**DISCLAIMER**If reading a pretty longwinded explination of an idea is not somthing you enjoy, you better hit the back button. If you happen to have looked at any of my "For Fun" guides, you may know that I spend ALOT of time imagining Diablo 3 as though it were already out. Since the August 1st information, I have been "going back to the drawing board" as it were, and while doing imaginary play throughs of the game, one thing keeps getting me stuck; only needing to have 1 of each class.
Making a new character is (in my opinion) a big part of Diablo. However, while "imagining" playing the game, I KNOW that being able to switch between skills with the amount of freedom we will have now is going to be a great expirience as well. So, as I tend to do, I started "assuming" that a system exisited in the game that would allow for both. I thought it was a good enough (interesting enough) idea to make a thread and see what you guys thought.
RUNES - The Best of Both Worlds
What the Problem was:
When Diablo 3 entered Alpha, the Developers noticed that the players were not using the skill system the way they had hoped they would. Indeed, it felt just like Diablo 2: Max 1 or 2 skills and spamm them to victory. The system actually "encouraged" this behavior and caused the players to "mass dump" skill points into new skills when they became available. The Dev Team didn't like this, as the combat (Monster AI, dificulty, pacing) was designed around players using 4-6 skills efficiently.
What they did:
This lead to what in my opinion was a pretty drastic change (considering how late we are in development), they removed the skill point system entirely. Players would now unlock new skills and passive skills at each level and be able to freely switch between those skills to find a "build" that they liked.
The (assumed) Effect:
This should lead to players using thier selected 6 active skills through out the entire game and to great effect, as the developers can ballance them based on character level and will give players a never-before-seen (in an ARPG) amount of freedom when expirimenting with their skills.
The Side Effect:
In my opinion, more by cause and effect than by design, this change lead to players really only needing to create 1 of each class (10 if you count gender or hardcore). Some people love this idea, while others (of which I am one) feel that comitting to your build should be considered a "core Diablo" concept.
Runes may help:
There have been alot of ideas tossed about since Aug 1st regarding the Skill changes / Rune changes. The Man himself (Jay Wilson) said in the interview that Force posted that one of the reasons they liked the proposed Rune change was that it would add to the "investment" players would need to make to their chosen skill set. This is the main reason I am all for the Rune changes, however, this does not change the fact that to change your build (even at the latest point in the game) you would not need a new character, but instead only new runes (and Gear too).
R*U*N*E*S Two birds with one Stone
So, my idea. Runes will drop in two forms: Common and Magic. So each time a rune is Rolled up, it then performs a roll to determine weather it is Common or Magic.
Common Runes:
Common runes would act just like runes from the "old" system did. They would drop with the Type already defined. When a Common rune drops, it would look somthing like this:
____________________________________________________ Crimson Rune: Level 1
____________________________________________________
Common runes could only drop up to level 5. This way the most rare (Level 6-7) would always be rolled up as Magic. Common runes can be freely switched between any active, currently equipped, skill. The fact that Common runes drop with their "Type" already rolled up (Crimson, Indigo, Alabaster, Obsidian, Golden) would mean you could hold the rune over any of your skills and get a look at what the rune would do to that skill. The common runes would be the way to let players "freely" try out all of the Rune combinations, and they would be VERY "common" drops in Act 2. As the game progresses, Rune's become more rare (in general), but by the time you start hunting for Level 6 and 7 Runes, they will only drop as Magical.
Magic Runes:
When a Magic Rune is rolled up, it can be any level of rarity. This would make Rare or even Legendary Runes possible. An example of how a Magic Rune would look when the player sees it on the Ground:
____________________________________________________
Both the Type (Crimson, Indigo, Alabaster, Obsidian, Golden) and the Modifiers would NOT be rolled when the item dropped. When the rune drops, the Roll up would determine the Level (1-7) and wether it was Common or Magic. When you mouse over a Magic rune that you find, a tooltip would pop up reading:
____________________________________________________
"Chose a Skill to Attune this Rune to. This will then Determine the Rune Type and Give an Extra Effect"
____________________________________________________
After you select a skill to "attune" the rune to, several Rolls happen. It rolls a type (Crimson, Indigo, Albaster, Obsidian, Golden), it rolls the Rarity (rare, legendary, ect..), and the Modifiers. The fact that the Rune doesn't make these rolls untill AFTER you attune it would make selling un-attuned runes pretty interesting. Could be AMAZING, could be just ok. An example of what a Level 4 Attuned runed might look like:
____________________________________________________
Sturdy Crimson Rune of Shadows:Ray of Frost - Level 4 Can be Insterted into Ray of Frost
"Beam increases in damage the longer it remains in use, to a cap"
+25 Defense
+11% to Dodge
____________________________________________________
But how does this address the need to only make 1 of each class..?
The Kicker:
Make the player limited to only Socketing 6 Skills at one time. Because Common runes are able to be "Freely" switched between skills, changing them out would be as easy as "click and drag". This would allow the player to play with the rune effects, while being a built in way to keep people from switching skills out literaly "on the fly" (as in during fights) as they would have to re-socket their skills when they change them out.
