U50 Preview 1: Endgame Itemization Adjustments

[nobodynobody1426]

There's a couple spells that would probably need be nerf'd if MCL went away but I'd feel it'd be way better in the long run for it to be gone. All the spells that currently become meh as I approach 20 and even worse in epic levels being good again? WIN!

That would be totally fine, some of the spells with bigger damage dice are done so due to having a low MCL. Remove the MCL then tune the damage dice and viola balanced spell damage.

[xBunny]

It wasn't clear that you were only talking about quality. Main stat is +1 in Sharn/Fey/RL over Slavers (+2 if you count artifacts) so
technically it will outperform slavers. Possibly not enough to offset the extra flexibility that Slavers crafting gives.

Think stats where the same for Slavers and RL\Sharn\Fey +13. And artifact being +14. But I am not sure 100%. But even if it is 12 for Slavers - agree, it still not a big offset compared to what it was. Unless it is main stat, which is likely you want to go with artifact if possible.

[Arctigis]

Think stats where the same for Slavers and RL\Sharn\Fey +13. And artifact being +14. But I am not sure 100%. But even if it is 12 for Slavers - agree, it still not a big offset compared to what it was. Unless it is main stat, which is likely you want to go with artifact if possible.

L28 main stat is +12 - there's a table in the very first post.

[Khurse]

Frankly at this point I'd rather just remove the concept of a max caster level altogether and just give out caster levels when we want spells to actually increase in damage.

Yeah this sounds like the way to go forward.

[icekinslayer]

So drastic changes are not healthy for game IMHO. All changes after THF and Paladin tree, making me more and more sad. Have filling like u trying to make a different game. Wonder how many ppl from veteran playerbase will stay up to u52. Have strong feeling like this is Star Wars Galaxies's NGE patch.

Jedi still isn't a playable class, so the NGE is still aways off I'd think...

[Kza]

Frankly at this point I'd rather just remove the concept of a max caster level altogether and just give out caster levels when we want spells to actually increase in damage.

Had been really nice and much easier for all.

[Sgt_Hart]

Frankly at this point I'd rather just remove the concept of a max caster level altogether and just give out caster levels when we want spells to actually increase in damage.

Seriously though, one of the worst things from 3rd Edition.

[fatherpirate]

Frankly at this point I'd rather just remove the concept of a max caster level altogether and just give out caster levels when we want spells to actually increase in damage.

Want a suggestion? prob not but why not.
About now as a developer you are likely thinking, DDO has hit a wall.
Anything that still resembles D&D has met it's limit.
So something has to change in a big way.

They have a tool in comics when the publishers need to shake this up and RENEW interest.
Renew as in get new customers.

It is called a 'crossover'
They make a deal with another publisher to 'borrow' their characters for a comic or short series
in exchange for something (money or permission to do the same or what-not)

and it works.
New customers buy the crossovers and some get interested in the original
publisher wares that were not original fans.

So what does this have to do with DDO?

DDO needs a 'CROSSOVER' Campaign to bring in new players that would not normally be interested
in D&D but might develop an interest if they try the game. They will try the game
because it 'the crossover' involves a story (IP) that they are interested in.

So what (IP) should SSG buy the rights to use? (NON-D&D IP)
What is a great fit with a large fan base with no current MMORPG attached?

Sword Art Online
"Dungeons and Dragons - Aincrad"
First 5 floors are F2P
The rest are VIP or for sale
Standard DDO HCL rules 'in campaign area only'
Levels 1 - max
Difficulty locked at Elite

Standard Aincrad story and design.
100 floors
each new floor must be opened with a successful floor bass raid (hard) before anyone
has access to it
Part of the level map is subject to PvP rules 'clearly identifiable'
PvP features improves exp.
You die in this campaign area, that character is done.
campaign features exclusive cosmetics and loot.

