Dear Simu,
I am writing today to talk about shield specializations. Thank you again for adding this component to the game. It's been a great enhancement and as a customer I appreciate the ongoing development.
It seems that there are a LOT of shield specs. Maybe 33 total though not every class can get them all. Shield Focus seems to be a great category since it's a prerequisite for some other specs and also has it's own benefit. Of course you have to pick the specific shield size you want to specialization in which also limits some of your other options. This seems to arbitrarily limit one's choices. Not every character or class is going to want choice when it comes to shield size though Rogues could really take advantage of it.
Typically a rogue is going to use either a small or medium shield but they may very well want to use both. Of all classes the rogue is the one for whom "right tool for the job" is most important. At times a dagger is the right tool and at others you may want to break out the handaxe. Same with armor. A well trained rogue may want to wear robes, small shield and STEALTH for one hunting ground or plate, a bigger shield and EVASION for another.
This is they type of flexibility that SIMU should encourage. It enriches the game by adding greater choice, flexibility and style.
Please consider consolidating the four (4) SHEILD SPECILIZATION SHIELD FOCUS into one category.
Sincerely,
Wolffc3
WOLFFC3
KRAKII
Re: Sheild Focus x4
08/23/2013 12:53 PM CDT
And so far as that is concerned, there is already precedent. There are even two of them.
1) In RoleMaster you paid the skill cost for each weapon (or spellcasters paid it for each bolt/ball spell), so you trained a rank in "Dagger" at the 1HEdged cost (or "Fireball" at the Directed Spells cost). GemStone re-did that by training in the entire class of weapons, allowing use of each/all at the same time.
2) For a non-copyrighted example--which arose in the process of getting away from the copyright--the four different "Maneuvering in Armor: <class>" (Soft Leather, Rigid Leather, Chain, Plate) skills were consolidated into "Armor Use".
(Which had its own unfortunate results, like requiring that someone who wants to use only-chain or only-plate, actually be forced to progress through the lesser armor types on the way there. But that's a separate issue, mostly having to do with how good plate armor is at this point, and mostly arising from how crits are generated based on damage, which is itself a separate issue. What can I say, GemStone currently has issues within combat.)
1) In RoleMaster you paid the skill cost for each weapon (or spellcasters paid it for each bolt/ball spell), so you trained a rank in "Dagger" at the 1HEdged cost (or "Fireball" at the Directed Spells cost). GemStone re-did that by training in the entire class of weapons, allowing use of each/all at the same time.
2) For a non-copyrighted example--which arose in the process of getting away from the copyright--the four different "Maneuvering in Armor: <class>" (Soft Leather, Rigid Leather, Chain, Plate) skills were consolidated into "Armor Use".
(Which had its own unfortunate results, like requiring that someone who wants to use only-chain or only-plate, actually be forced to progress through the lesser armor types on the way there. But that's a separate issue, mostly having to do with how good plate armor is at this point, and mostly arising from how crits are generated based on damage, which is itself a separate issue. What can I say, GemStone currently has issues within combat.)
JAKKAL
Re: Sheild Focus x4
08/23/2013 05:45 PM CDT
Just like the cmans for weapon specialization, why don't you train in multiple shield focus specs if you want the option to use different shield sizes?
ISMANO
Re: Sheild Focus x4
08/23/2013 06:49 PM CDT
>A well trained rogue may want to wear robes, small shield and STEALTH for one hunting ground or plate, a bigger shield and EVASION for another.
WOLFFC3
That's the price of flexibility though.
You have the option to go about a task in multiple ways, due to TP costs, where other professions do not. With this ability, there has to be some sort of cost associated with it. Needing to train in separate Shield Focuses is one of them.
-farmer
>He's right on all counts. ~Vanah
>Farmer is 100% correct. -REIDYN
>Farmer is correct -Wyrom
>Ahh, no, you are correct - QUARTZ
WOLFFC3
That's the price of flexibility though.
You have the option to go about a task in multiple ways, due to TP costs, where other professions do not. With this ability, there has to be some sort of cost associated with it. Needing to train in separate Shield Focuses is one of them.
