So what your saying is you don't want to role a character in an action RPG game? Choice is suppose to have consequence so yeah you'd rather be like o crap something I can't defeat easily I know back to town switch. At least that's how it sounds in your fire sorc story. Every one came across moments like that you didn't quit playing you continued on and in the next area you flames were destroying everything and the game was still fun. And the illusion you dismiss so lightly is what makes skills feel powerful even if they are not and that is crucial.
Now in terms of internet you misunderstood completely. I'm saying in the skill system there was only 2 ways to know how awesome skills were. You either put points in them and found out or you looked it up online. Now they are all just given to you. Im not a big fan of using walkthroughs or looking online but now I can just see it its right there
You are right your not going to know at face value about the skills and synergies but you'll know it 30 seconds later(exaggeration) after you swapped em out real quick to try.
O the asterik thing was because I know that word can't be correct.
Maybe the solution lay somewhere between our 2 opinions.
Your first sentence is inane. All the choices one will make in Diablo 3 will have consequences, many of which have already been covered in this thread and more that we'll discover when we play. If one comes across immunities in the harder difficulties we'll have the option of switching skills to fit the demand of the situation instead of having to resort to a skill that is lacking in every aspect (i.e. the low level frost spell). Having to do that is no fun and very annoying, frustrating, and takes away from gameplay.
Do you like being able to see it all right there? I can't tell, context is lost to me.
The word you're looking for is disincentive. Close!
First sentence is insane? It's a RPG your suppose to role a character and there are suppose to be draw backs to your characters choices are you saying that the draw back of awww man I have to go back to town to switch skills is enough consequence? I never once was so annoyed by immunities that I thought Diablo 2 was dumb I loved that game( and I built some bad sorcs).
The solution is definitely not just giving the character everything maybe give them more so you don't run into issues where people are so annoyed because their build can't handle an immunity but don't give everything. Or as I stated b4 if you have to give them everything give them a system that makes it harder to realize which skills are better ok worst and what not so the level of illusion that all the skills are awesome can be maintained thus giving us the incentive to stick to the build we are hopeing to make.
If you would though please inlighten me to the consequences you speak of, maybe I'm just not seeing what you mean in terms of that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Give a man a skill tree, and he will become a Fire Sorc. Give a man 6 skills to choose from, pulling from all three trees, and he becomes a Fire Sorc that likes to shoot lightning to manage the bigger crowds."
So what your saying is you don't want to role a character in an action RPG game? Choice is suppose to have consequence so yeah you'd rather be like o crap something I can't defeat easily I know back to town switch. At least that's how it sounds in your fire sorc story. Every one came across moments like that you didn't quit playing you continued on and in the next area you flames were destroying everything and the game was still fun. And the illusion you dismiss so lightly is what makes skills feel powerful even if they are not and that is crucial.
Now in terms of internet you misunderstood completely. I'm saying in the skill system there was only 2 ways to know how awesome skills were. You either put points in them and found out or you looked it up online. Now they are all just given to you. Im not a big fan of using walkthroughs or looking online but now I can just see it its right there
You are right your not going to know at face value about the skills and synergies but you'll know it 30 seconds later(exaggeration) after you swapped em out real quick to try.
O the asterik thing was because I know that word can't be correct.
Maybe the solution lay somewhere between our 2 opinions.
I think the implication is, the old system required pre-meditated choice (read the guide: make the character to fit it) and the new system requires de-facto choices (read the walk-through: use the appropriate skills). As I said, seeking a second opinion on what to do is a universal. We can't simply isolate that as a "cheat," prone only to one scenario.
Furthermore, how awsome something is: that's variable. Unless you comb over every monster and pre-select your optimal choices ahead of time, you have a lot of customization in terms of how you deal with X as opposed to Y with your skills. You no longer have to use fireball and god-help you if your monster doesn't take damage from it. You peruse the skill choices you've got and see what works. Trial and error if you didn't take the "~what do," rout and simply google it.
The moral of the story is: customization is not being harmed in the making of this new system. There are still a multitude of optimal, suboptimal, and downright stupid ways to go about slaying X and Y. Plenty of opportunity to play as though you were a firesorc, frostsorc, or any other vanilla-icecream variant you like. And plenty more opportunity to go all neopolitan on their asses and use whatever skill combos you want.
Yea I can see alot of what your saying there. But the last little bit bothers me if you are playing a fire sorc frost sorc or whatever you should be playing the entire game as one of those that's what it means to play a RPG. pick a role and live with. This is becoming less of an action rpg and more of an action strategy with some rpg elements
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Give a man a skill tree, and he will become a Fire Sorc. Give a man 6 skills to choose from, pulling from all three trees, and he becomes a Fire Sorc that likes to shoot lightning to manage the bigger crowds."
Yea I can see alot of what your saying there. But the last little bit bothers me if you are playing a fire sorc frost sorc or whatever you should be playing the entire game as one of those that's what it means to play a RPG. pick a role and live with. This is becoming less of an action rpg and more of an action strategy with some rpg elements
I think you're forgetting that the game is balanced around these realities. ie. when more skills are avalible to you, then you can be expected to use more of them. I think you're stuck on the idea we're going to get D2 with a facelift. For all we know the monsters will be much more of a challenge and that face-rolling old-school 2-button (so many hypenated words) style of gameplay is out.
