Attribute balance thread

[Rjc]

I think that for the stated goal of "every attribute combination works" we dont have enough offensive attributes and the defensive options are not as spread as they could be. These are the changes I would do:

 

MIG:

• %Dmg/Heal
• Interrupt (0.25 of current PER bonus)
• Fortitude

CON:

• %Recovery speed (Only affects Idle animation and with high enough CON it should offset any armor penalty)
• Concentration (0.75 of current RES bonus
• Endurance
• Fortitude

DEX:

• %Action speed (Only affects attack and reload animations)
• Deflection
• Reflex

PER:

• Accuracy (+1 per point)
• Range (2% per point)
• Reflex

INT:

• %Duration
• Interrupt (1.25 of current PER bonus)
• Will

RES:

• %AoE
• Deflection
• Concentration (0.75 of current bonus)
• Will

With these bonuses you could really make any character and be good at at least something. Even the current companions would be much more useful.

[Sensuki]

There is nothing wrong with Might, Dexterity or Intellect.

Perception probably needs Accuracy instead of Deflection.

Resolve could give +2 Deflection instead of +1, maybe.

 

Constitution needs a complete rework.

 

Interrupt and Concentration integers could be slightly increased.

[gkathellar]

There is nothing wrong with Might, Dexterity or Intellect.

 

Perception probably needs Accuracy instead of Deflection.

 

Resolve could give +2 Deflection instead of +1, maybe.

 

Constitution needs a complete rework.

 

Interrupt and Concentration integers could be slightly increased.

 

The problem with this is that it changes very little about the extreme specialization issues.  Tanks will be less pigeonholed, but everyone else will just have fewer points to spend on things other than Perception.

 

I would say every attribute needs both an offensive and defensive component. Might and Dexterity are probably fine. Intelligence is a little too much of a one-stop shop, but it's probably also okay.

 

Letting Constitution mitigate armor recovery penalties seems decent (in addition to other adjustments, quite likely) as an offense-ish component.

 

Maybe Perception could slightly adjust damage multipliers (like crits, sneak attacks, weapon specializations, abilities, etc), or provide DR Penetration. I dunno.

 

AoE or DR Penetration are the only things I can come up with that fits Resolve.

[Bazy]

Eating a piece of cheese > 18 CON

[Elerond]

Itemization, consumables and rest (+ night pleasure for main character) bonuses are the key to any successful build. Starting attribute values play quite minor role in character's combat efficiency and most part in my experience one should probably focus on their character's roleplay aspects when they select them if they don't necessary want to try do min/max build.

 

What I have seen Perception and Resolve are probably most important stats to open new conversation options and get additional information about game world and its characters (which probably is not that surprising in Obsidian's RPG).

 

Con/Per/Res are fully defensive attributes that in my opinion work fine (although they differ from three other attributes that give both defensive and aggressive bonuses). Interesting note if you do full tank build you usually don't need con as they don't take that much damage as enemies (and your own aoe's) will mostly miss or graze them. Con is actually useful stat for front line damage dealing builds as you need to sacrifice some of that defensive abilities that tanks have to make them efficient damage dealers.

[Ohioastro]

Here's the thing: Min/maxers will *always* find stat combinations that are the best for any given situation.  Period.  In AD&D with a point buy systems (as opposed to the BG "roll over and over and over until your stats are perfect") you maxxed specific stats relevant to your class, or stats that you needed to multiclass.  Con was useful for hit points, dex for AC (light armor only); there were some attempts to balance stats out, such as tying skills to Int, but again those tended to be very situational.

 

Having three optimal stats sets is scarcely different from having a setup like:

 

Tank: Might + Con, maybe Dex;

Cleric - Wis + Con

Wizard - Int + maybe Dex, maybe Con;

Rogue - Dex, some Con, some Str;

 

There is another huge consideration: for better or worse, this game *is* released and people *have* built characters around it.  A patch that changes what stats do could utterly trash games in progress and it will make a large fraction of the player base furious.

[Epsilon Rose]

Would adjusting certain things based on class help? For example, maybe Wizards and Ciphers use Int for damage, but wizards use resolve for duration while CIphers use it for AoE and Rogues use Per for damage?

