Fighter skill ideas

Azmodeous

Apprentice
I'm realizing that I'm late to the party here, I just joined this group so I haven't read through all of the previous posts. Still, I wanted to throw some of my ideas into the ring even if someone might have already proposed them.

I play Bjorn the fighter in the Seattle chapter. I have reviewed your proposed new rules and I have some suggestions for balancing the classes and new skills.


First off, I want you to know I have noticed some of the balancing that has been done with some of the classes such as the with the rogue having alchemy and create trap as rogue skills, I think that and the addition of thrown traps really gives them a boost that they dearly needed. I'm also a fan of the Hearty and Resolute skills for fighter though I think that maybe hearty should be 5 body and cost 3, but that's just me dreaming. The intercept skill also seemed neat, I can certainly see its usefulness. Anyhow, onto my suggestions.


Now, I know what I'm going to say will sound biased, please bear with me and hear me out. Scholars and other casters have a huge advantage over non-casters, Fighters in particular. Now, I know that you're thinking that this is wholly in my own interest. . . and it is. But the fact of the matter is that after roughly level 5, a fresh fighter vs a fresh caster of the same level, the caster always wins. I'm talking off the block, no magic items, no protectives other than what they could cast on themselves, and mundane gear. The caster pins/bind/webs/etc. the fighter and kills them at their leisure. The power gap only increases with the addition of high magic. I know that Fighters get to swing a weapon an infinite number of times at the same elevated damage, but from what I've seen in the game, burst damage (like from dragon's breath or a slay) wins.


So, with that in mind, here are my ideas:


  1. Disarm should cost the same as it does for casters. Disarm should cost the same for a fighter as for a caster. A caster gets all level one spells to choose from (providing they have the spell in their book) for one build, it seems that a fighter should be able to disarm an opponent with the same amount of study.

  2. Hamstring (New skill). Once per day per time purchased, this skill immobilizes one enemy hit with a melee, thrown, or packet attack following the call “weapon, hamstring.” If hit the target cannot move from that spot for 10 minutes or until they receive a “restore” spell. The target can still fight, cast spells, and otherwise defend themselves but cannot move without aid. Unlike a pin, it cannot be ripped out of which makes it worth, in my opinion, 4 possibly even 5 build and it should require 50-60 build in fighter skills for each rank.

  3. Throat punch (new skill, couldn't think of a better name.) Once per day per time purchased, this skill silences one enemy hit with a melee, thrown, or packet attack followed by the call “weapon, silence.” The target cannot scream, incant spells, or even speak for 10 minutes or until they receive a “restore” spell. The target can still fight, cast innate magic, and run away. This skill, I believe, would be huge step towards class balance and I can honestly say that I think it would be balanced at 3 build every 40 points in fighter/rogue skills.

  4. Toughness (new skill.) For each rank purchased, this skill provides 1 point of damage reduction. That means that if a character had 3 ranks of toughness and was hit with any melee, thrown, or packet attack for 9 damage, they would instead take 6 points of damage. Toughness puts into game terms a veteran combatant’s innate ability to take a blow. I'm unsure of what the build cost or prerequisites should be, so I leave it to you.

  5. Mighty blow (new skill.) Once per day per time purchased, this skill allows the character to swing for massive damage. This skill can be combined with other skills such as critical attack, slay, and evicerate. This is a pinnacle of fighter skills, and as such, can only be bought one time per 100 build spent on fighter skills for 4 build.

  6. Cloak is one of the most useful defenses in the game, but it's one that without magic items, a fighter can't have. Rogues get dodge, formalist get cloaks and banes, fighters do have parry and riposte, but nothing that works against spells. Yes, there is spell parry, but that requires both a magic item and the expenditure of a daily skill. I propose that either spell parry be made a skill or that there be a way that a fighter is able to gain cloaks much as formal casters can. I think that the cost should be the same as regular parry and that it should be a separate skill from regular parry. It could easily be explained by staying that by purchasing this skill the fighter has learned how to take the brunt of a magical attack on his weapon. The prerequisite should be about equal to what a scholar would have to invest to obtain a cloak.

Well, those were just some of my ideas, but they're the ones I thought worth sharing. I haven't seen any new rules since May, so some of these ideas might already be in the revisions, but I hope you find the my ideas helpful. Thank you for taking the time to review my ideas for the upcoming rules change.
 
Luke,

I think I speak for everyone here when I say that I greatly appreciate your enthusiasm. However, I should point out that the instructions for these forums are that they exist to discuss the playtest changes, not to propose new rules. If you have ideas for new rules, I suggest proposing them to your owner, which is the proper way to try to add new rules to the game.

