Mod 6 constitution contribution to HP

denvald · March 2015

Posting for those who aren't following every post in the official threads and because I think this really needs to go trough so I'm posting it here for discussion, because it's not allowed to discuss it in the official thread.

denvald wrote: »

Feedback: HP constitution contribution

So in my earlier post I mentionned HP gained from constitution is very underwhelming right now, I went on preview to show you guys how much of underwhelming I meant. The problem is the constitution gives HP from your characters base HP and has no effect on gear HP, whilst more than half of my current HP comes from gear it means my constitution isn't contributing to half of my HP, literally

The First two pictures are lv 70 mod 6 and two pieces of elemental fire (so there's another 20k missing from gear + enchants I don't have yet.)

These two are mod 5 (Live) wizard at level 60 at 17.5k GS

67k vs 64k and 30.5k vs 33k

In the first case I was missing 2 pieces of gear from elemental fire gear, which is roughly 20k more HP, so for testing's sake let's make it 87k and 84k because that's what it'll be when you gear up at 70. So that means 8 point of con contribute to about 3% of my total HP. For 8 points of Con the stat shows +16% because it's 2% per Con points, we're actually getting 3% of our HP from these 8 points of Con.

In the second scenario we're talking more of 8-10% for 6 points of Con, which is two less than the first example. The game stats simply note +12% HP, this is vaguely more true here than it is for the second one right?

This is what I mean by underwhelming, constitution on preview feels useless, and I dont think it should be this way.

Discussion open, this was tested with a CW, how do you guys feel about your HP in mod 6 as the other classes ?

mehguy138 · March 2015

My thought is that Con should give 2% increased overall HP if it's not the main nor secondary attribute and 4% if it is. It would also help to balance HP between tanky classes and strikers.

Specification:

if a CW with 20 Con gets 20,000 HP from gear, the result will be
20,000+20,000*0.2=24,000 HP;
if a SW with 20 Con gets 20,000 HP from gear, the result will be
20,000+20,000*0.4=28,000 HP.

Not a very big difference but still.

burkaanc · March 2015

so my Paladin getting some 50k hp from gear(epic l70) @ 30 con would get 50+50*0.8 = 90k hp(+ the feat that increases effectiveness of con), that might be a bit too high, but con should add more either flat hp - 1600(its about as much as 1% to stats) or 1600 for non con classes and 3200 to con classes

ladysylvia · March 2015

Easy answer: Con only buff the base/leveling HP you have. No buff to gear/enhancement/feat/skill HPs.
The only buff to total HP are feats like +x% HP(the GF have one).
Else the Con is just a gimmick for those, who think it 'buff' any hp...

This is one major reason why the balance between tanky/hp-classes and non tanky/'squishy' classes is so broken.
Achieving with 11 Con + all Gear vs. 27 Con + all Gear + feats is a fight like 120k hp vs. 133k(and the feat is +7k giving)...

voltomey · March 2015

So that means Con will be a wast of space in the new Mod even for GF unless its for the action point gains

katbozejziemi · March 2015

Light gear should not give as much HP as heavy gear.

Squishy classes should not have the same base HP as tanky classes. (because they ****ing don't in the PnP game,. hello d4 vs d10 hit die)

There, problem solved.

denvald · March 2015

I was referring to the idea that stats give flexibility in DnD. If my wizard decides that 30 constitution is a good idea he's gunna get 10 hp /HD which is literally twice as much as his base d4. So even if my wizard for example has low base hp in NW I was expecting that cranking up his CON would do something, I mean more than 3-4k HP out of nearly 100k. to achieve high con you sacrifice DPS it makes sense that it's worthwhile in the end, give 4 times the amount which then becomes 16k out of 100k for 8 points of Con, and then we're starting to get somewhere... However with each expansion it's susceptible to have this problem again, so perhaps simply reworking the stat to account for gear HP or something alike would be better.

