On the confirmed attributes for PE

[IndiraLightfoot]

Might covers damage and healing.

Constitution - stamina and health

Dexterity- accuracy

Perception - penetration and interrupt

Intelligence - area of effect and duration

Resolve - concentration

 

This is a pretty neat system, and not too far off the great one Aluminiumtrioxid summed up earlier on. I think this attribute system should work just fine, don't you?

[PrimeJunta]

Yes, yes I do. It's mechanically sound while being more relatable than the previous version. Dex, Per, and Int are a bit fuzzy, but I've no doubt they can be reinforced through non-combat activities and checks.

 

Bit of a "paging Dr. Freud" there at Perception though, but hey, we're all adults here (I think).

[IndiraLightfoot]

Here's what Josh just wrote on Concentration:

 

Concentration is similar to Concentration in 3E/3.5 (somewhat similar to Poise in Dark Souls) but it is for everyone, not just spellcasters.  Concentration prevents you from playing hit reactions when you take damage.  If you cannot maintain Concentration, you will play a hit reaction and your attack/reload/spell is interrupted.  We're still defining the system (in fact, I was messing around with the formulae before I sat down), but that's the general idea.

 

In the new scheme, Might affects damage/healing whether it's a single application or over time.  Penetration is something we may or may not use in conjunction with an inherent Penetration value on weapons and other attacks that cause damage.  I'm leaning toward "not" right now.

 

[IndiraLightfoot]

More info gleaned from Josh's replies in the New Year thread:

 

 

I see. So perhaps interrupt and conentration go hand in hand? So far, a great idea.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes.  Interrupt and Concentration are opposed.

 

 

 

 

 

Stunlocking - a viable tactic?

 

Outright stunlocking would be pretty darn hard.  The attacks that have high rates of fire (like wands and spell missiles) will likely have low base Interrupt values, so even someone with a high Perception wouldn't be likely to call a hit reaction often unless the target had a miserable Resolve.

 

 

 

 

When you're fighting one on one, sure, but if we're talking about some kind of "lone tank boss" that you gang up on with your entire party, then the odds are much higher.

 

Only in the end it's hit reaction animations, not attacking or dodging animations, that prevent a character from doing stuff.

 

At worst it would be no worse than the original BG/IWD, where pretty much every hit called a reaction.  In practice, it should never be that bad because you're making an actual check separately from being hit and if we make a "lone tank boss", that boss will likely have a gnarly Resolve specifically to avoid that situation.

 

 

 

A normal wizard with a high Might marching onto the front line to try to dish out damage and take hits like a rogue or a fighter is on a road to Crytown.  Don't get me wrong: if you want to have your wizard do some melee gish mix-ups, Might's a good stat to pump, but you still need a) to hit b) to avoid being hit and c) to roll with it f you do get hit.  Wizards are generally bad at all three of those things.  It's not an insurmountable thing, but if your wizard has a choice between casting a damaging spell (which they are accurate/good at) or swinging a mace while standing toe-to-toe with a barbarian (which they are not good at), it's usually going to be more advantageous use of time to do the former.

 

 

 

 

One of the advantages of having different attributes governing physical and magical accuracy/damage, apart from important RP reasons, is to be able to fine-tune balance between physical and magical attacks.

 

If all damage is affected by Might and all accuracy by Dexterity, you can't adjust attribute-enhancing spells/talents/items with specifically physical or magical damage/accuracy in mind.

 

As a designer, why would I want to?  If someone wants to play a traditional wizard, they'll bump Int and have big AoEs and long effect durations, which is cool and beneficial.  If someone wants to make a muscle wizard, they can bump Might.  If they don't like the idea of having a high Might wizard, there are five other stats for them to bump for their benefit.

 

Tuning is easier when there are fewer/less diverse input sources.  If Might is the attribute that affects damage for everyone, it's much easier for me to calculate how that feeds into the system than if every arbitrary type of attack/damage has its own attribute that affects it.

 

On the bright (much brighter, IMO) side, if you do bump your Int or Resolve, you're still getting a very real benefit out of doing so.  A spellcaster with a high Int has impressively large AoEs -- heck, even a barbarian's Carnage is impressively large with a high Int -- so you will wind up affecting more people and probably doing more net damage (or granting more people bonuses for longer) overall.

 

the only thing i am still concerned about is whether improving might over all other attributes is still a no-brainer. that matters more to me than whether my wizard uses his muscles to be mighty or uses his brain.

