Let's Talk: Enhancements! [Archive] - Page 17 - Dungeons & Dragons Online Forums

bigolbear

03-20-2012, 11:06 PM

And now for something completely different!

after playing both the hose cannith quest blown to bits and the quest undermine a thought occurs to me.

suggestion for prestige enhancements:

Rogue mechanic 2. - in addition to what it curently gives.
grants grenade use.
gives 10 uses of grenades per rest. grenades may be any of the following. (uses roges disable skill device as DC)
Smoke: causes a solid fog effect and a glitterdust effect.
Stun: causes a AOE stun effect similar to spell greater shout.
Fragmentation: Deals 10xD6 damage where X is the number of rogue lvls. reflex for half. (average damage would be 800, which i think is fair for a limited use ability when u look at sorcs and slas etc.)

Rogue mechanic 3.
grants Detonation pack use.
gives 5 uses of detonation packs per rest. these 'traps' do not need to be crafted as it assumed that a mechanic will spend their spare time constructing bombs. These work exactly like the detonation packs in blown to bits, including freindly fire, setting time and showing up on the map. They may be set from stealth and setting the trap does not break stealth.

Deals 20 X d6 where X is the number of rogue lvls. (average damage would be 1600 which is about what the det packs in bown to bits do on normal)

This means that although of limited use the grenades actualy hurt things and the det packs probably actualy kill things. The traps we have curently barely scratch enemies. 20 d6 sounds great for damage but in actuality when compared to a caster with maxemise and empower and potency and enhancements its realy not much. hell my pale master SLA's hit for 150 to 400, and there essentialy free.

Artificer battle engineer 2.
grenade use - as per rogue.
+other stuff like hitpoints, scope for your Xbow etc etc.

artificer battle engineer 3.
Det pack use. 5 uses just like rogue but for the arti they can be thrown a short distance, but cannot be placed with stealth.

kingfisher

03-20-2012, 11:23 PM

That isn't so different as now. Players choose the PrE and the benefits the PrE provides are chosen by the dev team. Players will still be choosing which PrE they want by spending points in the appropriate tree. It still looks like it frees up AP.

except they wont be able to choose the enh they should be able to choose based on their class because of the tree limit.

Aashrym

03-21-2012, 12:49 AM

except they wont be able to choose the enh they should be able to choose based on their class because of the tree limit.

That has nothing to do with the fact we'll have more AP to spend compared to the current system. The changes do free up currently tied up AP for a net increase in what we have to spend and effectively giving us more AP to play with looking at cost changes and free PrE's.

I'm still fine with the 3 tree limit until I actually see it at least. Then I might change my mind. Meanwhile, I think I've covered my opinion on that for now. ;)

HatsuharuZ

03-21-2012, 01:42 AM

Failedlegend

03-21-2012, 07:56 AM

Mech Suggestions

Must you keep forcing me to post this :P

edit: Grabbed the mechanic enhancements back into this poste from here (http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=4278417&postcount=3127) in order to consolidate for linking back to this post.

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

There still aren't enough crossbow bonuses to reach the capstone without taking anything else. I'm not sure if I'm ok with that. You could still get the capstone without taking any trap enhancements, or without taking any crossbow enhancements, although I can't imagine why you'd want to. 74 total points in the tab.

@Devs: Notice the complete lack of "General" enhancements despite being able to spend up to 74AP

[

bigolbear

03-21-2012, 09:26 AM

Must you keep forcing me to post this :P
-snip
@Devs: Notice the complete lack of "General" enhancements despite being able to spend up to 74AP

yes, yes i must because its I think its good constructive advice ;) especialy the bit about lots of points that CAN be spent in a prestige line without it containing any general enhancements. I know we both agree on this point - just need to hammer it home - hard choices are good devs.

I was aware of your suggestions for grenade/trap use but hear me out. The biggest issue with the current implementation is that there is the potential for some one with sufficient cash to render content trivial with explosives (grenades and traps) IF they did significant damage, The devs current solution to that issue is to make the traps and grenades 'fluff'. Ie they are fun and yes our rogues/artis can play with fireworks but in all honesty they just dont do enough damage to be worth using, its far far more efficient simply to hit it with your weapons or shoot it with your xbow.

The traps and grenades we have at the minute do aything up to about 50 d6(traps - less for nades.) damage, now that SOUNDS imense. But its a carefuly constructed deception, The fact is that unenhanced This damage is a mere 175 average. 175 damage for something that takes time, skill, and significant resources. IT is vastly cheaper and quicker just to umd a scroll or 2 such as acid rain for that kinda AOE damage. not to mention that just spending that time hitting it with a club of the silver flame will probly deal more damage overall.

So I propose that these traps and grenades become both MUCH more devastating - im talking orders of magnitude here, and limited in use by time/uses per rest constraints. - theres no harm in kepeing the old fluff ones, which of course will remain useable by any one with 'trapmaking feat', which i think you get for 4 lvls of either rogue or arti.

I think its better that a mech get 5 traps hes actualy got a use for than carrying around a hundred that arent worth the encumberance.

I also realy enjoyed the party interaction caused by these kind of mechanics(pun not intended). Yells of "GET CLEAR!" and "FIRE IN THE HOLE". That coupled with the fact i dont want to see rogue mechs/artis wiping raid bosses in short order with det packs is why I think they should be kept as freindly fire on, The ability to use them as a greifing tool is highly limited as they show on the map, make a sound and give sufficient time for players to run away. grenades on the other hand should definately be freindly fire off, so our mech oriented rogues and artis can use them as an AOE alternative to pew pew.

@ the person who said they need more for the various tiers such as bonus damage etc, absolutely, what i suggested here was only supposed to be part of the picture.

And finaly:
I think that an explosive device placed or thrown by an experienced mechanic or engineer should be doing the same kind of damage as a spell by an equaly experienced sorc or wizard. That means in ddo terms a grenade should be doing about the same kinda damage as a Delayed blast fire ball and a det pack should be up there with meteor swarm. As this is ddo were talking about dont forget to include maximise(100%), empower(50%), potency (50%), and enchancemnts(50%). For these reasons the use of them needs to be limited some how, and uses per rest just seemed the simplest.

Failedlegend

03-21-2012, 11:45 AM

Arty Suggestions

The simplest explanations (based on assumptions) I can think of would be:

Battle Engineer - Fairly Straight forward...you make things die.

So most likely increased enhancement bonus, maybe more endless fusialde uses and maybe a few PrE specific buffs

Runic Champion - Focuses mostly on rune arm usage will likely be the best for Melee Arty's although it may be their offensive casting PrE as well

Probably DC increases, more damage possibly some status effect

Master Maker - UMD, Crafting and Construct..will likely have bonuses to construct essence if the Devs stick to their current plans (otherwise it would be in the "Arty" Tree in the general section)

Likely will have a line to make construct essence better, imrpove retain essence and umd bonuses, increase your dogs overall effectiveness, possibly some more Construct-Only buffs

More Mech Stuff

A mix of X/Rest SLA like traps + the "fluff" ones would probably be best BUT I disagree hold heartely will the Friendly fire aspect...first it would open of the can of worms of what else should have friendly fire....and no one would use them because they'd likely get blacklisted

kingfisher

03-21-2012, 01:17 PM

That has nothing to do with the fact we'll have more AP to spend compared to the current system. The changes do free up currently tied up AP for a net increase in what we have to spend and effectively giving us more AP to play with looking at cost changes and free PrE's.

I'm still fine with the 3 tree limit until I actually see it at least. Then I might change my mind. Meanwhile, I think I've covered my opinion on that for now. ;)

the whole, 'look at the new shinies your getting so you wont mind what we are unecessarily taking away' thing still wont work for me, sorry, and all those free'd up ap's are not as nice when you cant do what you wanna do, but we will see how it plays out.

bigolbear

03-21-2012, 02:49 PM

A mix of X/Rest SLA like traps + the "fluff" ones would probably be best BUT I disagree hold heartely will the Friendly fire aspect...first it would open of the can of worms of what else should have friendly fire....and no one would use them because they'd likely get blacklisted

grumble grumble... your probly right. I guess i can dream about the freindly fire stuff. at least the devs put those quests in for us dirty stinkin pen and paper roleplayer types ;)

Captain_Wizbang

03-21-2012, 03:24 PM

Just wondering if we will see any Epic feats added.

LeslieWest_GuitarGod

03-21-2012, 05:24 PM

except the free stufff from pre's is stuff chosen and given by turbine, not the same as letting the players choose and use their own ap's. free stuff is great, but the free stuff is not the stuff you want, your still limited.

Not at all. That part falls in the hands of the character creators, us. I know for me, (and without a doubt for many others), as soon as they release the first draft, I will be all over it making new characters, and figuring out how best to "put the pieces together." It appears there will be more, perhaps many more choices than there are now. I love how they are spending this much time trying to "get it right."

Still not concerned until i see draft #1. Then, and only then will I jump up and down and cry foul if need be. Somehow I don't think that will be necessary (and it will be a bummer for me aging knees ;))

Chai

03-21-2012, 06:30 PM

LeslieWest_GuitarGod

03-21-2012, 08:37 PM

As for the state of enhancements... {snip} Apart from some classes that have been implemented in a rudimentary fashion, most of it is theoretical (tree diagrams, descriptions) as we don't want to go too far without feedback.

It wont be as necessary, due to much of the earlier feedback provided that steered them away from the unintended severely limiting paths in the first place, which was listened to and taken into consideration when making some tough decisions.

Partly true. The thread chat has been decent to follow at times, with some really great ideas from gamers, but its also been flooded with the same bickering from both sides since January 6.

Some angrier ones went as far to exclaim that this was pretty much done, and "we better shout loud because once it goes to Lammania its Dooom". I might be paraphrasing, but that was the jist of the bickering. Very "entertaining" but as many of us have tried to explain, it probably was not the case. Thank God its not. Its clear as Madfloyd has verified 2 1/2+ months later, this was really in a rudimentary state all along, just as they've been saying. We have PLENTY of time to help the devs get this right... and Mournlands is goin to be that place for starters.

Im sure all of our insight, positive and negative has and will continue to help them out in some way. I like the way things are coming along, and mostly I love how much time is going into this to make sure this game can compete with Neverwinter and other games down the pipeline...

Aldured

03-22-2012, 02:19 PM

UI

http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo93/Failedlegend/EnhancementMock-up.jpg

I like!!!

Didnt even have to wait for dev love to look nice (tho dev polish would be nice, btw Im fairly optimistic devs will be taking note; I mean legend says the druid visited the mourlands many many times and still hasnt visited our servers so I can imagine if they see something that solves their troubles they could take note)

Id also suppose you only get Hybrid tabs if you qualify for them .

Multiple types of AP

Not bad, but keep in mind many newcomers dont actually use AP in the first place, they have a hard time leveling up a char following a path. Just look at them trying to climb up to the wayward lobster...

Hence why I liked the UI proposal (and like it even better now). Keeps everything clear and streamlined for them, while remaining as versatile and powerful as ever (if not more).

Friendly fire???

... I can see so much potentential, but the ocassional chaotic evil disguised as neutral (those guys who seem nice and end up giving rude tells and trouble) could blow everyone at the end of a quest for no reason (and even worse, those newbs that streak pike their way up many levels could end up being even more dangerous than the players themselves)...

So, how? Well since its up for grabs why not consider it a possible epic enhancement? I mean those are the major leagues after all. As a final safety lock if possible just make them unsable in heroic content period.

A lets not let kids play with matches approach.

If this opens the door to epic friendly fire, would that be a bad thing? I mean if you get even more powerful spells, well maybe we could see some of the stuff most pen and paper devotees wish to be brought into the game. A more complex game dynamic might be interesting, true this would mostly force people into grouping with guilds and established groups, but uhm I somehow dont think epic is meant for soloing anyway.

kingfisher

03-22-2012, 02:34 PM

Not at all. That part falls in the hands of the character creators, us. I know for me, (and without a doubt for many others), as soon as they release the first draft, I will be all over it making new characters, and figuring out how best to "put the pieces together." It appears there will be more, perhaps many more choices than there are now. I love how they are spending this much time trying to "get it right."

Still not concerned until i see draft #1. Then, and only then will I jump up and down and cry foul if need be. Somehow I don't think that will be necessary (and it will be a bummer for me aging knees ;))

this has no bearing on the conversation, at all. of course people will be trying it out, and again at that time, it may be too late to change anything. as to my comment, yes its limiting if a player cannot do what he once could. thats a fact. no matter how many new 'options' exsist, if the options you once had are gone, you are limited compared to what you were. if you would have read further it might have been clearer to you.

the whole, 'look at the new shinies your getting so you wont mind what we are unecessarily taking away' thing still wont work for me, sorry, and all those free'd up ap's are not as nice when you cant do what you wanna do, but we will see how it plays out.

Partly true. The thread chat has been decent to follow at times, with some really great ideas from gamers, but its also been flooded with the same bickering from both sides since January 6.

Some angrier ones went as far to exclaim that this was pretty much done, and "we better shout loud because once it goes to Lammania its Dooom". I might be paraphrasing, but that was the jist of the bickering. Very "entertaining" but as many of us have tried to explain, it probably was not the case. Thank God its not. Its clear as Madfloyd has verified 2 1/2+ months later, this was really in a rudimentary state all along, just as they've been saying. We have PLENTY of time to help the devs get this right... and Mournlands is goin to be that place for starters.

Im sure all of our insight, positive and negative has and will continue to help them out in some way. I like the way things are coming along, and mostly I love how much time is going into this to make sure this game can compete with Neverwinter and other games down the pipeline...

um for the most part all the devs have actually said is benign stuff like 'hmmmmmm' and 'intersesting idea' and 'still reading!'. we have zero evidence that they have made any changes to their original plan. zero. they have not commented on the 3 tree limit, racial pre's, etc. i know they dont have to, but i believe that more info on their part was expected when this thread began. also, please tell me how this is in a rudimentary state if its being passed to mournlands for reveiw? we only have plenty of time if they dont implement it anytime soon lol. its hard to like how this is coming along without really knowing anything no?

i would also avoid pointing fingers about bickering, mr. 'i like this because multi-classers need a nerf' guy lol.

MadFloyd

03-22-2012, 04:44 PM

Just a quick update:

We have a number of enhancement trees up for review on the Mournlands forum and we've been getting some very constructive feedback that we're currently assessing.

As the trees get a little more polished I still plan to start posting them here.

Until then...

Monkey-Boy

03-22-2012, 04:48 PM

kingfisher

03-22-2012, 04:50 PM

Until then...

how about an update on racial pre's?

LeslieWest_GuitarGod

03-22-2012, 04:51 PM

{rant}{moan}{snip} i would also avoid pointing fingers about bickering, mr. 'i like this because multi-classers need a nerf' guy lol.

I actually do not feel multis need a nerf, and never did I stated they do. I feel there should be limiters in place for multis so that the game can be balanced. If multis were "all powerful" they'd be no reason to stay pure. There should be a bonus to build pure, but multis should be more versatile. Poorly built multis should suck, just like poorly built pures. Theres exceptions and some classes like bards are built with variety in mind from creation. Bottom line is BOTH MULTIS AND PURES should be fun to build and capable. And I cant WAIT to get my hands on the character builder and start building.

I have promoted that I think there will be many more choices for multis than ever before, and when this is all said and done, you will probably hear the devs, and everyone else that has been telling you this the entire thread say that we told ya so. I promise to be back here just to rub it in! ;) If it's much more limiting then it is now, for some unforeseen reason, then it will be very bad for the game. I remain cautiously optimistic.

Some people will never be happy with what information the devs give out. I for one am impressed they gave this much. They clearly are making an effort to be two steps ahead of Neverwinter when that ships in November. They will get to the Forgotten Realms before Neverwinter will, and they will have a much improved UI, maybe better than the one Neverwinter ships with. Personally I think the devs are waiting until Neverwinter beta ships so they can see what THEY did, and do them ONE BETTER...

kingfisher

03-22-2012, 05:06 PM

I actually do not feel multis need a nerf, and never did I stated they do. I feel there should be limiters in place for multis so that the game can be balanced.

um yeah ya did, but you know that and have edited it away as usual. still you dont get it, the balance is there already. it already exsists in the game right now today. the point which you still seem to miss after 200+ pages of bs is that adding MORE limiting factors to multi classing while not adding MORE limiting factors to staying pure is a nerf to multi's. there thats the last time i will spell it out for you, if you need anymore you will have to wait for DDO For Dummies Vol 6: The New Enhancement System.

I promise to be back here just to rub it in! ;)

im sure you'll say that no matter how it turns out, followed by a press release stating how you are still 'relaxed and confident'.

Chai

03-22-2012, 05:32 PM

No, there wont be many more choices for multis that imbalance the game, because we all have the same amount of points to spend. Multiclassing is always about the tradeoff. The only way multiclassing would imbalance the game is if they frontload all the good benefits of every PRE in the first 6 levels or so. If they do it correctly and put the most powerful stuff at the higher tiers of the PRE, multiclassing wont imbalance the game any more than pure will.

As far as bringing up some supposed competition with Neverwinter....that game is awesome, but primitive. Think DDO when it first came out. Low level cap, but content that has it all for true dungeon crawlers. It will take a few years for the people who turn gaming into work with their autocomplete farmfests to take their toll on that game, so like you said LeslieWest - they darn well better get this makeover correct in the eyes of the populace. But what does that mean exactly? Two big things to look at are...

1. Peoples build concepts will need to work after the makeover similarly or better than they work now. Why? Because if the changes make it so that peoples level splits on their favorite toon(s) no longer are effective, that can become an issue.

2. We better not be charged to respec toons that no longer work due to their rework of the entire system, after having to buy the expansion etc. If they botch number 1 and alot of present level splits and allocations just suck in the new system AND we have to pay to respec each toon, that will be a huge issue.

These are the two big factors that I see. The third being.....

3. What other options are available? LW names the clear obvious one which can compete - NWN. People who loved the good ol days of DDO before it became a massive farm fest for gear may look that direction. It is a great game but still in those primitive stages where players who enjoy starting from the ground up with no previous quest knowledge will enjoy.

Captain_Wizbang

03-22-2012, 05:37 PM

kingfisher

03-22-2012, 05:41 PM

No. They arent adding ........... MORE........ of anything Fish, they are redoing it all. You keep assuming everything is staying the same, and we wish for more limits and changes that will limit multis. Thats not what I or ANYONE has said in here.

please stop backtracking and pay attention, the limiting factor is the amount of trees available for a character. a pure ONLY has 3 choices anyway, so this factor is irrelevant to a pure. to a multi, who has traded the top lvls of their primary class for this benefit, has more than 3 options, but is still LIMITED to 3. this is an additional limiting factor to multi's that pures will not have.

edit: and please stop with your bs labeling. i have not said anything about quitting or any of that nonsense, nor have i said the sky was falling. i asked for a reason why about 140 pages ago just like everyone else and we have received no answer. i have said this is a bad idea, and unfair to multi's. so spare me your infantile positive vs negative ****, that was old ages ago.

also, you would see better if you stopped walking so closely behind those you are following. might remove that brown tint you seee everything through as well.

LeslieWest_GuitarGod

03-22-2012, 05:43 PM

kingfisher

03-22-2012, 05:58 PM

HOLY **** seriously dude? This was argued months ago. :eek: You have really gotten so caught up in this thread you cant think straight.

1. You do not know any information whats contained in the trees or exactly how the access will work to that tree or any other tree.

2. You will need to wait for more information before screaming from the rooftops your life as a multi are doomed.

Now goodbye until the devs give more info.

Oh before I forget....

3. Rant on!

1. we know about the 3 tree limit, which i just explained to you again. we know that there will be enh in the tree that a multi cannot get with the limit that they could without. that is enough to say it is an unnessary limiteation.

2. i dont think i have i have even raised my voice, let alone yelled or screamed yet, but thanks for playing.

3. i thought you had to do the whole /rant on thing for it to be a rant....

4. dont forget to let us know how 'relaxed and confident' you are!

LeslieWest_GuitarGod

03-22-2012, 06:04 PM

We better not be charged to respec toons that no longer work due to their rework of the entire system, after having to buy the expansion etc. If they botch number 1 and alot of present level splits and allocations just suck in the new system AND we have to pay to respec each toon, that will be a huge issue.

THIS. Of all the things that can go wrong with the UI change... no matter how much we like it or dislike it.... if we arent given one free chance to update our toons fully, then I can see an opportunity for an exodus from DDO. How big an exodus, not really sure. It would probably be the largest one to date at least matching the fallout in '09 when we didnt have an update for a year, thanks to those idiots suits at Atari.

The thing with Neverwinter that's different is the Foundry. That will allow the playerbase to create dungeons and entire quests from the ground up, without the need for programming skills. I've called for a dungeons/quest development kit for years... most recently on the short-lived but fun Kalari's Den podcast... but we'll probably never see it in DDO. The Foundry is a real attempt to ease the grind we have in games like DDO, and it can lure many away. I promise you it will be the biggest challenge to DDO its ever faced.

Thats why my sincere hope is that Turbine gets it right in 2012, with FR and the UI changes. We shall see...

Coldin

03-22-2012, 06:09 PM

sephiroth1084

03-22-2012, 06:23 PM

Until then....we can get another Let's Talk thread about either AC or Ranged Combat? :cool:
Yeah. Really overdue.

Chai

03-22-2012, 06:28 PM

please stop backtracking and pay attention, the limiting factor is the amount of trees available for a character. a pure ONLY has 3 choices anyway, so this factor is irrelevant to a pure. to a multi, who has traded the top lvls of their primary class for this benefit, has more than 3 options, but is still LIMITED to 3. this is an additional limiting factor to multi's that pures will not have.

If and when they unveil this with the multiclass limitation, I already have the template for the thread I will start hammered out, with about 20 different fantastic multiclass builds and why they will not work in the new system.

Whats in the trees is not relevant, because right now we do not experience a limitation where taking fighter enhancements a 12/6/2 F/R/M split limits us from taking ranger enhancements - where the new system as proposed early on in this thread limits just that.

What balances this now? The number of points we can spend. They could throw it wide open and even remove the three classes per toon limit and it wouldnt be unbalanced, because we still only get 80 points to play with.

Thinking with a DM/REF mindset:

If I give you 80 points to spend and then put 115 points worth of good enhancements in front of you, you will benefit as much in character power as if I gave you 80 points to spend and put 340 points worth of good enhancements in front of you. Putting more goodies in front of you places you into more of a dilema on which ones to take, but at the end of character planning, you still only have 80 points slotted. For hyperbole reasons, you could have 100,000 points worth of goodies in front of you, but if you still have the same 80 points to spend, theres your balance.

Why all this blabbering about tree limitations then? Whats the difference?

The difference is not in class power balance or toon power balance. The difference is in the level of cookie-cutter-ness this game becomes. The more options that are closed off by making specific choices, the more cookie cutter the game will be. If I hit you up with 80 points to spend and 300 points worth of good options to spend it on, and the minute you drop one point into one slot 40 points worth of other options disappears, thats an issue.

Its not a power issue (where needing to know whats in the trees themselves becomes relevant). Its an issue if I want to play a game where theres 4 or 5 accepted standard melee builds, barely any caster variants because all the power lies in being pure as a caster, and barely splashed hybrid toons, when we didnt have this issue before.

Many people I know who have alt itis are people who like to play one archtype but like variance. I know people who like clerics, so they play a pure babysitter build, a melee two hander battle cleric build, a clonk with 3 monk levels, a 12/6/2 TWF/AA build etc. If alot of these options disappear due to making a cookie cutter game out of something that used to have options, thats an issue. This game then starts to look alot like other MMOs where you are locked into specific template choices simply due to selecting other options in those trees. It even gets uglier if they make us pay to respec every single toon whose level split is now irrelevant due to the revamp.

Does this actually spell DOo0Oo0m!!1!?(LOL) - Its more an argument of degree than it is of absolutes. How much of a cookie cutter game does DDO become due to the harsh limitation to multiclassing? How many of my toons need a respec to become relevant in how I play them conceptually? - this one is huge for me becuase I am a concept builder and not a FOTM fist pumper. Never in the history of this game have I been forced to respec due to changes in the game to make a toon relevant again. My concepts always worked after a change or nerf as well as they did before the change or nerf. Due to the way I build and the reasons I build, I am not used to having to respec toons due to their level splits becomming irrelevant to how the class structure is set up.

Resetting enhancements is one thing we will all have to do, but should people be penalized because they liked multiclassing in the past and have 10 multiclassed toons that absolutely play well now, but afterward their level split becomes irrelevant, so they need to respec and pay for it. Do we all get +20 hearts of wood on each toon? A +5 wont be enough to fix a 12/6/2 split (a VERY popular split currently) with these kinds of limitations in place. How many people are willing to pay to salvage their toons?

Chai

03-22-2012, 06:50 PM

THIS. Of all the things that can go wrong with the UI change... no matter how much we like it or dislike it.... if we arent given one free chance to update our toons fully, then I can see an opportunity for an exodus from DDO. How big an exodus, not really sure. It would probably be the largest one to date at least matching the fallout in '09 when we didnt have an update for a year, thanks to those idiots suits at Atari.

The thing with Neverwinter that's different is the Foundry. That will allow the playerbase to create dungeons and entire quests from the ground up, without the need for programming skills. I've called for a dungeons/quest development kit for years... most recently on the short-lived but fun Kalari's Den podcast... but we'll probably never see it in DDO. The Foundry is a real attempt to ease the grind we have in games like DDO, and it can lure many away. I promise you it will be the biggest challenge to DDO its ever faced.

Thats why my sincere hope is that Turbine gets it right in 2012, with FR and the UI changes. We shall see...

Yeah, I ran a NWN server for 5 years and their dev kit even then was fantastic. I allowed players to change every single aspect of their toons appearance. ~175 models for shoulders, forearms, chest, thigh, calves, boots, neck, for EACH type of armor. Then there was the color scheme.

Basically no 2 toons looked the same. Ever.

As far as designing content, players could design entire WORLDS with it. Each zone line could lead to multiple instances to avoid metagaming as well.

Example:

The kobold lair entrance in my noob zone had many possibilities: One was just kobolds and a few trogs. One was kobolds fighting goblins. One was kobolds being bossed around by an ogre or two.

One in particular was a bunch of kobold and goblin corpses on the ground with a few casters still alive - looks like easy pickens, but when you advance, the caster animates all the corpses.

Another had a bunch of kobold rogues run off right when they see you enter, and when you chase them, you trigger their traps....

If this content dev kit is even remotely close to the old school NWN, its going to be off the hook.

kingfisher

03-22-2012, 07:08 PM

excellant breakdown of one problem with the proposed 3 tree limit
my thoughts exactly Chai, and thanks for putting it down in such fine fashion. you are much more patient than i.

the cookie-cutter-ness that you speak of will lead to only one thing seperating toons of the same type from each other, gear. gear should be the icing, not the cake.

LeslieWest_GuitarGod

03-22-2012, 08:09 PM

{snip} How many people are willing to pay to salvage their toons?

I agree with the cookie cutter build is bad argument. But the harsh limitation to multiclass build is simply not known yet. So it throws the whole argument into disarray.

I agree with you that the current system allowed us to re-build toons to get around yersteryear and todays ddo. Heck I barely had to do it with my toons 9only cause I plan the helll out of my toons:)), but when I did it always worked. I can say Ive never had to trash a build because DDO changed a mechanic. I always found an acceptable workaround to make it work just as effectively as before.

