Goblin Squad Member
|
...if you slot fighter and cleric skills you dont get the dedication bonus.Remember that the dedication bonus is the two-and-a-half-years-down-the-road topper of the "fighter tree", so it won't be of immediate concern.
This is not accurate. You're confusing Capstones (the benefit for maxing a skill tree without deviating) with Devotion (the benefit for having all your slotted skills be from the same role. Capstones were ditched in favor of Devotion a while ago.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The purpose has been stated repeatedly in this thread. For those people who have spent a lot of time (and MONEY) on a character that they didn't really want to play because the skills they need for the concept they want don't exist yet.
It sounds like dedicated traders and merchants won't even be possible until after OE. There are whole CC's (mine included!) that are going to have a pretty rough start because of it.
I can't figure out how someone could fail to see why a respec would be desired in this situation.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Remember that the dedication bonus is the two-and-a-half-years-down-the-road topper of the "fighter tree", so it won't be of immediate concern.
No, that was the old Capstone system. The Dedication bonus kicks in fairly early (maybe immediately?) and scales in power as you grow.
[Edit] And that's what I get for replying to a post on one page before reading on through the next page :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The quality of the people on the forums makes me think the interactions online will be immensely fun even with less content.
I'm old enough that I started playing D&D with the white box set. There was less content than today's games, but we still had a lot of fun.
I intend on playing a monk in PFO. Until the monk archetype is opened, I think I'll be exploring my character's life - what he did before he took his vows.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Remember that the dedication bonus is the two-and-a-half-years-down-the-road topper of the "fighter tree", so it won't be of immediate concern.No, that was the old Capstone system. The Dedication bonus kicks in fairly early (maybe immediately?) and scales in power as you grow.
[Edit] And that's what I get for replying to a post on one page before reading on through the next page :)
I call that my ninja ambush. I wait around the page turn to leap out at you.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Unless I see a better argument against a respec when the class of skills you truly want to play become available, I would have to say I favor a skill respect when appropriate (when the skills of your chosen character concept come into game). As much as all skills "may" be useful, spending experience time and making training payments for skills you might never use once the skills you want are available seems rather unfair.
For illustration, let us go with Wizard vs Sorcerer. Yes, they may both have identical prerequisite skills you could train. No problem there. Also, there may be enough other skills (harvesting, crafting, perception, etc.) that you can work on while you wait, but we don't know how many - and more importantly, how many of those you truly desire to train - before you run out. You may have planned to be very focused in your character design and not wanted all these tangent skills that you're training for lack of anything else to train while you're waiting to start Sorcerer.
The situations listed above seem unfair enough - not that we can expect the system to have everything at EE or even OE - but unfair that you can't rectify the situation with a respec. Worse still (at least in my mind) will be how much further behind you will be in your desired "class" of expertise compared to people who have been training the class skills they wanted since day one of EE. Yes, you still have those Wizard skills you trained while waiting for Sorcerer, but if you don't plan to use those Wizard skills once Sorcerer comes out, they amount to wasted skills, wasted experience time, and wasted training coin. If my character concept is a pure Sorcerer, I would refrain from using those Wizard skills as soon as Sorcerer skills were available, or seem Out-Of-Character by doing do. Didn't I seem OOC the whole time before that? Sure, but not by choice.
To put it in table top terms, if I start a Wizard from day one of EE, I might be the equivalent to an 8th lvl Wizard by OE. If I wanted to play a Sorcerer, but had to be satisfied with training Wizard skills at the beginning, I might be a lvl 5 Wizard and only a lvl 3 Sorcerer by OE. Yes, I'm not "behind" any other Sorcerers in skill, but I'm quite behind compared to the guy who has enjoyed playing his Wizard the whole time. Where is the harm of allowing the second fellow to transfer his experience spent on Wizard exclusive experience over to experience in Sorcerer?
