TOPIC: Basic Changes to 2016 Character Cards

Why do they need to meet the goals the other systems have Just because they have the same name?

jedibcg wrote: Why do they need to meet the goals the other systems have Just because they have the same name?

Currently Ranger and Monk outdamage all other classes.

In some cases they outdamage by a LARGE margin.

The general Holy Trinity of RPGs exists because it works.
(Tank/Healer/DPS)


When a melee character has more HP, more AC, better saves and more damage than a spellcaster character there is something wrong with the system design.

DPS=?

Damage Per Second
It's a common term in computer games to compare offensive capabilities.
I think an equivalent TD term would be Average Damage Per Round, or just DPR.

Druegar wrote: Damage Per Second
It's a common term in computer games to compare offensive capabilities.
I think an equivalent TD term would be Average Damage Per Round, or just DPR.

Makes sense to me.

The tank, damage, healer concepts are more MMORPG concepts than D&D concepts.

I play WoW, but I don't want TD to be WoW.

bpsymington wrote: DPS=?

DPS = Damage Per Second. In MMORPGs it is used to describe classes/characters whose primary purpose in a party is to deal damage. This is opposed by classes who are primarily there to soak up damage (tanks) or heal damage.

In the above context he just meant "Primary Damage dealing character"

DPS could also mean Damage Per Slide in True Dungeon, though Damage Per Round (counting both slides from Rangers/Monks) is probably a better statistic.

jedibcg wrote: Why do they need to meet the goals the other systems have Just because they have the same name?

Because 99.999% of the people who play True Dungeon only think about it 1 day a year. So, its easier to use the tropes those people already know from D&D and other tabletop/computer RPGs to help them pick classes quickly in the setup area.

Harlax wrote: The tank, damage, healer concepts are more MMORPG concepts than D&D concepts.

I play WoW, but I don't want TD to be WoW.

You haven't played much 4th edition, have you .

(In 4e D&D adopted a very similar model, but they called them: "controller, defender, leader, striker").

Jake Fitch wrote:
Because 99.999% of the people who play True Dungeon only think about it 1 day a year. So, its easier to use the tropes those people already know from D&D and other tabletop/computer RPGs to help them pick classes quickly in the setup area.

Wait - is this an argument for solopsism . Like - 5000 people play D&D a year, right? At least 50 of them think about it more than 1 day a year. That's 1%.

jedibcg wrote: Why do they need to meet the goals the other systems have Just because they have the same name?

I'm not sure we need the same archetypes (but I'm open to it), but I think substantial imbalance is odd - it may be a design feature that I don't understand, but if it's pure accident, I think it would be worthwhile to try to balance stuff out.

For example, looking at the Dwarf Fighter versus Monk:

Dwarf Fighter	+3/+1	+1/+1	7/1/2 - 10	8 (!)
Monk	+2/+2 x2	+2/+2	6/6/9 - 21 (!)	35

The main thing the Dwarf has going for it is the ability to wear armor, and equip a variety of weapons, especially at common or uncommon rarity. That trades off against two sliders, a higher natural AC, and saves that are twice as good.

Or consider the Druid and Wizard:

Druid	-/-	+2/+2	6/2/8 - 16	40 (!)
Wizard	-/-	-/-	2/1/4 - 7 (!)	23

The Druid has better stats, saves that are twice as good, more hit points, can equip armor and some slashing weapons, and is arguably the better spell caster (certainly is the more versatile spell caster).

Seems like maybe it would be a good idea for those of us that have this feeling to put together a list of issues we currently see, with the math to back them up, and have them in hand at WYC to discuss with Jeff. He seems open to discuss things with the players and I'd expect we would be given proper acknowledgement if we are simply looking to have class design and balance be a little more accurate.

The best we can do is provide the data and give it to Jeff, let him decide what changes need made.

In melee tutorials, I'd either delete the references to practice, or say "practice in training room." Many new players read that to mean they get a free practice slide against monsters, and I've never seen a trainer stop non-fighters from practicing their sliding.

Change Cleric card to reference the correct number of beads. (My biggest OCD peeve.)

It would be awesome, but impractical, to issue coaches a hole punch, so they can punch out each player's starting HP for non-newbies. I might pack one along, if defacing the card like that wouldn't get me in trouble.