Early Look: Artificer Changes & Renegade Mastermaker

[fmalfeas]

ASF removal should be included in a better way.

If you take this Tier 5 ability you have no ASF for all armor, but until you take it you have full ASF on all armor types.

More logical distribution of such benefit would be to either make discrete steps in removing ASF for light, medium and heavy armor, or to include a % reduction in ASF and spread it to multiple Tiers.

So instead of having ASF reduction for all armor on a Tier 5 ability, we could get ASF removal for heavy armor on that ability, and ASF removal from medium armor on some Tier 4 ability, and then ASF removal from light armor on some Tier 3 ability.

Or maybe just make it similar to Wizard EK tree and include a % ASF reduction on abilities through tiers.

And Warlock ES tree should be fixed that way too. Instead of having only medium armor ASF removal on Tier 4 ability, we could also get ASF removal for light armor on some Tier 3 ability.




I agree, if we are getting another ability that removes the need for components, a feat should be improved to be viable even with these enhancements taken.

It's nothing OP really. The feat itself is just for lazy folks (like myself ) who don't want to care about materials...

I think that since artis only suffer ASF with scrolls and casting spells off other arcane classes levels, the removal of ASF is largely just for not having to worry about heavy armor stopping your rez scrolls.

[gwonbush]

I think that since artis only suffer ASF with scrolls and casting spells off other arcane classes levels, the removal of ASF is largely just for not having to worry about heavy armor stopping your rez scrolls.

Res scrolls are divine. No problems there. It's GH/Displace/Teleport/Invis that have a failure chance.

[Grace_ana]

Ah, the elephant in the room. We wanted an ability in here that would let the Arti support a party in Reaper with defensive bonuses, and almost certainly overshot the number. That's why "Early Look" is in the name of the thread - This early, things aren't going to be balanced right, almost guaranteed. This one's next on my prototyping list, and will likely be different by the time it reaches Lamannia.

Nonononononononono.

We were told, repeatedly, that the reaper was meant to be an additional challenge, and that the game was not going to be balanced for reaper. The idea behind the reaper trees (which I still disagree with) was that they would provide the DPS and survivability boosts to succeed more in reaper.

So if you make enhancements intended to aid a class in reaper, then they have an unfair advantage. Then other class trees need the same thing. Then the quests are out of balance, because people have these hugely powerful abilities they can use in any difficulty, and they stack with the reaper trees, too. Which makes reaper easier, and then boring, and then we need the NEXT NEW THING.

So no. Do not make enhancement trees balance or "give something" with reaper in mind. Reaper should be entirely out of your mind when designing power for trees.

[cru121]

Res scrolls are divine. No problems there. It's GH/Displace/Teleport/Invis that have a failure chance.

Correcting your correction. Displacement does not have a somatic component and can be easily scrolled (or cast) in heavy armor.

[elvesunited]

Correcting your correction. Displacement does not have a somatic component and can be easily scrolled (or cast) in heavy armor.

As scrolls are generally bad for combat spells, the only thing I can think of that might qualify for an in combat scroll cast, would be stone to flesh. Yeah removing you armor to cast greater heroism might be an annoyance but you must have AP to burn if you're down to spending for that.

[fmalfeas]

Res scrolls are divine. No problems there. It's GH/Displace/Teleport/Invis that have a failure chance.

I that case, I revise my assessment to 'it's an ability meant largely for multiclassing'.

[blerkington]

Nonononononononono.

We were told, repeatedly, that the reaper was meant to be an additional challenge, and that the game was not going to be balanced for reaper. The idea behind the reaper trees (which I still disagree with) was that they would provide the DPS and survivability boosts to succeed more in reaper.

So if you make enhancements intended to aid a class in reaper, then they have an unfair advantage. Then other class trees need the same thing. Then the quests are out of balance, because people have these hugely powerful abilities they can use in any difficulty, and they stack with the reaper trees, too. Which makes reaper easier, and then boring, and then we need the NEXT NEW THING.

So no. Do not make enhancement trees balance or "give something" with reaper in mind. Reaper should be entirely out of your mind when designing power for trees.

