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

Shouldn't all spells be per combat encounter? Not per rest?

resting for free exploitable

  • Please log in to reply
157 replies to this topic

#141
nipsen

nipsen

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 550 posts
  • Location:Norway
  • Steam:retroquark

Backup Grimoire? Like a mini-grimoire in the inside suit pocket :p ...what would it take to get people to want to use this, though? Would it be enough to eventually introduce new spells later in the game, so you would end up with a second grimoire as full as the first one - or would it work better to always offer at least one similar but specialized cast every time you gain a new spell? From the beginning of the game. Or would it work to encourage people to create one "green" grimoire and a "black" one, for example. Would it work to have this as a quest? That it's part of wizard lore to craft your own book?

 

Because a bit of the problem with having too many spells is that you might tend to choose a selection of the spells you have in the grimoire. And then rotate with other spells in that grimoire, while ignoring spells you don't have or can't get into that first grimoire. Or, that you end up with two spellbooks with an equally random selection of spells..

 

So I'm wondering if there's a more intuitive way to get around this.

 

 

 I think you misunderstood the joke (whether or not it was funny is left as an exercise for the reader). He meant "I'm here to help you." 

 

Well, I don't need or want help like that. But, if I want to derail a discussion by having people scream their opinions at each other while holding for their ears, I'll be sure to ask.



#142
Gfted1

Gfted1

    Forum Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 5922 posts
  • Location:Chicago, IL
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Wizard should get access to all spells (per appropriate level) and they should be on cooldowns. Problem solved. :yes:



#143
scrotiemcb

scrotiemcb

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 253 posts
  • Location:El Paso, TX

Wizard should get access to all spells (per appropriate level) and they should be on cooldowns. Problem solved. :yes:

I thought spells on cooldown was the chanter's deal.



#144
View619

View619

    (5) Thaumaturgist

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

Wizard should get access to all spells (per appropriate level) and they should be on cooldowns. Problem solved. :yes:

 

Eh, this exists in D:OS and leads to the unbalanced power of spells in mid to late game, imo. Pretty sure it would just result in Wizard magic completely overshadowing all other methods of attack/defense/cc/etc since you could just cycle through useful spells not on cooldown until the others are ready.

 

Although, allowing a moddable player stat to reduce spell cooldowns doesn't help either. Bad decisions by Larian.


Edited by View619, 07 May 2015 - 10:33 AM.


#145
Gfted1

Gfted1

    Forum Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 5922 posts
  • Location:Chicago, IL
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

I didn't get far into D:OS but that sounds more like a balancing problem then a system problem. Longer cooldowns or less powerful spells are possible solutions, no? Im not opposed to a mana system either.



#146
View619

View619

    (5) Thaumaturgist

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

I didn't get far into D:OS but that sounds more like a balancing problem then a system problem. Longer cooldowns or less powerful spells are possible solutions, no? Im not opposed to a mana system either.

 

Yeah, it may just be the way intelligence affects cool-downs. Once you get it to decent levels spells recharge in one turn.



#147
scrotiemcb

scrotiemcb

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 253 posts
  • Location:El Paso, TX

I didn't get far into D:OS but that sounds more like a balancing problem then a system problem. Longer cooldowns or less powerful spells are possible solutions, no? Im not opposed to a mana system either.

In a general sense, I'm not opposed to these things, either. If I was, I would be arguing for the removal of the Chanter (cooldowns) and Cipher (mana system). I'm not.

But what I am opposed to is the removal of per-rest abilities and classes which specialize in per-rest abilities. Those deserve to remain in the game.

If you don't like it, play a Chanter or a Cipher instead of trying to give everything the same ability mechanics. Sameness is boring.
  • oaktownbrown and Namutree like this

#148
EvilCalvin42

EvilCalvin42

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 11 posts

Most RPG's I've played use the "per-rest" scenerio to refill the spells. I think it is fine as it adds a bit of strategy to the encounters otherwise you don' think much about it and it is just like a consumable.



#149
Gfted1

Gfted1

    Forum Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 5922 posts
  • Location:Chicago, IL
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Yeah, it may just be the way intelligence affects cool-downs. Once you get it to decent levels spells recharge in one turn.


So you could for example, cast Fireball every turn if your Int was high enough? That does sound OP. Maybe I should give D:OS another try. laughing.gif
 

In a general sense, I'm not opposed to these things, either. If I was, I would be arguing for the removal of the Chanter (cooldowns) and Cipher (mana system). I'm not.

But what I am opposed to is the removal of per-rest abilities and classes which specialize in per-rest abilities. Those deserve to remain in the game.

If you don't like it, play a Chanter or a Cipher instead of trying to give everything the same ability mechanics. Sameness is boring.


Why do you feel it is fine for Cipher and Chanter but no other class?

#150
archangel979

archangel979

    (11) Wizard

  • Members
  • 1617 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
I got a better question: Why are any spells encounter? It just made me use those each fight and barely any others and resulted in game having very little resource management except for health. And the worst part is that on Hard I was able to get away with such playing in 99% of encounters :(

#151
scrotiemcb

scrotiemcb

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 253 posts
  • Location:El Paso, TX

In a general sense, I'm not opposed to these things, either. If I was, I would be arguing for the removal of the Chanter (cooldowns) and Cipher (mana system). I'm not.

