PDA

View Full Version : Some thoughts on overcoming immunities



sephiroth1084
01-04-2011, 01:25 AM
As requested, a preface: Immunities have restricted design space in DDO, whether we're talking about character options or ways for the devs to challenge us. Epic content is boring for a lot of players because so many of the strategies, spells, abilities and effects that were useful in all previous content are entirely pointless. Many boss encounters are incredibly dull for some characters for the same reason. On the other side of the DM screen, our rampant immunities render many monsters, and even whole encounters, rather non-threatening. The devs are forced to throw insanely inflated numbers (damage or HP) at us, skewing the game toward high-DPS, high_HP characters, because other strategies don't work.

This isn't conjecture. Whether you want to accept it or not, these are facts. Facts that many players, and more importantly the devs, acknowledge as being a problem that needs to be addressed. It's part of the reason we've seen some powerful items and effects carrying fortification penalties with them. It's part of the reason Disjunction was coded and inserted into some quests. It's the motivation behind the monsters that spam Dispel Magic on players. The problem has, for the most part, been getting worse, and not better, as the devs appear to be increasingly painted into a corner. Something needs to be done!

I have a few ideas here, which are mostly jumbled, so this many not initially be very cohesive, but I'll try, and will make comments or edit it later after I've had some time to sort the ideas and such.

Item-based immunities
Change items that grant immunities to <insert whatever> to instead function like the Silver Flame Talisman. That is, they have a certain number of charges that get removed when subjected to a particular effect, and when the charges are entirely gone, so is your immunity. Certain effects should probably remain as total immunity.

For example, the Kundarak Delving Boots could be changed to something like:
Immunity to Slippery Surfaces
Absorb Impeding Effects (5 charges)

Where the absorption could block 5 effects before becoming inert (5 may be too few in this case). The charges should probably completely refresh upon resting, and maybe should even come with a regenerating effect for rarer effects (such as this one).

Standard Deathblock items could be divided into tiers, the way Heavy Fort is, that provide more charges, or regenerating charges or something.

This change would apply to Poison, Disease and Blindness immunity items as well, and could open up design space for items that grant immunity to curses, particular elements, etc...

Multiple items equipped at the same time shouldn't lose charges at the same time--if you want you spend half your item slots being immune to one thing, more power to you--but we probably shouldn't have access to too many items in the same slot that provide these effects (simply being able to cycle through 5 Deathblock necklaces, for example, would sort of defeat the purpose of this, and would simply overcrowd our inventory).
------------------------------------------------------------
In the case of Heavy Fortification, since it functions differently from other effects, would be to drop heavy fort to an 80 or 90% protection, while also reducing the penalties some other effects carry by a bit (Inspire Recklessness would be a 5% penalty instead maybe).

[EDIT} The devs have indicated that they are considering adding effects to both sides that reduce fortification. We've received some of these as a finisher for monks, feat for rogues, a general (crappy feat) for everyone, and monsters (sort of) received this with Inspire Recklessness.

Given this train of thought, I still think the idea of lowering the base on what fortification we have has merit, but that we should also possibly gain ways to temporarily improve our fortification as well. If we start with a lower base, so that even in regular content we aren't entirely dismissive of crits and sneak attacks, but have some way to occasionally boost it up to immunity-level, or to regain some of what a monster has stripped from us, I think we'd end up with a more interestingly complex combat dynamic than fortification currently presents.

Spell-based immunities
I have three thoughts on spells.
1) They function like the items do, providing charges that get stripped by repeated exposure to particular effects. The buff icon would clearly display how many charges are left (we'd need the buff bar fixed in some way).
2) They function the same way they do now, but have much shorter durations (along the lines of Haste, maybe). We could have constant immunity to everything all the time, but it would be very costly.
3) A hybridized version, where the spells provide a certain number of charges of protection, and when the charges have all been used, the spell ceases to protect the character for a short period of time, before automatically renewing its charges completely. In this case, the burden wouldn't be on casters so much as on individuals, as repeated exposure to something could become very dangerous.

Monsters
Instead of giving monsters flat immunities, they could instead be "equipped" with the new item or spell functions, where different monsters or difficulties would have different numbers of charges. Red and purple named creatures could regenerate charges faster, though should probably retain immunity to some fight-enders (instant death mostly).

In this way, a player could spam Wail or Finger on the devils in Bastion if they really wanted, and had the mana, to finally kill them in that way, or could drain charges with Death Aura, or Negative Energy Burst, or Necrotic Blast, etc...

Perhaps assign specific values to these effects (the spells and such), so that a Death Aura tick wouldn't have the same effect as a Wail, for example.

Specific effects/spells
Finger/Wail should probably gain some damage vs. things immune to instant death entirely (red and purple bosses mostly). Perhaps something like 2d6 negative energy damage/level on a failed save, with the same 3d6 damage on a successful save it deals now. This would be comparable to using Disintegrate vs. some monsters by some characters, and quite a bit better for others (Pale Masters--giving them some more options in fights with monsters immune to death effects would be a good thing), while being comparable, in some ways, to Necrotic Ray (the level 6 spell), as the latter does much more damage on monsters with high saves.

Monk dark strike/Touch of Despair could be used to drain charges from negative energy protections. Maybe ToDes could cut down on charge regeneration or something in addition to its other effects?

Stunning Blow/Fist could drain Freedom of Movement charges. Maybe trip could as well (Improved Trip would drain more, making taking the feat a little more attractive).

Waves of Exhaustion could be given a shorter duration than it has even now, and maybe a save (boosted in a way similar to Banishment maybe) in order to provide a potential debuff vs. bosses again that does something of real significance (-3 to-hit rarely matters; -3 damage per hit tends to matter even less than that; -3 AC sometimes is significant and other times pointless; and -3 Reflex saves is only rarely relevant).

Assassinate could probably be given the same treatment as Finger and Wail, or even simply coded as a different sort of effect, that bypasses certain types of deathblock/death immunity.