Would this cost a lot ?
ahh ... yup

would it fill the servers with brand new DEDICATED players
sword art online?
BIG YUP.
Thousands will not care it is the D&D rules set, they will only
care that it is Sword Art Online.

my free suggestion

[Chacka_DDO]

Frankly at this point I'd rather just remove the concept of a max caster level altogether and just give out caster levels when we want spells to actually increase in damage.

I think this is what you should do which includes also no lame MCL 5, 10, or 15 for certain spells and if possible the caster level should be the character level.
The master of x feats who add +10 MCL can be changed to feats that increase the caster level or they can be removed.
This would also make the whole thing much simpler in a positive way.

[SpardaX]

Want a suggestion? prob not but why not.
About now as a developer you are likely thinking, DDO has hit a wall.
Anything that still resembles D&D has met it's limit.
So something has to change in a big way.

They have a tool in comics when the publishers need to shake this up and RENEW interest.
Renew as in get new customers.

It is called a 'crossover'
They make a deal with another publisher to 'borrow' their characters for a comic or short series
in exchange for something (money or permission to do the same or what-not)

and it works.
New customers buy the crossovers and some get interested in the original
publisher wares that were not original fans.

So what does this have to do with DDO?

DDO needs a 'CROSSOVER' Campaign to bring in new players that would not normally be interested
in D&D but might develop an interest if they try the game. They will try the game
because it 'the crossover' involves a story (IP) that they are interested in.

So what (IP) should SSG buy the rights to use? (NON-D&D IP)
What is a great fit with a large fan base with no current MMORPG attached?

Sword Art Online
"Dungeons and Dragons - Aincrad"
First 5 floors are F2P
The rest are VIP or for sale
Standard DDO HCL rules 'in campaign area only'
Levels 1 - max
Difficulty locked at Elite

Standard Aincrad story and design.
100 floors
each new floor must be opened with a successful floor bass raid (hard) before anyone
has access to it
Part of the level map is subject to PvP rules 'clearly identifiable'
PvP features improves exp.
You die in this campaign area, that character is done.
campaign features exclusive cosmetics and loot.

Would this cost a lot ?
ahh ... yup

would it fill the servers with brand new DEDICATED players
sword art online?
BIG YUP.
Thousands will not care it is the D&D rules set, they will only
care that it is Sword Art Online.

my free suggestion

While this is an interesting idea, I think if they were to do a crossover, it would definitely be with Lord of the Rings, seeing as they have that license already because they make LotRO.
But even then, they'd have to get the go ahead from Wizards and from the owners of LotR, and at the scope you've just outlined, it would be multiple expansion packs worth of content.

If you want to stop reading here, go ahead.

But lets stop for a moment and I will attempt to take your idea at face value. They would have to still get the go ahead from Wizards, they'd also have to pay lots of money (I don't know the exact cost, but I believe using a license like this can be in the thousands of dollars), just to use sword art online from Reki, and then actually make it. And think about it, expansion packs normally have, well lets look at Ravenloft. 3 chains at 4 quests each, + 2 raids + 1 wilderness area. That's a total of 12 + 2 + 1? areas to make. With one of those being very large. You want 100 unique floors to a tower, each probably a wilderness area on it's own, probably with a single short boss only "Raid" attached. If we be generous here, and say that the wilderness areas are the quickest and easiest parts to make (I really think that's wrong but Im being generous), lets assume it's 1 wilderness area to 1 dungeon. (I'd actually assume a large area like that probably is on the time scale of 3 to 1 but...) Lets also assume the boss is easy and takes 0 time. (Another clearly faulty assumption).

100 floors. It takes them 2 years to make a 15 dungeon expansion pack which costs about $40 USD with no bells and whistles. 100/15 = 6.666-. 2 x 6.666- is 13~ years to make your idea, costing 40 x 6.666 us a minimum of $267 USD. No, there is no way they make floors free. To anyone. This is simply too large a project to fathom doing that. But that's irrelevant, because I'm pretty sure this project would send SSG bankrupt. Because the game is 15 years old, and this would take them about 13 years, which is basically the whole life of the game again to do.

