Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've been paying entirely too much attention :)
From Your Pathfinder Online Character, under the heading "Character Development in Pathfinder Online":
Attributes: These correspond to the classic six abilities of the tabletop game (although we may rename one or two just for the sake of clarity given the way they'll work in the online game). In Pathfinder Online, these attributes have two aspects: The first is that they determine how long it takes to train a skill that uses that attribute as a base. The higher the attribute score, the faster your character can train those kinds of skills. The second is that they determine how effective the character is at resisting certain types of effects. Instead of the tabletop game's three saving throws, in Pathfinder Online there's a resistance bonus or penalty associated with each of the six attributes.
So basically our attributes are going to work almost exactly like they did in EVE.
That's not really a bad thing. EVE's attribute system did have a lot of upsides but it did have one huge downside that eventually resulted in the attribute remaps EVE now uses.
IMO the biggest downside to the system of attributes EVE uses is that new players don't really understand enough to be picking something that is going to have such a huge impact on their development for the rest of the game.
For instance in EVE I wanted to be fighter/fleet booster. Strong focus on combat with a light focus on giving bonuses to the rest of my gang (Embodied by the Field Command Ships like the Nighthawk for those who have played EVE.) I knew that skills such as guns and missiles as well as the actual ship skills I needed relied on Perception and Willpower and the leadership skills I needed relied on Charisma and Willpower so I thought. "Naturally if I stack the crap out of willpower, that will really allow me be a great field commander right?"
Wrong.
As I later figured out when I ran the numbers in EVE-Mon (A skill planning tool that I didn't even know about when I made the character) the effect given by secondary attributes was dismally low. Stacking willpower was in fact a horrible idea for almost any character and the character I made would a significant amount more time to develop than any character with a decent attribute breakdown for pretty much any role. Even the skills with willpower as a primary weren't worth much without other skills that had charisma as a primary.
I ended up making a new character because of this.
So how does PFO intend to avoid a similar situation, or is it even a problem that is indeed worth avoiding?
It could be done via yearly remaps like EVE, or not allowing you to pick your attributes until after you have played the game awhile, or many other methods but I really don't see either of those two alternatives as ideal.
What I would like to suggest is this:
All characters start with even attributes except for racial modifiers. So lets say our character is an elf with +2 dex and -2 con.
They would start at 10 in everything except a 12 in dex and an 8 in con.
As they trained skills they would then gain points in the attribute associated with that skill. So your elf is training his archery skill. As he does is dexterity slowly raises. He then switches to training diplomacy. After he does his charisma slowly raises instead of dex.
He can raise any attribute to a max of 20 except for dex and con which he can raise to a max of 22 and 18. At a certain point his attribute points cap though. Lets say that is once he has 20 more attribute points than his starting levels (Though you could easily change it so raising a skill from 10 to 12 costs less points than 12 to 14 or however you want it to work.) So well say he has 22 Dex 20 Cha 8 Con and 10 everything else. He then starts training a skill that has wisdom as it's attribute. Lets say hes a ranger and starting to use his spells. In order to raise wisdom it will start subtracting points from Dex and Cha.
But the player doesn't want that. They really want their dex to remain high, but they are prettymuch done training charisma based skills. The player can "lock" dexterity meaning no matter what it won't have points drained from it. If they were to also lock charisma, then it wouldn't lose points either but wisdom wouldn't train at all because all of their other attributes are at their minimum values already. The skill would just train on without adjusting any attribute values.
The advantage to this is that it doesn't place too heavy of a decision on the player too fast. If the player starts the game by training dexterity based skills and later on says "Man I really don't like dexterity after all. I want to pursue strength and constitution based skills" they can still do that. Beyond that since a new character starts at the minimum values there is absolutely no reason to re-roll your character based off attribute regrets unless you are bent out of shape about the minor racial modifiers.
The pacing is more logical and less sudden than a remap. It gives more of a feeling of your character growing in to their new role rather than just "I was a big buff fighter, but now I'm a highly intelligent apprentice wizard who's skin and bones!"
Anyway. Thoughts comments and ideas are welcome. Let the discussion begin.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I like the idea, but I don't want to sacrafice my primary skills if I start training in other areas. As long as attributes only affect the speed at which things are learned and not the ability to learn them it's fine. I think that is the right interpretation of what you said in regards to the lockable feature.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I like the idea, but I don't want to sacrafice my primary skills if I start training in other areas. As long as attributes only affect the speed at which things are learned and not the ability to learn them it's fine. I think that is the right interpretation of what you said in regards to the lockable feature.
