Jump to content

Are per encounter spells needed? And are they balanced?


Recommended Posts

On topic, yes, it's easy for anyone to see per encounter spells are out of balanced with the rest of the game.

Perhaps, but it occurs in a different ... how should I put this? A different "sphere" of balance than raw class power does. Which is to say that it doesn't affect theoretical maximum power, just the ability to conserve power over many encounters.

 

Again, I think the central thing here is that other classes need to match the escalation in depth and breadth of options that casters have available to them. Better access to per-encounter abilities is almost certainly part of that, but I don't believe that it's the principal issue so much as the fact that high level casters have an ever-increasing advantage when it comes to the sheer number of ability uses - per-encounter and per-rest alike.

  • Like 4

If I'm typing in red, it means I'm being sarcastic. But not this time.

Dark green, on the other hand, is for jokes and irony in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basically the old, 'Linear Warrior, Quadratic Wizard' thing. You'd think PoE starting from fresh, but clearly drawing from the old IE games, would've been very aware of that issue, seeing as we all know what casters could do in BG. But, here we are, same general issue, if not quite so broken.

 

But yeah, I get what your saying. For a fully charged fight with all resources at disposal, per encounter does absolutely nothing to change the balance. That's always sorta been Wizards thing, in IE games, is that they can go Nova on a fight and just wreck it. And the cost for that was for all the other fights, they had to operate at a lower level of power, and here good old dumb warrior gets a little time to shine.

 

And you're also right, even that advantage shrinks as the game goes on, and the Wizard gets more and more spells, they don't have to be so stingy with them, even if per rest. Which might just be it's casting system; Cipher, for example, doesn't have that issue. (Not that I think Cipher works perfectly or anything).

 

Of course, with the only restraint on resting being ones tolerance for tedium, it makes you wonder what the system is even there for. I can only think of either just hewing to tradition, or giving the player a way to self police.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basically the old, 'Linear Warrior, Quadratic Wizard' thing. You'd think PoE starting from fresh, but clearly drawing from the old IE games, would've been very aware of that issue, seeing as we all know what casters could do in BG. But, here we are, same general issue, if not quite so broken.

Why do you think they weren't?

 

Here's a point for you to consider. Is it possible to be well aware of the linear warrior, quadratic wizard issue and not consider it to be a problem; not to consider it to be something that needs to be fixed, because it isn't broken in the first place?

 

And the answer is yes, when you are designing party-based single player games, where a single player controls the entire party and what is important is their performance as a team and the player weighs his success as being dependent on party success, unlike party based multiplayer games where each player controls one party member and, while achieving goals remains important, to a large degree the player's personal measure of success will depend on his party member's performance against the performance of the other players' party members.

 

As a designer it can even be liberating, because it frees you to be more inventive and concentrate on classes being good at the roles they are intended for without having to bother overmuch about how they compare to other classes. And it allows you to make some classes much less micromanagement intensive than others (another attribute that is attractive to some players) without having to jump through hoops to give them the same power level. Usually this is done by the simple tradeoff of classes with more tactical options being more powerful when played well, while the classes with fewer options are easier to perform solidly by unspectacularly with, allowing the player who puts together his party to largely dictate how powerful his party is through the selection of party members. (Of course, when you do that you need to ensure that a full party of weaker classes or recommended party setups can fulfill a game on normal difficulty with little trouble).

 

 

 

But it is a balance, as there are many conflicting desires, both from the player base and amongst designers.

 

DO the design of POE call for linear fighters and wizards? If so, they have failed magnificently. I didn't bother reading all the project updates during development, but a search of some of the older project updates certainly doesn't suggest so, though it is possible that this changed later in development.

 

Here from update #15, for instance, which had the first rough draft of the four core classes:

 

 

Classes: the "Core Four"

 

 

Classes in Project Eternity are meant to provide a general framework for character types. Different classes excel in different areas, but the framework can be extended and elaborated on in a multitude of ways to create characters with unique capabilities. If you see a fighter, chances are good that he or she is going to be able to take a lot of damage, but that's about all you can be sure of. If you see a wizard, he or she probably has some hard-hitting spells that can cover a large area, but his potential list of capabilities is vast.

 

If you want to create a wizard who wears plate armor and hacks away with a broadsword from behind a heavily-enhanced arcane veil, we want to let you do that. If your idea of the perfect fighter is one who wears light armor and uses a variety of dazzling rapier attacks in rapid succession, we want to help you make that character. So it's good to think of Project Eternity's classes as being purpose-ready but not purpose-limited.

 

To date, through our Kickstarter campaign, you have helped us fund seven classes. In our design, we started with the "core four" because they are the most broadly familiar and also some of the most versatile: the fighter, the priest, the rogue, and the wizard. To these four, you helped us add three specialized, but popular, classes: the ranger, the monk, and the druid. The design of each class has a solid, distinctive base set of abilities that remain in most builds, but will have a large number of optional specializations and alterations to give players a high level of flexibility in developing an individual character's particular style.

 

Though we are still early in development, we'd like to let you know the rough ideas on what the “core four” classes of Project Eternity encompass:

 

 

Fighter - Fighters are men and women trained to use a wide variety of traditional weapons in brutal combat. They are often put in -- or put themselves in -- harm's way and are built to take an extraordinary amount of punishment. Though not traditionally as mobile as the monk nor as likely to dish out individually withering attacks as a rogue, fighters are dependable and flexible, able to shift between a variety of attack modes that alternate between high damage, maintaining a strong defense, weakening opponents, and dealing harsh retribution to those who attack his or her allies. Some fighters build up arsenals of feints, knockdowns, and special attacks rather than rely on the “slow and steady” approach.

 

And while fighters are often thought of as being primarily melee-based, they can specialize in a variety of weapons, including bows, crossbows, and even firearms. They're unlikely to outclass rangers at their own game, but fighters can be almost as dangerous at a distance as they are up close. Though it may not look like it to see them in battle next to wizards and priests, fighters are just as able to tap into the power of their souls to devastating effect: accelerating their attacks to a superhuman speed, striking foes with such power that nearby opponents are knocked off their feet, and maintaining a phenomenal endurance that allows them to rapidly bounce back from even terrible wounds.

 

When they aren't locked in life and death struggles, fighters are, unsurprisingly, often quite athletically capable. Even so, it's not uncommon to find fighters who are stealthy and well-educated. Moving unseen and knowing how to get out of a jam can come in handy even for them.

