Stat changes don't make sense and are NOT an improvement. Much better to stick to DnD class stats and allow customizable rolls.
Frankly put, even if they remove customization of rolls, they shouldn't change the ability score effects from what they are on live.
If the dev team wants to force people into being effective, I'm fine with that-but for the love of Ao, don't add this HAMSTER where suddenly clerics and warlocks all need/want high intelligence, that's profoundly wrong.
I totally understand the importance of these artifact stats, and I already had a plan to review all the new artifacts and their stats to try and make sure that all roles and stats represented on these new tiered artifacts. Definitely will take this feedback into consideration when I do my review!!
This issue is actually a bit bigger...and there are other sides to it - this is not a gear-only issue, but more of a problem with the primary ability scores in general.
The problem is really the following: (I am using DCs as example as that's my facvourite class)
Our ability to roll initial ability scores was taken away. Each class now gets a preassigned stet of stats, only modified by racial bonuses. This is generally seen as a VERY bad move, and borders on being a dealbreaker for some people.
All primary ability scores now have the same bonuses for all classes. Maybe this simplifies some coding somewhere, but from a D&D perspective this is very bad, and when combined with the previous point the outcome is a disaster, as some classes now get wildly inappropriate stats.
DCs have traditionally had WIS as their primary stat, and CHA/STR as secondary stats. This is fine - in fact, this is exactly how it should be. The problem is that WIS/CHA/STR do not give bonuses that are relevant for clerice. The bonuses we want would be given by INT/CON/CHA, which makes ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE from a D&D perspective.
So, we are hoping that things will be reverted so that WIS gives a bonus that is relevant to Clerics, and if that is done, the pre-assigned stats are actually decent.
If that does not happen, and we are stuck with inappropriate stats, it makes no sense to have any gear that gives +WIS. Clerics would want +INT/+CON gear instead. I really hope it does not come to that. This is.....next to unthinkable for someone like me who has been playing D&D for 30+ years.
Just wanted to hop in and mention that wisdom will be updated to increase outgoing healing in this week's build. That said, if you have more general feedback on attributes and ability scores I would post in the thread: Official M16: Stats and Mechanics so that @noworries#8859 can see your feedback and answer your questions.
That's an improvement and really should be done, but I don't think that change alone will encourage players to consider WIS a proper primary stat. Unless content going forward proves to be unexpectedly healing-intensive, most players won't care.
And, of course, Arbiters utterly will not care since they'll want to focus on INT for damage.
Just wanted to hop in and mention that wisdom will be updated to increase outgoing healing in this week's build. That said, if you have more general feedback on attributes and ability scores I would post in the thread: Official M16: Stats and Mechanics so that @noworries#8859 can see your feedback and answer your questions.
.. And now for the feedback.
Okay, that's something. For Devout. Not sure why Arbiters would care that much, and for Clerics interested in switching roles it's just telling them to split their stats.
I guess that's fair. I mean, Fighter DPS will want strength and Fighter tanks will want constitution, and intelligence is a Cleric's #2 stat, but Clerics have, in the history of D&D, never needed intelligence until now.
When the game first launched the stats that a class would want in the PnP game all mattered to that same class here. Every stat had benefits, but the prime requisites of a class offered more to that class.
Now? DPS Clerics start with an 18 wisdom and we have no say-so at all in that. You get what you get and that's it. Know that you want to focus on DPS and thus will find intelligence more useful? Too bad. You start with an 18 wisdom.
Paladins start with an 8 charisma because... Well, just because. Because they are tanks or healers and those classes need constitution and wisdom. Why is charisma the dump stat instead of intelligence or dexterity? Because it is, that's why.
For a game that started out honoring the PnP roots as it did, this is a very sharp departure from that.
No example may be better, or worse as the case may be, than Warlocks. Warlocks will want a high intelligence and/or wisdom to power them in their role(s), but charisma makes no more difference to them than it does to a fighter. They may get a little boost to charisma in their starting array, I do not know, but it doesn't matter. Yeah, yeah, it may make their companions perform fractionally better than a Paladins, but it doesn't really matter. When it comes right down to it in this game Warlocks need one or two stats maxed out to operate at peak efficiency, and none of them are charisma.
In the PnP game they want Charisma above all else.
It may be easier to code, it may be easier to balance, but it doesn't do much to make these classes feel like D&D classes.
One huge question I have with this whole new attribute/ability score policy is did WotC approve this? I mean really, they own the IP and this (as well as so many other things in mod 16) seem to completely against the licensed IP's spirit. I would really be curious if anyone from WotC could take the time to explain to us why they are ok with this in particular because this ain't D&D any more.
Boudica's Sisters - A Guild For Introverts
4
Options
adinosiiMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 4,294Arc User
One huge question I have with this whole new attribute/ability score policy is did WotC approve this? I mean really, they own the IP and this (as well as so many other things in mod 16) seem to completely against the licensed IP's spirit. I would really be curious if anyone from WotC could take the time to explain to us why they are ok with this in particular because this ain't D&D any more.
I don't think anybody from WotC ever reads these forums, but I just thought of something....
A new module always means a number of brand new players - every year there is an entire batch of brand new D&D players, for example. What do you think their reaction will be when they discover that they cannot roll their ability stats?
I mean, it is as if whoever came up with this [HAMSTER] idea just does not realize how important character creation and tuning is to D&D players. I have said it before, and I will repeat myself - there was nothing seriously wrong with the ability generation and bonuses as they were before. Sure, there were some minor flaws, but the current system is just a broken [HAMSTER] in comparison.
Getting stuck with a predetermined set of stats is bad, and then discover that there is a big discrepancy between the stats you get and the stats you would actually want is even worse.
I see a few possible solutions to this issue.
Revert the whole mess, and go back to the old system. That would make most players happy.
Stick with predetermined ability scores (they are actually fine from a D&D perspective), but shuffle the bonuses around on a per-class basis, so the highest stats actually give relevant bonuses for each class, like they used to do.
Do the minimal fix which would make this (barely) acceptable, which is to have INT, WIS or CHA give a magical damage bonus, depending on class.
The worst fix: Just rearrange the basic scores on a per-class basis, so they actually make sense, even if that means ignoring decades of D&D rules and traditions.
Letting the current [HAMSTER] go live is a dealbreaker for some people.
There is an assumption among certain stat bashers that no one wants to play a sub optimal character. This is compounded by the desire to have parity and a lack of "wrong choices" put in front of players who don't know any better. A nice simple, uncomplicated, method of achieving this is having flat pro-forma base builds for each class. Cos everybody is too stupid to learn from making a HAMSTER build and have the good sense God gave little chickens and I dunno... use a HAMSTER REROLL token. it's not like they're particularly hard to come by.
So let's keep it simple eh... remove choice so you can't choose badly. (Even if you don't mind not having the absolute "optimum" set up...)
But that's not D&D... Having the CHOICE to not fit into the Min-Max "squeeze every drop of efficiency out of every point" method is what separates; My Ranger, Your Cleric, His Barbarian, Her Warlock etc etc etc, from Colonel Mustard, Miss Scarlet and Rev. Green, the Monopoloy dog and the HAMSTER LUDO counter. Flat base built, proforma characters are not "Role Playing" characters. They are playing pieces.
