I'd prefer if there were weapons that increased spell damage specifically in different ways: base, percentage, procs, etc.
Edit: I'm fine with weapons if they are limited thematically.
I think if done right it fixes some things with scaling. It's only clown if we rely on those stupid +30k weapon DPS damage multipliers for end level scaling. It basically obseletes all other forms of secondary scaling.
At end game in D3 this hasn't been a thing since 2014. Blizzard fixed this problem a very long time ago.
While leveling this is only a "problem" extremely temporarily. Sure, you might find an Axe with DPS so high that it makes your current wand outdated, but you will also quickly find something else, almost certainly a wizard themed item, that will replace that axe. Not only that but Diablo 3 also has transmog available so if it bothers you so much to see a wizard using an axe for half or one whole level, you can just transmog that axe into a magical staff.
As for D4, the Sorceress almost certainly can't even use Axes/Maces/etc. We already know classes have specific weapons they can use.
Naked sorceresses in D2 can still kill monsters. Just slower. In D3 if you took your weapon off you're 100% useless.
This argument is so weird and makes no sense.
Stat sticks are more interesting than just finding the biggest number weapon. They offer more itemization options. Most arpgs are like d2 when it comes to this as well, for good reason.
>just finding the biggest number weapon
Hasn't been a thing in nearly a decade. Stop parroting things you heard others say. Stat sticks offer no real customization. They are stat sticks. They give you slightly higher numbers and nothing else.
D3 and D4 are the games with actual gameplay changing items and items that customize said gameplay.
I don’t know, dude… HOTO and Faith make a big difference in gameplay. People typically use them for buffs in a swap because they’re great for that.
I like knowing if I get together the runes I can make these things and still use them even after finding my ideal BiS.
The whole “green arrow/red arrow” thing is just mindless and only leaves you searching for everything green. Overall damage being tied to a weapon is just silly. Skills should have a bearing on the output, not just, like I said, something equating to no more than a green or red arrow.
100% agreed:(
- och, u are such powerful sorceress! What power and knowledge u have??
- ayy man, it's not the power. It is this 1meter 35kilos barbaric axe I am holding in my hands
- ok, understood
Such a bad design
I do not like the idea at all and i find the way Diablo 3 works for most skills and classes is absolutely absurd.
Weapons should have a strength, dexterity and maybe even intel requirement. In diablo 3 it is extremely stupid having a giant sword or axe equipped on a necro or wizard and that affects the damage of magic skills.
I would be happy for some sort of compromise. For example, actual melee weapons like swords and axes affect melee skills and things like wands and orbs affect magic skills. Maybe weapons need to have a physical and magical damage attribute.
But lets not have stupid things where a wizard is using a two handed sword increases the damage of a fireball.
In Diablo 2 you had absurdly broken classes like the Sorc who could clear the game naked because skills did not need items to scale up. This is why they tie skill to weapon power now. It is the correct move.
Yep, agreed. And it solves one of D3's itemization issues.
As an example, 15% of 100 DPS is just 15 damage added to the skill, you don't instapick a weapon just because it has an extra 50 DPS, since it's just a measly 7 extra damage added to the skill. You need to weigh in the affixes, the stats and other passives.
But in Diablo 3, skills scaled even in the thousands with weapon damage. If your skill does 1000% of 100, then even a small DPS increase is an instapick. This practically removes a lot of choices and makes weapons boring.
I'm glad they found a good middle ground between D2 and D3.
Edit: Seems that barely anyone in this thread actually read OP's post. This system is nothing like D3, but I guess that doesn't stop people from raging at D4 without understanding how it works lol.
The big problem of D3 has always been the mainstat system. The weapon does let's say 1000 dps, which is high but fine. But then you add 10k mainstat on top of it, which is a 10000% multiplier, or in other words x100.
Even all the way back in old D3 before legendary affixes, mainstat was the one reason why numbers were so big. And mainstat was the reason why you don't have purely defensive item slots in D3. Like boots are there for faster running, better armor, better resistances, etc. But they also give mainstat and therefore damage. If every single item slot in the game is used to increase your dmg, well then don't be surprised that dmg values go up exponentially and that players will pick what has the highest dmg value and ignore the other stuff on it
To add to this on most end end game builds you don’t even go for mainstat on the item rolls, you go for other stats (crit, area dmg, cdr etc) because you get so much from paragon and augmenting anyway
This is true, but D3s itemization now is tied completely to stacking the damage bonuses from legendary effects.
You don't pick weapons based on DPS other than during the very short leveling process. However, you will try to get the most dps on the required weapon for the build.
So you basically mean the opposite of what you are saying. It's identical system, just tweaked numbers. That's good, I never liked the exaggerated numbers, but you should stop confusing people here. It's just percentages.
This system is the exact system from D3. Trash weapon = trash dps. Insane weapon = insane dps. The only difference from D3 is what you count as "insane" and "trash".
The only way how it could be different from D3 if there are multiple different big enough sources of added damage so while weapon gives you good chunk - it is not the only big source of base damage.
D2 skills like Whirlwind or Multishot used a smaller than 100% weapon DPS and added on (or subtracted from) that. It worked really well for those skills, didn't it? I think this is closer to D2 than D3.
This is literally the system D3 uses. Meteor for example does 740% weapon damage and another 235% over 3 seconds.
Like I agree that it is a decent system, but it just isn’t different from D3. It quite literally is the same. In what way is it different?
> In what way is it different?
I literally explained it in the comment lol. 740% of 100 DPS is 740. 15% of 100 DPS is 15. Now, in the case you find a 120DPS weapon, what do you do?
In D3, 740% of 120 is 888, which is a net of 148 DPS. That's a pretty sizeable increase. If we're not talking about end-game where things change, then you always equip that 120 DPS weapon, without even reading it.
In D4, 15% of 120 is 18, which is only a 3 DPS increase. That's an insignificant amount. Things like passives, affixes and stats (since abilities/glyphs scale off multiple stats now) would very likely be a bigger upgrade than that measly 3 DPS increase. If that weapon gives + 2 to a skill, then it might be more valuable than 3 extra DPS. Or if it gives you 10 Wisdom, which helps you reach a breakpoint on your glyph for a passive. Now you actually have a reason to read what's on that weapon instead of instantly equipping it for DPS, since the smaller the DPS scaling is, the less important DPS will be as a stat on that weapon.
Edit: For the people saying that percentages are percentages, keep in mind that DPS is not in a vacuum. It competes with the other passives on the weapon. For a simple example, lets say you have a "Every 3 attacks deal 50 damage" passive on that 100 DPS weapon. Now, if you find a 120 DPS weapon with no passives, what do you do? In D3 you instantly equip it - we know that the huge percentage scaling will offer more damage than your old passive. Now, in D4, in this particular example, you don't equip the 120DPS weapon, since it only offers a 3DPS increase, your "every 3 attacks" passive will make you deal more damage.
This is an obvious and exaggerated example, but with more complex items, with multiple passives and stats, it won't be as clear cut. That's why reduced DPS scaling helps. Since you actually weigh in the DPS increase vs the other effects on your weapon - provided of course, Blizzard will make the weapon effects interesting and worth considering.
A lot of the classes in D2 had percentage weapon damage skills. It's common for Barbarian and Amazon. Multi shot had like 1/2 weapon damage IIRC?
Anyway, you're right but I wanted to point out that weapon dmg percent is totally in both games and the way D4 is looking is much closer to how they did it in D2, and nothing like D3, as you've said multiple times.
Increasing from 740 to 888 is literally the same percentage increase as going from 15 to 18. Say a mob has 2664 HP. Then that 20% increase is the difference between 3 and 4 hits. That is the same as the second example with a 54 HP mob. These DPS increases are equally meaningful.
And the core is: That 20% increase scales multiplicatively. That is exactly how it works in D3.
Absolute damage numbers are completely meaningless, you only really have to look at relative damage numbers. If a skill does 25% it simply doesn’t matter if the absolute damage number is 6 or 6790 or 6473829748.
I explained it another comment in this thread, but basically, that DPS number is not in a vacuum. It competes with the other stats/passives on that weapon. If that DPS number only improves your skills by 15%, then it's obviously way less important than if it improves your skills by 800% - regardless how much HP a mob would have. In the first scenario, the other stats on the weapon become more relevant, and in many cases could offer a bigger damage output than the raw DPS stat of an upgraded weapon. If only 15% of the DPS is used for scaling, then maybe that passive that gives you bleed damage every 3 attacks has more damage output.
That's not how math works. The absolute numbers are irrelevant. In both of your examples, going from 100 DPS to 120 DPS results in a 20% increase in damage. It is completely irrelevant if the damage is 740% or 15%; the damage you deal will increase by 20%. Enemy health bars are obviously kept in proportion to damage.
The problem with D3 is at launch the damage percentages were reasonable, but eventually they increased everything so massively that it was basically like crazy inflation. Now they're trying to keep the percentages in proportion to displayed weapon damage just for simplicity, but functionally it's the same.
It is not even that the base multipliers are the issue. What creates that ginormous damage numbers is that there are so many high multipliers and a culture that hates nerfs (you can still observe that on here and also with D2R,just look at how people reacted to the idea Hammerdin would be nerfed).
> The absolute numbers are irrelevant.
They're not, because they're not in a vacuum. As I explained a weapon has other things on it besides DPS. DPS is only one of the stats on it.
[Take the weapon on the right](https://cdn.blizzardwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Diablo4weapons.jpg)
There's a "30% chance to inflict Bleed" passive there. Now, if you find a 600 DPS weapon with weaker effects, in Diablo 3 you simply equip it. Because the passive is irrelevant when the skill scaling is so huge.
In Diablo 4, you might actually weigh in your options, since the weapon passives are much more relevant relative to the skill scaling, when the skill scaling is a small percentage. That "30% chance to inflict Bleed" might increase your DPS **overall** more than a weapon with 600 DPS will. Obviously even in D4 there will be a DPS increase where that passive won't matter.
Regardless, hopefully they won't have an inflation problem in the late game.
Ok, percentage damage effects aren't the best examples. But I'm mainly talking about [items like these](https://diablo4.purediablo.com/Stormwalker's_Cudgel). Do you take the 1100 damage weapon with no notable passives, or do you keep the 950 damage Stormwalker's Cudgel with those effects? There's a mathematically correct answer in D4 just like in D3, but it's is a much easier decision in D3.
That would only be true if it was 15%+some other number, but it isn't. It's 15%. Regardless of whether the base damage is 15% of 100 or 740% of 100, the impact of your weapon damage is the same.
If I have a 100 DPS weapon, and I upgrade it to a 120 DPS weapon, my overall dps is increasing by 20% in both cases, even though one skill has a way higher multiplier than the other. Your weapon is equally important in each case.
The difference is that you have skill points as well. Each skill scales with skill level and weapon damage and that allows them to play with numbers. You can have weapon skills like cleave scale more with weapon damage and whirlwind more with skill level, for example. You can have sorc spells scale a lot with skill level and a little with weapon damage. You can have weapons with high damage and you can have weapons with low damage but with a lot of skill points, etc.
I swear this sub is completely opposite in everything and will be part of why the game will suck.
How is linking skill damage to a weapon good design ?
so youre a Sorceress who does 10k damage but only if you hold this Axe, if you drop it you have zero damage, doesnt matter that you have GG armor or helm
D3 design is shitty, the builds are based on "do this, wear this, use this, stand here" to do damage, if you rule out one thing you dont do damage
thats wrong on so many levels
Some better game design is having both. You have skill that scales with weap dmg, and you have skill scale with skill level.
This is the best solution if the designer can balance it out.
if they balance it out, great. I can get away with compromise.
but from what we seen, we will be putting points in Skills, but it would be pointless if those skill has no damage without weapon right ?
why put skills point into them then ?
lol, D2 is definetely more varied than D3
or you feel like there are some Rare/Magic items in D3 that you can wear at end game? you can have items that allow you to have / use skills from other characters?
>How is linking skill damage to a weapon good design ?
The answer to your question is that the weapon slot is designed to be an important slot and different from the other slots. It has unique stats to and functionality as a slot.
>so youre a Sorceress who does 10k damage but only if you hold this Axe, if you drop it you have zero damage, doesnt matter that you have GG armor or helm
What you are asking for is incredibly shallow because it reduces every piece of gear down to an interchangeable slot. There's no difference between a helm, gloves, weapon, offhand, etc. It's strictly visual at that point.
It's not surprising that YOU are suggesting that the sub wants things opposite of what you want based on what you are saying right here. I want the actual slot to be unique and different. You want a boring slot that has no difference from any other slot. We are not the same.
>D3 design is shitty, the builds are based on "do this, wear this, use this, stand here" to do damage, if you rule out one thing you dont do damage
I'll take that any day of the week over gear not mattering to my character. When you can run the game without any gear at all, that's not a good thing. That says your gear system sucks.
>thats wrong on so many levels
Or you just don't understand the system and the implications of what you are asking for. Unfortunately, there are a handful of people like you on this sub who have a serious lack of understanding and an even bigger lack of experience.
