lets talk about wizard & rogue

[Stun]

I think you are being disingenuous here, lock bashing and sending summons into traps are alternate ways of dealing with a situation but they aren't the same as lockpicking/trap disabling.

 

Wizards being able to cast knock or invisibility is just part of the whole "wizards can do everything" problem. Rangers being able to stealth is good and thematic which is cool.

They don't have to be the same mechanics. They're viable alternate solutions to the challenge at hand. Does anything else really matter? Although I do find it odd that anyone would cite the "wizards can do anything" design of the IE games as some sort of "problem" while at the same time praise a system where every class can sneak, disable traps, tinker with locks, etc. Edited February 10, 2015 by Stun

[Voss]

I'm not sure what your point is. Should the rogue class be removed? Should it have more unique features? Do you want a classless system? (I like classless systems, but PoE's simply isn't.)

 

Yes, they are set apart- but it is an entirely artificial separation.  Move class talents to general talents and you can make the same character without losing anything but limitations.

 

 

Yes, and this is true for the fighter. Move fighter talents to general talents, and everyone can be a fighter, including rogues. Losing limitations, what kind of limitations? This isn't DnD, a rogue can wear any armor and wield any weapon.

 

There are many, many games which offer the "basic three" as class choices, which is fighter, rogue, mage. The latest is Underworld Ascendant. Even System Shock 2 offered a modern-day version of the basic three: soldier, hacker, psi-op.

 

Edit: The "entirely artificial seperation" is called game design. Everything is artificial in a game.

 

Yes, the rogue should be removed, definitely not classless (too easy to break), just better designed classes.

 

Yes, everything is artificial, but it can follow sensible rules of game design (rather than poor ones), and make sense in the context of the setting, a strong thematic sense, believability (if a 12 year old can do it, it isn't worth making a class feature) and desired game mechanics.  A rogue class fits none of those criteria.   Of the PoE classes, I'd say very few do- definitely the chanter and cipher, probably the paladin and ranger and maybe the monk (though without the wounds system, definitely not).  The rest are pretty arbitrary divisions of spell sets and fighting styles, several of which are very redundant (the wizard and druid, and definitely fighter/barbarian/rogue)

[Diogenes]

 

They don't have to be the same mechanics. They're viable alternate solutions to the challenge at hand. Does anything else really matter? Although I do find it odd that anyone would cite the "wizards can do anything" design of the IE games as some sort of "problem" while at the same time praise a system where every class can sneak, disable traps, tinker with locks, etc.

 

 

There's a difference between every class being a viable choice for a party slot in any one encounter and one class being the optimal choice for every party slot.

[Stun]

 

They don't have to be the same mechanics. They're viable alternate solutions to the challenge at hand. Does anything else really matter? Although I do find it odd that anyone would cite the "wizards can do anything" design of the IE games as some sort of "problem" while at the same time praise a system where every class can sneak, disable traps, tinker with locks, etc.

 

There's a difference between every class being a viable choice for a party slot in any one encounter and one class being the optimal choice for every party slot.

 

Obviously. But what's that have to do with anything? Are you claiming that Wizards in Baldurs Gate were the Optimal sneakers, trap disarmers, lock pickers, healers, archers and tanks??

 

Regardless, Lets not pretend that PoE will be all that different. Josh has flat out said from day one that PoE will be soloable. And by definition this means that any class will be able to deal with any challenge. So I'm not sure how anyone can argue that the system in place is some radical departure from the IE games. It isn't.

[Osvir]

It's not a problem unique to the rogue, since anyone can put points into Stealth, but yes, the lack of individual stealth is a pretty huge issue. A developer said that it's an issue they really wanted to fix, but they had to prioritize bug-hunting and -fixing. Which isn't really an excuse, but at least an acceptable explanation.

The fix could be very simple..... make Shadowing Beyond a Talent/Out of Combat Utility Ability. Individual Stealth Get.

[BrainMuncher]

Josh has flat out said from day one that PoE will be soloable.

Citation needed?

 

I can only recall Josh saying that there wouldn't be any artificial barriers in place purely to stop you from attempting to complete the game solo. I don't remember him guaranteeing it would actually be possible.

[Stun]

 

Josh has flat out said from day one that PoE will be soloable.

Citation needed?

 

I can only recall Josh saying that there wouldn't be any artificial barriers in place purely to stop you from attempting to complete the game solo. I don't remember him guaranteeing it would actually be possible.

 

http://www.pcgamer.com/pillars-of-eternity-interview-josh-sawyer-on-world-building-magic-psychic-warriors-and-more/#!

 

 

 

PC Gamer: Party combat is a big part of the game, but you've also said it's possible to play the game solo. Do you think this will be fun, or is it for masochists only?

 

Josh Sawyer: It'll be hard. I'm sure people will find certain classes and builds that will make it easier than others. Especially once you've already played through the game, and you have the metagame knowledge, it becomes a lot easier. I think the enjoyment comes from the fact that it's a unique challenge on its own. Some people will say, I don't know how to play through this whole game with a priest or a wizard, but I'm going to figure out how to do it. It will be pretty challenging, especially at certain points. We're planning to use a sliding experience system, so if you have a single character they'll gain levels more quickly than if they were with an entire party.

 

If you don't want to have six characters in your party you can have four, or two, or you can just go by yourself. We're not discouraging this, but also the combat isn't balanced around it. You can try it, but we're not going to spend time figuring out if it's viable to play through the whole game with a single character. It should be possible, but we're not putting a lot of time into it.

This is exactly how Bioware's devs answered the the question of "is BG soloable"? No wait. it's isn't. BG1 actually has a load screen tool tip that says "no one class can handle every situation, be sure to use a party blah blah blah". HA. How wrong was that?

Edited February 10, 2015 by Stun

[dffgmmj]

I dont think that "Wizard can do anything" or handled most situation in their own way is a real problem,Mages power come from 1.Multiple-buff ablitliy such as Chain Contingency (not SpellRevision mod version) 2.They can use items to reduce spell casting time (i usually use mod to delete them) 3,They have Improved Alacrity. When a player got familiar with mages mechanics,they can combine 1 2 3 and other powerful spell in their own way.My point is that  "can do anything" contains two meanings,1 powerful,2 useful/fun and of course more players brain work,i partly disagree with 1 but not 2. If give them more school (not just more spells) like old BG series or even like that Skyrim game, and find a way to re-tweak those powerful staff,mages can do better in poe.

 

And sir Bronn from Game of Thrones,i always think he is a fighter/thief, if thats the idea of poes rogue i wont complain,i like his style.