Previous
I'm reading his complaint as, not that slots will be generated at all, but that when you compare them to spell slots, spell slots are a tradeoff between having a spell, or a feat. Whereas these would simply be a choice between X or Y feat.
Power creep could be a valid concern.
Pants.
KROONERMANREVENGE
ILLIENA
Re: Shield Hindrance
02/24/2013 04:49 PM CST
> I'm reading his complaint as, not that slots will be generated at all, but that when you compare them to spell slots, spell slots are a tradeoff between having a spell, or a feat. Whereas these would simply be a choice between X or Y feat.
Could make it a choice between a stance point or a feat. Remove automatic stance points, but make buying them back a way to spend the feats.
Could make it a choice between a stance point or a feat. Remove automatic stance points, but make buying them back a way to spend the feats.
SHADOWCHIEF3
Re: Shield Hindrance
02/24/2013 04:59 PM CST
If armor / defensive feats were based on anything it should be on defending not circle. Also, If this were to be released than it should never be a crazy amount and you should only be able to gain about the same feat amount as extra stance points currently do. Otherwise everybody and their brother will be running around with most of the feats that would be relevant in most situations, plus, its already hard enough to kill folks at level and this wouldn't help that mess out at all.
I think weapon feats should also work like this. Have a small set amount that can be gained and pick and choose what and how you want your character to be specialized. Probably the same number based on masteries as with defending, though, maybe slightly less because there is ranged / melee mastery that would probably grant per category.
Magic feats currently go with spell slots and therefor you should have the opportunity to get more, though, in my opinion they could take away that aspect and allow feat gain on some other skill like your guilds primary magic skill. It would give the skill meaning besides the ability to cast spells to a higher degree so that would give more meaning to the primary magic skill.
One more thing. With all this talk about feats... what about survival skillset? In my opinion the survival skillset would suck featwise. I mean, I wouldn't mind some stealth feat, evasive feat, perception and what not but after that theres not much to look up to. A feat for foraging? first aid? athletics? No thanks. That's just my opinion i'm sure some people would enjoy those feats but most of the feats i'd want to be getting would be armor / weapon which i'm tert in :(
Also I'm a necromancer so there's a high probability that after the preview period I will be able to get all my guilds spells, and all the feats because we have so little spells in the first place, so I guess I can't complain about that. I just think perhaps it should be changed also if the other categories of feats are set at a lower amount. Feats should be extra goodies that you pick and choose from here and there not a staple that everybody will have a huge amount of, that just hurts the point of having them in my book.
I think weapon feats should also work like this. Have a small set amount that can be gained and pick and choose what and how you want your character to be specialized. Probably the same number based on masteries as with defending, though, maybe slightly less because there is ranged / melee mastery that would probably grant per category.
Magic feats currently go with spell slots and therefor you should have the opportunity to get more, though, in my opinion they could take away that aspect and allow feat gain on some other skill like your guilds primary magic skill. It would give the skill meaning besides the ability to cast spells to a higher degree so that would give more meaning to the primary magic skill.
One more thing. With all this talk about feats... what about survival skillset? In my opinion the survival skillset would suck featwise. I mean, I wouldn't mind some stealth feat, evasive feat, perception and what not but after that theres not much to look up to. A feat for foraging? first aid? athletics? No thanks. That's just my opinion i'm sure some people would enjoy those feats but most of the feats i'd want to be getting would be armor / weapon which i'm tert in :(
Also I'm a necromancer so there's a high probability that after the preview period I will be able to get all my guilds spells, and all the feats because we have so little spells in the first place, so I guess I can't complain about that. I just think perhaps it should be changed also if the other categories of feats are set at a lower amount. Feats should be extra goodies that you pick and choose from here and there not a staple that everybody will have a huge amount of, that just hurts the point of having them in my book.
ISHARON
Re: Shield Hindrance
02/24/2013 05:15 PM CST
>>Kroonermanrevenge: I'm reading his complaint as, not that slots will be generated at all, but that when you compare them to spell slots, spell slots are a tradeoff between having a spell, or a feat. Whereas these would simply be a choice between X or Y feat.
For magic feats, I just think of it as having X slots that I can spend on Y abilities, not that I am choosing spells at the expense of feats or vice versa.
There's no reason that skillset feats have to be purchased at the expense of some other currently existing ability. Already the lore feats (crafting) are just choices between X or Y technique. (If there are more feats than you can learn, you the "cost" is in how you want to prioritize.)
Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall rank!
For magic feats, I just think of it as having X slots that I can spend on Y abilities, not that I am choosing spells at the expense of feats or vice versa.
