Page 26 of 27 FirstFirst ... 16222324252627 LastLast
Results 501 to 520 of 529
  1. #501
    Community Member nolifer1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    446

    Default

    Encumbrance is great, but when u tr and get collectibles bags u get Encumbrance in lowby level ,so shold remove weight from bags, evrythig else shold be stay same imo
    kokaisa cc/nuker drow warlock. .agrippe aa. farim-1 monk. meatmountain barbarian.boltergaist arti(retired pileon)
    Renowned in thelanis
    DDO on YOUTUBE CHANNEL



  2. #502
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    5

    Default

    I think the only real solution is to add the spell Tenser's Floating Disk.

  3. #503
    Community Member BlackSmith81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Turku, Finland
    Posts
    42

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by MadFloyd View Post
    Encumbrance: what value does it really bring to DDO
    A way to prevent your opponent from running, limitation how much stuff he can carry around and in extreme making the opponent helpless.

    This would be more limiting and a thing to keep in in mind if the game would follow the D&D rules. Now reducing opponents Str has only limited impact.
    Quote Originally Posted by MadFloyd View Post
    How many of you would mind if this just sort of 'went away'?
    I would rather see this silly "slot" inventory going away already and see weight limited inventory. Would make buying BoH lot more appealing.

    The more D&D aspects are made to go away, the more you are making a (another) WoW clone.
    Since AD&D/beta looking to play D&D 3½ online. Still looking.

  4. #504
    Community Member Artos_Fabril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,078

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackSmith81 View Post
    A way to prevent your opponent from running, limitation how much stuff he can carry around and in extreme making the opponent helpless.

    This would be more limiting and a thing to keep in in mind if the game would follow the D&D rules. Now reducing opponents Str has only limited impact.
    I would rather see this silly "slot" inventory going away already and see weight limited inventory. Would make buying BoH lot more appealing.

    The more D&D aspects are made to go away, the more you are making a (another) WoW clone.
    Bags of Holding still have a finite interior space, which is what it seems the current "slot" inventory is meant to model, and as much as I dislike the limitations of this system, it sure beats playing inventory tetris to model making everything fit into bags of holding with relative volume allocations.

    Given that, characters should be carrying no more than 12 lbs plus the weight of their equipped gear, if they have the full 6 inventory bags.

    What I'm saying is, i'm in favor of the hybrid system that has been mentioned a few times earlier in the thread:
    Keep encumbrance, but only calculate weight for equipped gear (+2 lbs per bag slot, as bags of holding).

    However, that really just means that things like Ray of Enfeeblement mean something at low levels where STR can be dropped below the threshold for carrying your worn gear. So if it makes things significantly easier on the coding back-end, go ahead and get rid of it completely.

  5. #505
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,104

    Default

    Get rid of it
    its just silly to get encumbered by Bags of Holding..
    Taenebrae, Daemonsoul, Daemoneyes and Daemonheart of Argonessen
    Glitzakram - Trade Thread

  6. #506
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    84

    Default

    First, I find encumbrance an integral part of D&D and thus DDO, I would feel the removal of encumbrance to be a step in the wrong direction for DDO.

    However, I want to mention this:
    Portable holes should be weightless, and bags of holding cannot be put inside portable holes. This is a generic statement about portables holes from D&D Wiki, I understand this applies to many D&D rules--
    http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Portable_Hole

    In DDO, we must understand that collapsed portable holes only increase the inventory page by one (and nothing further). However, from the best of my knowledge, portable holes are merely weightless. Perhaps we should rather examine the usefulness of a portable hole. The average weight of all items in one's inventory, minus bags of holding, could be reduced by 25% to represent the weightlessness of a portable hole, rather than a collapsed portable hole simply giving us a free inventory slot (same mechanic as elven arcane spell failure enhancement, when you mouse over an item and have a collapsed portable hole inventory slot, your items will also way 25% less).

    The extra inventory space acquired by TP should further reduce the weight by an additional 25%. We could debate whether the combined result of a fifth and sixth inventory slot would be 43.75% or 50% less.

    Bags of Holding-
    I find that many TRs bring their bags from life to life, which with each life get heavier and heavier. Myself included, I send collectables to one alt who holds all important collectables and ingredients. This is problematic at the beginning of the TR phase, though less dramatic thereafter.

