Skill layout and progression (Take down innates!)

4 months away from reaching persistence, the only mentions about combat and skills i read about is that combat is going to get "balanced". I can't help but wonder... what's the reach of this "balance" goes? I usually talk about someting requiring to be balanced when things are close to be finish and it's only matter of tweaking numbers up and down. I must say that, in my opinion, combat and skills require still a few critical changes before having what for me can make an enjoyable progression system and an interesting combat.

One of the things that bother me the most are innates. I've been playing sparingly for this Q because i don't have much time, but even so i managed to progress in some skills. I haven't reached GM in anything (i prefer to have even leveled skills than a couple of GMs) but I'm doing pretty well while fighting. I've been also managing my skills appropiately so i don't drain my xp pool, and all that stuff. I may not be the best player in town but i know my way around the works.

That being said, as i progressed up and leveled my skills i reached the point where i needed to choose what i should level up, because i couldn't keep up with the xp i was expending. There i was, lock all the stuff and leave some active skills to be leveled... It was great! it was fun, helped me including some other elements in my deck or to start focusing on using more other skills when i was leveling up those. Truly what one expects from an use based system.

But what really push up the game is innates. Innates give permanent benefits so they're specially desirable, and to me levelling those is a pain in the lowback. to keep up gaining experience while leveling a innate you must lock all your skills, and after getting up to some level they'll drain you anyway. The feeling is awful; there is no way to keep up with the experience drained while playing solo, and i was using all my skills to level another skill i wasn't using. I specially hated raising archery innates after having respectable level on the active skills, and thinking "if those skills are innate to archery shouldn't they level as i become a better archer, and not as a separate xp dump?"

That experience reinforces my vision about innates being undesirable, and i see no reason to keep them. From my point of view they didn't make sense in the level system, and i'd say they even make less sense in the use based system. Here are all the cons innates give to our characters.

• As i described above, they're not fun to level up because you're not actually using them. Unless you have plenty of XP to spend, they're quite painful.
• Since they require a huge amount of XP to be leveled up, they wide the gap between players that got powerleveled by parties and players whose friends are not as active, or maybe prefer to play alone (the more XP you earn the more innates you can raise).
• Some innates are redundant with other innates; strength raises your health, healthy raises your health, and leveling up raises your health. There's a triple factor that push combat away from the "you should be competitive with a few hours of playing" scenario that's the goal for the combat system. (Also attunement gives resistance and resistance gives resistance... basic combat skills gives damage and usually there's an innate combat skill that gives damage...).
• They're a bunch of "must have" if you want to be competitive. In a progression system that should be about choices, what sort of "choice" innates give if i can (and should) raise all the innates in the game?
• Being passive benefits, i can raise the 10-12 active skills i prefer to play the most and then start hoarding innate skills. Our innates define more our characters than our actives... how that makes sense in an use based system?
• They're not quite logical in the sense that mastery doesn't equal benefit. To put it as an example, if i'm a character that have mastered all skills in the ranged tree (including innates), my aimed shot does the same damage that the one with a character with only aimed shot leveled up and all the innates.

The solution? Simple. The new layout of the interface (which looks amazing btw) includes an interesting piece of information, that's the total amount of points you spent into an specific skill tree. Innates should be related to the mastery a player has in an specific tree, so the benefits should be tied to that number. That means that if i have 200 points spent in Archery i do less damage and have less range than a player that has 500. In the same line of thought, if i mastered all the spells in the Air magical schools, all my spells are more powerful, my resistances are higher and all my air spells stuns more. it sounds logical, doesn't it?

Of course there are some stuff currently listed as "innates" that we need to have; those are the Stats. Since i initially pledged i think raising stats should be in a different progression; currently a character can reach the 100 str 100 dex 100 int scenario if he plays enough, and that makes us to strive to that state. That only helps in reducing the choices once more, because in the end we strive to have the same stats. In my opinion, Stats should be removed from the skill tree and worked as a zero sum (something along the way it worked in UO), but softcapped and related with some other elements of the game, not just xp (like nutrition, activities, and all that). I also think that the softcap in stats should be reached way before being close to the "progression limit"; they bonus a lot of things and having them earlier could help into making players with less playing time more competitive.

