Ability, Skill respecs, 32 point/drow unlocks.

[Borror0]

It's not designed as a competitive like, for example, chess. You can turn doing laundry into a competition.

Being less competitive as some games does not make it not competitive.

"Focus on now" (which is essentially Yoda's message) is good advice even if it is from a cheesy sci fi movie.

"Play the game the way I intend it!" is a very inefficient advice if you plan on making money.

So far, it seems the "32-point build haters" are in the vast minority.

Not sure you've established that, exactly.

Even so, polling your current members is not the way to figure out if it is a good thing to change since it a design that can chase new players away.

[branmakmuffin]

Feel slighted? That's not the issue. The issue is that their characters are functionally inferior.

This is along the lines of "A bonus to you is a gimp of me" reasoning. That is "feeling slighted."

[Kistilan]

Any DM who did this would be unpopular, to say the least. If characters are unequal in a campaign, it should be due to mistakes on the part of the player, not an inherent facet of the rules.

Well, our DM is already relatively unpopular due to many renegotiations that are hopefully addressed: content, races, classes, guild housing, housing, crafting, skins, animations, etc. So that's obviously no concern atm and they can take their time concerning popularity.

However, mistakes on the part of a player: In a game such as D&D, where the luck of the roll is 99% King, we're forgetting that not all players are meant to be equal. Unless given the point-buy system (in which creative ingenuity through level sacrifice ie drow, other +level races, etc), many DMs utilize the 3d6x6, 4d6-lowest rollx6 or 6x6 4d6/3d6 grid BINGO creation methods. None of these methods guarantee equal-footing for all players and only in extreme situations will a player be given a mulligan during these methods. I've played a 9-13 stat character and made it work.

Yes, this is DDO -- I'm only citing examples. Popularity certainly isn't the issue and fairness really is based on how carebear stare your DM is going to be.

[Azdraugnor]

This is along the lines of "A bonus to you is a gimp of me" reasoning. That is "feeling slighted."

Except one is about feelings and one is about game mechanics. Did you READ the rest of my post? You seem to have a habit of ignoring arguments you can't refute.

[Kistilan]

Except one is about feelings and one is about game mechanics. Did you READ the rest of my post? You seem to have a habit of ignoring arguments you can't refute.

Some arguments can be ignored because refuting them is a waste of time. To get to the point is critical and not all are willing to write essays that will only be stripped and garbled.

Points (key points) are the pertinent. Some are better at finding them than others.

My own personal perspective: He did find a very critical point in the SWAG factor.

[Azdraugnor]

However, mistakes on the part of a player: In a game such as D&D, where the luck of the roll is 99% King, we're forgetting that not all players are meant to be equal. Unless given the point-buy system (in which creative ingenuity through level sacrifice ie drow, other +level races, etc), many DMs utilize the 3d6x6, 4d6-lowest rollx6 or 6x6 4d6/3d6 grid BINGO creation methods. None of these methods guarantee equal-footing for all players and only in extreme situations will a player be given a mulligan during these methods. I've played a 9-13 stat character and made it work.

Stat rolls are a moot point here. There's a reason they weren't implemented for DDO, and it's the same reason that all characters should have the same amount of points available. Characters should be equal except as differentiated by the player.

[Kistilan]

Stat rolls are a moot point here. There's a reason they weren't implemented for DDO, and it's the same reason that all characters should have the same amount of points available. Characters should be equal except as differentiated by the player.

I didn't think I needed the "reason they weren't implemented for DDO" statement. Yeah, there is a reason. It's not the same reason all characters should have the same amount of points at ALL TIMES.

All characters have equal access to earning these bonuses. It's not like rolling for a WoP or raid loot -- anyone can unlock drow and 32 point builds.

The difference is some people want it up front and given to them. All characters have the opportunity to be equal and have equal liberty in pursuing that goal.

