surge to get to full. He now has 11. The rogue uses 4 to get back. He now has 1.
Ok. If the healer used Healing word on the Rogue, why did he have to blow 4 surges on healing between encounters. At most he should have use 2. One surge is 1/4 of your hp. The Healing Word (+1d6+4?) should have healed the rogue to half of his HP. Did the Rogue get hit down to 0 again by the end of the combat?
Also as people have pointed out, tactics have always been important. The rogue should probably not be doing rogue stuff until the combatants have settled in and he knows where his enemies are standing. Slipping into flanking on the other side of an enemy just to have all the other enemies slip into flanking against him because he's the closest target is not good at all.
To all the "fighter blah blah" posters, take a look into the Monster Manual please.
The Fighter uses 1 healing surge to get to full. He now has 11. The rogue uses 4 to get back. He now has 1.
So the fighter is going to have to rest with all these surges because the rogue got unlucky in combat?
Well, the rogue has enough hp for one more encounter. He's at full hit points, and has 1 surge spare (for Second Wind or similar). But if he takes decent damage again, then he'll need to rest or take it very carefully.
But as others have said, it doesn't look like he tried to be very roguish. IMO, "be a rogue" = "has an escape route" ;)
So what you are basically saying is that the adventuring day is over because one character runs out of healing surges.
To all the "fighter blah blah" posters, take a look into the Monster Manual please.
Um... we've done quite a few demos and a little of KotS. We've gone through at least three encounters before anyone was seriously low on healing surges. I think no one ever ran out of them. The demos were four or five encounters. The Cleric should be healing in combat, since it's a minor action. The Paladin can Lay on Hands. Yeah, they use surges, but at least with word of healing, it's boosted by the power. Yes, it's possible that someone can get messed up enough in one encounter, but that'll be due to poor planning or tactics on the part of the party, not on the low number of healing surges that one character has.
Oh, and what do the monsters have to do with the role that the fighter has to play? The fighter should be doing his job regardless of whether he's fighting an orc or a Shadow Lich from the Nether realms.
To all the "fighter blah blah" posters, take a look into the Monster Manual please.
Sorry, I'm neither lucky nor dishonest, so that's not exactly an option.
If the party believes an extended rest is possible (i.e. no time constraints, a safe place to rest can be found, etc.) and they believe it better to take such a rest rather than continue on, then yes, they stop when one member runs out of surges. On the other hand, they can tell the rogue to suck it up and play more carefully. Sure, they'll be done half a party member for the remaining fights, but it also means no being ambushed while sleeping, no letting their foes regroup and form a cohesive defense plan, and no letting the BBEG get away to the next continent in the meantime.
It's essentially the same dilemma of earlier editions when someone runs out of spells, except that it just increases the risk of death to the character without directly curtailing their ability to participate in combat, if that makes any sense.
The rogue will need to learn to keep mobile, and to wait for an opening, instead of letting melee units swamp him. Being the Quarterback sucks, to compare to American Football.
None the less, you might take a break after two encounters. Maybe you will continue to press on if the Rogue managed to preserve the surge. Even so, the Rogue's player maybe will learn what not to do next time that situation comes up. Now that's what I call experince.
Do the cleric, paladin and warlord just hate him?
No, seriously, where is the rest of the party? Someone was there before to give him a Healing word, so why arent' they here again during down time adding 1d6 to his surges now? With an average of 3 additional hp/surge, he should be back to full sooned and have between two and three surges left.
Do the cleric, paladin and warlord just hate him?
Not to mention the cleric's CLW or CMW abilities, which actually heal without using anyone's healing surges.
No, seriously, where is the rest of the party? Someone was there before to give him a Healing word, so why arent' they here again during down time adding 1d6 to his surges now? With an average of 3 additional hp/surge, he should be back to full sooned and have between two and three surges left.
Do the cleric, paladin and warlord just hate him?
Agreed. The party's support should be causing him to take less damage & heal more damage.