As i said in the beggining, i'm hoping for those "balances" to be deeper than what the concept suggests, and deal with this one way or another.

 

You are basing all you knowledge with 4x in Exp and / or 4x In skill training, both of which cannot be used to really figure anything out but how to actually do it.

Wait till you have to spend even MORE time training / managing.

What they have now is doing VERY well.

 

All those comments are based on my experience after the 4x; that's when you're required to choose between skills. Just because they're doing it VERY well doesn't mean they can't do it better.

I also don't understand how my concerns are related to the amount of XP we're earning. No matter how fast we progress the issue stays the same. Innates are a pain and there are more elegant ways to implement that bonuses than just xp dumps.

 

They are skills, and as you clearly said valuable ones they are innate and therefore affect more than just one skill so they are harder to train which is good as designed. And you will have to manage your skill even 10 times more when the game launches.

You are not asking for more ways to manage them you are asking to make it so they are not actually managed, that they just happen , so again what they have is GtG

But each their own, I just do not agree with you

 

That was how you chose to level up those innates.. I find leveling up innates as I get a skill up to where it needs to be (for me) the simplest of course.. Depends on the methods you choose to train. Many may choose to never play with those settings (because to the uninitiated, it is a tricky system, or different at least, than most). So, not the systems fault, is what I'm saying

If we play without turning anything off, a person should not notice these issues until a very high level.. in your case, and many of us are similar, we wish to control where the xp is going. But we have full knowledge of what will happen with that as you described.

 

Thanks for explaining yourself. It's true i'm asking to reduce the elements to be managed, but from my point of view a skill based system should be based on choices; being able to raise as much innates as we can actually reduces those choices, because the most competitive is the one that have the most innates. That may make that in the long run, all our characters ends up being defined by our innates more than from our active skills.

From my point of view, having separate skills to handle how i master a shot and how much damage i'm doing with all my shots are like separate elements of training. It's true it is me who is choosing to level them separately but it's because the system gives that option (or mostly forces me into that option if i don't want to run out of XP or i can't/don't want to participate in xp trains). Doesn't it make much more sense to become better in archery as you practice archery, instead of requiring specific shooting practice to become better in that shoot and specific archery training to become better in archery?

Why not linking all those benefits to the amount of skills points spent in a tree? that way innate benefits are actually tied to the amount of training invested in the skill tree; the amount of skills you dominate from a skill tree matters more, and you actually become better in something just by becoming better in the parts of that something.

 

So removing the innates, and the number of skills total in the tree dictates how high the old-innate added to it? Similar then to before innates were even around?

edit: Sorry, i'm getting a little confused, mixing up attunement with innates.. does this idea affect attunements I guess, where do they fit in?

edit2: I reread your post, and see you think attuenemnts should be treated the same as innates..

edit3: I like the innates as is, personally. It makes variety in my build

 

Generally speaking what i'm trying to pull is exactly that; to link most of the static bonuses to the amount of points you have spend in an specific tree. Now allow me to elaborate further:

• In the combat trees there are some innates that dictate our "general handling" on the weapons in question. Those innates do make sense, since they actually mean something. If the system i'm suggesting was implemented, this skill can be raised and producing its effect, and at the same time effectively raising the amount of points you spent in that tree, thus increasing the value of all the innate benefits.
• Regarding attunements... i mentioned them in the OP but i shouldn't, since they're sort of "special" as well, so i acknowledge you being puzzled about that inclusion Thinking about it deeply i think attunements should be kept in the same role as "basic combat" ones; a innate that measures your character general competence in the magic skill tree and has its effect the same way it does now, and at the same time it increases the amount of skill points invested in the tree so you get more innate benefits. I edited and removed attunement from the list since it really doesn't make sense.

