Let's Talk: Enhancements!

[Thrudh]

As far as the enhancements go...

I say let us have as many "trees" as we want, but limit us by APs and level... If I'm a fighter/ranger/monk, I should have access to 9 trees along with a racial tree, but then I have to decide if I want the bottom tier of 10 trees or the top tier of two trees or a mixture in between.

I do not think we should be able to get two Tier III PrEs... I think one Tier III (from having 18 levels in a class) and one Tier II (from racial) should be the max.

Or if we can get two Tier III PrEs, it should cost every AP you got.

[lppmor]

Again I say the easiest solution is a "General" Tab which gets its own point system..than ANY enhancements in the PrE trees are directly related to them.

Agree. That would be the best. The only problem I see with that solution is that they will have to create a lot more new enhancements to fill each specific tree. If they are in the mood to do that, great! :)

[Thrudh]

Again I say the easiest solution is a "General" Tab which gets its own point system..than ANY enhancements in the PrE trees are directly related to them.

I definitely agree we need a "general" tab for each class...

So 4 tabs per class... 1 general, 3 PrEs.

[Failedlegend]

I definitely agree we need a "general" tab for each class...

So 4 tabs per class... 1 general, 3 PrEs.

Indeed...beyond that its up to the devs. At least until we get more info

[Chai]

It's interesting that you say it might not be "a big deal" for some characters to have +300% more damage than average ones. Typical multiplayer conventional wisdom is that a +10% damage disparity is the most that can be tolerated before steps have to be taken, although that's based a lot on how most games make DPS more important than it is in DDO.

So if I play a ranger I should be doing 90% DPS compared to a fighter or barbarian? Please DEVs, make it so. I will load up my account with rangers after that change, heh. Ill trade 10% DPS (less from full ****** fighter and barbarian) for that level of utility, survivability, and healing any day.

[XatheX]

I think what I'd like to see is for the Row-based prereq to be a global APs spent, while the bonus tiers would be APs-in-tree. This would allow for more flexibility in picking and chosing the enhancements you want. A melee FvS might just take the Healing Spell percent boost all the way up, which wouldn't be enough to get more than the very lowest PrE tier, whereas a more healing-dedicated FvS might buy up the healing PrE. Under the current system, there's no real choice between going for a full line of enhancements, and going for PrE tiers.

[

+1
I Like this Idea very much

Maybe have Level for the prerequisites instead because that amounts to the same thing
(5 ap per Level)

either have character level (for racial) or class level (for PRE trees) for each row


my 2 cents

[Missing_Minds]

Suggestion. There are issues with favor bonus not applying, esp after doing an LR or GR such as Coin Lord intimidation, Silver Flame regeneration (I know, we can re eat the coin), and Argonessen draconic vitality.

Could we have an enhancement page of free stuff, such that we can slot them in and never lose them again?

This way also, we'd stop losing thing after spending money in the store which is really aggravating.

[ohiolee]

This sounds like an excellent idea, I think it will be a good change. I do have one concern, though. I assume that when you say we will have to "re-spend action points", that we will automatically get back all the action points we have spent in the past? We're not going to have to start from scratch there, right?

[orakio]

So if I play a ranger I should be doing 90% DPS compared to a fighter or barbarian? Please DEVs, make it so. I will load up my account with rangers after that change, heh. Ill trade 10% DPS (less from full ****** fighter and barbarian) for that level of utility, survivability, and healing any day.

So i take it you currently only make 18/2 fighter/rog or barb/rog since those get some of the best dps with utility/survivability/healing of UMD and evasion? Thats a pretty boring way to make character decisions. DDO on live has tons of things that counteract some of those built in bonuses and other people have pointed it out, at the end of the day dps is too often the only thing that matters.

[dkyle]

This sounds like an excellent idea, I think it will be a good change. I do have one concern, though. I assume that when you say we will have to "re-spend action points", that we will automatically get back all the action points we have spent in the past? We're not going to have to start from scratch there, right?

Yeah, the same as reseting and respending APs now.


I remember when I first started DDO, my only exposure to the term "Action Point" had been 4E, so I assumed they were spent for one-shot effects. Really an odd term to use for them...

[Failedlegend]

Yeah, the same as reseting and respending APs now.


I remember when I first started DDO, my only exposure to the term "Action Point" had been 4E, so I assumed they were spent for one-shot effects. Really an odd term to use for them...

Yeah I've never really got the term...maybe nows a good time

Let's Talk: Less Dumb Name for Action Points

[Chai]

I have to agree with this...

Looking at melee

Barbarians and Kensai fighters should do more straight-up DPS than anyone...
Rogues can do even more DPS than barbarians and fighters, but only if they don't have aggro...
Rangers and paladins and monks should do less DPS, but should have self-healing, and/or evasion, and/or special attacks, and/or special buffs, etc.

In general, you guys have done a good job balancing the classes...

But one real problem is that you guys have too many magic items that replicate ranger/paladin/monk abilities...

Silver flame pots means you can do full DPS as a barbarian, AND get the self-healing of a paladin or ranger. That's a design flaw.

And AC needs to be useful in epics. If there's zero benefit to AC in epics, then full-****** DPS is the obvious path to take.

More viable choices is always better.

Typical of a "monte haul" game - is the characteristic you mention, clickies that emulate other abilities.

Example: What if DDO had no limitless potions / scrolls / clickies / wands etc?

Now those kensai 1 AM 2 fighter wizard builds no longer look so gimp, eh?

Cant get those buffs off consumables = an entirely different game where other builds become hugely viable, and full ****** DPS at the sacrifice of everything else is likely not soloing its way through quest after quest.

In monte haul games, specialists begin to trump hybrid classes when every single desired ability of the hybrid class can be emulated through some form of gear or consumible. This is literally why rangers and paladins arent really doing so hot at this point in the game. If endless heal scrolls, potions, and wands didnt exist, rolling a paladin now makes a heck of alot more sense. Cant quite DPS like a fighter, but that fighter isnt keeping themselves alive like a paladin either. Its now a direct trade off. What we have now is a situation where the fighter can splash a couple levels, buy a mountain of heal scrolls, still outDPS the paladin, and keep themselves alive at the same time. This has been an issue since early on in this game, and is the main reason why optimizers favor specialist builds.

[dkyle]

Yeah I've never really got the term...maybe nows a good time

Let's Talk: Less Dumb Name for Action Points

"Enhancement Points" would be a good choice, I think. Clear, and obvious what they get spent on. A little clumsy to say, but abbreviates to EP perfectly fine.

If we want to preserve the AP abbreviation, "Augment Points" could work.

[Failedlegend]

"Enhancement Points" would be a good choice, I think. Clear, and obvious what they get spent on. A little clumsy to say, but abbreviates to EP perfectly fine.

If we want to preserve the AP abbreviation, "Augment Points" could work.

Augmentation Points works for me. Than General Points for our General Tab :D

[Chai]

So i take it you currently only make 18/2 fighter/rog or barb/rog since those get some of the best dps with utility/survivability/healing of UMD and evasion? Thats a pretty boring way to make character decisions. DDO on live has tons of things that counteract some of those built in bonuses and other people have pointed it out, at the end of the day dps is too often the only thing that matters.

Youre right, that is a pretty boring way to make character building decisions, but thats what the optimizers favor due to having items and consumables in the game that emulate hybrid class abilities to the point where theres no reason to roll those hybrid classes.

[Failedlegend]

Youre right, that is a pretty boring way to make character building decisions, but thats what the optimizers favor due to having items and consumables in the game that emulate hybrid class abilities to the point where theres no reason to roll those hybrid classes.

Fun is ALWAYS a reason

[grodon9999]

Typical of a "monte haul" game - is the characteristic you mention, clickies that emulate other abilities.

Example: What if DDO had no limitless potions / scrolls / clickies / wands etc?

Now those kensai 1 AM 2 fighter wizard builds no longer look so gimp, eh?

Cant get those buffs off consumables = an entirely different game where other builds become hugely viable, and full ****** DPS at the sacrifice of everything else is likely not soloing its way through quest after quest.

In monte haul games, specialists begin to trump hybrid classes when every single desired ability of the hybrid class can be emulated through some form of gear or consumible. This is literally why rangers and paladins arent really doing so hot at this point in the game. If endless heal scrolls, potions, and wands didnt exist, rolling a paladin now makes a heck of alot more sense. Cant quite DPS like a fighter, but that fighter isnt keeping themselves alive like a paladin either. Its now a direct trade off. What we have now is a situation where the fighter can splash a couple levels, buy a mountain of heal scrolls, still outDPS the paladin, and keep themselves alive at the same time. This has been an issue since early on in this game, and is the main reason why optimizers favor specialist builds.

The far better option is to nerf Silver Flame pots. Make the -10 stat penalties stacking so while you can take one in those "Imma gonna die!" situations but cannot keep yourself up perpetually.

Un-limited heal scrolls is such a broken dynamic it's not funny, but they at least can be interrupted and require a bunch of gear for UDM at 100%.

Thing is . . . with casters being so OP right now what does Mr. Full-****** bring to the game at all anymore except for a few raids?

[Thrudh]

Typical of a "monte haul" game - is the characteristic you mention, clickies that emulate other abilities.

Example: What if DDO had no limitless potions / scrolls / clickies / wands etc?

Now those kensai 1 AM 2 fighter wizard builds no longer look so gimp, eh?

Cant get those buffs off consumables = an entirely different game where other builds become hugely viable, and full ****** DPS at the sacrifice of everything else is likely not soloing its way through quest after quest.

In monte haul games, specialists begin to trump hybrid classes when every single desired ability of the hybrid class can be emulated through some form of gear or consumible. This is literally why rangers and paladins arent really doing so hot at this point in the game. If endless heal scrolls, potions, and wands didnt exist, rolling a paladin now makes a heck of alot more sense. Cant quite DPS like a fighter, but that fighter isnt keeping themselves alive like a paladin either. Its now a direct trade off. What we have now is a situation where the fighter can splash a couple levels, buy a mountain of heal scrolls, still outDPS the paladin, and keep themselves alive at the same time. This has been an issue since early on in this game, and is the main reason why optimizers favor specialist builds.

Yeah, I used to have a ranger/wizard (11/5) that did quite well being able to self-cast Haste, Displacement, Blur, Invisibility, Exp Retreat, Shield, Protection from Evil, and Jump.

That was before Haste and Displacement clickables were available from the Shroud, Blur was not permanent on many items, before we got 15 minute Jump and Invisibility clickables, and before 30% striders were easy to find.

The AC part of the Shield spell is about the only spell left in that list that isn't easy to get on a pure melee (Nightshield, however, is and that gives the magic missile immunity part).

All those items mostly destroyed the point of rolling up an iconic fighter/wizard of AD&D fame. Just be a pure DPS fighter AND get all those good low-level wizard spells.

[Chai]

Fun is ALWAYS a reason

Ill then fix my own post to:


Youre right, that is a pretty boring way to make character building decisions, but thats what the optimizers favor due to having items and consumables in the game that emulate hybrid class abilities to the point where theres no **quantifiable** reason to roll those hybrid classes.

This is what the optimizers look for anyhow. If the fighter can outDPS the paladin around every corner, then also keep itself alive as well as the paladin due to limitless consumables, theres no quantifiable reason to roll a paladin.

Paladins then become the "flavor class" that people play when they want to have "fun".

[Thrudh]

The far better option is to nerf Silver Flame pots. Make the -10 stat penalties stacking so while you can take one in those "Imma gonna die!" situations but cannot keep yourself up perpetually.

Un-limited heal scrolls is such a broken dynamic it's not funny, but they at least can be interrupted and require a bunch of gear for UDM at 100%.

Thing is . . . with casters being so OP right now what does Mr. Full-****** bring to the game at all anymore except for a few raids?

All true... Silver flame pots and heal scrolls should be looked at...

But what's the point when casters are so OP compared to melee... Why bother balancing melee when a caster gets all the power of max DPS from range along with full self-healing?

Edit: At least they do have to drink pots to achieve that - my caster can solo anything... until the SP runs out.

[Shaz]

I for one like the current enhancement interface and system just fine. I quit WoW to play this game, I like everything about DDO better than WoW, and frankly I'm offended you want to make the enhancement system look and work like the talent system of that game. There is really no reason to copy WoW. Please don't. I like how each enhancement bought appears as a new item in a list. I like how they are colorful and have excellent tooltips. I like the icons. I like how active enhancements are square and passive ones are hexagons - i quickly know if an ability is going to need to be on my action bar or not.

Some of them are annoying; primarily the fighter weapon specializations and all the arcane damage enhancements; but only because even after being collapsed there are still so many of them.

Only change I'd make, is that when looking at unavailable... they could be grouped (and collapsed into these groups) into racial, class, class, and class. Which I guess you are doing...

[Chai]

The far better option is to nerf Silver Flame pots. Make the -10 stat penalties stacking so while you can take one in those "Imma gonna die!" situations but cannot keep yourself up perpetually.

Un-limited heal scrolls is such a broken dynamic it's not funny, but they at least can be interrupted and require a bunch of gear for UDM at 100%.

Thing is . . . with casters being so OP right now what does Mr. Full-****** bring to the game at all anymore except for a few raids?

Thats what I am saying though - if NO consumables were left....

Whats that caster going to do when they run out of mana. Its no longer a trivial pay to win situation, or as easy as dipping into the 5k mana potion stockpile some people have from playing for 6 years, to pull out a victory. Casters wouldnt be so OP right now with that kind of limitation. A few minor errors in mana conservation would add up to a failure to complete quest or raid.

[Failedlegend]

I for one like the current enhancement interface and system just fine. I quit WoW to play this game, I like everything about DDO better than WoW, and frankly I'm offended you want to make the enhancement system look and work like the talent system of that game. There is really no reason to copy WoW. Please don't. I like how each enhancement bought appears as a new item in a list. I like how they are colorful and have excellent tooltips. I like the icons. I like how active enhancements are square and passive ones are hexagons - i quickly know if an ability is going to need to be on my action bar or not.

Some of them are annoying; primarily the fighter weapon specializations and all the arcane damage enhancements; but only because even after being collapsed there are still so many of them.

Only change I'd make, is that when looking at unavailable... they could be grouped (and collapsed into these groups) into racial, class, class, and class. Which I guess you are doing...

First off..statements like this are relatively pointless this change WILL happen and most of us want it to.

Also FYI this system despite being a tree system is NOTHING like the WoW one...besides WoW stole it from Asheron's call...which was made by turbine.

WoW:

Step 1: Choose Class
Step 2: Choose 1/3 Specs (you have to pretty much max out the first spec before the other specs unlock iirc) and put a few points in the other 2 specs
Step 3: Profit??


DDO (Assuming the devs are listening and drop the limit):
Step 1: Choose a Mix of any 3 classes with any combination of 20 Lvls
Step 2: Decided What feats to take
Step 3: Decide What skills to take
Step 4: Use 80 Augmentation Points in up to 10 Specs (1 race,3 per class) spread by your discretion
Step 5: Spend 80 General Points in your 1-3 general Class Tabs


I fail to see how that's copying wow...from what I see WoW comes off looking like the cheap knock-off


Thats what I am saying though - if NO consumables were left....

Whats that caster going to do when they run out of mana. Its no longer a trivial pay to win situation, or as easy as dipping into the 5k mana potion stockpile some people have from playing for 6 years, to pull out a victory. Casters wouldnt be so OP right now with that kind of limitation. A few minor errors in mana conservation would add up to a failure to complete quest or raid.

I think the mana potion thing is a non-issue...maybe I just suck or I'm not liberal with my TP but i rarely have more than 5 Mana Pots and I only use them when theirs no other options. Personally I think they should be given a huge cooldown. I'm also in favor of Silver Flame Pots carrying a heftier downside and clickies being a little more restrictive and rare.

[voodoogroves]

In monte haul games, specialists begin to trump hybrid classes when every single desired ability of the hybrid class can be emulated through some form of gear or consumible. This is literally why rangers and paladins arent really doing so hot at this point in the game. If endless heal scrolls, potions, and wands didnt exist, rolling a paladin now makes a heck of alot more sense. Cant quite DPS like a fighter, but that fighter isnt keeping themselves alive like a paladin either. Its now a direct trade off. What we have now is a situation where the fighter can splash a couple levels, buy a mountain of heal scrolls, still outDPS the paladin, and keep themselves alive at the same time. This has been an issue since early on in this game, and is the main reason why optimizers favor specialist builds.

You're kinda mixing things up here.

This has nothing to do with the scope or scale of the loot. I've played in games where the loot and power levels were zero and games where they were practically unlimited.

It has entirely to do with the content. There are plenty of action-counter-action things in D&D ... antimagic zones, whatever.

DDO like most programmed games suffers from a very large player base trying to find the more simple of hammers to attack the same problem - and too many of them ARE simply nails.


It's not about consumables or not. Heal scrolls are fine. Concentration check to use that in the middle of an ice storm on slippery ground with a caster spamming dispel at you (or disjunction). This is D&D. At 20th level there's no reason not to expect some casters to tag us with disjunction ... WE ARE TRYING TO KILL THEM ... and fighting in hostile environments.


It doesn't need to be rock paper scissors ... but once there's a reasonable chance at failure (say around 20%) for one of those save-my-rear options, tactics start to change.

(Or we'll recall and try for a different boss set in part 2 until we find one that is nail-enough for us to hit with our hammer)

[Dulcimerist]

I didn't have time to read all of the posts in this thread, but I will at least chime in.

Although I'm somewhat happy with the enhancements the way they are, I'm excited at the possibility of improvements!

Although DDO can't really be implemented this way, I really loved how the enhancements and level-ups worked in pre-NGE SWG. Although restructuring DDO like that would be horrible, the easy-to-read interface layout of enhancements from pre-NGE SWG might be nice to borrow from for an enhancement user interface.

Prestige lines requiring two or more specific feats annoy me. Barbarian prestige and Bard Warchanter come to mind. Why not make only one of their required feats a prerequisite, and then grant the other feat as a free bonus feat as an enhancement after selecting the prestige enhancement? (For example, Barbarian could require Cleave and Warchanter could require Weapon Focus, but both could receive Power Attack for free after selecting their prestige enhancement.)

The elemental resistance enhancements (on Rogue, Barbarian, etc.) are extremely lame. As it stands, 1 enhancement point gives 2 stacking resistance to one element, 2 more enhancement points gives 2 more stacking resistance to one element, 3 more points gives 2 more resistance, and 4 more points gives 2 more resistance. Since this line is rather weak to begin with, why not make each increment only cost 1 enhancement point? If you keep the existing expensive tiered system, why not make the resistance apply to all elements instead of only one specific element?

If you revamp the enhancement system, the character paths system should also be revamped. The paths system should be made to actually help inexperienced players build competent builds. If the path builds are revised to be much better, the enhancement system could help suggest the best enhancements for the new player to select as their path build levels up. Revamping the enhancement system creates an excellent opportunity to revamp the largely-ineffective path system!

[JasonJi72]

I definitely agree we need a "general" tab for each class...

So 4 tabs per class... 1 general, 3 PrEs.

Yes, I believe a general tab is required to maintain the deep character customization that makes this game unique. What if you do not want to take a prestige class? There is nothing in DnD that says you have to take a prestige class, why start now?

Also, I am getting on board with the 'please don't limit my options by only allowing 3 trees group'. The current system does not limit us in this way.

If you want to reduce the number of tabs, and I can see why you would, then allowing a 'general' tab for each class taken is the only option. This way the prestige tabs can be more specialized, and less cluttered. I think this will help make it easier for players to understand it, and for the developers to design and balance it.

So if you had an elven fighter/wizard/rogue for example, you could have an elf race, fighter, wizard, and rogue tab with the ability to unlock prestige tabs limited by one per class. This would bring the maximum to 7 tabs, and keep the same customization options we currently have without the balancing issues forthcoming.

This would also enable you to implement the new system without having to finish all of the prestige classes for every class first. You would still be able to add more prestiges later.

*Disclaimer* Please please please please finish the prestige classes.

EDIT: I guess the max would be 8 to allow for one racial prestige class such as Arcane Archer, Dragonmarked, WF Juggernaught, etc...

Four main tabs with a sub-tab under each one for easy access and display.

[orakio]

Ill then fix my own post to:

This is what the optimizers look for anyhow. If the fighter can outDPS the paladin around every corner, then also keep itself alive as well as the paladin due to limitless consumables, theres no quantifiable reason to roll a paladin.

Paladins then become the "flavor class" that people play when they want to have "fun".

Thankfully 90% or more of the game isn't so much an optimizer that they ignore what interests them to pursue what is considered the "best" at the time. If they were then case all you would see in DDO right now is casters with the occasional barb or fighter.

This game isn't just about what you can do but how you do it. Sure silverflame/CSW pots help offset some of the survival of things like paladin/ranger, but they don't do it for permadeath groups that can't feed their chars CSW. They don't have some of those built in cool tricks that make different characters fun, they just UMD and move on which is sometimes equally cool/effective but often not available to much later in a characters life.

If you choose to ignore what is interesting or fun in pursuit of the best character that is your decision but I don't think that your opinion on the concept is the predominant one. There are tons of characters that participate in high end content that aren't the part of the top few builds in the game but they manage to enjoy themselves and their characters and even do so without (not always anyway)putting undue pressure or hardship on their groupmates.

[daydrmrzzz]

I like the term Augmentation point better than Action Point as well.

Also, the idea of getting a 5th AP (RAP?) at level up, that can only be spent in the racial section is an interesting option.

For racial enhancements, here's an idea that I'd like to throw out: 3 trees in the racial tab, of differing sizes and purposes.

The first tree is the Paragon tree. It is based on the racial Paragon prestige classes, introduced in the Unearthed Arcana. These were only 3 level classes, which offered minor abilities. To convert this to DDO, the Paragon tree would have the enhancements that improved the race's core abilities like Elven perception, Halfling stealth, etc. This would be a small tree, with no level gating (you could go all the way up to the top tier in 2-3 levels if you want). Tier granted bonuses would be at 2/4/6/9 AP spent in the tree. The granted bonuses at the 2/4/6 level would be racially specific, like Halfling luck save bonuses, Dwarven AC vs giant bonuses, Elven enchantment save bonuses, etc. The last bonus (9 AP) would be the same for all races: +1 BAB (doesn't count for feat qualification) and +1 caster level (in all spell casting classes you have) but only for the purpose of qualifying for scroll use and spell points.

This tree is for those "leftover" points that you aren't spending for your class Pre, or for a newbie to spend their first few points on to get some nice low level benefit fast, or for that 1 arti/1 rogue/1 bard who's 3rd level and still has a +0 BAB.

The second racial tree is the same for all races. It is character level gated at 3/6/9/12/16, and the AP spent per tier is 5/10/15/20/30.

This represents a 5 level prestige class, and contains the stuff that should be available to all characters.

It would have the improvements to skills, with 1 AP granting a +1/tier to 2 skills (Acrobatics: Balance/Tumble, Aggression control: Diplomacy/Intimidation, Athletics: Jump/Swim, Health: Heal/Repair, Influence: Bluff/Haggle, Intensity: Concentration/Search, Magic manipulation: Perform/Use magic Device, Mechanics: Disable Device/Open locks, Perception: Spot/Listen, Stealth: Hide/Move silently). Each level of improvement would require 1 skill rank/tier level in at least one of the skills to be able to purchase the ability (must have at least 3 ranks in Spot or Listen to unlock Perception 3, etc). A bonus to a skill that cannot be used untrained, must have at least 1 skill rank in it in order for that portion of the bonus to apply.

It would also contain the spell manipulation lines like acid manipulation, frost manipulation, etc. but not the spell critical lines (they'd go in the class Pre's). To make them useful to more than just casters, make them apply to Weapon elemental damage, Dragonmarks, Wands, Scrolls, Spells, Clickies, Weapon procs, etc.

The tier granted abilities would be tier .5: +1 spell penetration, +1 DC's, Tier 1: Skill mastery 1, Tier 1.5: +2 Spell penetration, +2 DC's, Tier 2: Skill mastery 2, Capstone: +5% melee alacrity, +5% ranged alacrity, +5% Spell alacrity (reduce all cool down timers by 5%). The bonus to DC's would apply to all DC's (spell saving throws, trip DC, poison saves, weapon procs, scrolls, wands, etc), so the granted abilities can be useful to all classes.

The purpose of this tier is to siphon off AP that would otherwise go to raising a 2nd Pre to tier 3. It costs as many AP as a Tier 3 Pre, but the max ability can come as early as level 16 instead of level 18. It could also be used to justify eliminating the action boosts.

The third Racial tree would be a full 41 AP/20 level Pre, in direct competition with the class Pre's (Elven Arcane Archer, Dwarven Defender, Warforged Juggernaut, etc.).

If someone wanted to, they could spend 80 AP in the racial area for all 3 trees, or they could spend some in the racial area and some in the class area. AP spent in the racial area could be counted to apply towards unlocking other enhancements in the class trees that simply rely on AP spent, but wouldn't count towards enhancements that require x AP spent in a Pre.

[dkyle]

Thankfully 90% or more of the game isn't so much an optimizer that they ignore what interests them to pursue what is considered the "best" at the time. If they were then case all you would see in DDO right now is casters with the occasional barb or fighter.

Not everyone is an absolute optimizer at all times. In fact, no one is, really. But the community does trend towards the optimal. How many melee Rangers are there compared to before U5? I see almost none anymore. I also see more and more casters as time goes by. There's always going to be inertia of players wanting to continue playing their existing characters, and a desire to have variety in our stable of alts. But that doesn't mean we wouldn't have more fun if there was better balance.

The issue isn't what's "considered the best", it's whether people with a desire to play the game to the best of their ability look at the options, and have a tough time deciding what they want to build. I don't really care what other people think I should play. I care what I feel I want to play, and that's dependent on what I see as viable options. The greater the variety of worthwhile choices, the more fun I have deciding which ones to pick.

Sure, people will find things "fun" for little to no rational reason. But as far as overall game design, that's a random noise. It's mostly impossible to predict, or design towards it. And if an option is just a "flavor" option, it'll tend to be used much less than if it were a truly viable contender. Lots of people have fun with different things. But I would think that most people have more fun in games if they are effective, and contributing meaningfully. Effectiveness is the one element of "fun" that is essentially universal, and can truly be predicted from the design of the game.

Look at it this way: in a game designed to present optimizers and powergamers with as many difficult choices as possible, producing as many balanced builds as possible, then it's likely that even players interested in playing to their own personal flavor priorities will have effective builds available to them. They can have their own fun, and be a real asset in groups. Meanwhile, the optimizers and powergamers are too busy debating which builds are the best, to really settle on any cookie cutters for them to demand in groups.

In a game designed willy-nilly, to cater to everyone's flavors of fun, without serious regard to balance, the optimizers and powergamers will just find the few, inevitable, overpowered builds, and the community ends up expecting those few builds in groups. Content ends up being balanced towards those builds, and people who just want to have fun their own way end up with lousy builds, that noone else wants to deal with.

Game balance is a good thing for everyone. Not just the optimizers and powergamers. It just looks like it because balance requires comparing optimal builds.

[Failedlegend]

I like the term Augmentation point better than Action Point as well.

Also, the idea of getting a 5th AP (RAP?) at level up, that can only be spent in the racial section is an interesting option.


No....The racial and prestiges rely on the 80AP system to function the entire new system is balance around that...as far you "Generic Racial PrEs" also no...either make them Racially Specific Unique PrEs or don't do it. The only reason the idea of giving the "General Tab" its own Points system is ok is because adding the general tab would upset that 80AP which is designed to work with the Racial & PrEs...thus giving the General Tab a separate points system (gaining X amount of points a level) is to keep from upsetting this balance.

