it's a hack. I don't mean that in a derogatory way, I end up doing hacks all the time in my day job. But fixing game issues by layering hacks on top of that does not make for a better game design, it makes for a more complicated game design, especially considering the realities of coding where you are likely also making it more fragile.
Also: seals can be cast out of combat and stick around for a long time; ever since PoE1 that has basically been their point. Warding Seal is not the best spell in later levels to cast in combat but remains a great spell to cast out of combat (even sometimes better than Searing Seal because Warding Seal's smaller aoe doesn't cause curious people to walk over it while you're sneaking). The only seal that I could see an argument for adjustment is Repulsing Seal, because laying a prone trap out of combat is extremely underwhelming and in-combat faces a tough competition to Pillar of Faith, which does damage and has a longer range. But in effect PL scaling already helps Repulsing Seal quite a bit because it gets +2 acc/PL on top of prone-ing on a graze, two benefits that do not accrue to Pillar of Faith. So... eh
I am not quite sure how to understand the word hack here. It has many meanings, and there is also a language barier.
But if you mean: a solution that is inconsistent with other spells... yeah, I can agree with that. And you have convinced me on this matter.
Just wanted to note that: isn't hazard - a spell or effect that is generally decoupled from it's owner? For example a character layed a trap or seal, and even if it deals shock damage, it doesn't factor his shock penetration talents, because it's a completely separate entity?
Taking this into account, what would you propose?:
- 1) leave these seal spells as they are
- 2) remove the hazard tag
- 3) change all hazards (such that they start benefiting from owners PL, penetration talents, etc). But there might be a risk of CTD in some scenes, if not properly implemented.
- 4) increase cast speed (e.g. from 4.5s to 3.0s) as compensation?
This is my problem with unsystematic changes like this. I don't think you're broadening your perspective enough and combined with other comments it seems you might have a personal bias on making effects more consistent (e.g. accuracy/reliability) versus enabling a broad spectrum of options (the core PoE philosophy). You seem to be mostly just focused landing offensive effects.
Imho, for a quick, yet already beneficial change, enabling just perception is enough. Because scrolls will stop missing that often; while high-ranked spells will still have a better accuracy.
It's not that I have some kind of prejudice. But I indeed do have a preference for binary effects being reliable (at least vs unnamed/regular enemies)
I mean, I am fine with damage sometimes missing, because I know that on average my dps is X, and if X suits me it's ok.
But I dislike when a binary effect that I count on, has a chance to do nothing. For example in PoE1: party priest lands painful interdiction, such that cipher can land paralyze, such that my melee dps'er won't get hit by that big (now disabled) guy, and also will have his attack resolution shifted right - which will increase his dps, because graze damage was sensibly reduced by enemy DR.
Now, if that paralyze misses - all this scheme crumbles. And I am pushed towards a safer/sturdier playstyle.
And it's not that I am fixated on hostile effects. I mean if my direct heals had a chance to miss, that would be unpleasant as well.
It still leaves might and intellect as dead stats for people who want to use non-hostile consumables, even though those stats are supposed to be otherwise universal. Enabling might and intellect on top of perception will not break explosives or potions, and will it make it more viable to split your skill points a bit more instead of basically having to invest everything into explosives or alchemy just to get enough PL scaling to use a poison or grenade decently in mid-late game. Yes, scrolls will probably need a rebalancing - frankly the fact that you get arcana/2 PL scaling on top of more powerful effects (that are already gated by a high arcana) is broken game design, but selectively enabling perception will meaningfully skew gameplay choices in the name of "reliability" (hellooooo scrolls of gaze of the adragan).
Completely agree on the dead stats argument. Not to mention that INT does add not only duration, but also area increase. And currently scrolls and bombs are stuck with default AoE.
But again, I would separate this problem in two parts:
1) is it worth to enable perception? And how much effort will it take?
2) is it worth to enable might and intellect? And how much effort will it take?
And speaking of perception, lets compare accuracy of scrolls vs spells, for the aforementioned Gaze of Adragan:
- spell_accuracy = 20 + 19 * 3 + (perception - 10) + class_power_level + power_level_bonus + ability_rank - 2
- scroll_accuracy = 20 + 19 * 3 + arcana/2 + power_level_bonus
With something like: 24 perception, 24 arcana, 9 class_power_level, 2 power_level_bonus, 6 ability_rank, which imo are quite plausible stats, this would be:
- goa_spell_accuracy = 77 + 14 + 9 + 2 + 6 - 2 = 106
- goa_scroll_accuracy = 77 + 12 + 2 = 91
And if scrolls benefited from perception, goa_scroll_accuracy would be: 91 + 14 = 105.
Sure, one could argue that arcana could be higher, but how much higher? 30? But that would add just extra 3 acc over 24 arcana
Meanwhile enemy fortitude goes up to 189 for megabosses on PotD, and up to 129-150 for non-bosses.
So, does this look broken for a consumable of generally limited supply?
Now regarding might and intellect. I do agree that enabling them won't break most of explosives and potions.
But still, this have to be done very carefully.
- intellect has the ability to increase duration for up to x2.25; and area radius up to x1.87
- might has the ability to increase the direct damage for up to x1.75
- and together they can increase the total damage/healing of a periodic/dot/hot effect, by up to x3.93
So this will require the adjusting of all scrolls from PL0 to their matching counterparts. And even then, arcane/2 can go higher than class pl. And this gonna be a quite deep change. I am not sure if it can go under the 'polishing' tag.