AI
Give more monsters the ability to cure themselves of negative status effects, such as the ability to drink a potion or some such. This should probably give the monster immunity to such effects for a short duration afterwards (15 seconds to a minute, depending on the monster, maybe) so that simply chaining debuffs on a monster wouldn't render an encounter non-threatening due to the monster constantly trying to cure itself instead of attacking.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Certain things should continue to be immune to particular effects (undead to paralysis, for example), while other things that are typically immune could instead simply have a greater degree of protection.

Gorbadoc
01-04-2011, 01:31 AM
I have a few ideas here, which are mostly jumbled, so this many not initially be very cohesive, but I'll try, and will make comments or edit it later after I've had some time to sort the ideas and such.

Yes, please do. I love good ideas, but it's so hard to identify them when their progenitors don't bother prefacing them with an abstract.

sephiroth1084
01-04-2011, 01:44 AM
Yes, please do. I love good ideas, but it's so hard to identify them when their progenitors don't bother prefacing them with an abstract.
I'd assumed that the reasoning behind the need for these changes would be obvious, but I've included some notes at the beginning leading into the idea.

Gorbadoc
01-04-2011, 01:55 AM
That was more of a preamble than an abstract. ;-)

Thank you, though. It implicitly said, "I'm trying to solve the problem of immunities (player and monster) painting devs into a corner, and these ideas can be evaluated in that context." It also told me that you're not just some yahoo who "OMG has such a good idea that it's TOTALLY worth posting a wall of text and then not editing it". Yeah, I know, I see your posts all the time, but I'm always getting people mixed up when I don't have a face or voice to put to them.

wax_on_wax_off
01-04-2011, 02:05 AM
I agree with the premise of this, it just surprises me so much that with this acknowledgment they went and gave us permanent, non-dispellable, immune to antimagic buffs from guild ships. Makes a joke of leveling up when you have 30/resist everything and bonuses to every stats, saves, skills etc that even a beholder can't get rid of.

I like this solution better:
Make each immunity give 100% protection against the affect but every time you get hit by that affect the immunity drops by 5%. It then regenerates at 1 tier/minute. This could apply to only immunities or resistances as well.

That would solve all the problems.

Additionally, don't make this change apply to casual difficulty (possibly not normal difficulty either) so that those who like to solo (and spend lots of TP) don't have their fun ruined.

Alternatively, the % decrease in effectiveness could change by difficulty level:
Casual: 0%
Normal: 1%
Hard: 5%
Elite: 5-10% (dependent on the difference between save and the DC)
Epic: 10-25% (same as elite)

It would be possible to be overbuffed by 1 step, for instance, if at 100% protection with deathblock you then cast deathward on yourself and so receive a 1 hit short term shield (ie. first death affect removes the deathward portion of deathblock leaving original 100% deathblock, consequent death effects affect the 100% protection normally as per difficulty).

This would create battles in which constant rebuffing of deathblock is required if under a barrage of instant death affects. Frustration (and strategy and teamwork) could ensure if hit repeatedly with blindness. Equipping a disease immunity belt won't be enough against mummies (but it will help a lot). Poison will eventually get through. Many possibilities.

sephiroth1084
01-04-2011, 02:07 AM
Any time a regular forum poster changes their icon, I start getting confused. This includes my own posts after my recent change from the stern-looking elf avatar to the wraith. :rolleyes:

The immunities thing is a constant sore point for me, and something I've come to dislike more and more while playing DDO (partly because it has become more and more prevalent and pronounced), and is something I've posted on numerous times. This is also the case for several other regular forum posters and devs (Angelus_Dead, Borroro, Eladrin, to name a few).

I'm interested in reactions to the ideas I presented both individually and as a whole.

Gorbadoc
01-04-2011, 02:11 AM
I like most of these ideas. The recurring theme seems to be that repeated exposure = opportunity for the resistance to break down.

In that spirit,
Suppose a death block item granted 150% resistance to death effects, but that every resisted death effect reduced the character's (not the item's) death resistance by 15%. Hence, the first four Fingers of Death to hit you would be resisted. Another Finger would hit you at 150% - 4*15% = 90% chance to resist. At this point, you could live with the 10%, 25%, 40% etc. chance of dying, or you could equip a second death block item. Just remember that the penalty sticks with the character. You actually have to ADD death block items to stay safe; swapping one item for another does not help.

chrisgina39
01-04-2011, 02:14 AM
/signed

sephiroth1084
01-04-2011, 02:18 AM
I agree with the premise of this, it just surprises me so much that with this acknowledgment they went and gave us permanent, non-dispellable, immune to antimagic buffs from guild ships. Makes a joke of leveling up when you have 30/resist everything and bonuses to every stats, saves, skills etc that even a beholder can't get rid of.

I like this solution better:
Make each immunity give 100% protection against the affect but every time you get hit by that affect the immunity drops by 5%. It then regenerates at 1 tier/minute. This could apply to only immunities or resistances as well.

That would solve all the problems.

Additionally, don't make this change apply to casual difficulty (possibly not normal difficulty either) so that those who like to solo (and spend lots of TP) don't have their fun ruined.

Alternatively, the % decrease in effectiveness could change by difficulty level:
Casual: 0%
Normal: 1%
Hard: 5%
Elite: 5-10% (dependent on the difference between save and the DC)
Epic: 10-25% (same as elite)

It would be possible to be overbuffed by 1 step, for instance, if at 100% protection with deathblock you then cast deathward on yourself and so receive a 1 hit short term shield (ie. first death affect removes the deathward portion of deathblock leaving original 100% deathblock, consequent death effects affect the 100% protection normally as per difficulty).

This would create battles in which constant rebuffing of deathblock is required if under a barrage of instant death affects. Frustration (and strategy and teamwork) could ensure if hit repeatedly with blindness. Equipping a disease immunity belt won't be enough against mummies (but it will help a lot). Poison will eventually get through. Many possibilities.
That;s essentially what my idea was, though this is an interesting variation on it.

