Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

List of Subclasses as we learn about them.

Subclasses Sub-classes

  • Please log in to reply
505 replies to this topic

#321
MaxQuest

MaxQuest

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1164 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

I think it's just an off-the-cuff example the questioner used, yes.

Perhaps you are right. It would make sense to use real names through (we already had 7 disclosed) in order to avoid confusion.
 

I've also seen the balance article. I need to save it for the next time someone goes on about balance not mattering in a single-player game (the Dragon Age fanbase is very prone to that)

Agreed. I find balance to be super important to me. I always try to optimize stuff, and often end up picking mostly optimal options. This means there are less options to chose from if something proves to be not viable enough. And this limits replayability.

P.S. As for DA:I, even through I wanted to have Varric in the party, he just never was near the power level of Sera. Which was either OP with Thousand Cuts, or a liability.
In the end I used the same party in all 3 runs: Blackwall + Casandra + Solar + Knight-Enchanter/Tempest/Rift-Mage.

Edited by MaxQuest, 01 June 2017 - 04:57 AM.

  • JerekKruger likes this

#322
JerekKruger

JerekKruger

    (11) Wizard

  • Members
  • 1771 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

I've also seen the balance article. I need to save it for the next time someone goes on about balance not mattering in a single-player game (the Dragon Age fanbase is very prone to that).

 

I completely agree with his point and yet was one of the most vocal critics of the reduction of the Unlabored Blade's proc rate, so I feel I should quickly point out that in my case my objection wasn't to the general notion of balancing things, it was that the tune in that case took one of a very small number of decent soulbound weapons and made it so it was no longer competitive with non-soulbound weapons. It just seemed such a shame to see another soulbound weapon consigned to the third rate pile when the idea of soulbound items is so cool.

 

I've been right on board with many down tunes Obsidian have made to, for example, Cipher's, and I think I was pretty vocal about how great the improvements to Barbarians have been (Rogues less so because I think they still need a bit more of a buff).


  • dukeisaac likes this

#323
MaxQuest

MaxQuest

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1164 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

It just seemed such a shame to see another soulbound weapon consigned to the third rate pile when the idea of soulbound items is so cool.

Yeap. Almost all (or indeed all?) soulbound weapons in this game have a 'support' and 'situational' vibe around them.
Without ability of being lashed and durganized they are usually not good enough from dps point-of-view. 

Unlabored Blade had potential to become one of dps weapons. And the calculations showed that it could be a beast in the hands of high MIG/DEX barbarian. 
Heh, first, I could not use it, because I had no barbarian in party/run. Then it wasn't proccing in 3.04. And then it was nerfed ))

Tbh, this dagger was a bit over-nerfed. 3% proc rate instantly make it useless to anyone except barbarian. While barb himself (if dps, not interrupt oriented) wants slower and harder-hitting weapons because of Barbaric Blow and HoF. Plus 3% is just unreliable. What's the point in petrifying the enemy group as a setup for Firebug volley if it might not even proc in this fight at all :)

#324
smjjames

smjjames

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 592 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

 

But wait - I totally missed (or forgot) that there is a wizard's subclass named "Sorcerer". What was it all about again?

The first time I've seen it mentioned, was via MortyTheGobbo's link to this tumblr post.

Although now, that I am re-reading it, "Sorcerer" term was used by the questioner, not Josh himself.

P.S. Stumbled upon his article on balancing. Interesting read, especially about player feedback.

 

 

While I agree it seems like an off-the-cuff example by the questioner, it seems logical that sorcerer could be a subclass name since it's already associated with wizard and I believe there's also a sorcerer class in DnD.



#325
MortyTheGobbo

MortyTheGobbo

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 218 posts

 

I think it's just an off-the-cuff example the questioner used, yes.

Perhaps you are right. It would make sense to use real names through (we already had 7 disclosed) in order to avoid confusion.
 

I've also seen the balance article. I need to save it for the next time someone goes on about balance not mattering in a single-player game (the Dragon Age fanbase is very prone to that)

Agreed. I find balance to be super important to me. I always try to optimize stuff, and often end up picking mostly optimal options. This means there are less options to chose from if something proves to be not viable enough. And this limits replayability.

