Jimmysdabestcop
-
Posts
172 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Jimmysdabestcop
-
-
Note: I would say the same about BG games because they are in D&D 2nd ed which had many many flaws as well. D&D 3rd ed was a much smoother and comprehensive experience and much more elegant and powerful way of doing things than 2nd. It could even handle sticky things in a mostly decent manner like making drow player characters in a way that worked fairly well rather than just watering them down because "Loth revoked her favor" or whatever.
I will take 2nd Edition D&D. It had staying power something like 7 years. 3rd edition wasn't that good it was revised to 3.5 Edition withing 3 years of release. 3.5 did a lot better then 3 and lasted half a decade. 4th edition I honestly never played but it did last as long as 2nd edition until 5th edition came out last year. Haven't played 5th Edition yet but I follow some communities that post about weekly game sessions. Looks real interesting. I think Beamdog might make a 5th edition game. They are making a 2nd edition prequel/sequel/insert for inbetween BG1 and BG2.
2nd Edition had Forgotten Realms, Planescape, Revaneloft and Dark Suns all pretty damn popular in its time.
-
This entire thread is like the exact opposite of the Ranger threads. The truth is Obisidian shouldn't have shoe horned any class into any specific combat role. Meaning this class is ranged and this class is melee. Even the casters should be able to do both.
Now I'm not saying all the classes need to do the job equally as well. But every class should have some kind of talent/abiltity that pertains to both ranged and melee.
Even some of the specific class abilities/talents are just combinations of generic talents all classes get. I mean if we have a fighter aka Warrior aka Soldier class shouldn't they at least have some type of ability for heavy ranged weaponry? It could easily make sense story universe wise that a Fighter is better at heavy weapons or a ranger better with bows or a rogue better at firearms etc.
Obisidian can probably change this problem but having subclasses in a DLC. Or they could have avoided it by making a handful of classes really unique and really flexible insteads of adding a 11 classes with some only being good at 1 type of combat.
A ranged fighter while possible is slightly lacking and it doesn't need to be Ranger status but it could be at least unique. A reason to actually have that character in your party beyond the reason of just wanting it in there to be different.
-
Fighter gets talents that increase weapon category damage by 45% Weapon Specialization on 5th level and I think you can take Mastery as early as 6th level.
So a fighter should be getting pretty damn close to Rogue's Sneak Attack without any afflictions being needed.
The only real question is can a Ranged Fighter get as many Critical Hits as a Rogue? A fighter has higher accuracy, elf gives another +5 accuracy and you can equip a +10 accuracy gauntlet on the fighter. +5 for marksman talent. An Elf Fighter can have +10 accuracy at range over a Melee fighter.
Armored Grace makes fighter 16% faster then a Rogue at level 7. Hold Wall enhanced to superb and with lash would get speed mod. Curious to see what damage could be done with the Wendgär that has speed mod and +10% critical chance.
Now I'm even curious about Ranged Fighter vs Ranged Ranger. Ranger will be able to reload faster and fire faster but single target damage still goes to the fighter. And even accuracy would go to the fighter.
-
1
-
-
You don't need abilities to maximize ranged rogues damage though, there are so many ways to constantly keep your enemies afflicted. Not only have casters got countless ways to do so and the cipher can do so every encounter, also you just need to flank an enemy, bang sneak attack until he's dead.
A ranged fighter could basically be getting +45% damage on every attack while the rogues sneak attack is +50% but it needs a modifier. The fighters would not. True the rogue gets the bonus a lot earlier than the fighter.
Would just need to test the fighter crit percent to see how often he can grit with his much higher accuracy then the rogue with his +20% crit chance.
-
1
-
-
I'm not sure if Obisidian just wanted a Pet becasue it fit with their idea of the Party NPC Companion or what the deal was. But I agree if the pet is going to be active all the time why not make it selectable at creation?
This problem probably goes back to Kickstarter extended goals. I rather have 5 classes with a lot of flexibility to play them in completely different ways like kits in D&D then a Dozen Classes with a narrower vision of how to play them.
Honestly think a Ranger fits in this exact problem. But there are even threads on people wanted Ranged Fighters. Barbarians and Monks same problem. So the underlying problem is class flexibility. A lot of people love the Ranger but a lot of people like to play them completely different.
-
1
-
-
Honestly ranged Rogue and Ranged Rangers aren't all that exciting ranged. Unless you are casting spells no class really has enough per encounter abilties Ranged to make it not 80% auto attack anyway. A Ranged Ranger you will be controlling the pet more then the Ranger basically. Most of the abilities that help Rogues and Rangers in ranged are all passive anyway.
