Is the E.D. system the demise of True builds?

[Captain_Wizbang]

I'm sorry I didn't realize telling the truth called for Neg Rep....the terms "Pure" & "True" have always been used to insult multiclass builds implying that they are tainted and fake.

Not sure about neg rep, but I see you edited out the word "stupid" from your original post.

I have been playing D&D for 39 years, and as other die-hard PnP players will tell you, these terms have NEVER been used in the context you describe. (See the quote below from ddoplayer.)

Funny, I've never heard "pure" used as a derogatory.

nope. Never heard the term "true" until this thread. I assume the op just got mixedup, tbh.
"pure" has no insult associated with it. pure water is simply that - water and nothing else. Similarly, a pure fighter is simply saying that the character has no other class other than fighter. splash, multiclass etc. is not pure.

Sorry people, I had no intention of reposting here, but as I read these posts, a response was warranted,
In PnP you'll see notations for "Pure Class" in DDO when capstones were released, the term "True" was implemented by the devs. Either way is correct.

Great feedback on the thread.

[Captain_Wizbang]

You do quite obviously have an opinion, which seems to come out in your usage of "true" instead of "pure" and the way you frame your questions.


Similarly, going pure should also offer incentives, and does. The capstones are part of that. The prestige enhancements are another. The D&D 3.5 designers have said numerous times that they regret not putting capstone enhancements on the core classes to draw people to go pure on them, and is something that Paizo made sure to do when they drafted Pathfinder.

What's had a greater effect on the pure vs. multiclass debate is Overwhelming Critical, which strongly encourages multiclassing on most characters in order to fit in the bloated prerequisites.

Good reply seph, I didn't realize my wording showed my favoritism to pre U14 True builds, Too funny, I was trying not to show that. (thanks)

Like Ive said, I still don't have an opinion now, (after U14) also, your reply about 3.5 D&D & Paiz & capstones being used in DDO is spot on.

+ 1 sir.

[Therrias]

There are incentives to multiclassing, that's why people do it in DDO. You multiclass to gain versatility, or more power in a particular area by synergizing abilities between classes.

Sounds like you're saying that multiclassing is its own reward and that no additional incentive is needed to encourage people to multiclass. Thanks for agreeing with me.

Similarly, going pure should also offer incentives, and does. The capstones are part of that. The prestige enhancements are another.

Sounds like your saying that staying pure is its own reward and also offers an enhancement as an extra incentive. Thanks for almost completely agreeing with me.

I would argue that capstones are silly because they often are situational or may not be applicable to your build and/or playstyle, yet they create the illusion that pure builds are inherently more powerful, which leads to bias against multiclassing in the playerbase, which leads to a stifling of build creativity.

I would also argue that capstones are unnecessary. People would still play pure class characters even without capstones, and I don't see why it should be a goal to encourage as many people as possible to play pure builds.

Not sure where your comment about me being "totally illogical" came from when we pretty much agree. Roll a 1 on reading comprehension? I guess no one puts points into that nowadays, it seems like someone is always misquoting my posts.

[sephiroth1084]

Sounds like you're saying that multiclassing is its own reward and that no additional incentive is needed to encourage people to multiclass. Thanks for agreeing with me.

Your implication was that multiclassing was attractive in and of itself, without qualifying the statement, which led me to assume that you meant that it was attractive simply to say, "I'm a wizard/fighter!" Pointing to the benefits gained through multiclassing and saying they aren't an incentive is kind of odd. You are incentivized to multiclass for the benefits gained. I suppose you could say that there is no additional incentive, or "artificial" incentive (the way you feel capstones function), but that's just getting into some odd semantics.

Sounds like your saying that staying pure is its own reward and also offers an enhancement as an extra incentive. Thanks for almost completely agreeing with me.

Not at all. Without the capstones, there is basically no reason whatsoever to stay pure on most classes, and little reason on others. Without capstones, most characters splash for /1/1 or /2 almost by default. As it is, classes with weak capstones tend to splash 2 levels anyway, except in cases where people prefer pure classed builds, or really want that capstone.

