I'm wondering if multiclassing will be "gimped" in PFO like it is in pathfinder. One of the games' blog posts mentioned how players will be rewarded with a capstone ability for sticking to one path for all 20 levels, which I really do like. But the game design team does seem to want player characters to be as individual and varied as possible, which makes me think that multiclassed characters ought to at least be viable. I guess I want to know if a lot of thought has been given to the subject yet.
Goblin Squad Member
|
There has been a lot of discussion :)
PFO has said they want to allow you to pursue another archetype once you've gotten 20 in your first, and even be able to get the capstone in that 2nd archetype as long as you gain all 20 levels of it in a row, without branching out into other archetype skill trees while doing so.
Some people are very concerned that this will inevitably end up with super-powered characters that will ruin the game.
Others of us are more hopeful that the designers are up to the task of creating a system with rational, RP-based restrictions, rather than resorting to the simple fix of some kind of capped Talent Tree system, or a capped number of "equipped" levels worth of abilities.
I think there's plenty of room for things like "can't cast spells in armor", and "can't sneak in armor", and even "only get Monk benefits while in a zen-like Chi state, which is not suitable for casting spells", etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hoping however for a playable bardarian...
|
in reference to Nihimon's post(I have no idea how to quote text), in the table top you can spells as a monk/caster or while wearing armor the penelty being the armor gives the spells a chance to fail(which you can take feats to partially bypass) and the monk/caster has split abilities so can't cast as well as a dedicated caster or fight as well as a monk of the same lvl. There is no need to otherwise limit the abilties.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
(I have no idea how to quote text)
Click the "Reply" link at the top of the post you want to quote, and then click the "Show" button at the bottom for additional tags you can use.
... in the table top you can spells as a monk/caster or while wearing armor the penelty being the armor gives the spells a chance to fail(which you can take feats to partially bypass) and the monk/caster has split abilities so can't cast as well as a dedicated caster or fight as well as a monk of the same lvl. There is no need to otherwise limit the abilties.
I believe the table top version also limits the total number of levels you can have, so that you'll never see a Monk/Wizard that's level 20 in both classes. Since that's going to be possible in PFO, there's been a lot of discussion of how to keep that 20/20 Monk/Wizard from being ridiculously overpowered.
I'm not terribly concerned, myself, since I trust that the designers don't want that any more than anyone else does, and that they'll come up with a system that deals with it reasonably.
What I am terribly concerned about is trying to make sure they don't resort to an arbitrary Talent Tree type of solution for that.
maybe rather than "no sneak in full plate armor", a "max bonus in sneak check with full plate armor" is preferable...
just like the max dex bonus... (and the max dex bonus is a penality for sneaking already)
in a sandbox game everyone should be able to sneaking. The fact that my cloisted cleric is awfully incapable to sneak behind even a drunk ogre is another story
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
maybe rather than "no sneak in full plate armor", a "max bonus in sneak check with full plate armor" is preferable...
just like the max dex bonus... (and the max dex bonus is a penality for sneaking already)
in a sandbox game everyone should be able to sneaking. The fact that my cloysted cleric is awfully incapable to sneak behind even a drunk ogre is another story
You're absolutely right. It should be skill-based, over a continuum of possible results, rather than a simple yes/no with arbitrary rules.
As I've said, my main point is to ask them to please not use the standard Talent Tree system, or anything else designed to put a hard cap on useful progression.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for the how to.
In table top you can go over 20 either by continueing the progression or multiclassing and there are a few books all about "epic level" adventures.
So the question is why prevent someone from spending 6 years to make a 40 level character? Each level regardless of which class you pick takes signifigantly longer then the previous so going from 20 to 40 takes a lot longer then going 1 to 20.
What i find disappointing is no capstone for sorcerer if I took monk every other level so at level 20sorc/20mnk I get less then someone else with same build who did one then the other. It should be at level 20sorc/19mnk I get capstone if I multi class it takes me longer but I shouldn't be penalized for playing my character as a spellcasting monk from the beggining.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What i find disappointing is no capstone for sorcerer if I took monk every other level so at level 20sorc/20mnk I get less then someone else with same build who did one then the other. It should be at level 20sorc/19mnk I get capstone if I multi class it takes me longer but I shouldn't be penalized for playing my character as a spellcasting monk from the beggining.
You're not alone, and I wouldn't be surprised to see them back down from this before all is said and done. Not that I'm privy to any special information, just offering my opinion :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What i find disappointing is no capstone for sorcerer if I took monk every other level so at level 20sorc/20mnk I get less then someone else with same build who did one then the other. It should be at level 20sorc/19mnk I get capstone if I multi class it takes me longer but I shouldn't be penalized for playing my character as a spellcasting monk from the beggining.You're not alone, and I wouldn't be surprised to see them back down from this before all is said and done. Not that I'm privy to any special information, just offering my opinion :)
Actually, one thing they could do to alleviate some of the disappointment would be to create other unique capstones for particular multi-class combinations. As a 20 Monk / 20 Wizard, you wouldn't necessarily have the Monk capstone or the Wizard capstone, but you'd get the Monk/Wizard capstone. And maybe that Monk/Wizard capstone is only available to players who aren't eligible for the Monk or Wizard capstone.
