Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 

1.  Keep weapon groups.  I like them, better than only having one weapon, keeps options open and lets you adapt to what you find better.  Also means that less 'popular' weapons end up being used and may lead to them being more embraced.  I would say actually expand on the weapon group system, dunno how as I ain't a designer but I feel there is more potential there for developing them as fencing schools and the like (fencing schools actually taught the use of many different weapons originally, and the famed zweihander wielders needed to have a certificate showing that they had been trained in the use of longswords for instance, which included the use of daggers...).

2.  Emphasise firearms and crossbows more. In fact, emphasise all the late medieval/early renaissance aspects more and I think not having the printing press in the setting was a bad idea.  Emphasising this would lead to a more 'bladepunk' or picaro type setting and help differentiate it more.  Fencing school students fighting each other in the street for their honour, banks and Churches taking the role megacorps would have in a cyberpunk setting, etc.

3.  This bit involves the main plotline and is huge spoilerific so will be spoiler tagged. 

Move away from the whole "The gods are fake!" thing.  Some questions should be left unanswered, and the woman who led the heresy came across as an obnoxious Mary Sue.  I'd like her to be the one proven wrong I found her that obnoxious.

 

 

Gods no.  The weapons group model is HORRIBLE.  Absolutely horrible! 

 

I like coming up with concept characters, and the weapons group model keeps making it nearly impossible to develop any concept that isn't a perfect fit for one of the existing weaps groups.  And the number of character concepts that are perfect fits a exceedingly small.

 

Right now, I'd like to play another character, but I can't come up with a good one because the weapon groups are a damned straight jacket!!! 

 

That's your opinion, my opinion is that it's good.  I don't see how they are a strait jacket, at least no more than specialising in a single weapon (which by the way IS limiting), if you really can't choose then don't pick one, or just go with whatever one has the weapon you want to use and consider the others a bonus your character can use.  I'm not seeing your issue...

"That rabbit's dynamite!" - King Arthur, Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail

"Space is big, really big." - Douglas Adams

Link to post
Share on other sites

Allow Chanters the ability to summon their creatures at the start of combat.  It annoys to heck out of me that by the time Chanter  can cast a summons the combat is usually over.   To me the whole purpose of summoning creatures  is to use them as expendable cannon fodder. To get around this mechanic I try  to leave 1 enemy alive long enough  to have the chanter summon more creatures to pull a new group of enemies  so I  remain constantly in combat.  I have to trade off popping off per encounter abilities and save them for more strategic times but to me it is worth it to have summon creatures bear the brunt of the enemies  focus of initial attacks and disables. So it would be nice I didn't have to do this and have the summons  right off the bat at the start of combat.

Edited by CynicalP
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is my first post here, I've been very much enjoying the game so far and this is an interesting thread of suggestions. Mine would be:

 

1. Increased pool of companions, as mentioned above. I will only play through these games once, and would like to experience each character type. I would love to have a generally good and generally evil companion in each class available. It just feels weird to bring along a load of do-gooders if you want to wreck up the place, and vice versa. Of course, keeping a reasonable level of interaction with each companion would be a real challenge.

 

2. Improved higher-level magic use in battles, again as mentioned. I find the basic mechanics far more to my liking than those of BG1/2, i.e. hitting, wounding, status effects, utility of all attributes to all characters etc. The one exception is the lack of really cool spells with unusual effects and specific counters. Also, there's nothing wrong with potentially OP effects if they're limited. My fondest memory from BG2 is finishing Firkraag with prismatic spray insta-death: no save-scumming and waiting for a favorable roll, just throwing off a single hit-and-hope and getting lucky, exactly as might happen in a heroic fantasy story!

 

3. Better ambience. While I prefer the mechanics of PoE, I do think it has yet to match the older games for atmosphere and immersion. On that note I personally found the golden-named backer designed characters a massive turnoff: their individual stories were fine, sure, but I feel they came at the expense of characters who could actually have fitted into their locale and built up atmosphere, rather than had individual "cool stories" that sometimes barely seemed to make sense in the setting of PoE.

 

I'm excited to think that if Obsidian improve a few small things, PoE2 could be right up there with BG2/ToB!

