Making Rare and Magic Items useful in D4

General Discussion
101

In Wolcen, if you dont go “Debuff proc” attribute, you pretty much make 1/3 of the passive skill web irrelevant. And if you do go for that attribute, you kinda make the other 2/3 of the web useless also. Problem with them Wolcens system imo (and again, it is still a better system than in most A-RPGs - and I havent played hundreds of hours of the game, so maybe the meta is completely different in late-game), is that each attribute is all or nothing. The two attributes you dont focus on, are kinda useless, since getting more debuff proc chance is pointless if you haven’t picked a debuff proc build. Never tried a crit build, but afaik, it is the same for that. attack speed is a bit in the middle, and potentially useful for both of the others.
I am not against that specialization in general; quite the contrary, since I prefer if gear affixes are not universally good for everyone. But for an attribute system, where you will pick 1 of 4 (or whatever combo), if each attribute is only useful in its own small niche, then they either define the rest of the build, or the rest of the build defines which attribute to choose.
In Path of Eternity, even if I make an Intellect Monk, that is focused on AoE (since Int = increased aoe radius), Str and Dex is still useful. Just less useful than Int.

Proc chance and debuff duration in the ADA system seem like they might have the same problem of only being useful in their own separate, focused build. Whereas buff duration is probably useful for most builds, as I would expect all builds to have at least 1 buff. I really like these 3 effects though, and would be sad to see them go away. But 1) I wouldnt want them to be an attribute system on their own, without other bonuses added, and 2) if they were attributes, then all 3 effects should have their own gear affixes too (+proc chance, +buff duration, + debuff duration), allowing you to get these effects even if you don’t go for their attribute.
Just like, if you have an attribute that gives armor or HP, there is also still specific gear affixes that gives armor and HP. Attributes shouldn’t replace gear affixes.
But of course, getting these stats outside of the attribute system might/should “cost” more; using a whole affix on an item just to get one stat, instead of the multiple stats gained through an attribute. That is fine, increased freedom to choose your stats should come with a greater cost, for balancing.

Sure, but you can get more dmg and defense in different ways.
+single target dmg, +attack speed, +aoe radius etc. all can give you more dmg. But in different ways. And they all interact with skills differently as well.
Attack speed is more useful for some skills than others, depending on their cooldown, their resource cost etc. AoE radius makes an aoe dmg skill do more dmg, as long as there are enough enemies around. Much less useful against a single boss though. But AoE radius might also increase the efficiency of a single target dmg build, by increasing the radius of your debuff skill, or your CC skill etc.
Single target dmg (which probably should be more like; “first target hit” dmg instead, so AoE still benefits somewhat) is a direct dmg boost, but doesnt benefit an AoE skill as much.

Also, cooldown reduction is not a generic stat boost. it does literally nothing for skills with no cooldown.

I agree about All resist and Dodge though.
All resist should not exist as a gear affix imo. But I think something like “all magical/elemental resist” is fine as an attribute (again, making attributes a bit more general), having the weakness of no physical resist.

Instead of dodge, it could be “increasing regeneration of the active dodge mechanims” that Diablo 4 have (the gear + dodge interaction in Wolcen is pretty nice).

102

I don’t know exactly what you want to express with that phrase.

Some more generic stats can also be more archetypical, like movement speed could be more associated with a Ranger, if you know what I mean.

Not sure if that answers our quiestion.

Because I thouhgt it is somehow more archetypically aligned with the Sorceress.

Yes, but that also applies to character systems.

In a certain way, this is what I was trying to do with my attribute proposal.

The idea was that for the Offensive and Defensive Affiix, there is a Primary Bonus and other three are secondary bonuses. You can see this fairly good on the Offensive Affix, which Primary Bonus is 120% increased damage, while the other bonuses are smaller.

I wanted to do the same with the Defensive Affix (but it would have made calculating the correct numbers more difficult, too difficult for that example, so I ddn’t do it), so that the xx% reduced damage taken Affix would overall provide the most increase in toughness from the attribute and the other three bonuses only contributing a smaller amount to the overall defense, …

… like 70% of the overall increase in Toughness and Damage comes from the Primary Bonus of the Defensive and Offensive Attribute, and the remaining 30% come from the three Secondary Bonuses.

That would make balancing between the different classes easier while also still allowing flavor and class identity to shine.

