Dungeons and Dragons Online

[Alkiera]

Agreed, hence my mention somewhere of the 2 pally / 18 sorcerer build, which was pretty popular in NeverWinter Nights.  Taking a couple levels of a fighter class can be kinda handy, just for the hitpoints at low levels... the extra base attack bonus is handy when you run out of spells, too.  But it can be taken too far.


One thing I hope for the game, is that the leveling curve isn't too painful.  D20 allows you enough flexibility that it can be easy to gimp yourself, sometimes such that it takes a few levels before you realize what happened... meaning either (a) there will be a lot of screaming people on the forums, or (b) it'll be easy enough to re-roll and catch up to play with your friends.

I also hope for there to be more than enough content to go 1-20 a couple times without having to do the exact same quests/dungeons/etc.

Alkiera

[kaid]

Multiclassing spell casters can work but you really have to watch out for the badly conflicting armor /weapon  issues. I actually find something like druid/wizard or sorc better than a druid/cleric. Druid/cleric is just to redundant where you pick up alot of the penalties and not much of the benefits.

And yes if they do it like D&D well there will be some multi class combos that really suck but for me I don't think that is such a bad thing.  If somebody wants to walk a hard path more power to them.  Also as long as your caster classes are high enough to cast 3rd level spells you will have almost all of your bread and butter powers from that class. Sure at high levels you get some silly stuff but most of the well known overall most useful powers in D&D tend to come at 3rd level of casting power.  I still would never recommend druid priest meh just way to may conflicts and the spell trees are just to similar.

kaid

[jpark]

Now, multiclassing the combat-heavy classes (e.g. fighter/paladin or barbarian/ranger) can definitely give you some interesting combinations, since the strongest abilities of those classes (e.g. attack bonuses and high HP totals) all stack together when you multiclass.

I am confused. 

If you have a FIghter/ Pally at 10/10 isn't that a problem just as two casters types are (e.g. mage/druid at 10/10)?  I don't see the stacking.

[kaid]

Oh I forgot to mention one of my more favorite combos of classes was taking monk if available for 2 or 3 levels and then branching off to wizard or sorc. This gives you a pretty darn good ac, good hp, decent fighting capability for when the spells run out without needing to use armor which screws casters.


kaid

[WayAbvPar]

The fighter/pally will get a to hit bonus every level, which stacks (one of the main perqs of being a fighter or pally). You will lose out on some feats (IIRC, fighters gain them more quickly than other classes), but you will still be a combat machine with some minor clerical abilities.  Multclassing casters restricts you from getting high enough level to use the upper end of the class's magic, which is where most of the real power comes in. You basically trade power for much greater flexibility and utility.

[kaid]

Actually warrior/paladin stacks well. Warriors I believe tend to get more feats and get new ones earlier. Take warrior to level 10 and then branch off to paladin. This way you should have more feats available than a normal paladin of your level and you get all the core paladin abilities high enough to be useful. This would make you a little less competent as a caster but it should make up for it by having a lot more versatility due to the additional feats and all the free armor/weapoin profeciencies that warriors get.


kaid

[Sobelius]

The only computerized implementation of 3E rules I've cared to play was in Temple of Elemental Evil. (Not for the game itself, which was fairly dull, but for the rules engine implementation.) It provided the correct class building system, took into account the turn-based combat and playing it felt -- at least mechanically -- just like the 3E rules, with 5-foot steps, attacks of opportunity, etc. It even included limited magic item creation. Even though I'd already played 3E table-top since release, TOEE helped me demonstrate some aspects of combat to people who were having trouble understanding the changes from 2nd Ed to 3E.

One thing I liked about TOEE was the I could form all kinds of party/class combinations. I once made a party of 5 evil elven rogues, all with ranged weapons. They didn't fare all that well. In the end I preferred a more balanced (i.e. traditional Ftr/Wiz/Clr/Rog) party.

Turn-based combat is such a big part of the mechanical infrastructure of 3E, and ties into feats and skills that affect movement rates and combat abilities, I wonder how Turbine is going to translate these to the more time-independent dynamics of movement in an MMORPG.

