Prestige Enhancement List (Holiday Bonus!)

[Angelus_dead]

A few times in this thread I have suggested granting abilities that provide new sources of otherwise exclusive buffs; a bonus that can currently be provided by only one character class.

There are a few of these in DDO:
1. Bards provide a morale bonus to attack and damage (up to +7/+8, going up later)
2. Rangers provide a +5 natural armor bonus to AC. (Potions or Madstone provides a smaller bonus, and bring drawbacks)
3. Paladins provide an unnamed bonus to AC and saves (up to +5/+4), which might be labeled as an "OfGood" bonus type. (It will go up again at lev18 with Defender of Siberys)

Class features like that are enjoyable for the players who have them, but they create a game balance problem: there can be a big disparity between parties which have those buffs and which don't, and there's no way for a party lacking that class to even partially close the gap (applies less to Natural Armor than the other types).

Therefore, it would be helpful to allow other classes to provide the same type of bonus with reduced power: most likely with lesser magnitude, but also possibly with fewer targets or less duration. That way parties are still rewarded for bringing the primary class with the strongest buff, but they have an option to take some other character type and still get a lesser bonus.

It's important to remember that no class should not rely too heavily on these features to be valued in a group, and they need other abilities to make them "stack" with other characters bringing the same buff.

Summary of suggestions along those lines:
Purple Dragon Knight: Mass buff +2, +3, +4 morale bonus to attack/damage. (Non-warchanter bards have +2/+2, +4/+5, and +6/+6 at those levels)
Shintao Monk: Aura effect +1, +2, +3 OfGood bonus to AC/saves. (Non-Defender paladins have +2/+2, +4/+4, and +5/+4 at those levels)
Henshin Mystic: Mass buff +2, +3, +4 Natural Armor AC (along with other effect).
Stalwart Defender: Passive self-bonus +3, +4, +5 Natural Armor AC.

Additionally it wouldn't hurt to let PDK's mass-buff include a +1,+2,+3 OfGood bonus to AC (not saves), even though that's stretching the usual definition of what "OfGood" means.

PS. I made a ton of suggestions for continued bard features.

[Trillea]

Disappointed that Arcane Trickster didn't make the list. My little guy would love to be able to disable a trap from 30' away.

Amen!

[barecm]

Prestige Enhancements planned over the next few modules are:


Ranger: Arcane Archer, Deepwood Sniper, Tempest

Is there any confirmation if Deepwood and/or Arcane made it into this mod? It would be a shame to only give Tempest (the most over used enhancement line in the game) an increase while leaving out a ranged enhancement increase (which the game desperately needs).

[FluffyCalico]

Sorcerer: Air Savant,
Wizard: Archmage,


These 2 seem broken. Turn into a wind ele and nothing will ever stand up again! Or be able to make your favorite spell whatever type of damage the thing is vulnerable to.

[SneakThief]

Prestige Enhancements planned over the next few modules are:

Barbarian: Frenzied Berserker, Occult Slayer, Ravager
Bard: Spellsinger, Virtuoso, Warchanter
Cleric: Exorcist of the Silver Flame, Radiant Servant, Warpriest
Fighter: Kensai, Purple Dragon Knight, Stalwart Defender
Monk: Henshin Mystic, Shintao Monk, Ninja Spy
Paladin: Defender of Siberys, Hunter of the Dead, Knight of the Chalice
Ranger: Arcane Archer, Deepwood Sniper, Tempest
Rogue: Assassin, Mechanic, Thief-Acrobat
Sorcerer: Air Savant, Cold Savant, Earth Savant, Fire Savant
Wizard: Archmage, Pale Master, Wild Mage

Human: Dragonmark Heir
Dwarf: Dragonmark Heir, Stalwart Defender [Counts as Fighter]
Elf: Arcane Archer [Counts as Ranger], Dragonmark Heir
Halfling: Dragonmark Heir
Warforged: Juggernaut [Counts as Barbarian]

To any Turbine folks wondering by: It would be immensly helpful to returning players trying to catch up on all the news if you could go back and link the items in the first post to thier respective threads.

[slumbering_dragon]

yes plz, add links. i've been gone for almost 3months and am swamped with all the news, and my little head cant wrap around it all.

[FluffyCalico]

A few times in this thread I have suggested granting abilities that provide new sources of otherwise exclusive buffs; a bonus that can currently be provided by only one character class.

There are a few of these in DDO:
1. Bards provide a morale bonus to attack and damage (up to +7/+8, going up later)
2. Rangers provide a +5 natural armor bonus to AC. (Potions or Madstone provides a smaller bonus, and bring drawbacks)
3. Paladins provide an unnamed bonus to AC and saves (up to +5/+4), which might be labeled as an "OfGood" bonus type. (It will go up again at lev18 with Defender of Siberys)

Class features like that are enjoyable for the players who have them, but they create a game balance problem: there can be a big disparity between parties which have those buffs and which don't, .

So let me make sure I understand correctly...

You are mad because in DDO it works better if you build your party well?

In every DnD session I ever played 1-2 people would pick their character and then the last 2 people would pick classes that made for a good group.

The whole point of classes is to bring something special to the party. Please do not make this where you invite 1 healer and 11 at random as it no longer matters what they are.

[Borror0]

So let me make sure I understand correctly...

You are mad because in DDO it works better if you build your party well?

Nope. He is saying it would make it easier to balance dungeons and easier for us to group if we remove exclusivity on buffs.

For example, the AC a character can have skyrockets if you have the right party make-up. This poses a problem for the game developers as either those with a non-optimal get their ass kicked or the ones with an optimal party walk through the quest too easily.