[kingfisher]

im betting that the 3 tree limit is already gone in the devs mind. just a hopeful hunch. too many valid reasons not to do it and not enough valid reasons to do it. too much negative feedback to push it through now. whatever they do (a general tree or an extra tree per class taken or all 3 trees per class taken) they cant choose the easy wowified 3 tree limit now imo.

they have not said a peep about the racial pre's in like 2000 posts tho, wondering if those are staying as is?

[Failedlegend]

im betting that the 3 tree limit is already gone in the devs mind. just a hopeful hunch. too many valid reasons not to do it and not enough valid reasons to do it. too much negative feedback to push it through now. whatever they do (a general tree or an extra tree per class taken or all 3 trees per class taken) they cant choose the easy wowified 3 tree limit now imo.

I'd actually prefer BOTH a general tab and less limited tree..preferably no limit. I also think "General" enhancements should get their own points because toherwise you would be "Wasting" points in that Tab which you could be spending towards a PrE..assuming the Devs do put approx 60AP of useful things in each PrE.



they have not said a peep about the racial pre's in like 2000 posts tho, wondering if those are staying as is?

If they don't have enough time allotted for actual racially oriented unique PrEs for the summer expansion I rather they saved it for another Day...also I call the X-Mas 2012 update for a handful of Multi-class PrEs :P

Regardless I'm really hoping they come out and say something to the effect of:

"Based on your feedback and many Caffeine induced dreams we've updated our plans to do <Insert new ideas & mock-up here > this is of course still subject to change and we're still looking for feedback but figured you'd like an update"

"Also here's a few PrE Trees and their respective bonuses to give you something to gnaw on while we continue to ride this continuous sugar high so we can finish ASAP and keep up with your endless posts :P"

[irivan]

Thanks Ippmor thats a great demonstration of why "Core" enhancements should NOT be in the PrE Trees..it will make them feel FAR to generic and instead of being Wild Mage, PM and AM..they become Fire/Frost, Force and Acid/Storm which also bring up the how do you determine which PrE gets which element

Again I say the easiest solution is a "General" Tab which gets its own point system..than ANY enhancements in the PrE trees are directly related to them.

Yeah definitely agree with this, core magic enhancements have no place in a Wizard tree. Now, maybe in a sorc savant tree, but not wizard under any circumstances.

[Chai]

Thankfully 90% or more of the game isn't so much an optimizer that they ignore what interests them to pursue what is considered the "best" at the time. If they were then case all you would see in DDO right now is casters with the occasional barb or fighter.

This game isn't just about what you can do but how you do it. Sure silverflame/CSW pots help offset some of the survival of things like paladin/ranger, but they don't do it for permadeath groups that can't feed their chars CSW. They don't have some of those built in cool tricks that make different characters fun, they just UMD and move on which is sometimes equally cool/effective but often not available to much later in a characters life.

If you choose to ignore what is interesting or fun in pursuit of the best character that is your decision but I don't think that your opinion on the concept is the predominant one. There are tons of characters that participate in high end content that aren't the part of the top few builds in the game but they manage to enjoy themselves and their characters and even do so without (not always anyway)putting undue pressure or hardship on their groupmates.

You are preaching to the choir bud. I have been proving the "DPS is the only way" crowd wrong for years now, the entire time running concept builds through the toughest content this game offers, and succeeding most of the time.

There is an inherant issue in balancing classes to eachother compared to balancing them to the content in a PVE game that has endless consumables available, which is what I clearly outlined.

The issue is not having a quantifiable reason to roll X class, due to the state of the game being that Y class can do every single thing X class can do and better. Justifying this severe lopsided-ness by saying "oh well, people will roll the class anyhow because they think its fun" doesnt cut it. Its not a logical justification. Its a justification based on emotional response and personal preference, commonly referred to as opinion.

The scenario I outlined is where there are no consumables at all in the game. Now those "flavor builds" which alot of optimizers label gimp are actually viable options, and many times are optimal, due to the characters ability being the only way to obtain certain buffs and effects.

another example: I managed and helped build a PW server in NWN. We were a low magic item server, and clickies + endless consumables did not exist. We had alot of builds that had wizard or cleric levels to gain access to specific abilities that otherwise could not be had at all. A fighter with 5, 7, or even 9 levels of wizard was not unheard of. Part of the entire reason to multiclass was to gain access to even low level magic abilities that helped in battle.

Many people ran what we called "monte haul" servers. All kinds of unlimited clickie items could be had, along with heal potions and res scrolls. Just about everyone was a pure class save for the 2 rogue splashes for UMD. No one needed to roll a cleric unless - yep you guessed it - they thought it was 'fun". Players had access to every single thing a cleric could possibly bring to a party in the form of consumables.

My observation was that not only are there quite a few multiclassed options that are indeed more "fun" but they are alot more viable when not playing a game where all their class abilities can be emulated by consumables. Giving people an actual quantifiable reason to roll a class makes it even more "fun" than having a scenario where optimizers are leaving their "fun" toon in the dust due to specializing and then emulating all of the hybrid toons abilities with unlimited consumable availability.

Not only does the "monte haul" atmosphere detract from multiclass options, it detracts from hybrid pure classes such as paladin and ranger.

If a fighter outDPS' paladins and can keep themselves alive just as easily due to limitless consumables, there is no other quantifiable reason to roll a paladin at that point. If the game didnt have those consumables, the fighter would still out the paladin in DPS, but the paladin would out the fighter in survivability, which is an even trade.

I noticed the question DKyle asks: How many melee rangers do you see in game now compared to a few years ago?

[voodoogroves]

I kinda agree with your problem statement, but not your solution.

Your solution is "remove consumables".

Mine is "introduce more content where those are not as optimal".


Who's to say the figher who splashes a UMD class so they can have the batman belt isn't a fun concept too? It has a trade off ... the key is making sure the opportunity cost to do something that is otherwise a core class ability is high enough to make it something you have to think about, rather than an automatic "yes".

For instance, what if the cool-down on wands / scrolls was increased ... unless you spent AP on them which you could only unlock if you had a class w/ UMD as a skill ... make more monsters perform interrupting attacks; make Sunder interrupt player item use ... make wands in hand take more damage to the item than a weapon ... give some environments a penalty to concentration checks ... put a cooldown on SF and SP pots.


Removing stuff isn't the only answer; the problem isn't its existence ... the problem is the easy use. Sure, removing it solves the ease-of-use problem, but it is an extreme measure that carries with it an implied assumption about what "good concepts" should be.

Let folks who want to build self-sufficent have a path; let some try to achieve that through gear ... but make it not as easy as today. Also let folks build selfish "someone else will buff and nanny me" builds. There should be room in the game for all of them.



(and for full disclosure, all of my builds are survivable self-healers/buffers of one sort or another ... that's the style I like so I'm not against well-rounded builds in the least)

[orakio]

@Chai, I suppose I misunderstood your statement as sarcasm. I thought you were implying that without more noticeable dps differences than 10% the more flexible class would then become the dominant to only choice, and I was wrong in that assumption.

I don't think that the removal of clickies/potions is really the answer to the dilemma of survivability vs. pure dps. I want to see more tactical/unique party roles for melee and i think giving the non pure dps options outside of just survival and dps could help without having to say "sorry melee, none of you should be as sustainable as casters", which is unfortunately what i think Silver Flame potion and clicky removal could do. Melee classes need more tactical options and additional party roles outside of sustained dps and the occasional tank here or there.

I do like things like the lore inclusions that they are doing on Lamania, the only problem is again its all the caster classes getting the unique features/roles and leaving the melee behind again. It is a step in the right direction though giving unique options in quests. Perhaps new class features and weapons tactics could really help some of the classes that are underrepresented currently.

[1halfelf]

Redesigning the enhancements should be ok --- as long as you don't let anyone who had a part in the redesign of the character class section of the forums near this project! I still can't find things.

Seriously though, as long as the classes remain distinct, I don't see a problem with a redesign.

[Thrudh]

I kinda agree with your problem statement, but not your solution.

Your solution is "remove consumables".

Mine is "introduce more content where those are not as optimal".


Who's to say the figher who splashes a UMD class so they can have the batman belt isn't a fun concept too? It has a trade off ... the key is making sure the opportunity cost to do something that is otherwise a core class ability is high enough to make it something you have to think about, rather than an automatic "yes".

For instance, what if the cool-down on wands / scrolls was increased ... unless you spent AP on them which you could only unlock if you had a class w/ UMD as a skill ... make more monsters perform interrupting attacks; make Sunder interrupt player item use ... make wands in hand take more damage to the item than a weapon ... give some environments a penalty to concentration checks ... put a cooldown on SF and SP pots.


Removing stuff isn't the only answer; the problem isn't its existence ... the problem is the easy use. Sure, removing it solves the ease-of-use problem, but it is an extreme measure that carries with it an implied assumption about what "good concepts" should be.

Let folks who want to build self-sufficent have a path; let some try to achieve that through gear ... but make it not as easy as today. Also let folks build selfish "someone else will buff and nanny me" builds. There should be room in the game for all of them.



(and for full disclosure, all of my builds are survivable self-healers/buffers of one sort or another ... that's the style I like so I'm not against well-rounded builds in the least)

Good post.

[maddmatt70]

I do not know if it is too late for this, but since some of the prestige enhancements like drow scorpion and juggernaut got the axe is there any chance some more prestige enhancements could get the axe and we could get different prestige enhancements instead. The prestige enhancement I would like to see get the axe are Knights of the Chalice, Hunter of the Dead, Spellsinger, and Virtuoso. They are all underwhelming and unexciting and underpowered. The three classic uns are in play.

Knights and hunter of the dead are too focused on specific mob types. More general prestige damage and general utility prestige enhancements would greatly enhance the paladin prestige enhancement options. The spellsinger enhancement is underwhelming because it does not enhance the spellsinger own abilities. How about the lyric thematurge prestige enhancement for e.g. instead of the spellsinger? That gives the spellsinger tons of spell options and really makes a divne/arcane spellcaster flourish. Finally, instead of the stale virtuoso how about the seeker of the song which gives bards a damage option and a variety of songs to play and sing.

Making classes and builds appealing is in DDO's best interest. Just because something is easy to make does not make it worth the effort. Bards and paladins need a bump and that is in part because they have boring and ineffective prestige enhancements. Let's just redo them especially since now is the time when prestige enhancements are getting finalized.

[Calebro]

How about the lyric thematurge prestige enhancement for e.g. instead of the spellsinger?

As discussed in another thread, I have always wanted Lyric Thaumaturge (http://therafimrpg.wikidot.com/lyric-thaumaturge) (from Complete Mage) as a bard PrE. Adding even a single spell of each level up to 6th from the Wiz list would go a long way towards silencing some of the bard complaints. It would also create a ton of different bard build choices. You could add PK and CoD at levels 4 & 5 for an instakiller bard, you could add Lightning Bolt and Chain Lightning for a more blasty bard, etc etc etc.
Tier I gets one each 1st and 2nd level spells. Cost 1 AP each (chosen in a similar manner as AM SLAs, one choice per spell level only).
Tier II gets one each 3rd and 4th level spells. Cost 1 AP each.
Tier III gets one each 5th and 6th level spells. Cost 1 AP each.
Keep the extra SP gained from Spellsinger to denote the extra spell slots that an LT gets and fold the Spellsinger songs into it. Add extra sonic damage in tier III (or scaling through the tiers).
Done. There's your Lyric Thaumaturge.

[maddmatt70]

As discussed in another thread, I have always wanted Lyric Thaumaturge as a bard PrE. Adding even a single spell of each level up to 6th from the Wiz list would go a long way towards silencing some of the bard complaints. It would also create a ton of different bard build choices. You could add PK and CoD at levels 4 & 5 for an instakiller bard, you could add Lightning Bolt and Chain Lightning for a more blasty bard, etc etc etc.

edited post.. meant the lyric them and not the mystic..

[LeLoric]

I do not know if it is too late for this, but since some of the prestige enhancements like drow scorpion and juggernaut got the axe is there any chance some more prestige enhancements could get the axe and we could get different prestige enhancements instead. The prestige enhancement I would like to see get the axe are Knights of the Chalice, Hunter of the Dead, Spellsinger, and Virtuoso. They are all underwhelming and unexciting and underpowered. The three classic uns are in play.

Knights and hunter of the dead are too focused on specific mob types. More general prestige damage and general utility prestige enhancements would greatly enhance the paladin prestige enhancement options. The spellsinger enhancement is underwhelming because it does not enhance the spellsinger own abilities. How about the lyric thematurge prestige enhancement for e.g. instead of the spellsinger? That gives the spellsinger tons of spell options and really makes a divne/arcane spellcaster flourish. Finally, instead of the stale virtuoso how about the seeker of the song which gives bards a damage option and a variety of songs to play and sing.

Making classes and builds appealing is in DDO's best interest. Just because something is easy to make does not make it worth the effort. Bards and paladins need a bump and that is in part because they have boring and ineffective prestige enhancements. Let's just redo them especially since now is the time when prestige enhancements are getting finalized.

Even if they don't do away with it entirely maybe incorporate some additional ideas form other pres like they are doing with tempest adding in some dervish abilities.

[MrTops]

My own 10 cents worth:

I like the flexibility of the existing system.

I'm all for implementing a tree like interface that makes working out the PRE prerequisites easier.

I'd be annoyed if you lost the current option to take the fussy, fully customized, manual approach.

[bigolbear]

Since the devs cared to create this thread to ask for suggestions, and I like to pretend I'm a game designer, so here comes my suggestion regarding the Wizard class. As MadFloyd said already, things are not simple and there are many factors to consider. I don't even have time to consider them all, so this is just more of less how I'm seeing the class with the new enhancement design. Hope you guys understand it. Ap spent in any tree (inside the class) is considered globally for requisites in any of the trees.

http://my.ddo.com/lppmor/wp-content/blogs.dir/77759/files/my-gallery/wizard.png


I just used the current enhancements we have today. The creation of new enhancements will probably become necessary to fit a few gaps in some trees. Also, I don't know what the devs have in mind for the Wild Mage line..

Firstly thanks for taking the time to do that mockup. You have illustrated my points about core fundamental class enhancemtns nicely.

You have split the damage lines amongst all three trees. Curently my PURE WIZARD, pale master has options selected from every damage enhancement line - even if its only a 1 point dip. I have cold, acid and electric nearly maxed, fire and repair mid way and force 'dipped'. So under the proposed 3 tree system as you have demonstrated i would be forced into taking the 3 class trees, denying my self access to the racial prestige.

and this is on a pure class.....

The situation on a multiclass is even more pronounced.

There are some abilities, represented as enhancements in ddo that are fundamental to balance - both in comparing that class to others and also in comparing one aspect of a class to another, eg nuking spells compared to instakill.

I remain concerned that the need to have access to the core enhancements of a class will drive us to less selections, not more.

I suggested multiple ways to remedy this in previous posts, as have others.

[Scraap]

By the way, gotta ask: How long will it be between the enhancement retool, and the quest review? After all, the numbers popping up over a mobs head mean a lot less than the number of swings it takes till they stop twitching.

Ideally, we'd evaluate this stuff in context, but I can see how that would be more than a little problematic.

[lppmor]

You have split the damage lines amongst all three trees. Curently my PURE WIZARD, pale master has options selected from every damage enhancement line - even if its only a 1 point dip. I have cold, acid and electric nearly maxed, fire and repair mid way and force 'dipped'. So under the proposed 3 tree system as you have demonstrated i would be forced into taking the 3 class trees, denying my self access to the racial prestige.

I agree with you. I also would like to go deep into both Pale Master and my racial enhancements without sticking with only fire, cold and negative energy. And considering my example trees, that is not possible since to get acid, shock and force, and even to get the Intelligence enhancements, you have to put a few points into the other prestige trees.

But one thing we must consider is that this can be exactly the kind of limitations the devs have in mind. You can choose to be a pure Pale Master and also reach top enhacements in your racial tree, but for that you have to stick with the preferences of your tree only, in this case, fire and cold. Or you can choose to be a more resourceful Pale Master by getting some enhancements in other class trees, denying yourself the ability to reach the top bonuses from your race, but on the other hand having access to acid, shock, force, more Int, more mp from reaching a few tiers in Archmage, etc.

These are all possiblities the devs will have to consider. We can passionately say we don't like it because we won't be able to create the exact characters we have now. But in the end it can be good for the game.

[Failedlegend]

Even if they don't do away with it entirely maybe incorporate some additional ideas form other pres like they are doing with tempest adding in some dervish abilities.

Spellsinger + Lyric Thaumaturge

Virtuoso + Dissonant Chord


KoTC + Shining Blade

HoTD + Champion of the Silver Flame

[Havesmat]

Could give more dps to tempest rangers. A good thing i tougth would be give a tear damage for them: something such as deal a bleed damage when they hit with on-hand and off-hand attack. Tath wouldnt solve all the trouble of the tempests actually but its nice idea and fits very well with rangers.

[bigolbear]

I agree with you. I also would like to go deep into both Pale Master and my racial enhancements without sticking with only fire, cold and negative energy. And considering my example trees, that is not possible since to get acid, shock and force, and even to get the Intelligence enhancements, you have to put a few points into the other prestige trees.

But one thing we must consider is that this can be exactly the kind of limitations the devs have in mind. You can choose to be a pure Pale Master and also reach top enhacements in your racial tree, but for that you have to stick with the preferences of your tree only, in this case, fire and cold. Or you can choose to be a more resourceful Pale Master by getting some enhancements in other class trees, denying yourself the ability to reach the top bonuses from your race, but on the other hand having access to acid, shock, force, more Int, more mp from reaching a few tiers in Archmage, etc.

These are all possiblities the devs will have to consider. We can passionately say we don't like it because we won't be able to create the exact characters we have now. But in the end it can be good for the game.

Its not just the ability to recreate the characters we have now that concerns me - with any change comes new options, and lets be honest some things need a gentle nudge with the nerf bat. builds will have to be remade and thats not a bad thing, ive been here a few years and each time something like this happens its good for the game in the end(mostly cos the devs do listen to the players, and play them selves). I do absolutely have faith in this working in the long run, but as a 'vet' i have a duty to give my opinions here - the devs have asked us.

what concerns me is that we will be railroaded into specific builds. Sure there will be x million combinations which is great for marketing but how many of those will actualy be anything like optimal.

The essence of my point is that some enhancements for all classes are general in nature - related to the class rather than any specific prestige, and forcing people to either take them or avoid them to get their prestige(s) of choice is bad design.

Take cleric for example, no matter what kind of cleric your making your going to want the life magic enhancement - thus clerics will always have the 'radiant servant' tree.

Why should a pale master be inherantly linked to fire and cold magic? it makes no sense, it is arbitary. There is a link based on the skeleton summons but unless the summons are vastly improved its essentialy meaningless.
Why should an archmage not be allowed to take negative energy amplification? there are numerous 'wizard' spells that use negative energy - they are not limited to pale masters.
Why should a cleric not be allowed to take fire magic, lightning magic, force magic? clerics get multiple fire spells, glyphs do electric damage, balde barrier is force....
Why shouldnt a NON CASTER CLASS be allowed to take these lines? because its no use... i disagree, dragon marks, past life feats, ki strikes all validate this enhcanement on non casters, the list goes on.

In order to keep this constructive (which is good) Ill try and take a look at your proposed wizard enhancements but add general stuff to a general tree. (ie 3 prestige trees and a general tree and a race tree). sory im not the artist you are but hopefuly you will get the gist.

Example: warforge wizard pale master.

RACIAL TREE:
toughness -> fort saves -> damage mitigation (toughness line)
DR -> armour spikes -> increase max dex on armour (armour plating line)
heal amp -> social intergration -> reforged (reforged line)
will saves -> repair amp -> construct (construct line)
balance -> tactics -> brute fighting (tactics line)
armoured caster (light) -> armoured caster (medium) -> armoured caster (hvy + sheild) (armoured caster line - note dwarves and elves should also get this as should bards)

racial bonus line:
+1CON -> +1 DR -> +1CON -> +1DR -> +1 DR
racial favoured class: fighter.
you are considered 4 lvls higher for any fighter trees you unlock, this bonus cannot raise you above your character lvl.

GENERAL TREE: (these abilities I feel are or should be accessable by all adventurers, irrelevant of class or race)
fire damage -> fire crit % ->fire crit multiplier
ice damage -> ice crit % ->ice crit multiplier
acid damage -> acid crit % ->acid crit multiplier
electric damage -> electric crit % ->electric crit multiplier
neg energy damage -> neg energy crit % ->neg energy crit multiplier
healing damage -> healing crit % ->healing crit multiplier
force damage -> force crit % ->force crit multiplier
repair damage -> repair crit % ->repair crit multiplier
wand mastery -> scroll mastery -> wand and scroll heightening.
skill boost -> skill bonus -> take 10. (works for all skills that are class/race skills)
physical damage boost - > longer -> more boosts.
sprint boost -> longer -> more boosts.
armour mastery -> inherant DR on armour by weight-> +blocking DR.
pet 1 -> pet 2 -> pet 3 (dropdown boxes for pet selection, advanced options available if requirements met such as class/race/skills/feats - includes familiars, iron defenders, animal companions)
toughness (depth is unlocked by class(s) but without class lvl gating, thus a 1 ftr splash has access to toughness 4)
mental toughness (as above but for casters)
cheaper metamagics (seperate line for each meta)
spell penetration.

general bonus line: no bonus for this stuff.


PALE MASTER TREE:
summon skeleton warrior -> summon skeleton archer -> summon skeleton mage (points spent determins number of concurrent summons, we are not happy with 1 weak skeleton)
stronger summons -> tougher summons -> regenerating summons-health and mana.
necromancy focus -> greater necromancy focus -> fearsome necromancy
natural armour increase -> fort save increase -> aura of fear.
necrotic touch -> necrotic bolt -> necrotic blast

bonus line: zombie form -> vampire form -> wraith form -> lich form -> arch lich form.

ARCHMAGE TREE: *see 3.5 dmg for what some of this does
arcane touch ->arcane bolt ->arcane blast
spell power -> arcane reach-metamagic -> mastery of elements
school mastery + SLA 1 -> SLA 2 -> SLA 3 -> SLA 4 -> SLA 5
secondary school mastery +SLA 1 -> SLA 2 - SLA3
wand staff and rod heighteing -> extending -> maximising.

bonus line: +SP, +SP, +SP, +SP, curent wiz capstrone.

WILDMAGE TREE: (woo free rein to go crazy)
Narloks mystical Dwoemer -> improved chance ->improved chance (attempt to cast any spell known as SLA with large % chance of it going amusingly wrong - spells may damage self but not others)
prismatic Bonus effect 1, bonus effect 2, bonus effect 3 (extra effects occur when casting prismatic spells)
amusing crit spell, explosive crit spell, huge crit spell (When your spells critical they gain additional benefits)
luck of heroes 1, luck of heroes 2 luck of heroes 3 (wild mages develop good saves)
magic item luck, magic item crit, magic item wild crit (using rods/staves/wands/clickies has the same chance of going amusingly as your spells)

bonus line: improved luck 1, improved luck 2, improved luck 3, improved luck 4, master of luck.(psst it should max out around 50% chance of getting what you want, with a 1% chance of something disasterous)




Ok so what I have outlined here shows that the prestige trees can be exactly that. I beleive they should be exactly that too. We need some form of general tree, or floating class general trees or something. I hate arbitary decisions such as associating specific elements with prestiges that have no connection to them. The new system should fit the enhancements, not the other way round. We will still be challenged to build, still have to make hard choices(hard choices are good). We can go with a 3 tree system+ race +general and multiclass would not be so detrimentaly effected. If i want 2 prestiges maxed out then MAKE ME PAY FOR IT IN APs... make me not able to afford the race enhancements and the spell damage line and class toughness and all those other generic things we all spend our points in.

[lppmor]

Ok so what I have outlined here shows that the prestige trees can be exactly that. I beleive they should be exactly that too. We need some form of general tree, or floating class general trees or something. I hate arbitary decisions such as associating specific elements with prestiges that have no connection to them. The new system should fit the enhancements, not the other way round.

That's for sure another way to think about the trees. As the devs are already quite aware of, there are many ways to go.

As you exposed, we can think of the trees as prestige trees. One general tab for class enhancements, and into each prestige tree only enhancements related to that prestige. That's for sure a very nice way to go.

But we can also think of the trees as plain class trees, with prestiges being only consequences of your choices. Something like "You decided to train your Wizard with cold, fire and some undead summons? Congratulations, you are now an adept Pale Master". But why fire and not acid leads to Pale Master? Well, yes, that's a suboptimal arbitrary decision. I can try to say that necromancers enjoy dealing with fire and cold in their cults, but not everyone will buy that.

[sephiroth1084]

Moving away from the trees debate a bit to bring up some other stuff...

The monk stances got revised recently to make the weaker two stances attractive, but I think the devs tipped the scales a bit too far with earth stance.

Wind gains +4 Dex, +15% attack speed, +10% double-strike. This used to be the highest DPS stance, but the +1 crit multiplier tacked onto Earth III and IV, and the fact that Earth gets +1 die step when using the Jidz-Teka bracers has made Wind second place when Haste is available. On top of that, Earth gained enough bonus AC to end up with more than Wind was granting, so it is providing more defense and more offense. I don't think this needs a lot of work, but it could use a little.

Fire gains +4 Str, +1 Ki on-hit, +5 Ki on-crit. This is the best to-hit stance for non-Finesse monks, and makes using Ki strikes, finishers and special attacks much easier, but the proliferation of items with Ki on-hit effects, reduction of Ki strike costs, and the change to helplessness leading to monks getting far fewer crits has resulted in most of the benefits of Sun Stance being too minor to be worth investing heavily. The stance is also very front-loaded: You can activate the basic stance for +1 to-hit, +1 damage, and +1 Ki on-hit. It needs more oomph, especially at tiers III and IV.

Water gains +4 Wis, +3 Dodge to AC, +5 on saves, and +1 passive Ki gen. The problem with this stance is that it is, for the most part, all defensive. It has the highest AC and saves, but nothing to make having those stats especially relevant (being the focus of aggro). It's biggest benefit is in boosting all of your finisher and special attacks DCs by 2, but it just doesn't feel like enough.

Earth gains +4 Con, +4 AC, 20% physical damage resistance, +70% incite, and +1 to crit multiplier (on 19-20). This basically got all the toys. It's the second-highest AC stance, the highest HP stance, the highest-DPS stance... This could stand to lose the crit multiplier bonus, perhaps moving that over to Fire III and IV.

[Viisari]

Moving away from the trees debate a bit to bring up some other stuff...

The monk stances got revised recently to make the weaker two stances attractive, but I think the devs tipped the scales a bit too far with earth stance.

Wind gains +4 Dex, +15% attack speed, +10% double-strike. This used to be the highest DPS stance, but the +1 crit multiplier tacked onto Earth III and IV, and the fact that Earth gets +1 die step when using the Jidz-Teka bracers has made Wind second place when Haste is available. On top of that, Earth gained enough bonus AC to end up with more than Wind was granting, so it is providing more defense and more offense. I don't think this needs a lot of work, but it could use a little.

Fire gains +4 Str, +1 Ki on-hit, +5 Ki on-crit. This is the best to-hit stance for non-Finesse monks, and makes using Ki strikes, finishers and special attacks much easier, but the proliferation of items with Ki on-hit effects, reduction of Ki strike costs, and the change to helplessness leading to monks getting far fewer crits has resulted in most of the benefits of Sun Stance being too minor to be worth investing heavily. The stance is also very front-loaded: You can activate the basic stance for +1 to-hit, +1 damage, and +1 Ki on-hit. It needs more oomph, especially at tiers III and IV.