|
|
Actually, one thing they could do to alleviate some of the disappointment would be to create other unique capstones for particular multi-class combinations. As a 20 Monk / 20 Wizard, you wouldn't necessarily have the Monk capstone or the Wizard capstone, but you'd get the Monk/Wizard capstone. And maybe that Monk/Wizard capstone is only available to players who aren't eligible for the Monk or Wizard capstone.What i find disappointing is no capstone for sorcerer if I took monk every other level so at level 20sorc/20mnk I get less then someone else with same build who did one then the other. It should be at level 20sorc/19mnk I get capstone if I multi class it takes me longer but I shouldn't be penalized for playing my character as a spellcasting monk from the beggining.You're not alone, and I wouldn't be surprised to see them back down from this before all is said and done. Not that I'm privy to any special information, just offering my opinion :)
I could go for that.
I believe capstones become meaningless if you don't specialize in one thing. If Jimmy the cleric decides he wants to take a few fighter levels but Desmond the cleric wants to devote himself entirely to one path, Desmond should see some sweet reward at the end that Jimmy wouldn't. But when all is said and done, Jimmy could probably kick Desmond's ass in a fight with all that fighter training.
If you don't get that capstone, multiclassing means you're still getting special abilities that other characters in your class don't.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can see the reasoning behind not allowing a player to switch between archetypes and also get one or more of the capstone abilities. The advantage of this kind of multiclassing is multiclassing itself; a 1/1 Ftr/Sor can wield two-handed, cast shield on himself and start off the party with magic missile. He/she will almost certainly spend time on the 'feats' (skills) that mitigate spell mischance in armor. Because skilling up in real time is a main prerequisite to reach ability milestones and these will presumably become more time-consuming as you progress in any certain archetype, at first a switch-hitter will reach 'levels' faster than a committed player. Right? Reaching L 1 of Sor in the above example should take a shorter period of time than a guy going directly to Ftr L 2.However by midlevels it should even out, as the switch-hitter has to spend more and more time acquiring skills that make his two (three? or more?) archetypes' abilities work together the way he/she was aiming for when planning the character build. Ryan has stated the capstone abilities will be cool but not earth-shattering, the icing on the cake. I'm certainly going to multiclass. I'll take a look at the capstones and then decide whether to commit to to one class first or switch-hit. That being said, as soon as they add the Summoner class/archetype I'm going up in that.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I can see the reasoning behind not allowing a player to switch between archetypes and also get one or more of the capstone abilities. The advantage of this kind of multiclassing is multiclassing itself; a 1/1 Ftr/Sor can wield two-handed, cast shield on himself and start off the party with magic missile. He/she will almost certainly spend time on the 'feats' (skills) that mitigate spell mischance in armor. Because skilling up in real time is a main prerequisite to reach ability milestones and these will presumably become more time-consuming as you progress in any certain archetype, at first a switch-hitter will reach 'levels' faster than a committed player. Right? Reaching L 1 of Sor in the above example should take a shorter period of time than a guy going directly to Ftr L 2.However by midlevels it should even out, as the switch-hitter has to spend more and more time acquiring skills that make his two (three? or more?) archetypes' abilities work together the way he/she was aiming for when planning the character build. Ryan has stated the capstone abilities will be cool but not earth-shattering, the icing on the cake. I'm certainly going to multiclass. I'll take a look at the capstones and then decide whether to commit to to one class first or switch-hit. That being said, as soon as they add the Summoner class/archetype I'm going up in that.
While I mostly agree with you, I absolutely hope they do not add feats/skills/abilities to mitigate spell failure in armor. This sort of thing would reduce midlevels, but then get more extreme when you are looking at 5 year vets compeating with 2 year players etc... Maxing out all classes should have numerous lateral advantages, but few direct straight foward advantages.
Flexability as in I can sneak attack, and I can cast scorching ray, not direct power as in "I can sneak attack with my scorching ray and deal the damage of both in 1 shot". Same goes for spells and armor, I can have heavy offense or heavy defense, possibly switch between the 2 at will, but not have extreme offense and extreme defense at the same time with no drawbacks.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I can see the reasoning behind not allowing a player to switch between archetypes and also get one or more of the capstone abilities. The advantage of this kind of multiclassing is multiclassing itself; a 1/1 Ftr/Sor can wield two-handed, cast shield on himself and start off the party with magic missile. He/she will almost certainly spend time on the 'feats' (skills) that mitigate spell mischance in armor. Because skilling up in real time is a main prerequisite to reach ability milestones and these will presumably become more time-consuming as you progress in any certain archetype, at first a switch-hitter will reach 'levels' faster than a committed player. Right? Reaching L 1 of Sor in the above example should take a shorter period of time than a guy going directly to Ftr L 2.However by midlevels it should even out, as the switch-hitter has to spend more and more time acquiring skills that make his two (three? or more?) archetypes' abilities work together the way he/she was aiming for when planning the character build. Ryan has stated the capstone abilities will be cool but not earth-shattering, the icing on the cake. I'm certainly going to multiclass. I'll take a look at the capstones and then decide whether to commit to to one class first or switch-hit. That being said, as soon as they add the Summoner class/archetype I'm going up in that.While I mostly agree with you, I absolutely hope they do not add feats/skills/abilities to mitigate spell failure in armor. This sort of thing would reduce midlevels, but then get more extreme when you are looking at 5 year vets compeating with 2 year players etc... Maxing out all classes should have numerous lateral advantages, but few direct straight foward advantages.