P.S. As for DA:I, even through I wanted to have Varric in the party, he just never was near the power level of Sera. Which was either OP with Thousand Cuts, or a liability.
In the end I used the same party in all 3 runs: Blackwall + Casandra + Solar + Knight-Enchanter/Tempest/Rift-Mage.

 

 

People mostly use this argument when they complain mages aren't game-breakingly powerful in DA2 and DA:I like they were in DA:O. Because it's single-player, so mages should be allowed to nuke everything, right? Except if you want to play a non-mage without feeling like a fifth wheel, I guess.

 

And yes, Varric's and Sera's specializations are both pretty mismatched for being archers. My first playthrough was an assassin archer rogue. Which can melt enemies shockingly quickly.

 

 

 

But wait - I totally missed (or forgot) that there is a wizard's subclass named "Sorcerer". What was it all about again?

The first time I've seen it mentioned, was via MortyTheGobbo's link to this tumblr post.

Although now, that I am re-reading it, "Sorcerer" term was used by the questioner, not Josh himself.

P.S. Stumbled upon his article on balancing. Interesting read, especially about player feedback.

 

 

While I agree it seems like an off-the-cuff example by the questioner, it seems logical that sorcerer could be a subclass name since it's already associated with wizard and I believe there's also a sorcerer class in DnD.

 

 

There's a lot of names for magic users that could serve as potential subclasses for wizard. But there's only going to be three of those.

 

As far as soulbound weapons go, I'd say that Durgan Steel and X Lash being so good as to be practically required for a damage-focused character is a problem in itself.



#326
JerekKruger

JerekKruger

    (11) Wizard

  • Members
  • 1771 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

Without ability of being lashed and durganized they are usually not good enough from dps point-of-view. 

 

Indeed. It's perhaps the case that lashes and durganization were too powerful and that it was those that needed to be tuned down, but since they weren't it left Soulbound weapons feeling weak.

 

Tbh, this dagger was a bit over-nerfed. 3% proc rate instantly make it useless to anyone except barbarian. While barb himself (if dps, not interrupt oriented) wants slower and harder-hitting weapons because of Barbaric Blow and HoF. Plus 3% is just unreliable. What's the point in petrifying the enemy group as a setup for Firebug volley if it might not even proc in this fight at all  :)

 

 

It was a strange one. I'd perhaps agree that 10% was too good on a Barbarian, but was probably about right for other classes.

 

People mostly use this argument when they complain mages aren't game-breakingly powerful in DA2 and DA:I like they were in DA:O. Because it's single-player, so mages should be allowed to nuke everything, right? Except if you want to play a non-mage without feeling like a fifth wheel, I guess.

 

Yeah I'd totally agree that balance is important here. It doesn't require perfect balance, just a sufficiently narrow range between the most powerful classes and the weakest so the player doesn't feel punished for choosing their favourite class based on non-mechanical criteria.

 

As far as soulbound weapons go, I'd say that Durgan Steel and X Lash being so good as to be practically required for a damage-focused character is a problem in itself.

 

 

 

Yeah, I think this is a large part of the problem. It sounds like lashes are being changed a fair bit in Deadfire, and won't be something that can simply be slapped on any weapon, and I hope that if they introduce something like Durgan Steel they'll make it less important and/or allow it to be applied to Soulbound items.



#327
DigitalCrack

DigitalCrack

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 254 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
I dont remember hearing anything in the q&a's specific saying yeah or nay but I wonder if some subclasses will have equipment limitations similar to BG2 kits? I actually liked that some subclasses had equipment limits as a trade off, it made them more interesting to play. for instance the beast tamer only being able to use leather armor and wooden weapons or the wizard slayer not being able to magic trinkets. playing a dual club weilding Beast tamer was some of the most fun I had in BG2 and I would never have played a ranger that way without the limit on the subclass. I know PoE is kind of counter in design to equipment limitations but maybe they could do the inverse which would be bonuses for using certain types of equipment (like priests get in PoE1).
  • Bill Gates' Son likes this

#328
injurai

injurai

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 865 posts
  • Location:Not the oceans
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

Yeah, I don't really like the idea of item limitation outside of class items and doing sub-class specific items would generate far to much useless equipment. Plus it canonizes certain stat distributions and builds as belonging to particular classes/sub-classes when some fantastic piece of equipment is only usable by one build.