As you can see i don't pretend to remove ALL the innates, since some of them has an undeniable purpose even under the system i'm suggesting. Does that make more sense? Is there any problem or a flaw that makes current implementation better? This is the point i'd like to elaborate and clarify in the OP, so i'd appreciate as much constructive criticism as i could get.

Take in consideration that, long term, regardless of the character you are, you're going to pick the innates related to the skill tree which innates you use (as players that choose to specialize in the same skill tree as you will) and then you'll start stacking the most convenient innates from the rest of skill trees (for example, even after being nerfed, it's my understanding that people still level up earth innates because they give you damage resistance).

Since they are all available there is no variety in the long run; people will end up getting whatever innates are mandatory for their character and then the most convenient ones. That's other of the points i'm trying to make; in the long run, innates will actually reduce diversity.

 

I was thinking earlier about posting my thoughts on the Innates , then saw this post and thought I would just add it here as it is semi relevant. As it stands for magery, if you want to learn some skills you are required to take the attunement. We will use earth/air as this example but there are others. I am an air mage, I want all air spells to do max carnage. I like the earth innates that boost hps and defense. In order to get those why must I "master" anything in earth aka pick up the earth attunement?
I propose two options here.
1. Make the attunement it's on branch in the tree. Nothing under it requiring it to be taken.
2. It is there to make your spells stronger right? Put it at the very bottom of the current tree. Make it require x amount of points spent in that tree to learn. Then it actually means something when picked up. This guy is a master air mage as he has started to attune himself.

Thoughts? Comments?

@Chris @DarkStarr @RichardGarriott

 

This illustrates my point about lack of diversity. It's not just you; everybody likes the earth innates to boost hp and defense because even after being nerfed is one of the best innates in the game. And since everybody is taking them it's unfair that air mages need to experience a power reduction (represented by the attunement), even if it's just 10 points. Under the current system, your claim is totally justified since they're forcing you to diminish your power just to get the same build as everybody (the competitive build), even though i woulnd't call "master" to get 10 points in a skill

Under this line of thought the future is clear; lots of characters that mastered a tree or two and then spent the rest of XP climbing towards the same most convenient innates. If there's something that defeats the purpose of a classless system is when its conclusion is everybody looking almost the same. So what are we achieving with innates "belogning" to a different tree? what's the point of opposing magical schools? Absolutely nothing! At this point, earth innates don't belong to earth... they belong to the people! And when i do have them and you don't it generates a difference, but that's only transitory, because you will pick them too. When everybody has leveled up the same innates and everybody looks the same... what's the point on having them? Even if it takes a year or two to get up to that point, it will come, and then everything will become stagnant and dull.

This is what i'm trying to prevent with my suggestion; by tying innate benefits to the amount of points earned in an specific tree you're grating those benefits to the ones that deserve them; the ones that are actually mastering the tree. That way we're actually working towards diversity, where the master of each kind of tree has different bonuses, and only the people that mastered the same tree at the same level has the same benefits. If you want to enjoy those benefits you should include that skill tree in your playstyle, not just conveniently spend 20 - 30 points on it and then maxxing out it... once again, as everybody else will.

 

I think the Healing tree has these same issues.. and that's the Skills, not innates... Healing Touch, Ressurection? Everyone takes these too (well, a few that use the Death tree don't, and I can't imagine anyone else that doesn't!)

edit: I'm in the death tree deep, and I use resurrection, and had to go down that whole tree

 

Earth innates do rock lol

 

Yeah, besides innates, the other lack of diversity is in the field of defensive skills. The way healing works make all the skills there too convenient and, since the system favors decks with the less skills the better people just take healing. Why they shouldn't? healing skills are awesome from the very start... I'd say that just getting healing touch and raising the innates (innates again!) is enough to make it the best defense skill in the game.

