I wanted to take a moment and talk about primary attributes. There are three different primary attributes; Strength, Finesse, and Intelligence.

Strength
- Determines your Accuracy with strength-based weapons
- Improves the damage of Warfare skills
- Decreases the heavy equipment movement penalty
- You can lift and move heavier objects

Finesse
- Determines your Accuracy with finesse-based weapons
- Improves the damage of Huntsman and Scoundrel skills
- Increases Dodging
- Modifies Thievery

Intelligence
- Determines your Accuracy with intelligence-based weapons
- Improves the damage of several different schools


So each attribute contributes to accuracy to their respective weapons. And each targets a specialization -- Strength providing the least amount of flexibility and Intelligence the most. Many people believe that Warrior is too strong at the moment but if the numbers were adjusted and talents like Warlord were scaled down -- wouldn't they lose all appeal (especially considering that they are typically in the fray)?

With all of this in consideration - what is the viability of electing to go hybrid?

Also, what is the point of the weapon type - Spear - in this format? Should there be changes to facility spears, and should there be more weapon types like Spear (strength-based crossbows for example)?

I'm not really picking a side (no doubt I'll enjoy the game either way), more or less just presenting some information to gain some perspective from other players.

The issue with the knight/melee class's in alpha in comparison to the other classes is that you can buff just strength and equip a two handed weapon with 4 skills and 1 talent you can own the battlefield killing every enemy with 1 hit. Maybe drop a point into scoundrel or rogue for a 5th teleporting skill and you can kill everything before it can act. This is why the melee fighter is over powered during the alpha in comparison to any other type of character you can make.

All of that being said spears currently serve no purpose as a two handed melee weapon because they are based upon finesse and all of a two handed melee fighters skills are based on strength. I can only see them as a back up weapon to an archer but then you don't need to use a melee weapon at close range at least not in the alpha now if they made it so that huntsman skills in some way included spear fighting it would make since to base them on finesse right now they are worthless.

I think they need to rebalance the attributes in a big way before release or they are going to have the same issues they are having with one class being more overpowered than another. They should really make strength damage and have nothing to do with accuracy and have finesse determine accuracy with all weapons and have nothing to do with damage for any weapon intelligence should govern damage with intelligence based spells and weapons while still having finesse handle accuracy.

This would be the simplest way of balancing out the attributes so no one class style is overpowered because you would have to spread your attribute points to be effective. The finesse based skills from marksmen and rogue should have to hit based off of finesse while having intelligence govern damage anyway because they are all about how well you place the attack for damage and your intelligence should govern that anyway.

I disagree. Mainly because a melee fighter doesn't have range. You spend more points moving around, take more environment damage, and get targeted more easily by enemies. This means you need to spend more effort focusing on your defenses. Sure, they have competitive DPS potential, but in my experience marksmen and mages do too, and they have an easier time doing it safely.



A few things here, the Warfare skills (and all skills using weapons) scale off of the damage of the weapon being used far more than from the main stat value. This means a Finesse spear user will still have strong Warfare skills because their weapon is strong.
There are a few advantages to spear. Mainly, it has a 2.5m range, the longest of any melee weapon. Compare this with 2m for a Str 2h or 1.5m for other 1h melee weapons.
Also, should you need to temporarily swap weapons to a bow/crossbow (can't reach a target, etc.), you will be more proficient with them than a Str based melee user would be.
I did a playthrough as a Finesse Spear user and didn't have trouble keeping up with the rest of the group.

As far as going hybrid is concerned, it's best if hybridizing abilities that provide utility, while getting your damage from a single stat type. This is to prevent spreading your damage bonuses over many different things when you can only use one. For example, I had teleport, first aid, and adrenaline as supporting abilities from other skill schools.
Also, many enemies have only 1 armor type. If you have CC that target physical and magical you can lock those enemies down right away, potentially very useful.

All this being said, I do agree that the current system could use some reworks. I don't very much like how main stat starts at 15% bonus per point, and degrades to only 2% by the end of the game. I don't like the Wits stat, as everyone is already getting 100% crit from Rage (maybe rage is the problem).
Also, the bonuses associated with skills aren't in-line. Pyrokinetics is far more powerful than the others, IMO.
Then there's Source points, which are such a pain in the buns I've yet to ever use a Source ability. O, this source ability costs tons of action points, a source point, and costs 3x the memory cost of anything else? No thanks.

Define 'hybrid' because depending on your definition it might not be viable at all.

Spear is a finesse two-hander. So, evasion heavy DPS that uses finesse as its primary stat which means you can cycle bows and use bow skills as well or use daggers or use really anything that is finesse based. Also, reach value does count for something.

Furthermore, there are plenty of skills that are based on weapon damage so take it as you will which still deals competitive damage.

Basically, opposite of what Fastel wrote.

As for the rest, it's mainly accuracy that hinders hybrid builds and you have to solve it through leadership and hotheaded along with gearing which is kinda' meh.

GG someone beat me to the point.

I suppose my definition of hybrid within the game would be the development of more than one specialization. I wouldn't consider a player putting a point into a specialization to get a particular skill a hybrid. So in essence, more than one specialization where one doesn't clearly overshadow the other(s).

Huntsman (Finesse) - Necromancer (Intelligence)

Aerotheurge (Intelligence) - Scoundrel (Finesse)

Warfare (Strength) - Pyrokinetics (Intelligence)

etc.

(of course you could also include Intelligence - Intelligence)

I definitely agree accuracy is a limiting factor.

Scoundrel has no baring on "hybrids"

It increases movement and crit multiplier

And on that note let me lint out that melee have a shit ton of movement if you're min maxing:

The pawn -> free AP for movement

Scoundrel -> crit mult and movement

Two handed -> damage and crit mult

Warfare -> only need one pint to allow learning skills


Rage -> auto Crit

Talent -> 2 AP per kill

Notes you can pump warfare for damage to physical armor to kill faster for hose that have physical defense but generally won't need it, there are lots of movement skills, and many abilities that are self buffs and so on that don't require actually pumping their associated stat, learning skills can skirt the req of having a pint in the ability through either armor bonus or being an elf

There are many good reasons for saying melee has issues

In my definition I was using the schools in reference to the the available skills, not specifically the points and what they modify -- sorry that I didn't clarify that.

*not to say the modifier doesn't count for anything

I'd recommend pumping your weapon skill instead. The bonus from it will work on the health portion of enemies too. Warfare gives no passive benefit when attacking an enemy without Physical armor, which are probably the targets you want your physical attackers targeting first anyway.

By thT definition, "hybrid" melee is the strongest build in the game currently

**and yes I know, I just threw in the warfare thing as a side note if someone wants has leftover pints or something

So, the reason why I asked is because if your definition was 'the ability to deal physical damage and magical damage competitively' then I would say 'Sure, you currently can have hybrids thanks to how abilities are set up.'

But what you're asking is closer to the thematic definition of hybrid which is an issue because some skill lines/trees/pools just don't have cross damage skills or they do so little damage to begin with that you can't really call it a hybrid or you have accuracy limiting certain factors.

Examples of this would be Aero + Physical Melee. Aero spells have no amplifier outside of higher damage against magical shielding which means that the int penalty won't really be overcome where as if you had say Pyro + Melee you can at least even the damage out by pumping more points into Pyrokinetics if that makes any sense.

Right now, one of the better hybrid builds is just one that uses warfare skills in conjunction with spells and goes almost pure int which is not exactly a build most would consider an archetype.

At the end of the day though accuracy is a factor and also that some skill lines have no way of bolstering damage. Aero + Phys melee would be a hard to consider lineup as an archetype since the magic damage would be so little - you would essentially just be a knight since you're using spells as pure CC/utility.

I am a bit hesitant in wanting to agree with you here due to the context; you're taking that component without considering the whole.

He's saying aero (int) + scoundrel (fin) which implies he's divving his attr points accordingly which means one of his weapons is going to be a dagger or even both or maybe single handed.

So that translates to some of the following possibilities; Shadowblade; Spell Crit/Ambush build.

Is it competitive relative to other options? Possibly maybe. You can, after all, dual wield wand + dagger so you get skills like Fatal Blow, various positioning things, and also backstab. I haven't tested this out, I am just going off of logic. So, backstabbing guerrilla wand damge + physical dagger damage while casting relatively decent hitting nukes with high crit chance using Scoundrel and Aero to catch up in damage efficiency and ... Chloroform ... deals magic damage and scales off of ... finesse? Maaaaybe?

@aj0413 The entire point of me creating this thread was not to establish your opinion of what you believe the optimal build is right now. I wanted you to evaluate the information and give your perspective about the attributes and how they relate to hybrid builds and weapon types -- then state if you think this system works great or could use some changes.

I'll state my own opinion for the sake of example.

- I think the primary attributes play a large role in determining what specialization will be available to you -- because of this Strength is the most penalized since you only have Warfare. If it wasn't for the absurd damage output that Warrior is capable of right now I think this would be much more obvious to everyone.

- Hybrid builds have to work around damage and accuracy lost from splitting points into primary attributes and combat abilities.

- I can understand the argument that Spear can be utility -- swapping to Bow/Crossbow/Daggers to use related Finesse skills. I don't think it's a very strong argument, compared to just using Bow/Crossbow/Daggers from the start.

- I think the system is fine -- it offers trade-offs. I do wish there were more weapon types or weapon types that accepted more than one attribute. (Crossbow can be either Strength or Finesse, same for Spear)

Spear is finesse. You don't need to swap unless you're looking to use a bow for ranged purposes. So, in certain situations spear-builds outpace pure strength melee builds.

Furthermore, you can still use warfare skills with a spear and do a ton of damage despite being primarily Finesse. Also, reach, and bonus from 2H. It's basically the same as a knight except you lose some of the top damage for the ability to do competitive ranged damage.

Range seems to be only a matter at the start. Later on a fighter can learn at least three Warfare skills for quick alocation and dealing damage by doing so. Give him Geomancers spells like Impalement and Phoenix Dive gets about three times as effective: Dealing a lot (magical) damage, moving him close to the target and creating a huge obstacle for enemie melee fighters.

Count in other classes and a warrior hardly needs to move at all. Get the enemie in front of you with teleport or just use additionally something like Tactical Retreat. Warriors got a huge buff to counter the range disadvantage comparing to DOS1.

Regarding the topic: As soon as you are getting close to level 10 damage wise putting points into them seems to get pointless. Only accuracy remains perhaps a reason to put still more points in. For Wits the deminishing return is even worse. At level 8 it doesn't matter if you but in 15 points or 17 regarding crit and initiative. You gain 8 initiative from level but only 2 from wits, wich is pretty ridiculous.

@Limz The range is definitely appealing -- it could be the difference of a bomb off going in front your face or not.

This actually helped me a LOT during the fight with all the voidlings spawning, as they had a tendency to explode in my face.

That's what I'm pointing out:

Warfare hardly matters to melee builds because the other abilities offer better synergy. I can't see how strength is penalized at all. They're also some of the best builds in the game as a hybrid according to your definition.

The abilities need work because it's clear they're not all Made equal and even the ones "meant" for a certain class don't workout as intended. Hybrids are super strong (and that's not a bad thing)

My min maxed build was to punt to the fact that if warlord was changed they wouldn't lose any appeal. There's a lot more going on there with warriors then archetypal abilities/skills synergizing too well.

Hybrids are quite simply not really hurt at all by their hybridization cause the main stats do very little to anything that matters to most hybrids aside from the one stat that scales their main damage type.

As for the stat system: it's a broken mess that really needs to be fixed. It's not really doing anything for or against hybrids. It's just kind of there. One only needs to worrr about accuracy from their main weapon and therefore should pump only one stat that effects that. The system doesn't encourage hybrids at all. Hell doesn't encourage much of anything with how little it makes it feel like leveling matters aside from "maintaining" relative damage of one typ or mitigating the accuracy and damage loss of two. Your combat abilities are the thing that really matters at the moment for damage.

Each stat should feel more important and hybrids should be built around deciding which gains are important; not what they're willing to give up. No class should.

** typing on phone so forgive writing grammar and spelling

@aj0413, etc.
There was a very specific reason why I had Kresky define what a hybrid build is. Based on the definition then the arguments provided can only apply to that definition - in essence, it's a thematic definition. If we change the definition to the ability to deal both physical and magical damage then stats do matter because they affect ability damage and it becomes balancing out your 'native' i.e. primary with your secondary sources as well as balancing our your skill points and memory.

Having hybrids exist by ability alone is perfectly fine, there just needs to exist abilities that facilitate that.

A lot of other games generally have things like 'arcane strike' or some way to deliver a spell with a melee strike but those abilities do not exist.