[AncientToaster]

Here's the thing: Min/maxers will *always* find stat combinations that are the best for any given situation.  Period.  In AD&D with a point buy systems (as opposed to the BG "roll over and over and over until your stats are perfect") you maxxed specific stats relevant to your class, or stats that you needed to multiclass.  Con was useful for hit points, dex for AC (light armor only); there were some attempts to balance stats out, such as tying skills to Int, but again those tended to be very situational.

 

Having three optimal stats sets is scarcely different from having a setup like:

 

Tank: Might + Con, maybe Dex;

Cleric - Wis + Con

Wizard - Int + maybe Dex, maybe Con;

Rogue - Dex, some Con, some Str;

 

There is another huge consideration: for better or worse, this game *is* released and people *have* built characters around it.  A patch that changes what stats do could utterly trash games in progress and it will make a large fraction of the player base furious.

 

True but it does need to change. It wouldn't be the first time that a game released a patch that overhauled the game and broke a few saves.

 

It probably won't happen for awhile though, so most of us will complete or get fed up with this game by the time the patch is released. I'm fine with some things and overall I've been patient with some of it but the more I play, the more things I find that need significant rework.

[AncientToaster]

Would adjusting certain things based on class help? For example, maybe Wizards and Ciphers use Int for damage, but wizards use resolve for duration while CIphers use it for AoE and Rogues use Per for damage?

 

I think that would help if anything. I do not like Might being the Damage stat for everyone, I think it sucks for a story/dialogue/RP standpoint, and it just does not fit. Might in conversation is always almost brute force, intimidation and meat head in context. You have to stack it on anyone that wants to deal damage, even a damn Priest or Wizard. Please don't tell me that my puny Wizard is going to pick someone up by their shirt collar and intimidate them...It just doesn't fit. I don't know why they felt like they had to reinvent the tried and true systems we've been used to for years. I think if anything, people would have been more happy to see systems that make sense instead of trying to be different.

[AlphaMagnum]

 

On the other hand, if you do it "wrong" (again, based solely on combat, totally ignoring the OOC/RPing stuff), you are making a blatantly suboptimal character who is just straight up worse at his job with no upside (outside of RPing/OOC uses for stats) that a "correctly" built character. In other words, there aren't any meaningful choices when it comes to attributes in combat. Either you spend your attributes well (and by "well" I mean 2 stats maxed and the rest irrelevant) or you do less good in combat than you could (likely WAY less good). There are no meaningful choices there.

 

Now, I keep placing a caveat for Roleplaying/Out Of Combat. It's totally reasonable to say "I'm going to give my rogue an 18 perception because I want to RP a very perceptive rogue and I want to see the out of combat options that come with having a high perception." That's 100% legit. But sadly, it comes at a cost. Your rogue WILL be worse (and likely a LOT worse) than a rogue that doesn't do this and instead maxes Might and Dex and has a good number of points in Int. Now that's a trade off I'm sure a lot of players will be happy to make. But the thing is, it isn't a tradeoff the players should have to make in the first place. It's a bad choice. It means that if you want to RP your character via their attributes, you might have to make a suboptimal character for the combat portions of the game. That's super lame, and it's certainly not interesting.

 

 

I don't necessarily agree that every stat needs to be super-amazing for combat, if that's what you're saying.  Could Perception/Resolve/Constitution get a bit better? Sure.

 

However, it doesn't make quite a lot of sense for the smart, perceptive, resolved Rogue to spontaneously be excellent at combat.  That Rogue shouldn't be as effective at combat as the Might/Dex/Int DPS Rogues we see, IMO.  Maybe the gulf shouldn't be massive as it is now, but there should definitely be a difference in effectiveness between the two, or there wouldn't be much point to putting points into Might/Dex/Int.

[View619]

Sounds like it's time to start a mod project for stat "optimization". As stated, the game is now released and players are learning the system based on the current attribute system. Going in now and completely re-working attributes could be disastrous for players in the middle of a session.

 

Maybe if bonuses were added to con, per and res without changing how the attributes fundamentally work (no removing duration from Int, for example), otherwise it would be pretty difficult to explain why such a revamp was done post-release.