In other words -- we all started at 28 points. It's equal. Play for your rewards. If you're not motivated to achieve it, that's all on you -- we're all capable of hitting 400 and 1750.

[Borror0]

It is not design that prevents a player from playing multiple chracters when reaching their first 1750 favor

That's dishonest rhetoric I did not use prevent, so don't use it either. .

If it was design causing that, it would effect everyone equally.

If you were honestly interested in my position, you would have understood by now that the problem is that it bias the choice. Therefore, it does not affect everyone. It's a design flaw, whether it affects you or not.

Since it is not, it is coming from that individual player and his perception of that issue.

Since developers cannot change our perception, they have to change the design if they are interested in making profits.

Thanks for acknowledging it is an issue, by the way.

For what you wrote to be true, there would have to be only two choices. There is not just two

There are only two choices:

• Accept to reroll the 28 point buy character
• Accept that the character will never be as good as if it was a 32 point buy character

That does not speak of a design flaw, that is a player perception flaw.

If the players' perception is flawed, I guess we should fix the players.

[branmakmuffin]

Being less competitive as some games does not make it not competitive.

The point is you can make anything competitive, so either we say the word competitive has no meaning whatsoever (because it applies to everything) or we mark boundaries defining "competitive." I think no one will debate whether playing chess is a competitive activity, or that, as a general rule, doing laundry is not a competitive activity. DDO falls somewhere in between "chess" and "laundry" on the competitive scale. It's pretty much impossible to play chess the way it's intended and not have it be competitive. Chess is inherently competitive. DDO is not, because it's perfectly possible to play it in a non-competitive way (and I do not buy that PvE is a competition, because the "E" does not care whether it "wins" or "loses").

Even so, polling your current members is not the way to figure out if it is a good thing to change since it a design that can chase new players away.

Based on posts I have seen in the forums, I haven't seen a lot of demand for 32-point builds for everyone (a few, yes). There's certainly not the same demand as there is for respecs (and I'm leaving "let me turn my 28-point character into 32-point character when I get to 1750 favor" out of the respec discussion, since that's a very specific kind of respec).

[Quanefel]

Stat rolls are a moot point here. There's a reason they weren't implemented for DDO, and it's the same reason that all characters should have the same amount of points available. Characters should be equal except as differentiated by the player.

First, reaching for some sort of equality in an MMO is a fruitless effort. Those who play more will always have better things, have better build characters and have more knowledge of the MMO than those who spend less time.

Obtaining 1750 favor for 32 point builds IS differentiated by the player. People want the same amount of stats as others? They need to go out there and play more. Earn the favor, earn the tomes. Forcing everyone to be equal by bringing up the casual player to the power gamer is will never be obtained.

[branmakmuffin]

Except one is about feelings and one is about game mechanics. Did you READ the rest of my post? You seem to have a habit of ignoring arguments you can't refute.

I reply to what I find interesting to reply to. If I don't reply to something, I didn't find it worth replying to, e.g, it's repetitive. I'm sure you feel the same.

Characters should be equal except as differentiated by the player.

So that applies in DDO only, or also in D&D? And if it does not apply to D&D, why not?

[Borror0]

The point is you can make anything competitive, so either we say the word competitive has no meaning whatsoever (because it applies to everything) or we mark boundaries defining "competitive."

You're drifting away from the real point, here.

The fact is that someone can make DDO competitive, if that is what he/she wants, and that is not an "incorrect" way to play nor does betray a lack of appreciation of the game. It's just a different philosophy and a different playstyle.

I'm leaving "let me turn my 28-point character into 32-point character when I get to 1750 favor" out of the respec discussion, since that's a very specific kind of respec).

I thought that this was what you were referring to.

In all honesty, I could not care any less if 32 point are available or not to new accounts. I see points for both positions and neither really sway me. To me, the indefensible position is to object the ability to respec a 28 point buy into a 32 point buy upon reaching 1750 favor.

That is both a very common request and one that there is very little reason to be against.

