DDO goes F2P. - (DDO Unlimited)

[Ingmar]

AC2 also, no?

I find DDO and LotRO more similar graphically than different. DDO is a little browner and has different character models, otherwise? Pretty darn similar. Everything has that same bloom effect or whatever.

[Mrbloodworth]

AC2 also, no?

I find DDO and LotRO more similar graphically than different. DDO is a little browner and has different character models, otherwise? Pretty darn similar. Everything has that same bloom effect or whatever.

AC2 was the fore runner, I am sure there have been changes made, but yes. its the AC2 engine, updated. I bet the bloom has a slider somewhere, its a post process. Mostly my comment was that it being the same rendering engine, dual monitor should work.

[kildorn]

The engine has to be updated, or have straaange options enabled. The behavior is that if I move the window to the second monitor and stretch the display, it resets to the primary monitor at the old resolution. Can't fullscreen to a different output, can't select a higher base res than the primary monitor.

Anyways, the bloom is pretty hilariously worse than LOTRO from what I recall, but I can compare them pretty quickly.

[Surlyboi]

Meh. I logged in and found all my old toons wiped.

Do I want to start this up again?

Did you check all the servers? I only ask because mine ended up on a different server than the one I thought they were on when I last played.

Yup, checked 'em all. All empty.

[Goumindong]

That is strange, because i logged in and found that my character were untouched after having canceled 1 mo after release.

[Sophismata]

Holy shit, man, cutting up the post into tiny chunks like that is unnerving.

You don't need to include supplements. A core bard, one of the weaker spellcasters, puts out a DC 27 will save or die at level 6.[actually can be more]. Wizards, while they can only get to DC 18-20 or so are much stronger. Core wizards make encounters and even games at all very lethal, nothing else, just core wizards. If you were having problems only with druids then either the people in your games were terrible, or you were arbitrarily limiting wizards.

Unfortunately, most high-level and nearly all special encounters - Constructs and Undead in particular - are completely immune to mind-affecting abilities. Not to mention that the ability you're talking about requires sharing the target's language. Also, it doesn't work in combat. Also, it grants two saving throws. Also, the suggestion saving throw is not based off a skill check. Note that I did say Wizards and Clerics are powerful, but the Druid is more so. The Druid is also incredibly effective right from the get-go (ie, level 1), every supplement you add increases both his spells available (and, like the cleric, he gets them all), and his Wildshape and Animal Companion possibilities.

This is one of the most retarded things i have ever heard anyone say, and i've heard a lot of retarded things.

Casters and multi-stat classes are not penalized. Paladins only have problems in power selection[early power selection for str based Paladins only] and casters have no to-hit problems compared to weapon based classes. While there is a small drop off in effectiveness, the drop off is for everyone, and a slight math error[representing +1-3 to hit over the course of the game] is a pretty small problem all things considered

Seriously, take off your rose colored glasses and play the various systems, 4.0 works better for pretty much everything.

"Too carefully balanced" means just that - the heavy emphasis on equality cuts into the feel of the game. There is very little risk taken in defining class powers, and as a result, they tend to feel very similar. This is, of course, subjective. A +/- 3 error in to-hit is a 15% chance, which, when combined with the careful ~60% average, throws off gameplay to a fair degree. Monsters written in the handbook do not have their natural defenses scale according to the system math, which is why casters (and abilities targeting natural defenses) fall behind. The inclusion of Expertise feats is a rather poor method of addressing these problems. MAD (Multi-Ability-Dependency) is a problem in 4e, and hurts several classes, Paladin and Warlock in particular. Part of this is because of the system's balancing - there is no way to maintain an effective to-hit for three+ stats. Note that the newer classes are SAD (Single-Ability-Dependant).

Note that I did prefix many of my observations with "in my experience", and this is not nostalgia speaking. I really do think that while 4e is a better, more carefully constructed system, it feels and plays very differently to 3.5, and not in an entirely good way. There is something more... staid about it, I suppose.

[Goumindong]

Holy shit, man, cutting up the post into tiny chunks like that is unnerving.

Don't say stupid shit and it won't get cut up

Unfortunately, most high-level and nearly all special encounters - Constructs and Undead in particular - are completely immune to mind-affecting abilities

Yes, you will note the "unless you take measures to completely make those effects worthless"

Not to mention that the ability you're talking about requires sharing the target's language. Also, it doesn't work in combat. Also, it grants two saving throws. Also, the suggestion saving throw is not based off a skill check

Irrelevant, wrong, irrelevant, and irrelevant. Everything knows common, it works in combat if you're not utterly retarded, the number of saving throws is irrelevant because they're fascinated and suggesting does not break it

Note that I did say Wizards and Clerics are powerful, but the Druid is more so

But the Druid is not more so, it doesn't get strong until it gets wildshape, its low level spells just don't have the oomph. Its high level spells don't have the oomph oomph to pull it through in the end. Not compared to wizards, but they're better than clerics.

"Too carefully balanced" means just that - the heavy emphasis on equality cuts into the feel of the game. There is very little risk taken in defining class powers, and as a result, they tend to feel very similar. This is, of course, subjective. A +/- 3 error in to-hit is a 15% chance, which, when combined with the careful ~60% average, throws off gameplay to a fair degree

No, see the feel of the game is all you, its not anyone else, its you simply being unable to wrap your head around simple concepts like "fighters should not be worthless" and utility spells should not be able to make nearly all combat pointless. Maybe you just haven't played the game, which makes sense if you feel that powers are very similar, or that classes are very similar. They look similar in the same way that wizards and fighters looked similar in 3.5 because both had a BAB and save progression.

