To: Skill Haters.

General Discussion
6 skills, 3 passives. Each of the 6 skills has 6 modes, and 7 grades of improvement. There's a lot of depth, and cookie cutter builds will exist, but the best will have made strategies on their own to suit their own styles.

Any rebuttals?
For all practical purposes there's only 5 modes. Runes are introduced in Act 2 Normal and a runed skill is flat out better than an unruned.
The argument is to those who don't believe there's enough depth of skills, and the skill system is lacking. I'm providing argument that there is a lot of potential depth and variety.

And Krystle, I agree, for all practical purposes are are only 5 modes. That has no bearing on the fact there are 36 states for every skill to be.
The math, for those who want to play along at home:

1 skill (it's primary form)
5 colours of runestone
7 grades of runestone

1+(5x7)=
The math, for those who want to play along at home:

1 skill (it's primary form)
5 colours of runestone
7 grades of runestone

1+(5x7)=
6 trillion?
Yes, six trillion. That's the correct answer. Have a lolly. >O<
The math, for those who want to play along at home:

1 skill (it's primary form)
5 colours of runestone
7 grades of runestone

1+(5x7)=

Indeed there is a huge amount of depth in the system, but what you just said has only a little to do with it. The seven grades of runestones give only numerical increases and do not add depth. The depth comes from all the possible permutations of six chosen skills out of 22-25, with the five colors you mentioned, and with three chosen passives out of 12-15.

I don't disagree with your general point, but I'm curious who has been saying the system is lacking depth and variety. I haven't noticed anyone making the complaint you're refuting.
11/25/2011 11:04 PMPosted by MeatSandwich
6 skills, 3 passives. Each of the 6 skills has 6 modes, and 7 grades of improvement. There's a lot of depth, and cookie cutter builds will exist, but the best will have made strategies on their own to suit their own styles.<br /><br />Any rebuttals?


Blizzard is aware cookie cutter builds will exist. What their aiming for is to make these cookie cutter builds barely better than a unique build that someone creates. In diablo II there was just a huge vast level of improvement going into one skill versus going into a unique build.
11/26/2011 12:21 AMPosted by Xanthippus
The math, for those who want to play along at home:<br /><br />1 skill (it's primary form)<br />5 colours of runestone<br />7 grades of runestone<br /><br />1+(5x7)=
<br />Indeed there is a huge amount of depth in the system, but what you just said has only a little to do with it. The seven grades of runestones give only numerical increases and do not add depth. The depth comes from all the possible permutations of six chosen skills out of 22-25, with the five colors you mentioned, and with three chosen passives out of 12-15.<br /><br />I don't disagree with your general point, but I'm curious who has been saying the system is lacking depth and variety. I haven't noticed anyone making the complaint you're refuting.


Assume we are picking 6 of 25 skills, your potential options are 25*24*23*22*21*20, which is 127,512,000. Then 3 of 15 skills, so multiply that by 15*14*13 for 348,107,760,000 possible combinations before we even count runestones... If you include runestones you get 16,241,315,650,560,000.

While the possibilities might be astronomical, someone will find he best combination and then we'll have cookie cutters anyway.
There's an error. If you have 6 of 25 skills, you must do (25*24*23*22*21*20)/(6*5*4*3*2*1)

i.e. [25! / (19! 6!) ]. Dividing by 6! (six factorial) means you're dividing by the amount of ways you can order six skills. In your calculation you are over counting by assuming it matters which order you pick your skills (e.g. if I pick whirlwind first, and taunt second, that would be a different outcome than picking taunt first and whirlwind second).

With 25 skills, 15 traits, and 5 different types of runes we have
[25! / (19! 6!) ] [15! / (12! 36!) ] 5^6 = 1.3 trillion
different ways to make a character. Far less than what you thought.


Give a nerd a calculator and a variable....
Yes, there will absolutely be strategy guides out there teaching people the best combinations of skills and gear.

I maintain that someone who spends a long time developing their own strategy will be better off than those who go to the internet for the perfect min/max, due to experience.
6 skills, 3 passives. Each of the 6 skills has 6 modes, and 7 grades of improvement. There's a lot of depth, and cookie cutter builds will exist, but the best will have made strategies on their own to suit their own styles.

Any rebuttals?

The argument is to those who don't believe there's enough depth of skills, and the skill system is lacking. I'm providing argument that there is a lot of potential depth and variety.


None here.

People in D2 revolved their entire build around one ability, there simply is no argument. If people come into the game expecting a stupid MMO rotation, then they'll be really disappointed. This is Diablo, we spam one thing over and over until the monster dies. Just like it should be. Then we perfect this skill. This will make many MMO players happy, as I've played with them in the past years and obviously MMOs were not their calling in life.

Any D2 veteran that complains about the lack of depth of skills, I will retort with "Your stupid F1-F4 keys covered buffs and 2 skills, explain the build you were using so we can all laugh in your general direction". You know damn well that you were not making hybrids (with the exception of a Bowazon/Javazon and that build died in 2003), you were maxing out Frozen Orb, Hammers, Whirlwind, Skeletons/Minions, Hydras, GA/MA, Hurricane, and any one of the specialized builds that existed and then maxing out their synergies because without them you felt they were terrible.

For me, it's all about playstyle and what you're hoping to get out of it. Not saying I'm going to go looking for the next Singer build, but I definitely have found my style with the DH already.
None here.

People in D2 revolved their entire build around one ability, there simply is no argument. If people come into the game expecting a stupid MMO rotation, then they'll be really disappointed. This is Diablo, we spam one thing over and over until the monster dies. Just like it should be. Then we perfect this skill. This will make many MMO players happy, as I've played with them in the past years and obviously MMOs were not their calling in life.

Any D2 veteran that complains about the lack of depth of skills, I will retort with "Your stupid F1-F4 keys covered buffs and 2 skills, explain the build you were using so we can all laugh in your general direction". You know damn well that you were not making hybrids (with the exception of a Bowazon/Javazon and that build died in 2003), you were maxing out Frozen Orb, Hammers, Whirlwind, Skeletons/Minions, Hydras, GA/MA, Hurricane, and any one of the specialized builds that existed and then maxing out their synergies because without them you felt they were terrible.

For me, it's all about playstyle and what you're hoping to get out of it. Not saying I'm going to go looking for the next Singer build, but I definitely have found my style with the DH already.


I agree. I've fallen in love with the WD and have what I believe is a nice little build on the Beta. When I start looking at the skill calculator and old videos though, I have to take a moment to think.

There are some insane number of potential builds, but I still think there could be as many as a dozen Good builds per character. Combine them with 'bad' builds that actually work extremely well for individuals, or in certain groups and you have a lot of options per character. Skills alone.
I feel some skills and passives are inferior already, but its pure opinion. i could pick 1.29~ trillion builds, but most of the time it will be 1-2 defensive and the rest situational offensive. You could have 5 survival skills and take 10 hours to clear 5 monsters but who cares if you dont ever take damae! id rather see a talent tree, i don't feel like it has been overused from other ames imo.
The math, for those who want to play along at home:
1 skill (it's primary form)
5 colours of runestone
7 grades of runestone
1+(5x7)=

I completely agree that the customization and build possibilities are amazing, but you're inflating the numbers. The 7 levels of runestones are irrelevant. No serious player would make a build with a level 1-4 Crimson runestone when they could use a level 7. It's just not a meaningful choice. It would be like including playing naked and weaponless in your build list. It might be possible to play the game like that, but players don't consider underpowered options in their builds.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum