Just as a thought, if devs really wanted to differentiate the defense between all classes, AC could be made into a multiplicative scalar to your DR from defense, rather than a flat bonus to it. This way, a CW compared with a GF will always have a lesser DR given the same defense stat, to reflect cloth versus plate. I hope a dev reads this for consideration.
I think you sort of nailed the answer to the problem on the head here.
For example, as a GF in BiS i'm likely to end up with something around 14k Defense and 45 AC. This is including stacking as much Defense as possible. However, this will barely break the 50-55% DR mark and is fairly ridiculous when you consider that, compared to the actual D&D game, if a character ended up with an AC of 45 then they should not be hit very often if at all.
By using your suggestion but modifying to suit the different types of armour worn (cloth, leather, chain, plate etc.) this would resolve the issue. For example, keep the cloth AC multiplier at 0.5%, increase leather to something like 0.65%, chain at 0.8% and plate at 1%.
This would mean that my current (ridiculously pathetic) AC of 43 and 7.5k Defense equaling 35% DR would actually result in 56.5% DR. This number would actually be a lot more consistent with the actual D&D game and resolve a few of the issues this game currently has with players taking too much damage, particularly tanks.
I think you sort of nailed the answer to the problem on the head here.
For example, as a GF in BiS i'm likely to end up with something around 14k Defense and 45 AC. This is including stacking as much Defense as possible. However, this will barely break the 50-55% DR mark and is fairly ridiculous when you consider that, compared to the actual D&D game, if a character ended up with an AC of 45 then they should not be hit very often if at all.
By using your suggestion but modifying to suit the different types of armour worn (cloth, leather, chain, plate etc.) this would resolve the issue. For example, keep the cloth AC multiplier at 0.5%, increase leather to something like 0.65%, chain at 0.8% and plate at 1%.
This would mean that my current (ridiculously pathetic) AC of 43 and 7.5k Defense equaling 35% DR would actually result in 56.5% DR. This number would actually be a lot more consistent with the actual D&D game and resolve a few of the issues this game currently has with players taking too much damage, particularly tanks.
Perhaps with the New Dev. having made a GF and a Pally he will be willing to look into this idea.
0
instynctiveMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,885Arc User
compared to the actual D&D game, if a character ended up with an AC of 45 then they should not be hit very often if at all
Actually, in REAL AD&D, you could be standing naked and have an AC of 10.
AC of 0 was quite something to have.
I had one character with an AC of -8. He was pretty much untouchable.
I do miss the good old days. Simple, fun, challenging..
"...I grab my wiener and charge!" - ironzerg79
0
bensansMember, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 6Arc User
edited April 2015
I have avoided gear that grants HP since the beginning of the game because I found it "inelegant". With Mod6, I have no choice. Otherwise I get insta-killed from one minion with one attack in IwD. Now with Eternal set, I get insta-killed from two minions with one attack each. Love the new armor: I'm twice as survivable! (read with extreme sarcasm)
0
magnusolamMember, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 82
I have avoided gear that grants HP since the beginning of the game because I found it "inelegant". With Mod6, I have no choice. Otherwise I get insta-killed from one minion with one attack in IwD. Now with Eternal set, I get insta-killed from two minions with one attack each. Love the new armor: I'm twice as survivable! (read with extreme sarcasm)
Too true. Traditionally if trying for more HP, you went looking for items that boosted CON which meant that there was still a large disparity between the different classes which gave them their individual roles within a party. Now granted that this format requires a reduction in disparity, bolstered by more potent attacks to allow for solo play, adding HP directly is IMHO just naff.
I can't help thinking that the boosting of enemy attacks smacks of the bane of all these games, developers being too fond of their own creations. Enemies should never be viewed as anything other than a plot device to provide the players with a bit of fun (unless of course they're paying to be allowed to slaughter the players like the powries are rumoured to be doing ).
Enemies should never be viewed as anything other than a plot device to provide the players with a bit of fun.
