Let's Talk: Enhancements!

[Artos_Fabril]

Aashrym, Blacksteel, Vormaerin, Orakio, and Waterboytkd are making a lot of sense. I think they have taken a good solid level headed wait-and-see approach.

And why would you not think that the people who agree with you are making sense?

Attempting to discredit the people who disagree with you by asserting that those who are arguing from the same position as you are on the one true path to understanding in an extension of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, and implies an ad-hominem attack by denying that anyone who disagrees with you might also have valid points and a level headed approach but still reach different conclusions.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

But I seriously hope that's not an issue, because every single build in this game is going to change.

Indeed. Which is why I'm concerned about those that arent highly proficient in creating builds from the start. Maybe a new system thats easier to understand, with a better layout and detail will allow them to create the toons they wanted to but were unable too under this new system.

If Turbine does it right, it will be less likely for many to take something that isnt worth it, while giving all players more enhancements that are meaningful to their builds. I cant wait to fit my toons into this new system.

Crying over today's enhancements will never end though... so I hope Turbine has invested in commercial grade cotton balls

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

And why would you not think that the people who agree with you are making sense?

Attempting to discredit the people who disagree with you by asserting that those who are arguing from the same position as you are on the one true path to understanding in an extension of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, and implies an ad-hominem attack by denying that anyone who disagrees with you might also have valid points and a level headed approach but still reach different conclusions.

Oh I think most of the people that are fearful of a new system have made perfect sense in this thread. They admit this isnt close to done yet and is taking the same wait-and-see approach that people who are upbeat are taking, albiet they might be sweating a bit more.

I gave my opinion of three people who I have essentially not agreed with because to me they gave the impression they have crossed off any possibility that this may work out just fine. They are still in their right to give their opinion, and it shouldn't be taken as a discredit in any way.... other than that I disagree with their assertions.

[maddmatt70]

I just want to point out to those folks wanting halflings to have acrobat or another new pre instead of assasin as a racial pre there is alot of lore for a halfling assasin in both D&D and classical sci-fiction. An example is Gray Mouser, from the science fiction series written by Fritz Leiber, who is the prototype assasin and was small and quick and basically a halfling figure.


From a game balance halflings need a dps racial PRE because otherwise why be a halfling? If you want to role play your halfling as non dps characters so be it, but some of us actually want to play an effective character in DDO's dps oriented game.

[HAL]

Its all opinions at this point. There are no facts. There's nothing written in stone. No decisions have been made at this point.

"Written in stone" = released in game. At that point it will be very difficult for our feedback to result in major changes and at least we will have to play with it until those changes come.

[stainer]

All the arguing is distracting and takes away from my enjoyment of this thread.

/sadtimes

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

"Written in stone" = released in game. At that point it will be very difficult for our feedback to result in major changes and at least we will have to play with it until those changes come.

If they go ahead with their plan to change Lamma into a test server, which they have stated was their goal in '12, this fear will finally, for the most part, be history. A lot hinges on that one act (or failure to act). Final, in depth testing of this change on Lamania, I believe would save a lot of people's time, nerves and money, and would be a noticeable improvement to their QA and fulfillment of Fernando's promise in his New Years letter. Maybe clarifying THIS ONE concern, might go a long way into alleviating many folks concerns on both sides of the fence.

Again, the ball is in Turbine's court on this one.

[HAL]

I feel I have more than read enough possible hypothetica from certain folks (details in first paragraph). I see those people attacking other people and blatantly insulting people for taking a different position. I think further debating the same hypothetica is nonsensical, but am amused watching others not grasp that nothing is close to being set in stone . (Aashrym is doing a great job explaining this and seems to be taking the most sensical approach.) Many others have offered their opinion only once or twice but they count just as much as another person giving his opinion 100+ times.

Whoa, "attacking" and "insulting"?! Please quote these attacks and insults because I think I'm in a different dimension than you are and I missed them.

And why do you care if people debate something? You claim that there isn't enough information to decide anything - if that's true, then people may be wasting their time. How is that a problem for you? Simply don't read their posts. Why bother insisting that they stop?

[Scraap]

It would be quite illuminating to see what the unlock point is for reflex amps, or skills and boosts such as disabling or intim to name a couple tied to hitting a fixed number.

Right now, most of those start at level 1, and cap at 12, which makes an MC hit less punishing in the existing system precisely because the benefits are front-loaded and available regardless of pre.