As for the game becoming more of an X than a Y; honestly, do you really care about semantics? If you're that bent out of shape by not having a skill tree, by all means just pretend you have one. It'll make the game much more challenging i'm sure. The bottom line here is that the game is going to be more enjoyable, have more variety, and still feature as much customization as you want; and that's party due to the skill change.
So what your saying is you don't want to role a character in an action RPG game? Choice is suppose to have consequence so yeah you'd rather be like o crap something I can't defeat easily I know back to town switch. At least that's how it sounds in your fire sorc story. Every one came across moments like that you didn't quit playing you continued on and in the next area you flames were destroying everything and the game was still fun. And the illusion you dismiss so lightly is what makes skills feel powerful even if they are not and that is crucial.
Now in terms of internet you misunderstood completely. I'm saying in the skill system there was only 2 ways to know how awesome skills were. You either put points in them and found out or you looked it up online. Now they are all just given to you. Im not a big fan of using walkthroughs or looking online but now I can just see it its right there
You are right your not going to know at face value about the skills and synergies but you'll know it 30 seconds later(exaggeration) after you swapped em out real quick to try.
O the asterik thing was because I know that word can't be correct.
Maybe the solution lay somewhere between our 2 opinions.
Your first sentence is inane. All the choices one will make in Diablo 3 will have consequences, many of which have already been covered in this thread and more that we'll discover when we play. If one comes across immunities in the harder difficulties we'll have the option of switching skills to fit the demand of the situation instead of having to resort to a skill that is lacking in every aspect (i.e. the low level frost spell). Having to do that is no fun and very annoying, frustrating, and takes away from gameplay.
Do you like being able to see it all right there? I can't tell, context is lost to me.
The word you're looking for is disincentive. Close!
First sentence is insane? It's a RPG your suppose to role a character and there are suppose to be draw backs to your characters choices are you saying that the draw back of awww man I have to go back to town to switch skills is enough consequence? I never once was so annoyed by immunities that I thought Diablo 2 was dumb I loved that game( and I built some bad sorcs).
The solution is definitely not just giving the character everything maybe give them more so you don't run into issues where people are so annoyed because their build can't handle an immunity but don't give everything. Or as I stated b4 if you have to give them everything give them a system that makes it harder to realize which skills are better ok worst and what not so the level of illusion that all the skills are awesome can be maintained thus giving us the incentive to stick to the build we are hopeing to make.
If you would though please inlighten me to the consequences you speak of, maybe I'm just not seeing what you mean in terms of that.
Yea I can see alot of what your saying there. But the last little bit bothers me if you are playing a fire sorc frost sorc or whatever you should be playing the entire game as one of those that's what it means to play a RPG. pick a role and live with. This is becoming less of an action rpg and more of an action strategy with some rpg elements
I think you're forgetting that the game is balanced around these realities. ie. when more skills are avalible to you, then you can be expected to use more of them. I think you're stuck on the idea we're going to get D2 with a facelift. For all we know the monsters will be much more of a challenge and that face-rolling old-school 2-button (so many hypenated words) style of gameplay is out.
As for the game becoming more of an X than a Y; honestly, do you really care about semantics? If you're that bent out of shape by not having a skill tree, by all means just pretend you have one. It'll make the game much more challenging i'm sure. The bottom line here is that the game is going to be more enjoyable, have more variety, and still feature as much customization as you want; and that's party due to the skill change.
(would /thread be too pretentious here?)
The semantics you refer mean a change in the style of game we are playing so yes I think atleast in this instance I will let "semantics" effect how I feel about this.
Now in terms of realizing the realities of what the games was balanced around. You need to realize that up until this announcement was made, this games was balanced around a system that used skill points in a similar way to D2 and many many many many many many other RPGS.
Pretentious yes but only cause your getting as tired of this convo as I am lol
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Give a man a skill tree, and he will become a Fire Sorc. Give a man 6 skills to choose from, pulling from all three trees, and he becomes a Fire Sorc that likes to shoot lightning to manage the bigger crowds."
So what your saying is you don't want to role a character in an action RPG game? Choice is suppose to have consequence so yeah you'd rather be like o crap something I can't defeat easily I know back to town switch. At least that's how it sounds in your fire sorc story. Every one came across moments like that you didn't quit playing you continued on and in the next area you flames were destroying everything and the game was still fun. And the illusion you dismiss so lightly is what makes skills feel powerful even if they are not and that is crucial.
Now in terms of internet you misunderstood completely. I'm saying in the skill system there was only 2 ways to know how awesome skills were. You either put points in them and found out or you looked it up online. Now they are all just given to you. Im not a big fan of using walkthroughs or looking online but now I can just see it its right there
You are right your not going to know at face value about the skills and synergies but you'll know it 30 seconds later(exaggeration) after you swapped em out real quick to try.
O the asterik thing was because I know that word can't be correct.
Maybe the solution lay somewhere between our 2 opinions.
Your first sentence is inane. All the choices one will make in Diablo 3 will have consequences, many of which have already been covered in this thread and more that we'll discover when we play. If one comes across immunities in the harder difficulties we'll have the option of switching skills to fit the demand of the situation instead of having to resort to a skill that is lacking in every aspect (i.e. the low level frost spell). Having to do that is no fun and very annoying, frustrating, and takes away from gameplay.