And secondly, you said it yourself: "the Rogue got dogpiled". Every now and then, a character is going to be hit much, much harder than expected. That's what crossbows and hiding behind people with shields are for :D
1) The incredibly mobile and twitchy rogue got 'dogpiled'
2) He only managed to absorb enough damage that blwoing a single surge fixed him.
So what you are basically saying is that the adventuring day is over because one character runs out of healing surges.
Actually, no, we were mistaken. The rogue has infinite healing surges and never dies, so you don't ever have to rest.
The dwarf fighter has 12 healing surges. The human rogue has 6 surges.
Is this right? Wouldn't this mean that the fighter can take about 3 times the total punishment in one day than the rogue could?
Isn't that difference a little extreme? If this is right, it seems like the fighter will be good to go for about twice as many encounters per day as the rogue.
Is this right? Wouldn't this mean that the fighter can take about 3 times the total punishment in one day than the rogue could?
Isn't that difference a little extreme? If this is right, it seems like the fighter will be good to go for about twice as many encounters per day as the rogue.
Fighters get: 9 + Constitution modifier
Rogues get: 6 + Constitution modifier
Is this right? Wouldn't this mean that the fighter can take about 3 times the total punishment in one day than the rogue could?
Isn't that difference a little extreme? If this is right, it seems like the fighter will be good to go for about twice as many encounters per day as the rogue.
It's based on the assumption that the fighter is out in front yelling "take ya best shot, ya cowards!" and beating on anyone that does, while the rogue is keeping out of harms way until he can dart in and gank someone good and proper.
Defenders expect to get beaten on; their role abilities are focused on making it unpleasant for enemies to not attack them. Strikers specialise in high mobility and high damage; they are not supposed to wait around for the enemies to retaliate.
The wizard hides in the back. The cleric already tried to help by administering a healing word. The ranger does his arrow thing.
The fighter was blinded by the goblin hexer and rolled a 2 on the next turn's saving throw.
Even worthless level 1 and 2 chumps from the MM will disrupt your precious tactical gaming by battlefield control, special movement, attacking thrice, et al. Saying to play smarter helps not at all.
Sometimes you just get unlucky in combat. In 3.5, you rested early because spellcasters had no discipline - a comparison that isn't quite the same.
Why is this a problem?
Like most have said if the party is on their toes you SHOULD be able to bang some good encounters out before you reach a point where someone says "Guys, I'm out of surges and don't look too good, can we make camp?"
1. Keep on trucking with no change in strategy. This option will likely end up with the rogue dead.
2. Take an extended rest. As you say, anybody that hasn't used up their healing surges, action point(s) and daily powers might feel a little bit shortchanged.
3. Continue on with the rogue being much more cautious. The rogue still might get dog-piled, but it's a better option than 1.
And if they can't due to time constraints, or they're stuck in the dungeon or some such, then they and the rogue just have to be especially careful at that point.
Fighter is there to take the beating, the rogues job is to AVOID the beating, and that means a fair amount of getting the *car horn* out of melee range of every enemy but your target.
1) the spellcasters overshadowed everyone by using up all of their powers
2) my main feature, having tons of hp and not dying, was pretty much useless since all we had to do was win *this fight*.
The first problem has been lessened, but not removed (OMG kobolds daily powers go!), the second one is still pretty prevelant. The rogue in particular can overshadow the fighter if he just leaps in there and stabs people like crazy until he falls unconcious (to be healed by the cleric after the now much shorter fight).
The answer, obviously, is DON'T LET PLAYERS REST AFTER EVERY FIGHT. Also, monsters should coup de grace unconcious players. That will make the rogue stop acting stupid real quick.
I think the problem here is the shortchanging feel, which made me very sad as a fighter in 3rd edition. You see, in third edition I would wade in and swing at some stuff, then the wizard would blow his entire stash of spells for the day and finish off the encounter. Then, obviously, we would rest. The problems here were:
1) the spellcasters overshadowed everyone by using up all of their powers
2) my main feature, having tons of hp and not dying, was pretty much useless since all we had to do was win *this fight*.