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

1.  Keep weapon groups.  I like them, better than only having one weapon, keeps options open and lets you adapt to what you find better.  Also means that less 'popular' weapons end up being used and may lead to them being more embraced.  I would say actually expand on the weapon group system, dunno how as I ain't a designer but I feel there is more potential there for developing them as fencing schools and the like (fencing schools actually taught the use of many different weapons originally, and the famed zweihander wielders needed to have a certificate showing that they had been trained in the use of longswords for instance, which included the use of daggers...).

2.  Emphasise firearms and crossbows more. In fact, emphasise all the late medieval/early renaissance aspects more and I think not having the printing press in the setting was a bad idea.  Emphasising this would lead to a more 'bladepunk' or picaro type setting and help differentiate it more.  Fencing school students fighting each other in the street for their honour, banks and Churches taking the role megacorps would have in a cyberpunk setting, etc.

3.  This bit involves the main plotline and is huge spoilerific so will be spoiler tagged. 

Move away from the whole "The gods are fake!" thing.  Some questions should be left unanswered, and the woman who led the heresy came across as an obnoxious Mary Sue.  I'd like her to be the one proven wrong I found her that obnoxious.

 

 

Gods no.  The weapons group model is HORRIBLE.  Absolutely horrible! 

 

I like coming up with concept characters, and the weapons group model keeps making it nearly impossible to develop any concept that isn't a perfect fit for one of the existing weaps groups.  And the number of character concepts that are perfect fits a exceedingly small.

 

Right now, I'd like to play another character, but I can't come up with a good one because the weapon groups are a damned straight jacket!!! 

 

That's your opinion, my opinion is that it's good.  I don't see how they are a strait jacket, at least no more than specialising in a single weapon (which by the way IS limiting), if you really can't choose then don't pick one, or just go with whatever one has the weapon you want to use and consider the others a bonus your character can use.  I'm not seeing your issue...

 

 

If you're not seeing my issue, it's because you're refusing to think about it.

 

Regardless, there's a vast difference between weapons groups being limiting and specializing in a single weapon.  One of them is a self imposed limit.  The other is forced on you by ridiculously artificial rules.

 

And choosing not to pick a weapons group is punishing.

 

You're wrong on all counts.

 

 

 

If I want to create a character, who is a Ranger who specializes in bows, why should he have to pick two different weapons groups, one of which (the adventurer's group) is blatantly stupid in its weapons mix?  This is why weapons groups are artificial, punishing, and just plain unfair.  The only characters who benefit from the weapons groups are those who fit into the little cookie cutter molds that the groups create.  Wanna be a stereotypical monk?  The peasant group is probably a good fit.  Want to be a thug with a bit of a pirate background?  Then the Ruffian group is a good fit.  Want to be a firearms specialist?  You're boned.  Want to be a bowmaster?  Boned again.  Specialist in crossbows?  Boned yet again.

 

The weapons groups are just plain dumb.  And they limit the ability of players to come up with different sorts of characters that are outside of the weapons groups little cookie cutter molds. 

Edited by Crucis
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes I wonder if I'm the only one who loves the game ^.^

I was looking for a story based rpg, and this is definitely the best one I played since at least the original Mass Effect.

It's also certainly the best kickstarted game I played (though FTL is a close one :) ).

 

I can't right away think of suggestions. Maybe after a few more playthroughs.

The game sure could use more polish at places, and get more bug fixes.

 

I'm mostly worried that changing too much would hurt the core, which I think is quite good, so Obsidian, just don't ruin what you have.

 

Here are some of my thoughts, part of them are in context at what was suggested above me.

 

1. No pre-buffs in combat.

2. No IE clone

3. No 20+ companions. I prefer a few rich companions instead of 20 one side quest and some banter. I think most of the ones in PoE are rich, but could be improved upon.

4. I think some kickstarter goals were silly (e.g. in game characters).

5. I actually on the side that likes the weapon groups. They do spice things up and make it different. However, I do agree they can be restricting and odd as well. Like, I wanted to do a character that uses pikes, and poleaxes, but nope :) Wouldn't mind flexibility there. Like, the option to create your own more minimized group? I dunno.

6. Game needs a better experience balance and progression.

7. The stronghold needs fixes. Either improve it, or minimize it to something more simple. It has a lot of potential though.

8. I found the game very immersive, with good music and hook, other than the lack of casual people you could talk to for more immersion. Game does indeed 'show don't tell' a lot of stuff. It is very well done.

  • Like 3

✔ Certified Bat Food

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, these may not be the only suggestions I have but they are the first ones I am thinking of.

