For clarification
Weapon Types = Greatswords, Axes, Bows, Staves, etc.
Poll
Weapon Types should have their own Talent Tree.
- Strongly Agree
- Agree
- Neutral
- Disagree
- Strongly Disagree
0
voters
Discussion
Disagree, but flexible.
I think at this time Iād like to see the skill tree work based off hit modifiers instead of individual weapon types.
Hopefully there will be more than just damage but specifically based on the question regarding weapons. Iād rather have more flexibility in leveling and end game.
So instead of a node possibly saying something like Greatsword attacks require % less stamina. It could just read, Attacks require % less stamina.
i disagree. weapons already got enchantments, upgrades and the crucible upgrade. i would rather see character and built specific things. and not only weapon builds.
things like a rogue tree, where u can skill light armor to become viable, make sneaking easier, backstabs more powerful etc.
or smith, where u can craft for less resources or your crafted items are automatically of blue or purple type.
or alchemist, where potions become more powerful and u unlock new recipes and passives like ātake less dmg for x seconds after taking a potionā etc.
or multiplayer roles like healer, tank etc, where for example u can skill that healing yourself, also heals allies for x %.
there is so much potential in a skill tree, so iād rather have roleplay focused skills. having a tree for each weapon AND having cool roleplay buffs will result in 20-ish trees that just overwhelm the player, and are super unsatisfying because u can never even really specialize, but rather put a skill here and a skill there.
2 Likes
I went with strongly agree, here is why.
Currently weapons such as greatswords, greataxes, mauls, polearms etc. all play and feel the same. There is nothing that sets these weapon types apart from each other. A greatsword build doesnāt differ from a greataxe build. I donāt like that from a thematic sense there have to be differences in what weapons do.
I wouldnāt want the talent tree to completely focus on weapon talents etc. But, there should be the option and that you mix and match various trees to make your builds.
Greataxes can focus on bleeding effects and executions whereas mauls focus on stagger and armor pen or something. It creates replayability for the player and a starting point for their potential build.
i feel those weapon āskillsā you describe should be in the weapons not the skill tree. I would not want to read and skill through 20 trees, because 10 of them are weapon exclusive trees.
weapons should have some sort of intrinsic āfeelā.
ok, maybe add 1 tree where u can skill character roleplay treats related to strength that also affect great weapons, like āyou are so strong u can swing heavy weapons more easilyā or whatever. But please donāt add 10 weapon trees. thats just too much. it should be done with 3-5 trees or so. thats it.
1 Like
Based on that logic Iād actually change to strongly disagree.
We get a limited number of points per level.
We have the ability to use up to 3 main hand and offhand item. If you only play one weapon thatās cool n all but this concept seems very personally bias.
Furthermore,
There is absolutely no reason to gatekept stats. Other people want to use bleed and def shred no doubt and have no interest in those weapon types.
You have no reason to justify splitting weapon trees in this manner to facilitate a weak narrative in the first place. All you will do this way is ostracized weapon imbalances even further by separating them further.
I could see splitting two handed and one handed for this reason but again I look at weapon swapping and feel this would leave parts of your build feeling lackluster.
To some extent, sure I get it. But I believe the purpose for the tree is to alter how builds play not weapons.
For example maybe one build you focus on crit and things while another you focus on ailments/on hit effects. Same weapon, same build, different play styles completely.
For the game we have I believe thatās much healthier than gatekeeping weapons more so than we do now. We already have unique animations for the weapons and the notion of locking buffs behind a particular weapon feels short sighted to me.
The actual difference between GS and GA are the weapon move sets, range, and styleā¦ We donāt need further division.
1 Like
Iām hoping for more depth than that, I want the talents to be more build defining than enchanting.
That is not what I am saying at all.
What I am saying is to give an example:
Greataxe: X = 40%, Y = 15%
Greatsword: X = 15%, Y = 40%
Now, I am fine if the weapons have innate stats and we have the talent tree allowing to spec into X or Y. Or if we have Greataxe 1 focusses on X whereas greataxe 2 focusses on Y. But, even then I would prefer multiple build routes for weapon types.
I disagree with it being a weak narrative, so therefore I do find it justified.
Now I can see the balancing issues sure, but I would consider the potential gains from replayability and depth to outway those.
To me one of the issues is that the weapons only offer their moveset and the rune they come slotted with, their stats are randomized and given the scarcity of some weapons it can become irrelevant - when it shouldnt be.
This I can get behind, but then I would want more stats on weapons to synergize with such potential builds.
Ideally, Iād like both to be fair.
