Item Balancing (Feedback / Discussion)

I'd like to start by saying that this post is a critical examination of items power level.

I am drawing conclusions from things I haven't yet seen. (A +8 item might come with some serious penalties, for example, this presumes otherwise)

Also from the assumption that everyone will eventually get the best possible gear. (I'm a firm believer in the worst (/best?) case scenario and that things should be balanced according to that)

Also this is PvP balancing, as oppose to PvE.

Working from this: https://anphilliaascension.forumotion.com/t29-item-balancing-information

Code:

Immunities / +8 Saves :

Death, Mind, Spells (level/individual), Stun, Freedom Of Movement, Damage Type. (In particular)

[Note: Temporary immunities (Which are breachables / dispellable) are great.]

Permanent immunities cause several issues.

The first being that saving throws become largely unimportant.
The second being that anything that has a save portion becomes largely useless.

This affects casters, for the most part. Ice-storm / MM, ILMS, IGMS become their only offensive threat. (Zzzz)

High +8 saving throw gear will also cause this.


Code:

+8 AC / Enhancement

This hugely affects combat in favour of casters as it is very, very unlikely that an average full BAB character can hit -
 an average plate-wearing, shield bearer.

Obviously there will be variations either side of this depending on build, but an average gives a good indication.

An average full BAB character with a maximised primary stat, standard feats and +8 weapon will reach 57 AB.
(If calculations are needed, happy to provide)

An average character with full plate, with a shield, will reach 77 AC. (+8 Gear)
(With haste, happy to provide calculation).
(Not including +10 if they're a caster an can afford imp expertise!)

This gives an average full bab character an average chance of 5% on every attack roll they have, to be able to hit -
 someone.
(The same chance as everyone else has all the time)


TLDR; is it possible for you hard working dev guys to have a look at the item balancing?

Interesting discussion. I would like to see your calculation formulas for your basis of AB and AC.

20: Pre Epic BAB
10: Epic BAB
4: (18 Base Modifying Stat)
5: (+10 Stat Allocation at 40 to modifying stat)
6: (+12 Item stat cap to modifying stat)
1: Weapon Focus
2: Epic Weapon Focus
1: Epic Prowess
8: Weapon Enhancement Bonus

= 57

10: Base AC
8: Full Plate AC
1: Dex AC (Full Plate limited)
8: Armour AC
8: Natural
8: Deflection
8: Dodge
3: Tower Shield
8: Shield Bonus
8: Tumble (Skill)
1: Dodge (Feat)
2: Armour Skin (Feat)
4: Haste

= 77

There are of course, other modifiers but this, I feel, is a good indication of an average and certainly a good working point for balance.

This has something that's been talked about; the max AC bonus from dungeon gear for non-shield/non-armor slots will probably have to be lowered.

That's also assuming a fighter class has haste during the entirety of a combat (not always very likely) and that he takes Tumble (probably fairly normal, but I know of plenty of builds that don't, or at least only take half the max because their character classes don't support it). Anyhow, we know that this may be an issue, we're already tracking on it; we'll get it figured out.

You lack of consideration for the Great (base modifying stat) I - X feats which can get you as much as a +5 more to that AB.

I would also take haste off the AC list since its on the non-allowed gear stats and is therefore only a temporary buff.

Taking just those two things into account you're at 62 AB vs 73 AC, or an approximate 50% hit chance on the first swing and a 25% chance on the next swing in the progression. That's witout a weaponmaster or AA build.

Add in a few temporary buffs to AB and that number will cap at about 74 AB. Add +1 to 6 or +5 to 15 for class features from weaponmaster and AA respectively.

Meanwhile your 77 AC (based on your calculations and the haste buff) is already using +12 (8 for boot items and 4 for dodge) of the +20 dodge buff cap. Thus the AC could temporarily reach 85 before expertise feats and class features.

Its really difficult to say how much of a problem this is. I know melee classes that tank out typically have sad attack bonus and make the game a rolling of 20s. Since they are forced 1 handed, they usually fold to the onslaught of a two hander due to the damage discrepancy per hit that succeeds.

You're right about the mages. There should be something to prevent 95 AC. Just disallowing Expertise related feats on the mage is enough to guarantee that.

Weapon Masters and AA's would, of course, have above average AB.

Taking 10 greater stat feats would also be very unusual. Considering you can have a max of 7 (Str), 10 (Dex, limited to ass, aa, bard), 10 (wis <zen archery>, limited to cot, cleric, druid).

Balancing combat around taking AA and WM to be able to hit anything is pretty crazy.

If you cap at +5, you'll have an average situation (Taking into account calculations above) of: 54 vs 62, which seems much more reasonable. % hit = 65/40/15

It also means that buffs remain relevant.

As a quick fix for casters, the improved expertise hook works well. No expertise casting. Having a +10 ac permanent buff, with no draw-back is pretty strong.


Are you agreed that permanent immunities will push casters into very (boring) specific roles and saves become pointless, though? I haven't seen any comments regarding that.

That depends on if more than one immuninty item could ever be equiped (in other words all immunity items are on the same slot). There is already a "Fear" immunity item available.

As it is, it does seem like the classes that have built in immunities have either been banned (palemaster for example) or restricted (monk can't multi) so we'll see.

It would be just as retarded to give out 20/- physical DR, crit hit immunity, and knockdown immunity to a mage.

I'm pretty sure the devs know how to balance it out.

I have faith that it'll be balanced, of course, otherwise I wouldn't have started the discussion!

Immunities affect viability in a massive way, however. Even with just one, you can easily cover a weakness and make saves / effect spells largely irrelevant.

As an example, casters will tend to roll there alignment as neutral so they don't have to deal with unbreachable and common mind immunity (Protection from Alignment). I did that earlier today, actually, before I realised!

Its funny. The mages I know roll evil or good just to have that common mind immunity available from themselves.

Targeting well solves the problem, though!

Ok, there's quite a few things to cover here, so:

Basics
The Random Loot generator works with item levels. These item levels range from 1 (weak) to 50 (very strong) and are based off the monster's CR that is to drop loot. In it's current implementation, we enabled a cap at item level 20, so everything above 20 is locked away at the moment but can be enabled at a later time.

Immunities
There are 4 types of (100%) immunities active within the Random Loot generator:
- Poison
- Fear
- Death
- Spell Level

These immunities are available on:
- Armor (i.e. Robes, Leather Armor, Full Plate etc...)
- Shields
- Helmets
- Jewelry

Obviously i won't go into specifics regarding the power level of said immunities and the corresponding item levels needed, but i can say this: in the current configuration, only Poison Immunity and Immunity up to Spell Level 2 is even possible to find.

Armor Class / Attack Bonus / Enhancement Bonus
When i initially configured the property power levels against eachother, i did so using "gut feeling" mostly and trying to balance them against eachother. It is entirely possible, even likely, that i made some errors then. The power balance between AC, AB and Enhancement Bonus (EB) is a likely candidate for such errors.

Let's say this: at the point you're able to get +6 AC on an item, you'll be able to get +6 AB and/or +4 EB to counter that, which obviously looks to be a problem. Then there's +4 Ability Bonus available at the same level, upping the AB again.

You guys already did the calculations, and the AC curve should probably be lower than it is.

My concerns are addressed! Thanks for that!