 

1. Remove camping. In its place use injury kits, a la DA:O. I am aware this will not go well with everyone since PoE is based on IE games, but I am not a fan of camping mechanism. I think a more enjoyable and overall better mechanic would be to have injury kits heal wounds, certain potions to restore fatigue, and inns/stronghold resting will heal all, restore fatigue and give bonuses.

Two questions about this hypothetical system : how does the spell system fit in, and are the injury kits limited in number like the camping supplies are?

 

2. Similar too what was mentioned above, the weapons groups is not a really good system. If you want to give an accuracy bonus to weapon types then just have weapons in their damage type groups, i.e slashing, piercing, etc...

 No offense, but that is a terrible idea. Enemies have different immunities and resistance to damage type, so the specialization you're proposing would only cripple some builds. The weapon groups tend to offer a weapon for each kind of damage in their selection.

 

For example, say that you have a character who is a ranged specialist, but may be only barely skilled with melee weapons.  He might take 3 levels in Marksman but only a single point (or none at all) in one handed weapons.

 Meh. For me the distinction between a ranged specialist and a melee specialist is better achieved through the talents and modals you choose that effect one weapon type or the other.

 

Gods no.  The weapons group model is HORRIBLE.  Absolutely horrible! 

 

I like coming up with concept characters, and the weapons group model keeps making it nearly impossible to develop any concept that isn't a perfect fit for one of the existing weaps groups.  And the number of character concepts that are perfect fits a exceedingly small.

 

Right now, I'd like to play another character, but I can't come up with a good one because the weapon groups are a damned straight jacket!!!

 How can weapon groups with a selection of weapons in them be straight-jackets?

 

Walls of protections you have to take down. Incredibly powerful spells and summons. Contingencies, Time Stop, Crowd Control, Protection from magic, Invisibility, all their respective counters.

 

I think that makes for some seriously strategic and challenging encounters.

 I will grant you the challenge, but I fail to see the strategy, especially once you know the tricks of the trade. As soon as the Contingency goes up, throw the spell to bring down the magic defenses, then launch Breach and maybe rain down the Magic Missiles to break the Stone Skin. With Haste on, the mage is back to being a squishie thing very quickly!

 

If I want to create a character, who is a Ranger who specializes in bows, why should he have to pick two different weapons groups

I fail to see the difference between taking two weapon groups and taking two specializations in specific weapons. Oh wait, I can see one : in the former, your character will be able to wield efficiently more weapon types rather than be gimped by AD&D-style hyper-specialization! Which was especially ridiculous for warriors, supposedly the greatest master at arms, but who had to specialize in one kind of weapon!

 

 

Also, on a side-note : f*** this fancy quote system, f*** it time a-million! At least give us back the readable BBCode, not that gimped version that can't even get to a new line when it no longer has room in the box!

Edited by Sannom
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well, these may not be the only suggestions I have but they are the first ones I am thinking of.

 

1. Remove camping. In its place use injury kits, a la DA:O. I am aware this will not go well with everyone since PoE is based on IE games, but I am not a fan of camping mechanism. I think a more enjoyable and overall better mechanic would be to have injury kits heal wounds, certain potions to restore fatigue, and inns/stronghold resting will heal all, restore fatigue and give bonuses.

Two questions about this hypothetical system : how does the spell system fit in, and are the injury kits limited in number like the camping supplies are?

 

2. Similar too what was mentioned above, the weapons groups is not a really good system. If you want to give an accuracy bonus to weapon types then just have weapons in their damage type groups, i.e slashing, piercing, etc...

 No offense, but that is a terrible idea. Enemies have different immunities and resistance to damage type, so the specialization you're proposing would only cripple some builds. The weapon groups tend to offer a weapon for each kind of damage in their selection.

 

 

1. Spell system has no relation to the camping/resting mechanism. As for quantity of injury kits I wouldn't put a restriction like the current camping supplies has. I would just limited the amount available within the game world. Not make them rare, but just have it so you can't go and buy 99 kits from a vendor.

 

2. Maybe, I think it can be improved by making it simpler. If not basing it on damage type then reduce the number of groups by 1.

