How do classes differentiate outside of combat?

[JFSOCC]

So far, every class update we've had focuses on the combat abilities of the classes.

 

This is understandable, it's a design decision to build the game around the combat systems, P:E is going to be a combat heavy game (or at least that's suggested by the statement that 100% pacifist runs will not be possible)

 

I've seen some upset more than once when classes were announced (and again some today with both the rogue and the ranger) because the classes don't seem to completely fit known CRPG standards. I've seen complaints that the classes are very similar to MMO versions or DnD 4e.

Again, understandable when class balance is designed around combat.

 

But there remains, at least with me, the desire to know more about how classes differentiate themselves outside of combat, we know what attributes do combat wise, but know little to nothing about how or even IF they affect skills. Whether every class will be able to invest in every skill (sounds like it) or if there are going to be features and abilities which are interesting for classes, outside of combat.

 

So this is an open question asking if there is any information available about class distinction outside of combat. Any information would be appreciated, really.

Edited January 29, 2014 by JFSOCC

[IndiraLightfoot]

Great questions, and very important to know. I tried to find some info, but so far I've only found what's in this wiki entry below:

 

Skills can be used outside of combat for a variety of purposes and they grant auxiliary combat bonuses.^[1] Non-combat skills are gained separately from combat skills(Abillities, Talents) and they do not use the same resources.

 

Contents  [hide] 

• 1 Description
• 2 Skill Types
• 3 Known Skills
• 4 Skill Bonus
• 5 References

 

[edit] Description

Non-combat skills do not use the same resources as combat skills. You don't spend the same stuff for a non-combat skill as you do for combat skills. Some don't use anything at all to use, so you will never find yourself unable to blast an opponent if you get caught sneaking.

Combat can be avoided with non-combat skills. There will often be ways to avoid fighting. Examples: standard methods of talking your way out of a fight or sneaking around an encounter, but there will be other ways too. Perhaps you can re-sanctify a desecrated cemetery to prevent any further undead from rising, or maybe figuring out a way across a ruined bridge will always avoid the bandits on this side of the river.

Skills can be used in both scripted interactions and conversations, but they will be less common in conversations.^[2]

[edit] Skill Types

• Learning Skills - This includes finding out previously unknown information, like the location of a town or a hidden door, or uncovering secret knowledge, like a potion recipe or the true name of a demon, or maybe knowing a good place to gather materials like ore or herbs.

• Traveling Skills - Skills that improve movement capabilities (such as sneaking around some ruins), or traveling across the world map faster or more safely, or even teleporting directly to destination. And skills like unlock and disarm that remove barriers like locks or traps.

• Item Skills - The alternatives to looting are the means to make new items, buy them, steal them, or supply NPC with materials or recipes to make them for players.

• Companion Skills - Non-combat abilities that interact with your companions, giving ways to recruit them, improve their usefulness, and keep them from dying (or even worse, disliking you!).

[edit] Known Skills

• Mechanic – can be used to open locks as wells as find hidden objects and set/disable traps. It determines the power of traps that the character sets.^[3]
• Stealth
• Survival – determine how long the effects of consumable foods, drinks (including potions), and drugs last.^[3]
• Lore ^[4]
• Athletics^[5]

[edit] Skill Bonus

Every class gets a bonus in two skills.^[6] Those bonusses to a skill are constant and are on all levels the same value.^[7]

 

Class Skill bonus 1st skill 2nd skill Rogue^[8]Stealth Mechanic Chanter^[9]Stealth   Monk^[9]Stealth   Ranger^[10]Stealth Survival

[Prometheus]

But there remains, at least with me, the desire to know more about how classes differentiate themselves outside of combat, we know what attributes do combat wise, but no little to nothing about how or even IF they affect skills.

1.  Because they use the attribute system to try to make all attributes equally important for all classes, attributes shouldn't differentiate classes.

2. Attributes are the most commonly checked stat in conversations and scripted interactions.

 

 

Whether every class will be able to invest in every skill (sounds like it)

All classes can invest in every skill.