Anything at present along those lines you'd care to share with the peanut gallery devs?

[waterboytkd]

Should pure classes get more than they have now? Yes. Should that be accomplished by taking away things that multiclasses get now? No.

The challenge, once again, is for Turbine to make all enhancements useful - not just some, they seem to be already aware of this, which is good.

Pure classes need, and needed some kind of boost. No arguments. Capstones was one way to get partway there, but is a small and arbitrary way as well - level 20 and 18 gives something but level 19,17,16,15,14 does not for example. So part of the answer is that ALL levels of a class, or at least every other level, gives something that benefits that class other than 4-10 more hp.

Casters get more spells, so casters are in a different category than melee. Most melee classes dont do more damage adding one more level - while casters do. A level 12 fighter and a level 20 fighter can do about the same amount of damage, and if you add 6 levels of a 'better' tier 1 from another class - do MORE damage adding in something else than taking Kensai 3 for example. Any mix and match of melee tends to give some kind of benefit - in part because right now a lot of tier 1 lines or splash bonuses are front loaded. (Similarly, a level 12 Rogue/8 fighter and a level 20 Rogue disarm traps all the same)

Currently a tier 3 line requiring 18 is just an artificial number tacked onto the flawed D&D system TSR and then WotC made from edition 3.0 and onward. While Turbine has done a lot to try and work within that system to add some better balance (and sometimes failing...) - this new system could possibly do a great job in fixing a decades old problem.

But for that to work, all levels, and all higher levels of enhancements have to give increasing benefits to staying pure - which currently they do not for many cases. Haste boost as one example. Level 1, 1 point. 15% increase. Level 4? 4 points, a 5% increase. What is wrong with that picture? Every line of enhancements is front loaded in BOTH cost AND effectiveness, which is very wrong.

Every point of AP should be as important as every other point - if 1 point gets you 15%, then 4 points should get you 60%. While that will be changing, most people complaining seem to keep missing that simple but critical fact.

The fact that so many early bonuses are big, and later bonuses get smaller is why so many multiclasses are out there now. For a melee is almost always better to multi than go pure - that 1 or 2 extra feats for a fighter cant compare to Tempest 1, DoS, FB 1 or whatever - in part because feats are also useless other than the few major ones that everyone takes. (On a side note, I have mentioned Pathfinder before - because they solved this problem already - every 2 class levels you get something. Level 20 you get something bigger. Every class, not just casters - it works well)

However saying that pure classes need more power - does not, and should not, require actively taking AWAY things from multiclasses that they have now.

100% agree up to this point.

Which is what the 3 tree limit and only accessing 1/3 of class enhancements per tree would do. No rational person can honestly say losing 66% of what you had from yesterday to today is not a nurf.

Unless that loss of access to old choices is replaced by a bunch of new choices. Which is probable (there's not enough current enhancements to actually make 3 separate trees without a massive amount of overlapping abilities). It'll only be a nerf if you lose enhancements and get nothing to replace them.

The most sensible solution should be pretty clear;

Certainly not the most sensible solution. I don't even agree with a good portion of it. This is the kind of hubris that's causing so much bickering in this thread.

Here's where I would differ from you:
-I would let Racial Trees give all the way up to capstone benefits (you want to be a paragon of your race, go for it).
-I would allow for more than one tier 3 PrE benefit. Why impose arbitrary or unnecessary limits? :O
-I would remove all class level restrictions on enhancements not specifically tied to certain class abilities. So even a 2 splash would have access to top tier enhancements all the way up the tree.
-I would then keep the 3 tree limit.
-Back loaded or not, it doesn't matter anymore. Everyone, including multiclasses, have access to high end stuff, so it doesn't matter if things are backloaded, frontloaded, or evenly distributed.
-Bonus PrE enhancements, including capstone, would still require certain class levels. This is the balancing act between deep multiclass builds and pures. Pures get their tier 3 PrE and capstone benefits but little flexibility in trees (just racial PrE can replace an unwanted class tree), while deep multiclasses (12/6/2, for example) don't have access to tier 3 PrE and capstone benefits (outside of race) but get amazing flexibility in what trees they have and get to take those trees to the top, even if they can't get the PrE bonuses, and splash builds (18/2) have access to tier 3 PrE benefits of main class and have a much broader selection of trees to choose from, but not as many as deep multiclass builds, and can't get a PrE bonus in more than 1 class's PrEs. Double splash builds (18/1/1) could look like the winners here, as they can 9 trees to choose from, but like 18/2, they can only get PrE benefits in one class's PrE, whereas the 12/6/2 can get PrE benefits in 2 classes.