Link to post
Share on other sites

- Stack identical weapons/armors.
- Shop interface: hide items through filters to avoid scrolling down down down...
- A visible bar for the queued actions.
- Small savegames.
- Decide if kiting is a combat mechanic or not. Right now it's an exploit. Add an appropriate mechanic to divide the enemies groups. Something like the coin in No One Lives Forever. Throw a egg to attract avian/reptilian enemies, throw a rib to wolves etc, play a flute...
- Allow to dismantle the low level traps to craft high level traps.
- Better, bigger, stronger, optional?, combat icons to identify the monster casting a spell. Among the dots over the heads that (+) healing icon is hard to see.
-Varied environments, world status changes, more reactivity. Even just a short trip to a radically different area like the White Marsh can give a sense of a much wider world, and if the main location changes in your absence, of time. Having Defiance Bay back to her initial status (excluding the sanitarium) does make sense, but it was a downer. And I understand there is limits to how deep quests can go, but a major event like the murder of the whole House of Doemenel should have more consequences.
- Let me pet the pets.
- Ducklings. Obsidian, you can do it.
- Don't forget the Big Head Mode.

Edited by Suen
  • Like 1

I've come to burn your kingdom down

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the weapons group model.  Why not just add individual proficiencies on top of it to further specialize a character?  That fits with the increased level range (that we're presuming will happen).

 

My suggestions (wow that ended up being a lot):

1.  More trap spells, especially spells that affect movement.  PE's strength is positioning, so let characters position.

2.  Grimoire switching should be made more useful so it's a real choice.

3.  Allow rangers to stow their pets for a permanent accuracy boost.

4.  Ditch one of the armor types at the upper end, like Brigandine.

5.  Engagement that varies with the range of the weapons.  Suddenly three fighters wielding halberds could become a murderwall.

6.  Xaurip as a player race, because obviously.

7.  Let druids shapeshift into animals at upper levels.

8.  Blood druids like the ones we saw in Twin Elms.

9.  Regeneration for barbarians at higher levels.

10.  The ability to lower the speed of a chant in exchange for a lowered effect.  Essentially, fast chanters become more focused on building up summons at the expense of their buffs.

11.  Additional active chanter abilities in general (if chosen).  The class is kinda boring, but that may be what they were designed for (six people with active abilities is a lot.

12.  More barks and city noises.

13.  More dialogue all around.  The city needed more NPCs and sub-areas.

14.  More levels that transform like the Wailing Banshee.  That was really neat to see.

15.  Rarer enchanting formulas.  If the supplies are easy to find and the formulas are hard to get to, it makes enchanting valuable loot (which it should be).

16.  Druid, Mage, and Priest spells that you can only discover in the world.

17.  Great focus on one theme.  PE had too many great themes, and as a consequence spent too little on each one.

18.  An npc that used to be a Wicht.

19.  Mage spells that slow time in an area.

20.  I've always wanted to see the equivalent of a blue mage / beast master from Final Fantasy in a western game.  The idea of eating enemies to gain their form is pretty cool (probably impossible to approach a semblance of balance.)

21.  More ending slides and interaction with sentient monsters, I wish I knew what happened to the Vithrack.

22.  Occasional fights with a horde of low level enemies just to show your party as murder machines.

23.  A way to run away from combat.

24.  An underwater area where you fight bell jar to bell jar.

25.  Addictions.

26.  DAO style injuries.  That was one mechanic that doesn't get the praise it deserves.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hadn't thought about the Weapons Groups much until it was brought up here. I can resonate well with the feeling of wanting to pick the "right" group that won't be wasted in the latter half of the game, and not wanting to spend too many talent points covering  enough bases. I like the idea of simplifying it, but it also shouldn't become a compulsory talent for every character.

I suppose, as it is, your fighters are likely to spend at least one point in the groups, and if you're really dedicated to flexibility and weapon switching, you'll spend more, but with just a [Dual, 2H, 1H, Ranged, Caster] type choice range, people are likely going to pick one everytime and not seriously consider the benefits of going for more. I guess one offset to this problem is for party members, you're likely going to switch them out and rotate them, so it's okay to experiment a bit with the groups.

 

I think, in conclusion, changing the system may make it worse than it currently is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having not finished the game yet, currently I see 2 major problems that I would like addressed in the next game;

 

1.  A revamp of the camping/ crafting system.  I would like to see a different approach to camping that is similar to Darklands in that camping/resting becomes it's own dedicated interface.  Crafting would only be done at camp sites, inns, or your stronghold.  Also, there would be options related to skills like survival that would allow the party to search for ingredients.  I would also either do away with camping supplies or raise the limit to 5.  In exchange, I would like to see zones for camping red (no go), yellow (chance of encounter) and green (safe).  I wasn't sure if I would miss random encounters in this game, but I do, and so do others.  There is a certain excitement in the uncertainty of random encounters that makes camping fun.  To prevent farming xp, etc. certain penalties could be placed upon parties that are awakened, like fatigue (and no loot drops or xp).  

