Diablo 3 OPEN BETA

You've 'confused' (ironically) two separate points I made.

Point 1) The confusion between D2 runes and D3 runes was very much(and possibly still is) an issue just with the usage of the word 'rune'. Diablo 2 set out the parameters of a 'rune' as something that went into an item, granted a bonus, and potentially interacted with other 'runes' to form a 'runeword'. This made a lot of sense if you consider what 'runes' actually are, in real life. I could elaborate but you have wikipedia and google, so you can learn for yourself if you're not sure. Either way, that totally changed with D3, where 'runes' were still socketable, but to a skill rather than an item. I honestly thought this was genius. But even back then I took exception to calling them runes. They clearly weren't runes anymore, these shiny orbs of socketable brilliance. I figured it was just a place-holder name until Blizzard could come up with something better, something new. Some new standard.

Point 2) The new 'runes' do look more like traditional 'runes' than the old orbs. Obviously I preferred the old orbs and how they were to be implemented (the change to level-increment unlocking was the final straw for me, as my original write-up made very clear), but calling them 'runes' was fairly misleading, and not because of the changed functionality from D2. They didn't look like runes at all. Whatever beef you might have with the post-patch 13 runes, they definitely do more closely resemble 'runes'. What you call 'squiggly lines' are obviously stylised attempts at drawing runes.

The 'confusion' lay with point 1, not point 2.

"

CharanJaydemr wrote:

This made a lot of sense if you consider what 'runes' actually are, in real life.

...

They clearly weren't runes anymore, these shiny orbs of socketable brilliance.

But runes are symbols.

D2's symbols were carved into bits of stone. D3's (old) ones were carved into what seem to be specially prepared artifacts. Both are equally able to be called runes, the same way B is a letter regardless of whether I write it on a scrap of paper or paint it on canvas and frame it.

I actually like the look of the new runes alot better. Also after playing it this weekend, I'm actually re-considering and might buy it (and I never thought I'd hear myself saying this XD). It's not a bad game, but it is fun. I still think PoE is a better game overall and am really looking foreword to being able to play in the cutthroat league. Unfortunately I tried to get the client to patch but didn't get it to patch successfully until today though so I had to miss out on the cut-throat weekend :(

Also The skeleton king acts exactly like the second boss in torchlight, without the hit boxes for the skeletons being to large (so you can move and not attack when you need to).

"

CharanJaydemyr wrote:

You've 'confused' (ironically) two separate points I made.

Point 1) The confusion between D2 runes and D3 runes was very (and possibly still is) an issue just with the usage of the word 'rune'. Diablo 2 set out the parameters of a 'rune' as something that went into an item, granted a bonus, and potentially interacted with other 'runes' to form a 'runeword'. This made a lot of sense if you consider what 'runes' actually are, in real life. I could elaborate but you have wikipedia and google, so you can learn for yourself if you're not sure. Either way, that totally changed with D3, where 'runes' were still socketable, but to a skill rather than an item. I honestly thought this was genius. But even back then I took exception to calling them runes. They clearly weren't runes anymore, these shiny orbs of socketable brilliance. I figured it was just a place-holder name until Blizzard could come up with something better, something new. Some new standard.

No. I understood what you said. I also am aware of what a rune is. The symbols on the orbs is what made them "runes".

I disagree that there was any confusion over the word "rune" with regard to D2 and D3. Blizzard has been pretty clear on what the D3 runes were from the start. I have yet to see a single person complain that it was confusing because of the terminology.

"

Point 2) I made was that the new 'runes' do look more like traditional 'runes' than the old orbs. Obviously I preferred the old orbs and how they were to be implemented (the change to level-increment unlocking was the final straw for me, as my original write-up made very clear), but calling them 'runes' was fairly misleading, and not because of the changed functionality from D2. They didn't look like runes at all. Whatever beef you might have with the post-patch 13 runes, they definitely do more closely resemble 'runes'. What you call 'squiggly lines' are obviously stylised attempts at drawing runes.

The 'confusion' lay with point 1, not point 2.

I actually asked Bashiok concerning the removal of rune drops and rune ranks. Basically the removal of rune tiers came down to this:

The ranks were a cool idea but they had some issues with them. First, while they talked about them, they were never actually implemented in the game. Second, only a select few skills lent themselves well to a visual increase in power.

For example: Arcane Missile. Rank 1 - 1 Missile. Rank 7 - 8 Missiles.