[Kazorn]

People want the same amount of stats as others? They need to go out there and play more. Earn the favor, earn the tomes. Forcing everyone to be equal by bringing up the casual player to the power gamer is will never be obtained.

No, we dont mind playing a lot, earning favor, grinding, farming... We dont want to reroll a char. Just it.

[branmakmuffin]

The fact is that someone can make DDO competitive, if that is what he/she wants, and that is not an "incorrect" way to play nor does betray a lack of appreciation of the game. It's just a different philosophy and a different playstyle.

The point is that DDO is not inherently competitive. D&D is inherently cooperative. Whether DDO is ...?

In all honesty, I could not care any less if 32 point are available or not to new accounts.

Nor could I (care less).

I see points for both positions and neither really sway me. To me, the indefensible position is to object the ability to respec a 28 point buy into a 32 point buy upon reaching 1750 favor.

That is both a very common request and one that there is very little reason to be against.

And interestingly enough, I'm not opposed to that, either (which is why I wrote that I wanted to separate that from the general respec discussion). But I do not understand the attitude of "It upsets me so much that this character will never be a 32-point character that I don't want to play the game."

[Quanefel]

That's dishonest rhetoric I did not use prevent, so don't use it either. .

If you were honestly interested in my position, you would have understood by now that the problem is that it bias the choice. Therefore, it does not affect everyone. It's a design flaw, whether it affects you or not.

Since developers cannot change our perception, they have to change the design if they are interested in making profits.

Thanks for acknowledging it is an issue, by the way.

There are only two choices:

• Accept to reroll the 28 point buy character
• Accept that the character will never be as good as if it was a 32 point buy character

If the players' perception is flawed, I guess we should fix the players.

I can not use the word "prevent"? Care to write a list of words for us to use that would satisfy your overwelming need to direct the discussion?


I was not talking about a design flaw effecting me. If it really is a design flaw then it would affect everyone in game. Why is this design flaw you think exists only effecting certian people but not all of them? Why is it not effecting everyone equally if in fact is really is a perception flaw instead?

The developers can not keep up with changing the game because of a select group of people who have a flawed perceptions about one issue or another. If it was the case then the Dev's would have their work cut out for them, trying to play catch up with each players perceptions on anything in game. It is unrealistic to say the least.

Wrong. Why do you keep pushing for this only two choices idea when you know it is flat out false.

Here:
1. Play one character then reroll at 1750 favor, if that player wants.
2. Reach 400 favor and roll up a one drow or more then advance to 1750 favor with it.
3. Not worry about that one character if playing is more important that 4 stat points.
4. Obsess about what others before you have and be forever disappointed.
5. Ask friends, guildmates or strangers to help you reach 1750 favor as quickly as you can on a toss away character.
6. *****, whine and moan until someone else hands out the rewards for you instead of lifting a finger for it.
7. Come to the realization that it is just a game, wanting a character to be perfect in everyway will only lead to disappointment.

We should fix players perception flaws? No, they should.

[Borror0]

So that applies in DDO only, or also in D&D? And if it does not apply to D&D, why not?

Many arguments can be made on that.

It's should be different in D&D:

• DDO is a video game, and therefore should capitalize more on skills while D&D is a game based on dice and therefore luck should be a greater factor than skills (especially since skills is not much of a factor in D&D - intellect is but that is quite different).
• D&D is a roleplaying game while DDO possesses very few roleplayers. So, while in D&D lower ability scores can be part of your character personality, that is generally not the case in DDO.

It should be the same in D&D:

• It is not fun to be the ones with only twelve or lower in your ability scores when all your friends got 16 as their lowest.

However, one thing is certain to me, ability scores should not be decided by luck in DDO.

The reasoning is that it first encourages players to constantly reroll until they got uber stats (it gets even more absurd if your stats are generated after choosing your class and race). So, while so would not mind starting with horrible stats, many would mind and it would cause the ridiculous situation where someone spends quite some time rerolling until he gets ability scores he is satisfied of.