Magic Runes would not be free to change. Because of this, when players are about to socket a magic rune into a skill (remember, "attuning" a rune to a skill only Does the roll on the item, it doesn't lock it into "your" skill yet) you would see a warning screen reading:
"Removing a Magic Rune from you Skill can only be done at the Mystic and Costs Gold. Removing this Rune from the Mystic will cost X amount of Gold (based on the Rune Level and Quality). Are you sure you wan't to socket this Rune?"
In this fashion, switching out a High Level Magic Rune could cost ALOT of Gold. So much, that changing out ALL of your skills (if you already invested good quality runes in them) would cost enough that you would likely make a new character instead. You could, however, change out 1 or 2 Magic Runes, and just eat the gold cost. And this would make tweaking expensive, but possible.
Conculsion:
This sytem (and props to you if you read all this!) would allow players to have fun expirimenting with rune effect as they level (with Common runes), Give back that awesome point of comparison that mousing a "Crimson" rune over your skills brings (that people like Sixen in the Podcasts have been missing), allow players to "invest" in their skills with expensive, hard to find Magic Runes, and by limiting to player to 6 Runes at one time (meaning that you would have to remove a Rune to change out your skills) would result in builds being important in the late game in a "tangible" way again.
This post is by no means meant to be a "if only Blizzard would do THIS" thread. It is simply what I thought was an interesting idea, and worth sharing with the forum.
I think you're missing one fundamental issue with your idea. Diablo 3 is focused on casual gameplay. Requiring a user to make multiple characters of the same class and get them all to max level in order to test various skill/rune combinations effectively is not casual gameplay.
What you're asking for is just tedious and frustrating for the average player. Sure, for the more hardcore its great, but the average player won't be hardcore. They'll want to try out the new rune they got and see if they like the effect. Just as you would a new piece of equipment. Players should not be forced to pre-plan their character using wiki, guidebooks, forums, etc as they did in the past. Instead, they should play the game and if they get a new rune they can try it without feeling like its permanent.
Now, that said.. I'm not against the idea of requiring a cost and requiring the Mystic to change out runes. I just think it should be decently cost effective. It could act as a soft respec as well as a gold sink. It wouldn't force you to re-roll but it would deter you slightly from continually switching out skills (especially since gold will have real money value).
i read the whole things but missed what R.U.N.E.S. stands for....?
The concept is neat but might as well just revert back to the old skill system and add a super expensive respec feature, thus simplifying you're overly complex methodology of ultimately just limiting the frequency of respecs...
I appreciate the end you're shooting for... but I think the system you propose is fairly clunky. And in the end, it doesn't really put a hard cap on what you're trying to avoid, especially since gold is purchasable for cashola.
Anyways, if the devs thought the old system was too complicated, they'll never do that PLUS another systems at the same time.
Good read interesting but I get the feeling there would have to be other reasons to reroll besides rune and skill combos that's kinda the whole point of "respecs" so you don't have to reroll but actually sounds like a in depth system.
I think you're missing one fundamental issue with your idea. Diablo 3 is focused on casual gameplay. Requiring a user to make multiple characters of the same class and get them all to max level in order to test various skill/rune combinations effectively is not casual gameplay.
What you're asking for is just tedious and frustrating for the average player. Sure, for the more hardcore its great, but the average player won't be hardcore. They'll want to try out the new rune they got and see if they like the effect. Just as you would a new piece of equipment. Players should not be forced to pre-plan their character using wiki, guidebooks, forums, etc as they did in the past. Instead, they should play the game and if they get a new rune they can try it without feeling like its permanent.
Now, that said.. I'm not against the idea of requiring a cost and requiring the Mystic to change out runes. I just think it should be decently cost effective. It could act as a soft respec as well as a gold sink. It wouldn't force you to re-roll but it would deter you slightly from continually switching out skills (especially since gold will have real money value).
Thanks for the reply.
I think the "average player" you speak of will likely stop playing after they beat the game on normal. (Maybe Nightmare?) And the "common" runes would fill the roll that you are speaking of. However, I do think I dissagree with your statement "Diablo 3 is designed for the Casual game". I think there are aspects that are, but this would take care of both I think. Play with the Common Runes, Chose your Magic Runes more carefully.
i read the whole things but missed what R.U.N.E.S. stands for....?
The concept is neat but might as well just revert back to the old skill system and add a super expensive respec feature, thus simplifying you're overly complex methodology of ultimately just limiting the frequency of respecs...
The topic title is miss leading! Not sure why I put the *s in there. Edited it out
I think me "over explaining" (due to bordem?) the idea makes it seem more complex than it is. Runes drop as Common or Magical. One can be freely moved from skill to skill, the other needs the mystic to be changed out. You have to remove a rune in order to change it out for a different skill. Not much to it really, I just am a bit long winded.
But as for going back to the old system, it doesn't even come near to accomplishing the same thing. Heavy investment into your chosen skills and adding a cool dynamic to Rune drops with the Modfiers.
