Why do Ciphers start with full focus?

[Bersercker]

Um, are people complaining about "OP" cipher actually play PotD? Also, whats up with mental binding "OP" when 1st level wizard's slicken is clearly superior in every way and also truns into per encounter later on? And mental blades? Cmon they are just garbage. Also LOL at "bringing wizards up to ciphers level". Imo currently its like wizard>priest>druid>cipher>chanter for thougher fights, while cipher and chanter are better for easier fights since you can preserve per rest spells.

Edited April 15, 2015 by Bersercker

[Longknife]

 

 

Cipher is a hobby-horse class of the designers, hip, setting-specific and utterly over-indulged. It's like a dungeon master's favourite NPC, the one that never dies and pops up everywhere while the players roll their eyes.

 

 

This.

 

It's painfully clear that the developers were playing favorites with the classes. Cipher got all the love cause they invented it. Wizard and Paladin clearly received quite a bit of neglect, comparatively.

 

 

How's that Kool Aid?

 

 

How the HELL does drinking the Kool Aid apply here...?

[Luckmann]

 

I'm not interested in entering a debate about overpoweredness and nerfs and that sort of stuff. That said:

 

I like ciphers because casting magic most of the time and shooting occasionally is more fun to me than the other way around + resting to regain spells. It makes me feel more like a "true caster", so to speak.

 

If you think that focus is too high as it is, maybe you can, you know... not use it fully? There's no need to ruin the class for those of us who like the way it plays now.

 

 

Oh, the Cipher is my favorite class. It's just that from level 9-12 or so it's so powerful it trivializes the content. Amplified Wave is ridiculonk, and chain casting Mental Binding isn't much different. 

 

To be fair a lot of classes have this issue, Gaze of the Adragan trivializes the endboss, etc. The *main* issue is that other casting classes need more per-encounter utility. But it wouldn't hurt to make ciphers have a *slightly* slower start, just so they couldn't always open every fight with their biggest whammy.

 

They sortof have the inverse problem from Chanters. Just like the fight is always over before Chanters get to use an Invocation, most fights are usually over before high-level Ciphers need to attack with a weapon. Just like Chanters should probably start combat with a couple phrases "in the tank," at least at higher level, Ciphers should probably start with slightly less focus "in the tank" (at least unless they take the "Greater Focus" talent, which conversely should do more than it does; it sucks now).

 

VVV But I do like them! I just want playing them to be a little more challenging at the top end. If I didn't like them at all I wouldn't play them and wouldn't have any opinion! VV

 

 

When I glance at your avatar, I see Lemongrab, and I read "ridiculonk" as "redonkulous" in Jake's voice.

 

Anyway, generally agree. I'd like to see Cipher's Focus dropped to at least 30% (from 50%), with the Greater Focus Talent improved. Because as you say, it sucks now. Why would anyone even consider getting it, ever?

 

If Focus was dropped to 2-3 (from 5) per Level (Even levels 3, Odd levels 2), and default Focus was dropped to 30% (from 50%), I could see the Greater Focus Talent actually increasing default Focus to 50%, or maybe even back to 50%, as well as increasing the maximum focus by 10 (so, 5 default focus with the Talent).

[Starthief]

You don't necessarily need to tweak cipher starting focus.  You just need to make it so that you don't generate focus with every Blunderbuss pellet.  Does anybody *not* use a blunderbuss on their cipher?

I used a pistol on my main Cipher for quite some time, until I picked up Grieving Mother and gave her a blunderbuss.  I noticed after the first shot she gained *slightly* more focus than my main.  Whether this woud balance over a longer fight I don't know, because longer fights were rare and I generally was too busy using focus (and managing other characters) to worry about differences in focus gain.  

 

After a while I gave my main a blunderbuss too, and did not notice any major difference in effectiveness.

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

 

 

 

I'd say just tweak Ciphers' starting focus down a bit so that they always start with slightly less than they need to cast their top-level power, rather than slightly less than they need to cast it twice. Otherwise leave gain, costs, etc. the same.

I agree with this. Right now they get (at the start of combat) 10 focus + 5 per level. It is clearly too much. Maybe 5 starting focus per odd-level would be a good amount. Then they should also change the greater focus talent to apply to starting focus, making it potentially useful instead of useless.

 

Some other cipher changes desperately needed:

-Ectopsychic Echo should have its damage cut at least in half. Duration should probably be reduced as well. Average total damage should be well below soul ignition since it can hit many enemies and it targets reflex.

-Mental Binding should probably have average casting time.

Ectopsychic Echo deals a lot of damage, but it is tricky to use. I see it as a high risk high reward spell. Halving its damage would mean it would be worse than antipathetic field and largely mitigated by DT. No good. It can use a nerf, but not this big. Soul Igntion actually needs a buff, it's crap atm.

