Update #74: The Mob Rulers: Wizards and Druids and our Partnership with Paradox

[Stun]

He used the term "melee-oriented wizard character", which is not the same thing as a fighter/wizard.

He also said "Gish-type characters" (a reference to Githyanki fighter-mages). And Gish are very much warriors first, mages second. In fact they mostly only use magic to augment their melee effectiveness. ie. combat buffs.

 

Personally, I'm thrilled. This excites me, because those are the types of builds that for me are the most fun to play.

 

a. The activation time is now a cost function, which it wasn't with DnD-style pre-buffing on higher levels.

Well, D&D imposed spell 'cost functions' in other ways. Sorcerers for example had a spell level pool. If you were a 17th level sorcerer, you could decide to pre-buff everyone in your party with Mind Blank, but then that meant that you wouldn't be able to cast your Horrid Wilting once combat began..

 

As it stands, PoE will be adopting this Sorcerer model in addition to the cost function you mentioned. I just hope this doesn't all add up to casters being..... weaker than non-casters.

Edited March 21, 2014 by Stun

[Terodemmah]

If they come across a spell in an enemy's grimoire, they can choose to learn that spell for the cost (in copper pieces) required to research it.

 

I hope this will be done in a sort of "realistic" way where you have to visit a great mage or something to actually pay for the research being done. Nothing would be more disappointing than sitting in the wilderness with my mage and learn a new spell and watch a certain amount of copper pieces vanish into thin air as a sort of payment for learning a spell.

 

Nice update btw. I can't wait to learn about more spells and potential combo's. I wonder if there will be temporary drain for using magic. It could be something like lowering your stamina for a short time after casting a spell or when a druid returns to normal form again (I remember seeing stamina on that character sheet picture). 

 

Keep up the good work! Cheers

Edited March 21, 2014 by Terodemmah

[cornishr]

 

Pps Male Aumaua?

 

As said before, pretty sure you can make one in the Adventurer's Hall. Oh, and nice restraint not calling everyone on the forums stupider than dirt this time.

 

I'll make one if i must, just hoping they do one for us. Having never existed until this game, i can't believe there won't be an Aumaua available, that'd be just weird. If she's a chick (or female/whatever term i'm supposed to be using nowadays), i'll take her anyway, but i still feel we are missing a seriously badass fighter. You know secretly you want one too ). I'm just hoping they don't throw a curve ball and have an Aumaua Chanter or something. You surely must have at least one big bar steward in a party, it's a prerequisite in my eyes.

 

And i was absolutely furious at that time after finding out we've lost out on more wilderness because some people on here don't want more levels. I still can't get my head around that and i never will. Vote for a bigger game or smaller game, and some people voted for a smaller! I wasn't myself that morning and i was throwing a tantrum. I'm not proud of it but i'm claiming severe provocation.

 

Anyway, i still don't think there is anything wrong with a male preferring to use predominantly male characters just like i wouldn't be offended by a girl wanting to play with mostly female characters. I think that is perfectly normal human behaviour, whatever the Californian media like to say about it. It doesn't mean i hate women because i want a big tough male fighter to lead my line. I have a beautiful daughter; i'd be happy for her to be in my party as a druid or a mage, but i'm sorry, i just don't see her as a barbarian with a two handed axe. Mind you, my friend's wife could do a convincing job with a battleaxe...

Edited March 21, 2014 by cornishr

[Bryy]

 

 

Pps Male Aumaua?

 

As said before, pretty sure you can make one in the Adventurer's Hall. Oh, and nice restraint not calling everyone on the forums stupider than dirt this time.

 

I'll make one if i must, just hoping they do one for us. Having never existed until this game, i can't believe there won't be an Aumaua available, that'd be just weird. If she's a chick (or female/whatever term i'm supposed to be using nowadays), i'll take her anyway, but i still feel we are missing a seriously badass fighter. You know secretly you want one too ). I'm just hoping they don't throw a curve ball and have an Aumaua Chanter or something. You surely must have at least one big bar steward in a party, it's a prerequisite in my eyes.

 

And i was absolutely furious at that time after finding out we've lost out on more wilderness because some people on here don't want more levels. I still can't get my head around that and i never will. Vote for a bigger game or smaller game, and some people voted for a smaller! I wasn't myself that morning and i was throwing a tantrum. I'm not proud of it but i'm claiming severe provocation.

 

Anyway, i still don't think there is anything wrong with a male preferring to use predominantly male characters just like i wouldn't be offended by a girl wanting to play with mostly female characters. I think that is perfectly normal human behaviour, whatever the Californian media like to say about it. It doesn't mean i hate women because i want a big tough male fighter to lead my line. I have a beautiful daughter; i'd be happy for her to be in my party as a druid or a mage, but i'm sorry, i just don't see her as a barbarian with a two handed axe. Mind you, my friend's wife could do a convincing job with a battleaxe...

 

1) "If she's a chick or female or whatever...." < dude. You seriously need to think about how you write things.

2) And you're saying that deep down I care if a gender stereotype is upheld? No. No, I don't.

3) Some people voted to keep the game small because of feature creep that could occur. 

4) You were provoked by... what? That you didn't get your way?

5) Nobody is saying there is anything wrong with that.

6) You don't have any problem with women, except you constantly refer to "the media" and "whatever we call them now" and you say you don't see your daughter playing a traditionally male role... in a video game. And then you follow up by calling your friend's wife a slur. 

[Eyeshield1625]

The inn looked amazing I can't wait to see more of the backer created items and inns. Wizards also sounded pretty cool. I wonder how many spells you can have on you at one time for combat (as in I'm walking in the forest and I need to fight how many spells can I use right now?) Can we have the same spells in multiple books. Like if I had a heal spell in 1 book and switched to another book with an amazing fire spell could I still have the heal spell there too. I mean could I have written the heal spell into 2 books not using casting a spell in another book. anyways can't wait to hear more.

[Tamerlane]

 

 

Pps Male Aumaua?

 

As said before, pretty sure you can make one in the Adventurer's Hall. Oh, and nice restraint not calling everyone on the forums stupider than dirt this time.

 

I'll make one if i must, just hoping they do one for us. Having never existed until this game, i can't believe there won't be an Aumaua available, that'd be just weird. If she's a chick (or female/whatever term i'm supposed to be using nowadays), i'll take her anyway, but i still feel we are missing a seriously badass fighter. You know secretly you want one too ). I'm just hoping they don't throw a curve ball and have an Aumaua Chanter or something. You surely must have at least one big bar steward in a party, it's a prerequisite in my eyes.

 

And i was absolutely furious at that time after finding out we've lost out on more wilderness because some people on here don't want more levels. I still can't get my head around that and i never will. Vote for a bigger game or smaller game, and some people voted for a smaller! I wasn't myself that morning and i was throwing a tantrum. I'm not proud of it but i'm claiming severe provocation.

 

Anyway, i still don't think there is anything wrong with a male preferring to use predominantly male characters just like i wouldn't be offended by a girl wanting to play with mostly female characters. I think that is perfectly normal human behaviour, whatever the Californian media like to say about it. It doesn't mean i hate women because i want a big tough male fighter to lead my line. I have a beautiful daughter; i'd be happy for her to be in my party as a druid or a mage, but i'm sorry, i just don't see her as a barbarian with a two handed axe. Mind you, my friend's wife could do a convincing job with a battleaxe...

 

Damn, dude.

 

...

 

Damn.

[Bryy]

There was a guy once at WonderCon who tried to argue with my friends wife that the only reason she read comic books was to feel like she was strong.

 

That conversation went well.

 

Cornishr, I have absolutely, 100% no idea what you mean by "whatever the California media like to say about it". Absolutely none. Unless you're just using big fancy words to just say "I don't like women as being shown as equal to men in real life or my fictional TV shows".

 

Women play video games. To say that anyone - let alone a female - should not be able to play as a traditionally male role in fiction is... that's beyond amusing. If you are so prejudice that you cannot bear to see females doin' stuff in a fictional world.... 

 

I also find it mindboggling that you constantly imply that Obsidian is somehow a part of the Great Female Conspiracy by not showing a male warrior. But wait, they have. Oh no, wait, that's not the specific fictional race that you wanted. 

 

Honestly, man, what kind of role model do you think you are being to your daughter, if you discourage her from doing certain things (especially in a game) if they are "too manly"? 

 

I feel sad for you if you feel so threatened that women play video games.

[Messier-31]

 

The Celestial Sapling inn looks absolutely beautiful.

