Erik-Dirk

I think a lot of the Tyranny politics kind of fell apart if you chose the "good path" or chose to take the tiers for yourself, I remember a few times being absolutely baffled as to why my character would want to go back to Tunons court.

Why wasn't White March end game content? While the story was quite good, I felt the initial motive for the watcher to put aside the current, far more personal and pressing mission so that they could journey into the mountains on the off chance that they can open the battery, a slight stretch. It probably would have made more sense story wise if it had been end game content.

I think you misunderstood what I was suggesting, think more along the lines of we gain a power level every level. (Abilities are treated as x levels lower not multiclass in general) Empower treats the ability as though it was x levels higher. It seems to me a much easier mechanic to understand and quantify. As Wormerine alluded to, I'm pretty sure must people on this forum will be fine with power levels, however it is likely to be a barrier to understanding for new/casual players. Perhaps i should rephrase to "Empower increases the Effects of an ability by +x levels" so there can be no confusion about accuracy etc.

I think this idea is just as likely to be able to balance the classes as any other idea, my only criticism is that it'll result in a larger power bloat at high levels. I.e. a level 20 single class will receive a +x% on around 21 abilities. I know the previous suggestion was slightly guilty of this as well, however a 1%/level and a multiclass nerf won't result is such a large power jump when you reach the highest power level. p.s. im aware of the diminishing returns from low level abilities but it still adds up.

I know power levels have thus far been inconsistently and poorly implemented, I can see how the system will potentially work. However I can see only see potential issues and no clear benefit to this system; Power level is less clear, if a spell does 5dps + 1dps/3 levels I instantly understand, currently I'd have to look at a table. Character powers will dramatically spike at certain levels. At tier 3 a cipher will gain access to biting whip as well as a boost to many abilities, and potentially existing passives. This jump will be even more obvious with a multiclass character. (If powers scale with level then less abilities will coincide with access to a new tier. The tool tips can't easily tell you how many level until an ability increase as well as the effects of empower. (E.g. Currently it'd have to say something like 2 power levels away from an upgrade, (6 levels). If abilities were affected by level the can scale in a perfectly linear fashion. So in conclusion what does "power level" actually bring to the game as opposed to simply saying that multiclass are considered 2 levels below single class for abilities? The clarity of the system is my main issue.

To achieve a reasonable balance the tier zero passives would need to start at 50% (Given level and power level are the same at level 1). This could be raised later to somewhere between 60-80% depending on how much power level affects abilities, how powerful top tier abilities are, how useful resistances prove to be at high level etc. I think other passives will likely need to be scaled down as well, remember that multi-class gets access to additional points, as well as a much broader selection of passives. Also I don't see that passives need to be linked with power level (With the exception of constant recovery) It could be made very simple. Single class gains 100% Passives, Multi class gets 50% +1%per level Even constant recovery would perhaps be better if it was changed to something along the lines of: Single class: 5Hp/3sec +1/every second level Multiclass: 3Hp/4sec +1/every second level This can be written in the ability tree and new players should easy be able to understand what this means. Just because we have a more complex system available doesn't mean it's the best option.

Actually pets can pretty easily be nerfed without breaking them. Health:100% Damage:50-70% Bonus for attacking the same target:50-70% Bereavement penalty: 50-70% Disengagement attacks do 100% single class damage. Personally I'd think it'd be easier coding wise to reduce multi class passives by a straight 70%, then implement power levels after we get a chance to see how this balances. One exception to this is constant recovery, this ability is powerful at low levels but starts to become obsolete at high level, this is an ability that really should scale with level/power level.

I think your totally missing the point, As a simplified example lets pretend 3 classes receive a different passive but receive the same passive each level. Character 1: 10% increased damage each tier Character 2: 10% Increase attack speed each tier Character 3: 5% increase in speed + 5% increase in damage. The third character will obviously be the most powerful. Therefore level 0 abilities could be nerfed by 50% and at the start of the game a multiclass will still be more powerful. Now at level 20 Single class will have access to 10 tiers of passives Multiclass will have access to 16 (8 if they're halved) So yes multiclass are 20% weaker Lets change the nerf to 62.5% 8*0.625=10 Therefore assuming relatively even value of the strongest class passives multiclass should be 62.5% of a single class. (not that far from 50%) Ideally they should scale for balance; level 0 abilities should be 50%, tier 7 80% but I don't necessarily see this working. We can also completely remove the slightly arbitrary power level penalty for multiclass.