Very well said.

First it was self healing and expanded crit range and multipliers, then gobs of melee power, then a new enhancement tree that adds a ton of ranged power to monk based ranged builds that certainly didn't need it, and now you're adding abilities into class trees specifically intended for reaper? Come on.

As developers the pious noises you make about attempting to balance classes against each other and the content are getting very hard to believe. Will we be having another round of class balancing because all classes should expect to get stuff like this for reaper? Did you learn nothing from the class balancing exercises and how content had to be rebalanced afterwards? Or do you really believe all that was a good use of your time and one of the game's successes? I sure hope not.

It's time to come clean, SSG. Just admit you have no interest in balancing your game or lack the understanding to do it properly. Declare game balance a free for all from now on, where anything goes and those of us who have concerns about it will know to stop offering feedback about nonsense like this.

Thanks.

[Hilltrot]

Nonononononononono.

We were told, repeatedly, that the reaper was meant to be an additional challenge, and that the game was not going to be balanced for reaper. The idea behind the reaper trees (which I still disagree with) was that they would provide the DPS and survivability boosts to succeed more in reaper.

So if you make enhancements intended to aid a class in reaper, then they have an unfair advantage. Then other class trees need the same thing. Then the quests are out of balance, because people have these hugely powerful abilities they can use in any difficulty, and they stack with the reaper trees, too. Which makes reaper easier, and then boring, and then we need the NEXT NEW THING.

So no. Do not make enhancement trees balance or "give something" with reaper in mind. Reaper should be entirely out of your mind when designing power for trees.

dittos

[Hilltrot]

Oh, naturally - best options these days for a Pure Arty to take are as heaviest as you can get. Sure. I'm mostly just nitpicking on the "we gotta support other builds" mentality that is seen heavily in this tree, moreso than the other two. With that sort of devils-advocate planning... Why are they giving a buff to an armor type Artificers Don't Get but not ones they Do? That's what I'm really getting at here.

As to their reflex progression... yes... but what Arty these days isn't taking Insightful Reflexes?

Most aren’t. There are far better ways to pump your saves. I, however, won’t deny your option like you seem to be denying others.

BTW, have you ever thought the armor requirements were for balancing purposes?

[Hephaestas]

I, however, won’t deny your option like you seem to be denying others.

Just lol.

BTW, have you ever thought the armor requirements were for balancing purposes?

And yes. That's a weak reason. Especially since Arties (especially once the changes go live) already are either Feat-starved Warforged who Always have to take their body type, or fleshies taking the Construct line. If you're talking the "shield ability" that too, is a weak reason. Barbarians and Warlocks get this ability, and those do not have any armor restrictions. If the idea of this tree is to benefit a great many new playstyles, why is there barely anything in it for a light armor user? These are questions I don't really care to hear answered by player's minds. I'd like to hear from the devs themselves what the idea of the tree is

[Thumbed_Servant]

nonononononononono.

We were told, repeatedly, that the reaper was meant to be an additional challenge, and that the game was not going to be balanced for reaper. The idea behind the reaper trees (which i still disagree with) was that they would provide the dps and survivability boosts to succeed more in reaper.

So if you make enhancements intended to aid a class in reaper, then they have an unfair advantage. Then other class trees need the same thing. Then the quests are out of balance, because people have these hugely powerful abilities they can use in any difficulty, and they stack with the reaper trees, too. Which makes reaper easier, and then boring, and then we need the next new thing.

So no. Do not make enhancement trees balance or "give something" with reaper in mind. Reaper should be entirely out of your mind when designing power for trees.

^ THIS

The truth seems to me to be thus: Power sells. In video games that is. As SSG isn't going to insert sex to sell (thankfully), they insert power. Each new wave of content has more difficult mobs but also more power in the gear they have and the enhancement and class changes they bring as people will buy the next thing if it gives their toons more power. It's a no win discussion. Interesting content is harder to make and sells less than content that has more power for the players. Interesting content with power is their best seller I'm sure, such as Ravenloft (kudos, content very interesting and enjoyable). Reaper was stated as a means to challenge players who had succeeded in mastering the game; truth seems to be it was the next hurdle to put in elite players path that could then be used to generate more sales by catering to with more power. Steelstar slipped by stating "We wanted an ability in here that would let the Arti support a party in Reaper with defensive bonuses", but truly the truth has been there to see for years in the power escalation with each update.

