Basic Attacks, Swords, Bows, Guns, At-Will Spells, etc.

[Aron Times]

So I just learned that there will be early firearms in PoE, and that they have the ability to penetrate a wizard's Mage Armor (can't remember the exact ability, so I'm going to use the D&D name). I'm one of those people who likes the concept of firearms in fantasy, as their literal firepower can keep the supremacy of magic in check. It also pleases my inner Technocrat (Mage: The Ascension) to have something mundane be so powerful.

 

Anyway, I was wondering about the basic attacks available in PoE. In the vast majority of RPGs, basic attacks are physical attacks, melee or ranged, that one uses in the absence of magical attack options. Throughout the history of D&D, for example, spellcasters use basic attacks (3.5 and earlier: ranged weapons, 4e and 5e: at-will spells) to conserve their big guns. In many CRPGs, basic attacks are what you use while your power meter is filling up or your other attacks are on cooldown. So, what basic attack options do PoE toons have?

 

Also, about firearms, can all classes use them? I saw concept art depicting a cleric with a longarm (musket or rifle, probably a musket). Will I have the option of having a six-man party packing heat as they go about their obligatory mass murder? I mean, if I'm going to be killin' a lot people, I might as well do it right; with a gun from long range so I'm less likely to get hurt.

 

Oooh, can I play a party of gunslingers? Do want.

[Sensuki]

Every class can use any weapon (or armor).

 

PE should handle very similar to the IE games. Standard attacks will make up the majority of your moves for a lot of classes. You just left click an enemy once and your character(s) start attacking.

 

http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Pillars_of_Eternity_Wiki

 

PE will have more abilities for martial classes than the IE games. There's a list of them on all the wiki pages along with descriptions of how they play.

 

All attacks and offensive spells use the same Attack Resolution system which is described on the wiki too.

 

The lead designer reported that currently the Cipher with an Arquebus does the most damage.

Edited June 8, 2014 by Sensuki

[teknoman2]

guns do the most damage of all weapons in the game and can pierce magic defenses, however they have low base accuracy and long reload times. so they are mostly 1 shot per battle, because your party will be dead by the time they finish reloading for the second shot

[Sensuki]

The reload times won't be THAT long, as long as you have a couple melee at least you should be fine.

[Lephys]

I'm with Sensuki: It doesn't seem that they'll quite be "one shot per battle" or anything. It seems more like they just won't be very feasible to take stuff head-on with. As-in "I'll just run around with my gun, shooting everything." You'll probably be able to attack several times in the same combat. But, it's more that you're trading off all that time for the chance that your potent shot lands. Is it worth it? Against a bunch of heavily armored opponents, it might be well worth the time (and keeping folks from interrupting that gun reload time). Against a bunch of little, lightly-armored enemies? Probably not. By the time you've fired 3 shots, you probably could've killed them twice-over with some other combat means.

 

Imagine the slowest crossbow reload time you can from any RPG time, then add a few seconds to it. It's most likely something like that. It's just not a very rapid attack rate, is all.

[J.E. Sawyer]

Guns and arbalests are both pretty slow.  I'll be tuning the damage down a bit because their "alpha strike" capability is too dominant right now even with the low RoF.  They'll still be pretty darn good weapons.

[Lephys]

Will there be any form of "pistol whipping" with gun/crossbow butts? Not so much as an offensive maneuver, but more of a "maybe I can at least do SOMETHING to this guy who just got really close to me, so that I can disengage and/or move away more easily to facilitate reloading/further firing on my part." Just curious.

 

And, as always, your time and design factoids are very much appreciated. ^_^

Edited June 10, 2014 by Lephys

[Valorian]

Will there be any form of "pistol whipping" with gun/crossbow butts? Not so much as an offensive maneuver, but more of a "maybe I can at least do SOMETHING to this guy who just got really close to me, so that I can disengage and/or move away more easily to facilitate reloading/further firing on my part." Just curious.

 

And, as always, your time and design factoids are very much appreciated. ^_^

 

Why would there be? Breaking melee engagement is covered by class abilities (and possibly talents). Many classes already have this ability, and I see no reason to buff a (already powerful) category of weapons with this valuable ability.

[Lephys]

^ Basically, I was just curious if any sort of melee attack, whatsoever, with a ranged weapon would be possible in PoE, since they're possible in reality (especially against a beast or creature that isn't parrying you, etc.). The added possibility of this attack's contribution to an easier disengagement was just something else I observed.

