Strength and resolve limiting use of certain weapons and spells?

[IndiraLightfoot]

With Josh's very recent upcoming change, we now get Strength and a new Resolve, as most of you know by now.

Besides all the game and combat mechanics, these two attributes may actually be used to limit the very use of certain weapons (twohanded sword or arbalest, for instance) or spells (If your resolve is too measly, you don't get to cast some of them). 

How do you feel about that? Is it too much RPG for you?

Are there other attributes which could be used in this way: Intelligence? Dexterity?

 

Discuss!

Edited November 28, 2017 by IndiraLightfoot

[Climhazzard]

I'm not at all okay with casters having a big deflection bonus over melee specialists.  But if damage stats end up getting split I can live with that.  Though I like the original stats better.  If resolve wasn't good enough something could have been added to make it better.

Edited November 28, 2017 by Climhazzard

[Skaddix]

Eh Melee starts with higher Deflection and gets more on level up already right? 

​It will help if you try to build a Gish or you are Druid I suppose.

 

But beyond that bonus deflection wont do much for a spellcaster besides sure up a naturally crappy Deflection.

[Aramintai]

I'm not at all okay with casters having a big deflection bonus over melee specialists.  But if damage stats end up getting split I can live with that.  Though I like the original stats better.  If resolve wasn't good enough something could have been added to make it better.

I feel the same.

 

Too bad devs don't want to ditch Resolve altogether. Could have solved the dump stat problem once and for all. If spells damage\healing power and melee damage absolutely must be separated I'd rather it be Intelligence and Might (Strength) that govern them, at least it would be logical.

[CENIC]

Hybrid multi-classes are definitely going to be affected by this update...

 

I posted this in the thread discussing Resolve, but I tweaked it after reading some other posts:

 

Strength (STR) - +3% Melee Weapon Damage, +2 Fortitude
Constitution (CON) - +5% Health, +2 Fortitude

Dexterity (DEX) - +3% Action Speed, +1 Accuracy, +2 Reflex

Perception (PER) - +3% Ranged Weapon Damage, +2 Reflex

Intellect (INT) - +3% Spell Damage/Magical Implement Weapon Damage/Healing, +2 Will

Resolve (RES) - +6% Area of Effect, +5% Inspiration/Affliction Duration (Received/Cast), -5% Affliction Duration (Received), +2 Will

 

I support Aramintai's idea to remove Deflection from attributes and make it armor-dependent. 

Edited November 28, 2017 by CENIC

[Lamppost in Winter]

I still don't understand the concern about deflection. Even at 20 Res, the bonus to deflection doesn't cover the inherent difference in base deflection between Fighters and Wizards, doesn't it? And they'd still have lower health than the martial classes which limits their tanking ability.

[Aramintai]

I'm just gonna copy what I wrote in another thread:

 

 

Btw, if we're separating damage here why not borrow from AD&D some more and separate some more? Relegate physical melee/ranged damage to Strength, wizard spells/ciphers abilities to Intelligence, priest spells/paladin&chanter abilties to Resolve (like Wisdom in AD&D).

But I can also go with dividing spells - defensive spells go to Resolve, offensive to Intelligence.

Edited November 28, 2017 by Aramintai

[Climhazzard]

Eh Melee starts with higher Deflection and gets more on level up already right? 

 

 

 

So what exactly would be the point of giving melee higher deflection to begin with if you're going to negate it through required stats?

[CENIC]

I still don't understand the concern about deflection. Even at 20 Res, the bonus to deflection doesn't cover the inherent difference in base deflection between Fighters and Wizards, doesn't it? And they'd still have lower health than the martial classes which limits their tanking ability.

 

For me, I care about if something fits into the description of what an attribute does.

Deflection fits under Constitution (physically hardy enough to shake off damage), Dexterity (nimble enough to avoid damage) or armor class (heavier armor deflects more damage, depending on type of damage vs type of armor of course) but not so much Resolve, which to me stands for mental willpower.

[Aramintai]

I still don't understand the concern about deflection. Even at 20 Res, the bonus to deflection doesn't cover the inherent difference in base deflection between Fighters and Wizards, doesn't it? And they'd still have lower health than the martial classes which limits their tanking ability.

Don't look solely at fighter. Take other melee classes into account, a rogue for example.

