Let's Talk: Enhancements!

[jkm]

The problem without capstones was there was no reason to go to 20 levels of fighter in the first place and seriously marginalizing pure class fighters.

Comparing that one level of fighter is not an accurate depiction of reality because the capstone is there to compete with something like a rogues splash where 2 levels provide much more benefit than those last 2 levels of fighter ever did.

IFFF there were more useable feats then the value of those last 2 levels of fighter would have easily increased over a 2 rogue splash (especially since fighters struggle to get the reflex necessary for evasion).

The ONLY class where there was a legitimate reason to give something nice was rogue. Mainly because WOTC messed up its design and you get all of your class abilities by level 19.

And I'm not even going to get into the relative power of the capstones. When a capstone is stronger than any feat in the game, then you have a problem.

[dkyle]

My pure builds are FAR more focused than my multis.
Ex: My AA is pure ranged (they're dead before they reach melee range, so why SHOULD I have a melee game?)

Raid bosses are dead before they reach you?

If you're not interested in the end-game, I can understand that point of view. But on the whole, pure Ranger AAs are more versatile than a lot of Elf AA builds. Whether you choose to use that versatility is another matter.

I'm not claiming that all multis are more focused than pures. Just that in the current game, it goes both ways. Which seems like it's not what Leslie wants to see, based on what he said. But I'm not exactly sure.

[Aashrym]

Yeah, that very well may be. I am concerned the Racial PrE capstone weakens the best reason to stay pure, which is part of why I've argued against the Racial PrEs.

I've gotten lax in my terminology. What I should have said is that the system as described favors pures and splashes, over deep multis. In my mind, splashes are much closer to pures, than to deep multis.

I still think there will be room for a lot of 12/8 and 12/6/2 melee or ranged splits too and just use the race PrE unlock. With the choices we know of with stalwart, ravager, tempest, assassin, and arcane archer most of those look like they suit melee with arcane archer for ranged.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

I'm not claiming that all multis are more focused than pures. Just that in the current game, it goes both ways. Which seems like it's not what Leslie wants to see, based on what he said. But I'm not exactly sure.

How in the universe CAN you claim that all multis are more focused than pures!? How can you claim ONE multi is more focused than pure?!

Since you stated most of your toons are pure, it makes sense now that you are having so much trouble grasping much of the basic gist of why pures need to be more effective than multis in their chosen profession.

Your arguments are so flawed its getting dang near impossible to debate with you.

As for your propensity to stand behind hypotheticals and mockups and a blank enhancement user interface as "KNOWN FACTS" that will occur in 3-6 months (maybe) is completely unexplainable.

[lathreborn]

Raid bosses are dead before they reach you?

That's what the melees are for. In most quests, she is self sufficient, DPS wise.

If you're not interested in the end-game, I can understand that point of view.

My AA has completed more of the end game content than most of the rest of my toons, being one of my personal favs. Being able to kill mobs before they reach me makes her survivability ratio higher than a regular fighter IMO.

But on the whole, pure Ranger AAs are more versatile than a lot of Elf AA builds.

She's human, although I have a helf AA that melees as well as my fighter.

I'm not claiming that all multis are more focused than pures. Just that in the current game, it goes both ways.

I agree totally that it goes both ways, but that doesn't seem to be the argument that you are making. It looks, from the posts I've seen to this point that you are making the argument that multis are being nerfed by the UI update, which we do NOT have enough information to gage at this point. I personally am looking forward to the changes, as it seems to me that multis will then have MORE options and versatility...but I could be wrong.

[jkm]

So I threw this together quickly (without going into MFs little visio stencils)

The rules would be as follows:

• 3 Trees Base + 1 for 2nd Life + 1 for Each extra class chosen (so a max of 6 trees)
• 1 Extra AP per Life
• All Purchaseable PL Feats move to the Reincarnation Tab and require PL:X for them to be purchased

Corollary is that Reincarnation Points would be separate and only used on that screen.

[Aashrym]

IFFF there were more useable feats then the value of those last 2 levels of fighter would have easily increased over a 2 rogue splash (especially since fighters struggle to get the reflex necessary for evasion).