I appreciate the end you're shooting for... but I think the system you propose is fairly clunky. And in the end, it doesn't really put a hard cap on what you're trying to avoid, especially since gold is purchasable for cashola.
Anyways, if the devs thought the old system was too complicated, they'll never do that PLUS another systems at the same time.
No doubt it is clunky. I wholeheartedly admit that. But I think it caps it out as well as most players would want it to. You can either spend ALOT of gold to respec totally, spend alot, but not bank breaking amounts to change 1 or 2 skills, or roll a new character. But your right, it is a bit clunky.
Good read interesting but I get the feeling there would have to be other reasons to reroll besides rune and skill combos that's kinda the whole point of "respecs" so you don't have to reroll but actually sounds like a in depth system.
Mainly meant to be just that, interesting read. I think respecs should be there (As Blizzard has said) to fix mistakes. Because of the leway that exisits in the game now in switching out any skill, you can't really make a mistake. And I like that. It is much better design. But this would allow you to still "lock in" your choices by investing heavily in High End Runes, that can't eaisly be removed. By the time you would be finding Runes that require ALOT to remove, you would be Mid Hell at least, so you would likely know what you wanted out of your character by then.
Again, this whole system would read "VERY POINTLESS" if you are some one who didn't like making a second or third character of the same class.
@snowhammer: My comment about Diablo 3 being a casual game isn't wrong at all. Its what Blizzard is specifically marketing it as and focusing their development time for. As for the average player quitting after they beat normal. That is the reason why Blizzard (I believe) is trying to make the game more casual and less focused on competition. They want people to sit down for an hour or three, get through some content and play again later. Those people will make up the brunt of the playerbase for the first couple years most likely. Those that still play the game ten years down the road are the minority.
As I said, any 'lock in' mechanism is counter productive to the style of play Blizzard is clearly focusing on. Think about it for a minute.. do you lock in stats? nope. Do you lock in your skills? nope. How about your gear? nope. Why should you lock in your runes? Seems like it would just serve to confuse players.
To offer such lock in mechanics reasonably, I think it would also have to extend to normal gear. Perhaps making gear that binds and cannot be removed once worn without going to the Mystic. That alongside a more reasonable rune removal cost would create a system that encourages consideration of skills and gear without making it the end of the world if you choose wrong.
I really just think your idea would be too extreme and feel like punishing a player if they wanted to try something different with their character. A system like that would lead people to have to wiki how each rune could affect their character, what skills they want to use in the end, and search forums for how they should get there without making a mistake. That isn't playing Diablo, thats playing spreadsheets the game. I think a more natural 'explore' gameplay is much better. Get a new rune, try it out, and sell it if you don't like it. It really just turns out to be more fun.
What would your system accomplish besides punishing a player for trying a new skill/rune combo without reading everything about it first? I may be not grasping things very well, but I cannot see any inherent advantage. To me it really just seems like you played a ton of Diablo II and want III to be the same.
@ecutriun
We will have to agree to dissagree on what Blizzard is developling. As I said in my original post, this specific issue (never needing a second Wizard) in my opinion was a side effect from the change they made. I dont think they said "lets make sure players only play 1 of each class". I think it just ended up that way because of the skill change.
By no means does the idea mean it would have to apply to gear too. The Runes Never "BIND" you can always pay to take them out and then sell them if you like.
It doesn't punish a player for wanting to try somthing different at all. At most it might make a player say "ooh, maybe I shouldn't socket that in this skill untill I'm sure I like that effect. Let me put in one of my Common runes of the same type to see if I like it first." and then "OOo, I'm not a fan. I'll put that on the AH".
Any way, thanks for the reply and if you don't like the idea, that is A.OK!
I think the only problem is with the runes at least in my opinion wont drive people to 'invest' in a certain character build ie looking for specific runes, but it will just make them use ray of frost because they happen to have magic rune that specifically effects ray of frost,
this makes the game more like diablo 1 than anything, found a book of fire wall? hm guess il use fire wall, which basically makes even less customization.
as for it giving you more incentive to try to reroll a same class, possibly, but not really, because you can just swap out runes etc there is still only mildly a reason to reroll same class
unless the gold cost your suggesting is pretty extreme, but that in a sense would simply be a respec
All in all I like your train of thought, as ive said before they need to find some kind of happy medium.
I think the only problem is with the runes at least in my opinion wont drive people to 'invest' in a certain character build ie looking for specific runes, but it will just make them use ray of frost because they happen to have magic rune that specifically effects ray of frost,
this makes the game more like diablo 1 than anything, found a book of fire wall? hm guess il use fire wall, which basically makes even less customization.
as for it giving you more incentive to try to reroll a same class, possibly, but not really, because you can just swap out runes etc there is still only mildly a reason to reroll same class
unless the gold cost your suggesting is pretty extreme, but that in a sense would simply be a respec
All in all I like your train of thought, as ive said before they need to find some kind of happy medium.
Hey Paroxy,
I can see where your coming from with the "like Diablo 1" thought. I think that the idea (not in my original post, but presented by Jay in his interview) of being able to pay the mystic to "re-roll" the rune might help that concern a bit.