 

If you really want to get into it, maybe it's just a chance to affect disengagement. If it doesn't work, then you've delayed your flight from the foe by standing there long enough to make a less-than-potent melee attack. If it does, then great. We already know about other classes getting disengagement attacks, and the Wizard gets to use his Grimoire for one. Who's to say the Ranger disengagement attack (for example) isn't a melee attack with a ranged weapon? *shrug*

 

It's not really any more powerful than Grimoire Slam. It's not like the Wizard just gets to never be engaged. He gets to break engagement once in who knows how much time (a minute? A whole encounter?). Besides... if you're relying on a ranged weapon, and you freely disengage and run away, the foe's going to be hot on your tail anyway. So, the very next time you stop and shoot (most likely after reloading, since you probably haven't done that yet and probably can't do that on the run), you're going to be engaged again.

 

Anywho, really, it was just a simple question, based on curiosity. I figured Josh has already thought about all this 7 times more than any of us have, since his day job is making this game. So, I figured just asking if anything like that was going to be in the game would be easier than presenting an elaborate analysis about it.

[Gfted1]

Aren't there two "weapon sets" that can be equipped? So you can switch that party member from range to melee?

[Lephys]

^ Indeed there are. If not more than 2. Or, at least, functionally, you can switch weapons in combat.

[Valorian]

Would you like all weapons to have an in-built disengagement capability? All ranged weapons? Just firearms?

Do you think they'd need to adjust damage and attack speed accordingly? Do you think it would strongly favor this category of weapons, regardless?

Would you like to be able to smack an enemy with your firearm more than once per combat encounter?

Do you think it devalues class abilities that do the same thing?

 

Please elaborate. 

 

:grins and peeks into Lephysland:

[Sad Panda]

If they do include melee attacks with firearms, I hope they account for that this is something that really only makes sense as a last resort, as guns generally aren't built to handle that kind of abuse. Smacking someone with a rifle butt is one thing, but if you use a pistol as a club, you better be prepared for the eventuality that that's all it'll be good for after that. I'm not sure if it's been confirmed if there'll be any kind of weapon deterioration or breaking, but at least in this case it'd definitely make sense to me that there's a chance of jamming or destroying a gun if you start swinging with it. I think the risk of this happening would work as a natural deterrent to over-using the "melee capabailities".

Edited June 11, 2014 by Sad Panda

[Sensuki]

Battle Realms had that, it was pretty cool. Although I assume in this you'd just swap weapons as attacking with a crossbow or something in melee seems pretty dumb.

Edited June 11, 2014 by Sensuki

[Mor]

1. Any idea what is the damage type of Guns\Crossbows, is it Piercing damage? if so what is the best armor against ranged foe?

 

2. Do we know if Ranged attack require LOS i.e. can I duck into a room to force them to come to me on my own terms, because if there is no cover from Ranged it gives them a huge advantage in all situations where the enemy comes from one side.

[Mor]

Aren't there two "weapon sets" that can be equipped? So you can switch that party member from range to melee?

Not just ranged to melee, but any weapon\shield combination that you decide would serve you best in that situation.

 

Basically, I was just curious if any sort of melee attack, whatsoever, with a ranged weapon would be possible in PoE, since they're possible in reality (especially against a beast or creature that isn't parrying you, etc.). The added possibility of this attack's contribution to an easier disengagement was just something else I observed.

...

I am also curious about the possibility of using ranged weapons in melee as last resort and if we have throwing knifes? However, the disengagement bit doesn't sound right, why would ranged weapons have any benefit over melee in melee situation?! and if every weapon can allow you disengage then what the point in engagement mechanics.. its just extra clicks..

 

I'm not sure if it's been confirmed if there'll be any kind of weapon deterioration or breaking, but at least in this case it'd definitely make sense to me that there's a chance of jamming or destroying a gun if you start swinging with it.

It was considered, but due to poor backers feedback has been removed long ago. Edited June 11, 2014 by Mor

[Lephys]

Battle Realms had that, it was pretty cool. Although I assume in this you'd just swap weapons as attacking with a crossbow or something in melee seems pretty dumb.

"Attacking" with a ranged weapon does sound pretty dumb. I'm really talking more something that wouldn't exactly be an offensive maneuver. You wouldn't be actively like "Yeah, I'm totally intentionally choosing THIS weapon, at my leisure, to swing with!"

 

It's more of an "I'm aiming my bolt at some foe, and OH MY GOD, A WOLF IS COMING AT ME FROM THE SIDE! I DIDN'T SEE THAT GUY! *stock butt to the wolf's head in an in-the-moment attempt to not get mauled by wolf*" type situation I'm thinking of.

 

You wouldn't casually place your crossbow on your back, then draw your sword, swing it once at the wolf (which is probably ripping your throat out already by now), THEN go "Yay! I successfully melee attacked with the optimal weapon!", then re-sheathe your sword, make a hasty retreat, then re-draw your crossbow, reload it, and resume shooting at things until the wolf got near you again.

