The life and times of Ruh Roh Shaggy

[Seikojin]

I think this should be required reading for each life. LOL

[Therigar]

I think this should be required reading for each life. LOL

Thank you ... I guess.

[Seikojin]

Thank you ... I guess.

I meant it as a compliment, so no problem

I think a ton of people equate high con as the requirement for the game. And they lose out on learning on how to utilize the environment, their debuffs, etc to help make combat a win for their low con toons.

[Therigar]

I meant it as a compliment, so no problem

I think a ton of people equate high con as the requirement for the game. And they lose out on learning on how to utilize the environment, their debuffs, etc to help make combat a win for their low con toons.

I knew that.

I agree. Brought on, to a large degree, by the easy win that comes from just smashing through to victory.

[Therigar]

A fast update.

Nothing to update.

Ruh Roh has been on a short vacation.

Ugly weather last night, all teenagers in school soccer for 2 weeks now, daughter in travel soccer 3 nights a week all this week, then silly Khyber 6 CON challenge....

But, don't despair, going to be dividing my time between Ruh Roh and the "unnamed character" (let's call him the Khyber Kid ). So, I'll have something to say on Ruh Roh in the near future.

[eden2760]

I meant it as a compliment, so no problem

I think a ton of people equate high con as the requirement for the game. And they lose out on learning on how to utilize the environment, their debuffs, etc to help make combat a win for their low con toons.

I think you're missing the point when you say that. This reminds me of various trophies and such that you might see on XBox or PS3 such as "Kill boss x, using only a butter knife".

Sure it can be done, and it might be bragging rights if you say that you soloed EE Citw with a 6 base con toon... but outside of doing it because it can be done, why would you (unless you're doing something experimental like Ruh Roh here).

I think when you set an arbitary amount on it and say "have 16 con minimum or you're a gimp"; "have 14 con minimum or you're a gimp!" is too extreme. You have to (or should) take your play style, your skill as a player, your eq, and your build's goals into account when you even roll up a build, which of course includes how much to put into con.

I think the problem comes when you regard con as wholly unneccessary stat (read: dump stat, and when not doing something experimental like this thread's subject). If that's what makes ddo fun for you, then by all means don't change... but you have to admit that for higher level, more difficult content, 6 con is only going to cut it in a few situations, and is probably going to result in you being granted a free season pass to Backpack Land(Tm).

[Systern]

I think you're missing the point when you say that. This reminds me of various trophies and such that you might see on XBox or PS3 such as "Kill boss x, using only a butter knife".

Sure it can be done, and it might be bragging rights if you say that you soloed EE Citw with a 6 base con toon... but outside of doing it because it can be done, why would you (unless you're doing something experimental like Ruh Roh here).

I think when you set an arbitary amount on it and say "have 16 con minimum or you're a gimp"; "have 14 con minimum or you're a gimp!" is too extreme. You have to (or should) take your play style, your skill as a player, your eq, and your build's goals into account when you even roll up a build, which of course includes how much to put into con.

I think the problem comes when you regard con as wholly unneccessary stat (read: dump stat, and when not doing something experimental like this thread's subject). If that's what makes ddo fun for you, then by all means don't change... but you have to admit that for higher level, more difficult content, 6 con is only going to cut it in a few situations, and is probably going to result in you being granted a free season pass to Backpack Land(Tm).

I think you've missed the point. The whole point of this experiment was to refute all the "You must be this tall to ride.", "14/16 con or you're a gimp" claims.

He built a viable character that defied common wisdom. He proved them wrong. He never claimed his way was best, He refuted their claims that you "NEED" that much.

[SableShadow]

He refuted their claims that you "NEED" that much.

Unfortunately, there will be those who will conflate "do not NEED" with "a GOOD IDEA".

[eden2760]

I think you've missed the point. The whole point of this experiment was to refute all the "You must be this tall to ride.", "14/16 con or you're a gimp" claims.

He built a viable character that defied common wisdom. He proved them wrong. He never claimed his way was best, He refuted their claims that you "NEED" that much.

Thanks for that. If you bothered to read the quote which I put in my post, you'll (maybe) see that I was referencing the quote...

...

I think a ton of people equate high con as the requirement for the game. And they lose out on learning on how to utilize the environment, their debuffs, etc to help make combat a win for their low con toons.

...per the direction the discussion was taking. I was simply stating that in the same way that "You must have X points of Con to get into my group/be not fail" is extreme, so is "We don't need no steenking cons!", especially when done in the name of non-conformity.