If something like that ends up happening I think I will be fairly let down. I really want a talent tree with a lot of depth and options. Not something like POE but if it was something like Stoneshard with various categories I can get behind it.
brother itās an example of on hit language vs what you wanted And 'm sure we will have more than we do now.
Nah what is this? I mean builds have to have themes. If you can unlock/have everything on a single buildā¦ Whatās the point. You have to be faced with build decisions. When itās all said n done, then go back and do it again a different way.
Build routes will be a given? I donāt understand this reasoning. How does this tie into Weapon trees when they donāt have to for the same effect?
This sounds like a matter of opinion so I canāt expect you to accept this logic butā¦ A word of advice from someone who designs things for a living. As a general rule of thumb if you can do something without adding additional constraints or complexity thatās typically the way to go. Ever heard this quote?
āI apologize for such a long letter - I didnāt have time to write a short one.ā -Mark Twain
Funny enough good writing and good engineering and everything else in between follow a lot of common threads when you boil them down.
Bit of a side bar rant but yeah, thatās the weak narrative for me. Creative a barrier, and for what purpose? Especially when you acknowledge it and still want the wall. Again weapons themselves are the difference.
How does this impact replay value in any way if weapon trees are not isolated? Letās say there is just a node for adding bleed on hit. Why would it need to be isolated to a particular weapon? Would you not have more replay value play different kinds of bleed builds if you enjoy the play style?
I donāt follow. The weapons are intrinsically different because of their move sets. So what do you mean the choices are irrelevant?
Iām sure weāll get plenty more. But Iām also ok with gear being a baseline platform then the tree being a different platform built on that one.
We donāt need to build crit on the weapon and the armor and the tree to play a crit build. You could just keep crit on the talent tree and have more value per stat than if you separate it between multiple pieces. Same outcome.
The difference comes from the weapons themselves, as those have noticably different move sets, attack speed, reach and poise damage. No hammer has a long range stab attack build into its moves; hammers seem to grant bonus poise defence during charge attacks.
Runes also play big role.
1 Like
I am literally arguing for build decisions, how do you not see this
I am not saying everything can be on a single build. What I am saying is that different weapon types can have different stats which can lead to different builds. And, that within those weapon types there can be different weapons that have different stats which lead to even more different build options.
It is not about me accepting that logic or not, it is about me not finding that logic applicable given the situation. It has nothing to do with āāa rule of thumbāā or anything. The difference in opinion stems from how we view and want the Talent Tree to be. We are both looking at something from a different perspective, therefore we have a difference in opinions.
The purpose to me is so that weapons have an identity and that playerās can easily recognize what build would be best suited for a certain weapon. If you allow every weapon to be valid for a build, what is the point in having builds in the first place.
I think the difference in opinion stems from how big of a role we want the Talent Tree to play. This is an assumption so correct me if I am wrong. I want a large and in depth Talent Tree which largely dictates our build. I donāt want it to be additive to our build.
If I can make every build work with every weapon than what is the purpose of a build. It will feel so hollow, instead you can reward players when there is more differentiation. If a player realizes that a certain weapon has better synergies for a certain build, that feels rewarding. But, it also lets players explore more weapons to see what would be the ideal fit for their build.
If you can make any build work on any weapon nothing is special about it. You are not presenting players with the incentive to look for weapons for their build. They can just use whatever they find, where is the fun in that? Builds donāt have to be isolated to certain weapons or weapon types, but they can lean in the direction of certain builds. You can even have specific weapons that lean into builds not commonly associated with the weapon.
Even right now the difference between playing with a sword, axe or mace is almost non-existant outside of the moveset. And even then, various one-handed weapons share the same moveset.
It is not the choice but the stats that donāt matter when a weapon has low availability. Since you are just happy with having 1 after, letās say a dozen hours of farming. For weapons bought from the vendor it matters more since they are more easily available. And, when I say it shouldnāt be, I mean that those stats should be relevant. Having 6 or 10 focus gain on a weapon can be huge given the length of the attack animation. On another note, I do think it would be better if each weapon has the same base stats. Would make it easier to balance things as well.
I think this is where most of the disagreement between us stems from. I want the talent tree to be the big center and weapons, armor, enchants etc. to be additive to this.
But, the road travelled is different. For me at least, it is a lot more fun trying to find synergetic pieces. It makes me feel like I am working on and towards something. Then finally all the pieces come together giving that satisfaction.
I have been playing some Stoneshard and Battle Brothers lately, and finding weapons, armors etc to complete your build is a lot of fun. It also gives you something to look forward to. I understand that the Talent Tree can also do this. But, then it feels more isolated.