[jpark]

The big advantage to liscensing a system like D20...  is that most of the system balance, class balance, equipment balance, spell balance, etc work has already been done.  Sure, you need to be careful when translating to your game to not unbalance things, but that s an easier task, I think, than coming up with a completely new system, with new classes, spells, equipment, and ways of interacting.  It's already had the hundreds of thousands of man-hours of testing it takes to get something reasonably close to balanced.  It's almost a shame as few system developers are as open with their system as d20 is...  I'd vastly prefer a game based off HERO/Champions(tho CoH certainly sorta seems to be, at the system level), or maybe even Storyteller(White Wolf's '5 dots in everything!' system) to d20, especially the d20 magic system.
Alkiera

I liked this comment.  Sometimes I feel that if possible - some MMORGPs would be better off if they started as pen and paper for some inexpensive and time tested balancing, in addition to looking at what abilities make a class "fun".  In pen and paper you can change rules pretty quick ... and adjust a class until it is both fun and balanced relative to other classes.

[Alkiera]

Oh.  The other thing I gleaned from the DDO forums was that the stat system was going to be point-buy at creation, with 28 points.  This allows you to have 4 14's and 2 10's, to give you +2 in 4 stats, and no penalties in the other stats.

For the uninitiated, new chars are allows stats between 3 and 18.  The point-buy system gives you an 8 in all stats, and a pool of points to use to increase them, but not at 1 to 1.  Well, points from 9-14 are 1 point each, 15 and 16 are 2 points, 17 and 18 are 3.

Thus, to have an 18 in one stat, costs 16 points, or more than half.  A 16 costs 10 points.  The bonus provided by a given stat is STAT/2 - 5.  An 18 is +4, a 10 is 0, a 3 is -4.

Racial bonuses or penalties are applied after the point-buy system.  Thus you could raise your dex to 18 with 16 points, then choose elf as your race, and the +2 dex would give you a 20 dex.

In play, you gain a stat point every 4 levels, and you can get above 18 that way.

The most efficient way to do this is to not put your stats at 18 to start, but put them fairly high, then put in the last few points with the points you get from leveling.

Alkiera

[AOFanboi]

But to that end, I would want a server with a 1st-Ed ruleset.

The operative word is set. 1st ed had a ton of independent systems, scattered across ten or so books, with differing mechanisms. In other words, a hell to implement and balance. 2nd ed is somewhat cleaner, but still has independent mechanisms.

3rd ed cleaned up all that by setting ONE mechanism (the d20 + modifier against a DC or opposing roll). Clean as teflon, and way way easier to implement.

You do not want a computer game based on 1st ed rules. You only think you do.

[Ironwood]

Agreed, hence my mention somewhere of the 2 pally / 18 sorcerer build, which was pretty popular in NeverWinter Nights.  Alkiera

A crap build.  D&D done right means you'll just be a fallen paladin and no use to anyone.  You'd be better off with 2 levels of fighter...

[Jain Zar]

With only 20 levels advancement is going to drag horribly.  Its going to be like the D&D campaign I was in where an average 5 hours a week most every week campaign had us reach level 5 and 6 in nearly 2 years.  Even when the adventuring was fun, and it was because the DM ran a good game, it got dull advancement wise.

DDOL is going to probably be slower than the advancement in the original crappy Neverwinter Nights solo campaign.  Which was agaonizingly slow as a solo adventure.

Unless they have a plan for adding in Epic Levels and all the extraneous races & classes that are well liked, I just don't see this game being all that fun.  A big part of the fun in a class and level system is gaining lots of levels so you can play with new toys.  And when you get bored, switch to a new set of toys.

