Jump to content

1varangian

Members
  • Content Count

    149
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

1varangian last won the day on April 10 2017

1varangian had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

112 Excellent

About 1varangian

  • Rank
    (3) Conjurer

Badges

  • Pillars of Eternity Backer Badge
  • Pillars of Eternity Kickstarter Badge
  1. An attack of exact same power can cause different amounts of damage based on where it hits. Randomness of damage also reflects where and how it hits.
  2. I never liked the food buffs or rest bonuses either. They were just completely unnecessary nonsense that didn't add anything worthwhile to the game. Except the nagging feeling that your party isn't performing at their best because you didn't eat fish or apples or whatnot before battle.
  3. I like those, but feel they should be softer. Well, and they may very well be in 5e. But, the whole "Oh, your Strength is 12? You can't wear this. Oh, it's 13? Slap it on! You're golden! 8D!" idea is a bit silly. There should be a more gradual effect of increased fatigue/hindrance whilst wearing it, versus simply being unable to feasibly wear it. If it requires 13 Strength and you have 6, then sure. No wearies. Strength of 11? Wearies, but you're gonna be less effective. Along those lines... I think ability requirements for equipment is one place where I can easily suspend my disbelief in favor of a better and clearer system. If you start introducing gradual penalties for not meeting the requirement it becomes unnecessarily difficult to understand how effective something really is. Is Splint Mail with 2 points too few in Str/Con actually better or as good as Chain without penalty? What's the point of pre-reqs in the first place if you can wear heavier armor with penalty that is just as good as lighter armor without penalty? If the penalties are meaningful enough to warrant their own existence you're automatically better off using gear that you meet the requirements for anyway. And then it's the penalties that become meaningless in the system. It also creates a sense of achievement for the character when they can use something that others can't.
  4. DAO is a great game but the attribute and equipment systems were definitely NOT good. Attributes and equipment scaled way too much, like in an action RPG. All armors had 7 (or more) tiers with pretty linear strength requirements. Basically those were level requirements to wear better gear. I don't want to see that in an RPG again, ever. DnD 5e has str requirement of 13 to wear chain mail and str 15 to wear splint or plate mail. Something along those lines works great.
  5. In DnD, with the progressive point buy system, you are making meaningful choices with attributes. A Wizard can raise Int from 16 to 18, or use the same amount points to get 6 points distributed between Str / Dex / Con up to 14. You can trade that last bit of spellcasting power with better survivability and the ability to smack goblins with a staff or sword or whatever. Without the progression, it would be a no brainer to always pump Int to max. So perhaps PoE needs progressive costs as well. And with that comes making the stats have much more impact. In NWN, when you are distributing attributes you are making important choices. The attributes create a clear image of the character in your mind. In PoE it's mostly just annoying trying to figure out the spread you want because your character will play the same whatever you do and it just feels like some really vague micromanagement.
  6. It's a great question. Spellcasters with increased Strength = able to wear better armor and wield better weapons, thus being able to fight in melee instead of having to flee or always start casting defensive spells when engaged Fighters with increased mental attribute = qualifying for talents and special moves e.g. "Focused Precision" or "Keen Defender" that increase their accuracy or deflection for a duration, and/or getting more uses of special moves. A mentally more capable warrior would be more flexible and "peak" more at the time of your choosing. A super strong but mentally lacking warrior would be more of a workhorse damage dealer with less choice for special moves or self buffs. I'm fairly sure the first one has never worked, since if a wizard doesn't want to wade into melee, they won't. So it's a dump stat. The second one seems functionally identical to intelligence. Unless you're proposing separate attributes for auto-attack damage and ability damage, in which case, which one does an archer/gunner use? Or magical implements? Or knives and rapiers? Strength as RPGs traditionally define is just shouldn't be a thing. It's too narrow and only really useful for a narrow subset of characters. It has to be either folded together with constitution or something else, like Pillars does it. You completely underestimate the usefulness of Strength in a system where armor and weapons have a Strength requirement to use. Also in a good combat system, staying out of melee completely isn't up to the Wizard. DnD is a great example where having 14 Strength suddenly gives your Wizard the ability to fight in melee. Compared to 10 Str you hit a lot more and can one hit goblins with a staff. So it has been done even without the pre-reqs I mentioned above.