-farmer
>He's right on all counts. ~Vanah
>Farmer is 100% correct. -REIDYN
>Farmer is correct -Wyrom
>Ahh, no, you are correct - QUARTZ
WOLFFC3
Re: Shield Focus x4
08/23/2013 09:16 PM CDT
I completely understand what you're saying about cost vs. benefit. It's an important part of keeping game balance.
Focus does have a pretty healthy cost as is. 40 points and you can only have 200 (for a Rogue and Paladin). Two focuses would be 40% of all your shield spec points. There are also limits to what size shields you can even train in. Getting to 2x shield at cap could take a year or 10. My rogue for example is lvl 44 and will take literally YEARS for him to get to cap.
Shield specs are fun and focus isn't OP in any way.
The way it's set up I don't think it's cost effective to do two different shield focus and use different size shields. Best to just get one really nice shield and train with that. This, IMHO, is a shame because I like seeing characters that use their locker as a toolbox. It can really add to the RP of the game and should be encouraged.
>>Just like the cmans for weapon specialization, why don't you train in multiple shield focus specs if you want the option to use different shield sizes?<<
I assume you can train in multiple shield sizes though this is kind of vague:
Rogues can only train in Small or Medium Shield Focus, while Paladins can only train in Medium, Large or Tower Shield Focus. Warriors can train in any size shield.
That's from Krakiipedia. Notice it say OR not AND. Can you in fact train in different sizes?
Focus does have a pretty healthy cost as is. 40 points and you can only have 200 (for a Rogue and Paladin). Two focuses would be 40% of all your shield spec points. There are also limits to what size shields you can even train in. Getting to 2x shield at cap could take a year or 10. My rogue for example is lvl 44 and will take literally YEARS for him to get to cap.
Shield specs are fun and focus isn't OP in any way.
The way it's set up I don't think it's cost effective to do two different shield focus and use different size shields. Best to just get one really nice shield and train with that. This, IMHO, is a shame because I like seeing characters that use their locker as a toolbox. It can really add to the RP of the game and should be encouraged.
>>Just like the cmans for weapon specialization, why don't you train in multiple shield focus specs if you want the option to use different shield sizes?<<
I assume you can train in multiple shield sizes though this is kind of vague:
Rogues can only train in Small or Medium Shield Focus, while Paladins can only train in Medium, Large or Tower Shield Focus. Warriors can train in any size shield.
That's from Krakiipedia. Notice it say OR not AND. Can you in fact train in different sizes?
OM1E5GA
Re: Shield Focus x4
08/24/2013 12:12 AM CDT
<That's from Krakiipedia. Notice it say OR not AND. Can you in fact train in different sizes?>
It's prolly unfortunate wording by whoever wrote the article there. They prolly assume people will only train in one type of shield focus available to them and prefer to spend their other SHIELD points elsewhere. Neither of my rogues use shields, but when I was deciding which SHIELD maneuvers to get for my warrior I didn't see anything IG stating certain professions could only train in one of them.
Really though, I can't see where using different size shields against different opponents would be beneficial unless you were also changing your training. Using rogues as an example, most that use small shields do so because they have more dodge ranks and want to take better advantage of them where those that use medium shields have a more balanced distribution or ranks between Shield Use and Dodging (I don't know any rogues that use large or tower shields, though I'm sure there's a few out there). So unless you're 2x in shield and 3x in Dodge (which would be a huge and unnecessary investment of TPs), you prolly be losing as much or more then you gain by switching between the two (shield focus training aside).... and even then I'd guess you'd be better off sticking with a medium shield.
Starchitin
A severed gnomish hand crawls in on its fingertips and makes a rude gesture before quickly decaying and rotting into dust. A gust of wind quickly scatters the dust.
It's prolly unfortunate wording by whoever wrote the article there. They prolly assume people will only train in one type of shield focus available to them and prefer to spend their other SHIELD points elsewhere. Neither of my rogues use shields, but when I was deciding which SHIELD maneuvers to get for my warrior I didn't see anything IG stating certain professions could only train in one of them.
