no it can not
attributes dont work like
intelligence will increase your speed and my HP
thats not how it works xD
1 Like
Weird since its common in fantasy media.
1 Like
I just said it can be anything from what they presented to what you wrote in your thread. I have no idea what you misread.
Yeah, but according to some folks; it’s something that shouldn’t exist. Quite baffling imo.
It shouldn’t as long as there are better options for it.
If you conceptualize 20 INT/STR classes and the game developer wants only 1 such combo you’d pick the most fitting concept.
We are doing exactly this in this thread (before the derail) - conceptualizing the best hunter/rogue class specific system. If you start reading from post 1 you’ll see how the idea evolved.
I don’t see why not, especially when it’s already enforced by the lore. Also from a gameplay perspective it allows players to have more builds for classes which is rarely a bad thing. Lastly the I’ve yet to see options better than allowing classes to have both hybrid and pure builds.
Well the developers themselves hadn’t said anything about being against classes having hybrid builds, as such it’s less of them not wanting it and instead more like you yourself not wanting it, which is fine because that’s your opinion, however know that others don’t share it and would like classes to be able to have hybrid builds along with pure builds.
Actually both the OP’s original idea regarding a class system for the Hunter as well as my own idea would still work quite well if the Hunter is allowed to hybridize their builds with magic and what not.
1 Like
I’ll say it for 10th time - I am not against hybrid classes.
The game in its current form allows all classes to have hybrid builds, which is quite fine. That doesn’t mean however all classes are being designed and pushed in the direction to be hybrids.
If you intersect all primary stat combinations you’ll end up with:
- 1 25/25/25/25 hybrid
- 4 33/33/34 hybrids
- 6 50/50 hybrids
- 4 pure classes
Each of the 4 pure classes would be able to be pushed by the player in the meme hybrid direction he wants. This should NOT result in efficient builds however since you go AGAINST the RPG part and the design of your class.
the current primary stat system is a meme itself and will not stay this way it was presented in the blog post
1 Like
It’s fine. What you suggested in your thread is just an improvement to it. It still follows its philosophy however.
A mage being able to go combat mage is directly in line with its RPG fantasy. Not against it.
Attributes are not classes.
Instead you can have
“Pure” Str barb, dex barb, int barb, will barb
str/dex, str/int, str/will, dex/int, dex/will, int/will barbs
str/dex/int, str/dex/will, str/int/will, dex/int/will barbs
str/dex/int/will barb
15 different attribute “builds” for the barbarian class. But they are all barbarians.
This remains true, even if the barb is not a hybrid (as in having melee, ranged, spells). Which it obviously should have though. If it want to be considered any kind of A-RPG.
(in reality, these attribute distributions are just theoretical archetypes of course. Often you wont have so clear cut attribute distributions. Like you might be 18/5/12//10 str/dex/int/will, which does not really fit into those archetypes)
And yes, an int barb should be a viable build, to the same degree a str build is. That does not mean 25% of all barbs will be int barbs of course. Since there might be more barb builds that works well with str.
90% of all barbs might use str (I hope not…), but as long as the 2% int builds have the same power potential, that is okay.
It’s okay only if it fits the designed fantasy of the class.
You could say it however many times you want, but you’re failing to realize is that some folks aren’t asking for classes to be designed as either hybrid based or pure based; instead their asking for classes to be designed to have the potential to be either one, as in a max level sorceress could have the potential depending on her weapons, skills, and talents to be either a pure lighting caster sorceress or a melee ice sorceress.
Also, even if melee sorcerers become a thing in Diablo 4, not every single player playing as a sorceress is going to be a melee one; same would go for a caster and melee barbarian and whatnot.
I perfectly well realize you want MEME META builds. That won’t happen intentionally (by design) however since it’s bad design in a game with class fantasy.
I suggest you re-read the last blog post of the D4 team to better understand this.
Well you realized wrong, as I don’t care for meta builds. The only time I play meta is when the game balance happens to rotate to the build that I’m actually playing, besides that I don’t play meta by choice and instead prefer to play builds that I like regardless if they’re meta or not. I already had said earlier in this thread that a weapon wielding sorceress with magic could be weaker than a pure magic casting sorceress (which would be expected due to the split in skill point distribution).
His post does not adhere to your attribute philosophy.
Nowhere does it say: “Barbs only use str”, nor “sorc only use int”. Quite the opposite actually.
And thus it also is not following Blizzards attribute philosophy. Though lets be real, they dont have a philosophy. The attribute system shown in the blog was just thrown randomly together. That is the only reasonable explanation.
Except for every decent CRPG ever?
It isn’t necessarily splitting its points more than any other sorc build.
Spending 20 points in Enchant Weapon or 20 points in Meteor is not something that should make you weaker.
Now, if you want to both swing a sword, and cast a meteor, then yeah, you should be weaker at both. But hopefully not weaker overall, due to the added flexibility you get from using both skills (if anything, any build focusing on a single skill should be penalized for such a narrow focus).
Which is of course not any different from a build that combines Meteor and Icy Touch or whatever close-ranged spell.
Yeah that’s pretty much what I mean.
The with magic part was supposed to describe a sorceress who’s attacking with a weapon while at the same time is casting attack spells. She would had to had split her points in between her attack spells and enchant buffs, which would lead her to being weaker than a sorceress who spent all of her points on either attack spells or enchant buffs. However, as a trade-off she would be more versatile than the sorceress who focused only on either magic for attacking or melee combat. Similar to Diablo 2, where if you go dual or tri elemental, you’d be weaker than a sorceress who focused on a single element; however you’d be able to fight more enemies (albeit less efficiently) than the single element sorceress due to immunities.
1 Like
well, but we can already see that they wouldnt want us to do that if we dont have global attributes and a sorc cant even spec into STR to gain melee damage
every character just gains “skill damage” because thats all we care about in modern age gaming
cool skills, completely detached from any meaningful stat system, blinking all over the map
1 Like
If a class is designed as an INT/STR you should be able to do that. Maybe they have a better fitting class than the Sorcerer in that place?
I know. The resident time traveller just shouldn’t be engaged.
1 Like
well, that was an attemt to create unique offensive stats for each attribute for the classes
i would actually prefer just the regular global stats on each character being the same
1 Like