 

 

or if there are going to be features and abilities which are interesting for classes, outside of combat.

stats that are checked in conversations and scripted interactions are class, race, culture, skills and attributes (and reputations and disposition).

from gamebanshee interview:

 

attributes are the most commonly-checked character elements in dialogue and scripted interactions. We check things like skills, races, and classes as well, but attributes are the stats we check most often

"example" for cipher:

 

Ciphers can occasionally in conversation sense things about a person's soul, but there will not be frequent (or detailed) mind-reading escapades.

[JFSOCC]

thanks, this does paint a picture for me that the only difference in classes can  be found in combat. I hope that's not the case.

[FlintlockJazz]

Classes will have bonuses to specific skills like Indira mentioned, and they will apparently be quite large bonuses as well that level up with the character (not a flat +1 no matter what level you are then).  The skill bonus will be applied even if the character spent no points on it and will, from what I heard about a year ago, be big enough that a character that only has a skill bonus and no spent points in a skill will still rival a character that has no class bonus to the skill but has spent their points in it.  Dunno how accurate or true that is or if it's changed now or what, but that's what I recall.

[Tamerlane]

Pretty sure inherent skill bonuses from class don't increase with levels. If a ranger has +15 stealth at level 1 and invests nothing in the skill, then they're sitting on +15 stealth at level 10.

[FlintlockJazz]

Pretty sure inherent skill bonuses from class don't increase with levels. If a ranger has +15 stealth at level 1 and invests nothing in the skill, then they're sitting on +15 stealth at level 10.

Yeah, it was ages ago when I read it and to be honest not only have I got a bad memory but I probably misunderstood what they said now that I think about it. 

[Greensleeve]

I honestly don't care if classes in of themselves are more or less the same outside of combat. I would be fine with the particular character choices being the determining factor in how a character works outside of combat, as opposed to it being class determined. Then again, classes are in-universe things, so that probably won't really work...

[Infinitron]

There wasn't exactly much difference between the classes outside of combat in the Infinity Engine games either. The stronghold in BG2 being the big exception.

[JFSOCC]

Well I wasn't just talking about quests. But if outside of combat classes are interchangeable, that is a dealbreaker for me. I don't have many dealbreakers, but that will pretty much be it. If that's the case they should have had a classless system in the first place.

Edited January 30, 2014 by JFSOCC

[Sabotin]

Wasn't the class system put in purely due to nostalgia/IE feels anyway?

 

The problem seems easily fixable though, just put skill points into different things on different characters... I don't think it unlikely that the game will have threshold checks achievable only with full invest+class bonus.

[sibakruom]

Well I wasn't just talking about quests. But if outside of combat classes are interchangeable, that is a dealbreaker for me. I don't have many dealbreakers, but that will pretty much be it. If that's the case they should have had a classless system in the first place.

 

Could you elaborate a bit on what differences you're looking for outside combat?

 

As you said previously, combat will be the main focus, which means non-combat gameplay will be limited. Either interactions with environment, where attributes and skills (mainly class independant) matter. Or interactions with NPCs, where the previous apply, but adds role-playing and reputation in the mix. Aside from adding class specific choices in those interactions, I am not sure what can be done to differentiate classes outside combat.

[JFSOCC]

Class specific quests, class specific non-combat abilities (for puzzles or dialogue, surely there will be challenges outside of combat?) Alternative routes. Class based membership of organisations/factions. Optional class-specific content within quests, organisations, or questlines.

 

Surely there is something possible?

[Greensleeve]

Class specific quests, class specific non-combat abilities (for puzzles or dialogue, surely there will be challenges outside of combat?) Alternative routes. Class based membership of organisations/factions. Optional class-specific content within quests, organisations, or questlines.

 

Surely there is something possible?

 

I'm not sure why you're asking for all of this from PoE, given that other than the stronghold quests from BG2, the IE games had none of this. I imagine you'll see something more like MotB where most out-of combat interactions will be influenced by abilities and the special power our own character will invariably get. 

[sibakruom]

Class specific quests, class specific non-combat abilities (for puzzles or dialogue, surely there will be challenges outside of combat?) Alternative routes. Class based membership of organisations/factions. Optional class-specific content within quests, organisations, or questlines.

 

Class specific content (quests, routes, factions, etc.) always felt like multiple-choice situations where the game removed options depending on the class of my character. Sure, it's possible to justify in-universe (like BG2 did with the strongholds), but I prefer role-playing (and by extension, reputation) to tell me which branch of the storyline is open to me or which optional faction I can join.

