Goblin Squad Member
|
Well, I think we all agree that in the Surprise Round, if the attacking character is not detected (and therefore, you know, gets a surprise round) then he can make a Sneak Attack (or a normal attack against flat-footed opponents.)
Was that really what this conversation was about?
It was, yes. Ryan was arguing:
I know I've said this before somewhere but I would point out again that since 3.0e, rogues are not mechanically able to approach a target unseen and inflict massive damage by surprise.
From 3.0e on, rogues primarily gain the ability to Sneak Attack by flanking a target with another character, or by capitalizing on a condition which renders the target unable to gain the benefit of dexterity bonuses to armor class.
This was used as part of his argument that Stealth should not be a valid route to Sneak Attack. At least, I assume that was what he was getting at.
By the way, if I have misunderstood Ryan's point at any place here, I apologize. Like I said, it's hot and humid in the Willamette Valley and I'm not at my normal, reliable Dial-up rate of thought.
There is also Sniping at higher levels, when you get your Stealth above +20. Or when you're a goblin.
|
Goblinworks Game Designer
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So it looks like the most recent word I can find on a search is that, in tabletop, KC is correct for Pathfinder under the current errata. This is based on Jason's post here. The way KC plays it is a pretty common house rule, and it looks like it's the official assumption of the Paizo staff as well. (If I remember, I'll probably bother them about it for total confirmation at our meeting on Thursday ;) .)
But Ryan's right that this is a common house rule that became errata for Pathfinder but was easily arguably untrue for 3.x. Under a strict reading of even the current rules (and Ryan states that it was the design intent for 3.0) it's not possible to get Sneak Attack from stealth, because it doesn't explicitly deny the target its dex bonus the way Invisibility does. It lets you choose when a fight starts, and makes it likely you'll get a Surprise Round. That means that, if you win Initiative, you're going to get a standard action and a full round action of Sneak Attacks. But then the target is alert to danger and on guard to your rascally ways, even if he technically isn't sure where you are.
Even in the Pathfinder errata, though, you'd usually need supernatural powers to get into Sneak Attack range of a target in any kind of open area where there's no concealment-granting terrain or lighting nearby. And that seems relevant when we're on this subject because of how close Stealth in PFO allows you to get to the target :) .
Yeah, I'll admit I don't know much of anything about 3.0 and only a bit more about 3.5.
I'm wondering if Stealth will be easier in a setting like a forest, though. It'd be nice if it somehow made it easier if there were bushes/trees/rocks to hide behind.
Of course, the "cliffside ambush" will probably be a valid tactic, since it's hard to see someone high above. And "trolling" your enemies by hiding in rivers/under bridges might work when rivers get improved. ;D
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
... I suddenly totally and vividly remember why I stopped playing 3e and Pathfinder and switched to Dungeon World, FATE, various other indie RPG's and modern retro-versions of 1e/2e D&D.
When playing tabletop, I prefer to tell a story with the group instead of playing Lawyers an Lawbooks :)
Back on topic, I'm totally fine with stealth working in a more "natural" way than the WoW etc. invisibility/cloaking-like stealth mechanic. I would love to play a stealthy ranger-type character at some point and explore the world though! (which still seams feasible).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, based on the twitch.tv I watched of alpha, more than a few people already duck behind trees and bushes to avoid being seen readily. The lack of names popping up without being targeted helps with this immensely.
That suggests the tactic of sneaking from boulder to tree to bush, always staying under cover. Only a couple guys in the enemy group have a high enough Perception to see you anyways, and minimizing the opportunities makes it less likely they will.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, based on the twitch.tv I watched of alpha, more than a few people already duck behind trees and bushes to avoid being seen readily. The lack of names popping up without being targeted helps with this immensely.That suggests the tactic of sneaking from boulder to tree to bush, always staying under cover. Only a couple guys in the enemy group have a high enough Perception to see you anyways, and minimizing the opportunities makes it less likely they will.
And if I were playing a Stealth character this is exactly how I would want to play.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My apologies if I missed it but I haven't dug through this whole topic yet.
Given people are in alpha do we finally know what the max view distance is yet?
Agree with Dario. In my current group my oracle is the best at stealth between having an alright Dex but also being small sized. The rogue-ish character is close, mind you, but I see no reason just because the rogue label is there to make them better at it. Anyone who puts the training and experience toward itshould have equal access to the skill in my opinion.