As it stands, spell absorption items are among the most powerful effects in the game, but are kept in check by their rarity, expense, competition for other important effects and by their limited duration of protection. Still, the Silver Flame Talisman offers complete immunity to two of a beholder's most deadly/problematic effects, and is usually sufficient for even several beholders. The Mantle of the Worldshaper, similarly, covers basically an entire major encounter with just its 5 charges. Whether these effects are too strong, just right, or too weak, I'm not going to comment on, but they certainly represent existing examples of the system by which to measure other changes.

sephiroth1084
01-04-2011, 02:21 AM
I like most of these ideas. The recurring theme seems to be that repeated exposure = opportunity for the resistance to break down.

In that spirit,
Suppose a death block item granted 150% resistance to death effects, but that every resisted death effect reduced the character's (not the item's) death resistance by 15%. Hence, the first four Fingers of Death to hit you would be resisted. Another Finger would hit you at 150% - 4*15% = 90% chance to resist. At this point, you could live with the 10%, 25%, 40% etc. chance of dying, or you could equip a second death block item. Just remember that the penalty sticks with the character. You actually have to ADD death block items to stay safe; swapping one item for another does not help.
I think this is what we're starting to see with fortification a little bit. A Pale Master, for example, can drink Yugoloth Int potions because they can, if they choose to, get up to 200% fortification by entering undead form and equipping a fort item. WF can ignore the penalty on Inspire Recklessness by equipping a Heavy (moderate) Fort item.

I like this idea, but I'm not thrilled with the idea of promoting carrying several pieces of gear that replicate a single effect, especially not if we have to do so for multiple effects, but I'm not entirely set against the idea. Afterall, it's up to each person how much of a chance they are willing to deal with.

Gorbadoc
01-04-2011, 02:44 AM
I'm not thrilled with the idea of promoting carrying several pieces of gear that replicate a single effect, especially not if we have to do so for multiple effects, but I'm not entirely set against the idea. Afterall, it's up to each person how much of a chance they are willing to deal with.

In at least some cases, the resistance shouldn't stack. I get a large +perform bonus from my cloak (competence), and I have the option of getting a smaller +perform bonus from a Gwylan's Blade (enhancement). In cases where the stacking WOULD get obscene, the obscenity can be avoided by limiting the stacking.

In other cases, though, I'm not sure it matters. There is a LOT of good gear out there these days. Piling on extra Poison Immunity creates opportunity costs left and right (My intense fear of green icons is preventing me from wearing my +4 strength gloves and boots of striding!). In some cases, redundant items will be discouraged by the fact that the marginal benefit per item doesn't outweigh the opportunity cost.

wax_on_wax_off
01-04-2011, 02:46 AM
I think this is what we're starting to see with fortification a little bit. A Pale Master, for example, can drink Yugoloth Int potions because they can, if they choose to, get up to 200% fortification by entering undead form and equipping a fort item. WF can ignore the penalty on Inspire Recklessness by equipping a Heavy (moderate) Fort item.

I like this idea, but I'm not thrilled with the idea of promoting carrying several pieces of gear that replicate a single effect, especially not if we have to do so for multiple effects, but I'm not entirely set against the idea. Afterall, it's up to each person how much of a chance they are willing to deal with.

I don't like this at all, the solution to any changes shouldn't be to just whack on more immunities, it should be to create new strategy, teamwork, difficulty. Anything which doesn't accomplish this goal should be thrown out.

I'm ok with WF and PMs having higher than 100% fortification as I think that this is a special case but I think a fleshy should certainly be limited to max of 100% fort.

Gorbadoc
01-04-2011, 02:56 AM
I don't like this at all, the solution to any changes shouldn't be to just whack on more immunities, it should be to create new strategy, teamwork, difficulty. Anything which doesn't accomplish this goal should be thrown out.

The devil is in the details, but at least on Elite, I agree with you. I like your idea to increase the -%resist per hit on hard/elite/epic.

In some cases, I think it should be enough that slapping on more immunities simply doesn't work as a long-term strategy; you weaken yourself to stay alive, only to die because you're weaker.

J1NG
01-04-2011, 03:59 AM
There's only one problem I feel with this idea that makes it VERY undesirable.

What happens when you are struck first en masse? And you are unable to respond?

Whether knowingly or not (because someone didn't know and aggro'd them), somehow in a Turn the Tides run on Epic, 6 casters have surrounded you with their lackies as well. Each of them spams their Hold Person/Monster spell on you. Before you can say "That's not fair", you're all held for at least the next 60's and will be dead inside 10's because your immunity via Freedom of Movement had it's protection get whittled down because 6 of them cast it at the same time. (-10 to -25% on Epic from each one basically means you have 0 protection, at the very most 40%, but what are the chances of that?).

I know, I know, you could say that you don't let that happen, etc.

I just feel there's a more simple way; Have casters attempt to dispel and disjunction more. At least that way, I don't need to look at an icon and mouse over it to wonder how much % protection I have left. If it's gone, I can scream I've lost my FoM or Deathward to the appropriate people.

Just let players cast dispel or disjunction and actually have an effect on monsters instead and it'll be fair and appropriate. Right now, it's where the problem is. You can't remove anything from enemies unless they cast it. For us the players, it's just buff removal. No item associated immunity removal. Which could maybe solve some of the issues.

The system you've proposed is highly complex, and I feel inapprpriate for an MMO environment like DDO where things happen so quickly you have 0 time to respond to it. I don't want to know how much % protection I have on my DW, FoM, Prot. Evil, Fire Resistance, etc in the middle of battling. I have things to kill or control and 0 time to mouse over every buff I have to see if I'm going to be Held by a spell because I missed them and they are casting their 11th identical spell on me.

I'd rather it just be there or not. Which dispel and disjunction works perfectly for already.

/Not Signed

I am however willing to change my vote if a better solution can be suggested or developed.