Water gains +4 Wis, +3 Dodge to AC, +5 on saves, and +1 passive Ki gen. The problem with this stance is that it is, for the most part, all defensive. It has the highest AC and saves, but nothing to make having those stats especially relevant (being the focus of aggro). It's biggest benefit is in boosting all of your finisher and special attacks DCs by 2, but it just doesn't feel like enough.

Earth gains +4 Con, +4 AC, 20% physical damage resistance, +70% incite, and +1 to crit multiplier (on 19-20). This basically got all the toys. It's the second-highest AC stance, the highest HP stance, the highest-DPS stance... This could stand to lose the crit multiplier bonus, perhaps moving that over to Fire III and IV.

Incite bonus is a bad thing when you're not tanking. Even after these changes I've been running mainly air and only use earth when I'm tanking or expecting extremely heavy damage (like say against eVelah or eLailat).

Water is good for light monks from what I hear, haven't really played around with it myself.

Fire is nice, especially since it rises to hit, but I don't really find ki to be an issue because Frozen Tunic is awesome.

[grodon9999]

One of these days somebody needs to explain to me why monks should even get a tanking stance . . .

[Aaxeyu]

The monk stances got revised recently to make the weaker two stances attractive, but I think the devs tipped the scales a bit too far with earth stance.

I always looked at it as "we don't have time to get all the stances ready , lets focus on one and get it out there".


This could stand to lose the crit multiplier bonus, perhaps moving that over to Fire III and IV.

Buffing the other stances would be a much better idea. Not only because the forums explode every time they nerf something, but also because the more powerful the stances are, the more difference can they add to monk gameplay.

[Dragaer]

One of these days somebody needs to explain to me why monks should even get a tanking stance . . .

Because DoT tankers got theirs with SM. I believe AA are next on the list...

[dkyle]

One of these days somebody needs to explain to me why monks should even get a tanking stance . . .

Why shouldn't they? The more viable tanking builds there are, the better.

[sephiroth1084]

Incite bonus is a bad thing when you're not tanking. Even after these changes I've been running mainly air and only use earth when I'm tanking or expecting extremely heavy damage (like say against eVelah or eLailat). That is true, but it lends even more weight to taking the crit bonus out of Earth. With it there, players want to be in the stance for DPS, but have to give up doing so or risk hurting the party, whereas the stance really should be The Tanking Stance. On my monk I tend to use earth about half the time when I'm not tanking, but Bruucelee wasn't exceptionally well-geared at 20 and was a Finesse build.



Water is good for light monks from what I hear, haven't really played around with it myself.
How so?


Fire is nice, especially since it rises to hit, but I don't really find ki to be an issue because Frozen Tunic is awesome.
My problem with fire is that there is almost no reason to spend AP in it. Tier I fire is +2 Str, +1 Ki On-Hit. Tier IV adds +2 Str (+1 to-hit) and some more Ki on crits, which don't come often enough to be a major factor. That fire also lowers your DCs for everything but Improved Sunder hurts.

I'd like to see the stances get defined a little bit better, and see them get balanced against each other, and tooled for the game, a little better.

[Viisari]

How so?

Well I guess I should've been more specific; light monks seeking max DC's on their abilities.

[sephiroth1084]

One of these days somebody needs to explain to me why monks should even get a tanking stance . . .
Why shouldn't they? They are naturally inclined to have high AC, have good saves, some solid defenses (like Evasion)...why shouldn't they be able to take and manage aggro?


I always looked at it as "we don't have time to get all the stances ready , lets focus on one and get it out there".
Which may be the case, and if it is, my post may be unnecessary, but unless you have some insider information, we have no way of knowing that.



Buffing the other stances would be a much better idea. Not only because the forums explode every time they nerf something, but also because the more powerful the stances are, the more difference can they add to monk gameplay.
The problem isn't just that earth is higher DPS than the other stances, while also being the best defensive stance, but that earth has something of an identity problem. You want the higher DPS, but you may not want to have the aggro that comes with that + the incite. There are people running around in earth stance during raids that they aren't tanking, because they wanted that DPS, when there are other stances that are actually supposed to be DPS oriented.

Earth increases Con, while Fire increases Str, which should be the more offense-oriented stance?

[Failedlegend]

Snip

Mmmmm...I'm really looking forward to Wild Mage

As for the general tab if they do do that AND plan to have about 60+AP in each Tree they should give the general stuff its own point system (X amount of GP per character level)

[Astraghal]

Why shouldn't they? They are naturally inclined to have high AC, have good saves, some solid defenses (like Evasion)...why shouldn't they be able to take and manage aggro?

Because in the traditional fantasy literature that D&D is based on, Monks weren't fulfilling the heroic warrior or knight in shining armor type roles like fighting Giants, slaying Dragons and saving damsels in distress. Barbarian and Fighter types were. Monks were busy praying in their monasteries. :)

[Aaxeyu]

Which may be the case, and if it is, my post may be unnecessary, but unless you have some insider information, we have no way of knowing that.

Obviously. It's just what it seems to me.



The problem isn't just that earth is higher DPS than the other stances, while also being the best defensive stance, but that earth has something of an identity problem. You want the higher DPS, but you may not want to have the aggro that comes with that + the incite. There are people running around in earth stance during raids that they aren't tanking, because they wanted that DPS, when there are other stances that are actually supposed to be DPS oriented.

Earth increases Con, while Fire increases Str, which should be the more offense-oriented stance?

That's exactly why I said they should (and think they will) buff the other stances.

[grodon9999]

Why shouldn't they? The more viable tanking builds there are, the better.

They were viable before the earth-stance changes.

What does a monk sacrifice for Earth Stance (I'm asking as I really don't know, that's not a hypothetical question) compared to what a fighter/pally gives up becoming a defender build. Can they not just switch to fire when in a DPS role and still be just as good in that role as they always were.

it also STACKS with the defensive abilities of DOS and stalwart in deep-splash builds, this combo is OP.

And with the stuff we've seen with U11 and beyond we have LESS viable tank builds than we had before.

[dkyle]

They were viable before the earth-stance changes.

Compared to an SDIII? I don't think so.


What does a monk sacrifice for Earth Stance (I'm asking as I really don't know, that's not a hypothetical question) compared to what a fighter/pally gives up becoming a defender build. Can they not just switch to fire when in a DPS role and still be just as good in that role as they always were.

They do sacrifice less, in terms of build, but that's actually something I'd like to see extended to other classes, because I think it's a good idea. Let Tank builds have a DPS mode, and a Tank mode. That way, building a Tank doesn't mean being relegated to one, or maybe two, slots out of a Raid.

The problem with Earth stance as it is, is that it's also the best DPS stance in a lot of cases. But that's a problem with the implementation of Earth stance, not the notion of a Monk tanking stance.


it also STACKS with the defensive abilities of DOS and stalwart in deep-splash builds, this combo is OP.

You have to give up tiers of Stalwart to get it (past EarthI, anyway), and you have to give up Shield Mastery benefits. A Stalwart/Earth Stance mix has fewer HP and less percent damage reduction than a pure Stalwart, with Shield Mastery, and a Tower Shield.

I think StalwartIII is quite well balanced with StalwartII/EarthII and StalwartI/EarthIII.

[voodoogroves]

Compared to an SDIII? I don't think so.



They do sacrifice less, in terms of build, but that's actually something I'd like to see extended to other classes, because I think it's a good idea. Let Tank builds have a DPS mode, and a Tank mode. That way, building a Tank doesn't mean being relegated to one, or maybe two, slots out of a Raid.

The problem with Earth stance as it is, is that it's also the best DPS stance in a lot of cases. But that's a problem with the implementation of Earth stance, not the notion of a Monk tanking stance.



You have to give up tiers of Stalwart to get it (past EarthI, anyway), and you have to give up Shield Mastery benefits. A Stalwart/Earth Stance mix has fewer HP and less percent damage reduction than a pure Stalwart, with Shield Mastery, and a Tower Shield.

I think StalwartIII is quite well balanced with StalwartII/EarthII and StalwartI/EarthIII.

What I'd like to see is, if I invest in a dual-mode character, being able to swap between SD2 and Kensai2 ... without resetting enhancments. Make them a martial stance (so you can't be in both) but make it so I can swap.

[Failedlegend]

OK guys this is get seriously off topic...monk stances if you wish to continue discussing them should be moved to another thread the devs likely already have enough trouble keeping up with our posts they don't need an unrelated topic being discussed which can bury relevent ideas/concerns

[Feather_of_Sun]

Thank you for the continuing feedback, all.

I wanted to pipe up and let you all know that we still are keeping up with the concerns and thoughts brought up by all of you in this discussion thread, and it has certainly helped us direct our internal design sessions.
This is a major change to the game, and we're putting a lot of effort into this to get it right.

Keep talking, we'll keep reading.

[grodon9999]

Compared to an SDIII? I don't think so.

Why should they compare to a SD III?




They do sacrifice less, in terms of build, but that's actually something I'd like to see extended to other classes, because I think it's a good idea. Let Tank builds have a DPS mode, and a Tank mode. That way, building a Tank doesn't mean being relegated to one, or maybe two, slots out of a Raid.

Not really sure how I feel about it, I don't think I tank build should have to go the the extreme level of gimpiness I'm seeing in a lot of the posted tank builds but there's gotta be some sacrifice with specialization.

A DPS shouln'd have as good of defense as a defender. Unless of course you're a monk. P2Win baby! :)



The problem with Earth stance as it is, is that it's also the best DPS stance in a lot of cases. But that's a problem with the implementation of Earth stance, not the notion of a Monk tanking stance.

So you're agreeing with me. It's brokenly good.




You have to give up tiers of Stalwart to get it (past EarthI, anyway), and you have to give up Shield Mastery benefits. A Stalwart/Earth Stance mix has fewer HP and less percent damage reduction than a pure Stalwart, with Shield Mastery, and a Tower Shield.

I think StalwartIII is quite well balanced with StalwartII/EarthII and StalwartI/EarthIII.

You're missing monk hjealing amp, shadow-fade, water-strider, and a few other over-powered things that monk-tanks have over every other build.

In ELOB, which is the big tanking raid right now, the monk defensive abilities BY FAR are the best while they sacrifice the least amount of offense.

Please tell me how this is balanced?

[karl_k0ch]

Thank you for the continuing feedback, all.

I wanted to pipe up and let you all know that we still are keeping up with the concerns and thoughts brought up by all of you in this discussion thread, and it has certainly helped us direct our internal design sessions.
This is a major change to the game, and we're putting a lot of effort into this to get it right.

Keep talking, we'll keep reading.
Hi, and Welcome to the official forums! Thanks for popping in and acknowledging the feedback.

[Phemt81]

Thank you for the continuing feedback, all.

I wanted to pipe up and let you all know that we still are keeping up with the concerns and thoughts brought up by all of you in this discussion thread, and it has certainly helped us direct our internal design sessions.
This is a major change to the game, and we're putting a lot of effort into this to get it right.

Keep talking, we'll keep reading.

Welcome to the forums! :D

[Cyr]

Thank you for the continuing feedback, all.

I wanted to pipe up and let you all know that we still are keeping up with the concerns and thoughts brought up by all of you in this discussion thread, and it has certainly helped us direct our internal design sessions.
This is a major change to the game, and we're putting a lot of effort into this to get it right.

Keep talking, we'll keep reading.

Hi and welcome to DDO.

Some more information about what has been decided, with of course the level of certainty that it will remain that way, would go a long ways towards directing our feedback towards the most pertainent issues you may be discussing currently.

Oh and since this is your first post on the forums how about a little information about where you fit in on the development team? You a systems dev, content dev, art guy...?

[smatt]

Thank you for the continuing feedback, all.

I wanted to pipe up and let you all know that we still are keeping up with the concerns and thoughts brought up by all of you in this discussion thread, and it has certainly helped us direct our internal design sessions.
This is a major change to the game, and we're putting a lot of effort into this to get it right.

Keep talking, we'll keep reading.



NEW CANNON FODDER! I mean a new Dev to pick on... I mean wait... :confused::o

Hey Feather welcome to the DDO forums, where being a Dev is a dangerous prospect :p:D

[voodoogroves]

In ELOB, which is the big tanking raid right now, the monk defensive abilities BY FAR are the best while they sacrifice the least amount of offense.

Please tell me how this is balanced?

Earth 3+ should lose the crit bonus as much as that pains me.

And in the new system I want the martial stances (stalwart, kensai) to work like the monk stances - you can have both, you can be in ONE of them.

Here's what I want:



They don't all need to stack, but we could have something crazy like ...

- One elemental (monk)
- One martial (stalwart, kensai, acro, etc.)
- One mental (mech, frenzy, dance of the water spider, etc.)
- One magical (occult slayer, bladesworn, shadow fade)
- One physical form (Lich, Wraith, vampire, beast, savant)
- etc.

Plus some boosts (Manyshot, rages, other boosts) and toggles (PA, CE, etc.)

[dkyle]

Why should they compare to a SD III?

Because if you want to be viable tank, you need to be competitive with SD III.

If you want to be viable melee DPS, you need to be competetive with FBIII, KensaiIII, AssassinIII, etc.


Not really sure how I feel about it, I don't think I tank build should have to go the the extreme level of gimpiness I'm seeing in a lot of the posted tank builds but there's gotta be some sacrifice with specialization.

A DPS shouln'd have as good of defense as a defender.

My point is that a build should be able to choose. You can have high defenses, but low DPS, or you can choose to turn off the tank stuff, and get solid DPS. And that choice would be available at play-time, not just build-time. A build with a tanking option would have less DPS in their DPS mode than a dedicated DPS build, of course.


Unless of course you're a monk. P2Win baby! :)

Monks certainly give up DPS for their defensive advantages, compared to Barbarians and Kensais. Considering how useless AC is in most actually challenging quests, Monks defensive advantages aren't actually that great.


So you're agreeing with me. It's brokenly good.

I'm agreeing the Earth stance is overpowered, compared to other stances. Not that it makes Monks overpowered compared to other classes. I'm also not agreeing that monks shouldn't have a tank stance, which is what you questioned initially.


You're missing monk hjealing amp, shadow-fade, water-strider, and a few other over-powered things that monk-tanks have over every other build.

Those are advantages that the monk hybrids get, but as I said, they have disadvantages in HP, and damage percent mitigation.

If we're comparing SDIII with an SDI/NSII build, the SDIII can get 25% damage mitigation, whereas the NSII gets 15%. How does 10% extra damage mitigation compare to 25% miss chance? It depends on the content. LOB is a melee-heavy boss, so the miss chance is probably better. Against Horoth, I'd value the extra damage mitigation.


In ELOB, which is the big tanking raid right now, the monk defensive abilities BY FAR are the best while they sacrifice the least amount of offense.

Please tell me how this is balanced?

There's always going to be an ideal build for a given boss. I don't see Monk hybrids having such a large advantage in that fight to declare them overpowered.

The issue with how much DPS Stalwarts give up, even when not tanking, is a problem, but it's a problem with Stalwarts, not Monks. As described above, I'd like to see Stalwarts have better DPS options.

The amount of DPS a tanking monk puts out, vs a tanking Stalwart, is not especially important. A tank's job is to hold aggro, and stay alive (or rather, make sure the healers can keep him up with reasonable resource expenditure). Being able to put out more DPS while tanking is an advantage, of course, but not a major one.

[Feather_of_Sun]

Hi and welcome to DDO.

Some more information about what has been decided, with of course the level of certainty that it will remain that way, would go a long ways towards directing our feedback towards the most pertainent issues you may be discussing currently.

Oh and since this is your first post on the forums how about a little information about where you fit in on the development team? You a systems dev, content dev, art guy...?

The enhancement system is in the midst of heavy development, so I can't personally comment as to what will be staying or changing. Anything like that will likely be coming directly from MadFloyd or Eladrin. I was catching up on the discussion here, and just wanted to let you all know that we're still keeping tabs on it.

As for me,
I've been playing DDO for three years, and though I don't have a Completionist, I did get my main character up to life five. As a developer however, this is my second week.
I'm the newest member of the Systems Design team, where I'm focusing on treasure design for the expansion pack.


Hi, and Welcome

I see what you did there.

[Failedlegend]

I'm with Voodoo on both points.

The +1 Crit should be moved to Fire Stance (as much I love it being in Earth STance)

Stances of the same "Type" should be a one at a time thing but Stances of different "Types" should be able to work at the same time


I'm focusing on treasure design for the expansion pack.

You probably shouldn't of mentioned that :P

On that note I vote for more useful boots this is such an under used slot...also a general boost of non-raid loot would be nice..not to much just enough to make it something to aim for for players who don't raid.

[Scraap]

I'm the newest member of the Systems Design team, where I'm focusing on treasure design for the expansion pack.

Given the thread, what are your thoughts on tod sets and the interaction between pre and itemization? Something you'll want to make more of, or will we be seeing less focused, and more all around approaches to gearing?

[Cyr]

As for me,
I've been playing DDO for three years, and though I don't have a Completionist, I did get my main character up to life five. As a developer however, this is my second week.
I'm the newest member of the Systems Design team, where I'm focusing on treasure design for the expansion pack.


Treasure guy huh?

Okay now I know what to ask you questions about....

People are very concerned about how MLs will work with the level cap raise. Is there going to be any ML21+ items and if so are any of the existing items going to change ML?

[Gratch]

Is the time table for the enhancement redo currently set?

From most comments it sounds like Turbine is doing:

U13 (soon), then Expansion, (then U14, etc)?

On one hand I could see the Enhancement redo having to come with the expansion so that you don't have to do druid's and epic level tie ins to enhancement stuff twice. On the other hand, druids plus epic levels plus enhancements is a ton of systems team work to design and debug all at once and maybe the epic levels don't tie into the enhancement trees at all.

So for now I'm guessing U14/U15 for enhancement redo. (?) Eladrin can do druid enhancements twice. He's had 5 years to think about them. (discounting his first year as mostly monster dev) :)

[grodon9999]

Because if you want to be viable tank, you need to be competitive with SD III.

If you want to be viable melee DPS, you need to be competetive with FBIII, KensaiIII, AssassinIII, etc. .

But on the same toon at the same time is broken.




My point is that a build should be able to choose. You can have high defenses, but low DPS, or you can choose to turn off the tank stuff, and get solid DPS. And that choice would be available at play-time, not just build-time. A build with a tanking option would have less DPS in their DPS mode than a dedicated DPS build, of course. .

You should not be able to build both in the same toon without and enhancement respect.




Monks certainly give up DPS for their defensive advantages, compared to Barbarians and Kensais. Considering how useless AC is in most actually challenging quests, Monks defensive advantages aren't actually that great. .

What? Shadow fade and 20% damage reduction isn’t great? Let’s not forget class-based healing amp and IMPROVED evasion.

Do you play the same game I do? All that stuff works great in epics. If AC did the game would actually be less imbalanced than it is right now.





I'm agreeing the Earth stance is overpowered, compared to other stances. Not that it makes Monks overpowered compared to other classes. I'm also not agreeing that monks shouldn't have a tank stance, which is what you questioned initially. .

Should rangers and rogues? How about bards while we’re at it.




Those are advantages that the monk hybrids get, but as I said, they have disadvantages in HP, and damage percent mitigation.

If we're comparing SDIII with an SDI/NSII build, the SDIII can get 25% damage mitigation, whereas the NSII gets 15%. How does 10% extra damage mitigation compare to 25% miss chance? It depends on the content. LOB is a melee-heavy boss, so the miss chance is probably better. Against Horoth, I'd value the extra damage mitigation. .

You’re forgetting healing amp and improved evasion which put monks OTT.



There's always going to be an ideal build for a given boss. I don't see Monk hybrids having such a large advantage in that fight to declare them overpowered.

The issue with how much DPS Stalwarts give up, even when not tanking, is a problem, but it's a problem with Stalwarts, not Monks. As described above, I'd like to see Stalwarts have better DPS options. .

You’re right, there always will be a best option. I just don’t think that “best” option that the devs intend to be is helf mostly-monks who double-intim and rarely hit the target (the best build in theory, I’ve never actually seen one). This is so broken, it’s worse than the pre U9 (?) turtle-tanks.



The amount of DPS a tanking monk puts out, vs a tanking Stalwart, is not especially important. A tank's job is to hold aggro, and stay alive (or rather, make sure the healers can keep him up with reasonable resource expenditure). Being able to put out more DPS while tanking is an advantage, of course, but not a major one.

Total DPS does matter in a group, and the monkey tank getting MORE DPS in addition to all the other defensive advantages is OTT.

You want this balanced? Give any boss with True Seeing Ghost touch and change the damage mitigation to be based off of Amror Class and not something arbitrary like shield type or a stance. There's a lot that needs to be changed and I'm sure that "Let's Talk . . ." thread will be epic.

[waterboytkd]

I'm agreeing the Earth stance is overpowered, compared to other stances. Not that it makes Monks overpowered compared to other classes. I'm also not agreeing that monks shouldn't have a tank stance, which is what you questioned initially.

Overpowered compared to other stances I'll give you. And I agree that does not make monks OP compared to other melees. That said, I went through the math in a different thread a while back showing how the +1 crit multiplier is only top DPS with certain gearing. I used my monk as an example, because given his gear (tier3 alc wraps, epic charged gauntlets, 2 ToD rings, Shintao's set), he got more dps out of 10% doublestrike than he got out of +1 crit multiplier. But still, Earth 3 is better than air 3 (given haste on both), and Earth 4, if not the best, is a very close second best. Personally, I'd like to see the damage multiple nuked off Earth stances, and see the threat generation increase to 25% per tier, to make it clearly a tanking stance.


Those are advantages that the monk hybrids get, but as I said, they have disadvantages in HP, and damage percent mitigation.

Don't forget Intimidate. Monks don't get that, and I have yet to see a deep splash hybrid monk/fighter build make use of it (though they could). A lot of people think Intimidate is useless for tanking now, but it's not. When we run echrono, no one can keep aggro of our sorcs other than tanks with Intim, and it requires them to be swinging a weapon and spamming intim. Also, Intimidate is amazing in all difficulties of LoB. Sometimes, for whatever reason, he gets a burr up his metal bum, and just wants to kill someone other than a tank. When that happens, whenever he comes down from a jump, he aggros hard on someone, and it's a pain to pull him off...unless we have an intim tank. He pulls him back real easily.


There's always going to be an ideal build for a given boss. I don't see Monk hybrids having such a large advantage in that fight to declare them overpowered.

The thought here is monk tanks with Dance of the Water Strider. Yeah, it's good. Cute. But you know, an attentive healer accomplishes the same thing. When LoB goes into whirlwind, a SD3 or DoS3 just hops back into the water, the healer heals him through it, and LoB whiffs like he does against dark monks.

Also, though dark monks work against LoB, they aren't really "better". From experience as a second-rate healer, healing a monk has zero margin for error, even a 700 hp monk. LoB on hard cuts through that fast, and his curses drop that number to very dangerous levels quickly. A 1000 hp DoS or SD gives a bit of a "noob" cushion for the healer, and can withstand curses much better.


The issue with how much DPS Stalwarts give up, even when not tanking, is a problem, but it's a problem with Stalwarts, not Monks. As described above, I'd like to see Stalwarts have better DPS options.

Agreed. That's why I'm excited about the notion of being able to get multiple PrEs in the new enhancement system. Switching between kensai mode and SD mode seems like a win for Fighters.


Earth 3+ should lose the crit bonus as much as that pains me.

And in the new system I want the martial stances (stalwart, kensai) to work like the monk stances - you can have both, you can be in ONE of them.

Kudos for trying to keep monk stances on topic. :D

I like that idea. I'd probably call monk stances Ki Stances, but that's just naming.

How to split those PrE stances up, though, could lead to some nerdrage, as it could "undermine" some multiclass builds. A TA-Kensai, for example, would probably become a bit upset if suddenly they couldn't do both Kensai stuff and TA stuff at the same time. Which gives me a segue into another run at my enhancements idea:

If there were no class level requirements in enhancements (other than PrE bonus enhancements), then stances would be less of an issue. A deep multi that was trying to be uber-focused dps could still get benefit from static bonuses (making stuff up: for example, the Knife Attack, Knife Damage, and Knife Specialization that assassins get would be static bonuses that apply even when not in Assassin Stance, but Assassinate and Vorpal Sneak Attacks are only obtained when in Assassin Stance; meanwhile, the Kensai-specific bonuses to attack, damage, and crit range and Power Surge are only available in Kensai stance, but Haste boost and Fighter Specialization would be static bonuses available no matter what stance you're in).

But I like the idea of typing stances. I think it's a good way to balance stacking issues that might crop up, while still encouraging multiclassing, and encouraging diversifying builds rather than going "full-******".

[Scraap]

You should not be able to build both in the same toon without and enhancement respect.


Given the general discussion (of which I read that comment as a part) is about the notion of making SD and kensai 'stances' able to be swapped at runtime, could you elaborate on why you think that'd be a negative as a general all around approach?



You’re forgetting healing amp and improved evasion which put monks OTT.


He also forgot DR10/epic, and I can tell you *exactly* how much that shaves off a fighter if you want it without gear-dependance, and how much sacrifice it took to get.

[grodon9999]

Given the general discussion (of which I read that comment as a part) is about the notion of making SD and kensai 'stances' able to be swapped at runtime, could you elaborate on why you think that'd be a negative as a general all around approach?

Link on that please, I didn't see anything posted by a dev (I've not read this entire thread, no sane person has) that would indicate this was possible.

[grodon9999]

He also forgot DR10/epic, and I can tell you *exactly* how much that shaves off a fighter if you want it without gear-dependance, and how much sacrifice it took to get.

Splashes won't have that and are better tanks as they can get intimidate and more HP, but yeah that's pretty ubber to.

[Scraap]

Link on that please, I didn't see anything posted by a dev (I've not read this entire thread, no sane person has) that would indicate this was possible.

Hunting. It was buried near the start where they talked about stacking, and stances being a notion for resolving issues where they wouldn't want em to.

[k1ngp1n]

I see what you did there.

I have decided that I like you.

[grodon9999]

Hunting. It was buried near the start where they talked about stacking, and stances being a notion for resolving issues where they wouldn't want em to.

Regardless as to what might be in the future I'm talking about the now.

If stances locked things out and simultaneous PREs were possible (I find it really hard to believe you'll have enough AP on a fighter to max out both fighter and kensai regardless) it might prevent some of the OP combinations.

[ArcaneMelee]

...(I've not read this entire thread, no sane person has)...

Are you kidding? This stuff is entertainment gold.

Remember everything we've read? That's an entirely different accomplishment.

[dkyle]

But on the same toon at the same time is broken.

A Monk Hybrid that rivals SDIII in tanking is not going to be rivaling FBIII or KensaiIII in DPS. A full-on DPS Monk isn't even there.


You should not be able to build both in the same toon without and enhancement respect.

Why? Why should Tank characters be relegated to one or two slots in a Raid?

What's wrong with having a build that can choose to either tank, or do, say, 85% of optimal DPS, and a build that does 100% optimal DPS, but isn't designed for tanking?


What? Shadow fade and 20% damage reduction isn’t great?

Do you play the same game I do? All that stuff works great in epics. If AC did the game would actually be less imbalanced than it is right now.

They're certainly good. But Monks are not raw DPS powerhouses, either. I do not think the defensive gains are out of line with the DPS losses, compared to dedicated melee DPS.


Should rangers and rogues? How about bards while we’re at it.

Rangers? Sure.

Rogues? Maybe, but it does go directly against their core design. It would be hard to get the tradeoffs right.

Bards? Probably not. Bards get tons of stuff that makes them useful without being able to tank.


