The Arguments for Character Respec

[Borror0]

Once again, character respec discussions have taken over the forums, to the point of derailing an important thread for feedback (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=174671).

It these discussions, it seems that there are a lot of misconceptions about the pro-respec arguments. For the proponents of character respec, it is quite irritating as it feels as if words were being put into our mouth. As for those against the implementation of a character respec, it weakens their positions because they are not addressing our arguments.

Hopefully, this thread will clarify our position and lead to more productive conversation.

Before I start explaining our argument, I think it may be worthwhile to define what is meant by "character respec".

Character respec is an expression used to simplify to gather multiple requests into one. The purpose of this word is to avoid making too heavy sentences each time one has to talk about all the request being made. Usually, in the context of DDO, it includes alignment respec, class respec, skill point respec and often race respec as well.

Whether or not these respec are offered all at once or if they are separated is unimportant (although the 'all at once' option seems to be less hard for turbine to code).

Aesthetic respecs are often included because the arguments from them are different than the ones for respec of things directly affecting gameplay but no one would complain if Turbine decided to kill two birds with one stone.

Please note that a request for respec makes no mention of the cost that will be used. Consensus is that we have to agree that really there is a problem before being able to discuss what is the best way to solve it. Possible costs are in-game money, XP and collectibles (Ã* la dragonshard). Respec as a Premium Service is often an excluded possibility because it does not address the problems that lead to requesting character respec in the first place.

Now that I have taken the time to explain what the request is, exactly, I'll proceed into explaining the two main reasons to ask for a character respec. The first argument being that character respec would increase character retention and the second argument being that character respec would allow game developers to change the game data more freely, thus leading to a better game.

The first argument can be summarized by the following syllogism:

Various errors were made during DDO's design.
To fix those errors, DDO developers have to change feats, spells, enhancements, etc. in a way that may harm characters, directly or indirectly.
Players value the continuous improvement of their characters and may quit if their characters are harmed.
If respecs were possible, then characters could change to follow changed game rules.
Players would not feel their character was harmed and not cancel their subscription.
Therefore, respecs would increase player retention.

As for the second argument, it can be described as follow:

Various errors were made during DDO's design.
Due to those errors, the game is not as good as it could be.
The developers are inhibited from fixing errors because some characters would be harmed, either directly or indirectly.
If respecs were possible, then characters could change to follow changed game rules.
The developers would have fewer worries when making a change, so more improvements would happen.
Therefore, respecs would make DDO better for everyone.

Both of these arguments illustrate that character respec requests have more to them than being a mere "I want it because I like it": there are benefits to their implementation other than just pleasing the players. And, to discredit the respec request one has to be able to refute both arguments.

Hopefully, that clarifies most misunderstandings.

Now, discuss!

[Borror0]

I'm going to take the time to refute the most common anti-respec arguments.

#1 - Necessary Grind

While what you are saying sounds nice, MMO's need grinds and without grind, a MMO will die. Thus, I believe that adding a character respec will lead to subscriber loss because players will get bored quicker by running out of things to do.
There are two problems with that argument.

First of all, it tries to paint grind as if it would be entirely positive and beneficial to a game when that is not the case. While 'grinding' has the benefit of keeping the player busy, it can also turn him away. In this case, 'grinding' is being 'forced' to start all over again and that is not something enjoyable.

Consider the following situation :

"All of Turbine's servers got hit with some malicious virus, wiping all of the character data, corrupting all the backups and thus forcing everyone in DDO to start over at level 1 with no favor nor gear."
...how many players do you think would renew their subscription? Very few.

At the risk of stating the obvious, a game is supposed to be fun. That's why humans tend to play games. It's very likely that one will cancel his subscription if he is not having fun anymore. And, for many people, feeling they have to start over again is enough to get them to quit.

Secondly, other MMO's currently offer what would translate into a character respec in DDO and yet they are more successful than DDO. If implementing respec would kill the game, it would have kill those games already.

#1.1 - Other MMO's don't have a class respec

You point out other MMO's as a proof that respec won't cause the death of the game but other MMO's don't offer class respec, while you are asking for it. Thus, your argument is invalid and your theory as not been tested.
While more popular games don't currently offer class respec, it is because it makes less sense for them than for us since those other games, like World of Warcraft, don't offer multiclassing. If they would, then they would most likely offer a class respec as well.

The logic used is:

All classes have spec worth playing.
Since characters can change everything but their class they will be able to spec into something balanced.
Therefore, we don't need allow class respec.

However, this logic does not translate to DDO.

Asking for every single multiclass possibility to be balanced and playable is an unrealistic request. There are far too many builds possible. The way we multiclass in DDO is more analogous to the way they spec within their class (ie a ranger/rogue is a ranger spec'd differently than a pure ranger) than to different classes.

Therefore, we should be able to respec the way we multiclassed.

#2 - Attack of the Clones

When respec will be added, everyone will change to the best spec and everyone will be the same! It'll be the end of diversity!
This argument is one of the most common argument against respec, which is odd because it has more holes in it than a chunk of Swiss cheese.

First of all, this argument cannot be used to oppose respec. It can be used to oppose some respec but not all. A respec request does not imply any specific cost. First we agree that a respec is needed and then we'll debate the best way to implement one. Thus, this is an invalid objection as there are many ways for such a thing to be avoided if noted as undesirable.

Secondly, if there is such a problem then the problem is with the balance of the game and not with respec. And, if there are serious balance problems, a character respec would allow the developers to address it more easily as they would not to worry about harming characters as much.

Finally, this argument states that 'the Attack of the Clone' is a bad thing but never states why. There is as much diversity with a respec than there is without. A character respec does not reduce diversity, at all. There is as much diversity at a respec screen then there is for you at a creation screen.

If this argument is that other players will finally play something that they like, I don't see what the problem is.

#3 - Cost versus gain

It's clearly not worth the time they'll spend into it. I want content.
This is an invalid argument because no one here can speak of the costs, only the benefits.

#4 - Players won't leave if you don't add respecs

You really think that all the players are going to leave the game if there is not no character respec?
Deep misunderstanding of the argument.

Players will leave because a change is made harms their character and a respec may have prevented them from leaving.

#5 - You asked for it

You exploited the game so now pay for it.
While that may be your opinion, Turbine does not nor should not think this way.

They are motivated by profit and preventing players from leaving is among their priorities.

[Tanka]

Good post, Bor. Though, I'm afraid the most vocal respec opponents will be in here to muddle things up again.

[Angelus_dead]

The first argument can be summarized by the following syllogism:
It looks like you're setting yourself up for failure (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SesquipedalianLoquaciousness). An alternative thrust (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ptitleqxvqql7oro2v) might have been better.

[Vorn]

One can only wonder if the anti-respec folks can post as clearly and concisely.
:)
Ireneus would like this thread, I think, but perhaps not your opponents.

[ahpook]

Good review of the situation Borr.

My only quibble is with this line


Respec as a Premium Service is often an excluded possibility because it does not address the problems that lead to requesting character respec in the first place.

which is derived by your biases more than the discussions. A premium service works to your goals if free respec tokens are provided when game changes are made that warrent them.

[Borror0]

Good review of the situation Borr.
Thank you.

A premium service works to your goals if free respec tokens are provided when game changes are made that warrent them.
But how do you determine that? Tricky question.

(Emphasis mine)

[Angelus_dead]

Finally, this argument states that 'the Attack of the Clone' is a bad thing but never states why. There is as much diversity with a respec than there is without. A character respec does not reduce diversity, at all. There is as much diversity at a respec screen then there is for you at a creation screen.
Also notice that respecs create an opportunity for diversity, by allowing players the freedom to try some suboptimal class choices without the fear of permanently wrecking the character. Maybe I'd like to try cle15/wiz1 for a while and see how it goes... maybe even cle18/wiz1/fig1 later! But if I'm afraid new cleric capstones or L9 spells will turn that into a mistake, then I'll stay away from variety and stick with nerf-proof pure builds.

[Lithic]

It looks like you're setting yourself up for failure (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SesquipedalianLoquaciousness). An alternative thrust (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ptitleqxvqql7oro2v) might have been better.

Hey if all A-D can do is point out that you should have dumbed-down your argument so the average "me keel orcses" player can understand, then you must be on the right track bor!

[Quanefel]

"First we agree that a respec is needed and then we'll debate the best way to implement one."


See, you could have saved yourself the trouble of posting all that above by just having this one line you wrote speak for itself.

It is good to know that you have decided for us that any real debate of wether it is even a good idea, that it needs to be done or should be installed in game is trumped because you have decided for us. Indeed!

[Lithic]

"First we agree that a respec is needed and then we'll debate the best way to implement one."


See, you could have saved yourself the trouble of posting all that above by just having this one line you wrote speak for itself.

It is good to know that you have decided for us that any real debate of wether it is even a good idea, that it needs to be done or should be installed in game is trumped because you have decided for us. Indeed!

If you reread the first 4 lines, he's pretty clear that his post is on behalf of the pro-respec forumites (though I don't remmeber voting for Bor'09 heh). There was also something in there about having the anti-respec posting their views, but none have stepped up in the 99minutes this post has been up. Care to volunteer?

[Angelus_dead]

Deep misunderstanding of the argument.

Players will leave because a change is made harms their character and a respec may have prevented them from leaving.
Several aspects you're leaving out:
1. Naturally, it's not black and white. There isn't one single change that makes someone instantly leave... it's that gradual changes make someone less likely to log in, until one day he decides to stop renewing.

2. Possibly more important than people who dislike their characters being nerfed is people who dislike imbalanced gameplay that can't be fixed without nerfing some characters. For example, suppose someone plays a tower shield fighter, and he's unhappy that he can't tank raids like a monk-splash does. The failure to fix that balance makes him less likely to keep playing.

3. Possibly more important than subscribers who would leave are new players who wouldn't join, because features they desire can't be added without nerfing existing characters.

[Lithic]

Thank you.

But how do you determine that? Tricky question.

(Emphasis mine)

Determining when free respec tokens are given out should be pretty easy. Any time major class abilities are changed would probably do it, at the devs discretion.

The evasion change of '06 would qualify (or was it 07?). Changing monk wisdom bonus ac to centered-only, or limiting it to 2x monk level would be another good example.

The upcoming mod with their capstones would also qualify, though any free respec tokens should expire 4 weeks after the change is made.

[Angelus_dead]

Determining when free respec tokens are given out should be pretty easy.
Yes, it's easy: Every time there's a real game patch.

That only happens 2-3 times per year, so it's no big deal. There will be some temptation to try to filter the tokens so they only go to characters directly affected, but because multiclassing is so flexible, it's better to just err on the side of generosity.

[roggane]

Also notice that respecs create an opportunity for diversity, by allowing players the freedom to try some suboptimal class choices without the fear of permanently wrecking the character. Maybe I'd like to try cle15/wiz1 for a while and see how it goes... maybe even cle18/wiz1/fig1 later! But if I'm afraid new cleric capstones or L9 spells will turn that into a mistake, then I'll stay away from variety and stick with nerf-proof pure builds.

I'd have to say, this would definitely gives lots of us something to do or work on while we're bored out of our minds waiting for releases.

[Quanefel]

If you reread the first 4 lines, he's pretty clear that his post is on behalf of the pro-respec forumites (though I don't remmeber voting for Bor'09 heh). There was also something in there about having the anti-respec posting their views, but none have stepped up in the 99minutes this post has been up. Care to volunteer?

Exactly why does any of the anti-respec folks need to post their views? He has already decided for us as well as posting our views clearly. Well he posted his twisted, illogical, false assertions of the anti-respec people.

Remember, debating it is not important just agreeing and debating out how it will be installed is the topic now....
;)

[Borror0]

Determining when free respec tokens are given out should be pretty easy.
As A_D pointed out, it'd need to be every module and given how rare that has become, even that model is unattractive.

Maybe if the game was updated every 1-2 month, but now with the 4 months lapse...

[...] though any free respec tokens should expire 4 weeks after the change is made.
If a player takes a break and logs back on five weeks after the module was released, he has to wait three months?

[Borror0]

/snip
Could you please '/snip' the quote? It takes a lot of vertical space for no reason.

I'd really appreciate it. Thank you.

[Lithic]

As A_D pointed out, it'd need to be every module and given how rare that has become, even that model is unattractive.

Maybe if the game was updated every 1-2 month, but now with the 4 months lapse...

If a player takes a break and logs back on five weeks after the module was released, he has to wait three months?

To get another free one? Yep. But he could always pay the theoretical cost of the non-free respec option (say, 20 dragonshards, or 1millpp, or W/E the devs decide it is).

Expiration dates prevent characters who don't want to respec due to a game change from gathering multiple tokens to be used later for other reasons. Maybe it wouldnt matter that someone gathered 12 respec tokens and used them all one month to try out lots of weird builds, but I don't think the spirit of a free respec token requires that they be permanent, only that they stick around long enough for the vast majority to use them to adapt to the related change.

Remember, there would likely be a costly, but available respec option anyway.

[Borror0]

Exactly why does any of the anti-respec folks need to post their views?
Sorry if you felt your input was not appreciated. This thread is intended for pro-respec and anti-respec to debate on whether or not character respec seems to be a good idea from our player point of view. So please explain your perspective and challenge my arguments all you want.

I'm looking forward to it.

Again, sorry about that. I'll try to reword that passage.

EDIT: Tried something. No idea if that sounds better to you. You can suggest a better wording if you want.

[KLBen]

I just want to be sure I understand what the mechanics of a respec would do:

I currently have a capped monk on Thelanis, the Devs make a change to my class (not exactly sure what that may be) where I would have to reroll my character if there were no Respec mechanism in place. A respec would essentially allow me to reroll my character without losing any XP or items, is that basicly the idea of a respec?

Thank you for your response.

[Borror0]

But he could always pay the theoretical cost of the non-free respec option (say, 20 dragonshards, or 1millpp, or W/E the devs decide it is).
Well, the non-free option would be in dollars as this was a reply to aphook's comment. ;)

I would have much less problem with such a system if we would be talking about Premium Services.

Expiration dates prevent characters who don't want to respec due to a game change from gathering multiple tokens to be used later for other reasons.
Well, then would make sense to get one per module an have it expire at each update, no?

[Borror0]

A respec would essentially allow me to reroll my character without losing any XP or items, is that basicly the idea of a respec?
Basically, yes. Some do include an XP Cost (half of your XP, all your XP, etc.) but not all.

As for items, every respec allows you to keep your bound items. That is essentially one of the main motivation behind a respec.

[Quanefel]

Basically, yes. Some do include an XP Cost (half of your XP, all your XP, etc.) but not all.

As for items, every respec allows you to keep your bound items. That is essentially one of the main motivation behind a respec.

And here I thought one of the MAIN motivations behind a full character respec was because the Dev's change things and we have no way to adjust to them. Thanks for clearing up what one of the main reasons, really is about.

[Borror0]

And here I thought one of the MAIN motivations behind a full character respec was because the Dev's change things and we have no way to adjust to them.
Losing all your bound items is the main reason as to why rerolling is such a pain, is what I meant. There is obviously having to relevel your character at the way to level 16 but that is far less of a problem than it is to gather all your bound loot back.

If rerolling was not so annoying and time-consuming, respec'ing would not be such a necessity.

[Quanefel]

Sorry if you felt your input was not appreciated. This thread is intended for pro-respec and anti-respec to debate on whether or not character respec seems to be a good idea from our player point of view. So please explain your perspective and challenge my arguments all you want.

I'm looking forward to it.

Again, sorry about that. I'll try to reword that passage.

EDIT: Tried something. No idea if that sounds better to you. You can suggest a better wording if you want.



"And, to discredit the respec request one has to be able to refute both arguments."

Really? Did you even think that out before you wrote it. Practice what you preach. If you are going to make that statement then do what want us to do by that. Reword whatever you want, I will still find all the flaws in it. Not to spite you, I am sure you put alot of effort and time in it.

Yet, at some point you and others might want to understand that it is not that so many of us are all against a full respec idea, it could very well be that we do not like how some of you are going about it.

[Borror0]

Did you even think that out before you wrote it.
Could you explain to me what is so extraordinary about this claim?

It seems very basic to me that to discredit a position you have to be able to refute their arguments.

Yet, at some point you and others might want to understand that it is not that so many of us are all against a full respec idea, it could very well be that we do not like how some of you are going about it.
Not sure I understand the logic here, so please correct me if I am wrong but are you saying that it may be that some of the opponent to respecs are not actually against respecs but simply do not like... the way the arguments are presented so they undermine a position they agree with?

If I understand that, why would someone do that?

And why would that person never mention he is on their side? It would be an invaluable tool to know what exactly that person oppose (or so it seems to me).

[Quanefel]

Losing all your bound items is the main reason as to why rerolling is such a pain, is what I meant. There is obviously having to relevel your character at the way to level 16 but that is far less of a problem than it is to gather all your bound loot back.

If rerolling was not so annoying and time-consuming, respec'ing would not be such a necessity.

If people are so upset about items being lost, I can understand that. I can not agree with it but I can understand that. Yet, it should not be a main reason for wanting to respec. It shows more of greed than a desire to actually fix something that is claimed to be broke. I know, I am horrible for calling people greedy. It is just a fact of life that people are. I only point it out to maybe pull people away from at least the impression this is all about greed.

I can not see rerolling as that annoying or all that time-consuming. Releveling, yes. That might very well be true. I can understand that. Respecing will not change that aspect. It is not a stretch of the imagination that IF a full respec is put into place, that the Dev's will in fact require us to relevel. I am sure even you can see that. When people try to give others the impression that the dev's will allow us to push a button, respec AND be brought right back up to full level before we hit that button is setting people up for disappointment. That is my opinion and how I see it. Some might not like that but what, just pretend it is not a great possibility of having to relevel just to make people feel good in the short term? Again, it IS setting people up for disappointment. Stop it.

[smatt]

Well Borro you offer up a nice summary of what i see as the spin for respec.... But what oyu left out is that the majority of the people who're really in on thsi disscusion IMO, are longtime players who have known for a long time that DDO isn't a static game. That changes will come, some will benefit a build, some will turn a build into trash. BUT the real arguement FOR a respec seems to come mostly from people who want to keep the bound gear and stats, they worked hard for on a toon, and apply it to the uber toon of the Mod...... That's what it's really about, isn't it? All this talk of player retention, it's not fair, etc, add nausiam is an end run around what it's really all about...... It simply is too much like a particular politcal parties propaganda lines, saying this when every knows it's a load....

I think a more honest arguement for it would go a lot further, I spoke out against it when people were talking about it 6 months ago. And I still think, in overall game mechanics it would be a mistake, but at this point it's just a whatever for me, even though I would certainly benefit from it.

It's all good, those for and against no matter what the reason, even if it is one that's got more propaganda posters on it than an election is still and opinion that should be considered......:D

[shores11]

Once again, character respec discussions have taken over the forums, to the point of derailing an important thread for feedback (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=174671).

It these discussions, it seems that there are a lot of misconceptions about the pro-respec arguments. For the proponents of character respec, it is quite irritating as it feels as if words were being put into our mouth. As for those against the implementation of a character respec, it weakens their positions because they are not addressing our arguments.

Hopefully, this thread will clarify our position and lead to more productive conversation.

Before I start explaining our argument, I think it may be worthwhile to define what is meant by "character respec".

Character respec is an expression used to simplify to gather multiple requests into one. The purpose of this word is to avoid making too heavy sentences each time one has to talk about all the request being made. Usually, in the context of DDO, it includes alignment respec, class respec, skill point respec and often race respec as well.

Whether or not these respec are offered all at once or if they are separated is unimportant (although the 'all at once' option seems to be less hard for turbine to code).

Aesthetic respecs are often included because the arguments from them are different than the ones for respec of things directly affecting gameplay but no one would complain if Turbine decided to kill two birds with one stone.

Please note that a request for respec makes no mention of the cost that will be used. Consensus is that we have to agree that really there is a problem before being able to discuss what is the best way to solve it. Possible costs are in-game money, XP and collectibles (Ã* la dragonshard). Respec as a Premium Service is often an excluded possibility because it does not address the problems that lead to requesting character respec in the first place.

Now that I have taken the time to explain what the request is, exactly, I'll proceed into explaining the two main reasons to ask for a character respec. The first argument being that character respec would increase character retention and the second argument being that character respec would allow game developers to change the game data more freely, thus leading to a better game.

The first argument can be summarized by the following syllogism:

Various errors were made during DDO's design.
To fix those errors, DDO developers have to change feats, spells, enhancements, etc. in a way that may harm characters, directly or indirectly.
Players value the continuous improvement of their characters and may quit if their characters are harmed.
If respecs were possible, then characters could change to follow changed game rules.
Players would not feel their character was harmed and not cancel their subscription.
Therefore, respecs would increase player retention.

As for the second argument, it can be described as follow:

Various errors were made during DDO's design.
Due to those errors, the game is not as good as it could be.
The developers are inhibited from fixing errors because some characters would be harmed, either directly or indirectly.
If respecs were possible, then characters could change to follow changed game rules.
The developers would have fewer worries when making a change, so more improvements would happen.
Therefore, respecs would make DDO better for everyone.

Both of these arguments illustrate that character respec requests have more to them than being a mere "I want it because I like it": there are benefits to their implementation other than just pleasing the players. And, to discredit the respec request one has to be able to refute both arguments.

Hopefully, that clarifies most misunderstandings.

Now, discuss!

Because you say one has to dis-credit both points in order to be valid is in itself not a valid point or stance as I do not recall reading your name in the book of "I make all things valid once I speak them".

It really comes down to some players want what they really do not want. Players that say they want all of these one click solutions to all of there gripes in DDO or any other MMO would be the very first ones to end up leaving the game for something else to play and gripe about because they are bored (Hey look at me I have everything uber in the game items, feats, skills now what do I do since all monsters die from just looking at me, this game is boring). Many of the proponents for respecs are also the same ones that want one click loot options for every quest/raid (after each run not the 20th run) as well or want 32 point builds without any effort at all to aquire them. You do not fool me or many other players.

In fact I submit the complete opposite point of view as you do. DDO knows exactly what they are doing and the game was never designed wrong and needed fixing. which does not imply that they should not or do not need to continue to develop the game to be fresh as possible to keep player attention. I submit that the DDO team see's many of these complaints from the less than 1% of its player base and picks the well made suggestions and/or complaints and alters the game play as needed. This does not mean it is broke it means they care about their product and continue to develop it. Something that may be a problem is something like the continued lag that haunts us all not the character customization.