I hear you want more but the byproduct is youāre gatekeeping those cool effects. Since you have a lot of posts about bleed as a mechanic Imma go out on a limb here and say you like to use that mechanic in other games, no? Ok so is bleed only going to be on the weapons you like? Course not thatād be silly. Thatās all Iām getting atā¦ you say -I wanna play a heavy stun build with Club. I say I wanna play a heavy stun build with Hammer. Should we both be able to? Sure. and if you say -well both can have it -thatās kinda my point. How unique are your unique skill trees if both hammer and club have extra poise damage or something. Let the tree just be a build modifier and let players find their own builds n such. Forcing specific trees on weapon types is a balance decision that doesnāt offer the same customization as a generic one. Weāre limited on points in this skill tree so thatās where the replay value comes from to me. Playing different things and playing the same thing in different ways.
Kinda took care in addressing this above, I agree that certain weapon types having an individual tree leads to suitable add-ons but since when has suitable directly translated to fun. It can donāt get me wrong but there are plenty of exceptions. Builds are to meā¦ and individuals interpretation or desire. Itās just a form of expression. Ignoring the % of the player base that hops on reddit/discord and says āwhatās the strongest buildāā¦ like itās a fucking ARPG, whatever you want to make is strong. To me thatās always been an underlying strength of the genre. Other games have specific boxes you have to or are expected to play within. And yet we see players so often try to break these rules and play how they like or in ways the developers never intended. ARPGs for me have typically leaned into this customization and that I enjoy.
Absolutely, two sides of the same coin. But check thisā¦ the talent tree would dictate your build by being additive. Thatās what Iām saying.
You take the weapon attacks, thatās one decision.
Then you have your baseline gear modifiers, more general purpose (also limits the power of exalting)
Then you have the skill tree to fine tune a weapon without gear.
That means any dagger would play like my dagger build because Iām doing X with my dagger. Now maybe you want to do something similar with a hammer and you can/should be able to. In a more flexible system like Iām suggesting youād be able to do the exact same thing youāre interested inā¦ leave it up to the players. Thatās why I call it āgatekeepingā. Iād love to see a tree where we get a lot of utility oriented stuff and some damage, so you can build your build, I can build my build, etc etcā¦
Players should be capable of narrating their own incentive.
This I understand and disagree with for what I want out of the game. First off exalting solves the variation in focus gain across the same weapon (and stamina). Exalting just equalizes stats. Itās one of the new and unique techs Moon is bringing to ARPGs. When ARPGs have builds what they really have are gear. In Wicked I see an opportunity to deviate from a gear focused ARPG to a player based ARPG. They put the players first with this addition and I love it. I have mirror tier gear rotting on PoE and as much as Iāve heard crafting new gear has improved I just canāt bring myself to care (2k hours in game, many more on Path of Building working on cool shit). The game boils down to one aoe skill one single target skill, a movement skill, buffs. It just all blends together. If you turn off the animations itās all the same. Spamming a skill and running in circles for mediocre loot.
Having fixed stats to build around is an amazing concept. I love it to the point if itās removed itād seriously consider stepping away because I feel without it weāll get more of the same ARPG. No matter how good the game is youāll be stuck in the farming cycle and at some point youāll wake up and goā¦ do I really want to do X for Y. Where as with exalting, we can focus on the game and how fucking fun it is to play.
You bowl, play baseball, basket ball, hockey, rugby, etcā¦ You play all these games for the experience, challenge, and at some point in older age some comradery and familiarity. Designing a good game that stands the test of time (a good game thatās not live service) is about creating something people want to play because itās fun. If all we get is another ARPG that asks the player to play an exorbitant amount of time just to get the items to play the build they wanted to in the first placeā¦ No thanks. We already have 10 different version of that game and itās the major reason Iāve taken a huge step back from the genre despite my addiction to the customization I enjoy.
Again I think it will be, it just doesnāt have to be as linear as the system you describe. I want the skill tree to be a big center of the players choices. The weapons, the devs make and we pick what we like based on an intended playstyle. The armor and rings are where the customization starts with prioritizing the kind of stats we want. Then the tree can take it over the top and add variety to the same weapon. You could play the same weapon in so many different ways. Then do it again with something completely different!
No doubt but in terms of power creep and general balance since the customization we want directly causes imbalanceā¦
Iāve said my piece about exalted. I love it. But I donāt think all stats should be available in the pool for max rolls. Thatās why I think armor and weapon affixes should be limited. A platform not a build. Let the skill tree āmakeā the build based on the weapons and armor you, the player have chosen.