You’re forgetting healing amp and improved evasion which put monks OTT.

I'm not forgetting them.


You’re right, there always will be a best option. I just don’t think that “best” option that the devs intend to be is helf mostly-monks who double-intim and rarely hit the target (the best build in theory, I’ve never actually seen one). This is so broken, it’s worse than the pre U9 (?) turtle-tanks.

A Helf doesn't get enough to keep an intim lock. The secondary intim is on a 60 second timer.

I'm also confused how a Monk hybrid has such advantages when turtle-tanking, compared to an SDIII. Being unable to shield block sounds like a serious disadvantage. And if the tank is rarely hitting back, doesn't that negate the whole DPS issue?


Total DPS does matter in a group, and the monkey tank getting MORE DPS in addition to all the other defensive advantages is OTT.

Of course it matters. But not as much as you seem to think. The monk tank does not get all the other defensive advantages.

[Scraap]

Stances are one way to preserve some of the stacking issues we didn't have to worry about before.


It'll likely be "pick one from a list", but still needs to be finalized. This might be a place where we vary that list by your classes - a human Paladin might be able to take a divine tree like Radiant Servant, while a human Fighter would be able to pick a martial tree like Assassin. Exactly what to do with the humans is still heavily in the To Be Determined area.


There will be fairly large changes to the prereq system for enhancements. PrE's will be gained by spending points in their associated tree. (Spend X points in the Assassin tree and have 6 levels of Rogue [or Halfling] and you're considered an Assassin I.)

Some of the tree enhancements will have feat prereqs, (i.e. can't get Improved Power Attack without Power Attack...) but we're trying to keep the specific requirements of enhancements as simple to understand as possible.

Some of the abilities that are currently attached directly to PrE's are now in the tree - the Assassin poisons, for instance, will be selectable enhancements in the Assassin tree and will work fairly differently than they do now.


I'll look into having Improved Dragonmark enhancements boost the associated mark healing/damage.

Quoted in full, because there's quite a few little nuggets in there of relevance to some of the sub-discussions.

that particular sub-discussion resumed based on:


This is why I'd like Kensai and SD stances to be achievable by fighters (and maybe similar with pallies), much like Fire/Earth are for Monks (and I'd love for a mix build to still be able to have both).


Are you tanking? SD or Earth (or weaker of each if you're a multi)
Are you not tanking? Kensai or Fire or Air (or again, combos if you're a multi)

You can toggle on/off threat reduction or amp from class abilities as well ... good stuff. Keep that.

Clarify which feats are "stances" and which are "toggles". Put some balance into that. Decide if things like Showtime or Power Surge remain boosts or stances.

I don't think it would hurt melees if some of those became static stances instead of boosts.


If they remain boosts, consider making the elemental amplification AP for casters boosts as well (or partially so).

And folks kinda riffed off the notion a bit for a few notions on similar implementations.

/goes back to his rubber room

[orakio]

Why should they compare to a SD III?


Not really sure how I feel about it, I don't think I tank build should have to go the the extreme level of gimpiness I'm seeing in a lot of the posted tank builds but there's gotta be some sacrifice with specialization.

A DPS shouln'd have as good of defense as a defender. Unless of course you're a monk. P2Win baby! :)
You're missing monk hjealing amp, shadow-fade, water-strider, and a few other over-powered things that monk-tanks have over every other build.

In ELOB, which is the big tanking raid right now, the monk defensive abilities BY FAR are the best while they sacrifice the least amount of offense.

Please tell me how this is balanced?

You have this viewpoint because it seems that you feel monks shouldn't be tanks, no matter what they invest into a character.

There is nothing that a monk tank, as currently implemented, can do that a SD3 or Dark Knight 18pal/2fighter tank couldn't do better. With the changes to Bastardswords and Dwarven axes those tank builds can swap to big two handed weapons that they already have the THF line for and dps right along with the monk. When they tank their hp is typically 300+ hp higher than the monks reach. Say what you want but monks damage reduction only applies to physical effects and when it comes down to it, its the spells that truly hurt a lot of the time.

A monk that designs and builds around high threat/healing amp/ac/damage reduction should be able to tank the same way that a fighter or paladin or anyone else who designs their build around that can. That is was D&D is all about, classes aren't limited to predefined roles like you see in some mmo's, they can do a large variety of things depending on the way they are built.

[Recared]

[QUOTE=Feather_of_Sun;4291152]The enhancement system is in the midst of heavy development, so I can't personally comment as to what will be staying or changing. Anything like that will likely be coming directly from MadFloyd or Eladrin. I was catching up on the discussion here, and just wanted to let you all know that we're still keeping tabs on it.

As for me,
I've been playing DDO for three years, and though I don't have a Completionist, I did get my main character up to life five. As a developer however, this is my second week.
I'm the newest member of the Systems Design team, where I'm focusing on treasure design for the expansion pack. [QUOTE]

Thank you for the info and welcome :-)

[Scraap]

Say what you want but monks damage reduction only applies to physical effects and when it comes down to it, its the spells that truly hurt a lot of the time.

Er...monks by their nature shave off 50% magical damage even when they *fail* a save. Are you sure you want to use that argument? Particularly if they ever fix ac to the point where that's as much if not more viable than being a simple sack of hit-points to be refilled by a bluebar occasionally?

[waterboytkd]

You should not be able to build both in the same toon without and enhancement respect.


Given the general discussion (of which I read that comment as a part) is about the notion of making SD and kensai 'stances' able to be swapped at runtime, could you elaborate on why you think that'd be a negative as a general all around approach?


Link on that please, I didn't see anything posted by a dev (I've not read this entire thread, no sane person has) that would indicate this was possible.


Regardless as to what might be in the future I'm talking about the now.

If stances locked things out and simultaneous PREs were possible (I find it really hard to believe you'll have enough AP on a fighter to max out both fighter and kensai regardless) it might prevent some of the OP combinations.

You never did elaborate on why a toon should not be able to swap between dps mode and tank mode without an enhancement respec.

As for enough AP...depends on what you mean by "max out". If I had to make a guess, I would say there will be about 60 AP worth of enhancements in each tree, so if max out means take all enhancements, then no, you couldn't max out kensai and SD. But if you just wanted tier 3 of both, that would only take 60 AP total. If you wanted a capstone in one of them, add another 11 AP (total 71), which is totally doable. It doesn't leave much room for anything else, but that was the devs' intention, as mentioned in the very early days of this thread.

If I had to guess as to the future, I would guess that many classes would be looking at the same style of build options available to monks right now: stances for certain modes of gameplay. I would even hazard that either earth stance is going to get a balancing nerf, or the other monk stances will get a balancing boost. But either way, my guess is that the melee classes will have trees loosely tied to certain kinds of gameplay: pure dps, tanking, self-sufficiency/survivability/utility.

[grodon9999]

You never did elaborate on why a toon should not be able to swap between dps mode and tank mode without an enhancement respec.

because it's over-powered. Balance is based on sacrifice, being great at every thing is OP. Stalwart DPS is actually not as bad as many think, it's really the tactics and stuff that take the hit because of lack of AP. Being able to get all your toys and not have to chose is OP.

Compared to casters and FVS no, not even close to being OP but I don't think we should compound that stupidity by spreading the OP'dness.



As for enough AP...depends on what you mean by "max out". If I had to make a guess, I would say there will be about 60 AP worth of enhancements in each tree, so if max out means take all enhancements, then no, you couldn't max out kensai and SD. But if you just wanted tier 3 of both, that would only take 60 AP total. If you wanted a capstone in one of them, add another 11 AP (total 71), which is totally doable. It doesn't leave much room for anything else, but that was the devs' intention, as mentioned in the very early days of this thread.

If I had to guess as to the future, I would guess that many classes would be looking at the same style of build options available to monks right now: stances for certain modes of gameplay. I would even hazard that either earth stance is going to get a balancing nerf, or the other monk stances will get a balancing boost. But either way, my guess is that the melee classes will have trees loosely tied to certain kinds of gameplay: pure dps, tanking, self-sufficiency/survivability/utility.

I'm not gonna try to guess what's in the future, thinking about it makes my head hurt.

[grodon9999]

You have this viewpoint because it seems that you feel monks shouldn't be tanks, no matter what they invest into a character.

Wrong. But so's the rest of your post so keep up the trend! :)



There is nothing that a monk tank, as currently implemented, can do that a SD3 or Dark Knight 18pal/2fighter tank couldn't do better. With the changes to Bastardswords and Dwarven axes those tank builds can swap to big two handed weapons that they already have the THF line for and dps right along with the monk. When they tank their hp is typically 300+ hp higher than the monks reach. Say what you want but monks damage reduction only applies to physical effects and when it comes down to it, its the spells that truly hurt a lot of the time.

The Dark Knight build has no offensive feats save power attack (Dark can correct me if I'm wrong) and no tactics. It's a big ball of threat, HP and healing-amp that would be totally piking in say an EVON6 or even a Shroud. It is entirely specialized for it's role.

Trying to compare the offense that this type of build gives up to what a monkey-tank gives up is laughable.



A monk that designs and builds around high threat/healing amp/ac/damage reduction should be able to tank the same way that a fighter or paladin or anyone else who designs their build around that can. That is was D&D is all about, classes aren't limited to predefined roles like you see in some mmo's, they can do a large variety of things depending on the way they are built.

Please show me how this Earth Stance garbage originated in a D&D source.

[dkyle]

because it's over-powered. Balance is based on sacrifice, being great at every thing is OP. Stalwart DPS is actually not as bad as many think, it's really the tactics and stuff that take the hit because of lack of AP. Being able to get all your toys and not have to chose is OP.

But we're not arguing against having to chose. We're arguing over changing the nature of the choice. From having to dedicate a build to tanking, to being able to choose between tanking, and viable DPS (but not 100% optimal DPS). There's still a choice, it just happens during play, instead of build time.

I don't share your assessment of Stalwart DPS. Losing Kensai is a big loss, and thanks to the rage immunity in defender stance, the Stalwart PrE has next to no DPS value, in practice. A Stalwart in a non-tanking Raid slot is a charity case, not a good choice.


Please show me how this Earth Stance garbage originated in a D&D source.

So you don't understand the difference between upholding design principles (flexible builds, classes aren't shoehorned into specific roles), and literal implementation of a specific edition's ruleset? Seems like a rather obvious distinction to me.

PnP Monks are utterly terrible. As are most non-spellcasting PnP classes, of course, but Monks are especially bad. Thank goodness we're not beholden to the "D&D source".

[Scraap]

because it's over-powered. Balance is based on sacrifice, being great at every thing is OP. Stalwart DPS is actually not as bad as many think, it's really the tactics and stuff that take the hit because of lack of AP. Being able to get all your toys and not have to chose is OP.


I don't really disagree with the principle, but should the decision for what to bring to the table party-wise as far as assets and detriments goes be toon-design time, joining the quest time (they've indicated respeccing anywhere, any time, and for a lot cheaper. Please don't make me go digging again), encounter time (say, with a 5 minute cooldown to swap stances), or on a per-mob basis?

There's examples of each method of thinking they've tinkered with at this point. Which would you pick as the standard?

[waterboytkd]

You have this viewpoint because it seems that you feel monks shouldn't be tanks, no matter what they invest into a character.

It's very common to see monk hate on these forums, mostly because monks allow for flexible designs that can fill multiple roles via stances, and for whatever reason, a lot of folks think that's OP. I see it as the future of melee builds (monks were the test run).


There is nothing that a monk tank, as currently implemented, can do that a SD3 or Dark Knight 18pal/2fighter tank couldn't do better. With the changes to Bastardswords and Dwarven axes those tank builds can swap to big two handed weapons that they already have the THF line for and dps right along with the monk. When they tank their hp is typically 300+ hp higher than the monks reach. Say what you want but monks damage reduction only applies to physical effects and when it comes down to it, its the spells that truly hurt a lot of the time.

A monk that designs and builds around high threat/healing amp/ac/damage reduction should be able to tank the same way that a fighter or paladin or anyone else who designs their build around that can. That is was D&D is all about, classes aren't limited to predefined roles like you see in some mmo's, they can do a large variety of things depending on the way they are built.

Whereas I disagree with the spell notion (monks do very well against spell damage, too, with their high saves and Imp Evasion; but on the flipside, evade-able spell damage isn't all that significant--horoth has one evade-able spell--except maybe in eChrono, but then your best bet isn't to bring melees into that raid, but all casters, and don't tank, just DoT kite), consider what a tank does: it absorbs punishment, so that the rest of the group doesn't get hurt. The most important characteristics to that end are hp and damage mitigation. I'm going to leave AC out of the damage mitigation equation because it doesn't work in epic (though when comparing monks to SD3, SD3s can actually get the higher ACs).

A SD3/DoS3 (hereafter referred to as Defender3) can hit around 1000 hp, with 25% damage resistance. That's around 1250 hp worth of beating they can take.

A deep monk splash (12monk/6fighter or paladin/2 whatever) hits around 750 hp (thanks to the Con and hp% boosts of that first defender tier), and gets 15% damage resistance plus 25% incorporeality (in effect, it's actually only 36.25% damage resistance; this is because they don't actually stack--when the incorporeal kicks in, the damage resistance does not apply, and when damage resistance kicks in, the incorporeality doesn't apply). That's around 1021 hp worth of beating. They're over 200 hp below Defender 3s even after all that.

Then look at a pure monk. If that monk is fully specced for tanking (ie a dwarf, at least a 10-point investment in Con, every toughness and con boost available), and heavily geared, that monk will hit around 700 hp fully buffed, maybe a touch higher (725 hp). Then, they get 20% damage resistance and 25% incorporeality (total 40% damage mitigation), giving them an effective 980-1015 hp, which is less than the splashes.

So Defender 3s are better at absorbing hits than monk tanks. And though the dps argument might get brought up, that's part of the trade-off. Also S&B isn't nearly as bad as a lot of people make it out to be. eFang is a very potent weapon, and Cannith Crafting and Alchemical Crafting means S&B tanks have some VERY attractive options for shields, especially with imp shield bash. A +5 Holy (burst) of Greater Bane DR breaking shield is actually quite an impressive DPS bump, and if you have Greater THF, your S&B dps is very respectable.

BUT, all of this is a massive derail from the actual topic of this thread: the future of enhancements.

I am very much so of the opinion that future classes should behave a bit more like monks in terms of "stances" or roles. I like the idea that a pure fighter could get both Kensai 3 and SD3, and then switch between them given what the situation calls for. Paladins probably need this even more than fighters do, too, as their dps-tree (KotC) is very focused on a specific enemy (something I think needs to be altered so that they are good dps against all evil critters, but get a boost against their foe), so the ability to switch between PrE bonuses on the fly will help them remain valid no matter what the content.

[grodon9999]

I don't share your assessment of Stalwart DPS. Losing Kensai is a big loss, and thanks to the rage immunity in defender stance, the Stalwart PrE has next to no DPS value, in practice. A Stalwart in a non-tanking Raid slot is a charity case, not a good choice.

You lose 4 STR (2 from Kensai difference and 2 from not being raged). 2/3 points of damage a swing.

You lose some threat range from lack of kensai 3 and some seeker modifiers. With the current state of raid-boss fort it's not a big deal.

You still have Haste boost IV which is where much of the ubberness comes from.

You still have weapon specialization feats and ENH (if you take them, and you should).

You are factually incorrect, it's not that much of a loss as most people think. it's maybe a 10% loss in boss DPS. The big hit comes from lack of tactics as you just won't have the APs for it on a stalwart.

[grodon9999]

It's very common to see monk hate on these forums, mostly because monks allow for flexible designs that can fill multiple roles via stances, and for whatever reason, a lot of folks think that's OP. I see it as the future of melee builds (monks were the test run).

4 of my capped toons have some monk in them, I'm not a monk hater but I will call out something as being OP when it is OP. The last updates monk changes were OP.

Monks are getting nerfed in the next patch, losing off-hand strikes on tactics which is NOT OP. Once again Turbine Nerfs the wrong thing . . .

[grodon9999]

I don't really disagree with the principle, but should the decision for what to bring to the table party-wise as far as assets and detriments goes be toon-design time, joining the quest time (they've indicated respeccing anywhere, any time, and for a lot cheaper. Please don't make me go digging again), encounter time (say, with a 5 minute cooldown to swap stances), or on a per-mob basis?

There's examples of each method of thinking they've tinkered with at this point. Which would you pick as the standard?

I think the reset your ENH every 3 days like we can now is fine as it is. You can level up with one PRE, try out different options, stuff like that. Being able to respec per encounter reaks of cheasiness.

[Missing_Minds]

Please show me how this Monk Stance garbage originated in a D&D source.
Fixed. Now to be fair given how DDO is, monks were going to need something in order to keep up. Those stances add good flavor even if I do NOT agree with some stuff they did. DR/-? I have always called over powered on that. DR/- is the flavor of a barbarian and should have been kept there.


PnP Monks are utterly terrible. As are most non-spellcasting PnP classes, of course, but Monks are especially bad. Thank goodness we're not beholden to the "D&D source".
Actually monks in PnP are quite powerful, but it depends on how your DM runs things quite honestly.

[kingfisher]

As a developer however, this is my second week.

tbf?

[Calebro]

Actually monks in PnP are quite powerful, but it depends on how your DM runs things quite honestly.

I agree here. If you play a PnP monk to his strengths he is quite effective. PnP monks are caster killers. Enemy spellcasters are on lockdown. Increased movement speed to get at them quickly, quality AC (including touch AC) and all three good saves so they have a hard time hurting you, improved evasion & still mind for when you roll a 1, a bunch of immunities, and free grappling feats. Enemies can't cast while grappled, so while they're trying to break free and/or doing 1d3 damage per hit (if they can even hit you), you're getting your full unarmed damage. What's that, he's flying? That's what DDoor is for.
Lockdown.
If you want to make him a primary DPR you're going to fail.

[dkyle]

You lose 4 STR (2 from Kensai difference and 2 from not being raged). 2/3 points of damage a swing.

However, if a Stalwart isn't tanking, and someone else is, then they can't be in stance (certainly not if they're using a two-hander, while the tank is S&B). So Kensai gets +8 STR, in that case, over whatever the SD could get. If noone is tanking, and the SD goes into stance, then the Kensai would reliably have Rage and Madstone, meaning +6 STR over the SD.

Also, Kensai gets attack and damage bonuses. +2/+2 for TWF, +2/+4 for THF. That's better than +4 STR, in terms of DPS.

The Kensai is likely to be +5 or +6 better in to-hit. That can easily be a significant DPS difference, against some important enemies.


You still have Haste boost IV which is where much of the ubberness comes from.

But three less uses of it.

[waterboytkd]

4 of my capped toons have some monk in them, I'm not a monk hater but I will call out something as being OP when it is OP. The last updates monk changes were OP

Yeah, but how much monk? Are any of them high enough for tier 4 stances? Or tier 3? Are you taking monk for the Wis to AC and the two bonus feats by level 2? Because I'll give you, a 2 monk splash is kinda OP.

I've capped most of the melee classes: a Fighter, Ranger, Paladin, and a couple Monks (only missing capping rogue and barb). I will say, from experience, that Earth stance did not make monks OP, and being versatile does not make them OP (unless, by definition, versatile is OP, which I would disagree with). Though both my monks have Earth 4, they don't even hang in it most of the time (only when I expect to be the focus of aggro), because Air is just more dps all of the time (I have the gear to make doublestrike 10% greater dps than +1 crit multiplier; I also don't demand to be hasted most of the time, as our guild most often does short-man runs and expects group members to be largely self-sufficient).

Though I can tank LoB on my monks, Defender 3s are typically better because they can take more punishment and have greater margins for error (my monks are not designed to specifically be tanks, but I invested enough into Con to get Earth 4, and have them geared through the teeth). My monks do not beat eSoS wielders in terms of dps, they do not outtank Defender 3s, and they don't out-CC any blue-bar meant to CC. But they can do second-rate jobs at all of those (well, CCing would probably be third-rate or lower--I mean, it's typically one mob at a time, 2 if I don't focus on being dps at all), making them useful in just about any group, and the cleric helf dilly makes them viable for shortman runs and even a little soloing. But they're not OP, they're not just wrecking content on their own, and they certainly don't make other, focused builds look gimpy. It's a sort of jack-of-all-trades but master-of-none thing.

And just for clarity's sake, I prefer monks over the other melees because of flavor and because they actually require active play--you know, the constant use of hot keys, comboing moves together, etc. The "buff and auto-attack" style of other melees, even when the buffs are short duration like Action Boosts, really bores me.

[waterboytkd]

But we're not arguing against having to chose. We're arguing over changing the nature of the choice. From having to dedicate a build to tanking, to being able to choose between tanking, and viable DPS (but not 100% optimal DPS). There's still a choice, it just happens during play, instead of build time.

This. Were not talking about taking away a choice of what role your filling in the party by letting you fill all roles simultaneously, we're talking about when that choice is made. If it's made tactically (in quests), it means more versatile builds, therefor more useful builds all around, and an easier time filling PUGs. If it's made strategically (creation/building), then toons are locked into roles, like now, and we see how that is bad for the game. Tanks are "suboptimal" outside of raids that require tanks, and filling PUGs can take quite a while when looking for tanks (as most dedicated tanks are also dedicated for guild runs, not PUGing).

I say "suboptimal" in quotation marks because a SD3 built right, and even a DoS3 built right, still offers pretty valid dps when not tanking, even if pretty behind where a dedicated DPS toon is.

[Failedlegend]

Guys this topic has nothing to do with this thread...take it elsewhere

[dkyle]

Guys this topic has nothing to do with this thread...take it elsewhere

While some of the specifics are rather tangential, the issue of whether it's reasonable to be able to build both for tanking and DPS, and deciding which to use at play time, instead of having to choose one or the other at build time, is a significant question relating to enhancements.

Monk stances are the best example we have currently of a system of flexible play-time choices that allow switching between DPS and tanking (and other functions).

[voodoogroves]

While some of the specifics are rather tangential, the issue of whether it's reasonable to be able to build both for tanking and DPS, and deciding which to use at play time, instead of having to choose one or the other at build time, is a significant question relating to enhancements.

Monk stances are the best example we have currently of a system of flexible play-time choices that allow switching between DPS and tanking (and other functions).

Exactly.

I'd love to have that option on other melee builds who can tank; an option to "not".

[slimkj]

Exactly.

I'd love to have that option on other melee builds who can tank; an option to "not".
Agreed. Bring options and versatility to other melee classes, I don't want to see all the fun ripped out of the most enjoyable class to kick it back into line with the others.

[Riggs]

Any class that does not have intim as a class skill - like say monks - should NOT have a 'tanking' stance that adds to hate generation.

Damage reduction? Sure. Extra +1 on crits? Sure. Insight hatred? Not a chance. It is stupid and has no place on a monk stance.

As said - damage reduction should be based on armor class somehow. And defender stances can add to it - instead of adding more hp.

The game absolutely does not need more hp inflation - because monsters get more damage based on the best tank possible, and every other class that is not a defender or barb gets nuked that much faster as a result.

Damage reduction good, extra hp bad.

[voodoogroves]

Any class that does not have intim as a class skill - like say monks - should NOT have a 'tanking' stance that adds to hate generation.

Damage reduction? Sure. Extra +1 on crits? Sure. Insight hatred? Not a chance. It is stupid and has no place on a monk stance.

As said - damage reduction should be based on armor class somehow. And defender stances can add to it - instead of adding more hp.

The game absolutely does not need more hp inflation - because monsters get more damage based on the best tank possible, and every other class that is not a defender or barb gets nuked that much faster as a result.

Damage reduction good, extra hp bad.

I'd be ok with threat generation removed instead of crit chance from the Earth stances.


I'm also ok with tying threat generation enhancements to intim ranks as a pre-req.

[Aldured]

To be honest I often duo quests, I have two mains a palemaster and a barb. My dwarven barb being my fav.

Since my barb was one of the first (the first being a pali that didnt even go to the Korthos wildernes and the second a barb I couldnt finish creating), Ive grown rather attached to it. It was a Bastion build (I know I know), the moment I saw a second toughness feat at level up I decided to mix in some fighter and "fix" my build. And honestly I really enjoy playing it. Im currently at GH now and often have to switch between tanking and DPSing.

So basically Im actually hoping to live up to the original Bastion plan, get as much AC, DR, saves, fort, etc gear while having a good all around DPS set (not as good AC and not as good DPS as dedicated builds but enough to duo quests and have a blast with my pals).

The only reason I mention any of this is, I too agree with roles. If say fighters can switch between stalwart and kensai, then I just hope I can also switch between racial pre and barb roles, in my case Id pretty much plan on keeping as true to the 2 level Fighter bastion splash ideal as possible: a mostly bestial warrior with a glimpse of reason (he can take em as he gives em). Not the strongest DPS or mitigation but a very helpful balanced melee, with a more DPS than protective focus. Perhaps hell never be the king of raids or make a decent role in EPICS, who knows what future lives will bring but yeah Im willing to farm as much as possible and read/number crunch as much as needed to be able to switch roles accepting the consequences of my choices.

So basically hope enhancements fulfill the Bastion ideal (rather than scrap and forget that ever happened), with a fixed AC system Im sure a well specced armor might help with a say 10% give or take overall damage mitigation (IE I dont want to wear jammies just because everyone else is).

Also Im glad to see how things are moving along, Im sure interesting chances are ahead of us.


Oh also, hope to see some summon/pet/iron-mithril-ect-defender improvements; in any case Im more than glad to get a pet (cosmetic pets) following me around :)

[Failedlegend]

Any class that does not have intim as a class skill - like say monks - should NOT have a 'tanking' stance that adds to hate generation.


So I'm to assume that before Paladin got intimidate you thought they shouldn't be a Tanks

Also you seem to forget this is D&D

My Bone Knight (see Sig) tanks just fine...sure not as good as a SD/DoS3 would but good enough and I enjoy him far more than I do my Paladin Tank...should my character be deleted or made impossible just because he doesn't follow "conventional" class roles. If that's true...than I'm not playing a DnD game anymore.

[GoRinNoSho]

As an interesting thought I'd like to see racial prestige class options augment/enhance class options if they stack. As an example Elves get AA prestige at a later progression than traditional AA ranger. If you are an elven ranger you lose out. No tempest AAs. My idea is to speed up progression if class and race match.

[Silverleafeon]

as for me,
i've been playing ddo for three years, and though i don't have a completionist, i did get my main character up to life five. As a developer however, this is my second week.
I'm the newest member of the systems design team, where i'm focusing on treasure design for the expansion pack..

:) :)

[sephiroth1084]

Because in the traditional fantasy literature that D&D is based on, Monks weren't fulfilling the heroic warrior or knight in shining armor type roles like fighting Giants, slaying Dragons and saving damsels in distress. Barbarian and Fighter types were. Monks were busy praying in their monasteries. :)
Which indicates that you are clearly not drawing on the correct source material for D&D monks, which are very obviously Asian-themed, and in that literature and film, monks do fulfill those roles.

OK guys this is get seriously off topic...monk stances if you wish to continue discussing them should be moved to another thread the devs likely already have enough trouble keeping up with our posts they don't need an unrelated topic being discussed which can bury relevent ideas/concerns
Off-topic because we are discussing enhancements without rehashing the same points that have been made for the past 50 pages?

[Chai]

Please show me how this Earth Stance garbage originated in a D&D source.

The 4 elemental stances (styles), and quite a few other stances, were in 3.5 as well as tons of "maneuvers" that could be "readied" similar to spell preparation.

Not to mention the infinitely broken grappling ruleset, heh.