To fix this, the mentioned passives should be toned down (and upscaled later with power levels) to match other classes' low-level abilities. (Mechanically halving multi-class passives might not be enough.) I don't quite follow your logic here; if passives scale with power level wont this mean multiclass passives will always be greater than 50%? Mechanically halving passives for multiclass wont be quite enough by itself, as they will often build better upon each other, however while the higher tiered passives may not be better than lower tiers they are still useful which multiclass either get later or can't get. For this reason the Paladin/Berserker should be slightly more powerful before taking these into account. The issues is that currently they get 100% passive benefits which is obviously going to cause imbalance. A straight 50-60% reduction to multiclass passives is worth exploring and likely easier to implement. While resistances may be harder to implement there are always ways the ability can be modified. E.g. Confuse immunity: Damage to allies is halved Paralyzed Immunity: Action Speed/movement is halved Armour penetration/Armour: Perhaps introduce 75% damage reduction for under penetration less than 1 or ability is applied 50% of the time

@KaineParker, don't be a tool and break up peoples paragraphs to make them look like an idiot, the paragraph was obviously supposed to be read as a whole. Given that the major disadvantage of multiclass characters is not being able to get those abilities, it very much does matter. I regards to your comment that multiclass characters are more complicated to build, therefore they should be more powerful. This is currently false. A cipher multiclass is worthwhile for just the 40% damage boost, there is nothing complicate or clever about this. Just a significant power boost. In regards to higher tier active abilities being more powerful your probably right. However I don't believe it's the synergy between abilities that currently make multiclass characters more powerful; passives are the main problem, especially the over powered low level abilities like carnage which a multiclass will often get between 1.6x to 2x the number of options, as well as the points to spend on them

As I mentioned earlier, Passive abilities definitely need to be included in this and treated separately since multi class will have access to 6 additional tiers as well as points to spend on them. Cipher is not even the best multiclass combo however with biting whip you do 40% extra damage. This means you need to reduce active abilities by 28% just to bring them down to the same level. Given you'll do 140% damage on an auto attack we might find some abilities do a lower DPS. (At this point the Multiclass has access to only 2 additional tiers) I don't think it matters how powerful the 8-9 abilities are. If new players are recommended to play singles class and they are very noticeably weaker for everything but the end game then this is a terrible design to bring in new players. If the access to higher tiers is supposed to improve single class then higher tiers need to be noticeably better throughout the game. However I don't really like this as it means you would rarely, if ever, pick a lower tier ability at a later point in the game (I.e. less versatility)

Nice ideas, although we can't add anything else to Might/strength otherwise it'll be more valuable than dex. (Currently might is more useful for limited abilities, dex is more useful for on hit effects/casting buffs) Although this could balance nicely if Might was an additive effect. In the strength option I'd move concentration under strength too (strength becomes a dump stat for classic casters builds) I also liked your older ideas of constution affecting healing received as well as resolve effecting crits in some way All the hybrid solutions would probably make things a little too complicated though, also I think it's fair that they need to sacrifice versatility if they intend to min/max.

It's not ok for most single classes to be very underpowered for the first 3/4 of the game. Especially since single class is supposedly the simpler build recommended for new players.

Rather than having long cast times could we just make it possible to interrupt DOT/Buff/Affliction effects.