Since there are several other threads bashing the Ranger I wont repeat. But Obisidian should have just made the class an Archer class or some kind of Arcane Archer with Pet. Like Rangers in Divinity Original Sin. Almost as fun to play as the wizard classes because they have so many magical arrows for every occasion and every fight. And then like a handful of ranged abilities.
-
Lets throw this back to NES days. AAA publishers all want Zelda sales instead of Dragon Warrior sales. Even though Dragon Warrior had like 3-4 gaems in top 25 NES sales of all time.
You can kind of relate Zelda to DA:I. You wouldn't classify Zelda as a cRPG or aRPG but more adventure with some rpg elements. Its the same thing with DA:I.
Where as all of the IE games and even all of the Bioware games up to DAO would be cRPG with some action/adventure elements thrown in. Mostly real time combat as opposed to jRPG tactical or turn based combat. Jade Empire was probably the most action adventure title Bioware head until it went to EA and Jade still has more cRPG elements in it.
Sure DAI has companions and quests and plot storylines and decisions. But so did adventure games like Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis. Or any of the other LucasArts adventure games. Its just DAI presents itself in a medieval fantasy setting.
And as others have stated a lot of this has to do with consoles. And even Japan being less of a market for non jRPG's especially with Xbox not really ever penetrating that market.
And the AAA publishers are almost forced to abandon real cRPG's because they have to sell to mass market of console gamers. And games like Wasteland 2, PoE, Divintity Orginal Sin wont sell.
-
Their best spells are their buffs and healing. There are encounters where Durance does nothing but buffing and healing, since otherwise the whole party would fall to pieces.
All depends on what difficulty you are playing. And what play style you are using. In my current party I never use buffs. Rarely use heals. I focus mostly on crowd control disables. Priest spells that prone or disable. Plus cipher or wizard or druid spells that disable. Or mass confusion/domination. There are so many blind, paralyze, prone, petrification, sickness, diseased, its kind of crazy. Especially when the Prone Seal second level priest spell becomes per encounter based. 10 mechanics its amazing.
Now I don't need buffs because I am disabling and a lot of disable automatically increase accuracy and or damage. And since the enemy is disabled I dont really need heals all that often. Most of the time I need heals is because I'm not paying attention to everyone and its my own fault.
But yeah you can just as easily focus on buffs/debuffs and healing. Several different ways to play. None right or wrong. All personal preference.
-
A Ranged Fighter Thoughts............
I wonder if you stick a fighter in clothes would he still get the -16% recovery from Armored Grace? Sounds like he should. That plus the generic reloading talent. Being an elf, plus marksman talent. soldier talent. Maybe Interrupting Blows. Maxed Might&Dex&Per&Res dump Int and Con. Int would only be needed for Discplined Barrage and its only 1 per encounter not worth it. Even dumping Con Fighter will have more con then any ranged squishy.
That would be +15 accuracy to the fighters already high accuracy. Possible 36% speed increase (armored grace and reloading talent). Would interrupt amazingly. If the speed mods for weapons work in 1.05 you could add leash and superb to Hold Wall Arbalest in the first town that would increase speed by another 20%. Plus weapon specialization and mastery for added damage. Could get away with clothes cause of maxed Per&Res and fighters high deflection. Wouldn't have to worry about him in the back and if something gets through switch to melee like pike/great sword.
The Fighters ranged accuracy would actually be +10 higher then his melee accuracy from being an elf and marksman. So fighter should actually crit more in ranged combat then melee. The Fighter should then have the highest possible damage of any class in range not counting the Rogue Sneak Attack. Probably will crit about as much as the ranger from ranged. So 40% faster relaod and 16% faster recovery time.
Now I am really curious about trying one out.
-
The Monk is a good idea for your PC. Once you do all the companion quests in your playthrough no reason to bring them on your 2nd playthrough I feel.
I would go IceWind Dale style and create an entire party. Monk, Fighter, Cipher, Priest with whatever other 2 slots you like. Maybe Barbarian and a Wizard.
-
1
-
-
Without knowing anything. I will say generally their seal/traps spells are the best especially when you boost your priests mechanics.
-
I'm fine with the enchanting system. It is simple. I feel you can go 2 ways simple or complex. And anything that is in the middle will feel awkard. Go simple or basically go big.
I really thought the crafting system in Divinty Original Sin was cool. Even though their equipment adapted to player level and that concept isn't in PoE. the stuff you could make or enchant was cool. Need a helmet use a knife on a pumpkin. Instant Pumpkin Helmet. Or a hammer on a cooking pot. And a pot helmet.