So it is simple in the way that if you wanna make your character tougher, put things into the Defensive Attribute, but beyond that, it can get more complex.

I agree with that! I am advocating for that balancing philosophy for several years now. Things do not have to be balanced perfectly, just reasonable.

It is just that I often run into people who make arguments like “there will always be something that is the best, and therefore we don’t need something like X, Y or Z because it will be useless”.

Not saying that you are one of them btw.

That is why I would say to make the Attributes more intuitive.

In the example I provided, I specifically called Intelligence, Strength, Precision and Faith “Offensive Attribute” (or I put that as a “subtitle” below them) to clarify that.

You spend points into the Offensive Attribute and your character becomes stronger, you spend points into the Defensive Attribute, and your character can take more damage, etc.

I will read that later.
I think I have head of this before, but at the moment I am already a bit too tired to process that.

I’ll look into later, so thanks.

I agree, that would be boring.

I think it is okay if there is a system that is more generic, or only generic at its base.

Because

  • 1 - the affixes on Attributes I have chosen are not random, and the Secondary Bonuses they give are more archetypical, which intertwines with Point 2
  • 2 - they provide (more) Class Identity
  • 3 - in Diablo 2 Unique Items (D2’s Legendary Items) had predetermined bonuses, and when large parts of your equipment is full of items that have predetermined affixes, then these are also not totally random - and I was basing the attribute system on such a design philosophy for legendary items, because it would provide more deterministic bonuses.

Therefore all the different systems provide different kinds of upgrades and have different roles:

  • Attribute System = Small and incremental upgrades with no limitation other than the amount of points you have to basic combat related things (offensive, defense, mobility, resource management) of your choice. They effect the Character as a whole instead of specific skills. Maybe 5 Points per Level Up.
  • Passive Skills = Larger bonuses, some incremental, some more basic and incremental, and other that significantly change a mechanic and get unlocked by spending a larger amount of points, but with no further upgrades. You can choose what Passive Skills you pick and upgrade. Examples HERE. They also effect the character as a whole, but not specific skills. 1 Point per Level Up.
  • Active Skills = Bonuses of various types to specific Skills. Maybe 1 Point for every skill all 5 Character Levels (which would make it 20 Points for every skill at leavel 100). There is more to it, but that would go beyond the frame of this discussion, like that you only gain Skill Points for Skills you have Specialized in, etc)
  • Items = Rare and Magic Items with Random Affixes and Legendary Items with pre-determined Affixes. In some slots you only wanna have Legendaries, so unlike the Attribute System, you might not get the exact (basic) thing you want, since they don’t roll with randomized affxies, therefore you are not able to get the legendary of your choice with the right affixes.

I hope that makes it more clear for why I think that an Attribute System is not redundant, even when you can have random affixes from items.

But an Attribute System can already do that, even if it has “bland” bonuses. As I said, it is more optional rather than mandatory, but that does not mean that something like that does not or can not exist.

And I also explain and illustrated that to you several times now, so I suggest you read this again:
https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/d3/t/making-rare-and-magic-items-useful-in-d4/23762/93?u=clueso-2790

as well as this one:
https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/d3/t/making-rare-and-magic-items-useful-in-d4/23762/91?u=clueso-2790

You apparently ignored the other example that I provided:

“If you have at least 125 Points in the Mobility Attribute, you can move through obstacles unhindered.”

I purposefully chose to prove two different examples, one with a simple, but larger stat increase, another one with a “more interesting” effect that is tied to the Attribute System.

Put things like these on a few Passive Skills, a few optional Upgrades for Active Skills and a few Legendaries, and that is how you can make an Attribute System “more interesting”, without making the skill and mechanical altering effects mandatory.

103

Which is a board stroke upgrade. Not a skill based upgrade. Not individual utility per character based on skill build. But any insert class with 125 points in mobility with said item gets the bonus.

And it’s a one time bonus. Not something you can build upon further.

Who said it’s mandatory? Oh you did. You haven’t even bothered to consider that some of those things don’t have to be mechanically altering. You just assumed to downplay my idea.

I’m not going to bother rereading anything if you’re just going to make up your own mind on design aspects of a system that isn’t even fleshed out.

Games can’t grow if they are held to old ideas all the time. A base stat system that does nothing but generic growth is played out.

1 Like
104

That is not the point. The point is that you also can make what you woud consider “more interesting” effects instead of “bland” stat increases that are gated behind a certain amount of Attribute Points.