Flexability as in I can sneak attack, and I can cast scorching ray, not direct power as in "I can sneak attack with my scorching ray and deal the damage of both in 1 shot". Same goes for spells and armor, I can have heavy offense or heavy defense, possibly switch between the...
I agree that the character certainly shouldn't be able to cast scorching ray and backstab in one shot (unless you're a Rogue/Magus of the right level!). But I think he/she should be free to choose between the two. Multiclass abilities that are not mutually exclusive should go together-that rewards the time spent and concept. If the player spends the time to develop it, I think he should be able to smite evil and backstab (Rogue/Paladin) at the same time if the situation warrants. In tabletop Pathfinder a character can reduce the spell failure chance to nearly nothing for medium or light armor. They can cast spells with no somatic component or eliminate it altogether with the Still Spell feat. Note that none of these combinations are free, they come with an opportunity cost and that is the way it will be in POL. Now, I said this elsewhere but it bears repeating: the limit on ubercharacters could be that the equivalent of your BAB would be capped at +20 no matter how many levels you added, your max health would be capped at the level 20 of your highest HD archetype, your base save in each category capped at +12, etc. You'd gain spells, abilities and bonus 'feats' but the number of normal skill progressions that resemble feats for a level 20 would stop there. So, why become a Sorcerer archetype when you're already a Ftr 20? Because you'll gain spells, bloodline powers and feats (remember, you've already used up your normal feats and bonus combat feats when you advanced to Ftr 20) and max out your Cha and Will save. There could be a cap on attributes as well. If a Ftr10/Sor10 meets a cleric 20 I think that would be a good fight. Meanwhile your crafting/looting cool gear. Character differentiation is something that appeals to every style of player. I don't subscribe to the view that 20/20s or better are overpowered unless they are allowed to rampage thru areas where newbies are starting out or grief with impunity and I think that has been addressed. Every MMO has characters at the level cap with awesome gear stomping around-they spent the time, they deserve it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But I think he/she should be free to choose between the two. Multiclass abilities that are not mutually exclusive should go together-that rewards the time spent and concept. If the player spends the time to develop it, I think he should be able to smite evil and backstab (Rogue/Paladin) at the same time if the situation warrants. In tabletop Pathfinder a character can reduce the spell failure chance to nearly nothing for medium or light armor. They can cast spells with no somatic component or eliminate it altogether with the Still Spell feat.
By stacking backstab and smite evil you are massively permitting an infinantly climbing damage per second rate. The idea is that a 20/20/20 can inflict damage in more ways, but not more raw DPS than a 20 or a 20/20. Say with universal cooldown I am perfectly ok with opening with a sneak attack, then following it with a smite evil. But I am greatly opposed to 1 shot getting the damage bonus of smite evil, sneak attack and favored enemy combined allowing you to one shot a 20 character.
They should have more options, and likely be stronger because they have the right trick for the job, but not directly more powerful at the same job as someone who only has the right trick for the job.
Bottom line is you should be equally powerful 2.5 years in, as someone 8 years in at what you specialized in, but not more powerful against every situation.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But I think he/she should be free to choose between the two. Multiclass abilities that are not mutually exclusive should go together-that rewards the time spent and concept. If the player spends the time to develop it, I think he should be able to smite evil and backstab (Rogue/Paladin) at the same time if the situation warrants. In tabletop Pathfinder a character can reduce the spell failure chance to nearly nothing for medium or light armor. They can cast spells with no somatic component or eliminate it altogether with the Still Spell feat.By stacking backstab and smite evil you are massively permitting an infinantly climbing damage per second rate. The idea is that a 20/20/20 can inflict damage in more ways, but not more raw DPS than a 20 or a 20/20. Say with universal cooldown I am perfectly ok with opening with a sneak attack, then following it with a smite evil. But I am greatly opposed to 1 shot getting the damage bonus of smite evil, sneak attack and favored enemy combined allowing you to one shot a 20 character.
They should have more options, and likely be stronger because they have the right trick for the job, but not directly more powerful at the same job as someone who only has the right trick for the job.
Bottom line is you should be equally powerful 2.5 years in, as someone 8 years in at what you specialized in, but not more powerful against every situation.
The universal cooldown idea is excellent. I hadn't thought of that. Especially when I proposed a max on Con and HD as a limiting factor, but of course that couldn't keep up with dps for multiple archetypes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... I am greatly opposed to 1 shot getting the damage bonus of smite evil, sneak attack and favored enemy combined allowing you to one shot a 20 character.
This is exactly what I was referring to elsewhere when I brought up the old D&D rule that, if you had a Ring of Intelligence (+2 Int) and a Necklace of Intelligence (+1 Int), then you would only get the greater bonus, not the sum of all of them.
In this sense, the 20/20/20 has an advantage in that he's more likely to get a good bonus because he has bonuses on many different situations, but he's not ever going to stack those bonuses.