I for one will happily trade off a bonus to a combat stat I'll probably max with gear anyway in order to play a Charismatic Paladin, (you know... like the ones in DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS.) Or a Rogue with the intelligence to plan and pull off the high crime of stealing candy from a baby, rather than the "Neverwinter Rogue" who is too dumb to tie his boot laces without adult help.
I know all this moaning about D&D is probably annoying to whoever is trying very hard to get 6 lines to match perfectly on a "Damage over time by DPS class" graph, but since a lot of us players haven't forgotten, it might be nice if the people making the game remember that some of the stuff that is important in D&D is STILL important to people who play both the P&P version, and Neverwinter.
For some people, topping paingiver, having BiS, and Min Maxing stats and optimizing effectiveness is the reason for playing a game. For some of us, it's about creating a character (one that is more than the sum of a bunch of stats handed to us in precise order by accountants,) and keeping that character alive in a fantasy world where death waits on every corner.
You're giving us VANITY pets for crying out loud... if we want individuality, please forget the "Chihuahua of Hilarity", give us the freedom to make a character that is NOT a type set, pro forma, vanilla clone of every other character of the same class.
7
Options
silvergryphMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 740Arc User
A lot of people seem to want the added complexity of changing which stat gives Magic Damage bonus to each class. Or are suggesting the addition of an entirely new Divine Damage type with a bonus that is determined by different stats for each class. I know we used to have this in some form, but there have been a lot of code changes to move to the streamlined ability score adjustments presented in M16 that might make adding this complexity problematic at this juncture.
I'm kind of on the fence about the need for such a thing myself, but here is an idea to add this complexity without undoing the streamlining and by using ratings that are already calculated.
For Clerics, they would have something like this: "Your powers are influenced by your ability to channel Positive Divine Energy. Your Magic Damage bonus does not apply. Instead, you deal bonus damage based on your Outgoing Healing bonus." (For those who missed it, asterdahl has said that WIS is going to give a bonus to Outgoing Healing.)
Paladins would have something like this: "Your powers are influenced by the inner strength and divine authority that make you a natural leader. Your Magic Damage bonus does not apply. Instead, you deal bonus damage based on your Companion Influence bonus."
So, it would still be Magic Damage, but the source of bonus damage would vary by class. If any other external effect modifies Magic Damage it would still apply because of the damage type. The Magic Damage bonus from INT would still exist but essentially be meaningless for those classes. No rating would need to have how it is calculated changed. Both of these ratings could also influence Divinity generation for Clerics and Paladins if such an adjustment becomes necessary.
Incidentally, that idea of Companion Influence bonus being tied to leadership for Paladins makes it a nifty potential modifier for any ally buffs they retain in M16. Or any class. It might be a good way to introduce limited buffs based on Companion Influence. Maybe rename it "Ally Influence" or even "Leadership". Imagine a Bard with spells that apply his "Ally Influence" to different ratings for the party. Or Paladin Auras doing so.
There is an assumption among certain stat bashers that no one wants to play a sub optimal character. This is compounded by the desire to have parity and a lack of "wrong choices" put in front of players who don't know any better. A nice simple, uncomplicated, method of achieving this is having flat pro-forma base builds for each class. Cos everybody is too stupid to learn from making a HAMSTER build and have the good sense God gave little chickens and I dunno... use a HAMSTER REROLL token. it's not like they're particularly hard to come by.
So let's keep it simple eh... remove choice so you can't choose badly. (Even if you don't mind not having the absolute "optimum" set up...)
But that's not D&D... Having the CHOICE to not fit into the Min-Max "squeeze every drop of efficiency out of every point" method is what separates; My Ranger, Your Cleric, His Barbarian, Her Warlock etc etc etc, from Colonel Mustard, Miss Scarlet and Rev. Green, the Monopoloy dog and the HAMSTER LUDO counter. Flat base built, proforma characters are not "Role Playing" characters. They are playing pieces.
I for one will happily trade off a bonus to a combat stat I'll probably max with gear anyway in order to play a Charismatic Paladin, (you know... like the ones in DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS.) Or a Rogue with the intelligence to plan and pull off the high crime of stealing candy from a baby, rather than the "Neverwinter Rogue" who is too dumb to tie his boot laces without adult help.
I know all this moaning about D&D is probably annoying to whoever is trying very hard to get 6 lines to match perfectly on a "Damage over time by DPS class" graph, but since a lot of us players haven't forgotten, it might be nice if the people making the game remember that some of the stuff that is important in D&D is STILL important to people who play both the P&P version, and Neverwinter.
For some people, topping paingiver, having BiS, and Min Maxing stats and optimizing effectiveness is the reason for playing a game. For some of us, it's about creating a character (one that is more than the sum of a bunch of stats handed to us in precise order by accountants,) and keeping that character alive in a fantasy world where death waits on every corner.
You're giving us VANITY pets for crying out loud... if we want individuality, please forget the "Chihuahua of Hilarity", give us the freedom to make a character that is NOT a type set, pro forma, vanilla clone of every other character of the same class.
You are deeply mistaken about who asks what.
People who min maxing and pick the choice, are the first to ask for meaningful choice, if there is no 'bad' choice, how people who aim to understand the choice and optimize it, will make the 'right' one?
Choices do not have to be over 3 trees of uselessness, a meaningful choice can be done with fewer, but feats that result in the same play style, with the same results, are not an actual choice.
In any case lets not stereotype these mistaken self imagined concepts about other people. If you want more choice, good, ask for it, but if you want to throw blame or reasons or whatever, make sure your aim is true.
2
Options
theycallmetomuMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,861Arc User
There is an assumption among certain stat bashers that no one wants to play a sub optimal character. This is compounded by the desire to have parity and a lack of "wrong choices" put in front of players who don't know any better. A nice simple, uncomplicated, method of achieving this is having flat pro-forma base builds for each class. Cos everybody is too stupid to learn from making a HAMSTER build and have the good sense God gave little chickens and I dunno... use a HAMSTER REROLL token. it's not like they're particularly hard to come by.
So let's keep it simple eh... remove choice so you can't choose badly. (Even if you don't mind not having the absolute "optimum" set up...)
But that's not D&D... Having the CHOICE to not fit into the Min-Max "squeeze every drop of efficiency out of every point" method is what separates; My Ranger, Your Cleric, His Barbarian, Her Warlock etc etc etc, from Colonel Mustard, Miss Scarlet and Rev. Green, the Monopoloy dog and the HAMSTER LUDO counter. Flat base built, proforma characters are not "Role Playing" characters. They are playing pieces.
I for one will happily trade off a bonus to a combat stat I'll probably max with gear anyway in order to play a Charismatic Paladin, (you know... like the ones in DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS.) Or a Rogue with the intelligence to plan and pull off the high crime of stealing candy from a baby, rather than the "Neverwinter Rogue" who is too dumb to tie his boot laces without adult help.
I know all this moaning about D&D is probably annoying to whoever is trying very hard to get 6 lines to match perfectly on a "Damage over time by DPS class" graph, but since a lot of us players haven't forgotten, it might be nice if the people making the game remember that some of the stuff that is important in D&D is STILL important to people who play both the P&P version, and Neverwinter.