[Epsilon Rose]

 

 

On the other hand, if you do it "wrong" (again, based solely on combat, totally ignoring the OOC/RPing stuff), you are making a blatantly suboptimal character who is just straight up worse at his job with no upside (outside of RPing/OOC uses for stats) that a "correctly" built character. In other words, there aren't any meaningful choices when it comes to attributes in combat. Either you spend your attributes well (and by "well" I mean 2 stats maxed and the rest irrelevant) or you do less good in combat than you could (likely WAY less good). There are no meaningful choices there.

 

Now, I keep placing a caveat for Roleplaying/Out Of Combat. It's totally reasonable to say "I'm going to give my rogue an 18 perception because I want to RP a very perceptive rogue and I want to see the out of combat options that come with having a high perception." That's 100% legit. But sadly, it comes at a cost. Your rogue WILL be worse (and likely a LOT worse) than a rogue that doesn't do this and instead maxes Might and Dex and has a good number of points in Int. Now that's a trade off I'm sure a lot of players will be happy to make. But the thing is, it isn't a tradeoff the players should have to make in the first place. It's a bad choice. It means that if you want to RP your character via their attributes, you might have to make a suboptimal character for the combat portions of the game. That's super lame, and it's certainly not interesting.

 

 

I don't necessarily agree that every stat needs to be super-amazing for combat, if that's what you're saying.  Could Perception/Resolve/Constitution get a bit better? Sure.

 

However, it doesn't make quite a lot of sense for the smart, perceptive, resolved Rogue to spontaneously be excellent at combat.  That Rogue shouldn't be as effective at combat as the Might/Dex/Int DPS Rogues we see, IMO.  Maybe the gulf shouldn't be massive as it is now, but there should definitely be a difference in effectiveness between the two, or there wouldn't be much point to putting points into Might/Dex/Int.

 

I'd argue that a more perceptive rogue should be better at doing damage, because they'd be better at finding the weak points they're supposed to focus on exploiting. At the same time, a strong wizard shouldn't necessarily be amazing at blowing things up, but that's how the stats have it.

 

 

Would adjusting certain things based on class help? For example, maybe Wizards and Ciphers use Int for damage, but wizards use resolve for duration while CIphers use it for AoE and Rogues use Per for damage?

 

I think that would help if anything. I do not like Might being the Damage stat for everyone, I think it sucks for a story/dialogue/RP standpoint, and it just does not fit. Might in conversation is always almost brute force, intimidation and meat head in context. You have to stack it on anyone that wants to deal damage, even a damn Priest or Wizard. Please don't tell me that my puny Wizard is going to pick someone up by their shirt collar and intimidate them...It just doesn't fit. I don't know why they felt like they had to reinvent the tried and true systems we've been used to for years. I think if anything, people would have been more happy to see systems that make sense instead of trying to be different.

 

To be fair, the old d20 system wasn't actually well balanced either, especially between classes.

[Rjc]

The more I think of this, the more im sure the problem is in the way stats are not reflecting on all the properties that affect an attack. Some properties are ignored (Acc, Range), some mixed (action speed/recovery speed), some are too weak (Interrupt) are some lumped together for no reason (Duration and Aoe). So when you take a combat action you end with something like this:

 

 

"An attack can cause damage (MIG), it can interrupt (PER), it takes time (DEX), it can fail (-), and it tires the user (DEX). Also, many of the abilities can be used from a distance (-), apply an effect (INT) and cover an area (INT)"

 

 

Compare that to the system I proposed above:

 

"An attack can cause damage (MIG), it can interrupt (MIG/INT), it takes time (DEX), it can fail (PER), and it tires the user (CON). Also, many of the abilities can be used from a distance (PER), apply an effect (INT) or cover an area (RES)"

 

Under these attributes a Rogue build using 13,13,13,13,13,10 would be a great and BALANCED option. Min Maxing is much less of a necesity when all stats contribute to your offensive capabilities. You could still min max but with more options and focusing on the party role for the character:

MIG/CON/DEX: Highest Dps

 

MIG/INT/DEX: Balanced damage speed and effects

 

MIG/PER/INT: Sniper balanced along damage and effects

 

CON/DEX/INT: Roaming debuffer and interrupter

 

CON/DEX/PER: Fastest, precise long range sniper

 