I would like to reiterate though, the basic idea for a crossover of some kind, is an interesting idea.
I don't think they'd do it though. I think their main rule for this game is "Keep it Canon to the current lore". It seems to be the only thing Wizards truly cares about. So I think this idea would die at stage 1. (Asking Wizards for approval)

[slarden]

Frankly at this point I'd rather just remove the concept of a max caster level altogether and just give out caster levels when we want spells to actually increase in damage.

Please don't forget about warlock - warlock doesn't benefit from this at all.

[rabidfox]

Please don't forget about warlock - warlock doesn't benefit from this at all.

Warlock, AA, & EK (and probably something something else I'm forgetting) would need scaling from extra levels too.

[thomascoolone64]

Have to laugh at that, input and feedback is something you get BEFORE you decide to code watered-down DDO2, then tell us after the ship has sailed, and hit an iceberg.

If the entire DDO population missed it, please point out the pre-programming discussion that said ANOTHER toggle, and a builder/spender clickfest would be a great plan.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After looking at all this, there's one conclusion. I see nothing here that's going to replace even nerfed Sharn gear. BANE? Is this 2008?

Too many duplicate items, a 5-set non-specific bonus, stats that are irrelevant on half the gear. It's Gem Food with a touch of sad puppy.

Three levels of scaling, is an expensive way to get Whelm Munchies (TM). Can we just skip U50/51, before they murder the game entirely?

I wholely agree with this one.

[thomascoolone64]

Exactly. They spent years selling us this power creep, now that they have sqeezed every last penny out of the old content, they gut what you have been paying for in order to sell the new power item in the content of the level 31+ packs.

This whole thing feels so scummy

Agreed, and /SIGNED On this one as well.

[zooble]

There's a couple spells that would probably need be nerf'd if MCL went away...

A couple? try the vast majority lol

Edit: the more I think about it the harder it seems to implement. Take a 1d6+1 MCL:5 level 1 spell for example. Using the same formula, nerf the damage, it's suddenly doing trash damage at levels it was intended to be used at. Don't nerf it and it's doing huge damage at high levels.

[CeltEireson]

Frankly at this point I'd rather just remove the concept of a max caster level altogether and just give out caster levels when we want spells to actually increase in damage.

Which begs the question - how are you going to handle some of the fixed damage / fixed number of missiles/rays type of spell. Most of these cap out pretty early on and max cap level is somewhat irrelevant, I also know you don't want to increase the number of rays/missiles to avoid having more items in the effects queue.

Maybe add some factor related to level once they hit their cap - such as making magic missiles do 1d2+3 damage they do an additional +1 damage for every 3 caster levels. Obviously numbers are up for debate. Probably have to look at things like ruin/greater ruin as well - may need to up (or down) depending on what level of damage you set as your goal for spells in general in epics level given that just removing the cap would likely increase the damage from spells that do x per level.

[Kelledren]

Agreed, and /SIGNED On this one as well.

All true, but at this point the only option is to keep making content at end game L30 and with new loot you don’t need, or rebalance everything so they can make new relevant content and loot. They are a business and need to make money for the game to exist. I prefer this to just taking Fey money and mailing it in for a couple years before closing the game.

Hopefully now new loot will be on this same scale/level moving forward and not bloated as above. I had fun playing RL, Sharn, & Fey and got my money’s worth (I don’t spend much beyond expansions tho) but is 100% subjective, and I feel for those who paid more for the gear grind in Fey.
They rounded the power curve a lot, and the must have abilities, so it is more bland, but it opens more choices I guess, so everyone will be mixed in opinions on that.

My main worry is lag so servers can be merged to ensure this level expansion does not hurt grouping.

[Chacka_DDO]

A couple? try the vast majority lol

Edit: the more I think about it the harder it seems to implement. Take a 1d6+1 MCL:5 level 1 spell for example. Using the same formula, nerf the damage, it's suddenly doing trash damage at levels it was intended to be used at. Don't nerf it and it's doing huge damage at high levels.

