The real problem is that might also influences heals.

[Mayama]

So I finaly decided to make a thread about it because its a issue that usually gets drowned in all those might debates. I think the real problem with might is that it influences healing. Please discuss might influencing magic and melee (well all) damage in other threads or else this thread loses its purpose.

 

I think its really problematic that healing scales with might. Its the reason why the caster classes are either good at healing or damage. You cant make a caster class good at both or you will have dps/healing machines. To make all the caster classes less one dimensional you have to split damage/heal so you need more stat points to boost your spell efficiency.

[Ink Blot]

So I finaly decided to make a thread about it because its a issue that usually gets drowned in all those might debates. I think the real problem with might is that it influences healing. Please discuss might influencing magic and melee (well all) damage in other threads or else this thread loses its purpose.

 

I think its really problematic that healing scales with might. Its the reason why the caster classes are either good at healing or damage. You cant make a caster class good at both or you will have dps/healing machines. To make all the caster classes less one dimensional you have to split damage/heal so you need more stat points to boost your spell efficiency.

I think we need to see how PER/RES are going to fit into the equation as well, If they're tweaked to actually be useful, then it may make for a wider range of caster builds. You'll probably want at least some points in RES so you have a higher Concentration. PER will allow a higher chance of Interrupt (although I doubt casters are going to care much about this). Still, I can definitely see an argument for uncoupling healing from Might, but i think we may need to see more tweaks in the beta before we can determine how important this is.

 

On a side note, I'm not clear on how Might affects healing: is it just healing done or is it also healing received?

[Monte Carlo]

The real problem is architecture - having all stats matter so critically to all classes. I know it isn't going to change, but it's a pretty fundamental, glaring, issue.

 

If you make a fighter in an IE game you know you can ignore INT and WIS, for example. That's not ideal, obviously, but at least you know where you stand. When I make a PoE character I think "well I need this and this and this... and if I don't I miss out on all those dialogue options..."

 

It also doesn't help that very low scores incur a bonus.

 

*shakes head*

 

It, ironically, causes me to make pretty cookie-cutter characters with a samey spread of stats.

 

Is that degenerative too?

[PrimeJunta]

How you respond to the "all stats are valuable to all classes" incentive is up to you. One way is to spread everything evenly. Another way is to pump some and dump some, and then adjust your tactics to make maximum use of the pumped ones and mitigate the weaknesses from the dumped ones. As long as both approaches are viable, I'm a happy panda. I would certainly try several different stat distributions and strategies for different experiences.

[Mayama]

On a side note, I'm not clear on how Might affects healing: is it just healing done or is it also healing received?

 

Afaik the might of the caster = healing done

[Matt516]

The real problem is architecture - having all stats matter so critically to all classes. I know it isn't going to change, but it's a pretty fundamental, glaring, issue.

 

It also doesn't help that very low scores incur a bonus.

 

The first bit - that's more a matter of personal preference. If you enjoyed having dump stats for certain classes, that's your prerogative - I got kind of tired of rolling 18 STR 18 DEX 18 CON 3 WIS 3 INT 3 CHA fighters, though. The more stats that are viable for a class, the more choice and more customization you have. That's a good thing IMO, but clearly YMMV. Just wanted to point out that having all stats matter to all classes is hardly a "fundamental, glaring, issue" as it's clearly something that some people like and some don't like.

 

The second bit - it's semantics. If they wanted to adjust all the base values such that 10 was 0, below 10 was a penalty, and above 10 was a bonus, they could and it would be the same in the end. Doesn't really matter though other than the "feel" - and the "feel" of all stats giving boni very much helps with the "all stats are viable for all classes" design intent as it doesn't make the player feel bad for choosing to leave certain stats low.

 

All in all, I can't tell you that you should like the design intent behind the new system, but I'm having trouble understanding why you don't like it. All it does it give more freedom and choice to the player.

 

So I finaly decided to make a thread about it because its a issue that usually gets drowned in all those might debates. I think the real problem with might is that it influences healing. Please discuss might influencing magic and melee (well all) damage in other threads or else this thread loses its purpose.

 

I think its really problematic that healing scales with might. Its the reason why the caster classes are either good at healing or damage. You cant make a caster class good at both or you will have dps/healing machines. To make all the caster classes less one dimensional you have to split damage/heal so you need more stat points to boost your spell efficiency.

 

Healing scaling with MIG helps balance it against Accuracy, which also gives effective damage to everything (albiet in a more RNG based way). It makes MIG different - and kind of makes sense as well (if your damaging spells are more mighty, why wouldn't your healing spells also be more mighty? Might is Might, right?).