Also, I think, before you make any proposals to your owner, you should read the playtest rules thoroughly. They are available in a thread that is pinned to the top of this forum. If you read them, you will see that some of your ideas already have been addressed in various ways in the rules.

Finally, I am not going to comment on any of these proposals, except for the first, and only to give you a little insight into the game that will help you better propose rules in the future. The game is designed to be cooperative. While a fighter and a rogue can learn some skills that mimic spells, they are intended to be able to use them much less often and to spend more build to learn them. This is both for balance (fighters and rogues have an unlimited damage option) and also to encourage teamwork. You should take that design goal into account when proposing new rules.

Thanks and welcome to this forum,
Mike
 
I have read through the .8 rules and still see a large power gap. I understand that the game is a cooperative one, but it has and supports PvP.
To make, or revise, a game that has PvP, first you balance the classes off of each other trying to make it so that with class skills and mundane items the outcome of a fight between two fresh characters of any two classes is a coin toss. This may require adding new skills or restrictions to certain classes. Next, the monsters can be created. If the monsters are created before this step, then they won't be balanced against players, and if they're made later, you'll be basing the monsters off of magic items instead of player skills. When monsters are based on skills alone, it ensures that any power gap between monsters and players is filled by magic items which are created in the next step. Lastly, is the creation of magic items and rituals. When you perform this step last, you're making magic items fill in the gap rather than making monsters that fit into a gap with a predetermined limit. It's important for this to be the last step so that magic items are useful, but not a requirement for a class to serve in their function.
I understand that this is a playtest, and because it is a playtest I feel that it is the best spot to bring up new ideas to support the system and influence the imbalance of the game.
 
To make, or revise, a game that has PvP, first you balance the classes off of each other trying to make it so that with class skills and mundane items the outcome of a fight between two fresh characters of any two classes is a coin toss.

Why? Why does pvp have to be balanced, why can't it be paper rock scissors? I think your base assumption on this is more personal opinion then a set in stone rule. Balancing a game for Pvp and Pve is a big challenge. Early World of Warcraft is a prime example of the mess it can make to even try.
 
I would love for it to be like rock paper scissors! It would then be left largely to chance. If you build a balanced pve game and then throw in pvp, there will be balancing issues with the classes. If you're building the monsters off of players abilities anyways, then it won't be a problem to revise monsters after new skills are in place. So adding pve to a pvp game is easier than the other way around.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
 
Balancing for PvP inherently encourages PvP, which is -possible- in Alliance, and -occurs-, but the system of Alliance largely lends itself towards a social PC vs Plot system (PvE).

It's honestly one of the reasons I prefer Alliance over WoD LARPs, which tend to be PvP in nature, and balanced accordingly for it.
 
The game does have a rock-paper-scissors aspect in terms of PvP.

Fighters destroy rogues in one-on-one (even if the rogue has a ranged weapon / thrown weapons)
Rogues clobber spell casters (dodge, dodge, Stun Limb, Stun Limb, game over)
Spell casters murder fighters (one spell is usually all it takes)

I have been playing for over 20 years and I have seen this RPS balance on the field of battle more times than I can count. I even take it into account when scaling NPC encounters that primarily include PC class humanoids.

And because this RPS balance affects PVE so strongly (especially in modules), I consider it pretty important to the game. If it were only PvP, I honestly couldn't care less.

-MS
 
Rogues clobber spell casters (dodge, dodge, Stun Limb, Stun Limb, game over)


-MS

Caster counters with Magic Purify/Dispel.

Caster continues to murder Rogue. :(
 
Caster counters with Magic Purify/Dispel.

Caster continues to murder Rogue. :(

That assumes a very specific magic item or high magic option and honestly, the Stun Limb, Stun Limb wasn't really necessary. All the rogue needs to do is be able to ignore a spell or two. Then rogue tricks or high damage (with thrown weapons, ranged weapons, or simply managing to get behind the caster) easily powers through the trivial armor + body of the caster.

-MS
 
Rogue murders everybody with alchemy.

I call foul. Alchemy ignores the RPS dynamic because any character, regardless of class, can effectively get "maxxed out alchemy" for at most 30 build (fighters are actually probably a few build higher). Unlike every other combat skill in the game, it doesn't improve with build spent beyond 3 ranks. If you have 3 ranks of alchemy, you can throw gasses (and drink poison shields) until you run out of money. In fact, due to the cost of Read & Write, a rogue is basically equally good at being a 3 rank alchemist as a scholar (a fighter spends about double that).