 

2.  Better narrative cohesion and integration of areas.  I understand that the megadungeon became a bit of a monster, but I really think this game suffers in act 2 from too many activities that are not integrated.  I am only about 2/3 way through the second act, approaching level 10, currently playing the first portion of the expansion, and it feeld like I am playing 3 games in 1.  The next game needs to do a better job with this.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A deeper and more comprehensive enchanting system, good god. Enchanting in PoE is so flat and straightforward that it's a bore. Give us an enchanting system with emergent properties, where we can actually put our minds to work schemeing and devising. Allow for a greater level of spell/enchant interactions, allow us greater control over the conditionals of when an effect fires off. I think this could add greatly to enhancing class diversity.

A synthetic spell system with the ability to layer spells and effects. More contingency options, such as delayed effects, conditionals, and reactives.

Greater party control. Give us the option to record AI macros, such as a chain of spells or abilities to fire off at the beginning of a fight.

A better combat system - deflection(damage avoidance) being the only viable tank stat is ridiculous. Instead of the flat DR system, give us armor, talents, and stats that soak up a flat percentage of damage. Specializing in soaking up damage should be viable alternative to dodging 20 mobs at once like you're Neo.

Tabula rasa character design. I honestly think that a blank slate approach to character design is a better option than a class system with poorly-implemented muliclassing. Instead of class determining advancement, give us points that we can apply to specific aspects. An example - putting a point into a 'combat adept' skill could give us 2 points to spend on branched combat adept skills(such as melee aptitudes like deflection and damage absorption, or weapons such as sword/flail). Having a system like this would allow for both highly-specialized characters and skilled generalists, which is, for the most part, more than the current game allows. It would also alleviate some of the tension regarding class balance(since you would only need to balance schools, rather than fully fleshed out completed products).

An improved event system. I'd like to see a real time and random event system implemented. I can't think of a single reason why this type of system never made it into PoE, the world and timeline are almost completely fleshed out aside from the player. Not having something like this makes it seem like the world revolves around the player, which to an extent, it does, but too much so in the case of PoE. You don't want your game to feel like a hallway.

I have way more ideas on how to improve PoE, this is just a few.

Edited by spardeous
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1)  I agree that the survival mechanic could be more fun if it involved more...well... survival.  Having to hunt for food, defend your camp, etc isn't necessary for following the entire story, but If "Fallout: New Vegas" has taught me anything, it's that a survival mechanic can be more than just a pain -- particularly the "carrot/stick" analogy used earlier.  I'd love to see more incentive for finding water sources or hunting and foraging for optional party buffs.  That kind of thing makes travel more interesting, makes exploring more involved, and is generally just more fun than going from encounter to encounter.

 

2)  I also agree that the stronghold mechanic is a lot more exciting if it's more involved.  Having bandit-attacks and bounties is great, but unless you can actually see more of your subjects and interact with kingdom affairs, I agree that the stronghold feels kind of flat.  As one poster put it, "the stronghold feels like it's just... there."  It would be nice if there were, again, optional castle-related adventures involving other kingdoms, intrigues between lords, or petitions for peasants that add more variety and flavor to the game.  I also would note that a number of obstacles in this game utility more text-based adventures and artwork -- castle-based adventures in text would be really interesting to do here.  It would also help better utilize the "prestige" and "reputation" based mechanics.

 

3) This is more of a personal one for me but I feel it really needs to be said:  magic in this game is so random it literally looks like it's lifted from the pages of "Dungeons and Dragons" -- literally you have "so-and-so's magic missiles" and "so-and-so's random obstacle of whatever" and that's a really out-dated concept this day and age.  D&D's magic has always been its weak point for me -- there's no rhyme or reason why the magic works the way it does or why the effects end up being the way they are.  They're completely arbitrary.  Instead, why not break it down into different magical effects?  Things you can learn that fall into categories.  Even if the end results are pre-programmed, it would put a little more creativity into the process than a bunch of randomly-discovered spells that often seem to have "inflict this status ailment or this damage type in this size an area" kind of spells, which people have min-maxed the best choices.  Revamp the magic system to at least include more varied spells, and I'd be happy. 