Do you like being able to see it all right there? I can't tell, context is lost to me.
The word you're looking for is disincentive. Close!
First sentence is insane? It's a RPG your suppose to role a character and there are suppose to be draw backs to your characters choices are you saying that the draw back of awww man I have to go back to town to switch skills is enough consequence? I never once was so annoyed by immunities that I thought Diablo 2 was dumb I loved that game( and I built some bad sorcs).
The solution is definitely not just giving the character everything maybe give them more so you don't run into issues where people are so annoyed because their build can't handle an immunity but don't give everything. Or as I stated b4 if you have to give them everything give them a system that makes it harder to realize which skills are better ok worst and what not so the level of illusion that all the skills are awesome can be maintained thus giving us the incentive to stick to the build we are hopeing to make.
If you would though please inlighten me to the consequences you speak of, maybe I'm just not seeing what you mean in terms of that.
They said inane, not insane.
lol woops thanks man
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Give a man a skill tree, and he will become a Fire Sorc. Give a man 6 skills to choose from, pulling from all three trees, and he becomes a Fire Sorc that likes to shoot lightning to manage the bigger crowds."
The semantics you refer mean a change in the style of game we are playing so yes I think atleast in this instance I will let "semantics" effect how I feel about this.
Now in terms of realizing the realities of what the games was balanced around. You need to realize that up until this announcement was made, this games was balanced around a system that used skill points in a similar way to D2 and many many many many many many other RPGS.
Pretentious yes but only cause your getting as tired of this convo as I am lol
The semanitcs don't mean anything when you're talking about an unknown or unclassified objective. If I call a UFO an "alien space craft," and you call it "Herr Kringle's Sleigh," we have a semantic diffirence of opinion, neither of which defines the object as we haven't actually identified it yet. We can see some videos of gameplay, some screenshots, and a rought list of abilities, but we know almost nothing about how the game actually plays as it relates to the skills avalible.
Thusly, when we are talking about the "reality" of diablo2, sure, we can speak in definite terms and with verfiable experience. However; when we are speaking of D3 we have to be careful NOT to do this.
You need to realize that the history of skillpoint systems and even it's previous iteration in D3's alpha... is totally meaningless to us. For all intents and purposes, we absolutely have to take the devs at their word on this. They've done a fine job for us before, so I think the only thing we CAN safely infer is that they're making an intelligent decision this time around too.
So now that i've covered why there is still the potential for ample (perhaps more than ever?) customization, refuted the proposition that the game is totally dependant on the (removed) skill system, and put the semanitcs to rest... what is next?
The semantics you refer mean a change in the style of game we are playing so yes I think atleast in this instance I will let "semantics" effect how I feel about this.
Now in terms of realizing the realities of what the games was balanced around. You need to realize that up until this announcement was made, this games was balanced around a system that used skill points in a similar way to D2 and many many many many many many other RPGS.
Pretentious yes but only cause your getting as tired of this convo as I am lol
The semanitcs don't mean anything when you're talking about an unknown or unclassified objective. If I call a UFO an "alien space craft," and you call it "Herr Kringle's Sleigh," we have a semantic diffirence of opinion, neither of which defines the object as we haven't actually identified it yet. We can see some videos of gameplay, some screenshots, and a rought list of abilities, but we know almost nothing about how the game actually plays as it relates to the skills avalible.
Thusly, when we are talking about the "reality" of diablo2, sure, we can speak in definite terms and with verfiable experience. However; when we are speaking of D3 we have to be careful NOT to do this.
You need to realize that the history of skillpoint systems and even it's previous iteration in D3's alpha... is totally meaningless to us. For all intents and purposes, we absolutely have to take the devs at their word on this. They've done a fine job for us before, so I think the only thing we CAN safely infer is that they're making an intelligent decision this time around too.
So now that i've covered why there is still the potential for ample (perhaps more than ever?) customization, refuted the proposition that the game is totally dependant on the (removed) skill system, and put the semanitcs to rest... what is next?
(no /thread, I swear.. oops)
ummm so Diablo isn't identified as an Action RPG good to know I didn't realize that.
So taking away a choice to be bad at skills doesn't take away customization hmmmm good to know.
You have the same skill choices as b4 except now you can't be bad at any of them your right when your roleing a character in any rpg game deciding what skills your bad at is not part of that customization
O and for the record your the one the brought up the fact that how important the way the build has been created thus far is.
But in all seriousness you are right to put your faith in the devs I know I'm going to and if you had read the topic discussion before the last page or whatever you had decided to skip ahead to you would have seen me say that it is just a cause for concern mutiple times.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Give a man a skill tree, and he will become a Fire Sorc. Give a man 6 skills to choose from, pulling from all three trees, and he becomes a Fire Sorc that likes to shoot lightning to manage the bigger crowds."
But anyway, it's not like you had a skill tree in D2, so I don't see what the deal is. Yeah, it looked like a tree, was called a tree, and in many ways, even worked like a tree. But the entire tree system of D2 ended up making people skill dump in some high-level skill. What kind of tree is that? It's not a tree, it's more like Skill Balloon. I follow this tiny, tiny thread of no major importance up and up and up... until I get to the top where the big round object is. It's where the fun is. It's what will carry me. So more or less, if you think about it, you're mourning the loss of Skill Balloons. D3 has more potential to behave like a tree than D2 ever really had, because if I pull all of my six skills out of a single tree, is that not playing with a skill tree? And am I not utilizing the skills in such a way that it really feels like I'm armed with skills from a tree?