 

 

Priest - In a world with many gods, there are many different types of priests. Though the majority of priests spend their time tending to worshipers or engaged in relatively peaceful pursuits, there are ranks of dedicated adventuring or mercenary priests who have turned the flame of their faith into a spark to ignite the power of their souls. Such men and women have found a divine link to their chosen deity, but their abilities stem solely from within.

 

Dedicated to spreading the news of their gods' dominions in the realms of mortals through their own deeds, adventuring priests thrust themselves into lethal conflict to prove their worth. Often trained to fight alongside soldiers of their respective churches, priests are capable in the fray (and near the fray, for those who follow less melee-oriented faiths), but their true power comes from their prayers, faith-inspired miracles that aid their allies and punish their enemies. These miracles range from combat blessings, weapon enchantments, and protective barriers to divine summons, sanctified wards, and crippling curses. In many ways, the prayers of priests have almost as much variety as wizards spells, though priests are restricted to invoking prayers that are aligned with their faith. Additionally, priests often specialize in the weapons, armor, and litanies of prayers most beloved by their church. Thus, the multitude of gods produces a multitude of different priests, each with their own unique array of abilities.

 

Most priests are church-educated and are widely versed in many types of lore. However, some priests get by on pure faith alone, having little knowledge of the world around them. Such battle priests often lean more heavily on their athletic abilities when they are in the field.

 

 

Rogue - Contrary to what their name might imply, rogues come from many walks of life. They are cutpurses, thugs, and courtesans but also aristocrats, diplomats, and personal guards. Often separated by station in life, they are united by their reliance on wits, speed, and subterfuge to achieve their goals. The way of the rogue is not to stand toe-to-toe with the biggest brute in the room and exchange body blows, but to glance away in feigned confusion and slip an unseen blade between the brute's ribs as he turns his attention. When a room explodes in a storm of fire, the fighters grit their teeth, the priests pray for salvation, and the wizards fumble to find a spell to protect them, but the rogues just... disappear. They excel at being in the one place where no one's looking, at kicking people when they're down, at taunting a foe into turning its back on the rogue's ally while he or she nimbly skips away, and at being just too damned slippery to pin down.

 

Whether they pack a pair of daggers, a fine rapier, a slim bow, a stubby pistol, or a brutish club, rogues haul a carnival of pain with them wherever they go. If their natural tendencies weren't dangerous enough, their affinity for skullduggery allows some talented rogues to tap into their souls to perform amazing stunts: fading from view in plain sight, briefly cloaking their allies in a veil of shadow, imbuing their weapons with a soul-eating venom, or even becoming so insubstantial that blades barely hurt them.

 

While rogues are known for their stealthy nature both in and out of battle, many of them are quite talented with machines and contraptions of all sorts. High-born rogues are often very knowledgeable about esoteric, while many low-born rogues are well-equipped to survive in the wild.

 

 

Wizard - Widely respected in most societies, wizards of Project Eternity are men and women of high education and extreme mental discipline, if not always outright intelligence. Wizards are sometimes called navigators of the mortal soul, charting out and practicing the precise ways in which “ordinary” people can unlock the power inside of themselves. Using their knowledge to truly spectacular ends, wizards rely not only on ancient practices but also their own research to propel them forward. Far from being occult or protected knowledge, most wizards' spells are just so incredibly complex and physically demanding that even practiced wizards cannot invoke them without the use of expensive, specially-enchanted tomes.

 

And what do the tomes contain? Instructions on ways to use one's soul to alter reality, to warp time around enemies, to make skin as tough as stone, to counter even the most powerful magic, to invoke balls of flame, bolts of lightning, gouts of acid, to conjure nightmares out of thin air. Truly, the possibilities open to wizards seem to exceed even those of what priests can call upon through their faith. And though any wizard may prepare several tomes, an inexperienced caster is not capable of channeling power through the log-thick, anvil-heavy, dog-eared grimoires of wizened archmagi. Such novices must alternate between more modest selections, relying on their less demanding spells and talents when they are unable to call upon their tomes.

 

Wizards are often assumed to be masters of occult lore. While this certainly applies to their knowledge of spells, many wizards are so narrowly-focused that they are ignorant of outside culture and history. It is also not uncommon for wizards to delight as much in mechanical curiosities as rogues. Because their powers make them targets in battle, a surprising number of wizards are quite fit, even if they aren't particularly strong.

 

 

 

or from #81 about the role of fighters:

 

 

In this, our final class update, we will be discussing fighters and barbarians. Along with the wily, pain-powered monks (covered in Update 52), these three classes form the front line. The front line defines the heart of any battle, where two sides tangle face-to-face. The responsibility of the front line is more than simply dealing damage. It means holding the line no matter what tries to break through. If the party rogue needs a breather, the characters in the front line need to be able to cover her retreat. If a swarm of xaurips descends on the group after the wizard hurls his fireball, the front line needs to be able to neutralize them en masse or absorb their attacks before they overwhelm the entire party. Designed to take punishment and tackle hordes, the front line are the first in and, more often than not, the last standing in any battle. Next update will focus on some brand new creatures that we haven't shown yet, so be on the lookout.

 

Each class holds the line in its own way. As covered in Update 52, the monk absorbs damage to fuel special attacks through the use of accumulated Wounds. These attacks can stun, push, or weaken individuals or small groups around them. While monks have to be monitored to ensure their Wounds do not overwhelm them, they can absorb a large amount of punishment and hamper enemy movement on the battlefield. In contrast, the fighter holds the line the traditional way: by standing her ground, blocking opponents, and being infuriatingly difficult to knock out. Barbarians are designed to jump into the fray swinging wildly. Lacking the accuracy and strong Deflection of the fighter, the barbarian makes up for his lack of discipline through sheer speed, savagery, and abilities tailored for fighting groups of enemies. We've already covered the monk's Wounds and how they play into their use, but the other two front line classes differ in how they stem the enemy tide and how players monitor and use them over the course of combat. To show you how they differ, let's look at the details.

