ambisinisterrMember, Neverwinter ModeratorPosts: 10,462Community Moderator
edited May 2013
I haven't spent a dime past a Founders Pack and I'm feeling no ill effects.
I'm not going to argue about pricing, that's not what this thread is about, but feel free to make threads asking for lower pricing. Trust me I work for the company but I am first and foremost a player. The D&D is important to me as a player while the pricing...well it's important but while I am free to speak my mind I like to let you guys do most of the talking...until you mess with my D&D. Then the gloves come off.
And for purists or RP'ers out there arguing this - different GMs handle their sessions differently, and can break rules, or have different applications of them. I don't hear any complaints about "the gang down in philly is not playing DnD the way I do right now!"? Strange.
An extreme, of course, but still valid, in a sense.
0
ambisinisterrMember, Neverwinter ModeratorPosts: 10,462Community Moderator
edited May 2013
If you want to bring down the rare powers often reserved to the gods...
Then make it fairly priced...and I don't mean that in the way MMO players consider it.
I want what D&D there is preserved. $30 dollars to me seems like a fair price for an act which shouldn't occur to begin with. If you're willing to spend the money on something which negatively effects my enjoyment of a game which by title is designed for my enjoyment then I'm not going to stand in the way of it as long as you make sure the game is improved accordingly.
I'm not happy about it but that would be my personal concession. Pay a hefty amount for a hefty service...
If you want to bring down the rare powers often reserved to the gods...
Then make it fairly priced...and I don't mean that in the way MMO players consider it.
I want what D&D there is preserved. $30 dollars to me seems like a fair price for an act which shouldn't occur to begin with. If you're willing to spend the money on something which negatively effects my enjoyment of a game which by title is designed for my enjoyment then I'm not going to stand in the way of it as long as you make sure the game is improved accordingly.
I'm not happy about it but that would be my personal concession. Pay a hefty amount for a hefty service...
Sure. When I see you in PnP sessions whip out your wallet to lay down IRL cash instead of ingame PnP gold or spell materials each time it's required.
I want the DnD preserved too, even added to, but this isn't really about that. And you still have no weight in your explanations of how this would negatively effect you or your "enjoyment of the game" - something everyone could wave as a flag for changes THEY want/don't want for a bunch of reasons.
EDIT; This game already has too much heavy/overly priced stuff that should be either alot cheaper or already in the game - not the Zen Store. The re-spec cost in a Beta alone is terrible.
This feature simply is something alot seem to want, for many reasons, and it would make money for PW/Cryptic just by having these people stay longer in the game (and thus maybe buying other stuff and so on.)
First the guy who realized he wanted to be a girl instead of a man, and then this...
Change Gender?Sure, i even remember some item that did it in BG2
Appearance?Why not, few spells there and there...
But re-roll stats...i dunno know.I know that there was some DM who alow it...At least give him some penalty like lower levels or i dunno.
Bad idea...
A character may reroll all of his stats entirely. All stats must be rerolled, and the character must keep the resulting roll, even if not as good as the original. This can only be tried once in a character's lifetime, and costs 35% of the character's experience total.
0
spikespireMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 14Arc User
edited May 2013
I don't really see a point in a race changer. If people knew how to read instead of "WHAT LOOKS THE COOLEST" when it came to races then you can figure out what classes are best suited for them. Believe you and me, I would have loved to do a Half-Elf Wizard but the stats just wouldn't allow it. So I just stuck with Human.
That is usually how it goes anyway, either pick a class or a race and then find the class/race that compliments the other and go from there.
But re-roll stats...i dunno know.I know that there was some DM who alow it...At least give him some penalty like lower levels or i dunno. Bad idea...
If the DM told you that stat X is the main stat for the class you play, and several weeks into the campaign you realize that this information was incorrect from a practical point of view, the DM would probably let you re-roll even without you having to pay him for a beer. Or he would modify the rules and validate the originally provided information.
(We already have the ability to reset your stats and powers, it costs $6. It just doesn't allow for changing the initial roll, which it probably should.)
ambisinisterrMember, Neverwinter ModeratorPosts: 10,462Community Moderator
edited May 2013
Like I said, there is no way I can describe it to win over your opinion or emotions.
It effects me. It may not effect you but it effects me.
I presented my feelings. If you don't agree you don't agree but my feelings are my own and not yours.
If we were playing PnP D&D I wouldn't ask for such actions and if I did I'd expect to be kicked out of the room before they asked for my wallet. Heck I might have to take out my wallet to beg them to let me back in the room.
