Stun
-
Posts
2849 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Stun
-
-
That's... not true. Build a Dex-based monk in AD&D and he will be rogue like. hard to hit/defensive master, but he won't hit hard. build a strength based monk and he'll hit hard but won't be very defensive.That means nothing when stats don't have much of an impact on the class builds in the first place. They are designed to be a modest supplement to already existing build options. More to the point: Boosting your wizard's Might and Con to 18 is NOT why he's so effective in melee. Your wizard is effective in melee because every class is designed to be effective in melee. Because they must be. Because...safety net.
You see this as excellent and refreshing. I see it as watered down class design. And Junta, I see it as such even as I concede the point that the AD&D class system takes it too far in the other direction.
You are aware that stats have zero impact on classes in AD&D? Their is only one way to spend them for every class. The only thing that stats did in AD&D was showing you how much you missed to perfection.
Build a strength based Cleric in D&D and he'll be far more effective in melee with his cleric combat buffs. Build a wisdom based cleric and he'll be a far better spell caster.
Build a Con based Barbarian in AD&D and he'll be a massive meat shield. Build a strength based Barbarian and he'll hit harder but be far less resilient.
And before you come back with: "That's how PoE does it" let me pre-empt you: NO. It's not. Stats in AD&D make or break the build. They're far more impactful...in both directions. Stats in PoE just...help you out a little bit.
-
6
-
-
That's a question in a vacuum. I would assume that if they significantly boosted the Weapon damage bonuses from might, that they would also boost the spell-based bonuses from intellect, the accuracy/critical bonuses from Dex etc., thus every class build can find a way to battle on equal terms with a Might-build, thus maintaining balance without insulting us with these placebo stats as they currently are which don't really do much to any build.Each small point has a small effect, but they add up. Would you really prefer the MIG bonuses (boni?) to instead be huge, such that characters without high MIG would be completely outclassed by those without it?
-
1
-
-
Stun and other 'butthurtees" would point out that D&D doesn't need a Muscle wizard supplement. D&D allows for Multi-classing. remember? (diversity? What diversity?)
Anyway.
Well, that's just a commentary on the relatively pointless nature of the other ability stats in PoE. As for Might, I'm not sure how one can conclude IT'S needed either, given that the damage and healing bonus difference between 3 and 18 is, like, about 15%? That's called a bonus. A slight one (you'll be doing about 4 more points of damage with your sword than someone with 3 might) That's not a NEED. Of course this is nothing but semantics. A system who's motto is: "no trash choices" means that no stats are needed. Period. Because if they were NEEDED, then choosing not to take them would lead to build failure. And there's no such thing as build failure in a "no trash builds" system. There cannot be.Oh? I thought the consensus was that Might is the only ability you need.
That means very little when stats don't have much of an impact on the class builds in the first place. The Attributes are designed to be a modest supplement to already existing build options. More to the point: Boosting your Muscle wizard's Might and Con to 18 is NOT why he's so effective in melee. Your wizard is effective in melee because every class is designed to be effective in melee. Because they must be. Because...safety net.With the P:E approach on the other hand, there really are different viable stat distributions for different character concepts.
You see this as excellent and refreshing. I see it as watered down class design. And Junta, I see it as such even as I concede the point that the AD&D class system takes it too far in the other direction.
-
4
-
-
Yes? But I suppose there's a market for people who enjoy developer imposed safety net chargens in video games. And what better way to do that than to create an attribute system where the power difference between 3 might and 18 might is just about nothing.Yes. This would be my personal stance on the matter.
But unlike you guys, I'm not convinced that alterations will be made to the ENTIRE attribute system (which IMO is what it's going to need to feel meaningful enough) I forsee them adjusting perception and resolve, because they've already said they wanted to. But that's about it.
I think I'm seeing a pattern here. I get the feeling that some of you really don't like that it's actually impossible, or very difficult, to gimp your character at chargen by picking the 'wrong' attributes. And, conversely, that it's impossible, or very difficult, to make your character objectively much more powerful by picking the 'right' ones. Is this in the ballpark?
If so, then yeah, I'm pretty sure it's not going to be changed as it goes against Josh's prime directive of "no trash choices." And yes, that is always going to make minmaxers unhappy.