 

 

 

contrasted with the role of wizards from #74:

 

 

Mob Rulers

 

While neither wizards nor druids are restricted to offensive spells that target groups or areas, they excel in that arena. Whether it's dishing out elemental damage or inflicting status effects on enemies, both classes have a wide variety of spells to whittle down the hordes. Rangers and rogues are the kings of single-target takedowns, but the mob rulers exist to soften up, slow down, hinder, or otherwise mess up groups of enemies. Both classes focus heavily on spellcasters, but they have slightly different mechanics to how they work. Together with priests, wizards and druids are the "traditional" spellcasting classes that can cast a certain number of spells of each level per rest. As they gain levels in their classes, they can access more powerful spells. Over time, their weakest per-rest spells become per-encounter spells. At very high levels, the weakest spells eventually become at-will abilities, capable of being cast indefinitely.

 

 

 

 

But yeah, I get what your saying. For a fully charged fight with all resources at disposal, per encounter does absolutely nothing to change the balance. That's always sorta been Wizards thing, in IE games, is that they can go Nova on a fight and just wreck it. And the cost for that was for all the other fights, they had to operate at a lower level of power, and here good old dumb warrior gets a little time to shine.

 

And you're also right, even that advantage shrinks as the game goes on, and the Wizard gets more and more spells, they don't have to be so stingy with them, even if per rest. Which might just be it's casting system; Cipher, for example, doesn't have that issue. (Not that I think Cipher works perfectly or anything).

 

Of course, with the only restraint on resting being ones tolerance for tedium, it makes you wonder what the system is even there for. I can only think of either just hewing to tradition, or giving the player a way to self police.

In a group centered around magic, the dumb old warrior performs the respectable role of helping control the battlefield via attacks of opportunity, being a beefcake, and delivering a dependable though unspectacular damageoutput, while being able to take more punishment than just about anybody else (at least if you give him a two-hander and a mix of the best offensive and best defensive talents and abilities). It may be a boring job, but somebody has to do it.

 

In a group centered around melee, he'll be standing on top of a mountain of his enemies, by the end of battle, but the battle will likely have taken considerably longer.

 

 

And I'll completely agree with you on the campaign supply issue; In practice, while it has some impact such as tempting people to save high level spells rather than potentially wasting them and having to buy supplies more often, most of the time it does feel a bit hard to justify the extra bit of jumping through hoops.

 

Carrying food, lamp oil, or whatnot is a classical CRPG approach, but it only really works well when it is ruthlessly enforced and you can't just get around it by investing time without challenge or significant cost..

 

With the current implementation, and supplies diminishing with difficulty level, it would work better were there either:

 

a) Considerably more areas where you could neither rest nor leave for relaxation - areas where, once you went beyond a certain point, you were effectively locked in until success or death. But it is the usual problem that many players simply don't find this funny, especially if they end up spending hours in an area before discovering that - for whatever reason - they simply can't succeed, so they have to go back to a previous save. And what if they don't have a previous save? Drama.

b) a scarcity of resources; You have so much and no more. With all the usual problems that attach to that regarding the possibility of completing the game for less skilled players if they are scarce enough to make experienced players careful.

c) a high cost of resources; If the cost means that buying resting supplies is so considerable that whether to buy or not is something you have to meaningfully fit into the budget along with other high-ticket items (enchanting, magic items) there's a good reason for doing so seldom. But again there's the usual problem that it hits the inexperienced much harder than the experienced player.

 

Any of these would, if ruthlessly enforced, result in whether abilities were per-encounter or per-rest matter a lot, but I can't really recommend any of them, because for a great many players, it would be no fun playing with such restrictions. Heck, not even SSI's wonderful Gold Box series back in the 80's and 90's did that ruthlessly. (Though resting in unsafe areas was an unsafe proposition.)

 

My own preferred solution is: No resource limit, rest wherever you like unless it is someplace really special with some awesome scripted fight sequences such as a battles leading up to the final boss, but include a chance of being interrupted by a random encounter (so no healing, no recovering spells if it happens) whenever the party rests somewhere unsafe". It allows players to keep trying to push through so long as they are doing good or feel lucky, with the option of returning to rest somewhere safe if absolutely necessary.

 

 

EDIT: inserted quotes from updates #74 and #81 regarding casters vs front line melee.

Edited by pi2repsion

When I said death before dishonour, I meant it alphabetically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Basically the old, 'Linear Warrior, Quadratic Wizard' thing. You'd think PoE starting from fresh, but clearly drawing from the old IE games, would've been very aware of that issue, seeing as we all know what casters could do in BG. But, here we are, same general issue, if not quite so broken.

Why do you think they weren't?

 

Here's a point for you to consider. Is it possible to be well aware of the linear warrior, quadratic wizard issue and not consider it to be a problem; not to consider it to be something that needs to be fixed, because it isn't broken in the first place?

 

And the answer is yes, when you are designing party-based single player games, where a single player controls the entire party and what is important is their performance as a team and the player weighs his success as being dependent on party success, unlike party based multiplayer games where each player controls one party member and, while achieving goals remains important, to a large degree the player's personal measure of success will depend on his party member's performance against the performance of the other players' party members.

 

As a designer it can even be liberating, because it frees you to be more inventive and concentrate on classes being good at the roles they are intended for without having to bother overmuch about how they compare to other classes. And it allows you to make some classes much less micromanagement intensive than others (another attribute that is attractive to some players) without having to jump through hoops to give them the same power level. Usually this is done by the simple tradeoff of classes with more tactical options being more powerful when played well, while the classes with fewer options are easier to perform solidly by unspectacularly with, allowing the player who puts together his party to largely dictate how powerful his party is through the selection of party members. (Of course, when you do that you need to ensure that a full party of weaker classes or recommended party setups can fulfill a game on normal difficulty with little trouble).

 

 

 

But it is a balance, as there are many conflicting desires, both from the player base and amongst designers.

 

DO the design of POE call for linear fighters and wizards? If so, they have failed magnificently. I didn't bother reading all the project updates during development, but a search of some of the older project updates certainly doesn't suggest so, though it is possible that this changed later in development.

 

Here from update #15, for instance, which had the first rough draft of the four core classes:

 

 

Classes: the "Core Four"

 

 

Classes in Project Eternity are meant to provide a general framework for character types. Different classes excel in different areas, but the framework can be extended and elaborated on in a multitude of ways to create characters with unique capabilities. If you see a fighter, chances are good that he or she is going to be able to take a lot of damage, but that's about all you can be sure of. If you see a wizard, he or she probably has some hard-hitting spells that can cover a large area, but his potential list of capabilities is vast.