[Niminae]

Just lol.

And yes. That's a weak reason. Especially since Arties (especially once the changes go live) already are either Feat-starved Warforged who Always have to take their body type, or fleshies taking the Construct line.

You have a limited view of the Artificer. It does not have to be "either Feat-starved Warforged who Always have to take their body type, or fleshies taking the Construct line" at all. You can make a very potent Artificer without being either a *forged or buying the Construct line of feats as a fleshy at all.

If you think that this is a requirement, then maybe it is you who have "a weak reason."

[Hephaestas]

You have a limited view of the Artificer. It does not have to be "either Feat-starved Warforged who Always have to take their body type, or fleshies taking the Construct line" at all. You can make a very potent Artificer without being either a *forged or buying the Construct line of feats as a fleshy at all.

If you think that this is a requirement, then maybe it is you who have "a weak reason."

I've played artificers since they came out. In every conceivable way. Battle Engineers. Arcaneotechs. Repeater builds, Great Xbow builds, melee builds. Half forged. Self Forged. Pure fleshie. The main issue in line with not taking those feats is the unfortunate dependability on either the very slow and occasionally finicky Admixtures, or Heal/Your fav Brand of Cure Scrolls, orrr the dependency on a more traditional Healer Role being fulfilled in the party. The Heal Scroll way being the most popular method these days, especially for the non-forged. I'd like to clarify for you that I do not intend to *assume* things as it appears you are are thinking I am, I am simply making a more general statement based on all my experience as the class, as well as any knowledge I have acquired from others playing the class. How they play, etc. Let's not go pushing buttons now because people are assuming things, shall we

I can only speak for what I have seen on my server in the years Arties have been around and those I've seen run them. As It Stands - the two most popular ways I See the class played, are the two ways I mentioned above. Thus why I mentioned em. Of course they arent the only way to play an arty. But now that I've started talking about the many ways, its gotten to be a much longer post now

I also hope you don't think there was any offense in my words simply because I used the word "weak." But balancing arties from what though? They're not required to take Heavy Armor. Nah of course not. But it mentions bonuses to a proficiency they do not get, and doesnt give them a bonus to light armor which they *do* get, which was my initial point. Saving them time on their shield clickies, wands, dragonmarks (which would be an extra feat too :c ) is overbalanced? I don't think so, and thus I have to called it a weak reason. But again, at this rate - we wait for the devs response. The beta stage is done

Thanks for allowing me to clarify things a bit~

[elvesunited]

You have a limited view of the Artificer. It does not have to be "either Feat-starved Warforged who Always have to take their body type, or fleshies taking the Construct line" at all. You can make a very potent Artificer without being either a *forged or buying the Construct line of feats as a fleshy at all.

If you think that this is a requirement, then maybe it is you who have "a weak reason."

With crossbow arty sure. Especially if you put effort in reflex save and splash some evasion. ( or go pure and use shadowdancer in quest with a lot of reflex saves ) While not up to monkcher damage their dps aint bad and they are far more versatile.

But the melee arty needs to be able to compensate for enemy attacks and damage. The whole kill them before they are able to hit you went out of style when trash started getting 2000 hp each in heroic. And being able to self-heal is one of the arty's strengths.

[Memnir]

[chant]RUNE!-ARM!-SOUNDS!!! RUNE!-ARM!-SOUNDS!!! RUNE!-ARM!-SOUNDS!!! [/chant]

[cru121]

some obscure ideas:

Mastermaker T2 - Stronger Admixtures
- make this a multiselector, and offer Faster Admixtures as an alternative

Arcanotechnician C2 - Palliative Admixture
- rather than being a separate ability, make this a 100% proc when arties toss something. Add a cooldown if needed. This ain't really worth the fairly long casting animation on its own.

[Steelstar]

Nonononononononono.