Yes that is exactly what I meant. You can lock it down so you cant raise your strength and con, and have 10 strength and 8 con, and train the "He man muscle power skill." it will just take considerably longer than if you had 20 strength and 22 con.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of the big issues I have with the EVE skill system is that EVE skills don't just give you access to stuff, they actually make your character intrinsically better.
So your attribute selection ties DIRECTLY into how good your PC is at many common activities, based simply on how old the PC is.
That creates a big part of the confusion people have about how to train skills in EVE. The mix of "sometimes a Skill is a pre-req, sometimes a Skill actually makes me better, and sometimes both" makes a tangled mess out of planning what Skills to train and in what order. And it's very easy to realize that you've made some choices that seemed logical at the start but then become a nuisance (or even a hindrance) later.
Pathfinder has a great legacy to build from. Everyone with a passing familiarity with D20 knows what the Attributes relate to. Pathfinder Online Attributes only do two things - they affect your "saving throws", and they affect the time required to train a skill. And skills only do one thing, act as pre-reqs for Abilities. As long as we avoid situations where we break those preconceived notions, we should also avoid most of the problems.
What about re-mapping?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What if, to continue your example, after training Strength and Constitution skills for a while the player decides to go back to high Dex ? He's already finished pretty much every Dex skill that he wants already - he shouldn't be forced to train unwanted Dex skills (if even there are any left for him to train) to shift his Dex back up.
Also, it's worth noting that EVE eventually got rid of all the "learning skills", so that they no longer have stat training at all. Personally I like the idea that characters enter the world more or less fully developed (and don't go through some bizarre "childhood" period where their stats grow up to their limit), but I support the idea of a constant, continuous process of stat rearrangement (decoupled from skill training) rather than the instant remapping method.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Maybe if the attribute adjustments came from the skills you use, and the attributes they're linked to, rather than what you train. Then you don't have to worry about running out of Dex skills to train if you want to raise it again. Multiclass attributes will stay geared to how the individual actually plays, too.
It's an attractive game mechanic but I can't get behind wobbly attributes for this game. Str might change by 1 or 2 with dedication but a person's basic aptitudes don't change meaningfully throughout life. I like a fully formed character from the start for reality/rp reasons.
The EVE problem happened to me before remaps and it sucked. But a prayer to A God for self-improvement (attribute remap) with a one year cooldown +1 prayer to newly created characters should cover newbie attribute assignment blunders and occasional wild changes in class.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I really like Andius' idea.
Otherwise I see attribute training skills going the way of EVE's learning skills. By that I mean, they were removed. Unless they are staggard in some sort of way in the overall training, players will probably feel obligated to train up the attribute skills first and formost, as what happened in EVE for so many years.
Staggering the attribute raising skills (oh i dont know, maybe every 4 "levels") would be a way to let players still raise their attributes without feeling imposed on.
One of the big issues I have with the EVE skill system is that EVE skills don't just give you access to stuff, they actually make your character intrinsically better.
So your attribute selection ties DIRECTLY into how good your PC is at many common activities, based simply on how old the PC is.
I dont see why this is an issue. I expect my rogue to be way better at Dexterity based things as compared to say, a wizard or sorceror. I also expect, when he is a year old or so, for him to be far better at dexterity based things than a 1 month old rouge. Much in the same way a Lvl 10 character is significantly better than a lvl 1 character.
Maybe I'm missing a part of the big picture, but I think attributes SHOULD make your character directly better.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What if, to continue your example, after training Strength and Constitution skills for a while the player decides to go back to high Dex ? He's already finished pretty much every Dex skill that he wants already - he shouldn't be forced to train unwanted Dex skills (if even there are any left for him to train) to shift his Dex back up.
Also, it's worth noting that EVE eventually got rid of all the "learning skills", so that they no longer have stat training at all. Personally I like the idea that characters enter the world more or less fully developed (and don't go through some bizarre "childhood" period where their stats grow up to their limit), but I support the idea of a constant, continuous process of stat rearrangement (decoupled from skill training) rather than the instant remapping method.
Personally I have one simple solution to this... don't tie attributes to saves. I've thought that was a horrible idea all along. So if you have all the dex skills you want... you don't need dex at all.
The other thing is I think the idea of "having all the dex skills you want" is pretty far fetched. I would imagine each attribute would have years worth of training under it, and as more skills are released it will grow.
I'm really guessing this question will be a non-issue once you see all the skills available to train.
I understand that, I was just trying to point out what I thought was the absurdity of it.
I really don't find it that absurd. I am 6'7" tall with not so slight a frame in real life. I am very naturally strong. I would not want to go up against a well trained fencer with a sword, someone who is a master at throwing shot-put/discus/javelins in a throwing contest, or even lifting heavy weights vs. someone with a really good lifting technique. I even have some training in most of those tasks.
