Another reason we need respec

[shwqa]

I like the idea of respec simply because it sucks to get far in the game and realize that your character sucks and there is nothing you could do to fix that. Anyways to avoid abuse why not have a permanent lose of skill? - 1 class skill and 50 health each respec.

[tiger_eye]

Perhaps you could meet a wise hermit in the far-east that can help you respec 1 category point, 5 class talent points, 5 generic talent points, and 5-10 attribute points (such as Str, Dex, etc). That is, if you are able to pass his rigorous training to prove your versatility...

Anyway, I don't think respec'ing is necessary at all. If you make a mistake (or are a novice), it doesn't cripple the game. Exploring what the talents do is part of the fun, and trying different things with different characters makes the game more replayable. And if you want to cheat, then cheat !

[gruevy]

I disagree with two points being made. Firstly, I can't think of a reason why it would be bad let people use low level useful skills at low levels, and then change to high level useful skills at high levels. Every skill ISN'T equally viable, and since no one seems to be willing to actually do the testing necessary to make it so, making people get halfway through the game before they realize how useless a skill was, despite its awesome name and stats at rank 1, seems awfully rude to me. It isn't the game's job to waste someone's time to get a good laugh. The game is there to be played. Why do some of you seem like you'd be personally offended if a newb was able to respec and survive for 4 more levels? GAME BROKEN GRRRR... Newbies should be rewarded for exploring and trying new things, not punished. Letting them get a bit further with the character they've been playing for four hours, by respecing and trying something else, is rewarding. Making them repeat the exact same 5 dungeons ten times with the same class before they figure out something that's even capable of surviving because of an arbitrary and obnoxious lack of basic functionality? Not rewarding. Not fun.

Also, I don't think there should be a 'developer's version' that allows respecs. Either the game as it's intended to be played has it, or it doesn't, but we're testing the game as it's intended to be played.

[ohioastro]

If the designers want us to give them feedback we need the tools to do so. I don't do lua scripting, nor do very many people, so if you want a significant fraction of the people to test things then you have to have some transparent means of doing so.

I'd rather focus on making the game more consistently challenging. The most obvious example is the (relatively easy) orc prides contrasted against the deadly orc patrols; another is the very difficult vaults filled with utterly useless rewards in the late dungeons. Slog through a sea of level 75+ mobs, get a plain elm bow. Yes! The final fight, by contrast, is a lot of fun and a lot of challenge. There are also imbalanced in high level abilities, tough to flag without testing. The usual roguelike mode is to make people do the intro levels over and over and over and over and over, with few folks ever seeing the later levels. This doesn't work as well for ToME, since there are a series of distinct dungeons.

That's another way of saying that the game would benefit a lot if there were some transparent testing modes. It would also benefit quite a bit, in the sense of more useful feedback on all of the skills, if there was some respec option in the beta. It may be that the purists (and roguelikes have 'em, God bless) hate the thought - but multiple lives have worked out pretty well for ToME I think. Worth considering, at least as an option while polishing the game.

[shooth]

The problem with no in-game way to correct bad builds is that it literally wastes players time -especially considering how disproportionately good/bad some trees/skills can be. If you don't comb the forums, you may not be "in the know" and end up with a severly underperforming character. This turns players off.

Players need an in-game way to help correct bad builds without making it overpowering or abusable - its just a matter of being creative in the approach...

Two possible approaches:
---
Sacrifice levels: (5 levels model)
- Player selects 7 class points to deallocate.
- Player selects 4 generic points to deallocate.
- Player loses 15 stat points randomly.
- Player loses 5 levels.
- Non-repeatable, optional quest at level 25.
This approach would allow a player to sacrifice 1 class point and 5 levels worth of time in order to re-allocate 6 class points and 4 generic points.... essentially enough to allow someone to decide that the investment up to 5 in a skill was not worth it, and to try something else. In cases where the skill/stat reduction removes min reqs for a skill, it should be treated the way it is in other circumstances - inability to grow the skill, but it is present.
---
Tree Amnesia:
- Player selects a tree to "forget", and the tree becomes cleared and unavailable.
- Player gets back class points allocated in that tree, minus 1.
- Player can allocate points directly.
- Requires an unused tree point, which is lost in the process.
- Non-repeatable, optional quest available at 25.
This approach would allow a player to correct potentially much more than the level approach... but would also cost a player not only a class point, but a tree and a tree point. A steep price, but one which allows a player to consolidate a build which is too spread out.

Both of these ideas can be implemented as quests, simple or complex....

shooth

[darkgod]

I wnot comment if I want or not respec, I dunno.

But the argument that some trees are less good would be a *WRONG* reason to do it.
If talents are bad: report them, suggest something better.
This is not a corporate game, people's voice is heard, so speak up when you see something you think is too powerless or powerfull

[madmonk]

The other point here is that people are essentially complaining about not knowing what a particular talent actually does (the low-down details).

This would suggest that a list of talents & details of their function might be a good thing to have on the Wiki...

[Final Master]

The other point here is that people are essentially complaining about not knowing what a particular talent actually does (the low-down details).

This would suggest that a list of talents & details of their function might be a good thing to have on the Wiki...

This is a project I am currently working on, but as I am also working on many other things, they are taking some time.

For those that are interested in what I have in store for the wiki/documentation that comes with the game:
Expected performance from all talents at minimal stat requirement [and all associated information]
Laymen terms full spoilers for all artifacts
Laymen terms full spoilers for all actors
Character guides for all classes
What to Expect: A Journeyman's Guide to the World of Tome
A list of all quests and what they involve
A list of all unlocks and what they involve [this is already mostly completed on the wiki]
Complete debrief on the saves and Armor/Defense system
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If anyone is interested in helping, or if you feel that there needs to be more documentation - please, post your ideas, suggestions and volunterisms here - http://forums.te4.org/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=25162

Thank you

FM

[PS - No, we don't need respec-ing, especially after this is done.]

