Jump to content
  • Sign Up


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About KingDiamond

  • Rank
    (1) Prestidigitator


  • Deadfire Backer Badge
  • Deadfire Fig Backer
  1. Permanent character death *SUCKS*. No. Yes. Wow, look. We accomplished so much. I just wanted to express my liking for permanent character death. Our actions and mistakes should have consequences.
  2. Yeah I have. Ciphers have basically three core roles: weapon damage, spell damage, and debuff/CC. Splitting the damage bonus between Str and Resolve means that ciphers are going to have to give up -- all else being equal and depending on stat spread, -- either about 20 to 24% of their weapon damage (if they drop Might to boost Res), about the same range of spell damage (if they drop Res to boost Might), or a corresponding loss to their CC ability by reducing their spell effect durations and areas (if they drop Int to keep Res and Might both topped off). There are other options also -- for example, as you point out, they can just not use the half of their power tree that does damage -- but if they do that they're surrendering a function (spell damage) that before this change they didn't have to surrender. They do get pick which class function they surrender but they have to surrender one of them. (Where "surrender" in this context means "take a 20% hit in effectiveness") That's presuming optimal play and stat allocation elsewhere and ignoring secondary effects (i.e., if Ciphers drop Might to boost Resolve, they'll lose focus gain in a corresponding proportion, etc.) Is not being able to have 18 STR AND 18 RES going to make it impossible to complete the game as a Cipher? According to some people around here it seems anything below 18 is garbage.
  3. You're missing the point here. It doesn't matter whether it's by big or small numbers, spellcasters should not be tankier than melee classes. Period. But with new system they will be. You are assuming wrongly that all spellcasters have 18 resolve. Give 18 resolve to your melee character if you want them to have higher deflection.
  4. I find it stupid that spellcasters will get a deflection buff basically for free because Resolve will be their highly recommended attribute, which in turn will make them better tanks by default than most melee classes, which in turn is illogical and breaks preconception that spellcasters should be squishier than melee classes. If deflection were to be placed into a more logical attribute like CON or DEX I'm all for it and will invest accordingly. They don't get a deflection buff for free, they have to invest in resolve. Spellcasters can choose intelligence instead of resolve or any other stats. A 3 points difference in deflection does not make you a significantly better tank. Not everyone will dump stats or max resolve or whatever. Some people like to roleplay instead of powergaming. Moving deflection to dexterity would be fine for me.
  5. Basically they will make a game were you have to invest into something to be good at it and you think it's stupid.
  6. In PoE my 10 might wizard never had any problem dealing damage. Stats are overrated.
  7. It's good at first, but it has declining impact over the course of the game. And you won't be gimp if you don't take it. You can build a perfectly fine character without it.
  8. Technically, I suppose we could. I would question, however, how much sense it would make. Let's assume Weapon Focus as it currently is becomes a general talent that everyone can take. +6 Accuracy at the cost 1 talent point would already be a pretty good deal; at the cost of 1 proficiency, it is a total no-brainer. Everyone who needs to hit their enemies (e.g. every non-support character who doesn't rely on spells to cause damage) would take it; not doing so would be willfully gimping oneself, which most players won't do (only veterans in search of a challenge via self-imposed rules would, in fact.) At that point, we have two scenarios: Everything stays the same (i.e. monsters are not rebalanced around the assumptions that most characters would have Weapon Focus.) This preserves the essence of the Weapon Focus talent, which is to give you an edge in combat versus the "normality" (which is not having a +6 Accuracy bonus on every attack.) However, everybody and their neighbor would take Weapon Focus because it's up for grabs at what amounts to no cost, and gives a very good advantage. Suddenly the game is too easy—and certainly easier than intended by the developer at any rate. Everything is rebalanced around the assumption that most characters have Weapon Focus in order to retain the challenge. This makes Weapon Focus a de facto must pick or you would be factually gimping yourself, since monsters' stats are such that you are expected to have it. Weapon Focus goes from being a talent you choose to gain an advantage to a talent you must pick to not be at a disadvantage. I'd say both scenarios are equally undesirable. Josh mentioned in one of the Q&A streams that for Deadfire they tried to limit the amount of things that could increase Accuracy specifically because it is such an important stat. Everyone would jump at the opportunity to increase their Accuracy, and it becomes harder for designers to balance the game and provide a challenge without being unfair to players. Now, let's assume you'd still give Barbarians an exclusive talent called Superior Weapon Focus that gives, say, +8 Accuracy instead. I see at least two problems: The game would still need to be balanced around the assumption that most characters would get a +6 Accuracy bonus, so my point about Weapon Focus becoming a must to avoid a disadvantage still stands. Barbarians would have a ridiculously high +14 Accuracy bonus from taking both, which would make them far superior to most other melee classes, if not all. The solution would be not to make the two stack; Barbarians would still get a +8 Accuracy for 1 talent point deal, which is a bit too good. Perhaps we could make Weapon Focus +4 and Superior Weapon Focus +6, mutually exclusive, to ameliorate the issue—but it would be too much work for too little benefit, imo, as the previous point would still be a problem. I definitely advocate for Weapon Focus to stay where it is now. It's OK as a Barbarian talent. Weapon Styles can become general if Fighters get something unique in their talent tree in exchange. Similarly, Bull's Will, Snake's Reflexes, and Bear's Fortitude should probably be general and replaced by something different in the classes that get them; and by all means, let's bring back the elemental talents for the general talent pool—they were flavorful and interesting, and it's a pity not to have them in Deadfire. Getting a +6 accuracy bonus from weapon focus will not have a significant impact on game difficulty. It did not in the first game. Why would it be different in Deadfire.
  9. Killing mages in BG2 is simple: True Sight + Breach + hit them with non magical weapon = Dead mage. You could also use an Inquisitor and Dispel.
  10. I'm talking about the food bonus. I have nothing against an injury system if there is some restriction on how to heal them.
  11. This is complete bull****. One can roleplay PotD just fine. No needs for efficient choice in character design. So PotD is easy when you don't understand the game mechanics and pick abilities wily nily? I never said anything about understanding game mechanics. But you can pick abilities you like, what feel cool or in character without problem. No need for min maxing stats either. I would not say it's easy, I find the difficulty just fine when I play like that.
  12. Do you mean Path of the Damned (PotD) or Pillars of Eternity (PoE)? But yes, with a Full Party you could totally go the non-optimal way in PoE with PotD difficulty. I mean Path of the Damned with a full party.
  13. This is complete bull****. One can roleplay PotD just fine. No needs for efficient choice in character design.
  • Create New...