And nothing prevents you from doing this for individual skill (via skill specific talents that can be unlocked via skill specific skill points) as well.

Nothing prevents you from coming up with other effects on Legendaries, Passives and Skill-specific Talents that give bonuses which are more progressive in nature and give you additional bonuses when you reached another threshold on with Attributes.

You said that having e.g. 100 Points in the “Strike” Attribute gives youa “Super Point” or something like that, which you then can spend into a skill that causes “something more interesting” to happen, aka a mechanical altering effect, and you mentioned numerous times that you do not consider numerical changes “interesting”.

I am sorry you see it that way.

You were complaining the whole times about that things that are just increase some numbers are boring and when I presented you with an idea of both a numerical buff and mechanical altering buff, you just focused on the numerical buff and said this about it:

Quote from your previous reply to me:

"MORE STAT INCREASES! MORE! GENERIC STAT INCREASES ACROSS THE BOARD! MORE I SAY!

DAMAGE! DEFENSE! MORE! APPLY IT TO ALL SKILLS ALL THE TIME!

So boring."

After that and other things you said, probably rarely anyone could have interpreted what you said in any other way than that you do not want non-mechanical altering changes, since you consider all of that “boring”.

105

But that’s the problem. You’re predefining the choices. You aren’t giving players the choice to do what they want outside of getting X item or X skill.

You’re saying if you get X item and Y condition you get the specific bonus in mind. There is no choice. It’s essentially a closed system. You predefine builds and choices for the player without giving them the option to choose something different.

Or if you have X talent with Y condition you get the specific bonus in mind.

It’s almost like D3 with it’s runes or legendaries. You get one skill, with one rune, with the specific legendary powers for said skill for a closed system of design.

Sure you can add up to 4 base stat bonus milestones to things, or add different layers to it, but you’re still just telling the player the goal and the bonus without giving them a choice other than yes or no.

Numeric changes aren’t interesting. Even if they are integral to the game. Adding something interesting to the mundane isn’t just about making everything special, but about making the mundane a part of the process.

It’s like unlocking and leveling skills in D2. Or just having them as 1 point wonders. That system supports a duality of design choices. The incremental bonuses with the unlocking of interesting skills.

I want that for base stats. Well the concept of mundane + interesting in a single system, not the specific system itself.

106

That is not the case. Let me explain.

You see that in this example / concept, you can change your Fire Hydra into a Frost, Lightning or Arcane Hydra for 3 Skill-specific Skill Points via a “Keystone Talent” for that skill.

So it is not as you claim that there wouldn’t be any choice and that there is a “predetermined goal that I set for the players”, since they could choose to spend points into whatever they want, because there are various option (even in this simple concept that was make to just illustrate the concept).

There could be another “Keystone Talent”, maybe on another skill, dunno, like Diamond Skin, that once you have it locked it for e.g. 3 Points, it gives you this bonus:

“When you have at least 150 Points in the Resource Management Attribute, you can move through enemies and objects unhindered while Diamond Skin is active”

And other kinds of this can exist as well that are more progressive in nature.

The context of what I said to which you are responding here had nothing to do with Skill-specific bonuses on legendaries. What I was saying was that there could be non-skill-specific effects on Legendaries that first activate after you have spend xxx points in Attribute X, Y or Z…

… because your argument was that the Attribute System I proposed is boring since there is no interaction with the other systems, so I provided examples to show that this is not the case, one of them being interactions the Attribute System has with Legendaries.

Skill-specific bonuses should imo never be on items, but rather the skills themself.

107

Yes, and that’s true the ADA system has this issue.
The question is, should everything synergize with each other ? When you specialize in Fire damage, you make it irrelevant to take Cold skills or affixes. And that’s normal.

I don’t think it’s necessary bad for game elements to exclude each other sometimes, but not for Attributes, you’re right : it would be a trap to offer several choices if you’re supposed to invest in just one of them (unless there are diminishing returns, making it possible to specialize in Angelic and Ancestral for instance).

I think it’s good though, if they are rare (only on some Legendaries or tied to an ADA power) and their max is smaller than individual res (like 10% vs 25%). Still a more valuable affix but it makes the game of balancing all 4 resistances more interesting.

“Pierce Resist” for example, suits the archetype of Elementalist. My question was “why also have generic “+Damage” too, for every class ?” Just one Attribute with one effect (plus a secondary one for defense or offense) would suffice and make it more readable without loosing any complexity.

