Is history set to repeat?

[Postumus]

Is this the case though? Sure, current multi-class builds will be removed, but is it so hard to make a multi-class build with this new system?

Probably not. Forumisers like to doomcry about how every change will FINALLY kill DDO, then someone creative thinks outside the box and a new build is born and copied and copied and copied until every build that does not copy it is labeled 'not viable' or gimp.

People have been whining about how long it has taken for the enhancement pass to arrive, and after their first whiff they are already mumbling last rites. Gotta love the forums.

[Mubjon]

If only 2 things that are best in this game, character building and multiclassing, are going to get removed (or so heaviliy nerfed that there is hardly difference between beign removed or not), the game will lose its only strenght.
They can as well shut servers.

My initial reaction to the alpha enhancement trees was pretty negative, I thought it destroyed my characters as I did 19/1 or 18/1/1 and could not get everything that I have currently on live.

I am going to see how the character plays with a 5 level splash in the class. I was able to get the burst, aura which I love on my cleric and I increased the defenses of the character without using an ED yet.

My level 20 character on live has a 54 AC and 35 PRR. With the changes I made in a 15/5 build I know have a slight less healing aura (27 to 31 with 40 attempts as the base) Bursts are a slight lower as well (137 to 156 on average, again used 40 bursts as the base), but I have more AC (74 to 54) and more PRR (43 to 23) all without being in a destiny.

I do imagine that my casting is going to be worse off if the healing is any indication. All my spell power ratings are lower, especially the positive and light are about 30 lower. I have no smiting lines to boost DP so I am sure that is going to be crappy. Just testing the DP on the cube in the dojo saw starting ticks at 35, when I get 91 on live currently. That is a huge drop in DPS potential at boss fights.

I think what is going to happen is that we are going to see far less multi-classing with Clerics (have to see how FVS and Druids go) and more pure builds to help with casting. Melee clerics are going to be minimum 15 now, instead of 18 which is going to limit their healing potential and raiding as they will be at best a backup to the primary.

[Dmnqwk]

They currently plan to restrict abilities based on 1,3,6,12,18 and 20 levels of a class. The multiclass factor will depend heavily on where they put the best abilities.

Take assassin - If assassinate was available at level 12, and was not based on rogue levels, Assassins would be able to then invest in other classes as they saw befitted them.
If assassinate required 18 rogue levels and the dc was rogue level based, you'd still take 20 levels in rogue and be penalised heavily if you took 2 levels elsewhere.

Right now, multiclassing is not about fun but about abusing whichever 1 2 or 6 level splash gives you the most overpowered abilities (eg 2 levels of paladin just for saves). Multiclass characters should not have a higher power level than single class, they should be equal with multiclass benefits coming from a broader range of skills/synergy.

If they wish to encourage multiclassing, they need to put the best abilities for prestige enhancements at the level 12 point and have the level 18 ones merely "icing on the cake" eg Giving Tempest Full damage on OH attacks at 12 then at 18 adding 3% doublestrike and dodge.

As for the current system, anyone who feels the way action points work at the moment is superior to a potential tree system is deluding themselves. Tree systems are not an automatic win and if done incorrectly they could screw up a lot of characters, but ultimately if they stopped people splashing 2 levels for pally saves they'd be improving the game tenfold.

[Archangel666]

Average man learns from his mistakes

Foolish man does not learn from his mistakes

Wise man learns from other's mistakes

That's Sig worthy. Any objections?

[Davelfus]

Is this the case though? Sure, current multi-class builds will be removed, but is it so hard to make a multi-class build with this new system?

i would say so, had to spend more than half of my action points on a lvl 23 stalwart def just to get the stance back on the same bonus i had on live... can't imagine it being much better for other prestiges...

sure you can multiclass, grab 3 different trees and collect a bunch of crappy low tier enhancements all day...

[Charononus]

They currently plan to restrict abilities based on 1,3,6,12,18 and 20 levels of a class. The multiclass factor will depend heavily on where they put the best abilities.

Take assassin - If assassinate was available at level 12, and was not based on rogue levels, Assassins would be able to then invest in other classes as they saw befitted them.
If assassinate required 18 rogue levels and the dc was rogue level based, you'd still take 20 levels in rogue and be penalised heavily if you took 2 levels elsewhere.