I just hope it doesn't end up with the meathead barbarian who would have a strength of 22 and an intelligence of 6 in the game ending up with maxed stealth, perception, diplomacy, intimidate, knowledge - "fill in the blank" etc. running around with all those abilities fully functional at the same time.
That would be a serious slap in the face to utility classes like the rogue who derive a large portion of their identity from having lots of skillpoints and class skills.
At some level I'd like to see a mechanic that makes it so your character that's taken levels in rogue or bard is going to have more utility function than the fighter who decided to max out the ability to take and deal damage.
Perhaps some kind of stat that determines a cap for how many utility skills you can effectively use at once that you have to weigh against things like the number of martial feats you get, spell quantities, or maximum hitpoints.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't want to belabor this, but I think the PFO "Role" vs. the RPG "Class", if I am undertanding it correctly and how "skills" are trained, is eliminating a fundamental aspect of what Pathfinder is all about. And as an old time RPGer who became interested in the Pathfinder MMO because of the RPG, that is troubling for me.
Here’s the fundamental issue as I see it, using an example from the tabletop RPG:
Rogue Guy A is a Level 1 Rogue. He maxes out his stealth ability. In the RPG, he can have 1 rank in Stealth plus the + 3 bonus because Stealth is a Rogue Class Skill. His total Stealth bonus is +4.
Fighter Gal B is a level 1 Fighter. She maxes out her stealth ability. In the RPG, she can have 1 rank in Stealth. Stealth is not a Fighter Class Skill, so her total Stealth bonus is +1.
Rogue Guy A is absolutely better (by far) at Stealth than Fighter Gal B solely because he is a Rogue.
Unless I am missing something here (and I may be), the way it looks in PFO now is that if Rogue Guy A and Fighter Gal B both max out their Stealth ability at Level 1 they both will have the exact same Stealth ability. That’s just wrong, in my opinion.
I think it could be fixed, in PFO just give characters a bonus to their class skills for the "role" they choose to fill (in this case, Stealth [and others] for the Rogue).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't want to belabor this, but I think the PFO "Role" vs. the RPG "Class", if I am undertanding it correctly and how "skills" are trained, is eliminating a fundamental aspect of what Pathfinder is all about. And as an old time RPGer who became interested in the Pathfinder MMO because of the RPG, that is troubling for me.
Here’s the fundamental issue as I see it, using an example from the tabletop RPG:
Rogue Guy A is a Level 1 Rogue. He maxes out his stealth ability. In the RPG, he can have 1 rank in Stealth plus the + 3 bonus because Stealth is a Rogue Class Skill. His total Stealth bonus is +4.
Fighter Gal B is a level 1 Fighter. She maxes out her stealth ability. In the RPG, she can have 1 rank in Stealth. Stealth is not a Fighter Class Skill, so her total Stealth bonus is +1.
Rogue Guy A is absolutely better (by far) at Stealth than Fighter Gal B solely because he is a Rogue.
Unless I am missing something here (and I may be), the way it looks in PFO now is that if Rogue Guy A and Fighter Gal B both max out their Stealth ability at Level 1 they both will have the exact same Stealth ability. That’s just wrong, in my opinion.
I think it could be fixed, in PFO just give characters a bonus to their class skills for the "role" they choose to fill (in this case, Stealth [and others] for the Rogue).
What about multi-classing in the RPG tabletop?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lone_Wolf, you're missing the point that Ryan made earlier in this thread. The way PFO works is, if Guy A and Guy B have invested the same amount of training in stealth, they will both be equally good at stealth. The fact that Guy B has also invested a lot of training in Fighter role abilities is completely irrelevant.
With that said, Stephen confirmed that slotting some Rogue role abilities may convey intrinsic stealth bonuses not available in other ways. Guy B may very well have access to that option, but if he chooses to slot foir max stealth he's not going to be able to slot his fighter stuff at the same time.
There is no "Guy A is a rogue" and "Guy B is a fighter" in any permanent, limiting sense in PFO. Every character has access to every ability, and can be just as good at that ability as anyone else IF he trains it to the same degree. Character roles are defined by the choices you make every day when you spend your XP, not one time when you make your character. The only important questions about role are "what have you trained?" and "what do you have slotted right now?"