For some people, topping paingiver, having BiS, and Min Maxing stats and optimizing effectiveness is the reason for playing a game. For some of us, it's about creating a character (one that is more than the sum of a bunch of stats handed to us in precise order by accountants,) and keeping that character alive in a fantasy world where death waits on every corner.
You're giving us VANITY pets for crying out loud... if we want individuality, please forget the "Chihuahua of Hilarity", give us the freedom to make a character that is NOT a type set, pro forma, vanilla clone of every other character of the same class.
You are deeply mistaken about who asks what.
People who min maxing and pick the choice, are the first to ask for meaningful choice, if there is no 'bad' choice, how people who aim to understand the choice and optimize it, will make the 'right' one?
Choices do not have to be over 3 trees of uselessness, a meaningful choice can be done with fewer, but feats that result in the same play style, with the same results, are not an actual choice.
In any case lets not stereotype these mistaken self imagined concepts about other people. If you want more choice, good, ask for it, but if you want to throw blame or reasons or whatever, make sure your aim is true.
This is a pretty good take. If optimal DPS is X, then all routes should lead to X, but how they get there (in terms of what array of buttons you click, conceptually what happens, etc) can be different. Like, a build that runs into the middle and drops a bomb, versus a build that pulls enemies 1 by 1, those are different playstyles, but their net DPS can be similar in the end.
Feats should be "how" but the "what" should be relatively the same.
I feel a little with my CW as a puppet: 1) Ability are pre-built and the values they give are so minimal (even if the reroll option is reached - they will have minimal effect) 2) Our combined rating will fill us with all ratings valued at around 15,000 ie. that somebody split 15000x9 = 135000 ratings for me. -------------------------------------------------- So far we have set the starting field all the same. ------------------------------------------------- 3) New equipment gives us additional statistics, resp. preset - approximately 10% rating we are able to debug through enchantment (ratio 10: 1) 4) With three statistic enchantments it will be very difficult to tune because they always contain something that I don't need to debug. Two enchantment statisticians are better but I'm afraid I will eventually end up with just one statistician for power (thus reducing the effect ratio). 4) The number of values I do not influence will be increased by each additional MOD (due to a combined rating). In contrast, the space for balancing has been reduced for a very long time - we only have the option of going into power or increasing the number of defense slots to make sense 5) The number of values that I affect has decreased to an ability of approximately 4x, so the possibility of affecting the recharge speed and APgain has been removed in almost the full range. Enchantment has been reduced by about 2 ranks and its ability to adjust statics vs. equipment has dropped about 10x. A little could be fine-tuned to the new insignia ranks - but it takes a lot of time before the average player upgrades them. 6) Low Runestone ratings and equipment for companions 2x reduced the possibility of balancing over the companion. 7) Boons are nicely processed, but everyone quickly realizes that the reward of their values is for beginners and not for targeted tactics. 8) Adjusting the statistics via the "player bonus power" on the companion is not very real ----------------------------------------------- In my opinion, the MOD 16 is unnecessarily complicated in statistics and unnecessarily simplified in the feats.
Furthermore, there is a mystery that we know the values for opposing ratings of the enemy, but apparently there are some other capabilities or even directly statistics that modify these values.
There is an assumption among certain stat bashers that no one wants to play a sub optimal character. This is compounded by the desire to have parity and a lack of "wrong choices" put in front of players who don't know any better. A nice simple, uncomplicated, method of achieving this is having flat pro-forma base builds for each class. Cos everybody is too stupid to learn from making a HAMSTER build and have the good sense God gave little chickens and I dunno... use a HAMSTER REROLL token. it's not like they're particularly hard to come by.
So let's keep it simple eh... remove choice so you can't choose badly. (Even if you don't mind not having the absolute "optimum" set up...)
But that's not D&D... Having the CHOICE to not fit into the Min-Max "squeeze every drop of efficiency out of every point" method is what separates; My Ranger, Your Cleric, His Barbarian, Her Warlock etc etc etc, from Colonel Mustard, Miss Scarlet and Rev. Green, the Monopoloy dog and the HAMSTER LUDO counter. Flat base built, proforma characters are not "Role Playing" characters. They are playing pieces.
I for one will happily trade off a bonus to a combat stat I'll probably max with gear anyway in order to play a Charismatic Paladin, (you know... like the ones in DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS.) Or a Rogue with the intelligence to plan and pull off the high crime of stealing candy from a baby, rather than the "Neverwinter Rogue" who is too dumb to tie his boot laces without adult help.
I know all this moaning about D&D is probably annoying to whoever is trying very hard to get 6 lines to match perfectly on a "Damage over time by DPS class" graph, but since a lot of us players haven't forgotten, it might be nice if the people making the game remember that some of the stuff that is important in D&D is STILL important to people who play both the P&P version, and Neverwinter.
For some people, topping paingiver, having BiS, and Min Maxing stats and optimizing effectiveness is the reason for playing a game. For some of us, it's about creating a character (one that is more than the sum of a bunch of stats handed to us in precise order by accountants,) and keeping that character alive in a fantasy world where death waits on every corner.
You're giving us VANITY pets for crying out loud... if we want individuality, please forget the "Chihuahua of Hilarity", give us the freedom to make a character that is NOT a type set, pro forma, vanilla clone of every other character of the same class.
You are deeply mistaken about who asks what.
People who min maxing and pick the choice, are the first to ask for meaningful choice, if there is no 'bad' choice, how people who aim to understand the choice and optimize it, will make the 'right' one?
Choices do not have to be over 3 trees of uselessness, a meaningful choice can be done with fewer, but feats that result in the same play style, with the same results, are not an actual choice.
In any case lets not stereotype these mistaken self imagined concepts about other people. If you want more choice, good, ask for it, but if you want to throw blame or reasons or whatever, make sure your aim is true.
I'm throwing blame at the devs for making assumptions about what people want, and applying it as a constant to everyone.
I'm saying that they assume people all want the best set of options from a min max point of view, so have issued flat pro forma stat sheets on which to build a character. Because "if everyone wants to choose A because A is best, why bother having B and C in the first place?"
I know how much min maxers love to have lots of things to not choose. (Particularly when someone has blogged a build about what they should choose, and made their own choice even easier.) Just read the forums here... the delight people get from telling new or inexperienced players how, if they aren't doing something a certain, specific, way they are "doing it wrong."
But that's beside the point. I don't care why the dev's have come to this decision. So, open apology... if I hurt anyone's feelings, I apologise. If you read "stat bashers" and assumed I was talking about you... I apologise, I was talking about the stat bashers performing the overhaul.
I just want them to know that I and others (and I don't pretend to know how many) really really don't like the idea of flat stat, pro forma, class templates. Particularly when the distribution of stats is so far removed from the source material.
Okay. Copy & paste from the DnD Player's Handbook...
You generate your character's six ability scores randomly. Roll four 6-sided dice and record the total of the highest three dice on a piece of scratch paper. Do this five more times, so that you have six numbers. If you want to save time or don't like the idea of randomly determining ability scores, you can use the following scores instead: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8. Now take your six numbers and write each number beside one of your character's six abilities to assign scores to Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma. Afterward, make any changes to your ability scores as a result of your race choice.
Is it so difficult to implement something like this?
3
Options
adinosiiMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 4,294Arc User
Isn't Crit. Avoidance kind-of pointless? I mean, unless my math is really wrong, it just does not seem worthwhile to put points into it.
