Angel of Vengence ToD Sets

[BananaHat]

We've been debating whether to add them to ToD or to a future treasure table. There are enough items in ToD currently that we're not sure if we want to expand those tables even more, making it more difficult to get a specific item.

I'm sad to hear that you don't want to make ToD end rewards complete. I guess any other new class is equally screwed, such as the one to be introduced later this year. I guess putting them in a different quest would be ok, but they should really spread out all the rings then. Want shintao? Run newquest1! For frenzied berserker, run newquest2!

Ideally, you guys will look at usage rates and desirability of the different sets and their effects because the ToD sets are all very far from equal. If each ToD set were best in slot for its respective prestige line, that would be fantastic, but as of right now, they are not.

[Solmage]

Could you somehow change the 20th mechanic, at least for this one raid, to ONLY include the rings that are applicable to your class showing up in the end reward list?

Hell no. Why the heck would the tempest ranger have to be saddled with the completely useless tempest ranger set, instead of something that improves his dps, as an example?

[Of course, it'd be nice if that set weren't completely useless, and penetrated DR and and added extra damage if tempest III, but since that's not going to happen..]

Now, if you were to rephrase the request so that just for this raid, 1-2 must-have rings always dropped on a 20, plus your PrE ring, on top of whatever else is going to drop randomly (such as +4 tomes, f.ex) then that'd be more interesting.

====

Rather than creating FvS rings, perhaps some of the existing rings could be made to be dual purpose cleric/fvs, ie make them accept either of the PrEs for their bonus?

This way you could have a Cleric or FvS melee ring set that adds damage and to-hit when used by melees, and one for casters that adds healing or caster level to their spells or something.

[Yaga_Nub]

not a good idea while it would work for a cookie cutter build any variation outside of the current class structure would be put at a disadvantage when getting a ring they need.


We need to make getting the ring you need easier not harder and putting all 3 rings of your specific class would just make it worse leaving you only 7 possible rings to choose from because they 3 for your class would be there every time.

You don't NEED anything thing. You want. Let's get that straight.

What we do NEED is for all of the rings to be best in class for the PrE it was designed for. Additionally, we could use better drop rates or a chance of rings added to the Sulo chest. If that was added then I would also say that the main chest should have the ability to drop +4 Tomes if and only if the Sulo chest appeared.

I still love the idea of making the ring set bonuses only work if you have the PrE but I know that people would whine up a storm if that little oversight was corrected.

[Yaga_Nub]

Hell no. Why the heck would the tempest ranger have to be saddled with the completely useless tempest ranger set, instead of something that improves his dps, as an example?

[Of course, it'd be nice if that set weren't completely useless, and penetrated DR and and added extra damage if tempest III, but since that's not going to happen..]

Now, if you were to rephrase the request so that just for this raid, 1-2 must-have rings always dropped on a 20, plus your PrE ring, on top of whatever else is going to drop randomly (such as +4 tomes, f.ex) then that'd be more interesting.

====

Rather than creating FvS rings, perhaps some of the existing rings could be made to be dual purpose cleric/fvs, ie make them accept either of the PrEs for their bonus?

This way you could have a Cleric or FvS melee ring set that adds damage and to-hit when used by melees, and one for casters that adds healing or caster level to their spells or something.

You're way behind. Read more, type less.

If you combine FvS rings with existing rings then why the hell not just combine all the rings and cut down on the fat in the rings. You might as well completely forgo the idea of have sets for each PrE and just have one ring for Clerics, one for FvS, one for Wizards, one for Savants, one for Fighters, one for Barbarians, etc., etc.

Creating the sets was a great idea. Putting them in the raid chest was a crappy idea. Each PrE deserves having their own set and that set bonus should be great to "must have" for the PrE, and it should be meh to 'well if there's no other item I can't find for the slots' for any other PrE even in the same class. The devs just got lazy, or they ran out of time before release, or they really just don't understand the game they design for.

It doesn't really matter though because Big E avoids revisiting raid and loot mechanics like they are the plague.

[guzzlr]

I'm not saying this luck is worse than any other persons, but 68 TOD runs (on one character), 3 encrusted rings dropped in chests, obviously none in end rewards. Of the ones that dropped in chests, 1 of those went up for roll.