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Unless I am missing something here (and I may be), the way it looks in PFO now is that if Rogue Guy A and Fighter Gal B both max out their Stealth ability at Level 1 they both will have the exact same Stealth ability. That’s just wrong, in my opinion.
You are missing something important. In TT, Rogue A got his stealth bonus for taking a level of Rogue. In PFO, that character got a level of Rogue after individually buying the skills and feats appropriate to that level. It has been indicated elsewhere that characters with levels in Rogue will have access to feats which will improve stealth beyond the mere skill (I think "Chameleon Armor"was mentioned.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This thread is bringing me to the realization that we should think of the class level feats ("Fighter 7") as the equivalent of Eve's certificates: A guided path towards the kinds of training you should pursue if you want to be competent in a certain role.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Nonetheless, if we take away the ability to make a ranged sneak attack from out-of-combat in stealth (like "everyone" does in the tabletop), I feel that we'd be removing a significant chunk of what makes a rogue a rogue.
Or else we are moving away from a legacy sentiment that rogues are different from fighters in many ways toward one in which the rogue is essentially an urban Ranger.
At least that is what I am gathering so far from this exchange.
A goblin fighter has a +7 lead on a human rogue.
Eat yer heart out.
;D
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I know the concern I have is that if anyone can train utility skills, and there is no limitation on how good they can be or how many you can run at once all utility skills become "gaps in the character sheet."
In other words, there is no downside to taking them, and everyone can take them, so why shouldn't everyone take them? Sure it takes time to train them but I know that:
A. The moment I capstone the first thing I do will be to start filling in gaps in the character sheet.
B. I'll train the early levels that can be gained quickly of any gaps in the character sheet as soon as progression in my primary role is slow enough to make it worthwhile.
In the tabletop classes with less skill points to spread around make up for it in areas like hit dice, spell slots, base attack, resists, or great class feats.
I'd like to see it so there is something that forces you to balance these types of concerns in PFO as well. Even if you never take a single level in any role.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
I know the concern I have is that if anyone can train utility skills, and there is no limitation on how good they can be or how many you can run at once all utility skills become "gaps in the character sheet."
In other words, there is no downside to taking them, and everyone can take them, so why shouldn't everyone take them? Sure it takes time to train them but I know that:
A. The moment I capstone the first thing I do will be to start filling in gaps in the character sheet.
B. I'll train the early levels that can be gained quickly of any gaps in the character sheet as soon as progression in my primary role is slow enough to make it worthwhile.In the tabletop classes with less skill points to spread around make up for it in areas like hit dice, spell slots, base attack, resists, or great class feats.
I'd like to see it so there is something that forces you to balance these types of concerns in PFO as well. Even if you never take a single level in any role.
Once you gain every ability you will ever slot, shouldn't there be something you can do with experience?
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It will drive some people nuts to not have the absolute highest "Number" in some value. Those people will be fundamentally incapable of training some Feat that isn't making that "Number" get bigger. They'll never be training Rogue Feats if they're on the Fighter role path.
It will drive some people nuts to not have trained every single available option. Those people will be fundamentally incapable of waiting to train something else if they could train something RIGHT NOW. They'll be very slowly becoming expert at everything.
Between these two poles there will be people who make strategic choices to pursue diverse training for diverse reasons. As long as we don't accidentally create a situation where the best way to pursue the Fighter role is to take Rogue feats, we'll be reinforcing the value of the Roles without constraining people's choices about how diverse they want to make their character's abilities.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...we'll be reinforcing the value of the Roles without constraining people's choices about how diverse they want to make their character's abilities.
I want the ability to go out and have fun with what I feel is my character's natural play style, so I naturally accrue the needed feats in order to get the next level of training my character needs to increase skill, power, etc... I am hoping it feels natural, but when I find a weakness in my build I have already done some things in the world that allows me to purchase a new talent without having to go to the bookshelf to see if that new talent fits my stereotype.
In other words, play, get experience, train, get better, have more fun.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Once you gain every ability you will ever slot, shouldn't there be something you can do with experience?
Yes. Train additional roles. I believe that if you can somehow manage to train every single skill in the game (which will likely be impossible based on the time to train them vs. the rate which they are added) that you should be able to train them all.