 

If you deemed it feasible to delay something's pursuit just long enough to get another shot off, as opposed to just saying "Eff it" and switching to melee combat (not just one, defensive attack), then you could, feasibly try to strike something with the butt of your sturdy ranged weapon's stock. I wouldn't recommend smashing your longbow against something. But, oodles of RPGs have some form of lethal AND non-lethal damage distinctions. So, maybe, if the thing you're hitting doesn't have a helmet or some other form of protection where you're striking it, the butt of a gun/crossbow stock could produce non-lethal damage.

 

Again, not ideal, but better than nothing if attacking before swapping weapons would potentially stave off the oncoming strike you hope to avoid. *shrug*

 

It was a really simple thought, really.

 

So, Valorian, to answer your question, no. I don't really want everything to have some special disengagement attack. I'm assuming there are ways to safely disengage without using something specifically designed TO safely disengage you from a foe. Like stunning them and/or otherwise incapacitating them, then simply leaving their engagement radius while they can't do anything about it.

 

And, as I already said, it would be rather arbitrary for an attempted strike with a crossbow/gun butt to ALWAYS result in a definite incapacitation. But, functionally, it could result in that. And/or an interrupt. *shrug*

 

I was really just curious. Stocks are easily jabbable with-able. They are on crossbows and guns. Maybe they could be used to jab things in the game, in whatever capacity. Thus, I asked.

 

Should I write a 1,000 word essay about the matter, submitted for your approval, before asking a simple question?

Edited June 11, 2014 by Lephys

[Valorian]

 

Should I write a 1,000 word essay about the matter, submitted for your approval, before asking a simple question?

 

 

Yes, but 1000 is so below your potential. Please, make it 2000 and send it via PM for approval.

[Lephys]

2500, and not an adjective less.

[Mor]

Btw, do we have a special ammunition slot, is it equipped as part of the 'weapon set' (unless some projectile weapons aren't considered 'two hand' weapons and can be used with a shield) or they drawn directly from Pack slots?

 

Also any thoughts on ammo stacks limits? I know that most people hated them. Ranged weapons allow you to deal damage from distance and stay away from harm. With little gamy tactics you can keep it up for as long as you have ammo, which IMO made Ranged weapon bit overpowered without stack limits. So considering that inventory management in PoE has been designed with tactics in mind, I think it would be prudent to make ammo a limited resource.

 

Guns and arbalests are both pretty slow.  I'll be tuning the damage down a bit because their "alpha strike" capability is too dominant right now even with the low RoF.  They'll still be pretty darn good weapons.

Good? I was planning a playthrough with Vailian pirate/slaver party, with every character having at least one Firearm, two if I can manage it:

 

 

to squeeze more of that godlike stopping power, before we do a short work of them with the more exotic melee weapons in our arsenal.

Edited June 12, 2014 by Mor

[Lord Gorchnik]

Guns and arbalests are both pretty slow.  I'll be tuning the damage down a bit because their "alpha strike" capability is too dominant right now even with the low RoF.  They'll still be pretty darn good weapons.

 

Oh so now I can't dual-weird arbalests like all the other pros eh?  Thanks Josh, dream = ruined!

[Elerond]

 

Guns and arbalests are both pretty slow.  I'll be tuning the damage down a bit because their "alpha strike" capability is too dominant right now even with the low RoF.  They'll still be pretty darn good weapons.

 

Oh so now I can't dual-weird arbalests like all the other pros eh?  Thanks Josh, dream = ruined!

 

Take bigger one

[Mor]

 

Guns and arbalests are both pretty slow.  I'll be tuning the damage down a bit because their "alpha strike" capability is too dominant right now even with the low RoF.  They'll still be pretty darn good weapons.

 

Oh so now I can't dual-weird arbalests like all the other pros eh?  Thanks Josh, dream = ruined!

 

Uhm, not sure what was your point, but Arbalests have always been two-handed, so no. However, if the dual wield comment refers to the the previous post, where I mentioned two flintlock pistols, then I was actually suggesting a consecutive use, to cut down the reload time. (i.e. Draw first, shoot, throw away. Draw second.. Draw sabber )

 

Which is realistic, and it make more sense, more accessible and more wieldy setup then most other things you can put in same 3 weapon slot e.g. Arbalests, War hammer\Shield, pike .. by the time you can swap you Arbalest with whatever on your back, you are dead twice over.  

Edited June 12, 2014 by Mor

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

Uhm, not sure what was your point.  

 

 

Pretty sure his point was to be facetious. Seems the humour has been lost somewhere.

[Mor]

Depending on how many of those you seen in discussion touching on realism, the more the Humorous part tend to blend with done to death thus looking for references..