v0.10 - Poll - Perception of existing character enjoyment

[Draven]

This poll is intended to gauge how much the current proposal is perceived to affect the way people enjoy their current characters, as different people weight build differently than others, and some people care way more about roleplay than their character's skills, etc. Also, "significantly" is not defined, and that's on purpose. To some people, a 50 Build change might be significant, and to others it's minor. This poll is about perception.

 

[mikestrauss]

Why is there no option for "I wouldn't have to make changes to a character?"

-MS

 

[Sage of Legaia]

My only change would be dropping spell levels above 1st and putting that build into either Craftsman or production skills; I don't think my character has any interest in anything that can be Meditated (he basically only ever touch-casts), so I wouldn't even need to take Improved Meditate.

 

[Draven]

Why is there no option for "I wouldn't have to make changes to a character?"

-MS

Added.

 

[Avaran]

-

 

[Draven]

Admittedly, with as significant as the changes are, I assumed everyone would have to change something, but...that's not really a fair assumption, and I shouldn't have made it. My bad.

 

[Muir]

I had to honestly vote for 'would enjoy more with significant rewrite', but this is less indicative of quality rules in .10, and more that I have one character who is built really, really badly.

 

[mikestrauss]

Honestly, I have a character that I haven't spent build on in a long time and has built up a lot of XP during that time from monthly blankets. Unless my calculations are off, I'd burn off most of that excess XP, but have an identical character to the one I last played (except for having a higher body total).

-MS

 

[Alavatar]

I am a Celestial Scholar with more Formal than sense (currently 98 Celestial Form). The changes in 2.0 are a net buff to my character, so from a "character enjoyment" perspective, I will enjoy my character more. But, I recognize the current draft significantly negatively impacts the fun of people around me.

 

[Samyania]

I wouldn't change anything with her build, but I can see playing my mostly-offensive and/or paperwork Earth Scholar getting more annoying as even more people come asking for healz she has no interest in passing to people who don't matter.

(Did I mention stone elf?)

 

[Draven]

I wouldn't change anything with her build, but I can see playing my mostly-offensive and/or paperwork Earth Scholar getting more annoying as even more people come asking for healz she has no interest in passing to people who don't matter.

(Did I mention stone elf?)

"Apply your legs in a northerly direction for about half a mile, scoop some mildly-damp sod into the palm of your hand, and apply it thoroughly to the damaged area. That's the only remedy I can offer you at this time."

----How I envision Vellis wording it.

 

[Samyania]

"I call upon the Earth to Cure Light Wounds. Get up and go find a real healer," is usually how it goes, but I like your version.

 

[Saephis]

I currently play a fighter, and enjoy it despite the meager non-physical defenses I've acquired (There's characters a quarter his level with more cloaks, banes, and activate-ables, in short).

If any of the 2.0 releases were to come out as-proposed, I'd have to either resign to burning through resurrections, avoid anything resembling combat, or significantly change the character's build and view on matters -- both IC and OOC changes, in short.

 

[Siestrion]

My current main is an Earth Scholar. The proposed rules will not affect how I play my character. My stone elf is okay with the healer role... just don't expect a Life spell if you aren't a "friend".

However, having participated in a prior playtest, I can see how melee classes would not enjoy the new version. We've nerfed static damage (kinda... weirdness with critical attacks and empower warrior, not included), while we've upped body and armor. So without take outs, static weapon swings take forever to take anyone down. Maybe that was intentional, but man... I would not want to be trying to land 12+ hits (not blocked) to kill a minion as a fighter. It could be argued that you could stat the monsters down, but then you end up with the weirdness of people burning 10 critical attacks/back attacks, messing up that statting. I know that when I NPCed during the playtest, swinging 5s to 10s against a PC felt largely ineffective vs a PC. Disarms/Shatters, followed immediately by Slays/Eviscerates were deadly, but static damage took forever to drop anyone, when fighters have 30+ Body (70+ in a couple cases) and easily have 40 armor in the new rules (not including that ritual that doubles armor). Even scholars with weapons were a pain to drop. Seriously, I don't see how the proposed rules are supposed to help staff with statting, which I believe was a part of the reason to make rules changes.

 

[Tantarus]

I am an earth templar, though I have been many classes over my 23 years. Mostly Fighter, earth templar, but also earth scholar, celestial scholar, started as a alchemy rogue, went stabby rogue for a time.

I likely will change to celestial scholar, the value of wands is over the top. 1000ish damage for no build that is thrown and elemental. Sign me up. I do really enjoy stick jocking though so is a slight change I will make a poor choice and remain a templar. Though I would only swing 5, but my wand would do 6 damage...

I just am not convinced hitting for 5 will even be relevant. At my level most things will have 50+ body/armor, at a minimum, most will have much higher even at 50% 1.3 hps. That is 10 hits... Where I risk getting wrecked by slays/evises out of no where. Just dont see that as being fun in the long run.

 

[Draven]

Day one of this poll seems to indicate that impacts to character enjoyment is mixed amongst forum participants, though leaning in the direction of "less enjoyment" to "character becomes unplayable." Mixed, though.

 

[Graham Wolsey]

I went through all the increase enjoyment results and broke them down by class intended to be after the rules change:

Celestial Scholar x3
Earth Templar x1
Rogue x1 (stated desire to play worst class)
Artisan x1 (Artisan under current rules)
No data provided x1

 

[Mark of Chaos]

I think I marked mine as "would have to modify, enjoyment would increase." I play a rogue right now, and have regretted it on occasion. I would happily jump on a free chance to change it the large majority of how those build are spent. So, not really an increase in enjoyment due to the new rules but simply from not being so heavily invested in Rogue skills anymore. Nothing I have seen in any of the last 4 or 5 playtest packets gives me reason to stay full Rogue in 2.0

 

[Draven]

I think I marked mine as "would have to modify, enjoyment would increase." I play a rogue right now, and have regretted it on occasion. I would happily jump on a free chance to change it the large majority of how those build are spent. So, not really an increase in enjoyment due to the new rules but simply from not being so heavily invested in Rogue skills anymore. Nothing I have seen in any of the last 4 or 5 playtest packets gives me reason to stay full Rogue in 2.0

Would you say that the free Spirit Forge by itself would be enough to warrant your enjoyment increase, then?

 

[Mark of Chaos]

Would you say that the free Spirit Forge by itself would be enough to warrant your enjoyment increase, then?

Seems to be a fair statement.