Why are base stats part of the passive tree

I think its a bad idea and here is why:

"

Startkabels wrote:

-Less restrictive passive tree, because players have more freedom as they do not have to plan routes that allow them to take the base stats they need.

Disagree and dont see why. Right now you have to choose paths and this paths are supported by basic stats. Great idea in my mind. You can replace strength with melee damage and life if you want, because strength gives you exactly that. Int and dex do give you other things. If you would patch them together its very hard to avoid destroying paths and you would inescapably reduce freedom.

"

Startkabels wrote:

-Less gear restrictions, because it is easier to raise base stats to meet gear requirements

Its a great thing in my opinion, that you have to keep your gear reqs in mind when you skill. A seperation of both passive stats would just destroy this.

"

Startkabels wrote:

-Less overwhelming passive tree, because it would be more clear and compact

can be viewed as advantage, can be viewed as disadvantage. Like i said. Smaller tree= less options and if only (and its not only because of:) you have to keep the advantages of taking a stat instead of a keystone in mind (+30 int gives you a lot of mana and es)

"

Startkabels wrote:

-Better support for hybrid characters

How? Really I dont see how. I can cleary see a disadvantage in your proposal: if I cant choose to take a 30 dex and +30 int node instead of 2 +5 critchance nodes because I play a hybrid char and have the same amount of Stats like a pure dex or int, remember, right now i can wear pure int boots and a pure dex armour and still fullfill the stat requriements. In a system where i have the same amount of stats as a pure char has but i have to divide them into 2 stats i probably am less able to wear pure int or dex armour.

"

Startkabels wrote:

-Taking the nodes you really want

Reducing the number of points you get and reducing the amount of nodes at the same time doesnt enable you to more freedom in choosing the nodes you want. If you make a system that does, the game loses one important think: That you have to make decisions in your build which means, everybode would play a cookie cutter build. Diversiy would die off.

"

Startkabels wrote:

-More easy managing of base stats, because they are on the character screen where you simply click "+". You do not need access to some node far away from where you currently are in the passive tree.

Not having to make a decision in a game might feel easier at first, but honestly can be a terrible thing.

"

Startkabels wrote:

-More easy balancing of base stats and monster stats, because they are more easy to predict

The stats in the tree are actually a huge part of the balancing....
Ever wondered why there are sometimes 1 or sometimes 3 strenght nodes to the next skillnodes?

"

Startkabels wrote:

-More fun leveling, because you well get a passive point and a base stat point each level

Maybe for some people, but not a huge point anyway.



Sorry for my bad english and possible typos. Wrote this on a broken keyboard.

Swapping the passive tree for something else would be like changing Angry Birds to a game that throws rocks from a ballista. The very title of the game is (imho) a subtle play on the passive tree: "Path of Exile" is a reference to your personal path through the tree...

Furthermore, my 12 year old son started playing PoE over the weekend and had zero problems whatsoever understanding the tree.

angry birds owes everything to crush the castle (the game you´re refering to) and i don´t think they paid a single penny to the original creators. if you meant ¨flavouring¨ then i can understand the metaphor. poe imho however adds a lot more than flavouring to the original game of D2. strangely enough, OP seems to be happier with a D2 style of passive point allocation.

Earlier in this thread I noticed everyone arguing about changing the passive skill tree, wanting stats put into the character tab like in the Diablo series, and reducing the size and complexity of the Path of Exile passive skill tree.

Attributes in the Diablo series:
In Diablo 1 and 2, there is no possible way to refund allocated attribute points. If I recall correctly, there is no possible way to refund them in Diablo 3, either. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm certain about the first two games.

Skills and Skill points in the Diablo series:
In Diablo 1, skills were gained by consuming (reading) books that dropped from monsters, environment pieces, and trading with other players. Diablo 2 had a Skill tab where players allocated points as they wished, with little limitation. Diablo 3 is similar to the previous one, but more "user friendly" as you can easily change out your skills and alter sub-skills to what you like or need.

Attributes in Path of Exile:
From what I can tell, they are automatically allocated when you level, as I have noticed some items become available before I allocated skills in the skill tree, health goes up, and mana increases.

Skills and Skill points in Path of Exile:
Skills are based on gems that you place into items, and, in my opinion, is much better than anything Diablo ever did simply because of the different system. The disadvantages are far outweighed by the advantages.

In the passive skill tree, I have the freedom to go and claim what I wish, as I wish. The only requirements for anything are having a node near it. This allows for a very wide variety of builds, choices, and changes. If I need more life, I can use some of the free refund points I get from simply playing the game. If I need more refund points, I can farm or trade for Orbs of Regret.

Above is a long description leading up to this: Path of Exile allows players what Diablo never has, a more open game where a certain class does not mean a certain build. Anyone can be anything. Some have better options early on, or are simply better off with certain builds, but it doesn't force anything on anyone.

As to the passive skill tree being "complicated", I'll have to disagree. The only things I've had trouble understanding are support gems like Trap, Remote Mine, and if Raise Spectre can raise rares or just regular variants-all of those I now understand.

One final point. Life and armor are very powerful, if not overpowered in normal and early to mid cruel. My marauder had no trouble until I come up to someone like Brutus, Kole, or someone else who simply lays out too much damage. Besides that, he doesn't have any trouble like my other characters. My characters based in energy shield and evasion have very hard times with stun lock and health management, as some fights are nearly impossible. I have yet to see a time where my marauder has trouble with anyone or anything other than a boss meant to be tough.

