Yeah that could definitely work
1 Like
The stats in PoE are the backbone of the skill tree and class design. PoE is proof it is NOT outdated, and can be heavily built upon.
To get bow skills you need to go to the ranger area of the tree, which like you pointed out, makes you intrinsically pick up Dex nodes. Itās baked in perfectly. If your character has LOTS of bow nodes, you probably naturally have a lot of Dex and wonāt need to find it on gear.
But if you want to wear plate as a bow user, you need to solve the problem of not having enough natural strength. Maybe there is a legendary you can take advantage of to efficiently solve that problem???
These dynamic problems and goals are what make RPGs so great. Itās sad Blizzard hates or misunderstands so much about it.
3 Likes
Cool!
But i think its better now.
Ā° one attribute for offensive hability/skill / damage increase (only phisical), equip requeriments, physical effects resistance, rapid fall recovery,
Ā° one attribute for defensive hability/skill / reduced all damage taken, life, resistances, HP regeneration
Ā° one attribute for speed / aka movement speed, attack speed, maybe physical dodge chance, cooldown reduction, fast cast skill
Ā° one attribute for resource management and magic damage / resource cost, resource regeneration, magic resistance, magic dodge, chance of not wasting resources on skill.
Thank you!
I donāt see these as dynamic problems. These are problems to be solved when planning the character out, and maybe an issue before ~68 or so but the 5ish hours it takes to get to maps are just a meaningless chore to me.
For a game meant to be played solo, 1-5 times through the story with only self found gear, I could maybe see this being an issue but in an always online game with trading this will basically never be an actual hindrance. Even in SSF PoE worst case scenario you waste a point on a +30 node until your ultimate solution is usable.
I donāt see how a problem with a naturally baked in solution (as you pointed out, most of the time you will get the stats you need from the pathing you would take anyway) is interesting.
Itās used as a natural limiter to make characters you create make thematic sense. Itās a built in framework for the rest of the games mechanics to fill in. Itās the backbone of RPGs for a reason.
4 Likes
I too would like an attribute system, but the gameplay would have to be one which actively rewards skillful play.
I want a skillful player to be able to make the choice of sacrificing survivability for other things like mobility or damage, while a less skillful player can choose to sacrifice damage for survivability and peace of mind and comfort. Then if a player is too greedy and sacrifices too much survivability that his/her skill cannot make up for the lack of raw stats then that player gets punished with character deaths. Right now this choice is entirely dependant on equipment but Iād like for stat points to also make a significant enough difference too. Planning and deciding on play styles specific to myself is part of the fun of rpgs imo
I want these choices to have meaning so players shouldnāt be able to respec stats easily, but I donāt want it to be overly punishing so maybe respecs can be bought at a hefty price or something.
1 Like
Allocation VS Election.
Allocate; being all players having a number of points to invest which unlock certain mechanics.
Elective; being all players have access to everything and only limited to a certain amount of access.
in DII; Players allocate 510 attribute points, gear REQlegend (STR, DEX)
Players may also allocate 110 skill points, into 30 different abilities, each point tensiles the strength of each ability along with other variables (synergies, grants from items; skillers) this determines how useful the ability becomes and interesting enoughā¦ Not all skills needed to be fully allocated in order to benefit. Some skills are useful by investing a single point, while others absolutely need full investment.
in DIII; Players can freely select between 6 abilities, and 5 passive points. Which everyone can change, anytime (excluding events) and this system is built heavily on the interactions on items. Its super simple, and basically IMOā¦ Harder to balanceā¦
For example, if two builds;
one OP build
one moderately good build
If both of these builds in any way share at least one item (due to the resourcefulness of the item) and say they want to leave the OP build where it is, they buff the item of the moderately good build which is also used in the OP build; then,
Your basically making the OP build even more powerful and nothing really changesā¦ This actually goes further, because its an example, meaningā¦
There are hundreds of builds in DIII, but only a fraction of those builds are metagazed. The chances of those builds, sharing an item with a build that isnāt so powerful. Its staggeringly high
Then you have SET items, built around skills and functions; integrating on a system that is infinitely scaled until a certain threshold is met (the paragon point system) And every build; that is, DPS and TOUGHNESS, scales way differently.
