163 réponses à ce sujet

[WebShaman]

Well, it is the comparison that sort of hurts, I guess. 3.5 Ranger just gets more.

Note that I do like the Ranger in NWN, btw.

[WebShaman]

Yeah, 3.5 rules are pretty out there. No doubt about it. Don't get me started about NWN2. Though I do like the Party possession system.

I prefer Pathfinder, myself.

[WebShaman]

Pathfinder NWN fer teh win!!!!!

[Magical Master]

Curious what people think about the following quote (from World of Warcraft):

We want to focus the talent trees towards your chosen style of gameplay right away. That first point you spend in a tree should be very meaningful. If you choose Enhancement, we want you to feel like an Enhancement shaman right away, not thirty talent points later. When talent trees are unlocked at level 10, you will be asked to choose your specialization (e.g. whether you want to be an Arms, Fury or Protection warrior) before spending that first point. Making this choice comes with certain benefits, including whatever passive bonuses you need to be
effective in that role, and a signature ability that used to be buried deeper in the talent trees. These abilities and bonuses are only available by specializing in a specific tree. Each tree awards its own unique active ability and passives when chosen. The passive bonuses range from flat percentage increases, like a 20% increase to Fire damage for Fire mages or spell range increases for casters, to more interesting passives such as the passive rage regeneration of the former Anger Management talent for Arms warriors, Dual-Wield Specialization for Fury warriors and Combat rogues, or the ability to dual-wield itself for Enhancement shaman.

The initial talent tree selection unlocks active abilities that are core to the chosen role. Our goal is to choose abilities that let the specializations come into their own much earlier than was possible when a specialization-defining talent had to be buried deep enough that other talent trees couldn’t access them. For example, having Lava Lash and Dual-Wield right away lets an Enhancement shaman feel like an Enhancement shaman. Other role-defining examples of abilities players can now get for free at level 10 include Mortal Strike, Bloodthirst, Shield Slam, Mutilate, Shadow Step, Thunderstorm, Earth Shield, Water Elemental, and Penance.

Basically, Blizzard decided to do the equivalent of giving Shadowdancers HiPS at level 1...but then mandating they take Shadowdancer for the next 10 levels.  They thought having HiPS made it feel like you were playing a Shadowdancer sooner and that was an important feeling to have...but realized that allowing anyone to take 1 level of Shadowdancer for it would be problematic.

So, using the HiPS for Shadowdancer as an example (since that seems to be a focus), which idea do people prefer and why?

1. Unlimited HiPS at level 1 but a mandated x levels in the class.

2. Unlimited HiPS at level x.

3. Limited uses of HiPS that scales with level progression, up to unlimited uses at level x.

x would probably be somewhere between 5 and 10 in this case.

Modifié par Magical Master, 23 juillet 2011 - 05:10 .

[Elhanan]

Personally, I believe that HiPS should be a Feat available for anyone that meets prereqs to be agreed upon in the game, as I dislike PrC;s as a rule. The prereqs should be somewhat more difficult to gain, and possibly aquired only between 11th+ Lvl. IMO.

That said, HiPS does have a standard in place and should be allowed in the game as is. The problem I have seen discussed the most is spamming of the ability in m/p, so perhaps this should be limited by the Techies as a patch, and eliminated as an item effect.

True Seeing seems to operate more powerfully than the rules intended, and should be restricted again by the Techies in some agreed upon matter.

[ffbj]

A number of fixes to hips involve a cool down period so you can't spam it. I put it on a item, a cloak, so if you want to use it it is rather limited x/times per day, and you can't be wearing your +3 cloak of fortification at the same time. Though I did give it some extra hide.
The WoW approach is ok I suppose since they do see it as a problem, basically they just reverse the process since you will be required to level up in that class, though it seems a bit bass akwards to me.

[WebShaman]

I personally hate the WoW method - it is soley geared for a MMO type of gamestyle.

I do not like that type of gamestyle.

DA, and DA2 have really gone in this direction, and I don't like that. 4ed went in that direction, and I don't like that either.

I intensely dislike "cooldown" type of abilities. Too much like WoW MMO stuff.

I would prefer to see abilities like HiPS, Dev Crit, etc, to be X/Day abilities, with increases in uses tied to levels taken in whatever classes that use it as a main ability.

Chalk me up as Old School here. I want my D&D back! Long live Pathfinder!

I do sort of hear what Elhanan is saying, though. But leaning too much towards just Feats is going in the WoW MMO tree-style stuff, IMHO. I tend to like the Feat, Ability, Skill thing that D&D had going (and that Pathfinder uses).