 

Also, equipment bonuses are already tied to talents, which also let's you build as you want. I do acknowledge that it's cool to sort of role play can get builds that seem to synergize around your classes, or maybe even lead you into a setup that you'd never think of yourself. Least you build everyone that same. They already to some extent drop items in a way that suggests who might best make use of things. I think these strong suggestions are a better way to hint at the play what sorts of characters they could be building.



#329
MortyTheGobbo

MortyTheGobbo

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 218 posts

Lack of equipment restrictions is one of Pillars' greatest strengths. Introducing them with subclasses would be a bad idea. We know some of the subclasses will encourage melee combat (like the Assassin and Soulblade), and it's possible there will be range-oriented ones too. But straight-up preventing the usage of certain items is something else.

 

Besides, it's a terrible balancing tool, because the restrictions tend to be either crippling or irrelevant. The Beastmaster and Wizard Slayer are the two worst kits in BG, incidentally. The Kensai's restriction on protective items goes from harsh to easily mitigated, although that has more to do with AC scaling being out of whack.


Edited by MortyTheGobbo, 05 June 2017 - 07:02 AM.

  • injurai likes this

#330
Boeroer

Boeroer

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 6209 posts
  • Location:Bucharest, Romania
  • Lords of the Eastern Reach Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

@Ganrich: cool, you updated the opening post.

 

One thing though:

 

Wizards have two known subclasses now - named "Evoker" and "Illusionist":

https://jesawyer.tum...ire-be-the-same

 

Ciphers have a sublcass called "Ascendant" (same source).

 

I don't think he just made those names up on the fly.



#331
smjjames

smjjames

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 592 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

@Ganrich: cool, you updated the opening post.

 

One thing though:

 

Wizards have two known subclasses now - named "Evoker" and "Illusionist":

https://jesawyer.tum...ire-be-the-same

 

Ciphers have a sublcass called "Ascendant" (same source).

 

I don't think he just made those names up on the fly.

 

Given that he definetly knows people are keeping track of the info as it comes out, it's extremely unlikely he made them up on the fly.



#332
DigitalCrack

DigitalCrack

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 254 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

Yeah, I don't really like the idea of item limitation outside of class items and doing sub-class specific items would generate far to much useless equipment. Plus it canonizes certain stat distributions and builds as belonging to particular classes/sub-classes when some fantastic piece of equipment is only usable by one build.

Also, equipment bonuses are already tied to talents, which also let's you build as you want. I do acknowledge that it's cool to sort of role play can get builds that seem to synergize around your classes, or maybe even lead you into a setup that you'd never think of yourself. Least you build everyone that same. They already to some extent drop items in a way that suggests who might best make use of things. I think these strong suggestions are a better way to hint at the play what sorts of characters they could be building.

Yeah thats why I was thinking of subclass specific talents (like the priest diety talents) that give them bonuses to using specific types of weapons and potentially armor. Partly for roleplay and partly to reinforce the change in playstyle the subclass represents compared to the base class.

Edited by DigitalCrack, 05 June 2017 - 09:33 AM.


#333
DigitalCrack

DigitalCrack

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 254 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

Lack of equipment restrictions is one of Pillars' greatest strengths. Introducing them with subclasses would be a bad idea. We know some of the subclasses will encourage melee combat (like the Assassin and Soulblade), and it's possible there will be range-oriented ones too. But straight-up preventing the usage of certain items is something else.

Besides, it's a terrible balancing tool, because the restrictions tend to be either crippling or irrelevant. The Beastmaster and Wizard Slayer are the two worst kits in BG, incidentally. The Kensai's restriction on protective items goes from harsh to easily mitigated, although that has more to do with AC scaling being out of whack.