We are all guesstimating if the changes are good or bad. I believe things will be better for both multi and pures, some believe multis will get the short end of the stick. As of yet, there's no proof of that, only conjecture.

Now "how many people are willing to pay to salvage their toons?" I dont think many hands will go up. Charging $35-$80 for the most recent upgrade I believe blocks Turbine from charging. Since Mad started this OP off as an "I have always wanted to change the UI" I think it would be a major problem to start charging anything for "fixing" a toon. Many folks have 15+ toons, it just wont fly. people will leave the game over it.

This is my only concern with the change at this point...

Missing_Minds

03-22-2012, 08:36 PM

Tease!

Also called marketing for 404 and Mournlands. ;)

Missing_Minds

03-22-2012, 08:46 PM

The Foundry is a real attempt to ease the grind we have in games like DDO, and it can lure many away. I promise you it will be the biggest challenge to DDO its ever faced.

I'd be inclined to agree with you if I knew nothing about Cryptic.

Cryptic, who kept saying in Coh/CoV "We can't do color changes like that! Stop asking for it and shut up" Where upon one month after selling it off to NC Soft, NC had those exact changes put into the game.

Cryptic, Who's day one nerf almost killed Champions Online.
Cryptic, who's higher up was hated the idea of and wanted to vomit all over micro transactions (which saved the game.)
Cryptic, who's once producer of Champions Online Bill Roper has been quoted for statements saying pretty much that players will play the game that he wants them to play. The same Bill Roper, that last I heard was now their lead creative director.
Cryptic, who got screwed over by Atari that it screwed over Champions Online trying to shove Star Trek Online out the door before either game was ready...

Who knows... Now that Perfect World NA owns Cryptic, maybe that will force them to get their act together or they'll kick people out to make things work.

yeah... you could say I'm jaded, but the above is history for you.

Oh yeah, I can already tell you for a fact, that Foundry won't be portable to their other systems in the same package because of what/how each game works. Maybe some basics, but that is it.

karsion

03-22-2012, 09:18 PM

The thing with Neverwinter that's different is the Foundry. That will allow the playerbase to create dungeons and entire quests from the ground up, without the need for programming skills. I've called for a dungeons/quest development kit for years... most recently on the short-lived but fun Kalari's Den podcast... but we'll probably never see it in DDO. The Foundry is a real attempt to ease the grind we have in games like DDO, and it can lure many away. I promise you it will be the biggest challenge to DDO its ever faced.

I am with Yahtzee on this one: programmers/designers are paid because they know what they are doing(for the most part). Users are mainly laymen with little knowledge how to design quests/dungeons properly and so most user-created content will be mediocre at best. Of course every now and then there will be some great quests created by users but how to find those good in the sea of ****? Ability to create your own dungeons/quests is a gimmick and for the most part won't affect if the game is successful or not.

Neverwinter maybe a competitor to DDO but I believe that for the most part DDO will remain it's own worts enemy and if people will be quitting/changing game it will be mostly because they are fed up with bug/lag/Turbine choices not because there is a game that is radically better.

Chai

03-22-2012, 09:57 PM

I am with Yahtzee on this one: programmers/designers are paid because they know what they are doing(for the most part). Users are mainly laymen with little knowledge how to design quests/dungeons properly and so most user-created content will be mediocre at best. Of course every now and then there will be some great quests created by users but how to find those good in the sea of ****? Ability to create your own dungeons/quests is a gimmick and for the most part won't affect if the game is successful or not.

Neverwinter maybe a competitor to DDO but I believe that for the most part DDO will remain it's own worts enemy and if people will be quitting/changing game it will be mostly because they are fed up with bug/lag/Turbine choices not because there is a game that is radically better.

Another D&D based MMO in its infancy has a chance to be a huge draw. This game has always had a niche crowd of P&P heads because of the D&D name.

And on the contrary, users that have played or DMed D&D sessions for 25+ years might just have a better imagination than developers do. Their utility does not require knowing how to write code in order to design content.

LeslieWest_GuitarGod

03-22-2012, 10:06 PM

I'd be inclined to agree with you if I knew nothing about Cryptic.

Cryptic, who kept saying in Coh/CoV "We can't do color changes like that! Stop asking for it and shut up" Where upon one month after selling it off to NC Soft, NC had those exact changes put into the game.

Cryptic, Who's day one nerf almost killed Champions Online.
Cryptic, who's higher up was hated the idea of and wanted to vomit all over micro transactions (which saved the game.)
Cryptic, who's once producer of Champions Online Bill Roper has been quoted for statements saying pretty much that players will play the game that he wants them to play. The same Bill Roper, that last I heard was now their lead creative director.
Cryptic, who got screwed over by Atari that it screwed over Champions Online trying to shove Star Trek Online out the door before either game was ready...

Who knows... Now that Perfect World NA owns Cryptic, maybe that will force them to get their act together or they'll kick people out to make things work.

yeah... you could say I'm jaded, but the above is history for you.

Oh yeah, I can already tell you for a fact, that Foundry won't be portable to their other systems in the same package because of what/how each game works. Maybe some basics, but that is it.

Oh I agree Missing, no doubt about anything you say. But Ive been watching them close, and Im seeing many things that they have in common with Turbine.

Turbine's reputation was in no way solidified pre-DDO, and many people doubted Turbine's ability to make and maintain the game. Others said Turbine would leave DDO for dead with Asheron's Call 2's cancellation embarrassment fresh on gamers minds. Many wouldnt even TRY it... D&D pen & paper purists were ****ed or simply didn't care because DDO was an MMO. But I think many of us feel Turbine is in a far better place, on Wall Street, and in gamers minds then they were just 7 years ago. DDO in effect MADE Turbine.

Cryptic has the same credentials issues Turbine did, but they both had super talented developers that wanted to evolve the industry. Turbine proved they could do it, and I think Cryptic, using Turbine as a model, has the talent on board to make it work.

From my perspective I think a strong Neverwinter and a strong DDO will be very good for the industry... because as these two game developer giants battle it out to give us a better MMO, we (as in both player bases) will be the winners in the end.

LeslieWest_GuitarGod

03-22-2012, 10:16 PM

I am with Yahtzee on this one: programmers/designers are paid because they know what they are doing(for the most part). Users are mainly laymen with little knowledge how to design quests/dungeons properly and so most user-created content will be mediocre at best. Of course every now and then there will be some great quests created by users but how to find those good in the sea of ****? Ability to create your own dungeons/quests is a gimmick and for the most part won't affect if the game is successful or not.

Neverwinter maybe a competitor to DDO but I believe that for the most part DDO will remain it's own worts enemy and if people will be quitting/changing game it will be mostly because they are fed up with bug/lag/Turbine choices not because there is a game that is radically better.

Naah, you are selling the "amateur" Neverwinter Nights designers very, very short. NWN had a lock-tight solid community, and much of the content they created was outstanding. I'll go so far as to say developer kit was the #1 reason a great majority of that community played the game. Their community is very similar in strength and loyalty to the DDO community. Our communities have a lot in common.

Cryptic will be trying tooth and nail to draw them back to the game.. as the majority feel "sold out" that they went MMO.

Ive listened to years of "this game" and "that game" will be the "DDO Killer". I knew none of it was true. But Neverwinter, will take a cut into DDO at the start, but I feel both game developers, if they can stay out of court , AHEM, will have jobs for many years to come.

Hafeal

03-22-2012, 10:32 PM

Just a quick update:

We have a number of enhancement trees up for review on the Mournlands forum and we've been getting some very constructive feedback that we're currently assessing.

Geez, I thought Mournlands was like fight club ... does this mean we gotta take care of some biznes MF? :eek:;)

MadFloyd

03-23-2012, 12:49 PM

Until then....we can get another Let's Talk thread about either AC or Ranged Combat? :cool:

Well I could tell you that we revamped the AC system but you would just want to know details and stuff...

I'll start one soon for AC. Judging from the Mournlands feedback on AC we need to divulge more detail than we have... and I'm trying to extract that info from a very tired systems designer.

MadFloyd

03-23-2012, 12:50 PM

Geez, I thought Mournlands was like fight club ... does this mean we gotta take care of some biznes MF? :eek:;)

Remember the first rule of FC?

Coldin

03-23-2012, 12:59 PM

Cyr

03-23-2012, 01:01 PM

Scraap

03-23-2012, 01:04 PM

paraplegic

03-23-2012, 01:05 PM

im so happy!

Avidus

03-23-2012, 01:08 PM

Well I could tell you that we revamped the AC system but you would just want to know details and stuff...

I'll start one soon for AC. Judging from the Mournlands feedback on AC we need to divulge more detail than we have... and I'm trying to extract that info from a very tired systems designer.

So Armor Class was revamped already? Before the thread was started.

How much of a 'revamp' are we talking about?
How much room will there be for changes / alterations based on player feedback?
Were you(i.e the 'devs') watching the various player started threads and using that as a spring board?

And who is this systems designer anyway? and where did he get the idea that he could slow down becasue he's tired?
Why doesn't he have a five hour energy / red bull I.V. drip?!
ARRGGHHHH we need details !

A bit more on topic for this thread, is there anything you can tell us about the tree limit? Could you possibly give us a vague timeline of when to check for a new mockup or even a semi full tree?

Thanks MF, we appreciate the time taken to share with us.

Phemt81

03-23-2012, 01:20 PM

Nyvn

03-23-2012, 01:22 PM

It looks like someone deflected the conversation on how to a 3 tree limit may or may not be penalizing deep multi-class builds by bringing up AC revamp.

Monkey-Boy

03-23-2012, 01:39 PM

I'll start one soon for AC. Judging from the Mournlands feedback on AC we need to divulge more detail than we have... and I'm trying to extract that info from a very tired systems designer.

Come on, spill it :)

Drakos

03-23-2012, 01:51 PM

Are these upcoming changes planned for U13 or this a longer term project?

Are changes being considered to bring the game more in line with 4.0 d&d?
^^^ I certainly hope not. WotC has even realized what a POS the 4e system is, already planning 5e.

Drakos

03-23-2012, 01:59 PM

Here's a thought that doesnt get brought up enough...

Prestige Enhancements should be broken away from their base classes ....

There's no reason a Fighter shouldn't be allowed to go Tempest, and no reason a Ranger shouldn't be allowed to go Kensai. This concept is already used for Arcane Archer (All Elves can take it, regardless of class). Imagine a drwarven defender Barbarian, fortifying one of their weaknesses... for example...

If you take all the right feats or invest in all the right skills and stats, all PrEs should be available to take for any class as long as you meet the required feat/stat/skill/enhancement abilities.

This was how it was done in PnP and how it should be done in DDO.

The main benefit of course is MORE CHOICES. More ways to build the fighter/caster/healer/custom pimp my ride ___________ that you want to play. The other benefit I see is potentially greatly minimizing game balance issues tied to class PrE vs class PrE and minimize your headaches at the same time "this PrE is for fighters, so we need to balance that with another for paladins"...
+1 to you. I always liked that about the PrC's in PnP, as long as you could meet the preReq's you could take any PrC'. In practice it was easier to get to some PrC's by using certain classes, but with a few exceptions it was rarely a requirement to have a specific class.

kingfisher

03-23-2012, 02:10 PM

It looks like someone deflected the conversation on how to a 3 tree limit may or may not be penalizing deep multi-class builds by bringing up AC revamp.

avoidance is a poor way to deal with a problem, and its not like its going to go away.

waterboytkd

03-23-2012, 02:35 PM

Why all this blabbering about tree limitations then? Whats the difference?

It's about stacking and cherry picking. The devs have stated that they plan/want enhancements to stack in a much more intuitive fashion (as in, they want them to always stack, not sometimes stack, not lockout). Without tree limits, unlimited stacking could get very out of hand, especially with low-tier enhancements.

Also, when you can take any enhancements you want from your classes, it leads to cherry picking the best ones. This actually leads to the cookie-cutter builds your worried about.

Mark Rosewater (like him or hate him, if you know who I'm talking about, you know he's a huge name in game design) has espoused this so many times: limitations actually lead to MORE creative designs. If you have no limits, you tend to fall back on the good stuff you know. If you have limits, you're forced to think more creatively and make use of tools you might otherwise have overlooked.

In respect to this tree limit thing, the three tree limit is going to limit you, yes. But it's going to create more variance in multiclass builds--a 12/6/2 ftr/rgr/mnk that focuses on taking only DPS-focused trees (say, Kensai, Tempest, Ninja Spy) would most likely look VERY different from a toon with the same split that focuses on taking SD, Purple Dragon Knight, and Shintao Monk.

Currently, a 12/6/2 build tends to take the same enhancements from its 6/2 classes as any other build with that same split because those are the only enhancements worth taking from those classes. With the 3 tree limit and the removal of class level gating on enhancements (except for the PrE Bonuses), varying toons with the same splits could be taking wildly different enhancements, all depending on what they want that toon to do.

We're probably going to be looking at LESS cookie-cutter builds than we have now.

NXPlasmid

03-23-2012, 02:47 PM

die

03-23-2012, 02:49 PM

Monkey-Boy

03-23-2012, 02:52 PM

Chai

03-23-2012, 03:08 PM

Currently, a 12/6/2 build tends to take the same enhancements from its 6/2 classes as any other build with that same split because those are the only enhancements worth taking from those classes. With the 3 tree limit and the removal of class level gating on enhancements (except for the PrE Bonuses), varying toons with the same splits could be taking wildly different enhancements, all depending on what they want that toon to do.

We're probably going to be looking at LESS cookie-cutter builds than we have now.

No sir - this game will become MORE cookie cutter.

With a three tree limit, people wont be taking ANY enhancements from the 2 level class (when we could before) and barely any from the 6 level class (when we could before).

Why even limit vertical progression by multiclassing? To gain lateral progression. Limit lateral progression and theres no reason to voluntarily limit vertical progression by multiclassing. Staying pure will be the best option. People may splash to gain feats, but certainly not enhancements. Evansion splashes will still be common. 2 fighter splashes will still be common. Deep multiclassing will disappear.

Why would I want to restrict myself to level 12 in 3 trees when i can just stay pure and go all the way up to 20 in three trees?

Mark Rosewater (like him or hate him, if you know who I'm talking about, you know he's a huge name in game design) has espoused this so many times: limitations actually lead to MORE creative designs. If you have no limits, you tend to fall back on the good stuff you know. If you have limits, you're forced to think more creatively and make use of tools you might otherwise have overlooked.

As for Maro from the good ol Magic days - tell him there are already limitations in the system. You cant cherry pick a level 14 enhancement when you took 12 levels of the class. Maro also knows about the trade off concept - you trade vertical advancement by cutting your primary class off at 12, to gain lateral advancement in another class up to 6 levels, then splash 2 rogue for evasion and UMD etc. If theres no lateral gain for the sacrifice made in vertical progression, people will choose to keep their vertical progression. Thus, pure and 18/2 will be the optimal choices.

Drakos

03-23-2012, 03:14 PM

I think that the current list of racial unlock trees were:

Dwarf: Stalwart Defender
Warforged: Stalwart Defender
Halfling: Assassin
Half-Orc: Ravager
Elf: Arcane Archer
Drow: Tempest
Human: Pick one. (Slightly higher investment in Racial tree required to unlock.)
Half-Elf: Arcane Archer, Human, Elf (Yes, in our current plan they can unlock racial trees from the other races if desired. They might be able to go Half-Elf tree -> Human tree -> Any PrE through gargantuan AP expenditures.)

These are still subject to change. (Especially that Human part.)
So does this mean that the announced Wareforged Jugernaut PrE is off the table? I hope not because I really was looking forward to that PrE line alot. Secondarily, I was also interested in Scorpion Wraith PrE for Drow.

Coldin

03-23-2012, 03:17 PM

I'm getting a feeling that the expansion is going to turn the game up on it's end as far as all the combat systems go. I guess that's what happens when a spider god merges two campaign worlds. :)

waterboytkd

03-23-2012, 03:21 PM

No sir - this game will become MORE cookie cutter.

With a three tree limit, people wont be taking ANY enhancements from the 2 level class (when we could before) and barely any from the 6 level class (when we could before).

Why even limit vertical progression by multiclassing? To gain lateral progression. Limit lateral progression and theres no reason to voluntarily limit vertical progression by multiclassing. Staying pure will be the best option. People may splash to gain feats, but certainly not enhancements. Evansion splashes will still be common. 2 fighter splashes will still be common. Deep multiclassing will disappear.

Why would I want to restrict myself to level 12 in 3 trees when i can just stay pure and go all the way up to 20 in three trees?

As for Maro from the good ol Magic days - tell him there are already limitations in the system. You cant cherry pick a level 14 enhancement when you took 12 levels of the class. Maro also knows about the trade off concept - you trade vertical advancement by cutting your primary class off at 12, to gain lateral advancement in another class up to 6 levels, then splash 2 rogue for evasion and UMD etc. If theres no lateral gain for the sacrifice made in vertical progression, people will choose to keep their vertical progression. Thus, pure and 18/2 will be the optimal choices.

Why the hell wouldn't they take those trees? Are you unaware that the latest plans the dev gave us did away with class level gating for enhancements (other than the PrE Bonuses)? You take a 2 ranger splash, and you can get Haste Boost IV from its Tempest tree. Unless you were unaware of that, why would you assume you wouldn't take splash or even 6 level class trees?

And the most recent arguments against the tree limit without class level gating was that it was TOO GOOD for splashes, and would actually make being pure look like a bad choice.

Your argument of vertical advancement vs lateral advancement doesn't apply to the latest plan the devs gave us.

Chai

03-23-2012, 03:27 PM

Why the hell wouldn't they take those trees? Are you unaware that the latest plans the dev gave us did away with class level gating for enhancements (other than the PrE Bonuses)? You take a 2 ranger splash, and you can get Haste Boost IV from its Tempest tree. Unless you were unaware of that, why would you assume you wouldn't take splash or even 6 level class trees?

And the most recent arguments against the tree limit without class level gating was that it was TOO GOOD for splashes, and would actually make being pure look like a bad choice.

Your argument of vertical advancement vs lateral advancement doesn't apply to the latest plan the devs gave us.

They are debating that yes, but they are also still debating the three tree limit. None of this is set in stone yet. I feel I should put my ideas on the table before the system is set in stone, when we have no say in the matter.

My argument absolutely applys. Limitation is limitation. Yes I feel there should be some, but it should be a trade off and not a cut off.

The only way pure is a bad choice is if they give us bunk capstones like cheat death, heh. My favorite current capstone is paladin. I dont even play one, but its fun to watch people squirm in a three hour mental debate with themselves about going pure -vs- splashing. When players experience that kind of dilema, you know the devs nailed it, and balance was acheived.

MadFloyd

03-23-2012, 03:36 PM

i just caught this . . . what details have already been divulged? From my understanding NOTHING has been leaked to the public yet regarding Turbine's plans.

I think if MF is really feeling evil he should drop this bomb at around 4:55 PM today so there's a mad feeding frenzy over the weekend :)

Not sure evil is the right word, more like playful.

Details have been divulged to Mournlands. We prefer to start small where we can make mistakes without causing mass panic. :)

Nothing is so far along that it can't be altered. You WILL get to comment before things are locked down.

Monkey-Boy

03-23-2012, 03:41 PM

Captain_Wizbang

03-23-2012, 03:47 PM

Not sure evil is the right word, more like playful.

Details have been divulged to Mournlands. We prefer to start small where we can make mistakes without causing mass panic. :)

Nothing is so far along that it can't be altered. You WILL get to comment before things are locked down.

Dude, you could fart and it would cause mass panic here.

Any chance on a sneak screen shot of the new trees?

Monkey-Boy

03-23-2012, 03:54 PM

Dude, you could fart and it would cause mass panic here.

Don't be silly, farts were nerfed in update 3.

waterboytkd

03-23-2012, 03:55 PM

They are debating that yes, but they are also still debating the three tree limit. None of this is set in stone yet. I feel I should put my ideas on the table before the system is set in stone, when we have no say in the matter.

Debating them? Yes. But they're not debating them separately. They're part of the same system. It's not three trees or no class level gating. It's three trees AND no class level gating.

As for your ideas, I haven't seen any in the last few posts. The only thing I've seen is you condemning the tree limit. In fact, in your last post, you argued that the three tree limit would equate to voluntarily limiting the vertical advancement of enhancements without any trade off for lateral advancement. This doesn't apply to their current system, though, because they're combining the 3 tree limit with no class level gating. So:

My argument absolutely applys. Limitation is limitation. Yes I feel there should be some, but it should be a trade off and not a cut off.

is not accurate. Your arguments don't apply, because they ignore half the system. Also, there is no cut off without trade off (and let's be clear, the current rules for enhancements have cut offs; that's what class level gating is--a cut off). The trade off in multiclassing is going to be: do you take trees that give better synergy with others but will lack PrE Bonuses, or do you take trees that give you PrE Bonuses? How do you split class levels? Do you stack up on one class to get higher tier PrE Bonuses (not a bad choice if you're looking to splash for feats/evasion, or if you only want one tree from your splash)? Or do you spread out your levels so you can get more PrE Bonuses from trees from varying classes (which is good if you're going the synergy route, and all three trees are going to focus on the same role and so come from different classes)?

And, in case one would argue that's not enough of a trade off, it's what we have with pure vs multi with regards to melees right now. The only reason to go pure (except with barbs and monks, as they get decent bonuses at level 20) right now is the capstone (which is going to be a PrE Bonus in the new system). And, apparently, that kind of trade off works:

The only way pure is a bad choice is if they give us bunk capstones like cheat death, heh. My favorite current capstone is paladin. I dont even play one, but its fun to watch people squirm in a three hour mental debate with themselves about going pure -vs- splashing. When players experience that kind of dilema, you know the devs nailed it, and balance was acheived.

Coldin

03-23-2012, 03:55 PM

Not sure evil is the right word, more like playful.

Details have been divulged to Mournlands. We prefer to start small where we can make mistakes without causing mass panic. :)

Nothing is so far along that it can't be altered. You WILL get to comment before things are locked down.

I'd just like to say that I really appreciate how open the development team has been recently, and giving players chances to comment and share feedback early in the dev cycle. It's very refreshing. :)

HatsuharuZ

03-23-2012, 03:59 PM

I have two major concerns:

1) How many points of enhancements are in each tree, and

2) What are the restrictions (if any) for multi-classing? Will there be a relationship between the number of class levels we have and which enhancements we can take from that classes' trees?

MadFloyd

03-23-2012, 04:17 PM

Dude, you could fart and it would cause mass panic here.

Any chance on a sneak screen shot of the new trees?

When I show the new enhancements here they will be in the form of trees.... so yes, very good chance. :)

Monkey-Boy

03-23-2012, 04:20 PM

When I show the new enhancements here they will be in the form of trees.... so yes, very good chance. :)

See . . . now you are being evil.

Show us SOMETHING. Some kind of bone we can gnaw on that'll cause wild speculation and nerd rage. It'll at least make the last few hours of the work day go by faster.

katz

03-23-2012, 04:23 PM

wow... that is some high quality merciless taunting, there, Madfloyd. :D i applaud you sir

waterboytkd

03-23-2012, 04:35 PM

When I show the new enhancements here they will be in the form of trees.... so yes, very good chance. :)

wow... that is some high quality merciless taunting, there, Madfloyd. :D i applaud you sir

Yeah, I LOL'd.

Grosbeak07

03-23-2012, 04:45 PM

When I show the new enhancements here they will be in the form of trees.... so yes, very good chance. :)

Will they be happy trees?

Grailhawk

03-23-2012, 04:49 PM

Will they be happy trees?

I think he would settle for non madstone rage inducing trees

bhgiant

03-23-2012, 04:58 PM

I nominate Madfloyd as troll dev of the year

Captain_Wizbang

03-23-2012, 05:02 PM

When I show the new enhancements here they will be in the form of trees.... so yes, very good chance. :)

Thank you sir, looking forward to the looksie AND the change, Im sure it will be a great improvement to the game

Cyr

03-23-2012, 05:09 PM

Details have been divulged to Mournlands. We prefer to start small where we can make mistakes without causing mass panic. :)

Nothing is so far along that it can't be altered. You WILL get to comment before things are locked down.

Really the players want to be heard as early as possible on these types of changes that directly impact our existing characters. Players really get upset when you guys say we are changing this thing which hits your builds, but it is too far along the process to really change things in major ways.

The key there is major ways. I am sure you will present things to us before they are ready to be shipped, but if our feedback can not alter things which actually are structural deficiencies in a new system (as opposed to tweaking an specific enhancement here and there) then that is really not going to pass the sniff test and a worse system will be the result compared to what could have been.

Players are not going to be in a mass panic if they know things are very fluid still when you present ideas, but they sure will be if they see a completed system dropped on them with the cold comfort that they can get the devs to tweak tempest 2's bonus PrE slightly when the entire structure of the enhancement system has been dramatically altered with no real possibility of major change due to a short time frame until release.

I guess this all falls on when this is set to go live which hopefully is far off.

MadFloyd

03-23-2012, 05:33 PM

Really the players want to be heard as early as possible on these types of changes that directly impact our existing characters. Players really get upset when you guys say we are changing this thing which hits your builds, but it is too far along the process to really change things in major ways.

The key there is major ways. I am sure you will present things to us before they are ready to be shipped, but if our feedback can not alter things which actually are structural deficiencies in a new system (as opposed to tweaking an specific enhancement here and there) then that is really not going to pass the sniff test and a worse system will be the result compared to what could have been.

Players are not going to be in a mass panic if they know things are very fluid still when you present ideas, but they sure will be if they see a completed system dropped on them with the cold comfort that they can get the devs to tweak tempest 2's bonus PrE slightly when the entire structure of the enhancement system has been dramatically altered with no real possibility of major change due to a short time frame until release.

I guess this all falls on when this is set to go live which hopefully is far off.

Keep in mind we ARE presenting ideas to players, but just a subset (who have signed NDA's :) ).

When we do post here, we're going to be flooded with more responses than we can keep up with - and get accused of ignoring people etc. It'll only be worse if there are any obvious mistakes or omissions (OMG!!! DOOM!!!).

MadFloyd

03-23-2012, 05:41 PM

Will they be happy trees?

We whisper sweet nothings to them every day in hopes of this very outcome. Some are coming out happier than others, so we have to change our methodology a bit I think. We're thinking of song (although I'm not sure that won't kill a few - not sure).

Here's some quotes (from actual players!) to show that happiness IS possible (first look at the Dwarven racial tree):

“Wow... with this tree, the dwarven heavy tank just became very viable.... about time ”

“I like this tree.

It's got the same basic stuff as now, just better.

Dwarven Tactics went down a ton in cost (12 AP for +3 Trip/Sunder/Stun) vs 5 AP for +5 Trip/Sunder/Stun

The enhancements are thematically appropriate and useful.

I personally think Dwarf Fortress might be a better fit in Dwarven Defender *cough* than the generic tree. The tree itself however is solid.”

OK, admittedly, I'm now being a bit of a snot (especially since I snipped out anything negative), but I've successfully avoided sugar for 4 weeks now, it's Friday, one has to cut loose now and then and I've already been called a troll... :)

Chai

03-23-2012, 05:44 PM

Debating them? Yes. But they're not debating them separately. They're part of the same system. It's not three trees or no class level gating. It's three trees AND no class level gating.

Id love to see where this is all just set in stone.

As for your ideas, I haven't seen any in the last few posts. The only thing I've seen is you condemning the tree limit. In fact, in your last post, you argued that the three tree limit would equate to voluntarily limiting the vertical advancement of enhancements without any trade off for lateral advancement. This doesn't apply to their current system, though, because they're combining the 3 tree limit with no class level gating. So:

Thats a fairly absolute interpretation of what I provided.