 

If you want to create a wizard who wears plate armor and hacks away with a broadsword from behind a heavily-enhanced arcane veil, we want to let you do that. If your idea of the perfect fighter is one who wears light armor and uses a variety of dazzling rapier attacks in rapid succession, we want to help you make that character. So it's good to think of Project Eternity's classes as being purpose-ready but not purpose-limited.

 

To date, through our Kickstarter campaign, you have helped us fund seven classes. In our design, we started with the "core four" because they are the most broadly familiar and also some of the most versatile: the fighter, the priest, the rogue, and the wizard. To these four, you helped us add three specialized, but popular, classes: the ranger, the monk, and the druid. The design of each class has a solid, distinctive base set of abilities that remain in most builds, but will have a large number of optional specializations and alterations to give players a high level of flexibility in developing an individual character's particular style.

 

Though we are still early in development, we'd like to let you know the rough ideas on what the “core four” classes of Project Eternity encompass:

 

 

Fighter - Fighters are men and women trained to use a wide variety of traditional weapons in brutal combat. They are often put in -- or put themselves in -- harm's way and are built to take an extraordinary amount of punishment. Though not traditionally as mobile as the monk nor as likely to dish out individually withering attacks as a rogue, fighters are dependable and flexible, able to shift between a variety of attack modes that alternate between high damage, maintaining a strong defense, weakening opponents, and dealing harsh retribution to those who attack his or her allies. Some fighters build up arsenals of feints, knockdowns, and special attacks rather than rely on the “slow and steady” approach.

 

And while fighters are often thought of as being primarily melee-based, they can specialize in a variety of weapons, including bows, crossbows, and even firearms. They're unlikely to outclass rangers at their own game, but fighters can be almost as dangerous at a distance as they are up close. Though it may not look like it to see them in battle next to wizards and priests, fighters are just as able to tap into the power of their souls to devastating effect: accelerating their attacks to a superhuman speed, striking foes with such power that nearby opponents are knocked off their feet, and maintaining a phenomenal endurance that allows them to rapidly bounce back from even terrible wounds.

 

When they aren't locked in life and death struggles, fighters are, unsurprisingly, often quite athletically capable. Even so, it's not uncommon to find fighters who are stealthy and well-educated. Moving unseen and knowing how to get out of a jam can come in handy even for them.

 

 

Priest - In a world with many gods, there are many different types of priests. Though the majority of priests spend their time tending to worshipers or engaged in relatively peaceful pursuits, there are ranks of dedicated adventuring or mercenary priests who have turned the flame of their faith into a spark to ignite the power of their souls. Such men and women have found a divine link to their chosen deity, but their abilities stem solely from within.

 

Dedicated to spreading the news of their gods' dominions in the realms of mortals through their own deeds, adventuring priests thrust themselves into lethal conflict to prove their worth. Often trained to fight alongside soldiers of their respective churches, priests are capable in the fray (and near the fray, for those who follow less melee-oriented faiths), but their true power comes from their prayers, faith-inspired miracles that aid their allies and punish their enemies. These miracles range from combat blessings, weapon enchantments, and protective barriers to divine summons, sanctified wards, and crippling curses. In many ways, the prayers of priests have almost as much variety as wizards spells, though priests are restricted to invoking prayers that are aligned with their faith. Additionally, priests often specialize in the weapons, armor, and litanies of prayers most beloved by their church. Thus, the multitude of gods produces a multitude of different priests, each with their own unique array of abilities.

 

Most priests are church-educated and are widely versed in many types of lore. However, some priests get by on pure faith alone, having little knowledge of the world around them. Such battle priests often lean more heavily on their athletic abilities when they are in the field.

 

 

Rogue - Contrary to what their name might imply, rogues come from many walks of life. They are cutpurses, thugs, and courtesans but also aristocrats, diplomats, and personal guards. Often separated by station in life, they are united by their reliance on wits, speed, and subterfuge to achieve their goals. The way of the rogue is not to stand toe-to-toe with the biggest brute in the room and exchange body blows, but to glance away in feigned confusion and slip an unseen blade between the brute's ribs as he turns his attention. When a room explodes in a storm of fire, the fighters grit their teeth, the priests pray for salvation, and the wizards fumble to find a spell to protect them, but the rogues just... disappear. They excel at being in the one place where no one's looking, at kicking people when they're down, at taunting a foe into turning its back on the rogue's ally while he or she nimbly skips away, and at being just too damned slippery to pin down.

 

Whether they pack a pair of daggers, a fine rapier, a slim bow, a stubby pistol, or a brutish club, rogues haul a carnival of pain with them wherever they go. If their natural tendencies weren't dangerous enough, their affinity for skullduggery allows some talented rogues to tap into their souls to perform amazing stunts: fading from view in plain sight, briefly cloaking their allies in a veil of shadow, imbuing their weapons with a soul-eating venom, or even becoming so insubstantial that blades barely hurt them.

 

While rogues are known for their stealthy nature both in and out of battle, many of them are quite talented with machines and contraptions of all sorts. High-born rogues are often very knowledgeable about esoteric, while many low-born rogues are well-equipped to survive in the wild.

 

 

Wizard - Widely respected in most societies, wizards of Project Eternity are men and women of high education and extreme mental discipline, if not always outright intelligence. Wizards are sometimes called navigators of the mortal soul, charting out and practicing the precise ways in which “ordinary” people can unlock the power inside of themselves. Using their knowledge to truly spectacular ends, wizards rely not only on ancient practices but also their own research to propel them forward. Far from being occult or protected knowledge, most wizards' spells are just so incredibly complex and physically demanding that even practiced wizards cannot invoke them without the use of expensive, specially-enchanted tomes.

 

And what do the tomes contain? Instructions on ways to use one's soul to alter reality, to warp time around enemies, to make skin as tough as stone, to counter even the most powerful magic, to invoke balls of flame, bolts of lightning, gouts of acid, to conjure nightmares out of thin air. Truly, the possibilities open to wizards seem to exceed even those of what priests can call upon through their faith. And though any wizard may prepare several tomes, an inexperienced caster is not capable of channeling power through the log-thick, anvil-heavy, dog-eared grimoires of wizened archmagi. Such novices must alternate between more modest selections, relying on their less demanding spells and talents when they are unable to call upon their tomes.

 

Wizards are often assumed to be masters of occult lore. While this certainly applies to their knowledge of spells, many wizards are so narrowly-focused that they are ignorant of outside culture and history. It is also not uncommon for wizards to delight as much in mechanical curiosities as rogues. Because their powers make them targets in battle, a surprising number of wizards are quite fit, even if they aren't particularly strong.