J1NG

frznvimes
01-04-2011, 04:36 AM
I feel like this would just make players carry around even more clickies and items to swap in, push casters more towards being buff bots, and make tanks even less useful. I do like the direction of your thinking though. Rather than seeing spells/items being depleted, I like the idea of seeing (dispelable) short term reductions in immunities applied to the character when an effect is blocked. Or seeing immunities work like fortitude with certain player/mob abilities essentially having a chance to pierce it.

Rakian_Knight
01-04-2011, 06:03 AM
I like your idea with charges for immunity items but not spells.

My reasoning is simple: Spells are temporary and can be dispelled. If you want a group of gnolls to be an interesting challenge have the caster throw a freedom of movement on then Greater dispel magic on the closest Player.

As far as Fortification:
Personally, I like it the way it is heading now but I would really like to see a change to Sunder that I heard about a while ago.

Sunder would work by decreasing AC (like it does now) and some fortification. Improved Sunder takes a bigger chunk out but I believe this would make things very interesting from both the players side and mobs. Maybe 25% hit for sunder and 50% for improved for about 10 seconds. They might be the longest 10 seconds of your game but it might add life to a dead ability and change the way we play the game a bit.

Again just my 2 cp,

~Rakian_Knight

sephiroth1084
01-04-2011, 06:38 AM
There's only one problem I feel with this idea that makes it VERY undesirable.

What happens when you are struck first en masse? And you are unable to respond?

Whether knowingly or not (because someone didn't know and aggro'd them), somehow in a Turn the Tides run on Epic, 6 casters have surrounded you with their lackies as well. Each of them spams their Hold Person/Monster spell on you. Before you can say "That's not fair", you're all held for at least the next 60's and will be dead inside 10's because your immunity via Freedom of Movement had it's protection get whittled down because 6 of them cast it at the same time. (-10 to -25% on Epic from each one basically means you have 0 protection, at the very most 40%, but what are the chances of that?).

I know, I know, you could say that you don't let that happen, etc.

I just feel there's a more simple way; Have casters attempt to dispel and disjunction more. At least that way, I don't need to look at an icon and mouse over it to wonder how much % protection I have left. If it's gone, I can scream I've lost my FoM or Deathward to the appropriate people.

Just let players cast dispel or disjunction and actually have an effect on monsters instead and it'll be fair and appropriate. Right now, it's where the problem is. You can't remove anything from enemies unless they cast it. For us the players, it's just buff removal. No item associated immunity removal. Which could maybe solve some of the issues.

The system you've proposed is highly complex, and I feel inapprpriate for an MMO environment like DDO where things happen so quickly you have 0 time to respond to it. I don't want to know how much % protection I have on my DW, FoM, Prot. Evil, Fire Resistance, etc in the middle of battling. I have things to kill or control and 0 time to mouse over every buff I have to see if I'm going to be Held by a spell because I missed them and they are casting their 11th identical spell on me.

I'd rather it just be there or not. Which dispel and disjunction works perfectly for already.

/Not Signed

I am however willing to change my vote if a better solution can be suggested or developed.

J1NG
I'd imagine the buff icons could be expanded to be a tiny bit larger, with some obvious indicator as to how much protection a particular buff is still offering, whether as a number, some dots, a pie or...whatever.

I think, though obviously can't actually compare, that Dispel?Disjunction is a lot more annoying, as a player, than my suggestion for a couple of reasons. One, there's no defense against it, really, and no way to adjust for it other than rebuffing, which gets wearisome. Two, we already have a fair number of creatures in quests who do almost nothing but chain dispel magics, and the effect sometimes removes your immunity, and sometimes it removes your Jump, Haste, Divine Favor, Rage...and not anything especially relevant to the monsters, but simply irritating to you and whoever is providing your buffs.

The other issue, is that I think that there's no real way to make monster immunities dispelable and still have them mean anything. If we wanted to, we could Disjunction a group of monsters rather easily, or target-dispel single monsters we know to have a buff we want to get around, with far more precision and efficiency than the monsters can do to us. Essentially, it would be the same as when Amrath came out, and insta-death spells essentially became 25 or 50 mana more expensive because we attached an Enervation or Energy Drain to the front of them. It was a more complex strategy, and had a real cost for casters, but it wasn't especially interesting.

Now, I'd much prefer dispellable buffs on enemies to the rampant blanket immunities we have now, but feel that such buffs would quickly become almost meaningless as the playerbase adapted to the change...suddenly every caster would be carrying Dispel Magic, Greater Dispel Magic, Break Enchantment and/or Disjunction (most carry at least one of these already anyway).

In the case of my proposal, at least, different immunities would require different strategies, and players could work together on weakening the enemies (I proposed ways for monks, fighters, barbarians to all help a bit, with potential for other classes to get in on the show somehow).

Another thing that occurred to me just now is that dispel magic functions, in regard to important buffs, in only 1 way: either you have the buff still or you don't, and if you don't you get rebuffed, which is cumbersome, and expensive, and requires almost no decision if its an important buff (FoM in Epic OoB for example). With graduated immunities, players will be deciding whether it is worth the SP cost to rebuff a partially depleted immunity, or wait, and take a gamble in order to save SP. The same occurs now, but the choice is clearer, since you're moving from 0 immunity to 100% (not really, because saves are usually involved, but something along those lines).

Maybe that degree of decision making is too much to still be fun? I don't know.

I like your idea with charges for immunity items but not spells.

My reasoning is simple: Spells are temporary and can be dispelled. If you want a group of gnolls to be an interesting challenge have the caster throw a freedom of movement on then Greater dispel magic on the closest Player.



As far as Fortification:
Personally, I like it the way it is heading now but I would really like to see a change to Sunder that I heard about a while ago.

Sunder would work by decreasing AC (like it does now) and some fortification. Improved Sunder takes a bigger chunk out but I believe this would make things very interesting from both the players side and mobs. Maybe 25% hit for sunder and 50% for improved for about 10 seconds. They might be the longest 10 seconds of your game but it might add life to a dead ability and change the way we play the game a bit.