Allow me to disagree:
Enemies EXEPT bosses/Titans/Gods/etc. should follow THE SAME rules that players follow. That expands to powers, stats, movement an all other aspects of the game.
A player of Level 45 should NOT be able to fight against 5 enemies of level 45 simultaneously and call it a walk in the park. It should be an even match for him fighting against ONE enemy and a challange fighting two of that level. If he wants to fight against a group, the individuals should be significantly below his own level. Only if this is enforced, the level has any meaning at all. For the develoment and balancing of the game (if any is planned!) this means: If you want an area to be soloed by players of Level X, fill it with enemy groups of Level X-10…X-5 and sprinkle some enemies of level X-4…X+2.
0
magnusolamMember, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 82
Enemies EXEPT bosses/Titans/Gods/etc. should follow THE SAME rules that players follow. That expands to powers, stats, movement an all other aspects of the game.
If you don't want to have fun that's fine, but I'm curious as to why not?
0
kaiserschmarrnMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 390
I have so many issues with the new "everyone has to wear THIS set to survive" mentality.
Armor should give minimal HP bonuses. Here's why: armor is for PROTECTION (defense), not health (hit points). Obviously no one who thought out this insanity has even seen, let alone worn armor (or played the tabletop game... this whole thing smacks f "So I wonder what WoW is up to.. oh, let's do it that way!")
Regardless...
While I love seeing those 5- and 6-digit orange numbers pop up on the screen while I'm fighting, it's utter insanity, and no need for it. But hey, WoW let you do thousands and thousands of points of damage, so we gotta keep up with that, right? Any *real* D&Der would be ecstatic to crit for 20 or 25 points of damage. Were my GWF on paper (which I'm strongly thinking of transferring him there to compare and contrast), the base damage of his axe is 1d8... that's right, before magic and modifiers, a max of 8 points of damage.
I can already hear the uber733ts crying over only doing 8 points of damage. Or having a max of 200 HP. Or the massive confusion over having a negative armor class (back when AC actually meant something).
But, as it is, trash mobs hit for more damage and can take more damage than an adult dragon or the Tarrasque (who remembers those? lol). Game formulas have gone from straightforward and simple mathematics to something a person would need a degree in advanced physics to understand.
You know what? This alone is why the game is so slow, so broken. Things have become overly complicated, the math has become overly convoluted. Stats have so very little meaning to modifiers and combat. And, instead of coming up with more creative ways to continue making the game harder (sorry, but any idiot can throw massive mobs at characters.. that's done every day in the Foundry), everything gets multiplied by 10 or 100.
But, in the meanwhile, I'll continue to run around in-game, wearing armor that has more hit points than my old gaming group had, combined.
Multiplied by 10.
Good post. +1
To me it seems that the armor was a knee jerk reaction to their own mob buffs.
Dev A: "Oh my, we might have overdone it a bit".
Dev B: "I know a solution, let's just forget about the old stat system and about basic D&D rules and stack health on the new armor pieces".
0
silverkeltMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 4,235Arc User
edited April 2015
AC fix sounds to be the most reasonable to me.
0
magnusolamMember, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 82
A player of Level 45 should NOT be able to fight against 5 enemies of level 45 simultaneously and call it a walk in the park. It should be an even match for him fighting against ONE enemy and a challange fighting two of that level. If he wants to fight against a group, the individuals should be significantly below his own level. Only if this is enforced, the level has any meaning at all. For the develoment and balancing of the game (if any is planned!) this means: If you want an area to be soloed by players of Level X, fill it with enemy groups of Level X-10…X-5 and sprinkle some enemies of level X-4…X+2.
Hmmm... but would they be a high enough level to prevent you from having fun (your stated goal), surely they should be stronger so they can one shot you every time.
In fact why have differing enemies at all, just have one boss with a massive AoE one shot power, that should do the trick.