People who climb Mount Everest probably don't have fifty pounds of rocks on their back in addition to their climbing gear. Many probably could, but the "average mountain climber" would suffer greatly and probably get nowhere. In the same way, the average player with a less-than-stellar grasp on game mechanics / character mechanics is going to be hard pressed to survive without a decent amount of the "hp buffer" which extra con provides.

For the record I think what Ruh Roh is doing is a cool idea, if not everyone's cup of tea, and I'm interested to see how it turns out.

[Therigar]

Unfortunately, there will be those who will conflate "do not NEED" with "a GOOD IDEA".

You are absolutely correct. People should not think one implies the other. But, more than that, neither is what I'm trying to show.

Rather, NEED and GOOD IDEA go hand in hand. But, see below on conformity.

I was simply stating that in the same way that "You must have X points of Con to get into my group/be not fail" is extreme, so is "We don't need no steenking cons!", especially when done in the name of non-conformity.

Until you put in "especially when done in the name of non-conformity" I was in total agreement. However, non-conformity is the precise reason for building this way.

D&D is all about players building characters with whatever quirks they want and the DM figuring out how to make things fun and challenging based on that. If it is just another board game where the DM reads from a script and every character only chooses from a limited number of permitted actions then we've lost sight of what it was meant to be.

DDO is like that with the environment and AI replacing the DM. There are many ways to get to the end of a quest without riding in a back pack or piking at the entry.

We should be encouraging players to be non-conformists and not beating them into submission with a set of pre-generated characters.

So, a build is judged as viable not based on how well it conforms to some arbitrary set of standards but on how well it meets the goals and objectives of the player who runs it. If that means that it does not NEED something then it turns out that not having that thing actually might be a GOOD IDEA.

Again, I'll point to other build concepts where this is more obvious. If the player's idea is a build that needs a slew of stats in order to work then it might be that the build only becomes viable if the sacred CON is dumped.

Ruh Roh exists because I believe in non-conformity. The NEED v GOOD IDEA isn't dependent on external evaluations but on internal ones driven by the player and their build concept.

So, I agree with both of you up to a point. But, if we are limiting players and forcing them into pre-generated characters then we should just do away with the whole character creation process and just offer a set of 30 pre-made characters. Use these or go play some other game.

I don't want DDO to be like that -- ever.

The current crop of pre-generated characters proves that the devs have no clue how to build a character for their own game.

Even Ruh Roh is a better idea than anything they have to offer.

[SableShadow]

But, more than that, neither is what I'm trying to show.

Sure, I get that.

Rather, NEED and GOOD IDEA go hand in hand. But, see below on conformity.

Well ... not really. It's cost / benefit.
I would no more recommend minimum con than I would maximum con; there are much better ways to distribute build points.
Heck, I don't even think I'd pay double build point cost for con on a non-TR character (but it all depends on the build).

But, if we are limiting players and forcing them into pre-generated characters

I think it's a fairly large step from "a GOOD IDEA" to run with minimum con and "forcing them into pre-generated characters".

The best rogue player I had the fortune to meet was Rameses; his Penitent Rogue dumped str/con ... on a halfling.
He did incredible things with that build, but I knew quite well that was beyond my skills to make work.

[eden2760]

I can see what you're saying, there. And I may have misrepresented what I was trying to say.

I was talking strictly from an effectiveness perspective, versus one of "fun". I don't view the general opinion that moar con is win, less con is fail as a bad thing. Do I kite or tank this mob? Do I stand here or there? Do I cast this or that? Do I wait five more seconds for the blades to close in, or do I get out now?

People will make less than the "optimal" decision in these situations that result in a penalty (often via the loss of hp) for their mistake. Somtimes you don't have a choice and lose hp anyway. More con/hp is what has stood up to repeated testing and been shown to provide a larger gap between said penalties and death (failure). People do it because they don't run a quest or raid perfectly every single time, and this works to make up for some of that.

D&D is all about players building characters with whatever quirks they want and the DM figuring out how to make things fun and challenging based on that. If it is just another board game where the DM reads from a script and every character only chooses from a limited number of permitted actions then we've lost sight of what it was meant to be.

If I'm misrepresenting your stance here, please let me know, but it sounds like you're confusing tabletop games and MMOs, which are totally different monsters. DDO has no DM other than the script. If you're a barb with 18 cha, 6 con, and 6 str, the DM isn't going to make Harry say "Wow... what a charming barb... let me banish myself back to Shavrath". If this were tabletop, I would 100% agree with everything you're saying. But this is an MMO, where there is little to no variation of game variables based solely on your build decisions... i.e. No human DM.