DEX/PER/RES: Fast long range nuker

 

MIG/PER/RES: Powerful long range nuker

 

CON/DEX/RES: Frontline leader, tanks and buffs, fastest speed to respond to changes the battlefield

 

 

If had any idea on how to mod i woul like to try these. It Sucks being an "idea man" with no programming knowledge

[illathid]

The more I think of this, the more im sure the problem is in the way stats are not reflecting on all the properties that affect an attack. Some properties are ignored (Acc, Range), some mixed (action speed/recovery speed), some are too weak (Interrupt) are some lumped together for no reason (Duration and Aoe). So when you take a combat action you end with something like this:

 

 

"An attack can cause damage (MIG), it can interrupt (PER), it takes time (DEX), it can fail (-), and it tires the user (DEX). Also, many of the abilities can be used from a distance (-), apply an effect (INT) and cover an area (INT)"

 

 

Compare that to the system I proposed above:

 

"An attack can cause damage (MIG), it can interrupt (MIG/INT), it takes time (DEX), it can fail (PER), and it tires the user (CON). Also, many of the abilities can be used from a distance (PER), apply an effect (INT) or cover an area (RES)"

 

Under these attributes a Rogue build using 13,13,13,13,13,10 would be a great and BALANCED option. Min Maxing is much less of a necesity when all stats contribute to your offensive capabilities. You could still min max but with more options and focusing on the party role for the character:

MIG/CON/DEX: Highest Dps

 

MIG/INT/DEX: Balanced damage speed and effects

 

MIG/PER/INT: Sniper balanced along damage and effects

 

CON/DEX/INT: Roaming debuffer and interrupter

 

CON/DEX/PER: Fastest, precise long range sniper

 

DEX/PER/RES: Fast long range nuker

 

MIG/PER/RES: Powerful long range nuker

 

CON/DEX/RES: Frontline leader, tanks and buffs, fastest speed to respond to changes the battlefield

 

 

If had any idea on how to mod i woul like to try these. It Sucks being an "idea man" with no programming knowledge

 

 

The problem with your suggestion is that all of the things you listed are contingent upon the attack succeeding or not. You want to interrupt, you need to hit first; You want to debuff, you need to hit first; you want to do more damage, you need to first; etc.

 

Anytime you add accuracy back into the attribute mix, it becomes the most important stat.

[Rjc]

 

The more I think of this, the more im sure the problem is in the way stats are not reflecting on all the properties that affect an attack. Some properties are ignored (Acc, Range), some mixed (action speed/recovery speed), some are too weak (Interrupt) are some lumped together for no reason (Duration and Aoe). So when you take a combat action you end with something like this:

 

 

"An attack can cause damage (MIG), it can interrupt (PER), it takes time (DEX), it can fail (-), and it tires the user (DEX). Also, many of the abilities can be used from a distance (-), apply an effect (INT) and cover an area (INT)"

 

 

Compare that to the system I proposed above:

 

"An attack can cause damage (MIG), it can interrupt (MIG/INT), it takes time (DEX), it can fail (PER), and it tires the user (CON). Also, many of the abilities can be used from a distance (PER), apply an effect (INT) or cover an area (RES)"

 

Under these attributes a Rogue build using 13,13,13,13,13,10 would be a great and BALANCED option. Min Maxing is much less of a necesity when all stats contribute to your offensive capabilities. You could still min max but with more options and focusing on the party role for the character:

MIG/CON/DEX: Highest Dps

 

MIG/INT/DEX: Balanced damage speed and effects

 

MIG/PER/INT: Sniper balanced along damage and effects

 

CON/DEX/INT: Roaming debuffer and interrupter

 

CON/DEX/PER: Fastest, precise long range sniper

 

DEX/PER/RES: Fast long range nuker

 

MIG/PER/RES: Powerful long range nuker

 

CON/DEX/RES: Frontline leader, tanks and buffs, fastest speed to respond to changes the battlefield

 

 

If had any idea on how to mod i woul like to try these. It Sucks being an "idea man" with no programming knowledge

 

 

The problem with your suggestion is that all of the things you listed are contingent upon the attack succeeding or not. You want to interrupt, you need to hit first; You want to debuff, you need to hit first; you want to do more damage, you need to first; etc.