 

 

 

or from #81 about the role of fighters:

 

 

In this, our final class update, we will be discussing fighters and barbarians. Along with the wily, pain-powered monks (covered in Update 52), these three classes form the front line. The front line defines the heart of any battle, where two sides tangle face-to-face. The responsibility of the front line is more than simply dealing damage. It means holding the line no matter what tries to break through. If the party rogue needs a breather, the characters in the front line need to be able to cover her retreat. If a swarm of xaurips descends on the group after the wizard hurls his fireball, the front line needs to be able to neutralize them en masse or absorb their attacks before they overwhelm the entire party. Designed to take punishment and tackle hordes, the front line are the first in and, more often than not, the last standing in any battle. Next update will focus on some brand new creatures that we haven't shown yet, so be on the lookout.

 

Each class holds the line in its own way. As covered in Update 52, the monk absorbs damage to fuel special attacks through the use of accumulated Wounds. These attacks can stun, push, or weaken individuals or small groups around them. While monks have to be monitored to ensure their Wounds do not overwhelm them, they can absorb a large amount of punishment and hamper enemy movement on the battlefield. In contrast, the fighter holds the line the traditional way: by standing her ground, blocking opponents, and being infuriatingly difficult to knock out. Barbarians are designed to jump into the fray swinging wildly. Lacking the accuracy and strong Deflection of the fighter, the barbarian makes up for his lack of discipline through sheer speed, savagery, and abilities tailored for fighting groups of enemies. We've already covered the monk's Wounds and how they play into their use, but the other two front line classes differ in how they stem the enemy tide and how players monitor and use them over the course of combat. To show you how they differ, let's look at the details.

 

 

 

contrasted with the role of wizards from #74:

 

 

Mob Rulers

 

While neither wizards nor druids are restricted to offensive spells that target groups or areas, they excel in that arena. Whether it's dishing out elemental damage or inflicting status effects on enemies, both classes have a wide variety of spells to whittle down the hordes. Rangers and rogues are the kings of single-target takedowns, but the mob rulers exist to soften up, slow down, hinder, or otherwise mess up groups of enemies. Both classes focus heavily on spellcasters, but they have slightly different mechanics to how they work. Together with priests, wizards and druids are the "traditional" spellcasting classes that can cast a certain number of spells of each level per rest. As they gain levels in their classes, they can access more powerful spells. Over time, their weakest per-rest spells become per-encounter spells. At very high levels, the weakest spells eventually become at-will abilities, capable of being cast indefinitely.

 

 

 

 

But yeah, I get what your saying. For a fully charged fight with all resources at disposal, per encounter does absolutely nothing to change the balance. That's always sorta been Wizards thing, in IE games, is that they can go Nova on a fight and just wreck it. And the cost for that was for all the other fights, they had to operate at a lower level of power, and here good old dumb warrior gets a little time to shine.

 

And you're also right, even that advantage shrinks as the game goes on, and the Wizard gets more and more spells, they don't have to be so stingy with them, even if per rest. Which might just be it's casting system; Cipher, for example, doesn't have that issue. (Not that I think Cipher works perfectly or anything).

 

Of course, with the only restraint on resting being ones tolerance for tedium, it makes you wonder what the system is even there for. I can only think of either just hewing to tradition, or giving the player a way to self police.

In a group centered around magic, the dumb old warrior performs the respectable role of helping control the battlefield via attacks of opportunity, being a beefcake, and delivering a dependable though unspectacular damageoutput, while being able to take more punishment than just about anybody else (at least if you give him a two-hander and a mix of the best offensive and best defensive talents and abilities). It may be a boring job, but somebody has to do it.

 

In a group centered around melee, he'll be standing on top of a mountain of his enemies, by the end of battle, but the battle will likely have taken considerably longer.

 

 

And I'll completely agree with you on the campaign supply issue; In practice, while it has some impact such as tempting people to save high level spells rather than potentially wasting them and having to buy supplies more often, most of the time it does feel

 

 

 

So let me see if I have this correct. By design Wizards are supposed to be more powerful and generally better than the other classes, while Fighters are there to basically be punching bags and blockers.

 

I wish that the Devs had just put that in writing at the character creation screen. I would not have wasted a bunch of time and gotten people all riled up talking about my perceived balance questions. I foolishly thought that there was supposed to be some level of parity between the various classes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lead designer of Pillars of Eternity was just recently on record with the statement that he did not intend for the game to have "quadratic wizards".

 

(in the PAX Prime retrospective panel)

Cool. Would you happen to have a link? original.gif

 

 

EDIT: Don't bother; I did a search and found a comment from Sawyer back in March 2014 affirming it: here.

 

Well, what can I say, he might not have intended for wizards to be quadratic compared to linear fighters, and I'm not saying they are, but the priests, druids, and wizards surely feel superlinear, if we consider fighters (and rogues, barbarians, etc.) linear. So perhaps he's fine with something like x^1.2 :D

Edited by pi2repsion
  • Like 1

When I said death before dishonour, I meant it alphabetically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lead designer of Pillars of Eternity was just recently on record with the statement that he did not intend for the game to have "quadratic wizards".

 

(in the PAX Prime retrospective panel)

...so he went with "exponential" instead?:p

I'm only half kidding here. If we compare PoE to BG2, which was based on Ad&d 2e, high level casters were all kinds of unbalanced, but their high level save or suck spells stood a high chance of being resisted by an equal-level opponent due to the way saving throws worked; also, their thac0 scaled slower than the warrior classes, whose main strengths were reliable damage output and high hp, aside from access to better equipment( advantage which was largely negated by the casters' plethora of self buffs). Also, the warriors' attack rate improved with level, and by the time they hit level 13, their damage output might well be doubled or even tripled.

In PoE, attacks against an opponent of the same level are supposed to hit or graze (aside from PotD, but even on PotD you're still more likely to hit than a high level opponent was to fail his save in BG), so CC and save or suck are way more reliable; the caster's "thac0"(accuracy) doesn' really fall behind as much as it did in BG2, and they have full access to the best equipment in the game aside from their self-buffs.

Also, the non-casters don't get anything comparable to the improved attack rate they got in 2e.

Lastly, everybody has access to skills in PoE, so your wizard or cleric doesn't even need a rogue in order to deal with those pesky traps like he used to in Ad&d.