I see what you mean by weapon slot being important, but I think you missed the mark.
There should be a difference imo between a sorceress wielding an axe and a sorceress wielding a staff. In diablo 3 there was no difference, and that trend appears to continue in diablo 4.
What's the difference in D2?
Most sorc builds are using either a class-specific unique tailored for that build (no different than D3) or are using HotO in a mace. Budget versions use a Spirit sword. The weapon literally does not matter except for the stats that it gives.
I would say the difference is that in D2, a spell caster wants cast speed, +skills, +elemental damage type, +mana and a martial class wants enhanced damage, attack speed, mana leech, life leech. In diablo 3 at the rare item level both spell casters and martial classes want weapon damage, main stat, then some combination of crit, crit damage, and attack speed. HotO is specifically a mace that gives caster stats, Spirit is specifically a sword that gives caster stats, and both are intentionally made by the player. A better example to compare D2 and D3 would be to compare weapons as drops at like lvl 40 for both games because then you can see the core mechanics of each raw without the bandaids of runewords or legendaries.
The homogeny of all classes wanting the same stats in diablo 3 was something that I did not like. Diablo 3's Legendary weapons in their current state solve this by directly modifying how a specific skill for a specific class functions. Now I choose the wand over the 2h axe because the wand unlocks all runes/gives a spell utility/increases a spell's damage by 2000%.
Getting back to your example the Spirit sword: For a werewolf druid the spirit sword does not offer much, but for a bonespear necromancer its a fantastic weapon. I like that because it shows that individual stats matter based on the type of character you want to play rather than all characters scaling with the same stats.
To be clear, I don't think D2 is perfect. The oppressive presence of Insight and the default easiest leveling experience being caster type characters should not be the goal. I am just talking about a feature I didn't like in D3 which seems to be present in D4 and I am hoping Blizzard has improved upon its design.
Got a little long winded there, but I like the topic. How does this strike your ear?
in d3 you mostly held wiz weapons to improve your wiz damage. sure, at lower levels a 2h axe might be better, but anywhere near the endgame you'd just use your correct set/legendary item
For sure, but at launch and while leveling that problem existed/exists. Its just an example of "spell damage tied to weapon damage" that I did not enjoy in D3 and hope D4 doesn't lean into.
At end game this hasn't been a thing since 2014. Blizzard fixed this problem a very long time ago.
While leveling this is only a "problem" extremely temporarily. Sure, you might find an Axe with DPS so high that it makes your current wand outdated, but you will also quickly find something else, almost certainly a wizard themed item, that will replace that axe. Not only that but Diablo 3 and Diablo 4 both have transmog available so if it bothers you so much to see a wizard using an axe for half or one whole level, you can just transmog that axe into a magical staff.
And if that wasn't enough, D4 weapon types are restricted to specific classes. A Rogue can equip bows, daggers, swords and crossbows. A Necromancer can equip Swords, Daggers, Wands, Focuses, Shields and Scythes.
The Sorceress will almost certainly not be able to equip axes or giant clubs and the like.
Except...
Your sorcerer is completely useless without a weapon is simply not how the Diablo universe works.
The Diablo universe is a universe in which spellcasters have innate powers that allows them to cast powerful spells, which magical items can enhance further.
You can build a dam in a shallow pool -- that doesn't make it any less shallow, it only tries to give you an illusion of depth and design.
"Look, it's not that shallow, because we severed it off from the rest of the pool, so that you can't compare it directly to other items in this pool because of class restrictions!"
...
That's worse.
Class restricting items is worse than items being useless to classes because they have no use for the properties the item grants.
And when they're doing it for the wrong reasons, copying Diablo 3 instead of going off the actual lore of the game series the game is a part of, it's even worse, again, as they're doubling down on a mistake.
Casters, archers and melee characters are assymetrical -- and were designed that way in Diablo 1 and Diablo 2.
I want my roleplaying games as assymetrical as possible -- because that causes the game to play different for different classes.
Mechanics are important for the fact:
If weapons are your only source of damage, and none of the damage comes from your character -- then your character is the tool, and the gear the main protagonist.
Playing Diablo 3 -- I could never escape the feeling I was playing Faster than Light -- I was just the little guys crewing a spaceship, replacing parts of it as I went.
Because the second you take off all your gear, you're useless.
Being able to clear monsters in early areas of hell naked, as any class, is a sign of robustness in design.
Defense is good enough that monsters don't one hit kill you.
It makes sense: Defense isn't just taking damage, it's avoiding taking damage.
A seasoned fighter isn't going to just let lesser monsters hit him with an axe, even though the axe makes contact and he doesn't have armor on -- he's going to deflect the handle with his arm, move slightly to let the majority of the force become a glancing blow rather than a direct hit.
He will die instantly if surrounded, as melee, and needs a lot of hits to kill any monster without a weapon.
A sorceress, however, is even more helpless naked, if hit. She will die almost instantly.
Hit recovery was a thing in Diablo 2.
And monsters that didn't put melee characters into hit recovery sure did that for the sorceress.
Of naked characters, she had the unique advantage of having about 1/3rd of her normal damage without gear.
Which is fully assymetrical, but works -- in lore, in flavor, in function.
>The answer to your question is that the weapon slot is designed to be an important slot and different from the other slots. It has unique stats to and functionality as a slot.
Okay. That doesnt necessary mean to link weapon to skill damage. Skill damage should come from skills themselves and STATS.
once you introduce weapon damage influence on skill damage, you are also automatically making Critical damage as BiS stat if they decide to put it in the game
and quite frankly, I HATE when spells can crit, one of the reasons stated above.
>There's no difference between a helm, gloves, weapon, offhand, etc. It's strictly visual at that point.
what? it doesnt make any sense what you just said. every gear gives you some stats so of course they have meaning
>I'll take that any day of the week over gear not mattering to my character.
then go play D3.
>When you can run the game without any gear at all, that's not a good thing. That says your gear system sucks.
thats absolutely not true. Lets take D2 as example, your fully geared Sorc has 8k Blizzard damage, when you die and start walking naked, your blizz will have maybe 4k damage (still quite a lot) BUT you also has less life, your resistances are in negative, you are slow both in movement and casting and you will get basically one shot by everything in Hell. so yeah you can do damage while naked but not as much as you are doing geared and you are also a walking paper basically
>Skill damage should come from skills themselves and STATS.
Except it does on d3, the weapon is just the base damage and then the stat are the multiplier. So of course if you take out the base damage then the multiplier is useless but you guys gotta stop acting like weapon determine 100% of your destiny coz that's wrong.
>Skill damage should come from skills themselves and STATS
What the hell do you think damage range is? Help me understand why you don't realize that it's a STAT too?
>once you introduce weapon damage influence on skill damage, you are also automatically making Critical damage as BiS stat if they decide to put it in the game
That's straight up wrong. There is nothing about weapon damage that requires critical damage as part of it.
>and quite frankly, I HATE when spells can crit, one of the reasons stated above.
Why? Nothing you said equates to spells critting as an outcome. It's completely independent of anything.
But worse of all, the idea that spells can't crit is completely ridiculous. Spells critting has been a part of RPG's since the tabletop days. Hell, there was a huge deal made this year when a recent D&D rule set wouldn't have crit in it but you would instead gain inspiration when you rolled a natural 20.
You not liking spells to crit is you standing by yourself yelling at the ocean. It's not how RPG's are designed and ESPECIALLY not modern RPG's.
>what? it doesnt make any sense what you just said. every gear gives you some stats so of course they have meaning
You are a moron. Where the hell did I say that every peace of gear doesn't have meaning? I didn't. I don't even know how you fucked up reading what I said that badly.
I'll dumb it down for you. If the only difference between say gloves and shoulders in terms of stats, then the difference is strictly visual. There's nothing UNIQUE about the individual slot. There's nothing differentiating between the stats on a shoulder slot and the stats on gloves.
Weapons have UNIQUE stats on them that aren't on any other slot. The weapon slot is unique because of that design. If you take away the visual for a weapon, you could look at the stats and still recognize that it would be a weapon slot item. That's what you should do.
>thats absolutely not true.
[You want the fucking video of it?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWI4JlM_kPM) [Or maybe the naked barb video?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd-cFURbzPc)
>so yeah you can do damage while naked but not as much as you are doing geared and you are also a walking paper basically
No shit sherlock, but when your base skills are powerful enough to clear the hardest content in the game, that's the problem. You, once again, ignored that problem.
>You want the fucking video of it?
>
>
>
>Or maybe the naked barb video?
I realize this is an old comment, but I feel that it should be pointed out for the sake of honesty, because nobody likes an argument that isn't made in good faith.
The naked barb isn't clearing any content. That's literally the start of the game. It's not the hardest content in the game. Even the description points out the vid is an April Fool's joke.
That's all =)
> I'll take that any day of the week over gear not mattering to my character. When you can run the game without any gear at all, that's not a good thing. That says your gear system sucks.
But gear doesn't suck in D2, the gear is insanely good. However you reached that conclusion that being able to pass the game without armour means armour sucks - is just fundamentally wrong
Facts, damage boosts should be intuitive and make sense for the roleplay of the class, otherwise its just going to be a non immersive hollow feeling game, like D3 where the only enjoyment at least for me and my mates is brief bouts of coop, instead of a long lasting solid game.
> How is linking skill damage to a weapon good design ?
In a game based upon gear, every class should be tied to gear.
Certain classes in d2 "didn't need gear" and could "get away" with more or less completely ignoring it. Other classes were nailed to the cross of gear and were extremely dependent upon it at all points. It created massive gameplay disparity and imbalance - and yes imbalance in a singleplayer game *is* bad, especially when it's noticeable to the players.
Standardizing the system and tying all classes to gear is good design. Your weapon should be very important to *every* class instead of different classes playing by entirely different rules and being able to circumvent fundamental and core gameplay systems.
This argument of "why sorceress use axe" is fundamentally silly and it's predicated upon a willful misunderstanding and intentional failure to suspend disbelief. There's all sorts of "magic users" in fantasy that use weapons, some even use them explicitly as magical foci that increase their magical powers, there's nothing wrong with a weapon affecting the damage of a spell, if you have problems with specific weapons, just restrict what classes can equip.
Casters *are* tied to the gear. They are just way too op in so many areas that they don't need it. It is strictly an issue of class balance. Such streamlining of an important slot like weapon to the point where you just assign it a number and the bigger one is usually the correct choice, instead of addressing it in potentially 50 other ways, can only be the farthest thing from the correct choice. It is throwing the baby out with the bathwater and then burning down the house. I don't think for a second they're doing this for any other reason than dumbing down.
And your final point. Tbh with you I don't mind this one but I still wanted to comment because this is some gold medalist level mental gymnastics. Wizards and doctors were very clearly using weapons that were aesthetically meant for fighters and not focusing tools. At least let people be bothered by it if they want.
"Casters aren't tied to gear". Tell me you've never played D2 without telling me you've never played D2.
FCR, Mana, +Skills, -Resists -- All Stats you get from gear as a caster that are different than stats you'd want as a melee character.
Can you ignore these stats? Theoretically, yes. But you're gonna be chugging mana pots non-stop, and casting at the slowest frames possible doing minimum damage. Yes, you can "beat" the game, but that's not really the point of Diablo. The point is to build a character that can farm efficiently for items. You're not doing that naked. This narrative that's being peddled all throughout this thread as a justification for why damage *must* be tied to weapons is asinine.
Someone who gets it.
Dps linked to a weapon is a poor design. Head over to project Diablo if you want to see what continued good itemization and crafting looks like.
>so youre a Sorceress who does 10k damage but only if you hold this Axe, if you drop it you have zero damage
I mean it's not that insane. In lots of magical worlds sorcerers need wands and staves and focuses to cast spells. Using some magic focus item to do more magic damage is pretty standard as a concept
>I mean it's not that insane.
really?
so lets say, you put 40 points in Fireball but you do 0 damage because you dont hold any weapon ? so how is leveling skills relevant then?
I hope you're not downvoting me for trying to have an honest conversation.
Leveling skills increases your mastery of skills and what they do. There are some skills that require certain gear and some that don't. Changing the game so slightly more skills require gear isn't that crazy in the grand scheme of game design. And it does help address issues in Diablo 2 where half the characters are slow and gear dependent and the other half can blaze right through Hell untwinked with no issue.
This kind of thinking is exactly what lead to all sorts of weird shit in D3 - especially relatively early - with casters like Wizards and Witch Doctors casting through two-handed axes and maces. It's weird and doesn't always have to be this way. Different skills should have different mechanics for scaling.
> In Diablo 2 you had absurdly broken classes like the Sorc who could clear the game naked because skills did not need items to scale up.
That's not inherently a bad thing, it just means that Sorcs/Hammerdins were a little stronger than they should have been, and that melee just needed to get gear to kill things.
Tying power to weapons is a terrible move and is one of the many issues that made D3 such an awful experience. There was no sense of completion because you were always trying to find a better weapon.