If we further restrict the tiers then maybe we won't require any reduction of power level i.e. Casting that one fireball is exactly half as good as a single class wizard with 2, you can then say autoattack and/or do what your other class is designed to do. Pure casters could potentially be treated differently. A druid/wizard would have access to exactly the same number of spells/potential casts, you can equip items with per encounter abilities, or use self buffing spells to synergize with your other class. This is another solution but for Transcendent suffering i'd say this is an exception, the skill is fine as it is as it just makes a weapon viable, possibly slightly under powered, definitely should scale with level rather than power, (I didn't mean that we blindly have to halve passives) I had already thought of pets but there's a pretty simple solution; Full health/defense, however damage, bonus and penalties are all halved. (Pet healing should probably remain the same too, and perhaps the pet does 100% disengagement damage. (of single class) As I said, no one has, or is likely to come up with a perfect solution for balance. We just need to find one with promise, examine the problems and potential work around. P.s. dunehunter I wasn't specifically talking about you but some of the objections people seem to have are relatively minor problems compared to the current multiclass discrepancy. I think people should be obliged to put forward their preferred solution when objecting, unless the proposed solution is actually worse or too hard to implement. (Even every 3rd or 4th objection was accompanied by, "I think power levels will eventually be sufficient" we'd have an answer)

If spells actually scale well with level then it'd still work quite well, you still have access to 10 spells/encounter, about 40 choices of spells and what is your other class doing? Alternatively maybe pure casters should be treated differently. The extra passive level zero ability is something that makes multi-class better than single class, not equal. Also presumably the classes without passive level 0 abilities have better active abilities so I don't see the problem (If this is not the case then it is a problem with the whole class, not multi-classing) But as I said, I believe there are better solutions. P.s. There will be pros and cons for all solutions, I think relying on power level alone to fix the gap isn't going to be sufficient as many of the passives are just too powerful. Not many solutions are being put forward and not many people are offering constructive criticism to improve the faults they find, I admit that there are shortcomings to every solution I offered, however I'm pretty sure they'd all result in a much more balanced system than is currently in place.

Reducing actual level probably would work too, however I suspect that we'd run into problems like perception HAS to be maxed, and accuracy boosting items equipped if you want to hit. (I.e. all attribute builds are the same) Reducing level is kinda the idea of restricting access to highest tier abilities. Problem is that most of the really powerful abilities are either low tier, or at best equally distributed between tiers. Problem is that this means that at level 20 a multi-class will have access to: 14 tiers of unique class skills 7 extra ability points to spend on these skills Opportunity for greater versatility/synergy with abilities. (Single class only has access to 9 tiers) Perhaps multi-class should only ever have access to tier 5, which still gives a slight advantage (+1 tier of options as well as starting abilities) Perhaps also make it that you unlock your first class, then two levels later the second so that level up remains interesting. Personally I prefer 1/2 value to passives, or make the higher tier abilities significantly more valuable.

There seems to be a lot of comments about how "balance is really hard" and "this combination is broken" but not a lot of suggestions on how to balance the classes. The way i see it is there are three options to balance the classes. Option 1: Identify the Key class abilities and create another ability of equal value. SIngle class can pick both, Multi-class will be locked out of the other. I,e, Say Barbarians could have a rather high drain ability with carnage at level 1 (drain only applies to the primary hit), a multiclass can never have both Option 2: Halve every passive for multiclass, This comes out with a slight advantage to multiclass when there is synergy, We could get rid of power levels and perhaps reduce the restricted access to only the highest tier. Option 3: Higher Tiers should always be better: At the moment a fighters level 1 "constant recovery" is 5hp/s. Veterans recovery (tier 4) is 2hp/s If obsidian are relying on access to higher tiers to balance the classes they need to get over the aversion of smaller base ability, larger upgrade. This aversion only makes sense for active abilities. I can see no logical reason to the numbers above

Extremely difficult to balance (and put in place). All is not as simple as "divided by 2". Because if you have this system, passives abilities become less attractive and you go to active abilities. Problem is moved, not changed. Agreed. The problem isn't so much the power of the passives, but the overarching system. Passives do not require resources, last indefinitely, and can stack and synergize with each other. In contrast, actives compete for limited resources (class power, time), are limited in duration, are only usable one at a time, and don't really synergize well with each other. Regardless of how hard you nerf passives, I would still find it hard not to take the. Even if passives were Awful you would still only take a couple of active abilities because they compete with each other for resources. Ummm.... I believe you just agreed with theBalthazar, then proceed to contradict everything that was said Anyway, halving the value of passives will make actives more appealing true but, as Bazy said, given that abilities will consume class resource the only power gained by selecting abilities will be through versitility (Which is kinda the point of multi-class) Bazy, the idea is not to make passives useless to a multi-class but rather bring them back in line with single-class. Take the example of two level 1 barbarian/ciphers compared to a barbarian and a cipher. Currently each barbarian/cipher does 120% primary damage plus carnage (Total = 240% primary + 240% carnage) If we halve the passives then we get 110% primary damage and 60% carnage (Total =220% primary +120% carnage) One of each single class gives, 120% primary damage (cipher), 100% primary damage + 100% carnage (Total = 220% Primary +100% carnage) As you can see even with half passives the multi-class is still superior, however the difference, while significant, is relatively minor so can more realistically be made up through access to higher tier abilities.