My view on D&D is simply a stricter view than your own. And as far as my personal desires are concerned I want this to be a Dungeons and Dragons MMO. That means D&D spirit...with a bunch of people. The fact this is an MMO isn't going to make me budge on what myself and a lot of others feel is core to D&D.
Things which may be common place in other MMO's are requested in Neverwinter because it is also an MMO...
But I look at the term MMO as a literal meaning from the age before WoW. Originally it meant a game in which there were large amounts of players able to play the game. And that's what I personally want from Neverwinter.
You may disagree. That's fine. I will probably never convince you of my opinion and you will never convince me of yours.
I am merely here stating that this is my opinion, this is why I formed my opinion, and no matter what you may think you can not dictate my opinion.
Sure. When I see you in PnP sessions whip out your wallet to lay down IRL cash instead of ingame PnP gold or spell materials each time it's required.
I want the DnD preserved too, even added to, but this isn't really about that. And you still have no weight in your explanations of how this would negatively effect you or your "enjoyment of the game" - something everyone could wave as a flag for changes THEY want/don't want for a bunch of reasons.
EDIT; This game already has too much heavy/overly priced stuff that should be either alot cheaper or already in the game - not the Zen Store. The re-spec cost in a Beta alone is terrible.
This feature simply is something alot seem to want, for many reasons, and it would make money for PW/Cryptic just by having these people stay longer in the game (and thus maybe buying other stuff and so on.)
Indeed, and you are waving the same flag, aren't you? "A race change will enhance my game". It's two sides of the same coin, so if one side is invalid, then so too is the other side. After all, if "something everyone could wave as a flag for changes THEY want/don't want for a bunch of reasons" is really how you feel, there is nothing you can state that justifies including them, because it's just something you want for a bunch of reasons.
The game is already far enough from a D&D feel for me that stripping more away would counter any reasons I have chosen to stay so far. Why is it, for example, that we have kits that can fail, but I can disarm any trap, even if I'm tooling along too fast and run through it first? Why can fighters find secret doors instead of either rogues or elves, barring of course elven/dwarven fighters? Was this just a way to minimalize the rogue's usefulness? Another way to further trivialize race selection? Is it part of 4e, and this is why the PnP community is so divided about it?
Reading comprehension is essential in a medium that requires reading for communication.
Like I said, there is no way I can describe it to win over your opinion or emotions.
It effects me. It may not effect you but it effects me.
I presented my feelings. If you don't agree you don't agree but my feelings are my own and not yours.
If we were playing PnP D&D I wouldn't ask for such actions and if I did I'd expect to be kicked out of the room before they asked for my wallet. Heck I might have to take out my wallet to beg them to let me back in the room.
My view on D&D is simply a stricter view than your own. And as far as my personal desires are concerned I want this to be a Dungeons and Dragons MMO. That means D&D spirit...with a bunch of people. The fact this is an MMO isn't going to make me budge on what myself and a lot of others feel is core to D&D.
Things which may be common place in other MMO's are requested in Neverwinter because it is also an MMO...
But I look at the term MMO as a literal meaning from the age before WoW. Originally it meant a game in which there were large amounts of players able to play the game. And that's what I personally want from Neverwinter.
You may disagree. That's fine. I will probably never convince you of my opinion and you will never convince me of yours.
I am merely here stating that this is my opinion, this is why I formed my opinion, and no matter what you may think you can not dictate my opinion.
You got a point there.But this isnt PnP D&D.I will go further and say this isnt D&D at all.This is a classical MMORPG with names and location from D&D.I agree with imivo : If the DM told you that stat X is the main stat for the class you play, and several weeks into the campaign you realize that this information was incorrect from a practical point of view, the DM would probably let you re-roll even without you having to pay him for a beer. Or he would modify the rules and validate the originally provided information..In PnP it would cause problem in role-play sence.You could change your stats in the part when you would profit from it most.Some of the older decission that you make could colide.
But, lets be honest here.In Neverwinter, there are NO decision.Period.You can make trough the game with 10 or 20 charisma.There are no stats restriction weapons, dialogs nothing.So, why not let him change it?It would make clearly no diference here...
Indeed, and you are waving the same flag, aren't you? "A race change will enhance my game". It's two sides of the same coin, so if one side is invalid, then so too is the other side. After all, if "something everyone could wave as a flag for changes THEY want/don't want for a bunch of reasons" is really how you feel, there is nothing you can state that justifies including them, because it's just something you want for a bunch of reasons.