But you are absolutley right, and more than just being a possible problem with "this" idea, it would be a problem with the new rune system in general. Seems like players builds might evolve mostly based off what level 6 or 7 rune they find first.
Honestly, I'm kinda confused as to why a individual having more then one of the same class is even important. Could I get some clarification as to why that is such a big deal? Seems to me to be kinda redundant in a ARPG to force people to keep rolling multiple Wizards to play different types of Wizards instead of just letting them change their gear and runes. Heck, from my past experience something like this would actually promote botting as many would have little drive to keep grinding the same class over and over and over to try different combinations at high level.
Now you seem to think that not having to make multiple of the same class is just a side effect, but really.. if Blizzard WANTED you to have to make a second class it seems like they would have noticed this right away. I'm pretty sure this fits well with their casual gameplay focus, to be honest.
My comment on gear was to standardize your idea across all gear instead of just skill mods. Since removing socketed gems will cost gold, having to unbind gear as well as runes (as they would be 'bound' to a skill) would kinda standardize the concept across all gear. My preference, however, would be to just keep it as they've announced as it allows for nice flexibility and more fun for the casual player. At most, I'd personally require going to the Mystic to swap out skills/runes (not for high cost just to restrict you to doing it at town).
casual players dont play games on hard, sometimes not even on normal. the casual player will be done with the game after 1 play through. they already said that it will take the harder difficulties to test good diablo players. really there is something for everyone in this game. hardcore and casual alike. and that is what they are going for.
Honestly, I'm kinda confused as to why a individual having more then one of the same class is even important. Could I get some clarification as to why that is such a big deal? Seems to me to be kinda redundant in a ARPG to force people to keep rolling multiple Wizards to play different types of Wizards instead of just letting them change their gear and runes.
People, including myself, prefer that you commit to a character, it becomes unique and defining. It's not some generic lv 60 that everyone else has, it was made by you and forged with your ideas and concepts, then of course, random items are icing on a cake, but the real cake is your customization. the cake ain't items that's the difference. ARPGs have a certain style, true...but you have a choice to make diablo pretty much like a generic ARPG or you can venture outside the box and give it more spice where it's appropriate, to distinguish itself from other ARPGs...
Heck, from my past experience something like this would actually promote botting as many would have little drive to keep grinding the same class over and over and over to try different combinations at high level.
with the OP's system, you don't need to make the same class over and over to try combinations because essentially the "common" runes will already fit your style. when you decide on a build, you commit to it and use "magic" runes. therefore, doing build testing on 1 char is feasible.
Now you seem to think that not having to make multiple of the same class is just a side effect, but really.. if Blizzard WANTED you to have to make a second class it seems like they would have noticed this right away. I'm pretty sure this fits well with their casual gameplay focus, to be honest.
i'm not really understanding the logic of your statement.
I guess if you mean their gameplay focus revolving completely, 100% around items then sure. because pvp isn't competetive atm, character stat/skill customization is pretty much gone, and there's an AH that allows you to purchase rare items without grinding.
Honestly, I'm kinda confused as to why a individual having more then one of the same class is even important. Could I get some clarification as to why that is such a big deal?
Hey ecutruin,
So in my opinion (and I "think" alot of others) having more than one of the same class means MORE Diablo 3. It means after you have played the game through 3 times with all 5 classes, there is a reason to do it AGAIN, and AGAIN. I think it boils to that, more Diablo. Also, it would mean an endless market for low level items. As it stands now, 2 years from now only top end gear will likely be on the AH as people aren't constantly making new characers.
I should point out, that Diablo 2 forced you to make a new character if you screwed up your build. THAT is not what I consider a GOOD design. I think being able to fix your mistakes as you level (endless respecing and swaping of common runes, Magic runes at a price) and all kinds of time to switch out your skills to find a playstyle you like is a GREAT thing. I just think you should need to committ to somthing eventually (not even in a perminent way, but just enough to make a new character an option).
As for what you said about "at most, require going to a mystic to swap skills" I hope that it is 'at least' that
I don't really grasp how being able to swap things out at a whim inhibits customization. o.o;
From what I can see.. you have 6 skills as your focus skills. Sure, you can swap them out whenever you'd like to but your liable to focus on a set 6 for regular use an a couple other skills for boss fights maybe. The majority of the others aren't likely to have runes in them unless you have a lot of spare runes. Stats will be customized based on your gear and class.
So, the only thing I can remotely see is needing to be able to show off your specific build to other players without them being able to simply implement your build themselves. Seems kinda like a silly reason to make people start over.
Saying it gives you more gameplay is just artificial. Its not any more gameplay then just trying out common runes for a few different builds. All its doing is giving someone bragging rights and honest that is stupid.
If I'm missing something, please do point it out.. I just don't see how this is beneficial to the game.
