Allow a third specialization in a Strategy tree

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Aetrion, Oct 10, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Aetrion

    Aetrion Avatar

    Messages:
    789
    Likes Received:
    1,725
    Trophy Points:
    93
    I'm writing a series of posts that aim to increase the variety of characters people can build in shroud by eliminating as many of the set interdependencies between schools as possible, allowing people to mix and match freely. In my first post about this I asked that the stat buff skills be moved to Strategy trees. (https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/f...ld-be-in-focus-subterfuge-and-tactics.159437/)

    In order to further allow a greater diversity of characters people should be allowed to pick up a third specialization in the Strategy trees. That means everyone gets to pick Focus, Tactics, Subterfuge or Taming as a specialization on top of the two others.

    The point is to encourage true dual spec characters. There would be 240 possible combinations of two of the remaining 16 skill trees, allowing a truly huge variety of characters in Shroud, and that's even before people further refine and customize their character by picking up non-spec skills. The big reason we aren't seeing such a great variety right now is because too many skill trees have unintentional interdependencies with other trees.

    By giving people a strategy tree spec on top of their two specs and moving universal skills that were mistakenly placed in specific spell schools to the appropriate strategy skill the game opens up to allow more different characters. All the characters that currently use a Strategy spec to support a single actual specialization will be free to become true dual spec characters, and all the characters that are currently tied down to a specific spec purely because it contains a buff they need will be able to freely pick a second spec on top of getting to enjoy a Strategy spec.

    Ultimately everyone will have more freedom to define their character on top of an extra spec. Nobody is getting nerfed, everyone will see their character get a little stronger, and find a whole new set of possibilities to combine skills.
     
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2019
    StarLord, Nick, Chatele and 10 others like this.
  2. Sketch_

    Sketch_ Avatar

    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    618
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    How do you plan to incorporate fish masks and beetle carapaces? And what about a heritage item specialization?

    :p
     
  3. Vladamir Begemot

    Vladamir Begemot Avatar

    Messages:
    6,194
    Likes Received:
    12,076
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    I see where you're going with this, and I think you may be on to something very important.
     
    Aetrion and Gravidy like this.
  4. Mishikal

    Mishikal Avatar

    Messages:
    1,965
    Likes Received:
    2,834
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Brittany Estates
    This is what I suggested in the Dev+ Area on August 24th:

     
  5. Sway

    Sway Avatar

    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    313
    Trophy Points:
    28
    isn't it redundant to move airs embrace out of the air tree (so you don't have to learn air skills for the dex buff) and then give you another spec to play with?
    if you just keep your air and get a new free focus, tactic, subterfuge, taming spec. your still free to go range or fire or what ever you want.
    also i'm not so sure that would be ok with tamers
     
    Dhanas likes this.
  6. Vladamir Begemot

    Vladamir Begemot Avatar

    Messages:
    6,194
    Likes Received:
    12,076
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    No, he's right, stat buffs shouldn't be in any of the magic trees now specializations exist. But for this to work the third specialization does need to happen.

    It's a simple refinement. You can picture it visually even, move those three all into one little spot and they could almost be in their own "tree". I'd almost say that makes more sense than even putting them in a tree. Pick your stat to buff, end of story.
     
    Numa and Violet Ronso like this.
  7. Aetrion

    Aetrion Avatar

    Messages:
    789
    Likes Received:
    1,725
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Yea, universal skills shouldn't be in a skill group with limiters like equipment requirement, attunement or specialization. Bonus strategy spec is the closest thing we'll get to eliminating these limitations without having to rebuild the whole system, it's just re-arranging the pieces in play to be neater and make sense.
     
  8. Vladamir Begemot

    Vladamir Begemot Avatar

    Messages:
    6,194
    Likes Received:
    12,076
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, I agree, and now bowing out as only the first post has much of a chance of being seen. Your wide angle vision of the combat system continues to make me throw away assumptions. Good job.
     
    Aetrion likes this.
  9. Violet Ronso

    Violet Ronso Avatar

    Messages:
    2,632
    Likes Received:
    5,108
    Trophy Points:
    153
    There was a time (at firstL where I basically disagreed with EVERYTHING Aetrion posted, not out of spite, hate or anything, but simply because he posted Ideas that seemed to be so far away from how Shroud combat needed to be, but lately, I feel like I agree with most everything. This specific suggestion is something I talked about with some guildmates before, and makes so much sense for many reasons, but here are the two that interest me the most : people could finally play magic less avatars without being at a huge disadvantage, and spacings for the buff would not feel like such a hard decision of do I take it but lose out on something else or do I avoid it but lose out on potential.
     
    Gravidy, Vladamir Begemot and Aetrion like this.
  10. Paladin Michael

    Paladin Michael Bug Hunter

    Messages:
    2,649
    Likes Received:
    4,202
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perennial Coast
    The idea is not new - maybe the answer will be (surprising new) ;)
    Anyway: 1 Specialization for at least each tree would be fine (3 instead of 2).
     
