Jump to content

Major Issues with Current Attribute System


Recommended Posts

The stated purpose of the current approach to attributes is to eliminate "dump stats." I believe that the current approach has not only failed at making every attribute equally important for every class, but has also made certain stats mandatory for all classes.

 

Issue One: There are still dump stats, and there will always be, and perhaps there should always be.

 

It is practically impossible to eliminate cookie-cutter builds because there will always be an optimal build. And because the current system focuses damage output into only strength and dexterity, every other stat becomes a potential dump stat, depending on class and party role. For example, a wizard can dump intelligence (along with perception and resolve like everyone else) if he focuses on using only single target, direct damage spells. With proper positioning and tactics, even spells like fireball can be used to maximum effect without any intelligence at all.

 

Issue Two: The current approach promotes attribute homogeneity.

 

Because all damage and healing, whether mundane or magical, depends only on strength, all classes MUST max strength in order to maximize combat effectiveness. This is not a desirable outcome because having a variety of attributes is better for a party so that different party members can succeed at different challenges. Fighters need strength to increase melee damage, wizards need strength to increase magical damage, clerics need strength to increase magical healing. Every party, if built to maximize combat effectiveness, will have every member with maximum strength. Likewise with dexterity for all classes except healers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every party, if built to maximize combat effectiveness, will have every member with maximum strength. Likewise with dexterity for all classes except healers.

That's not entirely true. Max Might does not = max combat effectiveness. There are other factors related to your combat effectiveness. The easiest (but not only other) example is Dexterity. If you have 4 Dexterity (and therefore horrible Accuracy), and max your Might, you get +... what, 30-something % damage output? Sure. But, what does that matter when the majority of your attacks are misses or grazes, and you hardly ever critical anything?

 

Do we need to make sure all the factors are feasibly "balanced" in terms of stat significance? Yes. I'm not saying none of it matters at all. But, Might doesn't automatically equal "you're the best! 8D!". I mean, as far as healing goes, INT matters a lot, if you're using AoE heals. If you hit a smaller area and miss a person, but heal for more, that's a significant difference from hitting a huge area for a bit less healing. etc.

  • Like 2

Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are vastly underrating the damage gain from int on all characters.  Vastly. 5% duration and AE per point vs. Might giving 2% damage + healing.  PS that duration applies to self buffs as well.

 

It's easy to ignore int for characters that use only single target instant damage effects. Also, extended duration only matters if the effect runs its course. In combat, it's almost always better to focus down individual enemies quickly as opposed to doing steady damage to all enemies at once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Issue One: There are still dump stats, and there will always be, and perhaps there should always be.

 

It is practically impossible to eliminate cookie-cutter builds because there will always be an optimal build.

 

Setting aside whatever tweaks need to be made to make stats balanced, which is what the beta is largely about anyway, you don't have to make every build optimal to make every build viable. Trying to make every build optimal would be an exercise in pointless frustration, I agree, but in a single player game optimal builds aren't as important. Plenty of people will play character builds they think are fun even if they can't lay waste to enemies as efficiently.

 

Still, yes, even making every build viable is a tall order. I wouldn't be surprised if a great number of builds end both inefficient and boring. I respect the attempt, though.  

Edited by Death Machine Miyagi
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The stated purpose of the current approach to attributes is to eliminate "dump stats." I believe that the current approach has not only failed at making every attribute equally important for every class, but has also made certain stats mandatory for all classes.

 

Issue One: There are still dump stats, and there will always be, and perhaps there should always be.

 

It is practically impossible to eliminate cookie-cutter builds because there will always be an optimal build. And because the current system focuses damage output into only strength and dexterity, every other stat becomes a potential dump stat, depending on class and party role. For example, a wizard can dump intelligence (along with perception and resolve like everyone else) if he focuses on using only single target, direct damage spells. With proper positioning and tactics, even spells like fireball can be used to maximum effect without any intelligence at all.

 

Issue Two: The current approach promotes attribute homogeneity.

 

Because all damage and healing, whether mundane or magical, depends only on strength, all classes MUST max strength in order to maximize combat effectiveness. This is not a desirable outcome because having a variety of attributes is better for a party so that different party members can succeed at different challenges. Fighters need strength to increase melee damage, wizards need strength to increase magical damage, clerics need strength to increase magical healing. Every party, if built to maximize combat effectiveness, will have every member with maximum strength. Likewise with dexterity for all classes except healers.

100% agree

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You are vastly underrating the damage gain from int on all characters.  Vastly. 5% duration and AE per point vs. Might giving 2% damage + healing.  PS that duration applies to self buffs as well.

 

It's easy to ignore int for characters that use only single target instant damage effects. Also, extended duration only matters if the effect runs its course. In combat, it's almost always better to focus down individual enemies quickly as opposed to doing steady damage to all enemies at once.

 

As a question what mode are you playing on. Hard and PotD fights tend to be more than long enough to justify 2x duration effects.  In a game with limited resources per combat like this one, crowd control and dpc(damage per cast) are far more important than single target damage.  I can not think of a single class that doesn't benefit from intel in an appreciable way.  Not even rogue as 25 second hobble = 25 secs of 1.5x damage via sneak attack trait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

You are vastly underrating the damage gain from int on all characters.  Vastly. 5% duration and AE per point vs. Might giving 2% damage + healing.  PS that duration applies to self buffs as well.

 

It's easy to ignore int for characters that use only single target instant damage effects. Also, extended duration only matters if the effect runs its course. In combat, it's almost always better to focus down individual enemies quickly as opposed to doing steady damage to all enemies at once.