But then, of course, as you are noting, we don't have to pull from one tree. But I like that, because I feel like that will immerse me in the world better. I find it easy to believe that there will be a Wizard out there who dabbles in all fields of magic. It's realistic, and it strengthens the lore a bit, don't you think?
So taking away a choice to be bad at skills doesn't take away customization hmmmm good to know.
Taking away a pre-determinate choice that limits the variety of gameplay to inject more de-facto choice making and customization of gameplay. Or are we going to pretend the posts we made before don't exist? That's not really fair though, seeing as I made sense in all of mine. =/
You have the same skill choices as b4 except now you can't be bad at any of them your right when your roleing a character in any rpg game deciding what skills your bad at is not part of that customization
You have more skill choices than before because your character is now offering you on-the-go customization and in all likelyhood the content will demand that you do make use of that at some difficulty level or another. You can still be bad and shoot nothing but fireballs, it's just more difficult to be make that mistake if you aren't intending to. (Cue the 'catering to casuals' drama) Both pre-determinate and de-facto choices as customization are valid, but as we elaborated on before one makes for pretty stale gameplay (hint: the one with skilltrees) by definition.
But in all seriousness you are right to put your faith in the devs I know I'm going to and if you had read the topic discussion before the last page or whatever you had decided to skip ahead to you would have seen me say that it is just a cause for concern mutiple times.
I've read the thread and i'm doing my best to convince you that there is no cause for concern. In-fact I would call this cause for great jubilation.
But anyway, it's not like you had a skill tree in D2, so I don't see what the deal is. Yeah, it looked like a tree, was called a tree, and in many ways, even worked like a tree. But the entire tree system of D2 ended up making people skill dump in some high-level skill. What kind of tree is that? It's not a tree, it's more like Skill Balloon. I follow this tiny, tiny thread of no major importance up and up and up... until I get to the top where the big round object is. It's where the fun is. It's what will carry me. So more or less, if you think about it, you're mourning the loss of Skill Balloons. D3 has more potential to behave like a tree than D2 ever really had, because if I pull all of my six skills out of a single tree, is that not playing with a skill tree? And am I not utilizing the skills in such a way that it really feels like I'm armed with skills from a tree?
But then, of course, as you are noting, we don't have to pull from one tree. But I like that, because I feel like that will immerse me in the world better. I find it easy to believe that there will be a Wizard out there who dabbles in all fields of magic. It's realistic, and it strengthens the lore a bit, don't you think?
sorry ska let me back up and read what I missed
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Give a man a skill tree, and he will become a Fire Sorc. Give a man 6 skills to choose from, pulling from all three trees, and he becomes a Fire Sorc that likes to shoot lightning to manage the bigger crowds."
Yea I can see alot of what your saying there. But the last little bit bothers me if you are playing a fire sorc frost sorc or whatever you should be playing the entire game as one of those that's what it means to play a RPG. pick a role and live with. This is becoming less of an action rpg and more of an action strategy with some rpg elements
I think you're forgetting that the game is balanced around these realities. ie. when more skills are avalible to you, then you can be expected to use more of them. I think you're stuck on the idea we're going to get D2 with a facelift. For all we know the monsters will be much more of a challenge and that face-rolling old-school 2-button (so many hypenated words) style of gameplay is out.
As for the game becoming more of an X than a Y; honestly, do you really care about semantics? If you're that bent out of shape by not having a skill tree, by all means just pretend you have one. It'll make the game much more challenging i'm sure. The bottom line here is that the game is going to be more enjoyable, have more variety, and still feature as much customization as you want; and that's party due to the skill change.
(would /thread be too pretentious here?)
I don't know how to use the selcta quote thing but the quote is in here first sentence from u in last quote
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Give a man a skill tree, and he will become a Fire Sorc. Give a man 6 skills to choose from, pulling from all three trees, and he becomes a Fire Sorc that likes to shoot lightning to manage the bigger crowds."
Prep the coffee maker agian lol that's pretty good but you are saying "The semanitcs don't mean anything when you're talking about an unknown or unclassified objective. If I call a UFO an "alien space craft," and you call it "Herr Kringle's Sleigh," we have a semantic diffirence of opinion, neither of which defines the object as we haven't actually identified it yet." and I am saying that Diablo 3 is defined as Action RPG so can you fill me in on what I'm missing?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Give a man a skill tree, and he will become a Fire Sorc. Give a man 6 skills to choose from, pulling from all three trees, and he becomes a Fire Sorc that likes to shoot lightning to manage the bigger crowds."
O Ska I have one reply to you on page five maybe you missed it. Was there a different comment I missed?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Give a man a skill tree, and he will become a Fire Sorc. Give a man 6 skills to choose from, pulling from all three trees, and he becomes a Fire Sorc that likes to shoot lightning to manage the bigger crowds."
