Armor and Mitigation Changes

[Ayseifn]

i don't see an issue with that though. isn't one meant to be defensive while the other is offensive? people will dip into other trees anyways if they need certain abilities. i know on my fvs for example have points in both warpriest and angel of vengeance. So why shouldn't a tank do that? hell right now they can be in knight of chalice and sacred defender. lol. i don't see the issue.

Look at the Rogue trees, they're all about weapon types. One for stick builds that can be defensive or offensive with some nice synergy in Henshin Mystic for either playstyle, one for daggers where you can go for int based instant kills, or dex/str based and and go for more DPS. There's also a ranged tree for repeaters that does something I guess.

Point is a lot of the trees are weapon and/or fighting style based and having two of them dedicated to using a shield seems over the top, especially on the more generalist fighter class.

[oradafu]

i don't see an issue with that though. isn't one meant to be defensive while the other is offensive? people will dip into other trees anyways if they need certain abilities. i know on my fvs for example have points in both warpriest and angel of vengeance. So why shouldn't a tank do that? hell right now they can be in knight of chalice and sacred defender. lol. i don't see the issue.

It's been a while since I checked, but both "shield" trees that paladins and fighters currently cost more AP than players get. Tank Paladin have to spend some AP in their "dps" tree just to get passable damage that currently lag behind even caster classes like Clerics, Sorcs and Bards. And you see no problem adding another tree just to buff shields when these characters are already AP starved?

[Rull]

I'm loving these changes.

I keep running into problems where I want to put on heavier armor but that uncenters or unswashbuckles me, two of my favorite sources for more damage.
Yay for balance!

[Seikojin]

i don't see an issue with that though. isn't one meant to be defensive while the other is offensive? people will dip into other trees anyways if they need certain abilities. i know on my fvs for example have points in both warpriest and angel of vengeance. So why shouldn't a tank do that? hell right now they can be in knight of chalice and sacred defender. lol. i don't see the issue.

Well if you look at pally and fighter right now, you have a defensive tree, or a shield tree, and an offensive tree, something that does not benefit or help shield use. As it stands, doubling the defensive enhancement bonuses with the capstone would be perfect for both Stalwart and Syberis. It would put them very close to, or on par with what you currently can get with multiclassing fighter/pal/wiz or pal/fighter/monk. Which gives the player 2 more options for ee capable builds defensively. Offensive, they need to remove the swf shield limit for the defender and syberis trees. Then that would put those trees back in the game as the best tank roles. Make that a passive on the level 8 core. This way they can only get that benefit from deep splashing and you wouldn't see tower shield bards with swf either since swashbuckling would not be changed to allow ti, only the pal and fighter defensive stances.

[Seikojin]

Look at the Rogue trees, they're all about weapon types. One for stick builds that can be defensive or offensive with some nice synergy in Henshin Mystic for either playstyle, one for daggers where you can go for int based instant kills, or dex/str based and and go for more DPS. There's also a ranged tree for repeaters that does something I guess.

Point is a lot of the trees are weapon and/or fighting style based and having two of them dedicated to using a shield seems over the top, especially on the more generalist fighter class.

Rogues, like monks, use dodge more than ac. So for them, they need (still) dodge enhancements and dodge lifters, so they avoid completely. Rogue is strong with defensive roll and a super high reflex save.

As far as weapons, those were put in to offer additional utility for underused items and lines of items in the game as well as filling flavorful builds.

[noinfo]

I have a few thoughts based on AC since it was mentioned by the devs but not overly discussed. All numbers used are just conceptual and its possible that a cap or some form of scaling could be used. (while I have skimmed the thread I hope I have not missed something similar discussed)

People rely on dodge and PRR because it is a fixed number, AC not so much because the actual mob too hits are harder to work out and vary between difficulties greatly. It is also there to provided the "Randomness" of attack. The threshold is not designed to replace basic too hit but to provide a minimum defense or threshold, ie if via formular the mob needs a 15+ to hit and your minimum says 5+ then it takes the better of the 2.