[Chai]

So I'm to assume that before Paladin got intimidate you thought they shouldn't be a Tanks

Also you seem to forget this is D&D

My Bone Knight (see Sig) tanks just fine...sure not as good as a SD/DoS3 would but good enough and I enjoy him far more than I do my Paladin Tank...should my character be deleted or made impossible just because he doesn't follow "conventional" class roles. If that's true...than I'm not playing a DnD game anymore.

I completely support monks getting a tank stance or PRE. Its just odd that earth stance is the best offensive and defensive stance.

[sirgog]

As for me,
I've been playing DDO for three years, and though I don't have a Completionist, I did get my main character up to life five. As a developer however, this is my second week.
I'm the newest member of the Systems Design team, where I'm focusing on treasure design for the expansion pack.


Alongside Genasi or supplanting him/her/it?

Genasi has been doing quite a good job in recent updates.

[paraplegic]

The enhancement system is in the midst of heavy development, so I can't personally comment as to what will be staying or changing. Anything like that will likely be coming directly from MadFloyd or Eladrin. I was catching up on the discussion here, and just wanted to let you all know that we're still keeping tabs on it.

As for me,
I've been playing DDO for three years, and though I don't have a Completionist, I did get my main character up to life five. As a developer however, this is my second week.
I'm the newest member of the Systems Design team, where I'm focusing on treasure design for the expansion pack.



I see what you did there.
´welcome

[Razcar]

As for me,
I've been playing DDO for three years, and though I don't have a Completionist, I did get my main character up to life five. As a developer however, this is my second week.
I'm the newest member of the Systems Design team, where I'm focusing on treasure design for the expansion pack.
Cool, nice with a dev that has a solid DDO player experience.

[Astraghal]

The problem with Earth stance as it is, is that it's also the best DPS stance in a lot of cases. But that's a problem with the implementation of Earth stance, not the notion of a Monk tanking stance.

I think this is the problem with a lot of Monk abilities and gear. It just wasn't planned out very well. There are too many things in DDO that we just don't know whether was intentional or bugged, that has become the precedent for future discussions on balance. I personally think that it was an oversight of stacking bonuses that allowed Monks to do so well compared to other 'melee' classes.

Once this was realised, not much was done about it because A: Monk was a pay to win class, B: Developers and PR people who weren't communicating, got their wires crossed and put their names to discussions regarding the issues, in some cases contradicting one another, so it became easier to just pretend that the current implimentation of the Monk class was intentional. C: It's just too hard and complicated.

I don't believe that Monks were ever intended to be what they are in DDO. The speedy, dodgy guy is always meant to do and take less damage than the slow, heavy guy, in any intuitive canon. The whole concept of Monks in their DDO incarnation, is based on Bruce Lee films, not holy men who renounced materialism and went to live in monasteries. I don't think that D&D and Bruce Lee are really compatible, the only way Monks should have all their powers is if they do significantly less DPS, threat and have less HP than they currently do. But they don't, which is why they are ragingly overpowered.

[etelan]

Monk stances are the best example we have currently of a system of flexible play-time choices that allow switching between DPS and tanking (and other functions).

I would like to see further benefits to using a shield and make it easy to use shield block tanking as a 'flexible play-time choice'. Large pieces of metal between you and them is a benefit that monks do not have. My tank has definitely had to sacrifice good DPS feats and enhancements just in order to take the expensive DoS line.

And no PA vs CE doesn't count. Maybe when CE generates hate and adds stacking damage absorption... or when AC tanking epic content is viable without complete min/max gimping.

[Deathdefy]

I honestly am not 100% up to date on this thread, so apologies if it has been mentioned before -

Mechanic Rogues need some form of threat reduction as 'subtle backstabbing' only reduces melee threat.

I know subtle backstabbing may be gone too, but would just like to make sure it's been mentioned that ranged rogue threat reduction needs enhancements that are solely lacking on live at the moment. Incidentally, they also need a dps boost to keep up with Artis / their melee counterparts.

I think my point is that mechanics could really use a tree full of near-entirely new enhancements.

[voodoogroves]

I would like to see further benefits to using a shield and make it easy to use shield block tanking as a 'flexible play-time choice'. Large pieces of metal between you and them is a benefit that monks do not have. My tank has definitely had to sacrifice good DPS feats and enhancements just in order to take the expensive DoS line.

Shield mastery should give a base capability which should be increased by (a) shield size and (b) defender PRE ranks. This could be done by a flat increase, or by granting the feats automatically to boost that at the various defender ranks (SD 2 gets improved, SD 3 gets greater, same w/ DOS). This would allow non-defenders to spec for it, but at an increasing cost.

The benefits need to be less front-loaded as well. Shield Mastery is, at this point, too good.

[Astraghal]

The benefits need to be less front-loaded as well. Shield Mastery is, at this point, too good.

I agree with this sentiment, as it applies to many aspects of DDO. A 2nd level ability should be at least twice as powerful than a 1st level ability. A 3rd level ability should be about three times more powerful than a 2nd level one. Exponential is good, linear is okay as long as balance with other classes is considered. The inverse situation that we currently seem to have with a few PrE's, is stupid.

Now, let's hope I got my mathematical terminology right and this post makes sense. :o

[voodoogroves]

I agree with this sentiment, as it applies to many aspects of DDO. A 2nd level ability should be at least twice as powerful than a 1st level ability. A 3rd level ability should be about three times more powerful than a 2nd level one. Exponential is good, linear is okay as long as balance with other classes is considered. The inverse situation that we currently seem to have with a few PrE's, is stupid.

Now, let's hope I got my mathematical terminology right and this post makes sense. :o

Makes enough sense to me, but I'm a moron.

[grodon9999]

The benefits need to be less front-loaded as well. Shield Mastery is, at this point, too good.

Shield Mastery damage mitigation shouldn't exist at all, it's a terrible concept. We already have DR and AC, adding a third type of mitigation, especially one as arbitrary as this, is a poor game mechanic and should be removed.

[voodoogroves]

Shield Mastery damage mitigation shouldn't exist at all, it's a terrible concept. We already have DR and AC, adding a third type of mitigation, especially one as arbitrary as this, is a poor game mechanic and should be removed.

I kinda agree in concept, but "absorption" like reductions are in the game. As the HP values (and damage values) are inflated well beyond PNP roots, flat DR doesn't scale properly.


As long as the other absorptions are in there, I see no remove the mechanic simply for shields.

[joaofalcao]

You have this viewpoint because it seems that you feel monks shouldn't be tanks, no matter what they invest into a character.

Correct me here if I am wrong, but a monk tank can reach higher AC and DPS than a stalwart.

How should they compare? I paid for a class so I am enticed to do anything I want?

[Glenalth]

I agree with this sentiment, as it applies to many aspects of DDO. A 2nd level ability should be at least twice as powerful than a 1st level ability. A 3rd level ability should be about three times more powerful than a 2nd level one. Exponential is good, linear is okay as long as balance with other classes is considered. The inverse situation that we currently seem to have with a few PrE's, is stupid.

Now, let's hope I got my mathematical terminology right and this post makes sense. :o

It doesn't really.

Following your suggested power increase, 20th level abilities being around 243,290,200,817,664,000,000 times more powerful than 1st level abilities.

A single 1st level splash would cut your power level down to around 5% of 20th.

[Scraap]

I agree with this sentiment, as it applies to many aspects of DDO. A 2nd level ability should be at least twice as powerful than a 1st level ability. A 3rd level ability should be about three times more powerful than a 2nd level one. Exponential is good, linear is okay as long as balance with other classes is considered. The inverse situation that we currently seem to have with a few PrE's, is stupid.

Now, let's hope I got my mathematical terminology right and this post makes sense. :o

It's logical, but the results are heavily pigeonholing as far as exponential curves goes. I suppose it really comes down to whether the design is about class-as-role, or class-as-aspect-curve-platform (say, defense, offense, mobility, to use a common design curve, with each aspect given greater or lesser weight by a given class).

That's a debate that's been going on since they introduced multi-classing in the first place, of course, and it wasn't exactly helped by the design of the classes themselves being all over the place power-per-level wise even in core.

[Astraghal]

It doesn't really.

Following your suggested power increase, 20th level abilities being around 243,290,200,817,664,000,000 times more powerful than 1st level abilities.

A single 1st level splash would cut your power level down to around 5% of 20th.

No, I meant for things like PrE's. 1st tier should be x power. 2nd should be between 2-3x power. 3rd should be 5-6x power. It should be (even slightly) better than a simple linear progression. An exponential progression, such as x, 2x, 4x etc. would probably be best, if we're only dealing with 3rd teir PrE's. These are my thoughts on a system that allows players to multi-class splash. Combinations of 1st and 2nd tier splashes shouldn't approach a 3rd tier PrE in power. What players are getting out of multi-classing is already some margin of self-sufficiency or versatility. Heavy investement should be rewarded. If a player wants to do something that their class isn't designed to, they need to change classes.

[grodon9999]

I kinda agree in concept, but "absorption" like reductions are in the game. As the HP values (and damage values) are inflated well beyond PNP roots, flat DR doesn't scale properly.


As long as the other absorptions are in there, I see no remove the mechanic simply for shields.

it's the flat % that's the crux of my major objection.

A Wooden towershield offering more damage mitigation than an Epid Kundarak Warding.

An 8 DEX Monk (okay, this wouldn't exist) getting the same damage mitigation as one with 10 items slotted towards AC.

This dynamic should be removed from the game.

[voodoogroves]

it's the flat % that's the crux of my major objection.

A Wooden towershield offering more damage mitigation than an Epid Kundarak Warding.

Agree completely. A wooden tower shield with Lifeshield is kinda arbitrarily lame. I wouldn't mind the base % tied to the blocking DR (at some rate) and then improved as you go up. Maybe this is how it increases w/ SD as well as they get passive increases to blocking DR, yes?


An 8 DEX Monk (okay, this wouldn't exist) getting the same damage mitigation as one with 10 items slotted towards AC.

Earth stances are too strong as it is, being a great DPS stance, HP boosting and damage avoidance ... PLUS THREAT. It needs to lose one of those - if it is to become the tankier stance it needs to lose the crit boosts.

The mitigation should have some cost associated.

If AC worked, then the AC monk could have both miss and absorb. The issue is that absorb is fricking cheap in terms of opportunity cost.

Here's a funny - tie that passive absorb to blocking DR as well. Monks who want to have absorb like mitigation will need to take TWBlocking and maybe some AP on it. Base it on a combination of blocking DR (use the blocking DR number as the basis) and the earth stance.

[Scraap]

The mitigation should have some cost associated.

You're emulating a rock. Ditch both flavors of evasion, or at least take a penalty to reflex saves.

/evilDM

[grodon9999]

You're emulating a rock. Ditch both flavors of evasion, or at least take a penalty to reflex saves.

/evilDM

I could live with that.

[Silverleafeon]

My halfling raiding cleric has improved shield mastery, and she would sad to see this removed.

On the other hand, she would love to see dragonmark only cost 1 feat.

[Cyr]

it's the flat % that's the crux of my major objection.

A Wooden towershield offering more damage mitigation than an Epid Kundarak Warding.


This is what i dislike also. It is dumb in it's generic approach.

I think something like the following (which is more work for the devs...big deal Genasai has some help now apparently)...


Shield Mastery - This feat grants the % incoming damage reduction listed on a shield when worn. Without this feat you do not gain this damage reduction.
Improved Shield Mastery - This feat grants 125% of the % incoming damage reduction listed on a shield when worn.
All shields given a % incoming damage reduction. This would allow the developers to adjust numbers on a named shield by named shield basis.

[voodoogroves]

This is what i dislike also. It is dumb in it's generic approach.

I think something like the following (which is more work for the devs...big deal Genasai has some help now apparently)...


Shield Mastery - This feat grants the % incoming damage reduction listed on a shield when worn. Without this feat you do not gain this damage reduction.
Improved Shield Mastery - This feat grants 125% of the % incoming damage reduction listed on a shield when worn.
All shields given a % incoming damage reduction. This would allow the developers to adjust numbers on a named shield by named shield basis.


If that's based on the blocking DR of the shield, that number already exists ... and defender PREs already have a mechanic to boost it ... that's what I was going with. Instead of a new number, use that one.

[voodoogroves]

You're emulating a rock. Ditch both flavors of evasion, or at least take a penalty to reflex saves.

/evilDM

I'm also ok with something similar to this - as it is Earth is too strong.

[Cyr]

If that's based on the blocking DR of the shield, that number already exists ... and defender PREs already have a mechanic to boost it ... that's what I was going with. Instead of a new number, use that one.

That would work also. Having another number would just be a way to have another handle that the devs can use to make shields different from each other.

[grodon9999]

That would work also. Having another number would just be a way to have another handle that the devs can use to make shields different from each other.

We're going WAY off topic here . . . that "Let's Talk: AC . . ." thread might actually crash the server though.

[Scraap]

We're going WAY off topic here . . . that "Let's Talk: AC . . ." thread might actually crash the server though.

True. Apologies.

[voodoogroves]

That would work also. Having another number would just be a way to have another handle that the devs can use to make shields different from each other.

The thought of them trying to live update a bajillion items (and I may be underestimating there) makes my colon twitch.


The devs have already said on numerous other occasions that "it really isn't that easy" and given the number of updates where names, text, coding, etc. don't get applied across the whole DB correctly I don't doubt them.

[Cyr]

The thought of them trying to live update a bajillion items (and I may be underestimating there) makes my colon twitch.


The devs have already said on numerous other occasions that "it really isn't that easy" and given the number of updates where names, text, coding, etc. don't get applied across the whole DB correctly I don't doubt them.

Yes, there is little doubt that the coding behind the scenes for items is a mess.

[Cyr]

We're going WAY off topic here . . . that "Let's Talk: AC . . ." thread might actually crash the server though.

Ah, but back on topic...

Along those lines....

Suggested Enhancements for the DoS and SD lines which require shield mastery...

Shield Defense (5 tiers) - Each tier of this power that you purchase increases the % incoming damage reduced by having a shield out by 10% of the normal % incoming damage reduction. Example, if you have one tier of this ability and wield a tower shield that grants 20% incoming damage reduction damge is reduced by another 2% for a total of 22%.

Magical Shield Defense (5 Tiers) - Each tier of this power that you purchase increases the % incoming damage reduced from magical forces by 10% of the normal % incoming damage reduction. Example, if you five tiers of this ability and wield a tower shield that grants 20% incoming damage reduction damage versus magical forces are reduced by 10%.

[Failedlegend]

You're emulating a rock. Ditch both flavors of evasion, or at least take a penalty to reflex saves.

/evilDM

ummm...I have little idea what you saying but if you saying one of the following

1) Remove evasion from the game

2) Disallow evasion with shields

My answer to both is NO

If I'm misunderstanding..sorry

On that note this is WAY off topic...using the stances as an example was on topic but arguing the effetiveness of tank builds and the stances themselves belong in another thread.

[Scraap]

2) Disallow evasion with shields


Are you under the impression that works now? Didn't last month, which was the last time I tested that, which is kinda where the stance notion came in as a tradeoff. The code's already there.

edit:
as for


On that note this is WAY off topic...using the stances as an example was on topic but arguing the effetiveness of tank builds and the stances themselves belong in another thread.

It's entirely relevant to discuss the interaction between class and pre with given examples.

[dkyle]

Are you under the impression that works now? Didn't last month, which was the last time I tested that, which is kinda where the stance notion came in as a tradeoff. The code's already there.

Shields don't prevent evasion. You can evade even while holding a Tower Shield. It's always been that way, even in PnP.

Heck, in 4E, shields even provide a bonus to Reflex.

[Scraap]

Shields don't prevent evasion. You can evade even while holding a Tower Shield. It's always been that way, even in PnP.

Heck, in 4E, shields even provide a bonus to Reflex.

Hrm. Do believe I've a bug report to write, as soon I figure out how to replicate whatever happened there then (Just double-checked, and you are correct). Discard the stance notion then. Good for the goose, good for the gander.

[Failedlegend]

Hrm. Do believe I've a bug report to write, as soon I figure out how to replicate whatever happened there then (Just double-checked, and you are correct). Discard the stance notion then. Good for the goose, good for the gander.

Its not a bug its WAI

Now please get back on topic...take this conversation elsewhere

[lppmor]

To try bringing this thread back on topic, I'm posting here another example of tree design, now with racial tree included. It's nice to create examples because some hard to spot design issues become clear with a mockup.

As I said before, this design considers the trees as plain class trees, not prestige trees, meaning that the enhancements inside each tree are not only specific to the associated prestige. Instead, your prestige bonuses come automatically as a consequence of picking enhancements for your class. For example, I'm not saying here that fire and cold enhancements are only tied to Pale Master, I'm just saying that if you decide to get fire and cold enhancements for your Wizard, then you'll slowly become a more powerful Pale Master.

I also understand that people will want to spend much more ap into their class trees than their racial tree, trying at least to reach 41 ap into one class tree, since racial enhancements are only supportive anyway. So, what I did here is making much easier to reach the racial capstone (25 ap instead of 41).

http://my.ddo.com/lppmor/wp-content/blogs.dir/77759/files/my-gallery/wizard_elf.png

[Failedlegend]

Thanks Ippmor another great demonstration of why we need a general Tab...your good at this :D

[Artos_Fabril]

To try bringing this thread back on topic, I'm posting here another example of tree design, now with racial tree included. It's nice to create examples because some hard to spot design issues become clear with a mockup.
http://my.ddo.com/lppmor/wp-content/blogs.dir/77759/files/my-gallery/wizard_elf.png

Speaking of design issues:
In your Elf tree, it is impossible to reach tier 2 with melee enhancements based on the current ruleset. (Aerenal and Valenar lock each other out), even if you leave them at the overpriced 2/2.

You would also have to be careful what bonuses you grant to the wild mage tree, since just gaining int3 and subtle casting would get you to the second tier (assuming also, that int 3 is available at 45 points spent in Wiz and not 45 points spent in WM trees)

I don't know if one of your design goals was to prevent non-pures from maxing out any spell line, but requiring 70 points spent in wizard trees for the top tier does that pretty effectively. The only MC build that could get there is a /2 splash. Additionally, anyone wanting the top-tier ability any any of your trees would have to purchase more than 70% of the options in that tree, in which case there's not much in the way of actual options. Especially since you would have to put point into both other trees to meet the AP spent requirements to buy the main-tree options required to get 41 points in a tree.

In short, I applaud your efforts, but I hate your ideas. That's my opinion, of course, so do with it what you will.

[Failedlegend]

I'd say Tiranblade has the best mock-up so far (I edited it a bit to correct some errors Tiran mentioned and to add the general tab)

http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo93/Failedlegend/Tiranbladesmock-upedit.png

You get 80 Augmentation Points (Action Points makes no sense) for your Prestige Trees as well as your racial tree. For your general enhancements you get "X" amount of General Points per level.

X = one of three things

1) Get one GP per AP you get

2) Get 1-3 GP per Level (decided by w/e devs deem balanced)

3) You get a certain amount points per level based on the class taken that level. Balanced based on the amount of total general enhancements said class has.

[Aesop]

Not to veer off target too much but can PMs be redesigned to get an Undead Pet similar in to Artis (with certain fixes) The Skeletons Companion can have its own Tree for upgrades into the direction you want it to go.


Not looking for more "power" per se just more unique pet options

Aesop

[Failedlegend]

Not to veer off target too much but can PMs be redesigned to get an Undead Pet similar in to Artis (with certain fixes) The Skeletons Companion can have its own Tree for upgrades into the direction you want it to go.

Aesop

I'd be in favor of that.

[orakio]

Correct me here if I am wrong, but a monk tank can reach higher AC and DPS than a stalwart.

How should they compare? I paid for a class so I am enticed to do anything I want?

Ac is debatable but I am not 100% sure of the total max AC for monks vs. tank fighters/paladins. At the same time they will never approach the threat and hp levels of a SD3 or DoS3 as has already been pointed out in this thread. They don't get access to intimidate as a class skill and have issues with snap aggro due to that. Monks do hit very high AC levels and yet they are still hit on a 2 in a large portion of epic content, how much use does all that AC have at that point?

There are tradeoffs that a monk tank makes vs. a fighter tank vs. a paladin tank. Of the 3 paladin has by far the highest self healing as well as saves, and potentially even has access to evasion through /monk2. It also has the highest +threat modifiers, equivalent healing amp to monks and significantly more hp at the cost of less dps and no improved evasion. Until monks are somehow the premiere tank class, which they aren't currently, or premiere melee dps class, which they aren't currently, or premiere anything, comments about entitlement because you paid for a class are fairly ridiculous.


Ah, but back on topic...

Along those lines....

Suggested Enhancements for the DoS and SD lines which require shield mastery...

Shield Defense (5 tiers) - Each tier of this power that you purchase increases the % incoming damage reduced by having a shield out by 10% of the normal % incoming damage reduction. Example, if you have one tier of this ability and wield a tower shield that grants 20% incoming damage reduction damge is reduced by another 2% for a total of 22%.

Magical Shield Defense (5 Tiers) - Each tier of this power that you purchase increases the % incoming damage reduced from magical forces by 10% of the normal % incoming damage reduction. Example, if you five tiers of this ability and wield a tower shield that grants 20% incoming damage reduction damage versus magical forces are reduced by 10%.

Interesting ideas, I like the concept of moving towards % mitigation and having enhancements effect that.

[Aldured]

Not to veer off target too much but can PMs be redesigned to get an Undead Pet similar in to Artis (with certain fixes) The Skeletons Companion can have its own Tree for upgrades into the direction you want it to go.


Not looking for more "power" per se just more unique pet options

Aesop

/signed

BTW palemasters get an "army of one" :P So agreed itd be better to get a good one (AP costly of course) could be an alternative to pure nectrotic blasting power and cater to more CC oriented builds :)

And as far as minions go, theres also the iron defender line...


Also :

Paths and pres should be more related

A path could have a "click me/for dummies/cookie cutter" AP approach, it could help casual gamers

A free form alternative has to be there for custom chars, mostly multiclass chars that appeals to power gamers and people who wish to leave the path


AC affects enhancements so please dont release the enhancement update before fixing AC. Two reasons come to mind:

* Some enhancements are AC oriented, in fact many casual gamers want a resistant char to start with (like stalwart or defender). No one says a brand new char will outperform a grinded completionist nor that they will excel as tanks but a cookie cutter tank should age decently (as far as 28 point builds go)

* Current enhancement changes and AC rebalancing will both affect a great number of builds, having to reroll twice may upset many players


Well those are my 2 cents, and Id only like to add that 20+ years of playing RPG videogames and this is my fav. So thanks turbine !!!

[Devonian]

One thing I would like to see, is the use of this opertunity to eliminate Dead levels. Those levels where you gain almost nothing but bigger numbers. Look at Monk 11 against 12, you get, no new stances, no new feats, no class features except an immunity. Its really dull and makes for a slog, other classes have similar points too, where the new shininess of a level up gives way to disappointment. Then next level you get Slowfall, better unarmed, abundant step, and becase its a level devisable by 3, a new feat to choose, plus its where tier 3 elemental stances are available, Famine to feast.

This also ties into another idea, what if, rather than racial PREs, you got specialised racial class features? So a WF monk can trade out the class's immunity to poison and disease in favour of, say, a bonus that kicks in for a short span on making a saving throw? An Elven artificer could trade out crossbow related abilities for bow based ones?

[sephiroth1084]

Agreed on the dead levels thing. I'd like to see more worthwhile enhancements moved to levels that a class doesn't get a significant benefit or a feat.

Most classes also need more worthwhile enhancements in the 16-20 range that are good enough to make multiclassing a hard choice, but not so good that it makes multiclassing a bad idea.

[voodoogroves]

Agreed on the dead levels thing. I'd like to see more worthwhile enhancements moved to levels that a class doesn't get a significant benefit or a feat.

Most classes also need more worthwhile enhancements in the 16-20 range that are good enough to make multiclassing a hard choice, but not so good that it makes multiclassing a bad idea.


They did a pretty good job already I think, esp. with things like Haste Boost, Healing Amp, etc.

[bigolbear]

Thanks Ippmor another great demonstration of why we need a general Tab...your good at this :D

I concur whole heartedly.

3 cheers for ippmor. some times the best way to spot design flaws is prototyping. i say we keep prototyping.

Ippmor - how about knocking up an example of how this would work on a multiclass build.

take your pale maste example and stick 2 rogue lvls on it. its a prety common split after all.

[sephiroth1084]

They did a pretty good job already I think, esp. with things like Haste Boost, Healing Amp, etc.
If you go check out the class pages on the wiki/compendium, you'll find that for most, there is not much or nothing at all going on at 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20 for most classes.

Everyone gets a feat at 15, so that's not too big a deal.
Everyone gets a capstone at 20.
Not much else going on at those levels for many characters.

[waterboytkd]

So I made these up and ran them by my guildies (who are largely sorc players) to get feedback. This was the version they felt was best to put up on the forums. The reason I did this was because the devs mentioned that the caster trees are giving them the most interesting debates. So, if they still are, here's some food for thought.

http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/1150/sorctreesv3.jpg

A couple of things to explain:

First, not into graphical stuff, so I just did it in a spreadsheet. :D Sorry.

Second, depending on the rules for multiclassing, tree limits, the abandoning of an increasing AP cost per tier, it might be a better idea to make the benefits of lines linear rather than front- or back-loaded. So, if you look at my elemental lines, I've reduced the number of tiers so that a linear progression is easier to follow. Each Manipulation tier would be +10%, each Spellcasting tier would be +3% chance to crit, and each Deadly tier would be +25% crit damage.

Third, for the currently tier 3 Savant abilities, I've broken them up into 3 tiers. For Earthgrab, the duration is 4 seconds per tier (otherwise, the same as current). For Wind Dance, you only get 1 charge at tier 1, and gain 2 more charges per tier. For Heat Death, you deal 600 damage at tier 1, then deal +700 damage per tier. For Icy Prison, it deals 100 damage and lasts 10 seconds at tier 1, then gets +200 damage and +10 seconds per tier.

Fourth, the current Sorc capstone is the capstone for either savant.

I tried my hardest to split the useful stuff up among the 3 trees, and to not turn Acolyte of the Skin into a "dump tree". The one thing that is possible here: if a Sorc truly wanted to be a master of Savant-ness, they could get 3 energy types all maxed out and uber. But, that would pretty much preclude any other enhancements.

Also, due to the nature of PrE bonus enhancements being something you gain automatically (not much of a choice there), you CAN'T put negatives or drawbacks in there. You don't want players suddenly getting screwed because they wanted to dabble deeply into a tree. Therefore, Savant loses the penalties to caster levels with opposite elements (which I'm of the mind shouldn't have happened to begin with; it works for "lore" reasons, but strategic drawbacks are typically poor for this kind of game design).

[waterboytkd]

Thinking about racial PrEs more, and I'm very much in favor of two things: first and foremost, racial PrEs should be something unique to the race, not a clone of an existing class Tree. This would give the races something more unique to offer the player, would increase choices, and thus increase customization in general. Second, I think the PrE Bonus Enhancements should be a part of the racial tree itself. This will make spending in the racial tree better, and also gets around the problem that a 3 tree limit could have on anyone that wants their racial PrE.

Note: For something like elf, which really needs a new racial PrE other than Arcane Archer, the way this could be handled is: just as you can swap out class trees for other class trees (if you're multiclassed), certain races will be able to swap out their racial tree for another racial tree. In most cases, these trees will be almost identical, but will have different PrE bonus enhancements, and may have other enhancements included or swapped in as necessary for the PrE bonus enhancements. For example, if you swapped from Elf racial tree with Revenant Blade to the Elf racial tree with Arcane Archer, you might lose the Valenare and/or Aerenal weapon attack and damage enhancements, but you'd gain some specific enhancements for AA.