This is how I would like to see the power curve flattened out at the top end, so that a 20/20/20/20/20 is not really all that more powerful than a 20, but still is a little more powerful since he's going to get a more powerful attack more often.
Agreed.
and, like in the table game, after the first 20 levels, no more advancing in BaB and saves. and no epic bonuses.
|
|
While I mostly agree with you, I absolutely hope they do not add feats/skills/abilities to mitigate spell failure in armor. This sort of thing would reduce midlevels, but then get more extreme when you are looking at 5 year vets compeating with 2 year players etc... Maxing out all classes should have numerous lateral advantages, but few direct straight foward advantages.
Flexability as in I can sneak attack, and I can cast scorching ray, not direct power as in "I can sneak attack with my scorching ray and deal the damage of both in 1 shot". Same goes for spells and armor, I can have heavy offense or heavy defense, possibly switch between the...
First the feats are fine they take a feat slot as a cost so those are paid for abilties.
Second in the PnP you can sneak attack with any attack that targets a target and requires a roll to hit as long as it also deals damage. So yes even at the table I can use stunning fist with a snk atk and a shocking grasp all in one shot(which I have done in 3.5 btw) the mix is alright, because I took three levels in different classes thus the dmg is not outlandish compared to a straight fighter of equal level with good feats and stats.
The rule for stacking is different bonuses stack, same bonuses don't. Mage armor doesn't stack with armor but it does stack with shield because they are different types of ac bonus.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
While I mostly agree with you, I absolutely hope they do not add feats/skills/abilities to mitigate spell failure in armor. This sort of thing would reduce midlevels, but then get more extreme when you are looking at 5 year vets compeating with 2 year players etc... Maxing out all classes should have numerous lateral advantages, but few direct straight foward advantages.
Flexability as in I can sneak attack, and I can cast scorching ray, not direct power as in "I can sneak attack with my scorching ray and deal the damage of both in 1 shot". Same goes for spells and armor, I can have heavy offense or heavy defense, possibly switch between the...
First the feats are fine they take a feat slot as a cost so those are paid for abilties.
Second in the PnP you can sneak attack with any attack that targets a target and requires a roll to hit as long as it also deals damage. So yes even at the table I can use stunning fist with a snk atk and a shocking grasp all in one shot(which I have done in 3.5 btw) the mix is alright, because I took three levels in different classes thus the dmg is not outlandish compared to a straight fighter of equal level with good feats and stats.
The rule for stacking is different bonuses stack, same bonuses don't. Mage armor doesn't stack with armor but it does stack with shield because they are different types of ac bonus.
Right, the table these things work, in PFO I am saying they should not, due to the fact that on the table you have limited feat slots, limited levels, challanges based on levels etc... Taking a level in rogue is sacrificing a level in wizard.
in 6 years, someone will have 20/20 rogue wizard, and we would like that to be more flexible but on the same power level of a 20 rogue or a 20 wizard, so that both can meet on the battle field, and the single class not be 1/2 as effective as the dual class. That is why they should not stack together that way to permit 1 super attack that gains the bonuses from all of your classes at once, but permitting variety in your attacks allowing a character to alternate to the most appropriate for the situation at the right moment, is reasonable.
|
|
Agreed.
and, like in the table game, after the first 20 levels, no more advancing in BaB and saves. and no epic bonuses.
I have only done epic (and even played a god) in 3.5 but epic bab and such increases as implied by the first 20 lvls; full bab equals lvl, cleric bab equals 3/4 lvl, etc.
@Sepherum, the time it takes to gain a level is based on TOTAL lvl regardless of what those levels were. It would take just as long to become 4mnk/2sorc as it would take to get to 6mnk.
Agreed.
and, like in the table game, after the first 20 levels, no more advancing in BaB and saves. and no epic bonuses.I have only done epic (and even played a god) in 3.5 but epic bab and such increases as implied by the first 20 lvls; full bab equals lvl, cleric bab equals 3/4 lvl, etc.
@Sepherum, the time it takes to gain a level is based on TOTAL lvl regardless of what those levels were. It would take just as long to become 4mnk/2sorc as it would take to get to 6mnk.
I'm pretty sure that the BaB after the first 20 levels stops augmenting.
Otherwise a 21° fighter would gain the 5th attack. And so is not, because the fifth attack is useless.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"That's the way it works in tabletop." is the worst reason to propose something for PFO. Limit sneak attack to certain weapons, and limit power attack to different weapons, if that makes the game better. Definitely drop the Vancian magic system, as well as the concept that martial characters get passive benefits to attacks as their primary feature.
I can see that you don't like a sneak attack with a great axe :P
I don't know about how the damage system works, but when you can inflict 10d6 sneak damage, if a weapon does 1d6 (short sword) or 1d12 (greataxe) i can't see big differences. the short sword can be handled with two hands too...
and power attack in pathfinder is already nerfed enough... it's like a status now
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How about unstacking: the player chooses to deal either precision damage or power damage. Precision effects stack with each other, but not with power effects or ki effects. Some attacks and weapons would be unusable by certain powers or styles; ''overpower" would be incompatible with a rapier, and "arterial stike" can't be done with a craghammer.
