Thinking Outside the Box: What if we had Rare Gems instead of sockets?

Interesting thought experiment, scrotie. But, how would you limit the number of gems a char could use?

"

Antnee wrote:

Interesting thought experiment, scrotie. But, how would you limit the number of gems a char could use?

You'd have some limited number of slots where you could equip them. It'd feel kind of like flasks, probably. Lots of ways to do it.

Just to point something out about the RNG criticism. I'll use a generalization of rare affix to illustrate my point.

If, of all items from one base that could drop, there were ten possible affix combinations, and of those ten combinations only one combination was desirable. If for that one good combination, there were ten possible tiers of affix rolls, and only one tier was most desirable, and two others were acceptable, then of all possible items that could for that base item the majority of players seeking that base will desire a minority (3%) of the drops.

Add as well, sockets and links for that base, etc... and you can see how demand is highest for only a tiny sliver of what could be the potential market for that item.

This is a failing of our item affix system, that it funnels the majority of players to desire a select few of all possible affix, shared for multiple multiples of different builds.

The same would be true for this suggestion if the gem affix were ill conceived; however, if diverse and interesting, then you will begin to see different builds desiring a greater variety specific affix sets.

Low supply, high demand, and it's easy to blame RNG and think "trade to win" to be too stronk. Greater supply (same amount of items, fewer are immediately "vendor trash"), more diverse sets of preferences in demand, and trade between items becomes much more fluid.

TL;DR: People blame RNG for what is really a short coming in our affix system, which is a pale specter compared to what it could be/could have been.

"

CanHasPants wrote:

Spoiler

Just to point something out about the RNG criticism. I'll use a generalization of rare affix to illustrate my point.

If, of all items from one base that could drop, there were ten possible affix combinations, and of those ten combinations only one combination was desirable. If for that one good combination, there were ten possible tiers of affix rolls, and only one tier was most desirable, and two others were acceptable, then of all possible items that could for that base item the majority of players seeking that base will desire a minority (3%) of the drops.

Add as well, sockets and links for that base, etc... and you can see how demand is highest for only a tiny sliver of what could be the potential market for that item.

This is a failing of our item affix system, that it funnels the majority of players to desire a select few of all possible affix, shared for multiple multiples of different builds.

The same would be true for this suggestion if the gem affix were ill conceived; however, if diverse and interesting, then you will begin to see different builds desiring a greater variety specific affix sets.

Low supply, high demand, and it's easy to blame RNG and think "trade to win" to be too stronk. Greater supply (same amount of items, fewer are immediately "vendor trash"), more diverse sets of preferences in demand, and trade between items becomes much more fluid.

TL;DR: People blame RNG for what is really a short coming in our affix system, which is a pale specter compared to what it could be/could have been.

True story. GGG has given the most balance attention to support gems and mostly neglected the affix system, leaving it at "barely better than D3 rares" levels. I only used the affix system as an example of good RNG because, unlike socketing/linking, it's actually possible. There is still a lot of unused potential.

I guess I agree with most people here.
I like it as a thought experiment, but dislike randomness in skill/support selection.

There is always a tradeoff between how much RNG and how much static data you want in a game, but there needs to be some backbone of static data to roll random on so that the game allows for thematic building. You also need that backbone to allow players to slowly but surely progress through the random (i.e. the backbone can never be too weak as to halt progress).

Currently, the tree and skills are non-random. A build can be defined by these things, then will have random rolls both on their gear (though currently rares and "chase uniques" are of the "strictly superior"/"bad" RNG) and primarily against the challenges they face. You can have bad luck in a league, but if you have some "core" that still kills monsters (say, a 3L Cyclone + MPD + BM), you can progress and eventually get better luck.

As an example from other games, in Crawl, you always start with something that can kill monsters up to Ecu temple. Every race/class starts with the tools needed to make it past the "burn-in" period and to a place where they're gaining faster than they're losing, and it generally becomes the character 'core' (excepting super lucky RNG drops that shift the player focus).

There's probably room for a lot more variation (primarily a world where rares were more of the "good" RNG, as noted by Scrotie, CHP, and others), but I wouldn't push that variation into skills/supports, since those primarily form the core of a character, both thematically and for being able to make progress.

The last thing you would want is for someone character to literally be halted because they can't get enough drops to roll their skills to get better drops, or for a league to be determined by the first person to roll a "strong combo" (say, FB prolif firepen empower cc) who then leads the rest by miles all the way to the victory podium. There's already a fair amount of this currently with "chase uniques" and it's shitty enough.

@pneuma: As opposed to the randomness of who gets a lucky 4L/5L/6L first?

You could mitigate randomness with master crafting or a similar mechanic. I never said to get rid of Vorici (or functional equivalent).

Hey, you gave me an idea: unique skill gems. :3

Do you roll gem levels or do they level naturally?

Basically is there affix tiers or not. Am I looking for a lvl 20 multistrike, or always lvl 1. If I get lvl 20 multistrike does it brick my build because of lvl req? Do skill gems have an ilvl which restricts what level supports you can get? Does their level limit the amount of supports it can have? Is it mirrorable? Is quality a factor when rolling, is that basically the tier?

While I think it's an overly complicated solution to a problem that's only a problem from one aspect, the transition from 5l to 6l, I'll humor you as I don't think you have any hopes of this making it into the current game.

Level with you: active skill part, yes. Affixes, no
Affixes increase required level: yes. This is why it's important that leveled gems can drop. "x% increased experience gain" for gems would also be an important "Vorici" mod
Does itemlevel effect affix numbers available: yes, very much so. This prevents quest reward gems from flooding market
Does itemlevel effect affix types available: yes, but minimally. Low level gems still need affix diversity
Would quality still matter: yes, but interesting effects probably moved to affixes. Most likely a flat 1% increased damage/effect per quality.

What's the difference between prefix and suffix?

Won't this result is more dramatic power jumps than currently? Working towards a 5/6l will be a sizable jump in damage but going from a decent rolled gem w/ 3-4 good lvl supports to a one with 6 high lvl supports is going to be a giant gain.

What changes do you suggest to the current support pool to make this possible? There are too many niche and useless gems compared to the few auto-includes for most builds. MS and echo aren't really optional for spells anymore, they are almost requirements. Would there be light versions of these gems introduced? Would they stack?

Right now 5ls are easy to get and 6ls are expensive to do yourself or buy. The major problem I see with this is currently a rare with 4 good rolls is hard to come by, nevermind tier. When the power level between 5-6 matters, the gap between 3 and 7 you suggest seems to be a high one.

Fundamentally this system makes sense, but in a practical sense I worry that either the drop rate will be so high we now have a new thing flooding our screen. Or it will be so common to get decent rolls that it will make builds to easy to put together. Right now support gems are part of build choices, figure out the tree, what gear you need where and what supports will be best for your specific build. With your system it will be play whatever you get, if you get an OP combination make a build and find gear around it. The creativity seems ripped away.

Agree with the posters who point out that skill gem combination is a fundamental part of the customization of our builds. It's something I prefer we maintain control over, like the skill tree. A system of randomized affixes would take build choices away from players and make them subject to RNG or a wealth check.