The first problem has been lessened, but not removed (OMG kobolds daily powers go!), the second one is still pretty prevelant. The rogue in particular can overshadow the fighter if he just leaps in there and stabs people like crazy until he falls unconcious (to be healed by the cleric after the now much shorter fight).
The answer, obviously, is DON'T LET PLAYERS REST AFTER EVERY FIGHT. Also, monsters should coup de grace unconcious players. That will make the rogue stop acting stupid real quick.
Where are all of you people finding these players that do this, and the DMs that allow them to? The only time I saw a wizard "blow his entire stash" on an encounter was at 1st or maybe 2nd level when he had a max of 4 1st level spells most likely (aside from a stupidly high Int).
So what you are basically saying is that the adventuring day is over because one character runs out of hit points.
Yes, yes we are. So? This isn't new to 4e. And frankly, hit points are a much fairer limiting factor than two PCs' spell lists.
To all the "fighter blah blah" posters, take a look into the Monster Manual please.
Most of us don't have the books or an interest in breaking the law, and frankly, even those of us who do can't read your mind, so why don't you tell us what about the Monster Manual suggests that a reasonable outcome would be for the party rogue to take his entire hit point total once over in damage, without significant damage to any other party members at all. Which was your original premise here, before you threw in "oh, and everyone else is tied up/burning resources/whatever as well".
For that matter, it would probably be worth explaining why the party rogue has an unmodified 8 in con, since that's never going to happen using the standard array, and can only happen if you use the point buy option, make Con the low stat, and then make it a point not to increase it. I mean, geez, I could talk about my 1 HP 1st-level 3e wizard, as well, but such contrived examples tend to suggest bad argumentation.
cleric already tried to help by administering a healing word.
Where was the cleric when the rogue was blowing out of combat surges? He can use healing word out of combat, you know?
Higher CON score.
as far as the other posts about teamwork and not getting hit... *sigh*
too bad the D&D Aggro management isn't as solid as that of WoW guys, *wince* but if you're fighting multiple foes can the fighter mark and control all of them? No.
If you're fighting a controller with AoE spells so he can attack the fighter and the rogue in blast/burst 3+ to avoid suffering the penalties of the fighter's mark, is the OP's question silly and invalid? No.
I fully relate to the OP. I've been at a table where the rogue runs out of surges twice already and I've seen a Warlord down to 1 this past weekend.
I've seen a ranger down to 1 twice.
In LFR you're almost always encouraged to fight 3 fights in the same day.
The rogue's job is "Striker" foremost and "stay out of trouble" secondarily.
oh well. see also "table variance"
The rest of the party.
The wizard hides in the back. The cleric already tried to help by administering a healing word. The ranger does his arrow thing.
The fighter was blinded by the goblin hexer and rolled a 2 on the next turn's saving throw.
Even worthless level 1 and 2 chumps from the MM will disrupt your precious tactical gaming by battlefield control, special movement, attacking thrice, et al. Saying to play smarter helps not at all.
Sometimes you just get unlucky in combat. In 3.5, you rested early because spellcasters had no discipline - a comparison that isn't quite the same.
Cleric should look into Sacred Flame, to give people saving throws to counteract blindness and such. The striker though, needs to learn when to bail, and like has been said, switch to ranged weapons(be they thrown or fired).
Also, maybe the he should have looked into something better than a 10 or 11 Constitution, where he is one of 2 melee characters in the group. He's bound to take some hits going in with just one other melee type.
One more thing, what's stopping the group from taking 2 short rests so the Cleric can use 2 healing words on him out of combat, to get some extra hit point out of those surges.
EDIT: Ninja'd! I take it back.
The rest of the party.
The wizard hides in the back. The cleric already tried to help by administering a healing word. The ranger does his arrow thing.
The fighter was blinded by the goblin hexer and rolled a 2 on the next turn's saving throw.
Even worthless level 1 and 2 chumps from the MM will disrupt your precious tactical gaming by battlefield control, special movement, attacking thrice, et al. Saying to play smarter helps not at all.