 

That is a matter of tuning and overall impact.  Just saying "Might affects damage" seems pretty compelling, but if I say, "Each point of Might adds 0.5% to Damage" that might be less valuable to players than each point of Constitution adding +10% to your Stamina and Health -- it doesn't/it won't, but that's just to illustrate the point.

 

Everyone wants to do or heal more damage if they can, but everyone also wants to score more hits than misses, wants to be able to take hits, wants to interrupt enemy attacks, wants their effects to be big and have long durations, and wants to be able to resist being interrupted.  I'm not under any illusions that this will be perfectly, objectively balanced system, but I believe people will be able to make a lot of different and interesting builds by emphasizing different aspects of their characters.

 

 

 

He will also be good at walking on suspended ropes and moving large rocks.

 

Wizard with high Intellect and Perception: "Hey look, I have huuge fireballs (sadly I need a few of them to kill a rat), but I *am* able to interrupt the rat's attack pretty often!"

 

Please look at the character sheet in this update.  The listed character has a 13 Might, granting +26% to Damage.  Let's assume you're Pro Mighty and have an 18 Might.  That's +36%.  Or you're an Ordinary Joe with a 10 Might, which is +20%.  Let's say a normal Fireball does 5-30 damage.  Pro Mighty does 6.8-40.8.  Ordinary Joe does 6-36.  Ordinary Joe does not need multiple fireballs to kill a rat because his average damage is 21 vs. 23.8.

 

Of course, these aren't the final values for the attribute modifiers, but proportion of advantage is important.

 

Resolve is used in situations where the character's intensity, presence, or believability are the deciding factors.  E.g., mental intimidation, inspirational leadership, a well-acted lie.  Intellect is used for convincing people through logic, either persuasion or obfuscation.  You could use Intellect to make a compelling case for something or you could use it to present a plausible (but made-up) scenario to explain yourself out of trouble.  Strength is used for outright physical bullying and intimidation.  E.g. picking people up, smashing things, imposing yourself, etc.

 

Wizard with high Might (Strength) and Dexterity: His fireballs will disintegrate enemies as they deal exceptional damage and are very accurate.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Sorry for the mess above. Apparently, I exceeded the number of quoutes allowed, so I had to rip up the quotes and remove some of our good forumites' questions, so it looks a bit messy and confusing. At least I tried. I should have split the posts up.

Edited January 15, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Does Resolve still influence status effects?

[tajerio]

Does Resolve still influence status effects?

 

It would appear not--looks like that moved over to Intellect.

[Sabotin]

I don't know how 4e dnd handles the stats, but those sort of remind me of the Neverwinter MMO.

 

I wonder how the point buy is handled though, it seems some stats have diminishing returns (% ones) and some do not (those for opposed rolls).

 

By the way, what happened to Fort./Ref./Will. They're not mentioned, yet they sort of coincide with the stats. But that might also just be due to the class.

 

One thing though, I am very weary of the interrupt mechanic, due to how it affected DA2. It heavily skewed the balance to favor offense. While not really stunlocking it was reducing the damage (since it often got interrupted) by a lot, making it the much better choice. This might have been also affected by other factors like fast repositioning and telegraphed attacks, but still...

[Mor]

This is a pretty neat system, and not too far off the great one Aluminiumtrioxid summed up earlier on. I think this attribute system should work just fine, don't you?

It's off by a margin of two new mechanics(penetration and interrupt/concentration) and one that didn't work, making most of the previous thread irrelevant, which is why my initial reaction wasn't pretty.

 

Anyway, I think the new system is more plausible(?) in the sense that I don't feel like I need to rationalize some aspect of it(like int before hand), it makes more sense in its effects grouping and overall it offers pinch of new and uncertainty that will make character creation more exciting to me  

 

The only thing that I don't like, even hate is the name "Might" especially its shorthand "Mig"   

 

[IndiraLightfoot]

Yea, that abbreviation comes across as a Russian fighter jet, and I didn't say the fit was template-tight, hehe!

 

But Might, I can see that being used for healing as well, and Intelligence used for extending a barbarian's Cleave, sure. It's not too far out.

[WorstUsernameEver]

I didn't really participate in the attribute discussion much before, so I haven't really had the time to read the in-depth analysis of the earlier breakout, but I don't mind the current stat distribution, though I'm concerned about two things (note: I use "stat" and "attribute" pretty much interchangeably):

 

1) Stamina and Health have been grouped again. With the previous stat breakdown, if you didn't want to spend a boatload of points on two stats to have a tank, you had to prioritize between short-term and long-term. Currently you simply pump CON and you're good to go (they're even affected in the same way by the stat).

