New Dice notation. Do not like.

[talyor]

I have no problem with players providing feedback on the change. Particularly, if you don't like the chance, please also include information such as:

• Your own suggestions for how to make description text numbers more clear
• Aspects of the current changes that you like the most
• Aspects of the current changes that you like the least

Such details are very very important and imperative. Saying "I hate it all" or "take it back" is not helpful or actionable. There is a middle ground to be had between expecting brand new players to learn about dice they don't get the joy of rolling and showing off the D&D rules set. Just again, make sure that it's actionable feedback that is in the forum guidelines.

1st i dont think it it was ever unclear or or needed to be more clear but my suggestion would have been to leave it alone but hyperlinked any XdX reference to the compendium and actually start using the compendium like the usefuk tool it is for players to learn.

2nd anytime you give players more info that is good.

3rd what I liked least is the apparent lack of thought most of us wouldnt have even batted an eye if you had left the main text as the d20 system and added at the bottom your laymans terms. I cant believe no one thought of that the amount of changes alone that would have saved in man hours alone.

[phillymiket]

Tolero... That is exactly what Turbine is telling us by keeping that notation.

In any rendition of DnD I've ever played, it was always roll the dice. 5d6, 10d6, 1d20, etc. Your sum result is the outcome. It is part of the heritage of the game.

It sure is silly thing.
Still I agree

Look at any documentary or news show about PnP Dungeons & Dragons. The first thing any non-player focuses on is the dice.
People are (seemingly) amazed with the fact that dice can have more or less than 6 sides.
The dice are what made the game special.
Giving up the dice format for describing random number generation, while a small and silly change, is HUGE as far as respect for where the game came from.
Let's not throw away the roots of the game.

/signed
Edited - phrased more diplomatically

[Rumbaar]

I've not read all of the comments, but is there anyone here that actually prefers the new system of damage display?

This is Dungeons & Dragons, base on Pen 'n Paper rules. Which are grounded in dice rolls. I do not like the extended and extra information required in an items descriptions. 1d6 becomes 1 to 6, that is not very space efficient and also at a glance not as easy to read as 1d6.

Second as this is D&D the true D&D damage indicators should be primary and any 'dumbed' down version secondary or even minimised as default.

Screen resolution and real estate is still a premium in DDO and having an item with many stats that now will include two sets of same stat descriptions and one overly superfluous and extended. Currently if an items description moves off the viewable area you cannot view the rest of it, this is an important outcome if this is implemented that needs to be addressed.

Now the most important thing for this is that will it ensure that ALL items will have 100% accurate statistic descriptions on them. Or is this just a find & replace and add to the many items that have incorrect display text?

We must and should stay true to the D&D lore in this regards. It's easier and more efficient use of limited screen real estate.

I'd like to know where all the feedback has come from that has justified this this thought and more so enough of it to actually get this implemented in a 'test' environment. If it was April I'd think it was an April fools joke.

[ieatogres]

I would prefer for the new annotation to be placed at the end of the description, or behind the dice notation.

Something along the lines of:

2d6 (this means 2-12)

would be a not-so-bad comprimise, IMO, if the new notation can't be moved to the footnote position (where you've moved the dice notation) instead.


After so many years playing, you have already trained me to the dice notation (whether I was/am a DnD player or not). This change has resulted in descriptions having a sort of ... jarring ... effect on my reading comprehension in-game.

I appreciate and applaud your efforts to make dice rolls easier to understand for new players which might not be familiar with dice rolls, but this feels very disruptive to my eyes and brain. I am far too trained to reading the dice roll notation, and seeing it in a particular position on the description; having it changed and moved is not feeling comfortable at all.

The problem I have with this change is it provides less information.

2d6 is obviously a normal distribution while 2-12 tends to imply a normal distribution. These are two very different things.

[Borror0]

Excellent idea, though I'd be in favor of adding reminder to text just about everything (so long as it is correct), not just lvl 6 and below stuff, but with an option to turn it off for those who don't need it. MTGO does this on their on-line cards, where there is an option to hide reminder text.

I have thought before you brought it up but came to the conclusion it was a bad idea. When designing a game, you have to ensure that the default option is what is best for players at that state of the game. If the break point of level six is too low, up it to eight. However, eventually, players of a certain level ought to know what a certain concept is so stop showing it to them. Most players won't go through options, so you have do it for them.

It is a known fact that users don't want to spend time up front on getting established, set up, or going through learning packages. Most people pick the default setting for things as important as organ donation - what makes you think they will make a conscious decision here? The default setting has to be the best setting for most users and leaving reminder on for everything is insane and would lead to absurd things. Can you imagine an Akroma, Angel of Wrath with reminder text? The description would be absurdly long for stuff most users should know at that point into the game.