Lets be clear now. More passive abilities=more power. Since most active abilities are tied to a resource they just increase versatility not power (spells are included as they wont run out mid-late game) That is not necessarily true, self-buff abilities Frenzy and Swift Flurry not only increase versatility, but also increase power. Some offensive abilities will increase power too, like Wounding shot, FoD. This is true, however they will still consume resources and/or some time to activate. They may still cause multi-class to be more powerful but not to the same extent as the passive ability to do carnage damage or chants buffing/de-buffing everyone. Sworn enemy and especially marked prey could be problematic though as they don't really consume the resource. It's ok if a well designed multiclass is superior through good choice of abilities. Just not the current system where most combinations are obviously superior.

In the thread of analysis I have found an interesting thing : Obsidian hate the upgrade. He create the better option first. Upgrade is never better than the base effect. (Chanter, Fighter etc. There is a lot of examples) Concrete exemple (actually) : Recovery of fighter = 5 HP by 3s. Upgrade = 2 HP by 3s. If I was in command (: p) I could be propose an other dividing : Recovery of fighter = 3 HP by 3s Upgrade = 4 HP by 3s After = better. There is a good effect : viable and optimal. Obsidian do that for avoid bad builds (= non viable). With base ability with the actual system of Obsidian, I have always a good "base" of general efficiency. There is a downside effect : Improvements are often not useful. (Exalted focus ? etc.) There's no logic to this stance though, large or small, a passive ability will always be useful. Smaller upgraded abilities only makes sense for active abilities, as cast time/resource cost will usually remain the same Lets be clear now. More passive abilities=more power. Since most active abilities are tied to a resource they just increase versatility not power (spells are included as they wont run out mid-late game)

Sorry for the confusion, I actually meant that multi-class should receive double points if the value of their passives are halved although the current 1 & 2/3 would probably be better I also wasn't suggesting that multiclass have access to the same active abilities only the same passive abilities (at half value)

The versatility of multi-class is not what's killing single class, it is the strong passive abilities. Realistically the only way I can see that multi-class can resemble a balance, is if all passives are halved in value, multiclass receive around double ability points, and the passives for each tier are available at the same time as single class. For example this would mean carnage does half damage and any weapon proc on hit chance would be halved. Obviously there should be a couple of exceptions, e.g. increased focus gain, pet passives etc. (Although these should take 2 ability points if multi-class get double the points at level up) Abilities should still only cost one point as given the respective class resource is halved the ability is theoretically worth half. Some active abilities should also be halved. E.g. Marked Prey

The problem is really that melee multi-classes have access to two rank zero abilities which are in themselves equal to what can be found in higher tiers. I.e. Cipher/Fighters get both "Constant Recovery" and "Soul Whip" The pure Fighter will need to unlock tier 3 to use "veterans recovery" before having access to relatively equal passives. (by which time the multi will have access to draining whip so be ahead in passives again) If we want to balance multiclass we need one of the following options The higher tiers are always better (e.g. soul whip is 15% draining whip is 20%) Multiclass receives even more ability points however every passive ability is halved, while opening up the highest tiers to multiclass. Give solo classes access to a unique ability/passive at every second tier

I brought this up in the non-beta thread earlier: Why do multiclass characters get additional ability points at character creation Why do multiclass get additional points at level up Seems to me that at creation: Single class characters should get 2 ability points. Multiclass should only gets 1 as they have already bought their rank 0 abilities. Multiclass should only get one ability point at level up like single class. Pretty sure they're still going to be very imbalanced however the current ability point system simply makes things worse.