The same apply to bard buffs, where the difference between Inspire Courage and no Inspire Courage is quite noticeable.

Removing the exclusivity makes having the ones best at it "nice" but not "must-haves".

Now, perhaps requiring all these classes is what you view as "building your party well", but if that is the case, then "building your party well" is synonymous with "not having fun". Waiting around for the right class to show up is not something I have seen a lot of players enjoy. Making of these classes "nice additions" rather than "must-haves" goes a long way into making grouping easier and more enjoyable for everyone.

[Angelus_dead]

So let me make sure I understand correctly...

You are mad because in DDO it works better if you build your party well?

In every DnD session I ever played 1-2 people would pick their character and then the last 2 people would pick classes that made for a good group.

The whole point of classes is to bring something special to the party. Please do not make this where you invite 1 healer and 11 at random as it no longer matters what they are.

Quoted for reasons I'm prohibited from revealing.

[moorewr]

Quoted for reasons I'm prohibited from revealing.

You paragon of self control, you.

[Angelus_dead]

Removing the exclusivity makes having the ones best at it "nice" but not "must-haves".

I'm too lazy to expand on that in detail, but the WOW developers have a good description of their analogous thought process.

Apparently in an earlier version, exactly 1 of the 9 classes provided a mana buff (Priest, I think), which really constrained membership possibilities for tough raids. In their upcoming update, 4 of the 10 classes will provide a mana buff, and they won't stack with each other (I guess that'll be Priest, Hunter, Mage, and one other) (Notice that by allowing a non-mana class like Hunter to buff mana, they are prioritizing balance over verisimilitude)

(If I were more enthused, I could hunt for older posts where they describe that topic more extensively)

[Angelus_dead]

I'm too lazy to expand on that in detail, but the WOW developers have a good description of their analogous thought process.

Stealing a bit more of the WOW devs' explanation of a similar change:

-- We can’t give everyone a unique buff that guarantees them a raid slot. We tried this in BC. What happens is that the classes with necessary buffs are brought and the others are ignored. There are 10 classes and 30 specs in the game. You can’t bring them all to a 25-player raid or certainly a 10-player raid.
-- We asked some cutting-edge raiders during LK development: How many balance druids, ret paladins or death knights are you going to bring? The answer was probably none. They didn’t have any space.
-- So our solution was to give you multiple ways to get the buffs. Different specs bring different versions of the same benefit that do not stack. Hopefully those specs will be attractive, but not so attractive that you want to stack the raid with them. You have more flexibility. You can make decisions about which players to bring.
-- In BC, Shadow priests brought the buff that we now call Replenishment. As a result, Shadow priests were pretty much mandatory to raid in BC. Great for Shadow priests. Bad for other dps classes. Our solution was not to cut the mechanic but to offer it to more specs to give you more flexibility.

Standard Disclaimer: Just because WOW did it, doesn't mean it's bad.

[Tanka]

Standard Disclaimer: Just because WOW did it, doesn't mean it's bad.

As a matter of fact, I'd say they have a lot more experience in making the game "fun" for their players. Lots of people that play DDO don't like its mechanics, but saying "WoW makes bad decisions" is rather counterintuitive -- if they were doing it wrong, they wouldn't have over 10 million active subscribers (note: above figure from a year ago).

[Angelus_dead]

As a matter of fact, I'd say they have a lot more experience in making the game "fun" for their players. Lots of people that play DDO don't like its mechanics, but saying "WoW makes bad decisions" is rather counterintuitive -- if they were doing it wrong, they wouldn't have over 10 million active subscribers (note: above figure from a year ago).

In press releases they've gone up to 11.5 million, but just like McDonald's served, they've stopped updating their advertising to the new peak numbers.

(The number is exaggerated anyway, because all game services use a really loose definition of an "active" subscription)

[Yaga_Nub]

.... verisimilitude....

Is this your word for the day on your desk calendar?

[Angelus_dead]

Is this your word for the day on your desk calendar?

Obviously not.

All game designers should be well aware of the pressure for verisimilitude and how it conflicts with other product goals (and how it differs from "realism")

[Tanka]

Is this your word for the day on your desk calendar?

What's the matter, Yaga? Afflicted by hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia?

[Angelus_dead]

What's the matter, Yaga? Afflicted by hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia?

I admit, it's rather a shibboleth.

[Hadrian]

Nope. He is saying it would make it easier to balance dungeons and easier for us to group if we remove exclusivity on buffs.

For example, the AC a character can have skyrockets if you have the right party make-up. This poses a problem for the game developers as either those with a non-optimal get their ass kicked or the ones with an optimal party walk through the quest too easily.

We do have different difficulty levels, and I think that is how they handle the balance that you're talking about. You have the option choose the appropriate difficulty setting for the amount of effort you're willing to put into preparing your party. If you're one of those groups that will get their butts kicked, play Normal. If you're one that will walk through too easily, play Elite.

I understand your point, but part of the draw of this game is the diversity of the classes and the ability to make your own build with strengths and weaknesses that suit you. If you start to limit the differences between what two different characters can offer, you take some of that away. I think that would have a larger negative effect than positive.

[Angelus_dead]

If you want to take on a quest on Elite, be willing to take the time to form a group that you feel is up to it.
....
Just choose the appropriate difficulty setting for the amount of effort you're willing to put into preparing your party.

Whiskey fallacy.

It's not really a question of "spending time" or "spending effort", but of "reducing diversity" and "excluding people".