I mean the real argument for respec's is to not have to quest for favor again and level again. I submit that this is DDO's way of saying run all of the various quests we have as options in the game and this is a great thing I think. I would submit that many of the players that say the game lacks content or hates favor questing has not ran over 60% of the games content and that my friends is a problem.

[Borror0]

It shows more of greed than a desire to actually fix something that is claimed to be broke. I know, I am horrible for calling people greedy. It is just a fact of life that people are. I only point it out to maybe pull people away from at least the impression this is all about greed.
Well, when designing a game you have to deal with players' psychology and if greed is a factor to them than it is.

It should not be used with a pejorative connotation.

Because you have to deal with player psychology, "greed" and fixing something broke go hand in hand. If you go against what the player wants, you're not going to make a profit out of them. If a situation irritates the players, whether you think they are greedy or not, you ought to consider fixing that. Otherwise, they may go see if the grass is greener elsewhere.

Personally, I don't think it is about greed. It's about achievement. It has nothnig to do with accumulating lots and lots of possession but rather improving the character. It,s not the frustration of losing virtual goods but rather the frustration to start over again as that loot is part of the character's improvement.

If you've played any console game, just think about how frustrating it is to die and having to start the level once from the start.

It is not a stretch of the imagination that IF a full respec is put into place, that the Dev's will in fact require us to relevel. I am sure even you can see that. When people try to give others the impression that the dev's will allow us to push a button, respec AND be brought right back up to full level before we hit that button is setting people up for disappointment..
Can I know reasoning?

[Quanefel]

Could you explain to me what is so extraordinary about this claim?

It seems very basic to me that to discredit a position you have to be able to refute their arguments.

Not sure I understand the logic here, so please correct me if I am wrong but are you saying that it may be that some of the opponent to respecs are not actually against respecs but simply do not like... the way the arguments are presented so they undermine a position they agree with?

If I understand that, why would someone do that?

And why would that person never mention he is on their side? It would be an invaluable tool to know what exactly that person oppose (or so it seems to me).

Pay attention to what you are writing. You ask us to refute your arguements as well as our own, yet you are not doing that yourself. Hence me telling you to practice what you preach. You want us to do that, you do it too. The do as I say, not as I do mentality does not go over so well with some people.

And yes, some people can agree with something yet total disagree with parts of the whole. Like the political parties here. They might agree the economy needs fixed but they greatly disagree on HOW it is to be fixed. Get it? It is very logical in my mind.

Why would a person never mention that? Maybe they have, yet the other side only seeing one way to go about it pushing the rest of us off to the side and our thoughts on the matter are dismissed time after time.

[Borror0]

Because you say one has to dis-credit both points in order to be valid is in itself not a valid point or stance
Of course not, but that is how a debate operates.

One makes one or many arguments and others have to refute them. That is how it works.

/snip
Why do you waste so much time flaming the opposite point of view? None of your attacks were warranted.

Maybe you want to stir up some... but if so, go do that elsewhere please.

DDO knows exactly what they are doing and the game was never designed wrong and needed fixing.
This is invalidated by them changing features because they were deemed too powerful.

Critical Rage II, Dwarven Toughness, Evasion and Human Versatility are the most known ones but there are others.

I mean the real argument for respec's is to not have to quest for favor again and level again.
Sorry, no, it isn't.

[Angelus_dead]

Personally, I don't think it is about greed. It's about achievement. It has nothnig to do with accumulating lots and lots of possession but rather improving the character. It,s not the frustration of losing virtual goods but rather the frustration to start over again as that loot is part of the character's improvement.
It's illuminating to compare that to a change in D&D 4e that was minor, yet controversial.

In D&D 3.5, Rangers got an animal companion, and if it died they could catch an equivalent new one within 24 hours. But in D&D 4e, Rangers have the ability to cast Raise Dead, but only on their pets.

That change reduces verisimilitude because it gives Rangers a spellcasting power more akin to clerics, but it improves role-playing and narrative because he keeps the same animal over time, instead of inexplicably training a new one whenver it's disposed of.

[Borror0]

Pay attention to what you are writing. You ask us to refute your arguements as well as our own
Not sure I am getting what you are saying...

They might agree the economy needs fixed but they greatly disagree on HOW it is to be fixed.
I could see that analogy being used as to "I agree that there is a need for respec but I disagree with you on how to implement one"

However, you have been arguing against the concept as a whole.

Maybe they have, yet the other side only seeing one way to go about it
Well, to be honest, this seems very inconsistent with you spending four hours (as per your words) collecting information to then be able to refute the argument that other MMO's offer the ability to respec all significant change that could be "invalidated" by rule change.

[kaidendager]

Sorry if you felt your input was not appreciated. This thread is intended for pro-respec and anti-respec to debate on whether or not character respec seems to be a good idea from our player point of view.


I can let a little argumentative masturbation go for awhile, we all do it. You've provided the easiest arguments against your own and knocked them down like a true champ. If you had said this is a thread where pro-respec people can congregate and congratulate eachother on how smart they think eachother is that'd be fine. But to say this is an open thread for debate when you attack anyone with an opposing viewpoint and set your own rules for how we should argue I've got a bit of a problem with it, particularly in light that you've built the opposing viewpoint in your own eyes and already demolished it.


And, to discredit the respec request one has to be able to refute both arguments.

Of course not, but that is how a debate operates.


While I cannot deny that isn't true in some respect it is also like saying playing DDO is just hitting keys on a keyboard really fast. It's true that refutation is an aspect of debate, but it hardly encompasses the entirety of debate.

Example: If I state that the war in Iraq is a good thing and we should continue it because of two points A) Killing people is a good thing and B) War is a natural part of the human psyche and stated that both are true unless both can be refuted I'd be laughed out of the forum. Saying that one must refute all arguments presented or not present his/her points is not very practical and not very conducive to a proactive debate.




It these discussions, it seems that there are a lot of misconceptions about the pro-respec arguments. For the proponents of character respec, it is quite irritating as it feels as if words were being put into our mouth.

This one I'm just requoting because I believe most people missed the juicy juicy irony.

[Elaril]

I still believe that there should be at least two forms of respec available. One should offer the option of keeping all of your xp and should be offered once per patch. The other should reset your character's xp to zero and should be unlimited in its use and should have a moderate in game cost.

[smatt]

While likely MOSt of the peopel I paly with, at least the ones that have been around for at least 2 years or more seem to be for repect, and some of them like me hae indeed been "nerfed" by changes to their current class. I'm betting that the vast majority of respects, if it was implemented would revolve around people changing TO classes/alignments/etc that have been improved, rather than changing away from classes/aligments/etc away nerfed classes. In other words they desperately want their old, raid loot/crafted/tomed toons to be uber using the changes to other classes. Which is fine......

[Mhykke]

BUT the real arguement FOR a respec seems to come mostly from people who want to keep the bound gear and stats, they worked hard for on a toon, and apply it to the uber toon of the Mod...... That's what it's really about, isn't it? All this talk of player retention, it's not fair, etc, add nausiam is an end run around what it's really all about......
I think a more honest arguement for it would go a lot further

Well, I know personally, if a respec option were magically inserted into the game tonight, I wouldn't use it tomorrow or any other time if the game remains exactly as is. I don't desire to change any of my characters. So I don't need to worry about keeping my bound gear or stats, b/c I won't be deleting/rerolling/respeccing anyone. I'm being honest when I explain there are multiple reasons, and not just 1. I'm trying to see the game from a variety of viewpoints, and not just my own. Maybe some others are as well, who knows. I know for me, a simple issue, and another reason, is basic fairness. Changes to the rules of a game midstream is unfair for its players. B/c this is a business, let's try to offset some of that unfairness so we can try and limit player loss b/c of that unfairness. I want DDO to succeed. In fact, I hope it's wildly successful. I don't want to see player loss, b/c I don't think DDO is in a position to afford player loss. Simply arguing "tough, that's life, reroll", shows a deep lack of understanding about the business consumer relationship, and what it could possibly mean for DDO.


In addition, this is one of the reasons why some of these anti respec folks are frustrating to discuss this with. They will avoid responding to what is said, and instead, they will question the motives behind the speaker. If the argument they are making is not logical, then discredit it. If they have an alternate reason they aren't sharing, it doesn't invalidate an argument if it makes sense. Personally, I love it when an anti respec person mindlessly falls back to the "it's for those multiclassers that just want to be even more uber!" line, as I'm pro respec and have 1 multiclass toon (only 1 splash class) out of 11. I also love the "easy button" go to line, as anyone that has grouped with me knows that I don't sit around waiting for the easiest situations in game before playing (amusingly, the same cannot be said of certain people who are using this line). Finally, I'm also amused at the "you built a gimp, reroll" etc. type argument. I have no desire to use a respec if one is implemented, in the current game. Furthermore, I believe all my characters are competent enough to survive the "gimp" accusation. Again, can the same be said of those using this line?

All of those are attacks on the motivation of the proponent, and don't address what's actually being said. The frustrating part is the person using these lines uses them frequently in situations in which they have no reply to what is actually being argued.

[smatt]

Well, I know personally, if a respec option were magically inserted into the game tonight, I wouldn't use it tomorrow or any other time if the game remains exactly as is. I don't desire to change any of my characters. So I don't need to worry about keeping my bound gear or stats, b/c I won't be deleting/rerolling/respeccing anyone. I'm being honest when I explain there are multiple reasons, and not just 1. I'm trying to see the game from a variety of viewpoints, and not just my own. Maybe some others are as well, who knows. I know for me, a simple issue, and another reason, is basic fairness. Changes to the rules of a game midstream is unfair for its players. B/c this is a business, let's try to offset some of that unfairness so we can try and limit player loss b/c of that unfairness. I want DDO to succeed. In fact, I hope it's wildly successful. I don't want to see player loss, b/c I don't think DDO is in a position to afford player loss. Simply arguing "tough, that's life, reroll", shows a deep lack of understanding about the business consumer relationship, and what it could possibly mean for DDO.


In addition, this is one of the reasons why some of these anti respec folks are frustrating to discuss this with. They will avoid responding to what is said, and instead, they will question the motives behind the speaker. If the argument they are making is not logical, then discredit it. If they have an alternate reason they aren't sharing, it doesn't invalidate an argument if it makes sense. Personally, I love it when an anti respec person mindlessly falls back to the "it's for those multiclassers that just want to be even more uber!" line, as I'm pro respec and have 1 multiclass toon (only 1 splash class) out of 11. I also love the "easy button" go to line, as anyone that has grouped with me knows that I don't sit around waiting for the easiest situations in game before playing (amusingly, the same cannot be said of certain people who are using this line). Finally, I'm also amused at the "you built a gimp, reroll" etc. type argument. I have no desire to use a respec if one is implemented, in the current game. Furthermore, I believe all my characters are competent enough to survive the "gimp" accusation. Again, can the same be said of those using this line?

All of those are attacks on the motivation of the proponent, and don't address what's actually being said. The frustrating part is the person using these lines uses them frequently in situations in which they have no reply to what is actually being argued.


Well Mhykke, I could go into agueing all day long about all the pro's and con's peopel ahve put forth. Kind of like politcal discussion I used to have on of all places a band/music board.... Many 1,000's of posts latter it got rather boring. I understand that some are of the opinion that a repc feature would on it's face create more of a chance of player retention. But really what would the long term, effect be? Can we say for sure what the unintended consequinces be? Reallky are that many people leaving simply because of a nerf to their build? Or because they have a bunch of toons that aren't the latest greatest because of addtions to the game? Or do people most often leave simpyl out of over all boredom witht eh game, which happens no mattter what Turbine does,e ven with new content.

I'm not attacking anybody at all..... But I think what I said in my posts in this thread IMO is very true.... Far more would use the repsec to go to classes that became BETTER than their current class, not because their class was nerfed directly. I'm simply offering that opinion, no matter if others see it as more or less correct than their own. I love this game, and of course want it to prosper, even if that would require them to do thigns I don't like or agree with personally. In the end I think my point is that just because a few dozen forum people who for the most part are very loyal DDO people who do in fact care aobut the game and offer a lot of good ideas up to improve it THINK and feranvtly argue a particular issue, doesn't mean that it's a good idea to run lock step with them. Or simply to go OK the few forum commons want it so it sahll be in other words.


I'm OK with it either way.... I just THINK that at least some who offer such long winded reasons why, really could shorten it all down a bit to one sentence..... "Some other build is more uber than my build, and I want to change my long worked on toon to that build" :)

That's my arguement... Im not going to get into long winded arguements with people who think they know how to run an MMO.... I have no idea personally, I won't ever spend millions to create, code, or market one..... I can only guess...... My lack of arguing every single point that say Borro brings up has nothing to do with me not being able to..... I could go on for days if I really cared to.... But I see it as a pointless endevour, I will continue to simply point out some things I'm observing just as you have.

[Angelus_dead]

But really what would the long term, effect be? Can we say for sure what the unintended consequinces be? Reallky are that many people leaving simply because of a nerf to their build? Or because they have a bunch of toons that aren't the latest greatest because of addtions to the game? Or do people most often leave simpyl out of over all boredom witht eh game, which happens no mattter what Turbine does,e ven with new content.
The purpose of this thread was to highlight the reasons to add a respec feature, so that before someone comes to argue against it, he'd at least know what those reasons are.


I'm OK with it either way.... I just THINK that at least some who offer such long winded reasons why, really could shorten it all down a bit to one sentence..... "Some other build is more uber than my build, and I want to change my long worked on toon to that build"
Then they might respond to the actual reasons, instead of saying stuff like that.

[smatt]

The purpose of this thread was to highlight the reasons to add a respec feature, so that before someone comes to argue against it, he'd at least know what those reasons are.


Then they might respond to the actual reasons, instead of saying stuff like that.


:rolleyes: I think I can comprehend what was intended, AD.... Maybe :D

And I agree that many of the original statements by Borro are in fact true. I'm just not so sure that this grand fix of a complete or near complete Repsec would fix them, and if it did fix those problems, that it might also create more and even worse situations..... I'm not trying to group all the for peeps, and against peeps into 2 groups.... Clearly there sre some that are on each side for differing reasons. I think a lot of the time as as read the ideas put forth on the DDO forum, mostly by intelligent, well meaning people, they often don't see past the face of their ideas. Often times it's hard to do, infact I think most times it's near impossible to do, when considering a dynamic situational game like DDO. That is why many of the changes the Dev team does implement come about, because even they the grand designers don't have the ability to see the future and how people will react and use the tools they're given.

[Angelus_dead]

:rolleyes: I think I can comprehend what was intended, AD.... Maybe :D
But instead of stating that you comprehend, could you you write something to demonstrate that you've seen it? Like 3-4 words to say what the benefit is supposed to be?

[Monkey_Archer]

Well this started out as a valid argument thread....
until the 2nd post...

No offence Borror... but this is classic polictics, not debate..
You start out with a clear well thought out argument for something.... then tell people in a disjointed manner what your opponents arguments supposebly are.
Anyone who actually responds with a valid counter-point automatically gets lumped in with the rest of the "arguments" in your second post. Anyone who tries to defend themselves in this kind of situation gets drowned out and crushed... (think Stephane Dion here ;))

To be clear, i am neither for, nor against this whole respec mumbo jumbo...

Yes I have builds that could benefit from it, and i have no intention of rerolling.
No, this is definatly not near the top of my list on things i would like to see added to the game. If it were added i probably would use it though.

The truth here:
-The strongest arugments for this are from people that would use it to optimise an already powerful build.
-The strongest arguments against this are from people that dont want to see powerful builds optimised even further (or people who already have optimised builds that dont want others to copy them)
-Most casual gamers, by definition, likely dont know or care about this.


So.. Since i dont completely disagree with post #1... i will refute your refutles... (if that makes any sense...)

1 - Grind - Part of the game... for the most of us, this is called fun or questing... just one of the many parts of the game that keep people playing. If you didnt have to "quest" you wouldnt be playing the game in the first place... If a respec causes you to not have to run quests, you would no longer be playing the game on that character would you?
1.1 - Other MMOs are not ddo and have no place in this argument. That goes for both sides.

2 - Clones - Repec will likely cause cloning... and will likely encourage more experimentation with less then optimal builds... Will probably even out eventually.

3 - Cost vs gain - This IS the best argument against respec... Ask anyone what they are looking forward to in the new mod. Some might say a capstone, or one of the PrEs.... but the majority will say content. (Where else would you test out that great new capstone or PrE?)
EVERYTHING they add to the game takes TIME. TIME = MONEY. Even something as simple as first person view could be boiled down to a dollar amount for turbine. Implementing a respec option is easily as if not more complicated then the various arguments for or against it. Think about it. If none of these threads about respec can come to some sort of consensus on IF it should be implemented, when do you think we could agree on HOW it is implemented? and what rules an limitations apply.

4 - People leaving - People leave for lots of reasons. Tubine should not listen to or accomodate any such threats, whether its from people who think thier build was nerfed, or from people who think respec would completly break the game.

5 - You asked for it - I have no sympathy for people who took advantage of a powerful build only to discover that something new might be a bit better. This is the nature of... well... everything. This is as much an argument for respec as it is against respec. Turbine's Priority should be attracting new players, not trying to keep the ones it already has. Playing defence usually means your in trouble...


Conclusion:
Respec or no respec i dont care... as long as it doesnt reduce the amount of new content. I just think its too complicated to be implemented properly. Say, you want to get rid of your 1 fighter level on a 15ranger/1fighter build... you took it at level 2 and chose dodge as your bonus feat... you now have 2 other feats that depend on dodge... and an enhancement that depends on those feats... So now you need to reset your enhancements and feats? you also have skill points spent that depend on that fighter level....
If this is every to happen, i will most likely come in small steps starting with skill respec.

[maddmatt70]

I personally feel that this upcoming mod is the best opportunity for them to add a respec. The level cap going up four levels, unpredictable capstones, prestige enhancements that follow 6/12/18, etc. will lead to the most disgruntled people that Turbine has had in regards to character building. This mod would be the best bang for the buck if they were to add a respec to alleviate disgruntled people. If they don't add it this mod my guess is they will never add it. Every single mod prior to this one and every mod in the future will probably nerf and/or have an effect on less builds and characters.

[Mhykke]

Well Mhykke, I could go into agueing all day long about all the pro's and con's peopel ahve put forth. Kind of like politcal discussion I used to have on of all places a band/music board.... Many 1,000's of posts latter it got rather boring. I understand that some are of the opinion that a repc feature would on it's face create more of a chance of player retention. But really what would the long term, effect be? Can we say for sure what the unintended consequinces be? Reallky are that many people leaving simply because of a nerf to their build? Or because they have a bunch of toons that aren't the latest greatest because of addtions to the game? Or do people most often leave simpyl out of over all boredom witht eh game, which happens no mattter what Turbine does,e ven with new content .

No, you're correct, we can't say what the long term unintended consequences would be. But that's not an argument against respec. Nobody can ever predict what the long term unintended consequences will be, about anything. Stating the obvious, that we are incapable of predicting the future, isn't an argument in itself not to do something.

I don't think anyone ever suggested that the only reason people are leaving is b/c of changes that are negatively affecting their characters. That would be foolish. Of course people are leaving because of boredom. But does that make irrelevant that some players might be leaving b/c they don't like changes to their efforts? Months, and maybe years, of building a character a certain way, only for it to be changed in one update, might upset a decent number of people, don't you think? Is it smart for Turbine, as a business, to simply look the other way while saying "tough"? Does it mean we shouldn't try to remove reasons people leave if those reasons happen to be something other than boredom?



I'm not attacking anybody at all..... But I think what I said in my posts in this thread IMO is very true.... Far more would use the repsec to go to classes that became BETTER than their current class, not because their class was nerfed directly. I'm simply offering that opinion, no matter if others see it as more or less correct than their own. I love this game, and of course want it to prosper, even if that would require them to do thigns I don't like or agree with personally. In the end I think my point is that just because a few dozen forum people who for the most part are very loyal DDO people who do in fact care aobut the game and offer a lot of good ideas up to improve it THINK and feranvtly argue a particular issue, doesn't mean that it's a good idea to run lock step with them. Or simply to go OK the few forum commons want it so it sahll be in other words.

Let's assume that people would switch to classes that are "better" than their own (although that's very subjective, what one person believes is better will change with the next person). So? I mean, honestly, so what? Why is it a problem to allow people to change their characters in a way that they'll enjoy more? If people can change things around, and enjoy the game in a way that's better than how they previously enjoyed it, isn't that a positive thing? Isn't that good that a business is providing a way for its consumers to enjoy its product even more? Or do we want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and think to ourselves "nobody's changing their character, you rolled a character, now play him!", even though some people may simply leave instead of rerolling or continue playing that character? We all know that DDO doesn't have the subscriber base to be so callous as to ignore player flight.

And nobody is saying that the game should follow "lock step" with anyone. But it is funny, that not many can really put forward a logical rebuttal to arguments in favor of respec. All we get are arguments from emotion, that address none of the pro respec arguments. We just get canned, lazy phrases like "easy button", or "multicassers want this" etc. etc. Attacks to motivations, not attacks of arguments. The attacks to motivation are personally frustrating to me, b/c none of them apply. I love when someone responds that it's simply b/c pro respec people exploited the game through multiclassing, and now those people are just jealous b/c they can't get capstones, as the "real" motivation for respec, when they could simply look at the characters in my signature and see how utterly foolish their argument is. In fact, some of the people making some of those accusations (easy button) are guilty of their own allegations.


I'm OK with it either way.... I just THINK that at least some who offer such long winded reasons why, really could shorten it all down a bit to one sentence..... "Some other build is more uber than my build, and I want to change my long worked on toon to that build" :) .

Sure, that may be the motivation for some. It's not in my case. The anti respeccers usually don't have a response, so they'll bring up what you mentioned, maybe in terms of "flavor of the month", or "easy button", etc., even though that has nothing to do with what the person they're responding to actually mentioned. It's much easier to simply reply with a canned phrase in order to attack motivations, instead of actually thinking about a person's post individually, and what he or she is arguing.

For example, I've argued, many times, that a reason could be "it's unfair to change rules in the middle of a game, and to reduce some of the hard feelings caused by that unfairness, give people a way to respond to those rule changes." Why, in your opinion, is a response of "some other build is more uber than my build, and I want to change my toon" a good response to my reason? Furthermore, why is your sentence a good summation of my reason?


That's my arguement... Im not going to get into long winded arguements with people who think they know how to run an MMO.... I have no idea personally, I won't ever spend millions to create, code, or market one..... I can only guess...... My lack of arguing every single point that say Borro brings up has nothing to do with me not being able to..... I could go on for days if I really cared to.... But I see it as a pointless endevour, I will continue to simply point out some things I'm observing just as you have.

