JFutral

Makes sense. You either:- disable them, or - gather enough concentration, or - bring enough casters, such that they would find it hard to interrupt them all Btw, there have been mentioned 'ritual' spells in this thread. Just a weird thought or rather association, as it makes me think of several robed figures drawing pentagrams together: a ritual could be an assisted spellcasting. E.g. a priest starts casting a very slow spell (let's say Storm of Holy Fire); and another priest (if he has access to the very same spell) can assist him, which results in twice faster casting speed, but at the cost: it's enough to interrupt only one of them - in order to interrupt the spell/ritual. The noise parameter I think should allow pre-combat buffs. A potion makes virtually no noise. And of course the "balance" is the cost in duration, as in the clock starts ticking before the ensuing battle. I'm okay with that. This is actually the strategy I've been employing in the last few play throughs, one direct engagement fighter type and four spell casters both dedicated and multi-class. eta: I like the collaborative spell caster idea a lot. Joe

In PoE1 we had many spells at our disposal, and it was a great feeling that I have 5 different general strategies, and that in this given situation I can use this approach or this one. Versatility. In Deadfire though... dunno, we'll have to see. But I can imagine a playstyle around: - send a tank to gather enemies - start casting a slow heavy hitting aoe spell that would seal the deal in one crit - toss a mass disable, and relocate the tank right before impact An additional thought came to me. One of the things that I think made spell casting in PoE work so well was in fact its simplicity. As this becomes more complex (both with spell schools and multi-class) and the way the mechanics are currently constructed it really does start to veer into BG/AD&D territory where the only way to be effective as a spell caster is to bulk up on quick shot spells like bless, magic missiles or chromatic orbs or DoT spells because those are the only ones you'll have time to cast, so might as well make casting count. And with the still current modality of certain buffs (both spell and potion) this system is even more arduous. When I see the enemy first through stealth I still do not get why anything I want to do has to wait for combat to "Start" before buffing. That is completely non-sensical. In terms of your strategy i was thinking, with an enemy AI that knows to target spell casters regardless of frontline tanks (especially with the rethought-out engagement mechanics which seems to let the bad guys run right by my enemy-gathering tank) maybe the best strategy is for everyone to be a spell caster of some sort, dilute the enemy's ability to focus on one target. Joe

That was a large part of the appeal of the Druid Storm spells, large AoE and only affected enemies. there were a good number of spells. Many of the AoE spells were only good if you had a small party, but casting time and interrupt was less of an issue. I don't want the NPCs chain-casting instant AoE disintegration at me, no! I want the game to be fun and challenging. A six second "Big Spell Incoming! Siren! Alert! Alert!" type mechanic with a little popup and suddenly I have a limited amount of time to interrupt the enemy caster's Big Incoming Nuke could be a lot of fun. Vice versa too if I have to defend my casters so they can get their Big Nukes off without the enemy interrupting them. I don't want it to take eight seconds to cast a ten second charm, though. That's not fun it's just lame. Well, of course I mean that the long casting times are applicable to the enemy and not me. ) There are other ways to deal with that, though. What makes certain encounters more challenging, especially the important encounters, is not casting time or interrupt abilities, it is the enemies resistances. This is the problem with such a high priority on balance. That 6+sec spell that is sooo good, is also sooo good for the enemy. If there were some spells similar to BG/ADD where you "pre-load" a limited number and level of spells (I forget what that spell was called), to have moments to counter act casting time, that would be good. Personally I think casting time, recovery time, and interrupt systems are the wrong place to focus. Like I've said before about PoE I my spell casters finally seemed to contribute to the battles vs the BG series. I think that was in large part because of spells in BG that had such long casting times. And without really knowing the reasons why certain spells take longer to cast than others, without some system of justification (I like whoever it was that talked about ritualistic spells inherently needing more time) all this discussion about casting time is arbitrary and abstract. Not that it isn't enjoyable. And that is what is really at stake, right? How much changing these things affects the enjoyability of the game. And right now the new, seemingly arbitrary, reshuffling of casting times has certainly disrupted our old spell casting strategies from PoE I. Maybe that was the rationale for the change. And I think that is what people here like Max's tables, they bring a level of reasonability to something that so far seems unreasonable. Would they make for a more enjoyable game, though? There is no way to tell. Joe Meh! All this got kerfluffled in a very BAMF sort of way. hopefully you can parse out what I was trying to say. JF