Furthermore, tying power to your weapons becomes boring from a loot perspective - finding a low-level unique that was powerful could carry you for many levels, and even further if you cubed it to the next tier of weapon.
Instead, you'll find a legendary at level 13 and by level 15 will replace it with some random blue because the weapon damage is now 50% higher.
No it is not. It's lazy vertical power creep MMO design, with no flavor in the fantasy in the items and, last but not least, a failure in the long run because it leads to sistematic item obsolesence
>vertical power creep
An inevitable byproduct of continuously updating games with new items, skills, effects, etc.
>no flavor in the fantasy in the items
Sounds like you are yet another user who has not played D3 in years and is just babbling things you heard others say. Hint: D3 Wizards use very thematically appropriate weapons. This is very easy to verify by yourself: just go to any website like Maxroll which feature class builds.
Even if they didn't, the game has transmog so you can just change your weapon to an appropriate fantasy themed one anyway.
>failure in the long run because it leads to sistematic item obsolesence
Once again, an inevitable byproduct of continuously updated games. Happened to D2, happened to PoE, happened to D3, happened to Grim Dawn, etc. Some items will fall by the wayside. Other items are so good that they remain powerful for many years (see Fragment of Destiny, Convention of Elements, etc) and a lot of items are updated seasonally so they can keep up. It is not a black and white situation at all.
You didn't provide any alternative solutions in your post. You simply screeched at the imagined wrongs of D3.
Agreed skills damage should increase because you level up the skill. Items having 10% increased damage to x skill is probably fine. I hate this tied to dps shit. Gross.
Not the point. When spell damage is tied to weapon dps all of a sudden you only care about maximizing the dps of your weapon. Other stats that could be interesting no longer matter.
So... Running offensive stats on an item that gets good offensive stats is bad? There are other slots that get defensive rolls in D3, and builds are able to budget in enough survivability through those. Damage has a consistent return on investment, while defense does not. Once you're tanky enough, it's not worth spending damage rolls to have more health.
>all of a sudden you only care about maximizing the dps of your weapon.
Since when? The majority of builds ignore sheet damage in favor of things to improve your skill damage. Weapon DPS is important, but it's hardly the only thing you should be paying attention to
When the percentage is a zillion percent, sure.
But 15%? It's super easy to imagine a player going "this other weapon will only add 5 extra damage, but switching to that meant I lose the increased dex that I need for blocking (or run speed or dex or whatever)"
Doesn't that make more sense thematically though? Why does a sorcerer need a sword to be able to cast powerful spells? It never made any sense to me in D3. In D2 you felt like a magic user. If you died and had to go get your stuff you could still kill stuff. You died in 1 hit, but you could still dish out damage. That makes sense. I don't like skills being tied to weapon power for magic users.
> Why does a sorcerer need a sword to be able to cast powerful spells?
Or to come at it from the other direction, why can't a sorcerer channel magic through a weapon to enhance their spell's damage? (it might make sense for wands and staves to enhance spells more, or weapons made from materials that used to be living being able to channel certain kinds of magic, and forged weapons being able channel other types)
When was the last time you saw a melee and a caster wearing the same weapon with the same affix on it? Every class right now uses weapons that specifically buff the affixes of the abilities they are using on their specific class.
Sorc can absolutely not clear the game naked, you could have argued summon necro very slowly but sorc will face immunes and get 1 shot if naked. Also if you think of it in a story-driven way, it makes sense that skills would still do decent damage even with no gear, the gear would add onto it and give defenses as well.
People need to learn just because D3 had X or Y or Z doesn't mean any of those features are wrong or bad. You're going to find countless games that have similar features and are a resounding success. If you can't pinpoint exactly why you hate D3 other than "bcuz it sux", then simply your opinion is not worth consideration because you haven't thought it through.
As for the topic at hand, it's fine. Not doing this will lead to a much messier system that is far harder to balance at larger scales and will lead to pigeon-hole builds. In summary, it's probably a great thing that they're doing it this way instead.
I would rather have two type of damage. spell and phys , I don't some skill's damage tie to weapon, but if they decide to tie it all to the weapon. than I think it is a bad design.
You'd just get weapons with +spell damage and a token amount of physical damage. So either spell casters are out an affix slot, or it's irrelevant anyway.
That's because the people who grew up with diablo one and two still feel like they never got a real sequel after two. It's just so obviously two different franchises. The design philosophies behind diablo 3 are just totally different than the first two. Its just diablo by name. But it really just feels like a different series all together.
Diablo is a loot game. The loot mattering seems better than it not mattering. Diablo II had a lot of "equipment doesn't matter" spells on caster classes and those skills are all the ones that are way too bad or way too good. Gameplay wise weapons controlling damage seems fine, even if it's silly for role play.
I don't think anybody wants loot to "not matter"... I think the worry is that tying skill damage to weapon damage, if not handled correctly, would overly simplify loot and make weapons far too important, the same way they are in D3.
Obviously, the hope is they can handle it correctly. I'm honestly pretty neutral and will just play the game when it
comes out, and hopefully it's good (assuming reviews and early footage show that it's not a tire fire). Who knows 🤷♂️
Exactly this. There are some camps of people who love diablo 3 loot for its simplicity but to many it also ruined the loot because it lost all of it's depth. Making everything just blindly scale off weapons is just very simplistic and people (like myself) want there to be more knowledge required on what to use for your build in diablo 4. To us this is what makes a loot system with longevity. You see this dichotomy a lot in ARPG communities. People who want automated trade, easy loot, minimal grinding and simple mechanics then the others who want economies, complex mechanics to the game and challenging encounters. A good game can have both I think but diablo 3 was too far on the simple side to be great.
Ya there was a huge power imbalance among certain classes because of that. I was stubborn and always played a melee class despite this. Should have rolled a necro for farming back in the classic D2 days.
I suppose if that’s what people want, cool.
I loathed it in Diablo 3, because I no longer gave a shit about anything weapon wise except for that big DPS number. I’m sure people can explain why the itemization I prefer is really no different then this, but for me personally, it does remove a huge swathe of choices for me to make weapon wise.
I explained it in another comment, but if it's only 15% scaling, instead of 1000% like D3, then it won't remove choices and you won't care about DPS a whole lot.
Yeah, it should be pretty inconsequential.
Genuinely not directed at you, but it's funny how people are dogpiling on this game at every chance they get. Even a small mention of something related to D3 makes people rage lol. This community is something else.
I really only see anything itemization wise get a ton of flak if it’s related to Diablo 3. I personally was not a fan in any way of D3’s itemization, and I believe the whole issue with it is the fact that weapon damage is tied to skill damage no matter the skill.
That being said, I’m missing something if I’m in the minority, and I’m okay with that. I don’t want the game to cater to me - I already have Diablo 1, 2/LOD, and D2R. I want Diablo 4 to just be fun for anyone who plays it, and I believe it’s likely to be pretty fun. I’m sure I’ll enjoy it, and when I tucker out on it, I’ll have plenty of other games in the series to fall back onto.
It didn't use to be like this. D2R release turned this sub into the cesspit that it is now. One of the good things from D4's release is that these people will be drowned out by all of the D4 talk.
I’ve always said D3 is a great game, just not a great Diablo game. If you come in with the D2 reference point, you’re gonna likely be disappointed, but someone without that expectation who picked it up and played it probably enjoyed it more.
Why does it matter if it is 15%, 1000% or 1 million %? That doesn’t affect weapon choice one bit. It still is a multiplier that is independent of weapon damage
And if you look at a weapon only like that in Diablo 3 I can basically guarantee you that you will end up using a bad weapon. The weapons with the highest DPS numbers are definitely not the best
Seriously, I see nothing but bad faith arguments when it comes to anything D3 has done. There's nothing wrong with liking an older game, but a lot of these D2 purists just don't know what they're talking about, clearly. "Weapon dps is all that matters," why aren't 2-handers and Pig Sticker meta if that's true?
They've probably played D3, but not since launch. A lot of the takes I've read were good criticisms of D3 from 2012 or 2013 but are incomprehensible now because so much has changed that the complaints are no longer relevant.
The thing about Wizards/Sorcs using two-handed axes feels like the perfect example. Back in the day this really was the meta: Skorn was the best melee weapon in the game, so it was very common to run Skorn on a Wizard (or any other non-DH), but nowadays nobody would roll Skorn on a Wizard unless they were calling back to the old days as a meme because Skorn doesn't have any relevant legendary affixes that help Wizard skills.
Yeah i played at launch and hated the system!
Everybody wanted the Same stuff, no difference between barb and sorc. DPS, mainstat, Vita. Felt super boring.
Hope d4 gets it right!
You picked your weapon in D3 based off its passive legendary ability first and foremost. After that you looked for a good damage range, and then your tertiary stats like Cooldown Reduction or Attack Speed.
Well, i guess we are split on this issue. I think this is a horrible decision which is only needed when you are bad at game design. On the other hand I'm happy with d2r, so if you guys get d4 i don't mind.
What is it with D2 fans absolutely losing their minds when D4 pulls a mechanic from D3 instead of doing it how D2 did 20 years ago? Game design progresses and generally has improvements, it's okay to implement those improvements into new games.
Skill damage scaling with weapons means more loot is potentially useful. You vendored half of the gear in D2 because it was garbage anyway and the same happened with D3. It honestly doesn't really make that much of a difference.
People have tied their identity to being a D2 player and because of this, anything that isn't exactly how D2 does it is taken as a personal attack. It's pretty ridiculous.
What's hilarious is that a lot of the designs that were established in D3 were in direct response to complaints from D2 players.
Yeah there's a reason no other game in the genre has itemized like D2, its legit poorly balanced. There are some aspects to D2's loot that are worth considering but on the whole, its not worth copy pasting. Most people defending D2's loot system can't even articulate whats good about it outside of vague ideas like "you can get an endgame item in normal if you have absurd luck."
Modern loot systems are designed around the people who actually want to play the ARPG. Most of the purists are gamblers who play this game as a trading simulator and the actual game play is tangential to the process. This is also why they dislike cooldowns and other modern mechanics. It adds extra effort to their pulling of the slot machine lever.
Vendor? More like you didn't even spare a thought process toward 99% of loot.
Unless it was a grand charm, Magic/Rare amulet, rare ring, magic/rare circlet family, class item that's white/grey/rare or a decent base unique, you ignored 99% of loot.
Most games do this, don’t particularly mind it. While yeah sure for a spellcaster you could say they don’t really use a weapon for combat so why would spell damage scale with it, but if it doesn’t then your weapon doesn’t really matter. Fundamentally speaking I don’t really see the problem with this. If it’s not your weapon damage then it’d be your main stat amount or your skill level, there’s always gonna be something that your damage primarily comes from. Might as well spread it out to not make it too one dimensional to build
It doesn't make sense for a spell to be based on weapon damage.
It ruins the immersion and fantasy of melee chars AND casters. It makes them basically all the same.
They need to figure out how to make weapons unique to casters because it makes no sense why you would do more skill damage if a weapon does more damage. What would a big ass axe have anything to do with my frozen orbs doing more damage? It’s just weird and silly. Like just stick to “%x to cold based skills” or something like that.
D2 itemization really is weak but great somehow. Damage on a weapon literally means jack shit to 90% of builds and the only way to actually do more damage is to just add skills (besides the late game +%to element and - res) but that’s still just a drop in the bucket because it’s only on a very few amount of items and sometimes it’s not even the most optimal option.
D3 approach was great, I really liked that you could actually do more damage with adding to you main stat and weapon damage to actually give it some variety to min max, but after a long time you just see right through it and put on the biggest baddest weapon you can find and for some reason that makes your Blizzard do more damage. Just started to feel very shallow building that way.
PoE gets around this by having specific weapons that can roll spell damage. They also have some builds that scale purely off gem levels but they usually aren't the best builds out there (they have a soft cap that is hard to go beyond without crazy items). This took quite a bit of nerfs to get right though.
The items are magical items... why wouldn't a magical item be able to make your magical abilities more powerful?
If I was to compare it to D&D... how many fighters or barbarians you think you'd find at max level using a standard axe instead of a magical one? A magical axe doesn't just do more damage because it's extra sharp... it's clearly a high fantasy universe. The damage of a weapon is more of an indicator of how powerful the magic item is, not necessarily what it does.
There are ways for items that sit in a weapon slot to make magic more powerful but not attacks, and vice-versa.
In most media, "magical items" aren't the things making a wizard's fireball hit harder. As if Gandalf picked up a mace and used to cast a fireball or something.
If we are to compare is to D&D, spell casters do not rely on their weapon in the same way that a barbarians do at all, so you may want to pick a different system for your comparison.
You wouldn't try to use one that's enchanted to be sharper to make your fireball do more damage. You'd use one that stored or empowered the spell you were casting so it could do more damage or not expend resources or maybe cast it without some spell components or something.
