If Scoundrel/Dual Wielding actually worked, people would put points into it now and it clearly doesn't. Not just because Warfare is better, but because the other two options suck until Warfare is maxed. Rogues do pathetic damage without Warfare and neither Warriors or Rogues start doing really high damage until the later half of Act 2 when the game is over half finished.
I am playing Classic difficulty with a Dual-wielding specialized Rogue with 0 base Warfare (I might have +1 from a piece of equipment) and I am finding my contribution to be quite effective in mid-act 2 (level 12). No, it's not as powerful per hit as my 2H knight, but it's certainly competitive and I have a 51% chance to dodge physical attacks as well.
There is a difference between min-maxed out the wazoo for uber ultimate elite damage and pathetic. You either do not understand this concept, or you have not actually played a Rogue.
***
I'm not calling for a nerf on the power of warfare, just on it affecting bow, dagger and necromancy skills better than points in the actual abilities which are meant to increase those skills power.
On my first playthrough, on Classic, I got through the game with a party of four - probably the epitome of suboptimal builds. I had a Ranger with Huntsman and Ranged (no Warfare), I had a Rogue with Scoundrel and Dual Wielding (no Warfare), a "tank" with Leadership and Single Handed and a mage with Pyro and Geo. The Ranger and the Rogue, even with their suboptimal builds easily carried me through the game. The mage, as a main character, albeit arguably well-built, and the "tank" were, frankly, fucking shit.
The point here being that physical damage classes are nuts even when poorly built and without Warfare.
As you know, this is my pet peeve.
Carry on.
Edit: removed my response: it probably wasn't very helpful either.
It really wasn't. Surely you acknowledge the fact that the game is not perfect and this itself is evidenced by the very fact that there is a discussion?
