Integrated Paths (Berserker) 2.0

what did you have in mind for the progression of damage spells? would low level spells receive separate progressions from the higher level spells, perhaps gaining increased utility instead of damage, or would they be used as 'basic' levels in the progression and the the higher level spells be the 'advanced' and 'master' levels? for instance, if i threw a perk at burning hands, would i be able to see some new utilitarian effect from it, or would it turn into a fireball or firestorm?

and what did you have in mind for the more unique spells/skills. what would we see from malform or catalepsy. would we be able to throw perks at racial skills?

overall i like the idea. i'm always a fan of more customization. i think you hit the thread running with the idea and it scared a few people away. i would of put more emphasis on how little this would actually change the end user experience, outside of a handful of additional options to select through leveling.

I like this idea too. Currently there is not alot of variety in the way you can play a class. Now when I fight one warrior it is exactly the same as the last warrior I fought and the same before that (unless they have uber gear). With the proposed system every single character would be different. From a pk standpoint you would have to prepare differently from one warrior to the next. From an rp standpoint there is opportunity for anything.

However I could see some problems. As the professor said (which you acknowledged) pk power players would find the best pk oriented path for each class and play that instead of playing something for RP sake. (I would).

Also how could a class like an invoker be changed much? Specializing in certain spells would make them more powerful or last longer?

On a side note, I always thought you should be able to cast flame arrow a room away. Same with Icicle.

I support this idea.

I think this is the next logical step. It does not make sense to me that some classes are more customizable than others. In the grand scheme of things this really changes very little anyway in terms of gameplay so I am surprised that anyone said they would have to relearn the game lol.

I think some of the examples you gave are a bit OP, like expert dodge on a zerk for instance. Also you said there would be no new skills, so what is this basic attack? Does it mean putting points into attack would grant you second, third and fourth? If so then it does get interesting becaue a warrior for instance could opt to not even take fourth attack (which would prolly be foolish). But a necro or invoker could opt not to take second attack and use a point somewhere that makes a difference.

I also like the race perks idea, something I mentioned in another thread. It is ridiculous that some eligible race/classes just suck completely. I think that some races should be "better" than others for certain classes but any should have a chance to compete.

I would like to see this implemented, but it would take a lot of balancing work. Well worth it IMO though. Thanks Celerity for the great idea.

edit: This has a bit of a HOMM5 feel with the basic/advanced/expert stuff goig on. It would be cool to further add unique bonuses that came with certain combinations of mastery selections. Although then emp newb would really have to relearn the game

I like the idea, especially the way it proposes to make generally redundant and never selected/practiced skills a possible option. It also has the potential to make many previously unselected races very viable for classes they would never normally be chosen for.

I've always thought that about 80% of the warrior lores are so much worse than the top 20% that they never get selected. I agree with Celerity that ALL the lores should have legitimate perks, and not just be sideshow attractions or purely cosmetic choices. When was the last time anyone saw a warrior take shield mastery, not just to try it out, but because it had real benefits in PK? The vast majority of people take whip mastery, with fewer taking exotic, spear or flail.

I think thief traps suffer from the same problem. Since you can only have two traps set at one time, and there is a decent sized timer between setting traps; the vast majority of traps you select are totally redundant. When was the last time anyone used fireseed or poison needle because it was actually useful, and not just to see what it did or mess with someone? You can't afford to, because it's much more important to be setting eyeduster, antimagic or chestbuster.

If these changes could get redundant skills being made useful, and improve character customization and range then I'm all for them.

dude, I use fireseed ALL the time on my thieves.

only Crypt could pull something like this off. otherwise it's just dreaming. i'd only support it if the finished product comes with selectable psi at creation.

...a warrior for instance could opt to not even take fourth attack (which would prolly be foolish). But a necro or invoker could opt not to take second attack and use a point somewhere that makes a difference.

