Player Count Conclusions

[-XXX-]

Why not just ax the language system?

Characters not understanding each other doesn't really enhance RP - it usually does the opposite.
The learning system is awkward and gave us mass language lessons.

[Iceborn]

Despite all its flaws, I like the language system - I like what it represents, the ability to exclude information - to have characters speaking their strange, racial tongues - to have characters that deliberately must put some effort into going out of their route to make a language that is not theirs part of their own character. There's a value of effort there that I appreciate. it's immersive, if that word still carries any meaning.

[Ruzuke]

I'm not sure what, if anything, to do with languages, but I do feel that the one main attraction of them (having a secret language) is heavily undermined by how easily anyone can master them. I would have thought learning a language like elven would be lifelong undertaking.

Using base D&D that would be the Bard. They have the skill speak language allowing them to learn pretty much any and all languages with the investment of skill points. This plays well with their bardic knowledge granting them insight to ancient mysteries. They are the class that knew all of the ancient secrets of the world.

Loremaster out replaces them. On Arelith bards are just musical spellcasters rather than the people who record ancient knowledge and tells stories passing knowledge to each generation.

[-XXX-]

Bards are getting a bonus language to acknowledge this.

If anything, Loremasters are getting too many - other than getting 5 bonus languages, the class also has a 16 INT prerequisite, meaning the character is going to become fluent in a minimum of 8 languages eventually - and that's assuming they are not a subrace or class that gets any other languages.
Furthermore, understanding languages is tied to the lore skill, which has been given added functionality since the implementation of the language system.

All of the above makes languages somewhat pointless, so either the mechanic should be sent off into the sunset, or the number of loremaster bonus languages and lore comprehension check DCs might need a review.

[Ruzuke]

Bards are getting a bonus language to acknowledge this.

If anything, Loremasters are getting too many - other than getting 5 bonus languages, the class also has a 16 INT prerequisite, meaning the character is going to become fluent in a minimum of 8 languages eventually - and that's assuming they are not a subrace or class that gets any further languages.
Furthermore, understanding languages is tied to the lore skill, which has been given added functionality since the implementation of the language system.

All of the above makes languages somewhat pointless, so either the mechanic should be sent off into the sunset, or the number of loremaster bonus languages and lore comprehension check DCs might need a review.

I agree with what you said 100% on every single line by line level. I would extend it to say that if lore mastery should be considered bardic knowledge. My bard dipped lore master simply to become the person who was an expert in ancient knowledge.

[Kenji]

wait fvs is fine what
finishing liberator should be at the top of that
loremaster is fine, just because it's popular doesnt mean it needs to be killed
or, that it's good

FvS is fine, yeah, but sometimes one wishes there's more RP flavor to whatever it is they're doing, like clerics and domains/paths. I've discussed with some FvS players (if y'all haven't had the chance, hit me up on discord) about their builds/concepts and what it is that they wish to see the class mechanically support their roleplay without it being a buff.

Liberator is finished, what're you talking about (I'll introduce more features for Lib when other stuffs are done)

Down with LM meta :torch:

[Second Breakfast]

make languages harder and that’ll already increase the pressure on those who run events to prioritize mechanical benefit over fun/entertainment value. which is by the way something I have felt and had to deal with in game.

I strongly feel that not everything needs to be quantified in terms of what your character gets out of it in terms of XP gained, % of language learned, and so on. Making languages harder to get by a nerf to LM will only reinforce the need to grind these things more, and that’s frankly not what I’m here to try and encourage

[Rubricae]

wait fvs is fine what
finishing liberator should be at the top of that
loremaster is fine, just because it's popular doesnt mean it needs to be killed
or, that it's good

FvS is fine, yeah, but sometimes one wishes there's more RP flavor to whatever it is they're doing, like clerics and domains/paths. I've discussed with some FvS players (if y'all haven't had the chance, hit me up on discord) about their builds/concepts and what it is that they wish to see the class mechanically support their roleplay without it being a buff.