P.S. I don't dislike this suggestion. I actually do like consistency. Just have little hope in that Obsidian will make a change that is not quick enough to implement.
Plus, no other heal in Deadfire scales with character level, it would still make the moon godlike effect stupidly good. In PoE1 the character scaling was an attempt to keep it relevant into the late game, and it was too good (and it wasn't unique; Holy Radiance also scaled with character level and combined with disposition scaling was stupidly good). With your suggested scaling you are supplanting PL scaling mechanism with character level scaling - adding more cognitive load about exceptions being made to systems that are allegedly universal
That's an argument.
Tbh I've been carried away, by it being so good in the early game, that wanted it to be at least half as good in the late game.
I disagree. If you were limited to the same abilities at level 1 when you got to level 20, then yeah, sure. But one of the consequences of getting higher level in a game like this is you get more options. So an AL1 restore or AL3 nature's balm do not need to scale proportionally to health as you get up to level 20 to still be useful at level 20 - instead of being your only heal, they increasingly becomes part of a larger toolkit of options.
Example with Restore is a good one.
But still something feels off. I mean AL1 Restore is not something I would be relying in the late game. But I would still rely on stuff like Elemental Endurance and Racial Resistances being as usefull as in the early game.
The good thing through, that aside from PL progression, character can aquire items that increase his might and healing done/taken during his journey, which can almost double the effective healing. So you are speaking about: 10 + 10% per PL, where PL is that of a single class, and benefits from potion of ascention, prestige and other PL bonuses?
Also iirc Silver Tide has no keywords atm, leave it at that?
Additionally: do you think having one racial is enough for them?
There's a couple of interrelated issues here. The first is that these are funges of math, because you're not actually looking at the net effect.
But let's take the Improved Critical and examine the "+10% Crit Damage" in 3 scenarios:
1). Fighter with 15 MIG, superb weapon, using Penetrating Strike. On crit that's: 2.05 damage coefficient that becomes 2.15. That's a +4.8% damage increase... which occurs only on crit.
2). Rogue with 10 MIG, superb weapon, sneak attack + deathblows, devastating blow vs 25%hp. On crit that's: 4.7 that becomes 4.8. And that's a +2% damage increase... which occurs only on crit.
3). Wizard with 18 MIG, 7 PL casting a rank 4 spell. On crit that's 1.64, which becomes 1.74. That's a +6% damage increase. But than again, what's your crit rate in a challenging encounter?
Case 1: a fighter with might 15, superb weapon, penetrating strike is better seen as having a graze/hit/crit coefficient of .87x, 1.85x, and 2.1x which become .87x, 1.85x, and 2.2x with improved crit. This can be as little as a +0% increase in net damage (in cases where you can never crit) to as much as ~3% (in cases where you always crit). So in this respect I think you're overstating the effect.
Or I am missing something?
Re: potent empower, I could maybe follow along that potent empower needs a buff or accurate empower needs a nerf because as it stands they are roughly in line with each other, but accurate empower is more generally useful than either potent or penetrating (or even lasting). I would probably advocate nerfing accurate empower a bit (+8 acc instead?) and making lasting empower effect durational effect instead of just afflictions/inspirations (many martial classes will have very few of these making this talent all the more marginal).
1. Please do not adjust deflection bonuses. Deflection is already a weird stat because of its increasing returns and its general murk/meaninglessness for many non-optimized-for-deflection character builds. I don't think +4 -> +6 meaningfully makes this more generally useful and only helps out the high deflection builds all the more. If you want to make it more generally useful, maybe adding a hit->graze chance would be better (high deflection builds aren't going to be hit all that much anyway).
2. I think this is way too good. In even slightly metagamed scenarios this basically seems like it can mean a fighter is immune to crits. I also have to ask - what is the purpose of this change? Is it just trying to de-murk % chance of happening effects? Because this does not seem like it's explicitly intended as a nerf or a buff but rather a lateral change.
3. I think we should be really really careful about making it easier to regenerate class resources. Same with paladin Virtuous Triumph, and arguably this is an easier condition to meet/metagame. I don't see any systematic polish reason why these should be buffed - I personally argued for so long to make existing effects weaker over several patches.
1. Ok, point taken.
2. The purpose is to have a decent effect for rank 8 passive. And atm, Critical Defense is in a weird spot. If a fighter doesn't want to get critted, he rises defenses. And the higher defenses he has, the lower effect this Critical Defense provides. For example fighter has a 10% chance to get critted by enemy X. Taking Critical Defense does not cover this 10% window; but instead, will proc on 10% of cases on those 10% of attacks; effectively reducing the chance to be critted from 10% to 9%. Yay.
3. Regarding Virtous Triumph: resouce generation tied to onKill, is generally limited by amount of enemies. On average there seem to be 6-8 enemies in an encounter. If paladin delivers killing blow to each enemy, on average he will get 1.5-2 zeal. Now, the problem is, paladin in a party rarelly finishes even 50% of enemies (in my experience it is closer to 15%), plus killing the last enemy does nothing.
Although... there are some shenanigans with killing friendly summons. And imo, Virtuous Triumph should not work of those.
As for Bonus Discipline talent: what do your propose?