[Hanzii]

The advancement is what bothers me too.
Playing low level characters in D&D is only fun if you have a good DM and wellwritten adventures - what your characters can actually do skillwise is extremely limited. Since a MMOG can provide neither, I just envision agonising hours of fed-ex quests or rat/goblin whacking.
"Sorry guys, I've spent my two Magic missiles - gotta rest!" works in a setting with built in fast forward (ie pen and paper) or where adventures can be solved without combat. This can be fun with a DM that rewards 'out of the box' thinking - I really don't see it happening with a computer as DM.
There's a reason all single player D&D games has been combat centric (and Planescape: Torment do NOT apply here) and has done away quickly with the low levels.

I predict suck.

-------------
And in the meta-discussion about instancing Bruce is wrong wrong wrong and should just shut up, allready.

[Ironwood]

No XP for Rat-whacking.  Bear that in mind.

Maybe finally we'll get mages that can do out of the box thinking :  invisibility to complete the quest, rather than 3 fireballs, 5 magic missiles and an ice storm...

Not that I disagree that it will probably suck donkeys unless they're REALLY thinking about this aspect...

[Sobelius]

A link to the people brave enough (proud enough?) to admit they are responsible for DDO.

[Miasma]

A link to the people brave enough (proud enough?) to admit they are responsible for DDO.

I thought the Lead Engineer was using a picture of the Hindenburg as his avatar.  That could have been a prophetic clue as to the fate of the game.  Then I looked around some more and found out it is the Graf Zeppelin, I don't think that one exploded to cries of 'Oh the humanity'.

[jpark]

Maybe finally we'll get mages that can do out of the box thinking :  invisibility to complete the quest, rather than 3 fireballs, 5 magic missiles and an ice storm...

I've done that in CoH instances often.

[Sky]

I thought the Lead Engineer was using a picture of the Hindenburg as his avatar.  That could have been a prophetic clue as to the fate of the game.  Then I looked around some more and found out it is the Graf Zeppelin, I don't think that one exploded to cries of 'Oh the humanity'.

Ah..another good WoW NPC, the goblin named Hin Denburg, zeppelin guy.

[Shavnir]

Oh I forgot to mention one of my more favorite combos of classes was taking monk if available for 2 or 3 levels and then branching off to wizard or sorc. This gives you a pretty darn good ac, good hp, decent fighting capability for when the spells run out without needing to use armor which screws casters.


kaid

It was ridiclous in 3.0.  You got Evasion, 8 HP, +2 to all your saves, and (to quote Fabricated at the time) the ability to shout "Here's my other somatic component, bitch!"

Oh and the Wisdom bonus to AC.  Although it isn't ideal for divine spellcasters (given you lose it the second you don armor) but sometimes that +1 or +2 for a Sorc or Wiz is plenty good.

[waylander]

With the NWN 3.0 ruleset I used to like making a dwarf thief with 2-3 levels (enough for evasion), and then go some variant of fighter.  With good AC, gear, and a weapon, he was tough for mobs to beat on.

What bugs me is that DDO is making solo play nearly impossible at higher levels. I like to group, but sometimes you can't find a group and I dislike sitting around on my ass.  I do like the fact that you get xp for completing quests rather than mob bashing.  I'm closing in on carpel tunnel with all these grinding games making me click the mouse or mash a button a billion times, do I won't miss mob bashing for xp.

Monks were always seemingly overpowered in 3.0 because they just kicked ass at everything. I personally prefer to be a thief, and sometimes a thief/<insert class>. 

I never really got into paladins because the modern D&D games kept track of alignment, sorcerers weren't versitile enough, and I hated the NWN mage spell interface.

Turbine can do a good job here, or totally muck it up.  I'm not sure what to expect yet.

[jpark]

What bugs me is that DDO is making solo play nearly impossible at higher levels. I like to group, but sometimes you can't find a group and I dislike sitting around on my ass.  I do like the fact that you get xp for completing quests rather than mob bashing.  I'm closing in on carpel tunnel with all these grinding games making me click the mouse or mash a button a billion times, do I won't miss mob bashing for xp.

The absence of solo content combined with no tradeskills (non-combat activity) could be a real problem for this game.  In EQ2 I called soloing doing tradeskills - which they actually did a pretty good job doing imo.

[Megrim]

Things.

