New Dice notation. Do not like.

[The_Phenx]

D&D is based on dice.

We even have a little die in the UI that we can change colors. The people who originally wrote the game understood that while a MMO could never be like PNP they at least tried to keep with the proper flavor or things.

Why sot be simple if you need to help the newbs.

3d6 (3-18) pts of damage. DO we really need to have all the additional text twice?

That is worst case.... best case is a simple explanation in the tips at the very beginning of the game.

[drac317]

1d3+3 /= 1 To 6

/signed

Actully Thats 4-6.

[drac317]

d&d Is Based On Dice.

We Even Have A Little Die In The Ui That We Can Change Colors. The People Who Originally Wrote The Game Understood That While A Mmo Could Never Be Like Pnp They At Least Tried To Keep With The Proper Flavor Or Things.

Why Sot Be Simple If You Need To Help The Newbs.

3d6 (3-18) Pts Of Damage. Do We Really Need To Have All The Additional Text Twice?

That Is Worst Case.... Best Case Is A Simple Explanation In The Tips At The Very Beginning Of The Game.

Tip # 134 Or Some Such Does Explain It

[dkyle]

If you want to make the numbers truly useful to everyone, take into account any spell damage buffs currently in place when generating the tool tip. For example, 1d4 + 1 (3-7) with 50% total force damage boost on magic missile. That way newbies see what actual damage range to expect, and even long time players can use it, since they can change based on many different factors. Could even throw in the spell crit info perhaps, e.g., (3-7; 1.75x/9%).

I'm not sure if weapon effects got the number range treatment, but if they did, tier 3 GS weapon tooltips are going to be half off the screen with all the extra space taken up by the current format.

[MrCuisinart]

Ok, here goes:
Make it better: no need; it is not needed 2d6 or 5d8 or whatever it just fine the way it is. If you must "make the text more clear" then do something like 2d6 (2-12) they way it is done on most weapons descriptions now.
What I like best: Nothing at all, this is D&D not some other game, if I wanted to play something else I would.
What I like least: See above.

/signed and I agree 100%.

So in that case "reversing" something because people said "I don't like it the way it's going to be" means I'm supposed to tell all the other people who said "I don't like it the way it is now" that they're out of luck?

Yes, unfortunately that's what it means. The [x]d[y] notation is a core part of D&D and should remain since this is D&D online. You wouldn't change "Paladin" to "Holy Fighter" if a lot of people didn't like the former, would you ?

-Chris

[Steiner-Davion]

I have no problem with players providing feedback on the change. Particularly, if you don't like the chance, please also include information such as:

• Your own suggestions for how to make description text numbers more clear

It was perfectly clear the way it was. No Change Required.

• Aspects of the current changes that you like the most

I like no aspect of it.

[*]Aspects of the current changes that you like the least[/LIST]

The whole concept or need for this change. It only futher confuses things by providing what can only be described at best as misleading information. Some of us have been playing DDO for over 4 yesars now, others for less, but most players have figured out one way or the other how to read the damage descriptions and effect descriptions to understand how much damage they will be doing. In its original true to D&D format, it was presented in such a way that you could quickly glance at the description to figure out how much damage you would do. This is no longer possible.

Such details are very very important and imperative. Saying "I hate it all" or "take it back" is not helpful or actionable. There is a middle ground to be had between expecting brand new players to learn about dice they don't get the joy of rolling and showing off the D&D rules set. Just again, make sure that it's actionable feedback that is in the forum guidelines.

Something like this should have been made public and input solicited (much like Eladrin did with the change to the combat system) so that you could have gotten a much better guage of the community's/player base's thoughts on the subject before expending time and resources on a change that might at best only be of minor use to a tiny fraction of the playerbase. At Best, a better solution could have been found and agreed upon.

In addition to the severe deviation from the D&D Franchise with is change, I think it is safe to assume (yes I know what happens when one assumes), that the playerbase would agree that there are probably other issues that should have taken precedence over this change. Now coupled with the response we have seen from the community forum team regarding the level of negative feedback some community members have provided, this issue may have gone from a minor one to become an issue that surpasses any other change the game has undergone in 4 years based upon the sheer outcry.

