I'd prefer that attribute points are far and few between as to make their impact that much greater when you do upgrade a piece of loot, or level up to a certain point. I almost feel like you could get away from having to provide attribute points when leveling up if instead you just became more effective versus npcs/mobs of an equal level range (i.e: if you had 10str and you were level 1, and you fought an npc that was level 10, 10str would roll against a 1/10th multiplier -- whereas if you had 10str and you were level 10, and you fought an npc that was level 10, you would roll against a 10/10 multiplier).
philo said: "Some people must not be aware that a ten year plan has been mentioned?"
For those who don't know what Philo is referencing here:
June 23, 2016: - Ben 'Machail' Dean asked Corey to explain their plans for Loot.
Corey LeFever said: "There isn't a whole lot of Voodoo behind it, we just sort of have worked out internally what our projected spread is going to be for our stats and formulas and from that we've just kind derived what we feel is a good balance, a good starting place for kinda get in and test things out and see what feels right. Just as kind of aside we've gone and done some pretty heavy lifting and we're already projecting well beyond whatever our early level cap projections going to be. So we are designing items and stat progression in mind for like a 10 year probably runway as far as content goes. If you've played everquest it's going to a very similar feel, you'll start out with a couple points in stats here and there but by and large it's going to mostly just be Armour Class and upgrades to that until you start killing more boss mobs and start getting some better loot. It's not going to be sort of what we've gotten used to in more recent MMO's where every level you're completely replacing your entire suit of gear, and it's 10 - 20 times better than previous sets of gear that you had." (source)
(** Note: Corey LeFever no longer works for VR but was one of the Senior Game Designers from July 2015 until Oct 2019.)
@goofy thats not the only time its been mentioned but that is a good reference. Thanks for posting that.
@eunichron Unfortunately true. But it can be difficult because of the way VR shares information.
Even those with large post counts sometimes seem completely unaware of previous comments made by devs. Hell, even VR employees contradict each other sometimes so you have to understand the hierarchy and be able to decipher what is most accurate based on the timeline of when we got the info and who it came from. It can be difficult for those community members who haven't been following closely from the beginning.
Even the tenets should be open to discussion, never mind subjects on which devs have happened to comment on over the years, if you can remember them.
Yes, if you go *against* what devs have stated you are perhaps open to fair criticism, but talking about 20 years from now isn't deserving of insult just because a dev once commented they have "a 10 year probably runway" whatever that means.
I'm hoping that the devs stick to their vision and tenets as much as possible, yes. I'm also hoping to discuss those aspects while we wait to see them in action. Surely this forum isn't about accurately aligning your comments with what devs have said. Sometimes Kilsin will shut down a thread if the devs are clearly going in another direction and the discussion is pointless and causing friction, but community members need to know they mostly are 'allowed' to discuss whatever they want.
It is useful infomation indeed to be reminded of that comment by Corey and it's of course germaine to the discussion. It does not, though, invalidate what Barin wanted to discuss or his desire for Pantheon to last and have plans for at least as long as Everquest has managed.
To return to the OP: It's interesting to see Corey's comment. I'm encouraged to be reminded that VR have such long-term plans and I would say that if they were already thinking 10 years ahead back then, there's no reason those plans would suddenly fall apart at year 11 and not see us through to Everquest-like longevity.
Basically, I do hope (and I am actually quite sure it is the case) that VR are closely looking at Everquest and at what they have done right and wrong over the last 20 years.
disposalist said:Basically, I do hope (and I am actually quite sure it is the case) that VR are closely looking at Everquest and at what they have done right and wrong over the last 20 years.
I really hope they aren't looking only at Everquest over the last 20 years for guidance. They need to be looking at every MMO that's been released in the last 25 years for guidance and inspiration.
eunichron said:disposalist said:Basically, I do hope (and I am actually quite sure it is the case) that VR are closely looking at Everquest and at what they have done right and wrong over the last 20 years.