Right now, multiclassing is not about fun but about abusing whichever 1 2 or 6 level splash gives you the most overpowered abilities (eg 2 levels of paladin just for saves). Multiclass characters should not have a higher power level than single class, they should be equal with multiclass benefits coming from a broader range of skills/synergy.

If they wish to encourage multiclassing, they need to put the best abilities for prestige enhancements at the level 12 point and have the level 18 ones merely "icing on the cake" eg Giving Tempest Full damage on OH attacks at 12 then at 18 adding 3% doublestrike and dodge.

As for the current system, anyone who feels the way action points work at the moment is superior to a potential tree system is deluding themselves. Tree systems are not an automatic win and if done incorrectly they could screw up a lot of characters, but ultimately if they stopped people splashing 2 levels for pally saves they'd be improving the game tenfold.

Your idea of beneficial change is something that makes me want to not play fyi. Messing with the system in the way you think is good will lose customers.

[Karavek]

Your idea of beneficial change is something that makes me want to not play fyi. Messing with the system in the way you think is good will lose customers.

I concur, the wntire point to the changes of how people made characters between 2nd and 3E+ where the changes of dual class/multi class being tossed out the window, and in general in 3E most if not all iconic characters from various settings ended up heavy splash builds. Elminster in 3E+ is literally a 100% by the book character build, and is a 1ftr,2rogue,3cleric then wizard+archmage with epic lvls put further into AM. He is something anyone playing 3E could choose to recreate aside from the chosen of mystra and spell fire abilities( which do all have rules and reasons a DM might choose to let a player use them for sotry purposes) And is actually meant to be the example for 3E character building.

There is nothing wrong for example in PnP and actually rather expected, to be something like a 2/4 paladin/fighter who then takes the champions of torm PRC for 5 lvls, and maybe then dabbles in something like ranger a while to qualify for shadow dancer for evasion when its a good thing to have, and that is just using basic core books and campaign setting PRC. Throw in the wide world of splat books and I may well run a guy with 1 lvl each in 20 classes just to mess with people when they ask what I am.

[Noctus]

Is the current system complex? Maybe, but not because the end result is necessarily a large variety in buiild types.

To my mind, the current enhancements can be divided into 2 types.

A. Enhancements that are really good, and everyone should always take.

B. Enhancements that are really bad, and nobody should ever take.

The build diversity that exists in DDO right now, on live, has very little to do with the enhancement system. All you have to do is look at the critiques on these forums to see that there is a very strict consensus on what enhancements are worth taking, and which ones aren't. For that matter the same thing can be said about feats.

What's the difference between an arcane archer and a tempest? One has 20& off hand, and the other has slayer arrows. Other than that, i assure you , all rangers are built 95% the same, and if not, they are immediately labeled as gimps.

In the new system, a tempest ranger and an arcane archer look like pretty different animals. This is due to the core abilities, which currently make up almost all of the enhancements, being placed into one tree or another. I don't think the problem is that it is limiting diversity. It's that it is forcing diversity. Now whether that's good or not is a different argument.

Apparently, all endgame martial builds are using manyshot these days. Some would say that because all of these various builds can incorporate manyshot, it's a sign of diversity. I say, if all of the characters have manyshot, that is the very opposite of diversity.

Same could be said of umd. It's said that all good endgame builds should have this abilty. Never mind how patently ridiculous it is to have a barbarian, who should be the very antithesis of magic, using high level wands and scrolls.

I'm not saying that the new system doesn't need some tweaking. It certainly does. I hate to see devotion enhancements gone from rangers and paladins, with no real ability to get that back. Unless, maybe, we will see a new wave of ranger/cleric splashes? A different beast than has prowled these grounds before?

When you see someone with a splash of 4 fighter, you really won't know immediately what that person actually took from those fighter levels. Not like now, when you see someone with a 2 fighter splash and you know that they have strength 1, toughness 1, and haste 1.

This actually game me food for my thoughts. ... !

What still stands is that i find the "Points spend in Tree"-Restriction too restricting, becauses it forces many players to "buy" stuff that they plainly do not want on their character, just to advance points-spend. This leaves a bad taste in anybodys mouth that is forced into it. thats just not a good way to design a restriction if it leaves the player building his character feeling.. well not bad, but slightly annoyed every time they work on their enhancements.