I can add in all the other toons that I've done this on, and I spose that adds another 60-ish TOD runs; no encrusted rings at all.

The loot tables are too diluted as it stands now. Please don't further dilute them. Some of these rings feel like the chattering ring in regards to rarity. However, the Titan loot table is not filled with this many items.

Add in a "crafting" or trade mechanic; or list all rings on the 20th end reward. More options I would be in favor of would be to raise the drop rate of the "extra rare" rings (assuming there are different rates), or to add *only* the more rare ring drops to other loot tables in other quests (put them in with the new sets in the works).

[ProdigalGuru]

I do not support emulsifying the Cleric and FvS rings.

The Devs are going to implement this however they see fit regardless of what we want.


Please Eladrin, may we have a sneak peek at the items in question?
If there has been discussion about where to put them, that means they are done, right?

If it makes you feel better, you can have us solve a puzzle first


I promise to go to bed when you say and to eat all of my veggies, even the broccoli.

[Auran82]

Make the rings have other craftable componants instead of a set bonus. Hell, have special '+6 stat rings' drop as well as special '+1 exceptional stat' crafting thingys.

Each ring has:

+6 <stat>
<potential strength> (replaced when you craft one of the +1 exceptional stat crafting thingys on it)
<Incredible Potential> (what we have now for trophies, great shards etc)
<unknown set potential> (Put the ring you want into some crafting altar (stone of change maybe) with the belt/necklace of the set of your choice to destroy the belt/necklace and transfer the set flag onto the ring. Putting the set bonus on, names the ring by that set bonus and makes it exclusive)

That way you can design the ring you want. You wont have barbarians taking the ring that shintao monks what, you wont have sorcerers screwed into having to put +1 exc cha somewhere else and hell, it will mean FvS and Clerics with Concordant opposition items (don't most?) can make their set ring with something they are missing elsewhere, dex, str etc etc.

Just an idea, and the bonus is that if done right, you wouldn't need to do a thing with the current rings people have, your shintao ring would essentially be a +6 Tod wis ring you chose to put +1 exc str and the shintao set on.

[Angelus_dead]

We've been debating whether to add them to ToD or to a future treasure table. There are enough items in ToD currently that we're not sure if we want to expand those tables even more, making it more difficult to get a specific item.

Please keep in mind that the main problem with TOD loot tables is that too many of the ring bonuses are unattractive. That's why player perceive the loot as diluted.

Just consider this: Is it a good thing that Assassins, Tempests, Kensei, Warchanters, and Warpriests prefer the Barbarian TOD rings to those from their own class?

Here are some year-old suggestions on improving the weaker TOD items:
http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=2669407

[Matuse]

All I want is for the AoV set to not involve a necklace item. Sadly, it will probably be a necklace item. So I'll never wear it.

And for the belt to be +6 con, GFL. Sadly, it will probably be Archmagi and Superior Brilliance VIII. So I'll never wear it.

And for the ring to be +6 Cha, +1 Wis or Con. Sadly, it will probably be +6 Wis, +1 Cha. So I'll never wear it.

And the set bonus to not be a giant pile of dung. Sadly, it will probably be a giant pile of dung. So I'll never wear it.

[Angelus_dead]

And for the belt to be +6 con, GFL. Sadly, it will probably be Archmagi and Superior Brilliance VIII. So I'll never wear it.

The pattern indicates that Favored Soul would not get as many spellpoints as granted by Archmagi. FVS is a high-sp class like Sorcerer, which already does not get Archmagi on their belt; only a low-sp class such as Wizard gets it.

[NeutronStar]

The 20th reward list always includes all three rings from the class that you have the most number of levels in...

This is false.

My pure 20th level Barb did not have the Frenzied Berserker ring in his 20th reward list.



As to the question of whether to dilute the treasure table by adding more rings, may I suggest just increasing the number of rings available to choose from in the 20th reward list to 20 or so?

[MeliCat]

It would indeed be good not to water down further the 20th TOD loot tables - but as has been suggested if you could make half of that loot table class specific and the other half random to tweak it more that might work to not water it down so much by adding FvS rings.