All people wanting a respect are asking for is choice...the choice to remake their character when the skills they originally desired are available. Not to be any higher than their spent experience and skill training warrant - just equal to it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Hobs the Short, my gut reaction is the same as yours, but I'm having doubts about it.
You probably noticed the lack of discussion of races, roles, and character diversity in the definition of MVP for Open Enrollment. That's because most of that work happens after we begin Open Enrollment. During the development of Early Enrollment, we focused on making game systems. After the commencement of Open Enrollment, we're going to shift to focus on game content.
We'll be adding new races regularly until we've added all the player character races from the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game core rulebook (and of course we'll also be thinking about additional races, too). We'll also be adding more roles, and all the support content those roles need—the gear, the weapons, the armor, the magic items, and specialist equipment. That will include things like animal companions, spellcasting systems, and other features that players expect for those roles.
Obviously, they'll be adding new Roles well after Open Enrollment. Should every character always have the ability to respec and suddenly be a high-level version of whatever new Role was just released? I'm not so sure. Especially when I consider a general development principle of Ryan's - that they will develop new features/systems as needed. If players are able to almost immediately reach the highest levels of power in a new Role, they'll have to always release the entire Role at once.
As much as I don't want to "waste" my Destiny's Twin's XP training Fighter skills that I won't use once I can play as a Paladin, I also realize it's probably much better for Goblinworks if they can release new Roles without allowing characters to respec deeply into them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think one free re-spec is more than reasonable. I also think that re-specing should be a cash-shop item.I've not yet figured out what purpose re-specs would serve. Any skill you learn will be useful in some way, so why would they give us a mechanism to get rid of them?
This is another arena where it feels they can adopt the EVE model: no re-specs ever, clean and simple, minimum viable product.
There's a difference between useful and desirable - and it can really affect how happy people are playing their characters, which in turn can affect the early months of EE. Here's an example:
I want to play a sorceror. My crowdforger guild friend - we'll call him Bob - wants to play a wizard. Based on this blog, we both start out playing wizards.
To the extent that "wizard" skills will also appear on the "sorceror" skill tree, both of us are training skills that are both useful (hey, we can shoot a magic missile at the wolf!) AND desirable (both a wizard and a sorceror have magic missile in their skill tree, so we're both progressing on our desired training path (note that this is just an example - I have no idea if magic missile fulfills this function)).
The problem starts when I run out of "cross-class" skills to train, and am left with the choice of learning "useful" wizard skills that I wouldn't be learning if sorceror were in the game, and won't ever use once I can train as a sorceror OR of simply banking my training time, and having fewer skills in my toolkit than Bob does. Bob does not face this choice. Because he lucked out and his archetype is part of the game from day one, everything he can train is both "useful" and "desirable".
So, for some unspecified amount of time, I have the unpalatable choice of:
(a) Stopping training until sorceror is added to the game. Upside: I can bank my training time. Downside: I will be at a disadvantage in power/skill compared to Bob.
(b) Stopping play until sorceror is released. Upside: I can bank my training time. Downside: I'm missing out on the chance to help crowdforge early enrollment.
(c) Training "undesirable" skills so that I can continue playing in some capacity. Upside: I will be at the same rough power level as Bob. Downside: When sorceror is released, Bob will continue blithely on his wizard path, and I will have to cease learning high-level skills until my sorceror-specific skills catch up to my wozard skills - putting me behind Bob.
By adding race changes, GoblinWorks has ensured that people who really, really want to play a gnome will start playing on day one quite happily as a human - because they know that GoblinWorks will let them transfer to what they really wanted to play once it's offered, with no loss of time, money or enjoyment. By offering a respec, people who want to play one of the core classes that won't be in EE at the start will get the same desirable outcome.
And once Early Enrollment is over, and/or all the CORE races and classes are in, GoblinWorks can shut off the race change/respec offers entirely.
Edit: Hobs, you beat me to it!
For anyone interested, this was discussed to some degree last night in the PFO Fan Teamspeak chat. I really do encourage people to join us!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Allow only one respect per character. I might be willing to wait even longer for the "class" I want to play if I know I can at least transfer that experience when I finally get the chance.
