Lamannia Update: EARLY Enhancements Preview

[BOgre]

Looking forward to when you get around to doing the core D&D class, Cleric, instead of that other class, from the Miniatures Handbook, Healer. I hope you have that covered, too.

hehe, don't count on it. Looks like all the BYOH lfms are living on borrowed time. There will soon be no such thing as a Cleric that doesn't heal, or more likely: there will soon be no one playing Divines at all.

[Pilgrim1]

My suggestions are simple and may be already voiced:

1 - Figure out which abilities you want linked to a particular level in a class. For example the capstones are linked to lvl 20, prestige enhancements are linked to 6, 12, and 18.

2 - Make fewer enhancements have prerequisite's of other enhancements. The only current prerequisites are for prestige enhancements (with a few exceptions). We can take extra action boost without having action boosts.

3 - Lower the total number of enhancements required for racial abilities to unlock (unless its for a racial prestige class). The advantage of being say human is to take just the stat and the healing amp stuff.

4 - Don't lean to far in the multi-class area. The more complicated and top end builds are already multi-classes, however most class splashes are not for enhancements. Typically 2 levels of a class are splashed for feets, evasion, skills, or other class specific abilities. Rarely are they splashed for enhancements. People splash 6 lvls of a class generally for the prestige class. If you open it up to a lower lvl split we will see things like 18 sorc/2pally with stalwart, or such like that.

5 - Multi-classing is something that happens on melee classes far more then on caster classes because the inherent advantage of staying pure on the class (spells, DC, spell points, spell lvl). If you want to encurage people to stay pure make the melee classes capstone's better.

6 - Lots of rambling but I want to say finally, I like how this is looking to be. Lots of new possibilities.

[Violith]

Our intent is to support both pure class characters and multiclass characters. Both should be viable. We would like there to be strong incentives for each, and not have the system clearly favor one over the other.

If you have concerns about either pure class or multiclass being obviously better than the other, voicing those concerns here is great, as well as in the surveys (linked in my signature).

until everything is implemented (What was said to be in a month, after all of the pure class focus feedback) Its kinda hard to say how multiclass are effected, so hopefully, at that time it iwll still be in alpha and able to be changed.

[legendlore]

I'd love to agree with that but Bards have never "studied" it...

This variant of Magical training is a feat entirely made up by turbine. Per dnd lore there are a couple of classes that doesn't train their spells (to the extent other classes do) but rather cast them as an innate awakened ability. The ones included in ddo are Sorcerers, Favored souls and Bards.

Sorcerers and favored souls are spontaneous casters just like bards and receive both the feat and double spell points for being spontaneous casters (to compensate for that every class can recast the same spell in ddo), yet bards receive neither.

[legendlore]

That's simply not true.

Spellsingers DCs are competitive with divine DCs.

And Spellsinger Spell Penetration is way ahead of divines.

Yes, the only-6-levels-of-spells and no-magical-training Specialist class is better at offensive casting than a full-9-spell-levels Spellcaster class like Cleric.

This isn't true.

Bards have extremely limited access to offensive casting (the best being Greater shout that does roughly 40 damage /cast).

If by offensive casting you mean enchantment spells, bards can only receive a workable dc in that particular spell school and has to stay pure or loose 3dc which isn't an option since they are already 3dc behind wizards in maximum achievable dc in that spell school.

Bards spell selection in enchantment is also very limited (consisting mostly of charm spells) and epic wards rule out the chance of charm spells being used at all in epic content above epic normal (they auto-break after a few seconds (5-8?) regardless of casters dc).


If clerics would choose one main offensive spell school it would probably be Evocation for most players (largely due to Blade barrier and Implosion).

At level 20 (ungeared and pure) bards & clerics would be equal due to bards capstone (if we were to compare bards enchantment to any chosen spell school for clerics). A cleric multi-classing monk and water stance will have 1 more dc in any spell school than a bard could achieve in enchantment, by equipping an alchemical wis item this will rise to 2 more than a bard can achieve. Bards can get another for enchantment from their past life that takes a feat slot. Clerics can get 3 sorcerer past lives for a total evocation boost of 3 that doesn't cost any feats (and both can get wizard of course).