Precision effects might focus on debuffs and bleed, power effects on stun and knockdown, and ki effects on ignoring armor. The barbarian/rogue/monk can't do any one thing better than the single-classed character, but with a one-handed flail, a rapier, and the right boots, he has the flexibility to perform any of his attacks.
ok, power attack plus +10d6 sneak plus rage plus TRUE STRIKE plus shivering palm is of course banned.
I agree with the unstacking thing
|
|
@ onishi. A 20rogue/20wizard is a 40th level character which should indeed be far more powerfull then a 20th level character whether rogue or wizard or both.
If I invest 6 years of RL time into a game I don't want anyone telling me that I can't do anything better then someone who only spent 2 years playing.
@daniel
This is a game based on a tabletop game which means the tabletop game is not a bad reference(though I wouldn't call it the best either)
Though I definatly agree that power type should not stack with finesse type but I would hate to lose my ability to snk atk with a spell, it has been a staple of many of my characters and that alone has kept me on par with the fighters of those groups.
For everyone else
1 major problematic assumtion I see here is most think a multiclass character is a gesalt character and that's not true. A 10rog/10wiz is a 20 level charater not a 10 level character and therefore can cast 5th level spells(not 9th) and can snk atk +5 dice(not 10).
So why do people say characters of vastly different levels need to be equal just because one is a multiclass?
Multiclassing should stack otherwise, what's the point?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ onishi. A 20rogue/20wizard is a 40th level character which should indeed be far more powerfull then a 20th level character whether rogue or wizard or both.
Completely disagree, they should be more versatile, but not directly more powerful. Bottom line is the game is still going to need new people to come in in 4 years, and knowing they are miles weaker and never going to permanently be one shot by people who have been in the game for 4 years already, is going to be a huge disincentive to play in a game with full world open PVP 24/7. In eve, within a year you can more or less be on par with the best at piloting one type of ship, now the absolute best players can pilot 7 different types of ships better then you, but in the one type of ship you specialized in, you are on par with them. That leaves it so that they are continuously becoming more flexible working towards more, but you aren't their free lunch in every other situation.
Secondly damage stacking together cannot be done too far, because HP etc... absolutely has to stop by the first 20. If damage etc... keeps rolling up, but HP stops... well now we are looking at everything oneshotting everyone, and if HP does keep scaling... well now we're just looking at super characters that do repeatedly walk in and kill everything in their path, and mid-level characters being left entirely on the sidelines.
If you've played WoW, you know how entirely little anyone who is not capped and in top of the line gear can do when a small band of capped characters attacks the town. IE say in a level 55 zone, a group of 3 level 85's in top epic gear come in, They pretty much could breeze through 50 players and all the NPCs without even slowing down, in WoW that dosn't matter you wait 5 minutes and the NPCs respawn, who cares if you took part in the fight. In PFO and eve type games, you are talking about everything you ever worked for going up in smoke, everyone who is effected should have a role to play in that fight, anyone who has been playing over 3 months needs to have a role to play, yes they should be weaker, but not so much weaker that their presence is completely irrelevant.
Bottom line is while the top does need to keep gaining to stay motivated, the difference between the top and the middle players, can never be to great. In every game there is a distance for how far you have to go before you are considered capable of setting foot in the arena, and if that is consistently moving forward at a steady pace, and takes over a year... only the people who got in at the start of the game will find this game fun to stick around.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We all want to capture the flavor of tabletop Pathfinder but of course the rules of that game simply won't work for an MMO. You can't have a wizard walking around with only 2 spells in his daily arsenal even at 1rst L. The 'rest' mechanic of NWN won't work in an open pvp sandbox game that doesn't feature point-and-click map travel. Many abilities have a 'times per day' limitation-these will certainly be replaced with RT cooldowns. There will be ki points, rage, spell points or 'mana', and other resevoirs of potetial power that a character can draw upon that will replenish at a certain rate based on game balance. I suggest that each archetype start with an attack based on character and weapon type and as it improves with levels (or merit badges, or whatever), it can be augmented by either precision or power effects which cannot be stacked. This has already been suggested and I think the idea is a good one. Also someone mentioned a universal cooldown so a 20/20/20, not all at once but based the situation (which also limits abilities) could, in order but not as one shot, say, sneak atk, smite evil, then use favored enemy- powerful, but someone did spend 7.5 years on the character.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... drop the Vancian magic system...
Not a huge concern of mine, but I always liked the idea of memorizing spells with a small chance that you'll have forgotten it each time you cast, but eventually never forgetting it.
How about unstacking: the player chooses to deal either precision damage or power damage. Precision effects stack with each other, but not with power effects or ki effects. Some attacks and weapons would be unusable by certain powers or styles; ''overpower" would be incompatible with a rapier, and "arterial stike" can't be done with a craghammer.
Precision effects might focus on debuffs and bleed, power effects on stun and knockdown, and ki effects on ignoring armor. The barbarian/rogue/monk can't do any one thing better than the single-classed character, but with a one-handed flail, a rapier, and the right boots, he has the flexibility to perform any of his attacks.
This seems very appropriate.