It's not about arguing on how to run an MMO. It's about arguing what player's would benefit from. An opinion that's only logical for a player of that MMO to have.

Sure, if you don't want to argue Borr's points, for example, don't. You don't have to argue them, or argue them all. The point is, also don't make up arguments and put them in Borr's mouth, only so you can take them apart. If one wants to disagree with a post by Borr, then disagree with it. Don't make up reasons, like Borr's real motivation is so he can have an "easy button" to get a "FOTM" build, or that he really wants this b/c he exploited the game by multiclassing and now he's jealous of capstones. It helps if people address what someone actual said, rather than making up reasons in order to argue against those reasons (which is the easy, lazy way out).

[Quanefel]

The purpose of this thread was to highlight the reasons to add a respec feature, so that before someone comes to argue against it, he'd at least know what those reasons are.


Then they might respond to the actual reasons, instead of saying stuff like that.



Oh, that is the reason for this post? I thought the debate was over and we are to simply talk about how to make it happen. As far as our arguements, those have been written out beforehand, for us. I guess to save us the trouble in responding to anything. Like a normal debate is handled. BorrorO has already kindly provided our answers/reasons for us. Isn't that nice of him? :D

[caution]

Like politics, not everyone agrees, so I will simply agree to disagree rather than get involved deeply in some argument.

Just put me down as one of those dissenters who really think that existing functionality is fine, and the need for further respects are crazy.

To simplify my response to the original arguments:
1. Perfection is unattainable, so quit now while you can!
2. If you got it so wrong to begin with, maybe you should start again!

So I believe that there is no concensus that respecs are important.

If you actually care about some of my viewpoints in this area...

Re-specs exist
* You can already respec feats, enhancements, and spell selections which are already too powerful, and exploitable. You need more?
* Race, class/alignment/skills are significant changes related to the fundamental character makeup. What is more important, your character or your loot?
* If you are really committed to character onwership, then take up permadeath play!

Not seeing the game from the grind
* If the 'grind' as you see it is not part of the game, then maybe Turbine should cut to the chase and allow new characters to be created at lvl 20.
* I believe the best quests are not VoD/Hound/Shroud/SoS, and running through WW with my level 16 barely equates to a 'game' IMO.

Quitters never win
* If you are going to quit because something changes, then please do! The drama queen vs. enthusiast ratio can always do with improvement.
* Change brings more to the game than none. Would you be happier if you could respec your old level 10 capped toon?

PS: Some of these points may be wrong, and I'm ok with that as they are there to just highlight that there are people who see sense in no respecs!

[Mhykke]

If you actually care about some of my viewpoints in this area...



Honest question:

Why should a person care about your viewpoints in this area, considering you don't consider the viewpoints of people on the other side?

[Tanka]

* You can already respec feats, enhancements, and spell selections which are already too powerful, and exploitable. You need more?
Care to explain how they're exploitable?

[smatt]

Sure, if you don't want to argue Borr's points, for example, don't. You don't have to argue them, or argue them all. The point is, also don't make up arguments and put them in Borr's mouth, only so you can take them apart. If one wants to disagree with a post by Borr, then disagree with it. Don't make up reasons, like Borr's real motivation is so he can have an "easy button" to get a "FOTM" build, or that he really wants this b/c he exploited the game by multiclassing and now he's jealous of capstones. It helps if people address what someone actual said, rather than making up reasons in order to argue against those reasons (which is the easy, lazy way out).


Hmm, now wait a moment.... Where did I say it was Borro that was putting forth all these reasons simply to hide the fact that HE wanted to be uber and really just was being greedy or whatever so many are calling it. I never said that.... I simply said that a good number of people who're FOR a full re spec, IMO are of that nature. If that's what you thought I was saying.... Oops... That's not what I was saying at all.

Read what I said again and again Mhykke, I think you took it all wrong. I also said that it's OK to want to be uber, and to not lose all that hard work on an out of date build. And it's far easier to make up what someone means than to actually reply to what someone means......

Never-the-less.... I'm not really for or against.... You see I would admit freely that I am not super-uber perfect toon builder... Not even close.... I don't care... My opinion of myself or my opinion of others play, build, or whatever doesn't really matter. I freely admit that I personally WOULD use the rep sec and am honest about why I would use it. BUT I will also freely admit that even though I would benefit from it in the short run, I may not int he long run. I was simply pointing out that things aren't always what the appear to be... That's all.... I wasn't attacking anybody.... Not even the great Borro :D Who I know loves this game, works hard to change this game for what he sees as the better, and I would also add that a good majority of the people that go into lengthy discussion here are valuable assets to the game. I'm sorry that you might have mis-interpreted what I said and or meant.... And edit.. I'm glad you have such high opinion of yourself :)

OK, here's an arguement...

That by adding a full re spec mechanism in the game, it may make it too easy to reach clear superiority and therefore would cause many to play out the game at a much faster rate therefore causing less player retention........

[Angelus_dead]

Where did I say it was Borro that was putting forth all these reasons simply to hide the fact that HE wanted to be uber and really just was being greedy or whatever so many are calling it. I never said that.... I simply said that a good number of people who're FOR a full re spec, IMO are of that nature. If that's what you thought I was saying.... Oops... That's not what I was saying at all.
That is not true.

Here's you:

Well Borro you offer up a nice summary of what i see as the spin for respec.... But what oyu left out is that the majority of the people who're really in on thsi disscusion IMO, are longtime players who have known for a long time that DDO isn't a static game. That changes will come, some will benefit a build, some will turn a build into trash. BUT the real arguement FOR a respec seems to come mostly from people who want to keep the bound gear and stats, they worked hard for on a toon, and apply it to the uber toon of the Mod...... That's what it's really about, isn't it? All this talk of player retention, it's not fair, etc, add nausiam is an end run around what it's really all about...... It simply is too much like a particular politcal parties propaganda lines, saying this when every knows it's a load....

In case you still deny the content of your own words, here they are again: "That's what it's really about, isn't it? All this talk of player retention, it's not fair, etc, add nausiam is an end run around what it's really all about...... It simply is too much like a particular politcal parties propaganda lines, saying this when every knows it's a load.... "

In case you continue to deny it, what you were doing is claiming that Borror0 was lying about what the reasons for a respec are.

[Mhykke]

Hmm, now wait a moment.... Where did I say it was Borro that was putting forth all these reasons simply to hide the fact that HE wanted to be uber and really just was being greedy or whatever so many are calling it. I never said that.... I simply said that a good number of people who're FOR a full re spec, IMO are of that nature. If that's what you thought I was saying.... Oops... That's not what I was saying at all. ..

Sorry for the confusion. My post didn't say you "were" doing anything. I was addressing this exchange:


My lack of arguing every single point that say Borro brings up has nothing to do with me not being able to....

I replied with:


Sure, if you don't want to argue Borr's points, for example, don't. You don't have to argue them, or argue them all. The point is, also don't make up arguments and put them in Borr's mouth, only so one can take them apart. If one wants to disagree with a post by Borr, then disagree with it. Don't make up reasons, like Borr's real motivation is so he can have an "easy button" to get a "FOTM" build, or that he really wants this b/c he exploited the game by multiclassing and now he's jealous of capstones. It helps if people address what someone actual said, rather than making up reasons in order to argue against those reasons (which is the easy, lazy way out).

We were discussing an example where you are responding to Bor. I was agreeing that if you don't want to argue a certain person's posts, or all of the points he makes in them, then don't. That's the first 2 sentences of the above quote.

But my next statement isn't saying that you are guilty of adding words in Borr's mouth. It simply says that the main point is one shouldn't add words simply to argue with those words. I used the word "you" b/c I was still sticking w/ the example of an exchange b/w you and Bor. I changed the "you" to "one" to be a bit clearer.

Edit:
And I had forgotten about your original post in this thread. While my response above wasn't directed at you personally, now that I go back to your original response, it can most definitely be applied to you. Your original response is exactly what I've been talking about. You accused Bor of "spinning" the argument. In the same post, you wished for a more honest argument. So yes, in fact, my request can directly be applied to "you." If you disagree with Bor, then disagree with what he's saying. Don't put words in his mouth, and say what the respec is "really" about. It's very easy if someone makes an argument, to simply say "your argument's really about X", and then proceed to argue against X. You're not arguing the person's points. You're simply arguing against your made up reasons. It is very tempting to do this though.




Read what I said again and again Mhykke, I think you took it all wrong. I also said that it's OK to want to be uber, and to not lose all that hard work on an out of date build. And it's far easier to make up what someone means than to actually reply to what someone means......

Hey, that's great that it's "ok to want to be uber." This doesn't address anything, b/c not many (none that I remember) argue that a reason behind a respec is in order for people to be uber.

You're distorting the argument of "one wants the ability to change his character b/c a game change/addition has altered that character in a way that the player did not expect and/or does not enjoy" to "one wants to be uber". Hardly. Is it difficult to imagine someone building their character not to be uber, but rather for flavor, and a change to the game alters a person's view of that character?



That by adding a full re spec mechanism in the game, it may make it too easy to reach clear superiority and therefore would cause many to play out the game at a much faster rate therefore causing less player retention........

Yes, you might be correct, if there was a way to reach "clear superiority" in game. But in reality, that doesn't exist. People build new characters all the time. If there was a "clearly superior" DPS build, for example, then those building a new character for DPS would all be doing the same thing. But in reality, they're not. Some are building rangers, some barbs, some fighters now with the fighter capstone, some paladins w/ knight of the chalice and the other additions to paladins. This isn't even considering multiclass options available. The game is varied, and there's rarely a "clearly superior" way of doing something.

[FluffyCalico]

Once again, character respec discussions have taken over the forums, to the point of derailing an important thread for feedback (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=174671).

It these discussions, it seems that there are a lot of misconceptions about the pro-respec arguments. For the proponents of character respec, it is quite irritating as it feels as if words were being put into our mouth. As for those against the implementation of a character respec, it weakens their positions because they are not addressing our arguments.

Hopefully, this thread will clarify our position and lead to more productive conversation.

Before I start explaining our argument, I think it may be worthwhile to define what is meant by "character respec".

Character respec is an expression used to simplify to gather multiple requests into one. The purpose of this word is to avoid making too heavy sentences each time one has to talk about all the request being made. Usually, in the context of DDO, it includes alignment respec, class respec, skill point respec and often race respec as well.

Whether or not these respec are offered all at once or if they are separated is unimportant (although the 'all at once' option seems to be less hard for turbine to code).

Aesthetic respecs are often included because the arguments from them are different than the ones for respec of things directly affecting gameplay but no one would complain if Turbine decided to kill two birds with one stone.

Please note that a request for respec makes no mention of the cost that will be used. Consensus is that we have to agree that really there is a problem before being able to discuss what is the best way to solve it. Possible costs are in-game money, XP and collectibles (Ã* la dragonshard). Respec as a Premium Service is often an excluded possibility because it does not address the problems that lead to requesting character respec in the first place.

Now that I have taken the time to explain what the request is, exactly, I'll proceed into explaining the two main reasons to ask for a character respec. The first argument being that character respec would increase character retention and the second argument being that character respec would allow game developers to change the game data more freely, thus leading to a better game.

The first argument can be summarized by the following syllogism:

Various errors were made during DDO's design.
To fix those errors, DDO developers have to change feats, spells, enhancements, etc. in a way that may harm characters, directly or indirectly.
Players value the continuous improvement of their characters and may quit if their characters are harmed.
If respecs were possible, then characters could change to follow changed game rules.
Players would not feel their character was harmed and not cancel their subscription.
Therefore, respecs would increase player retention.

As for the second argument, it can be described as follow:

Various errors were made during DDO's design.
Due to those errors, the game is not as good as it could be.
The developers are inhibited from fixing errors because some characters would be harmed, either directly or indirectly.
If respecs were possible, then characters could change to follow changed game rules.
The developers would have fewer worries when making a change, so more improvements would happen.
Therefore, respecs would make DDO better for everyone.

Both of these arguments illustrate that character respec requests have more to them than being a mere "I want it because I like it": there are benefits to their implementation other than just pleasing the players. And, to discredit the respec request one has to be able to refute both arguments.

Hopefully, that clarifies most misunderstandings.

Now, discuss!

My answer for repecs is simple.
1) DDO makes more people mad the further it gets from PnP
2) In PnP the closest thing you got to a respec was begging the GM to let you go on a quest to replace that feat of uselessness you took
3) DnD has never been about respecing to the single best build it has been about seeing your character grow and have its choices actually make differences in the game and how the character turns out. Respec completely destroys this. Having regrets about a choice is not only part of life, but part of the DnD emersion and always has been.

[caution]

Care to explain how they're exploitable?

Certain re-specable characteristics are valuable at different levels. For example, skill focuses, life/mana bonuses have larger impact at low levels due to the percentage benefit offered by them.

Some examples:
* At lvl 1 or 3, mobility is kind of lame, so take something handy like toughness and then just swap it in a level 6 when you need it for tempest.
* Charm person, web, sleep are not very effective without heighten, but awesome at low levels. Have your sorc or bard take it early, and swap it out later for grown up spells.
* Skip class +2 stat boost enhancement by re-specing to +3 when you make pre-reqs at lvl 10, utilising points on other handy things in meantime.
* ...and many more! :)

The only protection here is the 3 day limit (and cost) to prevent you doing it for each quest, point being that you manipulate your build to optimise your character in opposition to the intent of having limited/critical choices.

Whether this is a tactic or an exploit is up to you. Maybe I have used too harsh words for the description of these tricks, but it acknowledges some of the power in the current respec mechanisms.

[Mhykke]

Some examples:
* At lvl 1 or 3, mobility is kind of lame, so take something handy like toughness and then just swap it in a level 6 when you need it for tempest.
* Charm person, web, sleep are not very effective without heighten, but awesome at low levels. Have your sorc or bard take it early, and swap it out later for grown up spells.
* Skip class +2 stat boost enhancement by re-specing to +3 when you make pre-reqs at lvl 10, utilising points on other handy things in meantime.
* ...and many more! :)


All of these are specifically within the game rules, and working as intended. Sorry, not close to be exploits.

[Angelus_dead]

1) DDO makes more people mad the further it gets from PnP
True, but misleading, because people also get mad when they make bad choices. Following PnP D&D closely would be a bad choice. In fact, better online gameplay is mroe important than fidelity to some book rules that don't even work well in their intended environment.


2) In PnP the closest thing you got to a respec was begging the GM to let you go on a quest to replace that feat of uselessness you took
False.
1. By the rules as written in the core books, D&D characters can drop their levels and re-learn them as another class.
2. In D&D when a Dungeon Master changes the rules about how character features work, he is highly likely to allow the players to adjust character choices based on the old rules.
3. In D&D when a player incorrectly understood the rules, it is highly common for the Dungeon Master to allow erroneous choices to be revised. That is especially true if the mistakes were caused by the Dungeon Master himself, if he had told the players incorrect things about how the rules work.
4. The D&D PHB2 contains numerous and liberal rules for respeccing essentially everything.


3) DnD has never been about respecing to the single best build it has been about seeing your character grow and have its choices actually make differences in the game
Yes, if the choices are actually made by you, and not changed later because the DM alters the rules in the middle. "Hey guess what guys! You're all level 16 now, and I've decided to add new features to level 20 of every class, which might be good or bad... you'll see once you reach the level!"

[caution]

Honest question:

Why should a person care about your viewpoints in this area, considering you don't consider the viewpoints of people on the other side?

Because my point was to simply disagree, and not to influence others. So I didn't really care if people considered them, and I am cool if people skipped them.

It also does not mean I that hadn't been watching the discussion so far, and that I haven't been missing things either.

My viewpoints were probably unecessary, but added for potential benefit to anyone who is interested in understanding why some people actually do not think respecs are such a good idea. Such feedback helps in quantifying the assumption that people are unhappy or hurt by a world without full respecs.

[Tanka]

Certain re-specable characteristics are valuable at different levels. For example, skill focuses, life/mana bonuses have larger impact at low levels due to the percentage benefit offered by them.

Some examples:
* At lvl 1 or 3, mobility is kind of lame, so take something handy like toughness and then just swap it in a level 6 when you need it for tempest.
* Charm person, web, sleep are not very effective without heighten, but awesome at low levels. Have your sorc or bard take it early, and swap it out later for grown up spells.
* Skip class +2 stat boost enhancement by re-specing to +3 when you make pre-reqs at lvl 10, utilising points on other handy things in meantime.
* ...and many more! :)

The only protection here is the 3 day limit (and cost) to prevent you doing it for each quest, point being that you manipulate your build to optimise your character in opposition to the intent of having limited/critical choices.

Whether this is a tactic or an exploit is up to you. Maybe I have used too harsh words for the description of these tricks, but it acknowledges some of the power in the current respec mechanisms.
Working as intended, it seems. The Devs have never said that wasn't their intent.

[Quanefel]

True, but misleading, because people also get mad when they make bad choices. Following PnP D&D closely would be a bad choice. In fact, better online gameplay is mroe important than fidelity to some book rules that don't even work well in their intended environment.


False.
1. By the rules as written in the core books, D&D characters can drop their levels and re-learn them as another class.
2. In D&D when a Dungeon Master changes the rules about how character features work, he is highly likely to allow the players to adjust character choices based on the old rules.
3. In D&D when a player incorrectly understood the rules, it is highly common for the Dungeon Master to allow erroneous choices to be revised. That is especially true if the mistakes were caused by the Dungeon Master himself, if he had told the players incorrect things about how the rules work.
4. The D&D PHB2 contains numerous and liberal rules for respeccing essentially everything.


Yes, if the choices are actually made by you, and not changed later because the DM alters the rules in the middle. "Hey guess what guys! You're all level 16 now, and I've decided to add new features to level 20 of every class, which might be good or bad... you'll see once you reach the level!"

Let me see here, you come down on FluffyCalico for following P&P rules too closely in this respec debate then right after start listing of things about the rules to help support your positive position of a full respecc in game. Interesting to say the least.

Also interesting are these rules you claim are written in the core rule books, I for one would love to read them better. I have a curious mind. Links, page numbers, direct quotes of these rules you claim? I am not saying you are lying or making things up. I am sure all 4 things you listed are 100% correct in every detail.

[Tanka]

Let me see here, you come down on FluffyCalico for following P&P rules too closely in this respec debate then right after start listing of things about the rules to help support your positive position of a full respecc in game. Interesting to say the least.

Also interesting are these rules you claim are written in the core rule books, I for one would love to read them better. I have a curious mind. Links, page numbers, direct quotes of these rules you claim? I am not saying you are lying or making things up. I am sure all 4 things you listed are 100% correct in every detail.
4) PHB2, starting with page 191.

It's not terribly hard to open a book and look for yourself.

[Quanefel]

4) PHB2, starting with page 191.

It's not terribly hard to open a book and look for yourself.



PHB2? I was kind of hoping for a rule based off 3.5 rules since DDO is based off 3.5 rules, at least I thought so.

[Tanka]

PHB2? I was kind of hoping for a rule based off 3.5 rules since DDO is based off 3.5 rules, at least I thought so.
PHB2 is 3.5 rules. Or didn't you get that memo?

[Mhykke]

Also interesting are these rules you claim are written in the core rule books, I for one would love to read them better. I have a curious mind. Links, page numbers, direct quotes of these rules you claim? I am not saying you are lying or making things up. I am sure all 4 things you listed are 100% correct in every detail.

Lol, weren't you the one who claimed that a certain argument was made "countless" times, and when questioned to provide one shred of proof, spouted off that the person asking should find proof out for themselves?


you hope to squirm around the issue by making me prove something that actually does exist in written form already?

So are you now trying to "squirm around the issue by making [AD] prove something that actually does exist in written form already?"

Well, at least you're still laughably inconsistent.

[Hafeal]

I think the key is to define what a "respec" is. I don't agree with it including race, class or alignment.

We have feat and enhancements respecs - and we should - because of how the game has changed. What is missing is skills and I think Turbine should bite the bullet on tomes, make a decision and set up at least a 1 time skill overhaul.

The big question is bound and raid loot - which is not really a respec issue but seems to be the pink elephant. For casual players, like me, who have 2 capped characters in 2 years, it would be nice to not have to re-roll to "fix" a character due to game changes and lose out on very rare items that I may never get again. But I understand why this would bother some gamers and those points are valid. I do not envy the tight rope Turbine walks. Perhaps Turbine hopes in its silence that all will be resolved with upcoming mods. :o

[Quanefel]

PHB2 is 3.5 rules. Or didn't you get that memo?

Maybe you did not get the memo, 4.0 has PHB2 also.

http://dnd4.com/rumors

I have 3.0 in front of me, I think but no 3.5 PHB2. Is it about the energy drain from a wight?

[FluffyCalico]

Maybe you did not get the memo, 4.0 has PHB2 also.

http://dnd4.com/rumors

I have 3.0 in front of me, I think but no 3.5 PHB2. Is it about the energy drain from a wight?

They also left out the part that most DMs will only allow this to solve a very serious issue, if they allow it all. The fact that it even says in the book like I did that you would have to complete very special quests for this. And that you should not be allow to change things that will mess up the story line of your character and the things it has done. In short the things they are asking for are no way supported by the phb. In the players hand book if anything reinforces that this should be rare and under special situations with the approval and supervision of the GM. And should have restrictions on it to keep character identy valid.

In short I said if x then y z and they said omg god no the book says if x then yz get it right.

[Angelus_dead]

I think the key is to define what a "respec" is. I don't agree with it including race, class or alignment.
Why do you think it is OK for someone to trade Improved Trip for Power Attack or Greater Shout for Polar Ray, but not Evasion for Weapon Of Good?

Is there any justification for allowing respec for some of those things but not others, either by D&D rules or DDO gameplay consequences?


The big question is bound and raid loot - which is not really a respec issue but seems to be the pink elephant.
It really is a respec issue. Respec is about characters, and bound loot is attached to the character almost like a part of her.

[Angelus_dead]

They also left out the part that most DMs will only allow this to solve a very serious issue, if they allow it all.
Flat out untrue.

Are you making claims about the content of a book you don't possess?

[Quanefel]

Flat out untrue.

Are you making claims about the content of a book you don't possess?

Untrue? Does the DM have final say or the player on such matters?

[Angelus_dead]

As for the second argument, it can be described as follow:
Here are a few more arguments of lesser importance (with some twisting, you could shift some of them to be a subset of the reasons you listed)

1. Adapt to changed rules. Explained at the top, and repeated here for completeness.

2. Freedom to improve rules. Explained at the top.

3. Incorrect documentation. The developers have made various inaccurate descriptions of what character features actually do. Those mistakes can hurt player characters by leading them into a wrong choice, but a respec fixes it.