The absence of solo content combined with no tradeskills (non-combat activity) could be a real problem for this game.  In EQ2 I called soloing doing tradeskills - which they actually did a pretty good job doing imo.

Don't tradeskills sort-of seem like out of place in D&D? I mean, it'a all about the adventure right.. i don't really remember any sessions i ever played involving the manufacture of boots +1. Although, there is the ability to make magical items, but it's mostly a wizard thing.

 - meg

[Yoru]

Don't tradeskills sort-of seem like out of place in D&D? I mean, it'a all about the adventure right.. i don't really remember any sessions i ever played involving the manufacture of boots +1. Although, there is the ability to make magical items, but it's mostly a wizard thing.

 - meg

 I think it strongly depends on your GM; I've played in DnD and other pen/paper campaigns that focused largely on non-combat activities or finding non-combat solutions to problems that would imply combat to your standard DnD party. And I don't just mean diplomacy, although elf sex solves a surprising number of problems; making a pact with the Demon Lord of Investment Banking and staging a hostile takeover of the mithril and iron trusts in order to suppress an alliiance of dwarven warlords comes immediately to mind.

YMMV.

 Edit: But more to the point, you really can't expect that sort of thing from a MMO/CRPG. IIRC, 3E has a sort of tradeskill system spread between skills and feats. I wouldn't be surprised if the tradeskill-like feats (craft wondrous item, scribe scroll, etc.) found their way in at some point.

[Megrim]

Oh ya ya ya, i know what you mean, but when someone mentiones tradeskills in an mmorpg format, this usually indicates to me "level up your first aid to make bandages that heal 200hp" or somesuch. Vastly different from the non-combat interactions that D&D allows. And elf sex.

 - meg

[Alkiera]

Not to mention that in the vast majority of cases, creating magic items costs exp, which has to be provided by the person doing the enchanting.  Depending on what the 'grind' is like, that could be icky.

Alkiera

[jpark]

Things.

The absence of solo content combined with no tradeskills (non-combat activity) could be a real problem for this game.  In EQ2 I called soloing doing tradeskills - which they actually did a pretty good job doing imo.

Don't tradeskills sort-of seem like out of place in D&D? I mean, it'a all about the adventure right.. i don't really remember any sessions i ever played involving the manufacture of boots +1. Although, there is the ability to make magical items, but it's mostly a wizard thing.

 - meg

Subjective.  We all modified the rules when we play - and yes 15 years ago - my friends and I introduced tradeskills into our version of DnD :)

Maybe I'll expand on this - what the heck.  Gathering the components for the item to created was task to be addressed.  Finding a place to construct the item was another task to be addressed.  We had a rule that the more powerful the item you created, the greater the chance it would be '"sentient" with its own personality.  That personality would not tolerate the presence of other artifacts on your body, and may demand or withold certain benefits to the wielder if there was not "agreement" on some roleplay issues.  Because of of all of that - it was better make a very powerful weapon - leaving no doubt it would be sentient - and finding a person out there willing to buy immortality by offering his soul to the item.  The benefit here, is that in choosing the person, you could ensure that his Alignment matched yours rather than risk some random spirit entering the artifact.

Largely irrelevant to this this thread - but hey - that was our home grown trade skill system :)

[shiznitz]

So basically, kill grandma and put her in your sword? Nice. Then thw sword can say things like "when I was a human being, orcs were actually dangerous..."

[jpark]

So basically, kill grandma and put her in your sword? Nice. Then thw sword can say things like "when I was a human being, orcs were actually dangerous..."

It's a cold world.

Say, I have this water bottle I am looking to imbue... what alignment are you?

That was one of the great discoveries in pen and paper DnD for us - playing evil characters.  MMORPGS still do not do this well.  I can't tell you how much fun it was to take a "goody goody" DnD module and lace it with nefarious goals that an evil adventuring team had to achieve in making their way through the module.