 

2) Resolve seems to be the only stat, together with Dexterity, that only has one effect on your derived attributes. And while it's difficult to say without seeing its implementation, it sounds like having an average Resolve might be perfectly enough for most characters (I'm hoping I'm way off here, but that's the vibe I'm getting).

 

Were it for me, and I'm probably not considering a lot of factors, I'd add some measure of Stamina bonus to Resolve to make it a more attractive stat, and make the Stamina bonus of Con less prominent. This way Con would still be a very attractive attribute, but if you wanted the complete package you'd have to put some points into Resolve too, even if you don't have problems with Concentration.

[IndiraLightfoot]

And a minor thing that has been discussed in the New Year thread; a name change from Might-MIG to Power-POW would probably sit better. 

[JFSOCC]

I'm very curious what resolve does outside of combat, as well as the other stats.

I'm also curious if any stat governs skillpoints, I'm guessing not.

Edited January 15, 2014 by JFSOCC

[WorstUsernameEver]

I'm very curious what resolve does outside of combat, as well as the other stats.

I'm also curious if any stat governs skillpoints, I'm guessing not.

Resolve is used in situations where the character's intensity, presence, or believability are the deciding factors.  E.g., mental intimidation, inspirational leadership, a well-acted lie.  Intellect is used for convincing people through logic, either persuasion or obfuscation.  You could use Intellect to make a compelling case for something or you could use it to present a plausible (but made-up) scenario to explain yourself out of trouble.  Strength is used for outright physical bullying and intimidation.  E.g. picking people up, smashing things, imposing yourself, etc.

I have no idea about skillpoints, but if I'd have to guess I'd say that no, and I actually doubt attributes will influence skills in general, at least to the degree they do in D&D.

[Nonek]

I'm happy with them, but I was happy with the older iteration as well and foresee no problems playing with either.  Of course they're not ideal, but unless you design your own system nothing is, and they certainly beat 2nd edition AD&D. For instance I can't see the sense in physical might governing spell damage, but it's not something that will unduly phase me.

[Labadal]

Might could be called Soul.

 

My fear is that Might might(pun not intended) become a stat that many players will prefer. It offers both healing and damage bonus. That seems like a stat that I'd put lots of points in if I was making a tank/healer hybrid. It doesn't mean every player is going to create that type of character, but the benefits could make players more inclined to go with such a build.

[Rabain]

I think Resolve will prevent Might from being pumped for a tank/healer.  Without cheating you can't really pump all stats.  If you are on the front line getting hit all the time, being able to cast spells isn't going to really help if you get interrupted all the time due to a low Resolve. As a tank you'll want some decent Constitution score and as a caster you'll want a decent Int value...can't have everything!

 

Might is fine as a description of the stat, just the short version Mig is odd sounding.  Given the amount of space on the character sheet they could just use the full word for all the stats.

 

It will really depend on Int I think for casting if Might becomes overpowered.  If the AoE range is decent without a big Int score you could pump Might for damage and still get a decent hit out of an AoE spell.  If your AoE covers one enemy and 2yds around him with a mediocre Int then I think casters will want Int.

 

As for healing, I thought we were still on the "no traditional healing spells" model?  If that is the case there isn't much to worry about with regard to Might and Healing, healing could just be things like paladin abilities that buff stamina for a short period. 

 

Correct me if I'm out of date on anything...or just plain wrong.  I can't really see the downside to the current system considering the developers are the ones designing the encounters, they can make it work.

[Sabotin]

If each point in attack moves the 5/45/45/5% curve for miss/graze/hit/crit by 1% then your damage gain is higher than 2% if you're below enemy deflection or lower if you're above enemy deflection. Not counting DT.

 

Looking at the dispersal of offensive stats I would say that a little bit of everything would be optimal. Which makes me believe that class abilities and talents will be determining which way to go. I hope we'll be able to see all of the possible skills somewhere at character creation or in a manual, to help decide.

[rjshae]

I have been wondering whether the 'Healing' aspect of Might is the Stamina recovery rate during (and immediately after) combat?

 

They probably picked 'Mig' because it is consistent with the other abbreviations. Plus 'Mgt' sounds like management.

[JFSOCC]

From the other thread:

I'd like to see resolve influencing more than just concentration (not getting interrupted every time you're hit.)