 

Anytime you add accuracy back into the attribute mix, it becomes the most important stat.

 

 

Thats why I proposed only 1 point of acc for every point PER. At most it has the value of one or 2 talents. You also can tone it down to 1 point of acc every 2 of PER and have it be the attribute version of weapon groups talents. Alternatively you can still remove acc from attributes and keep range in PER and maybe give it some more interrupt.

 

The main idea is to have the highest possible number of attributes contributing to the attack and make choosing your dump stats a gameplay decision that depend on the role of the character and not on the class itself.

[Epsilon Rose]

 

The more I think of this, the more im sure the problem is in the way stats are not reflecting on all the properties that affect an attack. Some properties are ignored (Acc, Range), some mixed (action speed/recovery speed), some are too weak (Interrupt) are some lumped together for no reason (Duration and Aoe). So when you take a combat action you end with something like this:

 

 

"An attack can cause damage (MIG), it can interrupt (PER), it takes time (DEX), it can fail (-), and it tires the user (DEX). Also, many of the abilities can be used from a distance (-), apply an effect (INT) and cover an area (INT)"

 

 

Compare that to the system I proposed above:

 

"An attack can cause damage (MIG), it can interrupt (MIG/INT), it takes time (DEX), it can fail (PER), and it tires the user (CON). Also, many of the abilities can be used from a distance (PER), apply an effect (INT) or cover an area (RES)"

 

Under these attributes a Rogue build using 13,13,13,13,13,10 would be a great and BALANCED option. Min Maxing is much less of a necesity when all stats contribute to your offensive capabilities. You could still min max but with more options and focusing on the party role for the character:

MIG/CON/DEX: Highest Dps

 

MIG/INT/DEX: Balanced damage speed and effects

 

MIG/PER/INT: Sniper balanced along damage and effects

 

CON/DEX/INT: Roaming debuffer and interrupter

 

CON/DEX/PER: Fastest, precise long range sniper

 

DEX/PER/RES: Fast long range nuker

 

MIG/PER/RES: Powerful long range nuker

 

CON/DEX/RES: Frontline leader, tanks and buffs, fastest speed to respond to changes the battlefield

 

 

If had any idea on how to mod i woul like to try these. It Sucks being an "idea man" with no programming knowledge

 

 

The problem with your suggestion is that all of the things you listed are contingent upon the attack succeeding or not. You want to interrupt, you need to hit first; You want to debuff, you need to hit first; you want to do more damage, you need to first; etc.

 

Anytime you add accuracy back into the attribute mix, it becomes the most important stat.

 

How about replacing to hit with chance to crit?

[gkathellar]

Obviously Obsidian isn't going to change things, guys. I figured this was mostly idle banter while a smaller number of us were thinking about mods.

[DragonDai]

 

 

 

On the other hand, if you do it "wrong" (again, based solely on combat, totally ignoring the OOC/RPing stuff), you are making a blatantly suboptimal character who is just straight up worse at his job with no upside (outside of RPing/OOC uses for stats) that a "correctly" built character. In other words, there aren't any meaningful choices when it comes to attributes in combat. Either you spend your attributes well (and by "well" I mean 2 stats maxed and the rest irrelevant) or you do less good in combat than you could (likely WAY less good). There are no meaningful choices there.

 

Now, I keep placing a caveat for Roleplaying/Out Of Combat. It's totally reasonable to say "I'm going to give my rogue an 18 perception because I want to RP a very perceptive rogue and I want to see the out of combat options that come with having a high perception." That's 100% legit. But sadly, it comes at a cost. Your rogue WILL be worse (and likely a LOT worse) than a rogue that doesn't do this and instead maxes Might and Dex and has a good number of points in Int. Now that's a trade off I'm sure a lot of players will be happy to make. But the thing is, it isn't a tradeoff the players should have to make in the first place. It's a bad choice. It means that if you want to RP your character via their attributes, you might have to make a suboptimal character for the combat portions of the game. That's super lame, and it's certainly not interesting.

 

 

I don't necessarily agree that every stat needs to be super-amazing for combat, if that's what you're saying.  Could Perception/Resolve/Constitution get a bit better? Sure.

