DiabloFans

Quote from italofoca

I said they eliminated the character building aspect of the game, wich is really different. Character builds are nothing but a well planned strategy. Character building is the act to play an role in an game by creating an character.
Ex: "WD's should pick 1 summon skill, 1 AoE, 1 nuke, 1 cc skills, 1 dot and spiritwalk". This is an build.
Ex: "My WD will only use fire skills! I want him to be some sort of fire shaman". Thats character building.

You can still do that.

I want to make a barbarian that dual wields axes. I want him to be a raging berserker. I'm only going to take abilities that let me use 2 weapons or have the word "frenzy" in them.

When you play games that shares a D3's skill system (like guildwars) you will have the urge to just swap moves to see everything you have at your disposal and use the strongest strategy you find, instead of choose skills based on the character theme. Players are rewarded to just test each skill and use the strongest one. D3's skill system induces an rationality based on strategy and efficiency, not role playing.

The problem I see with your line of reasoning is that you assume people will automatically select the strongest skill simply because it is the strongest. If this were true, there would have been no "oddball" builds in D2.

By your line of reasoning, once a strongest class or build is discovered, all other builds are discarded in favor of that superior one. I'm pretty sure I remember games in D2 with classes other than hammerdin.

The biggest prove of what i'm saying is the reason why they felt the skill tree was a bad design. The skill tree totally fill it's role if you think the game is about character building and progression. Firebolt must be learned before fireball, thats the way mages learn spells (weaker ones before the fancy ones). It doesn't matter if firebolt becomes useless later on. Now if the game is about beign efficient and choose wisely all the times, the skill tree/synergy system blows.

You still learn skills in a certain order. You can't get the higher level ones before the lower level ones. For my above barbarian:

Start off with bash and ground stomp, cause they're skills all barbarians acquire. Then add or replace them with the following:

Battle Rage->Frenzy->Wrath of the Berserker
Leap Attack->Furious Charge->Whirlwind

Tbh honest, 'im 100% happy with the change. This skill systen is all I ever wanted since 2008. But i can understand why people more interested in other aspects of the game are unhappy.

I really like the skill system too. Still don't see how there isn't character building.

Alright, so your main point against the skill system (that other people have because you like it) is that it destroys character building.

I will counter argue with two points.

The first is that there is still character building. The only difference is that you do not have to plan out your whole build before you even start your character. Having to do so before hand is very unfriendly for new comers. They don't know what they will and will not need. Instead, what D3 has done is let you build your character while playing. This is much more user friendly and forgiving if you mess up. You won't have to restart your whole character because of one bad choice. In my opinion, getting to build your character while playing is much more fun than sitting in front of a wiki for hours planning it out on paper.

I do understand that some people like to pre-plan. To this, I say that this also helps with character building. I know I want a summon wd. I'm going to look forward to those levels that unlock the spells I planned to use for this build. Again I am building the character while I play even with pre-planning.

As for the runes, I think you might be underestimating the strategy and build forming these will be. With each runestone having a different effect on each skill, you cannot just transfer a rank 7 alabaster rune from one skill to another because it's effect may not work with the build and playstyle you have planned. Blizzard is also looking into locking runestones into a particular skill meaning you have to plan and build your character with specific spells to rune even though you have every spell available.

Seriously I'd buy the Tyrael hoodie if not for that D3 logo on it. When you wear that kind of stuff, it's cool when you find other people who just already know what your clothing is referencing. Granted, most people would see the D3 logo and still not know what it is, but I just like my clothing to be as logo free as possible.

Quote from Siaynoq

Seriously I'd buy the Tyrael hoodie if not for that D3 logo on it. When you wear that kind of stuff, it's cool when you find other people who just already know what your clothing is referencing. Granted, most people would see the D3 logo and still not know what it is, but I just like my clothing to be as logo free as possible.

I think I am going to sport the socks during basketball, perhaps to baffle defenders.

Demon Hunter coat is what I want. To make it perfect though, I'd wear it with a fashionable Diablo 3 T-shirt plus the belt and probably some black jeans or something.