Look at rogues, for example; level 19 is +1d6 SA, and level 20 is nothing, if not for the capstone. You can splash 2 fighter, or 2 monk, for 2 feats, added versatility, and possibly even a comparable DPS gain to the extra SA damage (depending upon what those feats you grabbed were). Wizards gain a feat and a couple spell slots, but largely don't need the extra slots they gain, whereas taking rogue opens up a lot of options for them, and dramatically improves their survivability, while monk does the same, and even essentially replaces the feat you lost and then some.

I would argue that capstones are silly because they often are situational or may not be applicable to your build and/or playstyle, yet they create the illusion that pure builds are inherently more powerful, which leads to bias against multiclassing in the playerbase, which leads to a stifling of build creativity.

What you're arguing is that the current capstones are/may be silly, which is true. We really should have gotten two or three capstone options for each class by now, and some of the existing ones really should have been more generally applicable (I'm looking at you, Ranger Capstone!). That doesn't make all the capstones poor, or inappropriate.

Whether pure or multiclass characters are stronger is a separate issue from the capstones. If some people look at Divine Intervention and decide that, somehow, that is more worthwhile than splashing a level or two of fighter, monk, rogue or wizard on their clerics, then they have made that decision, whether accurately or due to succumbing to the illusion that the capstone is worth that much. If they make that call, who cares? It doesn't stifle build creativity, because everyone else is still given the choice of whether that's worthwhile or not.

I would also argue that capstones are unnecessary. People would still play pure class characters even without capstones, and I don't see why it should be a goal to encourage as many people as possible to play pure builds.

The only people that would play pure classed characters, for most of the classes, are the ones who either A) cannot identify the weakness in taking levels 19 and 20 in their class, or B) simply like to play pure classed characters, which is essentially the same thing as people looking at a weak capstone and deciding that that is a strong reason to stay pure.

The capstones were needed to strengthen the last levels of the classes. This problem is exaggerated further in 3.5 because most classes have no reason to keep someone from prestiging at level 6--their back 14 levels have little or nothing to offer, which is made worse by some of the most valuable PrCs advancing the most attractive abilities from those classes as part of their benefits. Look at the wizard: it gets spells, a better familiar, and bonus feats. Most worthwhile PrCs keep the spell progression, and you can take a feat to shore up your familiar if you give a **** about it, which many players don't. So you're left with a choice between a bunch of new cool abilities, or 3 bonus feats.

In DDO, the enhancement system has invested more value in those 14 levels, and removed the prestige class issue/choice, but marrying the PrCs to the individual classes. That cuts down on build diversity, but breaths life into the classes.

Capstones make multi-classing a serious decision, rather than a given. What reason is there to go 20 fighter without the capstone, instead of /2 rogue, /2 monk, or /2 paladin? One feat doesn't compare to Evasion, skill access (UMD), and +1d6+3 sneak attack damage, and certainly doesn't compare to two feats and Evasion.

Not sure where your comment about me being "totally illogical" came from when we pretty much agree. Roll a 1 on reading comprehension? I guess no one puts points into that nowadays, it seems like someone is always misquoting my posts.

What was illogical was your claiming that staying pure was somehow its own reward and that it didn't require any incentive. Staying pure is only its own reward if it makes sense from a role-playing perspective, and you're concerned with that. If you are at all concerned with character power, though, you can RP away a splash of a couple of levels, or work them in without much hassle.

The only things that makes capstones feel awkward is that they weren't part of the initial design, which they should have been, and that in some cases they are much too weak, while in others they represent too large a boost in power.

[78mackson]

Pure builds seems to be the strongest path these days...good or bad? I find it kinda boring..

[shadereaper33]

Pure builds seems to be the strongest path these days...good or bad? I find it kinda boring..

That depends greatly on the build in question. Casters are generally better as a pure build, but rangers are rarely (if ever) better pure. I don't feel that anyone could say that pure or multi-class is inherently better in all cases, or even in enough cases to prove a majority. There are so many possible build combinations and strategies in this game, that the pure vs. multi question is something that really needs to answered on an individual basis.

[sephiroth1084]

That depends greatly on the build in question. Casters are generally better as a pure build, but rangers are rarely (if ever) better pure. I don't feel that anyone could say that pure or multi-class is inherently better in all cases, or even in enough cases to prove a majority. There are so many possible build combinations and strategies in this game, that the pure vs. multi question is something that really needs to answered on an individual basis.