 

As for more options in interactions (conversations, puzzles, etc.), keep in mind that we are playing with a six-character party. If they can all participate in those interactions, there will be a lot of overlap between playthroughs, no matter the player character class. And making them unable to participate doesn't make much sense.

[Failion]

 

Class specific quests, class specific non-combat abilities (for puzzles or dialogue, surely there will be challenges outside of combat?) Alternative routes. Class based membership of organisations/factions. Optional class-specific content within quests, organisations, or questlines.

 

Class specific content (quests, routes, factions, etc.) always felt like multiple-choice situations where the game removed options depending on the class of my character. Sure, it's possible to justify in-universe (like BG2 did with the strongholds), but I prefer role-playing (and by extension, reputation) to tell me which branch of the storyline is open to me or which optional faction I can join.

 

As for more options in interactions (conversations, puzzles, etc.), keep in mind that we are playing with a six-character party. If they can all participate in those interactions, there will be a lot of overlap between playthroughs, no matter the player character class. And making them unable to participate doesn't make much sense.

 

 

I like more interaction in gameplay then good old hack and slash combat. always thought the dueling system in suikoden games was awesome. It is basically dynamic dialogue through rock paper scissor. Since any class can use any weapon in pillars of eternity. Game could have you fencing leader types of factions or encounter bosses. Perhaps to prove a point of honor or give your party a slight buff before a encounter. Your party will spectacing your duels. But I can't see how this would visually look appealing in a isometric game lol but still be cool figuring out how to incorporate. 

[rjshae]

Other than skills, what non-combat abilities did the various classes contribute in the IE series? It doesn't seem like there were all that many: the restrictions on skills was the primary differentiator.

[Sir Chaox]

I think I'd rather have the game react to my attributes and skills than to my class, outside of combat. After all, any class is suppose to be able to excel in any skill or attribute, if enough focus is applied to those areas; for example, I would want my stealthy fighter to be recognized as a light-footed fellow by those that can distinguish such.

[Infinitron]

 

Class specific quests, class specific non-combat abilities (for puzzles or dialogue, surely there will be challenges outside of combat?) Alternative routes. Class based membership of organisations/factions. Optional class-specific content within quests, organisations, or questlines.

 

Surely there is something possible?

 

I'm not sure why you're asking for all of this from PoE, given that other than the stronghold quests from BG2, the IE games had none of this. I imagine you'll see something more like MotB where most out-of combat interactions will be influenced by abilities and the special power our own character will invariably get. 

 

 

I wouldn't say "none" - the Icewind Dale games had a smattering of class checks in their dialogue, for instance. It wasn't a focus though, yeah.

[Bwe]

 

As for more options in interactions (conversations, puzzles, etc.), keep in mind that we are playing with a six-character party. If they can all participate in those interactions, there will be a lot of overlap between playthroughs, no matter the player character class. And making them unable to participate doesn't make much sense.

 

 

Good point, a 6 character party with no leader as in IWD1&2 would lead to the typical question: "now which of my character should speak to that guy ?" , but  having a main character with companions, he will be the reference I suppose for dialogues, class-specific quest and such.

 

Now regarding class-specific abilities, as others have noted, I believe none will be reserved to any class in particular, so YES character class will only mainly differ from other in combat situations. BUT, priests will still be healers, wizards will still identify magic items and chanters or cyphers..... well, we will see later !

 

I suppose skill bonuses should be interesting enough to encourage for example thieves to be traps removers instead of potion makers. Let's wait for the relevant update to learn more.

[tajerio]

It would seem plausible that some classes would have different options in certain areas though.  One could imagine a cipher having different choices when talking about animancy, since the cipher messes about with other people's souls constantly in combat; a priest might have different choices in a religious dialogue or a temple; a druid might have the good old "talking to animals" option, as might a ranger.  That sort of thing seems eminently reasonable to me.

[DCParry]

It would seem plausible that some classes would have different options in certain areas though.  One could imagine a cipher having different choices when talking about animancy, since the cipher messes about with other people's souls constantly in combat; a priest might have different choices in a religious dialogue or a temple; a druid might have the good old "talking to animals" option, as might a ranger.  That sort of thing seems eminently reasonable to me.