Given the above, the reason to have a 3 tree limit is to prevent cherry picking the best enhancement lines in a number of trees. With a tree limit, you would have to choose which trees are most appealing to your desired role(s).

This suggestion makes it so multis and pures both have access to high level enhancements, so there's no weird balancing act of trying to make high level enhancements equivalent to an extreme number of options in low level enhancements (it's like trying to make apples equivalent to oranges). The trade-off between pures and multis becomes trading capstone and maybe tier 3 access for a broader range of class abilities, bonus feats, and a customziable set of trees.

I see that as encouraging multiclassing as you aren't hurt as far as enhancement power goes, as well as encouraging going pure, because it let's you focus more.

[Ungood]

DKyle sent out PMs to 2 devs, as he has been outlining in this thread for a few pages now. They confirmed that the we will have 3 trees accessible total.

Why didn't they just confirm this in this thread? Odd.

Which literally reinforces my viewpoint that the earlier our feedback is provided based on the information they DO give us, the better.

In this one, I am going to wait and see.

What's the worst that happens? It's finally ticks me off enough to leave?

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

Why bother insisting that they stop?

They are still in their right to give their opinion, and it shouldn't be taken as a discredit in any way.... other than that I disagree with their assertions. Did you miss it Hal?

Let me ask you this. I got what you dont like about the new UI. Do you have any positive vibes with this new system? Anything that might be a good thing for the game, in your eyes?

[Ungood]

Here's where I would differ from you:
-I would let Racial Trees give all the way up to capstone benefits (you want to be a paragon of your race, go for it).
-I would allow for more than one tier 3 PrE benefit. Why impose arbitrary or unnecessary limits? :O
-I would remove all class level restrictions on enhancements not specifically tied to certain class abilities. So even a 2 splash would have access to top tier enhancements all the way up the tree.
-I would then keep the 3 tree limit.
-Back loaded or not, it doesn't matter anymore. Everyone, including multiclasses, have access to high end stuff, so it doesn't matter if things are backloaded, frontloaded, or evenly distributed.
-Bonus PrE enhancements, including capstone, would still require certain class levels. This is the balancing act between deep multiclass builds and pures. Pures get their tier 3 PrE and capstone benefits but little flexibility in trees (just racial PrE can replace an unwanted class tree), while deep multiclasses (12/6/2, for example) don't have access to tier 3 PrE and capstone benefits (outside of race) but get amazing flexibility in what trees they have and get to take those trees to the top, even if they can't get the PrE bonuses, and splash builds (18/2) have access to tier 3 PrE benefits of main class and have a much broader selection of trees to choose from, but not as many as deep multiclass builds, and can't get a PrE bonus in more than 1 class's PrEs. Double splash builds (18/1/1) could look like the winners here, as they can 9 trees to choose from, but like 18/2, they can only get PrE benefits in one class's PrE, whereas the 12/6/2 can get PrE benefits in 2 classes.

Given the above, the reason to have a 3 tree limit is to prevent cherry picking the best enhancement lines in a number of trees. With a tree limit, you would have to choose which trees are most appealing to your desired role(s).

This suggestion makes it so multis and pures both have access to high level enhancements, so there's no weird balancing act of trying to make high level enhancements equivalent to an extreme number of options in low level enhancements (it's like trying to make apples equivalent to oranges). The trade-off between pures and multis becomes trading capstone and maybe tier 3 access for a broader range of class abilities, bonus feats, and a customziable set of trees.

I see that as encouraging multiclassing as you aren't hurt as far as enhancement power goes, as well as encouraging going pure, because it let's you focus more.

This, in my humble opinion, is brilliant.

[Feithlin]

As someone said earlier (sorry couldn't find who and where in the mass of posts), a very nice addition would be to introduce multiclass PrEs with time. Bring one at the introduction of the system to keep everyone happy, then bring a new one every major update, to fit with the theme of the update.
As said before, originally, many prestiges classes were based on multiclasses or could allow them.