A 20rogue/20wizard is a 40th level character which should indeed be far more powerfull then a 20th level character whether rogue or wizard or both.
I am not 100% sure of this, but I believe PFO's intention is to have levels above 20 only marginally improve effectiveness, and only by increasing versatility, not by increasing power.
At least, that's the way most of us who are arguing that we shouldn't be limited to 20 "active" levels at a time are pushing for.
There will be ki points, rage, spell points or 'mana', and other resevoirs of potetial power that a character can draw upon that will replenish at a certain rate based on game balance.
I'm not sure I would want them to do so, but I could see them creating a different stance for each meta-archetype (figher, monk, caster, thief, cleric) and requiring you to be in that stance to use those abilities. Wouldn't be horrible, and might be fairly easy to keep balanced.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
A rog20/wiz20 isn't a better rogue than a rog20 and isn't a better wizard than a wiz20. He is more powerful, since he lacks the characteristics "unable to cast spells" and "can't hurt things immune to magic". The fighter20 is still better at defeating golems and the like.
|
|
There are already limits to stacking snk atk and other such things in place. Snk atk requires a way to deal dmg that relies on acc and must be within 30 ft.
And favored enemy, well that applies to only certain types of enemies.
And no I don't think level 40 should be miles ahead rather takeing a 20th lvl char against a 40th lvl char should feel the same as going 1st lvl against 20th lvl.
And I do not want to see stances a want them abilities to merge that's why I multiclass, I cannot get the chararcter I want out of a straight class so I go get the abilities of various classes until I have the ablities I want. Truth be told I prefer classless but finding good resources for such is difficult along with finding friends with the creativity to use it.
I don't learn snk atk to use my dagger, I learn it to use scorching ray. I give up lvls to make them work together resulting in about the same dmg as an equal char there is reason why they work on paper. And it takes years to get there which should be rewarded with getting something significant.
If I start in the first gruop and I'm actually still playing the same char(unlikely) 10 years later then anyone in the know should realize that I'm not someone mess arould with, and if death brings neg lvls then it might take that long just to get above 20 to begin with.
Those who spend the time should be epic players that low level guild form just to kill these epic characters, adding neg lvls which means it takes even longer to advance, so anyone actually getting there would deserve to have those abilties.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Those who spend the time should be epic players that low level guild form just to kill these epic characters, adding neg lvls which means it takes even longer to advance, so anyone actually getting there would deserve to have those abilties.
There are going to be no actual levels in PFO whatsoever, it is going to be a skill based system, IE skills level up not actually you, the death penelties have been explained already and there is unlikely to be any loss of skills/XP upon death, getting the same character to 1-20, takes the same amount of time the second time around, only faster because the merit badges portion of it will be much easier with a class fully to 20. it is estimated to take about 2.5 years to get one archtype to it's 20 ability. The issue with no cap is quite frankly that if the power levels up like that, 6 years down the road, the players know that 6 years from the start, it will take them 6 years to deal damage on a comparable level to the people who started 6 years ago, Sneak attacking with scorching ray that deals the full sneak attack of a rogue and the full damage of the strongest wizard added together... means that 2.5 years from now, you are still doing half the damage, and at that point they are adding favored enemy humanoid, or who knows what other abilities to it to pretty much make it 1 shot you every time.
The fact that skills level over time will also make it far more disheartening to a player walking into the situation, because they know right off the bat that not only will it take them 6 years to get to where the person is now, but at that point the person is going to have 2 more classes, and probably have picked even more that they can stack the damage together with, that 6 year gap can never be closed until the other player hits cap, in 29 years (11 classes at 2.5 years each).
2.5 years?
29 years? sound like a challenge.
Challenge accepted.
But I think the game will end BEFORE 29 years (if not, good) :D
one question: if you reach the twentieth level after so much time (i don't know how this work in other sandbox games) this means that a 20° can one-shot a newbie for 2.5 years, and only stop to do it when him too reach the 20°?
|
|
For one it would not be 2.5 years each as leveling that takes longer regardless of what you already have so getting the second class would take more then twice as long as the first.
This is a catch up feature btw as when the newbie gets 20 the old guy is less then halfway to next 20.
I started my first dnd game 3 levels behind everyone and it took me no time at all to catch up with the group, I was always behind on exp but the power gap was ever shortening.
And stacking doent have to be one shot either its not about how I compare to people who have been playing longer, its about how I compare to others who have the same exp, stacking there is balanced any need to balance new and old players needs to be handled on whole character not on simple things like stacking which if removed makes multiclassing non-viable.
it's not what i meant.
i'm not saying it matter if i am 21° or 49°, the damage i can deal is not greater than a 20°.
BUT i can kill a 10° easily, his HP are half of mine (they've stopped augmenting at 20°)
ok, after 1.25 years he can be 20°, but before that for me is the elemental plane of ice cream
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For one it would not be 2.5 years each as leveling that takes longer regardless of what you already have so getting the second class would take more then twice as long as the first.
This is a catch up feature btw as when the newbie gets 20 the old guy is less then halfway to next 20.
I started my first dnd game 3 levels behind everyone and it took me no time at all to catch up with the group, I was always behind on exp but the power gap was ever shortening.