Because currently the meager 3k HP for 8 points of con is very underwhelming.
I only covered Constitution but feats(Toughness) and some other things like metallic dragonborn races which also work this way, I think they need attention too

fenrir4life · March 2015

If they are worried about excessive rate of growth (which is a concern, given how much HP there is on gear), they could always have CON contribute less to HP from gear than it does to base HP, but having it contribute nothing at all to gear HP is misleading(and frustrating- HP is still the most efficient survival stat, and it makes sense that if you want to make you HR or TR, say, a bit crunchier, you'd stat them for a bit more CON, even at the expense of DPS stats. Basing CON benefits only off of base HP punishes that choice, effectively making for fewer "right" ways to play- which is bad for the game.)

ayroux · March 2015

fenrir4life wrote: »

If they are worried about excessive rate of growth (which is a concern, given how much HP there is on gear), they could always have CON contribute less to HP from gear than it does to base HP, but having it contribute nothing at all to gear HP is misleading(and frustrating- HP is still the most efficient survival stat, and it makes sense that if you want to make you HR or TR, say, a bit crunchier, you'd stat them for a bit more CON, even at the expense of DPS stats. Basing CON benefits only off of base HP punishes that choice, effectively making for fewer "right" ways to play- which is bad for the game.)

Yes but the same can be said about defensive enchants.

As a GWF I can put 1 point into "STR" which gives me 1% damage or I can put 1 point into CON which also gives me about 400-600 HP (depending on feats).

Well at 60 this made sense since it was 167 power = 1% damage thus (167%4= 668 HP) meaning it was ROUGHLY a wash. I could either build tankier via base stats OR base gear.

NOW, unfortunately they have nearly FORCED our hand. I can put 1 point in STR and get my 1% damage which equates now to 400 Power. This 400 Power though is worth 1600 HP. I still only get maybe 600 HP per Con point though. So what is EVERYONE going to try and do? Build their gear as HP/tanky as possible and go full damage stats.

I just wish it was more of a trade off than it is. I mean based on ROUGH math: 400/167 = 2.39. So Maybe at 70, they should be DOUBLING the effectiveness of Con to atleast make it in the ballpark of "options".

denvald · March 2015

ayroux wrote: »

Yes but the same can be said about defensive enchants.

As a GWF I can put 1 point into "STR" which gives me 1% damage or I can put 1 point into CON which also gives me about 400-600 HP (depending on feats).

Well at 60 this made sense since it was 167 power = 1% damage thus (167%4= 668 HP) meaning it was ROUGHLY a wash. I could either build tankier via base stats OR base gear.

NOW, unfortunately they have nearly FORCED our hand. I can put 1 point in STR and get my 1% damage which equates now to 400 Power. This 400 Power though is worth 1600 HP. I still only get maybe 600 HP per Con point though. So what is EVERYONE going to try and do? Build their gear as HP/tanky as possible and go full damage stats.

I just wish it was more of a trade off than it is. I mean based on ROUGH math: 400/167 = 2.39. So Maybe at 70, they should be DOUBLING the effectiveness of Con to atleast make it in the ballpark of "options".

Math is a way of life, thanks for the mathematical input, was too lazy to do it myself lol

ndiov · March 2015

Aaaand my con belt is a pointless. At least its only blue.

suicidalgodot · March 2015

ndiov wrote: »

Aaaand my con belt is a pointless. At least its only blue.

At least you get some RP back when you recycle it into your new arti-belt :^/

...silver linings.

denvald · March 2015

the main problem caused by this is the very little gap of HP between non tanky and tanky classes

suicidalgodot · March 2015

denvald wrote: »

the main problem caused by this is the very little gap of HP between non tanky and tanky classes

...which would enhance the gap caused by AC.

So, with less DR gain from Defense due to lower stat effects, and that enhancing of DR generated by armour, this _might_ turn out quite balanced...

animalust · March 2015

int eh case of the SW, HP will need to be more that Doubled what is gained from CON. what is gained is only like 5k, acceptible in current Live server where 45k HP is considered alot, bu tnot in mod 6, where 10k HP is considered normal for almost every single class, tnak or cannon..

Classes that use HP as a secondary stat such as GWF and SW< should have that HP Gain maybe trippled to keep in line with Mod 6 changes.

suicidalgodot · March 2015

animalust wrote: »

int eh case of the SW, HP will need to be more that Doubled what is gained from CON. what is gained is only like 5k, acceptible in current Live server where 45k HP is considered alot, bu tnot in mod 6, where 10k HP is considered normal for almost every single class, tnak or cannon..

Classes that use HP as a secondary stat such as GWF and SW< should have that HP Gain maybe trippled to keep in line with Mod 6 changes.