People, including myself, prefer that you commit to a character, it becomes unique and defining. It's not some generic lv 60 that everyone else has, it was made by you and forged with your ideas and concepts, then of course, random items are icing on a cake, but the real cake is your customization. the cake ain't items that's the difference. ARPGs have a certain style, true...but you have a choice to make diablo pretty much like a generic ARPG or you can venture outside the box and give it more spice where it's appropriate, to distinguish itself from other ARPGs...
Hey Sentou,
I am right there with you. Committing to a character makes it "yours". As you say, it makes hiting level 60, or getting your last piece of gear, that much more rewarding, because its on YOUR character that YOU built.
That said, I think a Major draw back that has been around forever in ARPGs is the need to "check" to see if you are making any horrible mistakes. Like you can't really put 5 or 6 points in a low level skill with out the thought in the back of your head like "maybe I should google this to see if it is horrible late in the game". Its always been part of the genrea, so talking bad about it almost feels dis-respectful (lol), but its true.
Blizzard really is on to somthing though. Diablo 3 is going to be a sandbox of testing out skills and rune combinations. As Jay said in his interview, for the first time they have a system where the player isn't driven to go check a website for help. I say that is AWESOME.
The point of my OP is just to lay out a possible way we could have both, a system that people like you and I can feel 100% happy with, and a system that people like ecutruin can be happy with as well. Both camps, happy.
I can imagine, finding a Magic level 7 rune deep into my first Hell play through. By this time I have already decided what my core build is by play testing with level 4 and 5 common runes. I click the new Level 7 Magic rune, attune it to Slow Time and BAM! A Alabaster level 7 Slow Time rune with + 8% to Frost damage and +50 to vitality. Wahoo!
good idea, but this is gona take time for bliz to impliment... we dont have time, we want d3 asap. for future sure thing, but this wont be@release anyway
I don't really grasp how being able to swap things out at a whim inhibits customization. o.o;
yeah, when i say customization, perhaps that word is too broad. It's easier to look at it the other way around. With the current system, what makes your level 60 barbarian different from the hundred thousands/millions of barbarians out there? Nothing, other than items. I remember blizzcon 2010? where jay was saying, you didn't just make an amazon, you made a javazon or bowazon etc. now it's, i made a 'amazon'.
From what I can see.. you have 6 skills as your focus skills. Sure, you can swap them out whenever you'd like to but your liable to focus on a set 6 for regular use an a couple other skills for boss fights maybe. The majority of the others aren't likely to have runes in them unless you have a lot of spare runes. Stats will be customized based on your gear and class.
lots of spare mid-low runes aren't hard to come by anyway, you'll have enough runes, unless jay is lying to us and even low runes are not like as cheap as candy.
So, the only thing I can remotely see is needing to be able to show off your specific build to other players without them being able to simply implement your build themselves. Seems kinda like a silly reason to make people start over.
Saying it gives you more gameplay is just artificial. Its not any more gameplay then just trying out common runes for a few different builds. All its doing is giving someone bragging rights and honest that is stupid.
You see, part of why i don't really understand the opposition is probably because i feel like when skills/stats points were gone, you might as well just get a lv 60 char from the start and start grinding your runes and items. They simply can adjust difficulty for lv 60 char so you still feel the "challenge"
there's not experimentation with stats, but it's the fault that lies in the underlying system that blizzard has implemented...i suppose that's why i can let auto-stat slide, but pretty much "auto-skill" i feel is ridiculous because they had such a good thing going it's literally a huuuuge waste to throw away user choice when it comes to this. our choices now lie only in runes, and in 6skill slots. i would have rather had runes, 6 skill slots AND limited skill points. but the OP is finding a compromise so i will not comment completely on this. My post addressed blizzard's problem with players pumping pts in one skill but it's now buried and seems like no one can put up good rhetoric, at least one that i can follow. ( i don't follow shit like "blizzard makes good games, they tested and you didn't therefore they are right)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Making a new character is (in my opinion) a big part of Diablo. However, while "imagining" playing the game, I KNOW that being able to switch between skills with the amount of freedom we will have now is going to be a great expirience as well. So, as I tend to do, I started "assuming" that a system exisited in the game that would allow for both. I thought it was a good enough (interesting enough) idea to make a thread and see what you guys thought.
What the Problem was:
When Diablo 3 entered Alpha, the Developers noticed that the players were not using the skill system the way they had hoped they would. Indeed, it felt just like Diablo 2: Max 1 or 2 skills and spamm them to victory. The system actually "encouraged" this behavior and caused the players to "mass dump" skill points into new skills when they became available. The Dev Team didn't like this, as the combat (Monster AI, dificulty, pacing) was designed around players using 4-6 skills efficiently.
What they did:
This lead to what in my opinion was a pretty drastic change (considering how late we are in development), they removed the skill point system entirely. Players would now unlock new skills and passive skills at each level and be able to freely switch between those skills to find a "build" that they liked.
The (assumed) Effect:
This should lead to players using thier selected 6 active skills through out the entire game and to great effect, as the developers can ballance them based on character level and will give players a never-before-seen (in an ARPG) amount of freedom when expirimenting with their skills.