We were told, repeatedly, that the reaper was meant to be an additional challenge, and that the game was not going to be balanced for reaper. The idea behind the reaper trees (which I still disagree with) was that they would provide the DPS and survivability boosts to succeed more in reaper.

So if you make enhancements intended to aid a class in reaper, then they have an unfair advantage. Then other class trees need the same thing. Then the quests are out of balance, because people have these hugely powerful abilities they can use in any difficulty, and they stack with the reaper trees, too. Which makes reaper easier, and then boring, and then we need the NEXT NEW THING.

So no. Do not make enhancement trees balance or "give something" with reaper in mind. Reaper should be entirely out of your mind when designing power for trees.

What we put forward here was an early look at an ability that does not stack with several other forms of Temporary Hit Points (reducing its overall efficacy), buffs the entire party, and lines up with the stated goals of the tree (healing & survivability). The numbers clearly weren't balanced; I should have been more clear about the likelihood of that in this initial post, given that the tree was in an earlier state than we usually publish plans to the public.

There's a difference between "this ability is good in Reaper and OP everywhere else", and "This ability is good across difficulties, and happens to also be useful in Reaper". We're shooting toward the latter. Many classes already have things that apply to that latter category (that "unfair advantage" mentioned here), and it would be problematic to avoid ever introducing something like that in the future - The net effect would be "We can never use Temporary Hit Points or anything on this list in new things ever again". No, we shouldn't look at an ability from a perspective of "Let's add this to make this tree super great and powerful in Reaper", but I would not say it's out of the question to look at it through a lens of "Are we building things that are going to be useful (not powerful, per se, but worth using) to a wide variety of players?". And sometimes, that may include something Defensive that also works well in Reaper.

We'll keep working on it. That might entail testing how the numbers play out across difficulties; that might entail scrapping it outright and putting something less useful but less contentious in its place. Would be interested to know what people want to see there.

[Captain_Wizbang]

that might entail scrapping it outright and putting something less useful but less contentious in its place. Would be interested to know what people want to see there.

Looks good so far, maybe the #'s are a tick light, but thats ok at this stage....
re the quote.......you folks have enough savvy to figure out a simple solution.

As for the whole reaper debacle, "tighten that bonnet missy, we're in for one helll of a ride" Ive said it all along reaper did NOT need any enhancements. Its bad for the game in a lot of ways.

[Kza]

What we put forward here was an early look at an ability that does not stack with several other forms of Temporary Hit Points (reducing its overall efficacy), buffs the entire party, and lines up with the stated goals of the tree (healing & survivability). The numbers clearly weren't balanced; I should have been more clear about the likelihood of that in this initial post, given that the tree was in an earlier state than we usually publish plans to the public.

There's a difference between "this ability is good in Reaper and OP everywhere else", and "This ability is good across difficulties, and happens to also be useful in Reaper". We're shooting toward the latter. Many classes already have things that apply to that latter category (that "unfair advantage" mentioned here), and it would be problematic to avoid ever introducing something like that in the future - The net effect would be "We can never use Temporary Hit Points or anything on this list in new things ever again". No, we shouldn't look at an ability from a perspective of "Let's add this to make this tree super great and powerful in Reaper", but I would not say it's out of the question to look at it through a lens of "Are we building things that are going to be useful (not powerful, per se, but worth using) to a wide variety of players?". And sometimes, that may include something Defensive that also works well in Reaper.

We'll keep working on it. That might entail testing how the numbers play out across difficulties; that might entail scrapping it outright and putting something less useful but less contentious in its place. Would be interested to know what people want to see there.

Thanks for clarification! And big thanks to nice Communication both here and in druid thread.

[ForgettableNPC]

I still want to see at some offensive options available just to take advantage of the repair spell power, such as allowing you to deal rust spells to non-constructs, but at a penalty.

Especially assuming Converter applies to one ally at a time and works at a cooldown, so you can't Mass Heal like a Radiant Servant would, especially with the aura.
I mean, you have Curative Admixture as SLAs, sure, but you'd need to invest in Positive Spellpower independently.

...Maybe make the Curative Admixture spells work off of Repair Spellpower?