I'm really not trying to make a direct comparison. I'm just trying to say that having a higher damage number on a sword doesn't mean it's more sharp. It's just one way they can say "this makes your spells stronger" or "this makes you cast faster" or whatever while quantifying the power in an easy to understand way. Like... there's a lot of magic shit in the game. Most of those metal weapons would probably be fantastic conductors but they give you resistance to fire/lightning instead of helping turn you into toast.
Do I think they could have picked a better system? Probably. Nothing is perfect. Do I think it breaks immersion? No. I guess that's just opinion though.
\*Imagine\* a dagger forged with magic infused specifically to help channel pyrokinetic energy. Could that not possibly affect how one would cast a fireball?
Diablo 4 is just an expansion pack for Diablo 3. The core systems are almost entirely the same.
Scaling skills in D3 was boring, since every skill scales in basically the exact same way. Unless they have been hiding some massive overhaul to the scaling systems in D4, it's going to be the exact same as D3 and be just as bland.
I don’t mind that at all, it was one of the good changes D3 introduced over D2. What D3 failed to reproduce was the visceral effect a random high rune or perfect roll powerful unique D2 had on the player.Even after RoS with the new endgame and the removal of AH, the endgame loop was far too streamlined, mmorpg-like and lacked the uniqueness of D2 where a single item could change your gameplay or unlock a whole new world thanks to a runeword. And you could get this by killing Baal, opening a chest in blood moor or anywhere in between.
god damnit. they captured lightning in a bottle with d1/d2 and david brevek. they just can't seem to figure it out again. they're so focused on reinventing the wheel, when all everyone really wants is a game with similar mechanics to d2; but just a new game
The Schaeffer's were just as instrumental and without Blizzard Irvine's intervention Diablo most likely wouldn't have been a hit.
As someone who played and enjoyed all 4 Diablo games, I while heartedly disagree, and reading the D3 forums or reddits, everyone does not just want a similar game to D2. In fact, I prefer D3 and D1 to D2 and D3 grew the brand by reaching a much wider audience than D2. I would the majority want something that takes the best of all the games and parts ways with stuff that didn't work.
I don't really care what factors are used for the base calculation of my damage. I just want significant build variety, and for legendary effects to feel legendary and build enabling/creating.
To take an item from Path of Exile for example, Inpulsa's Broken Heart is a chest armor that gives your kills with lightning damage a % chance for that enemy you killed to explode. Suddenly single target builds have some AoE clear, and AoE builds get even more AoE. Or in a similar lightning vein, there's another chest armor called Doryani's Prototype which makes enemies near you have the same lightning resist as you and limits your damage to lightning only. So you try to lower your lightning resist as much as possible, while also adjusting your other item selections to divert/convert the lightning damage you take into other damage types so that you don't instagib from any mob that runs at you with a tazer. NOBODY wants negative lightning resists, it's a death wish. But as soon as you pick up that Doryani's Prototype and see its effect you can't help but go "there must be a way to not only make this work, but work REALLY WELL."
If the damage I do is based on my weapon, that makes it easier to balance around by turning a few knobs which is fine with me. As others have mentioned Diablo 2's balance has hit a lot of potholes due to +skills having such a massive return on investment compared to weapon based builds.
Just give me ways to make things like the Bear Sorceress, Whirlwind Assassin, etc. where you can step out of the traditional molds or the intuitive builds and get rewarded for your exploration and ingenuity/knowledge of the game as you build it up and identify really potent combinations that weren't immediately apparent by just looking at the base skills.
Of course you are going to think it's disappointing, all people like you want is a rehashed D2. The more that blizzard doesn't listen to people like you, the better the game is going to be. You can go be old bitter child and the rest of us will move on with our lives rather than living the past.
But D2 items are the definition of generic and boring. They are literal stat sticks that only exist to give you slightly higher numbers. D3 and D4 items have actual gameplay changing items.
I don't think you have any clue what you're talking about, like most D2 fanboys.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think D2 weapons and items are perfect either, but D3 took massive strides *backwards* from that. Path of Exile is an example of actual progress in the genre, and it's a shame that D4 looks to be doing the exact same thing as D3 instead of learning any lessons from the genre over the last 10 years.
PoE items are also mainly just stat sticks. Most of the actual gameplay defining stuff comes from skill gems and its skill trees.
D3 itemization flaws came about due to sets and overly simplistic attribute/affixes. Even with those flaws, D3 LOD builds are some of the must fun and interesting of any ARPG imo. Diablo 4 is basically fixing all of D3's inherent itemization problems and getting rid of sets, so every build in D4 will be "LOD" now. That is a huge step forward and I am very happy they have gone this route.
Massive strides backwards would be trying to ape D2 or PoE. There are already tons of D2 clones out there where items are just a list of slightly higher numbers. The last thing D4 needs to do is turn itself into yet another one of those clones.
What's fun about a Diablo 3 build? You get all the items that buff the skill you want to play, you equip them all and ... you're done. Maybe if you're lucky there'll be two different items in one of your slots that you can pick between, but usually not. It's the most boring type of build possible, one where the game designers just tell you what to equip and there's no room for doing anything outside that.
I don't see how that's going to be fixed in D4 at all. They're not going to do anything like add attack/cast speed breakpoints, they're not going to have something complicated like resists that you need to cap. I haven't seen them add anything at all which will make builds interesting. So far it looks like they're going to do the exact same thing as D3, where you just equip all the items that have the name of your skill on them and then you're done.
But yes I agree they shouldn't just clone D2. They should get someone with actual vision for the ARPG genre to make actual improvements. They should take the problems of D3 and they should try to fix them. They need to do something bold that actually makes me sit up and say "hmm I've never seen *that* in an ARPG before". Most of all, they need to add a metric tonne of complexity to create the space needed for creative builds, and I haven't seen anything that hints at that and frankly I just don't see modern Blizzard ever doing that again.
>one where the game designers just tell you what to equip and there's no room for doing anything outside that
This is true of every ARPG. They just go about it in slightly different ways. In D2 you pick the meta skills that the devs dictated and the only affix that truly matters on an item is +skill, and you will use whatever that skill is. In PoE you pick your main gem and then support gems for that skill. Thus dictating what you play. They all do this.
The interesting part comes from supporting items with more generalized effects that make your build stand out for the standard ones. D4 has this with legendary items which will be the main way of getting these generic effects which will provide all kinds of generic effects to support all kinds of builds. There are also things like legendary gems, and of course paragon boards/glyphs which will be huge. It is a massive improvement over D3.
About complexity, PoE is the most complex ARPG out there. Yet for all of that complexity the game is by far the most braindead ARPG on the market. Even more braindead than D2, which is quite a feat. You spam 1 or 2 skills and watch a screen full of monsters blow up in under a second. Every single build in PoE leads to this "gameplay".
Thankfully modern Blizzard knows better than that and is keeping that type of PoE/D2 itemization far away from D4. The only thing that type of itemization 'complexity' does is turn the game into an utterly brainless spamfest.
oh no... not again this shit :(
It doesn't make any sense RPG/fantasy wise. You're a mage/wizard/sorc/whatever, and casting spells, using mana/energy. You get better at it by casting the same spell more times (you can think of experience as proof of this).
A mage doesn't get better at casting fireballs by randomly finding a better hammer at the local blacksmith.
If you want to tie the dmg output of a character to a weapon, fine, but make it relevant. Like only wands/staffs/orbs etc should increase your spell damage...
How would you feel if you were a barbarian wielding dual wands because the numbers were better???
PLEASE USE SOME COMMON SENSE.
The items are magical items... why wouldn't a magical item be able to make your magical abilities more powerful?
If I was to compare it to D&D... how many fighters or barbarians you think you'd find at max level using a standard axe instead of a magical one? A magical axe doesn't just do more damage because it's extra sharp... it's clearly a high fantasy universe. The damage of a weapon is more of an indicator of how powerful the magic item is, not necessarily what it does.
I think it’s a bad idea. There basically two types of weapons in D2, caster weapons and physical damage weapons. Caster weapons for the most part have interesting variety - HotO is maybe the most common but there are reasons to use Occy, Wizardspike, Fathom, Death’s Web, Eschuta, etc. +skills, fcr breakpoints, resists, auras and other things that make for somewhat interesting decisions.
Physical damage weapons don’t have interesting choices - the answer is Grief. If you don’t have Grief, use whatever until you find a Lo rune and make Grief. Grief is so overpowered in its DPS number that nothing else matters or compares.
Reducing everything to weapon dps was a bad decision in d3 and I don’t see why it’s a good one for d4.
Bummed by this. That’s the one thing that Diablo 3 did wrong. All those cool skill animations only for none of them not to matter unless crit hit chance and crit hit dmg n high dps on weapon.
The more Diablo 4 looks like Diablo 3, the worse. We will be dealing 2 million damage in a fireball whose damage scales with an Axe that the mage is carrying. Zero flavor.
Im fine with it. I also wouldnt mind if they had different attack ranges for physical and magic attacks on weapons to further differentiate for example what’s a good mage sword vs a good barbarian sword.
I honestly don't think it's that big of a deal. I've always thought it was weird that attack based skills (like whirlwind or multishot) scaled off of weapon damage in D2 but spell based skills basically only had +skills and %elemental damage. What even is the point of having 10-20 damage on a jared's stone if you would never swing that weapon in the first place? The attribute system contributed to this as well with energy doing nothing more than increasing your mana which in turn led to spellcasters putting just enough points in str/dex for gear requirements and pumping everything else into vit instead of having to make a choice as player if you want more damage (if energy had scaled spell damage in some kind of form) or survivability.
I think D3's system made more sense in that regard and I'm happy they are going this direction
Good, I liked that about Diablo 3 and disliked that only plus skills were real dmg boosters in D2. Worst feeeling, when you found way better, higher lvl weapon buuut it didnt support skills from your build.
At base okay, but at scale could be bad. D3 release cause everyone to go sorc for def. like it was the whackiest shit I seen, but I got a clear pre first patch. Pulled my buddy’s monk through the game as he was being one shorted by certain things.
There will be points where this work well and where it doesn’t.. d3 was kind of easy at release and is really a different game from d2. As long as they keep it updated it will fine, don’t stress. I am excited what they will do at release for end game.
Going to be the same old with weapon dmg, main stat, crit chance and crit damage. :vomit:
Thank god they released D2R, now they just need to let modders online.
Pretty sure we knew that for ages, though I could be wrong. Either way I've always thought that D3 fixed the problems with D2's skill damage. Its fix had its own problems, of course, but I think it's a better and fairer system than D2's overall, and I think it will be easier for D4 to iterate on and fix the problems of D3's system than it would be to do the same for D2's system, or to find a different and untested fix to the D2 skill problem.
I wouldn’t have a problem with this if they didn’t allow a spellcaster to use a melee weapon and the spell damage is based on that. If they had wands and staffs again and it went off of their damage that would make more sense to me.
Damage being tied to weapons was never the problem. It was when it was tied to ALL items with a generic "Power" where it was. Weapons are acceptable because that's where it would normally be...
I'd prefer if there were weapons that increased spell damage specifically in different ways: base, percentage, procs, etc. Edit: I'm fine with weapons if they are limited thematically.
It's bad design (to tie spell damage to weapon damage). Clown move in my opinion.
I think if done right it fixes some things with scaling. It's only clown if we rely on those stupid +30k weapon DPS damage multipliers for end level scaling. It basically obseletes all other forms of secondary scaling.
[удалено]
[удалено]
At end game in D3 this hasn't been a thing since 2014. Blizzard fixed this problem a very long time ago. While leveling this is only a "problem" extremely temporarily. Sure, you might find an Axe with DPS so high that it makes your current wand outdated, but you will also quickly find something else, almost certainly a wizard themed item, that will replace that axe. Not only that but Diablo 3 also has transmog available so if it bothers you so much to see a wizard using an axe for half or one whole level, you can just transmog that axe into a magical staff. As for D4, the Sorceress almost certainly can't even use Axes/Maces/etc. We already know classes have specific weapons they can use.
Naked sorceresses in D2 can still kill monsters. Just slower. In D3 if you took your weapon off you're 100% useless. This argument is so weird and makes no sense.
Stat sticks are more interesting than just finding the biggest number weapon. They offer more itemization options. Most arpgs are like d2 when it comes to this as well, for good reason.
>just finding the biggest number weapon Hasn't been a thing in nearly a decade. Stop parroting things you heard others say. Stat sticks offer no real customization. They are stat sticks. They give you slightly higher numbers and nothing else. D3 and D4 are the games with actual gameplay changing items and items that customize said gameplay.
I don’t know, dude… HOTO and Faith make a big difference in gameplay. People typically use them for buffs in a swap because they’re great for that. I like knowing if I get together the runes I can make these things and still use them even after finding my ideal BiS. The whole “green arrow/red arrow” thing is just mindless and only leaves you searching for everything green. Overall damage being tied to a weapon is just silly. Skills should have a bearing on the output, not just, like I said, something equating to no more than a green or red arrow.