 

Re: making casters one-dimensional - there are still numerous dimensions at play for casters. Accuracy, Aoe/Duration, and Might. That's 3 dimensions on which you can vary your stats to affect just your casting (Interrupt as well for a 4th dimension I guess, but that's kind of meh at the moment).

 

EDIT: But yeah, from a mechanical standpoint MIG would be in danger of being UP if it didn't affect Healing. From a lore standpoint it kind of makes sense. Not really seeing the big problem here tbh. :3

Edited September 9, 2014 by Matt516

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Might is an abstraction of direct force and potency. It is concerned with innate power. It is not the sole governing statistic of spell casting. Dexterity influences the degree to which your spell will overcome defenses, reducing the chances and/or degree of which your spell will be resisted. In this regard, it functions similarly to Spell Penetration of D&D 3.0 , but towards all defensive statistics. Furthermore, it increases the chance as which the spell will critically hit (increased damage/duration). Intellect increases the scope/radius of the spell, allowing priests and other casters to make more broad use of their limited use spells. More importantly, very many spells, particularly for the Priest have duration. Intellect governs duration, and confers a significant advantage over Might for many spells because of this.

 

It's not the statistics themselves which verge on precluding modalities, but the availability of point on creation to maximize nearly four attributes. If you're concerned about a certain spell caster being overly potent and dynamic though, fear not. Priests (and other spell casters) will be hampered by their imitation of MMO class design to prevent this. In this way, Priests are at low risk to be both "DPS/Healing machines", or even a "DPS machine" for that matter.

[Sensuki]

Might and Intellect are currently the best offensive attributes. Constitution is a complete inverse of Might. No healing in this game is free, well okay - healing is free for enemies.

 

Healing is not free for your party. Everything that heals effectively is going to reduce your health when you take more damage.

 

HEALING SPELLS themselves however, might be a tad too strong at the moment .. in fact I would go with yeah, they definitely are too strong.

Edited September 9, 2014 by Sensuki

[GreyFox]

How you respond to the "all stats are valuable to all classes" incentive is up to you. One way is to spread everything evenly. Another way is to pump some and dump some, and then adjust your tactics to make maximum use of the pumped ones and mitigate the weaknesses from the dumped ones. As long as both approaches are viable, I'm a happy panda. I would certainly try several different stat distributions and strategies for different experiences.

 

At the same time how you respond to "dump" stats is entirely up to you as well...

No one forced Matt to go 18/18/18/3/3/3 he chose to....and in regards to people who like to "role play" I doubt those people would indeed go with any 3's as their stats regardless of if the game allowed you to or not.

 

Some  people seem to want this or that for role playing purposes but then admit to doing other things that are clearly not inline with role playing.

 

I've never had a character below a 9 in any stat in the IE games even if a higher stat wouldn't benefit that character. Now we have a game where it WOULD benefit that character even if not in combat....so.....

 

The stats look largely superficial to me anyway atm.

 

 

[Matt516]

 

How you respond to the "all stats are valuable to all classes" incentive is up to you. One way is to spread everything evenly. Another way is to pump some and dump some, and then adjust your tactics to make maximum use of the pumped ones and mitigate the weaknesses from the dumped ones. As long as both approaches are viable, I'm a happy panda. I would certainly try several different stat distributions and strategies for different experiences.

 

At the same time how you respond to "dump" stats is entirely up to you as well...

No one forced Matt to go 18/18/18/3/3/3 he chose to....and in regards to people who like to "role play" I doubt those people would indeed go with any 3's as their stats regardless of if the game allowed you to or not.

 

You are right, and in fact most of the time I don't do that (I'm talking about my metagamed-to-hell MP party here) for precisely those RP reasons you were talking about.

 

My point is that the fact that there does exist a "best" statline for a fighter and that I have to force myself not to roll it due to RP concerns is, in and of itself, a failure in design. Fighters (in 2e) use those 3 stats and don't need the others. Mages need 18 INT and don't benefit from any CON beyond a certain number (12, I think?). My point is that the 2e ruleset (the ruleset of the IE games) has some serious design issues, and the attribute design is one of them. There is very little actual choice involved from a mechanical standpoint. It's just "bad", "better", "best" where statlines are concerned for the most part.

 

Sure, this doesn't break the game - but the game would be better if there was choice beyond "do I want the best stats for my fighter or do I want to not have the best stats for my fighter because RP reasons?". PoE's stat system attempts to solve this, which I'm 100% on board with even if I think there are problems with the current implementation. The concept of an attribute system in which I can set my attributes (i.e. the type of character) independently of my class, and then that class plays differently, but not any less viably, is a fascinating concept, and one that I personally have never seen in any RPG.