If you don't want to have fun that's fine, but I'm curious as to why not?
I want have fun. Whats makes you think different of me? Is it fun to hack thru 20 spiders in given time to get a reward? Well, sometimes it is (for some of us). But if this supposed to be fun for a char of lev 50, then the spiders should be lvl30-40, not 52 in a map meant for 50. (im guessing random numbers, its an example!)
I want have fun. Whats makes you think different of me? Is it fun to hack thru 20 spiders in given time to get a reward? Well, sometimes it is (for some of us). But if this supposed to be fun for a char of lev 50, then the spiders should be lvl30-40, not 52 in a map meant for 50. (im guessing random numbers, its an example!)
I never stated this, please stop interpreting nonesense into my clearly written words.
So now you DO want to have fun? Make your mind up! Mind you if arcade game style play is what you're after then the one shotting boss should still be what you go for.
Either you're not able to understand what i wrote or your trolling. In first case your quest is:
Read it again. Think of it. If you still have questions, read it again. if you STILL have questions, ask me, i think everyone else understands.
So to go back to my previous premise 'Enemies should never be viewed as anything other than a plot device to provide the players with a bit of fun', a statement you disagreed with.
So to go back to my previous premise 'Enemies should never be viewed as anything other than a plot device to provide the players with a bit of fun', a statement you disagreed with.
*sight* again, this time even with underlining:
Enemies EXEPT bosses/Titans/Gods/etc. should follow THE SAME rules that players follow. That expands to powers, stats, movement and all other aspects of the game.
You cant have a balanced game when a lvl35 evilMage is wielding a much lesser kind of fireball than the player playing a lvl35 goodMage. If you want – for story reasons – kill the player 2 mages and 4 knights in a room, give him 2 lvl28 mages and 4 lvl25 knights. You dont generate fun (at least for most players) by just making them UNREALISTICALLY better, you generate fun by giving them situations they can solve without getting demoralized and that they have to solve somehow intelligently.
And – BTW:
If ALL follow the same rules, there *is* no issue with PVP-settings unbalancing PVE and vice versa.
As a DM, i'd NEVER allow a single knight to kill a full-grown dragon, thats a simple Rule #0 decision! I would of course allow him to trick the dragon into get killed by situation, like aggroing him into fire-breathing the only pillar left that's holding the caves ceiling.
Enemies should try to not die, they should try to get advantage of situations (they already do by trying to get behind you), they should run for their lives if situations becomes bad for them, they should simply behave like a player would behave if he controls the enemy. If this where MY game, if i would be the one in charge, there would be staff members playing random enemies in certain dungeons just to increase the randomness and the realism. To have someone that attaks those players that are the biggest thread to the side im playing. In a perfect K.I., i should not be able to know if i'm playing against another player or against the computer. Every enemy has to be viewed as a character, not just as a plot-device like you suggested!
Perhaps you misunderstood the perspective of my post, i dont say: let no one kill a group of enemies, i say:
if someone *is* to kill a group of enemies, this should be groups of a significantly lesser level.
so you want to make game the useless boring pile of **** it was back in mod5 ?
the damage to hp ratio was way off before, a gwf could hit for 5x his own hp without any party buffs, now its more like 2~3 times, ppl constantly got 1shot in pvp, and the higher hp pool makes % chance life steal more usable
they need to change con to affect hp from gear and thats it
You may nor care about the majority of users, but remember :
If it ain't fun they won't play.
If they don't play they won't pay.
If they don't pay, you won't play.
Mod 5: A buddy and me were leveling some toons and reached 60, started the campaigns and were just having fun at a casual pace.
Mod 6: We all of a sudden get one shotted doing the same stuff we were doing earlier. We adjusted and started the climb to 70 with the hope that we could get back to where we were. Reached 70 this weekend, upgraded our gear and went back to try the campaigns again. Well not one-shotted but 2- 3 shotted is more like it. We quit playing Saturday night because it was no longer fun. I want to play but with the bugs and hp replacing stats I don't know what to do. I'm afraid that if I leave the game I will not come back, but I still remember the fun I had before this Mod.