The Witchdoctor for example has a passive that increases INT by 50%. Its insane, because eventually the WD can go from the worst class, to the very top, based upon on how high the players paragon level is.
In laymenās terms, not every build equally increases in power determined by infinite level points. One builds dps could increase by .1313213% per paragon level, another could increase by .7607450674% per paragon level.
These are a few examples of balance, feel free to chime in, and correct me where I am wrong. This is how I learn.
I am some zero poster, good morning Vietnam.
3 Likes
I like it too!
Great post!
I prefer a stat system over no system at all. Sure it will turn into the same as d2 with putting enough points to wear certain items then rest into vitality. In the early stages of the game because we wouldnāt know what items to look for, we wouldnāt know where to put the stats. End game probably will just force us into d2 allocation of points. But again, i think its better than no stats at all. Just my opinions.
1 Like
It will not create a situation like in D2 where you had to put x points into STR to wear certain armor, IF gear has no attribute requirements.
Then the Attribute System would be there to customize your character further:
Do you wanna hit harder?
Doe you wanna be faster?
Do you wanna be tougher?
Do you wanna have more resource available and use your skills more often?
For each of these things there is an attribute for that, but you wouldnāt need to put x points into an attribute just to wear gear.
The attributes I suggest are not like STR, DEX or INT, since they are universially useful for all classes.
D4 needs a stat system. I dont want another dumbed down diablo game.
3 Likes
I think what attributes were intended for in the first place was to make a Barb more Barb, a Sorc more Sorc, and a Paladinā¦ well, more hammerdin. By tying gear back to certain requirements, it made the gear easier to be attained by the so-called correct class.
But what everyone is missing, is that it gives all classes the ability to go in any directionā¦ make my sorc more barb, by giving him STR and wearing plate, or my barb more ranged by upping his DEX and giving him javalins. These arenāt the meta, but they make for choice and fun choices at that.
Attributes and gear requirements went hand in hand. If you donāt have one, you might as well not have the otherā¦ imo.
3 Likes
First time poster here and let me say this has been an excellent discussion on the merits of attribute systems ( the best I have found so far on here and Reddit) and the importance of connecting them to meaningful choice. I was going to create a new post regarding my ideas and opinions on this but if itās alright with the OP Iād like to tack my stuff on in here as a lot of it is closely connected to their four attribute system. When I get home this evening I will try to post everything including my visual mock up of what Iād like to see and the rationale behind it.
As a primer I will say for me it helps to view Attributes in three categories, Iāll use D3 and D2 as an example:
Primary:
These are the āGodā numbers that determine everything. They should be simple whole numbers with a simple thematic name that relates to what they impact. They function as an umbrella under which each secondary attribute lies. The player should be able to look at them at a glance and while they have a quantitative value associated to them they should get a qualitative feel of āhigher better, lower worseā. In My opinion they should be impacted by player point allocation upon leveling or reward and items.
D2: Strength, Dexterity, Energy, and Vitality
D3: Strength, Dexterity, Intelligence, and Vitality
Secondary:
This is where the math magic actually happens where you can get out a spreadsheet and go crazy if you are so inclined. These numbers are all calculated off of the player driven input of a primary attribute that they fall under There is some equation behind the scenes that pumps this out and these are the numbers that interact to make the game function. They can be larger involve percentages and fractions. The player should be allowed to be aware of their existence from a quantitative stand point but not required. They should be translated into qualitative aspects like bars and visual effects; I now run faster, hit more often, have a larger health or resource pool or that pool recharges quicker. In My opinion these should be modified by items, skills and traits.