I can only think of 1 person who has responded to this topic that seemed in the least bit indifferent to the change, let alone supportive of this change.

[Hendrik]

/signed and I agree 100%.


Yes, unfortunately that's what it means. The [x]d[y] notation is a core part of D&D and should remain since this is D&D online. You wouldn't change "Paladin" to "Holy Fighter" if a lot of people didn't like the former, would you ?

-Chris

Well said Chris.

+1

[Borror0]

This post is nothing but me rehashing what I said in the other thread, but since you've asked for it...

Your own suggestions for how to make description text numbers more clear

In Magic The Gathering, there are some keywords used in place of the full explanation of the attribute or ability. Keywords have three functions: they ease communication by giving a single word to communicate the ability, instead of a phrase; they reduce the amount of words on a card for that ability, leaving room for more abilities which, in turn, expends the design space; and they make more complex cards easier to read to veteran players.

Of course, there is a drawback to keywords: it's harder for new players to understand a card.

That is why the cards in core sets - the sets aimed at new players - have reminder texts for each keyword. The goal is that "that way new players will get to learn what all the basic Magic abilities (like flying, first strike, fear, and vigilance) actually do. Hopefully, by the time they move up to expert level sets they won't be confused when they run into a keyword like 'defender' and everybody just winds up happier than they have been." Additionally, when a new keyword is introduced in a block, commons have a reminder text for that keyword but rares cards might not.

This is the model DDO should be copying, as it achieves the best of both world.

In DDO, the places where a reminder text belongs could be:

1. All feats that have a requirement that can be achieved before BAB 6.
2. Level 3 spells and lower.
3. All items whose ML is lower than 6.
4. All skills.
5. All enhancements below level 6.
6. Anything that the player is unlikely to have read about before that moment, even if it is high level.

By following these guidelines, it should cover most of the gameplay experience while not harassing veterans with stuff they already know like what a d6 or what being paralyzed means. The problem of keywords making the game hard to learn is real, but wordiness is a problem too.

For example, the description of Shocking Grasp could read:
"Deals 1d6 electricity damage per caster level (max 5d6). (A d6 is a six sided dice. The number preceding it refers to the number of dice thrown at once.)"

By the way, here are a few things that could use a reminder text:

• All conditions (explaining what it does)
• All abilities (explaining the basic of what it grants)
• Everything with a bonus type (explaining stacking)
• Dodge and Exceptional bonuses (explaining how it stacks)
• Hate/aggro (explaining what it is, a bit)
• DC (what it does)
• Damage Reduction
• Critical multiplier
• Threat range
• Active blocking
• Confirmation roll
• Glancing blow
• Grazing Hits
• Natural 20
• Possibly other stuff in that list I didn't think of

By the way, you can find examples of good description here.

[Anthem]

If an item says:
3-12

Is that 3d4 or 1d10+2 or a random number between 3 and 12 with an equal probability of each number?

Without the dice info, when a new item or spell is released, you will have players asking a similar question each time. Dice info gives us a probability distribution. It's important!

This cannot be stressed or repeated enough. +1 for clarity.

It is the whole point of the proven d20 notation. Most D&D players are smart enough to think of a couple ways to roll 3-12 or 4-24 or any range on their own, but each with different probability curves, so it's important to specify which is intended.

[Drfirewater79]

I tend to get overly emotional when i think something is pointless(* edit from what i wanted to say to be PC)

* Your own suggestions for how to make description text numbers more clear

I agree with the concept of 2d6 (2-12) ... if people dont know what 2d6 is they are unlikely to be able to run raids where people ask others to roll 1d100 for chance at raid loot. Its not even about not pnp enough or dumbing down the game ... its about knowing the game your playing and the lingo that goes with it .....

are there really that many people who have issues understanding what 2d6 mean?
and if there are ... isnt that a problem that should be addressed in the school system and not the video game world?