Instead of constantly worrying about upper end limits work on a lower end threshold that people can target and know that it will work.

Basic thoughts

for every 10pts of AC gain a 1% miss chance minimum
eg 70 AC gives a minimum 7% + base 5% miss chance
For a guaranteed 12% miss chance even in EE
add to this 5% for large shields
10% for tower shields
15% for combat expertise
5% for defensive fighting.
2 Weapon defense add 5%

A basic fighter with 80 AC 2 handed fighting would have 13% minimum even in EE

A fighter needs to minimise damage, pulls out tower shield and goes on defensive fighting.
AC jumps up to 87 or something like that (not run numbers for ac)

total defence is now base 5%
8.7 for AC
5% defensive fighting
10% tower shield
28.7% minimum even in EE (better than blur but cumulative with it)

Upper end
A maxxed out 400 AC (not sure this is possible or sustainable but going for extremes)
will likely have large or tower shield
will have combat expertise (significant cast and dps drop)
40% for armour
10% max for shield
15% for combat expertise
Minimum guaranteed 65% defence

[Eomen]

We don’t want to hurt Evasion builds.

I think this will happen with the changes to divine grace. EE reflex saves are insane.

The value armor depends on the class of the armor.

Robes or Outfits: No PRR, no MRR
Light Armor: 15 PRR, 15 MRR if armor has enchantments.
Medium Armor: 30 PRR, 30 MRR if armor has enchantments.
Heavy Armor: 45 PRR, 45 MRR if armor has enchantments.

So does this replace the bonus based on BaB? You will also want to rebalance how much PRR you get from enhancement, because they will have a relatively smaller impact now.

Shields will give additional PRR and, if enchanted, MRR.
Buckler: None
Light Shield: 5 PRR, 5 MRR if shield has enchantments.
Heavy Shield: 10 PRR, 10 MRR if shield has enchantments.
Tower Shield: 15 PRR, 15 MRR if shield has enchantments.

Physical and Magical Resist Rating multiplier against magical attacks that normally allow a Reflex saving throw.

Buckler: 1.0 (no additional mitigation)
Light Shield: 1.0 (no additional mitigation)
Heavy Shield: 2.0
Tower Shield: 2.0

Please consider bigger bonuses for Tower Shields. They have significant penalties over a Heavy Shield - 50% arcane spell failure, Max Dex cap, Max dodge cap, -2 to hit, -9 or 10 ACP... Perhaps give them 25 PRR and x2.5 or x3 multiplier.

Under the new system they would have a PRR and MRR of 260 which would translate to a damage multiplier of .4285 for both physical and magical damage. Against area of effect attacks (magic requiring a Reflex saving throw) this would be increased to 520, which translates to .2238.

In this example, when the heavily armored and shielded character is hit by dragon’s breath for 500 damage it would be reduced by his/her enchanted armor and shield down to 112.

Is that before or after Elemental resistances?

In addition, there are new or changed caps on certain scores based on the armor you are wearing.

Note that Medium and Heavy armor will continue to negate the Evasion feat.

In addition, some shields will negate the Evasion feat.

Buckler: None
Light Shield: None
Heavy Shield: No Evasion feat
Tower Shield: No Evasion feat

PRR and MRR Cap for armor (tentative, work in progress)

Robes or Outfit: -/100
Light Armor: -/200
Medium Armor: No cap
Heavy Armor: No cap

Please consider the affects of Adamantine and Mithril material. Adamantine is basically useless and Mithril is actually a penalty to PRR because it is considered lighter armor. Make these material sought after again. Perhaps Adamantine could double the base PRR. Remove the Mithril PRR penalty (it is lighter not weaker) and perhaps give it an MRR bonus.

[Eomen]

But DPS is terrible when using a shield!
We intend to give characters who use weapon and shield additional options.

~ We plan to introduce two new trees for shield use. The Vanguard tree will be focused on DPS while using a weapon and shield. This DPS will come from a combination of weapon damage and shield bashes.

