Source points need to go

[Mr. Graves]

They are an absolutely horrible way to handle the rarer spells. Having them have higher AP costs and long cooldowns was perfectly fine in OS1, and they currently feel utterly pointless to use, since there are a grand total of five source points available in Act 1. The entire system really has to be reworked before launch.

[Stabbey]

Removing the source pools in the February before last was a really strange move.

[Galileus]

By "perfectly fine" you mean "broken, OP and gamebreaking"? Since the high tier moves in DOS1 were only needed once a fight, and you started with them off of cooldowns...

[Dvil]

I remember throwing one Hail Storm to kill most of my enemies in one shot. And you could have 4 of that.

[Cameron Hall]

As far as I'm concerned, source should be generated either through getting X number of kills if you want to be bland, or each weapon-type could have a specific skill, like the heavy attack, which is unique to that weapon and used for generating source. Or a passive effect, like, for example, dual daggers needing to land X number of backstabs to gain a Source Point. That way, each weapon time has a reason to be used and you can make entire builds around it. Greatsword could have a different skill to a single sword. Dual daggers and dual axes could have a different skill, thus promoting usage of one over the other.

Of course, if you go down the route of kills = source points, spells and skills that use source shouldn't be able to generate source on a kill. Otherwise you'll have source skill spamming builds and that's obviously not what the devs are going for.

[Galileus]

Awful idea. That would promote cheesing the game and stunlocking to farm source skill, tunnel vission on one and only one weapon type and it would kill the limited resource balance approach DOS uses.

[Cameron Hall]

A solution of any kind is better than leaving it where it currently is.Source skills are, at most, 50% stronger than the non-source counterparts in most cases for a far, far higher cost. They are not so gamechanging that they should only be usable 9 times in Act 1, assuming you managed to collect each and every jar, especially with the removal of source pools (which only even added a few more spells at most. As it is, source points and source skills are completely ignored by the vast majority of players and not nearly worth the memory slots.

Additionally, I never said anything about what the quirks of each weapon would be, and that's only if you assume my latter example was the only example of a change. The former would be completely unphased by 'stunlocking', given that people tend to stunlock for kills, anyway. My latter example both presents an idea to change source points so that they actually feel like it's beneficial to use three memory slots on a skill, and it also promotes more weapons being used - right now, weapons like dual axes are completely worthless, so this would be another method of rewarding people for making builds around certain weapons, thus encouraging more diversity.

If you want me to give an example of how different weapons could have different effects, dual daggers might generate source points if you get X number of backstabs (not a hard feat, so the number of backstabs required would determine the balance behind it). Dual axes might gain source points for critical strikes, rage or not. A greataxe might generate a source point whenever it does X amount of armor damage, and a greatsword might generate them for straight-up killing someone (obviously assuming the skill that scored the kill wasn't a source point-empowered one). Obviously, these are examples and potential ideas for the devs to look into. If you're worried about source point farming, then just making it so you can keep only one point after combat (so that you can still do things like the Braccus helmet thing, where you deposit a source point. If they want the helmet challenge to be harder, make it require two, so you have to rush there after combat before source points where off, or leave an enemy in the room for the purpose of generating them).

I made a suggestion, I wasn't saying this is the only way it should be. I fail to see how it's an awful idea. I also have no idea what you're talking about when you say 'tunnel vision', because everyone tends to only use one weapon type, anyway. This just promotes people choosing their weapon type based on how they want to play, rather than what's actually the best, promoting more diversity.

[Galileus]

How does sticking to one weapon and skill promote more diversity? This is the exact opposite.

Your proposal is to make all source skills bland and a busywork. Repeatable, farmable and by neccesity bland.

Being rewarded for exploration and quests is great, grind is not. I see no reasoning behind it other by "i want moar sourze lol".

Sure, there might be balance to be struck in power and amount of sp to find... but I see no reason to scrap them altoegether and replace by a completely different mechanic!