The game is already far enough from a D&D feel for me that stripping more away would counter any reasons I have chosen to stay so far. Why is it, for example, that we have kits that can fail, but I can disarm any trap, even if I'm tooling along too fast and run through it first? Why can fighters find secret doors instead of either rogues or elves, barring of course elven/dwarven fighters? Was this just a way to minimalize the rogue's usefulness? Another way to further trivialize race selection? Is it part of 4e, and this is why the PnP community is so divided about it?
Actually not even close to being the same.
There are obvious and clear ways why this feature would enhance and enrich not only my gameplay but ALOT of others, while the person I was talking to had no obvious or clear ways why it would negatively effect his. He just wanted for wanting's sake, not backed up with .. anything of substance, really.
The difference should've been obvious, but maybe it wasn't... to you.
I only see alot of very valid reasons from people on why to implement this feature -even ones making it valid for RP'ers as well as "classic MMO'ers" - and a whole bunch of ... nothing, or weak arguments, from the other camp, and the latter have had their "arguments" countered and destroyed time after time - yet still they stick to them claiming "my opinion, you can't change it, nanananaaa!" wich is... an interesting way to go through life, I'm sure. Screw debates and arguments and actually realising you can be wrong about something, or that sometimes is only an issue for you because you want it to be.
Fanboi on, fellas.
0
ambisinisterrMember, Neverwinter ModeratorPosts: 10,462Community Moderator
edited May 2013
zarkhes,
As I said, that's something to fight to bring into the game. Not something to simply accept.
johnfell,
You are saying your own opinion is superior to mine. It's not.
Your "evidence" is no more or less powerful than mine. You are simply looking from the opposite end of the spectrum and do not consider my "evidence" as meaningful.
And that is what robertthebard was pointing out.
I've seen this topic many times on these forums. This is simply a divided topic in which players who want these types of mechanics always fall back on the same exact arguments you are right now. Yet there are large amounts of players who view things from the opposite spectrum which you may not understand or agree with but are by no means any less valid.
Actually not even close to being the same.
There are obvious and clear ways why this feature would enhance and enrich not only my gameplay but ALOT of others, while the person I was talking to had no obvious or clear ways why it would negatively effect his. He just wanted for wanting's sake, not backed up with .. anything of substance, really.
The difference should've been obvious, but maybe it wasn't... to you.
It is obvious: It would enhance your gameplay because reasons. That's exactly what was quoted in my post. You see, you want to use this as an argument for something, and believe it's valid, while also choosing to believe that it's invalid to argue against something. You want it because you want it, and any argument presented to counter that is invalid, because you want it. If "because reasons" is valid to argue for, then it's valid as an argument against. I should think that would be obvious, but maybe it isn't, to you.
Reading comprehension is essential in a medium that requires reading for communication.
You are saying your own opinion is superior to mine. It's not.
Your "evidence" is no more or less powerful than mine. You are simply looking from the opposite end of the spectrum and do not consider my "evidence" as meaningful.
And that is what robertthebard was pointing out.
I've seen this topic many times on these forums. This is simply a divided topic in which players who want these types of mechanics always fall back on the same exact arguments you are right now. Yet there are large amounts of players who view things from the opposite spectrum which you may not understand or agree with but are by no means any less valid.
Please don't put words in my mouth, or anything for that matter, without buying me a drink first.
Im saying that one side of the "debate" has alot more and alot stronger arguments than the other, wich is quite obivious from just reading this thread alone, not to mention the other threads regarding this on the forum. And I happen to think it's the naysayers who have the tendency to usually fall back on the same argument, wich is a weak one.
One side has offered; a large amount of Pros, very few Cons.
Opposing side has basically offered one, to a few, to them huge Cons, but when pressured these Cons reasoning got very vague.
It is obvious: It would enhance your gameplay because reasons. That's exactly what was quoted in my post. You see, you want to use this as an argument for something, and believe it's valid, while also choosing to believe that it's invalid to argue against something. You want it because you want it, and any argument presented to counter that is invalid, because you want it. If "because reasons" is valid to argue for, then it's valid as an argument against. I should think that would be obvious, but maybe it isn't, to you.
Sigh... Mama told me not to feed the trolls, but.. Read my posts again, think on them for abit, and try again.
My point was that one side had reasons (plural) and strong one at that, while the other really didnt, except weak ones when argued and more of a "i want for wanting, not for reasons". That was the difference, hence no flag waving.
Either one of us is missing a brilliant point from the other, or we just happen to misunderstand and circle eachothers lines of reasoning, neither of wich is very productive, but if you want to repeat yourself yet again with the same things that don't really apply to what Ive been advocating, please go ahead - I might answer.