And stacking doent have to be one shot either its not about how I compare to people who have been playing longer, its about how I compare to others who have the same exp, stacking there is balanced any need to balance new and old players needs to be handled on whole character not on simple things like stacking which if removed makes multiclassing non-viable.
Maybe you should actually read the blogs that have been posted on the game, there is absolutely no indications or even hints that taking 1 class will make your next class slower, and in skill based systems that is rarely if ever the case, mainly because that will permanently gimp someone who opts to learn crafting or something else on their character.
And yes it does absolutely matter how you stack to people who are higher level then you. This is a world PVP based, sandbox. This isn't WoW where level 20's are in one area, level 40's are in a different area, and their PVP arenas etc... do not overlap, this is like eve where everyone of varying levels will find themselves on the same battlefield.
So yes it does matter if a 9 year vet can instantly crush 20 2nd year players, because they are on the same battlefield, fighting the same war for very high stakes, that is why within 3 months a character has to be able to hold it's own, no I am not saying a 3 month old character should have a 50/50 shot against a 6 year vetarin, but the power level difference does have to be small enough that I would say that at the worse 4 3 month old characters should be able to take down 1 6 year or even 12 year vet. That is why at some point power has to stop moving foward, but instead switch to sideways movement.
instead of going from 100 damage to 200 damage, it needs to go to 100 physical or 100 fire, or 120 situational damage etc... but becoming a solid stacking of things means you may as well take anyone more then 4 years behind anyone off the field altogether.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The goal is to have all of the following be roughly the same power level:
5/5/5/5
10/10
20
20/20
20/20/20/20/20/20/20/20/20
I would not expect that goal to change.
The only advantage the 20/20 or the 20/20/20/20/20/20/20/20/20 has is that they have more options, but their actual attacks should be roughly on par with the others'.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The goal is to have all of the following be roughly the same power level:
5/5/5/5
10/10
20
20/20
20/20/20/20/20/20/20/20/20I would not expect that goal to change.
The only advantage the 20/20 or the 20/20/20/20/20/20/20/20/20 has is that they have more options, but their actual attacks should be roughly on par with the others'.
actually I would say the first 2 are just plain not possible to have on par with the lower 3. A system that makes a 20/20/20/20 on par with a 20, but more versatile, means a 5/5/5/5 is going to be on par with a normal 5 only more versatile.
@Nihimon
Ok, but for 2.5 years someone can only hide himself from others? (if a 20/20 isn't a ranger/rogue of course)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
it's not what i meant.
i'm not saying it matter if i am 21° or 49°, the damage i can deal is not greater than a 20°.
BUT i can kill a 10° easily, his HP are half of mine (they've stopped augmenting at 20°)
ok, after 1.25 years he can be 20°, but before that for me is the elemental plane of ice cream
Well we don't know the exact ratios of how long each level etc takes, nor the exact extent of the level ups. Personally my preferred proposal was that you could see a rough equivalency of all levels added up, as in 4 level 5's in a team would be a fair match for a level 20, as would 2 level 10s etc...
Enough that sane reasonable amounts of teamwork can compensate for being outmatched, but not enough for level to be insignificant. The issue I have with WoW and most theme park's ballancing is that being more powerful is too far on the extremes, a level 85 can run head on against 50 level 50's and basically slaughter them without taking a scratch. This is something that must be avoided at all costs IMO.
|
|
Yes but that does not justify removing stacking, and they don't have a pure skill based game if they did then it would have classes. Skills are just one part of the whole. And things like caster level and snk atk and favored enemy don't come from skills they come from lvls. And even if they change that aspect it would be stupid of them to not make it take longer as that alone would prevent a lot of these issues.
And old to new balancing is SEPERATE from equal exp balancing, both need to be considered and stacking is one aspect that affects equal lvl balance more the old to new balance.
as I said before there is a catch up feature built in to making it take longer as you go up in power a 6 year vet will not stay at the same gap compared to a newbie, the power gap shrinks as the newbie gains lvls faster then the vet.
Granted I haven't found anything about neg lvls but that would help at higher lvls and is as much a suggestion as anything else. Maybe once you hit 20 they start or something but the one thing I notice is if they remove the neg lvls how does raise dead vs rez work? The biggest advantage in higher rez spells are the reduction in negs which if normal death has no negs then why would I ever allow a cleric to raise me?
Also for neg lvls is a good hefty penalty to death which would mean they might not need to make inventory loss the main death penalty which is immersion breaking and irritating yet not hefty enough or too hefty depending on timing. Negs are just as hefty all the time.
And as my posts here are the only time I've ever even read much less posted in an online forum I admit I probably missed a few things somewhere.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Also for neg lvls is a good hefty penalty to death which would mean they might not need to make inventory loss the main death penalty which is immersion breaking and irritating yet not hefty enough or too hefty depending on timing. Negs are just as hefty all the time.And as my posts here are the only time I've ever even read much less posted in an online forum I admit I probably missed a few things somewhere.
