Wish list: +/– RES by character type

[MHertz]

One thing I’ve often wished for was a system in COH that allows players to choose a “type” for their character that comes with associated strengths and weaknesses. This would be analogous to the ill-named D&D “race” category, but with many more categories available.

 

Each type would have some small associated bonuses, like +RES to some damage types but –RES to other types. After all, it makes some sense for some fire-using characters to resist Fire damage (eg, salamander, demon, fire elemental) but others not to (eg, a wizard who simply uses fire, a guy with a flamethrower). You could also throw in some additional small bonuses or penalties to other things (global speed, global recharge, global accuracy, etc) or possibly raising or lowering the caps on things (capping RES to Energy 2% lower, perhaps). Obviously these would be tricky to balance, because there would be a great many combinations and synergies with different archetypes and power sets, but I think they could still be fun.

 

Some ideas:

• Demon (+RES fire and negative energy, –RES energy and psionic)
• Corporeal Undead (+RES cold and negative energy, –RES fire and lethal)
• Power Suit (+RES smashing and lethal, –RES energy and psionic)
• Avian (+DEF smashing, +FLY speed, –DEF fire, –RUN speed)

 

Or something like that. You could have a ton of variations, like skeletal undead, angelic beings, ghosts and spirits, androids, elementals of various types, fae (or fey) with resistance to magic-based powers, aquatic beings, plants, animals, various aliens, lycanthropes, and all sorts of beings that give the players a good shot at finding something suitable. Unless you want to be a demon rocket monkey in a magic space suit, then you’re out of luck.

 

Edit: Obviously this isn’t going to happen. It’s complicated, damage isn’t typed by Origin, it’s a lot of dev time, etc. It’s still fun to discuss.

Edited November 28, 2022 by MHertz

[TheZag]

Its more possible than u might think if it were done as a free temp power that you can only have 1 of.  I would still use it to lower resists that i can cap easily and boost those that are difficult to raise.

 

However,  the idea of a power that boosts some and reduces others does have merit.  If it were the temp power version it would have to be something like you can revoke it at any time but only get a different one once every 24 hours to prevent switching every mission.

 

Edited November 28, 2022 by TheZag

[MHertz]

As a temp power, it could be an Auto temp power that is exclusive with others of its type; or it could be like those powers where the first one is free, but additional ones cost money.

 

If each power were balanced with benefits and weaknesses it would be harder to game by combining them. Then you could say “I have a fire weakness because I’m undead, but my fire resistance from being a dragon cancels that out, so now I just have the bits that remain.” The player would still have a bonus for being undead and a weakness from being a dragon to contend with.

[Rudra]

My recommendation would be to make it more generic. For instance, instead of Demon, maybe go with Fiery, Flame-Touched, or something else not implying a specific race. You could even introduce an absorb mechanic, not to be confused with the current absorb mechanic, where instead of increasing damage resist to a specific type, taking damage from that damage type healed back some of your lost health.

 

However it is approached, having it be exclusive to others of the set or pool as already proposed would be necessary.

 

So if the devs are willing to do the work for this? I say go for it.

[MTeague]

I'm feeling cynical and jaded today, but I would see this rapidly devolving into a powergame min/max "can I squeeze more +DEF out of this?" where very few players would actually care what fits in with their characters backstory, just another vehicle to try to defense cap sooner, because most characters I inspect don't even HAVE a backstory.

 

That said, maybe I'll feel better after a Snickers.

[MHertz]

1 hour ago, MTeague said:

I'm feeling cynical and jaded today, but I would see this rapidly devolving into a powergame min/max "can I squeeze more +DEF out of this?"

Of course. Every game mechanic does.

 

If it is done right, the penalty would be something that actually hurts a little, which would make your selection much less frivolous. What that might be could depend on your AT. A blaster might not care about the resist cap vs smashing as much as a brute; but a brute wouldn’t care about –5% resist vs smashing as much as a blaster. The blaster doesn’t get many opportunities to max that resist anyway, and the brute can easily overcompensate for that minimal penalty. It might have to give both as a true penalty for any AT.

[Zect]

You do not allow players to pick and choose strengths and weaknesses at will without oversight.