I really hope they aren't looking only at Everquest over the last 20 years for guidance. They need to be looking at every MMO that's been released in the last 25 years for guidance and inspiration.
Absolutely! But I think for a lot of pledgers *early* Everquest represents a big drive for what we want from Pantheon - not the only drive, but a *big* one. Also, I think for a lot of pledgers, *late* Everquest represents a big drive for what they do *not* want Pantheon to do.
Not only should we not just be looking to Everquest (lots of other RPGs, MMORPGs and other games have much influence on the devs and that's great) we should not just be looking at Everquest as an ideal of perfection - much wasn't great and much went wrong as time passed.
I can see the mastery system being brought up as a different flavour of spending atrribute points. Personally, I would experience the mastery system more in line of getting skilled at something. It can stand alone aside of your character attribute points/stat points. Yes, they are also a kind of points to gain and spend on a timely manner. However, it's not because I've chosen to rank up Mantle of Mist that therefore my entire character has changed. Some complexer mechanics are in the VR-design plot when it comes to how spells of different classes can influence one another. To call that the same as I've increased my Int and as consequence everything related to INT has be altered. To me, that is a big difference.
Again, it's nice to be able to choose which skill to improve in and when. You can indeed work out a specific custome-to-player-made character. And still you wouldn't have spoken about attribute points.
I believe the word I'm linking with spending attribute points is Player Agency. A very valuable concept in game where choices matter. To my understanding, that is; given the player some degree of control on how their OVERALL character evolves. With that in mind, I want to think about designs that have in fact a long term plan to fall back on. Where gear nor stats go into exponential overdrive, but where you can provide 'ballparks' where the players can move around in.
In a game where choices matter, maxing out on 1 stat (can be feared by the devs, rightfully so). BUT, it can also have a massive downside for that character. And that is where the dev's come back into play....this is where they invite the player into their designed ballpark. Where a design could be: You can go max out in 1 stat, but boy howdy, you'll be terrible in most scenarios, because this Terminus-world requires you to really think, weigh out the pro's and con's. A world that requires you to balance stats, rather than just go full out on 1 -2 preferred stats.
And it's this scenario, that still allows players to spend "some attribute points- at a frequent timespan in their gamelife", but if they are not carefull and go to the edge of the ballpark, they risk creating a very demanding character. Demanding in the sense that, you cannot manage much without specific aid of others. Where these others are also finetuned to optimise their aid towards that single player and by doing so also risking a "less-then-optimal" build.
Now because stats matter, (see the weight of 1 point, in the game streams) you won't have to go far to find the extreme builds and how their unbalance will work against them in more occasions then the opposite. A simple example could be; A tank has gone full into STR. They did not spend more than 5 points into int, wis, agi,... So they managed to get 50 points in STR instead. The most of any tank on the server. That tank comes across a chestplate that is an upgrade to theirs. This chest plate for tanks could state: In order to wear this chestplate it requires +20 int, +10 wis. Now STR wise, that chestplate is an upgrade, but aside of STR the item requires other stats. This bottles down to: the supreme STR tank, can not wear this upgrade because they did not balance out their stats.
This is a ballpark created by VR. Yes, that is a gear example. BUT it is linked with spend character attribute points. I would not call this too far fetched. The wis-kids amongst us can work out the correct math. But these requirements to equip, are not that bizar in a magical world. The reason this can be important is, again, to allow a gap for Player Agency. You don't care about this chestplate? Fine, work your way towards another possible upgrade. You care about being able to wear more than just 1 kind of gear, balance your attribute points more carefully then. This design can already be implemented for early levels. (I'm not defining which level, since that's food for a debate on its own.) This requirement-design can also work very well in combination with the mastery system. I'm not saying that you need additional attribute points every level. So those moments where you need to weigh your decisions carefully, are even more important if they are more spread apart in time. (If they follow up quickly, the impact of a 1 point spend wrongfully is much less, than if you can only spend 1 point every 5-10 levels for example.)