Getting good drops can be a nice dopamine spike, no doubt. For me after countless (well I guess steam counts itā¦) hours in these types of games itās ultimately not the āmouse trapā I want to chase these days. Personal bias aside I donāt think heavy RNG is the way with a game thatās not live service. You can get the same sense of accomplishment from crafting a dope piece as opposed to a drop and generally with crafting itās a much more tangible goal. Unless youāre 10+ years into PoE jumping through 8 different league mechanics to make something zzzzzz.
Id much rather see the āworking on and towards somethingā to be a more linear path with regards to items. Give us selectable rewards, let us craft bases from materials gathered on the map and defeating enemies, etc.
I donāt necessarily like bleed effects, Iām just using the same example for consistency. The word gatekeeping is a overbearing for what unique talents for weapons would really do. What you would want is remove the uniqueness of those cool effects and make them available to everything. That makes the talent tree super shallow as the decisions wouldnāt matter as much as with weapon talent trees.
Weapon talent trees would make weapons feel more unique and special. It doesnāt offer the same customization as a generic one sure, but the customization is a lot better since it is tailored for the weapon/style. Following your logic I should be able to make a bleed build with a hammer. That wouldnāt make sense thematically and can be immersion breaking. Now, if a Spiked Mace would be valid for a mace build it would make more sense.
If the Talent Tree is just another modifier it will feel like such a smoke screen. Your build decisions with your talents are then disconnected from your weapon choice. As anything is valid and nothing matters.
Thatās the thing for me tho, your system seems more linear to me
I do think we both see a lot of flaws in each other perspectives and I also donāt think we can see eye to eye as we are going in circles a bit here.
One thing tho!
It doesnāt actually, or the UI isnāt being updated/bugged:
I have seen malice get between 6-10. Now imagine you have 100% focus gain, the difference is 12-20 per auto attack. The latter is much easier to get a focus neutral build with. Now imagine this with items that can only be found, kinda 
ed up.
100% agreed, we need more customization in general. Way too much RNG, what you said about live service games etc., is spot on. I donāt mind farming for gear in WoW or Genshin because that is the end goal etc. Even then it becomes mind numbingā¦ But for Wicked? Nah off. I want to craft my items and have more control over it, the game already has survival game elements. They should lean more into those.
Oh thatās wild I must have found weapons with the same base. I was running around with my Icebreaker build. Found one from the chest in the room crucible room with vendor and exalted it just to see if itād match and it did. When I left and put infusions in it (to match) can cap the tier 3 the stam and focus were the same but the weight was .02 different.
In that caseā¦ Yeah itād be nice if exalting made stats the same across the board. Thereās no reason for that because -yeah having different stam and focus generation can be huge.
No No No Noā¦ those effects are the uniqueness! A bleed build isnāt an elemental build and so on!
How? The tree would be giving you actual stats. Whereās the facade? Whereās the smoke screen?
This is more semantics and perspective butā¦ I think not disconnected. Built from An extension of.
The tree would directly influence your build and so does your weapon selection. Attacks have different speeds, attack patterns, etcā¦
It is, linear progression instead of linear playstyles. Thatās the difference. But yes what Iām proposing would be very straight forward for gearing, etc.
It loses itās uniqueness when you can apply a bleed build to any weapon, even hammers. Weapon types and specific weapons should be skewed in various directions to enable various builds. When anything becomes possible it loses an important sense of build crafting and accomplishment. It creates an illusion of choice.
If the Major Heart Surgery ends up being ā bigger numbers and % increases etc. then yeah 100%. We have cool and unique effects in the crucible, usefulness is debatable, but I hope they extend that to the talent tree.
Not semantics but facts, if you can use any weapon with any build and get a similar result, what you then have is an illusion of choice. Sure attack patterns matter, but that then means people will gravitate towards the same weapon with every build.
What people? The players who go on discord and ask for the strongest build? Sure. Thatās not everyone. Your line of thinking seems pretty attached to people playing the game one way. Itās an ARPG. Some people are going to play any game like that.
I love the Icebreaker for 2H. Iām forced to use what Iām calling the keystone rune which buffs my attacks with ice damage. Since there are no elemental reactions, and one rune is selected me, and the weapon scales 100% with Int I made a build that plays with 2H and Staff that combos to play around the Icebreaker only has one attack from neutral.
First thing I did after I got comfy with that build is goā¦ oh man. I canāt swap the cold buff out and no other 2H scales with Intā¦ itād be cool to do this with other elements and runes.
I want to make my build as strong as possible based on the things that I like but I could care less what skill does the most damage and try to force it into my buildā¦
You seem pretty eager to play a Knight themed build. Are you going to build a character based on that or play what is strongest?