Secondary attributes in parentheses
D2: Strength (attack damage) Dexterity (attack rating, defense) Vitality (max life, max stamina), Energy (max mana, resistances)
D3: Strength (damage (BARB and CRUS), defense) Dexterity (damage (DH and MONK), defense) Vitality (max life), Intelligence (damage (WIZ, WD, and NECRO), resistances)
Tertiary:
These are the same in function and form as secondary attributes but are either calculated by a combination of primary and/or secondary attributes or an entirely separate entity. In both games this is everything else not mentioned above so think things like gold and magic find, health and resource per second. The exact decision as to what is secondary and tertiary is obviously up to the designer. In My opinion these should be modified by items, skills and traits.
Of course the issue becomes how much do you want the player to interact with these? Do you want them to be putting points in every little secondary or tertiary attribute? That gives them a ton of customization freedom but at the cost of getting bogged down in numbers and analysis paralysis. If you have them interact via primary categories how many and what secondary attributes do they effect? Do you have them interact at all or maybe leave it all on items, skills and traits? These are the questions the designer has to ask themselves. Personally I think D2 did a better job of this than D3 and in further posts, if youāll stick with me, Iāll explain why I think that is and where I think D4 should go. Iāll stick to things mostly in a qualitative sense as I think that is easier to follow.
Again I just want to give a hand to everyone involved in this thread for a great and respectful discussion on the subject.
1 Like
Ey, whats this? A new challengre!?
Welcome to hell.
1 Like
Because in 2000 nobody had the internet to search for guides???
2 Likes
Hah! I still have the original strategy guide book for LoD. Any one else remember those?
1 Like
Thanksā¦glad to be here! and super glad I found this thread.
To continueā¦
This will be a fairly long set of posts and I will try to use images where relevant. I appreciate anyone willing to take the time to read it. I want to stress these are just suggestions and opinions, Iām not demanding anything or telling anyone this is how it has to be; for me personally these are important aspects that make or break my decision to invest in this form of entertainment and on the off chance that the people who are selling it to me want to know what drives me to purchase a product like this (and they said they do so Iām taking that statement in good faith) Iām going to try to tell them. That being said I do encourage thoughtful comments, constructive criticism, and requests for clarification from those who have read the post because I also like talking about this stuff.
The lack of attribute assignment is one of my biggest concerns for D4 and was a huge issue of mine in terms of how it was implemented in D3. Note there are attributes in the game, that Iām not disputing, but what has been revealed seems very bare bones in itās current state to me and extremely simplified. There is a balance between simple and complex and my opinion is D2 did a better job (and could do better in some regards) then D3, and D4 looks like they maybe taking that same route so I want to express my concern.
First, if you donāt want to assign attributes; fine, donāt.
Iām all for the game giving you the option to have an auto assignment that basically keeps your attributes at the same distribution as your class starts at as you level. In fact I think having a standard base line for each class is crucial, it is what gives each class a basic identity.
I also think there should be a maximum value to attributes and I think there should be a limit in theory to how many points you can get over the life time of a character and where each character starts on the scale (again this is part of character class identity and any good rpg). H3ysoOs āAllocation vs. Electionā is spot on above and many others have said this too. This is a fundamental way that defines character classes. By giving them different start points your barbarian can literally not have the same attributes at the end (and yes a character needs to end at some point) as a sorcerer or druid, as long as there is no way you can max every attribute out. Now you can have all this with just traits and skills but I think a well flushed out but easy to interact with attribute system makes things so much better.
If just maxing everything out is your goal you are playing the wrong type
of game and genre. What you are looking for is an action/adventure game where everyone is the same and just gets more powerful and can end in the exact same state of awesome (and thatās fine I like those games too but that is not an ARPG).
The RPG aspect is about choice. Choice does not mean my character gets everything, choice means I made a decision to take advantage of one thing and forgo another. My character should have weaknesses and strengths and my choices should impact how I play the game and interact with the world. This also means I should be allowed to deviate from that āstandardā build and if I want a barbarian who is a little more magic focused I can make that and even though heād clearly never be as āviableā for end game stuff he might still be a fun and unique way to play with friends and in fact I might not care about end game āviabilityā. This was one of the great things about D2. It let you make what you wanted (within some confines obviously), it gave me the choices I wanted to feel like I had created these characters. D3 does too, I just never felt like it reached the same amount of character customization, I still enjoyed playing it, just not nearly as much.
