There are 2 very simple reasons why they're making spells scale of weapon damage:
1) To allow more stats to effect those classes. Since Barbarians and monks already HAD to think about all the same attributes as the wiz/wd but also had to think about weapon damage... but wiz/wd didn't have to worry about weapon damage so they had less selection.
2) Magic find. They don't want you to be able to get away with using a low level wand that has 900000 mf on it but has 1-1 damage. They want casters to not have that 'dump slot'.
On this topic, people are afraid that this change will lead to wizards and witchdoctors using high dps axes. I don't think this will be the case because spellcaster weapons still have the additional '+x% to class damage only' to negate that. Also if need be they will add extra affixes on spellcaster weapons to even it out, like casting speed.
While I think the +% damage to caster damage will work fine to keep massive weapons out of the hands of little wizard girls, I'm having a harder time imagining what reason a person would have to not carry the biggest two handed face smasher they could find for their barb or monk.
I understand their reasons for using % weapons damage for skills. It has some huge advantages, but it also feels like it will make the DPS on your weapon more important than almost any other decision in the game, and that includes skill choice and runes.
Are skills for barbarians, demon hunters, and monks affected by faster cast rate? Or are we just supposed to intuit what is considered a spell versus a skill?
Also, I think that having all skills based on weapon damage makes it more likely that Blizzard can make all of the skills and classes pretty balanced, because they are all being measured in the same way. All of the classes have a bunch of 100-140% weapon damage skills and maybe some 200% damage skills (at level 60 without runes).
I also think that having all skills/spells linked to weapon damage reinforces the different playing styles between the classes. A lot of these skills are not going to be that different in terms of how much damage they do assuming each character has a comparable weapon, but they do affect how the player uses that character (DoT, AoE, direct damage to one target, summons, delayed damage like explosive blast).
Very good points..I was at first of the thought too that all casters would now just go with heavy damage weapons; which concerned me because my first roll is going to be Wizard, but now that I see a different perspective and some logic it makes sense why they did it.
Reading that my Meteor does 450% weapon damage is pretty strange. I hope that at least they hide the whole "formulae" (or show it only when I want to check it) and show actual damage numbers.
Everyone is thinking about this so one-sidedly. Logically it would seem that Blizzard will need to raise the damage on wands so that wizards can do more damage. After this happens, you'll have Barbarians running around with dual wands because of their high DPS. Now THAT will be entertaining!
we dont really have to worry too much about wizards using axes n such (not that it ruins it for me)since so many wizard friendly items have +80% or so bonus damage for wizard damage.
i saw a 1h wand with a potential for 400dps; that's only 100dps of the highest 2h weapon.
The thing is a caster (Wizard for example) won't just be using a wand but the offhand as well, so there's the opportunity for two stat sources like resource regen, flat increase to damage (I've seen upwards to 250% for the wizard on just a weapon alone) etc. It's going to even out just fine I think Blizzard's got their heads about them XD
I like the system, but I see some disadvantages as well. It seems clear that end game wizard gear will always be better than axes and swords. But what of early/ early mid game? When by chance you haven't found a decent wand yet, but you have found a legendary sword? This makes for some awkward decision making. Maybe the sword will give you more dps all in all, but choosing it over a mediocre wand goes against gaming intuitions.
It's also not logical. A sword with high damage (without elemental enchantments) presumably does high damage because it is well forged and sharp. How does that increase the damage of a wizard's frost ray? How is it that your lightning spells do more damage when you wield a very heavy club? It's just a bit counterintuitive and awkward if you ask me.
While the new % damage system might seem akward, consider the implications on actual gameplay in comparison to Diablo 2.
In D2, casters by and large didn't care what they were equipped with weapon wise, beyond whatever had the highest +mana, +resistances, and +fast cast on it. The actual weapon never came into play, just the bonuses it had. This made the "best" caster weapons few and far between, especially for Hell difficulty and onward. A caster in D2 saw little improvement in their killing power when "upgrading" to a new weapon. They largely just helped with their survivabilty, safety, and lasting power.
With the Diablo 3 system, caster classes have just as much incentive to constantly upgrade their weapon and gear just as much as classes that rely on hitting things physically. Gameplay wise, this makes total sense, and makes progression for all classes the same. It also means that you have much more flexibility in what you use for gear. If you have a drought of caster style drops, you can still equip a nice weapon of another type for a while and see a damage upgrade until you find something else you want to use. Also remember that all classes in D3 have many options available. It is possible to have melee Wizards and Witch Doctors and they would want to use a powerful weapon. It is likely you will see variations of "caster" Barbarians with the right gear, too.
The % system is better overall - people just aren't used to the idea, which is understandable. Once you take a good look at how it works from a gameplay standpoint...it makes all the sense in the world.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
1) To allow more stats to effect those classes. Since Barbarians and monks already HAD to think about all the same attributes as the wiz/wd but also had to think about weapon damage... but wiz/wd didn't have to worry about weapon damage so they had less selection.
2) Magic find. They don't want you to be able to get away with using a low level wand that has 900000 mf on it but has 1-1 damage. They want casters to not have that 'dump slot'.
I understand their reasons for using % weapons damage for skills. It has some huge advantages, but it also feels like it will make the DPS on your weapon more important than almost any other decision in the game, and that includes skill choice and runes.
For example, if your weapon has 10% increased dps but 100 less attack, chances are the other one would be better.
Also, I think that having all skills based on weapon damage makes it more likely that Blizzard can make all of the skills and classes pretty balanced, because they are all being measured in the same way. All of the classes have a bunch of 100-140% weapon damage skills and maybe some 200% damage skills (at level 60 without runes).
I also think that having all skills/spells linked to weapon damage reinforces the different playing styles between the classes. A lot of these skills are not going to be that different in terms of how much damage they do assuming each character has a comparable weapon, but they do affect how the player uses that character (DoT, AoE, direct damage to one target, summons, delayed damage like explosive blast).
Reading that my Meteor does 450% weapon damage is pretty strange. I hope that at least they hide the whole "formulae" (or show it only when I want to check it) and show actual damage numbers.
D3 Channel: OnetwoD3
i saw a 1h wand with a potential for 400dps; that's only 100dps of the highest 2h weapon.
It's also not logical. A sword with high damage (without elemental enchantments) presumably does high damage because it is well forged and sharp. How does that increase the damage of a wizard's frost ray? How is it that your lightning spells do more damage when you wield a very heavy club? It's just a bit counterintuitive and awkward if you ask me.
That would be ridic.
In D2, casters by and large didn't care what they were equipped with weapon wise, beyond whatever had the highest +mana, +resistances, and +fast cast on it. The actual weapon never came into play, just the bonuses it had. This made the "best" caster weapons few and far between, especially for Hell difficulty and onward. A caster in D2 saw little improvement in their killing power when "upgrading" to a new weapon. They largely just helped with their survivabilty, safety, and lasting power.
With the Diablo 3 system, caster classes have just as much incentive to constantly upgrade their weapon and gear just as much as classes that rely on hitting things physically. Gameplay wise, this makes total sense, and makes progression for all classes the same. It also means that you have much more flexibility in what you use for gear. If you have a drought of caster style drops, you can still equip a nice weapon of another type for a while and see a damage upgrade until you find something else you want to use. Also remember that all classes in D3 have many options available. It is possible to have melee Wizards and Witch Doctors and they would want to use a powerful weapon. It is likely you will see variations of "caster" Barbarians with the right gear, too.
The % system is better overall - people just aren't used to the idea, which is understandable. Once you take a good look at how it works from a gameplay standpoint...it makes all the sense in the world.