I believe she's saying some choices would be hard wired. The berserker in her example had most of his "selections" made for him; he only had five he could select (plus the three from his race). In that way warriors might have all of those attacks chosen for him so that wouldn't even be an option. That way they wouldn't have to burn a selection just to come up to par with the current warriors. In the same way the casters in your example wouldn't be able to pump up sleep or mana charge at the expense of second attack, it'd be out of their hands.

Marking my territory.

I'll make a detailed reply for you when I get back from work Cel, I just dont want to be too far down the list of replies.

I liked this before, and I like it now. I think all of the above mentioned are very pertinent but the biggest thing for me is how new everything will always seem. As it is now, you roll your character, and you know what your problems will be (whether or not you thought it out, in a powergaming way or not.) For example, I wanted a duergar cleric, an I knew I was automatically at a bit of a disadvantage against rogues that could put me to sleep. I roll a shaman or cleric, and I know blms with snakespeed will give me more trouble than some other classes. This way, without being cheap or overpowered, I don't exactly "know" what is in store when I see that drow thief, or human invoker (combinations that I've noticed are not very common, unless the human is going for psi or something) This system would balance alot of the "lesser" races and I think this could be a start to solving the problem in the other thread (Not derailing, just referencing) about the high dex melees. They could have other selectables or higher potential for mastery in areas that can help them out against the bigger races.

I haz teh gr8 luv 4 thys IDEEUH!!!!

I like it, for reasons others have already gone into. It'd be tricky to get the balancing done, but as a general idea it's very good.

Yeah, everyone has pretty much said what I think. The replay value would be amazing, and that to me is the biggest thing. I like it.

Thanks for the all of the overwhelmingly positive responses.

There are two areas I'd like to address:

First, balance is something that is never finished. The game has never been balanced and that includes even now. People always have, and continue to, find PK power combos. This wouldn't remove that problem, but it would lessen it. Yes, this would take a bit of effort in the design phase to balance. However, it is much less than what would be needed to code in a new class or race. Also, please remember that after this change is put into play, future balancing becomes much, much, much easier than it is now, for reasons I outlined in the original post.

Second, about how this would work for spells and attacks.

Basic attack is base attack as it is now.

Advanced attack is second attack.

Expert attack is third attack.

Master attack is fourth attack.

As classes earn second attack (communers), third (melees/hybrids/rogues), and fourth (warriors), they get the corresponding level for free. Warriors spend no points to become masters. Also remember that there is a limit. A rogue or hybrid can not learn fourth attack, even if they wanted to. Communers would be capped at third attack and so forth.

This applies to all the mini-paths. A berserker cannot learned advanced staff. A berserker cannot learn expert dodge (rogue hybrids) or master dodge (only dedicated rogues). A warrior/berserker cannot learn advanced meditation (DKs, BLMs, monks) or master meditation (paladins, communers, casters). This is a balancer and ensure that berserkers will still play like berserkers in the end. It is good that we don't know exactly what each character's perks/tactics are, but we should have a general idea of how the class will operate and think. This maintains that.

As for spell/racial skill details, the general idea is that stronger spells get weaker benefits/ease of play/passive benefits. Here are some examples I drew up:

[B]basic burning hands[/B]
--advanced burning hands (can blind with smoke)
--master burning hands (ignores saves and resistances)
[B]basic flame arrow[/B]
--advanced flame arrow (the spell hits the target group, similar to sharpmetal)
--master flame arrow (shoots a free flame arrow whenever the caster is targeted by a fired weapon, even to other rooms)
[B]basic fireball[/B]
--advanced fireball (adds 10 to the target's saves when calculating damage)
--master fireball (ignores resistances)
[B]basic firestorm[/B]
--advanced firestorm (explodes twice on the tick, giving two damage rolls and chances to blind)
--master firestorm (synergy damage bonus to all fire spells 5% when active, similar to fireshield now)
[B]basic fireshield[/B]
--advanced fireshield (cancels the weakness to fire)
--master fireshield (a further synergy damage bonus to fire spells of 5%)
[B]basic protective shield[/B]
--advanced protective shield (-30 AC)
--master protective shield (cannot be dispelled/dropped by dispel magic/haymaker/chii bolts)
[B]basic curse[/B]
--advanced curse (lowers the the target's defense/damage rolls by 5%)
--master curse (massive penalty to luck)
[B]basic shield[/B]
--advanced shield (-40 AC)
--master shield (missile shield)
[B]basic catalepsy[/B]
--advanced catalepsy (no poison/plague damage in catalepsy)
--master catalepsy (enables HP regen in catalepsy)
[B]basic blood vow[/B]
--advanced blood vow (can cancel the vow after half of the duration has expired--similar to monk's empower)
--master blood vow (can have two separate blood vows at the same time)
[B]basic sleep[/B]
--advanced sleep (target can't regen during the sleep)
--master sleep (sleeps the target group)
[B]basic curse weapon[/B]
--advanced curse weapon (no damage to the weapon when cursed)
--master curse weapon (no nodrop)
[B]basic mana charge[/B]
--advanced mana charge (halves the flare damage)
--master mana charge (can fully charge any type of weapon)
[B]basic malform weapon[/B]
--advanced malform weapon (weapon starts with nodrop/burnproof)
--master malform weapon (each kill counts as two kills)
[B]basic shed[/B]
--advanced shed (double skin HP)
--master shed (follows the slith, similar to a mirror image)

All the examples and the sheer amount of creativity and appeal of a FREAKING RIDICULOUS amount of builds is very attractive to me. I don't like this idea because it's new, or looks like it overhauls the current system, but because it's so variable. I love how this would very likely destroy cookie cutter builds, and I can roll an ogre ranger and not be like the other half of the pbase.

All the examples and the sheer amount of creativity and appeal of a FREAKING RIDICULOUS amount of builds is very attractive to me. I don't like this idea because it's new' date=' or looks like it overhauls the current system, but because it's so variable. I love how this would very likely destroy cookie cutter builds, and I can roll an ogre ranger and not be like the other half of the pbase. [/quote']

some combination will always rise to the top, and will become the "build you win with" for each class no matter how much you diversify it.

Thus says the rule of muds.

some combination will always rise to the top, and will become the "build you win with" for each class no matter how much you diversify it.

Thus says the rule of muds.

I would expect the idea of that would be to remove this as much as possible. As in, it comes down to opinion, what would be the best, seeing as how taking a "strong combo" leaves you weak elsewhere. I understand that there would eventually even be a build guide of sorts, but there are so many things to consider, I don't think it will be ever as cut and dry as ogre ranger:archer, anymore. That's what gets me bored. Instead if you wanted to try to powergame it up, it'd be like ogre ranger archer, arrow mastery, healing expertise, and parry expertise or whatever. There's so many, each player could tailor his characcter to his play too. Play defensive, or offensive... somewhere in between, tailor your skills to handle rogues better, be able to resist mental spells better so your sanc doesn't fall as easy, etc. And there would still be weaknesses with each choice. If you put all your efforts into parrying AND shield block or something, that does nothing for you against invokers... or something. I just like the premise.

This is a very, very fascinating idea. I'd have to think about it some more, and the actual balancing would be hell, but at first glance, it definitely intrigues. I particularly like the idea of 'levelling up' formerly useless skills and/or spells like detect good/evil...

some combination will always rise to the top, and will become the "build you win with" for each class no matter how much you diversify it.

Thus says the rule of muds.

Perhaps, but this system would minimize the work requires to balance out the "stronger" builds, as rather than needing to (for example) tone ogres on the whole because ogre rangers are too strong we could simply add some ogre ranger-specific penalties or remove some of the ogre ranger-specific bonuses (i.e. remove access to master healing for them if they seem to have too much longevity). While it seems like it'd certainly be a ton of work to balance enough to implement in the first place, consider how much easier it'd be to balance things after when we can implement combo-specific weakening rather than having it affect an entire race or class.

Are there any other questions?

I'd really like to see what Aulian and the IMMS (thanks Raar!) have to say about this...