U78 Lamannia Arcane Trickster Preview

[VinoeWhines]

There should maybe be an option to have a No Fail on 1(NFo1) ability for Bluff or NFo1 Open Lock/Disable Device maybe added to Rogue skills.
As of now, there are soo little choices to choose out of only 6 options, when the class is suppose to be loaded with Skills.

Alchemist (5 out of 28 Total) Allot of choices.
Rogue (4 out of 06 Total) Anemic. As a Specialist should have 7 out of 30.(second most to Fighter)
Monk (3 out of 26 Total) Allot choices.
Wizard (5 out of 12 Total) Modest amount.
Fighter (11 out of Kitchen Sink)

Arcane Tricksters or Rogues in general should have more Special Feats like a Globe of Invulnerability(Limans Tiny Hut) or an NPC(Unseen Servant: able to use Wands...) added to choices or just give a bigger list of choices/Options.

 

[pirotessa]

Rereading this as well, even though probably doesn't matter at this point, why are some classes 10 AP points to get all of their T5 while other archetypes are 36 points? Please stop with all these multi tier enhancements in T5 for certain classes. None of these are comparatively that good to justify the 2 to 3 ap points to take or max them out. This follows the poor implementation of archetypes like Assassin requiring 3 points for 25% competence bonus when other archetypes get it for 1 or 2 at most. Hybrids have enough of a tax on them without the goofy AP tax of mediocre abilities that cost 2x as they should.

Take your last one Dragon Disciple
- 1 AP for 1crit range/1crit mult and 25% hp vs AT - 2 AP for 1crit range/1crit mult and 15% hp. What is that about? Less effect for 2x the AP? No thank you.
Also Dragon Disciple Perfect Disciple - 1 AP for +2 DCS in Breath, Evocation, Conjuration, and Transmutation vs a 2 AP cost to get 2 DCS to just 1 school in AT.
And lastly lets look at 'Good with my hands' 3 AP for 8 MRR cap and 10 MP, when you can get 30 MRR cap for 1 AP in Dragon Disciple T5. This should be a 1 AP ability for 10 MP / 8 MRR, 2 at most. 3 just puts a tax that says 'Don't play T5 AT'.

There is currently no reason to take AT to T5 where you are objectively worse than taking T5 in pretty much any other class you could multi-class with. Bad design. Please adjust the AP cost and Enchanement effects to be comparable to what you have already released.

Tier 5:

• Mage Hand - Presto! (2 AP): Mage hand snaps it's fingers over a none boss target to make them disappear. We don't know where they go, it's magic! Target gets a will save to negate the effected with a DC equal to your disable device skill. Cost: 10 SP 30 CD. Passive: Gain 80 Spell Points. Requires previous mage hand enhancement
• An Extra hand: All meta magics are reduced in cost by 2. You have a chance when struck by a spell to manifest an extra mage hand which knocks down the opposing caster down.
• Magic is a Tricky Business: You gain a +1/2 bonus to illusion and enchantment DCs. Rank 2: Passive - Tricks on Tricks now also increases to hit and damage with weapons by 1 per stack.
• Good with my Hands: +3/6/10 Melee and Ranged Power. Rank 3: Passive - Gain 8 MRR cap.
• I'm Not Half Bad... Multi Selector: (2 AP):
  • With a Blade - +1 competence bonus to critical thread range and damage multiplier with melee weapons and 15% competence bonus to max hit points.
  • With a Bolt - +1 competence bonus to critical thread range and damage multiplier with ranged weapons and a +10% to Dodge Bypass.
  • With a Spell - +20 Universal spell power, +2 spell penetration and +5% crit chance with all spells.

 

[VinoeWhines]

Ya I have to waste 3 Action Points in Light Armor Mastery(Rogues also use Outfits/Robes) to just get the 25% Competence HP bonus, when it would better align with the HP% bonus, being in Measure the Foe(Majority take). This would allow you to get Deadly Strikes but can't if you want the HP.

Some classes only need to spend 2 Action Points, while others spend 3 Action Points for HP% Bonus(and 3 wasted points, that do them no benefit to Class - the 2/4/6 PRR doesn't work for Outfit/Robes in Assassin Tree).

 

[Neain]

There should maybe be an option to have a No Fail on 1(NFo1) ability for Bluff or NFo1 Open Lock/Disable Device maybe added to Rogue skills.

All skills are already no auto fail on 1s. I have disabled plenty of traps on 1s once I got my DD up high enough.

its also always been this way since its based on 3.5 where again, skills arent auto fail on 1s.
This idea of skills failing on 1s or critting on 20s, is actualy fairly new as far as being a real rule instead of something newer DMs did because they didnt read it well enough.