The racial PrEs I thought up (and I think would be good in Eberron flavor, as that is the world our characters are from, even if we go to visit Drizzt and the superfriends in FR) were:

Elf: Revenant Blade (melee-focused, scimitar/falchion specialists; this would give elves a ranged focused PrE and a melee focused PrE)
Drow: Scorpion Wraith (a sort of rogue-ish, weapon dps focused PrE)
Dwarf: Dwarven Defender (duh, but would use different mechanics than SD and DoS, so it could stack nicely)
Halfling: Talenta Scout (a rangerish PrE that would focus on Pets, specifically their dinosaur companion)
Half-Orc: Jhorgan'Taal Marcher (a versatile, utility PrE that would increase self-sufficiency)
Warforged: Warforged Juggernaut (a drastic deviation from the PnP version, this would be focused on being 'unstoppable', as in the ability to withstand punishment, and to be immune to certain 'stopping' effects, like knockdown, stun, or whatever)
Half-Elf: Something to do with their Dilly? I'd like something unique, not just something taken from the dilly class, but it could be something as simple as just gaining more relevant abilities from their Dilly's class. Could even be given a generic name, like Half-Elf Dilettante.
Human: This one also gives me problem. Could borrow from 4th ed here, and go Adroit Explorer (a utility, survival oriented PrE that would add quite a bit of self-sufficiency).

Following are some possible PrE bonus enhancement progressions for these racial PrEs. If some new enhancements would be needed to work mechanically, or even thematically, I've added those to the PrE sections, as well.

Revenant Blade
5 AP: Ancestral Guidance I: you can apply the benefits of the Weapon Finesse feat to Longswords, Scimitars, and Falchions.
10 AP: Revenant Blade I: your attack penalty from Power Attack or Combat Expertise is decreased by 1.
15 AP: Giant Slayer: gain Favored Enemy: Giants (use +2 or your Ranger value, if any)
20 AP: Revenant Blade II: your attack penalty from Power Attack or Combat Expertise is decreased by an additional 1 (total decrease in penalty of 2).
25 AP: Ancestral Guidance II: you gain a bonus feat from a specific list. This choice can be changed whenever the Elf Racial Tree enhancements are respecced. You need not meet the prerequisites for the feat (or should you? can't decide if that would be too crazy).
30 AP: Revenant Blade III: your attack penalty from Power Attack or Combat Expertise is decreased by an additional 1 (total decrease in penalty of 3). If you possess Elven Power Attack III or Elven Combat Expertise III, your penalty is decreased by an additional 1 (total decrease in penalty of 4).
41 AP: Legendary Force: Full modifier to off-hand damage instead of half-modifier; double modifier to falchion damage rather than one-and-a-half modifier damage.

Note: I wanted to keep the free bonuses as generic as possible (not requiring scimi/falchion use), so that melee-based elves using their racial weapons could take advantage of it.

Ancestral Guidance feat list: Alertness, Combat Expertise, Dodge, Great Cleave, Improved Critical (slashing or piercing), Improved Sunder, Improved Trip, Power Attack, Spring Attack, Stealthy, Weapon Specialization (slashing or piercing).

Note: If this is too good, or too complex, Ancestral Guidance could simply be changed to a free Improved Critical with Longswords, Rapiers, Scimitars, and Falchions.

New Elf Enhancements
Elven Power Attack
Prereqs: Aerenal Weapon Damage or Valenar Weapon Damage
Max tiers: 3
Effect: Your bonus damage from Power Attack increases by 1 (2 for two-handed weapons), and your penalty to attack increases by -1 as well. This only functions when you are wielding only Longswords, Rapiers, Scimitars, or Falchions.

Elven Combat Expertise
Prereqs: Aeranal Weapon Attack or Valenar Weapon Attack
Max tiers: 3
Effect: Your bonus to AC from Combat Expertise increases by 1, and your penalty to attack increases by -1 as well. This only functions when your are wielding only Longswords, Rapiers, Scimitars, or Falchions.

Scorpion Wraith
5 AP: Veil of Shadow: you move 30% faster while sneaking.
10 AP: Scorpion Wraith I: you gain +1d6 sneak attack.
15 AP: Darkness: 3 times per rest, you may blind a target (no save, 60 ft range, 10 second duration, 15 second cooldown).
20 AP: Scorpion Wraith II: you gain +1d6 sneak attack (total 2d6).
25 AP: Perfect Sight: you ignore miss chances due to concealment (including blurry, displacement, blinded, invisibility, and fog concealment).
30 AP: Scorpion Wraith III: you gain +1d6 sneak attack (total 3d6).
41 AP: Deadly Sting: any weapon you wield gains the Poison ability (1d6 poison damage on a hit).

Note: Very much so a DPS-focused PrE that would team up best with Rangers, Rogues, and Monks. The increased stealth speed and the Darkness really make the bonus Sneak Attack dice shine. Deadly Sting in PnP was a shadow poison you could apply to your blades that did Con damage, but the recent shift the devs made with Noxious Fang and the new Envenomed Blade to make Poison a damage type is better, so I went with that. Perfect Sight was because the Scorpion Wraith was so adept at fighting in his Darkness that he could summon up Blind Sight. What I have is about as close to Blind Sight as we could get in DDO.

New Drow Enhancements
Drow Darkness
Prereq: Scorpion Wraith Darkness ability (15 AP spent in this tree)
Max tier: 3
Effect: You regenerate uses of your Darkness ability at the rate of 1 use per minute. Each additional time you take this enhancement, the regeneration time is decreased by 15 seconds (so 1 use every 30 seconds at tier 3).

More to Come Later, I Hope

That's what I have for now (using Eberron source books makes this a bit easier). If I come up with more (and I hope to), I'll add them to this post, and make a post indicating I've added more PrE bonus enhancement progressions.

[Artos_Fabril]

Also, due to the nature of PrE bonus enhancements being something you gain automatically (not much of a choice there), you CAN'T put negatives or drawbacks in there. You don't want players suddenly getting screwed because they wanted to dabble deeply into a tree. Therefore, Savant loses the penalties to caster levels with opposite elements (which I'm of the mind shouldn't have happened to begin with; it works for "lore" reasons, but strategic drawbacks are typically poor for this kind of game design).
How about giving Sorcs "elemental stances" that allow for tactical drawbacks/advantages rather than strategic?

I would remove both the automatic caster-level bonuses, and the automatic penalties, as your system gives double the benefits of the current one without any associated drawbacks, and instead implement them as stances.

For instance: Planar Attunement: Fernia 2/2/2 AP, level 8/14/20 -- While in this stance, you have +2 caster levels to Fire spells and -1 caster level to Cold spells. You gain an innate fire absorption% equal to your charisma modifier, but take an extra 25/50/75% damage from cold-based spells and effects. You may only switch stances once every 5 minutes, and may not leave a stance before this cooldown expires.

That makes the current Savant advantages and disadvantages tactical in nature, but prevents a character from completely avoiding the penalties commensurate with the benefits of a stance. Also, with 4 stances each costing 2AP and only available at level 20, no character could take more than 2 at tier 3. (2AP for a second stance are freed up by making the capstone automatic instead of purchased.)

Your trees also have the same problem as all of the other split trees, in that a limited-tree system would still unduly penalize multi-class builds.

[Vargouille]

For things like elemental damage enhancements, we're considering multiple-choice enhancements that open a list, letting you pick an element. Every caster PRE could have one of these multiple-choice enhancements. Some PREs may have multiple of these lines (but more than 1-2 would eat up a lot of options). If you really want to maximize the number of elements you get bonuses with, you may need to focus on PREs from your main class, giving up diversity for focus.

This is just another option we're thinking about, but seemed relevant given recent discussion here and some interesting trees you guys have put up. Multiple-choice enhancement technology potentially has other applications, if that turns out to be the best way to go.

[Scraap]

For things like elemental damage enhancements, we're considering multiple-choice enhancements that open a list, letting you pick an element. Every caster PRE could have one of these multiple-choice enhancements. Some PREs may have multiple of these lines (but more than 1-2 would eat up a lot of options). If you really want to maximize the number of elements you get bonuses with, you may need to focus on PREs from your main class, giving up diversity for focus.

This is just another option we're thinking about, but seemed relevant given recent discussion here and some interesting trees you guys have put up. Multiple-choice enhancement technology potentially has other applications, if that turns out to be the best way to go.

What are your thoughts on the elemental stances notion thusfar? Or do you have other notions for stopping folks from taking the lines from each of the three pre trees and swapping them all over to, say, ice, which would mean the difference between full and 1/3rd-2/3rds the benefits were it only taken in one line?

[LeLoric]

For things like elemental damage enhancements, we're considering multiple-choice enhancements that open a list, letting you pick an element. Every caster PRE could have one of these multiple-choice enhancements. Some PREs may have multiple of these lines (but more than 1-2 would eat up a lot of options). If you really want to maximize the number of elements you get bonuses with, you may need to focus PREs from your main class, giving up diversity for focus.

This is just another option we're thinking about, but seemed relevant given recent discussion here and some interesting trees you guys have put up. Multiple-choice enhancement technology potentially has other applications, if that turns out to be the best way to go.

I could possibly see this working. It hurts people that want to dabble a bit in all four elements plus maybe repair and force too though. I'm not a big fan of those choices currently but I do see many that are.

I'd think you'd need 2 per line really to make it work. Any prestige with just one would probably fall pretty short in dmg capabilities and would force a pretty heavy splash into a 2nd tree to get another elemental line up to respectable useage.

However if you had the same enhancement setup as now with the 7/6/6 model you'd end up with 19 points spent in a line just for your enhancments. Do two lines of that and your at 38. That's almost to capstone and youve just taken elemental stuff.

This means probably changing the elemetal lines to something different. Maybe go with a setup of dmg line and crit line and multiplier line like we have now. Each tier of dmg would be 10% with 5 tiers total. Each tier of crit could be 2% crit and .25 modifier for a total of 10% crit chance and 1.25 multiplier slightly higher than now.

Total points spent would be 15 versus the 19 now that it costs and the crit chance would see a slight increase when maxed out. The weighted first tiers would go away in this model but I consider that a good thing as people are not wanting to spend further into a tree with it being so front loaded right now.

[voodoogroves]

The weighted first tiers would go away in this model but I consider that a good thing as people are not wanting to spend further into a tree with it being so front loaded right now.

And I hate the front-weighting of too many things. AP is where we can stray from the core rules and adjust for things baked into the class itself.

[Vazok1]

For things like elemental damage enhancements, we're considering multiple-choice enhancements that open a list, letting you pick an element. Every caster PRE could have one of these multiple-choice enhancements. Some PREs may have multiple of these lines (but more than 1-2 would eat up a lot of options). If you really want to maximize the number of elements you get bonuses with, you may need to focus on PREs from your main class, giving up diversity for focus.

This is just another option we're thinking about, but seemed relevant given recent discussion here and some interesting trees you guys have put up. Multiple-choice enhancement technology potentially has other applications, if that turns out to be the best way to go.

myself and a few other casters from my guild recently TR'd and a few levels back we were discussing who took what damage enhancements, personally I max out repair, ice and elec with first tier in acid and force and it seemed everyone else did the same, except with their preferred element. now i'd understand having to drop one of those full lines (personally I'd drop elec to first tier and take repair and ice to full) but would we be able to take the first tier of each of those non-specified enhancements or would we have to drop a main down to 45% in order to take 20% in another?

(thats an idea, how about maxing the elemental trees to a total of 14, enough to max 2 lines, then if you want first tier in others you drop 5% off your main? or maybe 16 to give a bit more lee-way)

[Vargouille]

What are your thoughts on the elemental stances notion thusfar? Or do you have other notions for stopping folks from taking the lines from each of the three pre trees and swapping them all over to, say, ice, which would mean the difference between full and 1/3rd-2/3rds the benefits were it only taken in one line?

If we went the route of multiple-choice enhancements, we would likely make it so that if you choose cold in one line you must choose non-cold in any other enhancement lines.

[Failedlegend]

If we went the route of multiple-choice enhancements, we would likely make it so that if you choose cold in one line you must choose non-cold in any other enhancement lines.

Any thought on not worrying about that and simply adding a general tab....its Win-Win

1) PrE tree will actually be related to said PrE which will make it so tey look alot less generic

2) no need to worry about which unrelated enhancement to put where

[sephiroth1084]

I liked the front-loading of the spell enhancement lines. It made dabbling in multiple elements more worthwhile, and increased spell damage a bit at early levels where it really needed it.

[Havok.cry]

General tab would be better.



But if the devs are not gonna budge on that (which the longer we go without a yea or nay means nay, cause they have to actually form their plans on the style they are gonna use) the multiple choices thing is a good idea.

Infact it is a good idea irregardless of other factors. You could apply it to kensai signature weapons too. You could use it to narrow savant to a single tree. Pick element first and rest of tree aligns to that choice. You could even have different enhancements appear on the tree based on that first elemental choice. Archmage could also be set up like that. If you allow two lines per tab for savants, or schools for archmage, you could have enhancements marked as either minor or major, with the secondary liines adding its minor abilities to the tree.

[Desonde]

I've seen a little bit of talk about a general tab, not sure the whole concept behind it, but I think it's the right idea.

The way I had seen it was that there would be 5 tabs, Race, Class, and 3 PrEs. Race would continue to have much of the same enhancements that they presently have, Class would have the core skills (Favored Enemy/Elemental damage lines), and a max of three 3 PrE based on the restrictions you implement.

In addition, Racial points could count for the racial PrE tree, and class points for class PrE's. For example, an Elf Ranger Arcane Archer would gain AA points when placed in any of the three trees allowing for more flexibility in the point spread without tight casting favored enemy to the deepwood sniper.

Though this method isn't without a flaw, if 41 points were available in the class tree they could gain the capstone of all three class PrE's. The simple solution is to put the capstone as a selectable lvl 20 enhancement in the Race tree for any PrE's that are 41+ where only one can be selected.

Keeping the total points allowed in the two general tabs would be ideal (below 20), and/or have them count at a 2:1 ratio.

[TiranBlade]

Any thought on not worrying about that and simply adding a general tab....its Win-Win

1) PrE tree will actually be related to said PrE make it feel alot better

2) no need to worry about which unrelated enhancement to put where

The problem I see with the general tab still is the matter of how they allocate to the trees to benenfit a pre, if they add to all of them, you can generalize yourself into each tree early on, it's too much of a power creep unless like one of my UI ideas was to have the general itself broken down to benefit only certin areas.

It's not a simple as you might think.

[MaxwellEdison]

Any thought on not worrying about that and simply adding a general tab....its Win-Win

1) PrE tree will actually be related to said PrE make it feel alot better

2) no need to worry about which unrelated enhancement to put where

The problem I have with a general tab is that you're likely going to spread the enhancements too thin and could very easily remove choice and diversity from the PrE tree's themselves. It could also negatively effect multiclass by putting you in a situation where a popular enhancement for all 3 PrE's could prevent you from advancing in the tree.

Say for instance you're taking 6 levels of fighter for Kensei I. Your amount of AP you can dedicate to the tree is not much more than what is required to hit the PrE threshhold. By it's nature the general tab would have the "fighter stuff" everyone would want, like Fighter Strength, Haste Boost, Tactics, etc. Leaving you with the chaff that got put in the Kensei tree.

[Artos_Fabril]

The problem I have with a general tab is that you're likely going to spread the enhancements too thin and could very easily remove choice and diversity from the PrE tree's themselves. It could also negatively effect multiclass by putting you in a situation where a popular enhancement for all 3 PrE's could prevent you from advancing in the tree.

Say for instance you're taking 6 levels of fighter for Kensei I. Your amount of AP you can dedicate to the tree is not much more than what is required to hit the PrE threshhold. By it's nature the general tab would have the "fighter stuff" everyone would want, like Fighter Strength, Haste Boost, Tactics, etc. Leaving you with the chaff that got put in the Kensei tree.
Here's a way to implement a general tab without breaking everything else. (http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=4277561&postcount=3116) Remember that 41 points is a design decision, not a hard coded requirement.

[Qzipoun]

Any thought on not worrying about that and simply adding a general tab....its Win-Win

1) PrE tree will actually be related to said PrE make it feel alot better

2) no need to worry about which unrelated enhancement to put where

Throwing my vote in for this. The ONE thing I can see completely breaking the system is how we handle 'general' enhancements. Putting them as part of PRE reduces flexibility, it's that simple.

Heck, put them in the 'race' tree an make PRE trees have cheaper versions. But don't stop someone from taking an enhancement just because it doesn't 'fit' with what a dev thought a PRE meant. Some people have pretty crazy builds out there, don't limit us...

[bigolbear]

For things like elemental damage enhancements, we're considering multiple-choice enhancements that open a list, letting you pick an element. Every caster PRE could have one of these multiple-choice enhancements. Some PREs may have multiple of these lines (but more than 1-2 would eat up a lot of options). If you really want to maximize the number of elements you get bonuses with, you may need to focus on PREs from your main class, giving up diversity for focus.

This is just another option we're thinking about, but seemed relevant given recent discussion here and some interesting trees you guys have put up. Multiple-choice enhancement technology potentially has other applications, if that turns out to be the best way to go.

it realy sounds like fitting the options around the system, rahter than what should be happening of desiging a system that can handle the options.

Im not trying to be overly critical but id hate to see elemental based casters relegated to 1 or 2 elements.

Honeslty i know its been echoed a lot but a general tab would solve these issues. It would also allow for whacky stuff like taking elemental damage boosts for your dragon mark, or clerics taking fire enhancemnts for flamestrikes.

ill take this point to remind every one again.

divines cast damage spells with the folowing types: positive, negative, fire, alignment, light, electric, force, sonic, untyped.
arcanes cast damage spells with the following types: fire, ice, acid, electric, force, repair, negative, sonic, utyped.
bards get a good mix too and bear in mind there are other ways to get elemental damage - feats, past lives etc. Non caster characters with access to elemental magic should have ways of enhancing it too.

Thanks for keeping us up to date, but i have to be honest with my feed back - I think the proposed idea of multichoice element lines is not going to be sufficient and will lead to sufficient restirction to cause 'cookie cutter' to be the norm.

[Aldured]

Here's a way to implement a general tab without breaking everything else. (http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=4277561&postcount=3116) Remember that 41 points is a design decision, not a hard coded requirement.

Interesting

[Failedlegend]

The problem I see with the general tab still is the matter of how they allocate to the trees to benenfit a pre, if they add to all of them, you can generalize yourself into each tree early on, it's too much of a power creep unless like one of my UI ideas was to have the general itself broken down to benefit only certin areas.


The problem I have with a general tab is that you're likely going to spread the enhancements too thin.


I mentioned this in a earlier post but since it was missed (really easy for that to happen in this thread) here's what I said

I figured the best way is to not worry about trying to siphon points towards a PrE and give the general Tab it's own points system. The general Tab would of course have Level gating just like the PrEs and whatever other controls he devs use.

Augmentation Points - For Race & PrE Tabs get 4 per level for a total of 80 at 20

General Points - To be spent in general tab...Possible methods of obtaining general Points:

1) Get one GP per AP you get

2) Get 1-3 GP per Level (decided by w/e devs deem balanced)

3) You get a certain amount points per level based on the class taken that level. Balanced based on the amount of total general enhancements said class has.



Putting them as part of PRE reduces flexibility, it's that simple.

It also makes them look and fell far less like PrE trees...have a look at Ippmor's mock-up....if it weren't for the titles at first glance you wouldn't know which PrE Tree belonged to which PrE.





http://my.ddo.com/lppmor/wp-content/blogs.dir/77759/files/my-gallery/wizard_elf.png



Than you look at Artos_Fabrils Example and you can DEFINATELY tell which PrE this belongs too



Mechanic
Enhancement Name Cost Progression Class Level Requirement Benefit
Engineering 1/1/1/1 3/6/9/12 +1 to Disable Device, Open Lock, Search, Spot
->Reverse Engineering 1/1/1 6/10/14 +1 to Use Magic Device, +1 crafting level, +2 trap DC
Combat Engineer 1/1/1/1/1/1/1 1/3/5/7/9/11/13 1 use per tier of "Combat Engineer"**
->Demolitionist 1/1/1 9/11/13 While Combat Engineer is active, your traps are emplaced instantly; traps and grenades have a 4% chance per tier to crit for double damage
->->Big Ba-da-boom 3 15 Consume a use of "Combat Engineer" to increase all trap, grenade, and crossbow damage by 50% for 8 seconds
->->->Mass Destruction 1 18 When your score a kill with a grenade, reclaim one use of "Combat Engineer"
Bolt-Ridden 1/1/1/1/1 2/6/10/14/18 Repeater criticals reduce enemy fortification by 2% and fortitude saves by 1 for 10 seconds, 1 stack per tier
Mechanical Aptitude 1/1/1/1/1 4/7/10/13/16 Increase the enhancement bonus of your repeating crossbow by 1 per tier
->Repeater Specialization 1/1/1 8/12/16 +2 damage per tier with your equipped repeater
->->Repeating Repeater 1/1/1/1/1 6/9/12/15/18 Your repeater has a 1% chance per tier to fire a second volley immediately
->->->Repeater Mastery 2/2 15/18 Reduce repeater reload time by 25% per tier (multiplicative stacking with rapid reload)
->->->->Sabot Shots 2 18 +1 to Critical multiplier on vorpal strikes with all crossbows/repeaters
Manual Dexterity 1/1/1/1/1 3/6/9/12/15 Reduces time to open lock or disarm by 20% per tier
->Nimble Mind 3 12 Add your dex bonus to your disable device total
Practiced Eye 1/1/1/1/1 1/3/5/7/9 +1 spot and -20% search time per tier
Monkeywrencher 1/1/1/1 3/8/13/18 +1d6 per tier bane damage to constructs
->Wrack Construct 1/1/1 5/10/15 Wrack Construct I/II/III (as current)
->->Ruin Construct 2 12 Wrack construct stuns on crits; red/purple named lose additional 15% fort instead
Repair Construct 1/1/1/1 1/4/7/10 repair 1d3+3 per second, per tier - 15 second duration
Trap Resistance 1/1/1 2/8/14 +2 to saves vs. traps and +3 to all elemental resistances per tier

**Combat Engineer: Traps take 50% less time to place and enemies who successfully save still have their defenses compromised, reducing fortification by 10% for 10 seconds (does not stack with itself)
Granted Benefits
Tier .5 Light Repeating Crossbow Proficiency; Critical fail while disarming trap dazes you, but does not explode the box
Tier 1 Add your Int bonus to crossbow/repeater damage; your trap DCs are increased; all of your traps and grenades deal 10% more damage
Tier 1.5 Heavy Repeating Crossbow Proficiency; +3 to Disable Device, Open Locks, and Search
Tier 2 Add half your dex bonus to sneak attack damage; your trap DCs are increased; +3% crit chance with traps and grenades (+0.5 multiplier)
Tier 2.5 Smite constructs/living constructs; +3 to elemental resistances, 10% damage reduction vs physical traps
Tier 3 Great Crossbow Proficientcy; your trap DCs are increased; traps and grenades deal addional 15% damage
Capstone: +2 Int; All light/heavy/great crossbows you wield fire volleys of 3 bolts, instead of 1; Trap DCs increased

[Scraap]

If we went the route of multiple-choice enhancements, we would likely make it so that if you choose cold in one line you must choose non-cold in any other enhancement lines.

It really does sound like you've inadvertently re-invented 'class based stats don't stack'.

I believe that was one of the headaches you were trying to resolve with the rework.

A softer version, perhaps, but the same headache in the long run.

How about building it off the racial pre notion? Spend x points in a given class, get Y tree available as a supplementary? (Or is that the intent, and the coffee just hasn't kicked in enough yet?)

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

I'd say Tiranblade has the best mock-up so far (I edited it a bit to correct some errors Tiran mentioned and to add the general tab)

http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo93/Failedlegend/Tiranbladesmock-upedit.png



Tiran did a very nice job, but personally speaking, every time I look at those tabs on the right, I feel like I'm looking something up in doctor or law office.

Its just not intuitive. I know I wouldnt have fun navigating it.

[Failedlegend]

Tiran did a very nice job, but personally speaking, every time I look at those tabs on the right, I feel like I'm looking something up in doctor or law office.

Its just not intuitive. I know I wouldnt have fun navigating it.

Well it would obviously look alot nicer after the Art team gets ahold of it...probably have a diff Icon for each PrE

[cheekysmile]

In the most non brown nosing way possible i'd just like to say thanks for the recent feedback and interest shown by the devs in player's opinions. Really does make a difference.

To say i'm excited about the changes would be an understatement. Please please don't mess it up :)

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

Well it would obviously look alot nicer after the Art team gets ahold of it...probably have a diff Icon for each PrE

Naah, sorry, its not the graphics, its the UI itself. Too much repetition in such a small space. Just dont like it. But I'm only one vote. :)

PS: Not meant as a knock towards Tiran, I'm glad he took the time and it is good work. Just havent seen anything yet that jumps out to me as the obvious choice.

[Failedlegend]

To say i'm excited about the changes would be an understatement. Please please don't mess it up :)

Amen

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

To say i'm excited about the changes would be an understatement. Please please don't mess it up :)

That about sums it up for me :)

[waterboytkd]

For things like elemental damage enhancements, we're considering multiple-choice enhancements that open a list, letting you pick an element. Every caster PRE could have one of these multiple-choice enhancements. Some PREs may have multiple of these lines (but more than 1-2 would eat up a lot of options). If you really want to maximize the number of elements you get bonuses with, you may need to focus on PREs from your main class, giving up diversity for focus.

This is just another option we're thinking about, but seemed relevant given recent discussion here and some interesting trees you guys have put up. Multiple-choice enhancement technology potentially has other applications, if that turns out to be the best way to go.

Oh, I like this. I even made up the following sorc trees as just a crazy idea, but with the multiple-choice technology, I could make it much better, and it could work....

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/9053/sorctreescrazy.jpg

My initial crazy idea was that the Element line was all Elements (crazy, but clean). But multiple-choice tech would make it actually work, and I could condense the tree quite a bit.

On a side note, I thought the battlesorc would be really popular. People like melee-casters, and this would be a PrE supporting that on a sorc.

Also, now I know how you'll do monk stances. Was REALLY wondering what you were planning there, but with multiple-choice tech, you could simply give each monk tree two stance lines. Very cool.

EDIT: This was fast an easy. A more refined version of the trees above:

http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/8384/sorctreesmultichoice.jpg

This would allow an elemental savant to be a savant in up to two elements. They could still do more elements...oh yeah...forgot to put other elements in the other sorc trees...oops.

Reconstruct and Force could probably be collapsed into one tree (multiple-choice thing), and it could appear in savant and battlesorc. That could replace the the question marks...

Hmmm...lemme edit again...

EDIT#2: Okay, hopefully, last tree I post in this post...

http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/8384/sorctreesmultichoice.jpg

The Energy line would be your Reconstruction and Force spells. This way, a full sorc (no other trees) could at least dabble in all energy types. A savant would be specialized in two, probably. Also, savant now has access to recon and force spells, just as a battlesorc does. AoS does not get those spells, but I have a feeling that AoS would do something more unique anyways...I envision the AoS being a fleshy-focused Sorc PrE that focuses on DC sorc casting.

[Artos_Fabril]

Stuff, including possible tree layouts.
The big problem I see here is that you still have to take Acolyte for Wand and Scroll mastery, and Subtle casting, and you've broken the meta feats out into the various trees. Also, by collapsing Force and Repair into a single dropdown, taking one locks out the other.