I have a sneaking suspicion that they won't allow a respec (especially with so much of the game following the EVE model), but it might behoove them to know how many players desire it before making their final decision.
Personally, Hobs is going with Cleric and a little Rogue, so this won't hamper my potential fun, but if it does for a large number of players, I think it's worth discussing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I really don't understand how GW can be planning on entering Open Enrollment without the bare minimum of all Core Races; Core Class Skill Trees; and the core game play elements (Combat PVE & PVP; Settlement Interactions (Construction, Warfare and Destruction - Capture; and a Gathering / Crafting system.
From what the Dev Blog says, the first two: Core Races and Classes, will not be in place. Which leaves me skeptical that the third will be in place.
Yeah eevn though I predicted the big 4 being the only classes available day 1 just a few days ago, I am disappointed that they do not plan to be adding races and roles throughout EE.
I expected about 5-6 races and 7-8 "classes" to be installed during EE and I expected the full 7 & 11 as the goal for day 1 of OE.
The current roadmap means 75% of us have to wait a very, very long time to start playing the character we want.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really don't understand how GW can be planning on entering Open Enrollment without the bare minimum of all Core Races; Core Class Skill Trees; and the core game play elements (Combat PVE & PVP; Settlement Interactions (Construction, Warfare and Destruction - Capture; and a Gathering / Crafting system.
From what the Dev Blog says, the first two: Core Races and Classes, will not be in place. Which leaves me skeptical that the third will be in place.
Ryan has taught us that the sandbox way it to focus on the tools first and add the content later.
Races are content (but highly important content). The minimum is not the minimum to play the game, but the minimum needed to make the world believable as Golarion.
Classes are... somewhere in between. Limiting viable playstyles is not something they will want to do, but at the minimum viable level "core four" cover the basic roles (melee, skills, arcane, divine) and niches can be emulated by combinations (ie pala=ftr+cl)
Core game play elements ("ways to meaningfully interact") is exactly what they have said they will focus on. If anything, them being so willing to cut the non-essentials to the bone tells me they have their priorities sorted and makes me less worried!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's good to know the master plan behind the development, and our thanks to Ryan for sharing so many details!
That said, I cannot say that I was thrilled with this blog. It seems we will get to "few" things with the start EE and (worse) we will wait a long time till we get more.
If I am not mistaken, EE will require of us to pay subscription. Some of us may already have 2 or 4 (or more) months free due to our pledge... but 18 months???
I recall that during the last Kickstarter, the EE was expected to last about 9 months - now this period is doubled...
EE, especially the first months, seems awfully like an open beta.
However, you ask from us to stay committed to the game, help develop it, play with only a faction of the mechanics and options "promised" and also pay a monthly subscription...
With so many features out, and expecting to see them after 18+ months have passed... I cannot really say if it will be enough to keep me and my guildies paying every month.
My humble request: please reconsider your business plan and your subscription requirements during "open beta" (aka EE) - because if people become disappointed during the long period of the EE and leave the game (and drop their subs), it may hamper the overall development.
Or at least try and deliver as much content and mechanics as possible in the EE (even the first month) so we can feel that we are playing and advancing the characters we want in PFO, not an beta character...
Interesting blog! It's nice to see all the cards on the table.
So I guess I'll have to also ask for some sort of respeccing. Not for classes--in my opinion, if you don't want the available classes, just save up the XP you're getting until your favored class is available. But I really hope there's a way to choose a new race. I know it sounds awkward, but it'd make things a lot easier for us half-orcs.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
b) My hope is that we can get Sorcerer, Barbarian, Paladin, and Bard in by the end of OE.
First... Hah! Thought you could slip past me, but I saw you posting under a new name and bookmarked you for my future dev post searches!
*grins*
Second, I assume you mean by the end of "EE".
... you can almost build a Paladin day one of EE from mixing Cleric and Fighter abilities, all you're missing is some class features...