I would actually like to suggest boosting the Crit Severity of mobs significantly (and maybe reduce base damage across the board a bit to compensate). This would make it worthwhile to put points into this stat .... or am I wrong?
A lot of people seem to want the added complexity of changing which stat gives Magic Damage bonus to each class. Or are suggesting the addition of an entirely new Divine Damage type with a bonus that is determined by different stats for each class. I know we used to have this in some form, but there have been a lot of code changes to move to the streamlined ability score adjustments presented in M16 that might make adding this complexity problematic at this juncture.
I'm kind of on the fence about the need for such a thing myself, but here is an idea to add this complexity without undoing the streamlining and by using ratings that are already calculated.
For Clerics, they would have something like this: "Your powers are influenced by your ability to channel Positive Divine Energy. Your Magic Damage bonus does not apply. Instead, you deal bonus damage based on your Outgoing Healing bonus." (For those who missed it, asterdahl has said that WIS is going to give a bonus to Outgoing Healing.)
Paladins would have something like this: "Your powers are influenced by the inner strength and divine authority that make you a natural leader. Your Magic Damage bonus does not apply. Instead, you deal bonus damage based on your Companion Influence bonus."
So, it would still be Magic Damage, but the source of bonus damage would vary by class. If any other external effect modifies Magic Damage it would still apply because of the damage type. The Magic Damage bonus from INT would still exist but essentially be meaningless for those classes. No rating would need to have how it is calculated changed. Both of these ratings could also influence Divinity generation for Clerics and Paladins if such an adjustment becomes necessary.
Incidentally, that idea of Companion Influence bonus being tied to leadership for Paladins makes it a nifty potential modifier for any ally buffs they retain in M16. Or any class. It might be a good way to introduce limited buffs based on Companion Influence. Maybe rename it "Ally Influence" or even "Leadership". Imagine a Bard with spells that apply his "Ally Influence" to different ratings for the party. Or Paladin Auras doing so.
I... actually love this idea. In a similar vein, rogues and archers would do Finesse damage, based on Dexterity, with scrapper rangers bunched in with fighters, barbarians, and paladins (thus creating some build diversity for rangers based on what kind of combat they want to do)- Ranger magic damage should probably come from Wisdom, unless the lightning and plant effects are classified as physical damage for ease of calculating stat preference.
Okay. Copy & paste from the DnD Player's Handbook...
You generate your character's six ability scores randomly. Roll four 6-sided dice and record the total of the highest three dice on a piece of scratch paper. Do this five more times, so that you have six numbers. If you want to save time or don't like the idea of randomly determining ability scores, you can use the following scores instead: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8. Now take your six numbers and write each number beside one of your character's six abilities to assign scores to Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma. Afterward, make any changes to your ability scores as a result of your race choice.
Is it so difficult to implement something like this?
Is implementing a true rolling system Difficult? No. Balanced at all? Also no. Remember in the Baldur's Gate games, where you could end up with ability rolls with vastly different stat totals, and some of your companions were just plain worse than others based on randomly rolled stats?
Fixed, Point Buy, and Array are the only options for a multiplayer game (current mechanism is Array, just hidden behind a fake "roll" mechanic instead of being selectable from a list).
Character creation takes a WHILE, particularly for roleplayers, and sitting in front of your computer for a half hour with a calculator, hoping the RNG gods favor you with an above-average array will only exacerbate that problem.
As for the PHB array, you'll note that 5e uses a very differently bounded range of attributes than 4e does. Even if the code were rejiggered to make the game effect comparable, people WILL be upset by seeing their numbers get smaller. Not saying it's a functionally bad idea, just saying it's probably not worth the extra vitriol it will win.
There is an assumption among certain stat bashers that no one wants to play a sub optimal character. This is compounded by the desire to have parity and a lack of "wrong choices" put in front of players who don't know any better. A nice simple, uncomplicated, method of achieving this is having flat pro-forma base builds for each class. Cos everybody is too stupid to learn from making a HAMSTER build and have the good sense God gave little chickens and I dunno... use a HAMSTER REROLL token. it's not like they're particularly hard to come by.
So let's keep it simple eh... remove choice so you can't choose badly. (Even if you don't mind not having the absolute "optimum" set up...)
But that's not D&D... Having the CHOICE to not fit into the Min-Max "squeeze every drop of efficiency out of every point" method is what separates; My Ranger, Your Cleric, His Barbarian, Her Warlock etc etc etc, from Colonel Mustard, Miss Scarlet and Rev. Green, the Monopoloy dog and the HAMSTER LUDO counter. Flat base built, proforma characters are not "Role Playing" characters. They are playing pieces.
I for one will happily trade off a bonus to a combat stat I'll probably max with gear anyway in order to play a Charismatic Paladin, (you know... like the ones in DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS.) Or a Rogue with the intelligence to plan and pull off the high crime of stealing candy from a baby, rather than the "Neverwinter Rogue" who is too dumb to tie his boot laces without adult help.
I know all this moaning about D&D is probably annoying to whoever is trying very hard to get 6 lines to match perfectly on a "Damage over time by DPS class" graph, but since a lot of us players haven't forgotten, it might be nice if the people making the game remember that some of the stuff that is important in D&D is STILL important to people who play both the P&P version, and Neverwinter.
For some people, topping paingiver, having BiS, and Min Maxing stats and optimizing effectiveness is the reason for playing a game. For some of us, it's about creating a character (one that is more than the sum of a bunch of stats handed to us in precise order by accountants,) and keeping that character alive in a fantasy world where death waits on every corner.
You're giving us VANITY pets for crying out loud... if we want individuality, please forget the "Chihuahua of Hilarity", give us the freedom to make a character that is NOT a type set, pro forma, vanilla clone of every other character of the same class.
You are deeply mistaken about who asks what.
People who min maxing and pick the choice, are the first to ask for meaningful choice, if there is no 'bad' choice, how people who aim to understand the choice and optimize it, will make the 'right' one?
Choices do not have to be over 3 trees of uselessness, a meaningful choice can be done with fewer, but feats that result in the same play style, with the same results, are not an actual choice.
In any case lets not stereotype these mistaken self imagined concepts about other people. If you want more choice, good, ask for it, but if you want to throw blame or reasons or whatever, make sure your aim is true.
I'm throwing blame at the devs for making assumptions about what people want, and applying it as a constant to everyone.
I'm saying that they assume people all want the best set of options from a min max point of view, so have issued flat pro forma stat sheets on which to build a character. Because "if everyone wants to choose A because A is best, why bother having B and C in the first place?"
I know how much min maxers love to have lots of things to not choose. (Particularly when someone has blogged a build about what they should choose, and made their own choice even easier.) Just read the forums here... the delight people get from telling new or inexperienced players how, if they aren't doing something a certain, specific, way they are "doing it wrong."
But that's beside the point. I don't care why the dev's have come to this decision. So, open apology... if I hurt anyone's feelings, I apologise. If you read "stat bashers" and assumed I was talking about you... I apologise, I was talking about the stat bashers performing the overhaul.
I just want them to know that I and others (and I don't pretend to know how many) really really don't like the idea of flat stat, pro forma, class templates. Particularly when the distribution of stats is so far removed from the source material.