It's literally idiot-proof.
-
3
-
-
You're kidding me. Doesn't that come out to, like, less than +1 point of damage per point of Might if you're using a *greatsword*? In a game where friggin level 4 spiderlings have 150 health? I hope I'm not the only one here who's cringing at these nearly worthless penny-increment stats.Something to take into account is that the actuall bonus damage increase of raising Might by 1 point isn't actually 2% of your current damage, but 2% of base damage
Change of plans. I'm gonna roll up a 3 might, 3 dex Fighter first thing in the morning and see if I can't STILL hold my own in melee against BB_Fighter and BB_rogue in a damage contest.
-
It's pretty darn expensive. But even if I had the money, I'm not quite sure how to dismiss my current party members so that I could hire 5 new characters.Monk is the next class I'm going to try out and see for myself
I wish they would have let us build a whole party atonce in this beta. I'm really getting tired of BB_Everyone.
Can't you hire an entire party from the tavern? Or is it prohibitively expensive to do so?
-
Thank you for this, sir. We need more threads like this. I want to learn the system. Actually we all need to, otherwise our mechanics-based feedback is worthless to the devs
Disappointingly weak, actually. Rogues are the class that gets the high end Accuracy scores, yet it looks like Might will be the stat to pump if you want them to play their dev-stated role of "heavy hitter".It does seem a bit weak, still.
<shakes head>
C'mon josh. Grow your backbone and turbo charge these stats already
-
4
-
-
I agree. And just so I'm not misunderstood, I'm not criticizing this aspect of the system. Unlike some grognards, I don't AT ALL oppose a system that intentionally blurs the lines between the classes so as to not make them very distinct from one another.
I only came to this muscle wizard thread to point out a neutral observation: This game feels like it doesn't need Classes. I just started a Rogue playthrough and right now he feels precisely the same as my barbarian under the hood. And my gamer instinct is telling me that it would be really cool (and it would feel natural) if my rogue could level up and get a Rage ability to compliment his crippling strikes.
I feel like the Fighters, rogues, pallys, and barbs are the most noticeable culprits. These classes need more to differentiate themselves. While druids feel like a cross between a priest and a wizard with shapeshift. However, shapeshift makes a pretty big difference and Druids aren't a heal oriented as Priests.
Chanters - have their chant/phrase/invocation system that feels different from the monk and Cipher (but more like the cipher).
Ciphers - ^
Monks - feel like intended offtanks. they are there to keep 1 person in check, or harass a back line.
Ranger - their pet makes a world of difference and they feel different as a byproduct.
I would like to say that I noticed a huge difference in some classes by selecting different attributes. While it is less noticeable with others.
I think we need feats/talents that further differentiate the classes. These Talents need to be something unique to the class and not just a buff to an already available ability/skill/spell, and increase to engagement limit, or a weapon specialization. I know Obsidian said that the beta wouldn't have many feats, and that input might be useful. I think this is the topic they were waiting for on that front and requires a new thread to get ideas rolling.
Monk is the next class I'm going to try out and see for myself
I wish they would have let us build a whole party at once in this beta. I'm really getting tired of BB_Everyone.
-
4
-
-
Yes. This would be my personal stance on the matter.It's certainly arguable that they're not meaningful enough,
But unlike you guys, I'm not convinced that alterations will be made to the ENTIRE attribute system (which IMO is what it's going to need to feel meaningful enough) I forsee them adjusting perception and resolve, because they've already said they wanted to. But that's about it.
-
1
-
-
In other words, the atmosphere/discussion over there is virtually indistinguishable from the one that is occurring on this very thread. I don't disagree. LOLI shooed the Codex crowd a long time ago, when I was following Age of Decadence's development with great interest. The Codex has a very particular opinion of what makes a game good, and an incredibly confrontational attitude that comes with being sure that their opinion is the only valid one.
-
1
-
-
They're criticizers. And before you shoo them away collectively, know well that Obsidian devs take them and their viewpoints seriously. In fact, an Obsidian Developer has multiple posts in that very thread. He was literally there to gather feedback on the beta.The people at RPG Codex hate it because they're haters.