I'd like to see stats being very rare because they determine the overall direction of your character.
Gear should mainly just give specific bonuses, like attack speed.
In my opinion, stats should only be rewarded as rewards for significant levels (like 10 and 20), significant actions related to the stat(like a quest chain), and/or AAs.
I hope the stat bumps are not tied to levels but gear and the mastery tree only. You may eventually get +1, 2, or even 5 to all stats through the mastery tree (depending on how powerful end game stats actually are), but it will be at the cost of not upgrading many abilities until super late game.
The +2 to a main stat for your PC would be very helpful making it a hard choice between various options and baseline stat bonus which would effect almost everything. I would be happy with 20 or even lower being the BIS max for your main stat at level 50. I hope we don't end up with a thousand green/blue/purple varities of boots with all the major stats on them for each class, but instead we find boots of runspeed, sneaking, climbing, acid resist, etc. You don't need stats on every item or even any item.
I think that one stat point per level is a good base but, i would like to see other ways (other than just armor and weapons) that would increase your stats. I am thinking of perhaps tasks or quests perhaps you as a (shaman) find a mage in a tower some place that gives you a couple of tasks after several (and depending how you do) he would ether assign a stat point to a skill or give you a point to spend. lets say he needs you to kill some spirits in a cave...
You get a group cause you know the spirits are tough, you die once (or a team mate dies) in the course of completing the task, when you return to the mage he will assign you a skill to wisdom cause you completed the task but you or your buddy died while doing it. Know lets say no one dies and you kill all them spirits fast and furious when you return he will instead give you the skill and let you decide where to place the point.
As a shaman it might be wisdom but, know the choice will be yours making the point a bit more valuable (IMO).
I am not sure how hard it would be to impliment or if there is anything like this already but I think it be cool if you could quest for extra attribute points.
Allowing stat appointment during levelling creates diversity or player choice. It allows players to not be cookie cutter versions of each other...otherwise whats the point if all players are exactly the same? it is funny see duplicate players running around all dressed the same and looking the same with same stats because they all hunted for uber stat armor 001....boring but funny.
Its the basic premise of Dungeons and dragons. Make your player as you see fit...optimized, not optimized who cares its your choice. But there are consequences to your choices maybe you dont tank as well but you hit harder...if thats your thing go for it...it allows freedom
Given how low their stat numbers are that we have seen so far i would say 1 per 5 levels would be a nice number.
10 points to differentiate your players abilities compared to other players of the same class. Some will split stats, some wont, but all that matters is that players can decide what they want to do with their limited stat points.
BUT....if the 10 points don't really make a difference in player performance than dont bother wasting the development time!!...it should be a noticable feel when you raise a stat.
This ramble brought to you by a DM thinking of what his players would enjoy.
Have a good day everyone
Kridak
Any good modern game will incorporate both linear and logarithmic scaling, and I hope that's what they do.
Levels and "talent points" should be on a linear scale. This is the "core" of your class and its abilities. Example: You level to 50, every next level is hard, but the difficulty is linearly increased. At 50, you have 50 "talent points" to spend and you can choose to make your warrior a tank, support, or DPS.
AA's should be logarithmic from the beginning and not linear like they were in EQ, otherwise, you're going to have to incorporate logarithmic scaling at a later time to make new AA's "meaningful". Example: Every time you gain an AA point, the next point becomes increasingly harder, to a point where the next AA is almost impossible to get. Think BDO and leveling past 62, but with AA's. You don't need a system that requires 1000's of AA's for 100 different skills with 10 tiers in each. You just need 10 AA skills with 10 tiers, but after you have 50 AA's out of 100 or so, the 51st will take you just as long to acquire as the entire 50 before it. Perhaps after 55 AA's, the 56th till take the average player an entire year aquire.
Supplementary skills such as trade skills and rare skill/spell "scrolls" or "acquired knowledge" can also add additional dynamics to character development, outside of your traditional linear or logarithmic grinding for levels of skills.