Edited September 9, 2014 by Matt516

[Ink Blot]

 

Sure, this doesn't break the game - but the game would be better if there was choice beyond "do I want the best stats for my fighter or do I want to not have the best stats for my fighter because RP reasons?". PoE's stat system attempts to solve this, which I'm 100% on board with even if I think there are problems with the current implementation. The concept of an attribute system in which I can set my attributes (i.e. the type of character) independently of my class, and then that class plays differently, but not any less viably, is a fascinating concept, and one that I personally have never seen in any RPG.

 

I like your thoughts on this, but I'm not sure this system actually does that though. It seems there's really not a helluva lot of difference between the 3 stat and the 18 as far as how it affects things goes, due to the way all the percentages are thrown around in the game. So sure, you can spread your stats around but if the difference is effectively fairly minimal, why wouldn't you still go for dump stats and pump everything into whatever you feel is the most effective for the character class? Much like that Fighter in BG. I don't know if I'm laying this thought out clearly though.

 

To illustrate: why would you pump PER and/or RES with a Fighter-type build (even if they do adjust their effectiveness in the game)? Unless you want to open up more dialog options, which essentially boils down to RP reasons.

 

I'll need to see more in-depth analysis of the game mechanics before I'm convinced about this system yet.

[Sensuki]

Don't worry, we have one coming.

[GreyFox]

 

 

 

How you respond to the "all stats are valuable to all classes" incentive is up to you. One way is to spread everything evenly. Another way is to pump some and dump some, and then adjust your tactics to make maximum use of the pumped ones and mitigate the weaknesses from the dumped ones. As long as both approaches are viable, I'm a happy panda. I would certainly try several different stat distributions and strategies for different experiences.

 

At the same time how you respond to "dump" stats is entirely up to you as well...

No one forced Matt to go 18/18/18/3/3/3 he chose to....and in regards to people who like to "role play" I doubt those people would indeed go with any 3's as their stats regardless of if the game allowed you to or not.

 

You are right, and in fact most of the time I don't do that (I'm talking about my metagamed-to-hell MP party here) for precisely those RP reasons you were talking about.

 

My point is that the fact that there does exist a "best" statline for a fighter and that I have to force myself not to roll it due to RP concerns is, in and of itself, a failure in design. Fighters (in 2e) use those 3 stats and don't need the others. Mages need 18 INT and don't benefit from any CON beyond a certain number (12, I think?). My point is that the 2e ruleset (the ruleset of the IE games) has some serious design issues, and the attribute design is one of them. There is very little actual choice involved from a mechanical standpoint. It's just "bad", "better", "best" where statlines are concerned for the most part.

 

Sure, this doesn't break the game - but the game would be better if there was choice beyond "do I want the best stats for my fighter or do I want to not have the best stats for my fighter because RP reasons?". PoE's stat system attempts to solve this, which I'm 100% on board with even if I think there are problems with the current implementation. The concept of an attribute system in which I can set my attributes (i.e. the type of character) independently of my class, and then that class plays differently, but not any less viably, is a fascinating concept, and one that I personally have never seen in any RPG.

 

 

Well yea I'm not defending 2E by any means.... a lot of the restrictions were pretty stupid especially the race/class/level ones.

 

There are more recent PnP examples where int can be useful for a fighter even in combat and of course out of it as well.(as well as other stats). And where mage types don't need x intelligence for x level of spell...so that's been dealt with for a long time now.

 

As far as your last point...it will be less viable....and should be....right?

  You can make a fighter with a 3 con in 2e and he is going to suck at soaking up hits

  You can make a fighter in PE with a 3 con and he is going to suck at soaking up hits 

 

If this isn't the case then why are we using attributes if the class is the determinate?

(which, incidentally is totally contrary to what you're saying as whole since we're talking rolling stats FIRST and coming up with a concept)

 

Say I want to make a sickly/low con fighter, he should be as viable a tank as one who isn't? Color me confused  (in response to your "but not any less viable")

The game's self proclaimed purpose of the fighter is to "front line" ergo tank damage....so if you dump con and pump w/e else with the idea that he is/should be as viable a tank as someone who pumped con.....whelp...

 

I guess I don't get how dropping what is clearly core to a class in lieu of secondary stats should mean they are equally as viable....maybe different....but certainly its not going to be equal...nor should it be IMO.

And keep in mind this game is what set the class expectations with the whole "mob ruler" "damage dealer" "front liner" etc etc

And the stats clearly explain which portion of those they affect...damage, duration, accuracy, extra health.....