[gruevy]

DarkGod: One problem that I've run into when trying to decide what to recommend as far as buffing certain trees is that generally, any one tree by itself is hard to judge. It's only when you use the skills in conjunction with everything else going on with your character - stats, eq, other skills - that you realize that you made a bad decision. Someone else with a completely different setup might be able to use those talents how they are and make it work.

In a way, I've been phrasing it wrong. Some skills are probably still underpowered, but that's not exactly the reason. Respecs should be allowed because of the time involved in realizing that things aren't working for you, and there's no way you could have known ahead of time. Allowing them will have the added benefit of people being able to try more things, and therefore be able to give better feedback about what needs to be buffed or nerfed.

[tiger_eye]

and there's no way you could have known ahead of time.

A tactic I like to employ is to keep a handful of unused generic and class points in case I need them (and a category point, if I can). If I recognize I'm in a particularly difficult situation--and different situations are difficult in different ways (!oh god, why do luminous horrors always seem to come in groups of three now! AAAAHHH!!)--then I can decide how to best use some or all of the points I have. This gives me the flexibility to respond to a variety of challenges without respec'ing, and has saved my characters life--and Melinda's--more than once. This tactic is very different from respec'ing; it is "spec'ing when you need it". It also let's me see how talents scale with talent level. Final Master makes a good point, too, that once in-game and out-of-game documentation is where it will be when the game is no longer in beta, then there will be a way to know ahead of time.

[jrmunch]

The argument against respec is very weak.

1. If some else respecs it will ruin my own enjoyment of the game
2. Choices are supposed to be permanent
3. People will meta game

Against #1 I would say, tough.
Against #2 I would say then why are incription/rune choices not permanent? Is there some sort of laser tatoo removal that must be roleplayed?
Against #3 I would say there are any number of ways to do this now.

The argument for respec is simply that it increases enjoyment of the game for the one choosing to do so, mainly by preventing otherwise unnecessary rerolling due to a handful of misspent points.

I am confident that should it be implemented, it would be done in a reasonable and balanced manner.

[edge2054]

I disagree with the above post.

The point about inscriptions is moot. Inscriptions are gear that works like talents. Beyond category points and gold you don't invest in them.

Talents are an investment and some talents pay off huge early game and some late game. When I'm playing a class with a blind ability I rarely invest in it early but I make sure I have it high before tackling the east and this is just one example. If I could spend points on a talent that I'd like now and not have to worry about having a talent I need later that's extremely meta-gamey and it makes it very hard to balance talents from a game design perspective. You have to start asking yourself not what situation would a player use this in but how can the player use this in every situation, because if they can't they'll just respec out of it or spec into it as needed which makes the circumstantial talents not circumstantial at all because everyone will have them when they need them.

Of course what I'm talking about above is all the extreme form of respecing like what's offered in WoW. A very limited scope respec might not be bad... and by limited I mean 5 points moved max per GAME.

All that aside a less limited respec system might be very nice for discovery mode and I agree that confirmation dialogues to prevent accidents are something the game is in need of.

[gruevy]

You're arguing against a point no one is making. No one is saying that you should be able to respec at any time, on the fly, for free. Being able to fully respec your whole character once or twice in a game does not ruin balance. It gives the character a different build, which they could also have started with, to continue on with from that point. Basically, everyone agrees there should be a cost, and no one is talking about having a completely free and easy floating point system to change between dungeon levels at will. You're straw manning this argument.

[edge2054]

First of all... I never said anyone was after a free floating system. I used a worse case scenario to illustrate the worst case scenario (and even pointed that out). I also used it to illustrate the difference between something you invest in and something that you don't (inscriptions vs. talents) over the course of the game. I fail to see how I'm 'straw manning this' but to insure that I don't from now on I'll be using quotes in this post.

Firstly, I can't think of a reason why it would be bad let people use low level useful skills at low levels, and then change to high level useful skills at high levels

I brought up Blind. Confusion is another big one. Immunities are all gear dependent and talents that grant them are naturally worth less once you have the appropriate gear. Now that armor is on diminishing returns talents that grant armor points are much better at low levels then high. The talent that grants hit is practically required for your first 6 levels as a weapon using class but once your Strength or Dex gets high enough it really isn't needed anymore. The list goes on and on.

Newbies should be rewarded for exploring and trying new things, not punished. Letting them get a bit further with the character they've been playing for four hours, by respecing and trying something else, is rewarding. Making them repeat the exact same 5 dungeons ten times with the same class before they figure out something that's even capable of surviving because of an arbitrary and obnoxious lack of basic functionality? Not rewarding. Not fun.

I offered a solution to the newbie issue, again something you brought up. I suggested full respecs in discovery mode would be fine since really game balance isn't much of a concern there.

Being able to fully respec your whole character once or twice in a game does not ruin balance. It gives the character a different build, which they could also have started with, to continue on with from that point.

They could have started with but they didn't. What they did was they was either planned for long term success or short term gain. In any system that offers respecs (especially any sort of full respec) you almost always take short term gain because long term success isn't as big of a concern. In other words, the short term gets you where you need to be and the long term is where you want to be. Without respecs the player must carefully consider both. With them you make no choice between the two.

Anyway I like shooth's amnesia potion idea.

[gruevy]

So your reason that we shouldn't have respecs is that some skills are crap in the end game, and others are crap in the early game, and you're perfectly happy if that continues to be the case?

The existence of skills that are really awful at low levels, or really awful at high levels, is an argument FOR respecs, not against them.