 

However, it doesn't make quite a lot of sense for the smart, perceptive, resolved Rogue to spontaneously be excellent at combat.  That Rogue shouldn't be as effective at combat as the Might/Dex/Int DPS Rogues we see, IMO.  Maybe the gulf shouldn't be massive as it is now, but there should definitely be a difference in effectiveness between the two, or there wouldn't be much point to putting points into Might/Dex/Int.

 

So what you're saying is that the Rogue who is perceptive, smart, and resolute is bad at being a rogue? Yeah, that's exactly what I was saying. Well, not exactly, cause Int can be quite good for rogues. More I was saying that the perceptive, resolute, hardy rogue was bad at being a rogue, but yeah, we're on the same page there.

 

Where we're not on the same page is...if you JUST look at combat (like I said about a dozen times in the post you quoted) why would you EVER make a perceptive, resolute, hardy rogue? There is literally no benefits in combat what-so-ever-at-all. He's just a really really really bad rogue who won't be able to do his job and still won't be able to tank because he's a rogue (or at least not as effectively as an actual tank class). By making a perceptive, resolute, hardy rogue, you are making an objectively inferior rogue for absolutely no reason.

Out of combat, for RP, there could be reasons to make a resolute, perceptive, hard rogue. But you know that by doing that for RP/OOC reason, you are making your character objectively worse at combat. And that's a fine trade off to make. But from a purely combat standpoint, it's not a fine trade off. It's not a trade off at all. You're giving away good stats and getting literally nothing in return.

To put it another way, you're saying "If I want to make a rogue who is perceptive, hardy, and resolute, he's not going to be as good at combat as other rogues, and that's okay." I agree with you. What I'm saying, on the other hand, is "If I want to make a rogue that's good at being a rogue in combat and is an effective member of my team, in combat, than any points I put into Constitution, Resolve, or Perception are wasted points that go against my stated goal of having a combat-proficient rogue, and that's not okay."

[Malk]

How about Per/dex  save vs refles

const might save vs fortitude

int resolve save vs will

 

don't dismiss saves and the need to max out 2 save types to get max benefits  other than that most damage types will  hit 

 

How about a mage  with high will max int and resolve  for drawing fire on enemies with charm attacks saves on all the attacks and the team moves in.  

 

The builds are not cookie cutter.  Very specific roles can be made.  

 

they should have called "might"   "power"  semantics but sounds class neutral.

[Malk]

 

CON for me is the one that really stands out, as in, no builds really need it and for most builds you can take points from it and not really notice.  To me it is clearly the weakest Attribute.

 

I don't think making it better at what it does is the answer though...I think maybe they should take deflection from PER and give it to CON and put Accuracy back to PER?  Or something else.

Agree with you also that Might feels like the strongest attribute, at least the most useful across all classes and builds.

 

I actually find CON fairly useful (in moderation) on my "frontline offtank" PC. It's a stat that should only be taken by "frontline grunts" which is why it is %-based (which isn't neccessarily a poor design choice, imho).

 

If CON got changed to a flat endurance/health bonus, it should be balanced around how much Fighters and Barbarians currently get out of it - which might potentially make it too good on Wizards and the like, depending on how the encounters get balanced. Seems unlikely, but it's something to keep in mind.

 

RES is, in my opinion, a decent secondary tank stat. It's not super-amazing, but it's in line with the majority of the stats in usefulness and I would not want my frontline fighters without at least some RES for that reason.

 

Now PER . . . really stinks, as far as I can tell right now. Whenever I spend points in it, it just feels bad. Interrupts aren't reliable or good enough to invest in, the high deflection bonus is nice (deflection IS useful in moderation because it works on a "1% to not get hit" system) but PER feels like a tertiary tank stat at best and you usually don't have the points to invest in it.

 

Not sure what to change about it . . . maybe make interrupts better ?

 

An ex of how stats are very dynamic in combination.

 

 

My ranger build  is  max dex  20 and 18 per.  The combination gives max reflex saves.   I need both like resolve and perception combine for tanks deflection.  The combination of attack speed and interrupts  is strong.    Every ability combines with multiple other abilities to create many combinations.     I gave other ex of barb with max cons and strength for max fortitude saves.   Making the barb virtually immune to poisons stun and knock down.   but will take damage from direct attacks because you gave up per and resolve. 