In a tabletop or more RPG-oriented D&D setting, I'd be 100% onboard with what you've been saying. Even in this setting I sympathize, because I do know a few players who enjoy particular feats and builds despite their niche applications, and who know that they could be doing things differently if they wanted to be more, let's say, efficient.
At the risk of repeating myself, the reason I'm still favoring the devs' changes to feats and ability scores is that I also have known many players, especially newer ones, who have experienced a great deal of unnecessary frustration because there was insufficient information in-game to let them know that they were making choices that created less effective characters. I see a lot of counter-arguments that players aren't stupid and should be allowed the freedom of trial and error, but if we follow the reasoning that only end-game number-crunchers are making a beeline towards the most effective possible builds, how do we expect these other players (the majority, I'd argue) to know that their choices are even wrong for the result they want? These players are just as likely to drop an entire class or the game as a whole, assuming that it's a fundamental issue with the product, not imagining that some choices would be so much better than others.
Ideally Cryptic could have kept the original feat trees and made compelling choices out of each of them that were also effective in gameplay, but I don't really blame them for narrowing down the field. After all, many of us have been complaining at them for years that there is a ridiculous surplus of useless feats; I just don't think we imagined that they'd axe almost all of them instead of updating them.
As for ability scores specifically, it's ironic that many of us miss being able to allocate these points now that they are generally worth much less than they were in the old system. I'd be happy if we had some discretionary points to move around to preserve that feeling of choice, but my bigger concern is what they've done to the stats themselves.
Okay. Copy & paste from the DnD Player's Handbook...
You generate your character's six ability scores randomly. Roll four 6-sided dice and record the total of the highest three dice on a piece of scratch paper. Do this five more times, so that you have six numbers. If you want to save time or don't like the idea of randomly determining ability scores, you can use the following scores instead: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8. Now take your six numbers and write each number beside one of your character's six abilities to assign scores to Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma. Afterward, make any changes to your ability scores as a result of your race choice.
Is it so difficult to implement something like this?
Is implementing a true rolling system Difficult? No. Balanced at all? Also no. Remember in the Baldur's Gate games, where you could end up with ability rolls with vastly different stat totals, and some of your companions were just plain worse than others based on randomly rolled stats?
Fixed, Point Buy, and Array are the only options for a multiplayer game (current mechanism is Array, just hidden behind a fake "roll" mechanic instead of being selectable from a list).
Character creation takes a WHILE, particularly for roleplayers, and sitting in front of your computer for a half hour with a calculator, hoping the RNG gods favor you with an above-average array will only exacerbate that problem.
As for the PHB array, you'll note that 5e uses a very differently bounded range of attributes than 4e does. Even if the code were rejiggered to make the game effect comparable, people WILL be upset by seeing their numbers get smaller. Not saying it's a functionally bad idea, just saying it's probably not worth the extra vitriol it will win.
I feel like the solution is to just use forced arrays, but to not change the effects of what the stats do from live.
Please use this thread to discuss the changes to Stats and Mechanics as well as report any issues.
So, this may seem like a stupid question, but can we get a clarification on how the "opposed rolls" of Power/HP work?
Is it like Mod 15, where Power is +% to damage, and HP is flat? Or is Power checked against the target's HP "value" and then that's used to determine some multiplier which is applied to Weapon Damage * Magnitude?
I suspect it's more similar to Mod 15, and presenting Power and Max HP as "opposed rolls" was sort of a rhetorical mixup, but wanted clarification.
My original understanding for how damage worked was that (Weapon Damage)*(Magnitude)*(1+ Other modifiers) was how your damage was calculated (assuming Defense = 0, no deflection, etc)
Please use this thread to discuss the changes to Stats and Mechanics as well as report any issues.
So, this may seem like a stupid question, but can we get a clarification on how the "opposed rolls" of Power/HP work?
Is it like Mod 15, where Power is +% to damage, and HP is flat? Or is Power checked against the target's HP "value" and then that's used to determine some multiplier which is applied to Weapon Damage * Magnitude?
I suspect it's more similar to Mod 15, and presenting Power and Max HP as "opposed rolls" was sort of a rhetorical mixup, but wanted clarification.
My original understanding for how damage worked was that (Weapon Damage)*(Magnitude)*(1+ Other modifiers) was how your damage was calculated (assuming Defense = 0, no deflection, etc)
Please use this thread to discuss the changes to Stats and Mechanics as well as report any issues.
So, this may seem like a stupid question, but can we get a clarification on how the "opposed rolls" of Power/HP work?
Is it like Mod 15, where Power is +% to damage, and HP is flat? Or is Power checked against the target's HP "value" and then that's used to determine some multiplier which is applied to Weapon Damage * Magnitude?
I suspect it's more similar to Mod 15, and presenting Power and Max HP as "opposed rolls" was sort of a rhetorical mixup, but wanted clarification.
My original understanding for how damage worked was that (Weapon Damage)*(Magnitude)*(1+ Other modifiers) was how your damage was calculated (assuming Defense = 0, no deflection, etc)
I don't see any place in that article that actually says there's a Hit Points vs. Power "opposed roll". Yes, they are sort of opposed in spirit because Power is extra damage vs. Hit Points, but Power also increases healing, so not really.
It does say, "With the change to an opposing rolls system, new stats needed to be added to act as the opposing ratings. While making these additions we also removed a few stats to improve the balance of the game.", and then it lists the Main Ratings. But it doesn't actually say everything on the list is for an opposing roll, just that this is the list of ratings and some ratings were added and removed. It doesn't even actually spell out which stats are opposed.
Everything else on the list is adjacent to a value used on an opposed roll though, so obviously they probably should have separated Hit Points and Power visually. So while I do see where you are getting that, I think maybe you are overthinking it based on an unfortunate formatting choice. Your brain must be too highly trained.
Is it possible to have some answer from DEVS about this new setup to initial STATS? Why? There is some way to change it or it is definitive?
Ability Score rolls during character creation are not coming back for M16.
There are no current plans to go back to variable ability score bonuses based on class.
Players will still have 20 ability score points that they choose where to allocate between racial choice, leveling up, and equipment.
The paladin initial ability score distribution will be looked at this week and probably adjusted some.
Doubling down on a dumb change is profoundly dumb.
Like, I totally get not wanting to let player set their ability scores will nilly and rolling, but changing away from keystat/secstat is just the dumbest change in all of mod 16.
The funny thing is, it doesn't affect *me*-a wizard-at all. Heck, since I'm an Int/Cha build, it actually HELPS since now my charisma pays into recharge speed.
But the whole system leaves a massively bad taste in people's mouths, and whoever came up with the idea should be sacked (no not really, but it definitely is a bad idea, that I've yet to hear anything even remotely approaching an explanation for why it was implemented).
6
Options
adinosiiMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 4,294Arc User
Is it possible to have some answer from DEVS about this new setup to initial STATS? Why? There is some way to change it or it is definitive?
Ability Score rolls during character creation are not coming back for M16.
There are no current plans to go back to variable ability score bonuses based on class.
Players will still have 20 ability score points that they choose where to allocate between racial choice, leveling up, and equipment.
The paladin initial ability score distribution will be looked at this week and probably adjusted some.
I am sad to hear this, because it is pretty much a dealbreaker for me.