Technique counts for A LOT. Most strength based tasks are somewhere between 50% technique - 50% brute strength and 99% technique - 1% brute strength.
I doubt this game is going to break things down 100% realistically. But it's not so far fetched as to be immersion breaking to me at least.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My real fear is if they introduce a way to change your attributes then I can see a place where people have the ones they need to get to a decent skill level in what they do, then 'respec' their attributes to get as high of saves as possible. It seems like it will end up just being cookie cutters on the attribute end. If my attributes only count for skill training and saves then at the end of the day I am training what I need to make myself viable in as short a time then switching to give myself the best saves I can so it increases my survivability.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My real fear is if they introduce a way to change your attributes then I can see a place where people have the ones they need to get to a decent skill level in what they do, then 'respec' their attributes to get as high of saves as possible. It seems like it will end up just being cookie cutters on the attribute end. If my attributes only count for skill training and saves then at the end of the day I am training what I need to make myself viable in as short a time then switching to give myself the best saves I can so it increases my survivability.
There is never a point when you are done skill training though. Even after you reach capstone there are other skills to train. Mapping out your skill training to get the best saves means not being able to train other skills as quickly.
So if Bob the Barbarian does that, he may have a SLIGHTLY better barbarian build than Burt the Barbarian. But Burt will get is dragonslaying, intimidate, and shipbuilding skills faster.'
Like I said though. I think tying saves to attributes is a bad idea.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The idea I was trying to convey is given about a year after early enrollment Bob will change his attributes to give him the great saves, he already has a solid barbarian build going he might reach his 20th merit badge about 6 months to a year after Burt, but for the most part he will be much more survivable than Burt. Especially if skill training wont intrinsically make you better. If you add in new characters then Bob will have not only a year of training to make him more talented but never really feel much of a sting for the slower skill training, after all most of his prey is a year younger than him and that power curve will constantly be widening because new players will join every day.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Mapping out your skill training to get the best saves means not being able to train other skills as quickly.
So if Bob the Barbarian does that, he may have a SLIGHTLY better barbarian build than Burt the Barbarian. But Burt will get is dragonslaying, intimidate, and shipbuilding skills faster.'
Like I said though. I think tying saves to attributes is a bad idea.
I don't see this as a problem - the guy with maxed Dex will have a better Reflex save and train Dex skills better than the guy who spreads his stats out for a more generalist training approach, while having worse Will/Fortitude saves and training in non-Dex skills. Why is that bad?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The idea I was trying to convey is given about a year after early enrollment Bob will change his attributes to give him the great saves, he already has a solid barbarian build going he might reach his 20th merit badge about 6 months to a year after Burt, but for the most part he will be much more survivable than Burt. Especially if skill training wont intrinsically make you better. If you add in new characters then Bob will have not only a year of training to make him more talented but never really feel much of a sting for the slower skill training, after all most of his prey is a year younger than him and that power curve will constantly be widening because new players will join every day.
Saves are not such a powerful feature it's worthwhile IMO. I would rather be able to switch to new roles depending on what is needed / what I feel like, or add crafting skills, or utility skills or something other than just min-max my self for slightly better saves.
There is a trade off, and IMO it's stacked heavily against Bob.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But again, I ask, what affects DCs? It has been explicitly stated that attributes will affect saves and skill training and nothing else. So, in that system a fireball with just a DC of 13 will be easily avoided by someone with a 16 dex and then whatever else will increase his reflex save. It just seems loaded for people to keep their saves up as high as possible then the only thing they have to worry about is that sword.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
How do the objections to attributes affecting saves change if every attribute contributes to a save?
Either have six saves (possibly including AC as a 'save' for this discussion) or two attributes contribute to each of three saves.
The objection "that's not how the PnP game works" has been considered and deemed irrelevant to this proposal.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But again, I ask, what affects DCs? It has been explicitly stated that attributes will affect saves and skill training and nothing else. So, in that system a fireball with just a DC of 13 will be easily avoided by someone with a 16 dex and then whatever else will increase his reflex save. It just seems loaded for people to keep their saves up as high as possible then the only thing they have to worry about is that sword.
Saves and DC almost surely will not work off the same numbers as they do in the P&P.
Anyway if your scenario worked out the way you are saying and attributes were locked. Min-maxers would just play with the attributes that give them the saves they want up to capstone, and get there slightly slower. You would still have the same problem in the end.
The solution is as I keep saying, don't tie saves to attributes. It's not like them doing that is any more set in stone than capstones were. And capstones were changed because they didn't make sense to the community, and we were able to find a better system.