 

In addition, something like enthnic/national origins might have just as big (if not greater) effect on PC knowledge and behaviour as class would. Hence, there might be identical options for a dialogue about the migratory habits of ice weasels for both a ranger and a mage with high survival skills, but a boreal dwarf might have an extra choice over say a god-like. 

 

I completely understand the desire for class choice to have an out of combat effect. Is it such an issue if you can do mostly same the same with skill choices? So, if you choose particular skills based on what idea for your character's background and knowledge, don't we functionally get the same the thing with, in addition, the ability to create more unique out-of-combat templates? For a mage for example, if you wanted a character who went through formal training and spent most of her life in study with other mages you can pick skill choices to approximate that, just like you could for a mage that was trained informally by a hermit in the woods away from civilization or one who spent her time as part of a mercenary company. Instead of having generic mage knowledge, we can customize the way in which our PC interacts with the world. Of course, this doesn't address the class quest issue, but even those sorts of quests could be activated by skill levels (ala the burglary spree in DA:O). 

 

Of course my thoughts are based on the assumption that we will have a robust skill system which involves skill sets we already (like survival, mechanics) with other common/useful areas (something like spellcraft, religion, and so on). 

[J.E. Sawyer]

 

I wouldn't say "none" - the Icewind Dale games had a smattering of class checks in their dialogue, for instance. It wasn't a focus though, yeah.

 

We also have class checks in dialogue but they are used less frequently than skill checks, which in turn are used less frequently than attribute checks.  BG/BG2 in general had relatively low reactivity to individual classes/races.  Strangely enough, IWD2 had more of that stuff, but still low overall.  Internally, we all seem to prefer PS:T's ability score checks as opposed to dedicated social skills or class checks.

 

Outside of conversation, before IWD2, most characters didn't have skills, period.  The classes that had access to "thief" skills split their points among them (or a subset of them) and that was pretty much the end of it.  Classes were dominantly defined by their combat capabilities (and ability to use gear, which largely tied into combat).  It is similar in PoE.

 

I understand both the desire to have a lot of class differentiation and the desire to have things feel as they did in the IE games, but the IE games didn't have much class differentiation outside of combat.  There's a lot of work "just" getting 11 classes to feel distinctive and good in combat and to have conversations and quests react to the player's choices (class or otherwise), but we can't be on the hook for creating a lot of differentiation for classes outside of combat.  The IE games didn't establish a high bar for that and, more importantly, it would be an enormous amount of work for us.  Sorry.

[rjshae]

NPC-specific quests can be decently useful for establishing class distinctiveness. At least in terms of providing some atmosphere.

 

IIRC, there's not going be much in the way of magical equipment differences. But that was another approach that worked, I believe.

[JFSOCC]

 

 

I wouldn't say "none" - the Icewind Dale games had a smattering of class checks in their dialogue, for instance. It wasn't a focus though, yeah.

 

We also have class checks in dialogue but they are used less frequently than skill checks, which in turn are used less frequently than attribute checks.  BG/BG2 in general had relatively low reactivity to individual classes/races.  Strangely enough, IWD2 had more of that stuff, but still low overall.  Internally, we all seem to prefer PS:T's ability score checks as opposed to dedicated social skills or class checks.

 

Outside of conversation, before IWD2, most characters didn't have skills, period.  The classes that had access to "thief" skills split their points among them (or a subset of them) and that was pretty much the end of it.  Classes were dominantly defined by their combat capabilities (and ability to use gear, which largely tied into combat).  It is similar in PoE.

 

I understand both the desire to have a lot of class differentiation and the desire to have things feel as they did in the IE games, but the IE games didn't have much class differentiation outside of combat.  There's a lot of work "just" getting 11 classes to feel distinctive and good in combat and to have conversations and quests react to the player's choices (class or otherwise), but we can't be on the hook for creating a lot of differentiation for classes outside of combat.  The IE games didn't establish a high bar for that and, more importantly, it would be an enormous amount of work for us.  Sorry.

 

well I can't say I'm not bummed to hear that, but thanks for your reply.