It is also possible to spell certain start damage and then additional damage for each character/caster level, and other formulas are possible to have less damage at the end.
For example 3d6+1d4 x caster level
Of course, the developers should take a look at each spell if they are actually overpowered but personally, I'm not aware of a single spell that is actually OP if the MCL would be not there anymore.
Even more, some spells that are currently not scaling should scale like bulls strength should give 13 strength if a level 30 character casts it.
And by the way, I can imagine a DDO without any scaling at all, but if scaling is the policy, almost everything should scale or it isn't consistent.

[elvesunited]

Frankly at this point I'd rather just remove the concept of a max caster level altogether and just give out caster levels when we want spells to actually increase in damage.

I would recommend opening only one Pandora's Box at a time. Eliminating max spell caster level has a lot of hiccups.

1) If enemy DPS casters also end up benefitting from no max caster level then I see a lot of parties getting nuked.

2) A lot of feats and enhancements deal with max caster level

3) The purpose of this update is reduce the power levels of legendary gear ( 28 - 30 ) and legendary quests ( 29 - 30 and some 28s ) In theory a level 27 running a level 27 quest should be oblivious to this update. Neither his gear nor the quest should be affected.

4) Every single spell would have to be evaluated and the spells caster cast would change drastically.

I'm not saying its a bad idea. I'm saying its something that should not be jumped into and have its own update. For this update, it is a problem that DPS casters using legendary gear are getting nerfed worse than other types of characters. But the fix for that should be limited to DPS casters ( and warlocks ) using legendary gear. Not a blanket change that effects all DPS casters.

[LurkingVeteran]

I would recommend opening only one Pandora's Box at a time. Eliminating max spell caster level has a lot of hiccups.

1) If enemy DPS casters also end up benefitting from no max caster level then I see a lot of parties getting nuked.

2) A lot of feats and enhancements deal with max caster level

3) The purpose of this update is reduce the power levels of legendary gear ( 28 - 30 ) and legendary quests ( 29 - 30 and some 28s ) In theory a level 27 running a level 27 quest should be oblivious to this update. Neither his gear nor the quest should be affected.

4) Every single spell would have to be evaluated and the spells caster cast would change drastically.

I'm not saying its a bad idea. I'm saying its something that should not be jumped into and have its own update. For this update, it is a problem that DPS casters using legendary gear are getting nerfed worse than other types of characters. But the fix for that should be limited to DPS casters ( and warlocks ) using legendary gear. Not a blanket change that effects all DPS casters.

I assume this would be for U51 at the earlist, not U50. I don't think the side effects would be as bad as you claim.

1) There is no need this has to spill over on NPC casters, it's probably one line of code.

2) MCL is the second rarest stat in the game after spell crit. All enhancement tree MCL bonuses also grant regular caster level increases, so you basically just have to remove it from the tooltip text.

3) U51+

4) I think you could actually change this without seeing any major gameplay impact. The spell balance would shift and some spells would benefit from a closer look, but many already do (e.g. the multi-hit spells you mentioned are already useless due to lacking scaling - they can be re-balanced when there is time). In the end some low level spells will stay valid for a while longer, but due to the spell dice progression, I don't think any of them will actually be OP, unless you count doing less than half the DPS for very little spell points OP.

Off the top of my head, only the following things would need closer scrutiny:
-Druid Ice Flowers, which was likely balanced for its lower MCL. This might need a small dice reduction, some already consider it too weak.
-The Savant trees might need to lose a few caster levels in mid-heroics since they aren't MCL capped anymore. FvS and Druid trees also grant both many caster levels and MCL though.
-Everybody would get a few more caster levels in epics if caster EDs stay the same, so you might need to adjust non-warlock caster DPS slightly downards, but U50+U51 already seem to be doing that. Not sure about Warlocks. I suspect having more caster progression in epics that isn't tied to grinding LGS crit multiplier items is probably a good thing.