The actual way the two options impact players are different, though, and not just two sides of the same coin.
1) If a race change option is not offered, player A, who does not like her character because of the race or because the advertised main stat turned out to be worse than the secondary stats, can either remain unhappy or has to invest 30-70 hours of re-doing the character. (In addition, money spent on that character cannot be recovered, e.g. bank slots, bags that are character bound, etc.)
2) If a race change option is offered, player B, who has philosophical concerns in regard to race changes, may at most have to accept that player A made a choice to alter her own character. Player B does not have to re-roll his character or race change it, lose money or time. Nothing, on a practical level, changes for player B.
Differently put, player B's opposition to race changes limits what player A can do. Player A's desire to race change does not restrict what player B can do with his own character (player B would also have the same option, but doesn't have to make use of it).
One option enhances and creates more freedom (choice), the other restricts and limits it.
sabinocsMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 4Arc User
edited May 2013
A race change would've been nice...
I've played a Cleric up to level 51, then I understood that I hated Dwarves and that I wanted different stats... so I had to reroll another cleric that is now lvl 54, with a race change option it would've been a lot faster and easier.
Sigh... Mama told me not to feed the trolls, but.. Read my posts again, think on them for abit, and try again.
My point was that one side had reasons (plural) and strong one at that, while the other really didnt, except weak ones when argued and more of a "i want for wanting, not for reasons". That was the difference, hence no flag waving.
Either one of us is missing a brilliant point from the other, or we just happen to misunderstand and circle eachothers lines of reasoning, neither of wich is very productive, but if you want to repeat yourself yet again with the same things that don't really apply to what Ive been advocating, please go ahead - I might answer.
How did I know that you would resort to calling me a troll for using your own argument against you? Sorry, if the logic in my posts seems to be coming apart at the seams, it's because it's your logic. Why is your logic valid for your opinion, but invalid for mine? Because it can be used to counter your position. There is nothing you can say that does not equate to "I want it because reasons". The only difference between that and "I don't want it because reasons" is, quite frankly, "don't". All I have done in this thread is apply your own logic to the negative side of this thread. If you feel like doing so is a troll, then you are simply here trolling?
Reading comprehension is essential in a medium that requires reading for communication.
The actual way the two options impact players are different, though, and not just two sides of the same coin.
1) If a race change option is not offered, player A, who does not like her character because of the race or because the advertised main stat turned out to be worse than the secondary stats, can either remain unhappy or has to invest 30-70 hours of re-doing the character. (In addition, money spent on that character cannot be recovered, e.g. bank slots, bags that are character bound, etc.)
2) If a race change option is offered, player B, who has philosophical concerns in regard to race changes, may at most have to accept that player A made a choice to alter her own character. Player B does not have to re-roll his character or race change it, lose money or time. Nothing, on a practical level, changes for player B.
Differently put, player B's opposition to race changes limits what player A can do. Player A's desire to race change does not restrict what player B can do with his own character (player B would also have the same option, but doesn't have to make use of it).
One option enhances and creates more freedom (choice), the other restricts and limits it.
This.
Over and over, this.
Well formulated and presented. Very hard to argue against, imo.
0
calaminthaMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited May 2013
Here's something to consider.
AD&D, D&D 3.0 and D&D 3.5 (not sure about the others) all had a Reincarnate spell which would change your race. Race changes have been part of D&D for most of it's lifetime.
AD&D, D&D 3.0 and D&D 3.5 (not sure about the others) all had a Reincarnate spell which would change your race. Race changes have been part of D&D for most of it's lifetime.
Reincarnate, together with Wish/Miracle and I'm sure other ways I personally don't know of, should appease the "rp crowd" opposing the idea. If there are PnP ways of changing race, it's actually the DnD they're so valiantly trying to defend or preserve (like I usually do myself, just not in this case in this MMO) theyre at the same time fighting against right now. :P
I dont see the problem. If I would race change none of the roleplayers would know I had done so? Or do you people go around memorizing peoples name/race/gender. And even if you did, how do you know Bill the Human you talked to before is the same as Bill the Drow since you cant really use the @handle when roleplaying. Can be two totally different persons with the same name. And if the option is available I'm sure the purist roleplayers would not use it. Wouldnt it just be easier to make up rules in your roleplaying group?
Or what about race/name change - its now a whole different characters that is roleplayed.
A lot of people think a lot of MMO features would be good to add.
Bottom line is you're still dealing with D&D. There's a lot of D&D missing in the game because it's an MMO.