What it really is, is showing how the system already has limitations in place, and how more limitations are not required in order to make sure people will be creative with their builds rather than just going with what they know.

is not accurate. Your arguments don't apply, because they ignore half the system. Also, there is no cut off without trade off (and let's be clear, the current rules for enhancements have cut offs; that's what class level gating is--a cut off). The trade off in multiclassing is going to be: do you take trees that give better synergy with others but will lack PrE Bonuses, or do you take trees that give you PrE Bonuses? How do you split class levels? Do you stack up on one class to get higher tier PrE Bonuses (not a bad choice if you're looking to splash for feats/evasion, or if you only want one tree from your splash)? Or do you spread out your levels so you can get more PrE Bonuses from trees from varying classes (which is good if you're going the synergy route, and all three trees are going to focus on the same role and so come from different classes)?

It seems like you already have a concept of how the system works, which has not really been verified as of yet. Im choosing to provide feedback before its all set in stone, because at that point, its too late.

And, in case one would argue that's not enough of a trade off, it's what we have with pure vs multi with regards to melees right now. The only reason to go pure (except with barbs and monks, as they get decent bonuses at level 20) right now is the capstone (which is going to be a PrE Bonus in the new system). And, apparently, that kind of trade off works:

Works to what end, forcing everyone into splashes yes, but we are talking deep multiclass options here. Even with severe level gating AND 3 three tree limitation in BOTH place, I dont see splashes going away. Its the deep multiclassing that is in question. Id rather provide my feedback while it is still in question rather than when its in the stage where they are showing it to us, which is when little to no changes are made to it.

MaxwellEdison

03-23-2012, 05:45 PM

Xyfiel

03-23-2012, 05:58 PM

I sincerly hope that you release stuff asap. Relying solely on ML for initial feedback for something so huge surely can not be the best option. Unless I am mistaken in thinking ML forums are similiar to ours with a very vocal minority of power gamers pushing for all the game to cater to them. This needs to be good for the community at large, not the top 5-10%. See the Lamannia forums and the Servants nerf thread.

Pwesiela

03-23-2012, 06:01 PM

MF: You are an evil, EVIL overlord!

Now I want to see what Dwarven Fortress is..... :D

Sgt_Hart

03-23-2012, 06:03 PM

“Wow... with this tree, the dwarven heavy tank just became very viable.... about time ”

Dwarven Tactics went down a ton in cost (12 AP for +3 Trip/Sunder/Stun) vs 5 AP for +5 Trip/Sunder/Stun

As a Long standing dorf lover.. all I can say is.. Outstanding Sir!

Hoping Things like Brewers Faith (http://compendium.ddo.com/wiki/Enhancement:Dwarven_Faith_IV) and Door Mastery (http://compendium.ddo.com/wiki/Enhancement:Dwarven_Shield_Mastery_III) Also got a good once over.

For that matter, I even hope my racial enemy got their Racial bit's (http://compendium.ddo.com/wiki/Category:Elf_Enhancements) looked over a bit harder.

Drakos

03-23-2012, 06:10 PM

Into the most appropriate tree, generally.

The Deepwood Sniper is built up as the "forester / hunter" line for the rangers, and has the Favored Enemy modifiers.

Extra Song is in the Virtuoso tree for Bards.

Multiclassed characters will have to decide whether a couple of enhancements from a class are worth locking that tree in as one of the three selectable ones. Of the sample characters we've built, my Arcane Archer monstrosity (that I talked about in one of the ranged threads) was forced to make this choice - I ended up dropping the extra sneak attack damage from the Assassin tree. (Half-Elf / Arcane Archer / Kensei / Warchanter was my build.)

I did gain a bunch of other interesting things, though, to make up for it.

Any of the above are possible on a case by case basis. The spellcaster damage amplification ones are currently giving us the more interesting debates.

Some things are currently slated in multiple trees - we've got Assassin Dex I and II, for instance, alongside Thief-Acrobat Dex I and II in the Rogue trees. They're currently expected to stack.
This, to me, is a big deal and I was concerned when I saw the mock-up. Wouldn't it be better to add another "Class" tree box rather than shoehorn the enhancments into a PrE line? I really cannot support the "Into the most appropriate tree" concept as it would meaa locking down an entire PrE selection for on, mabye two, slightly related abilities that are not really tied to that PrE line.

maddmatt70

03-23-2012, 06:11 PM

We whisper sweet nothings to them every day in hopes of this very outcome. Some are coming out happier than others, so we have to change our methodology a bit I think. We're thinking of song (although I'm not sure that won't kill a few - not sure).

Here's some quotes (from actual players!) to show that happiness IS possible (first look at the Dwarven racial tree):

“Wow... with this tree, the dwarven heavy tank just became very viable.... about time ”

“I like this tree.

It's got the same basic stuff as now, just better.

Dwarven Tactics went down a ton in cost (12 AP for +3 Trip/Sunder/Stun) vs 5 AP for +5 Trip/Sunder/Stun

The enhancements are thematically appropriate and useful.

I personally think Dwarf Fortress might be a better fit in Dwarven Defender *cough* than the generic tree. The tree itself however is solid.”

OK, admittedly, I'm now being a bit of a snot (especially since I snipped out anything negative), but I've successfully avoided sugar for 4 weeks now, it's Friday, one has to cut loose now and then and I've already been called a troll... :)

Yes.. Dwarves are the win or will soon be..:).

waterboytkd

03-23-2012, 06:36 PM

Id love to see where this is all just set in stone.

In what world does testing or designing = set in stone? Last we heard, they were designing the trees with a three tree limit and no class level gating in mind. In what way does that say to you that they are absolutely doing that system?

Thats a fairly absolute interpretation of what I provided.

What it really is, is showing how the system already has limitations in place, and how more limitations are not required in order to make sure people will be creative with their builds rather than just going with what they know.

Only the current system is going byebye. So what works now may not work after the trees come out. In fact, using the latest information we got, it looks like the current limitations are gone. Your two rogue splash could now get you max ranks in haste boost, if you so desired, which it can't currently do. So claiming that this new limitation is unnecessary because the current limitation works is a bit of a non sequitur, when, from the little we can gather, it seems the current limitations are going away.

It seems like you already have a concept of how the system works, which has not really been verified as of yet. Im choosing to provide feedback before its all set in stone, because at that point, its too late.

As for providing feedback...are you implying that I'm waiting until everything is "set in stone" to provide feedback? If so, it turns out, before the devs ever commented on no class level gating, I had written a large post on how I thought the 3 tree limit could work IF they got rid of class level gating. Then I PM'd the devs, pointing to that post, so they could see it, and take whatever they wanted from it. That's providing feedback on their ideas, and doing it before everything is "set in stone".

Also, this is why it seems like I have a concept of how the system works. It's one I commented on a lot and championed in the early days of this thread. I've thought a lot about it, how it could work, what possible pitfalls it would have.

If you want to give feedback early enough to change something, you should first read enough to know what they're currently looking at, then give advice on how to make their system better. Telling them to scrap whatever they have and do things your way isn't valid feedback, especially since you seemed to be unaware (or just ignoring) a fairly important facet of it.

When someone tells you they're writing a science fiction novel, they don't want you telling them how to turn their story into romance-mystery novel. Similarly, when the devs say they're redesigning the enhancement system, and are looking at unlimited stacking and a three tree limit, it's not very helpful to tell them to go with limited stacking rules and an unlimited tree limit. You're not helping them to design a great, new system. Your telling them to not redesign the system at all.

Works to what end, forcing everyone into splashes yes, but we are talking deep multiclass options here. Even with severe level gating AND 3 three tree limitation in BOTH place, I dont see splashes going away. Its the deep multiclassing that is in question. Id rather provide my feedback while it is still in question rather than when its in the stage where they are showing it to us, which is when little to no changes are made to it.

What? I really don't follow how this block of text relates to what I said and quoted (which were your words, btw). I was explaining on how balance CAN be achieved by causing stress between PrE Bonuses and Capstones vs a greater synergy between trees, and that the proposed system (3 tree limit, no class level gating) could accomplish that, and would make pures, splashes, and deep multis all desirable, and I used your own words to support this notion (the pally capstone example).

You were the one that said good capstones can balance pure vs multis. I agree. I also think good PrE Bonuses can balance a-synergistic trees with synergistic trees with limited or no PrE Bonuses. And I fully believe that deep multis would not only survive but thrive under a system with no class level gating. In fact, my suspicion is that your strongest full-****** builds (ie full DPS, full Tank; basically, builds that do one thing, and can't switch roles, but do that one thing amazingly) are going to be your deep multi builds, maybe with pure Barbarian Frenzied Berserker Ravagers being the exception.

karl_k0ch

03-23-2012, 06:52 PM

Not sure evil is the right word, more like playful.

Details have been divulged to Mournlands. We prefer to start small where we can make mistakes without causing mass panic. :)

Nothing is so far along that it can't be altered. You WILL get to comment before things are locked down.

You're such a tease. :D

I like that.

Also, my dwarven shield bard says hi.

Crack the Whips a bit harder on the Mournlanders already!

Jokes aside: Thanks for letting us participate in the decision progress, which is going to have a more public part than now.

Drakos

03-23-2012, 07:24 PM

Tentative plan for Tempest includes a single defensive line that requires Dodge and Mobility at various points, possibly Spring Attack. Many Tempest enhancements will only work when Two-Weapon Fighting, but don't strictly require any feats. You could probably be a terrible zero-feats TWF and still use a lot of Tempest TWF stuff, or the other enhancements that don't require TWF at all.
Will these Tempest abilities work for Monks using Handwraps?

Glenalth

03-23-2012, 07:29 PM

I personally think Dwarf Fortress might be a better fit in Dwarven Defender *cough* than the generic tree. The tree itself however is solid.”

Two cats?

Missing_Minds

03-23-2012, 08:02 PM

Two cats?

One box?

*just waits for the trees to show up then make fun of the small cursor again*

Cetus

03-23-2012, 10:08 PM

Hey madfloyd, so if we pre-purchased motu then we gain access to the beta. I'm assuming the beta would roughly be about a monthlong event. So we should gain exposure to the beta version sometime toward the end of may at the latest.

So that gives us roughly 2 months until the beta, which is a timeline consistent with pumping the relevant past lives into our characters in preparation for the new stuff.

I'd hate to wait 2 months learn anything new until I can play with that stuff myself once beta comes out.

If you can share some thoughts and directions you folks are taking I'd like to be aware of your considerations in the context of my own planning.

HungarianRhapsody

03-24-2012, 12:29 AM

OK, admittedly, I'm now being a bit of a snot (especially since I snipped out anything negative), but I've successfully avoided sugar for 4 weeks now, it's Friday, one has to cut loose now and then and I've already been called a troll... :)

Congrats on that. I gave up sugar for 2 days and ended up screaming at my wife and kids (first time I've ever done that). My wife just got up from the couch, went to the kitchen and then came back and handed me a small bag of Swedish fish.

I have cut back on sugar, but I haven't yet tried to eliminate it again since then.

Don1966

03-24-2012, 12:53 AM

Madfloyd, any chance as part of this enhancement rework that the cleric and paladin faith based enhancements can move to a class bonus feat as detailed here? http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=365201

Spoonwelder

03-24-2012, 11:38 AM

LeslieWest_GuitarGod

03-24-2012, 12:03 PM

Dude, you could fart and it would cause mass panic here.
+1 Eloquently put. LOL. The nerd rage radar in here is working at a fevered pitch, wouldnt you say?

I nominate Madfloyd as troll dev of the year

+1 Devs have never made me laugh so hard as I have the last few pages, thanks Mad!...

This thread makes me want to "design" and "utilize" happy trees (efficiently of course)... and no not Bob Ross's happy trees.

die

03-24-2012, 12:49 PM

Doompriest is going too love himself some "Dwarven Fortress" ty Mad for the reponses and keeping us all up too date.

Ashbinder

03-24-2012, 06:16 PM

Dwarf Fortress

Probably just my inner nerd talking but that name gave me flashes of hope that one of the Devs worships the cult of Armok, God of Blood, tantrum spirals and catsplosions.

EnjoyTheJourney

03-24-2012, 06:52 PM

Honestly Mad, I don't see what the trouble is. All we want is instant information about a still developing system in a way that makes everyone happy while addressing each individual's concerns and makes us more powerful without sending the game hurdling down the path to inevitable death by powercreep.

It's not that difficult.
Further to the above, this new system needs to be simple enough for new and casual players to have no significant difficulty understanding it, with no "newbie-casual attracting, time-wasting, bloody awful" choices; even though almost no new / casual players have made their voices heard in this thread, and will probably have virtually no involvement at any point in the design, development and Q&A process, the devs need to successfully read their minds and not make the new system unnecessarily complicated and buggy.

On that note, the new enhancement system must also have no bugs and no exploits that require later nerfs to fix, all while offering a near infinite number of choices (none of which can be bad choices) for the small fraction of the playerbase who will post (heck, already are posting) for months on end to promote different ways of bringing the number of choices as close to infinity as possible - something which can only occur at the expense of quality and simplicity.

I don't see why this hasn't already been done, either. :)

Aashrym

03-24-2012, 07:06 PM

Any chance we can have a well publicized publishing of the PrE Feat requirements for all the unfinished PrE's....I don't even need to know what they will do, but if I want to start a Cleric Excorcist in preparation for the PrE coming in June.....I would like to know what Feats I need.

I don't need anything else just the planned Feat req's (and likely the why's so you can minimize the feedback and follow up questions of everyone else.)

I doubt there would be any feat requirements for any PrE. It doesn't make any sense to force feats for the free bonuses. I could see enhancements in a tree that affect a particular feat previously associated with a particular PrE in a given tree but not an actual feat requirement for that PrE.

Phemt81

03-24-2012, 11:45 PM

i've already been called a troll... :)

l - o - l

Gorbadoc

03-25-2012, 11:22 AM

Failedlegend

03-25-2012, 11:42 AM

This new enhancement system promises to strengthen existing abilities and add new abilities. I ask that monsters be allowed to compete. While you're designing new abilities for player characters, design some new tricks for monsters. Maybe teach them to shield block. Additionally, revamp Elite difficulty on most quests, because you know the elite-streak players will want to put their increased power to the test.

I wouldn't mind some monsters that are immune or at least highly resistance to almost all damage (ie. SA would get through) unless their tripped or stunned or otherwise debilitated somehow.

Nyvn

03-25-2012, 03:29 PM

They need to make sure and update the Hirelings with the new system.

Spoonwelder

03-25-2012, 04:23 PM

I doubt there would be any feat requirements for any PrE. It doesn't make any sense to force feats for the free bonuses. I could see enhancements in a tree that affect a particular feat previously associated with a particular PrE in a given tree but not an actual feat requirement for that PrE.

Hmmmm - not sure what game you are playing - many of the current PrE's have feat requirements....in fact almost all do.....

Cleric - Emp. Heal
Sorc/Wiz - Spell Focus or Mental Tough etc...
Barb - Cleave
Fighter - weapon focus or shield mastery......

need I go on.

Aashrym

03-25-2012, 04:37 PM

Hmmmm - not sure what game you are playing - many of the current PrE's have feat requirements....in fact almost all do.....

Cleric - Emp. Heal
Sorc/Wiz - Spell Focus or Mental Tough etc...
Barb - Cleave
Fighter - weapon focus or shield mastery......

need I go on.

exactly. those are looking at possibly getting removed. ;)

EDIT:

Here are the links to back that up.

We're considering relaxing the feat requirements. Specific enhancements within a PRE may require a feat (e.g. getting Supreme Cleave, an enhancement by itself, requires Cleave), but Frenzied Berserker: Tier III may be achievable without taking Cleave at all.

0 AP and no feats.

You get these automatically for spending points in the Tempest Tree, taking things like Action Boost: Haste, Two Weapon Accuracy, Slashing Blades, and A Thousand Cuts.

Edit: We've taken a bunch of the Dervish abilities and merged them into the Tempest tree. They were similar enough in nature.

In the current system feat requirements complicate things IMO. I would think removing them completely for PrE's makes sense because it:

a) keeps the system consistent
b) is more friendly to newer players and easier to plan
c) removes an additional component to look at for balancing purposes (varied number of feats required)
d) increases the number of feats available on some of the feat starved builds

So you don't really need to go on; you just need to read the dev posts in the thread to which you posted. :D

EnjoyTheJourney

03-25-2012, 09:07 PM

kingfisher

03-25-2012, 11:49 PM

In the current system feat requirements complicate things IMO. I would think removing them completely for PrE's makes sense because it:

a) keeps the system consistent
b) is more friendly to newer players and easier to plan
c) removes an additional component to look at for balancing purposes (varied number of feats required)
d) increases the number of feats available on some of the feat starved builds

you forgot:
e) requires the majority of builds to respec beyond just picking new enhancements

Aashrym

03-26-2012, 12:00 AM

you forgot:
e) requires the majority of builds to respec beyond just picking new enhancements

I could see a nasty lining to that -- all those tempest builds who suddenly have a lot of feats they no longer need or want.

I don't think it actually forces them to respec, however. They haven't lost functionality in the feats they have (which would work the same before the change as after afaik), just necessity. It provides the option to respec out of those feats into a better build because the feats are no longer required.

Coldin

03-26-2012, 02:53 AM

Aashrym

03-26-2012, 04:02 AM

Aldured

03-26-2012, 05:34 AM

Eh, I don't really support removing feat requirements. They are still technically Prestige, and there should be trade offs for getting a powerful ability. Not to mention all the issues that come from players no longer needing a now worthless feat. Weapon Focus comes to mind.

Uhm... if the PRE tier doesnt require it, but some of the best abilites of it do, then its a build choice. I dare suppose most current feats will unlock appealing class related enhancements and that opting out will not be build breaking and hence a worthwhile option.

So many (probably not most, but at least some of the more common) builds may only see themselves with the option of shelving some feats or keep what they have without some terrible penalization for being born before summer.

I'll even wager many fundamental class enhancements might be spread on two (or more) trees. Hence opting out on one will mean making sacrifices rather than completely breaking your build.

Guess well have to see before we draw any conclusions, but I very much doubt things arent going in this direction :)

One thing I'm a little concerned about tho is stacking ability/skill increases. If the bar is raised too high on some aspect (say stun DC), we might end up with the same problem AC faces today: a fundamental ability/trait only working on certain very rare and specialized builds.

Still, I think Turbine has done a great job at embracing its comunity, and bewteen both such issues could be resolved before they're a huge problem.

voodoogroves

03-26-2012, 07:57 AM

Chai

03-26-2012, 10:00 AM

Cyr

03-26-2012, 10:03 AM

Keep in mind we ARE presenting ideas to players, but just a subset (who have signed NDA's :) ).

When we do post here, we're going to be flooded with more responses than we can keep up with - and get accused of ignoring people etc. It'll only be worse if there are any obvious mistakes or omissions (OMG!!! DOOM!!!).

Let's not kid ourselves. Those players have strong incentives not to rock the boat and sugar coat things for you guys. The live player base does not.

You want a better system you go to live. The desire for a better system should be the primary driving factor here, not concern about getting negative feedback.

I mean really Mad you are worried about having too much feedback? You should want as much as you can get from as wide a variety of players as possible. Then you can use quantity, which is an incredibly important part of evaluating feedback, to help guide you instead of a few voices who may or may not be representative of the live player base.

Cyr

03-26-2012, 10:39 AM

Dwarven Tactics went down a ton in cost (12 AP for +3 Trip/Sunder/Stun) vs 5 AP for +5 Trip/Sunder/Stun

Huh, that is a pretty big power jump. Going from 4 AP per +1 on all three to 1 AP per +1 on all three with a bigger total cap.

Most concerning to me is that dwarven tactics was one of good lines before. I always took some of it on my dwarven melee toons and I never felt like I was wasting AP.

Monkey-Boy

03-26-2012, 10:49 AM

Let's not kid ourselves. Those players have strong incentives not to rock the boat and sugar coat things for you guys. The live player base does not.

You want a better system you go to live. The desire for a better system should be the primary driving factor here, not concern about getting negative feedback.

I mean really Mad you are worried about having too much feedback? You should want as much as you can get from as wide a variety of players as possible. Then you can use quantity, which is an incredibly important part of evaluating feedback, to help guide you instead of a few voices who may or may not be representative of the live player base.

Remember the Madstone boots change? I can't blame them for presenting the ideas to a small group first in case something that obviously bad happens to prevent the torches and pitchforks we saw from that. I recall a dev saying that change was never presented to ML before it went to Lamania . . . I cannot imagine ML testers not giving a huge amount of negative feedback.

That said, if ML feedback has already been presented there is no reason at this time to not present the ideas for the AC pass. This of course assumes ML filtered out anything that would cause a tsunami of nerd-rage.

kingfisher

03-26-2012, 11:05 AM

Remember the Madstone boots change?

this is exactly why the info needs to be out in the open with plenty of time before any scheduled live drop. they are changing so many things about the game all at once, they are just begging for problems. how did the madstone change even get to lam? how was that boneheaded move not caught in advance? thats ONE item. they are changing the way the majority of toons will work, anyone think they have a fighting chance of catching all the issues? certainly not their fault, thats just too many changes to cover them all without getting the WOPR involved. imo releasing the just the descriptions in advance would give them a leg up on troubleshooting when its on lam. think of all the permutations to go through, all the possible opportunities for ****ups.....the last thing they want is another charge-for-it-now-nerf-it-later scenario.

Silverleafeon

03-26-2012, 11:12 AM

Silverleafeon

03-26-2012, 11:17 AM

Dropping all feat requirements for prestige enhancements is one of those choices that would both increase build flexibility, for hardcore players who love having as much freedom as they can get, when building their characters, *and* make enhancements simpler, and therefore friendlier to newer and casual players.

Awesome idea.

/signed

PS: For balance reasons, the devs may (or may not) feel they need another way to make players pay a price for unlocking particular prestige enhancements, if inserting feat requirements is no longer on the menu. I'd be wholly in support of finding ways to do that which don't reach outside of enhancements themselves, to make the new system as simple and self-contained as possible.Nods happily.

Hopes for a separation of feats from enhancements as much as possible...

Hopes for the ability to pay for certain feats with high enhancement costs, such as active past life feats, underpowered feats such as Athletic, etc...

Hopes for dragonmarks only costing one feat.
Hopes of dragonmark heir slowly recharging dragonmark uses.

Variety is the spice of life.

Monkey-Boy

03-26-2012, 11:18 AM

this is exactly why the info needs to be out in the open with plenty of time before any scheduled live drop. they are changing so many things about the game all at once, they are just begging for problems. how did the madstone change even get to lam? how was that boneheaded move not caught in advance? thats ONE item. they are changing the way the majority of toons will work, anyone think they have a fighting chance of catching all the issues? certainly not their fault, thats just too many changes to cover them all without getting the WOPR involved. imo releasing the just the descriptions in advance would give them a leg up on troubleshooting when its on lam. think of all the permutations to go through, all the possible opportunities for ****ups.....the last thing they want is another charge-for-it-now-nerf-it-later scenario.

My point was ML was not presented with the Madstone idea so it came to us and all heck broke lose.

I'm sure there will be a few "Madstones" in the AC pass. It's best that they get filtered out before being presented to us to keep the collective blood pressure of the community within reason.

Look, I'm chomping at the bit to see all this stuff to but I can understand wanting some kind of a filter.

Chai

03-26-2012, 12:04 PM

Let's not kid ourselves. Those players have strong incentives not to rock the boat and sugar coat things for you guys. The live player base does not.

You want a better system you go to live. The desire for a better system should be the primary driving factor here, not concern about getting negative feedback.

I mean really Mad you are worried about having too much feedback? You should want as much as you can get from as wide a variety of players as possible. Then you can use quantity, which is an incredibly important part of evaluating feedback, to help guide you instead of a few voices who may or may not be representative of the live player base.

The issue there is that people are not as outspoken and emotional about the positive aspects of the changes as they are about the negative aspects. When they do roll this out, I hope they make us answer questions about what we LIKE and DISLIKE about the changes as well as WHY for both. The players who have just as much feedback in each category are the ones who should mostly be taken seriously. The fanbois will say all is good regardless, and the haters will talk about anything they disagree with with the base assumption that if they didnt talk about it, it must be something they like.

The other valuable thing which has already been brought up, is that players get their chance to provide that feedback before the system is in a state where it has already been internally agreed that no more major changes will occur. Sometimes when stuff hits Lamannia I get the feeling that it is for the most part going to go live the way it is on Lamannia, even when major flaws are found and commented on.

fool101

03-26-2012, 12:23 PM

my secret hope for the release of more detailed information is that they are waiting for 13.1 to go live first.

This would allow them to focus the forums on their current issues without delving too much into new material. The fact that they seem to be releasing more teasers indicates they are gaining confidence in some current implementations of the enhancement trees.

Cyr

03-26-2012, 12:53 PM

Remember the Madstone boots change?

You mean a change that the live player base rightly cried foul on and was revoked so the game was made better by the live player bases reaction?

I think that is a good example of why live feedback works.

Worrying about recieving 'nerd rage' is counterproductive to putting out a good product.

Better product > concerns about recieving some negative feedback

Scraap

03-26-2012, 01:05 PM

One thing I'm a little concerned about tho is stacking ability/skill increases. If the bar is raised too high on some aspect (say stun DC), we might end up with the same problem AC faces today: a fundamental ability/trait only working on certain very rare and specialized builds.

That's pretty much the core concern with the trees sub-discussion. Debating how much and how little sacrifice justifies hitting close enough to the same number on a given build-aspect with something other than stars aligned to be good enough for the day to day. It hasn't been that long since the last time epic trap DCs had to be reverted from pretty much requiring mechs, after all.

Chai

03-26-2012, 01:13 PM

That's pretty much the core concern with the trees sub-discussion. Debating how much and how little sacrifice justifies hitting close enough to the same number on a given build-aspect with something other than stars aligned to be good enough for the day to day. It hasn't been that long since the last time epic trap DCs had to be reverted from pretty much requiring mechs, after all.

And reverted to being able to ignore any build decision made for trapping and still being able to spot and disable all traps on a nat 1 with dumped int. That was right about the time that they stated epics were going to be for the best of the best, and then created all new epics with a difficulty level where casual players who just made it to level 20 and havent even done one shroud run yet could complete them as long as they worked together as a team.

Their stated vision for epics, and what they actually became, are two completely different animals.

Monkey-Boy

03-26-2012, 01:18 PM

And reverted to being able to ignore any build decision made for trapping and still being able to spot and disable all traps on a nat 1.

Which was a good decision, why should somebody have to gimp themselves for epic traps? How does that add any fun to the game?

And please don't say "challenge" as there is no challenge on a pass/fail binary that is the search/spot mechanics of DDO.

Scraap

03-26-2012, 01:31 PM

And reverted to being able to ignore any build decision made for trapping and still being able to spot and disable all traps on a nat 1 with dumped int. That was right about the time that they stated epics were going to be for the best of the best, and then created all new epics with a difficulty level where casual players who just made it to level 20 and havent even done one shroud run yet could complete them as long as they worked together as a team.

Their stated vision for epics, and what they actually became, are two completely different animals.

Hence the need for some form of meaningful tradeoff less subject to wild swings to hit similar numbers. Rather why I keep harping on middle-ground solutions.

Chai

03-26-2012, 01:50 PM

Which was a good decision, why should somebody have to gimp themselves for epic traps? How does that add any fun to the game?

