DigitalCrack

Would be a good way of doing it for sure. Simple way of saying what I was thinking, take barbarian Frenzy extend its active time increase the bonus provided and then its negative effects when it wear's off in combat are persistent and increase the more encounters you use it. So would be like an aura sitting dormant and auto activates on encounter but times out like frenzy does. So the first 90 seconds of an encounter, for example, you would be super buffed but then would suffer from an ever increasing "soul sickness" (or whatever name you give it) until the encounter resolves. but yeah your suggestion would be a simpler way of implementing a balanced pre-buff.

Yeah but no bonus is different from it applying a negative modifier. no rest bonus is nuetral not negative. Plus thats a littke different then what I was proposing as a balance feature for a theoretical pre-buffing school of magic that actually stack negative modifiers the more you use it. So it would be a risk reward magic. If your confident you could win a battle before your pre-buff magic wore off then it may be worth it to you to invest in that play style otherwise you could go with tradiional in combat buffing magic that has no side effects but is less powerful also. Basically the idea is structure pre-buffing in a way that doesnt require encounter design to change too much to accomadate it as an option to the player and not a must have. Just throwing my thought on it out there, I'm sure there is oversight on my part with the idea too. Edit: One thing I just thought of is that I am running off the assumption that resting will have default positive affects (like healing injuries for example) that are not tied to using food. So I am assuming that resting, by default/at minimum, will at least heal injuries. Healing injuries is not a bonus imo its simply a permanent trait of resting regardless if food is used or not. Now if resting will literally do nothing without some kind of food being used then what I said earlier changes a little.

Click here. Appreciate the link hadnt seen that one yet. Although its sounds more like the resting bonus starts to go away if you spam it not that you'll recieve negative modifiers after resting too much. Its somewhat vauge though and could be totally wrong on how I am reading it.

Have not heard that resting wi work that way and was only proposing a negative condition specific to pre-buffs which would have to be setup as its own kind of "magic" seperate from in combat buffing. basically the pre-buffing magic would be stronger but at a cost while the in combat buffing, while less powerful, would not debuff you as a result of useage.

Another way you could implement pre-buffing is taking a page from the witcher and have something akin to toxicity for using pre-buffs. Some negative condition that builds based on usage and makes your character(s) suffer negative effects, when not buffed, based on condition level. That way you potentially sacrifice something for entering a fight buffed and forces you finish combat before the buffs wear off or suffer the condition aquired from pre-buffing. This way enemies would not really have to be designed for pre-buffing. Just a thought, I dont really care for pre-buffing but this would make it an interesting choice imo.

Going to try a Ghost Heart/Soul Blade combo myself. Now that base rangers are getting more melee options this time around.

It is possible for classes to be too rigid though. I would agree to an extent that I like classes having a certain level of distinctness from each other and pillars I thought did a good job with having classes feel distinct but still allowing flexibility within each distinct class. A wizard in pillars still feels like a wizard even if i build him more like a fighter.

The others still matter though. Just not as much as the main ones for that class. That's not the attributes' faults. That's the fault of the specific way in which the classes are set up. In DnD, they've typically affected a great deal of things. Just overbearingly is that PoE was an attempt to get away from that, yes, but I feel that the pendulum swung a bit far to the opposite end of the spectrum, where it feels like the effects of attributes are struggling to justify the existence of the attributes. As it stands, you just have a couple of attributes that are globally uber useful then the rest "don't matter" (as much). Instead of per-class now, it's just across the board, but the problem remains. I do wish PoE stats had a bigger impact. Even if everything is the same in deadfire, just having stats make more of an impact in what they already do would really change the feel. As it stands in PoE1 the difference is hardly felt in gameplay until its drastic. Like 6 might compared to 18 might, for example, is when you actually feel a difference in how thay stat plays in game.

Its sounds good in theory however it seems like when devs go this kind of route we end up with something thats too simplified. I have yet to play a game where they were able to simplify attributes and have more depth and relevance per attribute. My personal preferrence I would rather see an attribute system be more complicated than it needs to be than a system that ends up being over-simplified. Only cause that golden balance is hard to achieve in any capacity when creating an attribute system.

agree. I like playing POE1 melee ranger and they have added a stalker sub class that seems to be more melee focuses. Hopefully the ability revamps allow for some melee flexibility as well. Josh actually stated that the sharpshooter is closest to PoE1 ranger and that base ranger will actually have some melee capability without subclass-ing.

It could be cool to have dynamic quests appear for permanent negative conditions. If its a semi-rare occurence that say you get level drained which would add a new quest log to your journal that would kick off a mini adventure. Obviously all depends on your ability to keep it interesting if it happens more than once and how often it can happen and what not. I mean if its a 4-5 times average that it comes up in a playthrough could add some fun little impromtu quests. Edit: maybe make those conditions something only a boss level monster can potentially cause. So then you will see these serious conditions come up more than once but not have to worry about every fight adding a mini quest to your "to do" list.

yeah right now I am torn between rolling a Ghost Heart/Mind Blade or a Ghost Heart/Mage Slayer (or whatever that barbarian subclass is called ha) mostly for RP although I am sure they aren't terrible combo's. I like that you can actually look at the class ability trees on creation as that may help me with this decision once the game is released.

A small example of a stroy you made in your head after an imaginary (or real) session you played that lasted for hours or maybe days (since the dungeon was 3 levels down) but it is only 1 hour tops in video game time. I don't see how all these descriptions add lore or excuse pre-buffing in Pillars really. You go to fight a werebeast, ok you have your spells you have your potions you have the food, you use them during combat and that's it. Why pre-buff. Again it deosen't add anything to the gameplay. Imo, you need a game focused mainly on monster hunting in order to excuse pre-buffing and even then, I'd rather it is a single-character 3rd or 1st person game so there's only you you need to pre-buff.In any case, Pillars has maybe the less restrictions of any other IE-like game so I don't believe adding the freedom to bore yourself with repetitive pre-buffing is good. Scouting ahead and preparing your traps or your party positioning is enough imo. The thing is, as I see it, you like to make stories of your own when playing the game and that's good fo course. I do sometimes pause and let the scenery and the encounter sink in and appriciate the moment but I don't jump out of the video game and land in a tabletop one while doing so. I know what I'm playing and why. Not to derail the topic but a monster hunting crpg sounds brilliant! make it a 4 person party and add in the investigative portion where you have to use your skills to figure the monster type and method of its killings which would end in an epic battle with the monster(s). If done right could be amazing. The monster hunting quests were my favourite part of witcher 3 would be great to see it translated to a crpg where you can add in all the different nuanced skill checks and what not for different aspects of the investigation portion.

This one always scares cause I feel like no one has done a great job imo with less but more interesting encounters. Primarily I think devs just havent done a great job coming up with content more interesting than "trash mobs." Or they just make the game shorter which is irritating when its good. This is one that I would like to have my cake and eat it too... same amount of combat and better encounter design.

Agreed, If I wanted to indulge in Andrzej Sapkowski's masturbatory fantasies, I would read one of his hacky novels. huh? I think the Witcher games are terrible, and the books are even worse. Never read the books and games 1 and 2 I wasn't a fan (only made it an hour in on each) but witcher 3 is undeniably a great game, deserved all the praise it got.

really what could determine your options would be class. So if your a magically inclined class you get magic versions of might choices in scripted events and if physical you get physical versions. In the event of a multiclass situation you would simply offer both options so they could either pull the wall down with muscles or magic. This would also allow for you to have scripted events that could require a physical or magical version of a might check to pass. edit: I realize multiclass (magical/physical based) would have an advantage of more choice but thats the benefit of being hybrid instead of specialized.

For priests devs have already stated that their spell lists are different between each diety and each diety at least gets a few unique spells that the others do not.

The Ghost Heart is supposed to be the "petless ranger" or as close as we will get anyway. They are not effected by any of the bonded grief effects and the pet isnt even there unless summoned in battle. which makes me curious how he will even work given that rangers resource is "bond" makes me curious to see how that subclass will work resource wise considering they are technically bond-less.

Ranger Ghost Heart - Animal companion must be summoned as a spirit. They are not affected by Bonded Grief and the companion is more powerful, but the summon is limited duration. Sharpshooter - Bonuses to Penetration and Accuracy at range, but slower actions and lower Deflection. Stalker - Stalker and companion gain bonuses to Deflection and Armor Rating when close to each other, suffer Bonded Grief when too far apart. above is from update #40 which I am sure most have seen but figured I woukd get some ranger specific converation going again. I believe it was mentioned (in one of the many vids) that the sharpshooter would be closest to PoE1 ranger and that the base class is better balanced between melee and ranged now. So I am psyched to see what these changes entail, also loving the swing in playstyle between all 3 subclasses.

completely agree concerning the scripted interactions regarding might. it isnt clear in those instances. My earlier comment was purely towards people wanting magic damage on a seperate stat because "might=muscles." As someone said earlier the expansion and revamp of the skills system may have fixed this in regards to scripted interactions.

Here is the issue: “Might represents a character's physical and spiritual strength, brute force as well as their ability to channel powerful magic. During interactions, it can be useful for intimidating displays and acts of brute force. In combat, it contributes to both Damage and Healing as well as the Fortitude defence.” Might represent both physical strength of your character and magic/spiritual strength. While Constitution: “Constitution is a combination of the character's overall health and endurance. Although it is not used much in interactions, it is sometimes checked to withstand pain or endure a physically taxing ordeal.” So while a character with low might but high constitution could do Captain America’s “I can do this all day!” routine, or sustain environmental dangers (like escaping from burning house in white march) he is unlikely to threaten someone or lift heavy stuff. For me It would be enough if they would explain lorewise how physical strength correlates with powerful spell casting. All this back and forth on this is only because for some reason people cant seperate physical strength from "might" Might has no direct connection to specific origin of strength (physical or magical) its simply "the power to do something" whether through physical or magical means. no mental gymnastics required its simply a false perception that might is defined as only physical strength.

Xcom2 war of the chosen is awesome though so it was worth the price. I think with the small dlc you tend to feel ripped off more on averagr than you feel it was worth it. you drop 10 or 15 bucks for like 1 mission and some cosmetic stuff every 2 months just isnt as fun as a big game changing expansion with loads of depth and new features galore. Its way easier for small consistent dlc drops to be crappy then it is for a full on expansion. And maybe thats just a result of most everyone doing small dlc anymore instead of expansions, so more opportunities for dlc to be done wrong so perception isnt great concerning small dlc format.

The name indicates that he fights for/with the Cross, which is very much Christian thus religious. Of course many words are being used outside their original meaning, but your statement does away completely with that meaning. Not according to webster

A Crusader is simply someone who fights for a cause. Doesnt have to be a religious cause.

Cause for a game that was designed around not being as restrictive as BG series ranger was the one class that really suffered (at first) from a narrow design concept that left no room for anything other than being a ranged combatant. The Barbarian and Monk were and are currently not nearly as restrictive as the ranger was.