  11. Sway

    Sway Avatar

    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    313
    Trophy Points:
    28
    as a mage I don't want a fighting class. I have one because i'm forced to, and spec light armor is absolute trash lol. but also wouldn't allow for swords/heavy or shield (tanks) mages with 2 spell classes (witch you need because most do not have enough attack spells to carry them self) you can probably just erase shield spec at that point
     
  12. Vladamir Begemot

    Vladamir Begemot Avatar

    Messages:
    6,194
    Likes Received:
    12,076
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    He's a Holistic Shroud Detective. Not easy to understand at first, but I'm starting to get the big picture he's painting, and I don't think it detracts from the Shroud combat idea, but just sees the weaknesses and addresses them.

    So you're saying there's room for improvement? ;)

    [​IMG]
     
  13. Sway

    Sway Avatar

    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    313
    Trophy Points:
    28
    there always is. and a third spec i'm not against. forcing one in one of the 3 zones, well, just plainly helps others and hurts me. not just me all mages.
    light armor is trash
    focus is trash
    so that plan will take away a skill I use and benefit well with and add 2 trash heaps wile freeing up exp for archers and giving them a boost skill ? balance was long lost in the wind with that idea
     
    Dhanas likes this.
  14. Mishikal

    Mishikal Avatar

    Messages:
    1,965
    Likes Received:
    2,834
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Brittany Estates
    One of the ideas (originally) behind Shroud was that you were supposed to be able to be whatever you wanted. Specializations utterly ruined that. Get rid of them entirely IMHO. ;) If they're going to exist, you should be able to train any of them up that you want. Thus my post above. I don't really agree on keeping people limited to the number of active specializations, but as long as that also exists, I think my suggestion makes a lot of sense. They could of course expand it to being 3 active specializations rather than 2, and combine that with my suggestion. That would be a lot closer to allowing what they advertised than what we have now.
     
  15. Sol Stormlin

    Sol Stormlin Avatar

    Messages:
    359
    Likes Received:
    869
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Oh the devs said no they aren't going to do that. I forgot to tell you, Buckaroo messaged me back.
     
  16. Barugon

    Barugon Avatar

    Messages:
    15,678
    Likes Received:
    24,293
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    I would love to have a third specialization but it's not going to happen.
     
  17. Aetrion

    Aetrion Avatar

    Messages:
    789
    Likes Received:
    1,725
    Trophy Points:
    93
    I wouldn't call that a final decision, the devs probably just don't know why we're asking for that. If you go "I want a third spec" without any explanation it's easy to say "No", but when you lay out that a bonus strategy spec would increase build diversity by softening the need to pick specs purely because the combination of some trees is more powerful than the sum of their parts it's a lot more to consider. They might still not agree that this is the best way to solve the problem, but the biggest point of suggestions like that is getting the devs to understand that some people see a problem there. They might have an even better way of solving it.
     
    Numa, FrostII, Anpu and 1 other person like this.
  18. Adam Crow

    Adam Crow Avatar

    Messages:
    1,792
    Likes Received:
    3,729
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Or like a bunch of us have been trying to tell you in the nearly identical thread you have going, they don't see a problem the way you do. Pvp would become a nightmare and dps on pretty much every skill tree would need major adjustments with a change like this. That would require tons of testing and tons of work by the players and the devs. This is not an easy thing to do at this point of the game by any means. I have zero interest in a change like this as I already enjoy the way combat in general is setup.
     
  19. Paladin Michael

    Paladin Michael Bug Hunter

    Messages:
    2,649
    Likes Received:
    4,202
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perennial Coast
    You are right :) As they came in, I also asked Chris for 3 (free to use for every player). But I don't know, if a fighter could get to mighty with 3 in one tree?

    May be this would help: we receive 2 Specializations each tree :)

    I don't see this, so let's say: 3 in sum, max. 2 in one tree :)
     
    Aetrion likes this.
  20. Aetrion

    Aetrion Avatar

    Messages:
    789
    Likes Received:
    1,725
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Sorry, but simply claiming that something would be unbalanced and too much work is one of those pseudo arguments that people have been making on MMORPG forums for 20 years now when they can't actually show any logical flaws with a suggestion they don't like. Unless you can actually point out a paradox that would make balance impossible you're not making a good faith argument. Asserting that the numbers would be off is basically just asserting that the devs aren't capable of implementing a suggestion competently, and therefore it shouldn't be attempted.

    So you don't see the problem, that's fine, but if the proposed solution to a problem other people do see with the game only affects you if you assert bad implementation, you're either basing your entire opposition to it on a wild assumption or you're being dishonest about why you oppose it.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.