 

It is a bad idea, just as allowing players to design their own powers, select their own nemesis or create their own missions is a mistake. Paragon Studios disagreed with that last one in a fit of naive idealism, although they were amply warned. The consequence of their poor judgment was irreversible damage wrought on the playerbase's culture and reward balance.

[MHertz]

1 hour ago, Zect said:

You do not allow players to pick and choose strengths and weaknesses at will without oversight.

That is correct. As a long-time GM for tabletop games and as a hobbyist game designer, unfettered player-led design leads to power creep and munchkin builds. Arguably the game already has that with power pools.

 

That is why the features would be a bundle or pair of traits: something you get as a bonus, and something that hurts you as a weakness. There would be no option for “take a free bonus and skip the penalty.” In the same way, power pools grant abilities with a bonus and a cost (Endurance, recharge time). If combining them results in too easily reaching absurd and unintended levels of power, then don’t let them combine. If changing the body type during live play is too easily abused, make it a fixed part of character creation (like Origin or AT).

 

My current thinking is that the penalty will reduce the player’s cap in that field (speed cap, resist cap for a damage type, stealth cap, etc) in addition to a flat –% penalty to the stat itself. Lowering the cap hurts archetypes who can easily reach the cap; applying the flat penalty hurts archetypes who cannot easily accrue enough of that stat to worry about the cap. The trick is to give a bonus that is worth the penalty and vice versa.

 

Could somebody use the system to build the perfect farmer vs one specific damage type? Sure. But they can already do that.

[Zect]

You're looking at this from the POV of "if there are enough checks and balances, the system won't be exploited too badly." Well, Paragon thought the same about AE, and we all know how that turned out. Any system made by a human can be outsmarted by another human.

 

But that's too much of my complaining. Even if such a system will never (and should never) come to light, speculating about possible powers can be entertaining. Personally, I think you're being a little too conservative by adding yet minor buffs and penalties. You could get that experience by slotting and unslotting IO's. I would go with completely overpowered buffs, but make all the drawbacks severely meta-busting ones. Like... Stalkermode! all your aoe powers have their target cap reduced to 1 and range reduced to 7ft, but crit for 3x damage. Or... Pinball Wizard! Every power you have now does mag 20 kb and ignores kb2kd, but if they hit a wall, they are stunned and take extra damage based on how far they flew. Are these terrible ideas, certainly. Are they fun to fantasize about, absolutely.

[biostem]

Why isn't this something that can just be RP'd?  I mean, not every demon would necessarily be strong vs fire or weak vs energy/psionics...

[srmalloy]

6 minutes ago, Zect said:

Pinball Wizard! Every power you have now does mag 20 kb and ignores kb2kd, but if they hit a wall, they are stunned and take extra damage based on how far they flew.

No... They should take extra damage based on the difference between how much knockback you did and how far they flew before hitting the wall -- so a mob knocked back 50' that hits a wall 10' behind them takes more damage than if they hit a wall 40' behind them.

[Akisan]

I'd rather take Bowler - enemies you KB can KB enemies they hit while flying, and both deal and receive damage on impact.  Special - chaining 10 KB/KDs in this way grants bonus damage for a few seconds.

 

That said, while this could be fun for RP, there's a lot of potential cases where an envisioned character doesn't "fit" their race's stats.  I'd much rather leave that sort of thing blank and/or up to the imagination, instead of having to hand-wave it away every time. (Not to mention the serious munchkin potential here.  Any munchkin worth their loot can make pretty much any downside rarely/never matter.)

[Grouchybeast]

On 11/30/2022 at 8:17 PM, Zect said:

Or... Pinball Wizard! Every power you have now does mag 20 kb and ignores kb2kd, but if they hit a wall, they are stunned and take extra damage based on how far they flew.

 

In order to stop people min-maxing, this is also applied to support sets.  Pinball Wizard + Empathy becomes the most hated and feared combo in the game.

[biostem]

1 hour ago, Grouchybeast said:

In order to stop people min-maxing, this is also applied to support sets.  Pinball Wizard + Empathy becomes the most hated and feared combo in the game.

Obviously it would have to be paired with Willpower, so, with your heightened senses, you can play by smell...

[Major_Decoy]

I was trying to figure this out from the title. There's archeytpe, there's origin, by what is character type?