I agree scyber dragon with you completely, that almost all complaints against blizz changes are QQ'ing, but I have one logical argument against skill point system removal, and I will present it without anger or distaste, and hopefully if you guys do get to talk to people in charge at blizz, you can at least pass this idea on, since I will never be able to.

A guy on the forum came up with the idea of keeping the system how it is, but then at a certain level, say like 35 or 40, you start giving skill points to further improve upon whichever skills/elements/passives you like. So I still get to choose 6 active skills and 3 passives (or w/e it was), but i get skill points past that level.

reason being, blizz says they want people to be versatile and not have to respec while playing through the game. IF they do it this way, by level 35 you already have all the skills, and have had them long enough to experiment extensively, and decide what you want. It wouldnt be until later you would even have 'skill points'.

Past that they could choose to still include a respec option for gold for those skill points.

I am a little disappointed in their decision, because I feel most of their reasoning to remove it completely is just so people don't keep respec'ing as they level up, and this fixes it. ANother big arugment they gave was that people just max 6 anyways, and this would solve that too by giving you a different facet of cusomization. removing it completely just makes it feel less RPG like...

I agree scyber dragon with you completely, that almost all complaints against blizz changes are QQ'ing, but I have one logical argument against skill point system removal, and I will present it without anger or distaste, and hopefully if you guys do get to talk to people in charge at blizz, you can at least pass this idea on, since I will never be able to.

A guy on the forum came up with the idea of keeping the system how it is, with active skills and passive skills able to be switched out when you go to town, but then at a certain level, say like 35 or 40, you start giving skill points to further improve upon whichever skills/elements/passives you like. So I still get to choose 6 active skills and 3 passives (or w/e it was), but i get skill points past that level to improve on the ones I really like, or change them in some way.

reason being, blizz says they want people to be versatile and not have to respec while playing through the game. IF they do it this way, by level 35 you already have all the skills, and have had them long enough to experiment extensively, and decide what you want. It wouldnt be until later you would even have 'skill points'. You wouldn

Past that they could choose to still include a respec option for gold for those skill points.

I am a little disappointed in their decision, because I feel most of their reasoning to remove it completely is just so people don't keep respec'ing as they level up, and this fixes it. ANother big arugment they gave was that people just max 6 anyways, and this would solve that too by giving you a different facet of cusomization. removing it completely just makes it feel less RPG like...

I agree scyber dragon with you completely, that almost all complaints against blizz changes are QQ'ing, but I have one logical argument against skill point system removal, and I will present it without anger or distaste, and hopefully if you guys do get to talk to people in charge at blizz, you can at least pass this idea on, since I will never be able to.

A guy on the forum came up with the idea of keeping the system how it is, with active skills and passive skills able to be switched out when you go to town, but then at a certain level, say like 35 or 40, you start giving skill points to further improve upon whichever skills/elements/passives you like. So I still get to choose 6 active skills and 3 passives (or w/e it was), but i get skill points past that level to improve on the ones I really like, or change them in some way.

reason being, blizz says they want people to be versatile and not have to respec while playing through the game. IF they do it this way, by level 35 you already have all the skills, and have had them long enough to experiment extensively, and decide what you want. It wouldnt be until later you would even have 'skill points'. You wouldnt even have to worry about them till later.

As for spending hours planning stuff out, past that point they could choose to still include a respec option for a minimal amount of gold for those skill points. Everyone can be happy, no being punished permanently and having to start over, yet still the feeling of customization, and you have plenty of time to think about what you like.

I am a little disappointed in their decision, because I feel most of their reasoning to remove it completely is just so people don't keep respec'ing as they level up, and this fixes it. ANother big arugment they gave was that people just max 6 anyways, and this would solve that by affecting skills in some other way/shape/form. Blizzard is my favorite game company of all time, but I think they were a little hasty making this decision without really thinking of some alternative to solve the issues they had with a skill system.

Quote from bsf1206

So I still get to choose 6 active skills and 3 passives (or w/e it was), but i get skill points past that level to improve on the ones I really like, or change them in some way.

You just perfectly described runes. (maybe not for passives)

So I still get to choose 6 active skills, but i get rune levels to improve on the ones I really like, or change them in some way.

