Post:New Circle Requirements - A Precursor - 03/08/2012 - 12:44

From elanthipedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Re: New Circle Requirements - A Precursor · on 03/08/2012 12:44 PM EST 1989
>>I'm hoping part of the mindset of 3.0 is that the skills will be rebalanced to scale to 2000 ranks


This is the mindset but not an immediate goal of Skills 3.0. The first and most gigantic stage is to balance the ecosystem so that it's easier to make those changes. After the Big Changes, we'll turn our gaze to making all of the skills scale well. It's a big, multi-stage process, and the first stage is to get all of the skills lined up.

>>barbrians are having spirit skills granfathered in at a MUCH lower level than the other current Magic tert guilds.

You really can't make this judgement until you've actually seen the Barbarian circle reqs...

>>Oh and these innterfire/spirit skills power our guild specific abilities. Did you not say thaat guild spicific skills would be learned at primary rate? Skills that power guild spacific abilities should be learned the same way right? Like trading for traders or music for bards?

Inner fire and supernatural skills are, for all intents and purposes, magic skills. They're not guild-only skills. Expertise WILL learn at a primary rate and will fuel other guild-specific abilities, though.

>>but will we have a way to see our bonus ranks?

You won't, mainly because there's no good way to accurately represent it. 5 ranks from 10 to 15 is WAY different than 5 ranks from 500 to 505.

>>I just don't understand how you can penalise people who learn scholarship at a slow rate and/or don't (and therefore in some cases at least didn't) train it with a passion, because they more combat orientated.

It's a lore skill. Half of the ranks come from combat, and half come from lore. Also, it's free ranks that aren't combat essential. It could be argued that it's far more fair to give people ranks to start so everybody starts on equal footing, but that fits neither the spirit of the skill nor any definition of fun.

>>And TM being used to see if debiltating spells work for Rangers and Paladins

Please read the rest of the thread where we say we're no longer doing it this way :-P

>>Is the level cap going up?

Not at this time. We're already lacking substantial content for people at 150.

>>Defending - average of top armor and MO. Is shield included in this?

I don't see why not

>>Or an average of the top x melee weaopns?

Oh yeah - The masteries are going to be an average of your top N weapons. I'm thinking 3 melee, 2 ranged. Again, free ranks.

>>I think this hurts barbarians. Many if not all have extremely poor scholarship.

If by 'hurts', you mean 'Doesn't make them the best at it', you are correct. It's a lore skill and barbs are lore tert.

>>MO stops effectively training far before circle 150

Assuming MARGASH's number of 791. Barbs only need 720 to circle. MARGASH does pretty detailed tests and can tell you what you're doing wrong if you can't train MO.

>>I actually think this is an even greater benefit for those who have high escaping.

Totally true - My goal isn't to penalize people who have high escaping, but instead to make the most sensible balance of ranks in existing skills as we can.

>>If Athletics in 3.0 has anything to do with anything combat related(outside of fighting while swimming) I'd like to see Escaping remain included

The problem, though, is that this method essentially creates superswimmers and superclimbers across the entire game for anybody who's found a way to train this in combat, and that kind of screws up a lot of the natural obstacles that we've put in place (few as they are). I'd wait until it's in test to see how you fare against webbers before being too sad though :)

>>Can somebody point me at these Magic formulas that people are griping about?

There's no point in looking at them - Armifer has said that they're only drafts, and likely very off the mark of our ultimate decision.

>>Why throw them under the bus now?

It's not that I'm throwing 150s under the bus wholesale - It's just that if I'm assessing the balance of the whole game, something that's better for 150s but worse than the other 149 circles is unlikely to win.

>>Why not get it right for high level people and let lower level people suffer? Why do I matter less?

To touch directly on this: Because there are 149 other circles. 150 isn't all that matters, and it shouldn't screw up everybody else.

>>What are it's out of combat applications, besides studying a tactics book for pure exp gain?

Initially, there are none. However, it's got the potential to be used in a few places outside of combat. Consider the paradigm of studying something safely at home and then actually using those skills in practice - That's exactly what will be released with X3 for tactics, and that seems totally reasonable to me.

>>Why are barbs getting free supernatural ranks but not thieves? Are you implying that barbarians are more supernatural than thieves?

...No. Thieves aren't getting any abilities that use supernatural skills, nor are they getting supernatural circle reqs.

>>I vote "yes" without a doubt.

If you can come up with a useful way to represent it, that's fine by me. The only way I can think of is to say "You have a skill worth 1432 ranks left in your bonus pool", which doesn't seem terribly useful.

>>so long as you combine these two very different applications into one new skill.

Yep which is why we're no longer "combining escaping into athletics". Some escaping checks will use Athletics instead of Escaping, and others won't. There's no better skill choice than Athletics for web escaping, so web escape checks will go to that.

>>I wouldn't mind some more clarification on how the bonus pools or bonus ranks are going to work.

Bonus pool will contribute double ranks to your exp drain until the bonus pool goes away. It's per-skillset.

I'm out for a couple hours, back soon.

This message was originally posted in Abilities, Skills and Magic \ The Experience System, by DR-SOCHARIS on the play.net forums.