[HAL]

Is the current system complex? Maybe, but not because the end result is necessarily a large variety in buiild types.

To my mind, the current enhancements can be divided into 2 types.

A. Enhancements that are really good, and everyone should always take.

B. Enhancements that are really bad, and nobody should ever take.

The build diversity that exists in DDO right now, on live, has very little to do with the enhancement system. All you have to do is look at the critiques on these forums to see that there is a very strict consensus on what enhancements are worth taking, and which ones aren't. For that matter the same thing can be said about feats.

What's the difference between an arcane archer and a tempest? One has 20& off hand, and the other has slayer arrows. Other than that, i assure you , all rangers are built 95% the same, and if not, they are immediately labeled as gimps.

In the new system, a tempest ranger and an arcane archer look like pretty different animals. This is due to the core abilities, which currently make up almost all of the enhancements, being placed into one tree or another. I don't think the problem is that it is limiting diversity. It's that it is forcing diversity. Now whether that's good or not is a different argument.

Apparently, all endgame martial builds are using manyshot these days. Some would say that because all of these various builds can incorporate manyshot, it's a sign of diversity. I say, if all of the characters have manyshot, that is the very opposite of diversity.

Same could be said of umd. It's said that all good endgame builds should have this abilty. Never mind how patently ridiculous it is to have a barbarian, who should be the very antithesis of magic, using high level wands and scrolls.

I'm not saying that the new system doesn't need some tweaking. It certainly does. I hate to see devotion enhancements gone from rangers and paladins, with no real ability to get that back. Unless, maybe, we will see a new wave of ranger/cleric splashes? A different beast than has prowled these grounds before?

When you see someone with a splash of 4 fighter, you really won't know immediately what that person actually took from those fighter levels. Not like now, when you see someone with a 2 fighter splash and you know that they have strength 1, toughness 1, and haste 1.

I see your point, but not everyone uses the same cookie-cutter builds. A lot of people, whether they are new, they are in a static group/guild or they are solo, create "fringe" builds to play around with. This is more of the type of diversity I am talking about that won't be possible anymore.

[Postumus]

This actually game me food for my thoughts. ... !

What still stands is that i find the "Points spend in Tree"-Restriction too restricting, becauses it forces many players to "buy" stuff that they plainly do not want on their character, just to advance points-spend. This leaves a bad taste in anybodys mouth that is forced into it. thats just not a good way to design a restriction if it leaves the player building his character feeling.. well not bad, but slightly annoyed every time they work on their enhancements.

We already have to do this for most prestiges, the choices just arent arranged visually in a tree. Nearly every prestige has enhancement and feat requirements players would rather not have to spend APs and feats on in order to qualify for the prestige.

[Captain_Wizbang]

A better question would be if Turbine has learned from history.
If not...

Yup

[Drona]

Is the current system complex? Maybe, but not because the end result is necessarily a large variety in buiild types.

To my mind, the current enhancements can be divided into 2 types.

A. Enhancements that are really good, and everyone should always take.

B. Enhancements that are really bad, and nobody should ever take.

The build diversity that exists in DDO right now, on live, has very little to do with the enhancement system. All you have to do is look at the critiques on these forums to see that there is a very strict consensus on what enhancements are worth taking, and which ones aren't. For that matter the same thing can be said about feats.

What's the difference between an arcane archer and a tempest? One has 20& off hand, and the other has slayer arrows. Other than that, i assure you , all rangers are built 95% the same, and if not, they are immediately labeled as gimps.

In the new system, a tempest ranger and an arcane archer look like pretty different animals. This is due to the core abilities, which currently make up almost all of the enhancements, being placed into one tree or another. I don't think the problem is that it is limiting diversity. It's that it is forcing diversity. Now whether that's good or not is a different argument.

Apparently, all endgame martial builds are using manyshot these days. Some would say that because all of these various builds can incorporate manyshot, it's a sign of diversity. I say, if all of the characters have manyshot, that is the very opposite of diversity.

Same could be said of umd. It's said that all good endgame builds should have this abilty. Never mind how patently ridiculous it is to have a barbarian, who should be the very antithesis of magic, using high level wands and scrolls.