 

Mental binding clearly needs a nerf, but I kinda like its niche as an emergency CC, ciphers don't have any other "oh ****" buttons. So I'd say just remove the stuck aoe on it so it doesn't freeze groups in their tracks. It would still be a good single target spell, but not as strong.

 

And I still don't see a need for starting focus change, balance the spells instead.

 

 

On a side note, I think it's ridiculous that fighters start combat with 2 or even 3 knockdowns. They should start it with 1 and gain access to the 2nd one after 15 seconds.

I would suggest taking the stuck aoe off mental binding and adding it to phantom foes.

[kalel78]

since this is a single player game i really dont want ANY class nerfed.  what i would prefer is a buff to other classes to make them more aligned with the "overpowered" classes and a buff in challenge on mobs to compensate.

 

that being said.. i like the cipher a lot.  its quite a change from wizard/druid, and it puts an interesting twist on spell mechanics.  i dont want the cipher to turn into wizard/druid 3.0.. i want it to feel unique. and nerfing the focus would, IMO, turn the class into just another wizard/druid reskin.  also, you should be able to cast your top level spell when you enter combat.. at least once. i shouldnt have to auto-attack and/or be "forced" into equipping Grieving Mother with a blunderbuss to generate the focus to do that right away.

 

and keep in mind, my character is a wizard (which i enjoy).. and the only cipher i have is grieving mother. 

[Jojobobo]

I think it should be definitely nerfed, I'm having an easier time with a Cipher on PotD than I did with several other classes on Hard. I guess maybe the devs thought that their general squishiness would offset their high power, but with one or two tanks thats not such a large issue. Their range of powers with that initial focus allow them to multitask superbly well early fight giving you a strong house edge, then Biting Whip means that out-damage a lot of classes in a single shot too mid-fight and then you easily have access to a lot of focus again.

 

Not to say I'm not loving playing one, but part of the reason I'm having my first serious PotD run with a Cipher is so I could break myself in with an "easy" high difficulty run.

[Amentep]

 

Cipher is a hobby-horse class of the designers, hip, setting-specific and utterly over-indulged. It's like a dungeon master's favourite NPC, the one that never dies and pops up everywhere while the players roll their eyes.

 

 

This.

 

It's painfully clear that the developers were playing favorites with the classes. Cipher got all the love cause they invented it. Wizard and Paladin clearly received quite a bit of neglect, comparatively.

 

 

Not sure I can buy this; Ciphers were part of the 2.5 Million Stretch goal with Barbarians.  They reflected the Psionisist in D&D (as each of the classes correspond to a D&D class) and had every chance to not be in the game at all.

 

I think an easier (and most likely true) argument would be made that Obsidian had trouble finding places for all the D&D classes in their setting.  Chanters and Ciphers are really good lore related classes. But finding a role that distinguishes Paladin, Barbarian and Fighter seemed to be a harder task (since Fighter seems to tank as good or better than Paladin and the extra abilities of the Barbarian don't really improve its damage potential heavily over the Fighter, in my experience).

 

I mean it could be true, but to me the problem was being beholden to the D&D class distinctions because they choose to D&D-mirroring classes. 

Edited April 15, 2015 by Amentep

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

Not sure I can buy this; Ciphers were part of the 2.5 Million Stretch goal with Barbarians.  They reflected the Psionisist in D&D (as each of the classes correspond to a D&D class) and had every chance to not be in the game at all.

 

I think an easier (and most likely true) argument would be made that Obsidian had trouble finding places for all the D&D classes in their setting.  Chanters and Ciphers are really good lore related classes. But finding a role that distinguishes Paladin, Barbarian and Fighter seemed to be a harder task (since Fighter seems to tank as good or better than Paladin and the extra abilities of the Barbarian don't really improve its damage potential heavily over the Fighter, in my experience).

 

I mean it could be true, but to me the problem was being beholden to the D&D class distinctions because they choose to D&D-mirroring classes. 

 

 

 

They also had more freedom to design the Cipher. Because this game was a deliberate homage to the IE games, the IE core classes like Wizard, Fighter, etc., couldn't stray to far from the classic design -- and hence are stuck about 15 years in the past in terms of game design, using per-rest instead of per-encounter, etc. 

 

Part of the reason Ciphers are "better" is that they're just designed better. The points-per-encounter + do-damage-for-more-mana concept is just more fun to play that the straight up classical "X number of spells per rest" D&D wizard because you get to use your cool buttons more and don't have to worry about conserving your juice. 

Edited April 15, 2015 by Dr. Hieronymous Alloy

[Hassat Hunter]

since this is a single player game i really dont want ANY class nerfed.  what i would prefer is a buff to other classes to make them more aligned with the "overpowered" classes and a buff in challenge on mobs to compensate.

Tell me (since I really wish to know)...

 

How is buffing *everything* but the Cipher different from nerfing the Cipher? Except for being exceptionally prone to more errors/bugs and taking more waaaaaay more development time???