4. Operator error. Just like developers will sometimes make mistakes, players will too. And unlike the devs, they're not being paid to be careful and correct. A single missed click during level-up can permanently damage a character's future abilities. (In many competing games, you can respec everything except for choices at character creation- and if you screwed up there, it doesn't cost much time to simply reroll)

5. XP Cap. The D&D game rules were designed so that there is no upper limit on a character's level. So long as you can keep finding XP, you can add more and more levels as you play more. There is no situation in D&D where a pal19/fig1 would be blocked from obtaining a pal20 class feature because the DM just throws away his XP and refuses to advance him to pal20/fig1.

6. D&D Fidelity. The published game rules of D&D allow for respec, although they call it either "retraining", "rebuilding", or "permanent negative level". There's also such a thing as a "Helm of Opposite Alignment' and even "Girdle of Gender Changing".

7. Greater Diversity. Players are more likely to try out an oddball character choice if they know they can take it back later if it doesn't work.

8. Game Balance Feedback. Because characters can't respec class levels, it takes players longer to adapt to changes. That means that if a change is made which harms game balance, it takes longer for it to become noticeable, as characters must come up from scratch to maximize the benefit. (For example, when Monks came out on a test server, Ran16 characters were unable to switch to Ran15/Monk1 and test high-level monsters)

[Angelus_dead]

Untrue? Does the DM have final say or the player on such matters?
Non sequitur.

"Final say" and "only for very serious issue" are not equivalent. The PHB2 is very clear that respecs should be allowed to enhance the player's enjoyment.

[FluffyCalico]

Flat out untrue.

Are you making claims about the content of a book you don't possess?

Well if you had the book you would see that it says that even though it lays out the rules for changes that the changes must be kept within reason to protect the story and character integrity.

A full respec is not "within reason"

[FluffyCalico]

Non sequitur.

"Final say" and "only for very serious issue" are not equivalent. The PHB2 is very clear that respecs should be allowed to enhance the player's enjoyment.

Ever been in a major tourny and tried to pull out that repec section and say I demand a full respec lol. They will laugh you all the way to banned from location if you pull that there.

[Quanefel]

Non sequitur.

"Final say" and "only for very serious issue" are not equivalent. The PHB2 is very clear that respecs should be allowed to enhance the player's enjoyment.


Have you even ever played D&D before? Because comments like that, says to me you have no idea what you are saying. One of the main rules above all states that: The GM has final say on ANYTHING.

The PHB2 says respecs? Respecs is a term used for MMO's, there is no such word as respec in any D&D book that I am aware of.

What else about D&D are you going to attempt to bastardize?

[Angelus_dead]

Ever been in a major tourny and tried to pull out that repec section and say I demand a full respec lol. They will laugh you all the way to banned from location if you pull that there.
Do you have any idea how different event rules (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=rpga/hq/generalrules) are from the D&D rulebooks?

They even break Rule Zero.

[Angelus_dead]

Have you even ever played D&D before? Because comments like that, says to me you have no idea what you are saying. One of the main rules above all states that: The GM has final say on ANYTHING.
Wrong, again.

You're not even approximately following the conversation, and your replies are inapplicable to this context. The DM's discretion doesn't extend to modifying the text of books possessed by people he hasn't even met. Someone made an incorrect claim about the text of PHB2, a book published by Wizards/Hasbro.

The DM is in charge of his game, and he's allowed to modify or ignore the written rules whenever he feels like it. But just because some DM exercised his perogative doesn't mean that rule was never printed in the first place.


The PHB2 says respecs? Respecs is a term used for MMO's, there is no such word as respec in any D&D book that I am aware of.
If you'd read before replying, you might not make that kind of mistake.

[FluffyCalico]

Do you have any idea how different event rules (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=rpga/hq/generalrules) are from the D&D rulebooks?

They even break Rule Zero.

Yes I am in fact I will do you one better, the 5 people I often play 3.5 with (yes we hate 4.0) are all licensed to run offical games. And I can tell you unless you are fairly new to the game that respec section is very unlikely to happen without a quest from hell. If you are 1 rank short of getting into your pretigue class thats another story, but if you took something on purpose because you thought you could switch it out later when you didnt need it any more tuff luck, thats not what that section is there for. In fact if the master is doing his job and advising players when they make a "weird" choice then that section should not be needed at all for 99.99% of games.

1 of them (not me) is even a grand master level. I can tell you that the GM can toss whole books if he wants. If you choose not to respect the GM get certified your self as you won't be welcome in any of their games tourney or regular.

[Mhykke]

Yes I am in fact I will do you one better, the 5 people I often play 3.5 with (yes we hate 4.0) are all liscended to run offical games. And I can tell you unless you are fairly new to the game that respec section is very unlikely to happen without a quest from hell. If you are 1 rank short of getting into your pretigue class thats another story, but if you took something on purpose because you thought you could switch it out later when you didnt need it any more tuff luck, thats not what that section is there for.

And that's all fine and good.

But if those that run those official games change a rule that affects a player's enjoyment, would they be so rigid as to not allow some kind of respec? Maybe they would be. There are other DMs that wouldn't be. All of that is irrelevant to the question of would it be smart for Turbine to be so inflexible. And that's ignoring the vast difference b/w running a game for a handful of people, and running a game for tens of thousands.

[Angelus_dead]

Yes I am in fact I will do you one better, the 5 people I often play 3.5 with (yes we hate 4.0) are all liscended to run offical games. And I can tell you unless you are fairly new to the game that respec section is very unlikely to happen without a quest from hell.
That was a rhetorical question, so the details of the answer don't matter. I'll explain it a bit more explicitly:

If an organization makes widespread changes to many aspects of the D&D rules to support the play style desired for their events, then those changes cannot be used as evidence for how the original rules function.

If you think about it, the fact that they make changes at all is a clue that they're not adhering to the rules as written.


1 of them (not me) is even a grand master level. I can tell you that the GM can toss whole books if he wants. If you choose not to respect the GM get certified your self as you won't be welcome in any of their games tourney or regular.
That doesn't matter at all... the fact that you think it matters....

[RTN]

Didn't Turbine basically admit that respec would be an absolute nightmare for them technologically? While the arguments for respec might be convincing (I have a few things I'd like to alter about several of my characters), is it even worth it given that the Powers-that-be have basically said, we feel your pain, but it isn't possible with the resources we have. No, I don't have the post and it might have been before the great forum wipe, but I am 100% that at least one of the Devs have stated this.

[Quanefel]

Wrong, again.

You're not even approximately following the conversation, and your replies are inapplicable to this context. The DM's discretion doesn't extend to modifying the text of books possessed by people he hasn't even met. Someone made an incorrect claim about the text of PHB2, a book published by Wizards/Hasbro.

The DM is in charge of his game, and he's allowed to modify or ignore the written rules whenever he feels like it. But just because some DM exercised his perogative doesn't mean that rule was never printed in the first place.


If you'd read before replying, you might not make that kind of mistake.

I am wrong? The rule of the GM having final say I things is not in the rulebooks? Next time you play a P&P session, go ahead and tell the GM that YOU have final say. Tell me how that works out for you.

What are you talking about? Now you are just tossing out random statements that has nothing to do with any of this. Textbooks of people a DM has never met, ....what??

The GM has final say rule or the non-existant rule of players respeccing their characters fully on a whim? I still would like to see THAT rule.

[FluffyCalico]

And that's all fine and good.

But if those that run those official games change a rule that affects a player's enjoyment, would they be so rigid as to not allow some kind of respec? Maybe they would be. There are other DMs that wouldn't be. All of that is irrelevant to the question of would it be smart for Turbine to be so inflexible. And that's ignoring the vast difference b/w running a game for a handful of people, and running a game for tens of thousands.

Good point lets look at that with a WOW comparision yes I said wow.

Many top raid guilds require your spec to be x y z and get away with it bcause they know you can walk up and poof there is x y z spec. This is already being done to some extent to casters in this game. I do not see the ability to full repec (which will allow the demand of an exact spec) to be for the enjoyment of the masses. I see it as a way to run around with a level one that already has full raid gear in the bank. The only people who really benifit are the few that have tons of raid gear or those that play so little they can't level another up. This is in no way the majority. And I personally don't want anything in place that will make the whole you must x y z become a full reality.

[Quanefel]

Didn't Turbine basically admit that respec would be an absolute nightmare for them technologically? While the arguments for respec might be convincing (I have a few things I'd like to alter about several of my characters), is it even worth it given that the Powers-that-be have basically said, we feel your pain, but it isn't possible with the resources we have. No, I don't have the post and it might have been before the great forum wipe, but I am 100% that at least one of the Devs have stated this.



http://ddo.enterwiki.net/page/Respec

I hope that helps.

[Mhykke]

Good point lets look at that with a WOW comparision yes I said wow.

Many top raid guilds require your spec to be x y z and get away with it bcause they know you can walk up and poof there is x y z spec. This is already being done to some extent to casters in this game. I do not see the ability to full repec (which will allow the demand of an exact spec) to be for the enjoyment of the masses. I see it as a way to run around with a level one that already has full raid gear in the bank. The only people who really benifit are the few that have tons of raid gear or those that play so little they can't level another up. This is in no way the majority. And I personally don't want anything in place that will make the whole you must x y z become a full reality.

The fear of "you must be x y or z" could easily be handled if a respec was on a long timer, correct?

[FluffyCalico]

The fear of "you must be x y or z" could easily be handled if a respec was on a long timer, correct?

Nope lets say 1 month. Guild leader, I know you can respec in the next month so by day ... you must be x y z or your are out. It's not x y z for a quest. It's x y z to be in the guild period

[Mhykke]

Nope lets say 1 month. Guild leader, I know you can respec in the next month so by day ... you must be x y z or your are out.

You're just arguing degree. What about once every 12 months? Do you really expect someone to suggest to someone else to respec their character in a game that only allows 1 per year, for example?

[FluffyCalico]

You're just arguing degree. What about once every 12 months? Do you really expect someone to suggest to someone else to respec their character in a game that only allows 1 per year, for example?

Hm... not sure I have an objection to this other than I plain don't like repecs. I could look the other way if they did this. And yes this is very different than 1 per month

[Tanka]

Maybe you did not get the memo, 4.0 has PHB2 also.

http://dnd4.com/rumors

I have 3.0 in front of me, I think but no 3.5 PHB2. Is it about the energy drain from a wight?
Perhaps, before making unsubstantiated claims, you would do well to do a little research into points made by other parties before attempting to refute them.

[Angelus_dead]

Well if you had the book you would see that it says that even though it lays out the rules for changes that the changes must be kept within reason to protect the story and character integrity.

A full respec is not "within reason"
Ok, so you say you do in fact possess the PHB2 book... but still, you badly misrepresent it's contents.

I suppose I'll just type in one paragraph.

It's true that part of the D&D game's challenge is making smart choices in creating or advancing your character. But a DM who forces someone to play a character he doesn't find enjoyable isn't making the game fun for that player or the others at the table. In such a situation, the player usually either throws away the character and rolls up a new one, or quits the game. If your campaign values character continuity, neither of those outcomes is especially attractive. Why force Mike to throw away the elf fighter he's been playing for three months just because he made a couple of bad feat choices? If Mialee has been an integral part of the campaign since day 1 but has regretted being an elf since day 2, wouldn't it be better to let her become the halfling she'd prefer to be by undergoind a dramatic transformation at the Necrotic Cradle than by abruptly replacing her with Liamee the halfling wizard?

[Quanefel]

6. D&D Fidelity. The published game rules of D&D allow for respec, although they call it either "retraining", "rebuilding", or "permanent negative level". There's also such a thing as a "Helm of Opposite Alignment' and even "Girdle of Gender Changing".



That right there is the biggest bunch of BS I have ever seen. Fidelity, really?

A Helm of Opposite Alignement is one cursed magical item.
A Girdle of Gender Change is a seperate cursed magical item.
A respec...does not exist in D&D. It is an MMO term, not a D&D term.
Negative Level Drain comes from a spell or certian undead as an attack. Not a good thing.

For all of those to take place, a player would have to wear the helm, put on the belt, and stand there while a wight attacks and drains you down to level 1 without killing you outright and respec out anything else that is not taken care of with all that with a rule that does not exist. With the last thing of the GM saying, Go for it!


So basically bastarize various mechanics and rules, combine them, add other made up mechanics/rules that would somehow be more D&D like to would help this full respec idea? You seriously need to rethink all that.

[Mhykke]

Hm... not sure I have an objection to this other than I plain don't like repecs. I could look the other way if they did this. And yes this is very different that 1 per month

I'm open for there to be some kind of prevention of people respeccing constantly for the current flavor build (even though I don't consider this a big problem). I think there's some common ground where people would have the opportunity to adjust their character eventually according to a different game than the one when they created and leveled their character, at the same time not allowing for that person to simply completely readjust their character on a whim.

[FluffyCalico]

Ok, so you say you do in fact possess the PHB2 book... but still, you badly misrepresent it's contents.

I suppose I'll just type in one paragraph.

HAHA since you like typeing put in the last paragraph from that same page

[Angelus_dead]

Negative Level Drain comes from a spell or certian undead as an attack. Not a good thing.
Exactly... level drain is supposed to be a bad thing.

In D&D there is no level cap to get stuck at, so if you have a way to get XP you can keep going up and up. But in DDO there is a level cap, creating the perverse situation where many characters would enjoy getting level drained so they could take a better level.

Rule of Thumb: If the game rules create a situation where a player can regret accepting some reward (like advancing in level), those rules should be re-examined.


For all of those to take place, a player would have to wear the helm, put on the belt, and stand there while a wight attacks and drains you down to level 1 without killing you outright and respec out anything else that is not taken care of with all that with a rule that does not exist.
What are you trying to do?

[FluffyCalico]

I'm open for there to be some kind of prevention of people respeccing constantly for the current flavor build (even though I don't consider this a big problem). I think there's some common ground where people would have the opportunity to adjust their character eventually according to a different game than the one when they created and leveled their character, at the same time not allowing for that person to simply completely readjust their character on a whim.

At least you are being reasonable and trying to make sence. Thanks for creating an actual discussion out of all the BS from others that shall not be named.

[bobbryan2]

That right there is the biggest bunch of BS I have ever seen. Fidelity, really?

A Helm of Opposite Alignement is one cursed magical item.
A Girdle of Gender Change is a seperate cursed magical item.
A respec...does not exist in D&D. It is an MMO term, not a D&D term.
Negative Level Drain comes from a spell or certian undead as an attack. Not a good thing.

For all of those to take place, a player would have to wear the helm, put on the belt, and stand there while a wight attacks and drains you down to level 1 without killing you outright and respec out anything else that is not taken care of with all that with a rule that does not exist. With the last thing of the GM saying, Go for it!


So basically bastarize various mechanics and rules, combine them, add other made up mechanics/rules that would somehow be more D&D like to would help this full respec idea? You seriously need to rethink all that.

It makes more sense than using PnP fidelty as an anti-respec argument, truth be told.

[FluffyCalico]

Exactly... level drain is supposed to be a bad thing.

In D&D there is no level cap to get stuck at, so if you have a way to get XP you can keep going up and up. But in DDO there is a level cap, creating the perverse situation where many characters would enjoy getting level drained so they could take a better level.

Rule of Thumb: If the game rules create a situation where a player can regret accepting some reward (like advancing in level), those rules should be re-examined.


What are you trying to do?

Another point of view would be since DDO is xp capped there is no longer a penalty to loosing the level as you can quickly gain it back and not be behind the rest of the party in levels. Yes when all the bad is taken away and only left with the good something does look good all of a sudden. Which is why it should not be allowed without putting in a new bad thing as it was never ment to be a good thing.

[Angelus_dead]

HAHA since you like typeing put in the last paragraph from that same page
I guess that's the simplest way to prevent the illusion that the paragraph doesn't supports respecs.

This chapter presents rules for revising various aspects of your character during play. With this system, you can modify elements of your character to better fit your vision of who your character should be- both to meet the needs of the party and to face the threats presented during the course of an entire campaign. Though character revision does allow you to "rewrite" certain elements of your character, the rules presented here ensure that the changes remain within reason and do not upset the story that has been created by each characters' deeds in the campaign

[FluffyCalico]

I guess that's the simplest way to prevent the illusion that the paragraph doesn't supports respecs.

"Though character revision does allow you to "rewrite" certain elements of your character, the rules presented here ensure that the changes remain within reason and do not upset the story that has been created by each characters' deeds in the campaign"

Yes thats the line I wanted to see. Please explain how this line indicates that we should be allowed "full respecs" I see it saying very limited resepcs and in no way a full respec.

[Tanka]

"Though character revision does allow you to "rewrite" certain elements of your character, the rules presented here ensure that the changes remain within reason and do not upset the story that has been created by each characters' deeds in the campaign"

Yes thats the line I wanted to see. Please explain how this line indicates that we should be allowed "full respecs" I see it saying very limited resepcs and in no way a full respec.
Please tell me where, exactly, in DDO are my deeds recorded and retold by Bards throught Stormreach.

'Cuz I've got a few bribes I need to make if they do actually exist.

[Angelus_dead]

Yes thats the line I wanted to see. Please explain how this line indicates that we should be allowed "full respecs"
I don't need to do that.

It doesn't take a "full respec" to go from pal15/fig1 to pal15, or from ran16 to ran15.

[Mhykke]

"Though character revision does allow you to "rewrite" certain elements of your character, the rules presented here ensure that the changes remain within reason and do not upset the story that has been created by each characters' deeds in the campaign"

Yes thats the line I wanted to see. Please explain how this line indicates that we should be allowed "full respecs" I see it saying very limited resepcs.

-It mentions "character revision" specifically.

-It says it should be within reason. Revising your character to reflect a rule change isn't unreasonable. People in favor of respecs more often than not are willing to have a cost associated with them, so that one doesn't simply respec 10 times in a night.

-As for upsetting the story, respeccing a character doesn't really change the the "story that's been created" through his deeds. If we use an extreme example, let's say one wants to change his barb to a wizard (this would be highly unlikely as the gear a person acquired would be more for melee than a caster)....well, he changes his class completely, but doesn't affect the DDO story that the twelve sees that person as one helping destroy the pit fiend, for example. It doesn't change the story to have one change certain things about his character in DDO.


The 2 paragraphs that AD posted seem to me to indicate the authors were sensitive to the fact that it's better for players to enjoy their character, and allowed for a player to revise their characters, rather than leaving the game or playing a character one does not enjoy.

[FluffyCalico]

I don't need to do that.

It doesn't take a "full respec" to go from pal15/fig1 to pal15, or from ran16 to ran15.

Yes and thats not what alot of people are asking for. Lots are wanting to go from 6 ranger 2 rogue 8 of whatever to 16 of something. Your example I do not have a problem with.

Change 1 feat sure already in game.
Move 1 rank every month to new skill fine
Change 1 level every 3 months fine

Change half your charcter 1 time per month to be the flavor of the week hell no.

[Tanka]

flavor of the week
You keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

[FluffyCalico]

Please tell me where, exactly, in DDO are my deeds recorded and retold by Bards throught Stormreach.

'Cuz I've got a few bribes I need to make if they do actually exist.

You did know there is a spot for this on your character? Sadly most think this spot if for "check how many times you died with /death count" "Or dont group with x"

This could also be viewed as favor. At 400 favor from x some of their bards should definately be singing about you.

[Tanka]

You did know there is a spot for this on your character? Sadly most think this spot if for "check how many times you died with /death count" "Or dont group with x"

This could also be viewed as favor. At 400 favor from x some of their bards should definately be singing about you.
I don't play this game to roleplay. I play this game to have fun, which to me (and many others) is character improvement.

If I wanted to roleplay, I'd be with my tabletop group.

[FluffyCalico]

You keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

I think I have used it 2-3 times in 3 years. And I do know it's not icecream. To be clear its all the subpower gammers that want to be just like person x when they see what he can do. Or who want to copy some build that got posted and they oohh ahhh I like that.

Are you calling me short? Because if I look like anyone in Princess bride it would be the giant.

[bobbryan2]

Yes and thats not what alot of people are asking for. Lots are wanting to go from 6 ranger 2 rogue 8 of whatever to 16 of something. Your example I do not have a problem with.

Change 1 feat sure already in game.
Move 1 rank every month to new skill fine
Change 1 level every 3 months fine

Change half your charcter 1 time per month to be the flavor of the week hell no.

While I agree that that is not the goal of a respec... A respec, for sure, is not to be to spec into whatever is the current popular build.

However, it's one of those things that isn't such a big deal, that you should completely gimp legitimate respecs for it.

The truth of the matter is trading out one class, or one skill isn't even possible with the current way characters are saved... I don't mind people making reasonable suggestions for how to avoid the "FOTM" complaint... but most suggestions I see are more like this than anything else. Taking 1 class away every month isn't reasonable or feasible.

Something like, "limit 1 respec per 6 months, and make it cost 500k plat" is far more reasonable and feasible and limits FOTM speccing.

But seriously... I think you need to ask yourself if the FOTM speccing is really that big of a problem? There aren't currently any crazy, insane builds out there that make every other build useless. There are good ways to make any class out there, so there will be plenty of diversity, even if you were allowed to respec 100% of your character any time you wanted for free. (I don't think that would be a good idea even so... but I think there would still be diversity)

[Quanefel]

Exactly... level drain is supposed to be a bad thing.

In D&D there is no level cap to get stuck at, so if you have a way to get XP you can keep going up and up. But in DDO there is a level cap, creating the perverse situation where many characters would enjoy getting level drained so they could take a better level.

Rule of Thumb: If the game rules create a situation where a player can regret accepting some reward (like advancing in level), those rules should be re-examined.


What are you trying to do?

That is a perverse abuse of the rules. In DDO as well as a D&D there is a spell called restoration that cancels all that out. Also, I do believe the energy drain attack picks randomly what class is drained from you.

How does a game rule situation have anything to do with a player picking for himself a reward such as a class level the mistake of anyone but that player? The rules do not need to be examined, that player needs to be examined.

[Tanka]

I think I have used it 2-3 times in 3 years. And I do know it's not icecream. To be clear its all the subpower gammers that want to be just like person x when they see what he can do. Or who want to copy some build that got posted and they oohh ahhh I like that.
Wrong. The powergamers don't need "fotw" builds to succeed. They, in fact, usually make their own and don't post about it.

The people who would be respeccing to these so-called "flavor" builds aren't powergamers.