But any changes would mean you would have to add a ton of materials to find or buy. But a complex system would be a cool DLC or for PoE 2. Crafting and Enhancing could be seperate skills. Then you should be able to craft anything or enhance anything based upon skill and materials and slots.
The thing the current system has going for it is that you can find stuff in the start of game and make it really good. Eder armor can go to superb plus at least 1 more enhancement. That armor is good the entire game and when the player gets better so does the armor. Same thing with Paladin shield or Hold Wall now that speed mods work.
-
1
-
-
Honestly you would expect D&D to have better classes its like 4 decades old! We do use the IE games as comparision and its probably unfair truthfully.
I think Obisidian either should have had opposing talents for each class. That would help individualize them. If they didn't feel like doing that then just a couple extra talents so that any class could have some actives and passives in both melee and ranged. Or just have made all the class specific abilities and talents work in both range and melee.
A lot of the complaints with the Ranger are from people wanting them to be 1st or 2nd line melee fighters. Which is totally justified. Its the opposite problem that Barbarians and Monks have since they cant do ranged at all really. But they are so good at melee no one will complain that they cant have a Ranged Monk or Ranged Barbarian.
You could probably range a fighter since he gets some damage bonus abilities/talents.
I can tell you in BG2 I have dual wielded Minsc, 2 handed him, and strictly ranged him. All about equal. Ranged you could just walk around with insane magical ammo the entire game.
I do think they could have ranged Monks. Given them some kind of special chai/kai ranged focus like abilitiy. Even Barbarians could have had some kind of throwing weapon. Maybe magical throwing spear. Or even a blunderbuss could probably fit a barbarian.
-
DA2 and DA 3 aren't in the same category as PoE. PoE is in the same category as Wasteland 2 and Divinty Original Sin. Even though those games have tactical combat.
DA2 and DA:I are basically action/adventure games with "rpg lite" elements throw in. Those games aren't even aRPG's like say Torchwood 2. Torchwood 2 compared to DA:I in the aRPG category and Torchwood 2 smokes DAI.
Its like saying Assassins Creed games are RPG's, Just because you can pick skills or level equipment up an rpg does not it make.
Its the same thing with MAss Effect 2/3 all the real cRPG elements were stripped out. The Only reason Dragon Age Origin was spared was because it was in development for like 5 years before EA bought Bioware.
Those games are like fast food.
-
1
-
-
Who knows they may even update to Unity 5 like inXile is doing spring/summer with Wasteland 2. Unity 5 will make mods flurish. As it is basically impossible to release good tools under Unity 4.x.x
I think what would be really cool is to drop the PreMade "Soul" into a created character. I mean they could make the story elements dynamic so if any text mention s class or race or background it could change.
If not it be cool to be able to change ability scores. Not to min/max just fit better in with the party. Maybe only allow a total of 5 points to be rearranged.
At least with IeMod you can change class and relevel the companions up.
-
1
-
-
Think my first play through I forgot about the bounties. I did like 1 of the first wave then forgot. By the time I remembered I was level 12 and had to finish the first wave and then the next 3.
Judging by that there is probably enough xp still in the game.
-
He hasn't been nerfed but there was a bug with 1 of his abilties that made the barbs do really high damage and that bug was fixed.
-
Kill them all. Once you find leader you can pick between killing or pseudo happy scooby doo ending.
-
Priests aren't Clerics from BG1 or BG2 also. Plus in the IE games most times a fighter would be dual classed to a Cleric. And a cleric self buffs might them stronger then a fighter. Healing spells were probably higher level in BG2 as compared to PoE heals.
But Wizards can self buff an enter melee just like in Bg2 and IWD. You do have to read the Wizard spells. Some are AoE and soem are Foe AoE only.
Overall Bg2 was more about chess game between enemy and party arcane magic users. PoE isn't so much about buffs and debuffs on normal or even hard mode then it is crowd control and disables. Spellcasters are really good at disables in PoE.
-
For me I always need a rogue with a high mechanics so I have to make one at the Inn. Thankfully for my next game that will be the only party member I need custom made.
I feel the same way towards having a rogue in my party. Frankly, it's annoying that there's no Rogue companion in the game (outside of the tutorial). Perhaps even more than the other two missing companion classes, I feel that the lack of a rogue for locks and traps duty is a glaring hole.
You actually want your Priest to be the lead Mechanic. As it boosts his trap/seal spells. They are low level and powerful. If you are setting physical traps then the Priest is the only character who really needs Mechanics for his class.
Of course you ight want other classes to have mechanics because of role play reasons.