"

Chesto wrote:

I think its a bad idea and here is why:

Disagree and dont see why. Right now you have to choose paths and this paths are supported by basic stats. Great idea in my mind. You can replace strength with melee damage and life if you want, because strength gives you exactly that. Int and dex do give you other things. If you would patch them together its very hard to avoid destroying paths and you would inescapably reduce freedom.

With my suggestion you would take strength, life by clicking + in the character screen and a melee damage passive.

"

Its a great thing in my opinion, that you have to keep your gear reqs in mind when you skill. A seperation of both passive stats would just destroy this.

It would just be easier, it would not destroy it...

"

can be viewed as advantage, can be viewed as disadvantage. Like i said. Smaller tree= less options and if only (and its not only because of:) you have to keep the advantages of taking a stat instead of a keystone in mind (+30 int gives you a lot of mana and es)

Smaller tree is not less options, a lot of small nodes are put in the character panel. In fact there would be more room for more options.

"

How? Really I dont see how. I can cleary see a disadvantage in your proposal: if I cant choose to take a 30 dex and +30 int node instead of 2 +5 critchance nodes because I play a hybrid char and have the same amount of Stats like a pure dex or int, remember, right now i can wear pure int boots and a pure dex armour and still fullfill the stat requriements. In a system where i have the same amount of stats as a pure char has but i have to divide them into 2 stats i probably am less able to wear pure int or dex armour.

Like I said, for example make better use of the middle of the tree. Also I did not say that notable keystones would be gone like those +30 stats, only the smaller ones.

"

Reducing the number of points you get and reducing the amount of nodes at the same time doesnt enable you to more freedom in choosing the nodes you want. If you make a system that does, the game loses one important think: That you have to make decisions in your build which means, everybode would play a cookie cutter build. Diversiy would die off.

Who said reducing the number of points? My suggestion would involve a stat point and passive points and would require a complete revamp of the tree and leveling. I think it has great potential to significantly increase build variety.

"

Not having to make a decision in a game might feel easier at first, but honestly can be a terrible thing.

You decide what passives you really want without having to worry so much about effective paths in the tree

"

You decide what passives you really want without having to worry so much about effective paths in the tree

Thats the whole point everybody wants to tell you. Not to worry about effective paths is a bad thing. This game is build around optimizing and sacrificing. You want to take away exactly what people want. Two Ranger Critbuilds may differ just by the path they take and be thus a bit more optimized for each playstyle. One player may prefer the longer way to get a keystone, thus sacrifincing more points to get a single keystone (like unwavering stance). The other Player would take the shorter route, in his eyes a optimized path, to get a keystone on a different path or take multiple keystones next to him due to having more points open.

You want a huge structual change with a lot of disadvantages and problems (just saying "no that would totally work" doenst make them disappear). It may totally work, but would make this game worse for gamer who invest a lot of time in this game, not better.

I'm sorry but from what I read you dont have a reasonable understanding of this game and you're still trying to argue against ppl without giving any explanation. All you do is just saying it would work but you dont argue against the points presented to you.

"

Chesto wrote:

"

You decide what passives you really want without having to worry so much about effective paths in the tree

Thats the whole point everybody wants to tell you. Not to worry about effective paths is a bad thing.

What I am trying to tell people on my turn is that they don't understand the suggestion. You wouldn't have to worry so much about the path towards your keystones.

Players would still need to take a certain paths only they don't have to worry about base stats anymore.

You are acting like I want to take all of that away. Like I said, those minor differences stat wise when looking at 2 similar builds wouldn't be different: Player one picks more Strength while player two picks more Dexterity.

"

Startkabels wrote:

You wouldn't have to worry so much about the path towards your keystones.

"

Startkabels wrote:

only they don't have to worry about base stats anymore.

Like I said, this and the implications from it arent in it self a good thing. Dont have to worry= dont have to make hard decisions (and if you want to prevent this by any means, how the hell is your system different then now?). For many people, me included, it is a bad idea. You could replace the stats with passive perks (and then nerf the other perks) which would keep the tree the same size, or you could recontruct the whole tree while contructing some kind of artifical balancing for the different strength of the keystones. Right now this is balanced by the amount of stat-nodes you must take in order to get them. Which is a brilliant idea, which again you want to take away just to take it away and put it elsewhere because... you dont want it there? You dont want to worry about it in your tree? I dont know why and I dont see any advantages, just a huge potential for disadvantages for balance and builddiversity. And a lot of unecessary efford).

Btw Im leaving this thread unless you bring in a real kicker, a reason why this would be a good thing. This idea took far more attantion then it is worth.

How come you think that "don't have to worry about" is the same as "don't have to make decisions"?

Like I said: With my suggestions players can focus on the passives they really want but still need to make decisions obviously. What they don't have to worry about is whether the path towards those passives allowed them to take the needed base stats. They can always raise those if needed when leveling up. Of course this does not mean that the player deosn't need to decide what base stats he wants to have in the end.

its a good system, it ensures more freedom in gear because you dont have to fetch main stat in every slot, and sometimes it hard to meet dex / int for gems with the ones statted from tree, imagine without them.

The biggest problem is not the tree or the path system ... its int for some builds starting on the right side of the tree (ex life melee witch), but mainly dex, it SUCKS, It has no value to 90% of characters besides gems, and is mostly used for evasion, because you can get enough accuracy without stacking dex too. A lot of characters on the right side of the tree end up with 400 dex and its absolutely worthless POS stat