 

The IE games never said a fighter was a front liner and you could very well have one using a bow or whatever other combination of ranged/melee weapons/shields.

That's just using the fighter as an example but you could apply it to the others as well.

 

[GreyFox]

Don't worry, we have one coming.

 

Yea I was going to put in my other post that maybe someone has data or analysis backing up the current system or debunking it...maybe I just need to see it differently?(or maybe Monte Carlo is right *shrug*)

[Sensuki]

Should be ready by Friday or the weekend. Working on the last section now, just needs to be edited and Matt and I have to go over it and see if we've missed anything.

 

Anyone who reads it will get incredible insight into what they are getting per point in an attribute.

Edited September 9, 2014 by Sensuki

[GreyFox]

Something I found funny about D&D stats is...

 

If you had a 3 con (-2hp for 2E)

roll a Mage

roll a 1 for your hp out of d4....

 

Just a funny concept I suppose.

[redneckdevil]

Don't worry, we have one coming.

I cant wait.

[Ink Blot]

Should be ready by Friday or the weekend. Working on the last section now, just needs to be edited and Matt and I have to go over it and see if we've missed anything.

 

Anyone who reads it will get incredible insight into what they are getting per point in an attribute.

If you get this out on Friday, then I know what I'll be doing on the weekend. And if it's as good as I anticipate it will be, I may have to fly to Australia and buy you guys some drinks.

[Matt516]

 

 

Should be ready by Friday or the weekend. Working on the last section now, just needs to be edited and Matt and I have to go over it and see if we've missed anything.

 

Anyone who reads it will get incredible insight into what they are getting per point in an attribute.

If you get this out on Friday, then I know what I'll be doing on the weekend. And if it's as good as I anticipate it will be, I may have to fly to Australia and buy you guys some drinks.

Haha well we certainly hope it'll be that good.

 

It's certainly long at the moment - just have to make sure we're hitting all the points we want to hit and not saying anything incorrect.

 

Also, I live in Texas, if that makes the aforementioned drink-buying any easier.

[Ink Blot]

Also, I live in Texas, if that makes the aforementioned drink-buying any easier.

 

Well, I'm up here in Canuckland, so we'll just have to all meet up in Oz and test out the local brew. I'm sure Sensuki has a couch available. Or a floor.

[Matt516]

 

 

Also, I live in Texas, if that makes the aforementioned drink-buying any easier.

 

Well, I'm up here in Canuckland, so we'll just have to all meet up in Oz and test out the local brew. I'm sure Sensuki has a couch available. Or a floor.

Ah yes.. "Canada"... I have heard of this place.

 

Haha that'd be cool though. Do they have good beer in Australia? I've only been to England and Germany (excellent brews), as well as Quebec (when I was in 4th grade - no drinking there).

[Ink Blot]

Ah yes.. "Canada"... I have heard of this place.

 

Haha that'd be cool though. Do they have good beer in Australia? I've only been to England and Germany (excellent brews), as well as Quebec (when I was in 4th grade - no drinking there).

 

I believe they do. Like any place, though, I believe you need to ask the locals what they like.

[Uomoz]

Should the heals be tied to the receiver stats, like in 4th edition? For those who don't know, the healing surge in DnD4th, the primary healing measure for all characters, is 1/4 of the receiver HPs. The healers use that instead of a value determined by their power, and add relatively small bonuses on top of it.

[Ink Blot]

Should the heals be tied to the receiver stats, like in 4th edition? For those who don't know, the healing surge in DnD4th, the primary healing measure for all characters, is 1/4 of the receiver HPs. The healers use that instead of a value determined by their power, and add relatively small bonuses on top of it.

If we could actually heal health, I could see something like this in the game. Hell, it seems to borrow relatively heavily from 4e as far as battle mechanics goes, so why not this as well? Maybe something along the lines of the value of the CON score being healed with that being modified either as an additonal percentage, depending on either the spell or the level of the healer (or both), or a flat value added onto the value of the CON score.

 

As it stands, healing just Stamina, while possibly useful, can also be a hindrance (someone pointed out that if you keep healing Stamina and part of the damage dealt to you is also dealt as health damage, then healing Stamina ends up just costing you more health in the long run).

[Sensuki]

Well, I'm up here in Canuckland, so we'll just have to all meet up in Oz and test out the local brew. I'm sure Sensuki has a couch available. Or a floor.

I actually don't drink alcohol BUT I do know that the best local brew in the summer here is Red Hill Pilsner. I bought some for my mates for Australia day based on some research and they all agreed it was the best Pilsner they had ever tried.