 

Is a good system of give and take

[Aqvamare]

Might is not so important like it looks on first glance....

 

some damage classes like chanter, ciper and wizard have always some spells, were there damage is independent from might.

 

For example wizard level 6 death ring AOE spell does 1200 damage, completly independed from might.

 

Chanter AOE damage chant does 40dmg as fire, and 40dmg as pierce, completly seperated from might. Summon, too.

[DragonDai]

Might is not so important like it looks on first glance....

 

some damage classes like chanter, ciper and wizard have always some spells, were there damage is independent from might.

 

For example wizard level 6 death ring AOE spell does 1200 damage, completly independed from might.

 

Chanter AOE damage chant does 40dmg as fire, and 40dmg as pierce, completly seperated from might. Summon, too.

 

 

There are always exceptions to a rule. The rule here is that Might is the best stat for non-Tanks. Yes, Chanters can get away with lower Might in general and VERY specialized Wizards can get away with lower Might. But here's the question...why would you want to do that?

 

Obviously, if you're Chanter is tanking, lower Might is fine, but in all other situations, what benefit does lowering Might and increasing Constitution, Resolve, or Perception REALLY give to the non-tank? You drop Might from your Wizard, choose his spells and talents VERY carefully, and what have you gained? He survives 3-4 hits instead of 2? He's a Wizard...he shouldn't be getting hit at all, ever, except MAYBE by AoE. Same goes for the Chanter.

 

So the issue here isn't that you HAVE to have Might, it's that Perception, Resolve, and Constitution are worthless on non-tanks. The Deflection bonus you get from a 14 Resolve or a 16 Perception isn't significant at all. The extra HPs/Endurance from more Constitution is very very minimal (each point of Con is worth 1.2 extra Endurance and 3.6 extra HPs per level for a Wizard. A level 12 Wizard with 10 Con has 160 Endurance and a Wizard at level 12 with 18 Con has 196 Endurance. That's basically no difference at all. Why would you waste 8 points to get 36 extra Endurance and 108 extra Health when, instead, you could have 24% more damage? 

 

So yeah, you COULD give your non-tanks defensive stats (Con, Resolve, Perception), but you're just wasting points. They gain almost no benefit from them at all.

 

don't dismiss saves and the need to max out 2 save types to get max benefits  other than that most damage types will  hit 

 

How about a mage  with high will max int and resolve  for drawing fire on enemies with charm attacks saves on all the attacks and the team moves in.  

 

The builds are not cookie cutter.  Very specific roles can be made.  

 

they should have called "might"   "power"  semantics but sounds class neutral.

 

Why would you want your mage to draw fire? That's what your tank is for! Your mage isn't a tank. Let the mage do his job and let the tank do his job. It works out WAY better that way. And because of the Engagement system and Stealth, it's VERY easy to make sure your mage almost never gets attacked...ever...

 

I think the thing that a lot of people aren't getting is that, yes, you can make your wizard or your cipher or your barbarian more tanky. But no, making them more tanky in no way makes them better at their job. It does the exact opposite. It makes the worse at their job. You can do it, but it's a bad idea.

Edited March 29, 2015 by DragonDai

[Aqvamare]

no no, I understand you,

 

at the moment I have only two setups, tank role and DPS/support

 

Tank role: race orleander, sub wild:

 

class, you like, every class can maintank in game, even wizard, thanks to there spells, with best defence values selfbuffed, but lower health.

 

Mig:9

Con:14 or 15

Dex:3

Res:20

Int:3

Per:20

 

DPS/support

 

race is "mostly" unimportant, or 19/20 is question about race 

Mig: 18 or 19/20

Con: 3 or 10

Dex: 18 or 19

Res:3 or 10

Int:18 or 19

Per: 10 or more

[AlphaMagnum]

 

 

 

 

On the other hand, if you do it "wrong" (again, based solely on combat, totally ignoring the OOC/RPing stuff), you are making a blatantly suboptimal character who is just straight up worse at his job with no upside (outside of RPing/OOC uses for stats) that a "correctly" built character. In other words, there aren't any meaningful choices when it comes to attributes in combat. Either you spend your attributes well (and by "well" I mean 2 stats maxed and the rest irrelevant) or you do less good in combat than you could (likely WAY less good). There are no meaningful choices there.