    Perhaps the solution is, with maybe another favor reward, to offer a bag upgrade for an enchanted weightless bag of holding and, if required, using a collapsed portable hole in a (Harper?) eldritch device.

    This should solve the problem of bags of holding- at a cost of both favor and possibly acquirable items.

    --Odd moment when you realize it's 2013, and not 2012...
    Last edited by aeroplanefly; 02-14-2013 at 04:56 PM.

  7. #507
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    8

    Default

    If I am not mistaking, story line wise your entire backpack (or at least 2 tabs of it) is a bag/s of holding. This is why you have to have a collapsed portable hole to get the second rep tab. They are creating a bag of holding for you.

    This should me that, at the least those 2 tabs should be weightless (which, I admit, would be a pain to code. Easier to make all weightless).

    Which, when added to the idea of making the gem/component/mats bags weightless (i.e. into bags of holding) means you are putting a bag of holding, in a bag of holding. I seem to remember that this was a bad bad very bad thing to do .

  8. #508
    Community Member Blaze-Of-Glory's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    My own place
    Posts
    8

    Default

    Encumberance is an important AD&D/DDO game mechanic - please don't remove it, fix it instead for both players and monsters as others have already stated. If it's causing issues change how often or the way you calculate it but don't get rid of it altogether.

    I do agree with many previous comments regarding excluding collectibles and components from any calculations of encumberance given the current plethora of crafting and collectible devices and trade in systems in the game - combine/get rid of some of those instead.

  9. #509
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    116

    Default Encumbrance

    Ok. So what's on the table is dumping encumbrance right? I've heard some people argue against it being eliminated and would like to critique those reasons briefly before acknowledging that I would indeed like it to go away.

    1) It is part of PnP DnD. Indeed it is but that logic is poor when you consider how many related things are different. How many monsters did you kill in PnP? How much loot? For it to be like PnP in this regard would not make it more like DnD. It would in fact make it LESS like DnD as the scaling would be off.

    2) As to the greater complexity having it present, this complexity is one sided. What I am saying here is that you should not have to stat str just to carry loot. There are elements glossed over here. First in PnP you had the high str characters carry the loot in many cases. Second said bags could be dropped at the start of encounters. There is more to it but this should be sufficient.

    On a related note but clearly in favor of elimination encumbrance comes a question. Exactly how many of the bags are bags of holding? And why not more? How about similar items? Isn't at least one of my bags a repaired portable hole? Do you see what I am getting at? Encumbrance is supposed to be something that can be made negligible anyway.

    Get rid of it.


    p.s. Mobs don't carry bags of loot. They will never be encumbered by str damage in the same way as players.
    Last edited by woodchuckslayer; 02-15-2013 at 03:20 PM.

  10. #510
    Community Member BinyaminTsadik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    251

    Default My Spellsinger

    My spellsinger bard is permanently encumbered. She has medium encumbrance. I can't get rid of it because I need everything she has in her inventory.
    Either change your crafting system to allow bags to be stored off character safely/on character with zero weight/or just get rid of encumbrance.

    A good solution to weakened characters could be that they become encumbered if their strength is dropped to a specific value.

    example 8 str in plate armor/6 str in leather armor/4 str with no armor, then they can have an added debuff of encumbered.

  11. #511
    Hopeless Romantic dunklezhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Yorkshire Toxic Fringe Zone
    Posts
    4,315

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qzipoun View Post
    Like spell components it adds flavor to the game.

    You're running around on a high dex, low str halfling being dodgy and quick, then bam you get hit by symbol of weakness. Suddenly your ac drops, you need to alter your tactics

    Just one example where it makes the game a little more 'complex' (in a good way)

    What isn't good about it is useless stuff weighing you down. Gems, collectibles, ingredients, components etc. shouldn't affect your character's encumbrance
    This. At least in as much as what I'd prefer, in an ideal world.

    In practice, I think ditching it is probably a good idea, less hassle for players and dev's alike.