The problem is many of the runes don't conform to said formula above. Blizzard didn't want to just change the dmg numbers a bit. They wanted visual changes in power for the ranks. Sadly, when they cut them as a drop, it only made sense to cut the ranks that weren't working out anyways.

I'll admit I wasn't happy at first with the removal of rune drops and ranks. Those were two features I was seriously looking forward too. The idea of hunting Inferno for those illusive rank 7 runes sounded like fun.

After playing the beta though, while I hate the UI and icons, the core of the rune idea is still there and a hell of a lot of fun.

I really wanted to try out some pvp, the new pvp system looked interesting

I joined open beta :-)
It was fun, although I think the character skilling is boring - no way to choose anything.

"

Achilleios wrote:

I joined open beta :-)
It was fun, although I think the character skilling is boring - no way to choose anything.

No way to be permanently tied down to your choices, but plenty of choices, in fact, far more than in D2.

"

Achilleios wrote:

I joined open beta :-)
It was fun, although I think the character skilling is boring - no way to choose anything.

Well, your choices are semi-locked in while you're fighting, in that changing a skill puts it on a cooldown, and you can't change things on cooldown...

On the other hand, I like that, because I personally enjoy trying different builds to discover what I can do the stupidest things with.

"

alcovitch wrote:

No. I understood what you said. I also am aware of what a rune is. The symbols on the orbs is what made them "runes".

I disagree that there was any confusion over the word "rune" with regard to D2 and D3. Blizzard has been pretty clear on what the D3 runes were from the start. I have yet to see a single person complain that it was confusing because of the terminology.

Odd, I saw quite a few around the place, although admittedly most of them were as a response to my thread, which called for those who had issues with D3 at any level to speak up. I would not be surprised if you have not spent as much time with such people as I.

"

alcovitch wrote:

I actually asked Bashiok concerning the removal of rune drops and rune ranks. Basically the removal of rune tiers came down to this:

The ranks were a cool idea but they had some issues with them. First, while they talked about them, they were never actually implemented in the game. Second, only a select few skills lent themselves well to a visual increase in power.

For example: Arcane Missile. Rank 1 - 1 Missile. Rank 7 - 8 Missiles.

The problem is many of the runes don't conform to said formula above. Blizzard didn't want to just change the dmg numbers a bit. They wanted visual changes in power for the ranks. Sadly, when they cut them as a drop, it only made sense to cut the ranks that weren't working out anyways.

I'll admit I wasn't happy at first with the removal of rune drops and ranks. Those were two features I was seriously looking forward too. The idea of hunting Inferno for those illusive rank 7 runes sounded like fun.

After playing the beta though, while I hate the UI and icons, the core of the rune idea is still there and a hell of a lot of fun.

I've read enough of Bashiok's posts to understand why he's Blizzard's top CM and gear-oiler, if you will. A conversation with him would be like trying to grasp a greasy snake underwater with mittens on.

I am glad we agree that the removal of rune drops was disappointing; Tagek and I can't even see eye-to-eye on that one! I was fully aware of how the pre-patch 13 runes would work (and that they were concept only) -- and believed fully they could. They appealed to me as a low-to-mid level altaholic, in that I could transfer rank 1 runes I found along the way to new characters, thus enabling their unique builds quite early, and they appealed to more ambitious gamers such as yourself for the reason you've given above: hunting the ultra-rare 7s in Inferno. There is, I think, very little hope in denying that this system had a wider range of appeal than what has occurred.

But what has occurred is, apparently, 'being realistic'. Perhaps. The fact that Arcane Missile could be runed up for extra projectiles, piercing (I think was one of them), elemental shift might have been another...these were dramatic enough for me. Not all of the changes had to transform the skill utterly. In D2, we were often happy if a skill simply gained more damage as it went. Expecting all, say, 100 skills to transform 5 times visually (runes) and then 7 times (ranks) is ridiculous. Rank-wise, extra damage or elsewise efficacy would have sufficed. In short: rune-switching transformed the skill, ranks of each rune merely increased its usefulness. I do not agree with Bashiok's excuse (and it is an excuse) that simply because some ranks improved the visuals and some didn't, that ranks were then undesirable.

Now, I'm going to do something for you that I don't let myself do for many here, because it genuinely hurts me.