Please allow for creativity. Shield bashes have been STR based and Bludgeon, so if shield bashing is the extra damage these tanks are going to be pretty cookie cutter.

The Shieldbearer tree will be a mitigation tree that will focus on heavy armor and shield. This will also offer ways to counter enemies with active mitigation such as stuns, knock downs, and the like. These trees would be available to Fighter, Paladin and perhaps even a new class that supported heavy armor and martial abilities.

Perhaps consider a fortitude based 'evasion' for Heavy armor and tower shield. They are already standing behind a wall of metal basically.

[Monkey_Archer]

Just thought of another way to make armor choice (eg. heavy vs light) matter more.



Right now all additional mitigation is weighted on the shield with no additional mitigation coming from heavier armor in spite of the stated "and/or" objective. I suggest splitting it so that armor also gets part of the bonus :

Buckler: 1.0 (no additional mitigation)
Light Shield: 1.0 (no additional mitigation)
Heavy Shield: 1.5
Tower Shield: 1.5

Robes or Outfits: 1.0 (no additional mitigation)
Light Armor: 1.0 (no additional mitigation)
Medium Armor: 1.5
Heavy Armor: 1.5

I'm going to echo this.
The largest buff from these changes is definitely to S&B heavy armor builds who can get 200+ PRR and 400+ MRR. The second largest buff however is actually to unarmored evasion/monk builds who now gain up to 40% additional mitigation against the few spells that can actually hurt them. The comparatively small +30/45 PRR/MRR increase for wearing medium/heavy armor without a shield is good, but does almost nothing to compete with evasion.

Also, I dislike the MRR caps for unarmored and light armor. Most unarmored monk builds and light armored builds only get up to about 100 MRR anyway, so the caps just seem arbitrary and unnecessary. I'd much rather see all types of armor receive a MRR multiplier instead of arbitrary caps. So I'd change the quoted proposal to something like:

Buckler: 1.0 (no additional mitigation)
Small shield: 1.0 (no additional mitigation)
Heavy Shield: 1.25
Tower Shield 1.5

Unarmored: 0.5 (half mitigation)
Light armor: 0.75
Medium armor: 1.25
Heavy armor: 1.5

While it might be more complex, it would provide clear incentives for each of the various armor/shield combinations, instead of just having heavyplate/shield or unarmored evasion as the only real options.

[Scrabbler]

Instead of adding this whole MRR mechanic which will have wide-ranging effects and improve some characters who already have Evasion, they could take a different approach and add Evasion-like feats / enhancements which give less benefit (20% damage instead of 0% on a save) but require wearing a shield.

If that semi-Evasion were included in Sacred/Stalwart Defender trees for a few AP, heavy armored Fighters and Paladins would instantly become much more reasonable, right? Isn't that a more-direct approach?

[elraido]

Ok, so far it sounds like a decent upgrade. There are a couple of things that worry me though.

1. What is the point cost going to be? The defender trees are already expensive and don't have many points to spread out to get additional DPS.

2. Are the defender tree abilities still going to stack with one another?

[fyrst.grok]

(Edited based on player feedback.)
snip

PRR and MRR Cap for armor (tentative, work in progress)

Robes or Outfit: -/100
Light Armor: -/200
Medium Armor: No cap
Heavy Armor: No cap

Note that we have designed this so characters cannot gain both Evasion and the shield bonus coupled with high levels of resistance rating. This is intentional. If you see a hole in our design that allows for this please warn us!

snip

Sev~

Too many pages to read through so I'll just comment on the one thing that bugs me the most about these changes..

Nerfing light armor and robe prr/mrr without increasing other options to mitigate the damage is a bad move!
I'm all for making other choices viable but don't swing the nerfbat without consideration for those who invested time and effort in getting a high prr coupled with evasion to be viable tanks. At least set the bar at the current possible values.