But what I am opposed to is the removal of per-rest abilities and classes which specialize in per-rest abilities. Those deserve to remain in the game.

If you don't like it, play a Chanter or a Cipher instead of trying to give everything the same ability mechanics. Sameness is boring.

Why do you feel it is fine for Cipher and Chanter but no other class?
False assumption. I feel the game should have at least 2 and probably 3 per-rest classes, and I also feel the cooldown thing is limited enough that the game only needs 1 "chanter" class, but as far as mana systems go I think one or two more could fit.

Edited by scrotiemcb, 08 May 2015 - 12:12 PM.


#152
View619

View619

    (5) Thaumaturgist

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

 

Yeah, it may just be the way intelligence affects cool-downs. Once you get it to decent levels spells recharge in one turn.


So you could for example, cast Fireball every turn if your Int was high enough? That does sound OP. Maybe I should give D:OS another try. laughing.gif
 

 

Yep. It gets even more ridiculous when you can cast piercing ice shards with high freeze chance, touch spells with 100+% chance of adding the debuff (chance increased with higher int), AOE spells and elemental shields that give you +100% current HP and have a chance of applying a debuff..each turn.

 

Of course, only mage spells get reduced cool-downs with an increased stat, none of the Rogue/Ranger/Fighter skills benefit from this. Larian is supposed to be working on a new mode that aims to bring encounters in-line with the OP options the player has, but I get the feeling they dropped it and have moved on to the next title.


Edited by View619, 08 May 2015 - 12:26 PM.


#153
perilisk

perilisk

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 104 posts

Well, you could give the Cipher's mana resource to the Wizard, but have Wizards still start the battle out low and need to build up mana to power their spells. They could circumvent this slightly with a very limited number of per-rest slots that they could use to prepare (ooc) a specific known spell of any level, which could then be cast in combat without needing or using any mana. So, modern system, but with a little Vancian flavor.

 

Of course, that would leave Ciphers without a unique thing. So, I'd suggest dropping Focus altogether, and reimagining them as soul hackers, with a sort of magical cyberpunk theme. Ciphers would establish soul links to one or more enemies. These soul links would "hack" the enemy over time (with the speed dependent on enemy Will), with the hack level acting as a sort of per-enemy mana pool. Depending on the Cipher's abilities, there would be a series of increasingly powerful debuffs or control conditions passively applied with increasing hack levels, but higher levels would also unlock active abilities that the Cipher could trigger on or through the enemy, at the cost of reducing or resetting the hack level. Some active abilities would be learned by leveling, but others would be associated with the enemy itself (representing using their own strengths against them, essentially), so for example a hacked blight might be used to deliver an elemental attack against its allies. I like the idea of the Cipher only directly targeting enemies with their at-will ability (though some of the active effects triggered from an enemy might buff allies in range), as it makes them sort of the opposite of the Chanter.



#154
Namutree

Namutree

    Compulsive Double Poster of the Obsidian Order

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

Well, you could give the Cipher's mana resource to the Wizard, but have Wizards still start the battle out low and need to build up mana to power their spells. They could circumvent this slightly with a very limited number of per-rest slots that they could use to prepare (ooc) a specific known spell of any level, which could then be cast in combat without needing or using any mana. So, modern system, but with a little Vancian flavor.

 

Of course, that would leave Ciphers without a unique thing. So, I'd suggest dropping Focus altogether, and reimagining them as soul hackers, with a sort of magical cyberpunk theme. Ciphers would establish soul links to one or more enemies. These soul links would "hack" the enemy over time (with the speed dependent on enemy Will), with the hack level acting as a sort of per-enemy mana pool. Depending on the Cipher's abilities, there would be a series of increasingly powerful debuffs or control conditions passively applied with increasing hack levels, but higher levels would also unlock active abilities that the Cipher could trigger on or through the enemy, at the cost of reducing or resetting the hack level. Some active abilities would be learned by leveling, but others would be associated with the enemy itself (representing using their own strengths against them, essentially), so for example a hacked blight might be used to deliver an elemental attack against its allies. I like the idea of the Cipher only directly targeting enemies with their at-will ability (though some of the active effects triggered from an enemy might buff allies in range), as it makes them sort of the opposite of the Chanter.

This is another case of a solution in search of a problem. That's a lot of work to do something that would likely make the game worse.



#155
perilisk

perilisk

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 104 posts

 

Well, you could give the Cipher's mana resource to the Wizard, but have Wizards still start the battle out low and need to build up mana to power their spells. They could circumvent this slightly with a very limited number of per-rest slots that they could use to prepare (ooc) a specific known spell of any level, which could then be cast in combat without needing or using any mana. So, modern system, but with a little Vancian flavor.