0
magnusolamMember, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 82
Enemies EXEPT bosses/Titans/Gods/etc. should follow THE SAME rules that players follow. That expands to powers, stats, movement and all other aspects of the game.
You cant have a balanced game when a lvl35 evilMage is wielding a much lesser kind of fireball than the player playing a lvl35 goodMage. If you want – for story reasons – kill the player 2 mages and 4 knights in a room, give him 2 lvl28 mages and 4 lvl25 knights. You dont generate fun (at least for most players) by just making them UNREALISTICALLY better, you generate fun by giving them situations they can solve without getting demoralized and that they have to solve somehow intelligently.
And – BTW:
If ALL follow the same rules, there *is* no issue with PVP-settings unbalancing PVE and vice versa.
As a DM, i'd NEVER allow a single knight to kill a full-grown dragon, thats a simple Rule #0 decision! I would of course allow him to trick the dragon into get killed by situation, like aggroing him into fire-breathing the only pillar left that's holding the caves ceiling.
Enemies should try to not die, they should try to get advantage of situations (they already do by trying to get behind you), they should run for their lives if situations becomes bad for them, they should simply behave like a player would behave if he controls the enemy. If this where MY game, if i would be the one in charge, there would be staff members playing random enemies in certain dungeons just to increase the randomness and the realism. To have someone that attaks those players that are the biggest thread to the side im playing. In a perfect K.I., i should not be able to know if i'm playing against another player or against the computer. Every enemy has to be viewed as a character, not just as a plot-device like you suggested!
Perhaps you misunderstood the perspective of my post, i dont say: let no one kill a group of enemies, i say:
if someone *is* to kill a group of enemies, this should be groups of a significantly lesser level.
So you DO agree that the role of enemies is to provide players with fun?
All this other stuff is interesting and I have never disagreed with you. If the setup stated is such that it will provide you with fun then I agree that you should be able to play it as such. Equally, I believe that other players who may want/need a more challenging setup or a less challenging setup should also be able to enjoy the game.
Players do NOT come with a convenient set of numerical stats that can be plugged into the games algorithms in order to allow for a 'one size fits all' game, consequently a sliding level of difficulty should be provided so that the game can be FUN FOR ALL.
Mod 5: A buddy and me were leveling some toons and reached 60, started the campaigns and were just having fun at a casual pace.
Mod 6: We all of a sudden get one shotted doing the same stuff we were doing earlier. We adjusted and started the climb to 70 with the hope that we could get back to where we were. Reached 70 this weekend, upgraded our gear and went back to try the campaigns again. Well not one-shotted but 2- 3 shotted is more like it. We quit playing Saturday night because it was no longer fun. I want to play but with the bugs and hp replacing stats I don't know what to do. I'm afraid that if I leave the game I will not come back, but I still remember the fun I had before this Mod.
I share your sentiments precisely. The only difference is that i could tell that if i strained to arrive at level 70, returning to these enjoyable mod 5 levels will still be abusive. The entire philosophy and vibe has shifted to enjoyment to strife...
The toilet is flushing ...and there is overflow...i hope they call the plumber.
0
schweifer1982Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,662Arc User
Should just give us like 50k more hp on each armor piece. :rolleyes:
Also noteworthy: Why do we even have HP pots?
Should just give us 50k defense pots :rolleyes:
I play from beta i like close combat even if we have disadvantage .
But now playing close combat chars is a death wish.
There is simpl no way to build your char to not get oneshoted in t1-t2
.
I dont like to hold my Shild all time up as GF .
As GWF i must slot running speed buffs to not get oneshoted by trash but then there is the joke i kill 1 mob with IBS and the dam archer hit on my 400k pfff .. i think for me GWF is dead char.