Moreover, who says that reminder text cannot be useful to expert players. It is. In fact, designers should not allow players to turn reminder texts off. While I have been playing magic for years now - started in 2003, slightly after the release of Mirrodin - and know the evergreen keywords like flying or trample, they still introruce stuff I'm not familiar with like Annihilator X. Reminder texts are useful to many. Allowing users to disable them is doing yourself a disservice.

[Narzic]

I must say that I am in favour of the spirit behind the change. When I started playing DDO, I had no background in DnD at all. It took me a while to figure out exactly how dice worked(or rather it came up accidentally when talking with a friend). 1d6 is pretty obvious...but how is someone going to know that 3d6 is significantly better then 1d12 if they haven't had it explicitly told to them?

Regardless I do agree that the particular implementation was/is...rough. I think they could simply streamline it to something as simple as "1d6(1 to 6) damage per caster level (up to 5d6(5 to 30))" rather then add a sentence or two to describe it.

[Rumbaar]

1d6 is pretty obvious...but how is someone going to know that 3d6 is significantly better then 1d12 if they haven't had it explicitly told to them?

But the problem is that 2d6 and 1d12 displayed as 2 to 12 & 1 to 12 do convey an misleading [incorrect] distribution of possible results than the first two versions.

[gwlech]

I like the PnP aspects of DDO. It is mainly what draws me to this game. Take those away, and its like some kind of generic MMO made to appeal to the masses. Sad.

[Xeraphim]

It's for the ex-WoW players

It's an affront to the franchise.

I'm stuck between these two.

I like the idea behind it, but not the implementation.

Put some box in the UI to disable "Idiot Box Text" please. I want my 3d10 and 2d8 back the way it was. I enjoy the mental challenge, it keeps me from going bonkers.

[Narzic]

But the problem is that 2d6 and 1d12 displayed as 2 to 12 & 1 to 12 do convey an incorrect distribution of possible results than the first two versions.

right i forgot that. :/ although when i see 2d6(now a days) i still think in my brain 2 to 12, and tbh although there is a difference...for the average person just learning about what it means and/or that doesnt care about math it makes no difference to them. i'd rather they see 2d6 as 2 to 12 rather then 2 to 6.

[Fafnir]

Traditions and heritage are important. I prefer 1d6.

[Borror0]

right i forgot that. :/ although when i see 2d6(now a days) i still think in my brain 2 to 12, and tbh although there is a difference...for the average person just learning about what it means and/or that doesnt care about math it makes no difference to them. i'd rather they see 2d6 as 2 to 12 rather then 2 to 6.

You're right, for the new player the difference is too small to matter. However, when that player starts to be more experienced, it will start to make a difference to him or her. If we look at the change uniquely from that angle, it's a beneficial change. However, there are more aspects to this change: it makes descriptions wordier, it's misleading information, and it's removing something that made description much more D&D-like.

[donotdirect1]

/Outrage off

Now that I'm calmed down, I'm going to try to address your proposed change.

I'm kind of terrible with forum code by the way. Sorry.

__________________________________________________ _______________
Your own suggestions for how to make description text numbers more clear

If you absolutely must "dumb down" the dice system to let someone who is brand new understand, keep our descriptions and give them an average in brackets. That average won't display it's maximum, won't display it's minimum, and really not show the true worth. That they'll have to figure out on their own. Giving the "average" is just what they need to make really simple choices.

If you are truly trying to improve on the system, do an average of everything that the spell or item or weapon does on adding up all variable effects. That requires how much more coding? Quite a bit I'd imagine, though I'm no expert. But that would be an improvement, one bracketed number that displays the items most average result. And seems like allot of effort for not much return, yet still an improvement.

__________________________________________________ _______________
Aspects of the current changes that you like the most

In the attempt to try to introduce players to the system is not a truly failed intention. I recommend having a true starting quest, right in korthos, that is only for new players. You'd have the dungeon master explain the fact that you roll dice and break the 4th wall with the players. He'd explain it simply, and the quest would be completely optional. Using voice, the lazy new player doesn't even have to read. Also, add several interesting things in the quest.

For instance a mob vs player room where the mob has total damage immunity except to vorpal. The DM explains that this creature can only be killed by the quest item vorpal sickle, and he needs to roll a 20 to pull it off. Have this tester mob do no real damage, instead it harries the player and tries to push the player into the walls. When the 20 is rolled, the mob dies, and the DM explains the critical hit.

