Wasn't there a problem with melee characters not wanting to proc fire because it made their targets run away?
Are you sure you want to associate fire with Strength?

NotSorry: Bot d3 for cash, play POE all day
CaptainBurns: The game is just a means by which to kill things.

Posted by
Slicer
on Oct 23, 2011, 2:30:55 AM

I guess I don't understand how making it much harder to use off-alignment damage types (rangers using fire damage, templars using ice, ect) would cause more diverse builds..
But I haven't seen all the new toys in 0.9.3 yet so maybe I will be pleasantly surprised.

Urist McDwarfy has been happy lately. He admired an exceptional ARPG recently. He took joy in slaughter lately. He has been attacked by the dead recently.
Check out the Path of Exile wiki: http://en.pathofexilewiki.com

Posted by
UristMcDwarfy
on Oct 23, 2011, 8:12:58 AM

'

I guess I don't understand how making it much harder to use off-alignment damage types (rangers using fire damage, templars using ice, ect) would cause more diverse builds..
But I haven't seen all the new toys in 0.9.3 yet so maybe I will be pleasantly surprised.

I was talking more about diversity between classes, than within them. It means that, for example, a melee duelists and a melee templar are more likely to end up with more different builds due to having easier access to different elements. There's certainly room for disagreement on the issue, and I do see where you're coming from, but I personally feel it's better to keep them attribute-specific overall, but perhaps with reasonably low requirements (like DragoonWraith suggested) so that for example a maruader can use added cold damage, but with a lower level gem than a ranger of his level could.

Last edited by Mark_GGG on Oct 23, 2011, 11:25:13 AM

Posted by
Mark_GGG
on Oct 23, 2011, 11:23:23 AM

'

I was talking more about diversity between classes, than within them. It means that, for example, a melee duelists and a melee templar are more likely to end up with more different builds due to having easier access to different elements. There's certainly room for disagreement on the issue, and I do see where you're coming from, but I personally feel it's better to keep them attribute-specific overall, but perhaps with reasonably low requirements (like DragoonWraith suggested) so that for example a maruader can use added cold damage, but with a lower level gem than a ranger of his level could.

For me the elemental dmg problem also exist.
I will use always added fire damage over all other elements as any physical dmg dealer like ranger or maruder.
Simply because having 30% more dmg is higher than the flat dmg ,flat is good on low lvls only.
When your weapon reach higher lvl the tide change ,and the % starts to be much bigger than the flat ,also it adds much less MP to the cost of skill.
Personaly i am waiting for remake of all the passive support gems ,that add basicaly only boring mod of +x to something.
I would rather see for example:
Lighting dmg:
*Add lighting dmg
*Add small chance to shock enemy on attack (not only crit)
*Add small chance for chain lighting that deal dmg to few units starting from the one of your attack and shocking all of them (50% chance on crit)
*Remove chance of burning and freezing enemy with this skill (because what the fck is with freezing, burning and shocking enemy at one time)
*Block possiblity to use other add.element support gem on the same skill (same reason as above)
*Convert all other elemental and magic dmg in ur stats to lighting dmg at some ratio (If you have +15-20 fire dmg +1-5 ice dmg ,it will be all converted to lighting ,like turning ur skill to full electric power)
*Change animation of skill a bit
ADDITIONALY TO THAT
Changes in current skills:
'Pseudo removal' of most skills in game and adding 'model skills'. Indtroducing magic element to game (or force).
For example:
Remove ice and lighting nova from game.
Model skill for them would be just 'magic nova' or 'nova'.
By adding elemental support gem you change 'magic nova' to for example 'lighting nova' or 'ice nova' or even new ones like 'chaos/poison nova' and 'fire nova'.
Example number 2 with additional effect i model:
Remove fireball ,spark and ice spear.
Add model skill called 'magic missle'.
If magic missile is sloted with fire dmg it gain +100% explosion chance on impact (fireball).
If sloted with lighting dmg it gain life span and bouncing effect (spark).
If sloted with ice dmg it gain 100% pierce (ice spear).
Example number 3:
Remove freezing pulse and add model skill called pulse or something similar to that.
If sloted with ice dmg it gain width (freezing pulse).
If sloted with lighting dmg it gain ability to bounce between targets (chain lighting).
If sloted with fire dmg it leave fire trait after missile ( what name ?? i have no idea).
If sloted with chaos dmg it change to maintain skill (something like flamethrower but made of acid).

Last edited by herflik on Oct 23, 2011, 12:23:45 PM

Posted by
herflik
on Oct 23, 2011, 11:51:27 AM

'

'

I guess I don't understand how making it much harder to use off-alignment damage types (rangers using fire damage, templars using ice, ect) would cause more diverse builds..
But I haven't seen all the new toys in 0.9.3 yet so maybe I will be pleasantly surprised.

I was talking more about diversity between classes, than within them. It means that, for example, a melee duelists and a melee templar are more likely to end up with more different builds due to having easier access to different elements. There's certainly room for disagreement on the issue, and I do see where you're coming from, but I personally feel it's better to keep them attribute-specific overall, but perhaps with reasonably low requirements (like DragoonWraith suggested) so that for example a maruader can use added cold damage, but with a lower level gem than a ranger of his level could.

Lowering the requirements would be a good alternative.
I think there's already a lot more to differentiate between the Templar and the Duelist than just the type of elemental damage they have access to.
I think you've already got a good idea with the way you're differentiating skills based on weapons used, and as the number of skills increases, that gap will carry on increasing. I would, however, like to see all the classes having easy access to all the elements, as in my opinion, it could only help build diversity.

Posted by
iamacyborg
on Oct 23, 2011, 2:51:10 PM