As paladin w/o unlimited daly spam(from DC) i am dead too cuz mobs ignoring 80 % dr this is a joke my biggest dmg record was 4 mill in ECC then i rage q from the pt .
Warriors need some DR boost and hp boost there is no way to avoid those big hits w/o dodge or perma (shild on tab)
we are not ranged !!!
Actually, in REAL AD&D, you could be standing naked and have an AC of 10.
AC of 0 was quite something to have.
I had one character with an AC of -8. He was pretty much untouchable.
I do miss the good old days. Simple, fun, challenging..
True but 3rd edition changed it to what we have now - higher AC equals tougher to hit, not lower. Also, more "things" affect AC - armor, parrying, dodging, etc.
I do think adjusting the AC would be a better fix than simply adding HP to gear.
I aim to misbehave
0
instynctiveMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,885Arc User
True but 3rd edition changed it to what we have now - higher AC equals tougher to hit, not lower. Also, more "things" affect AC - armor, parrying, dodging, etc.
I do think adjusting the AC would be a better fix than simply adding HP to gear.
I stopped buying books at 2nd Ed, because 3rd Ed did a fairly good job at completely <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> up the game. So I banned 3rd Ed in my gaming group.
I stopped buying books at 2nd Ed, because 3rd Ed did a fairly good job at completely <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> up the game. So I banned 3rd Ed in my gaming group.
Players do NOT come with a convenient set of numerical stats that can be plugged into the games algorithms in order to allow for a 'one size fits all' game, consequently a sliding level of difficulty should be provided so that the game can be FUN FOR ALL.
The difference between your character level and the level(s) of your enemies should be that sliding level of difficulty.
You're level 49 and dont wanna have a though fight? Simple: circumstep that level 56 oger at the hill to the north. You wanna instead feel like the superhero incarnate? Well, there is a lair of mutated killer-bees level 37 to the west with a queen of level 48.
0
magnusolamMember, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 82
The difference between your character level and the level(s) of your enemies should be that sliding level of difficulty.
You're level 49 and dont wanna have a though fight? Simple: circumstep that level 56 oger at the hill to the north. You wanna instead feel like the superhero incarnate? Well, there is a lair of mutated killer-bees level 37 to the west with a queen of level 48.
Hmmm....Not too sure of what you're getting at here.
My point was that enjoyment of the game is a subjective thing (i.e. dependant on the player and how the like to play), therefore the only way to make all content FUN FOR ALL players is to allow the player to select the level of difficulty they wish to play at. It would also allow players to enjoy the content even if the developers made a mistake and made an area too easy or too difficult.
0
katbozejziemiMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 856Arc User
edited April 2015
To anyone thinking some AC buff will fix this: did you even take a look at the combat log? It will not matter if you have double the DR you have now because the enemies will ignore it anyway.
Comments
I think you sort of nailed the answer to the problem on the head here.
For example, as a GF in BiS i'm likely to end up with something around 14k Defense and 45 AC. This is including stacking as much Defense as possible. However, this will barely break the 50-55% DR mark and is fairly ridiculous when you consider that, compared to the actual D&D game, if a character ended up with an AC of 45 then they should not be hit very often if at all.
By using your suggestion but modifying to suit the different types of armour worn (cloth, leather, chain, plate etc.) this would resolve the issue. For example, keep the cloth AC multiplier at 0.5%, increase leather to something like 0.65%, chain at 0.8% and plate at 1%.
This would mean that my current (ridiculously pathetic) AC of 43 and 7.5k Defense equaling 35% DR would actually result in 56.5% DR. This number would actually be a lot more consistent with the actual D&D game and resolve a few of the issues this game currently has with players taking too much damage, particularly tanks.
Actually, in REAL AD&D, you could be standing naked and have an AC of 10.
AC of 0 was quite something to have.
I had one character with an AC of -8. He was pretty much untouchable.
I do miss the good old days. Simple, fun, challenging..