If I understood right, Josh wants some spells to be 6s because it increases the time window when you can interrupt them. And because of this drawback these few spells can be buffed for the BAMF effect, making interruption a really important aspect of the game. At the same time, imho there are no spells that worth of 6s cast duration yet. But imagine if there was something like... AoE Disintegration or Overwhelming Wave with the radius of Interdiction. - if all spells are instant - spells would become OP also it will be hard to follow what's happening on the field.- if spells have instant cast duration and long recovery - this would severely disfavor casters from wearing armor - if spells have long cast duration and instant recovery - there would be no reason for casters to not wear the heaviest of armors - if spells have long both cast and recovery durations - chances are that fights will be over before the casters will be able to adequately contribute to the fight Well, exactly, though. As the player I don't want any of my spells interrupted. As a spell caster that's my whole point of being part of the party. If a fighter gets interrupted he just loses the chance for damage, but he still has his weapon to give it another go. As a spell caster I lose my "weapon", the spell is spent. As the player I want my characters to be able to do the most damage with the least chance of failure. I want the odds in my favor. All this talk of balance, for the spellcaster if interrupt is going to be that important, then I want to either have the ability to cast more (as in more than two) short duration, uninterruptible spells and/or not lose a spell that is interrupted. Especially with an enemy AI that knows to target spellcasters. Long duration, big AoE, big Dam spells make sense in battlefield battles. In the close quarters fighting in most CRPGs of this nature long duration spells make no sense and almost have no reason to exist in this environment. And considering I also risk friendly fire with many of those spells, too, why do I have these spells? eta, Also, considering I now _have_ to have more than one spell book to carry my spells around in. All this seems weighted against spell casters. I don't know what the BAMF effect is. Joe

Why in the world does anyone _want_ 6 second spells? I'd rather they all be instantaneous. Wouldn't you? Joe

Great job. But again, in the abstract it seems reasonable. But without knowing exactly the thinking (if there is any exact thinking) with the changes as they are it is still kind of difficult to imagine. How does this proposal (or even the current casting mechanics) fit into the current battle mechanics as you understand them? Does it maintain some kind of balance, i.e. nothing is more difficult or too easy? I just ran a party of all spell casters (some multi-class). What it really seems to affect for me (as someone who thinks getting bogged down with math is besides the point of a good RPG) it required different strategies, but nothing was more difficult or insurmountable, per se. Fireball is less the first or quick strike as it used to be, but still a good pre-strike (if I am clear). For me, taking everything you know about the game mechanics (and I can't think of anyone who knows them better than you outside of the developers), does this chart result in a game that is more playable and enjoyable? How does this look in an actual fight? But I am still not a cipher fan, so I don't know the consequences for that class of the new changes. Asked another way, if it is at all possible to pull oneself out of the experience, if PoEII casting were in PoEI and we encountered PoEI casting in PoEII, what would we be saying? Joe

I had the same thing happen in the temple ruins on that other island with the dwarf named something Red-handed. I tried saving and restarting. What worked for me was to target him and kill him. When he revived he came up outside the wall he was trapped in. HTH, Joe

First, is there some guide somewhere that goes over how multi-classing affects when new level-up abilities are available? Related, in experimenting with various random multi-class configurations, I have an Orlan Priest (Magran)/Chanter (Beckoner). I keep forgetting I have the Reny Daret invocation because it shows up under the Spell icon instead of the Chanter/Phrases icon. Relating back to the first point, I feel like I am missing out on new invocations at Level 7. But I have no way of knowing. I don't know which I prefer, now that I remember that's where it is at. But negotiating the different class abilities is not always clear cut. Or maybe I just need to get used to it. Other UI things—popup aids cover up other information. Like when I click on a portrait, the character info (name and health) covers up the his or her toolbar. And the same when I select, say Empower, its description covers up the next level up toolbar, such as spells. And I am sure the small scale of the beta is playing a role, but I do enjoy the so far faster load times. Keep that if you can. I like not having enough time to make toast while loading. I still don't always know when a character is finished with an action since the action icon never changes (AI turned off). I keep slapping my forehead when I realize a character has been standing idle for a couple of turns. This has been reported already as a bug. Just feel like sharing a "Doh!" moment. Joe