Quote from ScyberDragon

Alright, so your main point against the skill system (that other people have because you like it) is that it destroys character building.

I will counter argue with two points.

The first is that there is still character building. The only difference is that you do not have to plan out your whole build before you even start your character. Having to do so before hand is very unfriendly for new comers. They don't know what they will and will not need. Instead, what D3 has done is let you build your character while playing. This is much more user friendly and forgiving if you mess up. You won't have to restart your whole character because of one bad choice. In my opinion, getting to build your character while playing is much more fun than sitting in front of a wiki for hours planning it out on paper.

I do understand that some people like to pre-plan. To this, I say that this also helps with character building. I know I want a summon wd. I'm going to look forward to those levels that unlock the spells I planned to use for this build. Again I am building the character while I play even with pre-planning.

Your logic is totally biased towards a game that does not evolve charactr building. Just to begin with, theres no "right" and "wrong" in a role playing universe. Theres no mistakes. You just play your character the way you want, it doiesn't matter if he is weak or strong (as long as you're able to finish the game).

For exemple, daggerzons are weak characters but i passed a good amount of time playing one. Why ? Because it's fun and i liked the idea of playing an amazon that huntdown stuff using an dagger.

Cleary the Diablo fanbase has changed A LOT since D1 and early D2. People were not concerned about "balance" or being strong or weak. They just wanted to play the game with an character their felt good with. lol Noone passed hours on wiki because it wasn't needed. Who passes hours on wikis before make an baldur's gate character ? Will people pass hours on wiki before they creat their Skyrim toons ? Obviously no.
D3 public changed a lot. They see Diablo as an mmorpg were min/max is more important then role playing. Actually majority of people think role player cannot exist in an game like Diablo (rofl). Character building is something that only exist in the role playing context (i think what you're calling character building is what people from rpgfans usually calls min/max). And everyone knows that roleplaying (thous character building) can only exist with permanent choices.

Quote from italofoca

Quote from ScyberDragon

Alright, so your main point against the skill system (that other people have because you like it) is that it destroys character building.

I will counter argue with two points.

The first is that there is still character building. The only difference is that you do not have to plan out your whole build before you even start your character. Having to do so before hand is very unfriendly for new comers. They don't know what they will and will not need. Instead, what D3 has done is let you build your character while playing. This is much more user friendly and forgiving if you mess up. You won't have to restart your whole character because of one bad choice. In my opinion, getting to build your character while playing is much more fun than sitting in front of a wiki for hours planning it out on paper.

I do understand that some people like to pre-plan. To this, I say that this also helps with character building. I know I want a summon wd. I'm going to look forward to those levels that unlock the spells I planned to use for this build. Again I am building the character while I play even with pre-planning.

Your logic is totally biased towards a game that does not evolve charactr building. Just to begin with, theres no "right" and "wrong" in a role playing universe. Theres no mistakes. You just play your character the way you want, it doiesn't matter if he is weak or strong (as long as you're able to finish the game).

For exemple, daggerzons are weak characters but i passed a good amount of time playing one. Why ? Because it's fun and i liked the idea of playing an amazon that huntdown stuff using an dagger.

Cleary the Diablo fanbase has changed A LOT since D1 and early D2. People were not concerned about "balance" or being strong or weak. They just wanted to play the game with an character their felt good with. lol Noone passed hours on wiki because it wasn't needed. Who passes hours on wikis before make an baldur's gate character ? Will people pass hours on wiki before they creat their Skyrim toons ? Obviously no.
D3 public changed a lot. They see Diablo as an mmorpg were min/max is more important then role playing. Actually majority of people think role player cannot exist in an game like Diablo (rofl). Character building is something that only exist in the role playing context (i think what you're calling character building is what people from rpgfans usually calls min/max). And everyone knows that roleplaying (thous character building) can only exist with permanent choices.

You have a good reason and totally understand your side. Question though, did you like PK'ng in D2?

I don get how roleplaying must be done with permanent choices?

Let's take real life as an example. In real life, I am a restaurant manager. This is my role. However, next week I could get a new job and change my role. Not permanent.

Ok, now a story. I have a character that is a thief. However, after one day realizing the effect is stealing has on his victims he changes his morals and becomes policeman.

