Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

[v392] Thoughts on The Paladin

classes paladin feedback discussion mechanics beta suggestions issues strategic firebombing smash cultural marxism

  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#21
Luckmann

Luckmann

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3497 posts
  • Location:The Scanian Flatlands

I was not aware that the Monk only got 3 Class Talents. Yes, I would consider that a definite issue with the Monk Class, they should absolutely get more than that. 3 Class Talents is just.. sad. It should absolutely be viable for every Class to take nothing but Class Talents during lvlups.

Not necessarily good, but possible.


  • Doppelschwert likes this

#22
PrimeJunta

PrimeJunta

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 4900 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer

... "unless you choose to play the concept (class) in such a way". Fighters in PnP are no less engaging than Wizards unless you choose to play them that way; in a DnD combat scene, you can do anything you want, not just swing your sword. The level of engagement really has very little to do with what powers you have, in a PnP, but in a CRPG, you are limited to the actions handed to you by the game. You cannot cut the cord of the chandelier and throw yourself at the king.

In a CRPG, the level of engagement, the low-maintenance vs. high-maintenance, must be mechanically supported in one way or another, choices offered by the system and arbitrated by the player in how much he desires to put into that one character.

 

Again: level of engagement is not the same as low or high maintenance, in PnP or a cRPG.

 

I do not find IE game fighters less engaging to play than IE game spellcasters*, even though AD&D fighters have no active abilities at all. None. Nada. Zilch. Zip. There is no action a vanilla fighter can take in or out of combat that any other class can't take. What makes a fighter engaging to play is that it does what it does better than any other class. No other class can hit things as reliably and as hard as a fighter.

 

If the paladin isn't working, the problem isn't that it doesn't have enough active abilities, it's that there is no thing that it does better than any other class -- or, as you put it earlier, it needs to be conceptually tightened up.

 

*In the level range we're discussing here, say up to 12 or so. High-level DnD is a whole different game.


  • Doppelschwert likes this

#23
prodigydancer

prodigydancer

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 435 posts

I'm well aware there are exceptions though I think DA2 is a pretty poor example for the reason it's a massive move away from PC RPGs that IE style games were towards console or action RPGs.

Yes, of course. IE combat was low-maintenance for all non-caster classes to the point where pure fighters were limited to switching weapons and using consumables (until HLAs were finally introduced). And to be honest I can't recall anyone being especially happy about fighter gameplay despite how awesome grand mastery was for pure DPS. Every class needs at least some active abilities.
 

DA2 should be kept out of any arguments if for no other reason than to not sully the discussion with it's mere mention.

I'm so sorry for not jumping on the "it's different from DA:O so we hate it!" bandwagon. original.gif Seriously though, while I agree that DA2 had issues, I think it had one of the best combat systems ever created. They managed to completely butcher it in DA:I though.

Edited by prodigydancer, 20 January 2015 - 03:32 AM.

  • Luckmann likes this

#24
Luckmann

Luckmann

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3497 posts
  • Location:The Scanian Flatlands

 

I'm well aware there are exceptions though I think DA2 is a pretty poor example for the reason it's a massive move away from PC RPGs that IE style games were towards console or action RPGs.

Yes, of course. IE combat was low-maintenance for all non-caster classes to the point where pure fighters were limited to switching weapons and using consumables (until HLAs were finally introduced). And to be honest I can't recall anyone being especially happy about fighter gameplay despite how awesome grand mastery was for pure DPS. Every class needs at least some active abilities.
 

DA2 should be kept out of any arguments if for no other reason than to not sully the discussion with it's mere mention.

I'm so sorry for not jumping on the "it's different from DA:O so we hate it!" bandwagon. original.gif Seriously though, while I agree that DA2 had issues, I think it had one of the best combat systems ever created. They managed to completely butcher it in DA:I though.

 

 

I am not sure whether I should love you for the first comment, or set you on fire for the second one. :p



#25
Namutree

Namutree

    Compulsive Double Poster of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 1711 posts
  • Location:Michigan
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

 

I'm well aware there are exceptions though I think DA2 is a pretty poor example for the reason it's a massive move away from PC RPGs that IE style games were towards console or action RPGs.

Yes, of course. IE combat was low-maintenance for all non-caster classes to the point where pure fighters were limited to switching weapons and using consumables (until HLAs were finally introduced). And to be honest I can't recall anyone being especially happy about fighter gameplay despite how awesome grand mastery was for pure DPS. Every class needs at least some active abilities.
 