 

 

Phew.  Thanks for the chance to bring up a few things.  Really excited to see Obsidian making a comeback!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

For example, say that you have a character who is a ranged specialist, but may be only barely skilled with melee weapons.  He might take 3 levels in Marksman but only a single point (or none at all) in one handed weapons.

 Meh. For me the distinction between a ranged specialist and a melee specialist is better achieved through the talents and modals you choose that effect AFFECT one weapon type or the other.

 

Gods no.  The weapons group model is HORRIBLE.  Absolutely horrible! 

 

I like coming up with concept characters, and the weapons group model keeps making it nearly impossible to develop any concept that isn't a perfect fit for one of the existing weaps groups.  And the number of character concepts that are perfect fits a exceedingly small.

 

Right now, I'd like to play another character, but I can't come up with a good one because the weapon groups are a damned straight jacket!!!

 How can weapon groups with a selection of weapons in them be straight-jackets?

 

 

If I want to create a character, who is a Ranger who specializes in bows, why should he have to pick two different weapons groups

I fail to see the difference between taking two weapon groups and taking two specializations in specific weapons. Oh wait, I can see one : in the former, your character will be able to wield efficiently more weapon types rather than be gimped by AD&D-style hyper-specialization! Which was especially ridiculous for warriors, supposedly the greatest master at arms, but who had to specialize in one kind of weapon!

 

 

Also, on a side-note : f*** this fancy quote system, f*** it time a-million! At least give us back the readable BBCode, not that gimped version that can't even get to a new line when it no longer has room in the box!

 

 

 

In reverse, I 10000% agree about this quoting system.  It's a massive pain.  On to the rest.

 

Are all you people's imaginations so freakin' limited that you can't see how weapons groups are as limiting as a strait jacket?  It should be as obvious as a nuclear explosion, for crying out loud!!!!!   Let me try to explain for the effing umpteenth time!  :verymad:

 

If I want to come up with a character who wants to use a warbow and saber, with the effing weapon groups model, he has to take 2 different weapons groups because those weapons are in 2 different groups.  THAT is limiting.  Why can you not SEE the OBVIOUS??? 

 

I do NOT want to be tied into the groupings that the devs came up with!!! They're artificial!  And they're limiting to anyone who actually HAS an imagination, and doesn't want to be stuck in this tiny, narrow minded buckets called weapons groups!!!

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the weapons group model.  Why not just add individual proficiencies on top of it to further specialize a character?  That fits with the increased level range (that we're presuming will happen).

 

My suggestions (wow that ended up being a lot):

1.  More trap spells, especially spells that affect movement.  PE's strength is positioning, so let characters position.

2.  Grimoire switching should be made more useful so it's a real choice.

3.  Allow rangers to stow their pets for a permanent accuracy boost.

4.  Ditch one of the armor types at the upper end, like Brigandine.

5.  Engagement that varies with the range of the weapons.  Suddenly three fighters wielding halberds could become a murderwall.

6.  Xaurip as a player race, because obviously.

7.  Let druids shapeshift into animals at upper levels.

8.  Blood druids like the ones we saw in Twin Elms.

9.  Regeneration for barbarians at higher levels.

10.  The ability to lower the speed of a chant in exchange for a lowered effect.  Essentially, fast chanters become more focused on building up summons at the expense of their buffs.

11.  Additional active chanter abilities in general (if chosen).  The class is kinda boring, but that may be what they were designed for (six people with active abilities is a lot.

12.  More barks and city noises.

13.  More dialogue all around.  The city needed more NPCs and sub-areas.

14.  More levels that transform like the Wailing Banshee.  That was really neat to see.

15.  Rarer enchanting formulas.  If the supplies are easy to find and the formulas are hard to get to, it makes enchanting valuable loot (which it should be).

16.  Druid, Mage, and Priest spells that you can only discover in the world.

17.  Great focus on one theme.  PE had too many great themes, and as a consequence spent too little on each one.

18.  An npc that used to be a Wicht.

19.  Mage spells that slow time in an area.

20.  I've always wanted to see the equivalent of a blue mage / beast master from Final Fantasy in a western game.  The idea of eating enemies to gain their form is pretty cool (probably impossible to approach a semblance of balance.)