-
1
-
-
I almost wish this was on the Paradox Forum like most games they publish. No way a thread has 18 pages on one of their forums without a comment from a developer or publisher or scripter or tester or someone corporate.
And no excuses for small team. Do you see how oftern the City Skyline devs post on the forum over there.
-
I don't think Obisidian should have went Pet without scripts. Scripts would solve mostly all problems with pets. Should have made Pets per rest or per encounter summons. Not magical like he calls them from woods or something. Instead one 1 pet it could auto generate based upon location. I think that would have been better.
Obisidian pet idea is strong its just without scripts you can't control the pet like how it needs to be.
-
Classes shouldn't be ranged or melee. That is like EA Dragon Age Inquistion nonsense. Obisidian should be capable enough to either make all class abilities/talents enhance both range and melee or make multiple abilities/talents so the player can decide.
Obisidian obviosuly did that with the Wizard class. And if a freakin Wizard can go melee and have abilties and spells for melee then a Ranger should. That's the bottom line.
Honestly cRPG's need to let the player decide on how to play the class. I could say the same thing with the Barbarian Class. It is basically the same problem but reversed as they are all melee based. Why shouldn't a player be able to have war bow barbarian and still have abilties that make that combat fun and exciting instead of just focusing on melee.
These are the specific details that make a great game into a legendary game. And I think PoE is really good right now. And its not that these classes suck or aren't balanced or powerful its just the developer has really designed 1 true way to play them and that is the sucky part.
-
1
-
-
Actually, I always looked at Rangers as "Fighter Lite" in BG1 and BG2 (when using a vanilla ranger). There was really nothing special about rangers in combat in BG1/2, except for BG2's Archer kit. That's where my "Fighter Lite" phrase comes from.
As for the spells, I never liked Ranger spells. They came too late and were generally too uninteresting. Oh, if one was playing IWD2 in HOF mode, their animal summoning spells could be darned useful, but that was rather situation. I also never really liked paladin spells either. Rangers with spells just seemed like a Druid Lite, just as Paladin spells made them feel like Cleric Lite. Neither held much value for me. I'd just prefer some improved constant or limited use abilities to druid or cleric spells on both Rangers and Paladins.
I don't need to see a Ranger as some sort of forest (or some other environment) warrior. I'd prefer them to be "light fighters" (not meaning the same thing as "Fighter Lite", BTW). And for a melee ranger, they should have abilities that encourage a totally different style of combat thAn your average plate wearing tank of a fighter. Abilities that encourage a more light, quick style of combat that favors speed, DEX, and deflection over armor. Arguably, this could end up being some sort of middle ground between fighters, rogues, and even barbarians. Rangers probably shouldn't care about increasing the number of enemies engaged. That's something that Fighters and perhaps Paladins in their nice shiny plate armor would care about. Melee rangers might favor increased disengagement deflection so that they can get in, hit hard, then fall back. One might even make a case that perhaps they could use a sneak attack ability, though if they did, the overlap between Ranger and Rogue might become so great that the differences would become blurred.
Ok now we are talking. That is what I have been trying to say for like 5 pages. I agree some kind of say counter attack or ambush type attack or a specific flank attack would help the Ranger to have his own identity. And would make him different from a fighter, rogue or barbarian.
And yeah in D&D from the IE era you probably wouldn't have a straight Ranger without a kit or dualed to a Cleric. BG2/IWD you could go archer or stalker or beastmaster. Stalker would be the melee path. Getting thief abilities plus several Wizard spells (Haste, Protection from Missiles, and Spell Deflection). And they get the thief backstab ability. Archer is basically the ranged version. And beastmaster being the weakest unless you dual classes to a Cleric. Original games you would then have access to all Druid and Cleric spells once your Ranger got the Druid spells. And you could either dual wield clubs. Go 2 handed quartstaff or use slings via range.
Stalkers could be just as good in melee as archers were in ranged. Stalkers are basically always hasted in combat. And in IWD high level Stalkers level 22 get Iron Skins. Since they get higher Druid Spell level. BG2 rangers were capped at level 3 divine spells. Which are kind of weak.
And Obisidian can easily fix this just by changing ranger abilities to make them matter in melee and range. If it makes faster reloading then melee could have faster recovery etc.
Survival Skill - Suggestions for Improvements
in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Posted
The Skills basically have no bearing on the game play. Besides Endurance just so you don't have fatigue all the time. if you left everything elase at Zero the game would play exactly the same way. There would be very little difference.
Skills are a great idea but they really need to be expanded on. They should be as important as abilities/talents since you get them when you level up. If they aren't that important why are they in the game?