The rogue, especially one with less than 14 CON, should have understood that the Fighter is the means by which his life is preserved, and he should have gotten out of there as soon as he was blinded. The cleric, if he was ranged and had it, should have used Sacred Flame to give the Fighter a save. If the Cleric was melee, he should have moved up to try and hold the front while the Fighter was incapacitated. The Fighter should have been told which square to attack; his mark still works, even if he can't make OAs and his CC attack is at -5. The Wizard should have used Icy Terrain or Ray of Frost or Thunderwave or something to keep the Rogue and Fighter from being swarmed while the Fighter was blind.
That's the smart playing they were talking about.
The rogue will have to play more carefully. IMO the fighter didn´t fail at his job because he didn´t take damage, but the rogue and the fighter both failed because the fragile of them took the most beating, the next time I suggest the rogue stay back, let the fighter do what he´s good at. In my experience as a DM and player of 4e, no matter who you are, if you try to play hero/hog the glory, you WILL be beaten to a pulp, the fighter just last a bit longer.
What I have to add, first the rest of the party should help the weakest member to heal more effectively, probably taking another short rest to give the rogue two more healing words for 2d6 more hp which should save a surge, lay on hands if you have a paladin, etc.
Second the rogue want to conserve surges and NOT max out their hp, 50% hp left and two surges is better than 100% hp and 0 surges because healing powers heal more when at negative hp and at the first strategy means that you can be brought back from dying without CLW. Yes, you drop earlier but you can be brought back.
Third, not much to do now but does this party have a ranged wizard, ranger, cleric and the only melee being the fighter and rogue? Rogues want more people on the front to flank with and take hits for them since they aren´t good at taking a beating, and if the rogue can´t soak damage then the fighter is alone in defending, fighters don´t want to be alone on the front line, trust me.
So what you are basically saying is that the adventuring day is over because one character runs out of healing surges.
To all the "fighter blah blah" posters, take a look into the Monster Manual please.
Considering how defensive you are about the whole situation I'll guess either the fighter or the rogue was you.
The rogue has a 0 con modifier, got himself into a bad position, didn't use an action point to escape the situation, didn't use defensive abilities, the Wizard didn't throw Shield on him...gee. I wonder why that happened.
You guys ran in and got tactically whomped and the rogue exhausted his healing surges. You said "saying play smarter helps not at all" but it's the best response. Which you seem to know but don't want to hear.
The rogue now knows not to go running head-on into combat against a group. He's got low hit points and few healing surges and why was he in the thick of it again? It certainly wasn't because it was a good idea.
What exactly are you looking for here? Pity? Support? A way to recover your hit points beyond healing and resting?
He answered your questions about the rest of the party, and no one addressed the particular circumstance? For shame. *slaps collective forum wrist* :P
EDIT: Ninja'd! I take it back.
The rogue, especially one with less than 14 CON, should have understood that the Fighter is the means by which his life is preserved, and he should have gotten out of there as soon as he was blinded. The cleric, if he was ranged and had it, should have used Sacred Flame to give the Fighter a save. If the Cleric was melee, he should have moved up to try and hold the front while the Fighter was incapacitated. The Fighter should have been told which square to attack; his mark still works, even if he can't make OAs and his CC attack is at -5. The Wizard should have used Icy Terrain or Ray of Frost or Thunderwave or something to keep the Rogue and Fighter from being swarmed while the Fighter was blind.
That's the smart playing they were talking about.
Yep.
Probably more than any other edition, 4e emphasizes teamwork. So far in my experience, if the group goes in with an 'every man/dwarf/elf/whatever for himself' attitude in combat they are going to find it VERY rough going, but if they work together well, combat is pretty easy.
Guys, this thread is over six months old.
If that alignment thread is any indication, insights like this will fall on deaf ears, and will be lost in the ensuing dozen pages of madness.
If that alignment thread is any indication, insights like this will fall on deaf ears, and will be lost in the ensuing dozen pages of madness.