When it comes to Epic destinies Clerics can get 2 more in evocation from twisting draconic spell school mastery and bards receive 2 enchantment dc if they tie themselves to the Fatesinger destiny (and are max level).


As for spell penetration it's true that many forget that bards (due to their capstone) actually have the second highest achievable spell penetration in the game (2 behind elf wizards). Compared to a cleric with equal feats they would have 3 more spell pen (2 from capstone and one from arcane might song). But the problem is just that 'equal feats', bards can't afford spell casting feats in the same manner as other casters since they lack offense spells and has to use their feats for martial dps abilities as well whilst a cleric can use Blade barriers or Implosion for their dps needs.

[SealedInSong]

Bards really need to be added to this list.

I really can't see how you can add another exotic weapon feat to artificers (which I like in principle, but it makes a good example) and still ignore bards as a casting class (Spellsingers in particular) by still denying them a feat they should have had ever since it was introduced.

This is now getting really bad, before it meant that bards had less spell points and no free spell point regen, then it meant that caster bards couldn't use new caster gear introduced to the game and now it locks them out of spell criticals and spell power enhancements (such as human versatility for casters).

Bards don't have the luxury of free class feats that artificers and wizards do and really can't afford buying magical training as a standard feat.

I'm afraid to point it out for fear of the nerf bat, but bards (rightly so) get spellcraft as a skill but NOT magical training?

I can understand rangers and paladins missing out on that blue bar privilege, but at this point, bards need all the leg-ups they can get it, and it doesn't seem logical or fair that bards should be excluded from Magical Training.

If the future of the bard enhancements is that one has to spend a ton of skill points in a prestige tree they don't have any interest in just to have a middling amount of positive spell power, they have to purchase Magical Training and invest in a ton of Intelligence to have a modicum of healing power... then no one should be under the illusion that they're a remotely balanced class.

So bards which are already the weakest class in the game, are yet even worse, because now they have to take a feat or splash to get 5% of something they used to get 9% of with enhancements.

You're already giving away most of the Bards best buffs with ship buffs, and items that give the Bard typed version of a bonus. They already have the worst DC's and spell pen. due to 6th level spells. They already get the least use out of meta magics. And you guys already pretty much completely left Bards out of the spell pass.

You could triple Greater shout's base damage and it would still be weak even using 50 spell power enhancements from 3 wiz levels and 20 spell power from 1 Druid level (and 80 from bard enhancements) for a sonic spell power of 290 with items (but without meta's) this spell is STILL weak... You can no longer even do that. because spell power lines go bye bye.

So you're getting rid of that, AND giving the pure Bard 0 base crit chance...

picture my Bard in quicksand already half drowned, with only an outstretched hand still above the surface, you just stepped on his head like a stepping stone while you were crossing

I think, you should very seriously consider giving bards magical training also.
I find there is some inconsistency in giving bards sonic spellpower boost via their perform (I think I like this) and at the same time removing their enhancement line for spell crits (healing and sonic).

At the same time, I think you should also consider making the Heal skill be a class skill for bards, because of the new changes to positive energy (healing) spellpower through the heal skill.

A long wall of quotes but I feel the emphasis is necessary. Please consider this. Thanks.

[Edit: also, addressing Vargouille's comment about bards being covered, if I am to assume that means they have to spend a quarter of their points in the Spellsinger?Virt?Combo? tree just to get perhaps 75% of the positive energy spell power they once had for half the AP, then... no. That's not covering it.]

[SealedInSong]

This isn't true.

Bards have extremely limited access to offensive casting (the best being Greater shout that does roughly 40 damage /cast). (snip...)

Very well-stated

[Blayster]

That was just an example. Self sufficient means being able to take care of yourself and the requirements of the quest. Many classes are self sufficient.