Backer, SHOW THYSELF.

 

 

IT IS I - L'ECLERC!

 

 

Actually no, this is just a joke.

[cornishr]

There was a guy once at WonderCon who tried to argue with my friends wife that the only reason she read comic books was to feel like she was strong.

 

That conversation went well.

 

Cornishr, I have absolutely, 100% no idea what you mean by "whatever the California media like to say about it". Absolutely none. Unless you're just using big fancy words to just say "I don't like women as being shown as equal to men in real life or my fictional TV shows".

 

Women play video games. To say that anyone - let alone a female - should not be able to play as a traditionally male role in fiction is... that's beyond amusing. If you are so prejudice that you cannot bear to see females doin' stuff in a fictional world.... 

 

I also find it mindboggling that you constantly imply that Obsidian is somehow a part of the Great Female Conspiracy by not showing a male warrior. But wait, they have. Oh no, wait, that's not the specific fictional race that you wanted. 

 

Honestly, man, what kind of role model do you think you are being to your daughter, if you discourage her from doing certain things (especially in a game) if they are "too manly"? 

 

I feel sad for you if you feel so threatened that women play video games.

Threatened by women playing video games? Good lord what an odd idea. Why would anybody be threatened by women playing videi games? I shouldn't think too many do mind you percentagewise. Buddy i think you take everything way too seriously, have absolutely no sense of humour, have all sorts of weird internal issues and you add two and two and come up with about 75. I'd simply like a big tough male fighter in my party. And i couldn't care less whether i get called a male, a bloke, a fella, a geezer and i couldn't care less about referring to a women as a girl or a lady or a chick. I have no interest in such trivialities.

[Bryy]

I like how, instead of responding to my points, you attack me personally.

[Hassat Hunter]

Yup, someone's vying for a place in ignore lists...

 

Also, we're still with "people voted for LESS content. Wtf?"

Haven't we already explained that a gazillion times by now? Are people still thinking more content is free and just plucked out of thin air?

[Bryy]

I just want them to focus on what is locked. Now is not the time to be asking for more things. 

[JFSOCC]

let's move on to more constructive debate.

[rdmcnz]

I am fair bubbling with excitement.
Given how exciting the selection of spells they have shown for the Wizard and the Druid are, the selection of effects and combinations of such that must be available for my Chanter is looking to be fantastic.

 

The concept of warrior/wizard is something I am keen on but I thought that the Chanter was the nice way of filling that role. More friendly and supportive of my compatriots and still able to be a sword master.

 

My problem now however - these different classes are each showing such signs of awesomeness and tactical intricacies, that choosing one at the beginning is becoming a very difficult decision. I am very glad I enjoy the character creation so much, but to experience all the fun is going to take many play throughs, and use of the Adventurers' Hall.

 

I am actively trying to plan ahead so from the beginning of next year I have time dedicated on a consistent basis to spend on PoE.

 

Loving the idea of the Druid's multiple spiritshift forms to choose from and especially that they can learn more throughout the game.

Excellent work Obsidian!

[mudd1]

So, we're back to square one: where gamers are stuck having to speculate. *I'm* guessing Paradox is going to get a share of the profits. How big of a percentage though?

 

Of course they are getting a percentage of the profits. If all goes according to plan, the better marketing will make the game sell so much more that it's a win-win situation in the end.

 

And the reason why none of the media people asked for the details of the business deal is the same you aren't told but have to keep guessing: because companies don't talk about these things publicly. What's the point in asking if all you achieve is to look unprofessional and get a "We can't discuss the details right now" as an answer?

[J.E. Sawyer]

 

 

Listening to Josh in the video, I got the impression that you could sling spells in shifted form. What you could not do in shifted form was using weapons. You had to rely on the claws/hoofs/whatever of the animal you shifted to.

 

 

This is correct.

 

Now in the video Sawyer said that they will give the mage several personal buffs so that they can be played as a fighter/mage hybrid.

Now how is this going to work?

Because the reason fighter/mage multiclass worked in IE games was because of pre-buffing and we don't have that in Eternity.

Does that mean that the hybrid mage will basically need to stand there buffing for a while at the start of each combat?

I don't think that's really going to work.