Really though, I can't see where using different size shields against different opponents would be beneficial unless you were also changing your training. Using rogues as an example, most that use small shields do so because they have more dodge ranks and want to take better advantage of them where those that use medium shields have a more balanced distribution or ranks between Shield Use and Dodging (I don't know any rogues that use large or tower shields, though I'm sure there's a few out there). So unless you're 2x in shield and 3x in Dodge (which would be a huge and unnecessary investment of TPs), you prolly be losing as much or more then you gain by switching between the two (shield focus training aside).... and even then I'd guess you'd be better off sticking with a medium shield.
Starchitin
A severed gnomish hand crawls in on its fingertips and makes a rude gesture before quickly decaying and rotting into dust. A gust of wind quickly scatters the dust.
CLUNK24963
Re: Shield Focus x4
08/24/2013 06:27 AM CDT
>>Can you in fact train in different sizes?
yes, warriors can train in two different shield sizes. Clunk has trained in both medium shield use (normal battle-mode) and tower shield use. Tower shield skill is prerequisite to skills related to remaining standing during attack and protecting those around him. Using a tower shield also blends well with guard duties. (some of you may have been around when Clunk takes hits directed at others)
The new shield skills have also led me to consider giving up 2x training in other skills to move toward 3x shield, to see if the old old awesome defense style Clunk of GS3 is viable again.
Clunk
(Buy your swords at CBD weapons in Zul Logoth.)
WOLFFC3
Re: Shield Focus x4
08/24/2013 09:08 AM CDT
>> Using rogues as an example, most that use small shields do so because they have more dodge ranks and want to take better advantage of them where those that use medium shields have a more balanced distribution or ranks between Shield Use and Dodging (I don't know any rogues that use large or tower shields, though I'm sure there's a few out there).<<
That's the point brother. This is an OR proposition. I want it to be an AND. Why not mix and match. The less we pigeon hole the characters the better.
Even the point you make about tower and large shields. There is no reason why rogues should be cut out of training in them. The shield sizes are detrimental to sneaking around and dodging so it's not popular on it's own. Shouldn't be a rule by SIMU though.
That's the point brother. This is an OR proposition. I want it to be an AND. Why not mix and match. The less we pigeon hole the characters the better.
Even the point you make about tower and large shields. There is no reason why rogues should be cut out of training in them. The shield sizes are detrimental to sneaking around and dodging so it's not popular on it's own. Shouldn't be a rule by SIMU though.
ISMANO
Re: Shield Focus x4
08/24/2013 02:32 PM CDT
>There is no reason why rogues should be cut out of training in them.
WOLFFC3
Rogues are designed to use medium to small shields, so they get the benefits of doing so.
Not getting shield focus isn't the same as not being able to use tower shields at all. Any rogue can use a tower shield as much as they want, they simply doesn't get the opportunity to gain this extra benefit. To me, the reasoning behind limiting rogues in this way, and others, is the same reason we have different professional TP costs for each skill, with each profession having a certain number of times to train in each skill. Things like this define each profession, and yes, limit them too.
Without these limitations, there wouldn't be separate professions, and it would be a different game.
-farmer
>He's right on all counts. ~Vanah
>Farmer is 100% correct. -REIDYN
>Farmer is correct -Wyrom
>Ahh, no, you are correct - QUARTZ
WOLFFC3
Rogues are designed to use medium to small shields, so they get the benefits of doing so.
Not getting shield focus isn't the same as not being able to use tower shields at all. Any rogue can use a tower shield as much as they want, they simply doesn't get the opportunity to gain this extra benefit. To me, the reasoning behind limiting rogues in this way, and others, is the same reason we have different professional TP costs for each skill, with each profession having a certain number of times to train in each skill. Things like this define each profession, and yes, limit them too.
Without these limitations, there wouldn't be separate professions, and it would be a different game.
-farmer
>He's right on all counts. ~Vanah
>Farmer is 100% correct. -REIDYN
>Farmer is correct -Wyrom
>Ahh, no, you are correct - QUARTZ
WOLFFC3
Re: Shield Focus x4
08/24/2013 04:32 PM CDT
>>Rogues are designed to use medium to small shields, so they get the benefits of doing so.<<
Please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think rogues get a profession bonus to shield size. They get one for hiding or attacking from hiding. They tend to use smaller shields because shields have modifiers. Not because the profession has modifiers regarding shields.