I liked it. 


  • PrimeJunta likes this

#26
DigitalCrack

DigitalCrack

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 405 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

Paladins need the same thing priests need.  A clear and distinct change of feel between Orders(deity's for priest).  I know they already have some talents that change the functions, slightly, of existing paladin abilities based on your order.  They should be way more distinct than that.  Each order could not only have variations of the base paladin abilities, but order exclusive active and modal abilities as well.  Like bleak walkers could have an aura that steals endurance from enemies and and gives it to friendlies affected by the aura.  Kind wayfarers could get an active, per encounter, ability that grants them freedom of movement and immunity to disengagement for a certain amount of time during combat you could call it "wanderer's spirit". 

 

In a completely different vein of thinking it could be cool to give paladins active abilities that are only usable when specific auras are active.  Like with zealous focus you could have an ability called "true strike" that hits every enemy with range of the aura without the possibility of missing but also without the possibility of hits being critical.   Just trying to give an example, not necessarily a realistic/balanced one, but something to help translate the idea of what I am saying.


  • Luckmann and gogocactus like this

#27
Luckmann

Luckmann

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3497 posts
  • Location:The Scanian Flatlands

Paladins need the same thing priests need.  A clear and distinct change of feel between Orders(deity's for priest).  I know they already have some talents that change the functions, slightly, of existing paladin abilities based on your order.  They should be way more distinct than that.  Each order could not only have variations of the base paladin abilities, but order exclusive active and modal abilities as well.  Like bleak walkers could have an aura that steals endurance from enemies and and gives it to friendlies affected by the aura.  Kind wayfarers could get an active, per encounter, ability that grants them freedom of movement and immunity to disengagement for a certain amount of time during combat you could call it "wanderer's spirit". 

 

In a completely different vein of thinking it could be cool to give paladins active abilities that are only usable when specific auras are active.  Like with zealous focus you could have an ability called "true strike" that hits every enemy with range of the aura without the possibility of missing but also without the possibility of hits being critical.   Just trying to give an example, not necessarily a realistic/balanced one, but something to help translate the idea of what I am saying.

 

I'd avoid offensive auras; I have the feeling that they'd be even harder to balance, because offence mechanically trumps defence 9 times out of 10, and with the nature of auras, the issue would be exacerbated by the number of opponents often outnumbering the amount of party members - and it'd scale by difficulty level, because one of the principal ways PoE chooses to increase difficulty is by adding or subtracting enemies in encounters.

 

With that said, I completely agree with both points. The first point could easily help solve core issues with the Paladin Class by means of the different Orders, and would be flavourful and meaningful in it's own right, to boot.

 

The second point could really make it interesting to have multiple auras, but with that, I'd actually make Auras a single Ability that gives you access to all three (or more) auras, and then you could pick the Abilities that are only usable with different auras. I'm not 100% sure how this'd all work out in practice, due to how the acquisition of abilities works in PoE (maybe the auras should be kept as separate picks, but also give you an ability that is only usable while the aura is on... further incentivizing picking multiple auras? Actually I think that'd be best and work well "out of the box" with the current system; or maybe auras should just give hard bonuses to multiple specific pre-existing abilities when they are on? Zealous Focus could make Lay on Hands instant, and Zealous Endurance could make Flames of Devotion Interrupt, and so forth).

 

Either way, I like the ideas.


  • illathid and DigitalCrack like this

#28
Shevek

Shevek

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1164 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
LoH should be 1/encounter in my book. Havent tested Paladin this build due to aura bugs. I hope they change it back.
  • Lord Wafflebum likes this

#29
illathid

illathid

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 726 posts
  • PSN Portable ID:illathid
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!
I think giving the paladin a way to do more FoD per encounter would help a lot.

#30
cmergler

cmergler

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 52 posts
  • Location:Germany
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

If I am not mistaken FoD sticks until weapon gets changed or encounter ends? Have to take a look (talking about v392 bb here). Also LoH is 1/encounter, in case people still think of the old versions.



#31
Shevek

Shevek

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1164 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
Ah ok, someone mentioned it was 3/rest. I havent rested the paladin this build so I wasnt sure.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: classes, paladin, feedback, discussion, mechanics, beta, suggestions, issues, strategic firebombing, smash cultural marxism

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users