Its not a +/- 3 error, its a -1 error, then a -2 error, then a -3 error. And while its a pain, its not the end of the world.

Monsters written in the handbook do not have their natural defenses scale according to the system math, which is why casters (and abilities targeting natural defenses) fall behind.

Yes they do. Monsters written in the handbook do not have their natural defenses scale according to the math for each NAD between each monster, but nor does AC. Some monsters have better NADs' some have better AC, some are harder to hit in general(soldiers). NAD's scale just fine, on average 2 behind AC. Player NAD's are another issue, but you're supposed to have a weak spot.

MAD (Multi-Ability-Dependency) is a problem in 4e, and hurts several classes, Paladin and Warlock in particular. Part of this is because of the system's balancing - there is no way to maintain an effective to-hit for three+ stats. Note that the newer classes are SAD (Single-Ability-Dependant).

No, it isn't. MAD really is not a problem in 4e. The Paladin is just fine except its a needs a few more str based powers for paladins whose secondary is not charisma[Which is a fine secondary for a Paladin, better than wisdom.]. Warlocks have problems not because they have to choose con or cha with an int secondary to use, but because they just don't do enough damage to be a good striker, which is not really a systemic issue [as spells were] and isn't large enough to cause massive problems in game

[Sophismata]

... Wow, you did it again.

Yes, you will note the "unless you take measures to completely make those effects worthless"

Irrelevant, wrong, irrelevant, and irrelevant. Everything knows common, it works in combat if you're not utterly retarded, the number of saving throws is irrelevant because they're fascinated and suggesting does not break it

...because Undead, Demons, Devils, Constructs and the like are such rare D&D encounters that including them is tantamount to to 'taking measures to make suggestion worthless'. Since your reading comprehension seems lacking, I'll point out that that was sarcasm.

Also, I suggest you re-read the Player's Handbook.

But the Druid is not more so, it doesn't get strong until it gets wildshape, its low level spells just don't have the oomph. Its high level spells don't have the oomph oomph to pull it through in the end. Not compared to wizards, but they're better than clerics.

No, see the feel of the game is all you, its not anyone else, its you simply being unable to wrap your head around simple concepts like "fighters should not be worthless" and utility spells should not be able to make nearly all combat pointless. Maybe you just haven't played the game, which makes sense if you feel that powers are very similar, or that classes are very similar. They look similar in the same way that wizards and fighters looked similar in 3.5 because both had a BAB and save progression.

Its not a +/- 3 error, its a -1 error, then a -2 error, then a -3 error. And while its a pain, its not the end of the world.

Okay, I can understand why you don't get this. Strictly speaking, an arcane caster can be more powerful than the divine casters (before Divine Metamagic), but that's not my argument. In practice, the Druid is the most powerful class in the core book, not because noone can hope to match him, but because he's strong without even trying. Furthermore, he lacks the stigma associated with Clerics and Wizards that leads them down 'sub-optimal' paths.


Sorta-edit: fuck this, I had a 5 paragraph explanation for this shit but it doesn't belong in a DDO thread. Check out this, this, or just search D&D forums for the term "CoDzilla". It crops up a lot. I also suggest looking up the martial / caster imbalance in D&D 4e.

[Goumindong]

Yes, everyone knows what CoDzilla is, but it has that name not because its stronger than wizards, or that it does so without trying. It has that name because it performs both as well as a fighter while being a full spellcaster.

You do not have to try to make wizards better than clerics and druids, and there is no "stigma" that makes classes worse... Unless you're saying that druids are stronger than Wizards and Clerics because people consciously choose for their Wizards and Clerics to be sub-optimal while making good choices for their Druid? Because then your argument breaks down to "Druids are better than Wizards because Wizards are better than Druids"

And there really is no martial/caster imbalance in 4e, you're imagining it.

Also, I suggest you re-read the Player's Handbook.

On what account, that you're not intelligent enough to take measures to go first,[by either improved init or allies who are smart enough to delay?] or that you falsely think a bards suggestion breaks fascination?

[UnSub]

What a fascinating, MMO-related argument. 

[Surlyboi]

Sir Bruce would be proud. All that's missing is CHARTS!

[Sophismata]

Sir Bruce would be proud. All that's missing is CHARTS!

I didn't want to bring up Sir Bruce, since I wasn't around back then, but I was tempted. I was provided a very nice picture of Sir Brucery in my first month here.

[Lantyssa]

If anyone cares, my real character is on Sarlona.  Rogue/Ranger named Sylphaela.  At least until I get some unlocks.  I've stopped playing the beta for now since I'll just be repeating the work, and they've pretty much tested everything I have access to.

[Yegolev]

Don't say stupid shit and it won't get cut up

Stop it.

[Yegolev]

Smalf von Bittern

[NiX]

Smalf von Bittern

You always brighten my day!

[Draegan]

So I'm downloading the 10 day free trial that's available right now.  Though I should tell someone.

[Yegolev]

I'm trying to get motivated to play this again.  Poor, poor Smalf.

[Lantyssa]

They pushed the new opening back a bit:

DDO Unlimited has a new launch date of September 9th, 2009 (headstart begins September 1st, 2009 for VIPs). If you've not heard the news yet, be sure to click here for more information!

[Draegan]

I'm trying to get motivated to play this again.  Poor, poor Smalf.

I stopped downloading the game half way through and instead installed and began playing the UO-WOW private server thing.