Here's how to do CC correctly

[Enoach]

...
2. Use CC effects more strategically (and less often) that always succeed to some extent

My problem comes with the "always" part of this phrase.

"always" is a dangerous place and has a tendency to lean towards "All or Nothing" and also limits development of challenging situations.

[Khalixxa]

Your first post also implied to me that you wanted to remove all 'randomness' based on character stats and replace that with success/failure based on player ability. To me that just sounds like turning DDO from an role-playing game into a FPS or similar. DDO, as an RPG, is based on the table-top game genre, and that is all about creating a character and then playing an adventure where your success/failure chances at a task is based on that character (not you as a player).
Creating a character with the abilities I want is part of why I like RPGs and I wouldn't want that to change in DDO. I want my character to be able to hit something with his sword because my character is good at hitting things with swords, not because I have fast (or not) reflexes with my mouse.

I wasn't saying anything about replacing stats based mechanics with reflex based mechanics. It was the RNG I was targeting.

However, your later clarifications make more sense. You are suggesting that spells, namely CC spells, shouldn't be all or nothing, but should have some kind of effect regardless of stats? Is that about the gist of it?

Not regardless of stats; regardless of RNG. I'm fine with stats (stats are part of what set RPGs aside from other genres); I'm not fine with RNG controlling important things like CC when there are better alternatives.

It would make sense to me if, for example, the Hold Monster spell held a monster that failed its save and merely temporarily slowed a monster that saved. But how far do we stray from the core tenets of Dungeons&Dragons? (I know, I know, many things have already strayed from that due to the logistics of making a turn-based game into a real-time one etc etc).

I'd argue that it wouldn't be straying very far, especially considering the benefits to game-play. There are already many concessions (such as conversion from the turn-based to real-time you mention) that everyone seems okay with. There are a ton of die rolls already cut out of game, presumably for the better, such as initiative, jumping, tumbling, moving, etc.

[Khalixxa]

Couldn't we improve poker by making it more like chess? Even old timey wargames i used to play had random elements to the combat involving a die roll. You could improve your odds, but only overwhelming numbers could make an outcome certain.

I get where you're coming from.

It all depends on what the players want. I'm making a big assumption that, considering how many inputs we give the game (literally how many times we hit a button trying to get something to happen) that increasing the importance of those inputs is what the majority of players would want.

I'm glad you brought up chess. It's a 100% deterministic game that has a lot of the qualities people often argue can only exist in a game that uses random numbers. It illustrates the level of game-play complexity that can be generated from rules that are actually very simple and easy to explain. However, I'm not arguing to get rid of RNG completely, but only in the areas where I think players should have more control.

[Khalixxa]

My problem comes with the "always" part of this phrase.

"always" is a dangerous place and has a tendency to lean towards "All or Nothing" and also limits development of challenging situations.

For the most part, the system for CC currently in DDO is "all or nothing" where die-rolls have the final say. (I don't think it can get much worse than that.)

Also, if "always" is problematic on it's own, how do you explain the things that already exist in DDO that "always" succeed? (I did say "to some extent" in the quote)

[zehnvhex]

Hi,

I think a lot of people simply don't understand what you're suggesting. Too stuck in the way things have always been "IE: If you don't like it go play something else."

People are focusing too much on the 'it should always do something' and thinking "What, it should always land? Huh? RABBLE RABBLE! This guy wants ez moad!" A better way to put it would be "I'd like more/all abilities to have a fallback condition like Crushing Despair and Finger of Death do."

That is to say, even if you fail your Trip DC, maybe it should at least still cause the mob to stumble for a few seconds unless you roll a 1. If a mob resists web it should still be slowed for a few seconds or at least until it's out of the web, etc...

It's indeed frustrating and unfun for someone to cast a spell and for nothing to happen. Psycho gave the "What, do you want an automatic crit button?" but that's not really the case. In DDO if something has enough fortification to not get crit you still get to hit it. So a more apt comparison would be if they changed it so that a crit blocked by fortification is now considered a miss.

Not exactly fun now is it?

I don't think longer cooldowns on CC are necessary but I wouldn't mind seeing "CC immunity" granted if you've been CC'd for longer than, say, 12 seconds out of every 30. Mobs gain immunity after 40 out of 60 seconds (scaling down to can only be CC'd for 5 seconds every 15 or something). Champions are half that (20 out of 30 down to 2 every 7).

You'd also probably have to make a distinction between the three types of CC as well. Slowing something shouldn't impact as much as making it helpless for example. So instead of seconds, maybe some kind of hidden meter that fills and when it's full the mob/player gets immunity?

---

For example, every second I'm held grants me 10 points towards immunity while being webbed would only grants like, 7 points per second while slow would be 2 points per second. Once I hit 100 immunity points all CC's last 2 more seconds (mostly for mob consideration, would suck to cast a CC only to have it immediately break because they hit immunity) and then I break all CC's and am immune for 15 seconds.

Having multiple CC's only the highest per second one would contribute so if I was held, webbed AND slowed it would still only be 10 per second.

---

As for CC breaking I think silver pin is good enough combined with the above immunity grants.

----

All combined this creates a scenario where getting saves and DC's are still really important, but not the "all or nothing" system we have now with luck being a major factor for a minor band. Something like this is also -significantly- new player friendly without really drastically increasing veteran power which is something I feel we can all agree DDO needs.

It would be a lot of work and a major departure from PnP though so I doubt we'd ever see something like it. It would be too much like a video game and I'm pretty sure they aren't allowed to do it.

So yeah, all of this will never happen. Get used to the all or nothing saves/DC casting system we oh so get to enjoy now. ^_^

[Enoach]

There is some that suggest DC is currently "All or Nothing"

I disagree and here is why...