The best of all would be to make most PrEs, if not all, independant of classes, with requirements based on BaB, skills, feats, able to cast Xth level spells, etc. But it's probably harder to code.

[Artos_Fabril]

If Turbine does it right, it will be less likely for many to take something that isnt worth it, while giving all players more enhancements that are meaningful to their builds. I cant wait to fit my toons into this new system.

This is the basic disagreement in this thread. Possibly the most basic disagreement in the world:

Some people believe restriction of choice is a good thing.

Some people believe restriction of choice is a bad thing.

If I had to choose one extreme or the other, I'd side with those that believe any restriction of choice is a bad thing. My preferred, more moderate stance would include the caveat expressed by Benjamin Franklin when he said "Your freedom to swing your fist ends where my nose begins." Which is to say that I believe that only the most necessary limitations to protect a person, or society, (or in this case the basic operations of the game system) should be instituted.

I see those people attacking other people and blatantly insulting people for taking a different position.

The only attacks I see in this thread are coming for the people calling dissenters "whiners" "Dooooomsayers" or making accusations of "crying" because they are providing (mostly) honest responses to a Dev's direct request for feedback.

[Feithlin]

100% agree up to this point.



Unless that loss of access to old choices is replaced by a bunch of new choices. Which is probable (there's not enough current enhancements to actually make 3 separate trees without a massive amount of overlapping abilities). It'll only be a nerf if you lose enhancements and get nothing to replace them.



Certainly not the most sensible solution. I don't even agree with a good portion of it. This is the kind of hubris that's causing so much bickering in this thread.

Here's where I would differ from you:
-I would let Racial Trees give all the way up to capstone benefits (you want to be a paragon of your race, go for it).
-I would allow for more than one tier 3 PrE benefit. Why impose arbitrary or unnecessary limits? :O
-I would remove all class level restrictions on enhancements not specifically tied to certain class abilities. So even a 2 splash would have access to top tier enhancements all the way up the tree.
-I would then keep the 3 tree limit.
-Back loaded or not, it doesn't matter anymore. Everyone, including multiclasses, have access to high end stuff, so it doesn't matter if things are backloaded, frontloaded, or evenly distributed.
-Bonus PrE enhancements, including capstone, would still require certain class levels. This is the balancing act between deep multiclass builds and pures. Pures get their tier 3 PrE and capstone benefits but little flexibility in trees (just racial PrE can replace an unwanted class tree), while deep multiclasses (12/6/2, for example) don't have access to tier 3 PrE and capstone benefits (outside of race) but get amazing flexibility in what trees they have and get to take those trees to the top, even if they can't get the PrE bonuses, and splash builds (18/2) have access to tier 3 PrE benefits of main class and have a much broader selection of trees to choose from, but not as many as deep multiclass builds, and can't get a PrE bonus in more than 1 class's PrEs. Double splash builds (18/1/1) could look like the winners here, as they can 9 trees to choose from, but like 18/2, they can only get PrE benefits in one class's PrE, whereas the 12/6/2 can get PrE benefits in 2 classes.

Given the above, the reason to have a 3 tree limit is to prevent cherry picking the best enhancement lines in a number of trees. With a tree limit, you would have to choose which trees are most appealing to your desired role(s).

This suggestion makes it so multis and pures both have access to high level enhancements, so there's no weird balancing act of trying to make high level enhancements equivalent to an extreme number of options in low level enhancements (it's like trying to make apples equivalent to oranges). The trade-off between pures and multis becomes trading capstone and maybe tier 3 access for a broader range of class abilities, bonus feats, and a customziable set of trees.

I see that as encouraging multiclassing as you aren't hurt as far as enhancement power goes, as well as encouraging going pure, because it let's you focus more.

So 1 fighter level to get Kensei II, 1 rogue to get Assassin II (or 1 ranger to get Tempest II), then 18 barb for a dps monstrosity? Sorry, but no, I don't buy it. This would make pures totally useless, at least for melees: a tier 3 and capstone are not worth loosing so much.

[Meat-Head]

So 1 fighter level to get Kensei II, 1 rogue to get Assassin II (or 1 ranger to get Tempest II), then 18 barb for a dps monstrosity? Sorry, but no, I don't buy it. This would make pures totally useless, at least for melees: a tier 3 and capstone are not worth loosing so much.