I'm not being sarcastic either. I do understand what you are saying. The costs; TP's, ambushing penalties, MAX shield ranks vs. shield spec points etc... are already creating the limit.
Full Disclosure: I'm also against the cman limits by profession. Barring just a few specific to profession identity like cutthroat, bonding and perfect self for example I think they should open cmans up to EVERY class. There's really no good reason why a monk can't learn haymaker or a ranger can't learn cheap shots.
Some of these limits are just arbitrary and diminish from the game. I can see no reason why 1 shield spec would be harmful to the RP environment, game mechanics or the spirit of gemstone.
Please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think rogues get a profession bonus to shield size. They get one for hiding or attacking from hiding. They tend to use smaller shields because shields have modifiers. Not because the profession has modifiers regarding shields.
I'm not being sarcastic either. I do understand what you are saying. The costs; TP's, ambushing penalties, MAX shield ranks vs. shield spec points etc... are already creating the limit.
Full Disclosure: I'm also against the cman limits by profession. Barring just a few specific to profession identity like cutthroat, bonding and perfect self for example I think they should open cmans up to EVERY class. There's really no good reason why a monk can't learn haymaker or a ranger can't learn cheap shots.
Some of these limits are just arbitrary and diminish from the game. I can see no reason why 1 shield spec would be harmful to the RP environment, game mechanics or the spirit of gemstone.
DOUG
Re: Shield Focus x4
08/24/2013 05:07 PM CDT
>>Some of these limits are just arbitrary and diminish from the game.
At a certain level, this is true. Yet, at another, it's not. The concept of a roleplaying game is arbitrary, and the concept of a rogue within that game is also arbitrary. In order for the profession, and the game, to be embraced they should follow sensical lines that the genre has established -- consider them gaming norms.
In those gaming norms, large shields hinder quick movements, rogues are masters of quick movements, and therefore a rogue would generally forgo anything to do with a large shield. This isn't arbitrary, except in the broader framework of the arbitrary game.
I personally don't have a significant position on the CMAN open to all discussion other than to say -- it's not as arbitrary as it may seem, even if it doesn't align with one's personal view of possibilities.
Rules are important!
Doug
At a certain level, this is true. Yet, at another, it's not. The concept of a roleplaying game is arbitrary, and the concept of a rogue within that game is also arbitrary. In order for the profession, and the game, to be embraced they should follow sensical lines that the genre has established -- consider them gaming norms.
In those gaming norms, large shields hinder quick movements, rogues are masters of quick movements, and therefore a rogue would generally forgo anything to do with a large shield. This isn't arbitrary, except in the broader framework of the arbitrary game.
I personally don't have a significant position on the CMAN open to all discussion other than to say -- it's not as arbitrary as it may seem, even if it doesn't align with one's personal view of possibilities.
Rules are important!
Doug
ISMANO
Re: Shield Focus x4
08/24/2013 05:53 PM CDT
>Please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think rogues get a profession bonus to shield size.
My comment was in reference to Rogues being able to train in those particular shield focuses, not to imply any professional bonus. There aren't any innate professional bonuses when it comes to shield as far as I/we know.
>Full Disclosure: I'm also against the cman limits by profession. Barring just a few specific to profession identity like cutthroat, bonding and perfect self for example I think they should open cmans up to EVERY class. There's really no good reason why a monk can't learn haymaker or a ranger can't learn cheap shots.
I'm also for opening up more, but not ALL, CMans to more professions. Though, probably a smaller number than you, and of a severely limited nature for pures. Magic is their domain, not physical skills, and since CMans are physical skills, I would only be in favor of (mostly new) group-oriented CMans being open to them. But that's a discussion for another folder.
>Some of these limits are just arbitrary and diminish from the game. I can see no reason why 1 shield spec would be harmful to the RP environment, game mechanics or the spirit of gemstone.
Is one specific SMan going to ruin GS? Of course not. But when you expand to the bigger picture, that same argument ("I should have X ability/skill"), can be used for a whole host of different other things. Why grant this one, and not the others? I don't see things like this as arbitrary or diminishing. Limiting? Absolutely. If staff ignores these types of limits then the game changes. It could be better, or it could be worse.
It wouldn't be the same game though.