The ONLY class where there was a legitimate reason to give something nice was rogue. Mainly because WOTC messed up its design and you get all of your class abilities by level 19.

And I'm not even going to get into the relative power of the capstones. When a capstone is stronger than any feat in the game, then you have a problem.

If more feats were viable you could take 2 levels of monk instead and get better saves and 2 more feats instead of 1 to go with evasion but wouldn't have the sneak attack. If that 1 feat were better than the rogue splash that just changes the splash to a monk as the better option than pure.

[AZgreentea]

I didnt see it mentioned here, but do the changes to enhancements mean having to rebuild some of the Hirelings? If so, may I suggest making more liberal use of PRE's with them, especially the cleric's and FvS's...

Its very rare that a player would choose to take no PRE's, especially by mid level (12+) and especially if (like with Clerics and FvS) there is really only one PRE available to the class. Their build would have to be very specialized to skip something as powerful as a PRE.

I'm not sure what you have to do to build a hireling (since they probably work more like a summon than a player character) but if you really do have to rebuild the hirelings because of this, may I suggest asking the players for some builds for all the levels we would find generally useful? feats and enhancments, basic must have gear/stat items for that level, and maybe you could throw some of the cosmetic armors on them.

[jkm]

If more feats were viable you could take 2 levels of monk instead and get better saves and 2 more feats instead of 1 to go with evasion but wouldn't have the sneak attack. If that 1 feat were better than the rogue splash that just changes the splash to a monk as the better option than pure.

You complicating your argument by choosing classes that have already ignored PnP balancing rules to become slightly more powerful in DDO. Yes a Monk Splash is more powerful in every single instance. Why? because its technically not supposed to be a splash class.

[Aashrym]

You complicating your argument by choosing classes that have already ignored PnP balancing rules to become slightly more powerful in DDO. Yes a Monk Splash is more powerful in every single instance. Why? because its technically not supposed to be a splash class.

That doesn't complicate my argument at all. If feats were better 2 feats plus more beats 1 feat. Why would I ignore splashing a class based on it's implementation in DDO from PnP when I'm playing DDO.

Monk is an awesome splash class.

[jkm]

That doesn't complicate my argument at all. If feats were better 2 feats beats 1 feat plus more. Why would I ignore splashing a class based on it's implementation in DDO from PnP when I'm playing DDO.

Monk is an awesome splash class.

Monk is balanced in PnP by 2 rules that were house ruled out in DDO.

1) Like a member of any other class, a monk may be a multiclass character, but multiclass monks face a special restriction. A monk who gains a new class or (if already multiclass) raises another class by a level may never again raise her monk level, though she retains all her monk abilities.
2) At 1st level, a monk may select either Improved Grapple or Stunning Fist as a bonus feat. At 2nd level, she may select either Combat Reflexes or Deflect Arrows as a bonus feat. At 6th level, she may select either Improved Disarm or Improved Trip as a bonus feat

Now tell me, had they abided by those 2 rules would you be making this argument?

This is kind of the history of DDO. 1 decision is made to make something more playable (IE monks would suck without the leeway on feat selection) but it cascades when you push it into multi-classing. There are other examples -> Ranger getting both bow and TWF feats, etc.

[lathreborn]

Monk is balanced in PnP by 2 rules that were house ruled out in DDO.

Dude, we play DDO, not PnP. The rules don't always translate as well as we'd like. Deal.

[dkyle]

How in the universe CAN you claim that all multis are more focused than pures!?

Huh? I believe I specifically just said I wasn't claiming that.

How can you claim ONE multi is more focused than pure?!

Depends on your definition of focus. I'm still not positive what your definition is.

If I want to focus on Stunning Fist DCs, it's quite apparent that multiclass Fighter/Monks are capable of being more focused on that than pure Monks.

Since you stated most of your toons are pure, it makes sense now that you are having so much trouble grasping much of the basic gist of why pures need to be more effective than multis in their chosen profession.

OK, I really don't know what you mean by "chosen profession". Are you just saying that pures should be better at having the specific set of abilities they get as part of their class, and at doing the specific set of things they do, than multis? Well, yes. I should expect so. I would expect most builds to be the best at having the specific set of abilities they have compared to other builds, whether pure or multi. But that's very nearly a tautology. The only way that could be untrue is if multis were strictly as good or better at absolutely everything the pure does. Which seems highly unlikely. Even a pure melee Ranger is better at some things than a splashed melee Ranger.

As for your propensity to stand behind hypotheticals and mockups and a blank enhancement user interface as "KNOWN FACTS" that will occur in 3-6 months (maybe) is completely unexplainable.

The facts stated by the Devs are "KNOWN FACTS" about the system they are currently planning to implement. I am giving feedback on that system, because they asked for it. I am not talking what what "will occur in 3.6 months". I don't know what will occur then. Although the facts about the currently planned system gives some indication of what is more likely than other possibilities.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

This is ... snip... DDO.

I have played PnP for years, and the closer this game is to 3.5 the happier it makes me.

However, if we make this thread about WoTC's 3.5e in relation to Turbine's DDO, we'll be at reply number 258,9898,090,053 before realizing Dkyle is still trying to explain how he was grateful that Turbine didn't nerf multis after all!

[dkyle]

Monk is balanced in PnP by 2 rules that were house ruled out in DDO.

1) Like a member of any other class, a monk may be a multiclass character, but multiclass monks face a special restriction. A monk who gains a new class or (if already multiclass) raises another class by a level may never again raise her monk level, though she retains all her monk abilities.
2) At 1st level, a monk may select either Improved Grapple or Stunning Fist as a bonus feat. At 2nd level, she may select either Combat Reflexes or Deflect Arrows as a bonus feat. At 6th level, she may select either Improved Disarm or Improved Trip as a bonus feat

Now tell me, had they abided by those 2 rules would you be making this argument?

This is kind of the history of DDO. 1 decision is made to make something more playable (IE monks would suck without the leeway on feat selection) but it cascades when you push it into multi-classing. There are other examples -> Ranger getting both bow and TWF feats, etc.

The first would not really be a meaningful restriction in DDO. The second would arguably be a buff, since bonus feats bypass stat requirements.

EDIT: For pure and deep multiclasses. Should've read the context more carefully. The second limitation would put a damper on splash builds. Although it still might be a buff for some.

[Aashrym]

Monk is balanced in PnP by 2 rules that were house ruled out in DDO.

1) Like a member of any other class, a monk may be a multiclass character, but multiclass monks face a special restriction. A monk who gains a new class or (if already multiclass) raises another class by a level may never again raise her monk level, though she retains all her monk abilities.
2) At 1st level, a monk may select either Improved Grapple or Stunning Fist as a bonus feat. At 2nd level, she may select either Combat Reflexes or Deflect Arrows as a bonus feat. At 6th level, she may select either Improved Disarm or Improved Trip as a bonus feat

Now tell me, had they abided by those 2 rules would you be making this argument?

This is kind of the history of DDO. 1 decision is made to make something more playable (IE monks would suck without the leeway on feat selection) but it cascades when you push it into multi-classing. There are other examples -> Ranger getting both bow and TWF feats, etc.

We're not playing by those rules tho, so they are irrelevant.

Some classes are just front loaded with a few nice things and others are not. The ones that are make good splash classes and those splashes tend to be better than what the last couple of levels offer some classes. A wizard doesn't need those last 2 levels either and can get a good reflex save and has the skill points for the skills that open up. If he could get the capstone without going to level 20 there is very little incentive to go to level 20.

That's in DDO. We're not playing PnP.

EDIT: Heck, if we were playing PnP I would have my bard who can cast 9th level spells and a 19 die greater shout.

[Vormaerin]

This is true. The Racial PrE does present some problems.

Basically, for a multiclass, I would value being able to pick and choose among a wide variety of options (so no tree limit), over now gaining a capstone. That helps multiclasses be unique, and more truly different than pures.

This is the thing.... The devs have indicated that they want to relax a variety of restrictions. Specific mentions were made of skill stacking, class stat bonuses stacking, and things like that. And adding the racial capstone.

So when someone comes and says "OMG, this new restriction will destroy us" (and you are not the major offender here, just a fellow traveler) and then denies that these other changes are also proposed, its disingenuous.