And please don't say "challenge" as there is no challenge on a pass/fail binary that is the search/spot mechanics of DDO.

Going from max str full ****** to 16 starting str and actually having some int is hardly gimping a toon. Epics were shaped by the best of the best....at complaining.

That was not a good decision. All it does is pander to the min maxers who dump every stat but str and con, then complain about entitlement.

In a build system that has diminishing returns if someone wants to make the decision to spend 6 build points to have 18 str rather than 16 str thats their decision, but to then banter that gimped int should find all traps in the game in content advertised as being made to suit the best of the best in builds and gear, is hilarious. By definition an 8 int toon cant even speak properly but it should find all traps or nerd rage ensues? 2 points of str is 6 points of int from 8 to 14. I had an assassin with 14 int and good gear / self scroll buffs, and had no issue finding / disarming traps in those days. It was all the 18 str 8 int (or 6 int) min maxers who were moaning about it.

Monkey-Boy

03-26-2012, 02:04 PM

Going from max str full ****** to 16 starting str and actually having some int is hardly gimping a toon. Epics were shaped by the best of the best....at complaining.

I'll agree to that . . . If you're a 6 INT Assassin with no APs in traps to make up for that lack of INT you shouldn't be able to get epic traps. Oh wait . .. they still can't! not without gear, but +20 search/spot is much more common now.

but from what I remember seeing about the EVON5 traps when it was first released you needed to be an INT-based mechanic who was an Elf or you couldn't do it. Perhaps I'm not remembering correctly as I'd barely been playing the game at that point and was far from epic ready . . . but wasn't the spot DC something insane like in the 80s?

Chai

03-26-2012, 02:14 PM

I'll agree to that . . . If you're a 6 INT Assassin with no APs in traps to make up for that lack of INT you shouldn't be able to get epic traps. Oh wait . .. they still can't! not without gear, but +20 search/spot is much more common now.

but from what I remember seeing about the EVON5 traps when it was first released you needed to be an INT-based mechanic who was an Elf or you couldn't do it. Perhaps I'm not remembering correctly as I'd barely been playing the game at that point and was far from epic ready . . . but wasn't the spot DC something insane like in the 80s?

It wasnt that high. It was 67 or very close. I was more than happy to outline for them how to make a rogue that could get all traps but I was piled on for suggesting that someone had to:

a) farm specific gear
b) roll anything less than a full 18 starting str (apparently everything else is gimp)
c) invest in any skill or boost that doesnt do any damage.

Hilarity also ensued when I stated that doing von 5 on epic wasnt even required to do von 6 on epic.

Munkenmo

03-26-2012, 03:08 PM

It wasnt that high. It was 67 or very close. I was more than happy to outline for them how to make a rogue that could get all traps but I was piled on for suggesting that someone had to:

a) farm specific gear
b) roll anything less than a full 18 starting str (apparently everything else is gimp)
c) invest in any skill or boost that doesnt do any damage.

Hilarity also ensued when I stated that doing von 5 on epic wasnt even required to do von 6 on epic.

the issue i see with traps is that the middle ground is incredibly slim.

comparing my epic geared dumped int rogue
+20 epic items
(+2) + 4 tome
+0 10base int (drow)
+2 goodluck
------
26

newly capped mechanic gets
+15 items
(+1) +2 tome
+3 disable (prestige pre req)
+4 prestige
(+3) 16 base int
+1 goodluck
-----------
24 search / 27 disable

I'm even ignoring +6 shroud int skills which i made when epics first came out and a new mechanic likely doesn't have

My question is, how high should serach / disable dc's be before a toon built for traps is unable to do them, whilst an int dumped full str ****** assasin makes him wonder why he's bothering to play, esp when the mechanic fails the search check that the assasin passes.

(I am completely of the opinion that a mechanic should be able to do all epic traps if he's got +15 items, voice and a +2 tome without having to rely on skill boosts)

Chai

03-26-2012, 03:58 PM

the issue i see with traps is that the middle ground is incredibly slim.

comparing my epic geared dumped int rogue
+20 epic items
(+2) + 4 tome
+0 10base int (drow)
+2 goodluck
------
26

newly capped mechanic gets
+15 items
(+1) +2 tome
+3 disable (prestige pre req)
+4 prestige
(+3) 16 base int
+1 goodluck
-----------
24 search / 27 disable

I'm even ignoring +6 shroud int skills which i made when epics first came out and a new mechanic likely doesn't have

My question is, how high should serach / disable dc's be before a toon built for traps is unable to do them, whilst an int dumped full str ****** assasin makes him wonder why he's bothering to play, esp when the mechanic fails the search check that the assasin passes.

(I am completely of the opinion that a mechanic should be able to do all epic traps if he's got +15 items, voice and a +2 tome without having to rely on skill boosts)

Nowdays?

23 ranks
20 item
4 GH
6 22 int - 14 start + 6 item + 2 tome
7 Tools
3 Ventilated Bracers: +3 to Disable Device (Stacks with other items)
2 HOGF - or other +2 luck
6 Int skills item - shroud
-----------------------------------------------------------
71 disable.

Note that everything here was in the game at the time of epics being released except for the 20 skills item. Even with a 15 disable item its a 66. I didnt use any feats, any exceptional int, any monk buff, any prayer buff, any boosts, any yugo pots, any bard songs, any AP for rogue skills whatsoever.

The state the game is currently in, we can roll up str builds that cant even spell their own names or speak correctly, and they can easily get all traps with the overkill gear available with stacking stats.

Munkenmo

03-26-2012, 04:13 PM

Nowdays?

snip

Note that everything here was in the game at the time of epics being released except for the 20 skills item. Even with a 15 disable item its a 66. I didnt use any feats, any exceptional int, any monk buff, any prayer buff, any boosts, any yugo pots, any bard songs, any AP for rogue skills whatsoever.

The state the game is currently in, we can roll up str builds that cant even spell their own names or speak correctly, and they can easily get all traps with the overkill gear available with stacking stats.

I was trying to avoid the bonuses like gh / tools that were the same since my only interest is in the difference.

With the state of trap dc's being what they are now, i feel they're more a hindrance to epic gameplay than a bonus.

The two big draw backs is that as is, the mechanic pre is unfinished, and existing easy to acquire epic items outshine the prestige completely (or atleast seem to based on my breakdown)

Increasing epic traps back to their old dc levels just turns away newly capped players who consider them uninhabitable without epic gear (again, i really don't feel a mechanic should even be expected to grind out tier 2 int skills greensteel / +3 int skills from dragon touched)

The only way i see to fix it in a way that helps out mechanics is giving the tier 3 prestige a bonus to search/disable of 1/2 rogue levels

Something like that means all trap / search requirements could be pushed up by 5+ giving mechanics an advantage and causing ****** assasins like mine to consider an investment in int.

Lastly I'm kind of wondering if, with the new arcane lore / trap lore etc. feats, that each feat could provide some sort of background boost to search / disable skills (traps be adjusted accordingly) as a way to deal with 18/2 wiz rogues.

That's one build I'm still iffy about, despite only having 2 rogue levels, they do give up a lot for trap skills, so i'm not opposed to them being equal or better trappers than the average mechanic, esp since their reflex save is still normally lower.

InsanityIsYourFriend

03-26-2012, 05:30 PM

i give up trying to read all of this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

just give us the enhances already!!!!!!! i want a full thread locked down for JUST them!
now watch how fast that thread catches up to current one

but really! i want to see if my lvling progression on my drow/rogue/bard tempest build due to the leak of drow getting tempest is going to work!
or how about if i should quit that...

HatsuharuZ

03-26-2012, 06:18 PM

Monkey-Boy

03-27-2012, 10:04 AM

but really! i want to see if my lvling progression on my drow/rogue/bard tempest build due to the leak of drow getting tempest is going to work!
or how about if i should quit that...

These changes are three months out. Build something that works now and TR later.

Failedlegend

03-27-2012, 10:37 AM

These changes are three months out. Build something that works now and TR later.

Also were hoping the clear opposition vs. having racial PrEs that are just copies of Class PrEs has removed that...would be nice if they were replaced with actual racially oriented PrEs but if they don't have the time it can be done later

Chai

03-27-2012, 11:51 AM

Also were hoping the clear opposition vs. having racial PrEs that are just copies of Class PrEs has removed that...would be nice if they were replaced with actual racially oriented PrEs but if they don't have the time it can be done later

That runs a huge risk of one race becomming the new melee king and everything else just being flavor builds.

If they mirror racial with class, and say tempest kensai becomes the new ubersteez FOTM build, well, theres more than one way to get tempest and kensai in the same toon. If its some unique racial like scorpion wraith + kensai that becomes the new cookie cutter, peoples choice would be to roll a drow fighter, or be a flavor build (word used by optimizers to describe something that is viable but not optimal).

Failedlegend

03-27-2012, 11:53 AM

That runs a huge risk of one race becomming the new melee king and everything else just being flavor builds.

I can't tell whether your agreeing with me or disagreeing with me. Please clarify so I can respond accordingly

Monkey-Boy

03-27-2012, 01:36 PM

I would really like to know what a "Dwarven Fortress" is. Come, leak it :)

Chai

03-27-2012, 01:43 PM

I can't tell whether your agreeing with me or disagreeing with me. Please clarify so I can respond accordingly

Neither. Im pointing out the objective downside of making unique racial PRE -vs- giving each race an already existing class PRE.

The "why" as far as them not designing unique racials isnt just that they dont have the time or resources etc. There are other issues that have to be dealt with.

Each time something new is released into the game there is a move to find out how it interacts with other things already in the game and once we have figured out what the highest power combination of those abilities are, /queues up sound of thousands of simultaneous TRs with cookie cutters stamping furiously in the background.

Using drow tempest as the example, if tempest + kensai was found out to be the most powerful combination, people can roll up drow fighters, but they arent boxed into playing just the drow race. They could also roll up human and half elf rangers and use the racial kensai PRE.

If they went with drow scorpion wraith, if scorpion wraith + kensai ended up at the top of the power ladder, players only choice is to roll a drow if they want to be the FOTM. Since theres no other way to get scorpion wraith, its either youre a drow, or youre second best.

Having a class method and a race method of being the same PRE opens up far more combinations that do not hinge on all of them being the same race.

Captain_Wizbang

03-27-2012, 06:08 PM

Each time something new is released into the game there is a move to find out how it interacts with other things already in the game and once we have figured out what the highest power combination of those abilities are, /queues up sound of thousands of simultaneous TRs with cookie cutters stamping furiously in the background.

Using drow tempest as the example, if tempest + kensai was found out to be the most powerful combination, people can roll up drow fighters, but they arent boxed into playing just the drow race. They could also roll up human and half elf rangers and use the racial kensai PRE.

If they went with drow scorpion wraith, if scorpion wraith + kensai ended up at the top of the power ladder, players only choice is to roll a drow if they want to be the FOTM. Since theres no other way to get scorpion wraith, its either youre a drow, or youre second best.

Having a class method and a race method of being the same PRE opens up far more combinations that do not hinge on all of them being the same race.

Well said. + 1

Gorbadoc

03-27-2012, 06:11 PM

I would really like to know what a "Dwarven Fortress" is. Come, leak it :)

See, you start with seven dwarves (http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/Main_Page). Then you have fun. Bring rez cakes.

Aldured

03-27-2012, 06:14 PM

If they went with drow scorpion wraith, if scorpion wraith + kensai ended up at the top of the power ladder, players only choice is to roll a drow if they want to be the FOTM. Since theres no other way to get scorpion wraith, its either youre a drow, or youre second best.

Having a class method and a race method of being the same PRE opens up far more combinations that do not hinge on all of them being the same race.

Hmmm so according to that logic some races can better cope with certain roles than others? Like say a Half-Orc wizzard isn't the most appealing alternative...

Well wed only be building on what we already have then, I guess your concern is that scorpion wrath gives them too much; but then, having a fighter whos a dwarven defender or an orc ravager is also appealing, and may shape up to being great alternatives (substitute those for racial ones if need be). Dont really see a problem with having more than one way of playing fighter, beats having 100s of classes with same gameplay to me...

IO I honestly dont feel too strongly either way as both offer interesting build choices. A class oriented PRE gives you flexibility while a racial oriented PRE gives you more variety. If anything my vote is to carry on as they have been and then add an additional completely racial alternative or class PRE as needed, giving both to all races (or most).

As for powercreep and balance, that is something that concerns us all. The thing is we wont know if one race will be overpowered, but so long as we have a community+Turbine thing going on we should be able to avoid potential pitfals (tho not everyone will be happy, its just not possible just hopping most will; and being one of most would be a nice bonus hehe). In any case my drow is squishy, no matter what I do; my dwarf is usually one of the last to fall in wipes. Is either better ? Well I like my dwarf a lot more (and glad hes getting a really good PRE) but hes not better.

Chai

03-27-2012, 06:51 PM

Hmmm so according to that logic some races can better cope with certain roles than others? Like say a Half-Orc wizzard isn't the most appealing alternative...

Well wed only be building on what we already have then, I guess your concern is that scorpion wrath gives them too much; but then, having a fighter whos a dwarven defender or an orc ravager is also appealing, and may shape up to being great alternatives (substitute those for racial ones if need be). Dont really see a problem with having more than one way of playing fighter, beats having 100s of classes with same gameplay to me...

We wouldnt be building on what we already have. The optimizers would be building based on what the best combinations are - I used an example of drow somehow becomming the best melee, which is certainly not what we have now, heh.

IO I honestly dont feel too strongly either way as both offer interesting build choices. A class oriented PRE gives you flexibility while a racial oriented PRE gives you more variety. If anything my vote is to carry on as they have been and then add an additional completely racial alternative or class PRE as needed, giving both to all races (or most).

Im not saying it cant work. Im basically saying it runs the risk of boxing us in. Remember when half orc came out, and two months later everyone who wasnt a half orc and swinging two khopesh was a flavor build? Thats the kind of stuff that can happen with unique racial PRE, only far worse due to it being an entire unique PRE rather than a few simple racial enhancements.

As for powercreep and balance, that is something that concerns us all. The thing is we wont know if one race will be overpowered, but so long as we have a community+Turbine thing going on we should be able to avoid potential pitfals (tho not everyone will be happy, its just not possible just hopping most will; and being one of most would be a nice bonus hehe). In any case my drow is squishy, no matter what I do; my dwarf is usually one of the last to fall in wipes. Is either better ? Well I like my dwarf a lot more (and glad hes getting a really good PRE) but hes not better.

When half orc came out, it was 13 points of damage per hit ahead of all other THF. 7 points ahead of warforged. 9 points ahead of a dwarf if they both swing great axes, and elf if they both swing falchion. Thats like having epic claw set, and both TOD sets + the profane strength from the abashai set on a human barbarian and the orc is butt naked riding a zebra. Pay to not grind and be the same DPS as other races that do grind, heh. You were either a half orc, or you were a flavor build that made a flavor choice to play a different flavor race. :p

Combining a unique racial PRE with class PRE can break the game so that ONE race is the most powerful.
Combining a racial class PRE with another class PRE can still break the game, but there will be more than one race the player can choose and still be both PRE.

Im not saying this should be the absolute excuse to not make unique racial PRE, im just saying dont be surprised if they do and everyone save for a few concept builders TRs into the same race.

Jay203

03-27-2012, 07:59 PM

any chance you guys will merge the elements resistance lines together?
kinda stupid to have them separated now especially with monk's monkey path doing pretty much the same thing but with added benefit =_=;;;

toapat

03-27-2012, 11:38 PM

Keep in mind we ARE presenting ideas to players, but just a subset (who have signed NDA's :) ).

When we do post here, we're going to be flooded with more responses than we can keep up with - and get accused of ignoring people etc. It'll only be worse if there are any obvious mistakes or omissions (OMG!!! DOOM!!!).

then take a page from WoW, release each tree as a calculator for the internet, so that we may see the ideas as they are presented.

The other problem is, the Mournlands group is a small testing and focus group, which when you say jump, they ask How High? This is a problem that can only be taken on by complete and utter openness with your playerbase. Back in the early days of WoW, Blizzard snuck out Protection and Retribution paladins without testing, and they took flak for months afterwards. SOE released the NGE patch, and Starwars Galaxies imploded immediately. When a change to the game that dictates a new world order is in the works, you dont sneak it out, you take it and shove it in everyone's faces. You let hell break loose, and you let the chaos, disorder, and pillaging tell you where you went wrong.

Cetus

03-28-2012, 12:19 AM

then take a page from WoW, release each tree as a calculator for the internet, so that we may see the ideas as they are presented.

The other problem is, the Mournlands group is a small testing and focus group, which when you say jump, they ask How High? This is a problem that can only be taken on by complete and utter openness with your playerbase. Back in the early days of WoW, Blizzard snuck out Protection and Retribution paladins without testing, and they took flak for months afterwards. SOE released the NGE patch, and Starwars Galaxies imploded immediately. When a change to the game that dictates a new world order is in the works, you dont sneak it out, you take it and shove it in everyone's faces. You let hell break loose, and you let the chaos, disorder, and pillaging tell you where you went wrong.

I couldn't agree more with this, I'd love to shoot down or prop up these changes in my most efficient rampaging anger voice I can muster. We've got less than 3 months, I'm getting worried that things will work out.

Failedlegend

03-28-2012, 01:26 AM

Each time something new is released into the game there is a move to find out how it interacts with other things already in the game and once we have figured out what the highest power combination of those abilities are, /queues up sound of thousands of simultaneous TRs with cookie cutters stamping furiously in the background.

I disagree new things do have some growing pains BUT duplicating the PrEs is even worse..'now if they change the Stalwart Defender PrE even a little the changes effect is magnified significantly as under their current plans Dwarf, WF, Half-Elves, Humans AND Fighters now have access to that PrE.

Also you mentioned cookie cutter builds. Let's take Half-Orc for example as if they weren't already the automatic go-to melee full ****** DPS now their getting Ravager as a racial PrE....or they could get an actual racially oriented PrE like Kal'Thaan Marcher or Eye of Gruumsh which could give them unique abilities.

EnjoyTheJourney

03-28-2012, 08:02 AM

I'd prefer that general and class enhancements were clarified first, pet enhancements where that applies next, and that racial enhancements came last in the list of priorities. If they were never much more than a way to customize your character, and had little to no effect on what characters can do, I'd be fine with that. The less "cutter" there is in the "cookie", the better.

But, races already have stat changes and other feats / skills that push them all in particular directions, and not others; if dragonmarks start to matter more, that will be even more the case in the future.

Paradoxically, more choice has the potential to lead to less variety. That would lead to more complexity (new and casual player unfriendly) and a smaller number of cookie cutter builds that have more elements to them, and that would probably require both more planning and more grinding to bring to fruition, at the end of the day (which only a tiny subset of even the most hardcore players would seem likely to prefer).

Chai

03-28-2012, 11:45 AM

I disagree new things do have some growing pains BUT duplicating the PrEs is even worse..'now if they change the Stalwart Defender PrE even a little the changes effect is magnified significantly as under their current plans Dwarf, WF, Half-Elves, Humans AND Fighters now have access to that PrE.

versus what, making dwarf defender something unique, and then every tank made will be fighter dwarf with stacked abilities from both cherrypicking from each. All other tanks would be second best.

Also you mentioned cookie cutter builds. Let's take Half-Orc for example as if they weren't already the automatic go-to melee full ****** DPS now their getting Ravager as a racial PrE....or they could get an actual racially oriented PrE like Kal'Thaan Marcher or Eye of Gruumsh which could give them unique abilities.

And if this Kal'Thaan Marcher is powerful, the only way to get it is to be a horc. If ravager is powerful players can be a horc OR they can be any race and play barbarian.

It runs the risk of creating a game where all tanks are dwarves, all DPS are horc KTM kensai TWF or hOrc KTM FB THF, and everything else is a flavor build. Wed be right back in 2008 all over again, if youre not (insert most powerful melee race here), you suck.

Like I said before, its not an absolute reason not to do it, but if they do go down that road, it had better be balanced so that each race is worth its weight. Weve seen how that works in past examples. :p The new pay to play race comes out and it does 13 points per hit more than the other races, heh. Pay-to-Pwn®.

Cetus

03-28-2012, 11:55 AM

I disagree new things do have some growing pains BUT duplicating the PrEs is even worse..'now if they change the Stalwart Defender PrE even a little the changes effect is magnified significantly as under their current plans Dwarf, WF, Half-Elves, Humans AND Fighters now have access to that PrE.

Also you mentioned cookie cutter builds. Let's take Half-Orc for example as if they weren't already the automatic go-to melee full ****** DPS now their getting Ravager as a racial PrE....or they could get an actual racially oriented PrE like Kal'Thaan Marcher or Eye of Gruumsh which could give them unique abilities.

Thats the beauty of versatility, you can make a stalwart from 4 different races and a class. I find it extremely appealing that I can cut the build many different ways, utilizing the other racial perks that we get instead of solely relying on the unique PrE's the races give.

In other words, I think that giving a race a completely unique PrE will definitely impose selection on only the select few races that synergize best with either dps, caster dc's, etc..versatility is compromised in the process, look at dwarves right now.

I'd prefer that their PrE's are the same as the class PrE's, so that the races aren't AS decisive, and their other, more subtle abilities can surface.

airavon

03-28-2012, 02:10 PM

Unique Racial PrEs need to be done, so long as they're balanced. Like Chai said, if they're not, every DPS build will be Horc KTM TWF Kensai, or whatever the top DPS build is. So long as they're balanced, say a WF Juggernaut FB could have similar DPS but a different style that focuses on something else. This is a very good idea, that if refined and balanced, could work very well.

Failedlegend

03-28-2012, 02:11 PM

In other words, I think that giving a race a completely unique PrE will definitely impose selection on only the select few races that synergize best with either dps, caster dc's, etc..versatility is compromised in the process, look at dwarves right now.

Thats why I don't think the racial PrEs should be clearly something to link to one class or another.

ie.

Warforged: Reforged or Juggernaut...focused mostly on embracing or shedding construct nature..specific to Warforged yes but for good reason and just as much a balancing issue as if they had Stalwart...less IMO.

Elf: AA and Bladesinger: Elves are masters of mixing might and magic...these Racials convey that perfectly

Dwarf: Dwarven Defender: I don't agree with this one as much as it will be just as bad as Stalwart...personally I'd rather see Runemaster or something. Unless they take some liberties with DD.

Halfing: Talentia Rider: Similar to Arty Pet...maybe some ranger-like abilities as well.

Human: Steelsky Liberator Good at fighting Larger Enemies with a focus on Dragons
Drow: Scorpion Wraith honestly don't know much about but its what the drow community wants and seems to suit EBBERON Drow much better than tempest

Half-Orc: Kal'thaan Marcher again don't know much about this one I think it's a leader-type PrE..ala Bard or Purple Dragon Knight

Half-Elf: Soulbow (IMO Half-Elves should get a different ranged PrE than Elves) and Any Class PrE based on Dilly this just suits the lore perfectly.

Regardless of opinions when ONE PrE is linked to multiple entities a single minor change can cause huge ripples...when there's no link like that balancing becomes much easier. Also it makes far more sense for RACIAL PrEs to be RACIALLY-based.

Side-note: Arcane Archer should be removed from Ranger, it doesn't suit the class at all (being an ARCANE PrE), DWS should get some serious boosts and Beastmaster should be added (Tracking skills, Animal Companion Boosts, Terrain Mastery,etc.)

Cetus

03-28-2012, 03:44 PM

Thats why I don't think the racial PrEs should be clearly something to link to one class or another.

ie.

Warforged: Reforged or Juggernaut...focused mostly on embracing or shedding construct nature..specific to Warforged yes but for good reason and just as much a balancing issue as if they had Stalwart...less IMO.

Elf: AA and Bladesinger: Elves are masters of mixing might and magic...these Racials convey that perfectly

Dwarf: Dwarven Defender: I don't agree with this one as much as it will be just as bad as Stalwart...personally I'd rather see Runemaster or something. Unless they take some liberties with DD.

Halfing: Talentia Rider: Similar to Arty Pet...maybe some ranger-like abilities as well.

Human: Steelsky Liberator Good at fighting Larger Enemies with a focus on Dragons
Drow: Scorpion Wraith honestly don't know much about but its what the drow community wants and seems to suit EBBERON Drow much better than tempest

Half-Orc: Kal'thaan Marcher again don't know much about this one I think it's a leader-type PrE..ala Bard or Purple Dragon Knight

Half-Elf: Soulbow (IMO Half-Elves should get a different ranged PrE than Elves) and Any Class PrE based on Dilly this just suits the lore perfectly.

Regardless of opinions when ONE PrE is linked to multiple entities a single minor change can cause huge ripples...when there's no link like that balancing becomes much easier. Also it makes far more sense for RACIAL PrEs to be RACIALLY-based.

Side-note: Arcane Archer should be removed from Ranger, it doesn't suit the class at all (being an ARCANE PrE), DWS should get some serious boosts and Beastmaster should be added (Tracking skills, Animal Companion Boosts, Terrain Mastery,etc.)

These are decent suggestions, but it seems like you are weighing in lore too heavily in here. Sure, I'd love to see the lore aspect satisfied but only AFTER the balancing issue and player-friendly systems have been locked. Some of the PrE's you mentioned in that list simply won't be very desireable by many of the folks (I am one of them) that are looking to optimize every point of damage output on their melees, or every point of dc on their wizards. Its just wreaking with flavor and not enough efficiency.

If class PrE's are made available to the races, we are already familiat with the current PrE's, but are also going to be exposed for the first time to the rest of the PrE's that haven't been finished yet.

We also don't know how ap tight it will be to incorporate 2 full line PrE's to make that ravaging berserker halforc, along with all of the racial DPS enancements, it probably will be impossible to fit it all in.

In short, I'd make class based PrE's available to the races, and in a future update simultaneously incorporate novel racial PrE's as well. It wouldn't be much of a power creep even if the races had access to class AND racial PrE's, since your AP expenditure will always be your limitation.

I'd even throw out a tangential suggestion while typing, we can link the number of TR lives you have to some AP gain. Say, every 3 lives after finishing a tr2 you gain an extra ap to spend.

Djeserit

03-28-2012, 05:21 PM

Can't believe I read the whole thing. Anne Trent made me do it.

Halfling Hero's Companion is an enhancement that few player use. Mostly it has been thought to be underpowered relative to the cost. This even with the bump it received in an earlier module.

I understand that some underpowered enhancements will be improved, others will be dumped.

I'd like to argue that Hero's Companion be kept and enhanced.

The reason I have always liked this buff is that DDO is most fun for me when it is a team game. This enhancement, if bumped up a bit, would encourage more team tactics and working together.

How to improve this enhancement? I would like to see it turned into an aura. I love the mechanic of auras because they change the tactics players use. Players have to think about how to position themselves relative the player with the aura. This makes the fights more interesting.

You could even end up with something like a "marching order", as in old time D&D!