It’s a good reasoning I think. But why not make these Secondary bonuses a choice ? Like every 20 points spent in Energy the player get to put a point in CDR, Max resource, Energy Shield or whatnot ? That way he/she won’t have to get effects they don’t care about when picking an Attribute.

Another question I’d like to ask : what is the difference between “increased Resource Generation” and “increased Resource Generation Rate” ?

But what about gameplay ? Why shouldn’t a Barbarian be specialized in AoE too ?

I don’t think adding systems just for the sake of Class identity is a good thing. Every system has to do something unique or it would end up adding layers of complexity for no good reason.

But improving on Class identity is good, I agree. It could even be a different system for each class : Attributes for Barbarian, an additionnal Skill modifiers system for Sorceress, a dual Mastery (TQ/GD way) for Ranger etc.

I understand your reasoning then, but there are still Magic and Rares, which were the original discussion of the topic. ^^ And if a Legendary doesn’t suit your character, you can just not wear it !
Anyway, I think there should be a small pool of random affixes for Legendaries so you could still get the +Life or +Damage you want (if lucky of course).

Not a simple read I have to agree ! :laughing: But it also suits the specifics of an old school RPG, so not everything is relevant for an ARPG. Just an example of why “offense+defense” Attributes can be a solution to this lingering problem.

108

We’re both trying to achieve a similar thing just doing it in two different ways.

The thing is your method relies on stats being applied on a broad scale to a character, and then fixing it by applying modifiers to specific skills as an addon through the skill system.

If I gain 10 “strength”, I gain a broad damage increase across the board on all skills, and then have an option to I dunno add stun to some skill by picking a skill with your system and reaching some milestone which could have 5 levels of stun or something.

But that means the question of strength becomes that of how much do I need to reach X goal. And then if I reach that goal the decisions for strength become significantly less and less interesting.

It’s similar to how people do attribute requirements on items, but you replace the requirement with a bonus. Which we’ve seen in D2. Once you reach that requirement stats lose out on their value.

Str to req, dex to max block, vit in rest. Your system does something similar without being so hard capped by making stats more useful. But you still end up with making whatever stat less useful when you hit whatever softcap or milestone there is.

Having stats have milestones that can be reached consistently, but continue on past predetermined points (I need 1000 strength to get 5 second max stun on Bash with the talent or something) means there’s another goal to reach.

But it also means you aren’t just strengthening your character as a whole. Buffing just one or two skills with one stat gives a power deficit that helps deal with issues that come up like with the D3 trifecta. Your other skills don’t automatically gain strength, but you are still stronger by investing in a stat.

The more I read of your system the more I’m thinking we’re actually on the same page, just the design is different.

1 Like
109

Sure, its a balance. No, everything should not synergize with each other.
Difference to me is, choosing fire, frost, arcane, or maybe fire-frost, fire-arcane, frost-arcane, or fire-frost-arcane, is already 7 different choices. And if you choose some of the last 4 options, multiple elemental types will be continue to be useful at the same time.
So even elemental dmg represents less of a niche.
Unless Blizzard is stupid and handles dmg types like they did in D3. But making one mistake there does not make it less of a mistake in attributes imo :smiley:

With attributes, you are turning multiple stat choices into a few. Quite unlike dmg type affixes, which is just one affix type out of a lot. It doesn’t mean attributes shouldn’t be done. Just be a bit careful with how they are done.

Legendaries should be rule-breakers, so sure. Talking normal affixes.
I very much dont think All resist should be only available through ADA power - npr should any other affix. That exclusivity is the main problem of ADA.
10% AR vs. 25% single resist, would make AR a lot better than single resists (assuming there are 4 resist types, making AR = 4x10% single res).

110

It has to do with enforcing class fantasy to a certain degree. I wanted to strike a middle ground between stuff that is easy(er) to balance while still keeping the class fantasy intact, without enforcing it too much, if that makes sense.

So when players get an effect they don’t want, it is not too much of an issue, since these bonuses are weighted much less, but it still has the benefit of slightly enforcing class fantasy. It is a middle ground.

You could make a similar argument about D2’s Uniques (with predetermined affixes) and D3’s Legendaries (which have completely randomized Affixes), by saying that D3’s Legendaries allow you to roll with whatever affixes you want them to roll, but it also means that D3’s Legendaries have much less of an identity than D2’s Uniques.