Yea I can see alot of what your saying there. But the last little bit bothers me if you are playing a fire sorc frost sorc or whatever you should be playing the entire game as one of those that's what it means to play a RPG. pick a role and live with. This is becoming less of an action rpg and more of an action strategy with some rpg elements
I think you're forgetting that the game is balanced around these realities. ie. when more skills are avalible to you, then you can be expected to use more of them. I think you're stuck on the idea we're going to get D2 with a facelift. For all we know the monsters will be much more of a challenge and that face-rolling old-school 2-button (so many hypenated words) style of gameplay is out.
As for the game becoming more of an X than a Y; honestly, do you really care about semantics? If you're that bent out of shape by not having a skill tree, by all means just pretend you have one. It'll make the game much more challenging i'm sure. The bottom line here is that the game is going to be more enjoyable, have more variety, and still feature as much customization as you want; and that's party due to the skill change.
(would /thread be too pretentious here?)
I don't know how to use the selcta quote thing but the quote is in here first sentence from u in last quote
Please help me understand what you're talking about then:
O and for the record your the one the brought up the fact that how important the way the build has been created thus far is.
As an answer to:
The bottom line here is that the game is going to be more enjoyable, have more variety, and still feature as much customization as you want; and that's party due to the skill change.
Where did I emphasize a build? I explained (several times) that removing skill points has the effect of opening up more de-facto choice, customization, etc. Nothing at all to do with previous builds, everything to do with how the skillpoint system effects choice and customization.
Prep the coffee maker agian lol that's pretty good but you are saying "The semanitcs don't mean anything when you're talking about an unknown or unclassified objective. If I call a UFO an "alien space craft," and you call it "Herr Kringle's Sleigh," we have a semantic diffirence of opinion, neither of which defines the object as we haven't actually identified it yet." and I am saying that Diablo 3 is defined as Action RPG so can you fill me in on what I'm missing?
You're missing the fact i'm not attempting to brand D3 with a meaningless title to make an unrelated point about a skill system (or lack there of) and you are.
My point was: If (and it was hypothetical) I played your game as said "nuh uh, it's an RPGZD," we'd both look equally silly when that kind of tag-line was uselss for the purpose of our discussion.
In the end, I just think that Blizzard wants each player to be defined by the player rather than the tree. Give a man a skill tree, and he will become a Fire Sorc. Give a man 6 skills to choose from, pulling from all three trees, and he becomes a Fire Sorc that likes to shoot lightning to manage the bigger crowds. Or a Fire Sorc that likes to freeze stuff before he does his heavy-hitting fire moves. And frankly, in a group of 100, there might be 20 or so players who like to freeze stuff and then hurl fireballs too. But that's better than the alternative, where maybe 50 players are all Fire Sorcs, and that's the end of that story, you know what I mean? I think there are valid concerns out there about how this is all going to play out, but I don't see how anyone could disagree that the new system is Blizzard's gift to people who want to play the game and be different from everybody else if they so choose.
I need to start making a list of things we agree on so I know what we're discussing.
With the recent reduction from seven, to six active skills able to be chosen Blizzard actually increase the number of possible combinations. Bashiok explains it rather well.
Official Blizzard Quote:
I realize there’s a lot of information spread around, I’m hoping to bring some of it to a single post and hopefully get our point across and reassure you that the changes we’re making are for the betterment of character customization options, and ultimately your long-term enjoyment of the game.
So, why did we get rid of skill points?
(Note: this is a supplementary min/max explanation. There are lots of other reasons which have been touched on in the past such as how players approach our game, supporting the idea of builds, observing how players behaved in internal testing, etc. This is just further explanation that I think will resonate with some of you.)
In Diablo III, we really want to improve the combat depth. Part of having combat depth involves having skills that are useful in different situations. In Diablo II players often used a single skill to deal with almost all situations: Blessed Hammer, Frozen Orb and Bone Spirit to name a few. Players invest 20 points into a single skill and use it as much as possible. The only reason a player would swap away from their primary spam skill is due to monster resistances/immunities. If a monster was immune to your primary spam skill, you’d either skip the encounter completely or fall back on a second skill. Neither of these answers provides the player with much combat depth.
To support combat depth, skills need to have different roles. Here is a very simple example:
Magic Missile deals 15 damage to a single enemy
Arcane Orb deals area of effect damage for 10 damage each
With these two skills we’re beginning to develop some combat depth for the player. Use Magic Missile when you’re facing one enemy, use Arcane Orb when you’re facing multiple enemies. But you may also want to use Magic Missile if one enemy is a “high priority target” in a group, and you want it to die quickly. In this simplified example players can still defeat a horde of enemies by casting Magic Missile multiple times, or they could defeat a single large enemy by casting Arcane Orb multiple times, but that wouldn’t be as efficient as a player who uses the right skill for the right situation.
Ok so that basic layout of combat depth out of the way!
With skill point spending your skills get better as you invest points into them. The problem is that this destroys combat depth. If after pumping a bunch of points into Magic Missile it now deals 70 damage to a single enemy, assuming my enemies have any reasonable health, then Magic Missile becomes a better choice than Arcane Orb even in group situations. If after pumping a bunch of points into Arcane Orb it now deals 45 damage, then it deals more damage than Magic Missile to single targets. Now rather than using the right skill for the right situation, I’m using the skill I’ve put all my points into. Skill point spending has eroded away combat depth.
Why did we go from 7 skill choices to 6?