 

[Lazuli]

I'd argue the opposite: it sets a GOOD precedent for making skills relevant again and giving classes a way to acquire DC's that doesn't require a borderline complete character.

You can argue the numbers might be off; but that's another issue.

No, it sets a bad precedent. Either they change the entire system and make all DCs run on spellcraft (the only skill that makes sense for this), or it sets a bad precedent.

But it's also a bad idea to change the system because the devs are doing a terrible, terrible gear design. It's time to go back to the drawing board and review on caster stats on gear, whose splitting has gotten out of hand. And time to make filigrees that provide damage and spell DC as they should have from the beginning.

And if necessary, time to lower a pair of save points on their NPCs. In Chill, they're far too high.

We need to fix what's wrong, not change the system. If the developers aren't willing to create a balanced save system, they're going to fail with this system or a skill system anyway.

 

[DBZ]

Then they have to make spell craft work with highest of cha int wis or divines get screwed again

There's a fix for chill fort buypass

 

[Lazuli]

Feels weird using an INT skill for DCs—why not a CHA skill? Isn’t that the trickster attribute? SP based on INT is fine—why DD? Why not Bluff for example?

I'm against using any skill for spell DCs—the difference between DCs from the normal system and skill-based DCs is 100+ points. That's not balanced.

But doing it through a disable device is utterly stupid. It makes no sense; Spellcraft is the skill that controls spell knowledge. If there's one skill that deserves a place in the DC system, it's this one.

The devs don't even care about consistency, balance, or anything anymore. They seem to be doing random, desperate things.

A 100-point difference, devs. No investment vs a hellish investment. HOW IS THAT BALANCED? How are you going to balance a 100-point difference? Have you ever even played a caster?

 

[Brac]

I like the Disable DC for the stolen spells and SLAs. Will the DC on those spells be very high, yes. But they are balanced by longer cool downs. And as many have pointed out, being a hybrid with a max spell level of 4, their normal DCs on spells will be terrible. What is wrong with having a couple spells that will be usable in high level content?

 

[Lofen]

I'm against using any skill for spell DCs—the difference between DCs from the normal system and skill-based DCs is 100+ points. That's not balanced.

If they don't want rogues building spell gear into their gear slots, than this makes it a very elegant "no-fail" spells for rogues, removing gear restrictions. The balance would have to come from things like available spell selection and their cooldowns, not the DCs. For example if rogues only get flaming hands as a spell, but get it at a no-fail DC, that would not be overpowered or invalidating to other casters.

So I think you're just looking at a design choice from the wrong angle, when you are assuming that it is meant to create a workable competitive DC comparable with normal casters, or assuming that giving the rogues' spells a no-fail DC would invalidates other casters and break the balance. The DCs are part of the whole picture, but they cannot be judged in a vacuum as bad or good.

 

[rabidfox]

It's gonna have good DCs for a few SLAs and still have bad DCs on spells and more importantly (IMO) on epic destiny stuff. I think the disable DCs are great and wish DCs in general were easier to hit for all builds. It's gonna suck having to ignore a bunch of cool toys in EDs.

 

[Lazuli]

If they don't want rogues building spell gear into their gear slots, than this makes it a very elegant "no-fail" spells for rogues, removing gear restrictions. The balance would have to come from things like available spell selection and their cooldowns, not the DCs. For example if rogues only get flaming hands as a spell, but get it at a no-fail DC, that would not be overpowered or invalidating to other casters.

So I think you're just looking at a design choice from the wrong angle, when you are assuming that it is meant to create a workable competitive DC comparable with normal casters, or assuming that giving the rogues' spells a no-fail DC would invalidates other casters and break the balance. The DCs are part of the whole picture, but they cannot be judged in a vacuum as bad or good.

No, a 100 DC difference isn't balanced. Just like using Intimidate for the DL/Barbarian visage isn't balanced. It's illogical and not balanced. They're being given the same spells that are key for many casters. They shouldn't have more spell DC.

Meanwhile, the DC system is broken not because of the system itself, but because of the gear design. They've been warned for YEARS to fix the gear, and voila, rogues and casters will stop having problems.

There's a big difference between doing things right and doing them wrong. This is doing things wrong, and creating new problems that didn't exist before.

What's more, the AT spellbook's DC will remain useless. It makes no sense to put super-.DC in SLAs and an unusable DC in normal AT spells. The devs need to fix the DC system (I've explained it to them several times - only the filigrees would help a lot) so that ALL AT spells work, but without ridiculously high DCs.

 

[YTSESoldier]

Needs a trance or DoA. No class should be made anymore at this point that doesnt have a trance included.

Yes, a class based Int trance which give + to hit which at this point does not exist.

 

[Falkor]

This tree needs it's own dash-type ability.