As a way to test it I've been playing using only dodge as defensive skill, and i must say i did well... then i saw Jobe soloing the dragon and healing 50 with each healing touch and thought:

• With dodge at 59 i get a +10.9 of combat dodge modifier (¿?) and my gear grants a 4.3 of that (¿?¿?) which i suppose it means that i have a 15,2% chance of not suffering damage from an attack (actually that's not true because when i dodge ranged attacks i still get damage... reported it as a bug and never knew if it was a bug or intended). Within the enemies i'm currently fighting, damage range from 10 to 20, and sometimes get a critical for 40. That means i have a 15,2% chance of avoiding 15 damage per average. Let's say that GMing it i get to a 20%, making it a 30% with top gear. Let's also assume that top notch enemies hit you for 40 to 50 damage. 30% of not suffering 45 damage on average, that's what dodge does.
• As Jobe shows in the video, with whatever values he has in Healing touch and the innates, he's able to heal himself 50 health points. That is, 100% chance of recovering 50 health points.

Why should i want to live without healing? mandatory! But let's give it a thought while coming back to the topic in the thread. Even if healing keeps working the way it works now (I feel we need to see major changes in how we heal ourselves, but i'll talk about that in another thread) BUT with innate benefits working the way i suggested, if you only raise healing touch you wont be able to get the massive healing amount granted by the innates, which forces you to spend points in the whole tree if you want to heal like a real boss. Which is what almost everybody does currently, but that's because of healing being arguably the best defense skill in the game.

Dat pun lmao

 

Well to touch on this, I have a decent amount invested in the death tree. touch ray attunement and power are all 90+. I have GM healing touch and 78 life power and still crit heal myself for 70ish. average heals are 30-40. So even with the opposing attunement high, life attunement stuck at 20, I have the best of both worlds. Healing touch on CD and death touch ray as needed..

 

Thanks for giving real numbers! I knew healing was OP but to that exent that even with attunement it heals you that much... The more reason to write about changing healing tree and defensive habilities

Nonetheless this is also a good example of what i'm talking about here. Even with negative attunement, just by GMing the skill and climbing over the innate you're healing yourself as a master healer... I can only imagine how many hp people without negative attument may heal themselves. That's something that's beyond unbalance, is a core mechanic that's not working, and the existence of innates as a way of handling passive bonuses plays a big part on it.

I acknowledge that for some this change might sound like a party pooper, but testing usually focus on how things work atm and i feel it's as important to look to the future and think about how things may develop. Right now it's fun because we're discovering the game and getting wiped often so we never reach the permanent state... but with persistence ahead we should start thinking about it, because that's the state we're going to be most of the time. If we keep a system that seems focused on choices but on a second look there are obvious elements of optimization, in the end we all take the same choice and it seems as if there were no choices at all.

With all that has been said i'll try to illustrate the idea again with bullet points, so you point the flaws or discuss anything you feel it's related

• Innates as we know it are removed from the skill tree, so skill trees are only composed of active skills. Each tree should have only a "representative innate" that's untied from the skill tree, but can be managed as actual innates, and raises when you use skills from the tree it belongs. To delve deep into this "representative innate" thing:
  • For the trees realated to magic we already have one, it's attunement. It's the perfect example of "representative innate" because the way it works is special and define how magic works in the world.
  • For the trees related to weapons, we already have one; it's basic combat. Compared with attunement they're a bit dull so maybe they could get some love to make them more interesting (instead of just a plain bonus).
    
  • Only the three defensive skill trees (Shield, Heavy and Light armor) lack a meaningful representative innate. I'd like to see the "roll" mechanic to serve some purpose, maybe the representative innate of those should work with it, in the same way basic combat skills interact with auto/free attack.
  • Stats should be taken away from the trees and laid out as a separate progression with some kind of softcap that prevents players from getting up to 100 100 100; link stat progression with nutrition and player activities in game. Maybe they could be the representative innate skills for the strategy trees but those (specially tactics - is sort of a potpourri of things - and focus - the most lacking skill tree of all) still require some work imo.
• The benefits previously granted by innates are now given to the player proportionally to the total amount of points he invested in that skill tree. That way passive bonuses (the most desirable) are proportional to the effort put by the player in that specific skill tree, making choices more meaningful. the "Representative innates" do count towards the total amount of point invested so raising it is desirable apart of whatever bonus they can give.
• XP curves could be compensated since raising every skill is like raising that skill and a innate.