This reminds me of something I tried to ask a while back. In PFRPG, the Warrior of the Holy Light archetype completely replaces the Paladin's Spells class feature with the Power of Faith class feature. This is actually much closer to my own personal vision of a Paladin, and I'm wondering if it's going to be practical to play this way in PFO.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A few points:
a) This is a question of resources. We could either get all the classes in and not really have them have much of their original flavor, not be well tested, each class has a single suit of armor appropriate to them, etc, or we could get some smaller subset in of a higher quality level and build on them. Of course we'd like to have more classes in, but time and resource wise it is not feasible.
b) My hope is that we can get Sorcerer, Barbarian, Paladin, and Bard in by the end of OE. They are relatively easy to add compared to Druid, Monk, etc, as most of their abilities are either not too difficult technologically or are combinations of other classes. Ranger, Druid, and Monk either involve a lot more tech (Animal Companion AI, wildshape), or a lot of custom animations (Monk combat) if we want to do them right. We're not going to do them unless we can do them right, as what's the point of playing a druid if you can't wildshape and don't have an animal companion?
c) The difference in terms of skills you buy between one of the four main classes and the other classes for the most part are a minority of your XP. For example, if you want to play a Ranger, day 1 of EE you make a Fighter and the XP you spend on Base Attack Bonus, Fortitude saves, Hit Points, special attacks, etc, is all going to be just as useful for a Ranger. If you want to play a ranged focused Ranger, just build an archer Fighter and you're about 80% of the way there. Once Ranger gets made available you could be up to speed on being a Ranger pretty quickly (around 20-30% of the time you spent buying Fighter). The same is very true for Paladin (you can almost build a Paladin day one of EE from mixing Cleric and Fighter abilities, all you're missing is some class features), Barbarian, and Bard. Sorcerer is a little trickier due to spell slots, but still not difficult.
a) we understand
b) I am confused, by "the end of OE". Did you mean end of EE or does OE have an end phase followed by "launch" where all the content is also in?
c) Thanks for clearing that up. Most of the secondary classes are just variations of the big 4 and will have plenty to do. Monk will be the most screwed (no surprise) with Druid a distant 2nd. Pally and Bard however, can be "quasi made". A Pally is a fighter/cleric and Bard is just a fancy pants jack of all trades anyways.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But I really hope there's a way to choose a new race. I know it sounds awkward, but it'd make things a lot easier for us half-orcs.
Ryan has already said as much. I expect they might limit it to one per character, and they'll probably limit it to a newly released Race - I can't imagine them letting you change a Dwarf to a Human just because they recently added Halflings.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
b) My hope is that we can get Sorcerer, Barbarian, Paladin, and Bard in by the end of OE.First... Hah! Thought you could slip past me, but I saw you posting under a new name and bookmarked you for my future dev post searches!
*grins*
Second, I assume you mean by the end of "EE".
... you can almost build a Paladin day one of EE from mixing Cleric and Fighter abilities, all you're missing is some class features...This reminds me of something I tried to ask a while back. In PFRPG, the Warrior of the Holy Light archetype completely replaces the Paladin's Spells class feature with the Power of Faith class feature. This is actually much closer to my own personal vision of a Paladin, and I'm wondering if it's going to be practical to play this way in PFO.
EE = Early Enrollment
OE = Open EnrollmentEE is first and when EE ends OE starts
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A Pally is a fighter/cleric...I imagine most Paladins would insist that it's the Class Features that really make a Paladin, not just the hybrid Fighter/Cleric abilities.
Naturally.
But for instance I am planning on a Ranger. Using the primary classes, all you have to do is take Medium armor and/or light armor, attack bonus, saving throws, melee weapons (two weapon fighting if it's available), archery and then grab stealth, perception and traps from the rogue trees. Add a splash of cure lt wounds from the cleric tree and then maybe bank some xp to spend on companions, favored enemies and ranger spells which is all that you will be missing.