-
I agree. And just so I'm not misunderstood, I'm not criticizing this aspect of the system. Unlike some grognards, I don't AT ALL oppose a system that intentionally blurs the lines between the classes so as to not make them very distinct from one another.
I only came to this muscle wizard thread to point out a neutral observation: This game feels like it doesn't need Classes. I just started a Rogue playthrough and right now he feels precisely the same as my barbarian under the hood. And my gamer instinct is telling me that it would be really cool (and it would feel natural) if my rogue could level up and get a Rage ability to compliment his crippling strikes.
-
1
-
-
But that's hardly all that distinguishes, say, a mage from a fighter in AD&D, is it. Fighters can't use wands or scrolls or cast spells. Mages can't wear armor or wield swords.Whats your problem? Thats basicaly the difference between classes in AD&D. If you throw fireballs at someone or hit him with a sword its basicaly the same.
A lock picker, trap disarmer, stealthy scout....in an RPG where a good dungeon experience should be about more than just combat.... is Useless. Yes I agree!The difference is that you are not forced to take useless characters with you like rogues because they are the only ones that can disarm traps and lock pick. It always felt anoying to be forced to bring a lockpickbot with you.
-
1
-
-
Well, I wouldn't call it imaginary. I would, however, call it "not a significant enough difference". If the only thing distinguishing a rogue from a Barbarian is that the Barbarian can hit 2 beetles at the same time for 50 damage then wild sprint straight to the 3rd, while the rogue can sneak attack one Beetle for 60 damage then teleport to the second, that's not "class diversity". That's just 2 melee specialists using different l33t tools. It's not a whole lot different than having 2 mages...one who specializes in Evocation spells, and another who's focusing on Necromancy.Yes, the fact that each class has a lot of abilities that only they can use is imaginary.
IMO there should be more to distinguish the classes than just their combat talents.
-
2
-
-
Well, I'm just going by gameplay experience. I'm looking at BB Fighter's Accuracy score and yes, it's lower than my Rogues's, but when I've got both of them meleeing on the front lines, I'm not noticing any difference.Gotta disagree with you here. Attributes and gear can apply to both the Fighter and the Rogue - but the Fighter will ALWAYS have higher accuracy/health/stamina. That's the difference. Yeah, they can have the same bonuses - but don't underestimate the differences those base values will make. I think OE has actually struck a really nice balance with the classes. You can do unconventional things (like have a frontline wizard)... but there are still major differences between the classes that set them apart.
Any number crunchers out there? Can someone tell me exactly how significant a 7 point accuracy score difference is in this game? Because that's what it is between my Rogue's and BB Fighter's.
-
Not in this demo they're not. In this demo, one non-spellcasting class can approach things exactly the same as any other. The game allows it.The classes are not a smoke screen. Classes are about how you approach something,
This isn't a knock. It's a neutral Observation. They could have dispensed with the classes outright and just turned all the skillsets/talents into "talent trees", allowing a character to pick and choose at will from any of them every time he/she levels up, and the build possibilities we're reporting wouldn't really change.
But as it stands, the only real difference between say, a Fighter and a Rogue are the health/stamina/accuracy/D.T and saving throw numbers assigned to them at the start. And even those differences can be practically eliminated by Attributes and gear.
-
Nope. It's not unbalanced. It's the opposite. It's exactly balanced. I'm getting precisely the same results with my Muscle Rogue. Only instead of standing on the front lines and killing things with colored lights, I'm standing on the front lines and killing things with a giant Pike.So the infamous muscle wizard is fun because... it's unbalanced?
The more I play this demo the more I'm realizing 2 things:
1) It's not as difficult as it initially felt
2) The classes are a smoke screen and the game would have been better off without them.
-
2
-
-
Yes.This is an interesting reading but I wonder - when every option is as good as the next one doesn't it make choices less exciting?
It also hurts replayability for people like me, who like to try and discover and play overpowered and underpowered builds for both role-play purposes and experimental purposes.
-
3
-
-
What a cool word.schadenfreude
I hope there's a lot of schadenfreude in PoE. When I'm finished playing PoE for the first time, I want to be able to look back and say: Yes, this game did schadenfreude as well as the infinity engine games.