I'm not willing to give up much more without a fight.
This game should have more D&D brought into it, not taken out of it. That's where that argument flounders.
And while it's easy to claim it doesn't effect people, it does. Claiming it doesn't effect other people is the same excuse the rotten exploiters use to justify cheating.
Whether or not the game allows certain features I consider blasphemous to the D&D IP effects me viscerally. It may not effect you but it effects me, and to argue that would be akin to dictating my emotions or opinions which is, quite blatantly, only discernible by me.
Comparing the permanance of decisions in a tabletop game to an MMORPG is borderline literal retardation. It's not like the founders of D&D decided that they didn't want people race changing, in the same way they didn't decide not to include a login screen. These features do not exist in a board game because they simply have no reason to exist.
At the end of the day, having people break their character before they have even started playing it through lack of game knowledge is ****ing ridiculous. The real question here is, can you name a single successful MMORPG that forces any form of character permanence with regards to player decisions?
The "appease the roleplayers" argument is just a little ridiculous.
If I change my race, how do you know I changed my race? Do you know what my character's race is now? If you do, please tell me. No really, I'll wait.
...
.......
................
...That's what I thought. How does me changing my race affect you at all, when YOUR CHARACTER DOES NOT KNOW MY CHARACTER.
Presumably, RPers hang out with other RPers. If someone within the RP community wants to change their race, then they will either A) Change their character story, and start roleplaying as if their character is an entirely new person, or Think up a way to justify their race change using lore (DnD does let you change your race, under very special circumstances.)
The risk of a few RPers having their immersion suspended because one of the very few people they know in the game changed their race, does not outweigh the desire of other players to re-roll their stats which were, in many cases, misrepresented during character creation.
-Travail.
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
0
spoohtheoneMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 15Arc User
Beyond the obvious "no way in hell response" from the players here for the D&D...
You also have to consider that races aren't cosmetic. As sockmunkey mentioned certain races have access to certain quests...
But the more key aspect is that different races have different abilities. Certain races are better for certain classes or for certain functions. And as the game evolves I would imagine race choices will become more (rather than less) important.
This is something which shouldn't be added to the game.
But I hate all this reset button stuff to begin with. Magic erasers are horrible and I'm an old school player who advocates for everything short of permament death.
Choices have to be meaningful. MMO's belittle every choice with magic erasers and it's really something I don't care for at all.
There are several reasons why the choices you made when you're a rookie shouldn't be meaningful in an open beta release. Especially not in this games current state.
1) When creating your character there are no ways of you looking up what the initial abilities actually does, you have to look up your abilities on 3rd party websites. On top of that, I can just assume most players put their trust in the game when it literally tells you "this is the stat to go for" as in primary stats. When in reality for many classes this is a lie.
2) Class forums were deleted at launch (strategic?). You had no ways of finding out which stats was better for you and / or which feats didn't work properly etc. This already caused many many respecs (hi dollars) and I assume it caused many deleted characters and re runs.
3) People spend a lot of money on their characters because they enjoy the game, thus not wanting to create a new character and lose everything they've invested a lot of time / money in. Nobody wants to lose something they've purchased.
If character creation was done properly, and the guy making the tooltips would actually EXPLAIN stuff properly, your argument would stand. However you know nothing about stats / abilities / powers / feats until you try them, then having some of them being permanent changes is not a good business idea. On Clerics, 90% of the tooltips only explains the spells actions and not durations and damages.
if you had a 100% polished insanely well made game with incredible amounts of information explaining what you are actually choosing, then I could agree with your argument. However since you are literally clueless about everything when you start, I don't think your argument holds any strength.
Race Change is a big money maker. Also a lot of people would rather be a Drow Trickster Rogue then their current choice, but they don't want to just sit on the game and wait 60+ days. So they made their character, hit 60, got their gear and now would pay for the Race Change when Drow becomes available.
Stats are subtle. At level 1-10 or so, you cannot tell the difference between a 15 and a 20 in your primary stat --- after all, 5 or 6% more damage when your damage is less than 100 is unimpressive. Its at higher levels when your damage is 10k and your primary stat is adding 12-15% (is 15 the max, 25??) that you see a big difference. For that reason it does pay to match your race and class if you want to max/min the game.
I have also made a bum character. Being less familiar with this ruleset, I gave my cleric high str so she could bash things with a mace.... doh. Her wisdom was over 18 so I have kept going, but if I had it to do again I would have rolled her differently.