In other words like I said, Monks and to a lesser extent Druids are the only ones that will be falling way behind the curve. Although I would be wary if I were a Sorcerer. I don't see how charisma based spell casting and intelligence based casting can come from the same tree.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
First, thank you for the response!
For those of us not intimately familiar with the tabletop game (it's been years since I played AD&D, and I've never played Pathfinder), will we/can we (as we go along) get some guidance on what skills do/don't cross-class? These may be "a minority of your XP", but (again, in my case, wizard/sorceror) they still represent a lost chunk of training time/subscription money as these are not skills I will ultimately be using, and they do not track along my eventual desired path. I'd rather know that after Wizard Skill 12 I should stop training Deianira until Special Sorceror Skills 1-12 are added, so to speak.
I would still much prefer a training time refund, of course, as it means I can concentrate on playtesting the game and not worry about learning skills that aren't applicable to my desired class; I hope that option will at least remain a possibility moving forward.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
First, thank you for the response!
For those of us not intimately familiar with the tabletop game (it's been years since I played AD&D, and I've never played Pathfinder), will we/can we (as we go along) get some guidance on what skills do/don't cross-class? These may be "a minority of your XP", but (again, in my case, wizard/sorceror) they still represent a lost chunk of training time/subscription money as these are not skills I will ultimately be using, and they do not track along my eventual desired path. I'd rather know that after Wizard Skill 12 I should stop training Deianira until Special Sorceror Skills 1-12 are added, so to speak.
I would still much prefer a training time refund, of course, as it means I can concentrate on playtesting the game and not worry about learning skills that aren't applicable to my desired class; I hope that option will at least remain a possibility moving forward.
I just stated above but I will repeat to respond to this: Sorcs need more info. Because sorcs and wizzies diverge from the very start: Wizards gain spells with intelligence and sorcs gain it with charisma.
So I'm not sure why it's being assumed that wizard tree of spell casting can be used by Sorcs.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
First, thank you for the response!
For those of us not intimately familiar with the tabletop game (it's been years since I played AD&D, and I've never played Pathfinder), will we/can we (as we go along) get some guidance on what skills do/don't cross-class? These may be "a minority of your XP", but (again, in my case, wizard/sorceror) they still represent a lost chunk of training time/subscription money as these are not skills I will ultimately be using, and they do not track along my eventual desired path. I'd rather know that after Wizard Skill 12 I should stop training Deianira until Special Sorceror Skills 1-12 are added, so to speak.
I would still much prefer a training time refund, of course, as it means I can concentrate on playtesting the game and not worry about learning skills that aren't applicable to my desired class; I hope that option will at least remain a possibility moving forward.
I just stated above but I will repeat to respond to this: Sorcs need more info. Because sorcs and wizzies diverge from the very start: Wizards gain spells with intelligence and sorcs gain it with charisma.
So I'm not sure why it's being assumed that wizard tree of spell casting can be used by Sorcs.
We discussed that a bit last night on Teamspeak (insert shameless Teamspeak plug here), but couldn't figure out how that intersected, as really, none of the first four classes rely on charisma. Paladin's in the same boat, yes, or has that changed from my D&D days? Anyway, as wizard is the only caster available at the start, that's sort of the default.
My other option is to shelve my beloved Deianira (sob) and start my ranger/druid Destiny's Twin, except that those two are likely even farther away than sorceror...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
First, thank you for the response!
For those of us not intimately familiar with the tabletop game (it's been years since I played AD&D, and I've never played Pathfinder), will we/can we (as we go along) get some guidance on what skills do/don't cross-class? These may be "a minority of your XP", but (again, in my case, wizard/sorceror) they still represent a lost chunk of training time/subscription money as these are not skills I will ultimately be using, and they do not track along my eventual desired path. I'd rather know that after Wizard Skill 12 I should stop training Deianira until Special Sorceror Skills 1-12 are added, so to speak.