D2’s Uniques also lead to you having to adjust your gear to make up for specific weakness that came when you equipped certain other Uniques. You either had to find Rare items with the correct randomized Affixes to make up for these weaknesses, or equip a specific legendary that helped you out. This kind of “puzzling” imo is a very good thing and the Attribute System imo strikes a good middle ground in regards to that, you know what I mean.

Increased Resource Generation is for classes that have Resource Generating Skills, like the Barbarian whos Primary Skills generate Resource. Increased Resource REgeneration Rate is for classes that have a Resource that REgenerates on its own, like Mana or Arcane Power.

Mana and Arcane Power regenerate on their own, while things like Fury requires skill to generate their resource.

He can, via items and passives and via spending points into the Skill-specific Upgrades that increase the AoE of a Skill (the concept that I posted for Hydra can also get applied on other skills).

If we take that argument to the extreme, then we could also say that a Barbarian should be able to learn to cast spells like Frozen Orb, because giving the Barbarian and the Sorc and all oter classes unique skills is a system that is just there for the sake of class identity.

btw, this is not an attack on you, it is just to illustrate my point.

The Attributes are all doing something unique, based on what class you choose.

I do not think it is complex, but we all probably have our own different thresholds here.

But wouldn’t that also be a system that is “just there for the sake of Class identity”, just like the secondary bonuses on my Attribute System being different from class to class?

It depends to which degree it does not suit your character.

If it “suits your character” to 80%, then I would say you are still good to equip it without much issues. If it is only 60% (but the legendary still might have something that you want on it), then you still can wear it although it is not perfect and it might come with some negatives (in regards to you missing out on things.

If the latter case applies, which for example could mean that your character is now missing out on Fire Resistance, then it might be worth to compensate for that by equipping the Upgraded Magic Boots I showed in the original post, which is exactly one of the cases that this was made for.

These kind of choices make itemization much more interesting, because if you could just have all the right affixes on your legendaries anyway because they roll with randomized affixes, then probably every item would have the same affixes, similar to how it is in D3.

It is not like that with the attribute system I proposed.

For example in D2, Strength was only useful e.g. for a Sorc to equip a more heavy armor piece, and after that, it lost its usefulness. In the Attribute System I proposed, you still could invest further into that Attribute and still get more benefit from that, whether it be more damage, more toughness, more and better mobility, or better resource management.

Also, such a Skill-specific Upgrade that is tied to Attributes is still optional, you don’t have to do it. You still can spend your points into another Skill-specific Upgrade that does not require to have xxx Points into Attribute X.

But how is that different from something that I shared previously, where you gain increased damage based on your Movement Speed? You would gain increased damage by spending points into the Mobility Attribute.

What I mean is it does not really matter if you gain a bonus like

  • +0.1 Second Stun Duration when you hit the enemy with Shield Bash for each single point into Attribute X

or if it is

  • +1 Second Stun Duration when you hit the enemy with Shield Bash for each 10 points into Attribute X

or if the Bonus comes all 50 or 100 points.

Imo you can do both, depending on what fits a skill better, but I don’t see too much of a difference between what you suggest here and what I have already suggested.

This is what I was trying to explain to you. What I propose is not mutually exclusive to what you want. It is rather just another way of imlementing it (and making it more optional, if you would agree with that assement).

111

Let’s hope there won’t be as much different damage types. ^^ Anyway, a Sorceress only has 3 (Cold Fire Lightning).

Which come with the price of making less damage for each different type. It should be the same for Attributes imo.

It’s not if each ADA has at least one exclusive affix useful for any character. And by exclusive, I don’t mean something you can’t get anywhere else : even without +AR, you can still max your restistances, it will just take a few more affixes/talents to do so. A mechanism that should make for more diverse ways of building and gearing a character.

I’m not sure actually. ^^ Do you mean that a Sorceress will have to use Energy Shield or +AoE anyway ?
If anything, having to balance item stats with attributes reinforces the idea of letting players choose what exact bonus they want. Even though it’s not something I would advocate for.

It doesn’t really answer the point : why does the Sorceress has a +AoE as Attribute on top of having it as skill modifiers ? Seems unfair and a bit arbitrary.

Ok thanks ! I mixed up a little bit here. ^^

Let’s not take it to the extreme then. :smiley:

But it’s doing even more non-unique things (which is not really the issue anyway).