Maybe, maybe not. But in its current form it sure does shift the role of the spell caster and which spells take on new importance. Joe

Joe

"should there be a few consistent spell categories, or it's ok to have a ton of them?" Seems a relevant question. I can't figure out how to answer that when the change strikes me as completely arbitrary and unnecessary. I have no context to answer that question. The chart is great to help me see the changes as numbers, but it doesn't help me understand why there were changes to begin with. Joe

That is an interesting take. The expansions did add, but in a way that when ever I play through again I either skip the expansions and play the finale section or I play the expansions and forget the final section. The expansion was pretty much incongruous to the main story line. I rarely play the whole campaign anymore. I might feel differently if the expansions were made to add "after finale" story lines. I do like epic battles as part of a story line. But I still never felt like an epic hero. Joe

I don't think anyone wants OS length battles, just maybe longer than they are now combined with further tweaks to casting times. Like I don't play min/maxed at all and my wizard probably gets to cast 3-5 spells in a normal combat as well as moving a bit, auto attacking etc., and that feels pretty good. So my thought continues to be that melee scale too well in optimal situations if people are really running into combats so short that their wizard only gets off one spell before everyone else cleaves through everything. If combat was 30ish seconds of non-pause time instead of 10-15 I don't think we run the risk of combat being drawn out and tedious and casters actually get to cast more. The idea of long cast, high risk/reward spells is cool and id like to see it worked out rather than removed. This is an interesting thing to ponder and I appreciate everyone's contribution here which makes me think. One of my biggest gripes about PoE I was that everything was balanced so well that I never felt like I either was or became an epic hero. That's what I want out of an RPG. I ran a play-through with a party of all 10's for attributes and it wasn't all that much more difficult over-all. Once you add all the paraphernalia and resting bonuses, it all kind of worked out. Which, on one hand, is actually kind of good. That makes the game approachable for new comers to CRPGs. But what makes a CRPG an epic quest is really going to vary depending on the main character. At some point i want to be able to one shot those pesky Xaurips and be able to stand toe to toe with a dragon without running like a frightened little toddler. Then I want to find that one magic item (or more appropriately for the analogy, destroy that one magic item) that makes me able to tackle the evil Sauron who would be invincible otherwise. Or be the voice that convinces the people to band together to defeat the evil who cannot be defeated by anyone alone. In reality it requires a different story line that is main character class driven. A fighter wants to bash through the enemy. A wizard wants to spell through the enemy. A priest wants to be blessed by his deity and cast pillars of fire or turn the enemy into pillars of salt. Etc. Point being, balancing for character class is no mean feat in a party based environment. If I'm a fighter type then I like the new melee advantage, and support from spell casters is just that, support. But if I am a spell caster I need the party to be a buffer while I cast the spells. But that is impossible if the rest of the party is able to plow through the enemy before I shoot off spells. I can't identify with a whole party being the hero, no matter the story line. I guess I need the trajectory to adjust depending on if my MC is a spell caster or melee class, at the least. Otherwise it is a miasma of lack of dynamics. The story is already set up well for different story lines based on how aggressive, or not, one wants to interact. Is being able to rebalance for MC class too difficult? Just some more thoughts, Joe

Well, I didn't say there wasn't a problem across all casters, only trying to point out at least one possible solution. Maybe it could inspire something similar across other caster classes. I've always felt priest and druid spells were a bit too generic in their spell abilities. Maybe a few deity specific spells that the priests would cast faster, some kind of religious predilection for fire spells for Magran followers, etc. I am sure there could be something similar with other casters. Not that I am for making spell casters in general more complex, but clearly for some reason Wizards seem to be a focus of unnecessary complexity. But if this is an RPG, then it seems RPG style solutions would be preferable to abstract or simply tactical solutions. Although there is nothing intrinsically RPG relevant about this whole "Empower" thingy. Maybe include an accelerated casting speed as part of that goofy ability/skill/ mode/whatever it is. Or not. What do I know? Like others here, just trying to think of ideas to help. Joe

I think with the whole spell school specialization possibility, that would be a logical place to decrease casting time aa a benefit and not just decreased recovery time. Joe

So three times now I have not received Mr. Red-handed's cloak after untying him. Did I miss that note somewhere? Ima check again, but in the meantime I thought I would ask as well. Joe

