So here is the deal.

You have an idea for an expirament but you don't want to be THAT guy or girl who bet on the wrong warrior legacy that simply won't work for you due to some stat being too low.

For example...

When you think about certain legacies specifc races leap to mind.

Greeting = Giants
STSF = Elves (and gnomes)

But what if you want to try one of those out with a non optimum race?

Is there or SHOULD there be some way to find out at what point (stat) at which picking a particular legacy would just be a really bad idea without throwing away hundreds of personal hours finding out the hard way?



And im not talking about clearly bad choices like a giant with STSF but maybe races where 1 stat point may be the difference between being workable and utterly impossible.

I wouldn't pick a legacy that cares about a stat if the stat in question was under 20. Or in the case of multiple stats, the average under 20.

That's not to say this is some kind of rule where a legacy becomes useless, only that by that point there's almost certainly one of the other 35 choices which is much more helpful to whatever you're trying to do.

1.

Some legacies do multiple things that no other legacy really does in one nice neat little package (for example STSF if im correct makes you alot more defensive over time and keeps people from fleeing which is useful if you don't use polearms) If the build you are thinking of is at 19 (not 20) does this mean it will take so long to charge up you'd derive little to no benefit whereas a human (humans stats all being 20) would still be viable? I'm ok with for example it charging up slower tthan a human...but how much slower is slower? Are we talking to the point where you would likely never get to the point where you are keeping people from fleeing?

2. I like Zephon's idea/comment about maybe being able to choose a different legacy (giving up one you had) after maybe 400 hours. Most players dont even live to 200 hours. Something you''d be interested in? I think this would help motivate some people to pick non-optimal builds and see if for some reason even the coders didnt think of they can make it work.

>Are we
>talking to the point where you would likely never get to the
>point where you are keeping people from fleeing?

I believe you could get to that point, but in practice I don't think many of your fights would likely go long enough. There is an element of luck involved and on a hot streak you could still hit that point in a couple rounds with 20 int, you just probably wouldn't.

For STSF specifically, I've picked it a handful of times over the years and at this point I'd only pick it for a fairly narrow set of builds (not just based on the INT of the character) because I consider it to only really shine for characters in a sweet spot where they don't win most of their fights too fast *or* too slow.

but im confused on too slow. Doesn't a long fight benefit STSF allowing more time to charge? And what about if the person flees, heals up and comes back? You retain the knowledge for a period so if you can make the person flee a few times (slow fight) isn't that a good thing?

STSF shines when the blocks get you the kill. As in, if the person flees then it's most potent use didn't work and the person has a second chance to either kill you or flee again. If you kill people really fast then it doesn't have time to really charge and if you don't have enough output then they can usually get away because the parting block portion isn't perfect.

If you make the person flee a few times and they aren't afflicting you with anything and are losing, why would they come back? It does happen sometimes but not often. If that is the situation, then you're losing your chance to get the kill.

nt

NT

Would there be any downside to stating which stats are best for certain legacies in the helpfiles for the legacies? I know one can search through the forums and find certain gems that you've posted in the past that help the playerbase glean some info on the legacies that help us make our decisions.

I honestly don't think this would hurt any aspect of the game, and as the playerbase becomes more casual it would only benefit the game in general.

I think the answer to your question is complicated in that some players can make any combo shine unlike any other. Part of it is experimentation and the other part is mostly in the help file. The point is, my elf striking warrior is not going to be on par with a better PKer than myself. While my Firegiant striking warrior is going to be a huge flop, unless against other fire giants and orcs...maybe. But I might not get the same out of it that I might have gotten out of ward of blades or trapping beneath thunder.

While I wouldn't mind more help files being less vague as far as what they do in general without giving specifics, I think most of them give you a good idea of what they do. Remember, playstyles are completely different so I might get a lot of mileage out of a legacy that you will find to not do much for you and vice versa.

Do you have a specific instance of a legacy you think is worded in a misleading way? Or what do you find that is confusing enough to not have an idea about what legacies to take?

Edit: Just to add, I think 1 stat point will not break a build entirely. Unless you are not as skilled as your opponents.

To address the whole 1 stat point thing I refer you to this:

http://forums.carrionfields.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=6&topic_id=21854&mesg_id=21885&page=

At the bottom you'll see that Daev says he wouldn't pick that legacy with a char who has less than 20 wis. To me that means that at least some legacies have a point where its a bad idea to pick them in general because stat reqquirements are on a sliding scale and past a minimum you probably wasted your time picking that legacy.

I'd like to know what number that is for the legacies that are effected by a sliding scale.

So in the example Daev provides here....would having a wis of 19 be a major drawback or minor? At what point does it become a major drawback?

I undertand skill has a part in all this per your comments but mechancis are mechanics and if a difference of one point can break a build,, I'd like to know that.

To clarify what I meant, if you cannot grasp if a legacy is a good idea or a bad idea from the help file there is a problem.

However, if you are talking about the difference between 25 wis (gnome) for a legacy and 19 that is a huge gap. You cannot expect a legacy that has wisdom as its prime stat to act the same in both cases. Also, I'm not trying to be mean here but that is way more than one stat point. So when does the legacy become useless to you? The answer to that is simple. If you read the help file and think, "Hey, maybe I shouldn't take this because it talks about strength and I'm a felar with really low strength." you probably shouldn't take it.

The point in the help file (to me) is to explain to you what would and would not be a good choice for taking the legacy as well as giving you a good idea of what it does. It really is up to you in the end to decide to take ward of blades over riddle of resilience or greeting the avalanche. There should be nothing to stop you from making a sub optimal choice because you might want to try something new or different.

Do I think that changing your legacy at 400 hours (or whatever requirement) would be a cool option to have? Hell yes. Because then you get a second chance you are talking about if you choose a bad one for your build. But it also gives you enough time to realize that. I really do get what you are saying though. It is an interesting idea. The only problem I have with it is this. Does it make sense that a warrior would forget this legacy he learned over his many years and miraculously learned a new one from an IC perspective?

Edit: I doubt you will be able to convince Daev that he should go through each of the legacies and tell you exactly where he thinks the legacy becomes useless. Even if you do, you would just be getting his opinion. Where as my whole argument is that you should be able to tell that from the help file explanation and not by a powergaming/metagaming number.

I'm not talking about the difference between 25 and 19. I'm more interested in the difference between 20 and 19. As Daev has answered, he personally wouldn;'t pick a legacy with its stats lower than 20 because there is likely a better choice for what you want to do.

Its more about looking at the helpfile and thinking (using your example) it mentions strength alot and you wonder if an arial could pull it off (arials have a str of 19) in combination with another legacy that plays off their dexterity.

The main legacy that plays off your dex is what you THINK would allow the weaker legacy to be effective although arials arent very strong....but they are just 1 point below human average.

However if you are wrong...then you just threw away a character.

This is why I like your idea about maybe having a 'second-chance'. Knowing you could expirament would be nice.