The Side Effect:
In my opinion, more by cause and effect than by design, this change lead to players really only needing to create 1 of each class (10 if you count gender or hardcore). Some people love this idea, while others (of which I am one) feel that comitting to your build should be considered a "core Diablo" concept.
Runes may help:
There have been alot of ideas tossed about since Aug 1st regarding the Skill changes / Rune changes. The Man himself (Jay Wilson) said in the interview that Force posted that one of the reasons they liked the proposed Rune change was that it would add to the "investment" players would need to make to their chosen skill set. This is the main reason I am all for the Rune changes, however, this does not change the fact that to change your build (even at the latest point in the game) you would not need a new character, but instead only new runes (and Gear too).
R*U*N*E*S Two birds with one Stone
So, my idea. Runes will drop in two forms: Common and Magic. So each time a rune is Rolled up, it then performs a roll to determine weather it is Common or Magic.
Common Runes:
Common runes would act just like runes from the "old" system did. They would drop with the Type already defined. When a Common rune drops, it would look somthing like this:
____________________________________________________
Crimson Rune: Level 1
____________________________________________________
Common runes could only drop up to level 5. This way the most rare (Level 6-7) would always be rolled up as Magic. Common runes can be freely switched between any active, currently equipped, skill. The fact that Common runes drop with their "Type" already rolled up (Crimson, Indigo, Alabaster, Obsidian, Golden) would mean you could hold the rune over any of your skills and get a look at what the rune would do to that skill. The common runes would be the way to let players "freely" try out all of the Rune combinations, and they would be VERY "common" drops in Act 2. As the game progresses, Rune's become more rare (in general), but by the time you start hunting for Level 6 and 7 Runes, they will only drop as Magical.
Magic Runes:
When a Magic Rune is rolled up, it can be any level of rarity. This would make Rare or even Legendary Runes possible. An example of how a Magic Rune would look when the player sees it on the Ground:
____________________________________________________
Magic Rune: Level 4
____________________________________________________
Both the Type (Crimson, Indigo, Alabaster, Obsidian, Golden) and the Modifiers would NOT be rolled when the item dropped. When the rune drops, the Roll up would determine the Level (1-7) and wether it was Common or Magic. When you mouse over a Magic rune that you find, a tooltip would pop up reading:
____________________________________________________
"Chose a Skill to Attune this Rune to. This will then Determine the Rune Type and Give an Extra Effect"
____________________________________________________
After you select a skill to "attune" the rune to, several Rolls happen. It rolls a type (Crimson, Indigo, Albaster, Obsidian, Golden), it rolls the Rarity (rare, legendary, ect..), and the Modifiers. The fact that the Rune doesn't make these rolls untill AFTER you attune it would make selling un-attuned runes pretty interesting. Could be AMAZING, could be just ok. An example of what a Level 4 Attuned runed might look like:
____________________________________________________
Sturdy Crimson Rune of Shadows: Ray of Frost - Level 4
Can be Insterted into Ray of Frost
"Beam increases in damage the longer it remains in use, to a cap"
+25 Defense
+11% to Dodge
____________________________________________________
But how does this address the need to only make 1 of each class..?
The Kicker:
Make the player limited to only Socketing 6 Skills at one time. Because Common runes are able to be "Freely" switched between skills, changing them out would be as easy as "click and drag". This would allow the player to play with the rune effects, while being a built in way to keep people from switching skills out literaly "on the fly" (as in during fights) as they would have to re-socket their skills when they change them out.
Magic Runes would not be free to change. Because of this, when players are about to socket a magic rune into a skill (remember, "attuning" a rune to a skill only Does the roll on the item, it doesn't lock it into "your" skill yet) you would see a warning screen reading:
"Removing a Magic Rune from you Skill can only be done at the Mystic and Costs Gold. Removing this Rune from the Mystic will cost X amount of Gold (based on the Rune Level and Quality). Are you sure you wan't to socket this Rune?"
In this fashion, switching out a High Level Magic Rune could cost ALOT of Gold. So much, that changing out ALL of your skills (if you already invested good quality runes in them) would cost enough that you would likely make a new character instead. You could, however, change out 1 or 2 Magic Runes, and just eat the gold cost. And this would make tweaking expensive, but possible.
Conculsion:
This sytem (and props to you if you read all this!) would allow players to have fun expirimenting with rune effect as they level (with Common runes), Give back that awesome point of comparison that mousing a "Crimson" rune over your skills brings (that people like Sixen in the Podcasts have been missing), allow players to "invest" in their skills with expensive, hard to find Magic Runes, and by limiting to player to 6 Runes at one time (meaning that you would have to remove a Rune to change out your skills) would result in builds being important in the late game in a "tangible" way again.
This post is by no means meant to be a "if only Blizzard would do THIS" thread. It is simply what I thought was an interesting idea, and worth sharing with the forum.
What you're asking for is just tedious and frustrating for the average player. Sure, for the more hardcore its great, but the average player won't be hardcore. They'll want to try out the new rune they got and see if they like the effect. Just as you would a new piece of equipment. Players should not be forced to pre-plan their character using wiki, guidebooks, forums, etc as they did in the past. Instead, they should play the game and if they get a new rune they can try it without feeling like its permanent.