A person with a high resolve would keep going despite setbacks or obstacles. So, maybe something which allows you to last longer? Resolutely keeping walking while you're tired, getting back up after being knocked down. Less fatigue over time? More stamina regain between combats? maybe decreases duration of negative effects?

that last one would make it a nice counter to high intelligence opponents.

[Lephys]

I've come to realize that my main concern with an all-encompassing Might is that it will dilute the potential for things like scripted interactions and dialogues.

 

Like I said in the update thread, I'd rather play a game in which whether I'm punching a wall or melting a sword with magic could actually produce different results in something like an intimidation attempt. As opposed to "*Might check:* ... Well, you vaguely exhude power, and the other person just knows you're really powerful, no matter the specifics, and is quite afraid now. Because power."

 

It's really not a problem in relation to combat, BUT, it's still somewhat of a freebie for that Wizard who runs out of spiffy spells. It's still more the principle of the thing than a super huge problem.

 

I get that splitting the "Magic potency" aspect to a different stat (I'd go with Resolve, if I had to pick, especially now that it doesn't affect other offensive things, like AoE range and/or spell/effect duration) has adverse side-effects, as well.

 

If you've built your Wizard (just the stereotypical example for magic-vs-strength capabilities) to be Accurate (high DEX) and powerful with magic (high Might), he's AUTOMATICALLY accurate and powerful with a sword, too. It's not about "Oh no, now he's a Warrior!". But, that aspect of a Wizard build is just... free. I mean, slap some plate on him, and you've got yourself a contingency plan. One of those foes break through the ranks and charge your Wizard? He can thwack that thing for 10 damage, instead of 5. He may not be as good as another class, but he's better than a less-Mighty Wizard. And what did he have to spend to get like that? Nothing. There's no trade-off.

 

It's not that he's uber-McFisticuffs now. It's that he gets two aspects for the price of one. And the only reason for it is "It's easier to just have that one stat, mechanically." Which IS a valid reason. But, I just mean that there's no reason that makes that supposed to happen. The reason isn't "Because Wizards are SUPPOSED to be more damaging with swords when they're magically potent! 8D!" or anything of that nature. There's no reason for that effect. It's a side-effect.

 

And, like I said, it manifests a lot more in what you can and cannot do with non-combat interactions with Might. What could've been a bunch of various situations is now just "Might." It's like picking a lock and jumping a gap with the same skill. "Well, that could've been different depending on your character, but now it's just the Doing Stuff skill."

 

*le shrug*

[Silent Winter]

I'm as fine with this one as I was with the last one - if it works well and is balanced in game, then it's great.

'Might' - like others, I'd prefer a better shortname than 'Mig' - Power and Pow are ok (though 'Pow!' with the exclamation reminds me of old TV-series batman, complete with mental sound-effect )

It still doesn't make sense from the point of view of bows and guns (NB: Unless the bow is made to your personal draw-weight+length, it's not going to be optimal and you can't put more strength into a bow than it has - put in too little strength and it just doesn't work).

Perhaps an aspect of 'Might' in PE is the use of your soul-power to enhance projectiles *shrug*.

 

That's nitpicky though, and as long as it's a balanced system that's fun to play then I'll roll with it.

 

Resolve - I like the suggestion of adding Stamina bonus to that - I liked that Health and Stamina were separate before - a fighter who could keep going in any given fight but would need to rest more often vs. a fighter who went down a little more easily but didn't need to rest as much so could keep on through a group of fights.

Again, that's not a major gripe or anything and it can make sense to have them together.  Would just be nice to see each stat having 2 dependencies - call me OCD

[Lephys]

^ I thought the same thing -- about health and stamina being separated -- at first. But now, when I think about it...

 

Look at the different ends of the spectrum:

 

If you have 10 Stamina, and 100 Health, how useful is that health, really, if you're 7 times more likely to not-"survive" (stay above 0 Stamina) a single fight, anyway? I mean, you can make it through more fights without having to rest somewhere, but that doesn't help you actually make it through those fights.

 

Then, the opposite... 10 Health, 100 Stamina. Well, that's obviously pointless. You can't even use the whole stamina pool before you're dead. So, that means the minimum health would be, what, 25? For 100 Stamina to actually be usable? And that's still with absolutely no room for Stamina regen; even if you take 50 damage, then get back up to 100 Stamina in the same battle, you could still only take 50 more damage before you died.