There's no reason that skillset feats have to be purchased at the expense of some other currently existing ability. Already the lore feats (crafting) are just choices between X or Y technique. (If there are more feats than you can learn, you the "cost" is in how you want to prioritize.)
Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall rank!
REASONMJ
Re: Shield Hindrance
02/24/2013 05:20 PM CST
>>Power creep could be a valid concern.
Power creep is definitely a valid concern (and this seems to be what Kodius is most concerned about), but the Armor vs Magic feats discussion is just plain whining. Who cares if Magic Feats are a tradeoff between spells and feats, but Armor Feats would be given for "free" without having to trade in anything? Every skillset should be interesting and compelling, and right now the Armor skillset is flat out boring and could definitely use some new features like Feats to spice things up a bit. The way Magic Feats or Lore Techniques are set up is completely irrelevant to how Armor Feats ought to work - it's completely different case and needs to be treated as such.
The fact that there is nothing to "trade off" when selecting Armor Feats just shows how boring and neglected the skillset is, and how badly something like Feats is needed. However, there is definitely the problem that even though Armor skills are boring, they are still are very powerful now. So probably the only way you can implement new Feats would be to take away many of the things that currently exist and turn them into feats (plus also making new ones). If balanced properly, you could set it up where everyone could choose to buy back all the things they currently have now (where paladins have much more than traders/barbarians/rangers who have much more than everyone else) or could choose to give up abilities you currently have in order to focus on things that aren't currently available. It would be difficult to balance properly, but in theory it could definitely work
Apu
_
Respect. Integrity. World Domination.
https://sites.google.com/site/apucorpdr/
Power creep is definitely a valid concern (and this seems to be what Kodius is most concerned about), but the Armor vs Magic feats discussion is just plain whining. Who cares if Magic Feats are a tradeoff between spells and feats, but Armor Feats would be given for "free" without having to trade in anything? Every skillset should be interesting and compelling, and right now the Armor skillset is flat out boring and could definitely use some new features like Feats to spice things up a bit. The way Magic Feats or Lore Techniques are set up is completely irrelevant to how Armor Feats ought to work - it's completely different case and needs to be treated as such.
The fact that there is nothing to "trade off" when selecting Armor Feats just shows how boring and neglected the skillset is, and how badly something like Feats is needed. However, there is definitely the problem that even though Armor skills are boring, they are still are very powerful now. So probably the only way you can implement new Feats would be to take away many of the things that currently exist and turn them into feats (plus also making new ones). If balanced properly, you could set it up where everyone could choose to buy back all the things they currently have now (where paladins have much more than traders/barbarians/rangers who have much more than everyone else) or could choose to give up abilities you currently have in order to focus on things that aren't currently available. It would be difficult to balance properly, but in theory it could definitely work
Apu
_
Respect. Integrity. World Domination.
https://sites.google.com/site/apucorpdr/
NEELD
Re: Shield Hindrance
02/24/2013 07:21 PM CST
<<and right now the Armor skillset is flat out boring and could definitely use some new features like Feats to spice things up a bit.
+1.
Madigan
+1.
Madigan
DAENAR-DR
Re: Shield Hindrance
02/24/2013 08:04 PM CST
I just think it's funny that small shields in 2.0 were King because it was a % modifier to evasion. Now it's a % modifier to shield.... which is the exact same effect just with shield intead of evasion.
So why would anyone use a large shield now?
So why would anyone use a large shield now?
DR-KODIUS
Re: Shield Hindrance
02/24/2013 08:16 PM CST
Because they protect better than small shields, especially versus ranged combat? Large shields suffer a bit at melee - but still protect better than a small shield would assuming the tier of the shield is the same. They just do better against ranged combat.
"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
KROONERMANREVENGE
Re: Shield Hindrance
02/24/2013 08:30 PM CST
>I just think it's funny that small shields in 2.0 were King because it was a % modifier to evasion. Now it's a % modifier to shield.... which is the exact same effect just with shield intead of evasion.
Bucklers were also a medium shield template wrongly put into the small shield category, so everyone and their mother was getting all the awesome of medium shields arm worn, for the penalties of a small.
So it was bjorked.
Pants.
Bucklers were also a medium shield template wrongly put into the small shield category, so everyone and their mother was getting all the awesome of medium shields arm worn, for the penalties of a small.
So it was bjorked.
Pants.
DAENAR-DR
Re: Shield Hindrance
02/24/2013 08:58 PM CST
>> Because they protect better than small shields, especially versus ranged combat? Large shields suffer a bit at melee - but still protect better than a small shield would assuming the tier of the shield is the same. They just do better against ranged combat.