[Gregor Wyrmbane]

Magical Master wrote...

So, using the HiPS for Shadowdancer as an example (since that seems to be a focus), which idea do people prefer and why?

1. Unlimited HiPS at level 1 but a mandated x levels in the class.

2. Unlimited HiPS at level x.

3. Limited uses of HiPS that scales with level progression, up to unlimited uses at level x.

x would probably be somewhere between 5 and 10 in this case.

Since HIPS is only a problem during PvP, and I dislike PvP and rarely engage in it, I don't believe it needs to be changed at all. On servers where PvP is prevalent the staff can add scripting to "fix" HIPS as they feel necessary. If balance is the goal, then True Seeing should also be "fixed", since it is much more powerful than HIPS. 

As has already been pointed out, HIPS isn't a feat that you can select at character creation, but requires a substantial investment in skill points and feats on the part of the character for at least 7 levels to achieve.  That first level of SD isn't a gimme, you have to earn it.

[WebShaman]

HiPS is NOT just a problem during PvP - it is also a headache for those developing Mods and PWs. Accounting for HiPS is horrid when attempting to create challenging encounters.

[Elhanan]

WebShaman wrote...

I personally hate the WoW method - it is soley geared for a MMO type of gamestyle.

I do not like that type of gamestyle.

DA, and DA2 have really gone in this direction, and I don't like that. 4ed went in that direction, and I don't like that either.

I intensely dislike "cooldown" type of abilities. Too much like WoW MMO stuff.

I would prefer to see abilities like HiPS, Dev Crit, etc, to be X/Day abilities, with increases in uses tied to levels taken in whatever classes that use it as a main ability.

Chalk me up as Old School here. I want my D&D back! Long live Pathfinder!

I do sort of hear what Elhanan is saying, though. But leaning too much towards just Feats is going in the WoW MMO tree-style stuff, IMHO. I tend to like the Feat, Ability, Skill thing that D&D had going (and that Pathfinder uses).

I have not seen or played WoW (nor played a game of 4E which seems based on such MMO's at a glance), but I cannot fault placing a cooldown on HiPS so peeps are not trying to play Nightcrawler simply because these sources may use it also. The cooldown need not be an eternity, but should suggest that once exposed, the cloak of stealth is not so easily regained.

As for my notion of Feat related, and using the current SD model, I would simply ask the prereqs be Dodge, Mobility, and add five ranks to the Skills already listed to push min lvl to 12th. If one prefers the PrC method, I would suggest the same alteration to prereqs.

And I may have to chase down this Pathfinder rules set, even though I no longer run any PnP.

[Gregor Wyrmbane]

WebShaman wrote...

HiPS is NOT just a problem during PvP - it is also a headache for those developing Mods and PWs. Accounting for HiPS is horrid when attempting to create challenging encounters.

That may be, WS, but the huge majority of people still involved in this game aren't builders or scripters. They're just players. And from a players perspective, the only time HIPS is an issue is during PvP. 

I don't know how difficult it is to "account" for HIPS, but one of the servers I've played on found a pretty simple way to deal with it. In places they didn't want PC's to get around the difficulty by using HIPS, or stealth in general, they just gave the NPC's True Seeing, or an insane amount of points in Spot. 

You hear a lot of clamor over HIPS because the way it's implemented in NWN allows it to be abused, but I don't see it as any more abusable, or hard to deal with, than spamming Knockdown. Again.... from a players perspective, that's only a problem during PvP.

[Shadooow]

Magical Master wrote...

1. Unlimited HiPS at level 1 but a mandated x levels in the class.

2. Unlimited HiPS at level x.

3. Limited uses of HiPS that scales with level progression, up to unlimited uses at level x.

x would probably be somewhere between 5 and 10 in this case.

I prefer default way of HIPS working. IMO peoples who says its too imbalanced in PvP has actually no idea what is PvP about, and I dont know about any other PvM issue.

The only issue is, that it can be used to many exploits like attack with two weapons, HIPS, change the weapons order and attack again without need to wait for next round and so on. And in the no True Seeing behavior it has been stated that the HIPS can allow to disappear even without any hide/ms skill (though i never was able to proof this statement).

But in the end, for totally random persistent world or singleplayer, there are no issues with HIPS at all. Its mainly players who has been killed with other SD player who complains on this. And thats no reason.

Modifié par ShaDoOoW, 24 juillet 2011 - 05:23 .

[WebShaman]

It may be that builders and scripters are in the minority - despite that, they are the ones who are creating adventures for all those others. And doing encounters accounting for HiPS is a headache.