IDK. This never made much sense to me either. Just like any good pool player, each shot should also be about setting up the next shot. There aren't many fighting styles out there that don't teach that principle that I'm aware of. The only things that should really affect recovery time is skill level and the skill of the other fighter. But, whatever. It's kind of like complaining about umpires in baseball. You take the home plate ump's peculiarities into account when pitching or you are screwed. /OT Joe

"Might" made sense affecting spells since "Might" did not have to equate to strength. But I do like "Resolve" as a modifier better, especially with remaking "Might" into "Strength". I don't understand why the need to rethink spell casting at all, though. That was one of the things that worked in PoE I. I felt like my casters were actually contributing as opposed to BG where, other than Magic Missiles or Chromatic Orbs, there wasn't time for the caster to contribute much to a fight that was usually over before somethings could be cast. Or worse, cast only to find out the enemy was immune. Oi! I like per encounter vs per rest to help alleviate the Rest spamming issue. The whole limiting of two casts per level seems excessive, but I guess with the increased casting time, you can't expend more spells than two anyway. I like more spells being available outside of Combat mode, although the whole Combat mode concept still make no sense to me for much of anything. Casting speed inversely proportional to power makes sense, though one more thing to make spell casting even more complex is a tough sell. All that to say increasing casting times seems totally unnecessary to game play or RPG considerations. It's just a joy kill. Joe

I've noticed two things with these. First, if you reload a save to fight a battle again, the party will have the action icons from the last action of the previous play. Second, for me the action icon never goes away once the action is finished until I direct the character to do something else. As such it is very hard to know exactly when a character is finished with said action. Joe

First, how did I never know about the Unlabored Blade quest and weapon until now? Somehow I have missed that for the past two years. Fierce little blade! Annoying as hell to level up. But once you get their it seems hard to beat. Also, is there a way to keep from disarming my own traps when in a fight? What happens is in the micromanaging of a battle, I select my guy, click on an enemy who happens to be close to a trap and somehow, beyond indication, my guy goes to disarm the trap instead of fighting. Is it possible to hold a hotkey down to disable "disable trap" functions or something? Thanks, Joe

Sagani is one of my favorite characters. Two bow slingers is not so bad, though. One time I had her start off with her bow (I mean, a bow with crush? Come on!) and then switch to that soul-bound/cursed two-handed sword in WM1. That was fierce. Flanking with flanking bonuses plus her fox, that's a battle to behold. Normally I get Storm caller for her as quickly as I can and she is set for the long haul. Joe

And unlike other areas of the map you DO NOT need to go through Crägholdt Bluffs first, which is what I thought, much to my frustration. You can skip straight to White March. Good luck! Joe

Be careful, though, if you want your fighter to use St. Ydwen's Redeemer. It is difficult to get that last upgrade! (I am discovering.) Joe

My current PotD PC rogue is a bit of a morphing of all that—a pale elf, rauatai, drifter dual wielding (currently) the March Steel dagger and some rapier I can't recall. Start off dropping a trap, a hunting bow for sneaky first strike, and then shifts to melee after Shadowing Beyond. I sacrificed a couple of points of Mech to get a few points of Stealth. In a pinch I'll use Escape to get back behind the trap if needed, especially against the Wraiths (I think) who can pull me to them. I stick to (in this set up) Sneak Attack (is that automatic? i can't remember), Blinding Strike, Dirty Fighting, Escape, Finishing Blow, Deep Wounds, Adept Evasion, other skills depending on my mood at the time, dagger/rapier weapon specialty, Two weapon, Flick of the Wrist, Dozens Luck. Sometimes when dual wielding I'll go dagger/stiletto, because, well, I am a rogue! This time I sided with the Dozens, but I usually go with the Doemenels with a rogue. I am not a fan of the Dozens, but I like their quests the best and that bow rocks. I tried to focus on a ranged rogue this time through, but I love a melee rogue too much, especially as the PC. Less enamored when the rogue is merely a companion. I don't remember the stats this time, but I think I majored in Might and Perspective, with a minor in Dexterity, since Falvano's gloves come so early in the game. I depend on accessories and resting to boost the other stats, but I just can't bring myself to let any stat start lower than 10. I hate digging out of a deficit in anything. I love rogues best. Joe

Will PotD for food. Hire me! Joe