The Arguments for Character Respec

[Tanka]

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

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

4) PHB2, starting with page 191.

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

[Quanefel]

4) PHB2, starting with page 191.

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

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

[Tanka]

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

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

[Mhykke]

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

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

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

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

Well, at least you're still laughably inconsistent.

[Hafeal]

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

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

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

[Quanefel]

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

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

http://dnd4.com/rumors

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

[FluffyCalico]

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

http://dnd4.com/rumors

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

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

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

[Angelus_dead]

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

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

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

The big question is bound and raid loot - which is not really a respec issue but seems to be the pink elephant.

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

[Angelus_dead]

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

Flat out untrue.

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

[Quanefel]

Flat out untrue.

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

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

[Angelus_dead]

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

Here are a few more arguments of lesser importance (with some twisting, you could shift some of them to be a subset of the reasons you listed)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Angelus_dead]

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

Non sequitur.

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

[FluffyCalico]

Flat out untrue.

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

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

A full respec is not "within reason"

[FluffyCalico]

Non sequitur.

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

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

[Quanefel]

Non sequitur.

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

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

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

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

[Angelus_dead]

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

Do you have any idea how different event rules are from the D&D rulebooks?

They even break Rule Zero.

[Angelus_dead]

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

Wrong, again.

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

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

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

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

[FluffyCalico]

Do you have any idea how different event rules are from the D&D rulebooks?

They even break Rule Zero.

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

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

[Mhykke]

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

And that's all fine and good.

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

[Angelus_dead]

Yes I am in fact I will do you one better, the 5 people I often play 3.5 with (yes we hate 4.0) are all liscended to run offical games. And I can tell you unless you are fairly new to the game that respec section is very unlikely to happen without a quest from hell.

That was a rhetorical question, so the details of the answer don't matter. I'll explain it a bit more explicitly:

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

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

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

That doesn't matter at all... the fact that you think it matters....