[FluffyCalico]

I don't play this game to roleplay. I play this game to have fun, which to me (and many others) is character improvement.

If I wanted to roleplay, I'd be with my tabletop group.

Then you have just taken the last part of DnD out of DDO. Congrats!

[Angelus_dead]

I don't play this game to roleplay. I play this game to have fun, which to me (and many others) is character improvement.

If I wanted to roleplay, I'd be with my tabletop group.
That's fine for you, but allowing respecs supports roleplay.

As explained in the PHB2 excerpts, when a character is rerolled because there had been a mistake building him, there's an interruption in the continuity of the storyline, as one personality ends and is inexplicably replaced with another (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/JonasQuinn). Rerolling hurts roleplaying, and respec prevents that.

[FluffyCalico]

Wrong. The powergamers don't need "fotw" builds to succeed. They, in fact, usually make their own and don't post about it.

The people who would be respeccing to these so-called "flavor" builds aren't powergamers.

Please read before quoting. It said subpower gammers. Thanks

Edit Hey wow allows you to see anyones complete spec and gear. Should we allow that too so when you are the bad ass of the server there are 1000 of you on every server?

[Angelus_dead]

The truth of the matter is trading out one class, or one skill isn't even possible with the current way characters are saved...
No, it is possible. It's not 100% straightforward, but it's possible.

If the starting design had been a little smarter it would have been easy, because the game server would have saved the choices made at each level up. But even without that data, a good programmer can handle it acceptably.

[Tanka]

Then you have just taken the last part of DnD out of DDO. Congrats!
In your opinion. Which is wrong.


That's fine for you, but allowing respecs supports roleplay.

As explained in the PHB2 excerpts, when a character is rerolled because there had been a mistake building him, there's an interruption in the continuity of the storyline, as one personality ends and is inexplicably replaced with another (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/JonasQuinn). Rerolling hurts roleplaying, and respec prevents that.
I could care less if they added an in-game storyline (even a multi-part quest) for the respec. I just know I want one that isn't handicapped to the point of uselessness.


Please read before quoting. It said subpower gammers. Thanks
Subpower gammers? I'm not even certain what that means.

[FluffyCalico]

In your opinion. Which is wrong.

.

You keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means.


I assume you know that it's an Oxymoron you keep using.

Lets see how to define subpower gammer for you. That would be a power gammer want to be that lacks the skills to do anything other than copy someone else and what they did. This applies to both characters and strategy for new content.

[Quanefel]

That's fine for you, but allowing respecs supports roleplay.

As explained in the PHB2 excerpts, when a character is rerolled because there had been a mistake building him, there's an interruption in the continuity of the storyline, as one personality ends and is inexplicably replaced with another (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/JonasQuinn). Rerolling hurts roleplaying, and respec prevents that.



What's next, "allowing respecs will stop global warming?" O.o

There are some straws still on the table over there, keep grasping for them.....

[Tanka]

You keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means.


I assume you know that it's an Oxymoron you keep using.
PnP does not automatically mean roleplaying. Many people played 3.5 for the tactical combat game that it tried to be.

[Tanka]

Lets see how to define subpower gammer for you. That would be a power gammer want to be that lacks the skills to do anything other than copy someone else and what they did. This applies to both characters and strategy for new content.
Quickedits to add more commentary are really quite annoying. You know that, right?

Either way, there's an extra 'm' in there that was throwing me off in my drunken state. ('Tanka', you ask, 'why are you posting drunk?' 'Well, because I can,' I respond.)

Who cares if the wannabe powergamers are copying someone else? They won't be able to grind for the right gear fast enough to make a difference if they're switching every however long (unless that 'however long' is prohibitively long - measured in the months, of course).

[FluffyCalico]

PnP does not automatically mean roleplaying. Many people played 3.5 for the tactical combat game that it tried to be.

You misunderstood, the Oxymoron you keep using isn't that it's

"In your opinion. Which is wrong"

[Tanka]

You misunderstood, the Oxymoron you keep using isn't that it's

"In your opinion. Which is wrong"
I can't help it that I'm right.

[FluffyCalico]

I can't help it that I'm right.

Sadly I still think you don't get it.

[Angelus_dead]

Either way, there's an extra 'm' in there that was throwing me off in my drunken state. ('Tanka', you ask, 'why are you posting drunk?' 'Well, because I can,' I respond.)
Drunken players are another good reason to allow respecs.


I can't help it that I'm right.
Maybe if you work harder at being drunk.

[bobbryan2]

You misunderstood, the Oxymoron you keep using isn't that it's

"In your opinion. Which is wrong"

Please don't start that whole "opinions can't be wrong" nonsense.

[Tanka]

Drunken players are another good reason to allow respecs.
Cheers.

[Borror0]

Let me know if I am wrong but it seems the best arguments anti-respec people haveso far is this discussion.

#1 -You are lying!

While your arguments make sense, you are lying and thus should not be listened to.
Irrelevant. Whether ones intentions are good or evil, in the end all that matters is if the arguments he put forward make sense. Simply because you think one is not honestly making his argument does not make them false. While that person may personally want respec for reasons not stated in the OP, it does not mean his idea is a bad one.

#2 - Against PnP

While the PHB2 makes mention of respec, I will keep on arguing that a respec is against PnP as if it was a compelling argument
As pointed multiple times throughout this thread, D&D books make several mentions to character respecs. The logic used behind is that it would be poor DMing to not allow the player to adapt to a rule you changed or misunderstood. Gameplay may trump RP in that situation.

You may disagree, personally, but it's there as a possibility.

Furthermore, this argument is a weak one in its core. Even if it was true that this would represent a huge change that would get us further away from PnP, this does not prove this idea to be bad. Assuming that this deviation will cost Turbine a few players, it would be a huge stretch to argue that this would cost them more players than it could allow them to save/gain and arguing that is should not be done simply because it is not perfect is a nirvana fallacy.

All that matters is: would this lead to greater profits or not?

#3 - Flavor of the Month

I will keep on mentioning that this will ridiculously reduce diversity as if it was convincing enough on its own..
I direct you to post #2 (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=2085283#post2085283) where I refuted this argument. Refute these counterarguments, then make that argument once again.

[Borror0]

Please don't start that whole "opinions can't be wrong" nonsense.
And if you are going to regardless, then do it in another thread.

[Quanefel]

Let me know if I am wrong but it seems the best arguments anti-respec people haveso far is this discussion.

#1 -You are lying!

Irrelevant. Whether ones intentions are good or evil, in the end all that matters is if the arguments he put forward make sense. Simply because you think one is not honestly making his argument does not make them false. While that person may personally want respec for reasons not stated in the OP, it does not mean his idea is a bad one.

#2 - Against PnP

As pointed multiple times throughout this thread, D&D books make several mentions to character respecs. The logic used behind is that it would be poor DMing to not allow the player to adapt to a rule you changed or misunderstood. Gameplay may trump RP in that situation.

You may disagree, personally, but it's there as a possibility.

Furthermore, this argument is a weak one in its core. Even if it was true that this would represent a huge change that would get us further away from PnP, this does not prove this idea to be bad. Assuming that this deviation will cost Turbine a few players, it would be a huge stretch to argue that this would cost them more players than it could allow them to save/gain and arguing that is should not be done simply because it is not perfect is a nirvana fallacy.

All that matters is: would this lead to greater profits or not?

#3 - Flavor of the Month

I direct you to post #2 (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=2085283#post2085283) where I refuted this argument. Refute these counterarguments, then make that argument once again.



What is the word to describe making up the arguements for the opposing side to later attack that made up arguement yourself? Hmmmmm....

[Borror0]

What is the word to describe making up the arguements for the opposing side to later attack that made up arguement yourself? Hmmmmm....
If I'm getting you right, you're talk about straw man but for that you'd have to mention I am misrepresenting the arguments.

[FluffyCalico]

What is the word to describe making up the arguements for the opposing side to later attack that made up arguement yourself? Hmmmmm....

Defense attorney trying to keep a guilty person out fo jail?

[Ughh]

Right for the game? Wrong for the game? Not my place to say, personally, I WILL ( and have) reroll if i don't like a toon. I will not respec if offered (and i have some gimps LOL). Just me..not meant to dig on anyone's opinion. HOWEVER, I have been playing PnP DnD since the 70s, paperback at that LOL..I have played in numerous tournaments and have seen some crazy builds. I have NEVER seen a DM in a tourney OR out of one allow a full respec. I have, however, seen a DM in both tourney play and out of, allow reappropriation of certain feats etc to allow the player to have a more enjoyable game experience. But, these changes have NEVER been game or toon changing, simply fixes for the "noob that didn't know" or the build that just can't function as built without a few "fixes". I just plain love playing this game and to me, the most important fixes ATM are Lag, server downtime and time between mods. Let's get these issues fixed first. It really doesn't matter if you can "fix" your toon if the lag at ole Harry kills you anyway..or the server goes down just as you were looting the Crippling Chain Shirt. Just my 2 cp

thanks
Ughh

[Quanefel]

If I'm getting you right, you're talk about straw man but for that you'd have to mention I am misrepresenting the arguments.



What I wrote is called a question, not an assertion. So no, I do not need to mention what you are misrepresenting in an asking a question.

[FluffyCalico]

If I'm getting you right, you're talk about straw man but for that you'd have to mention I am misrepresenting the arguments.

Prepicking the arguments is like a defence attorney standing up in court and saying let the prosecutor prove my client did it without mentioning the witness or the finger prints. He can only talk about points 1-5 not any others. I believe that is what he was getting at. You can't prepick only the topics you know you can defend and then go see I was right.

[Borror0]

What I wrote is called a question, not an assertion. So no, I do not need to mention what you are misrepresenting in an asking a question.
I answered your question:

"If I am getting you right, you're talking about straw man [...]"And then, I added a condition for my post above to actually contain straw men:

"[...] but for that you'd have to mention I am misrepresenting the arguments."
In other words, it means that I think you're trying to accuse my post to contain straw man (that is, made-up argument that do no represent the real arguments being made and are easier to refute than the real ones) but for that accusation to be true you'll have to point out why they are straw men.

[Mhykke]

Prepicking the arguments is like a defence attorney standing up in court and saying let the prosecutor prove my client did it without mentioning the witness or the finger prints. He can only talk about points 1-5 not any others. I believe that is what he was getting at.

Well, technically, Borr posted a summary of arguments made in the thread, as he saw them, asked to be corrected if he was misrepresenting, and refuted the arguments in the summary:


Let me know if I am wrong but it seems the best arguments anti-respec people haveso far is this discussion.



So if we want to use the courtroom example, it'd be like the defense attorney saying something like "the prosection's argument is a, b, and c (after the prosecution presented a case)"...then arguing against a, then b, then c...
If the prosecutor thinks the summation of his argument is incorrect, then he can argue why it is incorrect.

[Ughh]

Oregon inmate loses sex-change lawsuit.......

An Oregon prison inmate (TOON WANTING RESPEC known here to fore as toon) has lost a lawsuit to force the state (SEE TURBINE known heretofore as ...well turbine) to pay for a sex-change operation (RESPEC) and transfer him to a women's prison. U U.S. Magistrate...

By The Associated Press

PORTLAND — An Oregon prison inmate (toon) has lost a lawsuit to force the state (turbine) to pay for a sex-change operation (RESPEC) and transfer him to a women's prison.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Janice Stewart ruled that inmate Anny May Stevens (toon) could not pursue his federal lawsuit (request for respec) because he had previously lost the same suit (been discussed in past and decided it was too much work) in state court.

Stewart also ruled that it was reasonable for the Oregon Department of Corrections (turbine) to assign inmates to a men's or a women's prison (race, class or build) based on their anatomical sex (original build choice)— not their preferred gender identity ( possible respec).

Otherwise, the judge (turbine)said, inmates could request the opposite sex prison (new build) based on personal preference.(REROLL IRL)


THIS IS MEANT TO BE IN FUN

[Quanefel]

Let me know if I am wrong but it seems the best arguments anti-respec people haveso far is this discussion.

#1 -You are lying!

Irrelevant. Whether ones intentions are good or evil, in the end all that matters is if the arguments he put forward make sense. Simply because you think one is not honestly making his argument does not make them false. While that person may personally want respec for reasons not stated in the OP, it does not mean his idea is a bad one.

#2 - Against PnP

As pointed multiple times throughout this thread, D&D books make several mentions to character respecs. The logic used behind is that it would be poor DMing to not allow the player to adapt to a rule you changed or misunderstood. Gameplay may trump RP in that situation.

You may disagree, personally, but it's there as a possibility.

Furthermore, this argument is a weak one in its core. Even if it was true that this would represent a huge change that would get us further away from PnP, this does not prove this idea to be bad. Assuming that this deviation will cost Turbine a few players, it would be a huge stretch to argue that this would cost them more players than it could allow them to save/gain and arguing that is should not be done simply because it is not perfect is a nirvana fallacy.

All that matters is: would this lead to greater profits or not?

#3 - Flavor of the Month

I direct you to post #2 (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=2085283#post2085283) where I refuted this argument. Refute these counterarguments, then make that argument once again.

1. Lies
To you maybe lies are irrelevant to a debate but to others, it is. If a person can not be trusted to tell the truth with true facts instead of lies then their arguements hold no weight. If a person is asked what are his reasons behind his arguement and he lies, how is that person presenting logic or fact? Any lie can make sense but it does not mean it is allowed in an arguement nor will it just be accepted simply because the person liar wishes it so.

2. Against P&P
It is one thing to say if it is in the rules it should be allowed. It is another to say even if it isn't, it still should be allowed. The rules of D&D only seem to matter if helps make the full respec idea come into DDO. I have seen it before in discussing this issue and it does not hold water. To have so little respect for the rules of D&D just so some people can remake their characters is absurd. You can not wrap the rules around the issue but then dismiss them the moment they do not work in your favor.

All that matters if it leads to greater profits? I will let Turbine decide what will lead them to greater profit.

3. Flavor of the Month
Yes, you refuted it with the wave of a hand. As normal. Good for you.

[Quanefel]

I answered your question:

"If I am getting you right, you're talking about straw man [...]"And then, I added a condition for my post above to actually contain straw men:

"[...] but for that you'd have to mention I am misrepresenting the arguments."
In other words, it means that I think you're trying to accuse my post to contain straw man (that is, made-up argument that do no represent the real arguments being made and are easier to refute than the real ones) but for that accusation to be true you'll have to point out why they are straw men.



I was not aware there was pre-conditons to asking a question. Why you think I asked a question does not make it an accusation simply because you say so. Where are you getting all this from?

[Borror0]

If a person can not be trusted to tell the truth with true facts instead of lies then their arguements hold no weight.
Quanefel, you are clever enough to know that is not true.

For example, if I was to say "The Earth is round because of the crushing empirical evidences supporting that theory" but that my actual argument was "The Earth is round because God told me", if I were to be totally honest, does it make the argument "The Earth is round because of the crushing empirical evidences supporting that theory" hold no weight?

Of course not.

Furthermore, debating my motivations is impossible. You may speculate about it but you cannot know of it. Trying to make my motivations part of the debate is simply an attempt at changing the topic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring_(logical_fallacy)#Red_herring) to avoid better arguments, whether it is intentional or not.

My motivations cannot, and will not prove me wrong (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Types_of_ad_hominems).

You can not wrap the rules around the issue but then dismiss them the moment they do not work in your favor.
I think you're misunderstanding how we are using the PnP references.

We are not using it to validate our position, ever. The consensus is that 'being against PnP' is not a compelling argument on its own to flat out prove that respecs are a bad idea. However, not only is that argument not strong enough on its own, it is also false because PnP rules support the claims for respec.

We are not using it to validate our claim, though, as that 'being like this in PnP' is not a valid argument.

Why you think I asked a question does not make it an accusation simply because you say so.
It is quite clear that your question was a rhetorical question, which is why I answered it in that manner.

Even if I am mistaken in that assumption, you've got your answer so please tell why are you making a fuss about this?

[FluffyCalico]

Of course not.




I think you're misunderstanding how we are using the PnP references.

We are not using it to validate our position, ever. The consensus is that 'being against PnP' is not a compelling argument on its own to flat out prove that respecs are a bad idea. However, not only is that argument not strong enough on its own, it is also false because PnP rules support the claims for respec to be given to anyone who wants it. .





Negative they do not support a full respec and are in fact against a full respec to any who want it. What they are for is a limited amount of change to your character to address an important issue without drasticly altering your existing character. Stop doing exactly what you accuse others of in the same post about the same topic.

Again just to be clear the PnP rules in no way, shape, or form, support a FULL repec. They support very limited change because it's needed not a full change because it's wanted. Those are in no way the same thing.

[Borror0]

What they are for is a limited amount of change to your character to address an important issue
And I shall ask you what a class respec is, in your opinion?

The point is that 'full respec' is a generic term to refer to multiple request all at once (as explain in the OP). We are not asking for major revamp of character at once, but the the ability to adapt to change. That means the ability to adapt if skills get changed (ie skill point respec), ability to change our alignment (ie alignment respec - which is totally supported by PnP rules), etc.

The only reason they are all put together is because we need them all and it is easier to ask for 'full character respec' than you list them all each and every single time. Accuracy is lost to prevent from making our sentences redundantly long.

[FluffyCalico]

And I shall ask you what a class respec is, in your opinion?

The point is that 'full respec' is a generic term to refer to multiple request all at once (as explain in the OP). We are not asking for major revamp of character at once, but the the ability to adapt to change. That means the ability to adapt if skills get changed (ie skill point respec), ability to change our alignment (ie alignment respec - which is totally supported by PnP rules), etc.

The only reason they are all put together is because we need them all and it is easier to ask for 'full character respec' than you list them all each and every single time. Accuracy is lost to prevent from making our sentences redundantly long.

The problem is you are ignoring that this little accuracy detail is the breaking point on the topic for many. If you ask for some respec very few are going to get upset. When you ask for full respec you set off all kinds of people. This may be no big differece to you but to those opposing the topic little vs complete makes all the difference in the world.
I think if you take the time to not let this specific part get lost in the details that 90%+ of your opposers will not oppose you

[Quanefel]

Quanefel, you are clever enough to know that is not true.

For example, if I was to say "The Earth is round because of the crushing empirical evidences supporting that theory" but that my actual argument was "The Earth is round because God told me", if I were to be totally honest, does it make the argument "The Earth is round because of the crushing empirical evidences supporting that theory" hold no weight?

Of course not.

Furthermore, debating my motivations is impossible. You may speculate about it but you cannot know of it. Trying to make my motivations part of the debate is simply an attempt at changing the topic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring_(logical_fallacy)#Red_herring) to avoid better arguments, whether it is intentional or not.

My motivations cannot, and will not prove me wrong (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Types_of_ad_hominems).

I think you're misunderstanding how we are using the PnP references.

We are not using it to validate our position, ever. The consensus is that 'being against PnP' is not a compelling argument on its own to flat out prove that respecs are a bad idea. However, not only is that argument not strong enough on its own, it is also false because PnP rules support the claims for respec.

We are not using it to validate our claim, though, as that 'being like this in PnP' is not a valid argument.

It is quite clear that your question was a rhetorical question, which is why I answered it in that manner.

Even if I am mistaken in that assumption, you've got your answer so please tell why are you making a fuss about this?

It is not true? Really? I was under the impression that both sides were to present facts, logic, truthful statements, etc but to you...as long as they make sense it is irrelevant of someone might be lying in debating?

Example: Turbine has already said they will never, ever have a full respec added to DDO. Therefore, there is to be no further discussion of the matter.

What don't believe me? Doesn't matter, it is irrelevant if I am might seem dishonest in my statement. Correct?


Debating motives is impossible? No. A person still can and they can speculate all they want about it, especially if the person who might be lying could have exposed his dishonest statements before. It is not always an attempt to avoid a topic. More than likely people are losing respect for the dishonest person and question if that person even is wanting to debate, rather than them just spewing forth garbage from their mouth.


No, I am not misunderstanding anything about people using D&D rules as a shield if those rules might look favorable to a full respec idea. They bring it up for the debate yet then distance themselves from it when it does not work for them. Much like you writing about us not being able to use it for this debate then go on to tell us how the P&P rules support the claims for a respec. All in basically the same sentence!

You claim you are not using them to validate your claims then you go on to claim they support your claims! Lovely.


That last statement is even better. I ask a question, you get defensive and accuse me of something I never did then have the gall to ask me why "I" am making a fuss about it? Maybe you should read what you write before you hit the Submit Replay button.

[smatt]

That is not true.

Here's you:


In case you still deny the content of your own words, here they are again: "That's what it's really about, isn't it? All this talk of player retention, it's not fair, etc, add nausiam is an end run around what it's really all about...... It simply is too much like a particular politcal parties propaganda lines, saying this when every knows it's a load.... "

In case you continue to deny it, what you were doing is claiming that Borror0 was lying about what the reasons for a respec are.


Um no I didn't specifaicalyl say that it was Borro was lying... How many are claiming this player retention stuff.. Seems I remember a rather few were, as well as have used the same justifications he is. Which is fine.... But I think a good number of them would also be respecing for the reason I stated. Which is fine as well..... I mean really how many peopel have been truly "nerfed" by the game as oppossed ot would truly benefit by goign to another class that's been enhanced..... I think the later could easily be seen as the more numerous. Telling me what I'm doing doesn't work ;), I know what I'm doing, although it maybe been worded in a way that would give soemone who wants to over analize everything the room to accuse me of hate, or neferous motives. And as I've said, I can respect everybodies opinion on this, I may not agree with them but I do respect them. I'm jsut not sure that everybody is really 100% honest about their own reason for it. I'm not picking on any one person here at all, it's a generalization.

So get off your accusatory high horse A_D. I may joke around and give a flipant remark ( a joke), like the one I gave to Mhyyke. But I respect Mhykke as someone who contributes to this game not only through game play but here on the forums as I do Borro, and many others in this and a good number of other gameplay/mechanics threads. A great deal of thought is put into a lot fo these disucssions, and some really good ides come out of them.

And as I've said I would greatly benefit from a respec, I just don't neccesarily agree that it would create any kind of a difference in player retention, and in fact COULD lead to more "nerfing" due to a sudden amount of capped, raid loot laden uber builds. Which would lead to even mroe ridiculous walk-thoughs of the upper level content. Either way..... Thos ethat want it want it for whatever reason and that's fine.. And those that don't don't and that's fine as well.

[bobbryan2]

I asked this question in another thread, and I'll ask it here.

What other MMO has an analagous situation to this:

A drunk player gets on at 4am, accidentally levels with the wrong trainer, and his character is now permanently broken.