The concept that rogues use alchemy is entirely based on the fact that they spend 3 build per rank, but it doesn't play like that in game. Scholars get it all the time and even fighters usually pick it up once they've hit their favorite number for repetitive damage. I didn't include alchemy in the RPS calculation because it isn't meaningfully a part of it. It is a separate calculation that basically comes down to "Do you have Racial Resist?"

-MS
 
That assumes a very specific magic item or high magic option and honestly, the Stun Limb, Stun Limb wasn't really necessary. All the rogue needs to do is be able to ignore a spell or two. Then rogue tricks or high damage (with thrown weapons, ranged weapons, or simply managing to get behind the caster) easily powers through the trivial armor + body of the caster.

-MS

If we're assuming 1 v 1, that rogue isn't getting behind me. If we're assuming 2 v 1, the whole RPS idea falls apart.

I'm pretty sure that skill point for skill point, no magic items involved, I'll eat a rogue. Maybe literally. I play a kyn, after all.

The only thing I'd be concerned with is whether he sticks a Terminate/Assassinate with a thrown weapon before I can put a Magic Armor back up, but he'll have to focus on staying away from my bindomancy.
 
I have to be honest, pvp is primarily balanced around surprise, numbers, and the ridiculous power of Amnesia to turn anyone into a successful ninja. Class balance matters way less than racial balance; resistance skills play way more into how you approach attacking a player than their class. This is because you target someone based on picking a single vulnerability and exploiting it until they are down. This is either an effect group or raw damage.

That having been said; this is not the place for suggestions. This forum is exclusively for discussion on changes in the current play test edition. Suggestions for new changes should be sent to a chapter owner directly. A discussion of pvp balance in the current play test build is fine, although I will encourage anyone doing so to actually do some play testing before putting too much emphasis on any one aspect, but that is the extent of where this conversation should live. I will note that the testing packets do not really put a lot of emphasis on pvp, and that is something we should revisit for future testing. Thank you for bringing it up.

Lastly, and I want to be very clear about this, we have gotten feedback that states, sometimes very passionately, that certain classes are overpowering under the new rules. We have gotten that feedback regarding EVERY SINGLE CLASS. People have biases, and those biases are reflected in their feedback, and that will be doubly true for pvp. Broad, sweeping claims that a certain class is broken or overpowered are entirely unhelpful; counterproductive, even. Please don't do that. It is very difficult to take someone seriously when they say the sky is falling. Please note this is not intended as a direct rebuke to anyone for anything said so far.
 
With regard to class balance I believe it comes down to observing the pcs over time. And that, well, takes time.

Trends tend to paint a clearer picture than individual experience. We should probably accept that one guy saying casters (for example) now suck is flimsy, no matter how good the argument or how experienced the player.

However after an event or 12, if few people are now playing a given class (or trying to spirit forge out of it) one can suppose there's a good reason why. Likewise with the opposite. So if in two seasons no one is playing a rogue, then a rogue will need love. If everyone is playing a mage, a mage will need to wait till we call him back for a second date.

While I've looked at the new rules and had my concerns about martial classes being marginalized, I totally accept I could be waaaay off. So we'll see and I'm sure the owners/ARC will adjust things as necessary. In the meantime, instead of worrying too much about it, say your piece to your owner and just switch to the class you think is "like totally overpowered now." Then accept you were off or enjoy the ride!
 
I completely agree but The down side Gary...after all is said and done we won't be able to easily forge after 12 events. Having to "wait and see" is almost like telling players, don't play for a year and then pick your class.
 
I completely agree but The down side Gary...after all is said and done we won't be able to easily forge after 12 events. Having to "wait and see" is almost like telling players, don't play for a year and then pick your class.

Or NPC. Or, heavens forbid, take part in the playtesting.
 
I completely agree but The down side Gary...after all is said and done we won't be able to easily forge after 12 events. Having to "wait and see" is almost like telling players, don't play for a year and then pick your class.

Dave, I hear ya. All I can offer is that I'd npc for a while, but obviously that can't be for everyone, else the events won't happen. Unless we do battle days for a whole season...

It might not be a bad idea, given that as far as the rules go this is basically a different game now, for the owners to consider permitting a second spirit forge well after an initial one to allow for people to adjust as necessary.
 
Last edited:
Dave, I hear ya. All I can offer is that I'd npc for a while, but obviously that can't be for everyone, else the events won't happen. Unless we do battle days for a whole season...

It might not be a bad idea, given that as far as the rules go this is basically a different game now, for the owners to consider permitting a second spirit forge well after an initial one to allow for people to adjust as necessary.

I'd be down for that
 
Back
Top