 

So, that's the minimum, and I don't really know what the opposite threshold of feasibility would be, but, that doesn't leave a whole ton of room for benefit from the variations. Not to mention, you're never going to rest with part of your party, and not with the other part. In that regard, it's a bit like passive move speed; If one person can run 1.4 times the speed of everyone else, then you're just going to move that person less often so everyone still moves as a group. Likewise, when 4 people get down to 10 Health, the fact that that one guy still has 40 isn't really going to make you say "Let's just NOT rest, then! 8D!".

 

*shrug*. It could still be interesting, but I don't know that there's much of a feasible range for Stamina versus Health values.

[Sensuki]

I still think it could be slightly better, but it is better than before. Here is my suggestion.

If any more criticism is wanted regarding the character attributes I'm still seeing a little bit of a problem with the Perception attribute.

 

I like Might, Dex, Con, Int and (maybe) Resolve, but Perception seems a bit off.

 

Here are the issues I see (this may just be me not fully understanding but anyway)

 

Perception and Dexterity both raise Reflex Defense.

 

Dexterity gives you accuracy (always very good, on every character).

 

Perception gives you Penetration and Interrupt. If Penetration is staying, these are both once again reliant on the fact that you have to actually hit (Accuracy). Does Interrupt count on grazes? (I assume not, or at least, at a reduced amount) Because once again, the combat stats of the Perception attribute are highly reliant on the Dexterity attribute. It kind of seems like a similar situation to the last setup (but not as bad as the last Perception).

 

In order for Perception to be useful, you still need a high Dexterity as well.

 

Numbers aside, I can see Perception being useful for one or two characters - it would be beneficial to have a character with max Perception to be able to interrupt enemy spells and whatnot. Could be melee or ranged, with a fast and slow attacking weapon depending on the unit (Bow & Crossbow or maybe Pike & Maul). And depending on whether Penetration is kept it might be alright in a couple situations with slashing/piercing damage dealing characters as well, the penetration value could make a sword or axe more viable vs armor, depending on the math between higher might +dam and perception +pene).

 

So I dunno, maybe that's acceptable, maybe it isn't.

 

I know that the PE design philosophy likes mirrored mechanics, but perhaps Concentration (or Resolve) could square off against Bonus Damage (Might, which is importantly intuitive) for the purposes of determining whether a hit reaction is played or not and have something else on Perception?

 

I know I keep crying "Attack Speed", but with the right math it could work. Move Accuracy to Perception (also intuitive as hand-eye coordination comes from the brain as well as muscle) and put Attack Speed on Dexterity ?

Make it so that max Dexterity negates (or nearly makes up for) the action speed penalty to the heaviest armor (ie the max amount is the same - 20 Dex = +30% (1.5 per point)).

 

(for the record, that's probably not the best or only solution, just an example of one)

Edited January 16, 2014 by Sensuki

[Adhin]

@Lephys: I agree, mostly. The only thing I could really throw out as a counter point for the sake of argument or whatever would be that in DnD there is no attribute that makes your spells more damaging. It's entirely left up to feats. For a wizard INT provides 'more spells'. I don't think they're tying 'anything' like that to attributes (but they maybe). That's part of the reason (outside of literally requiring 19 int for 9th lvl spells in 3E) to max out INT is... well, more spells is always better.

 

Anyway in this example of INT is always better your mage will have longer lasting and area effects. Personally I just don't like the word might as an attribute but I kind of like the difference. If you play a pure might based wizard your not hitting as much (or potentially as much), your buffs/debuffs don't last as long but you do more damage. Your fireball is a smaller but more intense flame.

 

The other thing, and I doubt they actually have this set in stone, but there's no negative to there attribute? I mean 10 is 'average'. But that's also 20% dmg in the current example. So say that fireball does 10-30 dmg base, an 'average' strength mage (which are absurdly common in dnd) would be rocking 12-36 dmg base with out pumping strength. Getting it to 18 is just an extra 16%, or 13.6-40.8. That's a 1.6-4.8 difference. That's extremely minor... actually makes me wonder how big of a difference the duration and wider radius will play. In fact they sound SO minor that it seems like the RP side will matter more then the actual math side of things.

 

Which just leads me back to being super bummed at a stat being named Might. Cause its just kinda a ****ty general name for 'stuffs'. Would prefer strength effecting magic dmg then having it renamed to might but in the end it wont matter to much. My Mage's, for the most part, wont be jacking up might anyway. I'm probably gonna focus on INT and Resolve, cause a tiny bit more dmg on a fireball just doesn't matter to me to much. I'm sure there will be talents that are better suited to that.