Again just my 2 cp,

~Rakian_Knight
I'd like to see the Sunder change as well, but it makes up only a small part of the larger issue.

wax_on_wax_off
01-04-2011, 06:47 AM
The devil is in the details, but at least on Elite, I agree with you. I like your idea to increase the -%resist per hit on hard/elite/epic.

In some cases, I think it should be enough that slapping on more immunities simply doesn't work as a long-term strategy; you weaken yourself to stay alive, only to die because you're weaker.

Putting on more gear should never be a solution. It's pretty bad maths to have 110% of something. With the exception of fortification (because it's already been implemented) you shouldn't be able to have more than 100% resistance to anything. In the end, it's only failed saves which would erode your 100% immunity (which brings needed importance back to saves) and it would be possible to patch up your immunities with spells/clickies in a long fight. However, the important thing is that it will be possible to die occasionally (sorry PD players).

J1NG
01-04-2011, 06:58 AM
Maybe that degree of decision making is too much to still be fun? I don't know.

I feel as in my original post, that this is one of the bigger issues.

It's clear cut right now with buffs. Do we have the buff/item? Yes? I can hang in there longer.

No? I run, or let others know I could get hammered.

Your proposed expansion? Even with expanding the buff icons so you can see what % is remaining? Whilst in a fight, if I see Icons going, I know I'm getting dispelled a lot in a middle of a huge fight. In a massive fight, I have 0 time to look at all 50 icons of buffs and immunities I have and think to myself...

"I have 60% Fire Resistance 30 left, but I've also got a 30% Fireshield Blue going. Should I jump out of the Enter the Kobold fight? I look OK, but I've also got 160hp left out of 620hp. The boss has 30% life left. Do I stay in a little longer? Or seek help back in the passage?"

I don't really see everyone doing that all the time, looking at all the numbers and making a call every time it changes numbers. And in the example of the Enter the Kobold run. The amount of Fire damage coming through basically means no one ever has ANY fire resistance or protection of any kind in your proposed change as their effective % would be 0 due to the amount of hits that would have reduced your protections and resistances to 0.

In DDO, if you take too long over something like deciding to stay in a fight or jump out, it means life or death. And then ALL of the buffs all over again. Even worse than being dispelled only.

Again, I don't mind a change. But what's been proposed I feel works in a game where twitch and reaction skills are not important. That's not the case for DDO. Things happen quickly in DDO. And that's why I'm not a fan of the suggested change. Make this NWN where I can pause and evaluate the situation and I'll take it. But this is not. So...

J1NG

pHo3nix
01-04-2011, 06:58 AM
Yes, so casters would become more buffbots than they are now cause they have to refresh buffs every few sec..there are already enough quests in the game where mobs dispel you every 3 seconds(OOB, a cabal for one, coalescence chamber, etc..), and they are quite annoying..
And inventory space is already an issue, there's no room for more deathblock/disease immunity/heavy fortification items..

Changes like the ones you are proposing just affect in a negative way people with a blue bar, both divines and arcanes..

Hutoth
01-04-2011, 07:01 AM
snip

/signed - especially the idea re immunities (whether they be from items or wherever) are reduced by a small % on each 'hit'.

The possibilities it opens up against mobs are just as exciting as the increase in danger to the players.

Gorbadoc
01-04-2011, 12:31 PM
I'm seeing multiple complaints that amount to, "/notsigned, because this change would make the game harder for reasons X, Y, and Z."

Wax_on already covered the solution here: Keep the immunity degeneration mild on Normal dungeon difficulty.

Sometimes we all want to be able to play stupidly and not have it matter. Set the dungeon to Normal, and away you go.

Sometimes, though, we want to be challenged. The current immunities system fails to deliver. It flattens a huge opportunity for complexity in the game.

sephiroth1084
01-04-2011, 04:29 PM
Differentiating the deflation of buffs based on difficulty is interesting, and not something I'd considered initially, but is something the devs clearly have the tech for. I'd be behind that 100%, although it would seem kind of silly for a character on elite something to have an easier time of landing something through an immunity than on normal, and if elite monsters function in the reverse to avoid that issue, then elite would probably end up where the quests are now, with fewer strategies being viable. I guess the change in difficulty could apply only for us?

Yes, so casters would become more buffbots than they are now cause they have to refresh buffs every few sec..there are already enough quests in the game where mobs dispel you every 3 seconds(OOB, a cabal for one, coalescence chamber, etc..), and they are quite annoying..
And inventory space is already an issue, there's no room for more deathblock/disease immunity/heavy fortification items..

Changes like the ones you are proposing just affect in a negative way people with a blue bar, both divines and arcanes..
I don't know. For one, I'm not making this proposal in regards to resist or protection from energy, as I feel that those work fairly well for us, and reasonably well for monsters until we get to 100-point resists and lots of stuff with immunities.

As for the bookkeeping...how many encounters do we deal with more than 2, maybe 3 types of effects that we'd otherwise be immune to? Again, the buff bar could be tooled around with a bit (it needs improvements anyway)...maybe as buffs start to get depleted they slide to a different position (say, further to the right) for a more intuitive way of displaying this kind of data. Heck, the buff bar could even be divided into percentages of over 100%, 100%, over 75%, over 50%, over 25%, under 25%, where a little line with the indicating number would separate them.

[Deathward 110%] /100%+/ [Curse Immunity 100%] /100%/ /75%/ /50%/ [Freedom of Movement 35%] /25%/

If DW were reduced by 30%, it would slide down into the bracket between 100 and 75, would, while the 110 bracket would just be a narrow bar off at the edge of the buffs. If curse immunity also slid down, we'd have something like:

/100%+/ /100%/ [Deathward 80%] /75%/ [Curse Immunity 100%] /50%/ [Freedom of Movement 35%] /25%/

Ultimately, this is simply a response to the notion that more informative buff bars would necessarily be cumbersome. If we get used to seeing buffs depleting and moving to a location as they do so, the information will quickly become intuitive for us, as players, and rather easy to deal with.