Also, warfare is pretty critical for hybridized damage; it's an easy way to convert magic damage into physical. Unfortunately, there aren't really any abilities that convert physical into magical. Also, non-trivial damage, e.g., crippling blow, overpower.

Ah, I was focused on the whole using skills "hybrid"

I still say I don't like how current stat system works for anyone and the abilties need work

But I see your point on facilitating converting damage types and warfare's use for such

Wouldn't skills that are in magic schools but are meant for Might type characters be good enough though? Such as a skill to add elemental damage to a weapon? Or touch spells that can be channeled through weapons (via a talent)?

Also, can't Air be used to do the same as Warfare? ...If not could they make it so?

Honestly, though I'd much prefer changing the abilties and doing what your suggesting through either a new school of skills and a new combat ability, skills spread through out schools, and/or a talent.

Also, wouldn't a hybrid character who could cause massive damage of either or and/or both armor types at will be obscenely strong in a well made fighter type? They'd have to be balanced around sacrificing a large portion of their single target damage potential to make up for the variability...same as a mage, but not to the same extent (though mages need some work too).

I don't like how the stats currently work. They definitely felt meaningless by the end of the EA. Except memory. Investing in memory always felt rewarding.
The worst offenders were: equips awarding big bonuses compared to per level gains, the scaling changes on level up, the lack of anything else being tied to stats (no armor requirements/direct skill ties)

In D:OS a big mediator was the AP cost and CD for skills. So warfare skills require strength to reduce CDs and aP cost. Atleast CD modification could be included in the current game. And I feel that stat req's on items would also change the current feeling.

Well, you'll be ~20% damage behind purists and that's perfectly fine since you're able to strike whatever is more vulnerable. So in terms of burst damage you actually should be able to catch up with purists builds in some cases since it's less armor to chew through.

@Limz Lol the defender of the OP, thanks man -- but that was just my definition of hybrid. I really don't care so long as people are talking and we get some different perspectives (and stay relatively on topic).

However you balance and juggle it, the entire attribute system is a sham.
The only thing that it governs is your DPS, and so there's no real depth or strategy to it. It's not that it can help you make an interesting character with strengths and weaknesses.

If you go wizard there's no reason not to put everything in INT, ever. Even if you DO take combat skills you'll be shit with them as the game progresses.
If you go warrior there's no reason not to put everything in STR because even if you take magic skills or whatever you'll be shit with them as the game progresses.
etc


So it turns out that the game is only really fun at the first few levels where your character can still be very effective as an interesting multiclass

They first need to offer a better system, before we can really discuss this topic

No. F*** cooldown modification.

There is no mana system in the game. The only thing which can limit how often you use skills are AP costs (which in D:OS 2 comes down to "this turn" or "next turn"), Source Points (which only apply to certain skills), and cooldowns.

In D:OS 2, cooldowns are basically the ONLY, the ONLY thing which limits how often you can use the majority of skills. Including attribute-based cooldown modification is taking a hammer to the delicate clockwork machine of balance.

Already designers have to account for the power of a skill based on the power of the governing stat, and based on the power of the associated ability stats, and based on the scaling power as levels change, and based on memory space and AP costs, and you want to throw in yet another factor which the designers have to consider, which is variable cooldown time?

For the ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY (160) skills in the game?

I was a strong advocate for uncoupling cooldowns from abilities in D:OS 1, and I'm glad that that was the case in D:OS 2. Tying them back together will wreck balance back to how it was in D:OS 1.

Yeah, many skills need more cooldown for balancing, not less.

With the goals that the current attribute bonuses have in mind, the attributes should really be something you set at the start(S.P.E.C.I.A.L. in Fallout 1/2, or how D&D does it), and only scarcely improve throughout the game.

It's a perfectly viable approach with the new bonuses for skills, which affect all sources of their effects.

In fact, it would be a perfectly good approach to abandon the D:OS distinction between 'skill schools', and have things like "Recovery" instead of Hydrosophist or "Vampirism" instead of Necromancy, and then just give skills individual requirements based on what they actually do.

This is what I mean by this try it out it is why the melee fighter beats out the ranged ones because they also do way more damage I have not been able to get any other class to deal nearly as much damage but then I haven't tried raging an archer either.

This melee setup negates the need for a ranged weapon 3 different skills to close range 2 for 1 ap and 1 for 2 ap which hits two targets and drops you into melee range.

2 handed fighter build that is OP using only strength stat you can kill almost everything in 1 hit you can build this without using elf race but you don't get as much ap or damage on turn 1

Race: Elf
Stats to increase at each level only increase strength
Combat Skills:
Two-Handed: 3 or 4 if you reach level 8
Warfare: 3-4
Huntsman: 1
Civil skills your choice
Talents: Warlord, Bigger and Better, All skilled up
Skills: Enraged, Battering Ram, Crippling Blow, Blitz Attack, Tactical Retreat

You kill almost everything in one hit every time you kill someone you gain back 2 ap. So you can keep on attacking think strategically and you own the battle field enemies may get one round in battles where your main character just can't get to them and kill them in the first turn by level 3 though it has only happened to me rarely.

I agree its a better system which you are proposing and the game would be more balanced with it.

You are right. Strength 2-handed warrior with warfare skills is OP.
I had only tried the Finesse/Spear variant, and without the Str scaling the damage wasn't as high.
This surely needs a nerf, at least the strong synergy of Strength, 2-handed, and the warfare abilities.

The crux of the matter is that firstly the attribute system is too oversimplified and has very little weight on character builds and performance in combat. Seriously, compare D:OS & D:OS2 with other cRPGs like Baldur's gate, Icewind Dale, Neverwinter Nights, Pillars of Eternity, these games have so much going on in their attribute system than D:OS. Look at Pillars of Eternity, the most recent successful cRPG, they had an intricate system with 4 saving throws(Deflection, Will, Reflex and Fortitude) tied to different attributes and the attacks target different saving throws even for a Mage(different spells target different saving throws), on top of Damage Reduction against various attack elements(Fire, Corrode, Pierce, Crush, Freeze etc) and finally Resistance against different types of Crowd Control or Status Effect(Petrified, Burn, Poison, Disease, Knockdown, Blinded, Stun etc). Every attribute governs a different section of defense serving as the first layer of defense with DR and Resistance being the second layer but seperated into specific elements, players have to think when allocating points as every attribute is important, its not the matter of dumping everything in 1 or 2 attribute and ignoring balance.