But you shouldn't be able to slot them all at once. So after you've fully maxed your character's build the additional training is used to allow you to go home, re-slot your gear and skills, and adopt a different role if you're feeling like a change of pace/that's what you or your group need.
That's exactly how EVE works and its a great system. It's actually quite feasible to max out any specific ship setup in the game. But I don't know anyone who can only fly one setup for one specific type of ship.
It will drive some people nuts to not have the absolute highest "Number" in some value. Those people will be fundamentally incapable of training some Feat that isn't making that "Number" get bigger. They'll never be training Rogue Feats if they're on the Fighter role path.
It will drive some people nuts to not have trained every single available option. Those people will be fundamentally incapable of waiting to train something else if they could train something RIGHT NOW. They'll be very slowly becoming expert at everything.
Between these two poles there will be people who make strategic choices to pursue diverse training for diverse reasons. As long as we don't accidentally create a situation where the best way to pursue the Fighter role is to take Rogue feats, we'll be reinforcing the value of the Roles without constraining people's choices about how diverse they want to make their character's abilities.
The first two types I'm obviously not that concerned about. They're effectively nerfing themselves.
My concern is this. We in PFO you can train the low levels of any skill quickly while the higher levels will take much, much, longer. So at the point that it's like, you could spend a couple days training the first few levels of perception, or a couple months training the last level of your sword skill, I think it's obvious which choice is going to benefit your character more.
So why didn't everyone use low level stealth in EVE? Well because it took up a high slot and some of your PG/CPU. If you used that then it limited what else you could use.
I think we should be very careful what skills you are allowed to train without making sacrifices in other areas. Stealth and perception are definitely two that I don't want to see everyone taking levels in.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
There are something like 15 feats that I recall that cost about 10 XP or less. Considered as a whole, they have significant cost.
I think that the very slow movement speed of stealthy characters will suffice to make stealth uncommon enough that perception isn't a must-have.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So my question would be how long does it take to generate 150 xp? Something tells me that answer may sound significant now, but I wouldn't be surprised to hear some of the skills you need to train to go from level 19 to 20 in a role will cost 1500, 15k, or even 150k xp.
At that point taking a few ranks in all those lower level skills will look pretty damn appealing.
I'm quite sure everyone will run into situations that they'll be wishing they had a decent stealth check once in awhile. And if everyone feels that way, everyone will be taking perception to counter it.
Training time is not a sufficient cost when the gains are linear but the training time is on a curve.
However if their final build they are working for will sacrifice a bit in areas they care more about to have that enhanced stealth, then the decision of whether or not to train it becomes a more meaningful choice.
Especially if like CPU and Powergrid in EVE, being able to add more abilities to your build is also an ability that has to be trained.
Andius is right. That's how it works in Cookie Clicker, too—after my 1,000th Mine, I decided to scale things back to Grannies for a while to build up my strength.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In other words, there is no downside to taking them, and everyone can take them, so why shouldn't everyone take them? Sure it takes time to train them but I know that:A. The moment I capstone the first thing I do will be to start filling in gaps in the character sheet.
B. I'll train the early levels that can be gained quickly of any gaps in the character sheet as soon as progression in my primary role is slow enough to make it worthwhile.
Your point A sounds to me very much like "I won't do it until I've maxed a role", which is 1-2 years into the game. If everyone "will" take the skills but don't, the concern is at least not urgent.
Point B is extremely valid though, but the large variables are "quickly", "slowly" and "worthwhile". As Ryan said, there are two extremes and the 'strategic choice' middle ground, and you seem to be exactly where Ryan wants you.
Strictly speaking, spending even 10xp on a feat you never need (never use or use only in situations where it doesn't make a meaningful difference) is a waste of xp. Xp is a finite resource in any given time period, much like income (except you cannot spend xp before you earn it), so the downside of wasting it should be obvious. Since everyone is on the same budget, the differences in 'xp management' will show.
EDIT: the above is a general comment. Stealth and Perception is hardly a skill "you'll never need", and the "worthwhile" point for these skills come much earlier than for any random skill. Still, the cost of maxing perception comes at the clear cost of not spending that same xp on something else. (and 'max' is a very long way to go when you start as a new character).
@Decius: If you ever get to the point of having trained every skill in the game, they will add more. If not, that is the point where you stop paying for training and just enjoy the free game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm thinking of this from the perspective of EVE. Right now I have a level 0 skill in Labratory Opperation on my new industrial alt.