-farmer
>He's right on all counts. ~Vanah
>Farmer is 100% correct. -REIDYN
>Farmer is correct -Wyrom
>Ahh, no, you are correct - QUARTZ
My comment was in reference to Rogues being able to train in those particular shield focuses, not to imply any professional bonus. There aren't any innate professional bonuses when it comes to shield as far as I/we know.
>Full Disclosure: I'm also against the cman limits by profession. Barring just a few specific to profession identity like cutthroat, bonding and perfect self for example I think they should open cmans up to EVERY class. There's really no good reason why a monk can't learn haymaker or a ranger can't learn cheap shots.
I'm also for opening up more, but not ALL, CMans to more professions. Though, probably a smaller number than you, and of a severely limited nature for pures. Magic is their domain, not physical skills, and since CMans are physical skills, I would only be in favor of (mostly new) group-oriented CMans being open to them. But that's a discussion for another folder.
>Some of these limits are just arbitrary and diminish from the game. I can see no reason why 1 shield spec would be harmful to the RP environment, game mechanics or the spirit of gemstone.
Is one specific SMan going to ruin GS? Of course not. But when you expand to the bigger picture, that same argument ("I should have X ability/skill"), can be used for a whole host of different other things. Why grant this one, and not the others? I don't see things like this as arbitrary or diminishing. Limiting? Absolutely. If staff ignores these types of limits then the game changes. It could be better, or it could be worse.
It wouldn't be the same game though.
-farmer
>He's right on all counts. ~Vanah
>Farmer is 100% correct. -REIDYN
>Farmer is correct -Wyrom
>Ahh, no, you are correct - QUARTZ
CAELRIC
Re: Shield Focus x4
08/24/2013 06:43 PM CDT
| Without these limitations, there wouldn't be separate professions, and it would be a different game. |
I rarely agree with Farmer, but in this instance, I fully agree with the sentiment. Each class is meant to be distinct, and while there are3 mutant builds that are outside 9of the norm (the scroll warrior and the weapon swinging sorcerer come to mind), they are never as good as the mainline, non-mutant build, nor are they as good as the other profession they are trying to emulate; in this case, a twoer shield using rogue is tryng to emulate a warrior, and while they can do it, they will not be as good as the actual warrior.
-Taakhooshi, and Me
For the Story of Taakhooshi:
http://www.gsguide.net/index.php?title=Taakhooshi
WOLFFC3
Re: Shield Focus x4
08/26/2013 10:48 AM CDT
>>I rarely agree with Farmer, but in this instance, I fully agree with the sentiment. Each class is meant to be distinct, and while there are3 mutant builds that are outside 9of the norm (the scroll warrior and the weapon swinging sorcerer come to mind), they are never as good as the mainline, non-mutant build, nor are they as good as the other profession they are trying to emulate; in this case, a twoer shield using rogue is tryng to emulate a warrior, and while they can do it, they will not be as good as the actual warrior.<<
I'm confused. You guys keep agreeing with each other about game balance and I agree too! It's really important to GS.
Is there anyway that 1 shield spec focus vs. 4 would damage game balance?
I'm confused. You guys keep agreeing with each other about game balance and I agree too! It's really important to GS.
Is there anyway that 1 shield spec focus vs. 4 would damage game balance?
ISMANO
Re: Shield Focus x4
08/26/2013 10:43 PM CDT
>Is there anyway that 1 shield spec focus vs. 4 would damage game balance?
Like I said earlier, this specific thing? No.
But when you apply that 'Why can't I learn X' across the every other profession? Yes.
If there were a more compelling reason for your suggestion, the situation would be different, at least in my eyes.
-farmer
>He's right on all counts. ~Vanah
>Farmer is 100% correct. -REIDYN
>Farmer is correct -Wyrom
>Ahh, no, you are correct - QUARTZ
Like I said earlier, this specific thing? No.
But when you apply that 'Why can't I learn X' across the every other profession? Yes.
If there were a more compelling reason for your suggestion, the situation would be different, at least in my eyes.
-farmer
>He's right on all counts. ~Vanah
>Farmer is 100% correct. -REIDYN
>Farmer is correct -Wyrom
>Ahh, no, you are correct - QUARTZ