I get that not everyone is concerned with running elite/epic content. Some people are casual gamers, roleplayers, and in general aren't concerned about fast xp, epic elite raid ready toons and the like, and that's okay, too. You should have fun in the game.

But fun notwithstanding, trying to say that a character that has dumped con (or any other standard, such as fort, deathblock, boss beaters etc. without a very good reason) is going to be just as effective as a player that has the con is fallous at best, and encouraging others to stick it to the man, instead of going with what works isn't exactly going to help raise the skills of the player population in general.

[eden2760]

....
The best rogue player I had the fortune to meet was Rameses; his Penitent Rogue dumped str/con ... on a halfling.
He did incredible things with that build, but I knew quite well that was beyond my skills to make work.

Exactly my point. The less survivable a character is with respect to invariant game mechanics, the more the player has to make up for that with more optimal decisions based on what the game throws at them.

New players simply are not going to be able to do that, and encouraging them to do so is only going to lead them to build ineffective characters, not learn the game, and possibly get frustrated and quit when they could have enjoyed their gaming experience more, stuck around, and brought something meaningful to their respective server.

[psykopeta]

Unfortunately, there will be those who will conflate "do not NEED" with "a GOOD IDEA".

those will learn more about their limitations and game than the others who confuse "suggested X hp" with "less than X kicked/gimp/whatever"

and the best part is the difference of knowledge will be pretty higher than u expect

of course i would never do a toon with such low hp, i know my limitations, and that hp is far over (8 years laptop + usb modem = funny timing traps xD)

what have i learnt with my 1st life with 10 con + toughness feat (and 2 enhancements only) that i could put 14 or 16 con, and forget about toughness feat and enhancements, and that's what im doing, high con? no toughness + enhancements, low con? toughness+2 enhancements

but never never will waste 1 feat, enhancements AND ability points, just to make other players happier (EDIT: and grind/craft hp gear)
oh true, i couldn't because i don't use GFL item(iirc my necklace from 7 to 20 is the same, vulkoor cunning) and havent crafted my gs hp item yet, will do soon but will have to stop using my conc opp sp goggles (because im not gonna do 20 shrouds for a essence that has almost none use for me, or i want sp or i want hp, is absurd aiming for both, is cooler? maybe, is needed? no, never has been)

do i die? yes, as everybody(but the pro's, guess that pros are those with 400hp at lvl 13 with 30 dc spells rofl), but my ways to die are the best: dead aura on but havent swapped to undead, dead aura on and swapped to undead but with plis/whatever on and draining charges(and mobs hitting of course), open a door and wait just crossed it(like in ETK the falling floor) and being sliced waiting to dunno what(that's the best point, my mental lag rapes the lagmonster, by far), destruction/whatever w/o deathblock on, and those beatiful ways to die that make you thing "what does this guy smoke?" weed, must say

trying to justify the survining chances from a toon looking at his/her hp is showing a close to 0 idea about ddo, ddo isn't wow, in wow you needed specific values of hp because bosses dealt certain amount(and to all raid), iirc that doesnt happen here, so the hp-mania is absurd

should i kick 1 toon with low hp? ddo should kick me for such behaviour, because a rotten apple messes the rest, elitism killed wow, hope your elitism doesnt kill ddo(if new players have to spend 3 months getting the gear YOU WANT for their toon, you can be sure they won't spend a $, if they don't do so won't last much, and less grinding useless gear, because grinding gear is useless, same words different meaning)

gj OP

[SableShadow]

How you get from here ...

Unfortunately, there will be those who will conflate "do not NEED" with "a GOOD IDEA".

And end up here ...

hope your elitism doesnt kill ddo(if new players have to spend 3 months getting the gear YOU WANT for their toon, you can be sure they won't spend a $, if they don't do so won't last much, and less grinding useless gear, because grinding gear is useless, same words different meaning)

... I have no clue.

[eden2760]

...but the pro's, guess that pros are those with 400hp at lvl 13 with 30 dc spells rofl...,

Always trying to figure out that those who want their toon to be as survivable as possible have clever little quips thrown at them, told their elitist, and then told to go back to wow.

If you have no desire to play to a higher level, noone is going to make you. All us "elitists" are saying is that if you want to make it surviving the high level of difficulty that is required by some elites and epic elites, then you're going to need to do better than 200 hp at cap, unless you never make a mistake ever.

If that level of play doesn't attract you, or is beyond your grasp, then by all means carry on.