Is there another MMO that offers absolutely no recourse to this solution? Where the player's only options are start over from scratch or deal with a permanently gimped character?

I'm not saying that we have to be like every other MMO out there... but I at least want to hear justification why it's a good thing for DDO to be unique in this situation, offering unparalleled character customization AND an inability to fix any poor decisions or accidents?

[FluffyCalico]

I asked this question in another thread, and I'll ask it here.

What other MMO has an analagous situation to this:

A drunk player gets on at 4am, accidentally levels with the wrong trainer, and his character is now permanently broken.

Is there another MMO that offers absolutely no recourse to this solution? Where the player's only options are start over from scratch or deal with a permanently gimped character?

I'm not saying that we have to be like every other MMO out there... but I at least want to hear justification why it's a good thing for DDO to be unique in this situation, offering unparalleled character customization AND an inability to fix any poor decisions or accidents?

Am am about against respec as you can get..But I would not be against allowing anytime someone levels 72hrs to change their mind and take something else instead. So long as they can't change there mind every 72 hrs forever.

[bobbryan2]

Am am about against respec as you can get..But I would not be against allowing anytime someone levels 72hrs to change their mind and take something else instead. So long as they can't change there mind every 72 hrs forever.

Hint:

That's called a respec.

I understand your fears about total respec functions... but the reality is that there will be a ton of different scenarios that your proposed solution wouldn't fix. DDO's character customization is THAT complex.

Complex customization lends itself to needing a more flexible respeccing system than DDO currently has.

[Quanefel]

I asked this question in another thread, and I'll ask it here.

What other MMO has an analagous situation to this:

A drunk player gets on at 4am, accidentally levels with the wrong trainer, and his character is now permanently broken.

Is there another MMO that offers absolutely no recourse to this solution? Where the player's only options are start over from scratch or deal with a permanently gimped character?

I'm not saying that we have to be like every other MMO out there... but I at least want to hear justification why it's a good thing for DDO to be unique in this situation, offering unparalleled character customization AND an inability to fix any poor decisions or accidents?

A drunk player doing something accidentally on his own accord to his character is not the fault of any MMO, nor are MMO's in the business to fix the real life problems of their players. When they do, let me know.

DDO is not unique in that regard. It is your opinion that DDO is the only one who offers "unparalleled" character customization. Does DDO offer more than maybe others out there, maybe so. It is hardly the qualifier for a full respec.

The inability to fix poor decisions or accidents? We can do that to a certain degree just like many other MMO's allow in their games. In fact more so. We have 3 different types of partial respecs where most only have one. We should feel lucky we have more than those other games instead of just looking at what we don't have.


Again, poor decisions or accidents by players is NOT the resposibilty of any MMO, it is not their business to fix our problems. What is DDO, a nanny state now? o.O

[bobbryan2]

A drunk player doing something accidentally on his own accord to his character is not the fault of any MMO, nor are MMO's in the business to fix the real life problems of their players. When they do, let me know.

DDO is not unique in that regard. It is your opinion that DDO is the only one who offers "unparalleled" character customization. Does DDO offer more than maybe others out there, maybe so. It is hardly the qualifier for a full respec.

The inability to fix poor decisions or accidents? We can do that to a certain degree just like many other MMO's allow in their games. In fact more so. We have 3 different types of partial respecs where most only have one. We should feel lucky we have more than those other games instead of just looking at what we don't have.


Again, poor decisions or accidents by players is NOT the resposibilty of any MMO, it is not their business to fix our problems. What is DDO, a nanny state now? o.O

That's not what I asked.

Again, answer the question.

Is there an analagous situation in any MMO? If not? Why should DDO be different in this? If we can't fix situations like the above, obviously we shouldn't feel 'lucky' we have what we have... that would be completely ignorant. Obviously other games should feel lucky that their respecs are sufficient, while DDO's are not.

[smatt]

Sorry for the confusion. My post didn't say you "were" doing anything. I was addressing this exchange:



I replied with:



We were discussing an example where you are responding to Bor. I was agreeing that if you don't want to argue a certain person's posts, or all of the points he makes in them, then don't. That's the first 2 sentences of the above quote.

But my next statement isn't saying that you are guilty of adding words in Borr's mouth. It simply says that the main point is one shouldn't add words simply to argue with those words. I used the word "you" b/c I was still sticking w/ the example of an exchange b/w you and Bor. I changed the "you" to "one" to be a bit clearer.

Edit:
And I had forgotten about your original post in this thread. While my response above wasn't directed at you personally, now that I go back to your original response, it can most definitely be applied to you. Your original response is exactly what I've been talking about. You accused Bor of "spinning" the argument. In the same post, you wished for a more honest argument. So yes, in fact, my request can directly be applied to "you." If you disagree with Bor, then disagree with what he's saying. Don't put words in his mouth, and say what the respec is "really" about. It's very easy if someone makes an argument, to simply say "your argument's really about X", and then proceed to argue against X. You're not arguing the person's points. You're simply arguing against your made up reasons. It is very tempting to do this though.


OK I can see where you're coming from, I guess the way I wrote it could be construed that I was saying that it's Borro spinning it. Although I do think that there is a bit of a spin in it, as most of the toons that would be respecced, IMO, would be ones that would benefit from he improvements in other classes NOT from the nerfing of their own. So do Borro's original reason in this thread, constitute spin directly from him? Not neccearily..... My fault....





Hey, that's great that it's "ok to want to be uber." This doesn't address anything, b/c not many (none that I remember) argue that a reason behind a respec is in order for people to be uber.

You're distorting the argument of "one wants the ability to change his character b/c a game change/addition has altered that character in a way that the player did not expect and/or does not enjoy" to "one wants to be uber". Hardly. Is it difficult to imagine someone building their character not to be uber, but rather for flavor, and a change to the game alters a person's view of that character? [quote] Well, some people build just to build or are too new to the game. In fact I'd offer that the majority of people don't' use toon planners, and or don't plan a toon all the way to current cap, with all he current available equipment. I understand that SOME people builds have been hurt by the changes to a class, or race, or feat. But again I don't' think it's a reach or distortion to say that far more would use it simply to take hard earned bound items and tomes to the build of the Mod, because a particular class has become better than theirs. That's still my main point away from what Borro is saying.... Either way, people can want what they want for their own reasons. I can see why Borro would have the ideas he has, I don't think Borro or anybody else has a grand plan to take over the world......



[quote=Mhykke] Yes, you might be correct, if there was a way to reach "clear superiority" in game. But in reality, that doesn't exist. People build new characters all the time. If there was a "clearly superior" DPS build, for example, then those building a new character for DPS would all be doing the same thing. But in reality, they're not. Some are building rangers, some barbs, some fighters now with the fighter capstone, some paladins w/ knight of the chalice and the other additions to paladins. This isn't even considering multi class options available. The game is varied, and there's rarely a "clearly superior" way of doing something. Well Yes and no Mhyyke, there surely are better and more popular builds say for DPS. There are those that build a lot, and with the upcoming changes, there are more options for what is the highest DPS, most self-sustaining builds, than there are currently. But as I said to A_D above, what would the consequences of a sudden influx of respecced tons with allo the raid loot, all he crafted items suddenly taking advantage of the new class abilities and feats. Ones they didn't have to at least partially plan for? Could that lead to the game becoming far easier to far more people, leading to quicker burn-out, and gasp less player retention than currently? I'd say it's at least equal to Borro's thoughts on it being a positive move for player retention.

It's often hard to discern exactly what people are trying to say on a BB.... You don't get the nuances of the spoken word, body, and facial expression. I'm sorry that I may come off as accusatory at times. I really meant no disrespect to Borro, yourself or other in this discussion.

[Borror0]

DDO is not unique in that regard.
It actually is. All decision taken pat level 1 can be respec'd in all successful MMO's.

Unless you are trying to present a situation where a player created a character of the wrong class, leveled him for a while and only then realized he created a character of the wrong class as an analogous situation, DDO is "unique in that regard".

poor decisions or accidents by players is NOT the resposibilty of any MMO, it is not their business to fix our problems.
You are right. It is not their business to fix our problems but rather our business to keep us entertained.

I don't think making a mistake enhance the gameplay of anyone.

[Mhykke]

But again I don't' think it's a reach or distortion to say that far more would use it simply to take hard earned bound items and tomes to the build of the Mod, because a particular class has become better than theirs. That's still my main point away from what Borro is saying

Ok, if that's your main point (and I don't see it as the problem you do, but let's assume it's a problem) then make respec have a 12 month timer.

Problem solved?


But as I said to A_D above, what would the consequences of a sudden influx of respecced tons with allo the raid loot, all he crafted items suddenly taking advantage of the new class abilities and feats. Ones they didn't have to at least partially plan for? Could that lead to the game becoming far easier to far more people, leading to quicker burn-out, and gasp less player retention than currently?

Well, one consequence could also be that they actually stick around to play their newly respecced character, rather than simply leaving the game b/c they don't feel like starting over. And like I mentioned above, a long enough timer solves the "respeccing for the best for the current mod", correct? Or, if, when respeccing, one had to gain all his xp again, he'd have to relevel that character all the way back up to 20...again, it keeps that person playing the game, paying his subscription fees.

[Borror0]

Ok, if that's your main point (and I don't see it as the problem you do, but let's assume it's a problem) then make respec have a 12 month timer.
Heck, even figure a way to insert a restriction. For example, preventing a character to respec more the equivalent of half his levels.
(That would be a better fix than such a long timer, as that timer would prevent players to adapt to many possible changes.)

[bobbryan2]

Again, poor decisions or accidents by players is NOT the resposibilty of any MMO, it is not their business to fix our problems. What is DDO, a nanny state now? o.O

Also, I thought I'd address this in a seperate question.

I never said it wasn't the player's fault, and I never said it was Turbine's responsibility.

I merely asked if there was an analogous situation. And if your answer to that question is no... then maybe you should stop and figure out why that is?

[bobbryan2]

Heck, even figure a way to insert a restriction. For example, preventing a character to respec more the equivalent of half his levels.

That gets dicey quickly, because of how intricate DDO's multiclass situation is.

Would it be the worst thing in the world to go from a

7 Fighter, 6 Barb, 3 rogue

to a

7 Fighter, 6 Paladin, 3 monk

It's very similar to each other... but would trip that restriction. FOTM builds are simply not a big enough worry to try to stop legitimate respecs.

[Quanefel]

That's not what I asked.

Again, answer the question.

Is there an analagous situation in any MMO? If not? Why should DDO be different in this? If we can't fix situations like the above, obviously we shouldn't feel 'lucky' we have what we have... that would be completely ignorant. Obviously other games should feel lucky that their respecs are sufficient, while DDO's are not.

Yes I did answer your question.

"What other MMO has an analagous situation to this:"<------Not a question.
"Is there an analagous situation in any MMO?"<----That IS a question.

*Smack*

Analagous to what exactly? A person making a mistake on their on accord is still the problem of that player, not any MMO. A person not planning something out, is their fault. If a person does not research something, it is their fault. If an MMO makes a big mistake, yes that is the fault of the MMO. I can agree with that. I will not agree with players always wanting to blame DDO for their own mistakes that could have been avoided. Not all mistakes are the fault of DDO.

Yes we should feel lucky we have more respec options than others. It is not ignorant either. If you have $50 in your hand but get anger and toss the money away because you do not have $100 in your hand, that IS ignorant. Who goes through life only looking at what they don't have and not what they do have? Not me.

And how do you even know that those other games with their respec's is sufficient enough for their players. They are human beings and I have no doubt that they want more or think they want more than the respec options they have. Look at DDO. Even with the respec's we have, is it enough? Will it ever be enough? No. No matter what people are given they will always desire more. People demanded more character slots. They got them. Do you think that debate will ever really be over? No. People will still demand more since that is human nature.

[Borror0]

A person making a mistake on their on accord is still the problem of that player, not any MMO.Players unsubscribing, is a problem for any MMO.

[Quanefel]

It actually is. All decision taken pat level 1 can be respec'd in all successful MMO's.

Unless you are trying to present a situation where a player created a character of the wrong class, leveled him for a while and only then realized he created a character of the wrong class as an analogous situation, DDO is "unique in that regard".

You are right. It is not their business to fix our problems but rather our business to keep us entertained.

I don't think making a mistake enhance the gameplay of anyone.

Wrong. All decisions taken past level 1 can not respec'd out in all those MMO's. Each one if different in the details of how, when and what it is to be respecced. Some allow you to respec one part of your character that you chose at creation. Some allow you to change out one part at level 10, but just that one part.

DDO is still not "unique" in the regard of player making a mistake on picking the wrong class for x number of levels from creation. That is still not the fault of the MMO, that is a players fault. No one made him pick that class at start. The player did.

Now, this business issue. Sorry, but it is not their business to keep us entertained. It is their business to make money off us buying their product, using their service that they "think" would be entertaining for us. If we think it is entertaining, we will buy it. If we do not, we won't.

Making a mistake on something does not enhance the gameplay for anyone. I know.

[Mhykke]

Now, this business issue. Sorry, but it is not their business to keep us entertained. It is their business to make money off us buying their product, using their service that they "think" would be entertaining for us. If we think it is entertaining, we will buy it. If we do not, we won't.


Serious question, how old are you? 14, maybe 15?

This paragraph demonstrates a serious lack of understanding of, well, a lot really.

Their business is entertainment. Every company's job is to make money (hopefully profit if not a npo). If you happen to actually be older and have a real job (or know someone that does), when someone asks what business you're in, do you say "I'm in the business of making money off consumers by having them buy my product and or service"?

[Borror0]

Some allow you to change out one part at level 10, but just that one part.
Fine point, but do you have an example of that?

That is still not the fault of the MMO, that is a players fault. No one made him pick that class at start. The player did.
Well it is not the MMO's fault, it still concerns them. While the player is to blame, it is in the MMO's interest to be forgiving.

Now, this business issue. Sorry, but it is not their business to keep us entertained. It is their business to make money off us buying their product, using their service that they "think" would be entertaining for us. If we think it is entertaining, we will buy it. If we do not, we won't.
You're arguing semantics. The point is that whether or not we are entertain affects their business.

Therefore, it is in their interest to keep us 'happy'.

[FluffyCalico]

Hint:

That's called a respec.

I understand your fears about total respec functions... but the reality is that there will be a ton of different scenarios that your proposed solution wouldn't fix. DDO's character customization is THAT complex.

Complex customization lends itself to needing a more flexible respeccing system than DDO currently has.

Hint:no that is called I was drunk and have 72hrs to figure out what I did while I was drunk. It was aimed to solve 2 issues. 1 the I was drunk when i did it. and oops I went to the wrong trainer and hit yes instead of no. That is all it was amied at and yes it solves both of those 100% for all future occourances.

[Mhykke]

Hint:no that is called I was drunk and have 72hrs to figure out what I did while I was drunk. It was aimed to solve 2 issues. 1 the I was drunk when i did it. and oops I went to the wrong trainer and hit yes instead of no. That is all it was amied at and yes it solves both of those 100% for all future occourances.

Let's play a little game. Let's say Turbine introduces this 72 hour timer. There's 2 options for turbine to name it. Which do you think is more likely they call it:

1. Respec

or

2. I was drunk and have 72 hours to figure out what I did while I was drunk system

[Quanefel]

Serious question, how old are you? 14, maybe 15?

This paragraph demonstrates a serious lack of understanding of, well, a lot really.

Their business is entertainment. Every company's job is to make money (hopefully profit if not a npo). If you happen to actually be older and have a real job (or know someone that does), when someone asks what business you're in, do you say "I'm in the business of making money off consumers by having them buy my product and or service"?


Entertained and entertainment are not the same. The fact that you got those confused is not all that suprising. We are talking about what they do, not what they are. Learn the difference and stop confusing things.

[Quanefel]

Fine point, but do you have an example of that?

Well it is not the MMO's fault, it still concerns them. While the player is to blame, it is in the MMO's interest to be forgiving.

You're arguing semantics. The point is that whether or not we are entertain affects their business.

Therefore, it is in their interest to keep us 'happy'.

You want me to give you an example of...an example I already gave you? It was WoW talents I was talking about.

I am sure a great deal concerns them and it might very well be in their interest to be forgiving. In my mind, Turbine has. They have offered us 3 individual types of respec's AND have hinted at giving us more, sometime in the future. Like I wrote earlier, most of those MMO's that do offer at least one type pales in the forgiving nature of what Turbine has offered us and has hinted at offering us later. Other MMO's should be jealous of what Turbine offers us in terms of respec's compared to theirs.

Us being entertained or not might effect their business in some ways but the fact is, it is not always in their best interest to keep us "happy". Customers sometimes have no clue what they want, they usually think they know but not always what it really it is. A business also should avoid giving their customers every demand they want also. If they do give in every time, they will be run out of business. I owned a business once, I know how customers can be. Very demanding and wanting things more than what they think they should pay. A customer might not always like it but when does it end? If every customer makes their demands, they will want more the next time until you have no business left.

It goes back to DDO not giving us what we want all the time. Imagine if every single player demanded an idividual request and they give it to them. Do you think Turbine would be in business long? No. Trust me, they won't. They have to strike a delicate balance of what they can do vs what it is their customers what. Not always easy with some of the players you see in the forums!

[Quanefel]

Lol, you're splitting hairs, and it is laughable. You said This is false on its face, as they're in the entertainment business. Their business, by definition, is to entertain they're customers (to keep them entertained).

The fact you confuse this is not surprising, and makes it look like you're closer to 14 rather than 15.



They do not keep us entertained, they sell/make a product that keeps us entertained.

Keep attempting to insult me, someday it might actually work. Maybe. Probably not.

[Borror0]

It was WoW talents I was talking about.
Oh really? then maybe you should read more (http://www.wowwiki.com/Talent#What_if_I_choose_the_wrong_Talents.3F) on the topic (http://www.wowwiki.com/Talent_build#Re-spec)?

[...] it is not always in their best interest to keep us "happy".
I was obviously referring to reasonable request. If they can easily avoid angering the players, they should.

[FluffyCalico]

Oh really? then maybe you should read more (http://www.wowwiki.com/Talent#What_if_I_choose_the_wrong_Talents.3F) on the topic (http://www.wowwiki.com/Talent_build#Re-spec)?

I was obviously referring to reasonable request. If they can easily avoid angering the players, they should.

1) They have already said it is not simple or easy to do
2) What makes you happy can anger others
3) While partial respec might be reasonable full respec at no serious cost is not reasonable to many and would anger many

[Borror0]

They have already said it is not simple or easy to do
Irrelevant to whether or not it is a reasonable request.

full respec at no serious cost
Straw man, and I am not even going to bother telling you why.

[FluffyCalico]

Irrelevant to whether or not it is a reasonable request.

.

Very relivent.

How much time and resouces must be devoted vs how many it would please and anger is everything.

Why you ask? Because they don't have the manpower to do everything. Every min they spend doing this is a min they can't spend doing something else.

[Borror0]

How much time and resouces must be devoted vs how many it would please and anger is everything.
/facepalm

A time-consuming change can be worth it.

[smatt]

Ok, if that's your main point (and I don't see it as the problem you do, but let's assume it's a problem) then make respec have a 12 month timer.

Problem solved?



Well, one consequence could also be that they actually stick around to play their newly respecced character, rather than simply leaving the game b/c they don't feel like starting over. And like I mentioned above, a long enough timer solves the "respeccing for the best for the current mod", correct? Or, if, when respeccing, one had to gain all his xp again, he'd have to relevel that character all the way back up to 20...again, it keeps that person playing the game, paying his subscription fees.



Really, I don't see anything as a "problem"....... more of a consequince. I guess the way I think about DDO isnt' in line with say Bor's. I see it more as a game where you adapt to what comes at you. You dont' always need to perfect toon for everything, you make it work. It's kind of like the peopel that create new toons for one top level raid or quest, when it's been worked out. Just not my game, and that's all good, everybody has their fun in different ways,. What I realyl see with this Respec idea is as others said, and easy button. And that's OK, I just thnk it's a cheap way to be uber. There should be some finality ion your decision making when creating a build, that's part fo the learning process I like about DDO. It may hold it back a bit from other "Easier MMO's, and it might also create an even smaller initial player niche for it. But I think it's also part of what the core fanbase stays around for. This si why the high power items that are bound don't bother me. A particular ton has to earn that item, it's much harder to take the idea toon in and get that item to pass to another not so idea toon.


You've offered up a couple things that would seem to make it a bit less of a just respec wave the magic wand and suddenly I have a completely different toon that earned all those items through their skills and abilites. I offered up a few others way back in a thread months ago, that were mroe along the lines of it being a one time per toon thing, or perhaps somekind of permanent penalty to the toon. But on the face that would defeat the purpose of it, and that's to make this game more like the others. If we wan't DDO to be like allt he other MMO's we can much further to WoW it and just get it over with.

I don't persnally know how successful from a financial aspect that DDO is. While I constantly consider the business aspects around my thinking of why the implement some things it's hard to gauge. I'm sure though that they'd love to have more players, as I would. But not at the cost or ruining the game in the long run, and losing the unique parts of the game that does in fact draw the people that are here to it.

[Quanefel]

Oh really? then maybe you should read more (http://www.wowwiki.com/Talent#What_if_I_choose_the_wrong_Talents.3F) on the topic (http://www.wowwiki.com/Talent_build#Re-spec)?

I was obviously referring to reasonable request. If they can easily avoid angering the players, they should.

....And that shows what I was referring too. Cool?


A reasonable request can be suggested. That does not mean a reasonable suggestion should be done or would be given to us. They are not going to give us every request because it falls under your requirements of "being reasonable" because it would avoid us being angery at them. And what kind of logic is that anyways?

If they can easily avoid having us angery at them, any or all "reasonable" requests should be granted to us? Is that a new reason why they should have a full respec, to avoid having their players angry at them? That makes it sound more like a demand than a simple request.

Turbine in the end will decide if any request is reasonable, not a player. A player can have their own opinion that a request is reasonable and it remains that players opinion, not fact.

[linuxhippie]

For me it is rather simple. I knew nothing about D&D prior to starting this game. I played with a friend from work joined a small guild and had a wonderful time. Then the level cap increased from 10. Then new prestige stuff, etc etc. I've got a few characters of different class some pure, some multi, and a ton of bound items across all of them.

I don't have time to re-roll characters to this level. I made mistakes in creation (I'm sure I'm not alone here) and knowing what I do now I would luv to have a way (premium or otherwise) to go back and fix things (ie skill points distro or ability point distro) and keep my current character and all her bound items.