"...I grab my wiener and charge!" - ironzerg79
Too true. Traditionally if trying for more HP, you went looking for items that boosted CON which meant that there was still a large disparity between the different classes which gave them their individual roles within a party. Now granted that this format requires a reduction in disparity, bolstered by more potent attacks to allow for solo play, adding HP directly is IMHO just naff.
I can't help thinking that the boosting of enemy attacks smacks of the bane of all these games, developers being too fond of their own creations. Enemies should never be viewed as anything other than a plot device to provide the players with a bit of fun (unless of course they're paying to be allowed to slaughter the players like the powries are rumoured to be doing
Allow me to disagree:
Enemies EXEPT bosses/Titans/Gods/etc. should follow THE SAME rules that players follow. That expands to powers, stats, movement an all other aspects of the game.
A player of Level 45 should NOT be able to fight against 5 enemies of level 45 simultaneously and call it a walk in the park. It should be an even match for him fighting against ONE enemy and a challange fighting two of that level. If he wants to fight against a group, the individuals should be significantly below his own level. Only if this is enforced, the level has any meaning at all. For the develoment and balancing of the game (if any is planned!) this means: If you want an area to be soloed by players of Level X, fill it with enemy groups of Level X-10…X-5 and sprinkle some enemies of level X-4…X+2.
If you don't want to have fun that's fine, but I'm curious as to why not?
Good post. +1
To me it seems that the armor was a knee jerk reaction to their own mob buffs.
Dev A: "Oh my, we might have overdone it a bit".
Dev B: "I know a solution, let's just forget about the old stat system and about basic D&D rules and stack health on the new armor pieces".
Hmmm... but would they be a high enough level to prevent you from having fun (your stated goal), surely they should be stronger so they can one shot you every time.
In fact why have differing enemies at all, just have one boss with a massive AoE one shot power, that should do the trick.
I want have fun. Whats makes you think different of me? Is it fun to hack thru 20 spiders in given time to get a reward? Well, sometimes it is (for some of us). But if this supposed to be fun for a char of lev 50, then the spiders should be lvl30-40, not 52 in a map meant for 50. (im guessing random numbers, its an example!)
I never stated this, please stop interpreting nonesense into my clearly written words.
No challenge no fun.....
You're not having fun? You don't want to have fun? You don't want a challenge? Why play if you don't enjoy it or want to enjoy it?
So now you DO want to have fun? Make your mind up! Mind you if arcade game style play is what you're after then the one shotting boss should still be what you go for.
Read it again. Think of it. If you still have questions, read it again. if you STILL have questions, ask me, i think everyone else understands.
So to go back to my previous premise 'Enemies should never be viewed as anything other than a plot device to provide the players with a bit of fun', a statement you disagreed with.
*sight* again, this time even with underlining:
Enemies EXEPT bosses/Titans/Gods/etc. should follow THE SAME rules that players follow. That expands to powers, stats, movement and all other aspects of the game.
You cant have a balanced game when a lvl35 evilMage is wielding a much lesser kind of fireball than the player playing a lvl35 goodMage. If you want – for story reasons – kill the player 2 mages and 4 knights in a room, give him 2 lvl28 mages and 4 lvl25 knights. You dont generate fun (at least for most players) by just making them UNREALISTICALLY better, you generate fun by giving them situations they can solve without getting demoralized and that they have to solve somehow intelligently.
And – BTW:
If ALL follow the same rules, there *is* no issue with PVP-settings unbalancing PVE and vice versa.
As a DM, i'd NEVER allow a single knight to kill a full-grown dragon, thats a simple Rule #0 decision! I would of course allow him to trick the dragon into get killed by situation, like aggroing him into fire-breathing the only pillar left that's holding the caves ceiling.