That's my 2 CP.

kingfisher

03-28-2012, 05:38 PM

giving a single race the best melee pre's will still cause the cookie cutter problems that unique pre's will. yes they will be lessened by humans and half-elves having those options as well, but only slightly. humans and helves are already powerful enough, why give them a choice of ANY racial pre? or better yet, why not just let all races choose their racial pre?

they could set it up like a pool of choices for each race. the pre pool could include a dps melee, a tank melee, a specialist, an arcane, and a divine option or some combination of the above dependant on the race. horc would have more melee options where elf would have more caster type options. but 5-6 options for each race, each with a primary stat attached to it. to gain access to the pre, the player would have to have a minimum of a natural 15 or whatever (same mechanic as helf dilly but stricter) of the primary stat to qualify for the pre.

for example the horc PRE pool could look like this:
Melee - ravager, berserker, occult slayer
Specialist - warchanter
Caster - warpriest, wild mage

for dwarf -
Melee - SD, FB
Specialist - mechanic, battle engineer
Caster - radiant servant, aov

for elf:
Melee - purple dragon knight, KOTC
Specialist - spellsinger, arcane archer
Caster - archmage, savant

for drow:
Melee - kensai, ninja spy
Specialist - tempest, virtuoso
Caster - PM, AOTS

idk about which PRE's fit which races best, just tossing some out there as an example, im sure others could fill in the options better than i. multiple races could have some of the same options in the their pool. humans and helves could still have their choice, based on the same base stat the other races need to qualify.

i suggest this because i hate the idea that some races can pick, while others get ONE choice. no matter what that one choice is, it will still be teh suck compared to humans and helves getting whatever they want. imo if they go with only ONE choice, it should be more flavor oriented than a carbon copy of the class pre's. If they are bound and determined to use copies of class pre's then we have to have choices to keep it fair. who is to tell me that my dwarf, who has been all about speed and murder for 5 years is now to focus on being a 'fortress' in order to get the most out of his race? what happened to dwarven bloodlust? or a drow palemaster with 5 wizzy pastlives no has an empty racial tree because he has no intrest in being a drizzt clone?

Chai

03-28-2012, 05:46 PM

i suggest this because i hate the idea that some races can pick, while others get ONE choice. no matter what that one choice is, it will still be teh suck compared to humans and helves getting whatever they want. imo if they go with only ONE choice, it should be more flavor oriented than a carbon copy of the class pre's. If they are bound and determined to use copies of class pre's then we have to have choices to keep it fair. who is to tell me that my dwarf, who has been all about speed and murder for 5 years is now to focus on being a 'fortress' in order to get the most out of his race? what happened to dwarven bloodlust? or a drow palemaster with 5 wizzy pastlives no has an empty racial tree because he has no intrest in being a drizzt clone?

Racial PRE isnt something someone HAS TO take. When picking one class, the player still has 3 class trees. That drow could go up PM, WM, and AM trees. The dwarf doesnt NEED to focus on tanking, but its an option they get for being a dwarf. My dwarven barbarian will still have FB, occult slayer, and ravager trees to think about even if I have no interest in tanking whatsoever.

kingfisher

03-28-2012, 05:53 PM

Racial PRE isnt something someone HAS TO take. When picking one class, the player still has 3 class trees. That drow could go up PM, WM, and AM trees. The dwarf doesnt NEED to focus on tanking, but its an option they get for being a dwarf. My dwarven barbarian will still have FB, occult slayer, and ravager trees to think about even if I have no interest in tanking whatsoever.

did they change it from 1 racial tree + 3 PRE trees to now only 3 tree's period, including the racial one, if chosen? cause simply not putting points in a racial tree has got to be a bad idea, and will lead to the 'flavor build' issue you were discussing earlier no?

Aelonwy

03-28-2012, 06:50 PM

did they change it from 1 racial tree + 3 PRE trees to now only 3 tree's period, including the racial one, if chosen? cause simply not putting points in a racial tree has got to be a bad idea, and will lead to the 'flavor build' issue you were discussing earlier no?

As far as I understood the guideline the devs told us was we would have a racial tab (not to be confused with a racial PrE tree) and three class PrE trees. We should always have the option of spending points in the racial tab, enough points can unlock the racial PrE tree which we have the option of choosing instead of a class Pre tree such that someone who did so would have a racial tab, a racial PrE tree and only two of their class PrE trees.

Chai

03-28-2012, 08:31 PM

did they change it from 1 racial tree + 3 PRE trees to now only 3 tree's period, including the racial one, if chosen? cause simply not putting points in a racial tree has got to be a bad idea, and will lead to the 'flavor build' issue you were discussing earlier no?

Absolutely not. Racial tree is a choice and its not a given that it will automagically be a good idea to always spend points to attain the racial PRE. Many of the good builds will likely be 2 same class PRE like SD/kensai, or AM/PM - which would not require a specific race to be taken to be the hans.

Where we run the risk of cookie cutter issue is if the racial trees are unique (not a duplicate of a class PRE) and one of them ends up being really powerful when combined with a class PRE. People would then have to roll that race to be optimal because its the only way to access the unique racial PRE.

kingfisher

03-28-2012, 09:40 PM

Absolutely not. Racial tree is a choice and its not a given that it will automagically be a good idea to always spend points to attain the racial PRE. Many of the good builds will likely be 2 same class PRE like SD/kensai, or AM/PM - which would not require a specific race to be taken to be the hans.

Where we run the risk of cookie cutter issue is if the racial trees are unique (not a duplicate of a class PRE) and one of them ends up being really powerful when combined with a class PRE. People would then have to roll that race to be optimal because its the only way to access the unique racial PRE.

by this logic, racial pre's will only get used when the race and build combo matches up, ie a dwarf tank. or for horc, any dps. how will this in itself not cause the same problem? dwarves who are dps melee instaed of tank melees will be less than optimal, since they could be a horc dps melee. tanks who are dwarves will be less than optimal because they dont have this or that. same issue. the cookie cutter problem will always be there if races have different options than each other. you can argue it of course, but pure hypothetical numbers wise the problem will be there with either unique racial pre's or class-copied racial pre's.

personally i say play what you want to play, but i get where your coming from. i just think that problem will always be there. thats why i suggested multiple options for each race, so that every race will have a chance to be competitive, and unique, in each class type.

Djeserit

03-29-2012, 02:51 AM

giving a single race the best melee pre's will still cause the cookie cutter problems ?

Even worse, what if Humans are the only race that gets to pick a racial PrE that would be useful to a caster/divine?

How many will pick halfling (assassin) for their FvS instead of Human (choose any PrE or choose from a nice list)?

In my guild there are currently 9 FvS, all pure class, 8 are Human and with mostly all the same stats, feats and gear (ornamented dagger anyone?).
(Arguably these are the most powerful race/class combo in the game currently.)

There's one WF.

Really other races need options for nuking, cc, aoe, dot, insta-kill and healing or just toughness or 90% of blue bar will be human.

Given the current imbalance between magic and melee, DDO could end up a 'Humans only club.'

Alrik_Fassbauer

03-29-2012, 07:24 AM

Given the current imbalance between magic and melee, DDO could end up a 'Humans only club.'

When I'm looking all over Stormreach I usually see almost 40-60 Warforged Ones and all others.

Yes, I have even seen an Auctionator being entirely surrounded by Warforged Ones !

Chai

03-29-2012, 09:53 AM

by this logic, racial pre's will only get used when the race and build combo matches up, ie a dwarf tank. or for horc, any dps. how will this in itself not cause the same problem? dwarves who are dps melee instaed of tank melees will be less than optimal, since they could be a horc dps melee. tanks who are dwarves will be less than optimal because they dont have this or that. same issue. the cookie cutter problem will always be there if races have different options than each other. you can argue it of course, but pure hypothetical numbers wise the problem will be there with either unique racial pre's or class-copied racial pre's.

The problem will exist to a much higher degree if racial PRE is unique. At least if ravager is powerful, I can roll a barbarian of any race. If I want it on a non barbarian class I still have to roll a horc.

If Dwarf can be ANY CLASS and still be a defender, why would they choose fighter and put more enhancements into basically THE SAME PRE? If they do choose fighter, they will likely need to spec into kensai. There AC and DR can be over 9000, but if they cant hold threat from these double PRE DPS, they wont be worth the party slot.

personally i say play what you want to play, but i get where your coming from. i just think that problem will always be there. thats why i suggested multiple options for each race, so that every race will have a chance to be competitive, and unique, in each class type.

The problem already is there to a degree in the new system but theres more than one way to get ~the same powerful combination. Having unique racials runs the risk of one race ruling them all. I dont hate the idea, I just think if they did something like that they would need to be darn sure it was balanced all the way around. Weve seen from past examples that marketing a new class or race goes exactly against that. There better be a reason to play the new race or people wont buy it - which is why half orc came out doing 13 points of damage per hit more than most other THF.

Monkey-Boy

03-29-2012, 09:57 AM

If Dwarf can be ANY CLASS and still be a defender, why would they choose fighter . . . .

Feats.

Chai

03-29-2012, 12:55 PM

.

Feats.

Funny, paladins and monks tank just fine without anywhere near as many feats.

Then theres the multiclasses, like 12 pally/6 monk/2 fighter.

There are plenty of other options, even in todays game, than having to take lots of fighter levels simply due to having feats.

Exploiter dwarf ranger 18 / 1 monk / 1 rogue defender anyone?

voodoogroves

03-29-2012, 01:04 PM

To be fair, you asked "why would they chose fighter" and he gave a reason why someone may do that.

Other options may end up being more optimal, sure.

Monkey-Boy

03-29-2012, 01:18 PM

Funny, paladins and monks tank just fine without anywhere near as many feats.

Then theres the multiclasses, like 12 pally/6 monk/2 fighter.

There are plenty of other options, even in todays game, than having to take lots of fighter levels simply due to having feats.

Exploiter dwarf ranger 18 / 1 monk / 1 rogue defender anyone?

With significantly lower HP potential because they can't pack on the toughness feats, even on an AC build.

Say a dorf 18/1/1 Exploiter weighs in at 555 HP (which is about right , give or take 20). 6 more CON and 20% from stance gets him about 738 HP. This is very light for tanks in the modern game.

You won't have the feats to rack up the high intim. No room for Skill Focus, Bull headed, Barb PL, etc.

You won't have the feats to rack up the toughnesses for that 900+ HP that's needed for Epic LOB. I mean MAYBE if the AC pass would let it see some damage mitigation from AC it might be possible but who knows. but heck, you won't even be proficient with a tower shield if you wanted to switch between TWFing and S&B.

Would it be a good DPS build? Absolutely, the Exploiter is still a good (not great) build and getting +6 STR/CON and 20% more HP would make it very nice.

Would it be a better choice for a tank over a mostly fighter? Probably not. Again we're speculating because we don't know the details of the enhancements.

Don't underestimate the advantages a massive amount of fighter-feats gives you when building.

Chai

03-29-2012, 03:37 PM

With significantly lower HP potential because they can't pack on the toughness feats, even on an AC build.

Say a dorf 18/1/1 Exploiter weighs in at 555 HP (which is about right , give or take 20). 6 more CON and 20% from stance gets him about 738 HP. This is very light for tanks in the modern game.

LOL my bard has 600 HP - a geared ranger can totally have 680 then add the 6 con then add the 20% - a paladin 12 monk 6 fighter 2 tier 3 dwarf defender would have even more.

Theres one raid on one difficulty that may require more HP than that. It can still be tanked with ~800.

You won't have the feats to rack up the high intim. No room for Skill Focus, Bull headed, Barb PL, etc.

I know exploiters with 90 intim. Most fighters I know dont utilize those feats anymore once theyre geared. We are also assuming here that the intim enhancements will still require feats to take for the dragonmarked lines.

You won't have the feats to rack up the toughnesses for that 900+ HP that's needed for Epic LOB. I mean MAYBE if the AC pass would let it see some damage mitigation from AC it might be possible but who knows. but heck, you won't even be proficient with a tower shield if you wanted to switch between TWFing and S&B.

Tower shield proficiency. :p If thats what an effective tank build hinges on, we are all in trouble.

Would it be a good DPS build? Absolutely, the Exploiter is still a good (not great) build and getting +6 STR/CON and 20% more HP would make it very nice.

Would it be a better choice for a tank over a mostly fighter? Probably not. Again we're speculating because we don't know the details of the enhancements.

Don't underestimate the advantages a massive amount of fighter-feats gives you when building.

Dont overestimate them either. Its not the only direction to go and ive seen many tanks that do not have alot of fighter levels. Dwarf defender will allow for alot of multiclass combinations WHICH ALREADY WORK to be a tier 3 tank PRE. 13 rogue 6 paladin 1 monks tank TOD elite. With a tier 3 dwarven defender PRE i bet it could do epic LOB. Same with 12 paladin 6 monk 2 fighter.

Monkey-Boy

03-29-2012, 04:01 PM

LOL my bard has 600 HP - a geared ranger can totally have 680 then add the 6 con then add the 20% - a paladin 12 monk 6 fighter 2 tier 3 dwarf defender would have even more.

Not refuting anything with a deep splash of a class, talking about an 18/1/1 Exploiter ranger than you brought up. You know, a class without toughness enhancements.

Please spell to me in precise detail how an 18/1/1 dwarf Exploiter ranger can get those HP. With exact gearing including all the other stuff they'd need. 555 (575?) Is about right before rage, madstone yugo, etc for a dwarf unless they do something silly like put level-ups in CON. I'm not counting barb PLs which of course you can pile on for more or +4 tomes.

I'm talking about a specific example that you brought up.

Theres one raid on one difficulty that may require more HP than that. It can still be tanked with ~800.

And all those other raids, including Elite Tower (but not a good idea) can already be tanked by a Ranger RIGHT NOW if the ranger is good enough. Sure it's the exception not the rule but it has been done.

Do you think raid bosses are going to be tougher or easier than the LOB going forward? Tanking the epic lob with an 800 HP dwarf with NO damage mitigation (AC? yeah right) is just a horrible idea. I mean maybe if Shield of Whirling Steel gets some kind of % damage mitigation like Shield mastery it might be possible, but I'd still prefer helf or human for racial healing amp.

Of course this is pure speculation pulled from my rectum as NOBODY KNOWS WHAT'S GOING TO WORK AND WHAT WILL NOT until Turbine reveals way more about this stuff than we know. The trolling crusade some people are in in this thread is amusing as people are talking as if they know what they are talking about and none of us do except Madfloyd . .. and he stopped talking a week ago :)

I know exploiters with 90 intim. Most fighters I know dont utilize those feats anymore once theyre geared. We are also assuming here that the intim enhancements will still require feats to take for the dragonmarked lines.

I don't believe you. Spell that out, that looks impossible. Again for an 18/1/1 Exploiter.

Tower shield proficiency. :p If thats what an effective tank build hinges on, we are all in trouble.

Have you done Epic LoB? :)

And I agree, let's see what happens in the AC pass.

Dont overestimate them either. Its not the only direction to go and ive seen many tanks that do not have alot of fighter levels. Dwarf defender will allow for alot of multiclass combinations WHICH ALREADY WORK to be a tier 3 tank PRE. 13 rogue 6 paladin 1 monks tank TOD elite. With a tier 3 dwarven defender PRE i bet it could do epic LOB. Same with 12 paladin 6 monk 2 fighter.

I don't disagree about those combos, I was refuting the 18/1/1 ranger.

Pure monk dwarf defender looks ubber.

Also . . . combining some stuff of the other fighter PREs might be too good to pass up. We simply do not know.

bringjoy

03-29-2012, 05:33 PM

Are any of these suggested racial enhancements going to be good for casters? Not casters who want to melee, but casters who take pride in their casting;)

From what I saw reading the first few pages (and forgive me for not reading all 105 pages) there was nothing to interest my SORC, Wiz, or Cleric -- who are all pure casters. I hope I missed something!

If there isn't anything to make casters better arcane users, than this is the long-awaited-by-some nerf to casters.:eek:

Artos_Fabril

03-29-2012, 06:01 PM

Please spell to me in precise detail how an 18/1/1 dwarf Exploiter ranger can get those HP. With exact gearing including all the other stuff they'd need. 555 (575?) Is about right before rage, madstone yugo, etc for a dwarf unless they do something silly like put level-ups in CON. I'm not counting barb PLs which of course you can pile on for more or +4 tomes.
With best-in-slot gear, you could top 600 HP on an dwarf exploiter now, without ship buffs, madstone, or pots.

Add 3 feats from not having to take dodge, mobility or spring attack
add whatever toughness enhancements are in the dwarf defender tree
add 60 from defensive stance
start at 18 str, 19 con because you don't need 11 base dex for dodge.
then add 20%

Chai

03-29-2012, 06:28 PM

I don't believe you. Spell that out, that looks impossible. Again for an 18/1/1 Exploiter.

Impossible you say? Click, clack, BOOM. I know 2 exploiter builds who consistently comment that they are raid buffed past 90. I use them alot for elite hound, vod, tod, etc.

23 ranks
4 GH
10 cha of 30 14 start + 7 item + 3 tome + 3 exceptional +1 litany +2 completionist.
2 luck
6 cha skills item
20 epic brawns spirits
5 epic gloves of the claw
1 stacking cha yugo pot
2 bard song
5 human skill boost
1 boat cha buff +2
1 Boat skills buff
1 prayer
4 large guild augment slot
3 swap out khopesh for skill focus
1 improved intimidate I
---------------------------------------------
89 + you cant roll a zero on a 20 sider, so minimum 90 total result.

Keep in mind this is TODAY. I didnt put monk buffs in there. I didnt put store pots in there.

Once they rid us of the feat requirement of tempest, thats 4 feats free. I get my khopesh back if I want it and could then take bullheaded + sentinel dragonmark line which is 8 more intim after enhancements. (which also means not having to slot +5 protection, even though its easy to get) - Would be WELL over 90 with what we already know. If they tack on a point or two per tier of the PRE, we might be able to bounce that baby all the way past 100.

Monkey-Boy

03-29-2012, 06:32 PM

With best-in-slot gear, you could top 600 HP on an dwarf exploiter now, without ship buffs, madstone, or pots.

Add 3 feats from not having to take dodge, mobility or spring attack
add whatever toughness enhancements are in the dwarf defender tree
add 60 from defensive stance
start at 18 str, 19 con because you don't need 11 base dex for dodge.
then add 20%

With a 16 starting CON and 1 toughness feat? That's what an "exploiter" would have if they are taking the "standard feats" and ability score spread.

But yes, starting with a 19-20 CON would get you 600.

Do you really think the FOUR required feats for Tempest III are going to be dropped to none? I'd be surprised.

Djeserit

03-29-2012, 07:53 PM

Regarding the preference for Humans in the caster classes, FvS (non-melee) in particular....

When I'm looking all over Stormreach I usually see almost 40-60 Warforged Ones and all others.

Yes, I have even seen an Auctionator being entirely surrounded by Warforged Ones !

Human FvS on Thelanis = 2739

WF FvS on Thelanis = 1280

and downward from there.

level 20 Humans on Thelanis = 6361

level 20 WF on Thelanis = 3057

and downward from there.

---------------------------------------------------------

Three options have been suggested for humans (post 288 & 306 by Eladrin):

Choose from any PrE
(Human casters will be able to choose caster related trees. Human FvS with a wiz PrE that gives damage and critical bonuses to BBarrier anyone?)

Choose from a list based on class
(a human FvS will be able to choose non-FvS trees, but no details on which, probably they would include some from other casting classes. Again FvS could choose a wiz PrE. Human cleric could choose Radiant Servant/Angel of Vengance.)

Choose from the Racial PrE list
(Humans could take Stalwart Defender, since the rest of the racial PrEs are melee oriented. You might choose WF or Dwarf, but why give up the extra feat, CHA and WIS?)

Just more reasons to go Human on your blue-bar toons.
The only hope I see is for Halfling Dragonmarks to be so powerful that Halfling FvS returns as the master race for healer/cc/blasters.

Djeserit

03-29-2012, 08:39 PM

Assuming we end up with

one racial tree
three class trees

opening a racial PrE tree closes one class tree

multiclassing allows you to open a class tree from the new class, but closes one of the original three class trees

then...

the viability of two-class characters depeds a bit on the placing of paid enhancements on the trees. If the trees are "bushy" enough, have enough of the core class enhancements, closing one or two of the class trees will be viable.

but...

if the core class enhancements are spread thinly across the trees, closing a tree won't be viable.

:)Turbine will balance this.:)

However...

if you open a racial PrE, you will only be able to open two class trees. Taking a third class won't give you any enhancements from that class. OUCH!

:)WILL THREE CLASS BUILDS EVER BE VIABLE??? How you going to balance that Turbine?:)

Furthermore...

For Half-elfs to open a Human PrE tree, they would have to open the Human tree first

Half-Elf: Arcane Archer, Human, Elf (Yes, in our current plan they can unlock racial trees from the other races if desired. They might be able to go Half-Elf tree -> Human tree -> Any PrE through gargantuan AP expenditures.)

(Eladrin post 288)

So if you start with a helf, take human and a human PrE, you are left with one class tree open. If the trees are thin, having spread the core class enhancements across the trees with no duplication, this may not be viable.

I trust turbine will balance this half-elf issue, at least by the time they fix half-elf appearance....

Ziindarax

03-29-2012, 09:01 PM

Regarding the preference for Humans in the caster classes, FvS (non-melee) in particular....

Human FvS on Thelanis = 2739

WF FvS on Thelanis = 1280

and downward from there.

level 20 Humans on Thelanis = 6361

level 20 WF on Thelanis = 3057

and downward from there.

---------------------------------------------------------

Three options have been suggested for humans (post 288 & 306 by Eladrin):

Choose from any PrE
(Human casters will be able to choose caster related trees. Human FvS with a wiz PrE that gives damage and critical bonuses to BBarrier anyone?)

Choose from a list based on class
(a human FvS will be able to choose non-FvS trees, but no details on which, probably they would include some from other casting classes. Again FvS could choose a wiz PrE. Human cleric could choose Radiant Servant/Angel of Vengance.)

Choose from the Racial PrE list
(Humans could take Stalwart Defender, since the rest of the racial PrEs are melee oriented. You might choose WF or Dwarf, but why give up the extra feat, CHA and WIS?)

Just more reasons to go Human on your blue-bar toons.
The only hope I see is for Halfling Dragonmarks to be so powerful that Halfling FvS returns as the master race for healer/cc/blasters.

I'd give up the "extra" feat if it meant innate proficiency with greatswords, a tree that lets me eventually receive full healing from my own magic, while still retaining immunity to sleep, poison, disease, fatigue, exhaustion, paralysis and drowning (thus freeing up the need to waste an item/spell slot on something that could address any of these problems that would afflict a non-warforged. In essence, the Warforged (if they take the Reforged tree) would receive more "effective" feats than the human. Is it all at a penalty of losing spell points/DC's, yes, but Warforged divines tend to be built as a melee/solo-build, and what they get is MORE than enough to solo a quest if the player knows what they're doing.

To address another post you made, I am very concerned about racial pre's basically eating up your choice in class pre's. To use your example, the half-elf's racial pre should be something that's separate from the class tree's, and for racial pre's to eat up a class tree - well, frankly, I find that MORE restrictive than what we have now. So much so, that anyone wanting to unlock any pre through the human pre would be better off just playing a human (who happen to look better anyways).

Edit: Turbine would be better off if they made a fifth tree, the general tree that contains up to three sets of enhancements relating to a specific class (let's say you have a 12 paladin, 6 monk, 2 "x" build. The general tree would have three sets of enhancements; the first would belong to the paladin, the second the monk, and the third for the final class). As many others have pointed out, by having a general tab/tree, Turbine would avoid the problem of potentially condemning triple-class builds to failure on account of adding too many restrictions via tree-locking and dispersing general enhancements across multiple trees (rather than leaving it as it currently is).

Jay203

03-31-2012, 05:51 PM

atm i'm hoping the new system won't be more restrictive than the current system

Esserbe

03-31-2012, 07:20 PM

atm i'm hoping the new system won't be more restrictive than the current system

This. I don't want the new system to prevent me from doing what I'm currently doing.

Failedlegend

03-31-2012, 08:00 PM

atm i'm hoping the new system won't be more restrictive than the current system

If they keep the original plan it will be VERY restrictive if they listen to feed back it won't (ignoring the "feedback" saying to not give feedback).

Currently its on Mournland but based on what we've seen get through there I'm a little worried it's become infested with Yesmen/women...I'd apply but honestly I really only have enough time to play the game on live (I can only spend so much time on the forums because I have nothing better to do during my breaks at work) let alone produce sufficient feedback to make a difference so I'd rather not take a position away from someone else. It just worries me. Also If I understand NDAs correctly I wouldn't be able to participate in conversations like this and that would suck

Nigo

04-01-2012, 10:05 AM

Nigo

04-01-2012, 10:34 AM

I couldn't let it pass.. Multi-classing is not the essence of DDO nor it is a must-to-do thing. Multi-classing is a risk to take for those who dare. Don't worry guys, this won't be the first time we'll suffer from some changes made to the game. A very small change in game mechanics once ruined my capped fighter's build entirely. He still suffers deeply. I put my trust in Dev team once again because i know they are working hard to improve our gaming experience.

EnjoyTheJourney

04-01-2012, 10:39 AM

I don't understand why people are complaining about feat requirements for enhancements. After all, they are called "enhancements" for a reason, right? Their purpose is to enhance your existing abilities, aka feats.
For enhancements that build directly on specific feats, it makes sense to link feats and enhancements (toughness feat and racial toughness, for example). For prestige enhancements that are class-driven or attached to a race, the case for linking feats and enhancements seems particularly weak.

There is a good reason to have enhancements and feats separated as much as possible; linking them when there's not a strong reason for doing it makes the game more complicated, without also making it more fun.

Chai

04-01-2012, 10:38 PM

HatsuharuZ

04-01-2012, 10:58 PM

Multiclassing is the essence of DDO. Its one of the few things that separates this game from all the boxed into one class cookie cutter sammich games.

I have to agree with Nigo. imo, *Options* are the essense of DDO. Multiclassing is just another option. A lvl 20 wizard is just as viable as an 18/2 wizard/rogue, so long as you are willing to accept the pro's and con's of multiclassing.

Jay203

04-02-2012, 02:39 AM

Mjesko

04-02-2012, 03:41 AM

while that may be true, but DDO is steering further and further away from that being true

Yeah, the capstone enhancements were the biggest change against multiclassing. I think the new enhancement system sounds great, but i hope Turbine removes the level requirements of enhancements and replaces them with points spend in that tree.

The new enhancement system should be used to give all characters self healing:
- It should be a race enhancement line
- Second Wind can be used 5 times per rest
- Second Wind I restores (Heal skill) x 2 HP or (Repair skill) x 2 HP
- Second Wind II restores (Heal skill) x 3 HP or (Repair skill) x 3 HP
- Second Wind III restores (Heal skill) x 4 HP or (Repair skill) x 4 HP
- The Halfling dragonmark feat increases the Heal skill by (level) points and can be selected only once
- The Human dragonmark feat increases the Repair skill by (level) points and can be selected only once

Chai

04-02-2012, 08:36 AM

I have to agree with Nigo. imo, *Options* are the essense of DDO. Multiclassing is just another option. A lvl 20 wizard is just as viable as an 18/2 wizard/rogue, so long as you are willing to accept the pro's and con's of multiclassing.

Yeah right, but reading what I posted, understand that in most other MMOs, you dont even have the OPTION of multiclassing - which is a HUGE difference.

Most MMOs do have something that parallels PRE, like WOW and their talent trees for instance. Its still a completely boxed in system without multiclassing however.

You talk about options being the essence, but multiclassing is the enabler. Without it, we have as many options as we have classes, and its just a matter of PRE at that point - and this game starts to look alot like the other games that use talent trees.

People play DDO because it is NOT those other games. Turbine has been able to hold a niche market here by leveraging the differences - not playing on similarities.

orakio

04-02-2012, 10:12 AM

while that may be true, but DDO is steering further and further away from that being true

In which direction? I don't think it is wrong to say that at the moment correctly built multiclass builds are often considered more viable than pure counterparts (at least for melee classes).