[Skaddix]

 

Eh Melee starts with higher Deflection and gets more on level up already right? 

 

 

 

So what exactly would be the point of giving melee higher deflection to begin with if you're going to negate it through required stats?

 

 

 

It prevents you from dumping I suppose? Its weird I admit. 

[Lamppost in Winter]

 

Eh Melee starts with higher Deflection and gets more on level up already right? 

 

 

 

So what exactly would be the point of giving melee higher deflection to begin with if you're going to negate it through required stats?

 

 

I mean not all casters are going to be damage focused (mine tend to be duration + accuracy types). 

 

 

 

I still don't understand the concern about deflection. Even at 20 Res, the bonus to deflection doesn't cover the inherent difference in base deflection between Fighters and Wizards, doesn't it? And they'd still have lower health than the martial classes which limits their tanking ability.

Don't look solely at fighter. Take other melee classes into account, a rogue for example.

 

 

I actually just checked and Rogues do indeed have the same base deflection as Wizards. Odd because I know Josh said rogues would be sturdier in Deadfire, but apparently that also meant bumping up Wizards.

 

[Aramintai]

 

I actually just checked and Rogues do indeed have the same base deflection as Wizards. Odd because I know Josh said rogues would be sturdier in Deadfire, but apparently that also meant bumping up Wizards.

 

 

See? Sounds kinda iffy that rogues will be much more squishier than wizard nerds, no?

Edited November 28, 2017 by Aramintai

[Lamppost in Winter]

 

 

I actually just checked and Rogues do indeed have the same base deflection as Wizards. Odd because I know Josh said rogues would be sturdier in Deadfire, but apparently that also meant bumping up Wizards.

 

 

See? Sounds kinda iffy that rogues will be much more squishier than wizard nerds, no?

 

 

Yeah, though I think it could be solved by bumping down Wizard's base deflection, as well as bonuses from levelling.

 

I don't hugely prefer either system, though I think the new thing does hurt the universality of the stat system.

 

Back on topic to the OP, I don't think things should be attribute restricted since attributes already affect so many effects from using those weapons and casting those spells, we don't need to also restrict them. Not to mention attributes are largely static, so it'd feel pretty bad if you made your character on Res short of being able to cast a certain spell or something like that.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

Back on topic to the OP, I don't think things should be attribute restricted since attributes already affect so many effects from using those weapons and casting those spells, we don't need to also restrict them. Not to mention attributes are largely static, so it'd feel pretty bad if you made your character on Res short of being able to cast a certain spell or something like that.

 

Yeah, maybe it would be too old school?

Still, it could be a minor way to stop the deepest stat dumps for stuff like STR and RES.

"Nope, no battle axe for you if you pick STR 3."

[Lamppost in Winter]

 

 

Back on topic to the OP, I don't think things should be attribute restricted since attributes already affect so many effects from using those weapons and casting those spells, we don't need to also restrict them. Not to mention attributes are largely static, so it'd feel pretty bad if you made your character on Res short of being able to cast a certain spell or something like that.

 

Yeah, maybe it would be too old school?

Still, it could be a minor way to stop the deepest stat dumps for stuff like STR and RES.

"Nope, no battle axe for you if you pick STR 3."

 

 

Maybe instead of restricting heavy weapons based on STR, you just have a really dumb wet noodle swing animation (kind of like Dark Souls).

[IndiraLightfoot]

That would be hilarious!

Perhaps if you cast a tough spell with sucky Resolve, then you have to go through the new puke animation cycle as a recovery punishment.

 

EDIT: How about increased reloading speed if you are stronger? And faster spell recovery if you have higher resolve?

Edited November 29, 2017 by IndiraLightfoot

[Wormerine]

I'm just gonna copy what I wrote in another thread:

 

 

Btw, if we're separating damage here why not borrow from AD&D some more and separate some more? Relegate physical melee/ranged damage to Strength, wizard spells/ciphers abilities to Intelligence, priest spells/paladin&chanter abilties to Resolve (like Wisdom in AD&D).

But I can also go with dividing spells - defensive spells go to Resolve, offensive to Intelligence.

Here is why: they don’t want to make specific attributes key to certain classes. And yes, if you want your mage to focus on powerful damage dealing spells you will want resolve. But it is not the only good build possible. Intelligence is also quite important for pure spellcasters as it influences AOF and duration.