Now for q video game. I play a summon wd. Zombie dogs are out and fighting when another poison wd comes along and I like his poison skills so I switch. I'm still my same wd. The role does not have to be permanent.

Again, this is all assuming that you do switch. My personal opinion is that even though every skill is accessible, people will still choose their main six and use them for 75% of the game.

As for the min/max thing, the open skills actually allows people to just play how they want to without worrying about min/maxing. You can play however you want, if you get stuck, find another skill build that works. No need to sit and plan out forever. So, I'm kind of confused on why you think this makes the open skills bad?

What it all comes down to is people who want to switch can. Those who want to be strict on themselves cannot switch as well. Really, the people who are upset about this are really just trying to press their own playstyle on everyone else. Why not leave it open so both groups can be happy.

Tyreal Hoodie!

Id take the tyreal hoodie!

I'd say roleplaying has more to do with deliberate choices, rather than any kind of permanancy.

Since you have all the skills available, there is a greater opportunity cost to sticking with those aligned with whatever character you choose to make.

For instance, if there is a portion of the game where having some zombie dogs would be great, but you don't because your WD only uses fire spells, there should be more roleplaying satisfaction in beating that section using only fire spells than giving in to "rollplay" and choosing the optimal skills.

You still don't have to worry about min/maxing if you don't want to. You can still play a wand barb if you like, or a bow wizard, or whatever.

And I do think people will be looking up wiki info on the games you mentioned. Just because you don't care about skill power doesn't mean others don't. And I am of the opinion that the vast majority of people are concerned with both roll and role capability, "I want to make a DH, but one that heavily uses traps! Kind of like Batman, but not so up-close!" vs "The most dps that a DH can output is if they take x,y,z passives and stick with double crossbows, therefore this is the only choice"-and-"my dh is actually all sunshines and lollipops, and really just wants to let the demons know that they're preventing themselves and others from self-actualizing, and that they'd be better off if they stopped doing that."

All three of these people can play and enjoy diablo 3.

That Tyrael is about the coolest damn thing I have ever seen. DO WANT.

I've watched Force's video covering the details of why the stat point customization was removed. From what I recall Jay saying, it was basically a problem of there really being only one "right" way to configure your stat points if you're trying to make your character as effective as possible. This was how it worked in D2, and this is what they were seeing in testing for D3. So they scrapped it because it wasn't really providing much in the way of customization. Have I got this right so far?

What I don't understand is why they didn't just redesign the base stats to a more sophisticated system? Not crazy complicated that required tons of research to figure out, but something that allowed players to make different choices that could still be viable builds. For example, choosing between stats that might increase damage, or crit, or hit, or block, or avoidance, or resist etc. If those were more spread out across more base stats, wouldn't that allow for more varied builds? Those various stat builds would then synergise well/poorly with various abilities on your character. Matching up a good type of stat build with the abilities you want to use for your playstyle would be fun wouldn't it?

I was really hoping they would do something like that with a simple respec mechanic. I know you can still do character building to your chosen playstyle using skill choices and rune choices, but wouldn't keeping that extra layer of player choice give you a feeling like you were more "specialized"?

Even if in the first week of release people have figured out the best min/max builds and posted them online, who cares? If that's what people want to do, good for them, let them. If others would rather try something different, let them too. I really just don't like this approach of scrapping the system instead of taking the opportunity to fix it.

Not trying to QQ here btw. I'm really just curious if others have been thinking the same thing and if anyone has any thoughts as to why they didn't take this kind of approach?

that's one hell of a belt!

[x] need

Quote from Simpy7

Look at this video with an interview with Jay Wilson, he explains it very well I think. He start at 5:00
http://diablo3.gamona.de/2011/08/18/gamescom-interview-mit-jay-wilson/

Cool interview, thanks for sharing.

I'm still waiting for someone to ask him what I'm asking though. I like what they're keeping with skill choices and rune choices, but I still don't see why they couldn't have improved the stat point system to overcome it's short-comings rather than scrapping it. I guess I'll just have to wait and hope that someone puts that question to them at some point.

for ME the demon hunter coat... for my wife the socks