If "multiple choice technology" is supposed to be a substitute for a general tab, those blocks need to look like

"Improved Metamagic ^ " "Type^ Manipulation" "Type^ Spellcasting" "Deadly Type^"
and
"Selected Core Enhancement 1 ^" "Selected Core Enhancement 2 ^"

where the ^ indicate dropdown lists.

I'm still not a fan of the way this appears to interact with things like Stats. Taking Sorcerer Charisma I in Acolyte should lock it out in Savant and Battlecaster, but it should also unlock Sorcerer Charisma II in all three trees. Taking Sorcerer Charisma II in Battlecaster then would lock it out in Acolyte and Savant, but unlock Sorcerer Charisma III in all three trees.

Similarly, Taking Sorcerer Charisma I in Acolyte should lock out Bard Charisma I in all three bard trees, Favored Soul Charisma I in all three FvS trees, Cleric Charisma I in all three cleric trees, and Paladin Charisma I in all three paladin trees, but it should also unlock the tier II Charisma enhancements in all of those trees when the requisite class (or character) level has been reached.

That way, even though you can't make a sorcerer/bard/cleric/paladin/FvS, all 15 of the enhancements work the same way, as if they were on a single tree, which prevents stacking but doesn't lock out advancement up one tree based on what's taken in another.

[Aesop]

This really isn't a fleshed out idea at all... but has anyone considered an Opposing Elements pattern

ie You chose Elemental Enhancement. From there you have a choice of E/A/F/W. If you choose Fire you gain a Good Bonus (say 10% per tier) to Fire Spells a 5% Bonus per Tier to Earth(Acid) and Air(Electric) Spells and 0% to Water(Cold) Spells.

You may choose upto two Elemental Lines but none may be opposite of the other... Ie you could not choose Fire and Cold, but you may Choose Fire and Air or Earth or even double Spec in Fire.

You would gain bonuses to 3 elements that way but those you focused in would be better.

Alternately you could even have opposing Elements still have a bonus... maybe instead of 10/5/0 it was 15/10/5... or something like that. This way even Double Specialized Elements would have a little better than base damage. Of course these numbers are just random pulls and balance would dictate the end results.


Additionally some of the "Free Enhancements" for dedication to a tree could be general upgrades across the board.

Say for instance the Damage upgrades for a Focused Element (we'll go with Fire) were 15% and there were 3 tiers that would be 45% for a Single Focus, with 2 different Elements (Say Earth) it would be 75% and 90% for a Double Focus perhaps Maybe there are Free Enhancements that would add a total of 20% to all spells

So we'd see

Double Spec
Fire 110%
Earth 80%
Air 80%
Water 50%

For Fire /Earth

Fire 95%
Earth 95%
Air 65%
Water 65%


I'm not sure whether the concept is coming across correctly or not. Perhaps someone else can grasp what I mean. perhaps its a crack pot idea... it just seems to me that classically speaking Elements are supposed to be opposing forces and choosing one should reflect on the other a bit.

Aesop

[Aesop]

Another question. Has it been considered to NOT attach Stat Enhancements to Classes at all?

I mean why not just make that a Generic List that allow for up to 5 Stat Points to be allocated across the levels at 2/6/10/14/18?

Yeah people will probably just lock that into a single Stat MOST of the time but perhaps it would allow a little more flexibility for certain builds and Strength Rangers will not be locked into Dex Enhancements that they don't particularly want.

Perhaps certain OTHER enhancements could be based on the chosen stats and related back to the class or better yet Feat.

Perhaps if someone chooses Dex x2 and has Weapon Finesse it opens up Weapon Finesse Enhancements that improve their Double Strike Chance with Finesse Weapons. Maybe Strength 2 and Power Attack open up a Power Attack Enhancement. Maybe Int 2 and Wizard 5 open up an Echoes of Power Enhancement.

There could be lots of things that choices open up and make the character more of what it is intended to be instead of locked into certain Enhancements that don't particularly make sense for it.

Aesop

[Amorenkaire]

So, dunno if this has been mentioned anywhere before, but I'd like to vote for halflings not having Assassin be their racial class enhancement tree. Partially because I'm a firm rogue supporter and don't want to see my nice stuff go to others, and partially because I don't think the flavor fits the halflings... But I may be wrong, since I'm not as familar with Eberron.

Still, I'd like to recommend a special enhancement tree all to themselves, like stalwart defender. Perhaps something based off of the Whisperknife (a knife focused combatant that can fluidly move from melee to ranged with his daggers, partically based off of dual wielding throwing weapons and increasing attack speed with them, perhaps), or soething ore based off of the Halfling Outrider but with a dinosaur.

You're already adding druids, so a dinosaur animal companion/mount shouldn't be that hard, and who wouldn't love to see a halfling charge into a raid riding a dinosaur and shooting left, right, and center?

Edit: Forget shooting, they should be given their racial boomerangs in this update, too! And whatever racial PrE tree they get should include such gems as dazing enemies when hit by the boomerang, and boomerangs attacking two+ people! Tell me, who wouldn't prefer that for their halfling tree?

Edit2: Some love for weapon finesse feats would also be appreciated!

Edit3: I'm not sure if this was asked about or brought up before earlier in the thread, but will there still be an enhancement incentive to take a class all the way to level 20 (and eventually, 25?).

[TiranBlade]

Enhancement? Enhancement! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnGqeVoUBnM)

[Brother_Solar]

Just a thought: Rather than the standard WoW-type vertical trees, why not go with horizontal trees on the character sheet and just let us scroll down to get to different sections?

[Aesop]

So, dunno if this has been mentioned anywhere before, but I'd like to vote for halflings not having Assassin be their racial class enhancement tree. Partially because I'm a firm rogue supporter and don't want to see my nice stuff go to others, and partially because I don't think the flavor fits the halflings... But I may be wrong, since I'm not as familar with Eberron.

Still, I'd like to recommend a special enhancement tree all to themselves, like stalwart defender. Perhaps something based off of the Whisperknife (a knife focused combatant that can fluidly move from melee to ranged with his daggers, partically based off of dual wielding throwing weapons and increasing attack speed with them, perhaps), or soething ore based off of the Halfling Outrider but with a dinosaur.

You're already adding druids, so a dinosaur animal companion/mount shouldn't be that hard, and who wouldn't love to see a halfling charge into a raid riding a dinosaur and shooting left, right, and center?

Edit: Forget shooting, they should be given their racial boomerangs in this update, too! And whatever racial PrE tree they get should include such gems as dazing enemies when hit by the boomerang, and boomerangs attacking two+ people! Tell me, who wouldn't prefer that for their halfling tree?

Edit2: Some love for weapon finesse feats would also be appreciated!

Edit3: I'm not sure if this was asked about or brought up before earlier in the thread, but will there still be an enhancement incentive to take a class all the way to level 20 (and eventually, 25?).

Halfling Outrider (Complete Warrior pg 38)would be awesome if they got Dino-Mounts with them.

Weapon Finesse Enhancement that granted Double Strike Proc bonus would be nice

I'm sure there will be high level enhancements and probably capstones

Aesop

[Feithlin]

Some observations about the various alternatives to the Turbine's UI:
The main point, at the beginning, was to simplify the navigation into the enhancements UI. Most of the propositions make it actually a lot harder to manage enhancements. 2 sets of tabs = fail imo. It would horrible to have to go into 9 or more panels to find the enhancements you want, to compare them, or to eliminate the point you need into another one.
The error is to want to keep everything. There's no need for it. There's no point in comparing the current situation with the new system. The only need is to make characters more or less balanced within the new one.
Of course, some class splits will probably be out of date. It has always been like this. The bunch of my pre DDO Unlimited characters sleeping in Ghallanda because they have become near unplayable attests of it.
It's fine to discuss about the viability, and the respective sacrifices/benefits of going pure or multiclass, but we shouldn't take into account the current situation. Only what can be expected from the limited informations we have.
IMO, the balance is more to search into the abilities available at each tier / level than in the number of choices.

Some ideas now:
* In the PrE panel, you could have each row depend on different limitations. For example, the left row could be limited by level, the 2nd by class level and the 3rd by points spent in the PrE. This would allow a multiclass to keep some benefit from the tree, but a more limited one.
* If the 1st tiers of the PrE are slightly more beneficial than the last tiers, it would favor multiclassing. However, to keep pure classes better specialists, the benefits of the subsequent tiers should bring more to your specialty than any other tier 1 or 2 PrE. SD/DoS are good current examples imo.
* A possibility would be to only allow cumulation within the same PrE and not between PrE. This way, a multiclass character would benefit from a wider range of benefits while only a pure/semi-pure class would stay the best in his specialty.

[Havesmat]

I really dont think we need to change the way we select and acquire enhancements, only need to change them in theyr bennefits, to make all classes balanced to theyr purpose.

[Failedlegend]

Stuff

IF (and thats a big IF) the devs are against having more than 3 PrE Trees IMO the only way for this to not completely destroy heavy multiclassing and hinder light MCing is the following

1) Add a general Tab that has any "Core" Class enhancements (Favored Enemy, Stat Boosts,Most Action Boosts,Spell Damage Lines,Monk Stance,etc.) and its own points system so you don't have to worry about "Siphoning" the points into the PrEs somehow (GP is likely gained at the same rate as AP or X amount is based on what class is taken that level based on the total amount of enhancements that class has..basically whatever works for the Devs)

2) Add Hybrid PrEs...these are PrEs that require 2 other PrEs from different classes (A mix of Specific ones like Rogue Mech and Arty Construct PrE = Gadgeteer, more open like Arcane + Martial = Swiftblade...and some in between ones like Any Monk PrE + Any Cleric PrE = Sacred Fist) as well as levels in both classes...likely at least 7Lvls in each to get the multiclass capstone (Requires Character Lvl Twenty) this would of course take the third slot

3) Remove the Carbon Copy Racial PrEs

Optional) Add in actual Racially oriented PrEs like the Halfing Talentia Rider (probably make the Dino a Companion like the Arty Pet) Warforged Juggernaut/Reforged (allow WF to be more or less construct like with some other bonuses as well) Elven Bladesinger/Elemental Archer (AA is a carbon copy so elves should have a DIFFERENT magically oreinted ranged PrE) with the only one getting access to Class PrEs being Half-Elves but restricted to their Dilly Choice (as well as a Magically Oriented Ranged PrE of course)

This would make it so mulitclasses are punished for spending a point or two in a secondary or splash class but losing a FULL tab at least as far as the general Tabs and they would get something unique for multiclassing in the form of the Hybrid PrEs. Also both the Racial PrEs and the Class PrEs will feel alot more unique with all the generic enhancements removed as it will all be related to said PrE.


Sidenote: Change Action Points -> Augmentation Points....it makes a hell of alot more sense

[Aesop]

a note about Action Points.

They are called Action Points because in the Eberron setting Heroes get Action Points each level. These are used to gain a bonus on certain rolls when you really want to not fail or for other actions you may want to take. DDO just took that idea and turned them into the points earned and put towards Enhancements.

Further note. A number of Feats augment what can be done with Action Points and one Feat increases the number of Action Points you get.

I'd be vaguely curious about that Feat.

Aesop

[Feithlin]

1) Add a general Tab that has any "Core" Class enhancements (Favored Enemy, Stat Boosts,Most Action Boosts,Spell Damage Lines,Monk Stance,etc.) and its own points system so you don't have to worry about "Siphoning" the points into the PrEs somehow (GP is likely gained at the same rate as AP or X amount is based on what class is taken that level based on the total amount of enhancements that class has..basically whatever works for the Devs)


While I proposed an UI including a general zone earlier in this thread, I think we could live without it. This would obviously reduce the small splashes for an enhancements (Haste boost I mainly ; it wouldn't eliminate them all though, since you would still benefit from additional feats for example ; enhancements are often not the main reason to splash), but deeper multiclassing could still be desirable if the 1st tiers are nice.



2) Add Hybrid PrEs...these are PrEs that require 2 other PrEs from different classes (A mix of Specific ones like Rogue Mech and Arty Construct PrE = Gadgeteer, more open like Arcane + Martial = Swiftblade...and some in between ones like Any Monk PrE + Any Cleric PrE = Sacred Fist) as well as levels in both classes...likely at least 7Lvls in each to get the multiclass capstone (Requires Character Lvl Twenty) this would of course take the third slot


I don't think we will see any hybrid PrE in the 1st release. Turbine already has a lot of work with all the class PrEs. But I agree this would be a great addition, and a major improvement to one of the strength of DDO: the high personalization of the characters.



3) Remove the Carbon Copy Racial PrEs

Optional) Add in actual Racially oriented PrEs like the Halfing Talentia Rider (probably make the Dino a Companion like the Arty Pet) Warforged Juggernaut/Reforged (allow WF to be more or less construct like with some other bonuses as well) Elven Bladesinger/Elemental Archer (AA is a carbon copy so elves should have a DIFFERENT magically oreinted ranged PrE) with the only one getting access to Class PrEs being Half-Elves but restricted to their Dilly Choice (as well as a Magically Oriented Ranged PrE of course)

This would make it so mulitclasses are punished for spending a point or two in a secondary or splash class but losing a FULL tab at least as far as the general Tabs and they would get something unique for multiclassing in the form of the Hybrid PrEs. Also both the Racial PrEs and the Class PrEs will feel alot more unique with all the generic enhancements removed as it will all be related to said PrE.


I completely agree. IMO, racial PrEs shouldn't be copy/paste of class PrE, or access to a class PrE, but a complete array of enhancements giving additional abilities that could add to the actual class PrE.
However, there was a good dev's idea (I think it was Tolero, but not 100% sure) about additional virtual levels to apply earlier (or with fewer class levels) to the PrE. This would be nice for multiclassing, because that would let you apply for a second tier 2 PrE without needing the 12 levels.
For example, if a drows were favoring Tempest PrE, you could for example make a F12/Ra8 and get both Kensei II and Tempest II with +4 virtual ranger levels obtained via enhancements. Or alternatively, you could still focus on your Tempest III but would be able to splash deeper for additional abilities.

[Failedlegend]

While I proposed an UI including a general zone earlier in this thread, I think we could live without it. This would obviously reduce the small splashes for an enhancements (Haste boost I mainly ; it wouldn't eliminate them all though, since you would still benefit from additional feats for example ; enhancements are often not the main reason to splash), but deeper multiclassing could still be desirable if the 1st tiers are nice.

Well my secondary reason for pulling the "Core" enhancements for the PrE trees is it would make them fell FAR less generic...looking at Ipsom's Mock-up if it weren't for the titles you'd barely notice which PrE is which




I don't think we will see any hybrid PrE in the 1st release. Turbine already has a lot of work with all the class PrEs. But I agree this would be a great addition, and a major improvement to one of the strength of DDO: the high personalization of the characters.


I don't expect it either it would take alot of work but limiting us to 3 Trees would be a HUGE detriment to multiclasses while affecting SIngle-Classes very little so something would need to be done to balance that.

Would be nice to know what the Dev think of HYbrid PrEs...even if its a possible, maybe down the line thing. Considering they said the new system will assist with adding new pres much quicker (as opposed to the current speed)






However, there was a good dev's idea (I think it was Tolero, but not 100% sure) about additional virtual levels to apply earlier (or with fewer class levels) to the PrE. This would be nice for multiclassing, because that would let you apply for a second tier 2 PrE without needing the 12 levels.
For example, if a drows were favoring Tempest PrE, you could for example make a F12/Ra8 and get both Kensei II and Tempest II with +4 virtual ranger levels obtained via enhancements. Or alternatively, you could still focus on your Tempest III but would be able to splash deeper for additional abilities.



I completely agree. IMO, racial PrEs shouldn't be copy/paste of class PrE, or access to a class PrE, but a complete array of enhancements giving additional abilities that could add to the actual class PrE.

Oh yeah the "Favored PrE" system I definately like that one as well. :D

[Artos_Fabril]

2) Add Hybrid PrEs...these are PrEs that require 2 other PrEs from different classes (A mix of Specific ones like Rogue Mech and Arty Construct PrE = Gadgeteer, more open like Arcane + Martial = Swiftblade...and some in between ones like Any Monk PrE + Any Cleric PrE = Sacred Fist) as well as levels in both classes...likely at least 7Lvls in each to get the multiclass capstone (Requires Character Lvl Twenty) this would of course take the third slot.
You know, I've seen this idea crop up like 6 times in this thread, and I still don't see why you would lock all three of someone's trees in a three-tree system, when it should be possible to make a multi-class PrE that you can swap in like any other tree under the new rules. Mystic Theurge, for instance, requires the ability to cast level 2 divine and level 2 arcane spells. It should be easy enough to check if this requirement is met, and if it's not easy, you could instead put the unlock enhancements in the general tabs of both arcane and divine classes, name them in the database as Mystic Theurge Unlock (arcane) at wiz3 or src4 and Mystic Theurge Unlock (divine) at clr3 or FvS4. I'll fiddle with it a little and see what I can come up with. But If I can get something done by tomorrow, the whole Dev team should be able to get their version out before the end of the year. ;) That gives them a whole 3-6 months after the expansion. :D

As for multi-class PrE capstones, I would make them require a 10/10 split, since in DDO this is traditionally the weakest MC split. Giving a solid benefit to under-preforming options were what the capstones were supposed to be about.

[Failedlegend]

You know, I've seen this idea crop up like 6 times in this thread, and I still don't see why you would lock all three of someone's trees in a three-tree system, when it should be possible to make a multi-class PrE that you can swap in like any other tree under the new rules. Mystic Theurge, for instance, requires the ability to cast level 2 divine and level 2 arcane spells. It should be easy enough to check if this requirement is met, and if it's not easy, you could instead put the unlock enhancements in the general tabs of both arcane and divine classes, name them in the database as Mystic Theurge Unlock (arcane) at wiz3 or src4 and Mystic Theurge Unlock (divine) at clr3 or FvS4. I'll fiddle with it a little and see what I can come up with. But If I can get something done by tomorrow, the whole Dev team should be able to get their version out before the end of the year. ;) That gives them a whole 3-6 months after the expansion. :D

Hey go for it...I'm all for alternative ways to get this in



As for multi-class PrE capstones, I would make them require a 10/10 split, since in DDO this is traditionally the weakest MC split. Giving a solid benefit to under-preforming options were what the capstones were supposed to be about.

I'm very much against that because that means there's NO flexibility...thus very little variety in the builds with 7/7 you have 6 levels of play and you'll see a much larger variety of builds without being too open.

Here's how I see it...lets use Swiftblade as an example.

The "Free Bonuses"

5 Points Spent: Gain Spring Attack
10 Points Spent: Swiftblade I, 10% Blur Effect, +1 AC, To-Hit & Reflex Save
15 Points Spent: Haste Lasts 50% Longer
20 Points Spent: Swiftblade II, 20% Blur Effect, +2 AC, To-Hit & Reflex Save, All Hits deal an extra 1d6 Untyped Damage
25 Points Spent: Haste Lasts 100% Longer & Cannot be Dispelled
30 Points Spent: Swiftblade III, 30% Blur Effect, +4 AC, To-Hit & Reflex Save, All Hits deal an extra 2d6 Untyped Damage
41 Points Spent: Perpetual Celerity - When any Haste effect is on you it lasts until Rest/Death

The Requirements:

Tier 1 Enhancements: Arcane1/Martial1 Character Level 3
Tier 2 Enhancements: Arcane2/Martial2 CL 6
Tier 3 Enhancements: Arcane3/Martial3 CL 9
Tier 4 Enhancements: Arcane4/Martial4 CL 12
Tier 5 Enhancements: Arcane5/Martial5 CL 15
Tier 6 Enhancements: Arcane6/Martial6 CL 18
Capstone: Arcane7/Martial7 CL 20

Note: For clarification a Arcane18/Martial2 would only have access to Tier 2 Enhancements for Swiftblade but a Arcane12/Martial7/Anything1 could get the capstone

Note2: If ABSOLUTELY required I'd be ok with 8/8 required for capstone as that still leaves 4 levels of leeway but any more (ie. 9/9 & 10/10) and it will likely be torestricted.

[toapat]

I think one of the things that could vastly improve paladins would be if Smite evil became something along the lines of a 6-10 second buff (longer if it wouldnt recharge), granting all the normal benefits, plus any you get Exaulted smite for. As it is, Smite evil is a rather weak effect that you have between 1 and 13 uses of, recharges incredibly slowly, and which functions as a hail mary (and incredibly moreso if you take Exaulted Smite 4) for a class which has minimal going for it beyond Defender of Siberys and Zeal, without their mounts, without the external sourcebooks, and with very tight actionpoint expenditures.

Rangers need their pets, although the AI for hirelings and pets also has to be improved.

(sorry if this is really out of date, im about 1/9th of the way through the topic at the point that i am.)

[Amorenkaire]

I think one of the things that could vastly improve paladins would be if Smite evil became something along the lines of a 6-10 second buff (longer if it wouldnt recharge), granting all the normal benefits, plus any you get Exaulted smite for. As it is, Smite evil is a rather weak effect that you have between 1 and 13 uses of, recharges incredibly slowly, and which functions as a hail mary (and incredibly moreso if you take Exaulted Smite 4) for a class which has minimal going for it beyond Defender of Siberys and Zeal, without their mounts, without the external sourcebooks, and with very tight actionpoint expenditures.

Rangers need their pets, although the AI for hirelings and pets also has to be improved.

(sorry if this is really out of date, im about 1/9th of the way through the topic at the point that i am.)

I think I made a suggestion in the suggestion forums for Paladins to get Charging Smite at least, if they're not getting their mount. But expanding the ranger/paladin spell list for their exclusive spells from source books would be a great way to boost them. Not really a talk strictly refined to the enhancements of the topic, though.

[Feithlin]

Along these lines, some new enhancements could be introduced to reduce the cooldown of specific actions: reduced cooldown of smites for KotC, of intimidate checks for SD, of bluff and/or diplomacy for assassins, death spells for PM, etc.

[bigolbear]

IF (and thats a big IF) the devs are against having more than 3 PrE Trees IMO the only way for this to not completely destroy heavy multiclassing and hinder light MCing is the following

1) Add a general Tab that has any "Core" Class enhancements (Favored Enemy, Stat Boosts,Most Action Boosts,Spell Damage Lines,Monk Stance,etc.) and its own points system so you don't have to worry about "Siphoning" the points into the PrEs somehow (GP is likely gained at the same rate as AP or X amount is based on what class is taken that level based on the total amount of enhancements that class has..basically whatever works for the Devs)

2) Add Hybrid PrEs...these are PrEs that require 2 other PrEs from different classes (A mix of Specific ones like Rogue Mech and Arty Construct PrE = Gadgeteer, more open like Arcane + Martial = Swiftblade...and some in between ones like Any Monk PrE + Any Cleric PrE = Sacred Fist) as well as levels in both classes...likely at least 7Lvls in each to get the multiclass capstone (Requires Character Lvl Twenty) this would of course take the third slot

3) Remove the Carbon Copy Racial PrEs

Optional) Add in actual Racially oriented PrEs like the Halfing Talentia Rider (probably make the Dino a Companion like the Arty Pet) Warforged Juggernaut/Reforged (allow WF to be more or less construct like with some other bonuses as well) Elven Bladesinger/Elemental Archer (AA is a carbon copy so elves should have a DIFFERENT magically oreinted ranged PrE) with the only one getting access to Class PrEs being Half-Elves but restricted to their Dilly Choice (as well as a Magically Oriented Ranged PrE of course)

This would make it so mulitclasses are punished for spending a point or two in a secondary or splash class but losing a FULL tab at least as far as the general Tabs and they would get something unique for multiclassing in the form of the Hybrid PrEs. Also both the Racial PrEs and the Class PrEs will feel alot more unique with all the generic enhancements removed as it will all be related to said PrE.


Sidenote: Change Action Points -> Augmentation Points....it makes a hell of alot more sense

good list.
I agree with all of this, heck if youve read my posts im sure you know ive been talking along the same lines.

Id like to add 1 final option tho. Instead or as well as the above replace class lvl gating with character lvl gating, note some feat requirements will have to change or feats will have to change. This would realy open up the posibilities, leading to such strange builds as non warforge wizard fighters that actualy work.

imagine a fighter 8 wiz 12, who takes the full kensai tree, hed actualy be a viable mele build - and im sure hed be happy to trade out a wizard tree for full access to the fighter tree.

perhaps keep capstones locked out for multiclass, although im not sure thats realy necessary.

A further alternative to this is to replace class lvl gating with character lvlv gating ONLY when it is said characters favoured class. DDO does very little with the concept of favoured class, heres an oportunity to do more, allow humans to buy a any favoured class with APs spent in the racial tree.

[bigolbear]

This really isn't a fleshed out idea at all... but has anyone considered an Opposing Elements pattern

ie You chose Elemental Enhancement. From there you have a choice of E/A/F/W. If you choose Fire you gain a Good Bonus (say 10% per tier) to Fire Spells a 5% Bonus per Tier to Earth(Acid) and Air(Electric) Spells and 0% to Water(Cold) Spells.

You may choose upto two Elemental Lines but none may be opposite of the other... Ie you could not choose Fire and Cold, but you may Choose Fire and Air or Earth or even double Spec in Fire.

You would gain bonuses to 3 elements that way but those you focused in would be better.

Alternately you could even have opposing Elements still have a bonus... maybe instead of 10/5/0 it was 15/10/5... or something like that. This way even Double Specialized Elements would have a little better than base damage. Of course these numbers are just random pulls and balance would dictate the end results.


Additionally some of the "Free Enhancements" for dedication to a tree could be general upgrades across the board.

Say for instance the Damage upgrades for a Focused Element (we'll go with Fire) were 15% and there were 3 tiers that would be 45% for a Single Focus, with 2 different Elements (Say Earth) it would be 75% and 90% for a Double Focus perhaps Maybe there are Free Enhancements that would add a total of 20% to all spells

So we'd see

Double Spec
Fire 110%
Earth 80%
Air 80%
Water 50%

For Fire /Earth

Fire 95%
Earth 95%
Air 65%
Water 65%


I'm not sure whether the concept is coming across correctly or not. Perhaps someone else can grasp what I mean. perhaps its a crack pot idea... it just seems to me that classically speaking Elements are supposed to be opposing forces and choosing one should reflect on the other a bit.

Aesop

I have a big issue with the idea that taking fire magic would lock out or reduce cold magic etc. Savant as it stands at the moment is optional on a sorc, and many wizards would choose to invest in all the elements to some degree, in order to keep the idea that a wizard can change his spells out as needed.

sory aesop, your normaly full of good ideas but this one gets filed under 'crack pot' for me.

[Artos_Fabril]

Note2: If ABSOLUTELY required I'd be ok with 8/8 required for capstone as that still leaves 4 levels of leeway but any more (ie. 9/9 & 10/10) and it will likely be torestricted.
I don't see 10/10 as significantly more restrictive than the pure 20 required for single-class capstones. I could see an argument for 9/11, particularly in the case of Mystic Theurge with wiz/cleric, but an 8/8 multi-class PrE should not be any more eligible for a capstone than an 18/2 would be for a pure class capstone. If the goal is to incentivize deep multi-classing, you can do that with the PrE tiers without graning capstone access at 7/7 or 8/8. A 10/10 split, even with a three-tree limit, could still get 2 T1.5 PrEs and the MCPrE capstone. Viability vs a 12/8 split would have to come from the MCPrE capstone and the availability of the General Tab enhancements for each class.