The "why" seems really ridiculous to discuss. The "What" and the "How" are important to me. I "play" this game. I can't go back in real life and fix mistakes (or cast spells for that matter) so having that ability to do that in this game is very appealing to me.

I hope turbine will allow some method of respec. It would keep me and others I know more involved in the game and possibly bring people back that I know left for this very reason.

Krellin
Drow RG
blindfaith
Sarlona

[Hafeal]

Why do you think it is OK for someone to trade Improved Trip for Power Attack or Greater Shout for Polar Ray, but not Evasion for Weapon Of Good?

Well, my thought was because feats and enhancements have been added, removed and changed since the game inception. I draw a fundamental difference between feats and enhancement v. new classes. As for spells, casters can find and learn new spells in a game of exploration.

To me, feats, enhancements, skills and spells can blend into the storyline of your character and them learning new things and giving up old - just like many of us do in our real life jobs. I can cross the cognitive leap there so to speak.


Is there any justification for allowing respec for some of those things but not others, either by D&D rules or DDO gameplay consequences?

No, I think it is purely opinion. I just am of the mind, for the time being, that you made your alignment and race - that IS your character, stick with it. If you want to train them in a new skill set so be it. I like bobbyran2's point about a mistake on classes and I think I could be persuaded to that. I know some new players who went to the wizard trainer instead of sorc by mistake and I have had occasion to know some drunken fools to do something foolish. As this is a game and not the judicial system I see no reason to "punish" people for such mistakes.



It [edit: bound and raid loot] really is a respec issue. Respec is about characters, and bound loot is attached to the character almost like a part of her.

For me, I think it is a side issue, the more important facet are feats, enhancements, skills and, I will go along with, classes.

If you get these changes, the "raid or bound" loot issue goes away because people will be able to keep their stuff along with their new and improved character! :D

[bobbryan2]

Yes I did answer your question.

"What other MMO has an analagous situation to this:"<------Not a question.
"Is there an analagous situation in any MMO?"<----That IS a question.

*Smack*

Analagous to what exactly? A person making a mistake on their on accord is still the problem of that player, not any MMO. A person not planning something out, is their fault. If a person does not research something, it is their fault. If an MMO makes a big mistake, yes that is the fault of the MMO. I can agree with that. I will not agree with players always wanting to blame DDO for their own mistakes that could have been avoided. Not all mistakes are the fault of DDO.

Yes we should feel lucky we have more respec options than others. It is not ignorant either. If you have $50 in your hand but get anger and toss the money away because you do not have $100 in your hand, that IS ignorant. Who goes through life only looking at what they don't have and not what they do have? Not me.

And how do you even know that those other games with their respec's is sufficient enough for their players. They are human beings and I have no doubt that they want more or think they want more than the respec options they have. Look at DDO. Even with the respec's we have, is it enough? Will it ever be enough? No. No matter what people are given they will always desire more. People demanded more character slots. They got them. Do you think that debate will ever really be over? No. People will still demand more since that is human nature.

For the record, I think both of those are questions.

Secondly.... It IS ignorant to think we should be lucky for DDO's respecs if they're insufficient compared to every other MMO out there. How do we know they're insufficient? Because there is not another analogous situation that you can name.

Again... I didn't ask who's fault it is. You're going down that path either due to poor reading comprehension or because you're scared of where my question will actually lead.

I, instead, asked if there's an analagous situation. Where a character can permanently break his character with a few misclicks and not have a way to fix it.

What other MMO has that situation?

[Quanefel]

For me it is rather simple. I knew nothing about D&D prior to starting this game. I played with a friend from work joined a small guild and had a wonderful time. Then the level cap increased from 10. Then new prestige stuff, etc etc. I've got a few characters of different class some pure, some multi, and a ton of bound items across all of them.

I don't have time to re-roll characters to this level. I made mistakes in creation (I'm sure I'm not alone here) and knowing what I do now I would luv to have a way (premium or otherwise) to go back and fix things (ie skill points distro or ability point distro) and keep my current character and all her bound items.

The "why" seems really ridiculous to discuss. The "What" and the "How" are important to me. I "play" this game. I can't go back in real life and fix mistakes (or cast spells for that matter) so having that ability to do that in this game is very appealing to me.

I hope turbine will allow some method of respec. It would keep me and others I know more involved in the game and possibly bring people back that I know left for this very reason.

Krellin
Drow RG
blindfaith
Sarlona



Do you have more than one character? I ask because you say you do not have time to reroll a character to that level. Does that mean you do not have time to level up more than one character in the same amount of time?

[Aspenor]

I disagree with everything Borror has said, mostly just out of principle.

Oh...wait....we're talking about respecs?

Nevermind. Carry on.

[Borror0]

I disagree with everything Borror has said, mostly just out of principle.
Working hard to keep your title?

[Borror0]

....And that shows what I was referring too. Cool?
That shows that everythnig past level 1 can be respec'd, like I said.

[Fenrisulven6]

Keep attempting to insult me, someday it might actually work. Maybe. Probably not.

Gee, I'm actually pro-respec now, and willing to discuss the issue, but then I see the pro side is back to sliming and bullying people like Quanefel for not agreeing with them.

So I'm gonna go with: anything more on respecs is a waste of time & energy until we get feedback from Turbine. So go raid something.

Everything that can said has been said. Hundreds of pages in the forums. You're only going to tick each other off, and for no good reason.

[Quanefel]

For the record, I think both of those are questions.

Secondly.... It IS ignorant to think we should be lucky for DDO's respecs if they're insufficient compared to every other MMO out there. How do we know they're insufficient? Because there is not another analogous situation that you can name.

Again... I didn't ask who's fault it is. You're going down that path either due to poor reading comprehension or because you're scared of where my question will actually lead.

I, instead, asked if there's an analagous situation. Where a character can permanently break his character with a few misclicks and not have a way to fix it.

What other MMO has that situation?

Not all sentences are questions. A ? helps the reader determine if something written is a question. Not to nit pick, just saying.

How do you even know that our respecs that we have is insuffucient compared to every other MMO out there? If the other MMO has only 1 type of respec to cover all that makes up a character in each individual MMO game and we have 3 types right now, how is that insuffucient? No matter if the respec is to change something from creation or later on down the road it still shows DDO has more ability to adapt then the other MMO's with their respec.

You do not have to ask who's fault it is for me to make my own statement about it, what my thoughts are on the matter.

What other MMO has that situation? None. Since there are options to fix "misclicks" or mistakes a player makes in their character, depending on the mistake. If the MMO offers a type of respec to fix it, they can use that. If not they can reroll a new character if there is no other choice available. I am sure if any of those MMO's thought it was in their best interest to allow all their players to fully respec every aspect of their character with a full respec, they might have had one...at least one MMO that has that feature. No MMO allows for that.

[Quanefel]

That shows that everythnig past level 1 can be respec'd, like I said.

Everything past level one is it now? Does this mean you all do not want a full respec in this game to change anything at creation, only things starting after level 1?

[Aspenor]

Gee, I'm actually pro-respec now, and willing to discuss the issue, but then I see the pro side is back to sliming and bullying people like Quanefel for not agreeing with them.

Just to make it clear, people bully Quanefel because it's fun, not because he disagrees with them.

Half the time people aren't even bullying him, it's just that he plays the victim whenever anybody disagrees with him. It's a very noticeable pattern.

I changed my forums avatar so I wouldn't be visually associated. Seriously....:cool:

[bobbryan2]

Everything past level one is it now? Does this mean you all do not want a full respec in this game to change anything at creation, only things starting after level 1?

What other MMO has character choices made prior to level 1 that can permanently gimp a character?

EDIT: The point is, You're trying to say prior to level 1 is the same in DDO as it is in other MMOs. That's simply not true.

[bobbryan2]

Not all sentences are questions. A ? helps the reader determine if something written is a question. Not to nit pick, just saying.

How do you even know that our respecs that we have is insuffucient compared to every other MMO out there? If the other MMO has only 1 type of respec to cover all that makes up a character in each individual MMO game and we have 3 types right now, how is that insuffucient? No matter if the respec is to change something from creation or later on down the road it still shows DDO has more ability to adapt then the other MMO's with their respec.

You do not have to ask who's fault it is for me to make my own statement about it, what my thoughts are on the matter.

What other MMO has that situation? None. Since there are options to fix "misclicks" or mistakes a player makes in their character, depending on the mistake. If the MMO offers a type of respec to fix it, they can use that. If not they can reroll a new character if there is no other choice available. I am sure if any of those MMO's thought it was in their best interest to allow all their players to fully respec every aspect of their character with a full respec, they might have had one...at least one MMO that has that feature. No MMO allows for that.

So you agree that being able to permanently gimp your character is unique to DDO? Due to many reasons, including lack of sufficient respec system and very indepth character customization?

[maddmatt70]

Just to make it clear, people bully Quanefel because it's fun, not because he disagrees with them.

Half the time people aren't even bullying him, it's just that he plays the victim whenever anybody disagrees with him. It's a very noticeable pattern.

I changed my forums avatar so I wouldn't be visually associated. Seriously....:cool:

I don't bother reading his posts personally. The posts often are far removed from any reality I know. There are folks who are against the respec and they have some valid points, but it just feels a little harsh sounding to me especially since we are customers buying a product...

[Aspenor]

I don't bother reading his posts personally. The posts often are far removed from any reality I know. There are folks who are against the respec and they have some valid points, but it just feels a little harsh sounding to me especially since we are customers buying a product...

I, as well, don't bother. Mostly because I find myself zoning out after the fifth word....

[Borror0]

I, as well, don't bother.
Subscribe me to that now, too.

[Quanefel]

So you agree that being able to permanently gimp your character is unique to DDO? Due to many reasons, including lack of sufficient respec system and very indepth character customization?

No, you asked if MMO's had a way for you to permanently gimp your character and NO way to fix it. You did not like the answer so you remove the "No way to fix them" to make it a new question but using my answer to the original question?

[Monkey_Archer]

If you want to go to the moon....
Maybe you should start building a rocket?

Regardless of what a respec would add or subtract from the game... or who it would benefit.. or whether its a good or bad idea....

Maybe you should start arguing for something that might be FEASIBLE like a skill point respec.

In respose to a question about pickpocket skills:


Although this sounds like a really fun addition to the game, I believe we'll have a lot of other priorities that shadow this in the near future. To really do something like this justice, we'd have to rework a lot of monsters and quests to make use of this kind of dynamic. It would appear to me that the cost of doing this is that it would slow down the content team. Another thing to consider is that we'd want a new skill for this. Any time we talk about new skills or changing skills in the game, the scary topic of skill respec comes up. That feature is a lot trickier than most people would imagine it to be and will take a lot of engineering and QA time to complete if we ever decide to do it.

So overall, I don't really see this happening for you anytime soon. Sorry. However, I'll bring it up in our next meeting as a general concept.

Thanks for your feedback,

Codog

[bobbryan2]

No, you asked if MMO's had a way for you to permanently gimp your character and NO way to fix it. You did not like the answer so you remove the "No way to fix them" to make it a new question but using my answer to the original question?

No... they're both the same question.

It's implied that if you have a permanently gimped character, that there is no way to fix it. That's what permanent means, genius.

You're getting too cute for yourself.

[Quanefel]

If you want to go to the moon....
Maybe you should start building a rocket?

Regardless of what a respec would add or subtract from the game... or who it would benefit.. or whether its a good or bad idea....

Maybe you should start arguing for something that might be FEASIBLE like a skill point respec.

In respose to a question about pickpocket skills:



Agreed. Yet the problem is not that people are for something small like a skill respec, it is that unless it is a Full Respec.....it generally gets pushed to the side as not good enough.

[bobbryan2]

If you want to go to the moon....
Maybe you should start building a rocket?

Regardless of what a respec would add or subtract from the game... or who it would benefit.. or whether its a good or bad idea....

Maybe you should start arguing for something that might be FEASIBLE like a skill point respec.

In respose to a question about pickpocket skills:

That quote says that a skill point respec is less feasible than a full respec. In fact, most of the ideas of a full respec have come because it would be too difficult to use a deleveling system.

Soooo... I AM arguing for something feasible.

[bobbryan2]

Agreed. Yet the problem is not that people are for something small like a skill respec, it is that unless it is a Full Respec.....it generally gets pushed to the side as not good enough.

No, I'd be happy to have a deleveling system, and/or a skill respec. The point is... that it's not as easy to code as a redo. Full respecs are presented for simplicities sake.

[maddmatt70]

If you want to go to the moon....
Maybe you should start building a rocket?

Regardless of what a respec would add or subtract from the game... or who it would benefit.. or whether its a good or bad idea....

Maybe you should start arguing for something that might be FEASIBLE like a skill point respec.

In respose to a question about pickpocket skills:

No dispute here if it takes too much engineering to respec then the developers shouldn't do it. If on the other hand it costs gradual development time and it would only amount to 1 or 2 less dungeons in mod9 I think it would be worth it. Its cost-benefit analysis if a respec prevents people from leaving the game and doesn't take tremendous amounts of time to do then its an investment worthwhile because Turbine can in effect with those extra subscribers kept due to a respec make an extra dungeon or 2 in mod 10. We don't know exactly how long it will take to put a respec in ddo - that is all speculation on your part Monkey-Archer. I think some people will leave ddo because the prospect of rerolling and leveling and gearing up their favorite character is too daunting and just plain old not fun.

[Monkey_Archer]

No, I'd be happy to have a deleveling system, and/or a skill respec. The point is... that it's not as easy to code as a redo. Full respecs are presented for simplicities sake.

A full redo is called a reroll.
How do you propose a full repec WITHOUT having it include a skill point respec?

[bobbryan2]

A full redo is called a reroll.
Who do you propose a full repec WITHOUT having it include a skill point respec?

Umm... I don't propose anything of the kind.

Good thing I didn't ask for a full redo... I used the term full respec. But thanks for defining redo. And please... just try to say that full respec = reroll... because that's just dumb.

[Quanefel]

No, I'd be happy to have a deleveling system, and/or a skill respec. The point is... that it's not as easy to code as a redo. Full respecs are presented for simplicities sake.


I can imagine even I would be for some type of a deleveling system or even just a skill respec. Yet if we try to bring it up, we are shouted down if it is not for a Full Respec. Where are our choices, our options, our opinions being considered? For people to simply dismiss someone asking only for an alignment respec only because that person did not ask for a full respec instead, how do you think that looks? How do you think people start to feel when that goes on?

Start a thread asking for just a skill respec. See how long that lasts, see how many come down on you because you are not asking for a full respec. Maybe you will see some of the frustration some of us have with this whole issue.

[Steiner-Davion]

Determining when free respec tokens are given out should be pretty easy. Any time major class abilities are changed would probably do it, at the devs discretion.

The evasion change of '06 would qualify (or was it 07?). Changing monk wisdom bonus ac to centered-only, or limiting it to 2x monk level would be another good example.

The upcoming mod with their capstones would also qualify, though any free respec tokens should expire 4 weeks after the change is made.


I completely agree with the above points. As someone who has converted from the anti-respec camp (granted that was a long time ago, when I originally posted something along the line of you can't respec life, so you shuld respec in a game), those are perfect examples of great opportunities for nerfing and destroying builds. And as a casual player, who is lucky if I can get in 6 hours of gametime a week, I do not have the luxury of rerolling everytime things change. I have only 1 capped character after 3 years and 2 weeks of play (since head start).

My capped main character has a lot of wasted skills points (because skills I thought would be important at games launch, just did not turnout to be important or Turbine made changes to skills and there use after launch. Balance now being used instead of Reflex saves for example) and is a 28 point build. Is it completely nerfed no, but I certainly would do things differently if I had known these things ahead of time.

[Monkey_Archer]

I can imagine even I would be for some type of a deleveling system or even just a skill respec. Yet if we try to bring it up, we are shouted down if it is not for a Full Respec. Where are our choices, our options, our opinions being considered? For people to simply dismiss someone asking only for an alignment respec only because that person did not ask for a full respec instead, how do you think that looks? How do you think people start to feel when that goes on?

Start a thread asking for just a skill respec. See how long that lasts, see how many come down on you because you are not asking for a full respec. Maybe you will see some of the frustration some of us have with this whole issue.

Im sure mice dream of going to the moon too :D

I like rockets... some might just explode along the way :eek:

[Steiner-Davion]

Exactly why does any of the anti-respec folks need to post their views? He has already decided for us as well as posting our views clearly. Well he posted his twisted, illogical, false assertions of the anti-respec people.

Remember, debating it is not important just agreeing and debating out how it will be installed is the topic now....
;)

Well if the anti-respec camp disagrees with his view on your arguments, I think he is inviting you to correct his understanding of your arguments.

You cannot have an effective debate, if neither side understands where the other is coming from.

[Steiner-Davion]

And here I thought one of the MAIN motivations behind a full character respec was because the Dev's change things and we have no way to adjust to them. Thanks for clearing up what one of the main reasons, really is about.


You're just twisting Borro's words now.

Yes the main reason for having a respec feature would be to adjsutto changes made to the game by the devs, witohout loosing all the bound items and favor you have worked so hard in game to acquire. See ,they go hand in hand.

[Angelus_dead]

I can imagine even I would be for some type of a deleveling system or even just a skill respec. Yet if we try to bring it up, we are shouted down if it is not for a Full Respec.
Wrong.

I don't know what more to say, except to point out that your accusation is untrue.

[Quanefel]

Well if the anti-respec camp disagrees with his view on your arguments, I think he is inviting you to correct his understanding of your arguments.

You cannot have an effective debate, if neither side understands where the other is coming from.

How are we to correct arguements he has made for us, where he dismantles the false arguements to dismiss them himeself?

Yes, it does not make for an effective debate when one side does not know where the other is coming from and it is not effective if one side makes up the arguements beforehand for the other side and dismantles those same false arguements they made up.

[bobbryan2]

How are we to correct arguements he has made for us, where he dismantles the false arguements to dismiss them himeself?

Yes, it does not make for an effective debate when one side does not know where the other is coming from and it is not effective if one side makes up the arguements beforehand for the other side and dismantles those same false arguements they made up.

How? You correct the false arguments with real ones...

[Steiner-Davion]

If people are so upset about items being lost, I can understand that. I can not agree with it but I can understand that. Yet, it should not be a main reason for wanting to respec. It shows more of greed than a desire to actually fix something that is claimed to be broke. I know, I am horrible for calling people greedy. It is just a fact of life that people are. I only point it out to maybe pull people away from at least the impression this is all about greed.

I can not see rerolling as that annoying or all that time-consuming. Releveling, yes. That might very well be true. I can understand that. Respecing will not change that aspect. It is not a stretch of the imagination that IF a full respec is put into place, that the Dev's will in fact require us to relevel. I am sure even you can see that. When people try to give others the impression that the dev's will allow us to push a button, respec AND be brought right back up to full level before we hit that button is setting people up for disappointment. That is my opinion and how I see it. Some might not like that but what, just pretend it is not a great possibility of having to relevel just to make people feel good in the short term? Again, it IS setting people up for disappointment. Stop it.

While what you say here about not being able to just push a button and "Respec" and be exactly back where you started, but with the changes, is true, I'm not entirely certain I understand what you mean by having to "Re-level."

Which of the follwoing do you mean by "Re-level":

Loose XP permanently and have to adventure to regain that XP and have to level up normally through the acquisition of XP?
You loose no XP, but simply go through the entire character generation and leveling process again without loosing XP
Loose ALL XP, and get reset back to level 1 and haveto re-run all the quests to gain experience and level up normally?

[Quanefel]

Wrong.

I don't know what more to say, except to point out that your accusation is untrue.

Really? So if I started a thread asking only for a partial respec, a type of develing respec that no one will come to shout it down because it is not a full respec? Should I send you the link to my thread where I made that very suggestion and the shouting down that proceeded because it was not a full respec? I'd be more than happy to send the link to you privately if you wish.

[bobbryan2]

Really? So if I started a thread asking only for a partial respec, a type of develing respec that no one will come to shout it down because it is not a full respec? Should I send you the link to my thread where I made that very suggestion and the shouting down that proceeded because it was not a full respec? I'd be more than happy to send the link to you privately if you wish.

Your thread wasn't feasible... and it was explained to you in a rather indepth manner.

It wasn't "shouting" and "complaining".

[Quanefel]

Your thread wasn't feasible... and it was explained to you in a rather indepth manner.

It wasn't "shouting" and "complaining".

Not feasible? Will there be at some point in the future that any idea that is not a full respec become feasible?

Not shouting or complaining? Maybe review that thread without rose color glasses on the next time you read it?

[bobbryan2]

Not feasible? Will there be at some point in the future that any idea that is not a full respec become feasible?

Not shouting or complaining? Maybe review that thread without rose color glasses on the next time you read it?

Well, maybe there will be a point. But I meant feasibility... as in.. it can't be implemented. Is there a chance that simply starting over and moving inventory over to the new character becomes technically unfeasible? I very seriously doubt it... All you do is move some database entries from one place to another.

And yes... I did read that thread. and I didn't read it through your "I'm a victim" glasses. I explained several times why your suggestion wasn't technically feasible.

[Angelus_dead]

Really? So if I started a thread asking only for a partial respec, a type of develing respec that no one will come to shout it down because it is not a full respec?
Exactly.


Should I send you the link to my thread where I made that very suggestion and the shouting down that proceeded because it was not a full respec?
Yes, go ahead.


I'd be more than happy to send the link to you privately if you wish.
Absolutely not. I have no interest in something you're unwilling to transmit publicly.

You are undoubtedly referring to this thread (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=168673). The reasons it was disputed is not because it isn't a "Full Respec" (your own term), but because it's broken in many ways. I mean, changing class levels but not changing skill points? That's just insane.

[Quanefel]

Exactly.


Yes, go ahead.


Absolutely not. I have no interest in something you're unwilling to transmit publicly.


Go ahead and sent it to you but no you do not want me to send it to you? Errrr....which is it?

If you want me to post the link her publicly like you asked here........what a moment, that would be against the rules. You almost had me on that. Almost.

[Angelus_dead]

Go ahead and sent it to you but no you do not want me to send it to you? Errrr....which is it?
If a person would ask a question like that, it signals me that I shouldn't bother talking to him.

[Aspenor]

If a person would ask a question like that, it signals me that I shouldn't bother talking to him.

You shouldn't. I'd quit reading too, it gives me a headache just thinking about it.