I'm going to speculate how Diablo 3 pre-patch 13 and Diablo 3 post-patch 13 could have gotten along. Instead of unlocking runes for each skill individually based on level (post 13), Blizzard could have simply kept the unlocking of runes separate from the skills gained on level up and allowed *us* to choose which rune we get to unlock at certain level increments (starting at, say, level 10 for rune rank 1) and allowed *us* to choose which skills to socket said rune into. And then, every few levels between the rank upgrade, unlock another rune of that rank, to be allocated elsewhere. This would have retained the early-game build variety I desired AND it would have solved the 'problem' of runes being inventory clutter.

For example: my Wizard hits level 10. Glancing at the new skill calculator, I see that this pretty boring. You don't even have Spectral Blades, which used to be much earlier.

You have:
magic missile-->charged blast
shock pulse-->explosive bolts
ray of frost-->numb
Arcane orb
Frost nova
Diamond skin
Wave of Force
Blur (passive)
Power hungry (passive)

You may say that's a lot of skills for level ten as in terms of choice, and compared to D2, heck compared to PoE by level 10, it is (although PoE is far from done with skill-adding pre Open). But let's say you want to play a fire mage -- think more thematic here, not just power. You're screwed. Until level 18, you have no fire spells . It's all cold and lightning. I'd rather have fewer early skills but a broader range of damage types than what is on offer here.

What I envision would be, as I said, a combination of the old and the new. Let's disregard balance for a bit -- that's their job, not mine. Right now, my job is the visionary. The what-if brainstormer. As I see it, you would still only have the same base skills, but upon reaching level 10, you could allocate any one rank 1 rune to any one of these skills, modifying it appropriately. Thus you have escaped the doldrums of very low level cantrips, as it were, and started to sculpt your mage proper. Your Shock Pulse can become fire, or a concentrated orb, or a very weak 'Living Lightning'. In short, you are a neophtye fire mage, evoker or summoner. In turn, your ray of frost, at say level 13 or 14, can become a small storm around you, or reduce your enemies to ice upon which other enemies are slowed. Or you can choose not to use it altogether and stick that same rank 1 rune into wave of force for other effects. Forget that right now, some of these are definitely stronger than others; pre patch 13, they weren't. Crimson, Alabaster, Obsidian etc, were all balanced per rank, not per rune. Clearly they felt it could be done that way.

Now, the level 10=one rank 1 rune for socketing and level 13-14 for another is flexible and not really the point. The point is they could have retained the great variety of early-game builds within this new 'linear unlocking' method, using ranks as the numerical increments and runes as the base transformation of spells/skills.

And, of course, the rank 2 versions wouldn't 'unlock' at level 20 -- rank 1 runes would simply become rank 2 and gain substantial kicks in effectiveness, keeping in mind that skills themselves increment in effectiveness every level, not just every 10. Thus by the time you reach the ultimate 'level 60', you'd have more than enough runes to play with, all top rank. You'd have retained that level 60 complete freedom so many players apparently desire, and at the same time satisfied the desire of thematic players to create different types of builds very early on.

I think, given another half year or so before release and a higher priority, Blizzard could have made this work. I also think that changing them to something more linear was necessary given the release date announced. Thirdly, I believe not everyone at Blizzard 2.0 was very happy with that release date. I've said this elsewhere and will only summarise it here: the game feels simultaneously premature and untimely. The skill rune system as it was envisioned was, to me, the salvation of the game, some sort of paradigm shift in how ARPGs handle character development every step of the way.

But with that now gone, the lacking pvp, the server issues this weekend, the game feels premature indeed. I'm sure it won't be a miscarriage, but it might be less of the wunderkind birth Blizzard are hoping for. By the same token, it's untimely because you have PoE, Grim Dawn and Torchlight 2 lurking on the horizon. None of them will 'topple' Diablo 3 on their own, but the collective force will take a chunk out of Blizzard's heel I think. Not to mention GW2, which is a different genre but still very much appealing to many Diablo players...

Anyway, that's that. I proposed, off-hand and without any real consideration for counter-point, what I had hoped would happen if the skill runes ever became linear rather than drops. It didn't happen, won't happen, and it makes me genuinely sad to think about what might have been.

I think they simply never intented anything to be about the early game at all.

They just want you to have a fun experience testing out all of your skills, and then later make intricate builds when you have everything.

I feel it would've been pointless to make a system that only really exists for the first 20 hours of the game, or even less, and then nearly completely vanishes.

It just seems like a lot of work for something that most players really would not care about at all, and that would ultimately become a non issue for every player anyway after they passed the early game.


('I, I, I' - Forgive my lack of opening words / phrases. :P)