Mayama

It would be nice if you could lock it at a specific place on screen so it always shows up for example at the top right corner.

Their are 5 people in it right now

I still think adding extra range for spells/projectiles would be a nice addition to one of the underperforming attributes.

I guess its our cultural background, show that system to someone with asian heritage and I bet that he would find it perfectly normal that physical strenght = magic power.

Maybee its because your arrogant, elitist know it all attitude mixed with a heavy dose of apocalyptic teenage angst pisses alot of people off.

So he basicaly agrees with the majority here.

If the game does not give XP for kills than their is no need to fill the map with random monsters anyway. I personaly prefer few meaningful and challenging encounters over tons of easy ones anyway.

It would basicaly make the game turn based. If it gets implemented the game NEEEEEEEEEEDS to highlight which of your characters can do a new action.

:whispers: I houseruled that. Eventually. For me at least, when I started RPG's D&D was the only game in town. Literally. I branched out to others, mostly for radically different settings--Call of Cthulhu, Paranoia, Judge Dredd, Cyberpunk 2.0.2.0, Star Wars (two different editions), a stab at Warhammer but that didn't take for whatever reason, a stab at Rulemonster... ahem, Rulemaster, but that didn't take for obvious reasons. But I always kept coming back to D&D. It was because of that wonderful, magnificent multiverse system. My Al-Qadim campaign had forays into the Inner Planes; we met some old friends from there when we went Planescape; again with a completely different-flavored thing set in a fantasy version of Warring States China on this Prime Material plane or one very like it. There was a feel of "anything is possible" that nothing before or since could quite capture. But those systems, man. AD&D was godawful in every way. :stops self before embarking on long rant: Imo D&D is something for young players that want to play something powerfull with a ruleset that supports it. Everything has a rule, the style of writing kinda suggests that rule > game master. Of course they write somewhere that the GM is always right but it kinda feels like it was made for people that want to play OP characters. Stuff like call of cthulhu, world of darkness, paranoia could be played without any rule and stats are kinda vague anyway.

I would have backed it if the concept was good, but that would have been despite the D&D, not because of it. I'm an enormous fan of the worlds of D&D--many of them, anyway--but not a fan of the systems and mechanics. I played alot AD&D back when I was young but only because our dungeon master liked it so much. I still cant get behind the design decision to tie accuracy and damage to strength.

Exactly. I'm very confused right now. I missed something... Well only if you assume that the starting value was the same. My post wasnt directed at you manutree it was directed at Stun because he troled for around 3 pages now.

OK last attempt Might starts at 1 and every points add bonuses Sword 10 damage 10 + 1 might = 11 damage 10 + 2 might = 12 damage 10 + 3 might = 13 damage 10 + 4 might = 14 damage 10 + 5 might = 15 damage 10 + 6 might = 16 damage 10 + 7 might = 17 damage 10 + 8 might = 18 damage 10 + 9 might = 19 damage 10 + 10 might = 20 damage OR The average might gives zero bonus, less substracts, more adds bonuses Sword 15 damage 15 - 4 might = 11 damage 15 - 3 might = 12 damage 15 - 2 might = 13 damage 15 - 1 might = 14 damage 15 + 0 might = 15 damage 15 + 1 might = 16 damage 15 + 2 might = 17 damage 15 + 3 might = 18 damage 15 + 4 might = 19 damage 15 + 5 might = 20 damage It is the freaking same, only writen in a different way

LOL well no. I'd want there to be a functional difference. Ok, just going off the top of my head. I believe Rogues get a 17 health per level after level 1. If we were to impose Con penalties on a rogue, then a rogue with 3 con would get a percentage of that deducted every time they level up. Same thing with Might. if the base damage on a Pike is 27-42, then someone with 3 might would do less than that with his Pike. He exactly discriped what you want, is it so hard to understand? It makes zero difference if you have a sword dealing 10 damage + might bonus or if it does 20 damage at 10 might +/- might modifier... No they cant because its mathematical the same.