 

If you want your wizard to be able to hop into the front lines and hang with fighters, barbarians, rogues, etc., there should be some cost to doing so.  In our design, the trade-off is the opportunity cost of casting in combat.  Individually, the wizard's personal buffs are pretty powerful.  Casting one or two should really ramp the character's capabilities up.  If you sit out half the battle loading up on buffs while other characters hold the line, you can become really deadly -- but you're sitting out half the combat.  If you want to give yourself more time, use something to slow down or paralyze enemies first, then capitalize on that delay to layer buffs.  Alternately, coordinate with a paladin or priest who can buff the wizard along with the rest of the party.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Josh: Will there be specific magic items for shifted forms, like collars for a druid in wolf form, etc?

[J.E. Sawyer]

I am so pleased that shape shifting made it into the game! Even more that the idea of hybrid shape shifting also made it in the game! A few questions from someone who loves to play shape shifters…

 

1. Will we be allowed to cast spells when shifted?

2. How long will we be allowed to be shifted?

3. Will buff spells and abilities remain when changing shapes or when shifted for the first time?

4. If items will not merge when shifted what will make shape shifting unique? The abilities+ buffs or will it just be for role playing?

5. Will there be any shapes that are ranged in nature, for example like medusa with bow and arrow?

 

1. Yes.

2. Shifting lasts for the duration of combat or until you choose to shift back.

3. Yes.

4. All spiritshift forms have unique passive abilities that complement some aspect of fighting in melee.

5. Currently, they are all melee-oriented.  In the future, we are more likely to branch out into "weirder" spiritshift forms.

[J.E. Sawyer]

Josh: Will there be specific magic items for shifted forms, like collars for a druid in wolf form, etc?

 

That is not currently planned.  Sorry.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

Josh: Will there be specific magic items for shifted forms, like collars for a druid in wolf form, etc?

 

That is not currently planned.  Sorry.

 

 Never mind. You have to save some stuff for the expansions, no?

[Lysen]

5. Currently, they are all melee-oriented.  In the future, we are more likely to branch out into "weirder" spiritshift forms.

 

I don't usually play as a druid, but this sounds really interesting.

[Gumbercules]

Do wizards still get familiars, or have they been dropped?

[Stun]

Is fireball still a 3rd level spell?

[mudd1]

If you want your wizard to be able to hop into the front lines and hang with fighters, barbarians, rogues, etc., there should be some cost to doing so.  In our design, the trade-off is the opportunity cost of casting in combat.  Individually, the wizard's personal buffs are pretty powerful.  Casting one or two should really ramp the character's capabilities up.  If you sit out half the battle loading up on buffs while other characters hold the line, you can become really deadly -- but you're sitting out half the combat.  If you want to give yourself more time, use something to slow down or paralyze enemies first, then capitalize on that delay to layer buffs.  Alternately, coordinate with a paladin or priest who can buff the wizard along with the rest of the party.

 

 

If buffing is so powerful, won't that encourage save scumming? Like

1. Encounter
2. Quick load
3. Buff the hell out of your party
4. Lazily obliterate enemies

[Stun]

 

If you want your wizard to be able to hop into the front lines and hang with fighters, barbarians, rogues, etc., there should be some cost to doing so.  In our design, the trade-off is the opportunity cost of casting in combat.  Individually, the wizard's personal buffs are pretty powerful.  Casting one or two should really ramp the character's capabilities up.  If you sit out half the battle loading up on buffs while other characters hold the line, you can become really deadly -- but you're sitting out half the combat.  If you want to give yourself more time, use something to slow down or paralyze enemies first, then capitalize on that delay to layer buffs.  Alternately, coordinate with a paladin or priest who can buff the wizard along with the rest of the party.

 

If buffing is so powerful, won't that encourage save scumming? Like

• Encounter
• Quick load
• Buff the hell out of your party
• Lazily obliterate enemies

As opposed to:

 

1) encounter

2) Buff the hell out of the party with Weak buffs that do virtually nothing

3) Party gets obliterated because they sat there and buffed themselves pointlessly while the enemy destroyed them with offense.

4) Player reloads and just scraps the buffing.

 

No thanks. They already took spell pre-buffing away and there's already a spell interruption mechanic during combat. Making mage spells weaker on top of all of this will not reduce "save scumming", it will just make mages not worth playing.

Edited March 21, 2014 by Stun