Now, that said.. I'm not against the idea of requiring a cost and requiring the Mystic to change out runes. I just think it should be decently cost effective. It could act as a soft respec as well as a gold sink. It wouldn't force you to re-roll but it would deter you slightly from continually switching out skills (especially since gold will have real money value).
The concept is neat but might as well just revert back to the old skill system and add a super expensive respec feature, thus simplifying you're overly complex methodology of ultimately just limiting the frequency of respecs...
Anyways, if the devs thought the old system was too complicated, they'll never do that PLUS another systems at the same time.
Thanks for the reply.
I think the "average player" you speak of will likely stop playing after they beat the game on normal. (Maybe Nightmare?) And the "common" runes would fill the roll that you are speaking of. However, I do think I dissagree with your statement "Diablo 3 is designed for the Casual game". I think there are aspects that are, but this would take care of both I think. Play with the Common Runes, Chose your Magic Runes more carefully.
The topic title is miss leading! Not sure why I put the *s in there. Edited it out
I think me "over explaining" (due to bordem?) the idea makes it seem more complex than it is. Runes drop as Common or Magical. One can be freely moved from skill to skill, the other needs the mystic to be changed out. You have to remove a rune in order to change it out for a different skill. Not much to it really, I just am a bit long winded.
But as for going back to the old system, it doesn't even come near to accomplishing the same thing. Heavy investment into your chosen skills and adding a cool dynamic to Rune drops with the Modfiers.
No doubt it is clunky. I wholeheartedly admit that. But I think it caps it out as well as most players would want it to. You can either spend ALOT of gold to respec totally, spend alot, but not bank breaking amounts to change 1 or 2 skills, or roll a new character. But your right, it is a bit clunky.
Mainly meant to be just that, interesting read. I think respecs should be there (As Blizzard has said) to fix mistakes. Because of the leway that exisits in the game now in switching out any skill, you can't really make a mistake. And I like that. It is much better design. But this would allow you to still "lock in" your choices by investing heavily in High End Runes, that can't eaisly be removed. By the time you would be finding Runes that require ALOT to remove, you would be Mid Hell at least, so you would likely know what you wanted out of your character by then.
Again, this whole system would read "VERY POINTLESS" if you are some one who didn't like making a second or third character of the same class.
As I said, any 'lock in' mechanism is counter productive to the style of play Blizzard is clearly focusing on. Think about it for a minute.. do you lock in stats? nope. Do you lock in your skills? nope. How about your gear? nope. Why should you lock in your runes? Seems like it would just serve to confuse players.
To offer such lock in mechanics reasonably, I think it would also have to extend to normal gear. Perhaps making gear that binds and cannot be removed once worn without going to the Mystic. That alongside a more reasonable rune removal cost would create a system that encourages consideration of skills and gear without making it the end of the world if you choose wrong.
I really just think your idea would be too extreme and feel like punishing a player if they wanted to try something different with their character. A system like that would lead people to have to wiki how each rune could affect their character, what skills they want to use in the end, and search forums for how they should get there without making a mistake. That isn't playing Diablo, thats playing spreadsheets the game. I think a more natural 'explore' gameplay is much better. Get a new rune, try it out, and sell it if you don't like it. It really just turns out to be more fun.
What would your system accomplish besides punishing a player for trying a new skill/rune combo without reading everything about it first? I may be not grasping things very well, but I cannot see any inherent advantage. To me it really just seems like you played a ton of Diablo II and want III to be the same.
We will have to agree to dissagree on what Blizzard is developling. As I said in my original post, this specific issue (never needing a second Wizard) in my opinion was a side effect from the change they made. I dont think they said "lets make sure players only play 1 of each class". I think it just ended up that way because of the skill change.
By no means does the idea mean it would have to apply to gear too. The Runes Never "BIND" you can always pay to take them out and then sell them if you like.
It doesn't punish a player for wanting to try somthing different at all. At most it might make a player say "ooh, maybe I shouldn't socket that in this skill untill I'm sure I like that effect. Let me put in one of my Common runes of the same type to see if I like it first." and then "OOo, I'm not a fan. I'll put that on the AH".
Any way, thanks for the reply and if you don't like the idea, that is A.OK!
this makes the game more like diablo 1 than anything, found a book of fire wall? hm guess il use fire wall, which basically makes even less customization.
as for it giving you more incentive to try to reroll a same class, possibly, but not really, because you can just swap out runes etc there is still only mildly a reason to reroll same class
unless the gold cost your suggesting is pretty extreme, but that in a sense would simply be a respec
All in all I like your train of thought, as ive said before they need to find some kind of happy medium.
Hey Paroxy,
I can see where your coming from with the "like Diablo 1" thought. I think that the idea (not in my original post, but presented by Jay in his interview) of being able to pay the mystic to "re-roll" the rune might help that concern a bit.
But you are absolutley right, and more than just being a possible problem with "this" idea, it would be a problem with the new rune system in general. Seems like players builds might evolve mostly based off what level 6 or 7 rune they find first.