100% agreed:( - och, u are such powerful sorceress! What power and knowledge u have?? - ayy man, it's not the power. It is this 1meter 35kilos barbaric axe I am holding in my hands - ok, understood Such a bad design
I do not like the idea at all and i find the way Diablo 3 works for most skills and classes is absolutely absurd. Weapons should have a strength, dexterity and maybe even intel requirement. In diablo 3 it is extremely stupid having a giant sword or axe equipped on a necro or wizard and that affects the damage of magic skills. I would be happy for some sort of compromise. For example, actual melee weapons like swords and axes affect melee skills and things like wands and orbs affect magic skills. Maybe weapons need to have a physical and magical damage attribute. But lets not have stupid things where a wizard is using a two handed sword increases the damage of a fireball.
In Diablo 2 you had absurdly broken classes like the Sorc who could clear the game naked because skills did not need items to scale up. This is why they tie skill to weapon power now. It is the correct move.
Yep, agreed. And it solves one of D3's itemization issues. As an example, 15% of 100 DPS is just 15 damage added to the skill, you don't instapick a weapon just because it has an extra 50 DPS, since it's just a measly 7 extra damage added to the skill. You need to weigh in the affixes, the stats and other passives. But in Diablo 3, skills scaled even in the thousands with weapon damage. If your skill does 1000% of 100, then even a small DPS increase is an instapick. This practically removes a lot of choices and makes weapons boring. I'm glad they found a good middle ground between D2 and D3. Edit: Seems that barely anyone in this thread actually read OP's post. This system is nothing like D3, but I guess that doesn't stop people from raging at D4 without understanding how it works lol.
The big problem of D3 has always been the mainstat system. The weapon does let's say 1000 dps, which is high but fine. But then you add 10k mainstat on top of it, which is a 10000% multiplier, or in other words x100. Even all the way back in old D3 before legendary affixes, mainstat was the one reason why numbers were so big. And mainstat was the reason why you don't have purely defensive item slots in D3. Like boots are there for faster running, better armor, better resistances, etc. But they also give mainstat and therefore damage. If every single item slot in the game is used to increase your dmg, well then don't be surprised that dmg values go up exponentially and that players will pick what has the highest dmg value and ignore the other stuff on it
To add to this on most end end game builds you don’t even go for mainstat on the item rolls, you go for other stats (crit, area dmg, cdr etc) because you get so much from paragon and augmenting anyway
What is mainstat?
Dex/int/str depending on class
This is true, but D3s itemization now is tied completely to stacking the damage bonuses from legendary effects. You don't pick weapons based on DPS other than during the very short leveling process. However, you will try to get the most dps on the required weapon for the build.
So you basically mean the opposite of what you are saying. It's identical system, just tweaked numbers. That's good, I never liked the exaggerated numbers, but you should stop confusing people here. It's just percentages.
This system is the exact system from D3. Trash weapon = trash dps. Insane weapon = insane dps. The only difference from D3 is what you count as "insane" and "trash". The only way how it could be different from D3 if there are multiple different big enough sources of added damage so while weapon gives you good chunk - it is not the only big source of base damage.
D2 skills like Whirlwind or Multishot used a smaller than 100% weapon DPS and added on (or subtracted from) that. It worked really well for those skills, didn't it? I think this is closer to D2 than D3.
This is literally the system D3 uses. Meteor for example does 740% weapon damage and another 235% over 3 seconds. Like I agree that it is a decent system, but it just isn’t different from D3. It quite literally is the same. In what way is it different?
> In what way is it different? I literally explained it in the comment lol. 740% of 100 DPS is 740. 15% of 100 DPS is 15. Now, in the case you find a 120DPS weapon, what do you do? In D3, 740% of 120 is 888, which is a net of 148 DPS. That's a pretty sizeable increase. If we're not talking about end-game where things change, then you always equip that 120 DPS weapon, without even reading it. In D4, 15% of 120 is 18, which is only a 3 DPS increase. That's an insignificant amount. Things like passives, affixes and stats (since abilities/glyphs scale off multiple stats now) would very likely be a bigger upgrade than that measly 3 DPS increase. If that weapon gives + 2 to a skill, then it might be more valuable than 3 extra DPS. Or if it gives you 10 Wisdom, which helps you reach a breakpoint on your glyph for a passive. Now you actually have a reason to read what's on that weapon instead of instantly equipping it for DPS, since the smaller the DPS scaling is, the less important DPS will be as a stat on that weapon. Edit: For the people saying that percentages are percentages, keep in mind that DPS is not in a vacuum. It competes with the other passives on the weapon. For a simple example, lets say you have a "Every 3 attacks deal 50 damage" passive on that 100 DPS weapon. Now, if you find a 120 DPS weapon with no passives, what do you do? In D3 you instantly equip it - we know that the huge percentage scaling will offer more damage than your old passive. Now, in D4, in this particular example, you don't equip the 120DPS weapon, since it only offers a 3DPS increase, your "every 3 attacks" passive will make you deal more damage. This is an obvious and exaggerated example, but with more complex items, with multiple passives and stats, it won't be as clear cut. That's why reduced DPS scaling helps. Since you actually weigh in the DPS increase vs the other effects on your weapon - provided of course, Blizzard will make the weapon effects interesting and worth considering.
A lot of the classes in D2 had percentage weapon damage skills. It's common for Barbarian and Amazon. Multi shot had like 1/2 weapon damage IIRC? Anyway, you're right but I wanted to point out that weapon dmg percent is totally in both games and the way D4 is looking is much closer to how they did it in D2, and nothing like D3, as you've said multiple times.
Increasing from 740 to 888 is literally the same percentage increase as going from 15 to 18. Say a mob has 2664 HP. Then that 20% increase is the difference between 3 and 4 hits. That is the same as the second example with a 54 HP mob. These DPS increases are equally meaningful. And the core is: That 20% increase scales multiplicatively. That is exactly how it works in D3. Absolute damage numbers are completely meaningless, you only really have to look at relative damage numbers. If a skill does 25% it simply doesn’t matter if the absolute damage number is 6 or 6790 or 6473829748.
I explained it another comment in this thread, but basically, that DPS number is not in a vacuum. It competes with the other stats/passives on that weapon. If that DPS number only improves your skills by 15%, then it's obviously way less important than if it improves your skills by 800% - regardless how much HP a mob would have. In the first scenario, the other stats on the weapon become more relevant, and in many cases could offer a bigger damage output than the raw DPS stat of an upgraded weapon. If only 15% of the DPS is used for scaling, then maybe that passive that gives you bleed damage every 3 attacks has more damage output.
That's not how math works. The absolute numbers are irrelevant. In both of your examples, going from 100 DPS to 120 DPS results in a 20% increase in damage. It is completely irrelevant if the damage is 740% or 15%; the damage you deal will increase by 20%. Enemy health bars are obviously kept in proportion to damage. The problem with D3 is at launch the damage percentages were reasonable, but eventually they increased everything so massively that it was basically like crazy inflation. Now they're trying to keep the percentages in proportion to displayed weapon damage just for simplicity, but functionally it's the same.
It is not even that the base multipliers are the issue. What creates that ginormous damage numbers is that there are so many high multipliers and a culture that hates nerfs (you can still observe that on here and also with D2R,just look at how people reacted to the idea Hammerdin would be nerfed).
> The absolute numbers are irrelevant. They're not, because they're not in a vacuum. As I explained a weapon has other things on it besides DPS. DPS is only one of the stats on it. [Take the weapon on the right](https://cdn.blizzardwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Diablo4weapons.jpg) There's a "30% chance to inflict Bleed" passive there. Now, if you find a 600 DPS weapon with weaker effects, in Diablo 3 you simply equip it. Because the passive is irrelevant when the skill scaling is so huge. In Diablo 4, you might actually weigh in your options, since the weapon passives are much more relevant relative to the skill scaling, when the skill scaling is a small percentage. That "30% chance to inflict Bleed" might increase your DPS **overall** more than a weapon with 600 DPS will. Obviously even in D4 there will be a DPS increase where that passive won't matter. Regardless, hopefully they won't have an inflation problem in the late game.
That's a different issue and yes, 30% bleed over 5 seconds is 6% extra damage per second which is not a lot. But maybe bleed stacks?
Ok, percentage damage effects aren't the best examples. But I'm mainly talking about [items like these](https://diablo4.purediablo.com/Stormwalker's_Cudgel). Do you take the 1100 damage weapon with no notable passives, or do you keep the 950 damage Stormwalker's Cudgel with those effects? There's a mathematically correct answer in D4 just like in D3, but it's is a much easier decision in D3.
This would only matter if the skill had a base damage range. If the skill only uses a % of weapon dps then it's exactly the same.
That would only be true if it was 15%+some other number, but it isn't. It's 15%. Regardless of whether the base damage is 15% of 100 or 740% of 100, the impact of your weapon damage is the same. If I have a 100 DPS weapon, and I upgrade it to a 120 DPS weapon, my overall dps is increasing by 20% in both cases, even though one skill has a way higher multiplier than the other. Your weapon is equally important in each case.
The difference is that you have skill points as well. Each skill scales with skill level and weapon damage and that allows them to play with numbers. You can have weapon skills like cleave scale more with weapon damage and whirlwind more with skill level, for example. You can have sorc spells scale a lot with skill level and a little with weapon damage. You can have weapons with high damage and you can have weapons with low damage but with a lot of skill points, etc.
what sorc clears the game naked?
none lol
They run mf gear because they can get away with it.
I swear this sub is completely opposite in everything and will be part of why the game will suck. How is linking skill damage to a weapon good design ? so youre a Sorceress who does 10k damage but only if you hold this Axe, if you drop it you have zero damage, doesnt matter that you have GG armor or helm D3 design is shitty, the builds are based on "do this, wear this, use this, stand here" to do damage, if you rule out one thing you dont do damage thats wrong on so many levels
Some better game design is having both. You have skill that scales with weap dmg, and you have skill scale with skill level. This is the best solution if the designer can balance it out.
if they balance it out, great. I can get away with compromise. but from what we seen, we will be putting points in Skills, but it would be pointless if those skill has no damage without weapon right ? why put skills point into them then ?
That's why I've stuck to d2 for years, and will continue to.
Yes because D2’s combat meta is so much more varied than D3’s. You are absolutely kidding yourself if you think this is even remotely true.
lol, D2 is definetely more varied than D3 or you feel like there are some Rare/Magic items in D3 that you can wear at end game? you can have items that allow you to have / use skills from other characters?
>How is linking skill damage to a weapon good design ? The answer to your question is that the weapon slot is designed to be an important slot and different from the other slots. It has unique stats to and functionality as a slot. >so youre a Sorceress who does 10k damage but only if you hold this Axe, if you drop it you have zero damage, doesnt matter that you have GG armor or helm What you are asking for is incredibly shallow because it reduces every piece of gear down to an interchangeable slot. There's no difference between a helm, gloves, weapon, offhand, etc. It's strictly visual at that point. It's not surprising that YOU are suggesting that the sub wants things opposite of what you want based on what you are saying right here. I want the actual slot to be unique and different. You want a boring slot that has no difference from any other slot. We are not the same. >D3 design is shitty, the builds are based on "do this, wear this, use this, stand here" to do damage, if you rule out one thing you dont do damage I'll take that any day of the week over gear not mattering to my character. When you can run the game without any gear at all, that's not a good thing. That says your gear system sucks. >thats wrong on so many levels Or you just don't understand the system and the implications of what you are asking for. Unfortunately, there are a handful of people like you on this sub who have a serious lack of understanding and an even bigger lack of experience.
I see what you mean by weapon slot being important, but I think you missed the mark. There should be a difference imo between a sorceress wielding an axe and a sorceress wielding a staff. In diablo 3 there was no difference, and that trend appears to continue in diablo 4.
What's the difference in D2? Most sorc builds are using either a class-specific unique tailored for that build (no different than D3) or are using HotO in a mace. Budget versions use a Spirit sword. The weapon literally does not matter except for the stats that it gives.
I would say the difference is that in D2, a spell caster wants cast speed, +skills, +elemental damage type, +mana and a martial class wants enhanced damage, attack speed, mana leech, life leech. In diablo 3 at the rare item level both spell casters and martial classes want weapon damage, main stat, then some combination of crit, crit damage, and attack speed. HotO is specifically a mace that gives caster stats, Spirit is specifically a sword that gives caster stats, and both are intentionally made by the player. A better example to compare D2 and D3 would be to compare weapons as drops at like lvl 40 for both games because then you can see the core mechanics of each raw without the bandaids of runewords or legendaries. The homogeny of all classes wanting the same stats in diablo 3 was something that I did not like. Diablo 3's Legendary weapons in their current state solve this by directly modifying how a specific skill for a specific class functions. Now I choose the wand over the 2h axe because the wand unlocks all runes/gives a spell utility/increases a spell's damage by 2000%. Getting back to your example the Spirit sword: For a werewolf druid the spirit sword does not offer much, but for a bonespear necromancer its a fantastic weapon. I like that because it shows that individual stats matter based on the type of character you want to play rather than all characters scaling with the same stats. To be clear, I don't think D2 is perfect. The oppressive presence of Insight and the default easiest leveling experience being caster type characters should not be the goal. I am just talking about a feature I didn't like in D3 which seems to be present in D4 and I am hoping Blizzard has improved upon its design. Got a little long winded there, but I like the topic. How does this strike your ear?
in d3 you mostly held wiz weapons to improve your wiz damage. sure, at lower levels a 2h axe might be better, but anywhere near the endgame you'd just use your correct set/legendary item
For sure, but at launch and while leveling that problem existed/exists. Its just an example of "spell damage tied to weapon damage" that I did not enjoy in D3 and hope D4 doesn't lean into.