Secondly there are just too many Magic/Int skill trees and that these skill trees are too good, they have the best balance of damage, utility and crowd control so much so that diversity and hybridization in D:OS series means picking a magic skill tree. For a start they should implement a good spread of Strength and Finesse skill trees to add to the current 3 we have, it'll give players more options and incentive to go into Strength and Finesse attributes. Furthermore skill trees need to be heavily specialized and not be like the current magic skill trees where they are practically Master of all Trades. Magic skill trees have too good of synergy with each other than with the remaining 3. It'll encourage players to diversify their builds instead of taking magic skill trees cos they can do everything.

TL:DR, If Larian wants to fix these problems, they gonna have to do an overhaul of the attribute system followed by balancing magic skill trees as they are currently Master of all Trades and finally adding more Strength & Finesse skill trees.

Funny logic here.

More rolls is sadly something, some of us would really not want. They want a more chess like game.

But me for my selve, I really don't like, that putting points in only one stat is all you need. I would like a more classical approach like:

Strength:
- ability to equip heavier armor and move with them
- increase physical damage (to use a bot needs in reality a lot strength)
- lift and move heavier stuff
- carry more stuff

Finesse:
- chance to hit with any weapon
- chance to dodge
- chance to block (shield/twohanded)
- chance to parry (duo wield)

Intelligence:
- better damage with all skills
- memorize more skills

Constitution:
- more HP
- more max AP (slightly, not as many as in DOS1)
- chance to resist
- movement speed

Wits:
- trap detection
- chance to crit
- initiative

Just some bare bone idea I came up with in a quarter hour or so, most likely improvable.

In addition to this - just a spontaneous idea:

Why not implementing an exhaustion status (several levels) or stat that reduces strength, damage (possibly already included in strength penalty), finesse and maybe other, defensive stats - exhaustion speed depending on weapon type and armor type (or rather weight). So two handed warriors with heavy armor would quickly get exhausted and naturally be nerfed after a few actions, unless they invest in constitution (instead of boosting their damage with strength or increasing their chance to hit with finesse: make a decision). There could be talents that reduce the degree of exhaustion (second wind), special armor and weapon materials to make them lighter and skills that boost constitution or influence exhaustion directly (preventive or reactive).
Also skills might cause exhaustion (mentally or physically), depending on their power. So players would have to think of strategies, trying to get enemies down with heavy damage and risking too much exhaustion (less damage, less accuracy, even losing attribute requirements for their current equipment) or playing more defensive (less exhaustion) until armors are down and then using the more powerful attacks.

But maybe that tends to become a different game/system then...

Sometimes, simplification is not an inherently bad thing. Also different games work in different ways and aping what works for apples to apply that to oranges is not going to work well

Pillars of Eternity has a 6-character limit on the party. D:OS has a 4 character limit. That means that it's harder to fill all the roles in D:OS, and it would be much harder to be able to hit 4 different saving throws.

D:OS also has Memory to worry about, limiting pretty harshly early on what skills you have available to use. I can't afford to spend a slot on a skill which only removes one status effect, for instance.

The more different stats you have, the more numbers you have to try to keep balanced, which means the more numbers that will appear on loot. The more numbers which appear on loot and the more numbers you have to keep balanced, the more difficult it is to choose between different pieces of equipment which have numbers in different areas.

That leads to players eyes glazing over and them mentally checking out of the decision making process. This happens to me all the time when I try to compare equipment in games like Torchlight or Dragon Fin Soup. They have too many numbers and there are too many stats and so I basically stop caring about most of the numbers and just going for what roughly has the highest basic numbers.




I was one of the people asking for stretch goals for a 3rd skill tree. Unfortunately, judging by the Kickstarter, it seems Larian was entirely uninterested in adding a third skill tree then. I can't see them adding one now.

At best I think all we can hope for is to make Warfare hold 24-32 skills instead of only 16 like the other sets.




All attributes being useful for everyone would, as people have said, require a complete overhaul. It would either have to go to a Fallout-like - set at the start and be done - system, or else they'd have to give out far more attribute points per level than the two they do now. Two points a level is not enough to spread around in a system where all points have value.




Yeah, that does probably become a very, very different system.

You can't be serious.

True that, it worked well with Dragon Age Inquisition where it basically moved away from stats and instead focus on talent/skill trees. However it depends on the genre, DAI was aiming for action cum brawler oriented RPG(not to be confused with stats & loot driven ARPGs like Diablo, Grim Dawn etc) so limited mechanics worked well for it.

Divinity Original Sin series however is gunning for cRPG with Turn Based combat. Such a genre where mechanics and tactics both play a huge roll in turn based combat. Just like what we have with games like Age of Decadence, Wasteland series, Blackguards etc. If you oversimplify the mechanics part, theres honestly nothing much to the game then. It is perfectly fine if the devs take down a notch with the mechanics, i'm open to it, but D:OS2 overdid it. You gotta admit the attribute system in D:OS2 currently is as simple as it gets so much so that it is comparable to the system we see in MMORPGs, which as we all know is direct, narrow and shallow. Pretty much a no brainer. You don't even have to bat an eyelid when distributing your points.

That being said, i do agree it is too late for an overhaul. But it is still plausible for a few tweaks and additions to be made for each attribute.

Wait, you can't achieve depth with skills/talent alone (reasonably alone at any rate), really?

The fuck kind of garbage arguments are these?

That's just lazy on your part and most people that play RPG's a lot don't do that no offense but torchlight is by far one of the easiest stat based rpgs in creation. In case you haven't noticed the more complicated and RPG is in terms of character creation the more people tend to play it. Most people thought Planescape torment was terrible when it was released because they didn't understand it. Now it is considered one of the greatest video games ever created.



It is never to late for an overhaul we are in alpha if the devs really are reading the forums and taking these discussions to heart then they should see how off balanced the current system is and fix it before release. They don't have to even do a complete overhaul they just need to modify the existing system so that it is better. If you have played a lot of PnP games you can see how to use the existing system to create something that works great there have been some really good suggestions in this thread alone.

While most of the suggestions don't make it any more complicated to distribute stat points and skill points they do nerf the OP builds making the game at least have a little challenge which it is currently lacking.

If I am level 3 I shouldn't be able to fight 20 level 4 NPCs and win by myself with the current system I could which is ridiculous and that is all down to the way they laid out the stats and skill abilities.