(Note: again, this is a supplementary explanation. We’ve gone over some of the other reasons elsewhere, but this is specifically targeted at those of you here who feel strongly that 7 means there would be more build diversity than 6)
Diablo III emphasizes build customization. We feel that 6 skill choices actually creates more build diversity than 7.
Why? Well for any given set of options, the greatest number of combinations exists when the number of choices you can make is close to half the number of options you have. Some of you may remember a high school math problem like this: There are 12 differently colored marbles in a bag. How many different color combinations can you get by choosing X marbles? Well as it turns out the solution for various values of X are:
1 marble: 12 different color combinations
2 marbles: 66
3 marbles: 220
4 marbles: 495
5 marbles: 792 6 marbles: 924
7 marbles: 792
8 marbles: 495
9 marbles: 220
10 marbles: 66
11 marbles: 12
12 marbles: 1 (there’s only 1 way to choose 12 marbles from the 12 in the bag)
The greatest number of possible combinations happens when you are choosing 6 from a possible 12.
You may be asking what 12 has to do with anything as classes all have over 20 skills available to them...
This is true in theory, but in practice players tend to (and really should) pick up skills to fill different roles so they can be effective. Categories such as single target, area of effect, auto-targeting, debuff, defensive, group buff, escape, crowd control, 2-minute ubers, pet skills, etc. etc. Players generally take at most two (and often one) skill to fill any particular role. For example, the Wizard has Ice Armor, Storm Armor and Energy Armor, but I don’t think anyone is going to take all three (though maybe somebody will take that as a challenge and prove me wrong), most players will choose one Wizard Armor spell (note that this can change dramatically with some rune effects). If we look at each class, depending on how you count, you get anywhere from 8-12 different types of skills. So we err on the high side in our category estimate (12) and that means 6 is a pretty good number to maximize build variety.
It's important to note that we’re not just talking about you and your friend having Wizards with slightly different skills, we’re talking about you and your friend having 6 skills that are different in functionally significant ways.
Closing remark! When we pull math out like this I’m sure somebody will point out that if our only objective was to maximize build combinations we’d have allowed people to also choose 6, 7 or 8 passives rather than just 3. So I’ll counter by saying maximizing build combinations is not our only objective. We also want our system to have aesthetic flavor, to be simple to understand, and to have the passives in particular feel impactful. We have many different goals that we take into account when making any design decision. In the case of active skills, we felt the increase in variety was one of many good reasons to go from 7 to 6.
So how many skill combinations are there now?
Well taking into account 6 active skills, all the rune combinations, and 3 passives we currently expect each class to have roughly 2,285,814,795,264 different build combinations. That’s not taking into account skill types for ‘ideal’ builds, but that’s always been a big part of the fun of experimenting (and longevity for Diablo II) - finding a build that shouldn’t work, and making it.
“We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when all that we need to make us happy is something to be enthusiastic about.” - Albert Einstein
In the end, I just think that Blizzard wants each player to be defined by the player rather than the tree. Give a man a skill tree, and he will become a Fire Sorc. Give a man 6 skills to choose from, pulling from all three trees, and he becomes a Fire Sorc that likes to shoot lightning to manage the bigger crowds. Or a Fire Sorc that likes to freeze stuff before he does his heavy-hitting fire moves. And frankly, in a group of 100, there might be 20 or so players who like to freeze stuff and then hurl fireballs too. But that's better than the alternative, where maybe 50 players are all Fire Sorcs, and that's the end of that story, you know what I mean? I think there are valid concerns out there about how this is all going to play out, but I don't see how anyone could disagree that the new system is Blizzard's gift to people who want to play the game and be different from everybody else if they so choose.
I need to start making a list of things we agree on so I know what we're discussing.
LOL that statement is the best statement I've ever read lol. You just made my night.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Give a man a skill tree, and he will become a Fire Sorc. Give a man 6 skills to choose from, pulling from all three trees, and he becomes a Fire Sorc that likes to shoot lightning to manage the bigger crowds."
First sentence is insane? It's a RPG your suppose to role a character and there are suppose to be draw backs to your characters choices are you saying that the draw back of awww man I have to go back to town to switch skills is enough consequence? I never once was so annoyed by immunities that I thought Diablo 2 was dumb I loved that game( and I built some bad sorcs).
The solution is definitely not just giving the character everything maybe give them more so you don't run into issues where people are so annoyed because their build can't handle an immunity but don't give everything. Or as I stated b4 if you have to give them everything give them a system that makes it harder to realize which skills are better ok worst and what not so the level of illusion that all the skills are awesome can be maintained thus giving us the incentive to stick to the build we are hopeing to make.
If you would though please inlighten me to the consequences you speak of, maybe I'm just not seeing what you mean in terms of that.
TheSkaBoss
Yea I can see alot of what your saying there. But the last little bit bothers me if you are playing a fire sorc frost sorc or whatever you should be playing the entire game as one of those that's what it means to play a RPG. pick a role and live with. This is becoming less of an action rpg and more of an action strategy with some rpg elements
TheSkaBoss
I think you're forgetting that the game is balanced around these realities. ie. when more skills are avalible to you, then you can be expected to use more of them. I think you're stuck on the idea we're going to get D2 with a facelift. For all we know the monsters will be much more of a challenge and that face-rolling old-school 2-button (so many hypenated words) style of gameplay is out.