Here are the times to train it to level 1-5. Each listed time representing the time it takes to train that individual level.
Level 1: 8 minutes and 20 seconds.
Level 2: 38 minutes and 50 seconds.
Level 3: 3 hours 38 minutes and 39 seconds.
Level 4: 20 hours 42 minutes and 50 seconds.
Level 5: 4 days 21 hours 4 minutes and 50 seconds.
Each level grants the exact same increase in power. "Ability to run 1 additional research job per skill level."
Now maybe PFO doesn't follow EVE with how exponential the curve is, or how the gains in power don't curve along with it.
However I do know it's been stated that lower level skills will take less time to train, and taking a skill from newb to maxed out veteran is supposed to grant about 4 times the power level.
Seeing how you can train levels 1-4 in about a quarter the time as level 5, and levels 1-2 are completely non-consequential when compared to it. A small boost in power could be VERY much worth the investment if there is no limit on how many utility skills you can have actively benefiting you at once.
Given that this system is based off EVE, and if the curve is anything like EVE it's going to be very broken. I feel it's a concern very much worth expressing.
Ryan's statements aren't really alleviating my concerns because it sounds like he's saying he expects a lot of people to go out and do just what I'm describing and that's cool with him. I really don't want non-utility characters having a ton of ranks in a ton of utility skills. It defeats the purpose of utility characters and skills in general if everyone is trained in everything.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A small boost in power could be VERY much worth the investment if there is no limit on how many utility skills you can have actively benefiting you at once.
Absolutely!
The keyword here (except 'limit') is 'actively benefiting' (or passively benefiting). Are you assuming (based on alpha play?) that utility skills don't need to be slotted?A priori I would also expect that Perception is always-on, and that stealth doesn't -need- a slotted item to work (although stealth bonus items will exist).
I expect that eventually everyone will max out their hitpoints, power, perception, stealth and knowledge skills. But if the sum of all those takes years, and they are "balanced" to the point where none are obviously far superior to the others (so that different builds prioritize them differently), then it won't be a matter of everyone having the same skills for a very long time.
(Perhaps if the highest levels of utility skills required support buildings??)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I haven't played the alpha but from the sounds of it the only limiting factor on stealth / perception is whether they are trained or not.
I'd like to point out that people were talking about reaching level 2 with a day of the Alpha's release. As you have already pointed out it takes two years to reach level 20 in a role.
I'm sorry but if I'm right that's really freaking broken. The only argument being made that holds any weight is the suggestion stealth and perception are not useful enough to be worth everyone taking.
While I doubt that's true, if it were true then it means they need a serious buff. How could rogue be a viable class if two of it's central skills are so useless at low ranks that other classes won't take a small portion of their time to train them when they will end up a permanent part of their build if they do?
Utility classes can simply never be a meaningful role choice unless skills are powerful enough to be worth making substantial sacrifices to run.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There is no such thing as "a utility character" in PFO in any permanent, character-defining sense. A utility character is one who trained, slotted, and equipped for utility.
If it turns out to be bad for the game that everyone can have 2-4 levels of every skill for relatively little character cost, things can easily be designed to have characters slot and equip specific feats amd items when they wish to use a particular utility skill effectively.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There is no such thing as "a utility character" in PFO in any permanent, character-defining sense.
That's incredibly sad if true. Utility is what makes rogues, bards and even rangers the complex / interesting characters they are. Taking that away from them really sucks a lot of flavor out of the Pathfinder setting.
A utility character is one who trained, slotted, and equipped for utility.
If that's true then there is no issue. The issue I'm having is it sounds like "trained" is the only part of that which actually applies at the moment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You mean like WoW where rogues are relegated to a damage output class? Or really 95% of the MMOs on the market where utility classes as they exist in Pathfinder don't really exist?
Yeah that would be pretty boring.
I can adapt to whatever PFO throws at me. I'd just rather it not be a game where everyone takes some levels in most every utility skill and the fact you have all these utility skills to train makes the barrier to entry unreasonably high for newbs. That's quite frankly a pretty crappy design.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There is no such thing as "a bard" or "a rogue" in PFO in any permanent, character-defining sense. A rogue is any character who has trained, slotted, and equipped to perform a rogue role.
In eve there are very very few players who are trained to fly only one type of ship. Most players can fly both battleships and assault frigates as the mood strikes. There's nothing sad about that.
People here seem to fixate the idea of training one role to 20 before branching out. That would be the equivalent of training for a single race's T3 cruisers without ever bothering to train any frigates, battle cruisers, battleships, haulers, other race cruisers, etc. I think it much more likely that most people will end up with competent-level training in a variety of roles before they decide to invest in a top tier specialization.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't doubt that at all but that's not the issue.
The issue is that in EVE terms that if you train cloaking devices and probe launchers you can use them without the module. You don't tie up the high slots, you don't tie up the PG/CPU, and you aren't putting the value of that module on the line. You just train the skill and reap the benefits.
At that point you would quite frankly have to be stupid to not take at least a couple levels in cloaking and asometrics.
I fully support people's right to experiment around and try different things. I just don't want to see this be like the original a Darkfall where you could do everything on one character at the same time. That eventually leads to all powerful characters being nearly identical hybrids that fill every role at once. It destroys the identity of individual roles and increases the amount of training you need before you can compete with veteran players.
I'm sure a lot of the other people getting in on day one of EE love this idea but it's really freaking selfish of them to promote it, and will seriously hurt new player retention.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You mean like WoW where rogues are relegated to a damage output class? Or really 95% of the MMOs on the market where utility classes as they exist in Pathfinder don't really exist?
Yeah that would be pretty boring.
I can adapt to whatever PFO throws at me. I'd just rather it not be a game where everyone takes some levels in most every utility skill and the fact you have all these utility skills to train makes the barrier to entry unreasonably high for newbs. That's quite frankly a pretty crappy design.
This.
There is no balance between picking up a little perception and playing a rogue, with their useless-in-combat skills. Look at the list. Only rogues have to spend exp on perception and stealth to level up. Every other requirement across the board has at least a situational function in combat.Some ideas for solutions:
-level-based class bonuses to skills, which coincidentally would reward single class role-players without resurrecting capstones;
-armor penalties to skills (helmets can murder perception, etc);
-environment (hex type, day/night, stormy, etc) bonues/penalties to skill use (not saying graphical night/weather, just that it exists as a mathematical condition);
-add a d200 roll to the formula on both sides, make it opposed skill check like in tabletop
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
I'm thinking of this from the perspective of EVE. Right now I have a level 0 skill in Labratory Opperation on my new industrial alt.
Here are the times to train it to level 1-5. Each listed time representing the time it takes to train that individual level.
Level 1: 8 minutes and 20 seconds.
Level 2: 38 minutes and 50 seconds.
Level 3: 3 hours 38 minutes and 39 seconds.
Level 4: 20 hours 42 minutes and 50 seconds.
Level 5: 4 days 21 hours 4 minutes and 50 seconds.Each level grants the exact same increase in power. "Ability to run 1 additional research job per skill level."
Now maybe PFO doesn't follow EVE with how exponential the curve is, or how the gains in power don't curve along with it.
However I do know it's been stated that lower level skills will take less time to train, and taking a skill from newb to maxed out veteran is supposed to grant about 4 times the power level.
Seeing how you can train levels 1-4 in about a quarter the time as level 5, and levels 1-2 are completely non-consequential when compared to it. A small boost in power could be VERY much worth the investment if there is no limit on how many utility skills you can have actively benefiting you at once.
Given that this system is based off EVE, and if the curve is anything like EVE it's going to be very broken. I feel it's a concern very much worth expressing.
Ryan's statements aren't really alleviating my concerns because it sounds like he's saying he expects a lot of people to go out and do just what I'm describing and that's cool with him. I really don't want non-utility characters having a ton of ranks in a ton of utility skills. It defeats the purpose of utility characters and skills in general if everyone is trained in everything.
And when you have research 4, will you train missiles 1 because it takes so little time compared to research 5 and has a passive benefit? Or will you train the skill you will use more often, and get it 10 minutes sooner?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I just don't want to see this be like the original a Darkfall where you could do everything on one character at the same time. That eventually leads to all powerful characters being nearly identical hybrids that fill every role at once. It destroys the identity of individual roles and increases the amount of training you need before you can compete with veteran players.
I don't think anyone wants this, and I don't think the devs are idiots.