It's important to remember that these discussion are why there is an Alpha to begin with. Agree or disagree with the posited arguments, these discussions give everyone (including the developers) a chance to think about the topic at hand and see multiple view points.

All of us are here because we want this game to be great. We may have differing opinions on exactly how to make that happen but that's why we're here talking about it. Let's try not to dig our heels in too deep.

Personally, I'm on the side of the discussion that the attributes could use a little more "identity." Each attribute should offer something to a build (no matter the build) so that choosing which attribute(s) to increase becomes an important decision.

We can't compare it to D&D honestly because D&D accomplishes this by having a "skill" system with the skills being modified by the attribute (such as climb and swim being affected by strength while balance is dexterity), which this game does not have.

Instead, I would suggest finding a way to have each attribute contribute something to a build, something like:

Strength:
- Increases damage and accuracy with strength-based weaponry
- Reduces movement penalty for medium and heavy armors, allows the use of heavier armor
- Increases carrying capacity (weight)
- Reduces the AP cost for climbing during combat (contributes to the new height system)
- Affects Warfare skills

Finesse:
- Increases damage and accuracy with finesse-based weaponry
- Increases dodge chance
- Increases movement speed (move further per AP point)
- Affects accuracy and damage when dual-wielding (penalties for low Finesse while dual-wielding)
- Affects Scoundrel and Marksman skills

Intelligence:
- Increases damage and accuracy with intelligence-based weaponry
- Increases duration of status effects and control
- Provides bonus to Magic Armor (instead of Wits)
- Affects all magical school skills

Constitution:
- Modifies total Vitality
- Reduces duration of physical status effects and control on character
- Increases healing received

Memory:
- Modifies total number of abilities a character can have memorized and the power of skills that can be learned

Wits:
- Affects initiative, critical chance and detection (traps, hidden objects, stealthed enemies)
- Reduces duration of magical status effects and control on character


Now, I'm not suggesting these are the best ideas nor am I stating that they should be done exactly like this but...the idea is to make every attribute contribute in some way to any build or character so a player can choose to strengthen their character in a variety of ways based on the attribute(s) they choose to increase.

Strength based characters can still benefit from intelligence because it modifies magical armor (thus increasing their immunity to magical control) and it will affect the duration of their own control abilities (like knockdown).

Intelligence based characters can benefit from Wits because if their magical armor is depleted, it will reduce the duration of silence and other effects on them, Constitution to enjoy this same resistance to physical effects, etc.

Just a thought.

The argument quoted is pretty silly. Why do people insist on making arguments like these?



Everyone has entrenched positions more or less based on the language being used here and no one is interested in actually discussing actual mechanics.



What is 'identity'?

If all attributes contribute to any given build does it necessarily follow that selecting which attribute to increase becomes an important decision?

Does it matter that the D&D (depending on which edition) has a rigid progression and class system, which can contain exceptions to the core rule set(s), when examining the relationship between attributes and the system as a whole or other components of the system? Or does having skills weigh more heavily?



How about just adding more abilities that can accomplish what you just outlined? Just a thought.

To address your questions:

No, I suppose it doesn't necessarily follow that the decision becomes more important if the attributes all contribute in some way. I suppose it merely adds a level of diversity to builds that may-or-may-not be practiced by the playerbase.

D&D employs a multi-faceted system by which feats, skills, attributes and spells all intermingle to various degrees both in and out of combat. What I was pointing out is that one of the primary motivators for attribute distribution in a game like D&D is how those attributes affect other areas of the game, skills being the example I chose to use. It is simply one way in which D&D makes each attribute have some benefit to a character regardless of what class they are or what their "primary" attribute(s) are. I then followed this up by stating that attempting to accomplish something similar is one idea that could be toyed with but since the game doesn't have "skills" in the sense that D&D does, it could be done a different way and then provided a possible way to do so.

Some ideas of abilities to add that would accomplish the same general principle would be welcomed. It's certainly an alternate and viable approach.

Thanks for the feedback.

For D&D the strength and its weakness is the class system, attributes are second class citizens; in order to cover multiple play styles multiclassing was the solution and then attribute considerations came next.

Skills aren't that good of an example to bring up because of the bad exchange rate between attributes and skills (again depending on what edition you're in) and the quantity of ranks per level. Also, the relationship between skills + attributes vs levels is kind of inverted. So, the overall effect of attributes on skills is fairly small depending on which stage of the game - I do not think this is what you want. I

In DSO2, abilities are first class citizen as they have the largest impact in the game and they are what defines your play style based on what you pick. If that's the case then it makes more sense to achieve diversity of builds through abilities rather than attributes keeping it as internally consistent while minimizing side effects.

I'm curious if spell crafting will fill in the blanks for a larger variety of abilities.

I'll use an example to explain what I mean:

Blitz Attack (Strength) + Shocking Touch (Intelligence) = Thunder Jump (Intelligence)

You take the core identity of one strength/intelligence/finesse-based skill and essentially give it the attribute modifier (strength/intelligence/finesse) of another.

This is a fair assessment, thank you.

Oooh, I like where this discussion is heading.
Someone mentioned having static, or mostly static attributes. While I support this decision in principle. I think it does leave something out of the idea that "today a wizard, tomorrow a battlemage".
But if stats were more meaningful (and weren't all over every piece of equipment) than even getting 1 stat every few levels could work. The key is 'could work' I think we can all agree from playing all the forms of RPGs over our gaming careers that a lot of different systems 'could work'.

So would it be a fair direction to instead discuss what the goals of a system that works would be?

I propose:
1. That the system provides an avenue for a wide range of effective builds. (this is the biggest draw of the original sin series and it's most unique aspect when compared to similar games. You have no restrictions, class or otherwise. Many of the stat systems mentioned in this thread for comparison exist in rpgs with more rigidly defined roles)
2. That the system makes apparent sense and is intuitive. (strength for the strong, con for those who take many hits etc.)
3. That the system is fun to use. (this also covers progression and level-up, for instance: a static system takes some of the fun out of leveling up and developing your character, you make less choices and you cannot change your decision after the fact.)

I think the current system:
1. Moderate success. I think as awkward as it is, the current system allows a wide range of effective builds. I finished a play through with a battlemage (war/pyro/geo) who wore a staff and slaughtered lots of bad guys. My stats were also a nightmare (I purposefully just threw this and that there) and it was still a relatively easy clear. However, the current system also has too many dump stats and conversely: ideal stats. Limz might have more to say about this as he'd tried more builds.
2. This is where the biggest failing is. One, because it confused most players and even many critics and two, because all some of them do is tweak one maybe two numbers right now, and not very convincingly.
3. I think this is also something that could be improved currently. I mentioned earlier that I barely cared about stats unless it was memory. And I made a completely effective character by putting every single point into finesse and using only 3-4 skills the entire play through.