Oh, and let's not forget per-encounter spells and the fact that in BG, resting in a unsafe area wasn't necessarily a good idea.

Now, their spells aren'quite as good as 9th level spells used to be, but I'm not sure they're comparatively weaker.

Edited by Njall
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So let me see if I have this correct. By design Wizards are supposed to be more powerful and generally better than the other classes, while Fighters are there to basically be punching bags and blockers.

 

I wish that the Devs had just put that in writing at the character creation screen. I would not have wasted a bunch of time and gotten people all riled up talking about my perceived balance questions. I foolishly thought that there was supposed to be some level of parity between the various classes.

 

Right, that effectively highlights the fundamental problem with the whole, "It's a feature, not a bug," notion: lack of information.

 

Look, there is nothing essentially wrong with the idea of a game where casters are great and warriors don't scale at all, so long as the result is functional and enjoyable. I like asymmetric balance, but I would shy away from saying it's "right" or "correct," because that would be stupid. But if a game doesn't want to be balanced, then it should advertise as much at some level. If a game has casters that are better than the other classes and arguably more interesting, it should manage to communicate, in some way, that "casters are better than the other classes, and arguably more interesting." If a game has three difficulty settings labelled "wizard, fighter, rogue" instead of "easy, normal, hard," that's fine, so long as the information is actually there to advise the player.

 

But the information is never there (except maybe on forums by folks like us who spend too much time thinking about video games); certainly Pillars of Eternity presents unequal options as if they were equal, usually with insufficient information to make the inferences on one's own. Within TTRPG parlance, that is the definition of a "trap" option: a mechanically inferior choice that is presented as something other than what it is. I recall PoE's devs saying they would aim for class balance and mechanical transparency, but if they hadn't been, choosing not to notify the player would still be a problem in my eyes.

 

Basically the old, 'Linear Warrior, Quadratic Wizard' thing. You'd think PoE starting from fresh, but clearly drawing from the old IE games, would've been very aware of that issue, seeing as we all know what casters could do in BG. But, here we are, same general issue, if not quite so broken.

 

I can identify three potential causes that readily present themselves. I don't know that these are the reasons, but they strike me as likely reasons. Teachable moments, as they were.

  • Even very early in the backer beta, there were some complaints that PoE's micro was too intense when compared to that of the IE games. The warrior classes were certainly the big change in that respect, and so I'd be unsurprised if the dev team is very conscious of adding too many active abilities to warriors. This is actually pretty reasonable, and I dunno that there is any solution in a RTWP game like Pillars. Turn-based gameplay lends itself to extensive micro, but I think there's an upper threshold in RTWP games beyond which most players just see it as a pain in the tuckus.
  • I think generally, the devs underestimated the role that versatility plays in character strength, and overestimated the possibility of matching that versatility to a particular numerical advantage. When one tries to do this, they run into one of two problems. On the one hand, characters depending on sheer force of math can get numbers so high that versatility becomes irrelevant in comparison. On the other, if the numbers scale to stay pretty much where they already were relative to level-appropriate challenges, then the character just continues to do what they were already doing, and might as well not be advancing at all.
  • Above all, warriors are hampered by a narrative framework that says, "a caster can do anything you can do, but there are things a caster can do that you can never do." Maybe your warrior can knock guys off of their feet, or stun people with hard hits, or shoot two arrows at once, and maybe they can do those things more effectively than a caster. But a caster can do all of those things, and also petrify people and summon duplicates and create fields of damage and etc. PoE is better about this than some games in granting warriors some things to do, but ultimately, casters can still do almost anything, and that lends their versatility even greater weight.

In a group centered around magic, the dumb old warrior performs the respectable role of helping control the battlefield via attacks of opportunity, being a beefcake, and delivering a dependable though unspectacular damageoutput, while being able to take more punishment than just about anybody else (at least if you give him a two-hander and a mix of the best offensive and best defensive talents and abilities). It may be a boring job, but somebody has to do it.

I would find that case a lot more compelling if this were a job that you actually need a dumb old warrior to do in PoE. But you don't.

 

I'm all for contextual, cooperation-based party balance. I'm a huge fan of the Etrian Odyssey games, for instance, and if you don't bring a big dumb fighter to soak up hits in those ... well, you gonna die. But there are defensive things that only the defensive classes can do (see pt. 3 above) in those games, and that uniqueness lends an inherent value to their contribution. EO2U's Protector has a job - buffing the party to reduce damage. EO2U's Beast has a job - soaking up hits to the party and surviving them on pure toughness. Only these classes can do these things. PoE's dumb old warrior classes are fine in the sense of being good at their jobs, but most casters are also at least decent at that same job, and other jobs aside.

 

There's something to be said for games which force players to say, "okay, we need this class to take the hits, and this class to do the damage, and this class to debuff, and this class to heal." It can be a simplistic formula for sure, but it's one in which everyone plays a crucial role, and in that regard, it's elegant. But PoE doesn't really fit that formula, if only because a few of the classes can do any or all of those things.

  • Like 4

If I'm typing in red, it means I'm being sarcastic. But not this time.

Dark green, on the other hand, is for jokes and irony in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do agree that fighters arent fun at all, i mean i never mained one but i see Eder and i see his skills gain and talens, the way im building it is like a punching bag that just stands there doing nothing but autoattacks, i think most RPG are really shy and incompetent at the same time in putting warrior skills or aka physical abilities, DOS had a bunch of cool physical abilities not as many as mages but it was tottally better than in POE, i think the devs should start thinking outisde the box and make some cool physical abilities for melee fighters, like i said im only talking on what i see on Eder.

Edited by Zherot
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, i'm still not seeing any great argument in support of the situation here, at least not from a 'better gameplay standpoint.'

 

As to keeping a resting system in the game, and balancing around that, the only way I can think of it's treat it like a Wizardry game or something. You have to clear the place without refreshing, but it's easy enough to exit if you're not making it. Just have everything reset, and try again.

 

And again, I would never want that for a default. As I've said before, I'm a much bigger fan of the Dragon Age/Mass Effect 2 system of the highest difficulty changing some key mechanics, so you can have an easy mode for folks who just want to read a story, the normal and hard modes for folks who want the gameplay, but don't want to have to understand the combat system entirely, and the hardest mode for those of us who devote too much time to an individual game. (Again, few enough of us it's probably not worth doing this option, but if we're just talking abstract making better gameplay).