As I understand it, self-suficient char is one who does not depend on the group in which he is in. It means that he does not need to "play in team". Whereas there are exception, I'd prefer to not live under the exceptions roof. If absolutely no character is self-suficient, everybody is obligated to be a team player. That harms zerg players only IMHO... but I am coming to the conclusion that mostly zerg players post in forums... xD

If anything, I'd like DDO to come closer to PnP in team play terms (or at least in my PnP group we were all about team play) and I don't mean the holy trinity (tank+dps+heal). On the top of my head, I cannot remember any other MMO with a traps system, and I think DDO should explore this better, and perhaps add other similar things (like adding a meaning to the *scout* role) but well... this is another subject.

Put it back where it belongs.

Hahahahaha, it was a *cp -R /brain/delusions/that_comment /internet/forums/ddo/*, so it is in both places now and so it shall be xD

Our intent is to support both pure class characters and multiclass characters. Both should be viable. We would like there to be strong incentives for each, and not have the system clearly favor one over the other.

If you have concerns about either pure class or multiclass being obviously better than the other, voicing those concerns here is great, as well as in the surveys (linked in my signature).

I'd like to ask something about this...
There should be a conceptual difference between multiclass and pure class?
Is your intent to make multiclass more versatile but less powerful? If yes, how "less powerful"? And how "more versatile"? I'm not asking for an equation, just a basic idea.

Torrent download option please. Star Trek Online has this option, I know. I would seed for you.

+1

There will soon be no such thing as a Cleric that doesn't heal

Are you implying that they exist now? =P

Sorcerers and favored souls are spontaneous casters just like bards and receive both the feat and double spell points for being spontaneous casters (to compensate for that every class can recast the same spell in ddo), yet bards receive neither.

That is very true, thank you for correcting!

[SirValentine]

As for spell penetration it's true that many forget that bards (due to their capstone) actually have the second highest achievable spell penetration in the game (2 behind elf wizards). Compared to a cleric with equal feats they would have 3 more spell pen (2 from capstone and one from arcane might song).

More than that. Add in +2 from destinies, too. And most (not all) Bard spells are also on the Wiz/Sorc list, so add another +2 from an item.

1-2 DC is a "competitive" difference. 6-7 Spell Pen difference is "way ahead".

[Svartelric]

Regarding Toughness enhancements:

We've taken out most of the racial toughness enhancements. We had previously found that the Toughness feat was considered mandatory by many players and wanted to make it more of a choice than before.

Instead, we've added +5 HP to Heroic Durability, a feat that all characters start with at level 1. Characters also gain +5 HP when you taking the 5th, 10th, and 15th class levels for any class. That's tied to class levels, not character levels, at this time.

Where's the choice in that?

[EllisDee37]

As I understand it, self-suficient char is one who does not depend on the group in which he is in. It means that he does not need to "play in team". Whereas there are exception, I'd prefer to not live under the exceptions roof. If absolutely no character is self-suficient, everybody is obligated to be a team player. That harms zerg players only IMHO... but I am coming to the conclusion that mostly zerg players post in forums... xD

I'm about as un-zerg as a veteran player gets, and this would utterly destroy the game for me.

Self-sufficient means being able to solo. Soloists comprise a non-trivial percentage of the player base. Marginalizing soloists hurts the viability of the game itself no matter how you slice it.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

We are currently running into some issues with the Pando installer. I am sorry about the inconvenience this causes, and we are investigating the issue.

Ive got multiple guildies, including myself, that cant access Lamma. Always hangs at "Connecting".

Is there another way to load lamannia until you all figure the Pando mess out?

We are looking forward to testing/previewing the changes.

[Postumus]

Where's the choice in that?

Everyone already considers toughness a 'mandatory' feat now. So now you just got a feat slot opened up giving you more choices.

[Charononus]

Everyone already considers toughness a 'mandatory' feat now. So now you just got a feat slot opened up giving you more choices.

It's still mandatory imo

[Missing_Minds]

We are currently running into some issues with the Pando installer. I am sorry about the inconvenience this causes, and we are investigating the issue.

Every day there is no fix, is another day of failure of alpha testing. Leaving forumites to suggest changes based on conjecture vs. first hand experience.

How many days of failure during alpha before you mothball it and Turbine takes action for itself.

How much longer will Turbine continue to give Atari credit as publisher also?