[Therigar]

If I'm misrepresenting your stance here, please let me know, but it sounds like you're confusing tabletop games and MMOs, which are totally different monsters.

I'm not confusing them. I'm saying that the only reason they are different monsters is because we let them be different monsters.

Within the limitations of table-top players can and do design just about anything.

Within the limitations of MMORPGs players can and do design just about anything.

They should be able to do so in both and most of the times that should work. Exceed the limits of the game and it won't work. Stay inside the limits and it will.

We tend to take the game's limits and to squeeze them down even more. When the yard is 50 acres we want to play only in a 100 square feet of space.

I'm saying that being a non-conformist and going out into the rest of the yard isn't just ok, it is to be encouraged.

[eden2760]

I'm not confusing them. I'm saying that the only reason they are different monsters is because we let them be different monsters.

Within the limitations of table-top players can and do design just about anything.

Within the limitations of MMORPGs players can and do design just about anything.

They should be able to do so in both and most of the times that should work. Exceed the limits of the game and it won't work. Stay inside the limits and it will.

We tend to take the game's limits and to squeeze them down even more. When the yard is 50 acres we want to play only in a 100 square feet of space.

I'm saying that being a non-conformist and going out into the rest of the yard isn't just ok, it is to be encouraged.

I have to respectfully disagree that you're wrong. Within a tabletop game, the goal is much more focused on fun and less focused on character progress. You probably wouldn't run through the same adventure 12x in tabletop just to level up your character.

You have an interactive DM there that's going to ensure you're enjoying the game. Even if you're hafling bard with 6 strength, 6 con, and a masterwork quarterstaff, he'll find a way to make the experience fun for you. What I'm saying is that tabletop has MUCH more flexible limitations by virute of the DM being a human that can make decisions on how best to direct the gameplay. There is no such mechanic in DDO and there never will be, unless you get turbine to change their entire formula.

An MMO is a program (product) that behaves by a static set of invariant rules (with some randomness thrown in). You either adapt to these invariants via more hp or an extremely fine-tuned level of skill, or you fail. Yes you should have fun, but the game isn't concerned about your fun. The game evaluates what you give it in the form of character stats, and the actions you take with respect to completing a quest, and it gives you varying types of the same thing in return.

Expecting the mechanics to be able to be manipulated the same way in both, and then bawling out the masses for not playing it like a tabletop is less than prudent and only going to set you up for failure and disappointment.

[Orratti]

You did make an interesting challenge for yourself that is a fact. The original build of having a low con and using thf feats on a frontline fighter is certainly one I wouldn't recommend to anyone ever. Just the fact that thf draws the aggro of so many opponents makes the build one of the worst possible choices to put a low con on.

You have also done very well from your descriptions in making the character work, however most of the party saves you have accomplished such as the saving of the group in water works after dropping down screams game experience more than character ability.

You have also repeatedly done the thing that annoys most people about low hp toons, which is die. Granted others in your groups died first, but they weren't focusing on tactics or staying alive but instead "powering their way through" the quest. You were trying to use skill and tactics to stay alive and repeatedly failed.

On your next experiment I'd like to see you build a low con toon that focuses on overcoming the handicap of having a low con. Something like a drow repeater rogue or some other build that lets you evade, absorb, or completely avoid incoming damage by letting aggro magnets do their job with their high hp toons and using sneaking, spells, feats, equipment or what have you to avoid taking damage and dying. Then come back and tell us how successful you were. We'll count the 1st death of this build as the end of the experiment.

Low con isn't a real problem for an experienced player that realizes how important con or a lack of con is to a build. Some builds can do well with a low con because they aren't going to be drawing aggro, have excellent evasion and reflex saves, can move quickly while putting out damage, have spell resistance and have an experienced player behind the wheel. People who understand the game well and know what the ins and outs of combat are can dump con easily enough when they know how to overcome the drawbacks. There is no such thing as a minimum con stat needed by every toon. There is really no need to prove it and there is no way to prove it to people who don't agree.

[Therigar]

Expecting the mechanics to be able to be manipulated the same way in both, and then bawling out the masses for not playing it like a tabletop is less than prudent and only going to set you up for failure and disappointment.

I don't expect that they are manipulated the same way. I happen to know thru experience that there are multiple ways to get to the same objective.

And, I'm not bawling out the masses. To the contrary, the masses tend to be bawled out by those insisting that only a set number of builds that fit into a narrow set of expectations can or will work.

I'm bawling out those folk -- the ones who are bawling out the masses -- telling them that they are wrong. The number of builds that will work is seriously more than the set number they keep insisting on.