 

Also really agree wtih fighters not even being good dumb meat shields. The way the leveling and gear system works in this game, where every largely gets the same boost every level and can all wear the same gear, damn near anything can be close enough to how a fighter meat tanks if they have the same gear/stats. Often better (oh, hey there Wizard).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think having so many per encounter spells neuters the most interesting strategic element of the game. I tend to agree with curryinahurry that having the spells be available each encounter makes non-trivial encounters easier. I think this may have quite a bit to do with how one plays the game. I don't like to rest much and so generally go to new areas while my health and spells are at least somewhat depleted. Most of the time, I can scout ahead a bit but unless one uses a walkthrough or is replaying the game, it's not unusual to be surprised by a particular encounter or its difficulty.  The only ones I can think of in Act III (where I had per encounter spells) are the gods' quests. I went into each of those after other encounters. I was surprised by inadvertently continuing to try to sneak in Rymergand's quest after I'd talked to a guard or something (bc I'd tried to go to the wrong area). I don't really remember what I did, only that the whole place went hostile when I thought I was sneaking to avoid combat (and did not have yellow or red circles). The whole ice palace went hostile, which I'd not planned for. I think the combat was much easier for me because I had level 1 per encounter abilities, which I'd also used frequently in earlier encounters. Berath's quest also seemed significantly easier because of per encounter level 1 spells.

 

I understand that for some people per encounters will not affect the difficulty of non-trivial encounters, or at least not affect it much. I suspect that they rest more often than I do. Maybe they like to play on ironman so try to enter combat that they think will be challenging with (almost) full health and (almost) all their spells. That's one type of challenge but I prefer pushing ahead and not resting even when maybe I should. For me, per encounter spells make all combat easier because it's very unlikely that I'll be entering combat with all my health or spells. So having per encounters not only makes the current fight easier (or at least faster), it makes the next one (and the ones following that) easier as well bc I will have more health and more spells than I otherwise would have. The only exception for me was the battle with Thaos, where I rested before the fight.

 

I don't have a good solution. I understand that many players like the convenience of per encounter spell abilities. Perhaps Infinitron's suggestion to make the per encounters per encounter Vancian or the suggestion to delay (or parcel out) getting them would be good compromises.

Edited by oaktownbrown
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see a lot of interesting comparisons of battles that are "trivial" to those that aren't. I'm not sure when a lot of this happened in WM, but I do know that Cragholdt had mostly "non-trivial" battles, whereas most of WM, even though it was meant to be scaled-up to my >12 party, had some trashier mobs.

 

I did Cragholdt first after getting the expansion before knowing it was meant to be more of an end-game area. I struggled a lot with those mobs, and I'm not entirely sure how much my strategy relied on my PE skills. If anything, I probably tried to save my PR spells too much, and tried to PE my way through before dying a few times and realising my tactic (and spending of camping kits) needed to change.

 

I'm not entirely sure whether I'd prefer that the rest of WM had the same difficulty (when appropriately scaled to your party's level). Shouldn't that degree of intensity, problem-solving, and strategy be more common throughout a well designed game?

 

I'm not talking about Concelhaut (who I tried about 10 times before finding my winning strategy), but the general map mobs.

 

How would not having PE spells have changed your play through?

How would ALL PE spells have changed it?

How would having a smaller subset of the earlier tiers as PE changed things (like suggested above in this thread)?

Edited by FacesOfMu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hm I don't like the idea of removing per encounter mostly because ancient death knights are wrecking me even after exhausting my per encounter spells. In fact clearing the mercs would have been a pita without per encounter to fall back on and even then I had to keep resting as they sapped my hp. If it's gone all that means is more loading screens to rest. Plus load times drive me insane and put me off from playing.

Also you only reach per encounter when you trudged through a good portion of the game without. Tier 3 per encounter comes at level 13 meaning you won't be wrecking a lot of the game with it and cragholdt seems to step it up. Basically future expansions should all be like cragholdt where I had to drop high level spells to avoid getting run over and cleaned up with per encounter still needing to rest for health and higher tier spells.

Edited by Dinky Dino
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My personal illustraive case, to illustrate what pi2repsion was saying (taking into consideration I am the sort of player who plays too much to be called a "dirty casual" but is only at an average skill level and for whom there are but a handful of games ever on which above the medium difficulty level are ever touched):

 

In WM1, in the side quest tower area, I found I was having to rest (on normal) after two or three encounters, because my lvl 12 party was running out of top-level spells and health.

 

In Durgun's battery, where I was now max level (and thus fairly over-levelled for the monsters, even with them maxed out), I fought almost the entire thing using my per-encounter powers.

 

What would have changed if there were no per-encounter spells?

 

In the first case: nothing. Health and top-level spells were the most important factor; prevalence of level 1-2 (or even 3) spells was not an issue even under consideration; and even if it was, the amount used would have been well-under per-day before I could no longer proceed to the next fight because I was out of health.

 

In the second case: all that would have happened is I would have rested more, since I would have been using more per-day spells (probably higher level ones) and/or using very few spells at all and fighting entirely with no-per rest resources used. In the first instance, I would have thus rested more when I ran out of per-day spells; in the second instance I would have rested more, since the combats would perhaps have taken longer (since I was using just using weapons attacks) and I would have taken more damage.

 

The only other option is, in the second instance where I used just weapons to clear those encounters but taken no more damage, so I would have rested exactly as often, but instead of using spells per encounter, I would have been doing the rather less interesing "select party, click attack on target" interspersed with more "spam amplified wave."

 

I have been playing IWD2 recently (as in, since I finished WM1) and I have found that this third option is essentially what I've been doing, despite having a party of four primary casters and bard plus a light tank. Because I save my decent spells for the boss battles, I end up fighting most of the encounters there thus far by simple shooting everything to death with bows; it's not even worth using my 1st level spells for. Which is not tactically demanding. Had I got per-encounter spells there, I would have used them, which would not have decreased the difficulty of these already trivialised fights, but would have made it perhaps a little more entertaining to play.