Yeah right, but reading what I posted, understand that in most other MMOs, you dont even have the OPTION of multiclassing - which is a HUGE difference.

Most MMOs do have something that parallels PRE, like WOW and their talent trees for instance. Its still a completely boxed in system without multiclassing however.

You talk about options being the essence, but multiclassing is the enabler. Without it, we have as many options as we have classes, and its just a matter of PRE at that point - and this game starts to look alot like the other games that use talent trees.

People play DDO because it is NOT those other games. Turbine has been able to hold a niche market here by leveraging the differences - not playing on similarities.

Multiclassing is a core feature of D&D/DDO and nobody that is reasonable should want it to go away. That doesn't mean a multiclass character though is entitled to be superior in every way. If built right can it be a generally better character? Sure, but a key component of multiclassing should be sacrificing one aspect of a character for further gains in other areas. The proposed system has a lot of potential, both good and bad, to change the dynamics of character creation. I think Nigo is correct in stating that Options are the essence of DDO, you are correct in stating that multiclassing is the enabler (largest creator of) options in DDO. The most important thing then is that all options remain viable, some of the strengths and weaknesses of builds may change and some specific builds may be hurt, but in general there should be incentive/advantages for both staying pure or multiclassing.

Monkey-Boy

04-02-2012, 10:15 AM

When you're sitting there for hours agonizing as to going pure or splashing then we have it balanced. The Capstone system does this.

For the classed where it doesn't the solution is simple: better capstones.

kingfisher

04-02-2012, 01:16 PM

In which direction? I don't think it is wrong to say that at the moment correctly built multiclass builds are often considered more viable than pure counterparts (at least for melee classes)..

i think that is incorrect to say, at least not for the general populace. pure barb is still pretty tops. a mc build that comes close to it takes a lot of work and gear. the small things, like enh from mulitple classes, make up the difference. as it is today, only in some melee classes can a mc build compare to a pure. losing ANY of the perks will make mc'ing even less attractive and harder to do.

Multiclassing is a core feature of D&D/DDO and nobody that is reasonable should want it to go away. That doesn't mean a multiclass character though is entitled to be superior in every way. If built right can it be a generally better character? Sure, but a key component of multiclassing should be sacrificing one aspect of a character for further gains in other areas. The proposed system has a lot of potential, both good and bad, to change the dynamics of character creation. I think Nigo is correct in stating that Options are the essence of DDO, you are correct in stating that multiclassing is the enabler (largest creator of) options in DDO. The most important thing then is that all options remain viable, some of the strengths and weaknesses of builds may change and some specific builds may be hurt, but in general there should be incentive/advantages for both staying pure or multiclassing.

i dont see how an mc build is superior in every way from its pure counterpart at this time. the sacrifices have already been made, the system is already fair, the restrictions are already in place. adding more restrictions that hurt multis and not pures (ie tree limit) can only make mc'ing less viable.

The most important thing then is that all options remain viable

i agree that this is the most important thing. i have ZERO faith that it will make it through this change if they stick to the 3 tree limit. the limit removes many options regardless of what else is in there, without question.

kingfisher

04-02-2012, 01:19 PM

The new enhancement system should be used to give all characters self healing:
- It should be a race enhancement line
- Second Wind can be used 5 times per rest
- Second Wind I restores (Heal skill) x 2 HP or (Repair skill) x 2 HP
- Second Wind II restores (Heal skill) x 3 HP or (Repair skill) x 3 HP
- Second Wind III restores (Heal skill) x 4 HP or (Repair skill) x 4 HP
- The Halfling dragonmark feat increases the Heal skill by (level) points and can be selected only once
- The Human dragonmark feat increases the Repair skill by (level) points and can be selected only once

why do all classes need self healing? that is not DnD. the sf pots are already an joke, giving non healing classes more healing is a mistake. DnD is a party game, period.

Mjesko

04-02-2012, 01:53 PM

why do all classes need self healing? that is not DnD. the sf pots are already an joke, giving non healing classes more healing is a mistake. DnD is a party game, period.

The self healing would solve two problems:
- Reduce the required time a group waits for a healer
- Make the Heal skill and the Repair skill useful

If you look at D&D 4 all classes have self healing called Healing Surges and i think that this is one of the few things in D&D 4 that is great.

orakio

04-02-2012, 02:34 PM

i think that is incorrect to say, at least not for the general populace. pure barb is still pretty tops. a mc build that comes close to it takes a lot of work and gear. the small things, like enh from mulitple classes, make up the difference. as it is today, only in some melee classes can a mc build compare to a pure. losing ANY of the perks will make mc'ing even less attractive and harder to do.While being far from definitive, take a look at shade's dps challenge page and you will note that the majority of dps challenges(for melee) are largely dominated by multiclass builds. In the cast of a pure barb it is proven to be less damage than an 18/2 split due to the fighter haste boost enhancement and bonus feats allowing all dps feats to be picked up as well as additional utility. As it is today, most melee classes do more dps as a multiclass than a pure, period. Barb is more with a fighter splash, tempest rangers are far more dps multiclassed than pure, paladins aren't even a dps option unless multiclassed, Arcane archers are better dps as monkcher or fighter/ranger/monk builds than pure ranger. Perhaps the only pure melee classes that are still the superior option are pure monk and pure fighter, although fighter does excellently as a multiclass with rogue or monk levels as well, and pure rogue (although it falls off heavily compared to top melee builds with the fortification changes on elite/epic).

i dont see how an mc build is superior in every way from its pure counterpart at this time. the sacrifices have already been made, the system is already fair, the restrictions are already in place. adding more restrictions that hurt multis and not pures (ie tree limit) can only make mc'ing less viable.I am sorry but the inability to see the advantages of multiclassing is a oversight on your part. Tell me, what does a tempest ranger sacrifice when it goes from pure 20 ranger to a 12/6/2 split? A couple of weak level 3 and 4 spells, a weak tier3 PrE, 2 favored enemies, and some sp. In exchange it gets massive bonuses like bonus feats(helping cover the silly tempest feat requirements), access to umd, sneak attack damage, haste boost, a tier 1 PrE(kensai or fb), etc. Find me 1 pure tempest ranger that has both the same dps and same sustainability/utility as the multiclass build does... I will wait.

This is obviously only one example, and many others don't gain nearly as much, but the reality is there is little to no sacrifice in high end melee classes because of a total lack of high end class features or abilities that scale on a specific classes level. All you have are capstone enhancements to offset feats/evasion/skills, and for many classes the capstone enhancements simply can't compare. You see multiclass builds for a reason, they are good and in most cases can do everything their pure class counterpart can and some.

i agree that this is the most important thing. i have ZERO faith that it will make it through this change if they stick to the 3 tree limit. the limit removes many options regardless of what else is in there, without question.
And yet there is potential for that system to include tons of new options as well. We have already seen a post indicating that dwarven tactics are increasing by +2(from +3 to +5) potentially and for 1 less AP in the process. There will be new enhancements all over the place, the value of those enhancements can be better or worse than what you currently have and play a big impact on if 3 trees is enough or not. Lets say for example right now you pick up fighter haste boost 1 and str boost 1 from enhancements in a 12ranger/6monk/2fighter split. Now in a 3 tree system you can't get fighter haste boost anymore because you have 3 trees devoted to ranger/monk/racial trees.... but developers already hinted at haste boost in the new tempest tree. If I have new enhancements in the ranger or monk trees that give an equivalent increase to 1 str, or that 1 str isn't essential to the build with say a +4 tome instead of +3, then you lose nothing in a 3 tree system compared to live. This of course doesn't work for every build but really, how can you possibly claim that you lose out regardless of what is in the trees.

The point is that it's ok that multiclassing become "less viable" so long as it still remains viable. Right now its clearly the better decision to multiclass for a large number of builds, the idea is to make it the equal decision in as many builds as possible, while potentially being better for some and worse for others.

kingfisher

04-02-2012, 02:41 PM

The self healing would solve two problems:
- Reduce the required time a group waits for a healer
- Make the Heal skill and the Repair skill useful

If you look at D&D 4 all classes have self healing called Healing Surges and i think that this is one of the few things in D&D 4 that is great.

the only time you currently need to wait for a healer is for some of the raids, and this would not change.
the heal and repair skills dont need to be useful, but even if this was a goal there are better ways to do it.

i disagree, the healing surges are just one more bad thing bout 4e. there are already PLENTY of ways to get self healing in the game. if you want more self healing, make a different toon. making it easy for all classes to heal themselves just further blurs the lines and detracts from DDO's dnd base.

kingfisher

04-02-2012, 02:56 PM

While being far from definitive, take a look at shade's dps challenge page and you will note that the majority of dps challenges(for melee) are largely dominated by multiclass builds. In the cast of a pure barb it is proven to be less damage than an 18/2 split due to the fighter haste boost enhancement and bonus feats allowing all dps feats to be picked up as well as additional utility. As it is today, most melee classes do more dps as a multiclass than a pure, period. Barb is more with a fighter splash, tempest rangers are far more dps multiclassed than pure, paladins aren't even a dps option unless multiclassed, Arcane archers are better dps as monkcher or fighter/ranger/monk builds than pure ranger. Perhaps the only pure melee classes that are still the superior option are pure monk and pure fighter, although fighter does excellently as a multiclass with rogue or monk levels as well, and pure rogue (although it falls off heavily compared to top melee builds with the fortification changes on elite/epic)..

you just made my point, out of all the classes, there are only currently a couple melee that are better as a multi. all the caster classes are better pure, plus monk and fighter, some of the bard types, rogue....i dont see how your point is valid. MOST CLASSES are better pure, any further limitations to mc'ing will weaken the multi class option further. its not like it will suddenly be better to be a mc caster type.

I am sorry but the inability to see the advantages of multiclassing is a oversight on your part. Tell me, what does a tempest ranger sacrifice when it goes from pure 20 ranger to a 12/6/2 split? A couple of weak level 3 and 4 spells, a weak tier3 PrE, 2 favored enemies, and some sp. In exchange it gets massive bonuses like bonus feats(helping cover the silly tempest feat requirements), access to umd, sneak attack damage, haste boost, a tier 1 PrE(kensai or fb), etc. Find me 1 pure tempest ranger that has both the same dps and same sustainability/utility as the multiclass build does... I will wait. .

on the contrary, i run all multiclass builds so i am well aware of the benefits. they all already sacrifice something for more utility, more dps, more self healing, whatever. MC is not overpowereed because some classes are better that way, its just smart building. a pure whatever does not HAVE to be better than a mc whatever in EVERY class. its already pretty lopsided towards pures. the tree limit will make this worse, no way it wont.

The point is that it's ok that multiclassing become "less viable" so long as it still remains viable. Right now its clearly the better decision to multiclass for a large number of builds, the idea is to make it the equal decision in as many builds as possible, while potentially being better for some and worse for others.

no, its not ok for them to suddenly change the game and make multiclassing less viable. mc'ing has ALWAYS been one of the best things about this game, it makes it different than most other mmo's. its already balanced. it does not need a nerf, which is what this tree limit is. it does not matter whats in the trees because they cant possibly put all the class enh in all the pre trees.

kingfisher

04-02-2012, 03:11 PM

This is obviously only one example, and many others don't gain nearly as much, but the reality is there is little to no sacrifice in high end melee classes because of a total lack of high end class features or abilities that scale on a specific classes level. All you have are capstone enhancements to offset feats/evasion/skills, and for many classes the capstone enhancements simply can't compare. You see multiclass builds for a reason, they are good and in most cases can do everything their pure class counterpart can and some..

i deleted this in prev post but i agree with you here, the difference is i thinks its a good thing. MC'ing needs to have a niche

And yet there is potential for that system to include tons of new options as well. We have already seen a post indicating that dwarven tactics are increasing by +2(from +3 to +5) potentially and for 1 less AP in the process. There will be new enhancements all over the place, the value of those enhancements can be better or worse than what you currently have and play a big impact on if 3 trees is enough or not. Lets say for example right now you pick up fighter haste boost 1 and str boost 1 from enhancements in a 12ranger/6monk/2fighter split. Now in a 3 tree system you can't get fighter haste boost anymore because you have 3 trees devoted to ranger/monk/racial trees.... but developers already hinted at haste boost in the new tempest tree. If I have new enhancements in the ranger or monk trees that give an equivalent increase to 1 str, or that 1 str isn't essential to the build with say a +4 tome instead of +3, then you lose nothing in a 3 tree system compared to live. This of course doesn't work for every build but really, how can you possibly claim that you lose out regardless of what is in the trees.

there are many build combos that will not work with the 3 tree limit, some have been laid out in this thread and more will follow if they go through with the tree limit. im not going to bother listing a bunch again here but i will say that haste boost and str are just a couple of things on one build split. this nowhere near covers the problems people will face when they wake up one day this summer with a whole roster of broken toons.

orakio

04-02-2012, 03:34 PM

you just made my point, out of all the classes, there are only currently a couple melee that are better as a multi. all the caster classes are better pure, plus monk and fighter, some of the bard types, rogue....i dont see how your point is valid. MOST CLASSES are better pure, any further limitations to mc'ing will weaken the multi class option further. its not like it will suddenly be better to be a mc caster type.

I don't think it shows most classes are better pure at all. The discussion is around multiclassing with melee, casters already have proper incentives for staying pure but you still see large numbers of splash builds.

Better Pure: Monk, (rogues?), maybe bards except warchanter
Equal pure vs. multi: Fighter, (rogue? not a rogue expert), arti (if you want to trap or melee you want the evasion)
Better multi: Paladin, ranger, barbarian, any ranged combat build, any tank build, warchanter bards, anything that wants UMD, even melee clerics are significantly better as multi's than pure.

What you clearly want is a system with no tree limitations because it best benefits your all multiclass builds. I imagine the intent of the 3 tree system to be two purposes.

1) 3 trees gives pures/multi's/splashes access to essentially the same number of enhancements. Everyone has 80 AP and say (im pulling the number out of a hat here but its just an example) 195 options between the 3 trees. In unlimited trees you would have as much 585 ap worth of options for multis and still just the 195 for pures, assuming no level gating. The 80 AP is your most limiting factor, but the 3 trees creates a stable starting point for balance rather than a variable one with different potential for pure or multi.

2) Create a character design decision in which PrE's/enhancements/class features all come into play far more heavily than they currently do. Because multi gains often outweigh their losses I see this as an attempt to create more difficult decisions on whether a multiclass is what you want or not. It is possible that it is done wrong, and possible that it is done right.

The system isn't inherently biased towards anyone though as everyone has choices on where to place their AP, nobody can get everything for their character. Multiclass characters have more overall choices but make a build decision on giving up groups of choices so that they don't get more dps/survivability/utility all in one, perhaps they lose out on one or two aspects of a character. That is the real sacrifice.

Now if they made it so level 12-20 actually meant something to a lot of melee classes they could probably do away with the tree limit but so long as the strongest features for most classes are early on there needs to be a different balancing point.

Failedlegend

04-02-2012, 03:53 PM

1) 3 trees gives pures/multi's/splashes access to essentially the same number of enhancements. Everyone has 80 AP and say (im pulling the number out of a hat here but its just an example) 195 options between the 3 trees. In unlimited trees you would have as much 585 ap worth of options for multis and still just the 195 for pures, assuming no level gating. The 80 AP is your most limiting factor, but the 3 trees creates a stable starting point for balance rather than a variable one with different potential for pure or multi.

Thats wrong.

With the new system Single-Classes gain access to all three of their PrEs instead of just one while Dual/Triple class are cut off from Half to 2/3rds of the enhancements they would have access to now.

This proposed system is Single-Classes gains, Dual/Triple class loses and right now it's relatively balanced with most Single-Classes tipping the scales slightly in their favor the new system would cause multiclassing to plummet.

Again I say this is why we need an update were still arguing over things that were announced 300ish pages ago..we NEED an update

Qzipoun

04-02-2012, 03:56 PM

Madfloyd,

I am very sad today due to broken items in the patch.

Can you share some of your happy enhancement trees with me please?

Thank you,
AllDDOPlayers

PS: It's Monday, so no excuses like last time...

orakio

04-02-2012, 04:20 PM

Thats wrong.

With the new system Single-Classes gain access to all three of their PrEs instead of just one while Dual/Triple class are cut off from Half to 2/3rds of the enhancements they would have access to now.

This proposed system is Single-Classes gains, Dual/Triple class loses and right now it's relatively balanced with most Single-Classes tipping the scales slightly in their favor the new system would cause multiclassing to plummet.

Again I say this is why we need an update were still arguing over things that were announced 300ish pages ago..we NEED an update

Really... its wrong that both multiclasses and pures have access to the same number of enhancements if you consider no level gate on enhancements and a same number of enhancements per tree? 3 trees, 65 ap per tree = 195 enhancements. Pures get 195 options, multi's get 195 options, splashes get 195 options. Everyone gets 195 options. This isn't about what you get now versus what you get in the new system. This is about everyone getting an equal opportunity in the new system.... and you do.

Now you can argue that the multi classes and splashes may lose out on PrE ranks, but if you consider the typical gains of a multiclass/splash is it entirely wrong to think that may be one of the balancing features the dev's are putting into place? Rather than adding high end class features like damage reduction for all the melee classes they are instead making character decisions a choice of PrE's versus features/flexiblity that evasion/bonus feats/umd tend to include. Could this not be fair... perhaps, but it would all be dependant on what the PrE's themselves give. That isn't saying pure's somehow get more options than you would as a multiclass, it just means people will once again have to pick through build ideas to find something that takes best advantage of everything that a multiclass can bring and IF that is found to not be enough incentive THEN developers can look at changing some of those restrictions. I think you underestimate though how poorly most melee classes pre's work together... few pure melee classes have multiple pre's whose benefits work completely together.

kingfisher

04-02-2012, 04:36 PM

I don't think it shows most classes are better pure at all. The discussion is around multiclassing with melee, casters already have proper incentives for staying pure but you still see large numbers of splash builds.

Better Pure: Monk, (rogues?), maybe bards except warchanter
Equal pure vs. multi: Fighter, (rogue? not a rogue expert), arti (if you want to trap or melee you want the evasion)
Better multi: Paladin, ranger, barbarian, any ranged combat build, any tank build, warchanter bards, anything that wants UMD, even melee clerics are significantly better as multi's than pure.

What you clearly want is a system with no tree limitations because it best benefits your all multiclass builds. I imagine the intent of the 3 tree system to be two purposes.

1) 3 trees gives pures/multi's/splashes access to essentially the same number of enhancements. Everyone has 80 AP and say (im pulling the number out of a hat here but its just an example) 195 options between the 3 trees. In unlimited trees you would have as much 585 ap worth of options for multis and still just the 195 for pures, assuming no level gating. The 80 AP is your most limiting factor, but the 3 trees creates a stable starting point for balance rather than a variable one with different potential for pure or multi.

2) Create a character design decision in which PrE's/enhancements/class features all come into play far more heavily than they currently do. Because multi gains often outweigh their losses I see this as an attempt to create more difficult decisions on whether a multiclass is what you want or not. It is possible that it is done wrong, and possible that it is done right.

The system isn't inherently biased towards anyone though as everyone has choices on where to place their AP, nobody can get everything for their character. Multiclass characters have more overall choices but make a build decision on giving up groups of choices so that they don't get more dps/survivability/utility all in one, perhaps they lose out on one or two aspects of a character. That is the real sacrifice.

Now if they made it so level 12-20 actually meant something to a lot of melee classes they could probably do away with the tree limit but so long as the strongest features for most classes are early on there needs to be a different balancing point.

the discussion is about all classes, of which pure's already have the lions share. is it fair to just argue over the few classes/types that are better as multi's now? no its not.

its funny that most fo the stuff you listed the builds being better as multi's are for the utility, not to make them better at their main purpose. ie throw out umd and traps, those are sub goals and i doubt that a pure arti is weaker than a rogue splash arti at being an ARTI. better at traps, yes, better at xbow/buff/runearm, no. same with warchanter. same with rogue. same with barbs, they are only made better by mc'ing by the utility or survivability they gain. they are no better at being a barb. same with this is not comparing apples to apples. a lot of this utility comes from enh, which will be severely impaired if the tree limit sticks.

tank and archer builds are different, leave them out. these are not a 'class' but a build goal.

that leaves pally's and rangers. thats not a whole lot in the mc is better camp and imo speaks to the weakness of those classes as opposed to the need for 'pures' to have a boost. overcompensate much? fix the classes, dont destroy the whole system.

1) there you, exactly the point. the amount of AP already limits both pure and multi, if you add further restriction to multi only it nerfs them. thanks.
2) hogwash, its wrong already.

the sacrifice has already been made, no need for further penalty. whats next, xp penalty for mc'ing? if they want to add class benefits at higher levels so be it, and let the change happen as it will, but what is the point of an arbitrary tree limit?

say what you will about what i want, the tree limit will hurt many peoples toons, not just mine. the point is it will hurt the game, such as it has been for years, with abostlutely no need to do so.

Chai

04-02-2012, 04:44 PM

Really... its wrong that both multiclasses and pures have access to the same number of enhancements if you consider no level gate on enhancements and a same number of enhancements per tree? 3 trees, 65 ap per tree = 195 enhancements. Pures get 195 options, multi's get 195 options, splashes get 195 options. Everyone gets 195 options. This isn't about what you get now versus what you get in the new system. This is about everyone getting an equal opportunity in the new system.... and you do.

It doesnt matter if one (multis or pure) gets 300 options and the other gets 7000 options, if they give us 80 points to spend, we really only get 80 options. The necessary limitation(s) are already in place.

Now you can argue that the multi classes and splashes may lose out on PrE ranks, but if you consider the typical gains of a multiclass/splash is it entirely wrong to think that may be one of the balancing features the dev's are putting into place? Rather than adding high end class features like damage reduction for all the melee classes they are instead making character decisions a choice of PrE's versus features/flexiblity that evasion/bonus feats/umd tend to include. Could this not be fair... perhaps, but it would all be dependant on what the PrE's themselves give. That isn't saying pure's somehow get more options than you would as a multiclass, it just means people will once again have to pick through build ideas to find something that takes best advantage of everything that a multiclass can bring and IF that is found to not be enough incentive THEN developers can look at changing some of those restrictions. I think you underestimate though how poorly most melee classes pre's work together... few pure melee classes have multiple pre's whose benefits work completely together.

Why is there this need to make a more convoluted system than what was already in place though? Here they have this grand opportunity to simplify character building so there doesnt need to be this encyclopedia brittanica sized rulebook full of things that need to be figured out, but many of the things advocated here are creating a more complicated system, which WILL be less newbie friendly if put out as such. Level gating makes alot more sense than a 3 tree system. Its more intuitive to be sure. Its easy to understand why a toon with a 2 rogue splash cant have any enhancement that requires 3+ levels of the class. Its easy to understand how trading vertical advancement creates lateral advancement opportunities.

LeslieWest_GuitarGod

04-02-2012, 05:02 PM

.... creating a more complicated system, which WILL be less newbie friendly...

When its all said and done, this system can be far simpler than it is now, with more ability and flexibility to build and play the type of toons we want.

I see nothing wrong with uniformity if it allows us to more precisely build the toons we want. I see a cleaner, easier to navigate system with more precision tools. I see an opportunity for MORE OPTIONS that make sense, then before.

Now if the system limits good build design, I will be against it, but I just don't see it happening as of yet...

LeslieWest_GuitarGod

04-02-2012, 05:09 PM

I couldn't let it pass.. Multi-classing is not the essence of DDO nor it is a must-to-do thing. Multi-classing is a risk to take for those who dare. ... I put my trust in Dev team once again because i know they are working hard to improve our gaming experience.

Exactly. I do believe however with intelligent build design and play, a multiclass toon should be able to keep up or outplay a pure... but as you say, it should be a risk... it should take a decent level of game knowledge and ingenuity. It should not be granted and guaranteed that multis will be better.

Chai

04-02-2012, 05:13 PM

When its all said and done, this system can be far simpler than it is now, with more ability and flexibility to build and play the type of toons we want.

I see nothing wrong with uniformity if it allows us to more precisely build the toons we want. I see a cleaner, easier to navigate system with more precision tools. I see an opportunity for MORE OPTIONS that make sense, then before.

Now if the system limits good build design, I will be against it, but I just don't see it happening as of yet...

So what makes more sense to someone starting to play the game:

1. I can take enhancements up to the same level I have classes in a specific class (level gating)

2. I can take all class based enhancements (not PRE) with a 1 to 2 level splash but I only get selections in 3 trees.

To me, 1 makes more sense and is more intuitive. Even a fresh off the boat newbie first timer can see how they can have haste boost 1 but not 2-4 for instance, because they only have 2 levels of rogue.

Gating using trees does not seem as simple as gating due to levels. Level gating is both common to D&D, other MMOs, and other video games (like FPS etc) which is where this game draws its customer pool from. Tree gating on the other hand, is something that will only be inherant to this game if and when its released.

LeslieWest_GuitarGod

04-02-2012, 05:30 PM

So what makes more sense to someone starting to play the game:

1. I can take enhancements up to the same level I have classes in a specific class (level gating)

2. I can take all class based enhancements (not PRE) with a 1 to 2 level splash but I only get selections in 3 trees.

To me, 1 makes more sense and is more intuitive. Even a fresh off the boat newbie first timer can see how they can have haste boost 1 but not 2-4 for instance, because they only have 2 levels of rogue.

Gating using trees does not seem as simple as gating due to levels. Level gating is both common to D&D, other MMOs, and other video games (like FPS etc) which is where this game draws its customer pool from. Tree gating on the other hand, is something that will only be inherant to this game if and when its released.

I hear what you saying, but thats impossible to answer right now based on the information in your post, and the information we have at this point right now from Turbine. Without 2 complete systems, or at least nearly complete systems in front of you, making that call, at least to me is uniformed.

Clearly I want the opportunity for better build capabilities than we have now, in a cleaner UI.

I see the same potential balance issues that you do Chai, but that doesnt mean it will be that way come game time. Telling them "no" now, or "take it out" or "NERF/DOOM/ITSBROKENALREADY!!!!" as some like to shout, can be counterproductive to ever getting a better system than we have now. And i think right now the system as we have it now is a clusterfunk that is beyond polish, but in need of a total scrape, first rate primer coat, 2 layers of top quality paint. I like what I'm seeing so far... I see issues, but I dont see many remaining. The devs see far more of their project than we can, and I believe they know what they are doing about this.

Grant it Im happy they are getting feedback in this thread, as many on both sides make very good points. How they are going to make both sides of this debate happy is going to come down to ingenious UI/enhancement design (something Turbine is quite good at) and excellent in game descriptions (something Turbine has failed at miserably).

We'll see.

Chai

04-02-2012, 05:38 PM

I hear what you saying, but thats impossible to answer right now based on the information in your post, and the information we have at this point right now from Turbine. Without 2 complete systems, or at least nearly complete systems in front of you, making that call, at least to me is uniformed.

Clearly I want the opportunity for better build capabilities than we have now, in a cleaner UI.

We CAN make informed decisions based on the system and not the allocations, which is what they are asking for by providing us the system but not the allocations themselves.

I see the same potential balance issues that you do Chai, but that doesnt mean it will be that way come game time. Telling them "no" now, or "take it out" or "NERF/DOOM/ITSBROKENALREADY!!!!" as some like to shout, can be counterproductive to ever getting a better system than we have now. And i think right now the system as we have it now is a clusterfunk that is beyond polish, but in need of a total scrape, first rate primer coat, 2 layers of top quality paint. I like what I'm seeing so far... I see issues, but I dont see many remaining. The devs see far more of their project than we can, and I believe they know what they are doing about this.

