poll Should skill trees have flipsides?

[Jakepeng99]

Discuss in comments if you want to. I will link the original post where this idea came from which explains it much more.

 

Also i am not saying just add perks that are all downsides which is what some people think because how i worded it (can't edit polls) i mean trade offs, like as a shoddy example, deal 20% more damage to lunar enemies but take 10% more damage from them.

 

Scribbles post:

https://forums.kleientertainment.com/forums/topic/149289-skill-trees-arent-inherently-bad-but-some-people-wish-they-encorperated-downsides-and-balance/?do=findComment&comment=1648727

[Evelo]

"I still would hate skill trees regardless, but this is better. "

Thank you for this option.

[pyroisshy]

If skill trees are just a way to make characters more unique and customizable, every character perk and downside should be on the tree, and a majority of the perks should require enabling certain existing downsides, or even enabling brand new downsides that would allow for different playstyles and challenges.

[Waitdire]

I think the downside side of the lunar/shadow side can be done so that more serious lunar/shadow enemies(not all) deal you 1.35 more damage just because you are not on their side. Or any other similar punishment.

[goblinball]

I fail to see why so many ppl want to give downsides to the skill tree perks.

have none of you ppl ever seen a skill tree before???

the whole point of it is that you get stronger and unlock more rewards and skills. It’s supposed to be a reward; an inherently positive thing. Adding downsides kind of defeats the purpose and just doesn’t make any sense; why should I be punished for interacting with the skill tree?

I don’t see how downsides would be remotely fun in any way. If dst was more like ye ol’ fashioned ds; where it’s more about the challenge and survival, and worlds aren’t as long term and sandbox-y as dst worlds, then I’d understand this, but this just doesn’t work in dst. By the time a player will have unlocked these perks survival is no longer a challenge and the game is basically just a sandbox. Slapping more downsides onto a character NOW and only now serves zero purpose.

Like why should I have to deal with this random, unnecessary downside for the rest of my playthrough (unless I do celestial portal shenanigans, which I WILL, but this is still unfun) as a REWARD for surviving? It’s not going to make my gameplay any more fun or “uncompromising” or “challenging”. No downside from a skill tree is going to kill me, ever. They will only be minor annoyances that serve zero purpose other than to be annoying and to get in my way. Where’s the fun?? What’s the point other than “muh balance”??

and let’s not forget about the new players! Aren’t these skill trees supposed to like, help them?? Do you understand how nonsensical it is to help a new player by making their life harder? Do you not realize how silly this sounds??

[CyberSkink]

PLEASE don't add downsides to these skill trees. Weremoose Woodie is PERFECT now!

[_zwb]

4 minutes ago, goblinball said:

and let’s not forget about the new players! Aren’t these skill trees supposed to like, help them?? Do you understand how nonsensical it is to help a new player by making their life harder? Do you not realize how silly this sounds??

The skill trees definitely don't help the new players at all. If making the game easier would help then relaxed mode should solve the issue, but no, new players struggles because the game has 0 guidance whatsoever, the only way you can learn things is by jumpscared and killed. Just read the steam reviews for DST and you'll see how people dislike the unintuitive nature of this game. The skill trees doesn't provide anything that helps the player progress and actually learning how to play, you get stronger by doing nothing, how does that tell you anything about progression?

[EthanTheMime]

i've honestly been thinking about this. i wouldnt mind a "necessarily evil" set of skills that you are required to unlock to be able to spend insight on the upgrade tree. this seems much more don't starve-y than the current alternative where you can just getting a stronger character with literally no drawbacks or real effort (although the way it saves between servers will always be very out of place). then again, i think a lot of people have had the impression that klei has been weirdly phasing out downsides or at least seriously lessening their blow through the character reworks.

i understand klei wants DST to change over time--i just wish that they would be more transparent with their philosophy shift and how they have been planning to fundamentally change the game in this way. it's weird we haven't gotten any reasoning on the skill tree system when literally everyone in the community has been scratching their heads since wilson's """rework""". all of this falls on deaf ears as klei assures us that they have it under control and refuse to make major adjustments to these systems that people have been screaming about. they just kind of assure that they have a plan and it will work out, which is not only frustrating but also weirdly out of character for klei.

if people are worried about certain characters actually being in a good spot with a maxed out skill tree--just don't. i'm positive there is a better approach that will ultimately lead to a much more satisfying result. if a character needs certain abilities unlocked to be worth playing then that's a problem in itself.

[Theukon-dos]

6 hours ago, goblinball said:

I fail to see why so many ppl want to give downsides to the skill tree perks.

have none of you ppl ever seen a skill tree before???

the whole point of it is that you get stronger and unlock more rewards and skills. It’s supposed to be a reward; an inherently positive thing. Adding downsides kind of defeats the purpose and just doesn’t make any sense; why should I be punished for interacting with the skill tree?

I don’t see how downsides would be remotely fun in any way. If dst was more like ye ol’ fashioned ds; where it’s more about the challenge and survival, and worlds aren’t as long term and sandbox-y as dst worlds, then I’d understand this, but this just doesn’t work in dst. By the time a player will have unlocked these perks survival is no longer a challenge and the game is basically just a sandbox. Slapping more downsides onto a character NOW and only now serves zero purpose.

Like why should I have to deal with this random, unnecessary downside for the rest of my playthrough (unless I do celestial portal shenanigans, which I WILL, but this is still unfun) as a REWARD for surviving? It’s not going to make my gameplay any more fun or “uncompromising” or “challenging”. No downside from a skill tree is going to kill me, ever. They will only be minor annoyances that serve zero purpose other than to be annoying and to get in my way. Where’s the fun?? What’s the point other than “muh balance”??

and let’s not forget about the new players! Aren’t these skill trees supposed to like, help them?? Do you understand how nonsensical it is to help a new player by making their life harder? Do you not realize how silly this sounds??

            

As the second biggest hater :tm: of skill trees, I... actually have to agree.

 

I don't like skill trees for DST. But the concept of skill trees having downsides tied with them is even worse on a conceptual level. That genuinly sounds wrong just to read about. 

 

The only exception would be aggressively optional perks that are very clearly giving massive gains at the cost of their drawbacks. Something like, say, Wortox's souls being able to stack indefinitely, but being unable to eat or heal with them. That is very clearly a "F*** around and find out" style of perk, that could definitely be fun to play with in some situations. but is very much something the player has to make an active decision to embrace. Basically think Deep Rock Galactic's unstable overclocks. 

[Mike23Ua]

Skill trees in any video game I’ve played choices aren’t just powerful “Upgrades” some games even force the player into balancing a choice between Powerful new or upgraded perk, at the cost of consuming more stamina.

Wolfgang gains more power.. sure- But if he’s going to have a higher Mightiness cap and exceed planar damage- The TRADE OFF should’ve been faster Might Drain.

This photo is from Dead Island Riptide… so let’s just stop with the whole concept of “Skill Trees only let you climb in power”

because with THAT mindset, is how Klei makes a survival game I no longer care to play.

all I’m saying is that if Klei wants to turn DST into an RPG with Skill Trees, they need to consider all the pros & cons of creating an RPG with Skill Trees.

As a Wendy Main I would like for Abigail to be able to deal even more damage and glow even brighter at night, but the Trade-Off would be Abigail gets back her Pre-Rework Cooldown Timer where you need to wait for her flower to bloom out again before you can summon her (which can have another skill to speed up Sisturn bloom rate) etc…

You get the Idea- Skills need powerful choices, both good, and flipside- Balance.

[-Variant]

I think trade-ins would be wonderful. Not every perk needs them, that'd be awful, but I do think SOME could use them.

Not outright downsides, but trade-ins. Some "catch" to come with the upside.

One of my concerns is that some of the perks are very powerful but you don't actually work for them much at all. The limit is surviving a few days.
Waiting a little in exchange for some powerful perks feels off, I'd namely want either some trade-ins or some more effort to be put into the 'rewards'! I want them to feel like strong rewards!

[Jakepeng99]

10 hours ago, Waitdire said:

I think the downside side of the lunar/shadow side can be done so that more serious lunar/shadow enemies(not all) deal you 1.35 more damage just because you are not on their side. Or any other similar punishment.

Right now you take 10% less damage from them, but i don't think alignment skills should be that huge of downsides and should remain small or non existant so people can pick sides based on which they actually prefer. Larger downsides could work with ones like Wolfgang where he has 3 levels of it. E.g, first perk is deal 10% more, no downside, then second is 20% more but take 10% more.

2 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

Skill trees in any video game I’ve played choices aren’t just powerful “Upgrades” some games even force the player into balancing a choice between Powerful new or upgraded perk, at the cost of consuming more stamina.

Wolfgang gains more power.. sure- But if he’s going to have a higher Mightiness cap and exceed planar damage- The TRADE OFF should’ve been faster Might Drain.

This photo is from Dead Island Riptide… so let’s just stop with the whole concept of “Skill Trees only let you climb in power”

because with THAT mindset, is how Klei makes a survival game I no longer care to play.

all I’m saying is that if Klei wants to turn DST into an RPG with Skill Trees, they need to consider all the pros & cons of creating an RPG with Skill Trees.

As a Wendy Main I would like for Abigail to be able to deal even more damage and glow even brighter at night, but the Trade-Off would be Abigail gets back her Pre-Rework Cooldown Timer where you need to wait for her flower to bloom out again before you can summon her (which can have another skill to speed up Sisturn bloom rate) etc…

You get the Idea- Skills need powerful choices, both good, and flipside- Balance.

Skill trees being an after though is where most the problems arise, however even if they were in the game from the start and the characters were made around them, adding flipsides feels more don't starvey, it's a cheeky game that would give you a benifit, at a price... this is how most characters actually came into the constant, in Wilson's case, he got knowledge he desperatly wabted but at an unknown cost of being trapped in the constant.

10 hours ago, CyberSkink said:

PLEASE don't add downsides to these skill trees. Weremoose Woodie is PERFECT now!

There is an option for only add downsides when it fits or feels needed, so moose can stay the same. 

10 hours ago, goblinball said:

I fail to see why so many ppl want to give downsides to the skill tree perks.

have none of you ppl ever seen a skill tree before???

the whole point of it is that you get stronger and unlock more rewards and skills. It’s supposed to be a reward; an inherently positive thing. Adding downsides kind of defeats the purpose and just doesn’t make any sense; why should I be punished for interacting with the skill tree?

I don’t see how downsides would be remotely fun in any way. If dst was more like ye ol’ fashioned ds; where it’s more about the challenge and survival, and worlds aren’t as long term and sandbox-y as dst worlds, then I’d understand this, but this just doesn’t work in dst. By the time a player will have unlocked these perks survival is no longer a challenge and the game is basically just a sandbox. Slapping more downsides onto a character NOW and only now serves zero purpose.

Like why should I have to deal with this random, unnecessary downside for the rest of my playthrough (unless I do celestial portal shenanigans, which I WILL, but this is still unfun) as a REWARD for surviving? It’s not going to make my gameplay any more fun or “uncompromising” or “challenging”. No downside from a skill tree is going to kill me, ever. They will only be minor annoyances that serve zero purpose other than to be annoying and to get in my way. Where’s the fun?? What’s the point other than “muh balance”??

and let’s not forget about the new players! Aren’t these skill trees supposed to like, help them?? Do you understand how nonsensical it is to help a new player by making their life harder? Do you not realize how silly this sounds??

If you see one with a downside you don't like, you could not pick it. In my head i am thinking of the perks with upsides but come with a trade off not being required to progress in a branch, but being a side branch or at the end of them, e.g like how the wormwood sap is branched out as an option and is not needed for anything.

[abrocator]

11 hours ago, goblinball said:

the whole point of it is that you get stronger and unlock more rewards and skills. It’s supposed to be a reward; an inherently positive thing. Adding downsides kind of defeats the purpose and just doesn’t make any sense; why should I be punished for interacting with the skill tree?

It’s not a punishment. It’s either:

1. To make your character more extreme; or
2. to balance a super-good upside

For (1) you could have a perk which gives you 25% extra planar damage but also makes you take 35% more planar damage. (Using it as as an example since that is the hot thing right now.) That makes you (even more of a) glass cannon. And there is little downside if you don’t get hit much.

I’ve played a deck management (cards) game where the best perks had downsides. For example one perk gave you a higher chance to use an extra card but gave you less defense (this is point two: to balance a super-good upside). Or something like that (not important). Anyway it sounds like the perk will just get you killed. But the thing is that you can use that character to help the other characters draw extra cards. That in turn means you can deal more damage to the enemy. And you can also use cards which boosts the effective defense of the character with that perk. Which means that:

• You are more likely to wipe out the opposing team on the first round (before they can deal damage to you)
• If you don’t then you can use cards to boost the defense of the character with the perk, which makes his vulnerability less of a downside

You could build a team and deck which could wipe out all enemies on the first round… of course many people here would hate that since they don’t like the idea of beating a game, but that’s not the point.

The point is that perks with downsides have a purpose.

[Wonz]

Just don't add perks that ease the current downsides

[Jakepeng99]

12 minutes ago, Wonz said:

Just don't add perks that ease the current downsides

Good luck for when we get to Maxwell and Wickerbottom.

[BB Marioni]

my vote is not in the options haha. I will say keep the downsides as base perks of each character, then skill tree perks should not be something that counters their base downside, but instead improve their strengths. In short: skill trees should focus on the characters strengths, not their weaknesses.

[Wonz]

23 minutes ago, Jakepeng99 said:

Good luck for when we get to Maxwell and Wickerbottom.

As perks i mean. Incorporate downsides into main kit if needed. Just choosing your poison is no bueno. When it's there from the start then "it is what it is" feeling.  

[Jakepeng99]

1 hour ago, Wonz said:

As perks i mean. Incorporate downsides into main kit if needed. Just choosing your poison is no bueno. When it's there from the start then "it is what it is" feeling.  

Yeah those two with the smallest downsides in the franchise but biggest upsides.

2 hours ago, BB Marioni said:

my vote is not in the options haha. I will say keep the downsides as base perks of each character, then skill tree perks should not be something that counters their base downside, but instead improve their strengths. In short: skill trees should focus on the characters strengths, not their weaknesses.

I think the idea in scribble's post shows how this may work well.

 

-Any Wood-Made armour(There are Log suit, Woodie's Wood Helmet, Bramble husk and Scale mail) has more damage reduction and durability when worn by woodie, but all other armour protects him less.

 

I think it is cool, as a skill like this would only work on a skill tree rather than base kit, and it makes it more interesting than just buffing the wood armour alone. If this kind of thing was in his base kit it would be too limiting, but this gives a nice optiom and encourages using the upside. Other flipsides could be designed like this.

[Neu7ral]

No, but sidegrades would be cool. Coaching Wolfgang is a good skill because it gives you to choose between going mighty or use all your companion strenght, but Wolfgang skill tree is so bland I don't think is propperly implemented.

[Notecja]

Not sure if I want Woodie to transform on new moon, I'd rather prefer to have a stats drain or other downside when it comes to "no-transform on full moon", as that one rather makes Woodie playable when Wicker spams full moon. Outside of that some catches could be cool when it comes to very powerful perks.

[Jakepeng99]

9 minutes ago, Neu7ral said:

No, but sidegrades would be cool. Coaching Wolfgang is a good skill because it gives you to choose between going mighty or use all your companion strenght, but Wolfgang skill tree is so bland I don't think is propperly implemented.

Only characters i see that working with is Wolfgang and Wanda even though it sounds cool in theory. You could argue things like Webber spiders are stronger with the less spiders you have but i am not sure.

[MondayNight]

From what I've seen, except arguably Wolfgang's dmg-dealer case, the Skill Trees are mostly QoL "spices on top" not warranting any additional downsides. And they do in fact have a global con: you can't chose the perks in them in their entirety.

 

[Mysterious box]

3 hours ago, Notecja said:

Not sure if I want Woodie to transform on new moon, I'd rather prefer to have a stats drain or other downside when it comes to "no-transform on full moon", as that one rather makes Woodie playable when Wicker spams full moon. Outside of that some catches could be cool when it comes to very powerful perks.

For the most part curse embracer already makes the full moon not much of a issue honestly.

[Jakepeng99]

I find characters like Wormwood, and Warly more fun not because their upsides, but their downsides that mesh well with their upsides and encourage using their upsides, or make new ways to go around things that change your playstyle completly.

Most characters you often use the exact same strategy to survive, but with extra help on top, this makes it feel more unique and different from playing another character,

[Dr. Safety]

Which current skills do you think should have a downside?