Agreed.

• Arti 20 vs. /2 monk or rogue is a pretty small dip in direct power (better consumables), and a big jump in survivability.
• Barbarian 20 is more DPS than /2 fighter, but can't fit in tactics feats with everything else they want, so it does more damage per swing, but can't control the battlefield or debuff high-Fort enemies for higher party DPS.
• Bard really depends on whether you're bother with CC at all. If you aren't, and are concerned with melee, splashing is likely a better choice.
• Cleric 20 sucks.
• Favored Soul 20 is pretty strong, but there's a fair argument for something like /2 monk.
• Fighter 20 is worthwhile, but depending on your intended role, /2 monk, rogue or paladin may provide you with greater benefits than a feat and 10% double-strike.
• Monk 20 is strong, but not a necessity, and you can gain quite a bit out of a 2-6 level dip, especially if you want to be a tank.
• Paladin 20 is kind of worthwhile, but /2 fighter or monk is probably stronger in most circumstances.
• Ranger 20 sucks unless you're an archer, and if you're an archer, you should really have at least 6 monk levels in the current game. Really, ranger 15-20 is pretty poor for any ranger, and it's basically all upside to pick up at least 6 levels of something else.
• Rogue 20 is hard to give up.
• Sorcerer 20 is strong. I see a lot of people giving this up for Evasion/feats/Divine Grace, which doesn't seem worthwhile to me, but you aren't a gimp losing 2 levels, so it's not a big deal.
• Wizard 20 is probably the strongest pure class, but losing the capstone for Evasion makes some sense for some people, and if you pick up rogue skills while you're at it, you're filling 2 party spots. A hard trade-off, but not unreasonable.

There are plenty of high-DPS multiclass builds that are comparable in damage to pure classes, but bring some additional utility or versatility to the character.

[Ape_Man]

Pure builds seems to be the strongest path these days...good or bad? I find it kinda boring..

The gimping will continue until morale improves.

Multi's and deep-splashes aren't dead yet, give that until the ENH pass before turbine puts the final nail in that coffin. Turbine doesn't want us playing multi-class toons or basically having any creativity in builds.

12/6/2 and 16/2/2 or whatever builds that took a little brains to throw together don't work in a free2n00b pay2win MMO. They need to dumb the game down for the WOW refugees if they plan on stealing some market share. To complete this dumb-down Turbine will make pure and MAYBE 18/2 so attractive that you'd have to be an idiot to splash deeper than that.

As it is now EDs can cover a LOT of shortcomings in any build. In the currnent game if you're smart with your EDs you can gain a lot of power. You no longer need to splash for haste-boost for example which actually makes some pure-class toons stronger. I don't expect this new-founf viability to last when the ENH pass happens.

[Stormraiser]

Funny, I've never heard "pure" used as a derogatory.

You didn't understand what he said. Saying you're not pure, is an insult to the multiclass, not the "pure" character.

[bibliomane]

Mamma's Rule 1: Play what you like
Mamma's rule 2: You can't make everyone like you.

I've never heard pure used as an insult--just as a description and I've never heard true used at all. Whatever your class(es) be proud of them and don't look for insult where none is intended. If there was only one *right* build everyone would play it. We have so many different pure, multi, splashed, and deep splashed variants who can run endgame that people are never going to agree that you must have X to max your build and make it work. ie 2+5 isn't the only way to =5 or there is more than one way to skin a cat (who i love too much to skin.)

[78mackson]

Agreed.

• Arti 20 vs. /2 monk or rogue is a pretty small dip in direct power (better consumables), and a big jump in survivability.
• Barbarian 20 is more DPS than /2 fighter, but can't fit in tactics feats with everything else they want, so it does more damage per swing, but can't control the battlefield or debuff high-Fort enemies for higher party DPS.
• Bard really depends on whether you're bother with CC at all. If you aren't, and are concerned with melee, splashing is likely a better choice.
• Cleric 20 sucks.
• Favored Soul 20 is pretty strong, but there's a fair argument for something like /2 monk.
• Fighter 20 is worthwhile, but depending on your intended role, /2 monk, rogue or paladin may provide you with greater benefits than a feat and 10% double-strike.
• Monk 20 is strong, but not a necessity, and you can gain quite a bit out of a 2-6 level dip, especially if you want to be a tank.
• Paladin 20 is kind of worthwhile, but /2 fighter or monk is probably stronger in most circumstances.
• Ranger 20 sucks unless you're an archer, and if you're an archer, you should really have at least 6 monk levels in the current game. Really, ranger 15-20 is pretty poor for any ranger, and it's basically all upside to pick up at least 6 levels of something else.
• Rogue 20 is hard to give up.
• Sorcerer 20 is strong. I see a lot of people giving this up for Evasion/feats/Divine Grace, which doesn't seem worthwhile to me, but you aren't a gimp losing 2 levels, so it's not a big deal.
• Wizard 20 is probably the strongest pure class, but losing the capstone for Evasion makes some sense for some people, and if you pick up rogue skills while you're at it, you're filling 2 party spots. A hard trade-off, but not unreasonable.

There are plenty of high-DPS multiclass builds that are comparable in damage to pure classes, but bring some additional utility or versatility to the character.

From a melee perspective, adding 2 more "must have" feats and increasing the THF dmg output while the fact remains that you do not even have to spec the THF-line with 3 costly feats to be fully in operation.... is just sad. Fighter split that used to give 2 benefits; haste boost and feats is now narrowed down to 'just' feats. Why go fighter split when you can just pick up a two-hander and cleave away?

I hate to sound too negative--

Paladins and Rangers got a boost. But Paladin is so far down the line as it is already but I really enjoy that pure ranger seems like a very viable option these days. ("melee" ranger needs a boost and paladin, derp derp) Twf bards got scr3wed in this update, versatility down due to lack of feats, twist in some Dreadnaught and voila! Why even bother with TWF anymore? Pure battle bard seems very viable now -- TWF doesn't no matter how I twist and turn...

Fighter - I worked on a 12/6/2... Even though I never been a fan of evasion but with the new AC system (which I like!) I'm kind of regretting my choice..

Barbarians - pure for raid oriented characters and split if it's your main toon and you enjoy every day questing..

Monk - I'd go pure, but I'm no monk expert. they seem to be pretty OP as it is.

Druid - no opinion at all except that they look like dorks in animal form.

Ranger - why do you want to split it at 14 is beyond me in this update.. a bit of the haste boost dilemma here for splits. Adding rogue gives just trap disarming. fighter only for feats. More FE is the win.

Rogue - remains same.

[sephiroth1084]

From a melee perspective, adding 2 more "must have" feats and increasing the THF dmg output while the fact remains that you do not even have to spec the THF-line with 3 costly feats to be fully in operation.... is just sad. Fighter split that used to give 2 benefits; haste boost and feats is now narrowed down to 'just' feats. Why go fighter split when you can just pick up a two-hander and cleave away?

No idea what you're talking about here. The THF feat chain adds quite a bit of DPS, even if you're cleaving.

I really enjoy that pure ranger seems like a very viable option these days.

Ranger - why do you want to split it at 14 is beyond me in this update.. a bit of the haste boost dilemma here for splits. Adding rogue gives just trap disarming. fighter only for feats. More FE is the win.

Again, don't understand. Are you saying that archery focused rangers got a boost? If so, I direct you to go look up information on Ten Thousand Stars, and to search around the forums a bit for 10K Stars AA builds. Ranger levels 15-20 are significantly worse than picking up at least 6 levels on a monk, and depending on what you really want to be doing, you're likely better off with 12 monk or fighter levels, and only 6 or 2 ranger levels (if any at all).

Sure, once you start relying on favored enemies for damage, more is better, but FE isn't going to cover all of your deficiencies as a ranger, which is why you should be turning to other classes.

