Jump to content

randomletters543

Initiates
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About randomletters543

  • Rank
    (0) Nub

Badges

  • Deadfire Backer Badge
  • Deadfire Fig Backer
  1. I think the best character i made was a devoted dual-wielding scepters since the proficiency is just a pure damage boost with marginal downside. I can see a devoted with a war-bow good as well since they added two damage types to bows for some odd reason. However, my main gripe with devoted wasn't that it was too powerful, but that it feels too much like a normal fighter. 95% of the time it will just be better than a normal fighter so there is no reason not to take devoted unless you're building a tank character. Of course, this could change depending on what incentives the developers create for switching weapons mid-battle, but as it stands now, the devoted sub-class just seems like bad design. (95% of the time the blackjacket will be worse than a normal fighter so that's bad design for the same reason, just going the other way.)
  2. in re: devoted. I agree with you that -10 accuracy is a big penalty. However, if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it actually make a sound? Or in other words, how often are players going to switch between weapons mid-battle? My last several playthroughs of pillars 1 on potd, I don't think I ever switched weapons mid-battle. Of course, if you pick the wrong weapon at character start, you might break your character, but I would be surprised if the game didn't allow respecs. If that's the case, unless they make weapon-switching really attractive, I don't see you ever picking anything other than devoted for a damage dealing fighter. Also, I realized why I didn't like the classes that I mentioned in the first post. Ultimately, the sub-classes are fairly minor changes to the base class. They're there mostly for flavor and to give direction/focus to your character. For example, if you want to make a tank character, it makes sense to pick unbroken. However, the difference between unbroken and the regular fighter isn't that big, but just by picking the subclass it feels more like a tank. The problem with classes like beckoner or enchanter is that it is difficult in the current game to build a character around those classes. You can't build a summoner because of the limit on summons. You can't build an enchanter because there aren't enough enchanter spells and the enchanter spells that do exist overlap each other. The blackjacket is supposed to be a jack of all trades, but I think ultimately he'll just feel like a worse version of a regular fighter because there is no pay-off for making a jack of all trades character (at least in pillars 1). All of the other sub-classes have a well-defined flavor and correspond with a specific build.
  3. in re: beckoner. My criticism wasn't necessarily that beckoner was weak. It just doesn't feel good to play him because you cast one summon and then that's it. A summoner class doesn't make a lot of sense when summons are limited to one cast at a time. However, I can see it being a good multi-class option so maybe my criticisms weren't completely fair. Also, as a side note, there is a potion class with the drug monk, but there is no explosive class yet. I wonder if you can just make the blackjacket the explosive class. Otherwise I don't really see it getting played. The only use scenario that I can imagine at this point is if there are a bunch of weapon with per encounter spell charges. Then you can play the blackjacket as if it was some kind of jank wizard, although at that point you might as well play a wizard.
  4. After playing about a dozen hours of the backer beta, I had some comments on some of the design choices for classes. This isn't really a discussion about balance since numbers can be changed down the line, but there are a few fundamental design choices that I think can't be patched around. Wizard Sub-classes: I think the wizard sub-class needs to be rethought. The problem is that the spells are not well distributed. This is especially noticeable if you choose the enchanter subclass. A lot of the higher level enchanter spells overlap with the lower level enchanter spells and these do not stack. Thus, if you pick enchanter, a lot of your spells will become useless as you level-up and this cuts down on your options that are already cut down by the sub-class downside. I think wizards need to go the way of priest where there is only a benefit and no downside. You can also add some benefit to the non-sub-class wizard that would make not taking a sub-class actually attractive. Devoted: I think the devoted bonus is too oppressive. Since a majority of players will never use more than one weapon type, taking the devoted over a generic fighter is a no-brainer. Either proficiencies need to be beefed up which would make switching between weapons actually an attractive option instead of being a nuisance, or you need to give a bonus to the generic fighter, or you need to make the downside to the devoted an actual downside. Blackjacket: I can't see anyone ever taking this sub-class for the same reason you would never not take devoted. The game just doesn't make switching weapons attractive enough. Also, I think removing constant recovery eliminates an essential part of what makes a fighter a fighter. It would be like removing sneak attack from the rogue. I think the downside needs to be a weakened constant recovery, which still gives you the option to take rapid recovery. The bonus should be changed to something like you can use the proficiency from one weapon type at reduced power for another weapon type. Or remove the downside from weapon proficiencies. Something that doesn't require you to switch weapons for the class to actually do something. Beckoner: Since you can only have one summon at a time, this class seems kind of weak. I think a better bonus would be to raise the summoning cap from 1 to 2. That way you don't feel useless after casting one spell. Of course, this would make you feel useless after casting two spells, so maybein thee end, summoning is just too difficult to balance to make this sub-class feel fun to play. These were some of the main issues I had while building a variety of characters. In general though, most of the sub-classes feel unique and fun to build around.
×
×
  • Create New...