Point taken.

Thought crossed my mind: Maybe, as armors are class specific, too, this _might_ be taken care of weighting the armor boons towards even more +HP on the Con-primary/-secondary classes...

katbozejziemi · March 2015

Instead of adding ridiculous amounts of HP to gear, they should increase the base class HP, which in turn would increase the bonus CON gives.

klangeddin · March 2015

1) CON and Toughness feat stacking should be multiplicative and it should work with HP from gear and buffs as well.
2) HP from gear of tank classes should be higher than the rest.

That's it, really. This would probably also make less painful those crazy damage numbers in level 70 epic dungeons. Probably.

sangrine · March 2015

Cryptic wants level 60 gear to become obsolete.
If it's possible to have medium to high HP without level 70 gear, then many people will continue to use level 60 gear for the 4/4 bonus.

osterdrache · March 2015

denvald wrote: »

the main problem caused by this is the very little gap of HP between non tanky and tanky classes

NO!
It is not.

And to the other people who think they are so clever about DnD background:

Neverwinter is an adaption of the 4E rules, where "hit dice" does not exist. Actually the gap of hitpoints between tanks and non tank classes is very small. Beeing a tank class is not definied by having alot more hitpoints as it was in previews DnD editions (where a low level mage could be HAMSTER one shot by a CR1 monster).

Btw: "tanks" HAVE more hp based on CON. That was introduced in mod4. So please can you all stop your false and biased arguments?
Thx ^^

mirrorballs · March 2015

ladysylvia wrote: »

Easy answer: Con only buff the base/leveling HP you have. No buff to gear/enhancement/feat/skill HPs.
The only buff to total HP are feats like +x% HP(the GF have one).
Else the Con is just a gimmick for those, who think it 'buff' any hp...

This is one major reason why the balance between tanky/hp-classes and non tanky/'squishy' classes is so broken.
Achieving with 11 Con + all Gear vs. 27 Con + all Gear + feats is a fight like 120k hp vs. 133k(and the feat is +7k giving)...

Good point.

A good example would be some TR builds and its effects. Often some people in the forums complain about TRs as if we all have 60~70% deflection chance. In reality, a full-deflect build TR in PvP is very rare, and the probability of someone meeting this kind of deflection is close to zero. You could run a hundred games against all premade-level teams, and the chances are you'd not meet one TR player who is set up that way.

The reason is this: technically, it is possible to reach base 60~70% deflection with a TR. But this is possible with only one race, with a very specific build, and the price of such build is basically something like 12 CON at best. In this modern day of NW PvP, premade level fights run with at least 40k HP. A full deflect build has at best, something like 24k HP.

Now, why do I mention this, is because that even it is rare, there actually are some people who make up all the lack of HP with gear. The reason the full-deflect TR build is so rare, is because gearing up this build takes around twice as much more investment in terms of AD/RP than your usual "24k GS" setup, and realistically speaking, it's basically that much more expensive than your normal BiS build.

However, like I said, there are some people who actually do have that much gear, and though they are rare, their TRs have 60~70% base deflection, and basically the same amount of HP as any other builds -- around 40~42k HP. Basically armed to the teeth with absolute max-level BiS gear from head to toe, all with HP supplements, and 12 CON doesn't make any difference. It's still around similar HP in the end.

Less HP through gear, more HP through base attributes. I think this is the right way to go.

katbozejziemi · March 2015

osterdrache wrote: »

NO!
It is not.

And to the other people who think they are so clever about DnD background:

Neverwinter is an adaption of the 4E rules, where "hit dice" does not exist. Actually the gap of hitpoints between tanks and non tank classes is very small. Beeing a tank class is not definied by having alot more hitpoints as it was in previews DnD editions (where a low level mage could be HAMSTER one shot by a CR1 monster).

Btw: "tanks" HAVE more hp based on CON. That was introduced in mod4. So please can you all stop your false and biased arguments?
Thx ^^

Wizard has 4 HP per level, fighter has 6. According to you 50% is "very small difference" (not counting the base which fighter would have like double the wizard's as well).

By the way, good job on not reading anything that has been posted in this thread.

warpet · March 2015

Con should work on all hp not just base and it should be2%per point on classes where is con main atribute and 1.5%where is secondary

Mod 6 constitution contribution to HP

Comments