[Steiner-Davion]

To simplify my response to the original arguments:

2. If you got it so wrong to begin with, maybe you should start again!

I take exception to this line of logic. For arguments sake, assume, that a character was built "right" as you put it, and not "so wrong" "to begin with" and the perosn running the game decided to change the rules on you, NOW your "right" build is "wrong," what would you want? If you can't answer this question hionestly, then there is no point in having a rational discussion on this topic.In other words, if the rules were changed or were constantly being changed so that it was impossible for you to win, would you sitll play the game and have fun? Would you be able to have fun? I'm not necessarily saying that this has happend or is happening in DDO to the EXTREME scenario, but is a fundamental aspect of the basis behind the pro-respec argument (or so I believe).

[Quanefel]

If a person would ask a question like that, it signals me that I shouldn't bother talking to him.

Originally Posted by Quanefel
Should I send you the link to my thread where I made that very suggestion and the shouting down that proceeded because it was not a full respec?

Yes, go ahead.

Originally Posted by Quanefel
I'd be more than happy to send the link to you privately if you wish.

Absolutely not. I have no interest in something you're unwilling to transmit publicly.

Are you get confused or something here by what you wrote, could you clear this up then?

[Steiner-Davion]

My answer for repecs is simple.
1) DDO makes more people mad the further it gets from PnP
2) In PnP the closest thing you got to a respec was begging the GM to let you go on a quest to replace that feat of uselessness you took
3) DnD has never been about respecing to the single best build it has been about seeing your character grow and have its choices actually make differences in the game and how the character turns out. Respec completely destroys this. Having regrets about a choice is not only part of life, but part of the DnD emersion and always has been.

I totally agree with you. EXCEPT....

In Pen & Paper, you have one person making the rules, with a much smalelr player base. AS such the rules will less likel y change over time, andthe DDM (perosn making the rules) has the ability to better tailor the game to his/her players in such as way thee rules cahgnes arwe not necceary or even warranted.

The very nature of an MMO makes the above "facts" of Pen & Paper not applicable.

[Ryss]

My answer for repecs is simple.
1) DDO makes more people mad the further it gets from PnP
2) In PnP the closest thing you got to a respec was begging the GM to let you go on a quest to replace that feat of uselessness you took
3) DnD has never been about respecing to the single best build it has been about seeing your character grow and have its choices actually make differences in the game and how the character turns out. Respec completely destroys this. Having regrets about a choice is not only part of life, but part of the DnD emersion and always has been.

1) For some people, yes. For others, no. You cannot generalize this.
2) Not true. In many campaigns the DMs I know did allow full respecs. I allowed that too because it is a game and it should be fun. If Joe gets bored of his wiz and wants to play a ftr, he should be able to.
3) True if and only if the rules of the game are static. Then the choices you make are your responsibility alone. If someone else changes them... no.

[Steiner-Davion]

Well if you had the book you would see that it says that even though it lays out the rules for changes that the changes must be kept within reason to protect the story and character integrity.

A full respec is not "within reason"


Again what do we all mean by full respec? So far I am not aware of anyone (seriously) asking for a respec of Race or Gender....


And alignment is a very rare request, but is not out of question, as there were serious issues with "mysterious" alignment changes at one point.

[Tanka]

So far I am not aware of anyone (seriously) asking for a respec of Race or Gender....
A few people have.

[Steiner-Davion]

Have you even ever played D&D before? Because comments like that, says to me you have no idea what you are saying. One of the main rules above all states that: The GM has final say on ANYTHING.

Honestly what sane or GOOD DM whorth the title would sacrifice player enjoyment for the sake of having his way. I mean come on, what do you think wold happen to a PnP group, if the DM insisted on being right 100percent ofthe time and the players were not having fun?



The PHB2 says respecs? Respecs is a term used for MMO's, there is no such word as respec in any D&D book that I am aware of.


No you are just being stubborn. Obviously "respec" is an MMO term while "retrain" or whatever the term is in the PBH2 is the PnP equivelant. FOr arguements sake, lets "presume that they are synonyms.

[Borror0]

And alignment is a very rare request, but is not out of question, as there were serious issues with "mysterious" alignment changes at one point.
Alignment is a really common request but it is far less controversial as there are very little arguments against.

It's flavorful, has little game changing effects and does not seem too complicate.

[Aspenor]

Have you even ever played D&D before? Because comments like that, says to me you have no idea what you are saying. One of the main rules above all states that: The GM has final say on ANYTHING.

The PHB2 says respecs? Respecs is a term used for MMO's, there is no such word as respec in any D&D book that I am aware of.

What else about D&D are you going to attempt to bastardize?

Not sure what kind of a crappy game you're playing in, but the DMG is pretty clear that DnD is a game, and it's about having fun.

If somebody is not having fun, let them do whatever they have to do to have fun. It doesn't get any more clear cut than that.

I challenge you to find any excerpt from any DnD literature that states players should not be allowed to essentially rebuild from the ground up.

[Steiner-Davion]

"Though character revision does allow you to "rewrite" certain elements of your character, the rules presented here ensure that the changes remain within reason and do not upset the story that has been created by each characters' deeds in the campaign"

Yes thats the line I wanted to see. Please explain how this line indicates that we should be allowed "full respecs" I see it saying very limited resepcs and in no way a full respec.

Fluffy, now I understand exactly where yo uare coming form, and I completely agree with you... to ap oint. In PnP a characters actions have actual consequences on the story itself. But in DDO, this is simply not true. There is simply no reward or penalty, or any type of consequence for doing anything in game in terms of the story beging told. If there was, than if you killed Velah before me and looted her treasure trove, there would be no reason for me to enter the raid. If I kill all the "heretics" in the Church and the Cult quest, there is no alignment penalty or any other kind of social consequence for killing "innocent" people.

While I do can favor with one group for completing a quest, I do not lose favor with any other group, who may be diametrically apposed to them. IE, even if groups A and B are sworn enemies in the "story" helping A does not hurt me with B.

In short, a character's deeds in DDO simply do not "truly" matter and there is no real need to balance this rule and the paragraph you are refering to against the needs of the story being told.

[Quanefel]

Honestly what sane or GOOD DM whorth the title would sacrifice player enjoyment for the sake of having his way. I mean come on, what do you think wold happen to a PnP group, if the DM insisted on being right 100percent ofthe time and the players were not having fun?




No you are just being stubborn. Obviously "respec" is an MMO term while "retrain" or whatever the term is in the PBH2 is the PnP equivelant. FOr arguements sake, lets "presume that they are synonyms.

What sane or good GM would give into a player wanting to change his character because that player wanted more "enjoyment"? Is it the player or the GM in charge at that point? Why even have rules or a GM if it is the players deciding what they can change about their character whenever they wanted? Who is talking about the GM being 100% right? That is the extreme, not the rule. Stick to the reality of the situatution.

Replace rules with....fun? Let fun decide everything here? And who's idea of fun is the standard now for all of us to follow or do we each get to have anything we want simply because we decided it was fun? Rules be damned?

[Steiner-Davion]

You keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Inconceivable!:D

[Quanefel]

Not sure what kind of a crappy game you're playing in, but the DMG is pretty clear that DnD is a game, and it's about having fun.

If somebody is not having fun, let them do whatever they have to do to have fun. It doesn't get any more clear cut than that.

I challenge you to find any excerpt from any DnD literature that states players should not be allowed to essentially rebuild from the ground up.



A players fun trumps rules? Is the GM running the game or the player's with their own individual ideas on what rules they wish to follow for the "fun" of it?

[Mhykke]

A players fun trumps rules?

Well, in some ways, yes. If the rules don't provide a way for players to have fun, they're going to stop playing. So what's more important? That you rigidly stick to the rules as a DM, or that you have players playing your campaign?

As that quote from the 3.5 PHB2 states:

"But a DM who forces someone to play a character he doesn't find enjoyable isn't making the game fun for that player or the others at the table. In such a situation, the player usually either throws away the character and rolls up a new one, or quits the game. If your campaign values character continuity, neither of those outcomes is especially attractive. Why force Mike to throw away the elf fighter he's been playing for three months just because he made a couple of bad feat choices? If Mialee has been an integral part of the campaign since day 1 but has regretted being an elf since day 2, wouldn't it be better to let her become the halfling she'd prefer to be by undergoind a dramatic transformation at the Necrotic Cradle than by abruptly replacing her with Liamee the halfling wizard?"

[Tanka]

A players fun trumps rules? Is the GM running the game or the player's with their own individual ideas on what rules they wish to follow for the "fun" of it?
You're the kind of GM I would walk out on after the first session.

[Aspenor]

A players fun trumps rules?
That's not what I said. Try reading it closer next time. Any DM that thinks he or she can dictate what characters their players will play will quickly find themselves with no players. Their rules are irrelevant. When you have no players, your rules don't matter for squat. You cannot simply force a player to just suck it up and play along.

Is the GM running the game or the player's with their own individual ideas on what rules they wish to follow for the "fun" of it?
He better be, or he will, again, find himself with no players to play with. If a DM thinks he or she can just dictate to the players, they are wrong. Sure, they can try, but the players have an "I win" button.

They just don't show up anymore.

[Ryss]

1) They have already said it is not simple or easy to do
2) What makes you happy can anger others
3) While partial respec might be reasonable full respec at no serious cost is not reasonable to many and would anger many

1) They have only said that for some kinds of respec methods. A skill respec for example. A full respec is the easiest one to program.
2) True.
3) Not true because if turbine changes the rules in the middle of the game, that is not the player's responsibility. A free respec token each mod should be acceptable.

[Cinwulf]

For me it is rather simple. I knew nothing about D&D prior to starting this game. I played with a friend from work joined a small guild and had a wonderful time. Then the level cap increased from 10. Then new prestige stuff, etc etc. I've got a few characters of different class some pure, some multi, and a ton of bound items across all of them.

I don't have time to re-roll characters to this level. I made mistakes in creation (I'm sure I'm not alone here) and knowing what I do now I would luv to have a way (premium or otherwise) to go back and fix things (ie skill points distro or ability point distro) and keep my current character and all her bound items.

The "why" seems really ridiculous to discuss. The "What" and the "How" are important to me. I "play" this game. I can't go back in real life and fix mistakes (or cast spells for that matter) so having that ability to do that in this game is very appealing to me.

I hope turbine will allow some method of respec. It would keep me and others I know more involved in the game and possibly bring people back that I know left for this very reason.

Krellin
Drow RG
blindfaith
Sarlona

I can relate to alot of what you are saying here. Here you are learning how to play the game, made a few mistakes, or made a few choices you regret. I'm sure you are not the only casual player who doesn't have the time or will to re-roll. I'm sure you'd appreciate the chance to correct those things so you could get more enjoyment from your characters. As would lots of casual or new to DnD players.

But also there were choices people made based on things the developers said were working as intended at the time, that were later changed; And choices people made in the dark, since they had no idea what was next (including the developers). So now through no fault of their own, their character who was once "working as intended" doesn't work the same or has no opportunity to experience the latest in character development from the developers and it detracts from some peoples enjoyment.

Really, a full respec function would be a great tool for the developers to continue to improve the game without creating as much resentment in their subscription base. So I'm in total agreement.

[Mhykke]

I can relate to alot of what you are saying here. Here you are learning how to play the game, made a few mistakes, or made a few choices you regret. I'm sure you are not the only casual player who doesn't have the time or will to re-roll. I'm sure you'd appreciate the chance to correct those things so you could get more enjoyment from your characters. As would lots of casual or new to DnD players.

But also there were choices people made based on things the developers said were working as intended at the time, that were later changed; And choices people made in the dark, since they had no idea what was next (including the developers). So now through no fault of their own, their character who was once "working as intended" doesn't work the same or has no opportunity to experience the latest in character development from the developers and it detracts from some peoples enjoyment.

Really, a full respec function would be a great tool for the developers to continue to improve the game without creating as much resentment in their subscription base. So I'm in total agreement.

Good post.

[Quanefel]

That's not what I said. Try reading it closer next time. Any DM that thinks he or she can dictate what characters their players will play will quickly find themselves with no players. Their rules are irrelevant. When you have no players, your rules don't matter for squat. You cannot simply force a player to just suck it up and play along.

He better be, or he will, again, find himself with no players to play with. If a DM thinks he or she can just dictate to the players, they are wrong. Sure, they can try, but the players have an "I win" button.

They just don't show up anymore.

Very good, it is not what you said. It was my words, a question I asked. Maybe you need to read closer next time to tell the difference between you stating something and me asking a question on my own?

Dictate? You all are using the most EXTREME words and examples to describe something that is very simple. A GM decides on a list of books, rules and his campaign he runs. Players agree to them, maybe ask for something more if they can and when decided on they begin to play. Rules are not irrelevant. Rules are only irrelevant to a player who is not a team player, someone who just came into the group to mess around. Not actually play.

Force to suck it up? Another extreme. No one is forcing anyone to terms that you agreed to prior to joining a group to play. If a player flat out refuses to follow the rules then they know where the door is. If a player wants to ask nicely, politely...that is not unreasonable. You seem to make it that a GM is "forcing" players to play a certian way.

The fact is, no good GM is just going to look the other way or have no say in how you "rework" your character. A DM will want to keep balance where he can. Where is the balance if a player just out of the blue for whatever reasons he wants....completely changes his character into something it was not? Why is the fun of the rest of the players trumped by that one player wanting his character changed out because he decided for himself to do it?

[Ryss]

If you want to go to the moon....
Maybe you should start building a rocket?

Regardless of what a respec would add or subtract from the game... or who it would benefit.. or whether its a good or bad idea....

Maybe you should start arguing for something that might be FEASIBLE like a skill point respec.

In respose to a question about pickpocket skills:

That quote of Codog is only about skill respec. It is in fact a very hard (or even impossible because int tomes don't get logged).

A full respec is infinitely easier.

[Ryss]

Agreed. Yet the problem is not that people are for something small like a skill respec, it is that unless it is a Full Respec.....it generally gets pushed to the side as not good enough.

Well, because skill respec alone is not enough.

[Monkey_Archer]

That quote of Codog is only about skill respec. It is in fact a very hard (or even impossible because int tomes don't get logged).

A full respec is infinitely easier.

Ok, maybe im missing something here....
How do you do a full respec without redoing your skills?

[Quanefel]

Well, because skill respec alone is not enough.

For you.

[Tanka]

The fact is, no good GM is just going to look the other way or have no say in how you "rework" your character. A DM will want to keep balance where he can. Where is the balance if a player just out of the blue for whatever reasons he wants....completely changes his character into something it was not? Why is the fun of the rest of the players trumped by that one player wanting his character changed out because he decided for himself to do it?
None of us have ever said that character retraining in PnP should be done without any input from the DM. You're putting words in our mouths, yet again.

[Ryss]

What sane or good GM would give into a player wanting to change his character because that player wanted more "enjoyment"? Is it the player or the GM in charge at that point? Why even have rules or a GM if it is the players deciding what they can change about their character whenever they wanted? Who is talking about the GM being 100% right? That is the extreme, not the rule. Stick to the reality of the situatution.

Replace rules with....fun? Let fun decide everything here? And who's idea of fun is the standard now for all of us to follow or do we each get to have anything we want simply because we decided it was fun? Rules be damned?

I did that. The DMs I know did that too. So we are not sane?

Having said that, we didn't allow respecs to become the norm. If someone got bored and wanted more enjoyment, let him have it. If said player wants to respec too frequently, he'd get smacked.

You are presenting an absolute argument. All respecs are free, anyone can respec any time and any number of times. That is simply not the case.

[bobbryan2]

Ok, maybe im missing something here....
How do you do a full respec without redoing your skills?

You are missing something.

The difficulty is in doing skills alone. When you do the whole package, it becomes much easier.

Is it easier to rebuild an alternator when it goes bad, or just buy a new alternator?

Think about it like this? Would it be easier to figure out how many skill points to take away for each level? which level came first? Which skills were class skills at that point? Etc

Or... Put you back on the character screen and let you level up normally.

[bobbryan2]

For you.

No...

Once again, a skill respec would not be able to fix the accidental level up in the wrong class.

That would make it insufficient. For everyone, not just him.

[Ryss]

For you.

Yes.
For some no respec is needed at all. For some alignment respec is. For other people some other kind of respec is needed. And for some a full respec is needed. So, what is the problem?

[Monkey_Archer]

You are missing something.

The difficulty is in doing skills alone. When you do the whole package, it becomes much easier.

Is it easier to rebuild an alternator when it goes bad, or just buy a new alternator?

Think about it like this? Would it be easier to figure out how many skill points to take away for each level? which level came first? Which skills were class skills at that point? Etc

Or... Put you back on the character screen and let you level up normally.

Then why not call it what it is... a reroll...

I dont think turbine has any intention of transfering bound items and favor to rerolls.

[Quanefel]

No...

Once again, a skill respec would not be able to fix the accidental level up in the wrong class.

That would make it insufficient. For everyone, not just him.

Some players might want to just change out skills. You are saying it is less sufficient for him than if he was to change out his levels instead? What if someone wanted to change out their alignment? Now we are to respec back fully just for one small change? Seems a bit insufficient to me.

[Mhykke]

Then why not call it what it is... a reroll...

I dont think turbine has any intention of transfering bound items and favor to rerolls.

And that's a problem, considering a lot of people aren't willing to reroll a character they put effort in, especially if the desire for changing something on that character stems from something that turbine changes or adds to the game. You create dissatisfaction in players. That's a problem where the business is one of pure entertainment.

[Aspenor]

Very good, it is not what you said. It was my words, a question I asked. Maybe you need to read closer next time to tell the difference between you stating something and me asking a question on my own?

Dictate? You all are using the most EXTREME words and examples to describe something that is very simple. A GM decides on a list of books, rules and his campaign he runs. Players agree to them, maybe ask for something more if they can and when decided on they begin to play. Rules are not irrelevant. Rules are only irrelevant to a player who is not a team player, someone who just came into the group to mess around. Not actually play.

Force to suck it up? Another extreme. No one is forcing anyone to terms that you agreed to prior to joining a group to play. If a player flat out refuses to follow the rules then they know where the door is. If a player wants to ask nicely, politely...that is not unreasonable. You seem to make it that a GM is "forcing" players to play a certian way.

The fact is, no good GM is just going to look the other way or have no say in how you "rework" your character. A DM will want to keep balance where he can. Where is the balance if a player just out of the blue for whatever reasons he wants....completely changes his character into something it was not? Why is the fun of the rest of the players trumped by that one player wanting his character changed out because he decided for himself to do it?

Classic. First paragraph he admits that he deliberately misquoted me. You didn't ask a question you made a statement and put a question mark at the end. Big difference.

Then, in the next few paragraphs (which I am freakin' amazed I could read, for once) he goes on a rant about stuff NOBODY EVER SAID.

There's no point to having a discussion with you, Q. You insist on playing the victim, misleading, and completely making up things.

So what if the level 15 fighter decides he wants to retire, and the player wants to roll up a wizard instead (especially since at level 15, there's no reason to play anything but a full spellcaster of some type). It's a game, and if you think you can tell people what they can and cannot play, you have control issues. If you can't balance a game, even if people are throwing DMM-cheese at you, then you don't have any business behind the DM screen.

[Monkey_Archer]

And that's a problem, considering a lot of people aren't willing to reroll a character they put effort in, especially if the desire for changing something on that character stems from something that turbine changes or adds to the game. You create dissatisfaction in players. That's a problem where the business is one of pure entertainment.

Exactly.

-Rerolls that allow you to transfer bound items and such dont work because people dont want to have to level up again.
-Allowing people to respec all classes and keep all their items, favor, and XP doesnt work either as it creates the game breaking problem of polymorphism. (Hmm today ill be a sorc, tommorow i might try ranger... oh you need a cleric? hold on ill respec.)
-Partial Respecing (changing a couple levels you dont want anymore) is extremely complicated and would require a skill/alignment respec mechanism.

Which is why you have to start with a rocket :rolleyes:

[Quanefel]

he goes on a rant about stuff NOBODY EVER SAID.


I know I will be "ranting" by responding to you but in case you did not understand this, people use their own words to respond to people and because....."nobody ever said" something(a word, a phrase, a sentence) he is using to respond with, it is not called a rant. It is called a response.


If what you are saying is true then this would be classified as a rant because....no one ever said that....

So what if the level 15 fighter decides he wants to retire, and the player wants to roll up a wizard instead (especially since at level 15, there's no reason to play anything but a full spellcaster of some type). It's a game, and if you think you can tell people what they can and cannot play, you have control issues. If you can't balance a game, even if people are throwing DMM-cheese at you, then you don't have any business behind the DM screen.

Yours response is a response but the response of other people is called a "rant". Good to know.

[Mhykke]

.

-Rerolls that allow you to transfer bound items and such dont work because people dont want to have to level up again.

No, you're leaving something out. People don't want to level up again if they have to start from scratch. People on the pro respec side are willing to accept costs associated with a respec. Releveling could be a cost. If I wanted to change a character, I would not delete a character that I put in a lot of effort into, in order to create a similar character and start from scratch. I would be willing to respec that character if he kept his favor and gear, and he started at level 1. I'd be gaining a benefit in keeping my effort, and I'd be releveling. Releveling would be much more palatable b/c I received a benefit for my cost.


.-Allowing people to respec all classes and keep all their items, favor, and XP doesnt work either as it creates the game breaking problem of polymorphism. (Hmm today ill be a sorc, tommorow i might try ranger... oh you need a cleric? hold on ill respec.)

I'm not sure if you're too familiar with DDO if you're using this argument. You do realize that the gear that one shoots for as a sorc is completely and totally different than the gear one shoots for as a ranger, or a cleric, right? So the benefit of a respec (keeping gear), is completely irrelevant if someone were to completely change from a sorc to a ranger or cleric. B/c it is irrelevant, it is highly unlikely that someone would be swapping from ranger to sorc to cleric to barb.



-Partial Respecing (changing a couple levels you dont want anymore) is extremely complicated and would require a skill/alignment respec mechanism.

I think this has been explained to you, but if not, here it is again: DDO does not record when you eat a tome, for example. Let's say I eat a +2 int tome at level 5. At that point, I get an extra skill point a level. But let's say, at level 6, I want to erase my last 2 levels and go back to level 4. This is a problem, b/c DDO doesn't keep the information that you ate that +2 int tome at level 5. Furthermore, this problem is compounded if, let's say at level 5 you were a rogue, and level 6 you were a cleric. You get a different number of skill points for each of those classes, and DDO doesn't record that you got x number of skill points at 5, and x number at 6. It is very complicated for the game to go through all your decisions level by level to change them.

So the argument that starting from level 1 is easier makes sense. You simply start from level 1, and the game does not have to worry about recalling when you ate tomes, or what skill points you received when.