The quest proposed would offer no real experience, or favor, but should give some kind of chest with starter potions in it.
__________________________________________________ _______________
Aspects of the current changes that you like the least

Letting players know that this game is advanced is a good idea.

Reducing the advanced portion of the game to meet their expectations is a bad idea.

__________________________________________________ _______________
Final thoughts

With the changes to two weapon fighting, and now changing the die based effect I'm wondering if you understand that no matter how much you own this game you are really stretching your influence too thin. Allot of players came to see you try to put this wheel into action, not try to reinvent it.

[Narzic]

You're right, for the new player the difference is too small to matter. However, when that player starts to be more experienced, it will start to make a difference to him or her. If we look at the change uniquely from that angle, it's a beneficial change. However, there are more aspects to this change: it makes descriptions wordier, it's misleading information, and it's removing something that made description much more D&D-like.

true. as i said before i like the spirit of the change, although not so much the implementation.

on another note:

one thing i found helpful was Tip #71 from the loading screen:

Tip #71: '3d6' means three six-sided dice are being rolled. For example, when you see that a weapon does '2d4' damage, it means that two 4-sided dice are rolled for damage, for a damage range of 2-8.

now obviously including such in every description gets wordy...but as some others suggested maybe have it mentioned during the tutorial.

[Borror0]

now obviously including such in every description gets wordy

"'3d6' means three six-sided dice are being rolled, for a damage range of 3-18." sounds like a cromulent reminder text to me. If you limit reminder text to low level items, it'd be fine IMO. Of course, it would get insane on a Mineral II weapon but that's why certain reminder texts should not be displayed pat a certain level.

[phillymiket]

To me changing the dice notation would be like changing the phrase "top of the 9th" in baseball to a more intuitive phrase.
You lose too much tradition for the sake of making something that could be explained in one good sentence a little easier to understand.

Why not make the character generation process a little longer with some brief screens you need to click past that explain the basic nomenclature of the game?
How often do you make a new toon? It would be worth the xtra PITA as a service to new players.

People won't read a manual but they may look at a screen that pops up in front of them if its short and easy to grasp. (and I don't mean the loading screens that flash by so fast you can only subliminally soak them in.)

Edited - to remove rantish ugliness.

[Rumbaar]

Why not a 'tool tip' kind of action. You have to activate or hover over the item for a period of time to get the 'newb' version of the details.

[lutherl]

Why not a 'tool tip' kind of action. You have to activate or hover over the item for a period of time to get the 'newb' version of the details.

I dunno that you can tooltip over a tooltip.

As it currently stands, you hover your mouse over the item and get a description. I dunno that you can hover over the description that pops up. I know you can make it persistant, but IF they're using a tooltip to produce the window with the information, they might not be able to hover over that to generate another tooltip.

[Borror0]

Why not a 'tool tip' kind of action. You have to activate or hover over the item for a period of time to get the 'newb' version of the details.

For tooltips to work, the user has to have his or her mouse over the proper text. For websites, that often works because there is something indicating to put their mouse there for more info like an hyperlink or a more direct "hover for more info." In a description, you have neither. There is no reason for the user to intuitively hover over the confusing phrase. Asa result, the tooltip won't be of use to most users since they will not know of its existence.

[Belowme]

So in that case "reversing" something because people said "I don't like it the way it's going to be" means I'm supposed to tell all the other people who said "I don't like it the way it is now" that they're out of luck? In this case, a most resounding, unequivocal YES. This change has NOTHING to do with game balance. It has EVERYTHING to do with flavor. To those who don't like the way it is now, the way it has been since many of us filled out our first character sheets, welcome to the wonderful world of Dungeons & Dragons. Learn it. Love it. Live it.

We want to hear both sides of things. We have plenty of people telling us why they are intimidated or turned off by the current descriptions, so in the battle of "I don't like it" details are important As has been mention innumerable times before, many of the current descriptions are a mishmash of uninformative, confusing turnoffs, even to the grizzled veterans of PnP. Again, I suggest a reworking of the ingame glossary and compendium. Let's make it really easy. Enter: /glossary. Return: http://ddowiki.com/page/Home

Post script: this thread has a lot of very good details so far.

I could have chosen any game to call my new home. I didn't pick this one out of a hat. I chose this one because it purported to be as close to PnP D&D as you could reasonably get with a real time MMO. Dungeons & Dragons, and every smallest detail contained thereunto, brings UNIQUENESS to what has become a rather bland buffet of WoW / EQ clones. Let this go through and it'll be the slippery slope that turns this into yet another needle in a stack of needles.