I would still much prefer a training time refund, of course, as it means I can concentrate on playtesting the game and not worry about learning skills that aren't applicable to my desired class; I hope that option will at least remain a possibility moving forward.
I just stated above but I will repeat to respond to this: Sorcs need more info. Because sorcs and wizzies diverge from the very start: Wizards gain spells with intelligence and sorcs gain it with charisma.
So I'm not sure why it's being assumed that wizard tree of spell casting can be used by Sorcs.
It's probably because they share spell lists in tabletop.
I can see a quick and dirty fix, of the class feature slot determining which stat is used for spellcasting. But that opens its own dirty can of dirty worms.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's probably because they share spell lists in tabletop.I can see a quick and dirty fix, of the class feature slot determining which stat is used for spellcasting. But that opens its own dirty can of dirty worms.
Yes it does. If you do it that way the Sorc/wizard combo will be waaaaay OP in the long run.
Here is my prediction on the order "don't complain" to "you're screwed"
Don't Complain you nincompoop:
Paladins: you can do 90% of your class on day 1 combining Ftr/cleric and the class features are easy to implement making you a likely candidate to be one of the first paths included.
Barbarians: see paladins. Stay in the fighter tree.
Bards: You are supposed to be a jack of trades so act like one dammit! You can level from all 4 trees and bardsong should be easy to implement in the EE process.
Coulda been worse
Rangers: Will be able to create about 80% of the build but need to wait a long time for that special flavor sauce
Sorcs: Will probably not be able to do anything meaningful day 1, but should be the first class role added because the mechanics/spells are so similair to Wizard.
Screwed
Druid: Pretty much all the main core stuff is coming much later. You can train leather armor and hang out in the woods
You get your own expansion!
Yeah. Monks could be a long way off from what I am reading.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I can see a quick and dirty fix, of the class feature slot determining which stat is used for spellcasting.
I'm not 100% sure that Spells will be learned like other Skills, but if they are, it's significantly more of a problem because it's the act of gaining Skills that increases your Attributes. Will Sorcerers train Spell Skills that increase their Intelligence, and then suddenly have all of those increases switched over to Charisma when the Sorcerer is released?
Yes, it's a can of worms, indeed.
I'm not 100% sure that Spells will be learned like other Skills, but if they are, it's significantly more of a problem because it's the act of gaining Skills that increases your Attributes.
Yes, it's a can of worms, indeed.
I would almost assume based on GW's blog post I Put A Spell On You where they say "New spells may enter the game as loot, or through spell research," that the answer is kind of yes. I don't want to put words in their mouth. It could be similar to a fighter's weapon training but with spells, idk.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On the tangent that has been taken, I think that it's reasonable to allow some abilities to qualify for devotion for more than one archetype. Greatsword skills, for example, are appropriate for fighters and paladins but not sorcerers.
It would also be nice to see racial weapon proficiencies that stepped around the devotion system; I like my half-Orc bard with a greataxe, but a strict translation of weapon skills would say that the greatax isn't a bard thing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I really don't understand how GW can be planning on entering Open Enrollment without the bare minimum of all Core Races; Core Class Skill Trees; and the core game play elements (Combat PVE & PVP; Settlement Interactions (Construction, Warfare and Destruction - Capture; and a Gathering / Crafting system.
From what the Dev Blog says, the first two: Core Races and Classes, will not be in place. Which leaves me skeptical that the third will be in place.
Because EE is a paid beta, not the full game. This was at least very clear to me while making my kickstarter pledge.
What you are asking for is a fully functioning game at the very beginning of beta.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Also I accidentally logged into my personal account instead of my work account in the earlier posts. Whoops. All me though.
I bet you think you can hide from the NSA by using multiple accounts..... Hah! You can't.
I also bet you're thinking I'm talking about the National Security Agency? Well I'm not!
You have been detected by the Nihimon Scanning Agency, master of scanning all forum threads, posts and Dev Blogs.
|
Goblinworks Game Designer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On the tangent that has been taken, I think that it's reasonable to allow some abilities to qualify for devotion for more than one archetype. Greatsword skills, for example, are appropriate for fighters and paladins but not sorcerers.