1. There are different Saves - Will, Fortitude, Reflex and Strength
Part of the way of using Crowd Control is picking the right one for the situation. IE you wouldn't use Web to grab Oozes. But even more important is picking the weakest save of a mob, this comes down to efficiency. This does take knowledge some via research of ready and others with trial and error

2. There are debuffs
These can be passive like Aura of Menace, direct debuffs like enervation and slow or lingering such as what is provided by hypnotism even when a save occurs.

Next, I play on a first life character with random levels and without benefits of ship/tweak gear (so never optimal) and yet I can still land CC on elite. I concede that a lot of this has to do with knowledge about saves and "best CC for the job" But for me that is part of the fun.

[Khalixxa]

I don't think longer cooldowns on CC are necessary but I wouldn't mind seeing "CC immunity" granted if you've been CC'd for longer than, say, 12 seconds out of every 30. Mobs gain immunity after 40 out of 60 seconds (scaling down to can only be CC'd for 5 seconds every 15 or something). Champions are half that (20 out of 30 down to 2 every 7).

You'd also probably have to make a distinction between the three types of CC as well. Slowing something shouldn't impact as much as making it helpless for example. So instead of seconds, maybe some kind of hidden meter that fills and when it's full the mob/player gets immunity?

---

For example, every second I'm held grants me 10 points towards immunity while being webbed would only grants like, 7 points per second while slow would be 2 points per second. Once I hit 100 immunity points all CC's last 2 more seconds (mostly for mob consideration, would suck to cast a CC only to have it immediately break because they hit immunity) and then I break all CC's and am immune for 15 seconds.

Having multiple CC's only the highest per second one would contribute so if I was held, webbed AND slowed it would still only be 10 per second.

---

As for CC breaking I think silver pin is good enough combined with the above immunity grants.

This sort of system, where your character automatically gains some kind of resistance to CC the more of it they take, is very popular in fighting games (like Mortal Kombat), so there's no question that it "can" work. Here's why I don't think it's an ideal solution for DDO.

My whole issue with CC is how little player input matters. A system that automatically adjusts would solve the problem of "getting CCd forever", but it still wouldn't give the player any more meaning to their actions by itself. In a fighting game, there are no "stat differences" from game to game, and they only have one opponent at a time, so the player can eventually get used to the way CC falls off. In an MMO, it can be perceived as just another unpredictable effect of their button press. For example, it's much more difficult to keep track of which mobs are at what stage of diminishing returns, given how many of them there can be and how many other players there can be. World of Warcraft does use CC diminishing returns, especially in PvP, but I just don't think it's as fun as the CC breaker system that Elder Scrolls uses for example. They are similar systems, one is passive and the other is active. (It's better than what we have currently in DDO however.)

All combined this creates a scenario where getting saves and DC's are still really important, but not the "all or nothing" system we have now with luck being a major factor for a minor band. Something like this is also -significantly- new player friendly without really drastically increasing veteran power which is something I feel we can all agree DDO needs.

It would be a lot of work and a major departure from PnP though so I doubt we'd ever see something like it. It would be too much like a video game and I'm pretty sure they aren't allowed to do it.

So yeah, all of this will never happen. Get used to the all or nothing saves/DC casting system we oh so get to enjoy now. ^_^

I'm glad you brought up new player friendliness. It's very common for new players I try to introduce to make comments about how lame it is that "all or nothing" effects with long cooldowns sometimes do nothing at all, like Trip. This is one big reason why I suggest what I do. These new players would prefer that Trip always work (to some extent based on stats) but have a diminished up-time of some sort to compensate.

[Khalixxa]

There is some that suggest DC is currently "All or Nothing"

I disagree and here is why...

1. There are different Saves - Will, Fortitude, Reflex and Strength
Part of the way of using Crowd Control is picking the right one for the situation. IE you wouldn't use Web to grab Oozes. But even more important is picking the weakest save of a mob, this comes down to efficiency. This does take knowledge some via research of ready and others with trial and error

2. There are debuffs
These can be passive like Aura of Menace, direct debuffs like enervation and slow or lingering such as what is provided by hypnotism even when a save occurs.

Next, I play on a first life character with random levels and without benefits of ship/tweak gear (so never optimal) and yet I can still land CC on elite. I concede that a lot of this has to do with knowledge about saves and "best CC for the job" But for me that is part of the fun.

When I say "all or nothing", I mean the total success or total failure of a CC ability based on RNG. That RNG has varying effect based on stats/saves/etc, but the die-roll still has the final say. That's what I mean. I'm not implying that there's only one kind of save.

All the things you consider part of the fun would still exist under a system that I'm suggesting. Your knowledge of a mob's weakest save would still be relevant.

[Khalixxa]

Players should not be CCd forever, and neither should mobs.

Players should not find their CC useless, and neither should mobs.

The solution is to tone down the randomness, and balance around that reduced randomness.

[Vehementi]

Players should not be CCd forever, and neither should mobs.

Players should not find their CC useless, and neither should mobs.

The solution is to tone down the randomness, and balance around that reduced randomness.

But... Then why would we have dice rolling if it wasn't a game up to chance... This whole thing is gambling...

Also Hello fellow Swords of light guildie :P

[Khalixxa]

But... Then why would we have dice rolling if it wasn't a game up to chance... This whole thing is gambling...

Actually, tabletop D&D has a lot more dice rolling, such as initiative rolls, morale failure rolls, item identification rolls, jump & tumble rolls, etc. I think we can all agree that, in an MMO, it's much better that some things are left up to the player rather than the dice. How do you decide to what extent the dice should take control of the game?

DDO is not an idle game; players want their combat choices to matter. Randomness has a place, but it has far transgressed that place.