21.  More ending slides and interaction with sentient monsters, I wish I knew what happened to the Vithrack.

22.  Occasional fights with a horde of low level enemies just to show your party as murder machines.

23.  A way to run away from combat.

24.  An underwater area where you fight bell jar to bell jar.

25.  Addictions.

26.  DAO style injuries.  That was one mechanic that doesn't get the praise it deserves.

I ignored everything after 3

Link to post
Share on other sites

A better combat system - deflection(damage avoidance) being the only viable tank stat is ridiculous. Instead of the flat DR system, give us armor, talents, and stats that soak up a flat percentage of damage. Specializing in soaking up damage should be viable alternative to dodging 20 mobs at once like you're Neo.

I don't think you understand what deflection represents. It's your character's ability to deflect blows, generally through your shield or armor.

 

If I want to come up with a character who wants to use a warbow and saber, with the effing weapon groups model, he has to take 2 different weapons groups because those weapons are in 2 different groups.  THAT is limiting.  Why can you not SEE the OBVIOUS???

Unless your point is that we should be able to create our own weapon groups, I do not understand your argument, no. A system with specializations for each weapon would still require you to spend two talents to create your concept.

 

I do NOT want to be tied into the groupings that the devs came up with!!! They're artificial!

They're not artificial. They have an in-world logic as to what the people the group they're named after would fight with.
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1. More scripted interactions: I really enjoyed having various paths to solve a problem/situation and thought that these interactions are a nice way to make areas of the map more memorable.

 

2. Improved stronghold: as is, Caed Nua feels very static once you finish upgrading it and the various visitors are very flat. As has been mentioned in other threads, I think that populating the grounds and the keep with more NPCs (guards, labourers, farmers, merchants, stewards, etc) would go a long way in giving more life to the stronghold. Moreover, you could add the scripted interaction mechanic for random events concerning the stronghold and its surroundings as well as to give a sense of progression.

 

 

Random event example:

After reaching a certain level of prestige, a travelling circus arrives and asks permission to set camp in your lands. They are a varied group acrobats, jongleurs, hedge wizards and beast masters that, for the duration of their stay, will raise your prestige but lower the overall security of the stronghold.

 

If given permission to stay, after N turns/days an accident happens (a member of the circus is hurt during a performance, one of them is caught trying to steal the silverware, etc.) and you are offered a choice of how to react based on reputation (if not currently in the keep) and/or your stats (if present at the time).

 

Depending on your choice and the outcomes, it could affect the Stronghold's prestige/security or future events... say you showed mercy for the thief and allowed the carnies to deal with the individual, you are then offered a unique hireling (ie knife-thrower) and the circus might show up again in a few months.

 

 

 

Sense of progression examples:

A dispute arises between two of your farmers, with one encroaching on the lands of the other. However, the one doing the encroaching is a better steward of the land and produces bigger harvests (which earns you more taxes). After finding for one or other of the parties, the matter seems settled until N turns/weeks later another incident breaks the peace. You have maybe the chance to expel the troublesome individual, and perhaps at the next tax levy the bandits are bolstered by the exiled farmer and take a bigger cut of your taxes. The remaining farmer consolidates the fields and down the line produces a bump in tax income.

 

Other examples would be brief vignettes between NPCs at the keep: deaths, weddings, humorous/serious events that may not require your direct intervention with a choice, but which nonetheless keep you updated on the status of your hold and its people.

 

 

3. Banter with companions: when companions banter amongst themselves, have the possibility to have a conversation with them concerning the topic discussed. Does not need to be anything too in-depth, but to show that even aside from the main storyline and the side quests you find the time to engage in some light chatter with the people who have been following you around for months.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A better combat system - deflection(damage avoidance) being the only viable tank stat is ridiculous. Instead of the flat DR system, give us armor, talents, and stats that soak up a flat percentage of damage. Specializing in soaking up damage should be viable alternative to dodging 20 mobs at once like you're Neo.

I don't think you understand what deflection represents. It's your character's ability to deflect blows, generally through your shield or armor.

 

I understand it fine - it's you who doesn't understand it. Armor has no effect on deflection, whether you're wearing plate or nothing at all. Shield does, but most of your deflection score is inherent - these issues run contrary to your theory on what deflection represents. Hence, it's an ambiguous term that needs to be expanded upon to be less stupid.

Edited by spardeous
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...