Good point.
Now you seem to think that not having to make multiple of the same class is just a side effect, but really.. if Blizzard WANTED you to have to make a second class it seems like they would have noticed this right away. I'm pretty sure this fits well with their casual gameplay focus, to be honest.
My comment on gear was to standardize your idea across all gear instead of just skill mods. Since removing socketed gems will cost gold, having to unbind gear as well as runes (as they would be 'bound' to a skill) would kinda standardize the concept across all gear. My preference, however, would be to just keep it as they've announced as it allows for nice flexibility and more fun for the casual player. At most, I'd personally require going to the Mystic to swap out skills/runes (not for high cost just to restrict you to doing it at town).
with the OP's system, you don't need to make the same class over and over to try combinations because essentially the "common" runes will already fit your style. when you decide on a build, you commit to it and use "magic" runes. therefore, doing build testing on 1 char is feasible.
i'm not really understanding the logic of your statement.
I guess if you mean their gameplay focus revolving completely, 100% around items then sure. because pvp isn't competetive atm, character stat/skill customization is pretty much gone, and there's an AH that allows you to purchase rare items without grinding.
Hey ecutruin,
So in my opinion (and I "think" alot of others) having more than one of the same class means MORE Diablo 3. It means after you have played the game through 3 times with all 5 classes, there is a reason to do it AGAIN, and AGAIN. I think it boils to that, more Diablo. Also, it would mean an endless market for low level items. As it stands now, 2 years from now only top end gear will likely be on the AH as people aren't constantly making new characers.
I should point out, that Diablo 2 forced you to make a new character if you screwed up your build. THAT is not what I consider a GOOD design. I think being able to fix your mistakes as you level (endless respecing and swaping of common runes, Magic runes at a price) and all kinds of time to switch out your skills to find a playstyle you like is a GREAT thing. I just think you should need to committ to somthing eventually (not even in a perminent way, but just enough to make a new character an option).
As for what you said about "at most, require going to a mystic to swap skills" I hope that it is 'at least' that
From what I can see.. you have 6 skills as your focus skills. Sure, you can swap them out whenever you'd like to but your liable to focus on a set 6 for regular use an a couple other skills for boss fights maybe. The majority of the others aren't likely to have runes in them unless you have a lot of spare runes. Stats will be customized based on your gear and class.
So, the only thing I can remotely see is needing to be able to show off your specific build to other players without them being able to simply implement your build themselves. Seems kinda like a silly reason to make people start over.
Saying it gives you more gameplay is just artificial. Its not any more gameplay then just trying out common runes for a few different builds. All its doing is giving someone bragging rights and honest that is stupid.
If I'm missing something, please do point it out.. I just don't see how this is beneficial to the game.
Hey Sentou,
I am right there with you. Committing to a character makes it "yours". As you say, it makes hiting level 60, or getting your last piece of gear, that much more rewarding, because its on YOUR character that YOU built.
That said, I think a Major draw back that has been around forever in ARPGs is the need to "check" to see if you are making any horrible mistakes. Like you can't really put 5 or 6 points in a low level skill with out the thought in the back of your head like "maybe I should google this to see if it is horrible late in the game". Its always been part of the genrea, so talking bad about it almost feels dis-respectful (lol), but its true.
Blizzard really is on to somthing though. Diablo 3 is going to be a sandbox of testing out skills and rune combinations. As Jay said in his interview, for the first time they have a system where the player isn't driven to go check a website for help. I say that is AWESOME.
The point of my OP is just to lay out a possible way we could have both, a system that people like you and I can feel 100% happy with, and a system that people like ecutruin can be happy with as well. Both camps, happy.
I can imagine, finding a Magic level 7 rune deep into my first Hell play through. By this time I have already decided what my core build is by play testing with level 4 and 5 common runes. I click the new Level 7 Magic rune, attune it to Slow Time and BAM! A Alabaster level 7 Slow Time rune with + 8% to Frost damage and +50 to vitality. Wahoo!
lots of spare mid-low runes aren't hard to come by anyway, you'll have enough runes, unless jay is lying to us and even low runes are not like as cheap as candy.
You see, part of why i don't really understand the opposition is probably because i feel like when skills/stats points were gone, you might as well just get a lv 60 char from the start and start grinding your runes and items. They simply can adjust difficulty for lv 60 char so you still feel the "challenge"
there's not experimentation with stats, but it's the fault that lies in the underlying system that blizzard has implemented...i suppose that's why i can let auto-stat slide, but pretty much "auto-skill" i feel is ridiculous because they had such a good thing going it's literally a huuuuge waste to throw away user choice when it comes to this. our choices now lie only in runes, and in 6skill slots. i would have rather had runes, 6 skill slots AND limited skill points. but the OP is finding a compromise so i will not comment completely on this. My post addressed blizzard's problem with players pumping pts in one skill but it's now buried and seems like no one can put up good rhetoric, at least one that i can follow. ( i don't follow shit like "blizzard makes good games, they tested and you didn't therefore they are right)