The two optimal "rolls" seem to be primary = 20 or primary and secondary = 18, both of which *require* a race that adds 2 to the primary (to get 20) or 2 to both primary and secondary (to get dual 18s). Most of the other race/class/roll combinations seem to be weaker. Not enough weaker to be unplayable, simply not max/min material. There may be one or 2 special cases where a more well rounded character excels with fine tuning, of course; a pure tank (if they ever fix aggro) might do better with more rounded stats, having many 18s instead of 2 25s.
IMHO race change is meh/moot. Do it, fine, don;t do it, takes a week to re-build a new character to 60. I would not pay MUCH for it.
0
calaminthaMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
Comments
I'm not going to argue about pricing, that's not what this thread is about, but feel free to make threads asking for lower pricing. Trust me I work for the company but I am first and foremost a player. The D&D is important to me as a player while the pricing...well it's important but while I am free to speak my mind I like to let you guys do most of the talking...until you mess with my D&D. Then the gloves come off.
Perfect. Nice post.
And for purists or RP'ers out there arguing this - different GMs handle their sessions differently, and can break rules, or have different applications of them. I don't hear any complaints about "the gang down in philly is not playing DnD the way I do right now!"? Strange.
An extreme, of course, but still valid, in a sense.
Then make it fairly priced...and I don't mean that in the way MMO players consider it.
I want what D&D there is preserved. $30 dollars to me seems like a fair price for an act which shouldn't occur to begin with. If you're willing to spend the money on something which negatively effects my enjoyment of a game which by title is designed for my enjoyment then I'm not going to stand in the way of it as long as you make sure the game is improved accordingly.
I'm not happy about it but that would be my personal concession. Pay a hefty amount for a hefty service...
Sure. When I see you in PnP sessions whip out your wallet to lay down IRL cash instead of ingame PnP gold or spell materials each time it's required.
I want the DnD preserved too, even added to, but this isn't really about that. And you still have no weight in your explanations of how this would negatively effect you or your "enjoyment of the game" - something everyone could wave as a flag for changes THEY want/don't want for a bunch of reasons.
EDIT; This game already has too much heavy/overly priced stuff that should be either alot cheaper or already in the game - not the Zen Store. The re-spec cost in a Beta alone is terrible.
This feature simply is something alot seem to want, for many reasons, and it would make money for PW/Cryptic just by having these people stay longer in the game (and thus maybe buying other stuff and so on.)
Change Gender?Sure, i even remember some item that did it in BG2
Appearance?Why not, few spells there and there...
But re-roll stats...i dunno know.I know that there was some DM who alow it...At least give him some penalty like lower levels or i dunno.
Bad idea...
A character may reroll all of his stats entirely. All stats must be rerolled, and the character must keep the resulting roll, even if not as good as the original. This can only be tried once in a character's lifetime, and costs 35% of the character's experience total.
That is usually how it goes anyway, either pick a class or a race and then find the class/race that compliments the other and go from there.
"You know you wanna fondle my dragons."
If the DM told you that stat X is the main stat for the class you play, and several weeks into the campaign you realize that this information was incorrect from a practical point of view, the DM would probably let you re-roll even without you having to pay him for a beer. Or he would modify the rules and validate the originally provided information.
(We already have the ability to reset your stats and powers, it costs $6. It just doesn't allow for changing the initial roll, which it probably should.)
Consider it implemented!
It effects me. It may not effect you but it effects me.
I presented my feelings. If you don't agree you don't agree but my feelings are my own and not yours.
If we were playing PnP D&D I wouldn't ask for such actions and if I did I'd expect to be kicked out of the room before they asked for my wallet. Heck I might have to take out my wallet to beg them to let me back in the room.
My view on D&D is simply a stricter view than your own. And as far as my personal desires are concerned I want this to be a Dungeons and Dragons MMO. That means D&D spirit...with a bunch of people. The fact this is an MMO isn't going to make me budge on what myself and a lot of others feel is core to D&D.
Things which may be common place in other MMO's are requested in Neverwinter because it is also an MMO...
But I look at the term MMO as a literal meaning from the age before WoW. Originally it meant a game in which there were large amounts of players able to play the game. And that's what I personally want from Neverwinter.
You may disagree. That's fine. I will probably never convince you of my opinion and you will never convince me of yours.
I am merely here stating that this is my opinion, this is why I formed my opinion, and no matter what you may think you can not dictate my opinion.