Other than, it would create a few other problems:

• Ostracization of those who didn't "powergame"
• Lesser diversity between character for those who "powergamed"
• Game harder to balance between the all-18's and the all-10's

[Borror0]

The point is that DDO is not inherently competitive. D&D is inherently cooperative. Whether DDO is ...?

For me, DDO is inherently cooperative and competitive. For me, DDO is about beating the game. It's been that way since day 1.

By contrast, to me, LOTRO is about exploration and character development.

But I do not understand the attitude of "It upsets me so much that this character will never be a 32-point character that I don't want to play the game."

Do you really need to understand it?

To me, it seems that all that is important is that there are players who are like that and that satisfying those players' request is not absurdly hard (nor would have a negative effect on the game, at all). We all get bothered for a reason or another, but I don't see the point to understand their reasoning.

[Borror0]

Why is this design flaw you think exists only effecting certian people but not all of them? Why is it not effecting everyone equally if in fact is really is a perception flaw instead?

You have admitted that Dragontouched armor seemed too random for your taste.

Not everyone thinks the same as you do, therefore, by your reasoning, it is your perception that is flawed and not the design. Turbine should not listen to the player feedback that it is too random, no matter how overwhelming it becomes, because it is the players' fault if their perception is not set to enjoy the current design.

A design flaw does not need to affect everyone. Turbine makes a game for a playerbase, and if the playerbase (or potential customers) does not like it, then it is in their interest to change it because Turbine if a profit-driven company.

Perceptions cannot be flawed, only different.

Saying that perceptions are flawed is as absurd as saying preferences can be wrong.

Wrong. Why do you keep pushing for this only two choices idea when you know it is flat out false.

There is no choice other either keeping the character or deleting it.

[Quanefel]

Many arguments can be made on that.

It's should be different in D&D:

• DDO is a video game, and therefore should capitalize more on skills while D&D is a game based on dice and therefore luck should be a greater factor than skills (especially since skills is not much of a factor in D&D - intellect is but that is quite different).
• D&D is a roleplaying game while DDO possesses very few roleplayers. So, while in D&D lower ability scores can be part of your character personality, that is generally not the case in DDO.

It should be the same in D&D:

• It is not fun to be the ones with only twelve or lower in your ability scores when all your friends got 16 as their lowest.

However, one thing is certain to me, ability scores should not be decided by luck in DDO.

The reasoning is that it first encourages players to constantly reroll until they got uber stats (it gets even more absurd if your stats are generated after choosing your class and race). So, while so would not mind starting with horrible stats, many would mind and it would cause the ridiculous situation where someone spends quite some time rerolling until he gets ability scores he is satisfied of.

Other than, it would create a few other problems:

• Ostracization of those who didn't "powergame"
• Lesser diversity between character for those who "powergamed"
• Game harder to balance between the all-18's and the all-10's

Socialism has no place in an MMO, there will never be equalty between powergamers and casual players no matter how much effort is put into it. It will never happen. It does not speak well of those who would try to force it.

[Kistilan]

No, we dont mind playing a lot, earning favor, grinding, farming... We dont want to reroll a char. Just it.

I agree with this sentiment on a 28 pt build. If you're going to keep playing a 28 pt build after you've unlocked 32 pt builds, there should be a reward (although it may require even more favor) that essentially strips the character to the bare stats and allows 4 pts to be distributed.

There would be nothing wrong with that -- especially if it was earned.

I realize the compensation for those who rerolled 28 pt characters once they had 32 pt would be inefficient, but they too wanted the reward of 32 pt characters and at some point deleted a 28 pt character for this reason -- they were ambitious and had their 32 pt characters quicker than the 28 pt player. That in itself is a reward and their hard work rewarded them thus. It would not be taken away (this again would be a selfish thing of the 32 pt player to think they somehow were cheated -- both players would have worked for their characters to reach 32 pt status).