The concern that any change to make spells less effective will necessarily result in blue-bars being devoted more toward being buffbots is a concern. A fairly big one. Not allowing spells and items to stack, or having them only stack partially might be a solution. Whatever happens, spells cannot continue to provide such powerful immunities, as that would leave us where we are now, with players who scoff at raid bosses that cast Mass Hold, Enervation, Fear, etc...and who in turn are constantly frustrated by having half of their already fairly limited pool of useful spells cut out due to monster immunities.

Cyr
01-04-2011, 04:58 PM
The itemization part of the suggestion I will focus on as I find that particulalry undesirable as first proposed.

Charged items of this sort do not make for fun game play or great game design. The reasoning is very simple.

1) These effects are situational. This means that you only need X charges per shrine to carry you through certain content. This of course just leads to the bag full of charged items instead of the single immunity item. You also end up with this mod on items being a junk mod for the most part because it's purely situational (much like blindness immunity is on random loot now).

Unless changing inventory slots is fun gameplay this does little except in one particular case...

2) The fast burn through of charges issue. Existing content, like it or not, has dungeons where lots of mobs spam certain effects of these sorts. There are situations where many of the same sort of mob that spam these sorts of effects can be encountered at once. This leads to the undesirable effect that these abilities/spells that cause blindness/curse/restrict movement... are still essentially useless for mobs to have beyond a certain leve except where there are tons of mobs using them at once at which point they become very powerful.

Spell charges isntead of immunities do not suffer as badly from these two issues thankfully, but still do not make for fun gameplay.

There are some ways to alter these things to be better game play wise and design wise.

1) Ablative immunity per shrine. Instead of linking immunities to spells/items that can be swapped or recast you have a single ablative immunity that counts down and can not be recharged per shrine (or recharges at a slow rate). Use of this could be initiated from a clickie or a spell as long as another use of a similar immunity item would do nothing until resting. Alternatively this could be applied as a counter based upon resisted effects that works in the same manner, but could be easier to understand for players. IE, your bodies resistance to charms has been broken down you need more powerful spells and effects to have any immunity...this would also make itemization easier to understand for players (oh I have a -5 charge debuff on charms, better pop on my best charm immunity item or double them up)...

2) Lose of charges is not based upon each use of an effect, but instead is based upon each effect that has it's saving throw failed.

In these two ways you have a solution to the bag full of deathward items (which is not fun in any way shape or form) and also have a good method of providing long term psuedo immunity for mobs/pcs who would rarely be effected by said effects in the first place.

Gustel
01-04-2011, 05:17 PM
Well, my 2cents

1.)instant death effects/poison/etc. allready have DC check in place, so why not just add a another number for item charges each "immune" item would have like a 50 charges, and each time u fail a save a number above ur resist gets subtracted from charges. Charges would allso replenish with time like 1 per 2min. This would not effect spells in anyway or class/race immunities, so they would be at the advantage.
This makes two diffrent effects
1.) mobs have higher DC-s on harder difficulties, so more charges is wasted.
2.) higher resist of a toon would spend less charges in an item

2.)give the DC on anti-magic, it pure annoying as it is

redoubt
01-04-2011, 05:26 PM
You have some interesting ideas, but I have a couple questions.

1. Where does this leave dex/AC builds? Most of these builds will have lower HP and lowering fortification seems (at this point) to be yet another nail in the coffin of AC builds.

2. You talk about replacing immunties with a system that allows a caster to spam a spell 10 time(?) to get it to land. If the spell is meta'd that's 1000sp... For one mob. This doesn't seem to address the issue of limited usefulness versus immune and high hp mobs. Am I just not seeing the silver lining yet?

Thanks! :D

sephiroth1084
01-04-2011, 06:06 PM
Well, my 2cents

1.)instant death effects/poison/etc. allready have DC check in place, so why not just add a another number for item charges each "immune" item would have like a 50 charges, and each time u fail a save a number above ur resist gets subtracted from charges. Charges would allso replenish with time like 1 per 2min. This would not effect spells in anyway or class/race immunities, so they would be at the advantage.
This makes two diffrent effects
1.) mobs have higher DC-s on harder difficulties, so more charges is wasted.
2.) higher resist of a toon would spend less charges in an item
I had made a proposition a while ago that immunity items instead granted an additional saving throw (or two) vs. such effects, which would skew toward giving characters with higher saves a better degree of protection than those with lower ones, but few liked the idea, as it meant essentially stripping away a lot of survivability from the many low-save toons in the game.

No other reason to tie this to saves, as that is incorporating two separate abilities in disparate ways.


2.)give the DC on anti-magic, it pure annoying as it isWhat?


You have some interesting ideas, but I have a couple questions.

1. Where does this leave dex/AC builds? Most of these builds will have lower HP and lowering fortification seems (at this point) to be yet another nail in the coffin of AC builds. What?



2. You talk about replacing immunties with a system that allows a caster to spam a spell 10 time(?) to get it to land. If the spell is meta'd that's 1000sp... For one mob. This doesn't seem to address the issue of limited usefulness versus immune and high hp mobs. Am I just not seeing the silver lining yet?

There are ways to ablate immunities without spamming a spell, and what spell costs 100 SP to cast?

It would give us the option of using tools to break down resistances. On epics, for example, where monsters typically have enough HP to require 30 seconds to 2 minutes' worth of beating down, spending some extra SP to get through a fighter faster would likely be preferable for some.

Airie
01-04-2011, 06:47 PM
i apologize if this is a bit of a divergence from the current discussion, or totally misinformed... buuut. i must admit i liked the NWN approach.

if i were to summarize the NWN approach, from someone who isnt a NWN expert... they simply have a few more spell options designed to encourage the real-time spell combat in a rock-paper-scissors sorta way...

i think some of these spells were deviations from pnp? with the intent to improve the real-time combat.

