Discussion: Improving S&B

[oogly54]

As previously stated, there are ways to effectively balance this issue WITHOUT nerfs. Everything you have proposed is a NERF, nothing less.

And you might want to be careful with those personal insults at the end of your post. You get infraction points on these forums for insulting the intelligence of a person whose opinion differs from your own.

A general insult is not a personal insult. And what did intelligence have to do with it?

It is much easier to balance out casters to non casters by changing the content, but to balance out melee from melee is VERY hard to do with content because they both do the same thing.

[maddmatt70]

A general insult is not a personal insult.

Hate does not get people places. It may appear to fill gaps in statements and arguments, but in reality weakens arguments and the messengers that delivers them. I was of course speaking in general terms, although recently I have encountered some hateful messengers on these forums. I just ignore them and the messages or lack of message they deliver.

[Aspenor]

Of course some people are more "sensitive" than others. Insulting someone´s intelligence is excessively easy and sometimes needed in order to not allow empty rhetoric to fill the gap between where you are and where you need to be headed.

it's generally accepted in logical argument that questioning a person's intelligence (i.e. telling them they need "help" if they hold a certain point of view) is not only out of place, but it weakens the stance posited by the individual. It's called Ad Hominem, and has no place in any discussion.

If one has empty gaps in their point of view, perhaps they need to reconsider it.

[oogly54]

it's generally accepted in logical argument that questioning a person's intelligence (i.e. telling them they need "help" if they hold a certain point of view) is not only out of place, but it weakens the stance posited by the individual. It's called Ad Hominem, and has no place in any discussion.

If one has empty gaps in their point of view, perhaps they need to reconsider it.

Or help can simply mean, explaining a point of veiw different from your own in which case a large portion of others feels the same. In this particular case, a large portion of people in DDO belive that a full plate wearing, tower shield carrying tank should have a higher AC than a robe wearing duel weilder. If someone has trouble seeing that point of view, maybe someone with that point of view can help them see another side.

[Aspenor]

Or help can simply mean, explaining a point of veiw different from your own in which case a large portion of others feels the same. In this particular case, a large portion of people in DDO belive that a full plate wearing, tower shield carrying tank should have a higher AC than a robe wearing duel weilder. If someone has trouble seeing that point of view, maybe someone with that point of view can help them see another side.

Telling somebody they "need help" is not how you make them see the other side.

Providing relevant information, evidence, and logical conclusions, on the other hand, is the proper method of doing so.

[Dexxaan]

it's generally accepted in logical argument that questioning a person's intelligence (i.e. telling them they need "help" if they hold a certain point of view) is not only out of place, but it weakens the stance posited by the individual. It's called Ad Hominem, and has no place in any discussion.

If one has empty gaps in their point of view, perhaps they need to reconsider it.

I quoted your post as to make myself clear as to what I´m referring to and not appear as "out of the blue", and it was not directed at you in any way unless you so decide to take it; But I´m stating this for clarity as forum posts can be interpreted wrongly.

/Absolutely agree with highlighted area and would only add that in a debate / discussion it´s all about "nudging" the other party to review the perceived gaps and hopefully find common ground and advance.....at least in Conflict Management thats the way.

[oogly54]

Telling somebody they "need help" is not how you make them see the other side.

Providing relevant information, evidence, and logical conclusions, on the other hand, is the proper method of doing so.

The relavant information has been provided by the previous 11 pages in this thread and the numerous other threads discussing the same thing.

Do you not agree that changing content to make two melee characters balanced is much harder than the caster/melee balancing in the past?

[Aspenor]

Do you not agree that changing content to make two melee characters balanced is much harder than the caster/melee balancing in the past?

The varying difficulty of the balancing act has nothing to do with whether nerfs are an attractive option. Just because something is more difficult does not mean that the modus operandi for balance needs to change.

[oogly54]

The varying difficulty of the balancing act has nothing to do with whether nerfs are an attractive option. Just because something is more difficult does not mean that the modus operandi for balance needs to change.

I disagree. I think it may be impossible to balance with content change. To discredit the idea of a nerf in general is limiting ones choice to make the game better. Nerf have been done to every MMO ever created, for a reason. There are times when they are eeded in orderto keep the game blanaced.

It is not whether you make people mad or not, it is if the game improves by make the RIGHT changes. Do you think those of us that have made S&B are any less mad than a robe wearing, two weapon fighter would be if they were nerfed? People will be mad either way, it is making the game better that really counts.

[Angelus_dead]

Now we have most high level parties back to running 1 or 2 casters in a 12 person party. This was not due to the many NERFS that were proposed, but instead the developers (intelligently, I might add) developed content that effectively reduced the power level of arcane casters against the monsters primarily fought.