I feel like proving that feedback now rather than when its on lamannia and its practically set in stone is the better option. Case in point: The Madstone Boots debacle of 2012 - enough "negative feedback" was provided to deter tham from going ahead with the changes. Had we all taken the "lets wait and see" approach, wed all be wearing nerfed madstone boots right now.

Grant it Im happy they are getting feedback in this thread, as many on both sides make very good points. How they are going to make both sides of this debate happy is going to come down to ingenious UI/enhancement design (something Turbine is quite good at) and excellent in game descriptions (something Turbine has failed at miserably).

We'll see.

Regardless of current viewpoints, the best way to make us happy is to make it so that our toons that work right now still work after the change, or in the very least, not make us pay to TR/LR into something that does work because their complete overhaul of the system make current toons not work.

LrdSlvrhnd

04-02-2012, 05:49 PM

It honestly depends on how they arrange the enhancements.

Take the WF Wiz 14/Rog 6 who likes to sneak into a group, cast Mass Hold, and then go to town with a repeating crossbow*. Currently, he can take AM and Mechanic, and take rogue enhancements to boost his sneak speed, damage, attack, and stealth in general.

If, with the new method, Damage/Attack is Assassin only (because hey, how many mechanics really get close enough to worry about that very often? If it can be only only ONE tree, then Assassin makes the most sense) then he has to take enough Mechanic enhancements to get the free Light Repeating Crossbow (and, incidentally, give himself a non-SP way to repair himself several times a rest and the INT bonus to damage), and choose between dipping into the Assassin tree for the extra sneak damage/attack or having two Wizard trees.

If, on the other hand, there's basic stuff that's in EVERY tree, this is less of a worry.

If the bardbarian Ravager/Warchanter is forced to choose between a second Barb tree, or dipping into Virt for longer/extra songs... this could be a problem. If, however, longer/extra songs are in *every* bard tree, that's not a problem.

But until we know exactly how things work (and forgive me if it's already been said, but I didn't want to go through over 4,000 posts looking for Dev/Mod posts amidst all the arguing...) we really can't say for certain if the new method will hurt multi-classing.

*Note that I have absolutely no idea if this is even remotely viable, as I don't play wizards. Probably not in the average group, but possibly solo...

Ganolyn

04-02-2012, 05:53 PM

Take the WF Wiz 14/Rog 6 who likes to sneak into a group, cast Mass Hold, and then go to town with a repeating crossbow*.

*Note that I have absolutely no idea if this is even remotely viable, as I don't play wizards. Probably not in the average group, but possibly solo...

I would think that without a buttload of Divine Power clickies this build wouldn't be able to hit the broad side of a barn with a crossbow, but I could be wrong.

LeslieWest_GuitarGod

04-02-2012, 06:06 PM

Regardless of current viewpoints, the best way to make us happy is to make it so that our toons that work right now still work after the change, or in the very least, not make us pay to TR/LR into something that does work because their complete overhaul of the system make current toons not work.

You are wise enough Chai to know that ALL toons will not "work" after this change, because many of those builders found ways to take advantage of the options presented at the time.

However if we take time to really think about what our toons main concepts are, the great majority of your toons should be able to transfer just fine. And that's what I've been recommending to most people I've spoken to about this. For those with alt-itis, thats a daunting task, no doubt. Plan early by writing down all the finer points of each of your builds will provide an excellent start for many.

Now if Turbine expects us to PAY to do any of this, which of course is possible, then hell would and should brake lose. They need to provide us a system to easily transfer our toons to the new system, and would like to hear from Turbine something concrete on this. If they are thinking of a get rich quick scheme for this process things will go very badly regardless how good this system is.

orakio

04-02-2012, 06:06 PM

It doesnt matter if one (multis or pure) gets 300 options and the other gets 7000 options, if they give us 80 points to spend, we really only get 80 options. The necessary limitation(s) are already in place. It only matters in the degree that it lets you focus in 1 direction or another. the more options you have the more potential you have to find a clever combination of enhancements that stacks exceptionally well together. Overall I think its a small impact because of the number of enhancements you are looking at but when you are talking about character optimization the more choices you have the better ability you have to create a powerful character. Really though you are right, the primary feature is 80 ap which everyone has regardless of class split and the tree system does not change that.

Why is there this need to make a more convoluted system than what was already in place though? Here they have this grand opportunity to simplify character building so there doesnt need to be this encyclopedia brittanica sized rulebook full of things that need to be figured out, but many of the things advocated here are creating a more complicated system, which WILL be less newbie friendly if put out as such. Level gating makes alot more sense than a 3 tree system. Its more intuitive to be sure. Its easy to understand why a toon with a 2 rogue splash cant have any enhancement that requires 3+ levels of the class. Its easy to understand how trading vertical advancement creates lateral advancement opportunities.

I don't personally think that they NEED to change the system to a tree system. If they do go with a tree system I think that 3 trees gives a stable balancing point, although it could potentially effect multiclasses more than pure's depending on how it is implemented. I personally wanted to see two things out of the enhancement revision, and a tree has nothing to do with it really.

1) Completion of PrE's
2) Rebalance of enhancement costs so that all tiers are equivalent gains for the same AP investment. IE haste boost 1-4 should all give the same attack speed modifier(say 7.5% per rank) and have an ap cost of 1.

Those two things would be enough to compensate for most of the things that make multiclassing so strong and would reduce the gap between pures and multi's without extra restrictions or direct negative impacts on multi's that everyone seems so concerned about. Everything else is just UI changes that I would be fine with or without, although I do like the PrE unlock for free based on AP investment, but it really isn't necessary.

Chai

04-02-2012, 06:11 PM

I would think that without a buttload of Divine Power clickies this build wouldn't be able to hit the broad side of a barn with a crossbow, but I could be wrong.

Insightful strike scrolls + int to damage on crossbows for being mechanic.

Id be more worried about the holds landing. :p

Mass hold at that level would be mass hold person (mass hold monster would be out of reach for a 14 wiz). Alot of the quests that involve mobs in the "person" category in those levels, the mobs are drow, heh. Good luck landing mass hold person on drow with a 14 level based spell pen. A nat 20 roll likely wouldnt suffice.

LeslieWest_GuitarGod

04-02-2012, 06:43 PM

I will not say it WILL suck when the change finally comes nor will I say multi-classing will be completely obliterated but if it remains as the devs originally proposed than it will greatly diminish the reasons to multi-class and only a few build will still function.

No way to know that for sure Failed, because they never divulged what was "in the boxes" nor gave us any access rules that were set in stone. Honestly I think they should have waited until they were willing to lay out a complete model, albiet in its 1st draft state. (how useful its been for anyone to give us 1% and expect useful feedback is anyone's guess)

Will the original, or current model greatly diminish the reasons to multi-class? I expect for some folks wanting a certified carbon copy of their original build, it probably will be an issue. But I can say Im interested in fitting all my builds (and I have more multi class builds than I do pure) into this new system and seeing what new options become available that will make him/her better.

That's where I'm at with it now Failed.

Chai

04-02-2012, 06:58 PM

No way to know that for sure Failed, because they never divulged what was "in the boxes" nor gave us any access rules that were set in stone. Honestly I think they should have waited until they were willing to lay out a complete model, albiet in its 1st draft state. (how useful its been for anyone to give us 1% and expect useful feedback is anyone's guess)

He can make that ascertation without knowing whats in the boxes. We arent talking about number of viable builds, but about number of options available now -vs- new system.

Will the original, or current model greatly diminish the reasons to multi-class? I expect for some folks wanting a certified carbon copy of their original build, it probably will be an issue. But I can say Im interested in fitting all my builds (and I have more multi class builds than I do pure) into this new system and seeing what new options become available that will make him/her better.

That's where I'm at with it now Failed.

Im ready for beta. Got my expansion ordered before the end of Smarch. That boat needs to pull up to the dock already.

Aashrym

04-02-2012, 07:19 PM

He can make that ascertation without knowing whats in the boxes. We arent talking about number of viable builds, but about number of options available now -vs- new system.

The number of options actually increases as the cost of the higher tier enhancements decreases. Being able to take 10 AP and spend it applying 5 tiers of 2 enhancements is more than being able to spend that same 10 AP going up to 4 tiers of 1 enhancement.

The number of options just went up in that case instead of down regardless of whether those 10 AP are spent in 1 tree or more than one tree. We are looking at the possibility of more options on our characters; these are simply different options in some cases and just because they are different options does not guarantee they are worse options.

The new system looks simpler to follow, more streamlined, is easier to add more to it according to the devs, completes missing PrE's we've been waiting years for, provides potential to balance out some discrepancies, provides more AP for each character to spend due to cost changes, and opens up different multiclass builds even as it might negatively impact others. With all of those benefits, "I might lose something I want even though I don't yet know what those options are I will be losing" doesn't seem like much of an argument against it yet.

At the least the dev's have stated they want to make sure multiclassing remains viable. The fact they are taking that into consideration is a good thing for those players who like to multiclass. Having had them state such it seems to make sense to me to see what they come up with to make it happen. ;)

Aashrym

04-02-2012, 07:25 PM

Thats wrong.

With the new system Single-Classes gain access to all three of their PrEs instead of just one while Dual/Triple class are cut off from Half to 2/3rds of the enhancements they would have access to now.

That is also wrong. I would need 123 AP to spend in three trees for full access to those PrE's and then I would have 0 AP spent in my race tree. Spending 80 gives everyone, pure or multi, less than 50% of the available options.

Everyone has limited access because we are looking at having 4 trees with about 160ish (estimated) points from which we can select 80. That is why removing the level restriction is an interesting idea. It does put the pure classes and multiclasses on equal footing for how high each can go in to the available trees while still providing more choices to multiclasses than pure classes on which trees to use.

HatsuharuZ

04-02-2012, 09:20 PM

That is also wrong. I would need 123 AP to spend in three trees for full access to those PrE's and then I would have 0 AP spent in my race tree. Spending 80 gives everyone, pure or multi, less than 50% of the available options.

Everyone has limited access because we are looking at having 4 trees with about 160ish (estimated) points from which we can select 80. That is why removing the level restriction is an interesting idea. It does put the pure classes and multiclasses on equal footing for how high each can go in to the available trees while still providing more choices to multiclasses than pure classes on which trees to use.

Agreed, however I have some reservations:

1) should a toon that takes, say, one level of bard and 19 sorc be able to put points in all three bard PrE trees and be able to get the same benefits that a pure bard would get by taking those same trees?

2) should a monk who took the "fists of light" feat at lvl 3 be able to take the "Touch of Death" enhancement, which is currently impossible?

3) Currently, casters are best at what they do when they stay pure, or take as few levels in another class as possible. I can easily imagine a caster splashing a level of wizard in order to get higher DCs in one particular spell school by taking Archmage, and possibly some slas.

Yes, for the most part I agree that taking away level restrictions is a good idea, and I think that alot of the "ap spent" restrictions do not make sense and should be done away with. But there is also a huge potential if the amount of ap is the only restriction. There has to be some amount of opportunity cost for the balance between pures and mc's to be maintained.

LeslieWest_GuitarGod

04-02-2012, 10:58 PM

Im ready for beta. Got my expansion ordered before the end of Smarch. That boat needs to pull up to the dock already.

Oh hell yeah! Now that we are in complete agreement with.

Aashrym

04-03-2012, 12:33 AM

Agreed, however I have some reservations:

1) should a toon that takes, say, one level of bard and 19 sorc be able to put points in all three bard PrE trees and be able to get the same benefits that a pure bard would get by taking those same trees?

2) should a monk who took the "fists of light" feat at lvl 3 be able to take the "Touch of Death" enhancement, which is currently impossible?

3) Currently, casters are best at what they do when they stay pure, or take as few levels in another class as possible. I can easily imagine a caster splashing a level of wizard in order to get higher DCs in one particular spell school by taking Archmage, and possibly some slas.

Yes, for the most part I agree that taking away level restrictions is a good idea, and I think that alot of the "ap spent" restrictions do not make sense and should be done away with. But there is also a huge potential if the amount of ap is the only restriction. There has to be some amount of opportunity cost for the balance between pures and mc's to be maintained.

The 3 tree restriction is what maintains that opportunity cost. For example, that sorc 19 bard 1 who takes all 3 bard trees just lost all PrE's (which would still be dependent on class levels per the suggestion) and capstones. If he still had access to all 6 trees then he would have opened up higher access to all 3 bard trees and keep his sorc PrE's. That would be poorly balanced IMO.

Mjesko

04-03-2012, 02:27 AM

Everyone has limited access because we are looking at having 4 trees with about 160ish (estimated) points from which we can select 80. That is why removing the level restriction is an interesting idea. It does put the pure classes and multiclasses on equal footing for how high each can go in to the available trees while still providing more choices to multiclasses than pure classes on which trees to use.

Yep, that is exactly the reason why i think that level requirements should be removed and replaced by points spend in the tree.

Agreed, however I have some reservations:

1) should a toon that takes, say, one level of bard and 19 sorc be able to put points in all three bard PrE trees and be able to get the same benefits that a pure bard would get by taking those same trees?

2) should a monk who took the "fists of light" feat at lvl 3 be able to take the "Touch of Death" enhancement, which is currently impossible?

3) Currently, casters are best at what they do when they stay pure, or take as few levels in another class as possible. I can easily imagine a caster splashing a level of wizard in order to get higher DCs in one particular spell school by taking Archmage, and possibly some slas.

1) Yes, because the character has only 1 bard song per rest and looses 1 point of spell pen to get the OPTION TO EXCHANGE the sorcerer PrEs for the bard PrEs.

2) Yep, because of the same reason.

3) That should be possible, because in D&D it is much easier to splash a caster, because there is no capstone and there is the Practiced Spellcaster feat.

Jay203

04-03-2012, 04:21 AM

the 3 PrE tree limit really does sound like it's going to be way too limiting for the multiclassed characters
considering i doubt they're thinking about taking away the class requirement for higher lvl PrE access
can you imagine if a character can access tier 3 PrE with just 1 lvl of the class?

then again, we really need more information to see how it's going to be like
will also help with us planning for the HUGE change that's going to hit all of our characters

EnjoyTheJourney

04-03-2012, 06:46 AM

To help the viability of more popular multiclass combinations that might draw in newer and casual players, new paths could be put together. Multi-class paths could include fighter / mage, fighter / cleric, and mage / rogue, for example, and they could be supported by clearly articulated suggestions for enhancement "paths", as well. Give these multi-class paths their own "capstones", as a way of making them more appealing.

EnjoyTheJourney

04-03-2012, 07:14 AM

Those in charge of marketing seem well aware of what draws in newer players and keeps more casual players around, which is F2P, the D&D franchise, fantasy themes, character class and racial types that players think would be fun to play, and the promise of kicking some butt and scoring some loot, while looking cool doing it. None of the primary appeals of the game to the less-than-hardcore are overly deep or serious and they have little connection to some of the key arguments some are repeatedly advancing in this thread.

On that note, there's an element of truth and an element of fiction behind the claims that "DDO is about choice", and "multiclass is what distinguishes DDO from other games." Having some multi-class choices available is a great boon to the game, as there are multi-class archetypes throughout fantasy fiction and movies and plenty of players would enjoy the opportunity to play such a character. That part is true, and the option to have viable multiclass characters is very appealing to newer and casual players, many of whom have probably always wanted to play such a character.

However, it doesn't necessarily flow from that observation that a plethora of choice is good for attracting and keeping newer and casual players. Having a plethora of choice matters primarily, if not only, to the microscopic fraction of players who are so experienced that all the complexity of the game has been resolved into a kind of simplicity, because they know what works best in a multitude of situations. Players for whom the game has become simple, because they know it so well, often have huge post counts on the forums and are persistently and very vocal, particularly in threads like this.

In contrast, when players are relatively new, there's a superficial simplicity to their choices and handing them more choices in the future, while they're at best dimly aware of what choices are available in the game, is going to fall flat. Likewise, casual players and even many modestly-to-moderately experienced players are fairly regularly bewildered by what's happening in the game (ie: How did that caster kill my character so fast? Why does my fighter never seem to save against that spell that makes him dance? How come I run out of spell points half way through most missions?). Handing even more choices to somebody who is already fairly regularly bewildered isn't going to help them be less bewildered. If anything, that will have the opposite effect.

On that note, perhaps this thread has run its course. If the devs haven't gotten enough feedback in the thousands of posts already made, then they will never have enough.

Finally, I'm a big fan of three trees and/or whatever else makes the enhancement trees simple to navigate. Make things simple, make them work reliably, avoid missteps that require later nerfs, avoid obviously under-powered enhancements that can substantially undermine the viability of characters, if taken, and move on to other issues.

Chai

04-03-2012, 07:58 AM

Failedlegend

04-03-2012, 08:29 AM

This may or may not be what attracted many of us to play this game, but it certaily plays a HUGE part in keeping us here long term.

I was attracted by the DnD name...the reason I stay is because of Multi-classing and the active combat system. I've strayed a few times but I always come back because of those two things.

EnjoyTheJourney

04-03-2012, 08:37 AM

They use other tools to attract new players. Multiclassing is part of what keeps them here. When you look at any review of a video game or MMO worth its salt, one of the categories will be "replay value". What keeps this game fresh? Why do people STAY here after being attracted here. Playing different class combinations is a big part of that. When all of the content is the same, whats different each time around? Your character, which is the biggest factor that alters your play experience that you have control of.

Having more choices available is huge in this. Even 6 year vets can be playing brand new toons with the druid class, and new PRE like accolyte of the skin and purple dragon knight. Even the powergamer who has played through all raids repeatedly will have something new to look forward to, not just in content, which they can have handedly beaten in a few short weeks, but in classes and new class combinations.

This may or may not be what attracted many of us to play this game, but it certaily plays a HUGE part in keeping us here long term.
If I had to choose between more races and a complicated enhancement system, then I'd choose more races. There are perhaps a handful of prestige enhancements not already in the game that would be highly appreciated, if introduced. But, most that haven't already been added are likely to be meaningful primarily to a small minority of players. And, a complicated enhancement system (flexibility without complication is an oxymoron, in most cases) would be loved by a handful who are lobbying for it, and either not particularly meaningful or perhaps even a(nother) source of bewilderment to most everybody else.

The game already presents players with a very large number of choices, probably more than enough to keep all but the most hardcore players occupied for many, many years. It doesn't need even more choices as much as it needs better choices; too many feats and enhancements are best avoided for essentially every character, and yet they remain in the game anyways. The less-than-enjoyable experience of hitting a brick wall in the leveling process starts to matter more with the end-game being further built up, and the plethora of mechanically poor choices in all spheres of the game in which choices are made (ie: in everything) is a key reason why players hit brick walls.

Edit and PS: The above aside, it is true that there are some choices (not necessarily a large number, but some) that could be added to the game and that would be highly(!) welcomed by many current and potential players. I'm more than slightly happy about druids coming to the game, for example, and judging by the forum response there are plenty of others who feel the same way.

Yaga_Nub

04-03-2012, 09:42 AM

...

Yaga may or may not be what attracted many of us to play this game, but he certainly plays a HUGE part in keeping us here long term.

Thanks for those kind words Chai. I do what I can. :D

Chai

04-03-2012, 10:57 AM

If I had to choose between more races and a complicated enhancement system, then I'd choose more races. There are perhaps a handful of prestige enhancements not already in the game that would be highly appreciated, if introduced. But, most that haven't already been added are likely to be meaningful primarily to a small minority of players. And, a complicated enhancement system (flexibility without complication is an oxymoron, in most cases) would be loved by a handful who are lobbying for it, and either not particularly meaningful or perhaps even a(nother) source of bewilderment to most everybody else.

I disagree. What you are saying here is that a small handful of players will gravitate to accolyte of the skin and purple dragon knight and the rest of us are just going to be laa dee daa content with what we already have. Monk, FvS, and artificer releases already proved this wrong. I couldnt get into a PUG without an artificer for a few months after release.

When you play a game where most of the content doesnt change, part of what keeps the play experience fresh is the fact that classes play completely differently than eachother.

The game already presents players with a very large number of choices, probably more than enough to keep all but the most hardcore players occupied for many, many years. It doesn't need even more choices as much as it needs better choices; too many feats and enhancements are best avoided for essentially every character, and yet they remain in the game anyways. The less-than-enjoyable experience of hitting a brick wall in the leveling process starts to matter more with the end-game being further built up, and the plethora of mechanically poor choices in all spheres of the game in which choices are made (ie: in everything) is a key reason why players hit brick walls.

This again implies the perpetuation of the myth that the average player is some wet behind the ears noob who doesnt understand 80% of the game. This myth is highly inaccurate. Players dont hit brick walls, they hit a learning curve. Safe choices are presented in the form of pure classes, and when the player progresses and learns about the game more they can then incorporate more of the options they learned about into their builds.

Edit and PS: The above aside, it is true that there are some choices (not necessarily a large number, but some) that could be added to the game and that would be highly(!) welcomed by many current and potential players. I'm more than slightly happy about druids coming to the game, for example, and judging by the forum response there are plenty of others who feel the same way.

I expect the response to druid to be similar to artificer. It will be the perfect time to roll a tank. I will be surrounded by 5 group members with cure and heal spells at all times. :p

EnjoyTheJourney

04-03-2012, 11:44 AM

I disagree. What you are saying here is that a small handful of players will gravitate to accolyte of the skin and purple dragon knight and the rest of us are just going to be laa dee daa content with what we already have. Monk, FvS, and artificer releases already proved this wrong. I couldnt get into a PUG without an artificer for a few months after release.

When you play a game where most of the content doesnt change, part of what keeps the play experience fresh is the fact that classes play completely differently than eachother. You're comparing classes to prestige enhancements here. If you have examples of a new prestige enhancement being added to a class that already has at least one prestige enhancement, and then becoming wildly popular, then you would be making a stronger case.

Also, the post you're quoting does suggest that *some* new choices would likely be very well received. Your counter-argument doesn't put even a minor dent in the arguments you're addressing; if anything, providing only two examples of prestige enhancements that players are likely to be enthusiastic about supports the conclusion you're apparently aiming to undermine.

This again implies the perpetuation of the myth that the average player is some wet behind the ears noob who doesnt understand 80% of the game. This myth is highly inaccurate. Players dont hit brick walls, they hit a learning curve. Safe choices are presented in the form of pure classes, and when the player progresses and learns about the game more they can then incorporate more of the options they learned about into their builds. I take it you mean not to argue that a plethora of mechanically lousy choices is good for the game, but rather that "quantity of choices available" should be the dominant consideration over "quality of choices available." If it's the latter that you mean, then why not just say that, instead of bringing up a "straw man" argument about "... wet behind the ears noobs who don't understand 80% of the game."?

The average player is likely to have a fair measure of difficulty with, and confusion about, what is a highly complicated game, while also being sufficiently knowledgeable to handle many challenges and to (most of the time, and without piking) make progress in the game. You would like to emphasize what the theoretical "average player" knows, and it seems you'd like to dismiss what they don't know as unimportant to this conversation. I would rather emphasize that there's already plenty the average player doesn't know, even with the game as it is, and that adding an even greater number of choices can only make the number of unknowns larger. Some additions can add quite a bit to the fun of the game, enough to justify the added complexity. But, a very large number of possible additions would enrich the game for few, meaning little to nothing to many, and provide more reasons to be confused for some to many.

Finally, players do hit brick walls in the leveling process, which then tends to lead to moving up the learning curve; you present them as mutually exclusive alternatives, but that is not always the case.

Chai

04-03-2012, 12:28 PM

You're comparing classes to prestige enhancements here. If you have examples of a new prestige enhancement being added to a class that already has at least one prestige enhancement, and then becoming wildly popular, then you would be making a stronger case.

Arcane archer. Especially after the tempest nerf.
PM after AM.

Also, the post you're quoting does suggest that *some* new choices would likely be very well received. Your counter-argument doesn't put even a minor dent in the arguments you're addressing; if anything, providing only two examples of prestige enhancements that players are likely to be enthusiastic about supports the conclusion you're apparently aiming to undermine.

People gravitate to the new. We have seen it throughout the history of this game. Claiming that the populace will largely ignore most of the features save for a select few who understands the game is hilarious.

I take it you mean not to argue that a plethora of mechanically lousy choices is good for the game, but rather that "quantity of choices available" should be the dominant consideration over "quality of choices available." If it's the latter that you mean, then why not just say that, instead of bringing up a "straw man" argument about "... wet behind the ears noobs who don't understand 80% of the game."?

The only thing we can discuss now is quantity of choices available. As many people have pointed out, since we dont know what those choices will be we cant really have that discussion yet. In having a quantity based discussion, you a re assuming the quality of many choices will be poor in order to make your point. Unless you have a delorian parked in the lot with flaming tire tracks behind it, its really not a valid assumption.

The average player is likely to have a fair measure of difficulty with, and confusion about, what is a highly complicated game, while also being sufficiently knowledgeable to handle many challenges and to make progress in the game.

When they start playing, yes, but after 6 months or so, no. I know quite a few people on multiple servers who have absolutely no D&D background whatsoever. While they may learn a new thing or two about the game still, they were playing in the toughest content in this game fairly quickly.

You would like to emphasize what the theoretical "average player" knows, and it seems you'd like to dismiss what they don't know as unimportant to this conversation.

That is incorrect. I am emphasizing that the perpetuated myth that the average player knows diddly squat about this game is just that, a myth. The difference between casual gamers and power gamers in DDO is time, not knowledge.

I would rather emphasize that there's already plenty the average player doesn't know, even with the game as it is, and that adding an even greater number of choices can only make the number of unknowns larger. Some additions can add quite a bit to the fun of the game, enough to justify the added complexity. But, a very large number of possible additions would enrich the game for few, meaning little to nothing to many, and provide more reasons to be confused for some to many.

Thus perpetuating the false myth about lack of knowledge even further.

Finally, players do hit brick walls in the leveling process, which then tends to lead to moving up the learning curve; you present them as alternatives, but that is not always the case.

Brick wall implies that it cannot be circumvented. What they are actually hitting is the learning curve. Failing quests is not a brick wall - people adjust tactics and go back in and win. Building a questionable character and playing it to cap is not a brick wall. The TR/LR process allows people to rebuild it and learn from past mistakes made.

EnjoyTheJourney

04-03-2012, 02:51 PM

Arcane archer. Especially after the tempest nerf.
PM after AM.

...

People gravitate to the new. We have seen it throughout the history of this game. Claiming that the populace will largely ignore most of the features save for a select few who understands the game is hilarious. Both of your examples (you have two, again, incidentally) given earlier reflect, at least in part, adjustments by players to reflect changes in the power curve; novelty and the pent up desire to play a certain kind of character that was previously not available were undoubtedly also relevant, but not the sole considerations. If the new PREs had been a significant step down in power, compared to previously available alternatives, they probably would have been much less popular.

On a related point, a key question is how much those issues would apply to any new PREs, with many of the most obvious and most anticipated PREs already out, or already previously announced and in the queue for future release. There's also the question of whether we need anything other than a simple enhancement UI and system to accommodate new PREs, as the flexibility of the new system has been debated at great length in this thread, and it seems that the answer to that question is likely to be "no, we don't."