What I proposed were just examples with no content.
I’m not advocating for systems that just try to be unique per class nor repeat what another system is doing elsewhere but to organize the different ways of building a character (stats, skills, modifiers…) in interesting systems. Even better if each class has its own unique way of doing so.

It’s not a matter of threshold : any redundant system is additional complexity, no matter how simple it is.
Now I understand you want to champion the system you made of course, I’m just giving you my personnal perception. :wink:

112

Yeah, but 3 different dmg types => 7 different choices of your dmg types.

Yeah, you just need to design the attributes then, where you can still benefit from multiple.
Which you dont do, if each attribute has its own niche that cant work with the others, such as is somewhat the case with Wolcen afaik.
You need to be able to make Str-Int builds that are as viable as Str builds, or Int builds.
Pillars of Eternity manages this somewhat. I think most CRPGs (including D&D) somewhat fails it. Most A-RPGs certainly fails it.

True, I guess AR is not really exclusive in the strongest sense.
Which other affixes can you think of that would work in a similar way? I guess you could have “+all dmg types” whereas others would need to get +dmg for each dmg type they used. But it still feels like that pigeonhole everyone who use multiple dmg types, into one option for ADA.

113

If you invest points into the Sorcs Offensive Attribute, you will gain x% increased AoE and if you will invest points into the Sorc Defensive Attribute, you will gain a bonus to Energy Shield, however, since they are minor bonuses, you will not miss out on much.

E.g. 70-75% of the total damage increase you’ll get from the Offensive Attribute will come from the “x% increased Damage” bonus.

Most/a lot of them are multiplicative with each other, so if you e.g. get 70% increased damage from the attributes and another 70% from items, it will not be a total increase of 140% damage, but rather an 89% increase in damage (similar to Focus and Restraint, which is not a 100% increase in damage, but a 125% increase in damage).

Because x% increased AoE is more archetypically related to the Sorc (at least in my opinion when I think about a Sorc who throws fireballs that Fireballs that detonate into large fiery explosions).

And it is not unfair because the bonus is rather small since it is a Secondary Bonus.

And “having it on top of a skill modifier” can also be said about x% increased damage, since it also is basically on every single offensive skill, just like x% increased AoE, x% reduced resource costs is also on almost every single offensive skill.

So I do not see a problem with that.

Also keep in mind that the increase in AoE is also happening in smaller steps and not in large steps. The affix might be less powerful than what comes to your mind at this moment.

Okay, I see, but what you understand as “interesting” probably differs from person to person. I for example think that such an Atribute System as I have shown it is really intersting.

The alternative would be something like this, where every class had

  • Offensive Attribute = x% increased damage per point
  • Defensive Attribute = x% reduced damage taken per point
  • Mobility Attribute = x% increased movement speed per point
  • Resource Management Attribute = x% reduced resource costs

Maybe you could say that everything else is redundant, but I would say that these additional things bring much more flavor to the the whole thing.

Yeah, and I apprechiate that.
I always like discussing with people who also bring mutual respect to the table.

114

@Clueso

TBH don’t like the “damage per point” approach. Would much rather pair hit-effect strengths with class attributes than skill damage

Explanation/s:

If you pair attributes with only hit-effects as an impact point, you end up in a very nice spot with 4 relatively different sources of damage output, i.e.:

  • Physical = ATK - DEF (Target)
  • Elemental = Elemental * (1 + %amplify)/(1+ %resist (target))
  • HitEffect = HitEffect * (1 + Attr/100)/(1 + Attr(Target)/100)
  • And the 4th damage source being the Skill as a separate damage source

I mean this is quite cool way to approach that shouldn’t be “dangerous” to get things super out of control by severely skweing the “pie chart of damage sources” in one way or another (at least not as much) IMO

First things first, would gladly abandon the Str/Dex/Int traditional attribute route (and try something new), but even in this particular case let’s say (for the sake of argument) that we decided the effects and attribute pairings go something like this:

  • Knockback/Stun/ArmorReduction/Cleave/Summon effect gets empowered by Str
  • Crit/Bleed/Blind/Slow/Pierce/Trap by Dex
  • Freeze/Root/DoT/Curse get empowered by Int

Wielding an Axe ?, could have a Cleave, Bleed, ArmorReduction, or even DoT hit-effect (or maybe less primary attack but more hit effect types than one)