- Breach - think dispel magic but targeted specifically only at spell defense, bypasses SR/spell mantles. Doesnt dispel regular buffs, only spell protections. Also lowers the targets SR by 5.

- Spell Mantle - basically the same protection a scarab offers, maximizable in the NWN world too (blocks X levels of spells (not x spells total))

- and there was even a spell that reflected the spell back against the caster. I forgot the name on that one. I think they even removed this one in NWN2? Anyway, a little OP maybe should be reserved for some real nasty boss fights.


http://nwn2.wikia.com/wiki/Greater_Spell_Breach


just those couple spells add a paper element to the current rock-scissors. now, im totally theorizing here, but i think the following thinks would change if this approach were taken:

pvp for caster vs caster (i know it is a pve game, but pvp is a good test-bed for pve) would become more 'twitch-based' and less one-sided. it becomes who can dispel the others protections while keeping their own intact.

for it to really make a difference in pve ai scripts would need to be overhauled. enemy casters would need to debuff, and buff, and repeat when appropriate. certain bosses should definitely have trigger effects (be it AI, or some fancy gear they got that triggers a new spell mantle when they fall below 50% hp)

SomCrea
01-04-2011, 07:12 PM
I thought about this a bit recently. Why not have the immunity items, not spells, give a bonus to saves v that effect and the spells have a shorter duration(Haste), but complete immunity. I'd think it might be easier to keep track of for players than the other scaling changes to immunity.

e.x.e. you can get several levels of poison immunity from items depending on the min level, +5, +10, +15, +20, +30. This is a bonus to your saves v poison effects.

For a fight that has major poison problems, Harry, and other such fights. Neutralize poison would now be wanted by many parties because of the chance of rolling a 1, but it's on a haste duration so it would have to be re-cast to ensure complete protection for the whole fight.

For boss monsters remove the immunities, but make the effects very short. They can be held, but make a new save every .5 second ands auto break at 3 for an idea.

Gustel
01-04-2011, 08:01 PM
I had made a proposition a while ago that immunity items instead granted an additional saving throw (or two) vs. such effects, which would skew toward giving characters with higher saves a better degree of protection than those with lower ones, but few liked the idea, as it meant essentially stripping away a lot of survivability from the many low-save toons in the game.


Well thats the whole idea u would still have an "immunity" on all toons but would just benefit more from higher saves without completly sckewing low saves toons



1. Where does this leave dex/AC builds? Most of these builds will have lower HP and lowering fortification seems (at this point) to be yet another nail in the coffin of AC builds.

What?? if ur thinking abut 8con monk spalsh thingy, well thats not a tank.
Pretty much i hate tanks in robes and i hate monks and there kung-fu sounds even more
if ur talking abut AC heavy Fighter/Pally those have good fort saves esspecially the pally
NOTE: i allways tought that the pally should be the class with highest anti magic resistance



What?


never been hit by anti-magic, pretty sure i did invaders a couple days ago
got my buffs blow out at every single beholder i met, no dice was roled
the fun part is, that it wasnt till i got too the boss, that i figured i had no Deathblock item on

sephiroth1084
01-04-2011, 08:13 PM
- Breach - think dispel magic but targeted specifically only at spell defense, bypasses SR/spell mantles. Doesnt dispel regular buffs, only spell protections. Also lowers the targets SR by 5. Not sure about this one, but...

- Spell Mantle - basically the same protection a scarab offers, maximizable in the NWN world too (blocks X levels of spells (not x spells total))

- and there was even a spell that reflected the spell back against the caster. I forgot the name on that one. I think they even removed this one in NWN2? Anyway, a little OP maybe should be reserved for some real nasty boss fights.
...these two spells are from pen and paper, and would do nothing to improve the situation here.

pvp for caster vs caster (i know it is a pve game, but pvp is a good test-bed for pve) would become more 'twitch-based' and less one-sided. it becomes who can dispel the others protections while keeping their own intact. No, this is completely irrelevant. I'm not simply asking for a way to change the game to remove player-based immunities, but also monster-based. Aside from the fact that PvP is necessarily broken as anything more than something to fool around with out of boredom or for controlled-environment testing, it has zero bearing on how we deal with the rest of the game or how it deals with us.

for it to really make a difference in pve ai scripts would need to be overhauled. enemy casters would need to debuff, and buff, and repeat when appropriate. certain bosses should definitely have trigger effects (be it AI, or some fancy gear they got that triggers a new spell mantle when they fall below 50% hp)Enemey casters already do this for the most part, and we already have trigger effects on some bosses (the demon queen gains immunity to level 4 and below spells when she rages around 15% HP, for example).
The Breach spell would be a reasonable solution for enemy casters, but it seems rather clear that the devs have no desire for us to easily dismiss enemy buffs. After-all, almost none of the really problematic immunities are dispellable, even after they added Disjunction, which is essentially an anti-player tool. A one-shot dispel, especially an even more effective one-shot dispel would probably result in monsters gaining further inherent immunities.

sephiroth1084
01-04-2011, 08:27 PM
I thought about this a bit recently. Why not have the immunity items, not spells, give a bonus to saves v that effect and the spells have a shorter duration(Haste), but complete immunity. I'd think it might be easier to keep track of for players than the other scaling changes to immunity.

e.x.e. you can get several levels of poison immunity from items depending on the min level, +5, +10, +15, +20, +30. This is a bonus to your saves v poison effects.

For a fight that has major poison problems, Harry, and other such fights. Neutralize poison would now be wanted by many parties because of the chance of rolling a 1, but it's on a haste duration so it would have to be re-cast to ensure complete protection for the whole fight. The more this comes up, the more I think about it, the more I think it is a rather poor idea. At the lower levels, we'd be running around without immunities more often, but that's already kind of the case, and at the higher levels, it would just be a drain on caster SP without causing any other real change in gameplay (think about how often Haste gets renewed). There would be the occasional lapses in buffing, with someone dying perhaps, but I doubt that this would be enough to start restructuring the way encounters play out in general.