[FuzzyDuck81]

I love anything that increases options & ability to really make your character your character - hence i have my 12monk/7fighter/1arty dragonmarked elf shortsword user which im adding GMoF to and love her for her unique evasive, hard-to-pin-down flavour with some self healing & buffing plus decent damage capabilities & durability... i have my 12monk/6ranger/2fighter half elf zen arcane archer with shiradi who can pewpew away for decent dps with nifty random effects, can evade, self heal & dip into melee if i feel like it & love her too.. i also have my pure wf wizzy pale master who has a tight focus on death-dealing magics with a side-order of CC & a pure monk with GMoF & love her ability to flit around the battlefield, doing dps, crowd control, a few occasional mini-buffs & that wonderful "lets just skip this fight" button that is EiN & hopefully, assuming it works in u15, the ability to occasionally karate chop peoples heads off

[Chai]

Ranger - why do you want to split it at 14 is beyond me in this update.. a bit of the haste boost dilemma here for splits. Adding rogue gives just trap disarming. fighter only for feats. More FE is the win.

Adding 2 rogue grants 6.5 damage per non aggro hit. Adding 3 rogue grants 10 damage per non aggro hit.

Adding 6+ monk gets 10k stars for bow users, more feats, high stunning blow DC with high wis (synergizes with 10k stars).

2+ fighter gets 2 feats, a point of str, 14more HP, haste boost.

What are we comparing that to?

Either tempest 3 or 10% ranged alacrity. If someone wanted to be an archer AND get slayer arrows they can do that racially rather than class based. 10% ranged alac comes on quite a bit of gear, and most tempest I see nowdays are either 18/2, or kensai 1, which makes up for tempest 3.

Relying on FE for damage boosts is not justification enough to stay pure.

[Dolphious]

I don't think destinies fundamentally changed anything regarding whether it's best to go pure or multiclass, but it did make some of the capstones with static bonuses less attractive.

Both the artificer and animal druid (caster one is generic) capstones are quite interesting though, hopefully more of then are redone in that model with the enhancements pass.

[Sylvenon]

I think that ED twists benefit Multiclasses more than they do Pure/True builds.

I play a pure/true lvl 23 monk, and a pure/true lvl 24 rogue, and I see neither of them benefiting from a couple twists more than my 13/6/1 (R/M/F) does.

On the other hand, the R/M/F gets less from Shadowdancer than my Assassin does, and also gets less from Grand Master of Flowers than my pure/true Monk does. With twists though, he gets just as sexy, or even sexier (different style of play), than either of them.

[78mackson]

No idea what you're talking about here. The THF feat chain adds quite a bit of DPS, even if you're cleaving. Sure it adds DPS, but would you go TWF w/o the feats? I wouldn't even consider it.




Again, don't understand. Are you saying that archery focused rangers got a boost?.

nope, I would even consider shiradi rangers amongst the casters these days. My whole post is aimed from the melee POV.

Adding 2 rogue grants 6.5 damage per non aggro hit. Adding 3 rogue grants 10 damage per non aggro hit.

Adding 6+ monk gets 10k stars for bow users, more feats, high stunning blow DC with high wis (synergizes with 10k stars).

2+ fighter gets 2 feats, a point of str, 14more HP, haste boost. weaker boost than the ED.

What are we comparing that to?

+2 base dmg on FE and +1 favored.... As far as I see it, you should max FE's on rangers or just go another class since you can twist in action boosts... not that I am building a tempest since they are relatively weak (esp in comparisson to AA )... But still, DPS where is counts and self heals without SF pots, some versatility with ranged -- yes, the class definitley has some attraction, I guess.

[FrozenNova]

Capstones were added in DDO explicitly because DDO removes the experience penalty for multiclassing. They swapped the stick for a carrot. Their ideal implementation is one that leaves both pure and splashed builds as viable and competitive options. Has this been achieved? Well, not in every case, but we'll see what the enhancement pass brings.

Pure is just a technical term. In DDO, it has no connotations.
I've never heard "True" used in the context of DDO, and agree that it's unsuited. Having evasion, trap skills, and UMD makes my Wizard a 'false' wizard? You can see how it's a problem. Stick with Pure.

I don't see how epic destinies favour multiclassed builds any moreso than pure builds. If you're talking about numerical inflation, then maybe it's true that my 18/2 wizard's lack of 2 extra int from the capstone is slightly less important because with epic destinies everyone's DCs have gone up equally, making my lack less significant by comparison. But that is most definitely a rather minor matter.