Liberator is finished, what're you talking about :upside_down: (I'll introduce more features for Lib when other stuffs are done)

Down with LM meta :torch:

down with the problems that have lead to loremaster's popularity? sure.
none of this addresses what i said about loremaster either.

[Subtext]

I really don't think player counts are a good indicator for balance considerations, at least not in a game like NWN.
UNLESS there are some pretty hardcore outliers like Weapon Masters and Loremasters.

And as far as Loremasters are concerned - after having played a martial LM for a long time, I am really not agreeing with some of the suggestions here since they mainly aim at "weakening the class" for the sake of it rather than addressing why it's such an insanely good martial dip - and that's mostly the combination of de facto providing a bunch of epic feats if you choose them, a lot class skills and cracked scroll/wand use.
Once the new dweomer system is in place for example? Anyone can easily get a bronze weapon - any bronze weapon - with Keen and two to three damage types of your choice enchanted (depending on rune). You can add a permanent essence. And you can use a bless weapon scroll for 44 minutes of turning it into a +4 weapon as well. This absolutely rivals anything craftable there is on offer, especially for weapon masters (and everyone who can enchant their weapon). It's certainly better than any keened blade of elements.

I am stealing from an excellent thought Eters brought up to me but I think the biggest issue is Wand and Scroll Mastery with its potential to considerably improve a number of buffs and spells, especially some very cheap ones.
Tying that to having a certain investment into full caster classes as well...perhaps even traditional UMD classes too...should bring things much more in line. It would remain a very decent dip for martials but it wouldn't be such a must have choice anymore.

[Windows95 CD-ROM]

I think the language system is fine as it is and follows the spirit of 3.5. I like the language system. It recently took me 2 irl months to learn 2 languages (one month for each of them respectively, I also have a lot of time to play currently otherwise it would be taking me longer) leaving me with 1 more language slot for my character. I think a feat or intelligence based skill with the purpose of increasing the speed at which languages are learned or taught would be of value to the server, rather than any sort of large-scale change. For example, there could be a skill that increases the speed at which a language is taught by the speaker, although this seems to be a feat that the Loremaster possesses, which I've only just learned about as of writing this reply (I'm not sure how often this feat is actually taken).

I think the Loremaster's ability to learn languages that can't be attained through normal gameplay makes them unique. Bonus languages are learned once a level, and the typical investment is 5 levels which means that you get five bonus languages of learned languages + 1 unattainable language. This is a huge time-saver given what I said about languages taking months to learn depending on how you're going about it. I don't think someone being understanding of ic languages is a threat to server balance - it actually opens the doors for more rp to happen, in my opinion. This isn't an ability that's exclusive to every character either, it requires level investment and intent to take and I've still encountered plenty characters that are limited by their inability to speak a language. It's really only wizards that are able to become true polyglots with mastery over every language in the system (with the exception of unattainable languages).

[Windows95 CD-ROM]

Many of the qualities of Loremaster seem to be centered around enhancing RP and qol for various crafts and skill-sets. I don't really think I've ever seen these things threaten the balance of the server, so I wonder where the a lot of the rhetoric and critique for this class being overpowered, threatening RP niches and people's quality of roleplay come from (my impression based off this forum thread and others). Rogues and Bards can also make use of wands and scrolls, but they can't increase their cl like the Loremaster can which is another qol thing (and can't compare to full caster power at all). Loremaster isn't a class for spellcasters either even though it can do a few wizard tricks (I genuinely think that people deeply misunderstand the theme of wizard within the scope of forgotten realms and dnd if they think loremaster threatens its rp niche as well). It's meant to be a class that uplifts rp concepts and ideas through subtle mechanical advantages.

My impression based off this forum is that Loremaster needs to be nerfed because too many people are playing it and treating it as a dip class, which I think is intellectually dishonest. Why make a class like Loremaster, which mechanically is about increasing qol and playing a character with a unique skillset that distinguishes them from others, only to decide that it needs to be nerfed after it becomes a popular dip class? (which is it's intention in design, being a dip class) I don't really think that's an attitude that we should be approaching with classes such as these when we see the numbers. There are plenty of other classes as well that are used for popular dips of 4 and 5 such as rogue or fighter - do these need to be nerfed too because they're popular or mechanically useful?

A lot of the critique here seems to be based off RP and it's language learning rather than anything numbers related to explain why this class is overpowered, which leads me to think that people are more concerned about how easy it is to acquire languages or preserving the immersion of language learning in the module. There seems to be a concern about how Loremaster threatens this perception of immersion and rp 'balance' over anything else because of how easily languages can be acquired.

[Dreams]

Player numbers don't represent balance. It's absurd to treat this game as if there's a 'meta' because it is NOT an arena game. There are elements of player vs player, but things don't have to be 100% balance all of the time. We can see that the devs are already happy to release stuff with very little consideration of balance (i.e. Harbinger's package). Player numbers are more likely to represent people playing what they're enjoying.

[Kenji]

Player numbers represent balance. It's adequate to treat this game as if there's a 'meta' because it is a Conflict-based RP game. There are elements of Player vs Environment, but things have to be 99% balance all of the time. We can see that the devs are not happy to release stuff with very little consideration of balance (i.e. Monk rework). Player numbers are more likely to represent people playing what they think will attain them the power to dictate RP narratives.

(see below)

[Kenji]

Player numbers don't represent balance. It's absurd to treat this game as if there's a 'meta' because it is NOT an arena game. There are elements of player vs player, but things don't have to be 100% balance all of the time. We can see that the devs are already happy to release stuff with very little consideration of balance (i.e. Harbinger's package). Player numbers are more likely to represent people playing what they're enjoying.

Player numbers represent balance. It's adequate to treat this game as if there's a 'meta' because it is a Conflict-based RP game. There are elements of Player vs Environment, but things have to be 99% balance all of the time. We can see that the devs are not happy to release stuff with very little consideration of balance (i.e. Monk rework). Player numbers are more likely to represent people playing what they think will attain them the power to dictate RP narratives.

It is important for us all to recognize that both the above paragraphs are filled with subjective sentiments and yet there exists an objective truth that lie somewhere between the two.

Neither are wrong nor are they correct in their analysis (pessimistic or optimistic) of the server culture, but to claim one extreme and ignore the other does not benefit the server as a whole.

LM changes have been in discussion among the team long before this month's statistics. How one arrived at the conclusion that the team decides to nerf or change LM based on a whim from some recent statistic is an understandable misunderstanding.

[Dreams]

I feel like it’s really arguing in bad faith to construct something which is the opposite of what I’ve said and then call them extremes. Of course this is my opinion. Of course it is subjective. The same is true for every other post on this forum. I swear sometimes I can’t tell if a Kenji post is there to troll the community or to help it when half of the time you’re either writing with heavy sarcasm or belittling the people who don’t share your opinions.

[-XXX-]

LM has become too popular - it probably should be looked at regardless of whether it's mechanically powerful or not.

You know what else has become too widespread? EVASION - over 54% of all Arelith characters have free evasion - this likely needs a review too.

[Diegovog]

Player numbers don't represent balance. It's absurd to treat this game as if there's a 'meta' because it is NOT an arena game. There are elements of player vs player, but things don't have to be 100% balance all of the time. We can see that the devs are already happy to release stuff with very little consideration of balance (i.e. Harbinger's package). Player numbers are more likely to represent people playing what they're enjoying.

There's a total of zero rp enhancing tools given in the WM and fighter kits and yet they are two dominating classes in the player count. It is purely because of mechanical benefits. And although rogue is a very flavorful class, we are all too aware it's mostly for the class skills such as tumble and other small benefits.

There has always been a meta and I don't see why pretend there's not one. I remember when cookie-cutter builds started to be created when discord was being accepted into the community (before the official discord), there was a big discussion on how these affect the meta and we were seeing less diversity in builds.
This is also why spellswords were so dominating and absolutely everywhere in all the big factions of the server.

Meta is a thing and a real reflection of in-game balance.

[Ork]

Meta is a thing and a real reflection of in-game balance.

Players only pick fighter because of mechanics? Players only pick rogue because of mechanics? This is probably the most jaded, pessimistic and incorrect take I've seen in awhile.

[Shadowy Reality]

Meta is a thing and a real reflection of in-game balance.

Players only pick fighter because of mechanics? Players only pick rogue because of mechanics? This is probably the most jaded, pessimistic and incorrect take I've seen in awhile.

Okay, but then why do so many of these base classes pick Loremaster, or why do so many martials pick WM. Is it because, somehow, they all want these flavours for their character or is it because they happen to be really good?

I think its naive to say that classes being mechanically good has no impact on the numbers we see in these counts, you consistently see classes that aren't very good currently underrepresented. This is what people refer to as the 'meta'. If a class or build is good you will see higher numbers of it.

This is not to say that some flavours of characters aren't simply more popular than others. This can also be true, a lot of people really just want to be that fighter that is one with their weapon, that is fine, but just these preferences wouldn't see such a large gap between classes, and for sure not when it is consistently better classes at the top and worse at the bottom.

[-XXX-]

Fighter taking the first spot isn't surprising - human fighter is the most popular choice in D&D even outside Arelith or NWN.

[Windows95 CD-ROM]

Player numbers represent balance. It's adequate to treat this game as if there's a 'meta' because it is a Conflict-based RP game. There are elements of Player vs Environment, but things have to be 99% balance all of the time. We can see that the devs are not happy to release stuff with very little consideration of balance (i.e. Monk rework). Player numbers are more likely to represent people playing what they think will attain them the power to dictate RP narratives.

(see below)

I think this is mocking and bad faith of a dev to speak to a member of the playerbase like this.

I really feel like there's an unhealthy attitude in this forum starting to brew over classes that people enjoy. This is a dnd video game that we play together, I think classes that people enjoy for their rp quality or mechanical fluidity without being powerful are being looked through the lens of a powergame or an mmo, which this game is not.

LM has become too popular - it probably should be looked at regardless of whether it's mechanically powerful or not.

You know what else has become too widespread? EVASION - over 54% of all Arelith characters have free evasion - this likely needs a review too.

This post is the most telling for me - I can't tell if this person is serious or if this is a troll post. The attitude that a class needs to be looked at and nerfed because it's too popular, whether or not it's mechanically powerful, isn't the approach I think should be taken with an rp server. There are a plethora of reasons why someone would choose the class spread that they do, but at the end of the day a person chooses the classes they want to effectively represent what they think fits their character and rp best.

There is always a mechanical element to nwn, since we have encounters in the module and pvp does happen. But people usually level more for mechanical encounters than they would pvp; you'd rather not have dungeons be harder for yourself when you do them, that wastes time and fun you could have rping or doing something useful. When you can have rp flavour, but also feel good mechanically and have fun, why shouldn't you do it?

There does also exist an unhealthy player who treats this game like a pvp arena rather than a dnd game, its sad for me to hear that these people have become enough of a problem that its made people become jaded, needing to balance for them. I don't see anyone in this forum complaining about paladin, which I've often seen as a class used to great effect in pvp, rather than for it's rp quality.

I think looking over classes that are neglected to feel more enjoyable in the things they're built to do will increase build diversity among the playerbase. Why not look at cavalier, or liberator (it's apparently unfinished)? Hasn't the monk re-work been long awaited? Maybe sorcerer could use a touch up to feel more enjoyable or mechanically viable (this is a complaint I often hear on the forums and elsewhere). When you make something re-polished and feel cool, people will come.

[-XXX-]

This post is the most telling for me - I can't tell if this person is serious or if this is a troll post.

Why assume bad faith?

There's merit in mechanical diveristy - if every character turns out to be the same, things start to get boring and awkward.
Especially if none of them can do something the other ones cannot.

[ArelithMarketCrash]

While there is a demographic of players who will gravitate toward the strongest classes, the ideas that a class is overpowered because too many people play it or that a class is underpowered because too few people play it is strictly false.

Many, many years ago, druid dragonshaper was invariably the strongest build in the game, dragonshape characters were around but surprisingly? Not the first, second or even third most popular build of the time. People were not as mechanically savvy as today but even then about everyone acknowledged that dragonshaper druid was the strongest build. Turns out most people did not want to play druids and instead gravitated toward ideas they had for a character and what they had fun with.

Wizard is 7th, it has one single build that allows it to be "strong in PvP" and I have observed a great deal of wizards that are not Enchanters. Wizard roleplay is just really fun and a niche that other classes struggle to compete with in terms of roleplay.

Paladin is all the way around the bottom despite being extremely strong in PvP with incredible AC, saves, solid damage and all the oath bonuses. Its only more popular than Sorcerer and Druid in terms of base classic classes.

Loremaster is popular because it can be tacked on most character concepts without changing them, in fact it often enhances the idea they may have for a more studious blademaster. And honestly, while a fighter loremaster can be annoying in small PvP, I would be much more concerned about the ol reliable 20/7/3 weapon masters backed up by casters in a group PvP scenario.

[Windows95 CD-ROM]

This post is the most telling for me - I can't tell if this person is serious or if this is a troll post.

Why assume bad faith?

There's merit in mechanical diversity - if every character turns out to be the same, things start to get boring and awkward.
Especially if none of them can do something the other ones cannot.

I agree with you 100% that there is merit in mechanical diversity, but I don't think that we should remove or adjust things that aren't broken just because they're popular or they see higher player counts. I think classes which are being under-represented should be considered for the reasons they might not be as appealing to players.

Are they hard to level? Is it difficult to build rp concepts and themes around these classes? Does it feel like they under-perform mechanically in comparison to what could be achieved with another build? Is it hard to find quality of life with these builds? I think that the people who have played these classes and become intimate with their playstyle and feel would be best suited to answering. Maybe a dev needs to sit down and spend some time with these classes by playing them (if they have the time, since irl takes precedence).

Equally, I think questions for overpowered classes should follow the same line of thought: Do these classes make content trivial? Do they negatively impact the player experience through abuse of pvp and mechanics? Do people not roleplay the themes the class was designed to portray in good faith? I'm definitely not a dev, but I think it's important to think critically about these concepts.

I think cutting down the appeal or useful qualities of popular classes to increase 'player and build diversity' for the numbers is merely a band-aid, especially if they're not problematic. It overlooks issues other classes might be facing that contribute to the low numbers. I'm always an advocate for additions that make time on the server feel more fun and well-spent, rather than taking things away.

[Windows95 CD-ROM]

While there is a demographic of players who will gravitate toward the strongest classes, the ideas that a class is overpowered because too many people play it or that a class is underpowered because too few people play it is strictly false.

Many, many years ago, druid dragonshaper was invariably the strongest build in the game, dragonshape characters were around but surprisingly? Not the first, second or even third most popular build of the time. People were not as mechanically savvy as today but even then about everyone acknowledged that dragonshaper druid was the strongest build. Turns out most people did not want to play druids and instead gravitated toward ideas they had for a character and what they had fun with.

Wizard is 7th, it has one single build that allows it to be "strong in PvP" and I have observed a great deal of wizards that are not Enchanters. Wizard roleplay is just really fun and a niche that other classes struggle to compete with in terms of roleplay.

Paladin is all the way around the bottom despite being extremely strong in PvP with incredible AC, saves, solid damage and all the oath bonuses. Its only more popular than Sorcerer and Druid in terms of base classic classes.

Loremaster is popular because it can be tacked on most character concepts without changing them, in fact it often enhances the idea they may have for a more studious blademaster. And honestly, while a fighter loremaster can be annoying in small PvP, I would be much more concerned about the ol reliable 20/7/3 weapon masters backed up by casters in a group PvP scenario.

I completely agree with this statement, and I think it really reinforces the statement I've been trying to make much more eloquently than I could write it.