A cooldown does solve this, as would an X/Day sort of thing.

[Kail Pendragon]

How does an inquiry about what people think of multiclassing turn into a discussion about HiPS is beyond me

[Kail Pendragon]

Lowlander wrote...

WebShaman wrote...

It may be that builders and scripters are in the minority - despite that, they are the ones who are creating adventures for all those others. And doing encounters accounting for HiPS is a headache.

A cooldown does solve this, as would an X/Day sort of thing.

HiPS spammers are irrelevant to module designers the same way that people who pop out the console to give themselves unlimited gold/uber weapons are also irrelevent.

Designers can't waste their time worring about what cheaters/exploiters/spammers will do. Their feedback/complaints are meaningless. Modules are designed for those who are trying to play clean and fair.

Which in SP is everyone who simply plays since there is no cheating, no unfairness nor "uncleaniness" in SP.

[Kail Pendragon]

Lowlander wrote...

Kail Pendragon wrote...

Lowlander wrote...
Designers can't waste their time worring about what cheaters/exploiters/spammers will do. Their feedback/complaints are meaningless. Modules are designed for those who are trying to play clean and fair.

Which in SP is everyone who simply plays since there is no cheating, no unfairness nor "uncleaniness" in SP.

Which if your recall from the previous discussion, your opinion was counter to all of the module developers who joined the discussion. They actually design their modules for the people who do play clean.  It is the only way they can design, because you can cheat in countless ways, there is simply no way to account for it.

Everybody in SP plays clean. So module designers do not design the module for those that play clean, they design it and balance it according to their tastes. Period.

[Elhanan]

Lowlander wrote...

Sure Kail. Then lets just say their "taste" doesn't include console jockeys/exploiters/HIPS spammers.

The point was that they don't really have sweat HIPS spammers any more than they have to sweat console jockeys. It simply doesn't enter the equation for module design.

Evidently it does for some, and not all those agreeing with your POV.

For me, the reason HiPS comes into a discussion of m/c issues is in that not classes are well designed, and some present the SD as an example (and I hold the 3E Ranger). If however, HiPS were a Feat available to any class that could meet the prereqs, and a fix were made for spammage, that this would offer a solution.

[Shadooow]

I really dont understand the point of changeing the HIPS into general feat. As was already said, since its only SD feature feat it has some downsides. Making the general feat from it, removed most if not all of them.

[Kail Pendragon]

Lowlander wrote...

Sure Kail. Then lets just say their "taste" doesn't include console jockeys/exploiters/HIPS spammers.

The point was that they don't really have sweat HIPS spammers any more than they have to sweat console jockeys. It simply doesn't enter the equation for SP module design.

HiPS spamming probably enters the equation of some designers; I guess there is some module out there with HiPS restrictions implemented. Gear often enough gets stripped from the character in SP modules. Rest restrictions are implemented, lvl caps are implemented, denying the monk WIS bonus to AC is implemented or disabling Dev Crit, or denying skillpoint saving etc. So, some module builders do go lengths to take in account some possible player behaviours which would result in a perceived unbalanced gaming experience. And all is just a way for the module creator to say "look, I designed this module to be played and enjoyed the best, IMO, with these "rules" and within these boundaries. If you step out of those do not hold me responsible if your gaming experience sucks".

On a general level, well, I can easily concur that console users are not factored in the design choices of the module builder same as a lot of behaviours which cannot really be controlled by the module designer at all.

But all of this is really OT and has little to do with like/dislike of build optimization through free multiclassing which is what Grom asked about. So HiPS (whicxh simply started as an example of a bonus obtained with one level of a class/PrC, Grom could have mentioned Monk Wis AC, or druid enhanced summons and AB bonus in mnatural areas, etc.) and module designing apart, what do the forumers here think of multiclassing?

[Elhanan]

ShaDoOoW wrote...

I really dont understand the point of changeing the HIPS into general feat. As was already said, since its only SD feature feat it has some downsides. Making the general feat from it, removed most if not all of them.

At a glance, the only penalty I see that my suggestion removes is the 3rd class penalty, and the suggested 5+ higher ranks required for skills would prevent anyone from gaining this before aquiring double-digit lvls.

And by making HiPS more available to all classes, it seems to remove the desire to add it to some designs like the 3.5 Ranger. If anyone wishes to make such a Stealthy build, they could; more versatility for all.

But I am biased; dislike PrC's and still loathe 2E kits.

Modifié par Elhanan, 25 juillet 2011 - 06:27 .