If want to use your Crit as primary source it’s gonna perform better with more Dex on your character (without making certain skills broken)
If want to use ArmorReduction or Cleave then Str would be the choice
If having some DoT like Burn or Poison or whatever, then Int would be the best to invest into

The “good stuff” is that each weapon class can have at least one of these per attr type IMO, for examples:

  • (most common but not always) rolls for Staves: Freeze, Root, Blind, Knockback, Slow

  • (most common but not always) rolls for Wands: Freeze, DoT, Slow, ReduceArmor, Blind, Slow

  • (most common but not always) rolls for Hammers: Freeze, Root, Stun, Knockback, Crit, Slow

  • (most common but not always) rolls for Polearms: Pierce, Crit, Cleave, Bleed, Slow, DoT

…

Whatver, should’ve gotten the idea by now :slight_smile:

The problem of pairing the damage of skills with class attribute amounts is that “powercreep” potential. I mean you could even kinda end up in a D3 spot where numbers just get crazier and crazier with higher amount of attribute/s, on the other hand pairing the attribute amount with hit-effect powers (and things of somewhat secondary nature like Summon, Trap, Curse) shouldn’t backfire overall… :thinking:

115

I agree with what Lolli42 said, I’d prefer them dropping already that way, with their own pool of stats and a limited number of rolls.

What would keep the progression curve could be balancing the “chance to drop” vs the “chance of being good”. I mean, for every unique/legendary item dropping, you get 20 yellows and 100 blues. But the uniques are useful 100% of the time (yes, I know, unrealistic, but just for illustrating purposes), 1 out of 100 yellows are useful, and 1 out of 1000 blues are useful.

So this way, you’re 5 times more likely to wear an unique than a rare in a certain slot, and 10 times more likely to wear a unique than a magic item. That would keep tiers making sense, and a player would keep a higher level of excitement with higher tiers without rendering the lower ones into useless.

As I’ve said, the numbers are obviously just for illustration purposes.

1 Like
116

The issue with powercreep is powercreep, not that the Offensive Attribute gives you x% increased damage per point.

A situation like in D3 will never ever happen with an Attribute System, since the number of points you can get are limited and not unlimited/open-ended like in D3’s Paragon System.

The maximum number of Attribute Points you could get in the concept I proposed is 250 iirc, which you would have available at max level and after that nothing more, which is why there wouldn’t be any power creep.

One reason for why I came up with this idea was to make crafting more useful and another reason was that this way Legendary items could be more beefy on their own, which makes it feel even better when one drops.

117

You lost me there. ^^ What did you mean ?

Yes, and you’re right that means ADA may not be suited to be Attributes, in the classic sense.

I’m not sure actually. ^^ I had +Defense and +Attack in mind since every item will provide some but it’s not very interesting. Maybe new kinds of affixes with hard caps similar to resistances ?
Also, each ADA would need to have a defensive and offensive affix (or just have everyone of them have a defensive affix), if one boost damage and the other defense, it is doomed to end up imbalanced.

It is unfair for a Barbarian or any other class who wants more AoE and can’t get as much as Sorceress (unlike “+x% increased damage” or “x% reduced resource costs” that every class get as an Attribute).
And +50% ES for just 50 points in Magic Armor doesn’t seem small… but it’s just a matter of numbers after all, I understand your idea.

That would be more straightforward but still not a system I would choose. Some time ago I thought of these :

  • Might : + effects potency
  • Endurance : + effects duration
  • Precision : + chance of hit effect
  • Willpower : + resources (energy and CD) regeneration

… thought for how D4 seems to work right now.
But unlike you I don’t have imagined a whole game behind and many illustrations to showcase what I have in mind… so thanks for sharing this with us and triggering these exchange on the forum ! :slight_smile:

118

Your build could go for:

  1. Fire
  2. Frost
  3. Lightning
  4. Fire-Frost
  5. Fire-Lightning
  6. Frost-Lightning
  7. Fire-Frost-Lightning

Optimally, all these should be viable. Well, maybe not the last one, outside of some special legendaries (such as buffing your damage by how many different dmg types you use). The others should be viable through just the normal non-legendary affixes.

120

Which affixes would you have instead?

1 Like
121

No offense but I find all item affixes in all games of this genre including PoE, D2, D3, Grim Dawn are all starting to feel boring. Isn’t it time someone comes up with something a lot more interesting and original? +5 resist +2 damage +attack etc just seems so dated already.