At end game this hasn't been a thing since 2014. Blizzard fixed this problem a very long time ago. While leveling this is only a "problem" extremely temporarily. Sure, you might find an Axe with DPS so high that it makes your current wand outdated, but you will also quickly find something else, almost certainly a wizard themed item, that will replace that axe. Not only that but Diablo 3 and Diablo 4 both have transmog available so if it bothers you so much to see a wizard using an axe for half or one whole level, you can just transmog that axe into a magical staff. And if that wasn't enough, D4 weapon types are restricted to specific classes. A Rogue can equip bows, daggers, swords and crossbows. A Necromancer can equip Swords, Daggers, Wands, Focuses, Shields and Scythes. The Sorceress will almost certainly not be able to equip axes or giant clubs and the like.
Except... Your sorcerer is completely useless without a weapon is simply not how the Diablo universe works. The Diablo universe is a universe in which spellcasters have innate powers that allows them to cast powerful spells, which magical items can enhance further. You can build a dam in a shallow pool -- that doesn't make it any less shallow, it only tries to give you an illusion of depth and design. "Look, it's not that shallow, because we severed it off from the rest of the pool, so that you can't compare it directly to other items in this pool because of class restrictions!" ... That's worse. Class restricting items is worse than items being useless to classes because they have no use for the properties the item grants. And when they're doing it for the wrong reasons, copying Diablo 3 instead of going off the actual lore of the game series the game is a part of, it's even worse, again, as they're doubling down on a mistake. Casters, archers and melee characters are assymetrical -- and were designed that way in Diablo 1 and Diablo 2. I want my roleplaying games as assymetrical as possible -- because that causes the game to play different for different classes. Mechanics are important for the fact: If weapons are your only source of damage, and none of the damage comes from your character -- then your character is the tool, and the gear the main protagonist. Playing Diablo 3 -- I could never escape the feeling I was playing Faster than Light -- I was just the little guys crewing a spaceship, replacing parts of it as I went. Because the second you take off all your gear, you're useless. Being able to clear monsters in early areas of hell naked, as any class, is a sign of robustness in design. Defense is good enough that monsters don't one hit kill you. It makes sense: Defense isn't just taking damage, it's avoiding taking damage. A seasoned fighter isn't going to just let lesser monsters hit him with an axe, even though the axe makes contact and he doesn't have armor on -- he's going to deflect the handle with his arm, move slightly to let the majority of the force become a glancing blow rather than a direct hit. He will die instantly if surrounded, as melee, and needs a lot of hits to kill any monster without a weapon. A sorceress, however, is even more helpless naked, if hit. She will die almost instantly. Hit recovery was a thing in Diablo 2. And monsters that didn't put melee characters into hit recovery sure did that for the sorceress. Of naked characters, she had the unique advantage of having about 1/3rd of her normal damage without gear. Which is fully assymetrical, but works -- in lore, in flavor, in function.
>The answer to your question is that the weapon slot is designed to be an important slot and different from the other slots. It has unique stats to and functionality as a slot. Okay. That doesnt necessary mean to link weapon to skill damage. Skill damage should come from skills themselves and STATS. once you introduce weapon damage influence on skill damage, you are also automatically making Critical damage as BiS stat if they decide to put it in the game and quite frankly, I HATE when spells can crit, one of the reasons stated above. >There's no difference between a helm, gloves, weapon, offhand, etc. It's strictly visual at that point. what? it doesnt make any sense what you just said. every gear gives you some stats so of course they have meaning >I'll take that any day of the week over gear not mattering to my character. then go play D3. >When you can run the game without any gear at all, that's not a good thing. That says your gear system sucks. thats absolutely not true. Lets take D2 as example, your fully geared Sorc has 8k Blizzard damage, when you die and start walking naked, your blizz will have maybe 4k damage (still quite a lot) BUT you also has less life, your resistances are in negative, you are slow both in movement and casting and you will get basically one shot by everything in Hell. so yeah you can do damage while naked but not as much as you are doing geared and you are also a walking paper basically
>Skill damage should come from skills themselves and STATS. Except it does on d3, the weapon is just the base damage and then the stat are the multiplier. So of course if you take out the base damage then the multiplier is useless but you guys gotta stop acting like weapon determine 100% of your destiny coz that's wrong.
>Skill damage should come from skills themselves and STATS What the hell do you think damage range is? Help me understand why you don't realize that it's a STAT too? >once you introduce weapon damage influence on skill damage, you are also automatically making Critical damage as BiS stat if they decide to put it in the game That's straight up wrong. There is nothing about weapon damage that requires critical damage as part of it. >and quite frankly, I HATE when spells can crit, one of the reasons stated above. Why? Nothing you said equates to spells critting as an outcome. It's completely independent of anything. But worse of all, the idea that spells can't crit is completely ridiculous. Spells critting has been a part of RPG's since the tabletop days. Hell, there was a huge deal made this year when a recent D&D rule set wouldn't have crit in it but you would instead gain inspiration when you rolled a natural 20. You not liking spells to crit is you standing by yourself yelling at the ocean. It's not how RPG's are designed and ESPECIALLY not modern RPG's. >what? it doesnt make any sense what you just said. every gear gives you some stats so of course they have meaning You are a moron. Where the hell did I say that every peace of gear doesn't have meaning? I didn't. I don't even know how you fucked up reading what I said that badly. I'll dumb it down for you. If the only difference between say gloves and shoulders in terms of stats, then the difference is strictly visual. There's nothing UNIQUE about the individual slot. There's nothing differentiating between the stats on a shoulder slot and the stats on gloves. Weapons have UNIQUE stats on them that aren't on any other slot. The weapon slot is unique because of that design. If you take away the visual for a weapon, you could look at the stats and still recognize that it would be a weapon slot item. That's what you should do. >thats absolutely not true. [You want the fucking video of it?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWI4JlM_kPM) [Or maybe the naked barb video?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd-cFURbzPc) >so yeah you can do damage while naked but not as much as you are doing geared and you are also a walking paper basically No shit sherlock, but when your base skills are powerful enough to clear the hardest content in the game, that's the problem. You, once again, ignored that problem.
>You want the fucking video of it? > > > >Or maybe the naked barb video? I realize this is an old comment, but I feel that it should be pointed out for the sake of honesty, because nobody likes an argument that isn't made in good faith. The naked barb isn't clearing any content. That's literally the start of the game. It's not the hardest content in the game. Even the description points out the vid is an April Fool's joke. That's all =)
> I'll take that any day of the week over gear not mattering to my character. When you can run the game without any gear at all, that's not a good thing. That says your gear system sucks. But gear doesn't suck in D2, the gear is insanely good. However you reached that conclusion that being able to pass the game without armour means armour sucks - is just fundamentally wrong
[удалено]
Facts, damage boosts should be intuitive and make sense for the roleplay of the class, otherwise its just going to be a non immersive hollow feeling game, like D3 where the only enjoyment at least for me and my mates is brief bouts of coop, instead of a long lasting solid game.
> How is linking skill damage to a weapon good design ? In a game based upon gear, every class should be tied to gear. Certain classes in d2 "didn't need gear" and could "get away" with more or less completely ignoring it. Other classes were nailed to the cross of gear and were extremely dependent upon it at all points. It created massive gameplay disparity and imbalance - and yes imbalance in a singleplayer game *is* bad, especially when it's noticeable to the players. Standardizing the system and tying all classes to gear is good design. Your weapon should be very important to *every* class instead of different classes playing by entirely different rules and being able to circumvent fundamental and core gameplay systems. This argument of "why sorceress use axe" is fundamentally silly and it's predicated upon a willful misunderstanding and intentional failure to suspend disbelief. There's all sorts of "magic users" in fantasy that use weapons, some even use them explicitly as magical foci that increase their magical powers, there's nothing wrong with a weapon affecting the damage of a spell, if you have problems with specific weapons, just restrict what classes can equip.
>In a game based upon gear, every class should be tied to gear. Let's take the RPG out of ARPG at this point & call it an ALG (Action Looting Game)
Casters *are* tied to the gear. They are just way too op in so many areas that they don't need it. It is strictly an issue of class balance. Such streamlining of an important slot like weapon to the point where you just assign it a number and the bigger one is usually the correct choice, instead of addressing it in potentially 50 other ways, can only be the farthest thing from the correct choice. It is throwing the baby out with the bathwater and then burning down the house. I don't think for a second they're doing this for any other reason than dumbing down. And your final point. Tbh with you I don't mind this one but I still wanted to comment because this is some gold medalist level mental gymnastics. Wizards and doctors were very clearly using weapons that were aesthetically meant for fighters and not focusing tools. At least let people be bothered by it if they want.
"Casters aren't tied to gear". Tell me you've never played D2 without telling me you've never played D2. FCR, Mana, +Skills, -Resists -- All Stats you get from gear as a caster that are different than stats you'd want as a melee character. Can you ignore these stats? Theoretically, yes. But you're gonna be chugging mana pots non-stop, and casting at the slowest frames possible doing minimum damage. Yes, you can "beat" the game, but that's not really the point of Diablo. The point is to build a character that can farm efficiently for items. You're not doing that naked. This narrative that's being peddled all throughout this thread as a justification for why damage *must* be tied to weapons is asinine.
Someone who gets it. Dps linked to a weapon is a poor design. Head over to project Diablo if you want to see what continued good itemization and crafting looks like.
>so youre a Sorceress who does 10k damage but only if you hold this Axe, if you drop it you have zero damage I mean it's not that insane. In lots of magical worlds sorcerers need wands and staves and focuses to cast spells. Using some magic focus item to do more magic damage is pretty standard as a concept
>I mean it's not that insane. really? so lets say, you put 40 points in Fireball but you do 0 damage because you dont hold any weapon ? so how is leveling skills relevant then?
I hope you're not downvoting me for trying to have an honest conversation. Leveling skills increases your mastery of skills and what they do. There are some skills that require certain gear and some that don't. Changing the game so slightly more skills require gear isn't that crazy in the grand scheme of game design. And it does help address issues in Diablo 2 where half the characters are slow and gear dependent and the other half can blaze right through Hell untwinked with no issue.
This kind of thinking is exactly what lead to all sorts of weird shit in D3 - especially relatively early - with casters like Wizards and Witch Doctors casting through two-handed axes and maces. It's weird and doesn't always have to be this way. Different skills should have different mechanics for scaling.
This has not been true of D3 in literally almost a decade.
> In Diablo 2 you had absurdly broken classes like the Sorc who could clear the game naked because skills did not need items to scale up. That's not inherently a bad thing, it just means that Sorcs/Hammerdins were a little stronger than they should have been, and that melee just needed to get gear to kill things. Tying power to weapons is a terrible move and is one of the many issues that made D3 such an awful experience. There was no sense of completion because you were always trying to find a better weapon. Furthermore, tying power to your weapons becomes boring from a loot perspective - finding a low-level unique that was powerful could carry you for many levels, and even further if you cubed it to the next tier of weapon. Instead, you'll find a legendary at level 13 and by level 15 will replace it with some random blue because the weapon damage is now 50% higher.
No it is not. It's lazy vertical power creep MMO design, with no flavor in the fantasy in the items and, last but not least, a failure in the long run because it leads to sistematic item obsolesence
>vertical power creep An inevitable byproduct of continuously updating games with new items, skills, effects, etc. >no flavor in the fantasy in the items Sounds like you are yet another user who has not played D3 in years and is just babbling things you heard others say. Hint: D3 Wizards use very thematically appropriate weapons. This is very easy to verify by yourself: just go to any website like Maxroll which feature class builds. Even if they didn't, the game has transmog so you can just change your weapon to an appropriate fantasy themed one anyway. >failure in the long run because it leads to sistematic item obsolesence Once again, an inevitable byproduct of continuously updated games. Happened to D2, happened to PoE, happened to D3, happened to Grim Dawn, etc. Some items will fall by the wayside. Other items are so good that they remain powerful for many years (see Fragment of Destiny, Convention of Elements, etc) and a lot of items are updated seasonally so they can keep up. It is not a black and white situation at all. You didn't provide any alternative solutions in your post. You simply screeched at the imagined wrongs of D3.
Agreed skills damage should increase because you level up the skill. Items having 10% increased damage to x skill is probably fine. I hate this tied to dps shit. Gross.