As for the game becoming more of an X than a Y; honestly, do you really care about semantics? If you're that bent out of shape by not having a skill tree, by all means just pretend you have one. It'll make the game much more challenging i'm sure. The bottom line here is that the game is going to be more enjoyable, have more variety, and still feature as much customization as you want; and that's party due to the skill change.
(would /thread be too pretentious here?)
They said inane, not insane.
The semantics you refer mean a change in the style of game we are playing so yes I think atleast in this instance I will let "semantics" effect how I feel about this.
Now in terms of realizing the realities of what the games was balanced around. You need to realize that up until this announcement was made, this games was balanced around a system that used skill points in a similar way to D2 and many many many many many many other RPGS.
Pretentious yes but only cause your getting as tired of this convo as I am lol
TheSkaBoss
lol woops thanks man
TheSkaBoss
The semanitcs don't mean anything when you're talking about an unknown or unclassified objective. If I call a UFO an "alien space craft," and you call it "Herr Kringle's Sleigh," we have a semantic diffirence of opinion, neither of which defines the object as we haven't actually identified it yet. We can see some videos of gameplay, some screenshots, and a rought list of abilities, but we know almost nothing about how the game actually plays as it relates to the skills avalible.
Thusly, when we are talking about the "reality" of diablo2, sure, we can speak in definite terms and with verfiable experience. However; when we are speaking of D3 we have to be careful NOT to do this.
You need to realize that the history of skillpoint systems and even it's previous iteration in D3's alpha... is totally meaningless to us. For all intents and purposes, we absolutely have to take the devs at their word on this. They've done a fine job for us before, so I think the only thing we CAN safely infer is that they're making an intelligent decision this time around too.
So now that i've covered why there is still the potential for ample (perhaps more than ever?) customization, refuted the proposition that the game is totally dependant on the (removed) skill system, and put the semanitcs to rest... what is next?
(no /thread, I swear.. oops)
ummm so Diablo isn't identified as an Action RPG good to know I didn't realize that.
So taking away a choice to be bad at skills doesn't take away customization hmmmm good to know.
You have the same skill choices as b4 except now you can't be bad at any of them your right when your roleing a character in any rpg game deciding what skills your bad at is not part of that customization
O and for the record your the one the brought up the fact that how important the way the build has been created thus far is.
But in all seriousness you are right to put your faith in the devs I know I'm going to and if you had read the topic discussion before the last page or whatever you had decided to skip ahead to you would have seen me say that it is just a cause for concern mutiple times.
TheSkaBoss
But anyway, it's not like you had a skill tree in D2, so I don't see what the deal is. Yeah, it looked like a tree, was called a tree, and in many ways, even worked like a tree. But the entire tree system of D2 ended up making people skill dump in some high-level skill. What kind of tree is that? It's not a tree, it's more like Skill Balloon. I follow this tiny, tiny thread of no major importance up and up and up... until I get to the top where the big round object is. It's where the fun is. It's what will carry me. So more or less, if you think about it, you're mourning the loss of Skill Balloons. D3 has more potential to behave like a tree than D2 ever really had, because if I pull all of my six skills out of a single tree, is that not playing with a skill tree? And am I not utilizing the skills in such a way that it really feels like I'm armed with skills from a tree?
But then, of course, as you are noting, we don't have to pull from one tree. But I like that, because I feel like that will immerse me in the world better. I find it easy to believe that there will be a Wizard out there who dabbles in all fields of magic. It's realistic, and it strengthens the lore a bit, don't you think?
Oh shit, semantics again. Prep the coffee-maker Jeeves, it's going to be a long night.
Taking away a pre-determinate choice that limits the variety of gameplay to inject more de-facto choice making and customization of gameplay. Or are we going to pretend the posts we made before don't exist? That's not really fair though, seeing as I made sense in all of mine. =/
You have more skill choices than before because your character is now offering you on-the-go customization and in all likelyhood the content will demand that you do make use of that at some difficulty level or another. You can still be bad and shoot nothing but fireballs, it's just more difficult to be make that mistake if you aren't intending to. (Cue the 'catering to casuals' drama) Both pre-determinate and de-facto choices as customization are valid, but as we elaborated on before one makes for pretty stale gameplay (hint: the one with skilltrees) by definition.
Point on the doll where I tou.. er, excuse me. Please point out what you're referring to in a quote.
I've read the thread and i'm doing my best to convince you that there is no cause for concern. In-fact I would call this cause for great jubilation.
sorry ska let me back up and read what I missed
TheSkaBoss
Maybe it'd help if I got me an avatar. lol
TheSkaBoss
TheSkaBoss
O Ska I have one reply to you on page five maybe you missed it. Was there a different comment I missed?
TheSkaBoss
Please help me understand what you're talking about then:
As an answer to:
Where did I emphasize a build? I explained (several times) that removing skill points has the effect of opening up more de-facto choice, customization, etc. Nothing at all to do with previous builds, everything to do with how the skillpoint system effects choice and customization.
You're missing the fact i'm not attempting to brand D3 with a meaningless title to make an unrelated point about a skill system (or lack there of) and you are.