Enemies should try to not die, they should try to get advantage of situations (they already do by trying to get behind you), they should run for their lives if situations becomes bad for them, they should simply behave like a player would behave if he controls the enemy. If this where MY game, if i would be the one in charge, there would be staff members playing random enemies in certain dungeons just to increase the randomness and the realism. To have someone that attaks those players that are the biggest thread to the side im playing. In a perfect K.I., i should not be able to know if i'm playing against another player or against the computer. Every enemy has to be viewed as a character, not just as a plot-device like you suggested!
Perhaps you misunderstood the perspective of my post, i dont say: let no one kill a group of enemies, i say:
if someone *is* to kill a group of enemies, this should be groups of a significantly lesser level.
Mod 5 PVE was wonderful
Agreed ! So Burky? where do we SIGN
Mod 5: A buddy and me were leveling some toons and reached 60, started the campaigns and were just having fun at a casual pace.
Mod 6: We all of a sudden get one shotted doing the same stuff we were doing earlier. We adjusted and started the climb to 70 with the hope that we could get back to where we were. Reached 70 this weekend, upgraded our gear and went back to try the campaigns again. Well not one-shotted but 2- 3 shotted is more like it. We quit playing Saturday night because it was no longer fun. I want to play but with the bugs and hp replacing stats I don't know what to do. I'm afraid that if I leave the game I will not come back, but I still remember the fun I had before this Mod.
So you DO agree that the role of enemies is to provide players with fun?
All this other stuff is interesting and I have never disagreed with you. If the setup stated is such that it will provide you with fun then I agree that you should be able to play it as such. Equally, I believe that other players who may want/need a more challenging setup or a less challenging setup should also be able to enjoy the game.
Players do NOT come with a convenient set of numerical stats that can be plugged into the games algorithms in order to allow for a 'one size fits all' game, consequently a sliding level of difficulty should be provided so that the game can be FUN FOR ALL.
I share your sentiments precisely. The only difference is that i could tell that if i strained to arrive at level 70, returning to these enjoyable mod 5 levels will still be abusive. The entire philosophy and vibe has shifted to enjoyment to strife...
The toilet is flushing ...and there is overflow...i hope they call the plumber.
I play from beta i like close combat even if we have disadvantage .
But now playing close combat chars is a death wish.
There is simpl no way to build your char to not get oneshoted in t1-t2
.
I dont like to hold my Shild all time up as GF .
As GWF i must slot running speed buffs to not get oneshoted by trash but then there is the joke i kill 1 mob with IBS and the dam archer hit on my 400k pfff .. i think for me GWF is dead char.
As paladin w/o unlimited daly spam(from DC) i am dead too cuz mobs ignoring 80 % dr this is a joke my biggest dmg record was 4 mill in ECC then i rage q from the pt
Warriors need some DR boost and hp boost there is no way to avoid those big hits w/o dodge or perma (shild on tab)
we are not ranged !!!
True but 3rd edition changed it to what we have now - higher AC equals tougher to hit, not lower. Also, more "things" affect AC - armor, parrying, dodging, etc.
I do think adjusting the AC would be a better fix than simply adding HP to gear.
I stopped buying books at 2nd Ed, because 3rd Ed did a fairly good job at completely <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> up the game. So I banned 3rd Ed in my gaming group.
"...I grab my wiener and charge!" - ironzerg79
LOL. Point taken.
The difference between your character level and the level(s) of your enemies should be that sliding level of difficulty.
You're level 49 and dont wanna have a though fight? Simple: circumstep that level 56 oger at the hill to the north. You wanna instead feel like the superhero incarnate? Well, there is a lair of mutated killer-bees level 37 to the west with a queen of level 48.
Hmmm....Not too sure of what you're getting at here.
My point was that enjoyment of the game is a subjective thing (i.e. dependant on the player and how the like to play), therefore the only way to make all content FUN FOR ALL players is to allow the player to select the level of difficulty they wish to play at. It would also allow players to enjoy the content even if the developers made a mistake and made an area too easy or too difficult.