From above:
If I had to make a suggestion; I would start where many have already done in this thread: adding to the number of things tied to each stat.
Str: Move speed in armor is the biggest thing (reduce the penalties and take that ability away from crafting). A larger accuracy bonus for str. based weapons. I don't propose high stat req's for armor or stat req's on weapons. As that limits instead of adds to our options.
Fin: Climb rate/distance travelled (small increment increases). reduce chance to slip on ice/slowed by oil. (not when hit, but when walking over). Small acc. increase to all weapons.
Int: Nothing
Con: Something. (maybe this is the best place for more restrictive armor requirements. You'll need so much Con to equip this heavy breastplate or resist this cursed ring)
Wits: (I don't like wits)
Memory: Change the scaling to make 1 point matter.

Then I would implement something like a sigmoid or S curve to the scaling (for clarity, this is referred to as a 'soft cap' - except I would recommend a soft soft cap). This was one thing I absolutely loved in the first D:OS. That the more invested you were in one area, the more points it cost to improve that area. Except don't change the costs, instead change the rewards. Maybe this is already in game, because at level 20 or so, more finesse only added a 2.0% increase. So if at that point one point in Str adds the large swings we see at character creation then this would be a point in favor of stat diversification. As partner to this, I would change the stat by level and stat by item balance currently in game to more of a 50/50 split. (with optimizer players potentially achieving 50/60 respectively by sitting on shop keepers)

I think by that point I would be happy.

The annoying thing really about the attribute system in this game and, in say D&D, is that there are almost always inflection points; for example, you only need X amount of Memory for Act 1 and need Y amount of Wit to ensure that with +3 Leadership you will always go before most of the mobs. Then the rest goes into Strength/Int/Finesse (your primary attr).

Because of Larian's decision, and other designers, attaching non-uniform bonuses to attributes then factoring in the other systems you end up having those inflection points. There is always a danger that adding more things to attributes ends up creating a more toxic atmosphere while doing the opposite will lead to more stability but at the cost of diversity and meaningfulness (why even have attributes at a certain point). For example, removing the relationship between attributes and accuracy would allow for more potent hybrid builds in terms of damage (and also it would make finesse stronger since you would have less sources of accuracy).

I would be happy if they took another look over accuracy and gave some D&D 4e-esque abilities that cross scaled between attributes/weapons and diversified the 'skill' trees to include both magic/physical damage abilities.

Call me lazy if you want, I don't care, but for me, there are cases of games which put in too many stats. Without it being very clear which stats would be better, it doesn't help make decisions. The more stats you have to consider, the more difficult decisions become.

Honestly I only finished Torchlight once and that was years ago. It was too boring and the kind of item fever which is supposed to drive those kind of ARPGs never clicked for me.

Also while yes Planescape: Torment is still highly praised for its world and story - the combat, not so much.





My issue with that approach is simply that at the moment, you get only two attribute points per level. That is only enough to focus on two or three attributes anyway regardless of how many are useful.



Still though, that looks like a pretty reasonable distribution of useful bonuses to different attributes.




I'm having a hard time seeing how the balance for that would work. Would it be some kind of extremely steep diminishing returns, so a handful of INT points gets you a lot of bonus magical armor, but a truckload doesn't give you all that much more?

If it's linear, then either the bonus to STR characters from INT would be minimal, or the bonus to INT characters would be huge. There are other issues along those lines as well.

No, it isn't. Those numbers count for ever point above 10. (except Const and Memory)

Also the benefit for each point ist down to 2% per point already at level 8. You started with 15% at level 1 for the three base stats, wits starts with 2.5 per point and goes down to 0.3 per point at level 8. Meaning at level 8 you need about 8 Skill points for the same effect you got at level 1 for 1 point. Seems to be a linear devaluation.

Planescape torment was ground breaking I never said the combat was good lol it was more than the story it was about feeling like your character was achieving something for any stat increase. Your character came alive because you were forced to make choices which affected them in game leading to ability increases and you had to find the right people to change class's not just purchase skills from some bum with a book.

That being said:

This thread has become very active hopefully the devs are seeing that and noticing that they need to do something about how character advancement works before release of the game and change the way attributes work.

I'm not asking for Hero system level revamp here if anyone gets that reference good on you its the most complicated PnP roleplaying system out there and you actually have to use a computer program to create characters or it would take you days for creation and advancement.

I would be happy with a change back to the DOS skill and attribute system when you can learn anything at level 1 skill points that is crazy and the attribute mechanic is totally broken right now and the system used in DOS to determine how many and what skills to raise being limited by points and having the cost of points spent per level of skill be cumulative prevented most OP builds that could destroy game balance it also made the game more fun.

While the suggestions in this thread are good I am also thinking of the easiest way to keep the game fun without making the devs work to hard on any kind of revamp to the system.

IMO the primary stats as it stands are terrible from a design standpoint. They don't actually provide much of any choice or customization in their current state. What do I mean by this? Well, if I want to be a potent caster, I need int to be pumped every level. If I want to be a melee fighter, well then strength is my jam, and so on, and so on. With the way that your power gets stripped away from you if you stop putting points into a stat, you can really only afford to be flexible with 1 or 2 stat points ever few levels. Because of this, every choice the player makes isn't really a choice. There is the right way and every other way is the wrong way. As it stands the game would literally be better off if stats didn't exist and only skill specialization mattered. (think Elder Scrolls)

They really need to find a way to separate from skills being associated with stats if they was to keep the backwards scaling effects of the primary stats. (which I honestly hope they don't)

How is this argument silly? I could do it with the elf/melee build because I can keep killing and killing and killing with no draw backs. Even with half the build I killed the cooks cadre at level 1 as a perfect example they are all level 3 and there are 6 of them. This was on classic mode by the way which is as hard as it gets right now.

The linear devaluation by level is an odd problem. But it's because of their damage increase/level mechanic. The idea being, if you just leveled up and never put in any stat points. You'd do the same damage as you did at level one. Larian has confirmed that that was their intent. This makes it seem like you HAVE to invest every stat point.

They have already confirmed that they are looking into it.

The more is said about the system, the more it sounds like it really should do away with adding stat points every level.