There are a couple other posters who both swear up and down that the restrictions the devs say will be relaxed won't be and yet insist that the new restrictions the devs are going to use instead are "mathematical fact."

It can't be both ways. Either we have racial capstones and cross class stacking and three tree limits "For sure" (because devs suggested all of those explicitly) or we don't have any of them "For sure."


My preference would be to relax the class level limits on enhancements. Its vaguely closer to p&p and would give multi class characters a distinct advantage. AP point costs will keep everyone, pure or multi, from piling deep into multiple trees anyway.

If all the prestiges are broken into an assortment of abilities like AA, then characters won't take trees that their character can't take advantage of. But if a ranger/fighter wants to AA/DWS, I don't see a problem even if mostly fighter.

That would really open up options. You could have the three tree limit, but still allow multis to pull off combos not otherwise possible.

[jkm]

I am fully aware of what we are playing. However, you have to take into account the effects of those decisions on the game as a whole and WHY staying pure isn't as good in DDO as it is in PnP.

Your argument is that Fighter 18/Monk 2 is better than Fighter 20. Yes it is. It SHOULDN'T be, but it is because of decisions made by this game. To fix this, they then had to buff fighter 20 and they went overboard making 18/X way underpowered compared to Fighter 20 when they should be COMPARABLE. The BEST way to do this would have been to add Superior Weapon Specialization as Fighter 20 for another 2 points of damage.

Thus what I'm talking about when you use enhancements. 17/3 splits should be comparable to 18/2 should be comparable to 19/1 should be comparable to 20.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

The facts stated by the Devs are "KNOWN FACTS" about the system they are currently planning to implement. I am giving feedback on that system, because they asked for it. I am not talking what what "will occur in 3.6 months". I don't know what will occur then. Although the facts about the currently planned system gives some indication of what is more likely than other possibilities.

Whats pm'ed does not equate to facts. Heck whats posted here in this thread was only a mockup. Mad already stated it will change to a horizontal nature and that all enhancements were to be decided. He mentioned that there will be new, removed and combined enhancements, NONE of which were mentioned.

Your "known facts" then are based on ZERO known enhancements.

You can give your opinion all you want. I even agree with .05% of what you said, however you nor I nor anyone else in this thread can claim anything factually because what we are discussing does not exist yet.

We are speaking in a solely in hypothetical nature. You are the only one who hasnt figured this out and apparently wont.

I am still waiting for... a mockup, with the new enhancements filled in, that prove that not going your way, would be a fail for all multi-classed builds.

[jkm]

This is the thing.... The devs have indicated that they want to relax a variety of restrictions. Specific mentions were made of skill stacking, class stat bonuses stacking, and things like that. And adding the racial capstone.

So when someone comes and says "OMG, this new restriction will destroy us" (and you are not the major offender here, just a fellow traveler) and then denies that these other changes are also proposed, its disingenuous.

There are a couple other posters who both swear up and down that the restrictions the devs say will be relaxed won't be and yet insist that the new restrictions the devs are going to use instead are "mathematical fact."

It can't be both ways. Either we have racial capstones and cross class stacking and three tree limits "For sure" (because devs suggested all of those explicitly) or we don't have any of them "For sure."


My preference would be to relax the class level limits on enhancements. Its vaguely closer to p&p and would give multi class characters a distinct advantage. AP point costs will keep everyone, pure or multi, from piling deep into multiple trees anyway.

If all the prestiges are broken into an assortment of abilities like AA, then characters won't take trees that their character can't take advantage of. But if a ranger/fighter wants to AA/DWS, I don't see a problem even if mostly fighter.

That would really open up options. You could have the three tree limit, but still allow multis to pull off combos not otherwise possible.

To me the biggest issue with relaxing level restrictions has to do with monk stances. They've been buffed so much that being able to take 1 level of Monk for a +1 Crit Mod would make an insane arcane archer build (18 Fighter/1 Monk/1 Wizzy i guess). Kensai and FB3 would probably be the other problem children for 1 level fo fighter/barb.

If they added some general item where it cost you 1 AP for +2 levels of a class it would probably be the best solution here.