I usually find that there is not that much incentive to run chars that can heal in TOD. As there is not that much competition for the rings that I want in there I usually get passed what I want within 20 runs. I think this maybe true for caster type rings too. (Although now more casters do serious dps party makeup is changing such that this may not be as true). A lot more arcane sets to choose from.

So if the FvS rings were added to TOD and something can be done about the watering down of the 20th end rewards then there is an incentive for these chars that can heal to run TOD a bit more.

(I realise there are a lot FvSes do more than just heal and will be competing just as fiercely for all the other rings).

Not sure if I have explained myself clearly...

[Calebro]

All I want is for the AoV set to not involve a necklace item. Sadly, it will probably be a necklace item. So I'll never wear it.

And for the belt to be +6 con, GFL. Sadly, it will probably be Archmagi and Superior Brilliance VIII. So I'll never wear it.

And for the ring to be +6 Cha, +1 Wis or Con. Sadly, it will probably be +6 Wis, +1 Cha. So I'll never wear it.

And the set bonus to not be a giant pile of dung. Sadly, it will probably be a giant pile of dung. So I'll never wear it.

Unfortunately I agree with you. Almost.
I know what you'd/we'd prefer, but thematically it doesn't make sense that way. Thematically, the AoV set should be necklace +6 Wis +1 ex Cha/Wis, and ring +6 Cha +1 Wis/Cha. These are the two main stats for the class after all....

[Phidius]

Oh jesus christ you nit-picky person. How's this? The 20th reward list always includes all three rings from the class that you have the most number of levels in
and then another random number of rings from the other classes

Screw the fact that other sets work better for other classes than the ones intended. That's what your 20 runs of the quest were for, to have a chance at those other rings.

Also screw trading rings with some other additional cost too. Turbine wants us to grind. Long live the grind!

This is false.

Mt pure 20th level Barb did not have the Frenzied Berserker ring in his 20th reward list.
...

Yes, but did you run your 20th after Yaga_Nub's suggestion was implemented? I'm guessing not...

[UrbanPyro]

Deleted.

[Bodic]

We've been debating whether to add them to ToD or to a future treasure table. There are enough items in ToD currently that we're not sure if we want to expand those tables even more, making it more difficult to get a specific item.

It makes no difference where you ADD it everyone Not FvS will complain.

If it is a new drop quest then the other classes will be like where is ours for this , and whats 2 more items on the loot table for TOD a drop in the bucket compared to the add it somplace else and then only for the FvS whinefest and even then if it doenst drop for the FvS I am sure the whiner's will not let the FvS have the ring, but require that you give up the ring they want from TOD because its not for you.

[aristarchus1000]

We've been debating whether to add them to ToD or to a future treasure table. There are enough items in ToD currently that we're not sure if we want to expand those tables even more, making it more difficult to get a specific item.

It seems to me that if dilution is the problem, then you can just increase the overall drop rate so that all the previous rings still "drop" at the same rate.

I do agree that the main reason people complain about "dilution" is because most of the rings are not desireable to most classes (even the primary ones). Improving them will be a big plus, regardless of whether you add FvS rings or not.

[sephiroth1084]

We've been debating whether to add them to ToD or to a future treasure table. There are enough items in ToD currently that we're not sure if we want to expand those tables even more, making it more difficult to get a specific item.

Good call there, Eladrin. Stick these in elsewhere. If the new place ends up being suitable enough, maybe you could even move some of the existing ToD items to the new location, or copy them there.

[Solmage]

You're way behind. Read more, type less.

If you combine FvS rings with existing rings then why the hell not just combine all the rings and cut down on the fat in the rings. You might as well completely forgo the idea of have sets for each PrE and just have one ring for Clerics, one for FvS, one for Wizards, one for Savants, one for Fighters, one for Barbarians, etc., etc.

Creating the sets was a great idea. Putting them in the raid chest was a crappy idea. Each PrE deserves having their own set and that set bonus should be great to "must have" for the PrE, and it should be meh to 'well if there's no other item I can't find for the slots' for any other PrE even in the same class. The devs just got lazy, or they ran out of time before release, or they really just don't understand the game they design for.

It doesn't really matter though because Big E avoids revisiting raid and loot mechanics like they are the plague.