There's no real mechanical difference between being forced to add points to improve, and just having the character improve automatically based on their initial stats(again, S.P.E.C.I.A.L. in Fallout 1/2), but with static stats, the value of a point grows with level, rather than diminish, so it feels a lot better when you do get the opportunity to increase one of them.

While I feel like a static system would be an improvement I don't feel like it is the ideal solution because1, it requires knowledge of the system before making a character. I need to know what stats my char will need before I get a chance to make then. 2, I cannot change or develop with my character. Because advancement and class design is so fluid, it would be unfortunate if I decided my mage wanted to develop his finesse and use some sneak attacks but I would never get the stat spread to make that effective because I didn't plan for it at start. 3, it would take some of the enjoyment and excitement away from leveling and remove an avenue of progression.

Some of this could be mitigated by having a standard point spread or pseudo/randomized character stats. But I feel many would dislike those decisions being taken out of their hands.

I think trivializing the ability points is the wrong direction. I think the idea is rather to make the ability points feel more prominent and important. A slight increase the effectiveness of a single point at the cost of reducing how many points you get would accomplish a lot more toward getting them where I'd like to see them.

Making points feel more prominent and important doesn't have to mean less points. The main concerns are the penalties to hybridization, the lack of depth and the relative 'meh' that comes from tieing only minuscule % buffs to stats. What we want is something that is fun, intuitive and allows for a wide variety of customization.
I don't see how slightly increasing the numbers associated to a stat point makes any difference in these concerns or goals without further in depth changes. Unless you were already factoring in those changes.

We only get two points now, and apparently they are not very effective, so a "slight" increase would not help much even before you reduce the number of points.

In D:OS 1, all attributes started at the base of 5, and you got 0.5 attribute points per level.

In D:OS 2, all attributes start at the base of 10. That's already cutting the relative power of them from D:OS 1 in half. The 2 attribute points per level is roughly equivalent to getting 1 D:OS 1 point per level. That's only a slight increase in attribute value per level compared to D:OS 1.

In any event, even leaving the amount of points you get per level at 2 seems to be low considering that you have primary, secondary, AND Memory attributes to consider.

There is no decision being taken out of the player's hands though.
It's just being front-loaded to the beginning of the game.
Realistically, none of the flaws you mention really apply.

-You need a basic understanding of the game mechanics when creating your characters anyway, and everything you need is explained at creation to the extent necessary.

-Course correction is actually easier, because it's only a matter of finding the right gear, rather than taking numerous levels to boost a previously neglected stat to match the rest(and the point is largely moot anyway, since the game will likely provide the ability to reset the character build at some point).

-It takes no enjoyment out of leveling at all, since a vast majority of the interesting decisions in that regard is made not in the stats tab, but in the talents one. On the contrary, by making a stat gain more scarce and more meaningful, it actually boosts the satisfaction from gaining a point.

You took that slightly out of context, the statement is directly referring to a standard point spread or pseudo/randomized stats instead of a full point buy or custom.



This is not a counter argument to allowing character development. I would also argue that what you need to know is not explained at character creation to a necessary extent. Front loading takes two things away:
Character development - i.e. I can't work out a lot and become stronger.
Changing my mind: After I've distributed stat points, I should not have to wait 10+ hours to decide I wanted a slightly different distribution (at some point was your argument). At each level up I can make those decisions as they come. And, if I'm making this decision regularly (i.e. at every level up) I don't have to spend numerous levels as you have falsely claimed.


No it isn't. The point is not moot if you eventually get a respec option (which cheapens the experience if used too freely. Correcting with equipment is also a cheapening of the experience. Why should a belt of Giant strength matter more than my character's decision to do something about his physical fitness? Course correction is not easier if you have to rely on outside anything. Don't start tweaking every other system to suit this one.
"Changing my mind: After I've distributed stat points, I should not have to wait 10+ hours to decide I wanted a slightly different distribution. At each level up I can make those decisions as they come. And, if I'm making this decision regularly (i.e. at every level up) I don't have to spend numerous levels correcting as you have falsely claimed."


But you just made the argument for no stat gains - which is very different from scarce stat gains. In addition you just stated you want items to fix the problems a static system would generate which would make a rare stat gain near meaningless if I can just swap my gloves to get the build I want.

As I said, a static system may be an improvement from current but I argue that it is far from optimal.

They should take away the fact, that spell strenght depends more on your level, than everything else. It's the main reason why stats turn more and more into bottomless barrels. Or hat least weaken the powergain per level.

Giving players more stat points to design the progress of their heros isn't that bad. But in D:OS is was mostly done with Skill-Points not Stats. But now neither stats nor skills feel like they really matter. The damage from the spells mainly depends on your level or your weapon, and I think that is a pretty bad design choice.

Autogaining stats would deny the core principle of the game: You can start as a warrior but turn into everything you want.

My perspective was always scarce gains: there are things like bloodrose potions, talents, and possibly other avenues towards boosting your stats, and in all my posts I always assumed at least those.

Given the stated goals of the system, scarce gains is exactly the way to go, as it provides the balance between a specialist and a hybrid they seek to achieve, but instead of a convoluted system where the points change their relative value based on player level(to assure that the stats left at base value do not become worthless), the relative value remains consistent throughout(gaining one point in a stat puts all related attributes at an appropriate level).



Because the decision, as far as gameplay goes, is not for your character to hit the gym, but for a number to go up on a spreadsheet.
You change equipment throughout the game constantly, if you temporarily need more strength, it's better to do so by wearing the right belt, than it is to invest levels into it.
Especially in a situation where stats can be orders of magnitude apart:
If you have 10 strength and 30 dexterity, gaining 2 strength isn't quite as significant in terms of catching up as it would be if both stats are in a 1-10 range.

On top of that, those 2 points in strength, in the current system, will eventually stop providing any benefit: there will be no new gear they unlock, they will not contribute any bonuses to skills, etc.
Meanwhile a system that scales the benefits of a point with level, rather than the amount of points, is universally tuned such that each point has those benefits regardless of your level.

I agree with the number on the spreadsheet problem. Do you feel the same about your RPG characters in every system? Because I genuinely want it to feel more like your character has been hitting the gym / prioritizing muscle. I also want to avoid making gear a requisite for hybridization or an avenue to change your character after creation. Maybe a way to accentuate, but not a requirement.



I agree that in any system the numbers need to tweaked from current. Either provide more stats/level and less from gear with the current itemization. So the total number of stats available is the same but you have more ability to direct that manually. Still, if you're at 30 dex, you've neglected str long enough that I can only posit that you don't care. So it will be more like comparing 20 dex and 12-14str and you add 4/level and find less on gear (no +7 int items)



I agree that this is a problem. I want to change the current system, I'm just not sure a static (like DnD) attribute system would be the best solution. It could work, but I think we can do better.

@Naqel

I feel like you have a specific system in mind that sounds decent but aren't quite getting the whole picture across. What were you thinking specifically?

Aside from the stats screen, D:OS is already a mix of D&D 3.5 and SPECIAL from Fallout 1/2, my idea is to bridge that gap, rather than have the weird hack&slash hybrid.

You get stats in a 5-20 range(natural values: racial traits, buffs and gear can exceed without breaking the system), they are the basis of your scaling.
I.e.: If you have 20 strength, you get +20% bonus damage with Strength based weapons per level; if you have 20 Constitution, you gain 20 Vitality per level, etc.(sample values, not really a balanced, but it gets the point across).
You start with the 30 needed to have a minimum 5 in each stat, and then another 50 or so to distribute as you see fit.
Every few levels, let's say level 3 and every 3rd level thereafter, you gain one extra point.

Then you get character skills that govern additional benefits.
For the sake of simplicity, let's say we keep the current ones, and just tweak the values.

Then you get talents, again, for simplicity let's assume they work as they do now.

I like the idea of having a per level scaling based on attributes (and not simply based on leveling) that could be really cool. So in your example, a level 15 character would get X bonus from stats 15 times? Where X could be +weight carried, + heavy arm penalty reduced+% damage and accuracy (but in small numbers)

However,
'

If you start with 80, and you get 1 per 3 levels, leveling won't change a thing about your character ever and you might as well just stay at what you started with and give no points/level. Nobody is ever changing their mind about what they want their character to do unless they are doing the math on 30+ stats available through gear which to my mind is not only a nightmare balancing but also a lot of extra work anytime an item drops.

If your starting distribution was maybe 10 points and you got one new point every three levels, things would feel more static and 1 point would also mean much more, both at creation and when leveling.

However, that also requires a complete rework of the current stats and the current math, changing itemization, leveling structure and power/level.
I think a more measured tweak is needed.

I admit that when put to paper it does sound a bit less attractive and some refactoring might be needed, but you have to keep in mind that the value of a single point does go up as you advance, rather than diminish.

The game looks to be targeting around level 30 as endgame(level 8 is ~25%), and those extra 10 points will, combined with gear and other sources, still add up to nice chunk of your power.

As an example, an average D&D campaign has you start with about 70, depending on how you split them in point buy, and you only get 5 extra before you hit level cap.

In game development, one of the most gut wrenching things a developer can do to a player is take away something they earned. You worked hard to save that person, well they just dies when you went to make your escape. You got your amazing weapon of destiny? Turns out it has lost all of it's power over the ages and now it's just symbolic. Things like this are the devs version of a dramatic bombshell, not a precision tool to be thrown around.

Right now, due to the current stat systems, leveling feels this way and that MUST change. If they do nothing else, at the very least in presentation it should not feel like leveling up is actively hurting you. I could rattle off for hours about why systems like this don't work and also don;t feel good to the player (like Final Fantasy 8) but I honestly hope that there is no need to. There are an almost infinite number of ways to handle stats and the current system is one of the worst that exists, it needs to go.

I sometimes forget that DnD offers that many stats / Since most of the time you cannot give yourself lower than 10 or 8 in at most 1 stat. So functionally you're investing 10-16 depending on the point buy. In the most recent addition you are now offered a +2 or +1/+1 every four levels. So it's 10 stats given by leveling with roughly 15 points invested at start.
My math is all assuming that the base stats remain with a 'bottom' floor of 10 (or pretty much 0) So in that case you'd be investing 20 points (using 60 of your suggested 80 to give your character the minimum of ten in each.)
In this case our math isn't all that different. I was suggesting that instead of the DnD point buy, stat points instead offer diminishing returns not based on level but by current stat, in math that closely reflected the point buy seen in DnD character creation. (i.e 2 points invested from 13 and up to get the equivalent benefit of 1 stat at 8-12 as opposed to DnD 5e where it costs 2 points to get one stat at 13+ but only one point to get a stat at 8-12)
And I'm suggesting they keep that math ( similar to the point buy you use at DnD character creation) throughout the entire experience and offer more stat points (similar again to the +2 in one or +1 in two of DnD). Which is very similar to the way DnD does it but wouldn't require a change to as many numbers. Hopefully, the amount of stats given by items and everything else remains relatively untweaked (3 stats/level and 66% of that currently offered on gear)

Sorry for all the brackets. tl:dr our ideas may only be different in presentation and how important we want gaining 1 level to be to the process.

For example:
I invest some number (I'm doing less at the start, so 5) of stat points.
All stats offer static and nice looking bonuses to the things they should offer bonuses to (mostly agreed upon already in this thread) up until your character has more than 5 invested (or 15 solid number) So say you put all five in INT. at level two you get 3 (3!) stat points. Say you want to increase int and start giving yourself some finesse. You put one point in int and 2 in finesse. The 2 in finesse are worth the nice shiny bonuses they would have been worth at creation. But the 16th int (the 6th point invested) only gives HALF (or 2/3rds?) the static and nice looking bonus. So you get another level and decide that the next three go all into Finesse to get yourself to 16 INT/15finesse and take advantage of all those shiny 10-15 full bonuses. Now level 4? You can further diversify by putting points somewhere else but you've fallen behind a pure INT by (6-(6/2)= 2 full static bonuses in two levels!

I'm hoping that a system like that would provide fun shiny meaningful decisions each level and allow for a variety of builds. (also encourages more stat spreading while still rewarding having a main stat)

The thing about that is that in point buy, purchasing higher stat costs more to compensate for the fact that the player gets full control over a process that traditionally involved rolling a set of dice(3d6, hence the 3 point minimum, and you can remove points below the default 8 if you wish so).
It is in no way related to actual balance, as far as balancing encounters goes.
The system I'd have in mind would already be more generous than classic D&D, and not having those penalties is a deliberate part of that.

As far as adjusting the value a point has, if it was to change/diminish as you increase the number of points in a single stat, a more elegant solution than thresholds(which encourage min-maxing) would be to have a formula that adjusts the value.