    I mean, consider the inventory bags as they are:

    Coin Lords favour grants you extra bag space. I believe those bags are described as bags of holding. If this is the case for all the bag tabs, then your inventory should really have a fixed weight which never fluctuates and the only time encumbrance changes would happen would be when you swap gear (as one set of gear goes back in the bag, and another set, which may have a different weight, comes out). So if the game was adjusted to work this way as the flavour text really indicates that it should (and fits with the eberron theme of low level magic items being produced in an almost industrialised way which would explain why every adventurer in stormreach has five bags of holding) then encumbrance would in reality serve very little purpose except for factoring for minor fluctuations when gear is swapped..

    The idea of your inventory NOT being bags of holding sounds suspect to me because of things like my ranger carrying around 12 sets of paired scimmies and 8 bows, but let's ignore that for now, because: if you use the new inventory UI (which I don't, because I like to organise things myself), then you don't see 'bags' at all, you just see filters for gear types. This indicates that inventory space is NOT 'bags of holding', in which case total load should indeed be recorded, because of getting hit with Str damage which should, in theory, completely immobilise you if your str gets too low while you're carrying around ten spare weapon sets and so on.

    But if we're going to record total weight, then certain things should be made 'weightless' - like Turbine's obsession with introducing more and more unique crafting systems for every flippin' raid release. I don't want to carry this stuff around, I'm never going to be able to craft anything because I raid once a week at most, but I also don't want to have to be working through my inventory to just chuck stuff away to save weight. Working through all possible inventory items to set this variable is work for the devs and is something to be considered every time they create a new item. Must be hell to co-ordinate and test that.


    So three choices as I see it:

    1. As things should be, according to flavour text and a common sense view of how on earth we can carry around so much stuff on our person (i.e., inventory space must all be bags of holding).

    Outcome: Essentially everyone would just need to make sure they have enough Str to carry 100lbs of fixed-weight bags of holding, which isn't hard to achieve. Beyond that, Str is only needed for DPS purposes.

    Conclusion: Although it would be internally consistent, this is a non-starter. You'd end up invalidating the point of encumbrance in the first place.

    2. Status quo: bags are just bags, and everything has mass, which has a direct effect on the impact of getting hit with Str sapping effects beyond just lowering folks' DPS.

    Outcome: there is a need to micromanage every single possible inventory item for both players and devs. That's expensive and impacts on testing time, dev time, and becomes a time consuming inconvenient mini-game for players without the benefit of a UI that really helps with it (like a "sort by weight" filter of some kind so you can actually manage it). This has verisimilitude, but is a PITA and could in fact (because of the impact on dev and testing time) be harming the game.

    Conclusion: not adding value. Abandon.

    3. Status quo + fixes: get rid of weight for a bunch of stuff that you can't help but collect masses of (ammo, collectibles, ingredients, potions, spell components etc) and have weight only matter for heavy stuff (armour, weapons). Add filters to inventory management screens to allow for a specific weight readout to assist with management.

    outcome: lots of dev time spend on every single inventory item, new and old to determine if it should have mass and if so how much, and in developing the filter system. Players still need to manage this mini-game, but now have the tools to do so. Still the issue however that many players don't enjoy this kind of mini-game and in fact find it off putting (particularly as I can't think of another MMO which has this sort of system).

    Conclusion: well, this is personal opinion, but I don't think this is worth the dev time putting in place and maintaining.

    Overall conclusion: I don't like it, I don't want to say it, I'm probably going to need to go flaggellate myself in penance but... just abandon encumbrance.
    Last edited by dunklezhan; 02-20-2013 at 08:07 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vargouille View Post
    The best of the best DDO players generally overperform when given a real challenge

  12. #512
    Community Member Meetch1972's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The land down under.
    Posts
    1,033

    Default Necro!

    Well that's the second thread of this type today that I've seen necroed. I don't think MadFloyd's after the info from the OP any more. But of course, bring on more LET'S TALK threads.
    Goe ahed... korekt mah spelin'.