My big issue is that as an Arbiter Cleric, I get the highest initial number assigned to WIS, but that stat is being made utterly useless, violating decades of D&D tradition, and well...when my favourite class is treated like that, my motivation for playing the game is pretty much gone.
Well, have fun, everyone. Maybe I'll check back in a year or so to see if the game is still around.
Ability Score rolls during character creation are not coming back for M16.
There are no current plans to go back to variable ability score bonuses based on class.
Players will still have 20 ability score points that they choose where to allocate between racial choice, leveling up, and equipment.
The paladin initial ability score distribution will be looked at this week and probably adjusted some.
How about Clerics? WIS adds very little, STR is nigh useless to a class with no melee attacks, which leaves CHA as the only useful stat, and it's a Secondary attribute. I'll repeat my previous suggestion of adding value to WIS while I'm here:
Current: STR: Stamina regen; Physical dmg boost CON: Max hit points / Action Point gain DEX: Crit severity / Movement speed INT: Control Bonus / Magical dmg boost WIS: Control resist / Incoming healing CHA: Companion stat bonus / Recharge speed
Proposed: STR: Physical dmg boost CON: Max hit points /Stamina regen DEX: Crit severity / Movement speed INT: Magical dmg boost WIS: Control resist / Incoming healing / Action Point gain / Control Bonus CHA: Companion stat bonus / Recharge speed
You want damage, take damage - but that's all you get. Stamina regen makes more sense in CON. AP gain adds a bit of value to WIS (and the +Control items make more logical sense there).
2
Options
theycallmetomuMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,861Arc User
Ability Score rolls during character creation are not coming back for M16.
There are no current plans to go back to variable ability score bonuses based on class.
Players will still have 20 ability score points that they choose where to allocate between racial choice, leveling up, and equipment.
The paladin initial ability score distribution will be looked at this week and probably adjusted some.
How about Clerics? WIS adds very little, STR is nigh useless to a class with no melee attacks, which leaves CHA as the only useful stat, and it's a Secondary attribute. I'll repeat my previous suggestion of adding value to WIS while I'm here:
Current: STR: Stamina regen; Physical dmg boost CON: Max hit points / Action Point gain DEX: Crit severity / Movement speed INT: Control Bonus / Magical dmg boost WIS: Control resist / Incoming healing CHA: Companion stat bonus / Recharge speed
Proposed: STR: Physical dmg boost CON: Max hit points /Stamina regen DEX: Crit severity / Movement speed INT: Magical dmg boost WIS: Control resist / Incoming healing / Action Point gain / Control Bonus CHA: Companion stat bonus / Recharge speed
You want damage, take damage - but that's all you get. Stamina regen makes more sense in CON. AP gain adds a bit of value to WIS (and the +Control items make more logical sense there).
You know if they're just so absolutely devoted to this whole ability scores give set benefits no matter the class thing-
They should just go ahead and force characters to choose a paragon path at level 1 instead of level 30, and have ability scores be set on the basis of paragon path. So when you swap from your Healer build to DPS, your ability scores change to match.
Not as good of an idea as just using the old system (which conformed to the IP they're licensing a heck of a lot better), but at least it avoids this problem of Arbiters being somewhat handicapped.
I say somewhat because I *still* have no idea what % of their damage is lost from having poor stat distribution, because the effects of ability scores are not at all obvious.
Alternate idea: JUST GET RID OF THEM ENTIRELY. If you're going to slaughter a problematic sacred cow, just go ahead and kill it off, don't bleed it to death for a decade.
2
Options
silvergryphMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 740Arc User
Is it possible to have some answer from DEVS about this new setup to initial STATS? Why? There is some way to change it or it is definitive?
Ability Score rolls during character creation are not coming back for M16.
There are no current plans to go back to variable ability score bonuses based on class.
Players will still have 20 ability score points that they choose where to allocate between racial choice, leveling up, and equipment.
The paladin initial ability score distribution will be looked at this week and probably adjusted some.
Is there any way we can get to choose our racial modifiers again? I don't know if it's technically possible. Maybe a special version of race re-roll that just takes you to ability scores and that's it? Kind of like how appearance change only takes you to that portion of character creation.
Ability Score rolls during character creation are not coming back for M16.
There are no current plans to go back to variable ability score bonuses based on class.
Players will still have 20 ability score points that they choose where to allocate between racial choice, leveling up, and equipment.
The paladin initial ability score distribution will be looked at this week and probably adjusted some.
How about Clerics? WIS adds very little, STR is nigh useless to a class with no melee attacks, which leaves CHA as the only useful stat, and it's a Secondary attribute. I'll repeat my previous suggestion of adding value to WIS while I'm here:
Current: STR: Stamina regen; Physical dmg boost CON: Max hit points / Action Point gain DEX: Crit severity / Movement speed INT: Control Bonus / Magical dmg boost WIS: Control resist / Incoming healing CHA: Companion stat bonus / Recharge speed
Proposed: STR: Physical dmg boost CON: Max hit points /Stamina regen DEX: Crit severity / Movement speed INT: Magical dmg boost WIS: Control resist / Incoming healing / Action Point gain / Control Bonus CHA: Companion stat bonus / Recharge speed
You want damage, take damage - but that's all you get. Stamina regen makes more sense in CON. AP gain adds a bit of value to WIS (and the +Control items make more logical sense there).
In case you missed it, asterdahl has said that WIS is getting a bonus to Outgoing Healing as well in the next build. So, that's something. To be honest, it looks like you are asking to move too much to a single stat.
They should just go ahead and force characters to choose a paragon path at level 1 instead of level 30, and have ability scores be set on the basis of paragon path. So when you swap from your Healer build to DPS, your ability scores change to match.
That is not a terrible idea, but think of new players making their first character suddenly presented with a choice like that. It might be kind of stressful being presented with two lists of abilities to choose from when you haven't even set foot in the game yet to see how anything works. And then there's the classes with 2 DPS paths. They probably don't need different ability scores for each.
Ability Score rolls during character creation are not coming back for M16.
There are no current plans to go back to variable ability score bonuses based on class.
Players will still have 20 ability score points that they choose where to allocate between racial choice, leveling up, and equipment.
The paladin initial ability score distribution will be looked at this week and probably adjusted some.
How about Clerics? WIS adds very little, STR is nigh useless to a class with no melee attacks, which leaves CHA as the only useful stat, and it's a Secondary attribute. I'll repeat my previous suggestion of adding value to WIS while I'm here:
Current: STR: Stamina regen; Physical dmg boost CON: Max hit points / Action Point gain DEX: Crit severity / Movement speed INT: Control Bonus / Magical dmg boost WIS: Control resist / Incoming healing CHA: Companion stat bonus / Recharge speed
Proposed: STR: Physical dmg boost CON: Max hit points /Stamina regen DEX: Crit severity / Movement speed INT: Magical dmg boost WIS: Control resist / Incoming healing / Action Point gain / Control Bonus CHA: Companion stat bonus / Recharge speed
You want damage, take damage - but that's all you get. Stamina regen makes more sense in CON. AP gain adds a bit of value to WIS (and the +Control items make more logical sense there).
With the change of Stats allocation system this would be sooooo good resolve. It would be fantastic if that come to final version of the game !! @Devs please consider this changes.