 

Resolve might also influence other classes non weapon based abilities.

[Wormerine]

I don’t really see a benefit of restricting weapons with min stat requirements.

[KDubya]

An Orlan Wizard who drops Strength to 2 is not going to care about weapon damage so minimum levels for using bigger weapons is meaningless.

 

The weapon choice for the Orlan Wizard is the wand due to its weapon modal of an accuracy debuff to the enemy at the cost of doing damage. This basically becomes free because the difference from doing -24%damage and -74% damage is meaningless when you were not trying for damage at all.

 

To further the Tank-Mage you'd want to keep Fortitude neutral so as you drop Strength add it to Constitution. Your Orlan with 2 strength will also have 18 Constitution for a massive +40% health boost. This is all accomplished with a 1:1 shift, you still have the rest of your stat points to spend.

 

Your Orlan gets a resolve bonus as well as starting culture so you can pump up to 20 at the cost of 8 of your 18 'at large' stat points. You can make two of your remaining stats a 15 so two of .either dexterity, perception or Intellect  can be at 15 with one at 10.

 

On the plus side Barbarian Rage can be explained as being caused by being easily scared as they will probably dump Resolve to the Timid level.

[Katarack21]

I *despise* stat-based weapon requirements, always have. I want to use whatever weapon I feel is appropiate on whatever character I want. If I want my wizard to wield a two-handed sword, I should have that option without having to stat them as a fighter.

[theBalthazar]

Hybrid multi-classes are definitely going to be affected by this update...

 

I posted this in the thread discussing Resolve, but I tweaked it after reading some other posts:

 

Strength (STR) - +3% Melee Weapon Damage, +2 Fortitude

 

 

For me, not enougth, because, now damage is splitted. So 5 % ?

 

Constitution (CON) - +5% Health, +2 Fortitude

 

 

OK

 

Dexterity (DEX) - +3% Action Speed, +1 Accuracy, +2 Reflex

 

 

Dexterity became too interresting. AS + accuracy... Especially that...

 

Perception (PER) - +3% Ranged Weapon Damage, +2 Reflex

 

 

...Perception is not equilibrate. Josh want to avoid bad build. Here, if you are not ranged, perception is globally useless. Accuracy is better to perception : Better split ratio.

 

 

Intellect (INT) - +3% Spell Damage/Magical Implement Weapon Damage/Healing, +2 Will

 

 

Not a bad idea. Implement are very special weapons. I like that.

 

 

Resolve (RES) - +6% Area of Effect, +5% Inspiration/Affliction Duration (Received/Cast), -5% Affliction Duration (Received), +2 Will

 

 

Area of effect in resolve = why not, it is logical on the paper. determination = amplitude of spells. Amplitude with buff ok I agree. And affliction duration it is a good idea.

Edited November 29, 2017 by theBalthazar

[Sedrefilos]

Stat-restricted weapons is not only old-school and annoying, is also nonsensical. A two-handed sword weights around 3 kilos. Come on, even my supermarket shopping weights more! And I'm not even strong :D

[CENIC]

 

Strength (STR) - +3% Melee Weapon Damage, +2 Fortitude

 

For me, not enougth, because, now damage is splitted. So 5 % ?

Then Intellect will have to give +5% to magical damage/healing. +3% has been the standard for damage so far.

 

 

Dexterity (DEX) - +3% Action Speed, +1 Accuracy, +2 Reflex

 

Dexterity became too interresting. AS + accuracy... Especially that...

Perception (PER) - +3% Ranged Weapon Damage, +2 Reflex

 

...Perception is not equilibrate. Josh want to avoid bad build. Here, if you are not ranged, perception is globally useless. Accuracy is better to perception : Better split ratio.

The main reason I suggested making a stat for ranged damage is firearms. Strength can affect a bowstring but it can't affect a trigger. But, I concede your point that giving DEX both AS and Accuracy is too OP. What can be done with firearms to address this? Edited November 29, 2017 by CENIC

[IndiraLightfoot]

I *despise* stat-based weapon requirements, always have. I want to use whatever weapon I feel is appropiate on whatever character I want. If I want my wizard to wield a two-handed sword, I should have that option without having to stat them as a fighter.

I hear you, still I sometimes get carried away for RP purposes. Fun should really trump harsh restrictions and any zealous claims to realism.