The only thing we can discuss now is quantity of choices available. As many people have pointed out, since we dont know what those choices will be we cant really have that discussion yet. In having a quantity based discussion, you a re assuming the quality of many choices will be poor in order to make your point. Unless you have a delorian parked in the lot with flaming tire tracks behind it, its really not a valid assumption. I don't have a delorean, much less one in flames, parked in the lot. I do have Skill focus: Swim, Rogue enhancement: Wand heightening, and Ranger: Vermin empathy sitting in my garage, though. Note that it took about 1 minute on the wiki to find these examples, and many more could easily have been found.

Do these serve a useful purpose? If so, then let's keep them in the game, as they are. If not, then why not fix these "trip up the new player" choices by either making them better or deleting them? Why aren't these kinds of issues being discussed at greater length, in this kind of thread?

When they start playing, yes, but after 6 months or so, no. I know quite a few people on multiple servers who have absolutely no D&D background whatsoever. While they may learn a new thing or two about the game still, they were playing in the toughest content in this game fairly quickly. And there are posts in multiple threads from longtime players who confess to being unable to complete missions on any difficulty, at some point in the leveling curve. Confessing publicly to an inability to do something is a fairly rare thing, as there's a good chance somebody will come along and be snide, in response.

Also, your presence as a knowledgeable player in the midst of all this knowing spoils your sample; you share what you know regularly on the forums and it is a virtual certainty that you also share what you know while in the game. Also, your experienced and knowledgeable in-game friends will bring along their own mentees, plus there are quite a few players who begin getting mentored shortly after they begin. Whether your example fits as a good description for the "average" player is debatable, at best, when the silent majority are not offering their opinion. And, they never will.

A few generalizations seem quite safe, though. The theoretical "average player" has never made a forum post and has probably read next to nothing about the game, other than what comes up on loading screens and whatever advice was typed into chat, for their benefit. The amount and quality of mentoring they've received is likely to have been uneven, and in many cases will have been mostly limited to occasional comments from teammates delivered in-game (with an uneven level of accuracy, patience, and courtesy on the part of the one delivering advice). They'll have partial retention of whatever they've learned and (most likely) a poor to (at best) moderate ability to transfer knowledge gained to new situations. There will be some things they know very well, some things they know adequately well, some to many things they know that they don't know, and some to many things they think they know but about which they're wrong, and wrong in a way that matters.

...

That is incorrect. I am emphasizing that the perpetuated myth that the average player knows diddly squat about this game is just that, a myth. The difference between casual gamers and power gamers in DDO is time, not knowledge.

...

Thus perpetuating the false myth about lack of knowledge even further.

...

Brick wall implies that it cannot be circumvented. What they are actually hitting is the learning curve. Failing quests is not a brick wall - people adjust tactics and go back in and win. Building a questionable character and playing it to cap is not a brick wall. The TR/LR process allows people to rebuild it and learn from past mistakes made.
The "tl/dr" on your arguments clipped out from above is that you wanted to chip away at the argument that mechanically lousy choices are problematic, and should be a priority; to make that argument you opted for a virtually literal translation of the phrase "brick walls." In the narrow and literal sense, you'd be right to suggest that there are no leveling "brick walls" in the game. In the bigger picture, even if all that happens is that opting for some of the currently available, mechanically lousy in-game choices leads to players losing a substantial amount of their leveling speed, that can easily be enough to lead to parking a character and moving on to something else.

Again, there are multiple newer and casual players who indicated (in the "Let's Talk: Difficulty" thread, as one example) that they are not just discouraged, but flat out not able to get the characters they've been playing to level 20. Given the relative rarity of people publicly self-identifying as "not able" in a wide variety of situations, and the even rarer occurrence of somebody doing something like that on an internet forum populated mainly by hardcore gamers, it would seem implausible to believe there are a mere handful of players in that situation.

The availability of many mechanically weak (feats and) enhancements is undoubtedly not the only driver of players getting stuck in the leveling process. I don't see how it could possibly help, though.

Here's the "tl/dr" on the main arguments in the post that you chopped up earlier:

1. There are already lots and lots of available choices and many of them are mechanically bad choices that are likely to slow or stop character progression in the game, when selected. Ergo, improving the quality of available choices is a more pressing issue than further increasing the quantity of available choices.
2. The number of new prestige enhancements that will excite players, if introduced, is likely to be small, at this point in time.^
3. A complex enhancement system would be valued by few, have little to no value to many, and be an additional source of confusion for some to many.

^ I acknowledge that if new PREs are introduced as the new "max" in the min/max continuum, then they'll be popular. That's about power, though, and not necessarily about "players gravitating to what is new" in large numbers.

Finally, none of this debate about PREs makes for a strong argument in favor of making the future enhancement system more complex than its originally proposed form, in the OP.

Failedlegend

04-03-2012, 04:04 PM

1. There are already lots and lots of available choices and many of them are mechanically bad choices that are likely to slow or stop character progression in the game, when selected. Ergo, improving the quality of available choices is a more pressing issue than further increasing the quantity of available choices.

The tempest example is proof that they are planning to do just that along with the UI...beyond that your just assuming that more choice inevitablely = bad choices

2. The number of new prestige enhancements that will excite players, if introduced, is likely to be small, at this point in time.^

um...what???

It's human nature to gravitate towards the new and the history of the game proves that...ie. Logging on during the release day of Half-Orc, FvS, Monk, Arty, etc.

If this was incorrect we wouldn't constantly be striving to create bigger TVs, better cars, improved quality of life,etc. and we'd still be lving in caves beating our food with a rock tied to a stick

3. A complex enhancement system would be valued by few, have little to no value to many, and be an additional source of confusion for some to many.

Honestly I enjoy the fact that this game doesn't pander to the lowest common denominator (most of the time) and would rather those people didn't play this game and ifg the devs do dumb down the game for them and it kills or greatly diminishes multi-classing or the other multitude of choices we have

HatsuharuZ

04-03-2012, 05:22 PM

Yep, that is exactly the reason why i think that level requirements should be removed and replaced by points spend in the tree..

1) Yes, because the character has only 1 bard song per rest and looses 1 point of spell pen to get the OPTION TO EXCHANGE the sorcerer PrEs for the bard PrEs.

2) Yep, because of the same reason.

3) That should be possible, because in D&D it is much easier to splash a caster, because there is no capstone and there is the Practiced Spellcaster feat.

1) That makes sense, although most sorcerers I've run with didn't seem to need or care about spell pen, since they're all elemental savants. Hopefully that will change.

2) That does not make sense to me. There is no opportunity cost at all. Have you ever played a monk, or understand how they work?

3) This isn't PnP D&D, though, and there is no such feat. In the current min-maxing environment, there is very little room for arcane caster splashes unless you are a divine taking advantage of the spell amp and metamagic enhancements.

On a similar note, I think that casters may need an entirely different kind of tree, especially wizards/sorcerers. There are just too many enhancements that are used by most builds, like the empower, maximize, heighten, spell amp enhancements, etc. You might need a "trunk" of sorts with the enhancements that most builds are going to use, then "branches" above it for the PrEs and their associated enhancements, slas, summons, etc.

kingfisher

04-03-2012, 05:22 PM

Really though you are right, the primary feature is 80 ap which everyone has regardless of class split and the tree system does not change that..

why implement the 3 tree system then? the 80 AP is enough of a limitation already. not buying the stacking issue or them wanting to do away with level gating as reasons. and its definetly not going to be any less confusing for new players with the limit.

I don't personally think that they NEED to change the system to a tree system. If they do go with a tree system I think that 3 trees gives a stable balancing point, although it could potentially effect multiclasses more than pure's depending on how it is implemented. I personally wanted to see two things out of the enhancement revision, and a tree has nothing to do with it really.

1) Completion of PrE's
2) Rebalance of enhancement costs so that all tiers are equivalent gains for the same AP investment. IE haste boost 1-4 should all give the same attack speed modifier(say 7.5% per rank) and have an ap cost of 1.

could not agree more, except for the part about 3 trees being a stable balancing point. i think its an immediate hinderance and drag on what could be a very cool improvement to the game. also agree with chai about it possibly being more confusing than it would be without the tree limit.

kingfisher

04-03-2012, 05:55 PM

No way to know that for sure Failed, because they never divulged what was "in the boxes" nor gave us any access rules that were set in stone.

he absolutely can without knowing whats in the boxes because we know that they will not put all class enh in every pre tree therefore there will be many combos that work today that will not work afterwards. do you think they will give out 2 free +5 LR to each toon? i doubt that very much. the rules are NEVER set in stone, they change things all the time, which is why speaking up now is the right thing to do.

The number of options actually increases as the cost of the higher tier enhancements decreases. Being able to take 10 AP and spend it applying 5 tiers of 2 enhancements is more than being able to spend that same 10 AP going up to 4 tiers of 1 enhancement.

The number of options just went up in that case instead of down regardless of whether those 10 AP are spent in 1 tree or more than one tree. We are looking at the possibility of more options on our characters; these are simply different options in some cases and just because they are different options does not guarantee they are worse options.

The new system looks simpler to follow, more streamlined, is easier to add more to it according to the devs, completes missing PrE's we've been waiting years for, provides potential to balance out some discrepancies, provides more AP for each character to spend due to cost changes, and opens up different multiclass builds even as it might negatively impact others. With all of those benefits, "I might lose something I want even though I don't yet know what those options are I will be losing" doesn't seem like much of an argument against it yet.

At the least the dev's have stated they want to make sure multiclassing remains viable. The fact they are taking that into consideration is a good thing for those players who like to multiclass. Having had them state such it seems to make sense to me to see what they come up with to make it happen. ;)

the options go up within that tree, but not compared to the options that players have now with the full enh (limited by lvl ofc) of each class they take.

possible options yes, viable options, no. these are not the same thing. and it does not guarantee they are better or equal options either.

all of those benefits are unknown, and as others have said, it could easily be MORE confusing. the tree system and the ui change are not eternally linked, there is nothing to say they cant make those changes wthout taking anything away that players have access to today.

yeah they have said that, but they also have said a lot of things over the years, like the twf change would fix lag and would not impact twf damage. in the end there is no choice but to wait and see, but turbine's track record with nerfs and changes like this is less than stellar.

EnjoyTheJourney

04-03-2012, 09:35 PM

...

It's human nature to gravitate towards the new and the history of the game proves that...ie. Logging on during the release day of Half-Orc, FvS, Monk, Arty, etc.

...
On reflection, I think I've been projecting my own negative thoughts about PREs onto others, and anticipating the same lack of enthusiasm about having more of them that I have; out of all of them, I only like a handful. I suppose that's likely to be very much a minority view, though, and a more intuitive UI will probably help everybody to like them better (or at least to generally dislike them less); there probably are many players who are genuinely looking forward to at least some of the PREs currently in the development queue -- and not just because they might offer a more powerful character.

Point taken.

Honestly I enjoy the fact that this game doesn't pander to the lowest common denominator (most of the time) and would rather those people didn't play this game and ifg the devs do dumb down the game for them and it kills or greatly diminishes multi-classing or the other multitude of choices we have
Is this momentary frustration or is this a clear a statement about where you stand, when it comes to striking a balance between the concerns of vets and of newer / casual players?

Failedlegend

04-03-2012, 09:47 PM

Is this momentary frustration or is this a clear a statement about where you stand, when it comes to striking a balance between the concerns of vets and of newer / casual players?

Well I would be considered a casual player...im not saying a vets vs. casuals thing...when I first starting playing the game..yes I was a bit unconfused but a few question in gen chat on on the forums and i learned enough to get by than ive learned more as playing...if a player doesn't care enough to do that I their not going to be playing long anyways

Aldured

04-03-2012, 10:02 PM

he absolutely can without knowing whats in the boxes because we know that they will not put all class enh in every pre tree therefore there will be many combos that work today that will not work afterwards.

Well so long as they back down on linking basic enhancements to a tree, like in the case of wizard

ice/fire-necro, force/repair-> archmage, acid/lightining->wildmage

Instead? Well just give 6 enhancements, 2 per tree of each and that should be enough (IO spread em around, dont be stingy :P). I dont think its a big deal really. If you want to be really really good then stay pure otherwise make "some" sacrifices rahter than gut one of the main traits of your class (like versatility for wizards)

As for the noob mythos...

ITS NOT A MIYTH.

When i started I had no mentor. The reason I got into ddo was I was looking for an rpg as good as a single player rpg that also allowed me to play with other people. That and that I had played other d&d games and liked their dark ambiance and storylines.

I hate the click and snooze approach or dry storylines that plague other mmos (go kill 10 somethings because I hate them, seriously?). So when I got into korthos I was a happy (tho lonesome) camper. And soon I brought in some buddies from other mmos into it, and this is what happened:

First of all, everyone thought they had to smash every single crate because there was a TON of money there.
Everyone chose a path, and still thought there were MANY choices...
They wouldnt use their action points, didnt the path do everything anyway? (the concept of PREs AC, etc was beyond grasp)
Korthos was big, the harbor huge and the marketplace hard to not get lost in it.
Compendium? Forums? I was the nerd that actually went to look for online help and the wiki.
If you talk to people in Korthos youll see most using either two handed or simply two weapons that they most likely arent profecient in it.
Found a heavy armor! My wiz will be indestructable (I did look at the icons, but thats me, most people arent as obsesive)

...

Long story short Ive seen said "myth" and still see it. Be it in my engineering students that just picked up the game, new arrivals to my guild, my own memmory, or some guildies little brother or sister.

Do I like trees? Not really no; theyd be nice if they were just a cosmetic UI improvement rahter than a character design restriction. Still the enhancement system did help drive away the people I started out with and I honestly want this game to be around which means Turbine has to keep its market even if some of its consesions dont appeal to me.

If anything, thats why I wanted to discuss the possibility of hybrid PREs; character race based PREs (IO non class related racials). And try and explore other avenues that might bring versatily while leaving a very streamlined/friendly beggining for newcomers.

One last thing, I certainly agree that many skills need to be revisited as many enhancements are based on them.

Chai

04-04-2012, 08:49 AM

As for the noob mythos...

ITS NOT A MIYTH.

When i started I had no mentor. The reason I got into ddo was I was looking for an rpg as good as a single player rpg that also allowed me to play with other people. That and that I had played other d&d games and liked their dark ambiance and storylines.

I hate the click and snooze approach or dry storylines that plague other mmos (go kill 10 somethings because I hate them, seriously?). So when I got into korthos I was a happy (tho lonesome) camper. And soon I brought in some buddies from other mmos into it, and this is what happened:

First of all, everyone thought they had to smash every single crate because there was a TON of money there.
Everyone chose a path, and still thought there were MANY choices...
They wouldnt use their action points, didnt the path do everything anyway? (the concept of PREs AC, etc was beyond grasp)
Korthos was big, the harbor huge and the marketplace hard to not get lost in it.
Compendium? Forums? I was the nerd that actually went to look for online help and the wiki.
If you talk to people in Korthos youll see most using either two handed or simply two weapons that they most likely arent profecient in it.
Found a heavy armor! My wiz will be indestructable (I did look at the icons, but thats me, most people arent as obsesive)

.

It actually is a myth.

First, the quantity is greatly exagerated. The myth perpetuated onthe forums is that 80+% of all players dont know what they are doing.

Second, people dont stay noobs. They come to the game, some of them knowing nothing about D&D whatsoever, but they learn, and next thing you know we are teaching them how to raid. New people join the game all the time which is why theres always a crop of people who dont know, but its not that they just will never get it, its that they havent gotten it YET.

Third. This whole myth is blown out of proportion even more when used to justify how easy the game needs to be in order to cover up the posters own lack of knowledge, or lack of desire to put in the effort to obtain the reward. Shroud normal should be autocomplete because most newbies cant handle it. Its not because I cant handle it, oh no, you see, I can practically solo it, but the newbies man, do it for the newbies. SOTO elite needs to be nerfed. Dont tell me to run it on hard, I can eeeeeaaaasily solo it, they need to nerf it for the newbies.

Fourth. Obvious scapegoat is obvious. Most newbies dont even care about these issues. They are too busy figuring out what stacks with what. They arent running most of the stuff that gets complained about. It supposedly (not really) negates the ability of anyone who disagrees to tell the poster to learn the game or run easier difficulties rather than complain.

Fifth. Yeah there will always be clueless people in every game. They are in the bottom 10% though, and not 80% of the players as many who perpetuate the myth that the average player sucks would havde you believe. This is a scapegoat and nothing more. The quantity is greatly exagerated by those who will not put in the time to even play with those people, then used as a scapegoat to justify their stance when complaining the game is too hard / complicated.

orakio

04-04-2012, 09:08 AM

why implement the 3 tree system then? the 80 AP is enough of a limitation already. not buying the stacking issue or them wanting to do away with level gating as reasons. and its definetly not going to be any less confusing for new players with the limit.Again, I am not 100% pro trees but the developers already explained their thoughts on why they wanted a tree system. Simply, visual UI's are much less cluttered and more intuitive for most people. It is what has made Apple products (iPhone, iPad, etc.) so popular recently, and has been a huge part of the success of a couple other mmo's and is therefore a concept that has been shown to work in the gaming industry as well.

Is it better? Thats all personal preference. But they have a real reason for thinking it is a good thing for the game. As for 3 trees specifically that can only be speculated on because developers have not given a solid reason for that number at the time. Simple possibilities, because it gives everyone the same number of trees, because there may be coding issues with allowing access to 5/6/7+ PrE's at once if you allow too many trees, because the concept of a new UI is to simplify things and 9 trees isn't simple. Really nobody knows the answer but the dev's.

could not agree more, except for the part about 3 trees being a stable balancing point. i think its an immediate hinderance and drag on what could be a very cool improvement to the game. also agree with chai about it possibly being more confusing than it would be without the tree limit.It is stable in that it creates the same situation for everyone. If there are only 3 trees then developers would only have to balance the way enhancements interact with all of the 3 tree combinations at a time. There are already massive possibilities in 3 tree combinations leading to a large effort by the developers. If you allow unlimited trees at once then developers have to balance around all possibilities for up to a 10 tree system(3x3class, 1 racial PrE). That balance though would only effect heavy multiclass builds, how would you balance 10 trees against a 3-4 tree limit of pures? Do you have any idea how many more possibilities that creates for crazy stacking enhancements and the difficultly of balancing two vastly different situations against eachother?

Lets say for example you can make a 12monk/2paladin/6fighter with barbarian ravager racial PrE(something not possible in live). I believe a dev already indicated that ravager may include something like barbarian critical rage. For this combination i could then get a +3-4(earthstance 3 for +1, 2+ from barb crit rage) crit multiplier on all attacks, and another +2 on my smites. A simple longsword(with imp crit slashing) would then become a 17-20x5, 15-20x7 weapon on smites. Now in a 3 tree system(no class level gating) you can limit that because I would have a hard time getting standard monk enhancements for earthstance 3, full racial ravager tree for the PrE, and still pick up the necessary paladin enhancements for exalted smite. I could do it, but would most likely miss out on things like fighter tactics and boosts, some of the monk abilities like touch of death and healing amp(only works with handwraps but with all those crit enhancements they too would be insane), and most of the sustain/utility that paladin (extra LoH, paladin devotion/self heals, aura's and PrE's)builds can bring. My dps would be amazing, but it would be on par with other dps that sacrifice everything for it, I am not getting all the utility of fighter/monk/paladin. In unlimited trees, if developers aren't careful, I could potentially have access to all of those things making and absolutely ridiculous character. Sure AP might be tight, but with cost revisions it may be doable still, especially if developers don't have tight class level requirements on enhancements in trees.

THAT is why there is a proposed limit, because otherwise the potential to make overpowered characters could either require them implementing a tree limit later (****ing everyone off) or force them to balance around these super characters making "normal" builds completely unviable. When conducting an experiment you always start with a simple base and then make changes from there based on feedback from the experiment. Hence: announce 3 tree system, test 3 tree system, if thats too restrictive then open it up but don't do so before extensive testing. That is why I have said wait to see the system in it's entirety before crying that it is broken or bad for the game.

Chai

04-04-2012, 12:26 PM

Honestly I enjoy the fact that this game doesn't pander to the lowest common denominator (most of the time) and would rather those people didn't play this game and ifg the devs do dumb down the game for them and it kills or greatly diminishes multi-classing or the other multitude of choices we have

This.

Plus its not mutually exclusive. The game can have its "safe choices" for beginners, which are just as viable as the super multiclassed well planned through metagaming knowledge build. Those are the pure classes. Its not a matter of EVERYTHING having to be more simple just because the game wants to attract more new players. With D&Desque character building we CAN actually have our cake and eat it too on this one.

Chai

04-04-2012, 12:35 PM

Lets say for example you can make a 12monk/2paladin/6fighter with barbarian ravager racial PrE(something not possible in live). I believe a dev already indicated that ravager may include something like barbarian critical rage. For this combination i could then get a +3-4(earthstance 3 for +1, 2+ from barb crit rage) crit multiplier on all attacks, and another +2 on my smites. A simple longsword(with imp crit slashing) would then become a 17-20x5, 15-20x7 weapon on smites. Now in a 3 tree system(no class level gating) you can limit that because I would have a hard time getting standard monk enhancements for earthstance 3, full racial ravager tree for the PrE, and still pick up the necessary paladin enhancements for exalted smite. I could do it, but would most likely miss out on things like fighter tactics and boosts, some of the monk abilities like touch of death and healing amp(only works with handwraps but with all those crit enhancements they too would be insane), and most of the sustain/utility that paladin (extra LoH, paladin devotion/self heals, aura's and PrE's)builds can bring. My dps would be amazing, but it would be on par with other dps that sacrifice everything for it, I am not getting all the utility of fighter/monk/paladin.

In unlimited trees, if developers aren't careful, I could potentially have access to all of those things making and absolutely ridiculous character. Sure AP might be tight, but with cost revisions it may be doable still, especially if developers don't have tight class level requirements on enhancements in trees.

Rediculous character? I doubt it. Youd still run into epics and watch the PMs do 90% of the work on your rediculous melee toon. The rediculous character you outline is what melee NEEDS in order to bring characters that swing weapons in line with casters in this game.

Here with this overhaul of the system they have this awesome chance to rebalance melee -vs- casters which is one of the main issues running epic quests in this game, without nerfs to casters etc. To screw that up and still have the same issues in the same proportions after the overhaul would be facepalm worthy.

Alrik_Fassbauer

04-04-2012, 12:58 PM

Second, people dont stay noobs. They come to the game, some of them knowing nothing about D&D whatsoever, but they learn,

But only within the given course, and that is DDO:

The learning courve is restricted to everything combat-related right ow.

Within that course, learning is possible, yes.

But Turbine doesn't offer any other "larning course". They don't offer other means of resolving a quest.

Combat in its myriad varitions remins to be the only wa here (exceptions prove the rule), and that's essentially a One Way road.

There would be more - and ifferent ! - learbning going on iif there were other methods to solve a quest. Charisma-based dialog trees, for example.

Or an xp bonus for NOT smashing creates !
(There already is an xp bonus for NOT killing anyone, but I don't think it is actually implemented in many quests.)

And, what you don't, or maybe even can't see anymore :

Limiting the course to combat-only quest resolutions actively limits the Newbiews.

Newbies are new to a game. They will follow ANYTHING they see which might give them a step towards the solution of a problem.

They don't expect games to have combat as the onlysolution as to solve a quest. That's a myth.

Unless they are already trained to blieve so. By the myriads of Action-RPGs out there, for example. In which nothing matters but combat. And no quests are solved any othr way than through combat.

Now imagine people would begin applying that to Real Life.

But we know that this isn't so. In Real Life we are not limited in our means to solve any problem. Yes, in Real Life combat is the method that is usually NOT preferred !

But action-oriented RPGs like DDO kind of funnel (and this artificially limit) their abilities into those which are combat-related. Fast mouse, fast keyboard, DPS, healing, nuking.

Dialog trees ? Nope.

orakio

04-04-2012, 01:22 PM

Rediculous character? I doubt it. Youd still run into epics and watch the PMs do 90% of the work on your rediculous melee toon. The rediculous character you outline is what melee NEEDS in order to bring characters that swing weapons in line with casters in this game.

Here with this overhaul of the system they have this awesome chance to rebalance melee -vs- casters which is one of the main issues running epic quests in this game, without nerfs to casters etc. To screw that up and still have the same issues in the same proportions after the overhaul would be facepalm worthy.

Only ridiculous because it can do so much more than any other melee. Didn't mean to bring the melee vs. caster conversation into this, but the reality is a situation like this could define what all other melee's are judged by, and no simple (i.e. not super tweaked melee) would ever be comparable. That is a problem as well, a character shouldn't have to be a multi-tr multiclass build to be considered viable(though not necessarily optimal) for endgame content.

I agree, casters ,especially PM and FvS, are incredibly powerful right now and I have been arguing for increases to combat roles and tactics for melee's to help bridge some of those gaps. You said it, that is what a melee NEEDS to compete with casters, but that should be all melee not the privelege of multiclass builds only. Melee can also be addressed through combat feats, class features and changes to the AC system so it isn't just enhancements that should be used to balance the power gap.

That wasn't the point of the example though, the point was to demonstrate the difference between a pure and a multi potentially in a system that does not create an equal opportunity for the pure (i.e., no tree restriction or enhancements restrictions by class level). In my mind a multiclass character should see slight to moderate gains overall, or perhaps slight decreases in some areas for major gains in others. That is what the tradeoff is supposed to be, not "multiclass so you can do everything better and some things that a pure/splash never could in addition". Basically multiclasses shouldn't be expected or mandatory for melee to be considered a power character, they should just increase the potential of a character but not necessarily improve all aspects of it.

Chai

04-04-2012, 01:36 PM

Only ridiculous because it can do so much more than any other melee. Didn't mean to bring the melee vs. caster conversation into this, but the reality is a situation like this could define what all other melee's are judged by, and no simple (i.e. not super tweaked melee) would ever be comparable. That is a problem as well, a character shouldn't have to be a multi-tr multiclass build to be considered viable(though not necessarily optimal) for endgame content.

I agree, casters ,especially PM and FvS, are incredibly powerful right now and I have been arguing for increases to combat roles and tactics for melee's to help bridge some of those gaps. You said it, that is what a melee NEEDS to compete with casters, but that should be all melee not the privelege of multiclass builds only. Melee can also be addressed through combat feats, class features and changes to the AC system so it isn't just enhancements that should be used to balance the power gap.

That wasn't the point of the example though, the point was to demonstrate the difference between a pure and a multi potentially in a system that does not create an equal opportunity for the pure (i.e., no tree restriction or enhancements restrictions by class level). In my mind a multiclass character should see slight to moderate gains overall, or perhaps slight decreases in some areas for major gains in others. That is what the tradeoff is supposed to be, not "multiclass so you can do everything better and some things that a pure/splash never could in addition". Basically multiclasses shouldn't be expected or mandatory for melee to be considered a power character, they should just increase the potential of a character but not necessarily improve all aspects of it.

Youre also using (assuming) todays enhancement lines to make that point, which will not exist when the new system comes out. How do you know that a pure fighter with access to all 3 fighter trees + any one racial wont obliterate youre pally monk fighter hybrid build? We dont. A ravager (assumed crit rage) FB (assumed crit multiplier increase like they have now) as a dwarf (tactics line) would be just as good if we are assuming todays enhancement lines.

The other assumption youre making is that there would be one build that ends up being better than everything else while nothing else increases in power even remotely close.

The last assumption youre making is that a three tree limitation somehow limits the ability to make all mighty powerful builds. It does not. What it does do is prevents people from exploring the myriad of other options that would exist if there was no tree limitation and we all just have 80 points to play with. It limits the number of options in general - it does NOT limit the fact that some builds WILL be more powerful than others.