-
1
-
-
Stacks of items will also disappear, btw.
I had 2 scrolls of Paralysis on one of my character's quick item slots. I saved and Exited the game completely. When I launched the game again and loaded my save, they were gone.
-
<gag>And an 18 in DnD 3.5 is only giving a measly +4 to hit and damage.
That is such a ridiculous apples vs. Oranges retort that I can only conclude you're just trying to get some attention.
First, in 3.5, a standard sword only does 1-8 damage, not 14-23. So the extra +4 damage in 3.5 means more. It's a 50% increase vs. PoE's 40%. Second, and most significantly, Min-maxing has a FAR wider range in 3.5. It actually MEANS something. 3 STR in 3.5 incurs damage penalties. You're at -4 to damage. or -50% with a long sword. That's a 100% damage difference from a strength of 18. By comparison, 3 Might in POE still gives you a f*cking bonus of +10%. Third, 3.5 gives you a stat increase every 4 levels, thus allowing you to constantly be increasing your STR bonuses natually. By 12th level a Str maxed Human has 21 STR before any item or feat bonuses. That's +5 to damage, or +66%(?) damage. Fourth, 3.5 has passive weapon Feat Bonusses. Weapon specialization in 3.5 grants you another +4 to damage. If you're keeping up with this, You're now doing more than double damage with your long sword... on standard hits.
There's also a list of secondary factors that are too numerous to mention (critters have FAR more health in POE. Standard armor does not give the same damage reduction in 3.5 as it does in POE etc.
Lets not sugar coat Josh Sawyer's disgusting deception attempt here. He promised us real Build diversity. He officially swore to it. But there's NOTHING here. My fighter will be no different than yours in this game. This system only allows for meaningless, trivial, cosmetic alterations.
I'm gonna do something now that I very rarely ever do on the internet: Change my mind. This system is insulting.
-
3
-
-
That's a good point.Another point to consider is that the relevant attribute we're talking about is "Intellect", not "Intelligence", and while related, I think their definitions can be interpreted differently enough - You could be a complete non-intellectual without being an idiot.
But I'll also point out that low intellect (or even low intelligence) also doesn't mean that your character is incompetent. An Idiot can still be a very persuasive speaker.
An example from ToEE was when your character put points in the speaking skills but had 5 intelligence.
NPC: "I'm afraid I cannot tell you where the prisoners are."
You: "You talk or me smash face!"
NPC: "Ok Ok! I'll tell you. Don't hurt me. Go down the hall and make a left. Use the stairs. Then make another left. Here I'll mark it on your Map!"
-
Walking does not require tactical thinking or role playing in PoE (well, barring any shi*t pathfinding you have to deal with lol), nor does it cause your party to expend rare consumables and limited per-day abilities. The threat of Death also is not attached to walking in PoE. So I wouldn't support an XP for walking system.The problem with that line of thinking is that there are trash mobs and they are unavoidable. You are going to fight, a lot.
Well ... walking is also unavoidable, yet the game doesn't give you xp for it constantly. If it did, you'd sure as hell be inclined to take the scenic route, wouldn't you?
-
4
-
-
Well, the choice of "to pick up or not" has been kinda nullified here with PoE's inventory system, as the Stash is both bottomless and weightless. Why wouldn't you grab everything that's grabbable?Dragon Age Origins had a pretty nice system for comparison of what you had equipped and what was on the ground or in your inventory. Pretty straightforward and useful to the player especially in terms of speeding up the process whether to pick the loot or not.
"No Bad Builds" a failure in practice?
in Backer Beta Discussion
Posted
It's disingenuous. If you want to compare the inherent diversity of the classes in PoE with the classes in D&D, then do that. It'll be an easier debate for you, and you won't have to instinctively go into denial mode. Obviously the classes in PoE are more diverse by nature. D&D classes are not designed to be jack-of-all-trades do alls, like the ones in PoE. D&D takes a far more specialized approach to the individual classes. Of course, D&D also lets you multi-class, and that's something you're probably not going to be able to overcome...even with your muscle wizard.
But lets not play stupid and pretend that the Attributes in PoE have a more meaningful impact on class builds than the attributes in D&D. because they Do not. And it's not even close.