Comments
If the dev team wants to force people into being effective, I'm fine with that-but for the love of Ao, don't add this HAMSTER where suddenly clerics and warlocks all need/want high intelligence, that's profoundly wrong.
Contagion - Cleric
Testament - Wizard
Pestilence - Ranger
Dominion - Paladin
NIGHTSWATCH
One huge question I have with this whole new attribute/ability score policy is did WotC approve this? I mean really, they own the IP and this (as well as so many other things in mod 16) seem to completely against the licensed IP's spirit. I would really be curious if anyone from WotC could take the time to explain to us why they are ok with this in particular because this ain't D&D any more.
A new module always means a number of brand new players - every year there is an entire batch of brand new D&D players, for example. What do you think their reaction will be when they discover that they cannot roll their ability stats?
I mean, it is as if whoever came up with this [HAMSTER] idea just does not realize how important character creation and tuning is to D&D players. I have said it before, and I will repeat myself - there was nothing seriously wrong with the ability generation and bonuses as they were before. Sure, there were some minor flaws, but the current system is just a broken [HAMSTER] in comparison.
Getting stuck with a predetermined set of stats is bad, and then discover that there is a big discrepancy between the stats you get and the stats you would actually want is even worse.
I see a few possible solutions to this issue.
- Revert the whole mess, and go back to the old system. That would make most players happy.
- Stick with predetermined ability scores (they are actually fine from a D&D perspective), but shuffle the bonuses around on a per-class basis, so the highest stats actually give relevant bonuses for each class, like they used to do.
- Do the minimal fix which would make this (barely) acceptable, which is to have INT, WIS or CHA give a magical damage bonus, depending on class.
- The worst fix: Just rearrange the basic scores on a per-class basis, so they actually make sense, even if that means ignoring decades of D&D rules and traditions.
Letting the current [HAMSTER] go live is a dealbreaker for some people.This is compounded by the desire to have parity and a lack of "wrong choices" put in front of players who don't know any better.
A nice simple, uncomplicated, method of achieving this is having flat pro-forma base builds for each class.
Cos everybody is too stupid to learn from making a HAMSTER build and have the good sense God gave little chickens and I dunno... use a HAMSTER REROLL token. it's not like they're particularly hard to come by.
So let's keep it simple eh... remove choice so you can't choose badly. (Even if you don't mind not having the absolute "optimum" set up...)
But that's not D&D...
Having the CHOICE to not fit into the Min-Max "squeeze every drop of efficiency out of every point" method is what separates; My Ranger, Your Cleric, His Barbarian, Her Warlock etc etc etc, from Colonel Mustard, Miss Scarlet and Rev. Green, the Monopoloy dog and the HAMSTER LUDO counter.
Flat base built, proforma characters are not "Role Playing" characters.
They are playing pieces.
I for one will happily trade off a bonus to a combat stat I'll probably max with gear anyway in order to play a Charismatic Paladin, (you know... like the ones in DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS.) Or a Rogue with the intelligence to plan and pull off the high crime of stealing candy from a baby, rather than the "Neverwinter Rogue" who is too dumb to tie his boot laces without adult help.
I know all this moaning about D&D is probably annoying to whoever is trying very hard to get 6 lines to match perfectly on a "Damage over time by DPS class" graph, but since a lot of us players haven't forgotten, it might be nice if the people making the game remember that some of the stuff that is important in D&D is STILL important to people who play both the P&P version, and Neverwinter.
For some people, topping paingiver, having BiS, and Min Maxing stats and optimizing effectiveness is the reason for playing a game.
For some of us, it's about creating a character (one that is more than the sum of a bunch of stats handed to us in precise order by accountants,) and keeping that character alive in a fantasy world where death waits on every corner.
You're giving us VANITY pets for crying out loud... if we want individuality, please forget the "Chihuahua of Hilarity", give us the freedom to make a character that is NOT a type set, pro forma, vanilla clone of every other character of the same class.
I'm kind of on the fence about the need for such a thing myself, but here is an idea to add this complexity without undoing the streamlining and by using ratings that are already calculated.
For Clerics, they would have something like this:
"Your powers are influenced by your ability to channel Positive Divine Energy. Your Magic Damage bonus does not apply. Instead, you deal bonus damage based on your Outgoing Healing bonus." (For those who missed it, asterdahl has said that WIS is going to give a bonus to Outgoing Healing.)
Paladins would have something like this:
"Your powers are influenced by the inner strength and divine authority that make you a natural leader. Your Magic Damage bonus does not apply. Instead, you deal bonus damage based on your Companion Influence bonus."
So, it would still be Magic Damage, but the source of bonus damage would vary by class. If any other external effect modifies Magic Damage it would still apply because of the damage type. The Magic Damage bonus from INT would still exist but essentially be meaningless for those classes. No rating would need to have how it is calculated changed. Both of these ratings could also influence Divinity generation for Clerics and Paladins if such an adjustment becomes necessary.
Incidentally, that idea of Companion Influence bonus being tied to leadership for Paladins makes it a nifty potential modifier for any ally buffs they retain in M16. Or any class. It might be a good way to introduce limited buffs based on Companion Influence. Maybe rename it "Ally Influence" or even "Leadership". Imagine a Bard with spells that apply his "Ally Influence" to different ratings for the party. Or Paladin Auras doing so.
Champions Online Advanced Forum Search
People who min maxing and pick the choice, are the first to ask for meaningful choice, if there is no 'bad' choice, how people who aim to understand the choice and optimize it, will make the 'right' one?
Choices do not have to be over 3 trees of uselessness, a meaningful choice can be done with fewer, but feats that result in the same play style, with the same results, are not an actual choice.
In any case lets not stereotype these mistaken self imagined concepts about other people. If you want more choice, good, ask for it, but if you want to throw blame or reasons or whatever, make sure your aim is true.
Feats should be "how" but the "what" should be relatively the same.
1) Ability are pre-built and the values they give are so minimal (even if the reroll option is reached - they will have minimal effect)
2) Our combined rating will fill us with all ratings valued at around 15,000 ie. that somebody split 15000x9 = 135000 ratings for me.
--------------------------------------------------
So far we have set the starting field all the same.
-------------------------------------------------
3) New equipment gives us additional statistics, resp. preset - approximately 10% rating we are able to debug through enchantment (ratio 10: 1)
4) With three statistic enchantments it will be very difficult to tune because they always contain something that I don't need to debug. Two enchantment statisticians are better but I'm afraid I will eventually end up with just one statistician for power (thus reducing the effect ratio).
4) The number of values I do not influence will be increased by each additional MOD (due to a combined rating). In contrast, the space for balancing has been reduced for a very long time - we only have the option of going into power or increasing the number of defense slots to make sense
5) The number of values that I affect has decreased to an ability of approximately 4x, so the possibility of affecting the recharge speed and APgain has been removed in almost the full range. Enchantment has been reduced by about 2 ranks and its ability to adjust statics vs. equipment has dropped about 10x. A little could be fine-tuned to the new insignia ranks - but it takes a lot of time before the average player upgrades them.
6) Low Runestone ratings and equipment for companions 2x reduced the possibility of balancing over the companion.
7) Boons are nicely processed, but everyone quickly realizes that the reward of their values is for beginners and not for targeted tactics.