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with either of you at this point. But I am pretty sure that you misread his post. Maybe re-read this part:

-Bonus PrE enhancements, including capstone, would still require certain class levels. This is the balancing act between deep multiclass builds and pures. Pures get their tier 3 PrE and capstone benefits but little flexibility in trees (just racial PrE can replace an unwanted class tree), while deep multiclasses (12/6/2, for example) don't have access to tier 3 PrE and capstone benefits (outside of race) but get amazing flexibility in what trees they have and get to take those trees to the top, even if they can't get the PrE bonuses, and splash builds (18/2) have access to tier 3 PrE benefits of main class and have a much broader selection of trees to choose from, but not as many as deep multiclass builds, and can't get a PrE bonus in more than 1 class's PrEs. Double splash builds (18/1/1) could look like the winners here, as they can 9 trees to choose from, but like 18/2, they can only get PrE benefits in one class's PrE, whereas the 12/6/2 can get PrE benefits in 2 classes.

Btw, my understanding of the proposed system by the devs is pretty much along these lines. Only major differences I can see between this and devs original mock up is that devs said if you had, say, 1 level in rogue you wouldn't be able to take much more than the first row or two of rogue enh from a rogue tree if you chose to use it as one of your three. But BOTH this guy AND the devs say you don't get Kensei II without 12 levels of FTR.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

This is the basic disagreement in this thread. Possibly the most basic disagreement in the world:

Some people believe restriction of choice is a good thing.

Oh Im fully expecting and hoping for many more enhancements, some to go away and some to be blended with others. I'm definitely looking forward to many more ways to build toons.

But I realize that making choices when you multiclass automatically limits you in all areas, but at the same time grants you abilities you wouldnt of had it you didnt. That is the essence of multi-classing. My hope is there will be many more way to build a toon, by offering more choices via new and better fleshed out enhancements and prestiges.

Im still feeling the same way I did when Mad made his comments in the OP. I do not see this as a nerf, but getting a 6+ year old wild system of patches under control. Hopefully, I'll also see this as providing a better balance and more options for more people when the new UI is complete. Only time will tell.

[kingfisher]

and why would you not think that the people who agree with you are making sense?

lol.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

Here's where I would differ from you:
-I would let Racial Trees give all the way up to capstone benefits (you want to be a paragon of your race, go for it).
-I would allow for more than one tier 3 PrE benefit. Why impose arbitrary or unnecessary limits? :O
-I would remove all class level restrictions on enhancements not specifically tied to certain class abilities. So even a 2 splash would have access to top tier enhancements all the way up the tree.
-I would then keep the 3 tree limit.
-Back loaded or not, it doesn't matter anymore. Everyone, including multiclasses, have access to high end stuff, so it doesn't matter if things are backloaded, frontloaded, or evenly distributed.
-Bonus PrE enhancements, including capstone, would still require certain class levels. This is the balancing act between deep multiclass builds and pures. Pures get their tier 3 PrE and capstone benefits but little flexibility in trees (just racial PrE can replace an unwanted class tree), while deep multiclasses (12/6/2, for example) don't have access to tier 3 PrE and capstone benefits (outside of race) but get amazing flexibility in what trees they have and get to take those trees to the top, even if they can't get the PrE bonuses, and splash builds (18/2) have access to tier 3 PrE benefits of main class and have a much broader selection of trees to choose from, but not as many as deep multiclass builds, and can't get a PrE bonus in more than 1 class's PrEs. Double splash builds (18/1/1) could look like the winners here, as they can 9 trees to choose from, but like 18/2, they can only get PrE benefits in one class's PrE, whereas the 12/6/2 can get PrE benefits in 2 classes.

Given the above, the reason to have a 3 tree limit is to prevent cherry picking the best enhancement lines in a number of trees. With a tree limit, you would have to choose which trees are most appealing to your desired role(s).

This suggestion makes it so multis and pures both have access to high level enhancements, so there's no weird balancing act of trying to make high level enhancements equivalent to an extreme number of options in low level enhancements (it's like trying to make apples equivalent to oranges). The trade-off between pures and multis becomes trading capstone and maybe tier 3 access for a broader range of class abilities, bonus feats, and a customziable set of trees.

I see that as encouraging multiclassing as you aren't hurt as far as enhancement power goes, as well as encouraging going pure, because it let's you focus more.

I think the UI will wind up very similar to the way you describe it here. +1