If you get a sense of accomplishment that is not of your own design thatās on you. No need to project. We just talked about
Did we not?
If anything is possible it doesnāt mean nothing matters. If thatās how you interpret it -go for it but itās no fact.
Also
Have you ever been hit by a blunt instrument? Internal bleeding is a bitch n a halfā¦ Bleed seems pretty on theme for a blunt instrument despite what I guess you assumeā¦
If anything elemental effects are pretty far out if you ask me. But hey it is a fantasy game.
Those people for sure, but it is also just sequential thinking. If there are certain weapons that stand head and shoulder above the rest due to their moveset. And, if the skill tree makes it so each and every weapon is viable for a specific build. Then guaranteed a lot of people will gravitate to the same weapons for different builds.
Rather than that, provide an incentive to people to try and play with other weapons. Weapon specific trees can allow for that, even moreso if weapons have more basic stats that are signifiers for potential builds.
You know the answer to this yourself so why ask? I donāt see why you want to lump me in with those people.
I am 100% starting with my armor as a base for my build, gotta look the part.
Now weapon trees would also mean you get more diverse builds. So when the clowns come in and ask āāwHaT iS oP?āā. People donāt just reply with use weapon X and any build. But, ask what build? Or they give the strongest build weapon combo.
Yet, what I am advocating for has a more in depth design than what you want. Therefore, your comment here is more applicable to your own suggestion than mine. With weapon trees there are more elements required to create something of your own design. If there are more linear playstyles, your design matters less. As you pick the playstyle and slap a weapon on it and the design is done. It is so shallow.
Sure, but your choices as a player matter less. Regardless of game people generally like the idea of choices and decisions mattering more. And, I think that idea should extent to your build decisions with regards to weapons and armor.
Sure they can cause bleeding as a by product of the blunt force trauma it is more commonly associated with. This mostly translates to video games in the form of stagger, daze, stuns etc. Whereas bleeding is more associated with skin puncturing. Which a blunt weapon is less likely to cause compared to a sharp weapon.
For instance, I can see a polehammer or a spiked mace inflicting bleed. If those are weapons in Wicked it would make sense for them to be able to have a bleed build. Wooden club, less so.
I think it is better if for instance, a spiked mace is better with a bleed build than a stagger build and vice versa for a wooden club. Making them equally viable for each build is something I see as a bad thing. Weapons should inherently synergize more with a build outside of their moveset.
i think we do no have to reinvent the wheel. having a (1) weapon tree with weapon specific skills is common practice. but i do not want 10 weapon trees and 10 character, roleplay and world focused trees.
having a whole tree for each weapon type is just overkill. you should not skill 15 skills to make an axe feel like an axe. it should feel like that from the start and maybe get 1 or 2 bonus talents from the weapon tree.
skills should in my opinion never just be about weapons and attacks, but more about your character. its a RPG after all. so each skillpoint spent should feel like your character is more individual now, but not chained to a weapon.
you character can now sneak better, smith weapons, talk to animals or influence the outcome of enchantments etc. there are so many cool possibilities. please do not waste those on 15 āaxeā skills, 12 āswordā skills and 10 ādaggerā skills.
1 Like
Thank goodness for individuals ability to choose for themselves. All of us right?
I hope we have a cool platform to modify builds and possibly the character as well like @Chemile0n mentioned. Iāll always care more about the combat but options are nice.
I just donāt see how a tree per weapon is the better choice. Like I said, for balance constraints, sure -understandable. The notion that itās better because you think certain weapons should specialize in a particular thingā¦ Nah. Iām good, haha.
I donāt want my time in game to be constrained by your or the devs imagination. Imo all they need to do is make a platform for us to enjoy. To me ARPGs offer a lot of fun and replay value in the customization alone.
The best reference I have for a similar issue is PoE vs Last Epoch. I have 2k hours in PoE and only a couple hundred in Epoch (despite feeling like it has the best crafting system in a dungeon crawler). Why is that? Well PoE the skys the limit, but the combat gets a little boring with two skills. Meanwhile Last Epoch has multiple skills and you specialize in a select number of skills, typically the ones you use on your bar. Last epoch gets boring for me because the combat isnāt as fun and engaging as something like Wicked and Iām restricted in how I can play my class based on the limited skills and specifications of those skills, not to mention gear. When I hear you go on about your opinions of how a weapon should play, I think, cool you play your way Iāll play my way. If Iām stuck to a narrow specialization tree per weapon it reminds me too much of the LE system.
When I used that argument in Rune Augments thread, you put me on your ban list.