8) Adjusting the statistics via the "player bonus power" on the companion is not very real
-----------------------------------------------
In my opinion, the MOD 16 is unnecessarily complicated in statistics and unnecessarily simplified in the feats.
Furthermore, there is a mystery that we know the values for opposing ratings of the enemy, but apparently there are some other capabilities or even directly statistics that modify these values.
I'm saying that they assume people all want the best set of options from a min max point of view, so have issued flat pro forma stat sheets on which to build a character. Because "if everyone wants to choose A because A is best, why bother having B and C in the first place?"
I know how much min maxers love to have lots of things to not choose. (Particularly when someone has blogged a build about what they should choose, and made their own choice even easier.)
Just read the forums here... the delight people get from telling new or inexperienced players how, if they aren't doing something a certain, specific, way they are "doing it wrong."
But that's beside the point. I don't care why the dev's have come to this decision.
So, open apology... if I hurt anyone's feelings, I apologise. If you read "stat bashers" and assumed I was talking about you... I apologise, I was talking about the stat bashers performing the overhaul.
I just want them to know that I and others (and I don't pretend to know how many) really really don't like the idea of flat stat, pro forma, class templates. Particularly when the distribution of stats is so far removed from the source material.
Is it so difficult to implement something like this?
I would actually like to suggest boosting the Crit Severity of mobs significantly (and maybe reduce base damage across the board a bit to compensate). This would make it worthwhile to put points into this stat .... or am I wrong?
Remember in the Baldur's Gate games, where you could end up with ability rolls with vastly different stat totals, and some of your companions were just plain worse than others based on randomly rolled stats?
Fixed, Point Buy, and Array are the only options for a multiplayer game (current mechanism is Array, just hidden behind a fake "roll" mechanic instead of being selectable from a list).
Character creation takes a WHILE, particularly for roleplayers, and sitting in front of your computer for a half hour with a calculator, hoping the RNG gods favor you with an above-average array will only exacerbate that problem.
As for the PHB array, you'll note that 5e uses a very differently bounded range of attributes than 4e does. Even if the code were rejiggered to make the game effect comparable, people WILL be upset by seeing their numbers get smaller. Not saying it's a functionally bad idea, just saying it's probably not worth the extra vitriol it will win.
At the risk of repeating myself, the reason I'm still favoring the devs' changes to feats and ability scores is that I also have known many players, especially newer ones, who have experienced a great deal of unnecessary frustration because there was insufficient information in-game to let them know that they were making choices that created less effective characters. I see a lot of counter-arguments that players aren't stupid and should be allowed the freedom of trial and error, but if we follow the reasoning that only end-game number-crunchers are making a beeline towards the most effective possible builds, how do we expect these other players (the majority, I'd argue) to know that their choices are even wrong for the result they want? These players are just as likely to drop an entire class or the game as a whole, assuming that it's a fundamental issue with the product, not imagining that some choices would be so much better than others.
Ideally Cryptic could have kept the original feat trees and made compelling choices out of each of them that were also effective in gameplay, but I don't really blame them for narrowing down the field. After all, many of us have been complaining at them for years that there is a ridiculous surplus of useless feats; I just don't think we imagined that they'd axe almost all of them instead of updating them.
As for ability scores specifically, it's ironic that many of us miss being able to allocate these points now that they are generally worth much less than they were in the old system. I'd be happy if we had some discretionary points to move around to preserve that feeling of choice, but my bigger concern is what they've done to the stats themselves.
Contagion - Cleric
Testament - Wizard
Pestilence - Ranger
Dominion - Paladin
NIGHTSWATCH
Is it like Mod 15, where Power is +% to damage, and HP is flat? Or is Power checked against the target's HP "value" and then that's used to determine some multiplier which is applied to Weapon Damage * Magnitude?
I suspect it's more similar to Mod 15, and presenting Power and Max HP as "opposed rolls" was sort of a rhetorical mixup, but wanted clarification.
My original understanding for how damage worked was that (Weapon Damage)*(Magnitude)*(1+ Other modifiers) was how your damage was calculated (assuming Defense = 0, no deflection, etc)
There are no current plans to go back to variable ability score bonuses based on class.
Players will still have 20 ability score points that they choose where to allocate between racial choice, leveling up, and equipment.
The paladin initial ability score distribution will be looked at this week and probably adjusted some.
It does say, "With the change to an opposing rolls system, new stats needed to be added to act as the opposing ratings. While making these additions we also removed a few stats to improve the balance of the game.", and then it lists the Main Ratings. But it doesn't actually say everything on the list is for an opposing roll, just that this is the list of ratings and some ratings were added and removed. It doesn't even actually spell out which stats are opposed.
Everything else on the list is adjacent to a value used on an opposed roll though, so obviously they probably should have separated Hit Points and Power visually. So while I do see where you are getting that, I think maybe you are overthinking it based on an unfortunate formatting choice. Your brain must be too highly trained.
Champions Online Advanced Forum Search
Like, I totally get not wanting to let player set their ability scores will nilly and rolling, but changing away from keystat/secstat is just the dumbest change in all of mod 16.
The funny thing is, it doesn't affect *me*-a wizard-at all. Heck, since I'm an Int/Cha build, it actually HELPS since now my charisma pays into recharge speed.
But the whole system leaves a massively bad taste in people's mouths, and whoever came up with the idea should be sacked (no not really, but it definitely is a bad idea, that I've yet to hear anything even remotely approaching an explanation for why it was implemented).
My big issue is that as an Arbiter Cleric, I get the highest initial number assigned to WIS, but that stat is being made utterly useless, violating decades of D&D tradition, and well...when my favourite class is treated like that, my motivation for playing the game is pretty much gone.
Well, have fun, everyone. Maybe I'll check back in a year or so to see if the game is still around.
Current:
STR: Stamina regen; Physical dmg boost
CON: Max hit points / Action Point gain
DEX: Crit severity / Movement speed
INT: Control Bonus / Magical dmg boost
WIS: Control resist / Incoming healing
CHA: Companion stat bonus / Recharge speed
Proposed:
STR: Physical dmg boost
CON: Max hit points /Stamina regen
DEX: Crit severity / Movement speed
INT: Magical dmg boost
WIS: Control resist / Incoming healing / Action Point gain / Control Bonus
CHA: Companion stat bonus / Recharge speed
You want damage, take damage - but that's all you get. Stamina regen makes more sense in CON. AP gain adds a bit of value to WIS (and the +Control items make more logical sense there).
They should just go ahead and force characters to choose a paragon path at level 1 instead of level 30, and have ability scores be set on the basis of paragon path. So when you swap from your Healer build to DPS, your ability scores change to match.
Not as good of an idea as just using the old system (which conformed to the IP they're licensing a heck of a lot better), but at least it avoids this problem of Arbiters being somewhat handicapped.
I say somewhat because I *still* have no idea what % of their damage is lost from having poor stat distribution, because the effects of ability scores are not at all obvious.
Alternate idea: JUST GET RID OF THEM ENTIRELY. If you're going to slaughter a problematic sacred cow, just go ahead and kill it off, don't bleed it to death for a decade.
Champions Online Advanced Forum Search
Champions Online Advanced Forum Search
Champions Online Advanced Forum Search