Wrong. Casters were nerfed. Apparently you can't tell, but adding new monsters resistant to your class abilities is a nerf too.

By the same token, if I went and put 75% fort on every monster, that'd be a rogue nerf too.

[Borror0]

Wrong. Casters were nerfed. Apparently you can't tell, but adding new monsters resistant to your class abilities is a nerf too.

By the same token, if I went and put 75% fort on every monster, that'd be a rogue nerf too.

True. I just see why people are so opposed to nerfs but are ok with balancing with content, the effect is the same except that if you nerf there will be less unscheduled changes and thus there are less risk you'll create something a need to nerf once again. Basically, nefing is the safest way to fix a problem. Buffing will create new problems, 100% guaranteed.

By nerfing nuking, they killed DPS on trash mobs. That was a bad idea. Vorapalling is no fun.

They also made WoP rapiers overpowered.

Just because something is more difficult does not mean that the modus operandi for balance needs to change.

You're right. However, there are factors to look at:

• How much more complicated is it? (If it's too complicated, it may create more bugs or affect the game in ways not desired.)
• How much longer is it to do? (If it's too long, it's too expensive to be an option.)
• Will it impact other character types in a way we don't want? (Overpowering or nerfing another class/build type that wasn't.)

Usually, it makes of nerfing the best option.

[Angelus_dead]

Basically, nefing is the safest way to fix a problem. Buffing will create new problems, 100% guaranteed.

Neither of those can be accurately claimed as an absolute. Which one is safer is entirely dependent on the state of balance. In general, smaller changes are safer than larger ones, but whether that means a nerf or a buff cannot be predicted in the abstract.

In this case, the correct way to have reduced caster power would have been to fix metamagic costs.

[Borror0]

Fighters and Paladins should get more AC than any other class using S&B.

Explain me that logic. I can easily why rangers get bow/TWF focused abilities, but they are the only ones.

I don't see barbarians getting THF abilities and there is a reason to it. Nothing justifies giving these two clases abilities to make them better at S&B.

[Borror0]

Neither of those can be accurately claimed as an absolute. [...] In general, smaller changes are safer than larger ones

Yeah, you're right. But my logic was that when one ability is more powerful than every others... adjusting what is too powerful is better.

Obviously, if a class is much weaker than all the others, then buff it so it can match the others.

[Kaldais]

The root cause of TWF AC higher than S&B AC is actually very simple, the over inflation of stats versus a capped dex on armor. Fix that, and you will solve this 'problem'.

[Angelus_dead]

The root cause of TWF AC higher than S&B AC is actually very simple, the over inflation of stats versus a capped dex on armor. Fix that, and you will solve this 'problem'.

No. The higher stats are almost entirely compensated for by the higher dex bonus allowed by heavy armor.

If you want to focus the blame on only one thing, it's magic items, and primarily Magic items which increase AC but which are incompatible with heavy armor / tower shields. In two words: Icy Rainments.

(Of course there are other causes too, but that's the most prominent)

[Aspenor]

No. The higher stats are almost entirely compensated for by the higher dex bonus allowed by heavy armor.

If you want to focus the blame on only one thing, it's magic items, and primarily Magic items which increase AC but which are incompatible with heavy armor / tower shields. In two words: Icy Rainments.

(Of course there are other causes too, but that's the most prominent)

Hence, I proposed to buff the defensive capabilities of all armor, across the board.

Unfortunately it seems the solution is to even further buff items.

[Borror0]

Unfortunately it seems the solution is to even further buff items.

Please, no more item inflation...

[Aspenor]

Please, no more item inflation...

Be one with your hate. The Dark Side is the only way...

[Alcides]

Explain me that logic. I can easily why rangers get bow/TWF focused abilities, but they are the only ones.

I don't see barbarians getting THF abilities and there is a reason to it. Nothing justifies giving these two clases abilities to make them better at S&B.

May I remind you of the Divine Shield Feat(add Charisma bonus to AC while using a shield) and the Shield of Warding(gain +5 Sacred Bonus to AC/Reflex saves) spell. Paladins would really turn the AC dilemma on it's head with those two abilities. Anyway paladins deserve to get their proper due after receiving a bunch of nerf bats to the face.

Other than Paladins, I'd say fighters are the only other class that really has a defensive tank feel. I guess you could count barbs(although they are better served as DPS melee). Other than that there really is no good reason to include them with my original statement.

Not to mention if I'm being defensive I should have AC through the roof. DDO should be the quintessential power of D&D, anything less is unnacceptable.