I think people are often far too concerned with the idea that letting other people make sub-optimal choices in games will some how ruin their experience.
It wonāt.
I say let the player explore, this is a sandbox for you to have fun in and that is what is fun about choice in games. Also the choices of another person of how to play the game doesnāt effect you so just let them play the game they want to. I also understand that choice can be frustrating to some players, but again an auto assignment option can solve that. Iād also have to ask that person if choice and character customization are not something you are interested in perhaps this is the wrong game genre for you.
The way Iād like to see an attribute system implemented is in the same vain as to to what clueso is talking about here. Iāll show you what Iām thinking of and how Iād break it down in my next post once I figure out where the best place to upload the related images is. 
2 Likes
So here is an example of how I would break this system down, I finally attached images to help visualize. (pardon my photoshop skills I just like to play around on there sometimes). Also I appologize for the need to put some spaces in the link, but apparently Iām too new to include direct links in my posts. if the mods have an issue with my solution to this I apologize for trying to have a discussion and I guess Iāll get banned.
https: //imgur. com/gallery/wr3oHaO
I agree with clueso, four primary attributes seems like a good breakdown. My opinion here is donāt fix what isnāt broke. You want enough to generate complexity (I think two is too few, that is a A or B choice which is boring) but also not so many that the player starts to get overwhelmed and loses focus on the action side of the ARPG. Strength (STR), Dexterity (DEX), Intelligence (INT), and Vitality (VIT) are what I would go with for primary attributes, I think the way D3 named them is thematically sensible and tells the player how to think about them. cluesoās equivalents of Power, Agility, Spirit, and Constitution work well too.
Each primary attribute is then associated with roughly four secondary attributes, (again similar to clueso here where they looked at connecting three secondary attributes to each) these are obviously just suggestions and again this is very qualitative the exact math behind the calculation of these values would have to be played around with but I think the concept is a sensible one.
Tertiary attributes would then be tucked away under the details section just like in D3. I liked this, I think they did that really well so keep it, itās there if you are into that kind of thing but you donāt have to look at it if you donāt want to. In terms of what exactly is tertiary and secondary and what primary attribute they fall under the exact choice is not the point here. The point is that interconnected decision making and cost/benefit analysis these systems give you makes character creation more unique and fun. and if you donāt like it click that āauto assignā and move on.
I do think it is worth separating damage into two types; physical and magic; and magic damage into itās separate, say six types from D3, that are associated with the resistances (fire, cold, lightning, poison, arcane, and holy). We can go into my thought on the damage attribute and all that in more detail if someone is actually interested, but this way I think it makes magic users and physical combat users focus on separate primary attributes. sure this is reminiscent of D3 (and actually something I think has potential if implemented correctly) but by attaching more secondary attributes to those primary attributes, that are thematically appropriate, it forces one to make a more interesting choices between what type of damage do I want to mainly do and how do I want to do it? Is it focus only on my damage attribute (in this example either strength or intelligence) and do large amounts of damage infrequently or splash in some dexterity and do smaller amounts more often, can I now find items that further let me shift this balance? How do I plain on protecting myself from incoming damage do I want to totally avoid it with a heavy dexterity build or take it head on with vitality or perhaps reduce it more with strength? Where can my traits and items come in to help me out here? These are the questions I like to ask as a player.