 

Of course, that would leave Ciphers without a unique thing. So, I'd suggest dropping Focus altogether, and reimagining them as soul hackers, with a sort of magical cyberpunk theme. Ciphers would establish soul links to one or more enemies. These soul links would "hack" the enemy over time (with the speed dependent on enemy Will), with the hack level acting as a sort of per-enemy mana pool. Depending on the Cipher's abilities, there would be a series of increasingly powerful debuffs or control conditions passively applied with increasing hack levels, but higher levels would also unlock active abilities that the Cipher could trigger on or through the enemy, at the cost of reducing or resetting the hack level. Some active abilities would be learned by leveling, but others would be associated with the enemy itself (representing using their own strengths against them, essentially), so for example a hacked blight might be used to deliver an elemental attack against its allies. I like the idea of the Cipher only directly targeting enemies with their at-will ability (though some of the active effects triggered from an enemy might buff allies in range), as it makes them sort of the opposite of the Chanter.

This is another case of a solution in search of a problem. That's a lot of work to do something that would likely make the game worse.

 

 

Well, it's definitely not something they should undertake for PoE or the expansions, whether or not it's worthwhile design.



#156
Badmojo

Badmojo

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 401 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

I am definitely in the whole rest mechanic sucks category.  Especially for the wizard class, if I known how bad it was I would have picked something else for my main character than this broken class.  All the rest mechanic does is force people not to play wizards, but hoarder gun singers who use boring rods to attack, but never use their spells because running back to an inn to rest or restock is just too tedious.  Sure, it was ok a couple of times, but after the dozenth It just became unbearable.  

 

I think an options setting would be the best, to turn off the system or at least adjust it.  Something that might have been a sort of middle ground solution is that if the map is free of monsters/hostiles you should get a free rest in that area (there is literally NOTHING to attack you, so why can't you rest)?  Also, gaining talents to turn your spells into per encounter would have made leveling up/talents much more enticing.

 

Regardless, the rest mechanic is probably the worst things about this game to me and I really wish it would go.


  • luzarius likes this

#157
oaktownbrown

oaktownbrown

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 56 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

I am definitely in the whole rest mechanic sucks category.  Especially for the wizard class, if I known how bad it was I would have picked something else for my main character than this broken class.  All the rest mechanic does is force people not to play wizards, but hoarder gun singers who use boring rods to attack, but never use their spells because running back to an inn to rest or restock is just too tedious.  Sure, it was ok a couple of times, but after the dozenth It just became unbearable.  

 

I think an options setting would be the best, to turn off the system or at least adjust it.  Something that might have been a sort of middle ground solution is that if the map is free of monsters/hostiles you should get a free rest in that area (there is literally NOTHING to attack you, so why can't you rest)?  Also, gaining talents to turn your spells into per encounter would have made leveling up/talents much more enticing.

 

Regardless, the rest mechanic is probably the worst things about this game to me and I really wish it would go.

 

What difficulty are you playing on? What level are you? What is your party composition? How often do you rest? What other party cRPGs have you played, especially those with a rest system?

 

It seems to me that most maps have a camping supply that you can find which essentially gives you a free rest. It sounds like that is not enough to make the rest system work for you.

 

We are on opposite sides on this question: I rarely rest to replenish spells and tend to rest only when a few ppl in my party have major fatigue (when playing with a party). I find more camping supplies than I can use. But I'd like to understand what is different about the way we play that makes the rest system not work well for you.

 

I think that it might be a pain for devs to implement your suggestion about a free rest if you've cleared a map and I think it could also lead to frustration for some players (e.g., you think you've cleared everything but there is an enemy somewhere you didn't see). But I wouldn't mind a mid-level talent that changed a few low level per rest spells into per encounter spells.


Edited by oaktownbrown, 09 May 2015 - 08:29 PM.


#158
Namutree

Namutree

    Compulsive Double Poster of the Obsidian Order

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

 Especially for the wizard class, if I known how bad it was I would have picked something else for my main character 

So you picked the wizard not even knowing how they work? Why? They don't play all that differently from the IE games; so how exactly did you let yourself get into this situation?

 

 

 than this broken class.  

How is the wizard broken?

 

 

 All the rest mechanic does is force people not to play wizards, but hoarder gun singers who use boring rods to attack, but never use their spells because running back to an inn to rest or restock is just too tedious.  Sure, it was ok a couple of times, but after the dozenth It just became unbearable.  

 

Sounds like you're not using the wizard very well if this is the case for you. The problem isn't the wizard; it's you.

 

 

 

I think an options setting would be the best, to turn off the system or at least adjust it. 

 

That would require a huge amount of time to balance. How about instead you just pick a different caster class instead? That is the appeal of different caster classes; pick the one that suits you.

 

 

Something that might have been a sort of middle ground solution is that if the map is free of monsters/hostiles you should get a free rest in that area (there is literally NOTHING to attack you, so why can't you rest)?

That would shatter the game balance.

 

 

 Also, gaining talents to turn your spells into per encounter would have made leveling up/talents much more enticing.

 

It would also make the wizard super OP; basically making the other classes relatively useless.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: resting, for, free, exploitable

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users