Never had any trouble with either those class kits. Probably from a power gaming standpoint but I am not a min-maxer type. but yeah thats why I brought up doing something more like the priest deity talents for subclasses as the alternative for PoE "limiting equipment"
  • Bill Gates' Son likes this

#334
Doppelschwert

Doppelschwert

    Sword Enthusiast of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 946 posts
  • Location:Germany
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

I'm wondering because no ones seemed to mention this, but didn't josh more or less say during the E3 interview with IGN that you choose your multiclass at character creation now, instead of opting into it later?



#335
Boeroer

Boeroer

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 6209 posts
  • Location:Bucharest, Romania
  • Lords of the Eastern Reach Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

I think he just wanted to point out that new players will be presented with all infos around multicallsing right at the start of character creation. I guess he just explained it in an ambigious way.

 

But even if you would have to choose it at the start it wouldn't change much, would it? Since you can retrain it doesn't really matter.



#336
JerekKruger

JerekKruger

    (11) Wizard

  • Members
  • 1771 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

I'm wondering because no ones seemed to mention this, but didn't josh more or less say during the E3 interview with IGN that you choose your multiclass at character creation now, instead of opting into it later?

 

The way I understood it was that, at the start of the game, you'll be presented with the choice between allowing multiclassing or having it disabled (I assume to keep the levelling up process simpler and quicker). I might be wrong of course.



#337
injurai

injurai

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 865 posts
  • Location:Not the oceans
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

All I know is that you pick your second class at level 2.

 

I don't get why you would want to disable it before seeing how the game plays out, unless there is a way to enable it again.

 

Seems to me the level up screen can just default to your own and only class, leaving a little button somewhere to multiclass if you so choose. If you already have to classes picked, then it should just prompt you for which class you'll be level at this particular level. Doesn't seem all that complicated, and why permanently hide away options. These games are dense you don't want confusing players away from multiclassing, let them warm up to it over a few levels. Retraining is in the game again right? So no big deal really.


  • JerekKruger likes this

#338
JerekKruger

JerekKruger

    (11) Wizard

  • Members
  • 1771 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

All I know is that you pick your second class at level 2.

 

I don't get why you would want to disable it before seeing how the game plays out, unless there is a way to enable it again.

 

Seems to me the level up screen can just default to your own and only class, leaving a little button somewhere to multiclass if you so choose. If you already have to classes picked, then it should just prompt you for which class you'll be level at this particular level. Doesn't seem all that complicated, and why permanently hide away options. These games are dense you don't want confusing players away from multiclassing, let them warm up to it over a few levels. Retraining is in the game again right? So no big deal really.

 

This would make sense of course, but Doppelschwert's right that the Josh said something about there being an option when you start the game to disable or enable multiclassing.


Edited by JerekKruger, 19 June 2017 - 07:58 AM.


#339
injurai

injurai

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 865 posts
  • Location:Not the oceans
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

I guess that forces you to read up on the trade-offs. I'd probably leave it enabled even if I was single-classing though. Unless that forces you to pick up a second class at level 2. Which I don't think it should.

 

I should be allowed to pick up a second class for the first time at level 12 because I've made some realizations over the course of the game.



#340
Doppelschwert

Doppelschwert

    Sword Enthusiast of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 946 posts
  • Location:Germany
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

My point is that josh mentioned some time ago (I think on his tumblr, or twitter), that he is not sure yet whether you should decide on a multiclass at character creation, with a fixed progression throughout the game, or if you can just take levels of a second class whenever you want.

 

Just to be clear: the first option means you advance in both classes equally (think dualclassing of AD&D / BG), while the second option means you can decide each lvl which of two classes to take (think multiclassing of D&D3.X / NWN).

 

My impression was that he described the first option in the IGN interview, which seems like a huge loss in build diversity (I'd actually prefer that, since it would probably balance the dual classes much much better).

 

EDIT:

 

http://www.youtube.c...V7hJswk&t=4m45s

 

You're given the option at the beginning that says like you wanna play as a single class character or do you wanna go the multiclass route?


Edited by Doppelschwert, 19 June 2017 - 10:59 AM.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Subclasses, Sub-classes

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users