REALITY SAYS THAT'S NOT TRUE!
REALITY SAYS THAT'S NOT TRUE!
Reality says YOU'RE not true!
Reality says YOU'RE not true!
Reality says your MOM isn't true!
Basically play a bit smarter or play a ranger based stiker so you don't have to get in the middle.
I think its an issue of party composition.
The party consisted of - 1 Defender, 1 Controller, 1 Leader, and 2 Strikers
Wizards reccomended composition for a 5 person party is: 2 defenders, 1 controller, 1 Leader, 1 Striker.
Why is this important well a defender can only really effectively tie up one monster at a time. By only haveing one defender you are basically allowing another monster to wander around at hit things...and look at the specifc class combinations, wizard - ranged, ranger - ranged, cleric - ?? but im gonna guess ranged too, fighter - melee, rogue - melee. Who is going to be the easiest/closest target for the unengaged monsters. It wouldbe hard for the rogue not to get dogpiled...
Guys, this thread is over six months old.
Yeah, I noticed that my post in this thread referenced the fact that nobody had the books yet. Yeesh, that's some serious thread-necromancy.
Actually I dont think this is just an issue of poor play (which everyone seems to be assuming).
I think its an issue of party composition.
The party consisted of - 1 Defender, 1 Controller, 1 Leader, and 2 Strikers
Wizards reccomended composition for a 5 person party is: 2 defenders, 1 controller, 1 Leader, 1 Striker.
Why is this important well a defender can only really effectively tie up one monster at a time. By only haveing one defender you are basically allowing another monster to wander around at hit things...and look at the specifc class combinations, wizard - ranged, ranger - ranged, cleric - ?? but im gonna guess ranged too, fighter - melee, rogue - melee. Who is going to be the easiest/closest target for the unengaged monsters. It wouldbe hard for the rogue not to get dogpiled...
in the game I run the party is comprised of
1 defender/striker "fighter,rogue"
1 controler "wizard"
1 striker "ranger"
and 1 leader "warlord"
and they do fine
in the game I am in
its 1 defender/controler "swordmage,wizard" <--me
2 strikers a ranger and a warlock and 1 leader "a trobador"
and we do ok though its a little harder going.
If I play a striker and get hit I feel I messed up somehow and wonder if it could have been avoided somehow.
You should be ranging with cover and conceal. As a rogue you can even deft strike to come out from behind hard cover, sneak attack, and move back/re-stealth. In melee your fighter should be marking those enemies so they should decide not to OA you or suffer the fighter wrath.
Sure, you can take some hits in melee, but they had better be for good reasons (like intentional mark triggering).
The only class I have ever seen suffer true squishyness is Wizards who love to close blast/burst without enough marks to go around on the still standing targets. These Wizards seem to suffer the bloody condition more frequently then some fighters. But even so, I never saw these folks run out of surges.
You just have to change your play style more conservative as your surge count lowers... pace yourself until you can get your solid six hours rest.
About my thoughts when I saw this... shambling unholy thing ressurected. Just why was this ressurected? For ressurection's sake?
I mean the topic is not really that hot even... just... wow
I have the feeling someone will resurrect an old thread every time the current necro-thread starts dying down. The alignment one was the first I noticed.
Not 100% sure how the healing surge bit works. Can someone explain what can alleviate this situation without saying, "the rogue shouldn't have gotten hit."?
Umm...nope.
Guys, this thread is over six months old.
Why don't they have an autolock feature after a certain time after the last post? Like, a month? maybe even 2 weeks?
Hit him again and check his pockets!
It arises from the Rogue's need for combat advantage to even be remotely relevant in a fight. This isn't too bad if the entire group is playing toward helping the Rogue get CA safely, but it can be a nightmare when inexperienced or casual players are the Rogue's teammates (double this problem if the Rogue player himself is inexperienced or casual).
I saw this firsthand. I was in a very large party (8 or 9 players, can't remember which) and I was playing one of two Rogues in the party. The other Rogue player was totally new to the game (as were several other players at the table), but I've been playing D&D for many years. The new Rogue got CA almost every single round of every encounter, but he had to endanger himself to pull it off. In fact, his character ended up getting reduced below 0 HP in every encounter.
Meanwhile, my Rogue was doing everything from delaying to moving into position to shift the following round, to ducking behind corners and Deft Striking. These sort of tactics require a lot of forethought, and can bog down play as initiative has to be changed. I took far less damage than the new guy, but lacked CA on many of my attacks (which really hurt as a dagger Rogue). Not to mention, it seemed like the Deft Strike tactic was viewed as cheesy, and the group collectively rolled their eyes as I had the DM change my initiative. This is in contrast to the excitement they experienced at the new Rogue player's character dropping and getting back up over and over.
By playing the Rogue "the smart way," I came off as a stick in the mud that needlessly complicated the game, while the reckless new Rogue came off as a hero. Seems counter-intuitive to me.
As I said before, though, this responsibility of "playing safe" can't fall on the Rogue alone. His teammates have to consider his need for CA as well, and set up opportunities for him to get it. For instance, if a single enemy has moved toward the party and there are several other enemies further back, the Defender should try to move next to that enemy, rather than directly in front of it. That way, the Rogue doesn't have to put himself between multiple threats just to flank the thing. This is only one example, but I think it's easily one of the simplest fixes that gets completely ignored a lot of the time.
The greatest responsibility the Rogue has is foresight. It's easy to say that a Rogue "needs to know when to get out of there," but if he waits until he needs to get out of a situation, it's usually too late. As in several enemies are going to pound him while he waits for his initiative to roll around again, and then he's got to worry about provoking to get out of a tight spot (chances are he already used tumble to get himself into a flank, and now can't use it to escape danger). Foresight will help prevent ending up in an "oh crap" situation to begin with, but as I said before, it's made much easier when the Rogue's teammates keep him in mind on their turns as well.
In our campaign the two rogues in our 6-man party had a hard time getting CA in the beginning but got better at it when the rest help to provide it, still not something that happens every round, probably because they use sly flourish every attack and forgot they have deft strike. When their sly flourish Sneak attacks hit it's scary though...
I've actually seen this be a pretty major obstacle to overcome, most noticeably with new or "casual" players of the game.
It arises from the Rogue's need for combat advantage to even be remotely relevant in a fight. This isn't too bad if the entire group is playing toward helping the Rogue get CA safely, but it can be a nightmare when inexperienced or casual players are the Rogue's teammates (double this problem if the Rogue player himself is inexperienced or casual).
Doing a quick count of the powers in the PHB and Martial Power, the rogue has 19 powers that grant him CA before he even reaches Paragon Tier. I was wondering about it, as I didn't understand your comments about everyone in the team having to help the rogue get CA. He gets oodles of opportunities to use CA on his own. Team help is always a bonus, but I've found in the 4 different 4E groups I DM for that the rogue is quite self-sufficient.
Doing a quick count of the powers in the PHB and Martial Power, the rogue has 19 powers that grant him CA before he even reaches Paragon Tier. I was wondering about it, as I didn't understand your comments about everyone in the team having to help the rogue get CA. He gets oodles of opportunities to use CA on his own. Team help is always a bonus, but I've found in the 4 different 4E groups I DM for that the rogue is quite self-sufficient.
Having played a rogue in a group that was good about helping me set up CA, I'd like to point out that it's nice to be able to select your powers based on criteria other than "will this give me CA next round?" It's nice to be able to slide foes, either to set up an AOE or just to shove them back into someone else's zone of unpleasantness. It's nice to be able to tack on other effects (especially ones that last the whole encounter), and it's nice to be able to grab the highest damage power available (rogues are strikers, after all). Rogues playing in ranged-heavy parties obviously need to be more cautious and more self-reliant (things that are certainly possible with the rogue's power and skill options), but help from the party is what really makes a rogue shine.