It would also be nice to see racial weapon proficiencies that stepped around the devotion system; I like my half-Orc bard with a greataxe, but a strict translation of weapon skills would say that the greatax isn't a bard thing.
This is how it works. There is a large group of "General" feats, particularly for attacks, that don't count against any dedication bonus. They still may be better for a certain role. For example, most of the currently designed ones include a bonus on Opportunity, which synergizes with all the Fighter's other bonuses on Opportunity, but can be used by anyone who wants to have something cool to do against players running around in combat.
So your sorcerer or bard with a greataxe may not be getting the synergies he'd be getting with a weapon designed for the role, and he'll potentially have to buy a bunch of attack upgrades and attack feats that don't directly contribute to leveling his primary role to be any good with the weapon, but he also won't be considered to be slotted for multiple roles unless he puts some Fighter-specific attack feats on the weapon.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think one free re-spec is more than reasonable. I also think that re-specing should be a cash-shop item.I've not yet figured out what purpose re-specs would serve. Any skill you learn will be useful in some way, so why would they give us a mechanism to get rid of them?
Because GW wants people to train skills, test combinations, etc. and otherwise participate in EE so they can see how their game works; not just sit on an 18-month pile of xp waiting for the day when you can be sure they're going where you'll want them. Unless GW can guarantee at this early stage and communicate in the skill assignment during EE, "All of these following skills will be part of the Ranger template..." etc.
All sorts of systems and skills will be iterated on, synergies changing, a potential hurricane of rapid changes so skills don't work the same way as when you trained them because beta is beta.
How is it fun or promoting the spirit of crowdforging to lose even 20-30% of your character to things you didn't want in the first place but accepted as the best available at the time just to be a part of EE?
I'm not suggesting anything other than: once all the skill options are available, provide a limited-time window for EE players for a one-time voluntary reset of the xp we accrued and assigned to help test the game and participate in EE. It would then be assigned into our skill tree following all the the finalized pre-reqs and training systems that every player has at that time. So instead of 70-80% the character we wanted we can build 100% the character we want like people that join years later after the building work is done.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One thing to keep in mind regarding "respecs" is that Ryan has said from day one that character development over time will be about breadth of experience, not necessarily depth.
In the example of a sorcerer who needs to start out as a wizard and bemoaning the fact that he'll be weaker than the wizard once the sorcerer is introduced, consider how much more powerful that character will be compared to any other Level 1 sorcerer. You'll already have X levels in another class and have chosen to expand the character's abilities by developing as a sorcerer. Levels don't exist per se but you get the point.
As another example, take the monk. Instead of not playing your twin until the monk comes out, consider how much more powerful he could be if he starts his monk career with "10 levels" of fighter under his belt?
I think in general it will be more beneficial to think of your character as a person first, rather than a class. That person is going to go through life picking up all sorts of skills in his career as an adventurer, or leader, or merchant lord, or robber baron. This game differs from the tabletop in that it's not about being a "pure" whatever, it's about accumulating a diverse array of skills over time.
That's going to be the life of an early adopter.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In the example of a sorcerer who needs to start out as a wizard and bemoaning the fact that he'll be weaker than the wizard once the sorcerer is introduced, consider how much more powerful that character will be compared to any other Level 1 sorcerer. You'll already have X levels in another class and have chosen to expand the character's abilities by developing as a sorcerer. Levels don't exist per se but you get the point.
As the person in question, I'm not concerned with how much more powerful I am than other first-level sorcerors, I am concerned with how much less powerful I am than my own group-mates, once I stop training wizard in order to go back to pick up the sorceror skills I didn't have access to during training (while my wizardly colleague had all relevant wizard abilities available to him). Any wizard-specific skills I train that do not transfer to sorceror don't matter to me, because regardless of Ryan's vision, I want to single-class, not multi-class. (Besides which, if I were to multiclass, it would be in something other than another arcane caster, like, oh, bard, which I had planned to do with Deianira but which also won't be available.) Depth, not breadth... at least, not in the early stages of my career. My wizardly colleague has that choice, and I do not.