The imbue needs to be moved to core 3 or core 6, similar to EK and Vile chemist. Where it's sitting makes it worthless. Devs are over estimating its worth with its current placement in the tree.

In addition, making it for multi-classing is a build failure. The tree needs to stand on its own merit.

Dragonlord is a premium archetype ... so is this one. So make it strong, make it playable, make it fun ... else this is dead on arrival and all this development time and conversation is utterly worthless.

And I am still of the strong opinion that AT would be better as a universal tree, and not as a rogue archetype.

Where did dev responses / feedback go ?

 

[Falkor]

No, a 100 DC difference isn't balanced. Just like using Intimidate for the DL/Barbarian visage isn't balanced. It's illogical and not balanced. They're being given the same spells that are key for many casters. They shouldn't have more spell DC.

Just a heads up, if you weren't aware of this ... issues with DC casting were acknowledged and are being looked at in a recent dev stream or conversation. Full caster revamp is harder to accomplish, this is the low hanging fruit they are aiming for.

 

[Lazuli]

Just a heads up, if you weren't aware of this ... issues with DC casting were acknowledged and are being looked at in a recent dev stream or conversation. Full caster revamp is harder to accomplish, this is the low hanging fruit they are aiming for.

Yes, and we'll have to wait a year to see the abomination they're thinking of, because seeing what they've been creating lately, I have no faith in their abilities.

What Torc said is a complete overhaul of the DC system, and that scares me a lot. They don't need to change everything; they just need to stop splitting stats on equipment and not drastically increasing saves with each expansion. It's not that difficult. But no, with their love for randomness, you'll see how they come up with a system that will make those of us who have worked tirelessly to have good casters fail much more often, and will give moderate success to newcomers. I can see it coming.

They don't need to reinvent the wheel. They need to start thinking about equipment more carefully. Equipment design has been an absolute disaster for years, especially on the caster side.

I'm sorry, but they're designing AT's DCs badly. Unusable in their spellbook, too high in SLAs. They should design them properly (add decent DC to the AT tree) and start working on the equipment now (the big problem with hybrids and casters). They have no excuse, I'm sorry. They've been procrastinating on this for far too long.

 

[Falkor]

Yea, I hear your frustration and concur. Just have learned over the years that investing emotional energy or caring about DDO and how the staff operates is a waste of my time. They literally have account hacks, people being stolen from, and don't respond or address these issues, amongst a host of other game flaws.

It's why my feedback on this is also so limited, SSG has a tried and true habit of ignoring feedback to release buggy, bad content.

For me, hope has no home here. I save it where it takes root, can be nurtured, and grow.

It'd be par for the course for SSG to release a buggy weird useless archetype to represent 20 years of the game.

If they release another subpar archetype I'll have to dub it the 'arcane jester' and find appropriate in-game attire. Does DDO even have a jester cap cosmetic? Must have!

 

[YTSESoldier]

15% competence hp in T5 is a break from convention for every other class/archtype in the game...previously all trees of the same base class have had the same competence modifier if at all (FTR/Barb/Monk/Ranger: 25%, Bard/lock/art: 20%) the only "exception" to this is druid but wolves do not get comp from a tree they get it from a destiny feat. Dropping from rogues standard 25 to 15 is just another gimping of an already gimped archetype (there is no truly effective hybrid at high reaper levels in this game as it is impossible to build for gear wise and this will be no different). Luckily I'm not interested in the PL bonus or the archetype so this will be a skip for me, or a quick inquisition/iconic life or 3 when I get around to it.

 

[VinoeWhines]

All skills are already no auto fail on 1s. I have disabled plenty of traps on 1s once I got my DD up high enough.

its also always been this way since its based on 3.5 where again, skills arent auto fail on 1s.
This idea of skills failing on 1s or critting on 20s, is actualy fairly new as far as being a real rule instead of something newer DMs did because they didnt read it well enough.

I have a 122 Bluff DC and sometimes in R10's, when I Bluff a Reaper, far away, the whole gang comes rushing out to meet me like a Boys in the Hood comeupins'....

It doesn't happen often but sucks when I tell the group, "You want me to Bluff the Reaper to us? I have 122 Bluff." and then, the whole room of mobs rush out like a Flash Mob....fail!

 

[VinoeWhines]

And I am still of the strong opinion that AT would be better as a universal tree, and not as a rogue archetype.

Yes, this would solve allot of problems and give it a chance to be introduced without the interruptions of being tied to Rogue in general but give it assistance with other Enhancement Trees, like how Horizon Walker does or even Feydark illusionist does; even Vistani and Falconry are boosts to other Trees.

 

[VinoeWhines]

As a stand alone Tree it can be massaged more easily to be fixed/tweaked with upcoming patches and not have to be tethered to Rogue sub-engine issues...