  7. It's a great question. Spellcasters with increased Strength = able to wear better armor and wield better weapons, thus being able to fight in melee instead of having to flee or always start casting defensive spells when engaged Fighters with increased mental attribute = qualifying for talents and special moves e.g. "Focused Precision" or "Keen Defender" that increase their accuracy or deflection for a duration, and/or getting more uses of special moves. A mentally more capable warrior would be more flexible and "peak" more at the time of your choosing. A super strong but mentally lacking warrior would be more of a workhorse damage dealer with less choice for special moves or self buffs.
  8. The AD&D "opposing schools" system was rubbish which is why it's weird they would want to replicate it in PoE2. At least in BG you only lose one school out of 8, so the current PoE system of axing 2/5 is actully much worse.
  9. 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. Exactly right. PoE attribute system could be great with some fine tuning. - separate Might into physical and mental strength - make the abilities matter more across the board - instead of a linear cost and progression, introduce a point buy system where raising attributes costs progressively more. It hinders min/maxing and makes an evenly spread "jack of all trades" build viable
  10. For real, what's the problem in Warriors always needing Str and Wizards always needing Int? Of course a melee fighter needs to be strong and fast. Or high Dex and finesse. Of course a Wizard needs to be highly intelligent if magic works like science. There's nothing wrong with "obvious" stats. They make perfect sense.
  11. You could easily flip the schools on that diagram to whatever arrangement and it would make just as much sense. That's what I meant by random. None of these schools oppose eachother thematically which would make losing access completely understandable. If Illusion and Enchantment are your favourite schools, you're simply out of luck because someone decided that should you specialize in one, you lose the other. The only way to get both Illusion and Enchantment is to pick Evoker subclass or not subclass at all. The system is just rigid and arbitrary. Getting a penalty to all spells outside your chosen school makes sense because of focus. But being completely unable to cast two entire schools of spells "just because" doesn't.
  12. If I know all my spells replenish after every battle, of course I will open up with the most powerful ones. Every time. And then work my way down gradually to lower level spells. To maximise efficiency and minimize the risk of injury. That can get predictable and boring very fast. Unless the encounter designs are always smart and unpredictable and give you something else to consider.
  13. NWN / D&D 3.5e manage this because stats have more weight in combat and skill points. A Str 18 character hits twice as hard with a Longsword than a Str 10 character. The difference is even bigger with a two hander. High Str characters in NWN hit clearly harder, can carry more weight and feel strong like they should. In PoE Mig 18 vs. Mig 10 equals 24 dmg vs. 20 dmg, hardly enough to make the distinction between weak and strong. (And you don't even know if its physical strength or some spiritual magicsoulpower that apparently manifests as telekinetic augmentation of physical strength.) D&D Dex 18 gives you a massive AC and Accuracy bonus while in PoE Resolve isn't really worth putting points into. Copy paste for every other stat. I'm not saying D&D is perfect but the attributes DO work much better than the PoE system in making your character feel a certain way.
  14. So there will only be per encounter spells?? That sounds like casters are going to spam their most powerful spells in every single fight since its free. Which gets repetitive. Which makes casting spells less awesome and more of a chore rather than an intelligent tactical choice. And spells will have be less powerful and less impressive because you cast much more. Please prove me wrong.
  15. If they really are going forward with randomly axing 40% of the potential spell list, I feel like the subclasses need to be much deeper with more unique powers/spells and bigger focus on the chosen school. I still probably wouldn't play any subclass that loses Evocation in a game like Pillars. The lost schools define the subclass more than the chosen school does, which is completely backwards. And there's no way they can ever explain why precisely Conjuration and Evocation are mutually exclusive. Base Wizard can cast everything, so they are not mutually exclusive.
×
×
  • Create New...