[Murgos]

I'm not too familiar with 3.0 vs 3.5 rules.  I only really played AD&D and even then stopped well before 90's even started but I have played most of the single player D&D games and if it follows along those lines I'll probably end up playing some fighter/cleric mix.  With only like 1 or 3 levels of fighter.  Focus on to hit type bonuses and along with self buffing and the ability subsets that get you bonus healing spells and the ability to instantly convert healing spells to harm spells and you are basically a minor god by the medium high levels.

Wear almost any armor, use almost any weapon, cast spells that do cubic butt loads of damage to single and multiple targets, obliterate undead, heal yourself and others have good attacks and excellent hit-points and thats not even getting into all the utlity spells that come in handy in a pinch.

Clerics have been way overpowered in most of the single player D&D games, though some of the wizard/sorc builds are damn impressive too.

[Ironwood]

Heh.


This thread has already convinced me that this game is going to fail.  You're all min-maxing already and missing the point of what they're trying to do.

What is what everyone else will do, I guess.

Another world chock full of dual-wielding, panther stroking dark elf rangers.

Motherfucker...

[eldaec]

Maybe finally we'll get mages that can do out of the box thinking :  invisibility to complete the quest, rather than 3 fireballs, 5 magic missiles and an ice storm...

I've done that in CoH instances often.

You almost certainly have. What you haven't done in CoH is got anywhere near equivalent reward for stealthing a mission as you would have done for annihilating every last motherfucker in the building.

Which is something that restricts CoH in introducing new mission types, and is what means most groups won't be keen to stealth a mission unless they can't complete it any other way, and it's a on a Trial/TF.

[jpark]

Heh.


This thread has already convinced me that this game is going to fail.  You're all min-maxing already and missing the point of what they're trying to do.

What is what everyone else will do, I guess.

Another world chock full of dual-wielding, panther stroking dark elf rangers.

Motherfucker...

Paladin Thief!  Barbarian Druid?

You have a point though about optimization which a lof us tend to do.  I was intrigued way back when EQ2 devs suggested there might be some recognition for folks that take suboptimal class / race combinations.

I am all for unusual class / race combinations.  However, Gnome warriors should be banned.  Period.

[Stormwaltz]

What you haven't done in CoH is got anywhere near equivalent reward for stealthing a mission as you would have done for annihilating every last motherfucker in the building.

This is one reason to consider rewarding XP for tasks completed rather enemies slain, buffs applied, or number of leather gloves stitched. Random mobs can still offer kill XP, just not as much. It's a minor paradigm shift of going from an action-oriented to a goal-oriented reward sytstem. Offhand, the only place I've seen levelling done this way is the Witch's Wake NWN premium module, and it threw a lot of players who were used to the traditional P&P XP reward system.

The primary drawback of task-based XP is that it requires a lot of interesting quests, which can be difficult to manage in an MMG at ship. Unless you're Blizzard, and you enjoy the luxury of being able to ship whenever you feel like it.

[eldaec]

The primary drawback of task-based XP is that it requires a lot of interesting quests, which can be difficult to manage in an MMG at ship. Unless you're Blizzard, and you enjoy the luxury of being able to ship whenever you feel like it.

Ideally yes, but if you take CoH as an example, you could easily grant zero xp for kills on a mission, but credit mission completion with equivalent xp to killing everything in the building.

Outside of missions, since enemies spawn in groups it would be equally straightforward to gve xp only for arresting an entire group (you already get an influence bonus for wiping an entire group if you save a civilian in the process).

So goal based xp would certainly be possible on a COH budget.

[jpark]

The primary drawback of task-based XP is that it requires a lot of interesting quests, which can be difficult to manage in an MMG at ship. Unless you're Blizzard, and you enjoy the luxury of being able to ship whenever you feel like it.

Ideally yes, but if you take CoH as an example, you could easily grant zero xp for kills on a mission, but credit mission completion with equivalent xp to killing everything in the building.

Outside of missions, since enemies spawn in groups it would be equally straightforward to gve xp only for arresting an entire group (you already get an influence bonus for wiping an entire group if you save a civilian in the process).

So goal based xp would certainly be possible on a COH budget.

I have a feeling this is the way it might be done in DDO as well.