Right now INT is the only real dump stat. Some builds are completly OP with very high INT like buff/heal priests but alot of builds/classes could drop it to 3 and it would not bother them. AoE increase/decrease exist outside the combat system its not something you can calculate like HP, damage, accuracy etc. making it hard to balance. The other part of INT, the duration increase feels like a all or nothing attribute. You either ignore it because you can live with the basic duration of your skills on a build with not many duration based skills or you go all in and max it out to get insane buffs. I dont have a solution for this but because the discussion is all over the place I thought it needs its own thread.

Dont know if thats actually important to do because theirs a chance that we play something that is not part of the real game.

Beside the none existing enemy AI this is the reason why it feels so mmorpg'ish

Good to know, now we can use the "you didnt even play X" argument to make all your arguments invalid

But.... But.... No bad builds! Dont you get it IT DOESNT MAKE A DIFFERENCE where you put the average. If you start with 3 and give +5% good looks for every point after that or if you start with 10 and substract 5% if its lower or add +5% if its higher doesnt make a freaking difference. Bullsh*t. If we had a system like the one Namutree suggested (where 18 = 100% increase in the benefit and 3 = 100% penalty), and we made a rogue with 3 con and 3 might, it would be a bad build. Or more relevantly, it would be just as bad a build as a fighter in BG2 who dumped his Con and Strength all the way. I dont get why some people need to spam every thread with negativity instead of posting something like "I think the attribute bonuses need tweaking" in one thread that is actually about that topic. All that fuss about a minor problem.

But.... But.... No bad builds! Dont you get it IT DOESNT MAKE A DIFFERENCE where you put the average. If you start with 3 and give +5% good looks for every point after that or if you start with 10 and substract 5% if its lower or add +5% if its higher doesnt make a freaking difference.

Ok here we go in BG2 the combat was completly broken, here is an example that doesnt use any exploit only normal use of abilites: Make a mage/fighter hyprid, cast protection from elements + protection from fire on him, also haste him and equip a ring of free action. Now run into a group of enemies and spam fireballs or any other fire spell. That gives you a durable fighter that is immun to fire, gets healed by fire damage because your fire resistance is over 100%, does massive aoe fire damage, is hasted, cant get CC'd and if the fire damage is over time he gets healed for twice the damage he would get because haste doubles regeneration. All those spells are standard, a ring of free action is easy to get.

Actually, they made a system where every stat can be dumped with no penalty at all. No, worse than that. They made a system where you can dump every stat to 3 and still receive bonuses. Dumping your Barbarian's Might to 3 will cause him to receive a +10% boost to damage and healing. Same goes with the functions of every stat. It's the casual gamer's dream system. Makes class building idiot proof. It doesnt make a difference if you have a average like 10 and substracting/adding bonuses to it and starting with 3 and only add bonuses to it. Your doom prophet like behavior because something needs number tweaking is absolutly ridiculous.

Well making mage-fighters completly OP would be "more like bg2".

All that talking about ToEE forced me to install that game again... D:

Dis. Seconded. That's why I'm not very interested in a queue at the moment. It's not about people having the choice to use it. It's about the root of the problem. Combat is too chaotic for reasons other than lack of a queue to be able to benefit from one. It's a misapplication of a solution to a tangential problem. Trust me after some time the combat stops beeing chaotic, the problem is that its hard to read because everyone stands on top of each other.

So you think: - offscreen web, offscreen cloud kill, offscreen fireball fireball fireball - enter room of a deadly mage, leave room, wait out his spells, kill him - getting tons of movement speed / actions by stacking haste spells - getting 25 charisma with rod of terror + ring of charisma - abusing double regen effect while hasted - using the guard button to shot through doors - blocking doors with eye of the wizard was fun? If you're a filthy cheater, that can't play a game without resorting to exploits. Exploit? You will most likley do most of those things in a play through unintentionaly anyway.