I'm not saying that the new system doesn't need some tweaking. It certainly does. I hate to see devotion enhancements gone from rangers and paladins, with no real ability to get that back. Unless, maybe, we will see a new wave of ranger/cleric splashes? A different beast than has prowled these grounds before?

When you see someone with a splash of 4 fighter, you really won't know immediately what that person actually took from those fighter levels. Not like now, when you see someone with a 2 fighter splash and you know that they have strength 1, toughness 1, and haste 1.

This is a wonderful post! +1

[ZeebaNeighba]

The problem, as others said, is the requirement to spend AP where you don't want them.

I'm sure my favored soul arcane archer is a goner if the enhancement pass goes live as it is. I need to spend about 60 AP just to get the Arcane Archer stuff I want, leaving me with **** from the other favored soul trees. Notice how, on live, I don't have a load of elf enhancements to use my slaying arrows. I have elf arcanum 1 because it's a prereq, spent 12 points taking the actual AA line, and technically the 40 force spell power enhancement I have says it's available to "level 2 elf" though it's at the same time kind of a wizard enhancement. That's it, iirc. 66 points for favored soul goodies.

An option I won't have later.

[Taojeff]

The problem, as others said, is the requirement to spend AP where you don't want them.

I'm sure my favored soul arcane archer is a goner if the enhancement pass goes live as it is. I need to spend about 60 AP just to get the Arcane Archer stuff I want, leaving me with **** from the other favored soul trees. Notice how, on live, I don't have a load of elf enhancements to use my slaying arrows. I have elf arcanum 1 because it's a prereq, spent 12 points taking the actual AA line, and technically the 40 force spell power enhancement I have says it's available to "level 2 elf" though it's at the same time kind of a wizard enhancement. That's it, iirc. 66 points for favored soul goodies.

An option I won't have later.

You should not be able to get the best parts of a build without getting through the trees... why because it would be downright op and a balance issue. Every tree game does this...why should ddo be any different. The tree system is a step in the right direction to improving balance issues.

[Dilbon]

The problem, as others said, is the requirement to spend AP where you don't want them.

And that's new how?

[nibel]

You noticed that too, huh? Yeah, folks who'd worked for literally MONTHS to unlock Jedi suddenly saw Jedi made into a starting profession. Think about that for a moment... There's literally nothing comparable in the game except maybe some of the highest tier favor unlocks.

Except by all the Jedi background, I think we do have something comparable in this game.

Completionist.

Imagine that everyone that pre-buy the next expansion gets one passive past life per class for free. Every character you make from now on is a 36-pts build, that can buy completionist. I bet a lot of completionists would be flipping out.

There are some stuff that we don't care much if new players have an easier way to acquire now, like greensteel or dragontouched armor. But Completionist and all the tasty stuff merged on that feat, plus all the work needed to get those 13 past lifes...

[GeneralDiomedes]

Probably not. Forumisers like to doomcry about how every change will FINALLY kill DDO, then someone creative thinks outside the box and a new build is born and copied and copied and copied until every build that does not copy it is labeled 'not viable' or gimp.

DDO ... still here since 2006.

[eonfreon]

And that's new how?

That's pretty new. My Paladin has to buy some fluff to qualify for DoS, but largely the enhancements I spend my points in are up to me. Very few enhancements have gates requiring more than a number of AP spent and the level of the Class or, in the case of Racial enhancements, the level of the character.

By largely getting rid of level requirements they had to completely redesign everything.

It's baffling that they want to create a new game at this late point in the game's life.

[Postumus]

And that's new how?

That isn't new. I think what is more frustrating for some people is that in the current system I can spend APs in any 'tree' be it class or racial, and the total APs spent across all 'trees' count for a the minimum APs spent requirements for a particular enhancement whereas now only the APs spent in the specific tree count for the minimum APs spent requirements for an enhancement in that tree.


I'm on the fence about it. It completely changes how I choose enhancement progression, and now I can go with a cleric who can get the healing aura by level 9 (10?) if I ignore other enhancements in other trees I'd typically get, or I may not get my healing aura until after 12. That is actually seems to give me more choices while leveling than I have now. It is quite possibly a good thing.

[Postumus]

It's baffling that they want to create a new game at this late point in the game's life.

This is just more ammo for my theory that EDs were the first step in the morph from DDO to DDO2. Or to keep it in DnD terms, from 1st edition DDO to 2nd edition.