.jpg.ce846aae50e732dc4985eb712252381f.jpg)
CottonWolf
-
Posts
400 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by CottonWolf
-
-
Josh said on SA that their going to add a "board" option at combat start, so you can get straight into boarding in exchange for an indeterminate amount of ship damage if you find the ship combat boring.
-
4
-
-
Newest patch.
Rolled a shattered pillar/devoted. Devoted now get only one weapon proficiency which is great but they get the devoted penalty applied to unarmed attacks with no way to remedy as fists can not be a proficiency choice.
Intended behavior or bug?
Yep. This should be fixed. It's always been weird that there's not a unarmed proficiency.
-
Terminology is a thing though...
What's a starboard? What's jibe??
I think they're generally okay, because the icons are informative. Jibing being the exception. That needs a better icon to make it clear exactly what it means.
-
Ship to ship combat is way more robust than I anticipated. I wonder if it will stay fun, or become tedious after a while. I wish there was a more detailed attack system (aim for different system of the ship to demage crew members, cripple manuvers, delay enemy attack.) Right now I am not sure what is the gameplay elements beyond - move from one side to another and shoot, or rush your enemy and board. Wind seems to be a thing, which gives bonuses if you use it well. After getting murdered, I am now off to figure the system out.
Yeah, targetting different parts of the ship or switching ammo to chain balls for different effects or something would definitely make it more engaging. As it is, I didn't really feel in control of what was happening. It was just a lot of turning to get in a broadsides then dicerolls as I fired. I'm not sure if I should even have been attempting something else.
-
2
-
-
In theory it should be today, the redemption website says updates on the first Thursday of every month until release.
-
1
-
-
Now I really want to try a monk/fighter and pick Monastic Unarmed Training - just to see if the universe collapses or something.
Apparently you can't take it if one of your classes is Monk.
-
At the same time, I wonder how different dev build is from backer beta. It lacks so much content that we know willl be in the game, that I would be surprised if what we played was barely representative of what Obsidian works on - early cut of a game, design to test stuff, rather than showcase what is to come. Still, you folks, who were part of the beta for PoE1 can judge better how much 1.0 can vary from the BB.
The answer is a lot.
-
Yep. Mine too. They must have pushed a silent update.
-
It's obviously okay. That's the deliberate downside of the subclass. You're trading flexibility for power, and if there was never a cost to that power, it's no longer a trade-off. It's not like there's nothing that can be done. It's a party based game, you can pull your fighter back and let the other four toons take out the immune thing, or you can switch to a weapon your fighter has a malus with, and fight it with the handicap.
-
6
-
-
Unless it's genuinely enciphered text, and we should be decrypting it rather than attempting to type it in somewhere.
-
If I attempt to start the game through Steam it immediately to desktop before managing to get to the title screen. However, if I find the local file and use the "Open" command on it directly, the game loads fine and can be played. It's an odd one.
-
1
-
-
IV. IMMERSION/ROLEPLAY
Character Creation and Skill Points:
Backround, Class, Culture should not affect skill points. STOP THAT. Let me choose how to build my character. My devoted fighter should not have a point in explosives. My nature druid should not have two points in explosives. My timid orlan should not have more intimidation than my aumaua just because she is a kind-wayfarer. My laborer should probably have points in Mechanics, not Athletics.
Why are you forcing these absurd RP choices on us in a CRPG?
I'm with you on class, but background absolutely should give you skill points. What you did before you became an adventurer is the main determinant of what your starting skills would be.
-
7
-
-
Even without multiclassing, first priority should be given to balance single classes, which requires nerfing low-level strong passives among others. If all single-classes had comparable progression (roughly equally strong abilities on every level), multi-classing based on power levels could be automatically satisfactory in some degree.
It seems easier to me to balance 11 single classes than all their combinations, after all
Don't nerf the strong passives. They're the only actually interesting ones. Besides, getting rid of the strong passives doesn't make multiclassing any less desirable, it just makes it moreso, because you have to look for real synergies to counter the decrease in power, which is something single classes can't do. The only way to solve that problem is to make passives less good for multiclass characters, but that means taking out any that cause step change effects, or putting them so late in the progression trees that multiclass characters functionally can't take them.
-
I agree passives are an issue, so I like Boeroer's suggestion of having passives be A + b(powerlevel) instead of a flat number like 50% sneak attack or 15% like weapon specialization. That way single class gains a quick and consistent lead over multiclass both in powers of individual abilities and in terms of their passive.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
That doesn't work because most of the really good passives have step change effects, like +1 engagement or downgrading all afflications of a certain type one level.
-
I bet the choice and consequences will be New Vegas style, which is good imo.
This is what I'm hoping for.
-
Plus, there's DLC, so they'll want post-release support to keep people playing so they'll buy it when it comes out. And if they have plans for a PoE3 (divine campaign, please), they'll want to keep goodwill.
-
All that numbers tweaks sounds attactive , however, lets take a look at roots.
From the game world mechanic point of view.