 

As a question what mode are you playing on. Hard and PotD fights tend to be more than long enough to justify 2x duration effects.  In a game with limited resources per combat like this one, crowd control and dpc(damage per cast) are far more important than single target damage.  I can not think of a single class that doesn't benefit from intel in an appreciable way.  Not even rogue as 25 second hobble = 25 secs of 1.5x damage via sneak attack trait.

 

 

So your point is that all classes should max int as well? How does this conflict with my point in any way whatsoever? So, to maximize combat effective, everyone should max strength AND int, and you just end up with even more homogeneity than before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget dexterity: effects don't last as long if they have a poor hit roll, and that damage is just as meaningless as the effects without accuracy. So max might, dexterity, and intelligence.

 

Really only constitution and resolve are the odd men out: they only mean something if you get hit, and right now it's easy enough for your ranged characters to almost never get hit. Perception may be weak right now, but it can be balanced upwards so the increase in interrupts is very valuable for mitigating damage to your front line.

Curious about the subraces in Pillars of Eternity? Check out 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think intelligence was an example there. Dexterity is also important for hitting stuff, constitution for health, perception for preventing interruptions (which can now happen to fighters and other classes besides spellcasters I seem to recall), and resolve is important for saves. These all seem important for combat.

 

So yes, given infinite skill points there would be a lot of homogeneity. Everyone would max out every attribute....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think intelligence was an example there. Dexterity is also important for hitting stuff, constitution for health, perception for preventing interruptions (which can now happen to fighters and other classes besides spellcasters I seem to recall), and resolve is important for saves. These all seem important for combat.

 

So yes, given infinite skill points there would be a lot of homogeneity. Everyone would max out every attribute....

 

Sure, every stat has some use in combat. I never said they had no effect. But that doesn't change the fact that strength is the MOST USEFUL, and thus every character must max strength.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got it. yeah, I don't actually have the beta so I guess I can't have too much of an opinion. If that is the case, hopefully they can just make the other attributes more powerful/useful and it'll work itself out.

 

I'm hoping it will be possible to build a character with high dexterity, perception and/or resolve and hit enemies often for less damage and avoid being hit often yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't quite understand the desire in design where every stat must have some positive effect for every character class.  Why is this so trendy. Sometimes it seems we change things just to change them.

 

If this had actually been achieved, it would be fantastic design. Unfortunately, the current attribute system has not only failed to achieve this holy grail, it has actually regressed to something worse than what we're used to in RPGs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don't quite understand the desire in design where every stat must have some positive effect for every character class.  Why is this so trendy. Sometimes it seems we change things just to change them.

 

If this had actually been achieved, it would be fantastic design. Unfortunately, the current attribute system has not only failed to achieve this holy grail, it has actually regressed to something worse than what we're used to in RPGs.

 

I'll be honest it seem like if it was achieved I wouldn't know what to do with my points. I want to hit hard and be hardy at the expense of accuracy or so on and so on. Studies show in retail, the more choices you give people end up being more paralyzing than empowering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be honest it seem like if it was achieved I wouldn't know what to do with my points. I want to hit hard and be hardy at the expense of accuracy or so on and so on. Studies show in retail, the more choices you give people end up being more paralyzing than empowering.

... You only have 6 choices. Plenty of other games not only have more stats than that, but also more individual effects from each stat.

 

It's really not that hard. It's like classes. When you see a class list, do you think "Hmm... which one's the BEST one?", or do you just think "Hmm... which one would I like to play the most?"? If you prefer the effects of INT, you boost INT. If you'd just like to do awesome raw damage when you hit, boost Might. etc. Just like "pick any class you want." No one gets confused and gives up at class choice, so why should 6 stats that all provide good benefits (I understand the system needs a little tweaking, but they've already acknowledged that, and that's what beta data is for) be paralyzing via choice overload?

  • Like 3

Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'll be honest it seem like if it was achieved I wouldn't know what to do with my points. I want to hit hard and be hardy at the expense of accuracy or so on and so on. Studies show in retail, the more choices you give people end up being more paralyzing than empowering.

... You only have 6 choices. Plenty of other games not only have more stats than that, but also more individual effects from each stat.It's really not that hard. It's like classes. When you see a class list, do you think "Hmm... which one's the BEST one?", or do you just think "Hmm... which one would I like to play the most?"? If you prefer the effects of INT, you boost INT. If you'd just like to do awesome raw damage when you hit, boost Might. etc. Just like "pick any class you want." No one gets confused and gives up at class choice, so why should 6 stats that all provide good benefits (I understand the system needs a little tweaking, but they've already acknowledged that, and that's what beta data is for) be paralyzing via choice overload?
No you're right. Some of these games (general speak) can over do it a bit with all the different things you have to choose from. Edited by Zansatsu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not trying to arbitrarily criticize here. I realize that simplicity and intuitiveness is the ideal. But, at the same time, I just don't think that "each of these is a good decision, in its own way, but you can't max them all" is somehow flawed in design.

Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not trying to arbitrarily criticize here. I realize that simplicity and intuitiveness is the ideal. But, at the same time, I just don't think that "each of these is a good decision, in its own way, but you can't max them all" is somehow flawed in design.

 

That is the point I was trying to make.  Sure they are not perfectly balanced right now.  But contrary to the OP's belief a 10 might, 16 dex, 16 int rogue/barb/ranger would be just as good at dps when properly set up as a 18 might 18 dex  6 int r/b/r.  As far as defensive stats those do need some work still.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...