Negs are hefty all the time, but they kind of crush the game in a skill based system in a heavy PVP game. When you are talking wars where you are expecting to die pretty much dozens and dozens of times in a day that the situation calls for it on, you may as well just go full out and say the game caps at 20 levels, otherwise no sane person would participate in a war with a hefty death toll. We don't know if there will be multiple levels of res spells, and there could be other benefits to them. True res for instance doesn't require you to be near the body. Meaning you could res your team mate instantly when you are a 10 minute walk away. On top of that if you are saying that the higher level res spells would remove negative levels, wouldn't that eliminate the penalty for the one group that you believe needs it?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A system that makes a 20/20/20/20 on par with a 20, but more versatile, means a 5/5/5/5 is going to be on par with a normal 5 only more versatile.
I hadn't really considered that.
I've suggested before that it might be a good idea to award a special Capstone ability for someone who goes the 10/10 route, that's distinct from the capstones for the 20th in either class. Maybe the system could analyze all the classes you have levels in when you attain your 20th merit badge, and assign a unique capstone based on that. It would be possible then to differentiate between pre-capstone and post-capstone skills and abilities, although that might be prohibitively complex.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are already limits to stacking snk atk and other such things in place. Snk atk requires a way to deal dmg that relies on acc and must be within 30 ft.
And favored enemy, well that applies to only certain types of enemies.
And no I don't think level 40 should be miles ahead rather takeing a 20th lvl char against a 40th lvl char should feel the same as going 1st lvl against 20th lvl.
And I do not want to see stances a want them abilities to merge that's why I multiclass, I cannot get the chararcter I want out of a straight class so I go get the abilities of various classes until I have the ablities I want. Truth be told I prefer classless but finding good resources for such is difficult along with finding friends with the creativity to use it.
I don't learn snk atk to use my dagger, I learn it to use scorching ray. I give up lvls to make them work together resulting in about the same dmg as an equal char there is reason why they work on paper. And it takes years to get there which should be rewarded with getting something significant.
If I start in the first gruop and I'm actually still playing the same char(unlikely) 10 years later then anyone in the know should realize that I'm not someone mess arould with, and if death brings neg lvls then it might take that long just to get above 20 to begin with.
Those who spend the time should be epic players that low level guild form just to kill these epic characters, adding neg lvls which means it takes even longer to advance, so anyone actually getting there would deserve to have those abilties.
The stated design goal of PFO is that a Level 20 character and a Level 20/20/20/20 character should be able to COMPETE with each other on relatively equal terms on the battle-field. The 20/20/20/20 will have a greater variety of abilities to choose from but they should not be able to squash the level 20 character like a bug on a windshield. I believe I am accurately paraphrasing what the designers at Goblinworks have expressed.
The reasons for this are that the game will have a heavy focus on PvP and the designers want players that join the game a few years after it starts (or that can't afford to devote the same amount of play time as others) to not be PERMANENTLY rendered INCONSEQUENTIAL to gameplay.
The reason why this is not an issue in your 40th level PnP campaign is due to the fact that you don't likely have 1 or more players PERMANENTLY stuck playing a character that is 20 levels below the others. Generaly speaking such a dynamic would not be fun for most players for an extended length of time.
Mechanicaly there are 2 methods of approach to achieving this (not mutualy exclusive) you can either place a limit on the number of levels, abilities, bonuses, etc that a character has access to at any one time (I.E. the way some tabletop systems place a limit for non-epic rules to 20th level or the way some MMO's have hard set level caps) OR you can place limitations on the way certain abilities/bonuses stack together (or do some combination of the two).
Failing to pursue either approach (effectively) means you end up with a 20/20/20/20 that completely squashes a level 20.
|
|
True rez is the only one, but that is part of the point and helps to get groups together as you want someone to rez you or instead of reviving normally pay a cleric PC or NPC to true rez.
And the thought of how wars would be fought with such penalties is interesting as an army probably has those who can rez you and the players need to achieve the goals but the risks demand creativity not blind sword swinging hence tactics and strategies will come into play.
Consider this as well if a player gets out of hand then he gets ganged up on and there are spells which prevent rez spells insuring that such a person gets the penalty and at higher lvls that becomes a bigger and bigger penalty. And no, individuals doing that to individuals is pointless since they would have to revive instead of rez anyway.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
actually I would say the first 2 are just plain not possible to have on par with the lower 3. A system that makes a 20/20/20/20 on par with a 20, but more versatile, means a 5/5/5/5 is going to be on par with a normal 5 only more versatile.The goal is to have all of the following be roughly the same power level:
5/5/5/5
10/10
20
20/20
20/20/20/20/20/20/20/20/20I would not expect that goal to change.
The only advantage the 20/20 or the 20/20/20/20/20/20/20/20/20 has is that they have more options, but their actual attacks should be roughly on par with the others'.
Which is kinda the point behind what I was arguing in the other thread about the need for some sort of level cap system.
That is, of course, assuming that the 5/5/5/5 and the 10/10 and the 20 all represent the equivalent time investment (i.e. the 2.5 years it would take to get to plateau)..... if that assumption is NOT the case, then the issue is not as straight-forward.
I just have trouble envisioning the details by which you make the multi-classed character in some combination of levels below the Plateau Not overly gimped when compared to the single classed character of equivalent time investment....and then somehow translate that into the 20/20/20/20 not being super-powered at the same time.