My point was: If (and it was hypothetical) I played your game as said "nuh uh, it's an RPGZD," we'd both look equally silly when that kind of tag-line was uselss for the purpose of our discussion.
I need to start making a list of things we agree on so I know what we're discussing.
Official Blizzard Quote:
I realize there’s a lot of information spread around, I’m hoping to bring some of it to a single post and hopefully get our point across and reassure you that the changes we’re making are for the betterment of character customization options, and ultimately your long-term enjoyment of the game.
So, why did we get rid of skill points?
(Note: this is a supplementary min/max explanation. There are lots of other reasons which have been touched on in the past such as how players approach our game, supporting the idea of builds, observing how players behaved in internal testing, etc. This is just further explanation that I think will resonate with some of you.)
In Diablo III, we really want to improve the combat depth. Part of having combat depth involves having skills that are useful in different situations. In Diablo II players often used a single skill to deal with almost all situations: Blessed Hammer, Frozen Orb and Bone Spirit to name a few. Players invest 20 points into a single skill and use it as much as possible. The only reason a player would swap away from their primary spam skill is due to monster resistances/immunities. If a monster was immune to your primary spam skill, you’d either skip the encounter completely or fall back on a second skill. Neither of these answers provides the player with much combat depth.
To support combat depth, skills need to have different roles. Here is a very simple example:
Magic Missile deals 15 damage to a single enemy
Arcane Orb deals area of effect damage for 10 damage each
With these two skills we’re beginning to develop some combat depth for the player. Use Magic Missile when you’re facing one enemy, use Arcane Orb when you’re facing multiple enemies. But you may also want to use Magic Missile if one enemy is a “high priority target” in a group, and you want it to die quickly. In this simplified example players can still defeat a horde of enemies by casting Magic Missile multiple times, or they could defeat a single large enemy by casting Arcane Orb multiple times, but that wouldn’t be as efficient as a player who uses the right skill for the right situation.
Ok so that basic layout of combat depth out of the way!
With skill point spending your skills get better as you invest points into them. The problem is that this destroys combat depth. If after pumping a bunch of points into Magic Missile it now deals 70 damage to a single enemy, assuming my enemies have any reasonable health, then Magic Missile becomes a better choice than Arcane Orb even in group situations. If after pumping a bunch of points into Arcane Orb it now deals 45 damage, then it deals more damage than Magic Missile to single targets. Now rather than using the right skill for the right situation, I’m using the skill I’ve put all my points into. Skill point spending has eroded away combat depth.
Why did we go from 7 skill choices to 6?
(Note: again, this is a supplementary explanation. We’ve gone over some of the other reasons elsewhere, but this is specifically targeted at those of you here who feel strongly that 7 means there would be more build diversity than 6)
Diablo III emphasizes build customization. We feel that 6 skill choices actually creates more build diversity than 7.
Why? Well for any given set of options, the greatest number of combinations exists when the number of choices you can make is close to half the number of options you have. Some of you may remember a high school math problem like this: There are 12 differently colored marbles in a bag. How many different color combinations can you get by choosing X marbles? Well as it turns out the solution for various values of X are:
1 marble: 12 different color combinations
2 marbles: 66
3 marbles: 220
4 marbles: 495
5 marbles: 792
6 marbles: 924
7 marbles: 792
8 marbles: 495
9 marbles: 220
10 marbles: 66
11 marbles: 12
12 marbles: 1 (there’s only 1 way to choose 12 marbles from the 12 in the bag)
The greatest number of possible combinations happens when you are choosing 6 from a possible 12.
You may be asking what 12 has to do with anything as classes all have over 20 skills available to them...
This is true in theory, but in practice players tend to (and really should) pick up skills to fill different roles so they can be effective. Categories such as single target, area of effect, auto-targeting, debuff, defensive, group buff, escape, crowd control, 2-minute ubers, pet skills, etc. etc. Players generally take at most two (and often one) skill to fill any particular role. For example, the Wizard has Ice Armor, Storm Armor and Energy Armor, but I don’t think anyone is going to take all three (though maybe somebody will take that as a challenge and prove me wrong), most players will choose one Wizard Armor spell (note that this can change dramatically with some rune effects). If we look at each class, depending on how you count, you get anywhere from 8-12 different types of skills. So we err on the high side in our category estimate (12) and that means 6 is a pretty good number to maximize build variety.
It's important to note that we’re not just talking about you and your friend having Wizards with slightly different skills, we’re talking about you and your friend having 6 skills that are different in functionally significant ways.
Closing remark! When we pull math out like this I’m sure somebody will point out that if our only objective was to maximize build combinations we’d have allowed people to also choose 6, 7 or 8 passives rather than just 3. So I’ll counter by saying maximizing build combinations is not our only objective. We also want our system to have aesthetic flavor, to be simple to understand, and to have the passives in particular feel impactful. We have many different goals that we take into account when making any design decision. In the case of active skills, we felt the increase in variety was one of many good reasons to go from 7 to 6.
So how many skill combinations are there now?
Well taking into account 6 active skills, all the rune combinations, and 3 passives we currently expect each class to have roughly 2,285,814,795,264 different build combinations. That’s not taking into account skill types for ‘ideal’ builds, but that’s always been a big part of the fun of experimenting (and longevity for Diablo II) - finding a build that shouldn’t work, and making it.
TheSkaBoss