Spells are cast based on religion or high education (which is a science based religion).
Not really. Spells are cast because soul power in PoE. What you are affects how you manifest this power. Gods and religion itself has no power over it.
Yeah, just to add to this. While text of the game is rather equivocal about this in Durance's case, the pre-release information implied that priests abilities don't come from direct divine power tapped from a specific god, but rather the power of the soul of the priest, fueled by their own belief. So in theory, a priest in PoE could believe in anything. A really fervent athetist could be a "priest" if they wanted.
-
Eh? Why that? Actually having single classes adds choice and does not remove it. Even if they happen to be less powerful than several multiclass combos they are still viable choices. The choice is basically "faster ability progression and more powerful endgame abilites vs. powerful synergies and two resource pools". Removing them does nothing good for anybody. If you think they are bad - just don't play them in your game.
If you would only allow multiclass chars then it would be wiser to remove classes alltogether and design a classless system (like Josh - and me - like them best anyways).
At the moment it's just a matter of balancing. And in my opinion the problem can be easily solved with a) shorter casting times (for our poor single class casters) and b) proper design and implementation of Power Level and how it influences ALL abilites in a meaningful way. That should do the trick.
I don't have a philosophical objection to them. I have a practical one. (But yes, I'd generally prefer a classless system too.) My issue is generally that I can't see how you can balance the power of passives across multi/single classes. Passives are (arguably) the most powerful abilities on the tree, and multis get full progression in both classes passives. And as many of them represent step changes, you can't even scale them with power level - partial downgrading of afflications doesn't make sense. Even if the level 8/9 spells are amazing, for most of the game they won't have them, single classes surely won't be able to make up the difference that multis get through their passives (and that's putting aside that ranger pets and summoned weapons, and possibly other things I don't know about, don't depend on power level, making multis built around those concepts even more broken).
If they want to keep single classes in as an option, fine. But seriously, give new players recommended multiclass combinations to choose from. Don't make them play a single class character, that's the worst possible outcome. Auto-level up is already a thing if they want to avoid the complexity of skill choice.
-
I can't see how confusion would cause that anyway... You're right it just looks like a straight up bug, not an interaction with the afflication system.
Since we're talking about shared flames, when using shared flames as a Bleak Walker, I noticed that all the allies who get effected by the buff also get sickened. Pretty sure that's not supposed to occur.
Bleak Walkers are notorious for not sharing.
-
I still think the solution is to get rid of single class characters entirely. They're vestigial at this point. Just have full advancement in two classes. There are enough pure martial classes that you could build a roughly "non-magical" fighter (Fighter/Rogue) if you wanted to, and everything else is covered.
-
Am I right in the understanding that the beta is level capped below the release cap? The progression chart seems to suggest that the idea is for single classes to pull further ahead in their speciality as the game goes on, so only having access to the lower parts of the level curve could distort perceptions. Consider the way 2e multiclassing worked in the IE games: multiclasses barely lag behind a pure class in both classes until the experience curve levels out in the low teens. In BG1 multiclasses are fairly absurd because it sits on the early part of the curve, while in BG2 the better single and dual classes pull far enough ahead in levels to shine in their niches (though non-caster single classes still tend to be pretty sad in comparison to multiclasses).
In general, it seems OK to me if the best builds are multiclass as long as single classes are basically viable (especially if they're being recommended to new players). If balance is going to tilt towards one or the other, give me the one with more space to explore.
Yep. It's nowhere near the whole progression. Up to level 20 in the full game. So, yeah, we can't be sure what the balance look like in the endgame, but it's also true that the majority of the game isn't the endgame.
-
I'm on the put healing on Constitution train, autoattack and weapon skill damage being on Strength, and deflection and "magic" damage being on Resolve, feels right, and it gives Constition a reason to exist.
-
Yeah. What's even the point of the conjurer subclass then?
I mean, if you want to be a gish, surely you multi Fighter/Conjurer or something? Then you summon your weapons as if you were a pure wizard.
That was exactly the situation that led me to find this out. I was creating a Devoted/Wizard using summoned weapons, and I wanted to find out exactly how they scaled with Power Level to see whether Conjurer was the best class for the build (also how useful Nature Godlike would be). A bit of testing later and I reported what I thought was a bug and was told it was intended behaviour. Seems very odd to me.
It is odd. It possibly explains why so many spells are conjuration though, that had puzzled me. But it was probably necessary if you were going to have a subclass focusing on conjuration spells but have the archetypal spells of that school not actually get an increase in power.
Speaking of which, what does empowering a summoned weapon do at the moment? More damage? Longer duration?
-
That seems like a poor solution. The number of specific items that would then be required would be huge, and many of them would be unusable for most players due to the lack of a pure class X (especially with the smaller party size).
suggestion: setting the amount of saves
in Pillars of Eternity II: Deadfire General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Posted
If this is easy to be implemented, it seems like a really good idea, but at this point, if it takes significant time away from from bug fixing/balancing, I don't think it's worth it.