Example
Barbarian:
A barbarian is thought of as a primarily Strength based class, they hit hard and can take a hit because strength is all about raw physical damage, physical damage reduction, and bouncing back form a hit, they often like to supplement that with having a large health pool so that when even large amounts of damage get through they can keep going. They are a class that hits hard but not often but when they do it is big hits thus they are not typically dexterity focused. But lets say I want to use my skills more often perhaps I need to consider some investment in intelligence or on that same attribute switch maybe I want to use magic imbued weapons so sure Iām going to do my physical damage through strength but my focusing more on intelligence will help to increase the additional fire or cold damage my swords do. Perhaps I want to hit a bit more often or rather then take a hit I want to dodge it so dexterity is what i need to shift into, to address theses shortcomings i need to sacrifice a little Vitality or Strength to do that. Iām now different then most standard barbarians at my most basic attributes but I made a choice as a player to go down a different path, I as the player got to input that decision. My character is mine; a unique expression of the way I want to play out that classes fundamental characteristics. It has weaknesses and strengths that I have to play around and figure out how best to deal with. And hey I have other choices like traits and items that I can invest in too to help shore up some of my deficiencies.
Sorceress:
a sorceress is more of an intelligence based class, here damage comes from her knowledge of magic and the arcane and her ability to tap into that deep knowledge pool quickly, she often wants to avoid getting hit and hit often thus she supplements with some dexterity. but maybe sheās tired of being a glass canon so she sacrifices a little bit of that mobility and accuracy for vitality which will give her a bit more health and resistance to the elements and conditions should she get hit. Again here items and traits can help her make up for her some of her shortcomings.
With a system like this if I want to I can deviate from that norm by moving away from what is the ātraditionalā or āviableā path because I have the choice to adjust attributes to create something unique that provides a different game experience and challenge. This choice leads me, the player, to discover new things and want to come back to play again and try something new. I think these are the interesting choices you should have to make in character customization and what D2 and many table top RPGs like D&D do so well. I think having this type of three tiered attribute system that the player interacts with to create the baseline numbers that drive the game is important and I think this is where D3 stumbled. By attaching the same secondary attribute of damage to a different primary attribute for every class and only one other secondary attribute to each primary attribute (defense for Strength and Dexterity, resistances for Intelligence and life for Vitality) D3 was a far less interesting game because, combined with the fact that you have access to all the skills at the same power level as every other character at your level (another topic entirely, although related and something they appear to have addressed), now only one attribute and vitality really matter and you canāt even change them if you wanted to. In D3 there is one thing to tune and differentiate your character from another; items. I like Gothic fantasy dress-up just as much as the next person obviously, but I donāt want that to be it.
D2 tied a few secondary attributes each to a single different primary attribute for every class so that way the way you dealt damage, prevented damage, and the access you had to mana and life were all separate and made you make choices whose base values sat solely within the players hands to choose; your character was further augmented by the items and skills you used not solely defined by your item choice. I think these multiple ways of tuning a character allow you to differentiate your character more from a game-play standpoint. It is the same way a character creation screen with more sliding bars lets you differentiate the look of your character that much more.
Obviously balancing these to get the desired effect is not a simple job, itās super tough to program right and to get items, traits, and skills to sink up but I think that this type of breakdown is what is needed for a great ARPG. In my opinion it leads to more diversity (some very subtle) in builds because not everyone has to go about their base attributes the same way. it is of course a battle with complexity vs simplicity but I think D3 lost some complexity and some people my self included would like to see that return and a system like this allows that to happen.
1 Like
That is interesting.
Thanks for sharing.
2 Likes
Maybe base stats are a broken system for a game where you are intended to get potentially hundreds of points doing the same thing.
Every single suggestion for strength dex int vit just ends up the same. With each stat being tied to damage/defense but also the same stats we already have. Crit, life, resistances, armor, etc.
We already have those stats on armor. Adding bloat to each stat doesnāt make it more interesting, it just takes away from a system that already covers the bases.
Systems like DnD use lower values and do just fine because thereās a tangible difference between 10 strength and 18 strength.
In Diablo 2 and 3 we have numbers that significantly exceed that.
Not only that but the concept of strength on a sorc with no strength bases abilities just doesnāt make any sense no matter how much padding you add to the stat itself.
Stats need to change to a system that fits with the game design of potentially hundreds of a single value. And also to apply to all classes near equally.