Indeed, and you are waving the same flag, aren't you? "A race change will enhance my game". It's two sides of the same coin, so if one side is invalid, then so too is the other side. After all, if "something everyone could wave as a flag for changes THEY want/don't want for a bunch of reasons" is really how you feel, there is nothing you can state that justifies including them, because it's just something you want for a bunch of reasons.
The game is already far enough from a D&D feel for me that stripping more away would counter any reasons I have chosen to stay so far. Why is it, for example, that we have kits that can fail, but I can disarm any trap, even if I'm tooling along too fast and run through it first? Why can fighters find secret doors instead of either rogues or elves, barring of course elven/dwarven fighters? Was this just a way to minimalize the rogue's usefulness? Another way to further trivialize race selection? Is it part of 4e, and this is why the PnP community is so divided about it?
You got a point there.But this isnt PnP D&D.I will go further and say this isnt D&D at all.This is a classical MMORPG with names and location from D&D.I agree with imivo : If the DM told you that stat X is the main stat for the class you play, and several weeks into the campaign you realize that this information was incorrect from a practical point of view, the DM would probably let you re-roll even without you having to pay him for a beer. Or he would modify the rules and validate the originally provided information..In PnP it would cause problem in role-play sence.You could change your stats in the part when you would profit from it most.Some of the older decission that you make could colide.
But, lets be honest here.In Neverwinter, there are NO decision.Period.You can make trough the game with 10 or 20 charisma.There are no stats restriction weapons, dialogs nothing.So, why not let him change it?It would make clearly no diference here...
Actually not even close to being the same.
There are obvious and clear ways why this feature would enhance and enrich not only my gameplay but ALOT of others, while the person I was talking to had no obvious or clear ways why it would negatively effect his. He just wanted for wanting's sake, not backed up with .. anything of substance, really.
The difference should've been obvious, but maybe it wasn't... to you.
Fanboi on, fellas.
As I said, that's something to fight to bring into the game. Not something to simply accept.
johnfell,
You are saying your own opinion is superior to mine. It's not.
Your "evidence" is no more or less powerful than mine. You are simply looking from the opposite end of the spectrum and do not consider my "evidence" as meaningful.
And that is what robertthebard was pointing out.
I've seen this topic many times on these forums. This is simply a divided topic in which players who want these types of mechanics always fall back on the same exact arguments you are right now. Yet there are large amounts of players who view things from the opposite spectrum which you may not understand or agree with but are by no means any less valid.
It is obvious: It would enhance your gameplay because reasons. That's exactly what was quoted in my post. You see, you want to use this as an argument for something, and believe it's valid, while also choosing to believe that it's invalid to argue against something. You want it because you want it, and any argument presented to counter that is invalid, because you want it. If "because reasons" is valid to argue for, then it's valid as an argument against. I should think that would be obvious, but maybe it isn't, to you.
Please don't put words in my mouth, or anything for that matter, without buying me a drink first.
Im saying that one side of the "debate" has alot more and alot stronger arguments than the other, wich is quite obivious from just reading this thread alone, not to mention the other threads regarding this on the forum. And I happen to think it's the naysayers who have the tendency to usually fall back on the same argument, wich is a weak one.
One side has offered; a large amount of Pros, very few Cons.
Opposing side has basically offered one, to a few, to them huge Cons, but when pressured these Cons reasoning got very vague.
Sigh... Mama told me not to feed the trolls, but.. Read my posts again, think on them for abit, and try again.
My point was that one side had reasons (plural) and strong one at that, while the other really didnt, except weak ones when argued and more of a "i want for wanting, not for reasons". That was the difference, hence no flag waving.
Either one of us is missing a brilliant point from the other, or we just happen to misunderstand and circle eachothers lines of reasoning, neither of wich is very productive, but if you want to repeat yourself yet again with the same things that don't really apply to what Ive been advocating, please go ahead - I might answer.
1) If a race change option is not offered, player A, who does not like her character because of the race or because the advertised main stat turned out to be worse than the secondary stats, can either remain unhappy or has to invest 30-70 hours of re-doing the character. (In addition, money spent on that character cannot be recovered, e.g. bank slots, bags that are character bound, etc.)
2) If a race change option is offered, player B, who has philosophical concerns in regard to race changes, may at most have to accept that player A made a choice to alter her own character. Player B does not have to re-roll his character or race change it, lose money or time. Nothing, on a practical level, changes for player B.
Differently put, player B's opposition to race changes limits what player A can do. Player A's desire to race change does not restrict what player B can do with his own character (player B would also have the same option, but doesn't have to make use of it).
One option enhances and creates more freedom (choice), the other restricts and limits it.