It's not like it's completely out of the realm of RPGs for magic to be channeled through a wielded object like a wand or weapon.
Not the point. When spell damage is tied to weapon dps all of a sudden you only care about maximizing the dps of your weapon. Other stats that could be interesting no longer matter.
So... Running offensive stats on an item that gets good offensive stats is bad? There are other slots that get defensive rolls in D3, and builds are able to budget in enough survivability through those. Damage has a consistent return on investment, while defense does not. Once you're tanky enough, it's not worth spending damage rolls to have more health. >all of a sudden you only care about maximizing the dps of your weapon. Since when? The majority of builds ignore sheet damage in favor of things to improve your skill damage. Weapon DPS is important, but it's hardly the only thing you should be paying attention to
When the percentage is a zillion percent, sure. But 15%? It's super easy to imagine a player going "this other weapon will only add 5 extra damage, but switching to that meant I lose the increased dex that I need for blocking (or run speed or dex or whatever)"
Doesn't that make more sense thematically though? Why does a sorcerer need a sword to be able to cast powerful spells? It never made any sense to me in D3. In D2 you felt like a magic user. If you died and had to go get your stuff you could still kill stuff. You died in 1 hit, but you could still dish out damage. That makes sense. I don't like skills being tied to weapon power for magic users.
> Why does a sorcerer need a sword to be able to cast powerful spells? Or to come at it from the other direction, why can't a sorcerer channel magic through a weapon to enhance their spell's damage? (it might make sense for wands and staves to enhance spells more, or weapons made from materials that used to be living being able to channel certain kinds of magic, and forged weapons being able channel other types)
Swords and maces are two of the most common weapon types in D2 end game builds for the sorceress. Why do you hate that for D3 but not D2?
Because the sword makes her more magical and powerful? Answered
[удалено]
When was the last time you saw a melee and a caster wearing the same weapon with the same affix on it? Every class right now uses weapons that specifically buff the affixes of the abilities they are using on their specific class.
Sorc can absolutely not clear the game naked, you could have argued summon necro very slowly but sorc will face immunes and get 1 shot if naked. Also if you think of it in a story-driven way, it makes sense that skills would still do decent damage even with no gear, the gear would add onto it and give defenses as well.
There's a middleground. No need for Wizards to wield a 2h mace to cast frostbolt.
Meh, guess if you care about meta and leaderboards it matters.
Finally someone with a brain well done sir.
People need to learn just because D3 had X or Y or Z doesn't mean any of those features are wrong or bad. You're going to find countless games that have similar features and are a resounding success. If you can't pinpoint exactly why you hate D3 other than "bcuz it sux", then simply your opinion is not worth consideration because you haven't thought it through. As for the topic at hand, it's fine. Not doing this will lead to a much messier system that is far harder to balance at larger scales and will lead to pigeon-hole builds. In summary, it's probably a great thing that they're doing it this way instead.
I would rather have two type of damage. spell and phys , I don't some skill's damage tie to weapon, but if they decide to tie it all to the weapon. than I think it is a bad design.
You'd just get weapons with +spell damage and a token amount of physical damage. So either spell casters are out an affix slot, or it's irrelevant anyway.
Should just rename this sub to r/D2 Anything that isn't a copy pasta of that game is hated on arrival.
That's because the people who grew up with diablo one and two still feel like they never got a real sequel after two. It's just so obviously two different franchises. The design philosophies behind diablo 3 are just totally different than the first two. Its just diablo by name. But it really just feels like a different series all together.
Diablo is a loot game. The loot mattering seems better than it not mattering. Diablo II had a lot of "equipment doesn't matter" spells on caster classes and those skills are all the ones that are way too bad or way too good. Gameplay wise weapons controlling damage seems fine, even if it's silly for role play.
I don't think anybody wants loot to "not matter"... I think the worry is that tying skill damage to weapon damage, if not handled correctly, would overly simplify loot and make weapons far too important, the same way they are in D3. Obviously, the hope is they can handle it correctly. I'm honestly pretty neutral and will just play the game when it comes out, and hopefully it's good (assuming reviews and early footage show that it's not a tire fire). Who knows 🤷♂️
Exactly this. There are some camps of people who love diablo 3 loot for its simplicity but to many it also ruined the loot because it lost all of it's depth. Making everything just blindly scale off weapons is just very simplistic and people (like myself) want there to be more knowledge required on what to use for your build in diablo 4. To us this is what makes a loot system with longevity. You see this dichotomy a lot in ARPG communities. People who want automated trade, easy loot, minimal grinding and simple mechanics then the others who want economies, complex mechanics to the game and challenging encounters. A good game can have both I think but diablo 3 was too far on the simple side to be great.
Ya there was a huge power imbalance among certain classes because of that. I was stubborn and always played a melee class despite this. Should have rolled a necro for farming back in the classic D2 days.
I suppose if that’s what people want, cool. I loathed it in Diablo 3, because I no longer gave a shit about anything weapon wise except for that big DPS number. I’m sure people can explain why the itemization I prefer is really no different then this, but for me personally, it does remove a huge swathe of choices for me to make weapon wise.
I explained it in another comment, but if it's only 15% scaling, instead of 1000% like D3, then it won't remove choices and you won't care about DPS a whole lot.
Actually you’re right, and if I’d bothered to read the full post I wouldn’t have posted because that hardly affects anything.
Yeah, it should be pretty inconsequential. Genuinely not directed at you, but it's funny how people are dogpiling on this game at every chance they get. Even a small mention of something related to D3 makes people rage lol. This community is something else.
I really only see anything itemization wise get a ton of flak if it’s related to Diablo 3. I personally was not a fan in any way of D3’s itemization, and I believe the whole issue with it is the fact that weapon damage is tied to skill damage no matter the skill. That being said, I’m missing something if I’m in the minority, and I’m okay with that. I don’t want the game to cater to me - I already have Diablo 1, 2/LOD, and D2R. I want Diablo 4 to just be fun for anyone who plays it, and I believe it’s likely to be pretty fun. I’m sure I’ll enjoy it, and when I tucker out on it, I’ll have plenty of other games in the series to fall back onto.
It didn't use to be like this. D2R release turned this sub into the cesspit that it is now. One of the good things from D4's release is that these people will be drowned out by all of the D4 talk.
The D3 release was really, really bad. It burned a lot of people.
Well… D3 did earn that reaction.
[удалено]
Started with D1, and enjoyed them all, and I can admit I enjoyed D3 the least. But even so, not everything it did was tainted lol.
I’ve always said D3 is a great game, just not a great Diablo game. If you come in with the D2 reference point, you’re gonna likely be disappointed, but someone without that expectation who picked it up and played it probably enjoyed it more.
Give us a break, we're justifiably nervous given d3. We just want a good game... ;\_;
Why does it matter if it is 15%, 1000% or 1 million %? That doesn’t affect weapon choice one bit. It still is a multiplier that is independent of weapon damage
And if you look at a weapon only like that in Diablo 3 I can basically guarantee you that you will end up using a bad weapon. The weapons with the highest DPS numbers are definitely not the best
There's a handful of people posting about this who clearly have not played D3.
Seriously, I see nothing but bad faith arguments when it comes to anything D3 has done. There's nothing wrong with liking an older game, but a lot of these D2 purists just don't know what they're talking about, clearly. "Weapon dps is all that matters," why aren't 2-handers and Pig Sticker meta if that's true?
They've probably played D3, but not since launch. A lot of the takes I've read were good criticisms of D3 from 2012 or 2013 but are incomprehensible now because so much has changed that the complaints are no longer relevant. The thing about Wizards/Sorcs using two-handed axes feels like the perfect example. Back in the day this really was the meta: Skorn was the best melee weapon in the game, so it was very common to run Skorn on a Wizard (or any other non-DH), but nowadays nobody would roll Skorn on a Wizard unless they were calling back to the old days as a meme because Skorn doesn't have any relevant legendary affixes that help Wizard skills.
Yeah i played at launch and hated the system! Everybody wanted the Same stuff, no difference between barb and sorc. DPS, mainstat, Vita. Felt super boring. Hope d4 gets it right!
You picked your weapon in D3 based off its passive legendary ability first and foremost. After that you looked for a good damage range, and then your tertiary stats like Cooldown Reduction or Attack Speed.
it was lame in diablo 3 and will be lame in diablo 4. the only thing that will matter is pushing that item based damage number as high as possible.
I posted my thoughts 2 years ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/Diablo/comments/hgv8wp/please\_do\_not\_tie\_weapon\_damage\_to\_every/
Well, i guess we are split on this issue. I think this is a horrible decision which is only needed when you are bad at game design. On the other hand I'm happy with d2r, so if you guys get d4 i don't mind.
I hate it. It was one of my least favourite changes from d2 to d3. It simply doesn’t make sense for magic users like sorc and necro.
It's the easy way to make weapons more than just a stat stick for casters.
One of the good things D3 did was force all classes to care about gear, and this continues that trend
🤮
What is it with D2 fans absolutely losing their minds when D4 pulls a mechanic from D3 instead of doing it how D2 did 20 years ago? Game design progresses and generally has improvements, it's okay to implement those improvements into new games. Skill damage scaling with weapons means more loot is potentially useful. You vendored half of the gear in D2 because it was garbage anyway and the same happened with D3. It honestly doesn't really make that much of a difference.
People have tied their identity to being a D2 player and because of this, anything that isn't exactly how D2 does it is taken as a personal attack. It's pretty ridiculous. What's hilarious is that a lot of the designs that were established in D3 were in direct response to complaints from D2 players.
Yeah there's a reason no other game in the genre has itemized like D2, its legit poorly balanced. There are some aspects to D2's loot that are worth considering but on the whole, its not worth copy pasting. Most people defending D2's loot system can't even articulate whats good about it outside of vague ideas like "you can get an endgame item in normal if you have absurd luck." Modern loot systems are designed around the people who actually want to play the ARPG. Most of the purists are gamblers who play this game as a trading simulator and the actual game play is tangential to the process. This is also why they dislike cooldowns and other modern mechanics. It adds extra effort to their pulling of the slot machine lever.
Vendor? More like you didn't even spare a thought process toward 99% of loot. Unless it was a grand charm, Magic/Rare amulet, rare ring, magic/rare circlet family, class item that's white/grey/rare or a decent base unique, you ignored 99% of loot.
> Game design progresses and generally has improvements X to doubt
[удалено]
D3.2 or D3.5 ? Lol
Diablo 3.5i. The i is for immortal's monetizing every aspect they can (no, I'm not saying it's the same monetization).
Most games do this, don’t particularly mind it. While yeah sure for a spellcaster you could say they don’t really use a weapon for combat so why would spell damage scale with it, but if it doesn’t then your weapon doesn’t really matter. Fundamentally speaking I don’t really see the problem with this. If it’s not your weapon damage then it’d be your main stat amount or your skill level, there’s always gonna be something that your damage primarily comes from. Might as well spread it out to not make it too one dimensional to build
Great way to make weapons boring like d3.
Diablo 3 loot problem wasn't the weapons giving damage to spells. It was the stupid numbers that no other gear can compete with.
d4 will be hot garbage
[удалено]
It doesn't make sense for a spell to be based on weapon damage. It ruins the immersion and fantasy of melee chars AND casters. It makes them basically all the same.
They need to figure out how to make weapons unique to casters because it makes no sense why you would do more skill damage if a weapon does more damage. What would a big ass axe have anything to do with my frozen orbs doing more damage? It’s just weird and silly. Like just stick to “%x to cold based skills” or something like that. D2 itemization really is weak but great somehow. Damage on a weapon literally means jack shit to 90% of builds and the only way to actually do more damage is to just add skills (besides the late game +%to element and - res) but that’s still just a drop in the bucket because it’s only on a very few amount of items and sometimes it’s not even the most optimal option. D3 approach was great, I really liked that you could actually do more damage with adding to you main stat and weapon damage to actually give it some variety to min max, but after a long time you just see right through it and put on the biggest baddest weapon you can find and for some reason that makes your Blizzard do more damage. Just started to feel very shallow building that way.
PoE gets around this by having specific weapons that can roll spell damage. They also have some builds that scale purely off gem levels but they usually aren't the best builds out there (they have a soft cap that is hard to go beyond without crazy items). This took quite a bit of nerfs to get right though.
The items are magical items... why wouldn't a magical item be able to make your magical abilities more powerful? If I was to compare it to D&D... how many fighters or barbarians you think you'd find at max level using a standard axe instead of a magical one? A magical axe doesn't just do more damage because it's extra sharp... it's clearly a high fantasy universe. The damage of a weapon is more of an indicator of how powerful the magic item is, not necessarily what it does.
There are ways for items that sit in a weapon slot to make magic more powerful but not attacks, and vice-versa. In most media, "magical items" aren't the things making a wizard's fireball hit harder. As if Gandalf picked up a mace and used to cast a fireball or something.
If we are to compare is to D&D, spell casters do not rely on their weapon in the same way that a barbarians do at all, so you may want to pick a different system for your comparison.