[Free2Pay]

Many players appear to forget why there are various classes instead of just one generic class in mmo. If you choose to play either of the robe wearing classes like Wizard and Sorcerer, you know (or should have known) that you are signing up for a glass cannon dps role by sacrificing your survivability just for that. On the opposite end, Armor wearing classes like Fighter and Paladin gain better survivability at the expense of dps too. It was this natural ability to function well in one area just by choosing a particular class that the concept of tank, dps and healer distinctive roles - a notion tried and tested - are borne from various mmo.

No one will bother to play other classes if one class is superior to any all the other classes in term of dps, survivability and utilities. Which is sadly the case in DDO - Fighters, Barbarian and Paladins can't compete with blue bars once THE heat is on. It's come to a stage that wizard and sorcerer expect to be top dps while having the same damage migitation as heavy armor fighters. Well if that's the trend, I'll say a rethink of fighter, barbarian and paladin as DPS roles is in order. If blue bars have the same if not the better option in term of survivability, Fighters, Barbarians and Paladins should also match them in term of dps. Expand Shiradi so that it benefits TWF, THF and SWF. Give us dancing balls. Give us death aura. Give us earthquakes. Gives us mass holds. Give us reconstruct. Give us wails. Give us FoD. Give us.....

[HippieBallz]

Free2play has it right I play many toons my rogue has evasion and I know she is squishy that's the point if I had 200 ac and 1700 hp on her what is the point of playing she has a role in the group as a traper and if I don't see it or blow the box I should take more damage on a failed save than the guy in full plate with a tower shield I skimmed through the thread here and some of the ideas about the purposed change are good but most of this is just the elitist complaining that there op 26 life toons will take a small hit to survivability the point here is to make it more like what armor would really do for the person whit it on in the way that type of armor would react if I was wareing a robe and a claymore like trap went off id be screwed but if I was in full plate id take less damage I like the idea of the mrr as well but it does seem op if I am in metal suit and hit with a fire ball the burn would do most of the damage so I believe it should be toned down slightly to count for various types of spells lighting spells would still hurt as where sonic or water would be less likely to have a major impact I look forward to seeing the final numbers and maybe a change to the ac of armor to more reflect the difference between them keep it up

[Tizian]

Instead of adding this whole MRR mechanic which will have wide-ranging effects and improve some characters who already have Evasion, they could take a different approach and add Evasion-like feats / enhancements which give less benefit (20% damage instead of 0% on a save) but require wearing a shield.

If that semi-Evasion were included in Sacred/Stalwart Defender trees for a few AP, heavy armored Fighters and Paladins would instantly become much more reasonable, right? Isn't that a more-direct approach?

Right now, the closest feat (& enhancement for Purple Dragon Knights..) is Shield Deflection:
---
Shield Deflection
Prerequisite: Base attack bonus +8, proficiency with shields

When actively blocking with any type of shield you are proficient with, you gain a competence bonus based on the type of shield to completely ignore Acid, Cold, Electric, and Fire damage:

Buckler: 20%
Small Shield: 25%
Large Shield: 30%
Tower Shield: 40%
---

Does anyone use this? I haven't tried, but just looking at it I go 'meh' because of the active blocking requirement. I can't hope to time my blocks correctly because of latency issues and in any case the bonus is unreliable.



The following is pretty much my thoughts on the feat and how it might be changed (if it requires changing at all):
---
(changed) Shield Deflection
Prerequisite: Shield proficiency

When actively blocking with a large shield or a tower shield, you gain a competence bonus based on the type of shield to completely ignore Acid, Cold, Electric, and Fire damage:

Large Shield: 45%
Tower Shield: 60%

While using a shield, you gain a competence bonus based on the type of shield to Acid, Cold, Electric and Fire damage absorption:

Buckler: 5%
Small Shield: 6.25%
Large Shield: 7.5%
Tower Shield: 10%

---

This feat would have no offensive bonus, so only useful for tanking.