 

Obviously: Roleplay, Farmer, PVP, Casual, and Hardcore.

 

Roleplay would clearly get high resists whenever they had a roleplay reason for it, and similarly huge weaknesses. They lose the bonuses whenever they're out of character for too long.

I have no idea what bonuses the other types would get.

 

While I'm not entirely opposed to temporary powers to give you specific resists, I also feel like "Well, that's the point of having power sets. You pick power sets relevant to the character you're trying to play."

[Menelruin]

I've commented before that there are powersets that can affect what you DO, but there should be more thematic ones that can fit for what you ARE.  For example, a "cybernetics" defense set that offered high resistance to PSI and Toxic, at the cost of less protection against Energy.....like if you're either a cyborg or a robot, your mind will be harder to affect, and poisons won't bother you as much, but you have to worry about being shorted out by electricity.  Probably some equivalent for Ghosts, plant creatures, etc, etc.  Make defensive sets that offer up an edge in certain areas but balance it with less protection in others.

[biostem]

1 hour ago, Menelruin said:

I've commented before that there are powersets that can affect what you DO, but there should be more thematic ones that can fit for what you ARE.  For example, a "cybernetics" defense set that offered high resistance to PSI and Toxic, at the cost of less protection against Energy.....like if you're either a cyborg or a robot, your mind will be harder to affect, and poisons won't bother you as much, but you have to worry about being shorted out by electricity.  Probably some equivalent for Ghosts, plant creatures, etc, etc.  Make defensive sets that offer up an edge in certain areas but balance it with less protection in others.

Here's the problem with that - not all robots are strong vs psi or weak vs electricity.  At the same time, you could simply select sets that are weak vs those damage types and RP said vulnerabilities, and no further work need be done...

[Menelruin]

12 hours ago, biostem said:

Here's the problem with that - not all robots are strong vs psi or weak vs electricity.  At the same time, you could simply select sets that are weak vs those damage types and RP said vulnerabilities, and no further work need be done...

I thought almost all robots in the game WERE resistant to psi, except the clockworks.....which are actually psionically held together anyway.   And the problem is, the only sets that are notable for guarding against psi are Stone and Dark, which don't really fit thematically.  Maybe if Stone had "metal" animation options?  And yeah, I know, technically some sets have all-around defenses and resists.....but there's not a lot for specifically guarding against psi, thematically. 

[Rudra]

2 minutes ago, Menelruin said:

And the problem is, the only sets that are notable for guarding against psi are Stone and Dark, which don't really fit thematically. 

Depending on the game system or other depiction, psionics and negative/dark are naturally resistant to each other. (Though in some, dark is resistant to psi but not the other way around, so a dark creature is your only real means of fighting against a psionic one.)

[Menelruin]

38 minutes ago, Rudra said:

Depending on the game system or other depiction, psionics and negative/dark are naturally resistant to each other. (Though in some, dark is resistant to psi but not the other way around, so a dark creature is your only real means of fighting against a psionic one.)

I mean in terms of making things like a robot character, since robots in both CoX and other media tend to be resistant to psi.  Darkness might fit for a ghost/undead character, though. 

[Rudra]

That's why my recommendation for the OP is to make it more generic. What robots are resistant to and vulnerable to depends on the robot for instance. Depending on the depicton, a robot could be resistant or even immune to magic. (How would that be addressed in CoX since magic is an origin and not a specific effect? Would the character be resistant to the attacks of a character with the magic origin?) Other depictions make them vulnerable to or even completely defenseless against magic. Same thing with psionics in that a generic robot can be resistant/immune to psionics or vulnerable to it depending on the portrayal of psionics and robots/technology. And that is even before you get into the different ways a robot could be constructed, powered, or operated which all would further affect what the robot is resistant to, immune to, vulnerable to, or completely defenseless against.

 

Same thing with demons. Some demons are depicted as resistant or invulnerable to fire and dark. Others to fire and poison. Yet others to cold and poison. And there are even other iterations/interpretations of resistances, immunities, and vulnerabilities. So saying a demon type would be resistant to fire and negative, but vulnerable to energy and psionics is to say that all demons in the game are limited to a specific interpretation of demon.

 

So on and so forth.

Edited December 5, 2022 by Rudra
Edited to fix "depcition" to "depiction".

[MHertz]

On 11/30/2022 at 12:17 PM, Zect said:

You're looking at this from the POV of "if there are enough checks and balances, the system won't be exploited too badly." Well, Paragon thought the same about AE, and we all know how that turned out.

I don’t think your logic tracks here. The poor design of and insufficient controls over AE content, and the inadequate discipline when it came to appeasing AE users with equal XP, does not invalidate the idea of any checks and balances of any kind in game design. AE was a monstrosity and it should never have been approved in its current state; it has become far more central to the game than it was likely ever intended to be (partly because in some ways it wallpapers over bad design decisions that predate it). In D&D terms, AE isn’t just getting XP from the Monster Summoning spell; it’s choosing which DM will run the encounter so the monster does not fight back effectively. Checks and balances are still one foundation of good game design.

[MHertz]

22 hours ago, Rudra said:

That's why my recommendation for the OP is to make it more generic. What robots are resistant to and vulnerable to depends on the robot for instance.

I am on board with this. I’ve tried to figure out specific strengths and weaknesses but I too run into the problem of defining a category so it embraces everything. There’s at least four different kinds of undead I can think of — corporeal undead like zombies, skeletal undead, ethereal undead like ghosts and spirits, and superior undead like vampires and liches. They shouldn’t all have the same strengths and weaknesses. Not only that, but people will come up with concepts that defy categorization: a plant vampire alien in a suit of body armor; a mage with a cybernetic exoskeleton; a spirit possessing a stone statue, etc.

 

However, it really depends on how the “body type” is implemented. If the type is merely a label for the buff/debuff set and is never referenced on the character sheet, then you could pick the “Robot” type without fear of the game thinking you are an actual robot. You could label the body types “Doc” and “Sleepy” and “Dopey” for all it matters; the label is just for players’ reference.

 

On the other hand, if the game started to use the body type as an actual reference for what the player is made of — “Greetings, fellow robot!” says the Clockwork — then we would need to divorce the name of the buffs away from the type of buffs. I think it’s too late in the game’s lifespan to imagine they would start to modify the existing text and NPC behavior within all these prior missions.

Edited December 6, 2022 by MHertz

[MHertz]

On 12/2/2022 at 7:54 PM, Major_Decoy said:

I was trying to figure this out from the title. There's archeytpe, there's origin, by what is character type?

Spoiler alert: posts contain explanatory text.

[Rudra]

25 minutes ago, MHertz said:

I am on board with this. I’ve tried to figure out specific strengths and weaknesses but I too run into the problem of defining a category so it embraces everything. There’s at least four different kinds of undead I can think of — corporeal undead like zombies, skeletal undead, ethereal undead like ghosts and spirits, and superior undead like vampires and liches. They shouldn’t all have the same strengths and weaknesses. Not only that, but people will come up with concepts that defy categorization: a plant vampire alien in a suit of body armor; a mage with a cybernetic exoskeleton; a spirit possessing a stone statue, etc.

 

However, it really depends on how the “body type” is implemented. If the type is merely a label for the buff/debuff set and is never referenced on the character sheet, then you could pick the “Robot” type without fear of the game thinking you are an actual robot. You could label the body types “Doc” and “Sleepy” and “Dopey” for all it matters; the label is just for players’ reference.

 

On the other hand, if the game started to use the body type as an actual reference for what the player is made of — “Greetings, fellow robot!” says the Clockwork — then we would need to divorce the name of the buffs away from the type of buffs. I think it’s too late in the game’s lifespan to imagine they would start to modify the existing text and NPC behavior within all these prior missions.

The problem comes in that people already get hung up on names. For instance, there is an old thread where someone asked to have a power to replace Rage in Super Strength because his/her character doesn't get angry to get stronger. Then that person asked for the replacement power to be called Adrenaline or something, and described the mechanics of it. And the described mechanics? Was the Rage power. There are more recent threads where arcane power sets are being asked for, being there is no power set with the word "arcane" or "eldritch" in its name. And the power sets are obviously not magic in nature otherwise regardless of the magic origin (to that person).

Edited December 6, 2022 by Rudra
Edited to add comment in parenthesis.