In this particular case, a melee favour soul and a melee cleric happen to be more or less identical (with the FvS obviously having some weapon-specific bonuses) What will differentiate them will be their PrEs. So, a ring could be coded to provide a given bonus if FvS melee PrE III is present, and another bonus if cleric melee PrE III is present.

The advantage would be that this would stop the dilution of the loot table with rings generally useless to everyone else, while still providing an unique ring set for both classes.

In a similar vein, all the sorcerer rings could be combined into one, and provide it's bonus to the right spells depending on PrE. This alone would eliminate 3 pointless rings from the loot table, and leave us with just the one ring. (And who knows, it might even be a single actually useful +1 exceptional cha ring )

I don't think our positions are as different as you seem to think: I strongly believe each set has to be REALLY useful and really helpful to the given PrE, and that the main benefit should come WITH the PrE.

(I also believe there should be 1 or 2 generally useful for non-PrE people, but we already have that, the ravager set f.ex)

However, with the proliferation of PrEs, the loot situation isn't going to get any better, it's going to get worse. Having a few rings pull double duty when it makes complete sense to do so, such as with the sorcerer's savants, would help things.

[sephiroth1084]

It makes no difference where you ADD it everyone Not FvS will complain.

If it is a new drop quest then the other classes will be like where is ours for this , and whats 2 more items on the loot table for TOD a drop in the bucket compared to the add it somplace else and then only for the FvS whinefest and even then if it doenst drop for the FvS I am sure the whiner's will not let the FvS have the ring, but require that you give up the ring they want from TOD because its not for you.

They could, you know, add other loot to whatever quest gets the FvS rings. Admittedly, not putting the rings in ToD would erase most desire for any favored souls to run the raid, which is a problem.

One solution might be to fold the multitude of rings into a set of 11, one for each class with the option of adding more as more classes are introduced. Each ring would be:

Ring of the Warrior (fighter)

• +6 stat: put into altar with 1 war trophy, 1 charged low energy cell and 1 of a small scale, stone, arrow, chain, bone or shrapnel, where each is tied to a specific stat (ie. scale is Str, stone Con, etc...). Perhaps limit which rings will accept which recipes. So, fighter would only accept Str or Con, Paladin Str or Cha, Cleric Wis or Cha, etc...
• +1 stat: put into altar with 1 war trophy, 1 charged medium energy cell and 1 of a medium scale, stone, arrow, chain, bone or shrapnel as above.
• Set bonus: Wearing the appropriate belt or necklace activates the corresponding set bonus. If you wear the Kensai necklace, you get the Kensai bonus. If you swap to the Stalwart necklace, so, too, does your set bonus. The belts are spread across a few quests and drop in droves from ToD 2, so having a whole lot of them on the loot tables isn't so bad, even if it can take 8-10 runs to acquire a specific belt.
• Prestige bonus: Having rank 3 of a prestige enhancement associated with the class of the ring grants its bonus, just as it does now, but if you were to swap your AP from Assassin to Mechanic, you'd not have to go hunting for a new ring, though you may need a new belt. The prestige bonus could apply either only while the full set is worn, or just by wearing the ring and having the PrE.
• Craftable: Same as it works currently, with the ability to put Shroud effects on these as we see fit.

This cuts down on rings without removing the variety that they offer currently, though it makes a few rings better by allowing characters like sorcerers to get Cha +6/Cha +1 and rogues who may have a Dex item elsewhere pick something more useful.

The biggest downsides here are that the loot table drops from something like 30 items to 11, making it one of the smallest raid loot tables in the game, and far too easy, I'd wager, to acquire all the rings you want, and my suggestion likely would eat up a fair bit of dev time in recoding all of the rings by hand. The first problem, at least, could be partly averted by making the rings non-exclusive, in order to allow characters to get more than one copy of a ring they might want, in order to have a variety of combinations that all still provide their set bonuses. For example, a paladin could acquire 3 Defender of Siberys rings, one with Str +6/Cha +1/20% healing amp, another with Str +6/Str +1/Str +2, and a third with Cha +6/Cha+1/Cha+2 for tanking, DPS and UMD respectively.

That might up competition for rings a bit, particularly for those already highly sought after, but no more so than epic Seals and Shards engender.