There are some outlines that require special attention; for example there are skill trees that heavily rely on innates (shields, focus and taming, mostly)... but i think overall it gives us a better progression than what we currently have, and it doesn't seem hard to implement. Do you folks like it? Am i missing something else?

 

Very interesting topic, information and a good read.

Cheers

 

Wait a minute.... you'd better have another look at the Life tree.

The amount of healing done by healing touch is increased by only two innates in that tree, which is FAR from the "whole tree". When I see exaggerations like that, I tend to ignore anything else you say.....

Just sayin'.......

 

Sorry FrostII but it seems you misinterpreted my words. in that part i'm talking about how it would work under my suggestions, now how it works now. I underlined that part and changed the format into bullet points in an attempt to make the reading easier. In fact, that's exactly the problem i was discussing there; i can heal myself like a boss just by raising healing touch and the two innates, and that (along with the way healing works) puts healing over any other defensive skill, making it the best option available and actually working against the goals of a classless system.

To push the issue a bit further, i'd say that i underestimated the power of healing in that post! I was supposing that to get to that amount of healing you'd need higher values in all the healing innates, but @Insinious FizzleThorpe came with fresh data and showing that you can heal more with less. So yeah, healing touch is only increased by two innates in the healing tree, and just that makes it incredibly powerful, and it should be looked at thoroughly.

I hope i managed to clarify it! would you mind to read through it now? your insight on the subject will be highly appreciated.

 

here's my take on innates:

i like them.
now, here's why:
it is a freebie as you work towards getting better at a skill. by default you are setting goals to reach x level in skill (or just level, in other games) so you can get y innate activated. goals are very good in a use-based system, and almost as good in a level based system, and lets not mistake it, we're a hybrid, no matter what anyone claims.

ok, further clarification:
i think innates should be part and parcel to your skill. lets use archery as the example, same as the OP.

you shoot a ton of arrows, some miss, you learn. some hit, you learn more. some do crits, you learn much more. etc etc
ok, so your archery skill just went from "N00b" to "intermediate" - you should get a trait based on the things you did in the game. so say now you've killed a ton of wolves. so now against bi and quadrepedal furry creatures, you know where to hit the vulnerable bits - so you get a 'hunter' perk that gives you a higher chance at, and as that innately levels up, more potent, criticals.

now, lets say instead of wolves, you fought humans, most of whom were in heavy armor.... when you level up to intermediate from n00b, you get a perk called naildriver, instead of hunter. anything in heavy armor takes extra bleeding damage, as you've learned the weakspots and know how to hit those just right, so they shatter on impact leaving shrapnel bouncing around inside the tincan.

to be clear - you should not have to put a single xp point or gold coin towards this, it should simply happen all based on your actions and decisions in between being a Noob and Intermediate archer. - all this on top of your regular skill training and leveling that you currently have. - and the innates should not add or reduce the intensity of your level ups on skills 'in training'...seperate subsystem alltogether.

---

before reading the OP, i had the opinion that i loved innates. period. but things changed because i see them a bit differently now... if the above type system doesn't occur, i'd rather simply do without innates entirely until this type of system can be utilized. - besides, it would also help de-clutter the current skill window, allow you to have another tab for innates and make rows showing the skill, then next column is an innate and its level, with a status bar at the bottom of that row showing overall skill level of the skill itself (archery, not hunter or naildriver)

 

glad to hear that! I consider this a major turndown that may pass unnoticed, and fixing it may improve the progression experience. And what's more important, i don't think there's a lot of coding involved since we're just changing the control variable from different skills to a big number. Well it's going to be harder than that for sure, but it's not as if we're asking for a whole new system in place.

Now talking about things that may be harder to code... that trait idea! It's simply amazing. Gaining different conditional bonus as you play relative to how you play it's just the kind of thing this game must have (sometime!)

So... first tie innate benefits to the total amount of points invested in a skill, then implementing the trait suggestion, amirite? i'm thinking of modifying the OP to improve how my idea is presented and to include your idea as well if you think it's appropiate.