[Postumus]

It's still mandatory imo

I guess that depends on how many hit points you think you need to have fun. For me this just opens up another feat for some of my builds.

[legendlore]

More than that. Add in +2 from destinies, too. And most (not all) Bard spells are also on the Wiz/Sorc list, so add another +2 from an item.

1-2 DC is a "competitive" difference. 6-7 Spell Pen difference is "way ahead".

+2 from destinies can be twisted by clerics as well, +2 from item I assume you mean Arcane augmentation that doesn't stack with Song of arcane might, so it would be an +1 bonus and would effectively lock out the bard from the only offense ability it would have (its weapons) since it is only available on weapons.

The +1-2 dc difference is actually in the clerics favor (as shown in the post above) and it rises to a +4-5 difference if its Evocation.


I'm generally a bit confused though, your argument is that bards are better offense casters than clerics, which to me translates as you saying that Greater shout is a spell good enough to beat Blade barrier, Divine punishment and Implosion combined.

As said if you by offensive casting capability mean the ability to crowd control, a enchantment bard build is very limited, it would give up all of its offense capability in order to cc dealing about 40-50 damage a swing with its weapons since it doesn't have the feats to boosts its only way to deal damage.

It also has to depend on 2 capstones, meaning it has to stay pure and will be very far behind until it gets its l20 capstone and then be very far behind again until it reaches its Fatesinger capstone. All this to be able to cast Ottos dancing sphere, Ottos irresistible dance and hold monster (single target version). These are generally the only effective enchantment spells bards have access to at epic levels.

Compare this to an enchantment wizard who not only gets better dc:s it will also get a much wider spell selection, a more even progression while leveling by not depending on capstones and many of the feats used will also boost its offense capability by having access to offense spells.

[danzig138]

Last time I checked I was allowed to expose my opinion without the fear of being offended publicly.

No, that isn't the case. You're free to express your opinion, and that is all. You are not free to express your opinion unchallenged, unmocked or unoffended, as long as the rules of the forum are not violated. That's a common misunderstanding that people seem to have.

I wish I had something to say about the new enhancement system, but the downloader is being a PitA, so I don't have Lamm up and running yet.

[Blayster]

Self-sufficient means being able to solo. Soloists comprise a non-trivial percentage of the player base. Marginalizing soloists hurts the viability of the game itself no matter how you slice it.

Good that you mentioned it, and good that you also mentioned your personal experience (thus opening the oportunity for myself to also do so).

I have played for nearly 10 years another MMO with a solo build as my main character, some sort of a battle cleric. It was a horrible build, it was good for soloing and nothing more, it could not fit any party and so on. The game never supported this kind of build via spells nor equipament (that is, new things were added to the game but never with that in mind). Some few people were insisting in similar builds. We did that for fun, and we all knew it was not optimal. We heard rumours several times that they would add new stuff for this build (the old "we support all kinds of game play!" thing), but it never happened.

All in all, I don't think devs need to support solo builds, as they will probably happen anyway. Support would just make them more valuable, thus encouraging its use. Now what is the matter of opinion here; you think devs should encourage the use of solo chars (via developing enhancements and maintaining certain builds) whereas I personally don't like this idea. That's all. I don't even think my opinion has any weight here, given the aggressivity of the community after my mere comment. It also doesn't mean that I would never work myself on a soloer, regardless of being supported by the game or not.

You are not free to express your opinion unchallenged, unmocked or unoffended, as long as the rules of the forum are not violated. That's a common misunderstanding that people seem to have.

http://forums.ddo.com/announcement.php?f=211&a=4

1. While participating on the Community Sites, you must respect the rights of others to participate in the community. To this end you may not harass, defraud, threaten or cause distress and/or unwanted attention to other members or Turbine staff. This includes, but is not limited to:

• Name-calling or other insults
• Posting or commenting with the intent of provoking ("trolling") another user or users

[EllisDee37]

I'm not saying they need to add incentive to solo. I'm saying they are significantly nerfing self-sufficiency that we already have on live.

I don't want anything taken away from anyone. You, apparently, want the soloability we currently have to be taken away.