Dev Feedback Needs: Improving Class Advancement/Improving Class Features

[Lephys]

And another no, this time, on making a number of fighters in BG1. They got different weapon styles, but more importantly, I could vary the attributes and get something different RPG-wise and combat-wise, even dual-class them. And BG:EE's class kits (from BG2), made them almost like different classes, but still they were not.

To be fair, the main stattribute problem right now is simply the numbers. When some weapons/attacks are doing damage in the teens, and you get +10% damage from your Might value, you're looking at less than 2 bonus damage.

 

D&D was using a 20-point scale, (+1 To Hit on a d20, +1 damage, etc.) and starter enemies would have like 8-16hp. So, percentage-wise, +1 damage was a big deal. +2 or +3 was even better. Especially with how that worked on the damage-roll range. If it was 1d8, and you had +2, then your damage range (without crit) jumped to 3-10.

 

I'm not sure how the modifiers are applied in PoE (if they adjust the whole range, then let the roll occur, or roll for damage, then modify that result -- I think they affect the damage range first), but +4% damage (from 2 points of Might) of, say, 20 damage, is an extra .8 damage. That versus the HP values of enemies... it's a lot less of a bonus than we saw in D&D.

 

Not trying to say "WE SHOULD BE LIKE DND 8D!". I'm just trying to compare the math between PoE (new) and D&D (something people are used to).

 

Really, the baseline I'd start with regarding stat distinction is "If I give this guy 18 in this stat, and this other guy like 3... HOW different are they?" You don't want the 18-Might guy to do 7,000 damage, while the 3-Might guy does 1 damage, obviously. But you also don't want the essentially top-5-percentile person to be doing like 8 more damage than the person who's as strong as a squirrel, to enemies that need to sustain 100+ damage.

 

So, I couldn't tell you, without extensive iterative testing, what the exact numbers should be, but I feel like the stattributes definitely need larger bonuses. If the combat significance of each point of a stat gets a little boost, and we see plenty of stat-checks throughout the game (because, remember, we're only seeing a tiny portion of the game, so stuff like "How much of a difference does my 4 extra points of Might matter out-of-combat in this game?" is kinda hard to tell at the moment), I think you wouldn't be feeling like the points mattered so much more in D&D.

 

Annnnnnnywho... Now I should probably start actually thinking of talents/class-ability-structuring feedback... *ponder*

[redneckdevil]

Tbh one thing i have been thinking is to not make class abilities very good right off the bat. Make them something thats noticeable but nothing "excellent". Then design the feats around class abilities along with feats not related to class abilities. Of course the feats designed around class abilities shouldnt be designed for "ONE" specific ability but can be something broad such as a feat that for ex. "Whenever u use an ability that does damage over time, this feat extends it by 1 sec." Course thats problemly a bad example. This would basically be like strengthening a certain part of the role of a class and id even go so far as to make feats uptainable at the level u unlock them such as pulling out my butt level 2, those feats u see are only uptainable at that level. Now to do this u would need a big selection of feats, but this would make selecting ur feats much more important instead of "mmm i really like these 2 feats but i will select one now and then next time i will select the next one" deal. If the feats are good and varied, would instill different playthrus with same class and each class feeling different. Would also if done right do away with "must have" feats that all ur classes would have because there would be a consequence and losing out of certain feats because they are locked at that certain level.

 

Take it or leave it, i like specialization and being forced to pick certains things without a safety net of always i can chose this one at a later level type thing.

[rjshae]

I tend to think of rangers as a type of skirmishing/scouting class. They could be adept at breaking away from combat, or striking then rapidly shifting position. In this sense they would be rogue-like, although I don't think they'd get the rogue's spike damage. Their ranged attacks are more adept at firing between obstacles, thereby allowing them to better fire into a mixed melee or strike a foe behind cover. Over long ranges though, the accuracy of a ranger and fighter with a missile weapon are probably somewhat comparable.

 

Thus their talents could include things like a Sprinting Shot (take an accuracy penalty but gain extra movement after each shot), Acrobatic Maneuver (to bypass or disengage an enemy), Ricochet (to hit a concealed target), and Point Blank (for close ranged fire).