It's lovely that the system offers breadth, but the fact is, people who want four particular classes are the only ones who get a choice in the matter.
That said, I am hopeful that GoblinWorks will offer templates which indicate which skills are cross-class and which are not, as well as how those skills affect stats (again, wizards and sorcerors diverge early on with wizards using intelligence and sorcerors using charisma). At least that way I can participate a bit in EE without going down a path I don't want to take.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
(See, I broke it down into nice little easy to read points!)
THE FLAVOR OF THE MONTH (Nerf peanutbutter! It's too tasty!!!)
This is an issue we won't have to worry about that much in PFO, because of the time it takes to train our characters and the lack of respecs. Add respecs and people will all respec into the build that is currently most powerful, and then cry and quit the game when it gets nerfed.
PLEASE SIR, CAN I HAVE SOME MORE? (No soup for you!)
Ok so one respec doesn't mean that you'll be respeccing all the time to the point you'll change your build more frequently than your undergarments. But the problem is it will create an expectation.
Sorcerers are released? I want a respec! Rangers are releases? I want a respec! Oracles are released? I want a respec! Bloat mages are released? I want a respec! Magic missile gets nerfed? I want a respec! Ryan shaves his beard of justice? I want a respec! Neville Longbottom wins 10 points for Gryffindor? I want a respec!
Pretty soon people will expect respecs after every game changing (or not so game changing) release.
YOU WILL SURVIVE (For as long as you've got love to give you know you're still alive!)
As a EE enrollee you are getting a head start on the rest of the community. Ok so some dude who never wanted to be anything but a sword wielding fighter may start getting class skills before you. That may seem like a big deal now but when you are ahead of 90%+ of the community simply by having been in EE you will forget you ever cared.
No skills you take will ever hurt you because there is no cap on training. And as Lee stated, most skills aren't class specific. Some day you will look back on this discussion and laugh. If you even remember it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That is actually not what I asked for. What I hoped for us that the Core Races, Core Class Skills and Core Game Mechanics are in place by the start of Open Enrollment.
What you are asking for is a fully functioning game at the very beginning of beta.
Right so you want the entire core game in. Not the stuff that comes in the additional content otherwise known as expansions.
I retract my statement. Clearly I have misrepresented what you said.
The bit about monks makes me incredibly sad. Nothing I didn't expect, but sad nonetheless. This likely means I won't even consider picking up the game until monks are released. Yes, I know this means I'll be miles behind everyone else.
*shrug*
Monks and paladins are the only base classes that really interest me in any way in D&D/Pathfinder... and Paladins fall under the category of 'Just don't hate it as much as I hate everything else.'
The magus and the monk are the only classes I have enjoyed playing in Pathfinder. I simply can't get 'into' other classes anymore - likely a case of burnout from too many years of not having those options in most online games, which accounts for the majority of my gaming in the last 12 or 15 years.
Like I said, I understand the reasoning behind it. I'm working on my Computer Science degree, and I want to get into game design so I've taken a bunch of courses on that subject. I didn't really expect monks to be available from the get go. From what it sounds like, it will be as much as 3 or 4 YEARS after the start of EE before monks are available.
:(
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Zanathos,
I feel your pain over the Monks. It is especially difficult to understand the reasoning behind it. I couldn't care less about have "special animations" for Monk combat. That I can wait, months or even years for. Just give me the core class Monk. Let him swing a no staff like a two handed weapon and thrust it like a spear. Nothing fancier than that is needed.
I will start my " Monk" and focus on the gathering / crafting side of skill training for him. I will of course train the core skills and the very basic combat and survival skills. Then I will store the rest until Monks are properly introduced.
I may also go with being a Cleric of Irori and then switch to Monk later on.