Well Traim ran some pretty extensive tests and at least for a tertiary armor, that doesn't seem to be the case. (Large being better against ranged attacks.)
My assumption was that if the shields were comparably "even tier" that pulling out a large shield versus ranged would help quite a bit. But that was not the case in his tests.
Well Traim ran some pretty extensive tests and at least for a tertiary armor, that doesn't seem to be the case. (Large being better against ranged attacks.)
My assumption was that if the shields were comparably "even tier" that pulling out a large shield versus ranged would help quite a bit. But that was not the case in his tests.
MOCKERJB
Re: Shield Hindrance
02/24/2013 09:32 PM CST
I tried bigger more protecting shields too (using warrior shield, and a covelite large shield, scrapping the low hinderance idea) and ranged smacked me even worse. I think it's just a thing where terts are not supposed to use bigger shields, kind of like we're not supposed to use heavy armor. The weird thing is, that should appraise in the total hinderance. If medium shield is that much worse for me, it doesn't make sense that it's virtually unnoticeable in the effective hinderance appraisal. That's what makes me thing something is just bugged, for me, or for the shields in question, or something.
DR-KODIUS
Re: Shield Hindrance
02/24/2013 09:49 PM CST
Well sure, there might be bugs. I'm just talking about the intended design. This weekend I managed to get Combos 3.0 out to Plat and fixed a number of combat bugs... hopefully getting those to Prime tomorrow night. Just haven't had a chance to look at the shield thing yet.
Shields and weapon balance/power are likely to be next on my list.
"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Shields and weapon balance/power are likely to be next on my list.
"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
BEVERAGEK
Re: Shield Hindrance
02/24/2013 10:14 PM CST
>>This weekend I managed to get Combos 3.0 out to Plat and fixed a number of combat bugs... hopefully getting those to Prime tomorrow night.
Can't wait to try Combos :D
Also appreciate you looking into the balance of weapons and such :)
~ Leilond
http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h307/ss1shadow/Leilond_Progression.jpg
Can't wait to try Combos :D
Also appreciate you looking into the balance of weapons and such :)
~ Leilond
http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h307/ss1shadow/Leilond_Progression.jpg
MOCKERJB
Re: Shield Hindrance
02/24/2013 10:14 PM CST
Thanks Kodius, and I apologize if it comes across as accusatory when I post things like that. It's just very hard sometimes to tell the difference between what's intended and what's not, especially when we're operating ignorant of the behind the curtain stuff, and have limited data experience. For all the poking at different things I've personally been part of, I have complete confidence in you guys to address the valid things we bring up, where they are actually valid, knowing what you know.
GORTEOUS
Re: Shield Hindrance
02/25/2013 12:50 AM CST
>> I just think it's funny that small shields in 2.0 were King because it was a % modifier to evasion. Now it's a % modifier to shield.... which is the exact same effect just with shield intead of Evasion.
Small shields weren't king... I used a Skirmisher Shield from the time they were released. Much better choice for an armor secondary. Big problem was that Medium shields could not be made for so long that they weren't worth using.
IM: Dannyboy00001111
"Fool proof system do not take into account the ingenuity of fools, nor the power of numbers."
Small shields weren't king... I used a Skirmisher Shield from the time they were released. Much better choice for an armor secondary. Big problem was that Medium shields could not be made for so long that they weren't worth using.
IM: Dannyboy00001111
"Fool proof system do not take into account the ingenuity of fools, nor the power of numbers."
BINU
Re: Shield Hindrance
02/25/2013 01:23 AM CST
Traim, there was something I noticed about your tests that you may want to look into. You tested the small shield as arm worn and the other 2 as held and are comparing the results. I know you're armor tert and can't use the bigger shields as arm-worn, but I think you should do the same test with the small shield being held and compare that to the bigger shields.
The only way to do the other side of the test is to find a Paladin with a similar spread of evasion and shield skill to what you have and have them test with all shields being arm-worn.
Binu
The only way to do the other side of the test is to find a Paladin with a similar spread of evasion and shield skill to what you have and have them test with all shields being arm-worn.
Binu
NEELD
Re: Shield Hindrance
02/25/2013 12:19 PM CST
It will almost be impossible (maybe in Test?) to find a paladin with a similar evasion/shield set up. The skillset are opposite between a MM and a paladin at least with regard to those two skills.
I am happy to test. Traim and I are both on M'riss, so we just need to find someone to shot at us (which shouldn't be hard).
Madigan
I am happy to test. Traim and I are both on M'riss, so we just need to find someone to shot at us (which shouldn't be hard).
Madigan