I've played a Cleric up to level 51, then I understood that I hated Dwarves and that I wanted different stats... so I had to reroll another cleric that is now lvl 54, with a race change option it would've been a lot faster and easier.
How did I know that you would resort to calling me a troll for using your own argument against you? Sorry, if the logic in my posts seems to be coming apart at the seams, it's because it's your logic. Why is your logic valid for your opinion, but invalid for mine? Because it can be used to counter your position. There is nothing you can say that does not equate to "I want it because reasons". The only difference between that and "I don't want it because reasons" is, quite frankly, "don't". All I have done in this thread is apply your own logic to the negative side of this thread. If you feel like doing so is a troll, then you are simply here trolling?
This.
Over and over, this.
Well formulated and presented. Very hard to argue against, imo.
AD&D, D&D 3.0 and D&D 3.5 (not sure about the others) all had a Reincarnate spell which would change your race. Race changes have been part of D&D for most of it's lifetime.
Reincarnate, together with Wish/Miracle and I'm sure other ways I personally don't know of, should appease the "rp crowd" opposing the idea. If there are PnP ways of changing race, it's actually the DnD they're so valiantly trying to defend or preserve (like I usually do myself, just not in this case in this MMO) theyre at the same time fighting against right now. :P
Or what about race/name change - its now a whole different characters that is roleplayed.
Comparing the permanance of decisions in a tabletop game to an MMORPG is borderline literal retardation. It's not like the founders of D&D decided that they didn't want people race changing, in the same way they didn't decide not to include a login screen. These features do not exist in a board game because they simply have no reason to exist.
At the end of the day, having people break their character before they have even started playing it through lack of game knowledge is ****ing ridiculous. The real question here is, can you name a single successful MMORPG that forces any form of character permanence with regards to player decisions?
If I change my race, how do you know I changed my race? Do you know what my character's race is now? If you do, please tell me. No really, I'll wait.
...
.......
................
...That's what I thought. How does me changing my race affect you at all, when YOUR CHARACTER DOES NOT KNOW MY CHARACTER.
Presumably, RPers hang out with other RPers. If someone within the RP community wants to change their race, then they will either A) Change their character story, and start roleplaying as if their character is an entirely new person, or
The risk of a few RPers having their immersion suspended because one of the very few people they know in the game changed their race, does not outweigh the desire of other players to re-roll their stats which were, in many cases, misrepresented during character creation.
-Travail.
There are several reasons why the choices you made when you're a rookie shouldn't be meaningful in an open beta release. Especially not in this games current state.
1) When creating your character there are no ways of you looking up what the initial abilities actually does, you have to look up your abilities on 3rd party websites. On top of that, I can just assume most players put their trust in the game when it literally tells you "this is the stat to go for" as in primary stats. When in reality for many classes this is a lie.
2) Class forums were deleted at launch (strategic?). You had no ways of finding out which stats was better for you and / or which feats didn't work properly etc. This already caused many many respecs (hi dollars) and I assume it caused many deleted characters and re runs.
3) People spend a lot of money on their characters because they enjoy the game, thus not wanting to create a new character and lose everything they've invested a lot of time / money in. Nobody wants to lose something they've purchased.
If character creation was done properly, and the guy making the tooltips would actually EXPLAIN stuff properly, your argument would stand. However you know nothing about stats / abilities / powers / feats until you try them, then having some of them being permanent changes is not a good business idea. On Clerics, 90% of the tooltips only explains the spells actions and not durations and damages.
if you had a 100% polished insanely well made game with incredible amounts of information explaining what you are actually choosing, then I could agree with your argument. However since you are literally clueless about everything when you start, I don't think your argument holds any strength.
I have also made a bum character. Being less familiar with this ruleset, I gave my cleric high str so she could bash things with a mace.... doh. Her wisdom was over 18 so I have kept going, but if I had it to do again I would have rolled her differently.
The two optimal "rolls" seem to be primary = 20 or primary and secondary = 18, both of which *require* a race that adds 2 to the primary (to get 20) or 2 to both primary and secondary (to get dual 18s). Most of the other race/class/roll combinations seem to be weaker. Not enough weaker to be unplayable, simply not max/min material. There may be one or 2 special cases where a more well rounded character excels with fine tuning, of course; a pure tank (if they ever fix aggro) might do better with more rounded stats, having many 18s instead of 2 25s.
IMHO race change is meh/moot. Do it, fine, don;t do it, takes a week to re-build a new character to 60. I would not pay MUCH for it.
You might feel different if you had any lockbox mounts, fashion outfits or Zen store companions.