For boss monsters remove the immunities, but make the effects very short. They can be held, but make a new save every .5 second ands auto break at 3 for an idea.
This I'd like, with the caveat that after a boss becomes subjected to a particular effect, he gains immunity to all other similar effects for a short, but not explicit (a range, rather than a static number) duration. That way we won't end up solving each boss fight by spamming Hold Monster on it, or even cycling Hold with Stun with Paralyzing weapons, etc... But monsters would have to necessarily be able to do the same to us.

If the devs implemented the heroic surge deal they'd been considering a while back, reducing immunities significantly might be more reasonable.

Well thats the whole idea u would still have an "immunity" on all toons but would just benefit more from higher saves without completly sckewing low saves toonsHigh save toons would likely simply be immune to everything all the time, as everybody is currently. If my paladin had a Deathward that only ablated if he failed a save, he would be immune with a single effect for almost the entire quest, since he only fails vs. most effects on a 1. Conversely, a rogue or fighter would likely get stripped rather quickly. Then, even if immunities ran out for both, the first character would still have near immunity due to his saves. The point of items and spells it to shore up weaknesses, not (necessarily) to widen the gulf in this way.

On the one hand we would have almost zero change in the way immunities function for some, and a dramatic decrease in immunity for others, rather than more of a universal decrease.



What?? if ur thinking abut 8con monk spalsh thingy, well thats not a tank.
Pretty much i hate tanks in robes and i hate monks and there kung-fu sounds even more
if ur talking abut AC heavy Fighter/Pally those have good fort saves esspecially the pally
NOTE: i allways tought that the pally should be the class with highest anti magic resistance I still have no idea what you're talking about here.




never been hit by anti-magic, pretty sure i did invaders a couple days ago
got my buffs blow out at every single beholder i met, no dice was roled
the fun part is, that it wasnt till i got too the boss, that i figured i had no Deathblock item on
Still not sure what exactly you're asking here. If it is for anti-magic fields to come with a save, I ask, why? What purpose does this serve in the context of this discussion?

frznvimes
01-04-2011, 08:31 PM
What?? if ur thinking abut 8con monk spalsh thingy, well thats not a tank.
Pretty much i hate tanks in robes and i hate monks and there kung-fu sounds even more
if ur talking abut AC heavy Fighter/Pally those have good fort saves esspecially the pally
NOTE: i allways tought that the pally should be the class with highest anti magic resistance
an 8con character is a straw man, not a build. A dex rogue is a ac build with low hp and fort saves but decent ac.
Your dislike of monks and robes is completely irrelevant.
The only class i can think of in pnp that gets defense against antimagic is the wildmage prc


never been hit by anti-magic, pretty sure i did invaders a couple days ago
got my buffs blow out at every single beholder i met, no dice was roled

antimagic has no save. This is also true in pnp (although in pnp it suppresses all magic including items rather than dispelling all spells, but there's no ddo mechanic for that): http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Antimagic
More to the point, what does antimagic have to do with anything?

Gustel
01-04-2011, 09:03 PM
an 8con character is a straw man, not a build. A dex rogue is a ac build with low hp and fort saves but decent ac.
Your dislike of monks and robes is completely irrelevant.
The only class i can think of in pnp that gets defense against antimagic is the wildmage prc


on part with rouges; versatiliy is there main bonus too there DPS, they can use a scroll anytime, and plz ppl read the post, the full post
My disslike of robes-monks is relavant since they make for the highest AC toons in game, i just cannot fan this in any way sense or meaning



antimagic has no save. This is also true in pnp (although in pnp it suppresses all magic including items rather than dispelling all spells, but there's no ddo mechanic for that): http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Antimagic
More to the point, what does antimagic have to do with anything?

Still not sure what exactly you're asking here. If it is for anti-magic fields to come with a save, I ask, why? What purpose does this serve in the context of this discussion?

hmm, antimagic is somewhat relavant since buff=immunites, i like the PnP version but unlikly we gona get one so DC any1?


I still have no idea what you're talking about here.

read the quote i qouted then read the full post it refers too AC-tanks, fighters/pallys


EDIT: after checking couple off numbers the idea fails on a complete another scale tho so move along

sephiroth1084
01-04-2011, 10:23 PM
*snip*
Please just stop posting in this thread, as none of the ideas you've mentioned are relevant to this discussion. You're free to start a thread, or post in one of the many others that already exist, about the disparities between armored AC tanks and robed ones, or how annoying beholders are, or whatever else you're talking about, but whatever it is you've been saying (and I'm still not entirely clear on this) doesn't belong here. Thank you.

Gustel
01-05-2011, 06:28 AM
Please just stop posting in this thread, as none of the ideas you've mentioned are relevant to this discussion. You're free to start a thread, or post in one of the many others that already exist, about the disparities between armored AC tanks and robed ones, or how annoying beholders are, or whatever else you're talking about, but whatever it is you've been saying (and I'm still not entirely clear on this) doesn't belong here. Thank you.

Its an attempt too simplyfy the OP-s idea and make it more in line with the current dice system. This fails tho too overinflated numbers in DDO. Ur argument how this wont work cuz AC will get nerfed as a result, is.....meh,
When some1 says AC i think of a tank, high end AC toons that r used too TANK, u were thinking of rouges/rangers with high enuf AC too be relavant in some part off the current content. The rougse r not even a problem if u read the intial post I posted. On an overall, yeah wont post anymore since u cannot connect posts.

On the OP idea
/signed

frznvimes
01-05-2011, 06:49 AM
*snip*
... the person you're replying to IS the op (sephiroth1084).
the person making the high ac/low fort build argument (redoubt) is someone else.
the person saying that your personal vision of who should get ac is not relevant (me), is yet another person.