The active blocking chance of ignoring damage is increased (1.5x compared to current), but bucklers and small shields are removed (they're not big enough to hide behind?). Improved evasion works passively and provides a 50% reduction even on a failure against most spells dealing these types of damage while active blocking requires ceasing all offensive actions (unless shield bashes with Improved Shield Bash feat still count as actively blocking, I'm not sure. Do you retain the full benefits of active blocking with that feat or only the shield bonus to AC?).

A passive benefit is added (1/4th the average benefit of actively blocking) to make the feat useful even when not actively blocking. Since the active blocking is complete negation of damage, this passive feature only applies when active blocking fails due to timing or RNG (or choosing not to actively block).

The option for making two feats (Shield Deflection & Improved Shield Deflection) is also there of course, to have shield tanking counterparts to evasion/improved evasion. Feat starved classes might not be too keen on that though.

Too powerful for perma-shield-blocking-intimitanks? Major issues? Worthless because timing blocks is difficult? Damage type issues? What about Purple Dragon Knight "race"? Any other thoughts/comments?

[janave]

The last time they touched AC and introduced PRR, my Casters benefitted way more from the changes. Really, way way more, Arcanes especially. So before you make a game changer system addition/revamp, please run the numbers, and get clear on the direction of the bypassing named gear later on.

Just a thought.

[Manganakus]

Resist Rating Caps and Evasion
In addition, there are new or changed caps on certain scores based on the armor you are wearing.

Note that Medium and Heavy armor will continue to negate the Evasion feat.

In addition, some shields will negate the Evasion feat.

Buckler: None
Light Shield: None
Heavy Shield: No Evasion feat
Tower Shield: No Evasion feat

Hi,
sorry to say that, but again a Back-and-Forth change with great impact on multiple builds. Do you ever consider making changes that won't penalize players ?

Do you ever consider the possibility to avoid people to respec, LR or TR most or part of their alt ?

On another part, any compensation for money/time spent on alts to get the bound item/augment/(...) that will now rot in there vault because it is now useless with those changes ?
Or are we just here to pay more and have less fun ?

Did you at least think about an alternative (specific Enhancement, Feat, chance of failed evasion as per Spell failure , etc...) to prevent or help players cope with this ?
On a very personnal point of view, I'm really bored to spend more time after each release of this kind to respec or TR instead of gaming.

The opportunity to wear a Heavy Shield while keeping Evasion is here from the very beggining of the game (I'm here since the very first day...when Med ad Heavy armour were buggy and did not prevent Evasion...), so why again change known and accepted game mechanics ?

Did you consider that maybe quest design, item and mob balance lead to that kind of 'rebalancing' ?

Rebalancing quests and items would be widely accepted, while I think changing the core rules all the time depending on where the wind blow is not.

[Zasral]

I really like the idea of these changes. If an explosion happens in my kitchen and I hide behind my table I would expect to take less damage. If I am wearing the equivalent of the table... There is a reason bomb disposal techs put on armor before they attempt to disarm.

[MangLord]

Does anyone use this? I haven't tried, but just looking at it I go 'meh' because of the active blocking requirement. I can't hope to time my blocks correctly because of latency issues and in any case the bonus is unreliable.

When i did my paladin life i took it briefly. It was introduced right when I was doing that life, so I had to try it out. After one quest i went straight to Fred and changed it for a cleave or something. If you want to benefit from a random % chance to ignore spells, you basically have to be blocking and acting useless while the rest of the party is killing things around you. If I had a 40% passive chance to block damage that increased to 80% when actively blocking, it would be well worth it. As it stands, it's a sucky feat and a waste of valuable space.

[Scrabbler]

Worthless because timing blocks is difficult?

Maybe "difficult" isn't exactly the right word, but timing blocks is not a well-functioning mechanic in DDO. Tying an important feature to actively blocking won't be easy to make work.

Basically, if you add bonuses that make active blocking more protective, the result won't be players trying to mix blocks at the right time during battle... they'll use it to become semi-invulnerable and remove themselves from combat for long periods.