* Aspects of the current changes that you like the most

I like the colour additives to highlight important must know information lets it pop out from the blanket text and allows people who understand the lingo to pick out the important information.

* Aspects of the current changes that you like the least

the placing of important information outside of the description ... no reason to put more information relating to the dice rolls a the bottom where it is more likely to confuse the people who dont understand basic dice roll mechanics.

instead like above mentioned a bracketed insert for people who do not understand makes more sense over all [2d6 (2-12)].


Now is that easier ..... Tolero you know how hard that was for me to be nice and PC ... as i normally cannot do that in my heated hate for some of these topics ... I really hate this change and so i was willing to tone down my hate enough to get my point across ....

[justagame]

This cannot be stressed or repeated enough. +1 for clarity.

It is the whole point of the proven d20 notation. Most D&D players are smart enough to think of a couple ways to roll 3-12 or 4-24 or any range on their own, so it's important to specify which is intended.

This. The d20 notation is for more than just nostalgia -- it's for precision.

[WeaselKing]

you Guys Are Really This Upset About A Change In Description?

Yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

[Visty]

did anyone mention already that ddo is using loaded dices and thus 1d6 =/= 1-6 even if the description says so?

[Borror0]

did anyone mention already that ddo is using loaded dices and thus 1d6 =/= 1-6 even if the description says so?

I did. I did so in the other thread and did it again now too.

[Zzevel]

We absolutely want feedback on the change, but it should be done civilly, please. This is a community and a public space, so we'd appreciate it if people remembered that when providing feedback.

If you make such a ******** change you should expect some sort of backlash, this is mild compared to what the level should be. Its like changing the name from 'Dungeons and Dragons' to 'Pixies and Fairys'. Certain things should be considered holy and you just don't mess with them.

If you want people to understand what the dice are or you think they are not smart enough to figure it out, add 15 seconds to your Korthos Island to throw up a pop up with an explaination.

[kernal42]

I'm all for making things more clear.

Whether or not the new notation makes anything more clear is up for debate; I think it doesn't, but that's just my opinion.

It is, as pointed out above, more misleading. Not only does it neglect to point out the weighted dice, but now it also glazes over the distribution.

If you're going to make a change, make it an honest change and don't give numbers that are known to be incorrect.

-Kernal

[Visty]

I did. I did so in the other thread and did it again now too.

was more a rhethoric question as i mentioned it twice already too

[Sylvurdragon]

You wouldn't change "Paladin" to "Holy Fighter" if a lot of people didn't like the former, would you ?

OH OH OH!! Why not change Rogue to Thief while we're at it!! And Fighter to Warrior....and and and Wizard to Mage....and and and...

/sarcasm off

:-D

[moops]

I agree with folks who say that it's not about a description (honestly, that's a minor thing to me), it's about the underlying philosophy of what this change represents. To me it's a violation of the D&D license and I'm really upset by this. I realize I'm getting all nerd ragey over what ultimately has little impact in terms of gameplay, but shifting the idea of dice to be a second-class citizen in DDO feels wrong to the core.

QFT

Suggestion to make it clearer? I dont understand how it is not clear to people--unless they are 5 years old--cuz even my 8 year old cousin understands 5d6 or 1d20.

And just how are these people going to roll for loot end game when everyone is saying 2d666 or 1d77 or 4d555 for Raid loot?

I like looking at my spells and seeing 5d6 or what have you---I do not like 5-30--that just looks like this really lame $10 game I played for a Day.

Also, I love my Dice Sets

[megathon]

We absolutely want feedback on the change, but it should be done civilly, please. This is a community and a public space, so we'd appreciate it if people remembered that when providing feedback.

What good is feedback when most of it doesn't get heard? I've seen so many threads on here and various other games of the majority not wanting something added in (or taken out) and yet it gets done anyways. You have the test server. Put what ever changes you have planned there. Let people comment on the change and see how the majority feels. If the majority doesn't like it then take it out. Don't go and push it down our throats by putting it on live anyways. It just makes it look like you don't look at the feedback anyways. Remember your own slogan "Powered by the People".