  13. #513
    The Mad Multiclasser Failedlegend's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Canada,Ontario, GTA
    Posts
    6,819

    Default

    When I first started playing DnD back when 3e was released I was in high school and we played vanilla rules but eventually we developed house (cafeteria?) rules and one of them was dropping encumberance its just a PITA and the numbers PCs can carry is ridiculous anyways. I've tried each editions version of encumbrance since than and just ditched it...along with having to count how much basic ammo you have (magic ammo must be counted but basic ammo is just assumed to have some)

    It's a pointless rule that artificially forces none Str characters to waste build points in str.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cordovan
    There is little value in getting into an edition debate; as with anything, we create what we believe works best for DDO.

  14. #514
    Community Member Magil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    299

    Default

    I think that it would be better off to remove it. The inventory space alone is enough of a restriction, seeing as at least one of them is going to be a portable hole, and thus weightless anyway.

    Instead, how about altering various spells / poisons to affect a few things anyway in it's place? Something similar to how say... Waves of Fatigue works. Make these various things (and perhaps items with various poisons as well) work similarly to how encumbrance currently works. Our enemies don't get encumbered until their strength hits zero, regardless of whatever items they might realistically have on them.

    For example, Ray of Enfeeblement could keep it's current workings, but you could add a 1d4 - 1 penalty to the target's attack / movement speed, where 0 would be nothing, 1 would be 5%, 2 would be 10%, and 3 would be 15%.

    As for monks, you could have them thrown out of stance if they no longer have the stat required for the current stance they're in. Say... if you have Grandmaster Ocean stance, if you hit below 18 wisdom, you lose that stance.
    Last edited by Dark_Requiem; 02-20-2013 at 12:20 PM. Reason: Reorganized and added examples for clarity.

  15. #515
    2015 DDO Players Council Starla70's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    East Coast USA
    Posts
    356

    Default

    I'm all for getting rid of it. Which each expansion comes more stuff to collect. I have already spent enough on buying up bank space.

  16. #516
    Community Member eachna_gislin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MadFloyd View Post
    Encumbrance: what value does it really bring to DDO?

    How many of you would mind if this just sort of 'went away'?
    I wouldn't mind if it went away, but I prefer storage space was dealt with, instead. (bank space, pack space, bags, stacking, etc).

    I would prefer storage space increase and encumbrance stay in place, rather than ditching encumbrance and continuing to have storage issues.

    Encumbrance is a D&D concept and so I prefer it to the more generic storage slots (which come from computer games in general).

  17. #517
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Upstate New York (EST)
    Posts
    1,211

    Default

    I play with a static group that is testing various guidelines for playing DDO in a more "Classic" way.
    The encumberence mechanics in place CAN add a measure of enjoyment for us, if only the Maximum Limit was reduced to 10-20% of it's current value.
    This might be viable in Casual or Normal Difficulty, making them more of a Classic Difficulty opposed to Hard and Elite.
    I don't suspect the majority of DDO players use the lower difficulties anyway.

    We have a thread in "Permadeath / Static Groups" area where we work on these ideas.

    Thanks.

  18. #518
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Upstate New York (EST)
    Posts
    1,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intruder1 View Post
    I play with a static group that is testing various guidelines for playing DDO in a more "Classic" way.
    The encumberence mechanics in place CAN add a measure of enjoyment for us, if only the Maximum Limit was reduced to 10-20% of it's current value.
    This might be viable in Casual or Normal Difficulty, making them more of a Classic Difficulty opposed to Hard and Elite.
    I don't suspect the majority of DDO players use the lower difficulties anyway.

    We have a thread in "Permadeath / Static Groups" area where we work on these ideas.

    Thanks.
    It's too bad this idea isn't too well accepted. I know the mechanical was programmed in. A shame, it is one of the basic concepts of Dungeons and Dragons.

  19. #519
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Upstate New York (EST)
    Posts
    1,211

    Default Burden of Guilt?

    Here's a thought.....
    You've been able to flag an individual and incure upon the character an Encumberence Effect: Heavy Burden.

    It would not be too much of a stretch to enable an Encumberence System with the Max Limit one third of it's current value by use of a checkbox in the UI section of Options, would it?
    Individuals that would like a more Classic game could enable this themselves.

    What do ya think?

  20. #520
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    6

    Default Who exactly is encumbrance a problem for?

    removing "weight" from a rpg will accomplish exactly that.

Page 26 of 27 FirstFirst ... 16222324252627 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload