for making points a requirement.  The current system discourages distributing your points and ends up limiting the choices for each champion.

I agree as well that the +XP skills don't add much to the game.  The problem (apart from being a boring upgrade) is that it's a raw calculation whether that trait is worthwhile that's the same for all champions and every game.  If the game is balanced to make leveling easy, then those skills are a waste of time.  If the game is balanced to make leveling hard, then those skills are required.  It's completely deterministic and so not a fun choice.

The non-specialized skill tree needs a lot of love.  I feel like many of the items in the tree currently are placeholder skills brought over from FE, including, but not limited to, the +XP.

I agree the experience traits seem really pointless. One trait like knowledge if balanced right can be interesting but three in a row like potential is taking it too far. 

I also agree that trait trees should be wide not tall. For example, why is spell-mastery a prerequisite for evoker? You could easily run them side by side so players could make more choices. It would be balanced because you want spell-mastery anyway to be good at dmg spells. The current build makes spell-mastery seem like it exists only to help you get to better dmg spells, where are the curse/buff traits? Any why are we forced to buy a bunch of summons we don't want or need to get the good ones?

All the really long trait trees do is force us to get many traits we don't want, to get few we do. Theres no reason we cant have more level/point caps and allow us a few spare points to let us generalize a little, so characters are more unique and traits more rewarding. Its not like a mage character gets OP if it can summon and curse, we still only get the same amount of turns to cast spells.

I think the AI would just do a lot better with a wider less filler heavy trait tree, as it wouldn't be forced down narrow paths and make less stupid decisions.

Is anyone familiar with the game A Farewell to Dragons, from 1C?

I recommend taking a look at the trait/skill trees in that game as an example of what the OP and others are suggesting; the game itself isn't anything special, but the character leveling system is a lot of fun to use.

I am trying to reply to 3 posters at once... but the forum seems to not like that much

-------------------------

Sorry I don't agree with you 3 at all.  Many players are making this point and I doubt they really understand the powerful effects that levelling faster has.  I'm not saying you don't understand but these skills are certainly not a waste of time unless you have a champion that will gain very few more levels.  These skills add a great deal of depth to the game and are not "pointless" or a "waste of time"

The level up skills Potential I, II and III are a very important part of a level up strategy for the sovereign and some champions (but not all).  Removing those from the game would be a big mistake.  It is not really determinstic unless you know exactly what equipment you will get and what spells you will be able to run and what order you need to pick your other traits.  If you get the Tutelage spell early that can take the place of a Potential pick for some champions that will not need to level up far but otherwise it might be good to use Potential III and Tutelage for a bonus of 85% to XP

Taking the Potential skills early in the game will mean whatever experience is gained will go a lot further, and having Potential III will mean 60% extra experience.  At some level (and it is hard to calculate for a real game situation due to other factors)  by the time enough experience has been gained for level 12 or so a sovereign that invested in Potential III early (in the first 4 level ups say) will have caught up on one that did not and they both have the same "useful" traits.  But one sovereign will be level 12 with 11 useful traits and the other sovereign will be level 15 with Potental III and 11 useful traits.

Those 3 extra "wasted" levels can make a lot of difference in many situations and obviously give more HP, accuracy and spell mastery and spell resist and faster healing.  The sovereign's starting traits make a lot of difference, for instance Hardy and Brilliant are both level dependent.  A sovereign with the Brilliant trait will have 9 more spell mastery by following the +XP level up strategy at this stage.  A defender that chose endurance will have 3 levels with 4 HP each and so on.  Some spells are level dependent.

And of course once the "wasted" picks have been regained you have a sovereign that is levelling approximately 60% faster which will probably mean an extra level for every 2 or 3 levels without the bonus.

JJ

I agree that XP traits are far from being pointless. The fact that some people like them and some people dislike them is great, because it fits different play styles and show those traits are not a no-brainer choice, but something more dependent on personal style. 

I know I am getting a little repetitive with this, but limiting the choices at each level up while keeping the tree is the option that I thing is the best one. Say that there are 8 available traits, but only 4 at random can be chosen. This would combine predictiveness with randomness at a fair mix. 

The branches are too large because currently champions level up too slowly. Consequently wasting your precious level up in a bland +1 perk seems pointless, and being condemned to the same branch during the whole game (if you want to reach the end of that branch) also seems too much. Heroes need to level up faster. 

i recommend taking a look at Heroes of Might and Magic V skill system, one of the very few innovations in that game and a really good one. 

Please No! Any random research, traits or skills a player receives should only be quest rewards! Random trait choices aren't really giving you things, they are taking them away for no reason. At least from a quest it makes sense, not like your fire mage is now able to learn water spells while unable to learn some fire spells because the winds of #$%^ing magic are whimsical today.

Realistically, I really doubt we will have a trait tree large enough to be capable of effectively supporting random traits.

You make really good points here, thank you.

But my issue is: Do we really need 3 skills which do nothing but give a small boost to xp?  Where's the imagination or excitement in that?  Yes it creates a subtle difference in a hero's development, but does it make the hero legendary?  I would say no, it doesn't.

So why not make a single skill, and try to make it fun.  Let's call it 'Historian.'  Let's say it gives +50% xp from combat, +20% fame from quests, +2 research (empire) and +50% research to whatever city the unit is stationed in.  Now we're getting several bonuses that are all meaningful, are tied into the concept of a historian, and make the unit more useful in several -but not all - game situations.

I think it would even add more depth if it would (indirectly) effect the XP all other "normal" units of a party get. I think it is not doing that at the moment.

I also think in the beginning the "choice" is meaningful EXACTLY because it is three traits and not only one. This means that you have to weight the benefits of three more useful early traits against the potential of levelling faster. My only problem with this is that my heroes cannot die. Therefore I will choose the XP traits first always, because I do not care much about the survivability of my hero...

Another idea might be to "lock" the path beyond the first decision into the five basic paths in a way that you are not able to choose everything you see. That should make heroes more unique.

What about making each trait dual purpose?  Pair a significant option with a passive bonus.

For example, with the summon tree you only select new summons to add to your repertoire but each new summon you learn adds +1 to the levels of all summons.  Perhaps have a master summoner trait later on that just does a +3 to summoning levels.

Cut the filler and have every single trait be interesting.