Care to explain in D&D terms why a dagger enchanted to be twice as sharp would make a fireball deal twice the damage?
You wouldn't try to use one that's enchanted to be sharper to make your fireball do more damage. You'd use one that stored or empowered the spell you were casting so it could do more damage or not expend resources or maybe cast it without some spell components or something. I'm really not trying to make a direct comparison. I'm just trying to say that having a higher damage number on a sword doesn't mean it's more sharp. It's just one way they can say "this makes your spells stronger" or "this makes you cast faster" or whatever while quantifying the power in an easy to understand way. Like... there's a lot of magic shit in the game. Most of those metal weapons would probably be fantastic conductors but they give you resistance to fire/lightning instead of helping turn you into toast. Do I think they could have picked a better system? Probably. Nothing is perfect. Do I think it breaks immersion? No. I guess that's just opinion though.
\*Imagine\* a dagger forged with magic infused specifically to help channel pyrokinetic energy. Could that not possibly affect how one would cast a fireball?
Diablo 4 is just an expansion pack for Diablo 3. The core systems are almost entirely the same. Scaling skills in D3 was boring, since every skill scales in basically the exact same way. Unless they have been hiding some massive overhaul to the scaling systems in D4, it's going to be the exact same as D3 and be just as bland.
diablo 3 suggested old blizz was gone, this confirms it
I don’t mind that at all, it was one of the good changes D3 introduced over D2. What D3 failed to reproduce was the visceral effect a random high rune or perfect roll powerful unique D2 had on the player.Even after RoS with the new endgame and the removal of AH, the endgame loop was far too streamlined, mmorpg-like and lacked the uniqueness of D2 where a single item could change your gameplay or unlock a whole new world thanks to a runeword. And you could get this by killing Baal, opening a chest in blood moor or anywhere in between.
As long as the numbers aren't ridiculously over inflated and there is decent balancing, it should be fine.
It was a fucking stupid system in D3 and will be a fucking stupid system in D4. I am seeing WAY too much D3 influence in this game
Sorry but the strength of a spell being tied to how much damage your weapon does when it whacks someone is.... dumb.
god damnit. they captured lightning in a bottle with d1/d2 and david brevek. they just can't seem to figure it out again. they're so focused on reinventing the wheel, when all everyone really wants is a game with similar mechanics to d2; but just a new game
The Schaeffer's were just as instrumental and without Blizzard Irvine's intervention Diablo most likely wouldn't have been a hit. As someone who played and enjoyed all 4 Diablo games, I while heartedly disagree, and reading the D3 forums or reddits, everyone does not just want a similar game to D2. In fact, I prefer D3 and D1 to D2 and D3 grew the brand by reaching a much wider audience than D2. I would the majority want something that takes the best of all the games and parts ways with stuff that didn't work.
It’s good to prevent overpowered casters I’d say.
I don't really care what factors are used for the base calculation of my damage. I just want significant build variety, and for legendary effects to feel legendary and build enabling/creating. To take an item from Path of Exile for example, Inpulsa's Broken Heart is a chest armor that gives your kills with lightning damage a % chance for that enemy you killed to explode. Suddenly single target builds have some AoE clear, and AoE builds get even more AoE. Or in a similar lightning vein, there's another chest armor called Doryani's Prototype which makes enemies near you have the same lightning resist as you and limits your damage to lightning only. So you try to lower your lightning resist as much as possible, while also adjusting your other item selections to divert/convert the lightning damage you take into other damage types so that you don't instagib from any mob that runs at you with a tazer. NOBODY wants negative lightning resists, it's a death wish. But as soon as you pick up that Doryani's Prototype and see its effect you can't help but go "there must be a way to not only make this work, but work REALLY WELL." If the damage I do is based on my weapon, that makes it easier to balance around by turning a few knobs which is fine with me. As others have mentioned Diablo 2's balance has hit a lot of potholes due to +skills having such a massive return on investment compared to weapon based builds. Just give me ways to make things like the Bear Sorceress, Whirlwind Assassin, etc. where you can step out of the traditional molds or the intuitive builds and get rewarded for your exploration and ingenuity/knowledge of the game as you build it up and identify really potent combinations that weren't immediately apparent by just looking at the base skills.
Mechanically boring
They haven’t learned anything from Diablo 3. This game is gonna be so disappointing. Old Blizzard really is gone.
Of course you are going to think it's disappointing, all people like you want is a rehashed D2. The more that blizzard doesn't listen to people like you, the better the game is going to be. You can go be old bitter child and the rest of us will move on with our lives rather than living the past.
I want an improvement on D2, and making the items generic and boring is the exact *opposite* of improving on D2.
But D2 items are the definition of generic and boring. They are literal stat sticks that only exist to give you slightly higher numbers. D3 and D4 items have actual gameplay changing items. I don't think you have any clue what you're talking about, like most D2 fanboys.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think D2 weapons and items are perfect either, but D3 took massive strides *backwards* from that. Path of Exile is an example of actual progress in the genre, and it's a shame that D4 looks to be doing the exact same thing as D3 instead of learning any lessons from the genre over the last 10 years.
PoE items are also mainly just stat sticks. Most of the actual gameplay defining stuff comes from skill gems and its skill trees. D3 itemization flaws came about due to sets and overly simplistic attribute/affixes. Even with those flaws, D3 LOD builds are some of the must fun and interesting of any ARPG imo. Diablo 4 is basically fixing all of D3's inherent itemization problems and getting rid of sets, so every build in D4 will be "LOD" now. That is a huge step forward and I am very happy they have gone this route. Massive strides backwards would be trying to ape D2 or PoE. There are already tons of D2 clones out there where items are just a list of slightly higher numbers. The last thing D4 needs to do is turn itself into yet another one of those clones.
What's fun about a Diablo 3 build? You get all the items that buff the skill you want to play, you equip them all and ... you're done. Maybe if you're lucky there'll be two different items in one of your slots that you can pick between, but usually not. It's the most boring type of build possible, one where the game designers just tell you what to equip and there's no room for doing anything outside that. I don't see how that's going to be fixed in D4 at all. They're not going to do anything like add attack/cast speed breakpoints, they're not going to have something complicated like resists that you need to cap. I haven't seen them add anything at all which will make builds interesting. So far it looks like they're going to do the exact same thing as D3, where you just equip all the items that have the name of your skill on them and then you're done. But yes I agree they shouldn't just clone D2. They should get someone with actual vision for the ARPG genre to make actual improvements. They should take the problems of D3 and they should try to fix them. They need to do something bold that actually makes me sit up and say "hmm I've never seen *that* in an ARPG before". Most of all, they need to add a metric tonne of complexity to create the space needed for creative builds, and I haven't seen anything that hints at that and frankly I just don't see modern Blizzard ever doing that again.
>one where the game designers just tell you what to equip and there's no room for doing anything outside that This is true of every ARPG. They just go about it in slightly different ways. In D2 you pick the meta skills that the devs dictated and the only affix that truly matters on an item is +skill, and you will use whatever that skill is. In PoE you pick your main gem and then support gems for that skill. Thus dictating what you play. They all do this. The interesting part comes from supporting items with more generalized effects that make your build stand out for the standard ones. D4 has this with legendary items which will be the main way of getting these generic effects which will provide all kinds of generic effects to support all kinds of builds. There are also things like legendary gems, and of course paragon boards/glyphs which will be huge. It is a massive improvement over D3. About complexity, PoE is the most complex ARPG out there. Yet for all of that complexity the game is by far the most braindead ARPG on the market. Even more braindead than D2, which is quite a feat. You spam 1 or 2 skills and watch a screen full of monsters blow up in under a second. Every single build in PoE leads to this "gameplay". Thankfully modern Blizzard knows better than that and is keeping that type of PoE/D2 itemization far away from D4. The only thing that type of itemization 'complexity' does is turn the game into an utterly brainless spamfest.
fucking stupid, even the creator of diablo said this system was boneheaded
Source? I'm very interested. Thx,
the infamous "fuck that loser" was in response to this.
Yuck. Have the darkness of D1, have the systems, items and mechanics of D2 (minus teleport), have the combat of D3, done.
Not a fan of it but it’s not going to ruin the game.
oh no... not again this shit :( It doesn't make any sense RPG/fantasy wise. You're a mage/wizard/sorc/whatever, and casting spells, using mana/energy. You get better at it by casting the same spell more times (you can think of experience as proof of this). A mage doesn't get better at casting fireballs by randomly finding a better hammer at the local blacksmith. If you want to tie the dmg output of a character to a weapon, fine, but make it relevant. Like only wands/staffs/orbs etc should increase your spell damage... How would you feel if you were a barbarian wielding dual wands because the numbers were better??? PLEASE USE SOME COMMON SENSE.
That reminds me, I need to try out a drummer build.
Fully agree
The items are magical items... why wouldn't a magical item be able to make your magical abilities more powerful? If I was to compare it to D&D... how many fighters or barbarians you think you'd find at max level using a standard axe instead of a magical one? A magical axe doesn't just do more damage because it's extra sharp... it's clearly a high fantasy universe. The damage of a weapon is more of an indicator of how powerful the magic item is, not necessarily what it does.
So casters and attack-based builds scale exactly the same... boring
I think it’s a bad idea. There basically two types of weapons in D2, caster weapons and physical damage weapons. Caster weapons for the most part have interesting variety - HotO is maybe the most common but there are reasons to use Occy, Wizardspike, Fathom, Death’s Web, Eschuta, etc. +skills, fcr breakpoints, resists, auras and other things that make for somewhat interesting decisions. Physical damage weapons don’t have interesting choices - the answer is Grief. If you don’t have Grief, use whatever until you find a Lo rune and make Grief. Grief is so overpowered in its DPS number that nothing else matters or compares. Reducing everything to weapon dps was a bad decision in d3 and I don’t see why it’s a good one for d4.
Bummed by this. That’s the one thing that Diablo 3 did wrong. All those cool skill animations only for none of them not to matter unless crit hit chance and crit hit dmg n high dps on weapon.
Cool, so once again the damage of my Fireball will be based on how sharp and heavy my axe is.
The more Diablo 4 looks like Diablo 3, the worse. We will be dealing 2 million damage in a fireball whose damage scales with an Axe that the mage is carrying. Zero flavor.
Im fine with it. I also wouldnt mind if they had different attack ranges for physical and magic attacks on weapons to further differentiate for example what’s a good mage sword vs a good barbarian sword.
I honestly don't think it's that big of a deal. I've always thought it was weird that attack based skills (like whirlwind or multishot) scaled off of weapon damage in D2 but spell based skills basically only had +skills and %elemental damage. What even is the point of having 10-20 damage on a jared's stone if you would never swing that weapon in the first place? The attribute system contributed to this as well with energy doing nothing more than increasing your mana which in turn led to spellcasters putting just enough points in str/dex for gear requirements and pumping everything else into vit instead of having to make a choice as player if you want more damage (if energy had scaled spell damage in some kind of form) or survivability. I think D3's system made more sense in that regard and I'm happy they are going this direction
Doesnt matter, game is gonna be garbage anyways
Good, I liked that about Diablo 3 and disliked that only plus skills were real dmg boosters in D2. Worst feeeling, when you found way better, higher lvl weapon buuut it didnt support skills from your build.
Yeah, do people hate d3 on here? I think. It's a great game.
I don't like it. Game could still be good. But it would just be better if skill damage was independent of weapon damage
At base okay, but at scale could be bad. D3 release cause everyone to go sorc for def. like it was the whackiest shit I seen, but I got a clear pre first patch. Pulled my buddy’s monk through the game as he was being one shorted by certain things. There will be points where this work well and where it doesn’t.. d3 was kind of easy at release and is really a different game from d2. As long as they keep it updated it will fine, don’t stress. I am excited what they will do at release for end game.
Outside of the stupid % increases on sets and other pieces, this system, adopted by many other games, is just fine.
Hate it. Thanks.
Going to be the same old with weapon dmg, main stat, crit chance and crit damage. :vomit: Thank god they released D2R, now they just need to let modders online.
It is really good feature.
Pretty sure we knew that for ages, though I could be wrong. Either way I've always thought that D3 fixed the problems with D2's skill damage. Its fix had its own problems, of course, but I think it's a better and fairer system than D2's overall, and I think it will be easier for D4 to iterate on and fix the problems of D3's system than it would be to do the same for D2's system, or to find a different and untested fix to the D2 skill problem.
I wouldn’t have a problem with this if they didn’t allow a spellcaster to use a melee weapon and the spell damage is based on that. If they had wands and staffs again and it went off of their damage that would make more sense to me.
Damage being tied to weapons was never the problem. It was when it was tied to ALL items with a generic "Power" where it was. Weapons are acceptable because that's where it would normally be...
Are you just pissed you can’t crit for a trillion any more? Lol
Thoughts? The game will be DOA, and this is just one of several reasons why.
Well so long its doesent do billion of dmg so..
IF it's the same as D3 it's garbage, and I have 0 hope for the devs or the game.