 

Now, I keep placing a caveat for Roleplaying/Out Of Combat. It's totally reasonable to say "I'm going to give my rogue an 18 perception because I want to RP a very perceptive rogue and I want to see the out of combat options that come with having a high perception." That's 100% legit. But sadly, it comes at a cost. Your rogue WILL be worse (and likely a LOT worse) than a rogue that doesn't do this and instead maxes Might and Dex and has a good number of points in Int. Now that's a trade off I'm sure a lot of players will be happy to make. But the thing is, it isn't a tradeoff the players should have to make in the first place. It's a bad choice. It means that if you want to RP your character via their attributes, you might have to make a suboptimal character for the combat portions of the game. That's super lame, and it's certainly not interesting.

 

 

I don't necessarily agree that every stat needs to be super-amazing for combat, if that's what you're saying.  Could Perception/Resolve/Constitution get a bit better? Sure.

 

However, it doesn't make quite a lot of sense for the smart, perceptive, resolved Rogue to spontaneously be excellent at combat.  That Rogue shouldn't be as effective at combat as the Might/Dex/Int DPS Rogues we see, IMO.  Maybe the gulf shouldn't be massive as it is now, but there should definitely be a difference in effectiveness between the two, or there wouldn't be much point to putting points into Might/Dex/Int.

 

So what you're saying is that the Rogue who is perceptive, smart, and resolute is bad at being a rogue? Yeah, that's exactly what I was saying. Well, not exactly, cause Int can be quite good for rogues. More I was saying that the perceptive, resolute, hardy rogue was bad at being a rogue, but yeah, we're on the same page there.

 

Where we're not on the same page is...if you JUST look at combat (like I said about a dozen times in the post you quoted) why would you EVER make a perceptive, resolute, hardy rogue? There is literally no benefits in combat what-so-ever-at-all. He's just a really really really bad rogue who won't be able to do his job and still won't be able to tank because he's a rogue (or at least not as effectively as an actual tank class). By making a perceptive, resolute, hardy rogue, you are making an objectively inferior rogue for absolutely no reason.

 

Out of combat, for RP, there could be reasons to make a resolute, perceptive, hard rogue. But you know that by doing that for RP/OOC reason, you are making your character objectively worse at combat. And that's a fine trade off to make. But from a purely combat standpoint, it's not a fine trade off. It's not a trade off at all. You're giving away good stats and getting literally nothing in return.

 

To put it another way, you're saying "If I want to make a rogue who is perceptive, hardy, and resolute, he's not going to be as good at combat as other rogues, and that's okay." I agree with you. What I'm saying, on the other hand, is "If I want to make a rogue that's good at being a rogue in combat and is an effective member of my team, in combat, than any points I put into Constitution, Resolve, or Perception are wasted points that go against my stated goal of having a combat-proficient rogue, and that's not okay."

 

 

Like I said, there's room for improvement, but not the point of putting Accuracy on Perception, for example.  Right now you seriously suck if you build the perceptive/hardy/resolute Rogue, and that's an issue.  I think the perceptive/hardy/resolute Rogue should be strictly inferior to the strong/coordinated/smart Rogue, but the gap shouldn't be as big as it is right now.

 

You build the perceptive/hardy/resolute rogue for RP reasons?  Fine, you get to RP.  But you should be functional but not optimal in combat. Maybe 60-70% of what the strong/coordinated/smart rogue can put out?  You won't be utterly useless, but you will not be as valuable as your strong/coordinated cousin.

 

Right now it's more like 30% vs 100%, which is kind of an issue so I agree that something needs to change.  But I don't want the Con/Per/Res Rogue to reach combat (read: DPS) parity with the Mig/Dex/Int Rogue, since that doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Edited March 30, 2015 by AlphaMagnum

[DragonDai]

Oh, totally...agree with basically everything you put here. All I want is for more Attributes to be useful for more classes and more specs. I'd like Resolve/Perception/Con to be at least somewhat useful to my rogue. They don't need to be as good or even close to as good as Might, Dex, or Int. That's what I'm looking for. Looks like we are on the same page here.