[Cameron Hall]

Diversity isn't having a character switch to the next best weapon they find. It's the ability to make a character in the way you want and to get rewarded for such - you shouldn't be forced to use only the very best weapon types because everything else is simply worse. If I want to play a character with dual axes, I get absolutely no reward for it as they are inherently weaker than dual daggers, and inherently do less damage per AP than a greataxe or greatsword. If each weapon has a specialized benefit to it, then each weapon is an option you can pick, and not be held back for just because you're not picking the most optimal option for damage. This is diversity, ie. promoting a wider range of options to choose from. As it is, if you want to play a Rogue, you pick daggers. If you want to play a frontline fighter of some kind, you pick a greataxe or greatsword. There is literally no reason to pick certain weapons.

My proposal said literally nothing at all about the source skills in specific, just the methods of gaining source. At most I said the source skills aren't worth the cost, and they aren't in the slightest. You don't seem to know what 'bland' means, either.

The reward for 'exploration' is the option to be able to use dramatically overpriced spell once? In order to use the spell you've used three memory slots on and had to buy, you need to complete a dungeon, in which case you get to cast it once, when no source spell is all that great? Or, in Braccus' dungeons' case, you can cast the spell five times if you don't want to give anyone their souls back (and god forbid you do, in which case you've just dropped the amount of source spells you get to use in Act 1 from 9 to ~2, assuming you're giving back the souls to people who have quests for them). A generic weapon goes a lot further than a single casting of a source spell - a source spell that does what I'd do when casting 1.5 spells.

I said literally nothing about scrapping anything. The OP of the thread did. I said that there should be more methods of acquiring it and promoted an idea.

I've seen your posts all throughout the forums and they're hilarious. You seem to take any suggestion that doesn't coincide with the current game mechanics as an attack on the game devs and defend it, dismissing anything different, accordingly. A suggestion is a suggestion, nothing more, and saying what I've suggested is an awful idea is closeminded.

[Galileus]

Reread my post. You missed all the points.

And read your own diversity comment too. You can use one optimal weapon instead of using one optimal weapon! I want to scream right now.

[Cameron Hall]

What the hell does "You can use one optimal weapon instead of using one optimal weapon!" even mean? Diversity implies the ability to be diverse. Currently, you can't be diverse if you want to succeed. You're forced to use the weapon types that have the most damage, because there is a severe lack of utility in weapons to make other options viable. If you want to dual wield, the only viable option is dual wands or dual daggers, nothing inbetween, nothing else. If you want to use two-handed weapons, you've got a greataxe or greatsword. If you want magic, wands beat staves, and staves certainly aren't strong enough to beat out other melee weapons.

In short, there is no reason to dual wield anything other than daggers (or wands for mages), and there is no reason to two-hand anything other than greatswords or greataxes. This is the direct opposite of 'diverse'. What I suggested potentially improves the source point system while adding diversity to weapons (thus killing two birds with one stone), and gives the devs something to think about. I haven't seen you propose a single constructive idea in any thread you've posted in; you're dismissive of any new ideas and don't even attempt to add to conversation.

No offense, but you genuinely need to work on your English, because what you're saying, regardless of which post I refer to, makes no sense. If I didn't respond to what you were trying to say, you simply didn't express it correctly. I responded to everything you -actually- wrote. You're the one who didn't respond to anything I've said, instead dismissing it with ad hoc reasoning that had no real weight behind it.

[Galileus]

Offense taken. If we're down to personal attacks, there is nothing not to be offended about.

Your idea scraps a powerful story/exploration element and replaces it with boring grind that somehow makes diversity happen for reason of it happening. And you don't see any problem with that, you dont see how you scrap a system by scrapping a system and there is non-linear diversification caused by adding another layer of linear power curve on top of existing linear power curve.

Yes, my English is bad. Gimme a break.

[Cameron Hall]

Story is never an excuse for weak gameplay mechanics. The point of a game is the gameplay, the story is just a motivator for actions inside the game. Even then, nothing I said went against story, as the story literally states that source is acquired through life force - and guess what, you're killing people often. Source also doesn't imply you're draining peoples' souls to gain it.