The "Free Bonuses"

5 Points Spent: Gain Spring Attack
10 Points Spent: Swiftblade I, 10% Blur Effect, +1 AC, To-Hit & Reflex Save
15 Points Spent: Haste Lasts 50% Longer
20 Points Spent: Swiftblade II, 20% Blur Effect, +2 AC, To-Hit & Reflex Save, All Hits deal an extra 1d6 Untyped Damage
25 Points Spent: Haste Lasts 100% Longer & Cannot be Dispelled
30 Points Spent: Swiftblade III, 30% Blur Effect, +4 AC, To-Hit & Reflex Save, All Hits deal an extra 2d6 Untyped Damage
41 Points Spent: Perpetual Celerity - When any Haste effect is on you it lasts until Rest/Death

The Requirements:

Tier 1 Enhancements: Arcane1/Martial1 Character Level 3
Tier 2 Enhancements: Arcane2/Martial2 CL 6
Tier 3 Enhancements: Arcane3/Martial3 CL 9
Tier 4 Enhancements: Arcane4/Martial4 CL 12
Tier 5 Enhancements: Arcane5/Martial5 CL 15
Tier 6 Enhancements: Arcane6/Martial6 CL 18
Capstone: Arcane7/Martial7 CL 20
For an example, This character as a WF Juggernaut/Switfblade/Kensai: 12ftr/8wiz...
Perma Haste, Firewall, Stoneskin, Repair Critical. THF BSword Kensai2 (eFang). 2 Metas, 7 Ftr Feats, 7 standard feats. +8 AC +7 saves +4 to hit +14 Str (Stance+Power Surge) 30% blur and 25%DR... Or an even more brutal combat wombat if Juggernaut becomes an offensive PrE a la Occult Slayer. The again, the same character without the Swiftbade capstone would still be pretty broken, losing only perma-haste, but an 8 minute undispellable haste is still enough, or close to enough, to last throughout the entire Horoth fight on elite without having to take off boots.


I'm still working on the Mystic Theurge idea, because that balance seems like the hardest to pull off. Casters are already powerful, but lose a lot to an MC split, and MCing 2 casting classes is generally Terrible. (with a capital "T")

[Failedlegend]

For an example, This character as a WF Juggernaut/Switfblade/Kensai: 12ftr/8wiz...
Perma Haste, Firewall, Stoneskin, Repair Critical. THF BSword Kensai2 (eFang). 2 Metas, 7 Ftr Feats, 7 standard feats. +8 AC +7 saves +4 to hit +14 Str (Stance+Power Surge) 30% blur and 25%DR... Or an even more brutal combat wombat if Juggernaut becomes an offensive PrE a la Occult Slayer. The again, the same character without the Swiftbade capstone would still be pretty broken, losing only perma-haste, but an 8 minute undispellable haste is still enough, or close to enough, to last throughout the entire Horoth fight on elite without having to take off boots.


Vs. a pure Wizard with Palemaster/NecroAM/Racial or Wild Mage

Restricting it to 10/10 just makes another version of a Single-Class as it give NO choice which completely defeats the purpose of multiclassing....like I said the best limit is either 7/7 or 8/8 any more makes it pointless any less and the restirctions become too loose. Also stuff like Power Surge and Defender Stance we already know won't stack

Voodoo grooves actuall made a good suggestion for stacking stuff

They don't all need to stack, but we could have something crazy like ...

- One elemental (monk)
- One martial (stalwart, kensai, acro, etc.)
- One mental (mech, frenzy, dance of the water spider, etc.)
- One magical (occult slayer, bladesworn, shadow fade)
- One physical form (Lich, Wraith, vampire, beast, savant)
- etc.

Plus some boosts (Manyshot, rages, other boosts) and toggles (PA, CE, etc.)

[Artos_Fabril]

Restricting it to 10/10 just makes another version of a Single-Class as it give NO choice[...]
Which is the exact same restriction as single-class capstones. I don't see the conflict here. If they loosen the requirements for single-class capstones, that's a different story. A non-capstone multi-class can still derive benefit from an MCPrE without gaining the capstone, just as any other splash class gains benefits from the relevant PrE without gaining the capstone.

And of course figuring out these mechanics could allow them to add alternate racial PrEs

Maybe what you're looking for is a 3-class MCPrE? Requiring a min 6/6/6 split and totaling all levels in those classes to determine capstone access.

Also stuff like Power Surge and Defender Stance we already know won't stack.
Not exactly...

Stances are one way to preserve some of the stacking issues we didn't have to worry about before.
Unless you have better information that states that they have locked in on stances as the way they will deal with stacking issues (or even "this is our current plan"), rather than a "this is a thing that might work." But yeah, benefits could be less than I stated above, or more, potentially, since you didn't detail any of the enhancements that might actually appear in the tree itself.

[Aesop]

I have a big issue with the idea that taking fire magic would lock out or reduce cold magic etc. Savant as it stands at the moment is optional on a sorc, and many wizards would choose to invest in all the elements to some degree, in order to keep the idea that a wizard can change his spells out as needed.

sory aesop, your normaly full of good ideas but this one gets filed under 'crack pot' for me.

Yeah. Personally I like the idea of Elements being balanced around opposing forces ... but I understand peoples hesitation due to the limiting factors of opposed forces.

Aesop

[Artos_Fabril]

Ok, So. Here is a look at what I think would make a viable Multi-class PrE for Mystic Theurge.
My assumptions are:
We're stuck with three PrE tabs per character.
General Tab for each class containing enhancements to core abilities, as described here (http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=4277561&postcount=3116) (does not replace a PrE tab)
This stuff could actually be implemented under the new Enhancement UI code
Epic levels will not work like Heroic class levels
Adjustments would likely be needed based on balance testing


Mystic Theurge

Enhancement Name Level Requirement* Enhancement Cost Benefit
Arcane Theurgist 6/9/12/15/18 1/1/1/1/1 +1 caster level for Divine Spells
->Hermetic Healing 8/13/18 1/1/1 +6/12/20% to Positive Energy effects
->->Arcane Blessing 11/15/19 1/1/1 +1 6th level divine spell slot per tier
->->->Arcane Investiture 14/18 1/1 +1 7th level divine spell slot per tier
->->->->Arcane Miracle 17 1 +1 8th level divine spell slot

Divine Thaumaturgy 6/9/12/15/18 1/1/1/1/1 +1 caster level for Arcane Spells
->Mystic Power 8/13/18 1/1/1 +6/12/20% to Force and Reconstruction effects
->->Ecclesiastic Scholar 11/15/19 1/1/1 +1 6th level arcane spell slot per tier
->->->Divine Knowledge 14/18 1/1 +1 7th level arcane spell slot per tier
->->->->Divine Arcana 17 1 +1 8th level arcane spell slot

^Drop Down^ x2
Divine Fire 9/11/13 1/1/1 +5% per tier to Light, Alignment, and Fire effects
->Purifying Flames 11/14/17 1/1/1 +1% per tier to Light, Alignment, and Fire critical chance
->->Firey Wrath 12/15/18 1/1/1 +10% per tier to Light, Alignment, and Fire critical damage
Cool Resolve 9/11/13 1/1/1 +5% per tier to Cold and Untyped effects
->Icy Demeanor 11/14/17 1/1/1 +1% per tier to Cold and Untyped critical chance
->->Frozen Hearted 12/15/18 1/1/1 +10% per tier to Cold and Untyped critical damage
Forge of Creation 9/11/13 1/1/1 +5% per tier to Positive, Electric, and Reconstruction effects
->Power of Life 11/14/17 1/1/1 +1% per tier to Positive, Electric, and Reconstruction critical chance
->->Essence of the Forge 12/15/18 1/1/1 +10% per tier to Positive,Electric, and Reconstruction critical damage
Caustic Dust 9/11/13 1/1/1 +5% per tier to Acid and Negative effects
->Corrosive Spirits 11/14/17 1/1/1 +1% per tier to Acid and Negative critical chance
->->Rot and Rust 12/15/18 1/1/1 +10% per tier to Acid and Negative critical damage
Force of Will 11/14/17 1/1/1 +1% per tier to Force critical chance
->Will to Power 12/15/18 1/1/1 +10% per tier to Force critical damage



**->Aureon's Champion 12 2 +1 DC to all spells; +100 SP
**->Argentus of Miron 12 2 +1 DC to Evocation and Conjuration Schools; +1 Caster level for Evocation and Conjuration spells
**->Undying Magus 12 2 +3 DC to Necromancy School; Summoned and Created undead benefit from Augment Summoning
**->Vulkoorim Ancient 12 2 +2 DC to Enchantment and Illusion Schools
**->Bladesworn Forger 12 2 +2 DC to Blade Barrier; +2 caster levels for Healing and Reconstruction Spells

Burst of Power 10 3 An intertwined burst of arcane and divine power restores SP and deals Positive and Force damage
->Font of Power 17 3 An Aura of Power surrounds you, returning SP over time

*Level Requirements total arcane and divine class levels; In order to meet a level requirement, a character must possess at least req/3 levels in divine AND arcane classes
(for instance, Arcane Miracle requires at least 6 (5.66) levels of either Sorcerer or Wizard, AND 6 levels of either Favored Soul or Cleric, with a minimun of 17 combined arcane and divine levels
**These enhancements require the appropriate tier 2 Faith Enhancement

-> Show dependencies

It's a little bare right now, as I haven't gotten the granted PrE benefits down and the tree itself needs a little fleshing out, but assuming the enhancement backend can handle this, it might make taking 2 caster classes somewhat viable.

[rodallec]

once a again: a pre and a bonus for every tod set :D

[Vazok1]

a developer question just popped into my head if you guys are still following. do any of the new prestiges have any downsides to taking them? if yes, why? if not, why?

For example, to explain my meaning a tad more (this is just an example off the top of my head based) would a barbarian prestige get minus to AC or would a defender get minus to hit. I know those are not viable for several reasons they are there solely to explain the thought behind the question.

[boomer70]

Been awhile since I posted a version of an alternative to the current dev plan so here goes again.

This is a list of the tabs I would like to see along with a description of the types of things in those tabs. I am not posting specifics this time only general ideas.

The big differences between what I propose and what has been presented are:
* No tree (or other) arbitrary limit
* Enhancements not forced into "prestige" trees.
* Prestiges are not as dominant (or even as dominant as they are currently)
* Prestiges are not tied to classes. Makes it easier to add new prestiges and not as crippling if there isn't 3 prestiges for every class.

Assumptions
* Enhancements will be changed to generally provide linear benefits and will be spaced out over class and character levels to ensure there is a trade off to multiclasses.
* New enhancements can be added.
* No radical new mechanics need to be developed.

Tabs
Race – Contains enhancements that modify the basic racial traits (e.g. racial weapon aptitudes, skill modifiers, stat modifiers, etc.). In addition, contains “class level substitution” features for the race. These would be enhancements enabled when you have certain levels in specific classes that would make a character of that class/race combination unique. Some examples would be elven paladins getting smite with bow, dwarven sorcerer earth spell aptitude, etc. Points spent in this tab would either unlock or grant (depending on what people like better) “paragon” type abilities.

Skills – Contains enhancements that modify skills. Current enhancement examples are all the Improved XXX enhancements. Characters would qualify for the first tier by having the skill as a class skill. Additional tiers would open based on skill ranks in the skill in question. Points spent in this tab would grant 1 (extra) use of skill boost per unlock tier.

Feats – This tab would contain enhancements that modify the character’s selected feats. Current example is Racial Toughness enhancements. I am of the opinion that many of the class specific enhancements that modify feats (Fighter Mobility, Barbarian Power Attack, Fighter Weapon Mastery) should be available to any character that has the feat in question. Two options here, either allow the existing classes to also have stacking copies of the enhancements or replace the existing enhancements in the classes with more unique abilities related to the feat (my preference). This tab would be fleshed out with many enhancements to bring some of the feats more in line with the DDO scale. Examples would be a critical line for Power Critical allowing crits to deal special effects, skill related feats granting extra bonuses and special effects at higher tiers. There would be no granted abilities to points spent on the tab.

Spells – This would have the spell damage/crit/crit damage lines as well as metamagic and spell penetration enhancements. These enhancements would only effect spells cast by the character (not item effects) but would be open to any character able to cast spells in any way (including Dragonmarks, SLAs, and semi-spellcaster classes when they can cast). If granted abilities are desired could grant extra spell points. New enhancements would include metamagic enhancers (e.g. maximize does 110% damage instead of 100%, extend last 120% longer, heighten spells above your max spell level (capped by character level) useful for casting classes that don’t get 9th level spells)

Class – One tab for each class the character has. These would contain the majority of the existing enhancements for classes. Would be fleshed out to scale more gradually over the class levels. In particular more unique higher level abilities would be added that improve the performance of all aspects of the class (should be relatively comparable to prestige abilities, i.e. slightly weaker abilities but more generally applicable). Enhancements in this tab would be class level gated. Granted abilities based on points spent could be added but should be minor general purpose abilities (+1 to hit, extra spell points, etc)

Prestige – This tab contains all the available prestige “classes”. For lack of a better name I will call these specializations. Each specialization has a list of entry requirements that must be met before that specialization can be selected. The requirements are not class based but rather focus on abilities that a character must possess (BAB, skill ranks, spell casting, sneak attack dice, etc). Once a specialization is selected a new tab specifically for that specialization is added and the character is granted the most basic feature of the specialization. You can have as many specializations as you can qualify for and can afford. Most specialization requirements should be geared around character level 6 entry if the character takes the quickest possible path to entry.

Specialization – One tab for each specialization the character possess. Contains enhancements that further specialize the character in the direction the specialization focuses on. Enhancements on this tab would be gated based on points spent in the tab. Minor granted abilities could be provided at each “tier” of advancement.
Dragonmark – Would become available when a dragonmark feat is selected. Each dragonmark is a single feat. The lesser and greater effects would be incorporated into enhancements within the tab. Skill enhancements specific to the dragonmark and extra dragonmark uses would also be located here. Enhancements would be added to expand on the capabilities of each dragonmark.

I have probably forgot something but its a start.

Aside from the this is not what the devs proposed argument what are the negatives people see in this approach?

[toapat]

A bit rediculous, and again something which i do not know whether it has been proposed:

The Superior Hearts of Wood (+0. +1. +3. and +5)
Same as greater reincarnation, but they allow you to racechange, can be purchased, while they have an incredibly low droprate.

I propose this for the people who dont want to tr, but want a racechange when the update this topic is discussing is implemented


+1/+3/+5 True Druidic Hearts of Wood
These simply start you off as level 2, 4, and 6 respectively, They can be purchaced or crafted in the stone of change from multiple +0 hearts, the total number of hearts required to craft is equal to double the enhancement bonus.

I propose this as a way to make turbine more money

[barecm]

I read the first line of the OP about fixing something that isn't broken.... yeah, please focus on broken things before redoing unbroken things. Kind of illogical otherwise.

[toapat]

I read the first line of the OP about fixing something that isn't broken.... yeah, please focus on broken things before redoing unbroken things. Kind of illogical otherwise.

Functional, and so terrible to be virtually unsalvageable and unusable, are 2 different things.

[Scraap]

One other thing I haven't seen addressed so far, except in a round about way, is how are multiple methods for unlock going to occur now?

Fighter Stalwart Defender II (Requires One of: Fighter Armor Mastery II, Fighter Armored Agility II, Fighter Toughness II, Fighter Tower Shield Mastery II, Lesser Dragonmark of Sentinel)

is one thing, since that's a pre, and falls under the 'spend x, and get it unlocked automatically', but what about

Iron Companion (Requires One of: Skill Focus: Repair, Self Sufficient, Least Dragonmark of Making, Improved Repair II, Warforged Mechanics II, Rogue Mechanic I)

Admittedly, the line is pretty much garbage for the first tier (in fact, the mutt is an active detriment for puging), and not real hot after about level 13-14 either, but is the mechanic it's-self going away with this system?

[Silverleafeon]

We've been discussing some possible changes to Dragonmarks as well. The Extra Dragonmark enhancement is likely to change into an "Improved Dragonmark" enhancement that grants both additional uses and other perks. We've also been debating turning the Lesser and Greater marks into enhancements that have the Least mark as a prerequisite, freeing up some feats on Dragonmark builds...

Please do this.

Also, if there is any concern that Warforged or Drow will become a bit overpower, this is a off beat way to balance that out because the other races do get dragonmarks.

[Silverleafeon]

One other thing I haven't seen addressed so far, except in a round about way, is how are multiple methods for unlock going to occur now?

Fighter Stalwart Defender II (Requires One of: Fighter Armor Mastery II, Fighter Armored Agility II, Fighter Toughness II, Fighter Tower Shield Mastery II, Lesser Dragonmark of Sentinel)

is one thing, since that's a pre, and falls under the 'spend x, and get it unlocked automatically', but what about

Iron Companion (Requires One of: Skill Focus: Repair, Self Sufficient, Least Dragonmark of Making, Improved Repair II, Warforged Mechanics II, Rogue Mechanic I)

Admittedly, the line is pretty much garbage for the first tier (in fact, the mutt is an active detriment for puging), and not real hot after about level 13-14 either, but is the mechanic it's-self going away with this system?

I believe there was a Dev post about reducing feat requirements for enhancements in general.
An example was not require Cleave for Barbarian Frenzy 3, however you could not unlock the Barbarian Cleave attack without having Cleave.

I am hoping to see muchly reduced Feat requirements along with possibly purchasing certain Past Life Feats and less powerful generalization feats (such as Skill Focus or Acrobat) with enhancement points.

[Scraap]

I believe there was a Dev post about reducing feat requirements for enhancements in general.
An example was not require Cleave for Barbarian Frenzy 3, however you could not unlock the Barbarian Cleave attack without having Cleave.

I am hoping to see muchly reduced Feat requirements along with possibly purchasing certain Past Life Feats and less powerful generalization feats (such as Skill Focus or Acrobat) with enhancement points.

Right, and that covers 'requires points', and 'singular skills unlocked with singular feats', but the closest analogue presented so far to the present unlock logic structure of 'requires one of x or y lines', is that mutually exclusive elemental proposal.

That works for kensai or stance augmentations for instance, since those are inherently roots that branch, but would seem to get rather arcane if they want to introduce multiple methodologies for unlocking a given ability with anything but a singular expenditure (line or feat).

[Artos_Fabril]

Right, and that covers 'requires points', and 'singular skills unlocked with singular feats', but the closest analogue presented so far to the present unlock logic structure of 'requires one of x or y lines', is that mutually exclusive elemental proposal.

That works for kensai or stance augmentations for instance, since those are inherently roots that branch, but would seem to get rather arcane if they want to introduce multiple methodologies for unlocking a given ability with anything but a singular expenditure (line or feat).
My guess would be that anything (non-PrE) that is unlocked via purchase of other enhancements would appear above the unlocking enhancement in every tree those enhancements are in.

Ub this specific case, if they don't just scrap it, I'd expect it to show up in every race tree (unlocked by skill focus: repair, or Cannith Dragonmark in the human tree) it would be above improved repair (or whatever that is replaced with) in the WF tree, etc.

Wherever it appears, it could easily be shown as a stand-alone block that is greyed out if requirements are not met.

[esheep]

Devs,

Please consider redo'ing bard enhancements to allow 'Music of Maker's' and 'Music of the Dead' affect all bardic music -- instead of each being their own song...

As it is on live bards have enough songs to keep straight on their hotbars... cutting this down by two and increasing the overall usefulness of bardic music would be a great (but not overpowered) boost.

[barecm]

Functional, and so terrible to be virtually unsalvageable and unusable, are 2 different things.

No, I meant what I said. Focus on broken things, not things that currently work. When that list is empty, then rework things that you don't like but yet are working.

[Valindria]

Devs,

Please consider redo'ing bard enhancements to allow 'Music of Maker's' and 'Music of the Dead' affect all bardic music -- instead of each being their own song...

As it is on live bards have enough songs to keep straight on their hotbars... cutting this down by two and increasing the overall usefulness of bardic music would be a great (but not overpowered) boost.

That sounds like a good idea. Also make it work with enthral.

[Artos_Fabril]

No, I meant what I said. Focus on broken things, not things that currently work. When that list is empty, then rework things that you don't like but yet are working.
In your estimation, is class balance one of the things that is broken?

If the enhancement system change fixed or improved that balance, would it then rate as a worthy endeavor?

Ok then, how about this?
Do you realize that content design devs and systems devs do not generally do, and may not be qualified to do the grunt coding work that is required to fix bugs. They can devote their time to designing systems for the next several months while the grunt coders root out bugs, and neither one is wasting time waiting for the other to finish one process so they can begin another?

[bigolbear]

GRUNT CODER!

HEY I resemble that statement! ;)

[Silverleafeon]

Nods solemnly...

[toapat]

No, I meant what I said. Focus on broken things, not things that currently work. When that list is empty, then rework things that you don't like but yet are working.

from what i read, working is only on our end, and even by our definitions, working is a vast overstatement, while from what i understand, it has to be fully pulled out and replaced for any semblance of repair to the game to be implemented. the system functions, but it hinders and damages the rest of the game.

[BlackSteel]

Seems some people are concerned about WF casters becoming even more durable. While others have complained that WF tanks are already undesirable in current game b/c of their healing penalty.

Fix to both issues:

Change the WF racial from defender to Kensai. WF melee get a nice DPS option, while preventing 800+ HP arcane casting WF defenders of doom. (granted thats assuming they'd even be able to fit in defender and enough casting enhancements)

[SealedInSong]

We're running out of bones to chew on (no new info really). So here's one:

Cleric Domains. Will they be a part of anything in this system or the future? I asked as much from MF in a PM. Here it is:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Great question, but I don't have an answer at the moment. I need to challenge Eladrin with this. :-)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Meat-Head
I'm a cleric lover. (Don't tell my wife. She's not a cleric!! O.O)

Question: Domains. Will we see them?

Definitely yes?
Probably yes?
50/50?
Probably not?
Definitely not?


Will they possibly get folded into this new system somehow?


Thanks!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Translation: You want domains? Now's the time to "challenge" Eladrin. :)

I would pay a firstborn child for cleric domains, Turbine. Really. I would. Gimme.
Maybe an ugly cousin or two, also. If you're in the mood for a deal.

[Failedlegend]

Seems some people are concerned about WF casters becoming even more durable. While others have complained that WF tanks are already undesirable in current game b/c of their healing penalty.

Fix to both issues:

Change the WF racial from defender to Kensai. WF melee get a nice DPS option, while preventing 800+ HP arcane casting WF defenders of doom. (granted thats assuming they'd even be able to fit in defender and enough casting enhancements)

or we could give them actual RACIAL PrEs

[butcheredspirit]

I would pay a firstborn child for cleric domains, Turbine. Really. I would. Gimme.
Maybe an ugly cousin or two, also. If you're in the mood for a deal.

Thank you for bringing the issue up (again).

It sounds as though they will actually discuss the possibility of domains, when they rework the class.

This is what makes cleric's different from each other.
It can emphasis their religion and who they get there spells from. Very good from a role play perspective.

But should they be enhancements...when on pnp they are essential free, and integral to the class.


I do think divines may finally get Storm of Vengeance.
After all, there aren't many level 9 druid spells currently in the game, they'll have to make them.
And if they give this to the druids, then clerics and favored souls should see it on their lists too.

[maverik99]

Ehi Madfloyd... i have an idea

Why turbine not add a special monster races.... likes githzerai, orcs and others?
It will be very appreciated if there are takeble after the firt Legend TR...

Example:

1 life monk Champion
2 life monk Hero
3 life monk Legend
4 life monk Epic


in 4 life there are the possibility to take some special monster races....

For my ac monk one Githzerai will be very appreciated :P
So good work and hope that you consider my idea ;)

PS: Tiefling and Aasimar its also appreciated, but in normal races... takeable at 1 life :P

[Failedlegend]

-Snip-


As much as requiring X amount of TRs to get access to a race is a stupid idea...this has NOTHING to do with this thread

[toapat]

Thank you for bringing the issue up (again).

It sounds as though they will actually discuss the possibility of domains, when they rework the class.

This is what makes cleric's different from each other.
It can emphasis their religion and who they get there spells from. Very good from a role play perspective.

But should they be enhancements...when on pnp they are essential free, and integral to the class.


I do think divines may finally get Storm of Vengeance.
After all, there aren't many level 9 druid spells currently in the game, they'll have to make them.
And if they give this to the druids, then clerics and favored souls should see it on their lists too.

i think Domains would be class feats at creation, that you pick 2 of.

Functionally the same thing, and besides Fred already casts the epic spell Miraculous Wish to rewrite reality on us

and do you really want to burn action points on spellslots?

[toapat]

I think the largest problem i forsee with this entire update is the elimination of multiclassing that yields interesting powerful results, such as the 13 rogue/ 6 ranger/ 1 Fighter/Artificer build which uses sneak attack to generate obnoxious damage at range through the interaction of Deepwood sniper, Rogue Mechanic, and sneak attack damage

[SisAmethyst]

I have a big issue with the idea that taking fire magic would lock out or reduce cold magic etc. Savant as it stands at the moment is optional on a sorc, and many wizards would choose to invest in all the elements to some degree, in order to keep the idea that a wizard can change his spells out as needed.

sory aesop, your normaly full of good ideas but this one gets filed under 'crack pot' for me.

Yeah. Personally I like the idea of Elements being balanced around opposing forces ... but I understand peoples hesitation due to the limiting factors of opposed forces.

Aesop

I usually like the idea of opposing forces too but I see as well the issues if you force a penalty. Maybe not completly lock out the opposing element but rather limit its maximum tier.

For example if we could have for each element 7 tiers, then taking tier 4 fire would limit me to tier 3 cold. This way I could as a Wizard still dip a little bit in all elementals, but would never be able to rise to the maximum, as if I could if I would stay pure on one elemental. This way it wouldn't be a real penalty but just a limitation.

[StelionisIgnigenae]

I don't know if it has been said before but if redoing the UI gets you to finally work on Purple Dragon Knight, Wild Mage, and Acolyte of the Skin then I'm all for it. Having an enhancement UI that isn't a headache to look at would be awesome in and of itself, for sure.

[bigolbear]

I usually like the idea of opposing forces too but I see as well the issues if you force a penalty. Maybe not completly lock out the opposing element but rather limit its maximum tier.

For example if we could have for each element 7 tiers, then taking tier 4 fire would limit me to tier 3 cold. This way I could as a Wizard still dip a little bit in all elementals, but would never be able to rise to the maximum, as if I could if I would stay pure on one elemental. This way it wouldn't be a real penalty but just a limitation.

Why not simply lock all other elements to one tier less - forcing people to pick a speciality? Because my feeling is that it is forcing people into pre designated builds, Id have no issues having a caster in my group that chose to max out 1 element, and lots of extras, like wise id have no issues with some one maxing out 3 elements but not having spare points for extras. Id advocate leaving those kind of decisions in the hands of the player, number of AP's and class/character lvl gating are more than enough incentive to take whats right for your character concept rather than simply take everything.

Savant is somethign different, I appreciate that and perhaps savants should get an EXTRA 10% above and beyond what a non specialist can acheive but at the detriment to their opposed element. Of course that takes us back to the problem of prestige abilities giving negatives - when we cant say no to the prestige abilities as they will be granted automaticaly by spending points in the tree, then it is unfair and unreasonable to have negatives.

Take for example a sorcerer that intrinsicly understands manipulating temperature with magic (character concept), sorcs are inate casters and typicaly lack schooling in the arcane. Said sorcer might want to max out both cold and fire magic and this would be entierly reasonable. Infact this is the oldschool sorc, many a good fire/ice sorc back in the day.

Compare to the concept of a fire mage, a sorc who instinctively burns things - said sorc would obviously be a fire savant and as such would find freezing things some what anethama to their way of thinking.

Id like to see both these options work, they do currently - and there is no reason with careful thought and planning that the new system cant allow for them both.