They could have a fine story mechanic and still improve on what they currently have. There is no grind at all in what I was saying, and I even proposed ideas to limit any potential 'grind'. Your only examples of grind was 'stunlocking an enemy to 'grind' source points', which only covered a portion of my initial suggestions. I suggested two things, one was involving kills, and you can't 'stunlock' to grind source points if they're grained from kills, regardless of whether you get one source per kill, or one per multiple. You would have stunlocked the enemy regardless. I also said that you wouldn't gain source points for getting a kill with a skill using source points prevents any real abuse.

As for the other suggestion, stunlocking would only work if the weapon ability allowed farming through stunlocking - which depends entirely what the weapon requires you to do in the first place to gain source points. It could be elaborate, it might be simple, but in the end you were making an assumption with no foundation and dismissed the idea because of that baseless assumption. To top it off, even if you still think it would be possible to 'grind' source points, you could very easily impose limits such as only keeping one source point after a fight, or slowly losing source points which requires you to be close to another fight, and you can't just run from fight to fight grinding the points, Either way, your issue about stunlocking, -which was the one and only example of 'grind' that you gave,- was baseless.

Once again, I scrapped nothing. You can still keep the current system while adding onto it. There is nothing I have said that implies otherwise. The OP did, but I didn't. Stop making assumptions.

My point about English was that you should probably stop using terms you don't understand. It's not a personal attack, it's that your refusal to simplify your arguments only degrades from what you're trying to get across, making it incomprehensible. The entire spiel about power curves makes no sense, because power curve literally implies you -only- get exponentially stronger, but source points have a limit, thus implicity denying a curve of any kind, and you can even enforce that limit further to prevent it from curving, as I showed in my third paragraph.

The entire point of my suggestions were just that, suggestions. It's not saying that what's currently implemented is bad, it's something for the devs to look at. You just seem to take anything other than blind fanboyism as a direct attack against the game, just like every other post you make that tries to dismiss each and every single suggestion or idea.

[Galileus]

STORY IS JUST A MOTIVATOR? Are you insane for gods sake? Why? Who said that? Did Judge of Internet made a verdict? This is so obviously a blatant lie only made to support your strawman!

YOU'RE GAINING POINTS PER KILLS, SO TO GET MORE POINTS YOU KILL MORE. ITS A ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ GRIND FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!

And yes, YOU SCRAPPED THE EXISTING SYSTEM. If you can get points for kills and have a steady income, this kills the rarity and story importance of source acquisition, DOES IT ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ NOT!? The only ass in here is YOU!

Im done. Im going insane. This is like talking to a wall. He says he wants to grind a point per kill, but this is not a grind, because you cannot stunlock. You cannot stunlock, he said! Ha ha ha. And I thought it's grindy. But no worries, nothing is scrapped, you can have rare source and still not have source be rare, nothing is wrong with that, no, no, IM ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ GOING INSANE NOW.

[Prince of Madness]

Originally posted by ShRv GalileOS:

nothing is scrapped, you can have rare source and still not have source be rare.

I belive that he is saying he doesn't want Source points removed, Just used diferently. therefore changing not scraping the idea.

[Galileus]

Originally posted by Prince of Madness:

Originally posted by ShRv GalileOS:

nothing is scrapped, you can have rare source and still not have source be rare.

I belive that he is saying he doesn't want Source points removed, Just used diferently. therefore changing not scraping the idea.

But the whole idea of SPs is for them to be rare. They have no reason to exist if they are just a resource you collect in each and every fight. Sure, this changes the system, but the very reasoning behind the system gets trashed - and you're left with an empty shell of a system with no meaning to it and no reason to exist in the first place.

Without the narrative leaver device thingy (working on my English), SPs are a busywork and nothing more. All they do is gate some skills. Such system was used in that Obsidian game that was made without their lead writer... Tyranny?... and it ended a mess, making some skills simply too much pain in the ass to use. So yes, trashing the very idea behind SPs and keeping only their most up-to-surface appearance is indeed trashing the system.

Game mechanics do not exist in void, they do have weight and reasoning behind them. And as the amazing Nier:Automata shown us recently, nothing stops you to have the very basis of cinematography - set up and pay off - in a game, using game mechanics instead of visuals or story ques to foreshadow and prep up a powerful experience.