 

So. A trivial fight is a trivial fight is a trivial fight. If the party is sufficiently overlevelled (very to do in PoE) that you can win it with "click normal attack, repeat ad nausem" then it doesn't MATTER if the wizard and cleric and druid can spam spells. (Hell, the Ciphers ALREADY DO; by the time you've started out with two amplified waves, followed by usually only one attck from their blunderbusses, you're in a position to spam amplified wave AGAIN and that's better than a lot of wizard spells!) If anything, then, taking away the caster's per-encounter spells just makes thew cypher a more attractive option.) It doesn't make the fight more meaningful. It dfoes make it slightly shorter, but since if you can win by just "click attack" additinal length is not MEANINGFUL. It's just busy-work. Per-encounter spells at least make it slightly more fun, because all the shiny VFX (and that's the long and short of it, really). Because as soon as you stick that "per-rest" flag on an ability, you may as well replace it with a "do not use until boss fight" because basically that's what it translates to for most people.

 

(Further example. I am not a particular fan of D&D 4E, but when someone else runs it, I play. Notably, we ended up having to come to a gentleman's agreement with the DM to fight at least four combats before resting, because we would either use virtually no per-days (except the odd area-effect if it came up), or we'd nova and use all of them and then immeditely rest, because we'd been taught by the modules you don't around without your big guns in reserve.)

 

You can't package out a limited resource and expect people will actually trickle it out, because most people don't think that way; there is the natural inclination to save the powerful (and by making it limited, you'e automatically drawing a flashing neon sign underneath it saying "THIS IS POWERFUL") abilities for "in case I need them", which is typically a boss fight, not a generic chaff encounter. By removing the per-encounter flag, all you do is change the goal-posts as to what people will classify as "powerful."

 

The only solution to that, aside from mass mind-control, is to not have any trivial fights.

 

But then if you treat every fight like a boss fight, it means you're going to HAVE to have people resting more (see: side quest tower area, where I had to rest more than in any other area in the entire game). Despite a lot of people complaining PoE is too easy, a large but I suspect the fairly quiet majority (as there always is) will be comfortable with the difficulty as-is. And while a skilled player might be able to use less resources in a boss fight (by using exactly the right resources) most folk aren't. And further - which is what the badly designed early model for 4E taught my group - you don't then go around at less than full strength because you might run into a fight you can't win. So you're right back to rest-spam. And then it doesn't matter whether you limit the camping supplies or not, since you'll find people will tend to put up with tedium more than difficutly (so even if you removed camping supplies altogether, people would just trot back to the inn after every couple of fights, adding nothing but busy work to the game.)

 

(And if you prevent THAT, by making the characters unable to leave the area or rest until some condition is fulfilled), you'll find people turn the difficulty down, furiously complain the game is too hard, have to use a strategy walkthrough for the whole game and/or not buy the game in the first place when they hear about "how hard" it is.)

 

Basically, you can't MAKE people play in such a way as to force them to use a steady trickle of limited resources. Hell, you can't even do that on the TABLETOP with a living, breathing (or not...) DM!

 

 

 

Now, I can see maybe an arguement for having an option for Hard or PotD for disabling per-encounter spells if you want to make it harder; but in general, if you are fighting battles that you are using nothing but per-encounter abilities on, it's not a fight that many - perhaps even most - going to be using per-day abilities on anyway. Regardless of what level of power those abilities actually really ARE.

Edited by Aotrs Commander
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Aotrs_Commander - You make some good points, especially with regards to player psychology. The stuff you're talking about is, I think, the entire reason that the concept of "per-encounter" abilities became prevalent in the first place (outside of PoE, anyway). That said, I dunno if it's totally applicable at lower levels.

If I'm typing in red, it means I'm being sarcastic. But not this time.

Dark green, on the other hand, is for jokes and irony in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do they make that much of a difference? As far as I can see it's pretty much for convenience more than anything else. You can rest before every big fight which would make per encounter spells useless no? Overpowered, not entirely convinced. BTW the major issue is really that wizards have better 3 rd level spells, so they tend to benefit more than the other casters. No need to nerf all casters because wizard gets haste and fireball.

"Those who look upon gods then say, without even knowing their names, 'He is Fire. She is Dance. He is Destruction. She is Love.' So, to reply to your statement, they do not call themselves gods. Everyone else does, though, everyone who beholds them."
"So they play that on their fascist banjos, eh?"
"You choose the wrong adjective."
"You've already used up all the others.”

 

Lord of Light

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Aotrs_Commander - You make some good points, especially with regards to player psychology. The stuff you're talking about is, I think, the entire reason that the concept of "per-encounter" abilities became prevalent in the first place (outside of PoE, anyway). That said, I dunno if it's totally applicable at lower levels.

 

 

No, at lower levels of difficulty it isn't so much; because by the nature of low-level, there's less "down" than "up." And if there's no "down," there are no trivial fights anyway. (Which is why most RPGs tend to have an inverse difficutly curve over the low-to-mid level range at least, since at bottom levels you have so little resources to spend and you'll probably find you have to rest more anyway. Actually, that said, I think PoE's endurance/health system actually went a long way to migitate the "we have to rest after nearly every fight since we're out of resources (e.g. hit points)" you often got at bottom levels in the IE games.)

 

But by the time you hit mid-level (where I think PoE got the balance right with the per-encounters filtering in) there's enough "down" you start to get those trivial fights (if you don't have some completely fluid level-scaling system, which has a different set of problems!)

Edited by Aotrs Commander
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An option to disable per encounter spells is in my opinion the wisest way to deal with this.

 

Quite easy fix. No changes for casual players (or players who just don't want to bother with per rest spells). Everyone could play according to one's style.

 

Make also the few per encounter abilities of casters more interesting (seriously, what the point of interdiction once you got per encounter spells ?), as well as bonus spell talents and god favored weapon talents.

Edited by Elric Galad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An option to disable per encounter spells is in my opinion the wisest way to deal with this.

 

Quite easy fix. No changes for casual players (or players who just don't want to bother with per rest spells). Everyone could play according to one's style.

 

I think that's very unlikely to ever happen as part of the base game, but it's already a feature in the IEMod, for those who care.

 

Doesn't mean it's not worth debating, if only for the sake of inquiry.

 

Make also the few per encounter abilities of casters more interesting (seriously, what the point of interdiction once you got per encounter spells ?), as well as bonus spell talents and god favored weapon talents.

 

I'd like it if they could start by making the per-encounter abilities of non-casters more interesting. Casters have plenty of abilities - they're called "spells," and they encompass a huge majority of the interesting abilities in the game.

 

Yes, I will keep beating this dead horse forever.

 

I will agree that there do need to be more talents that are actually of interest to casters; in addition, the terribly lackluster per-rest abilities attached to favored weapon priest talents need to be either much better, or per-encounter. As it is, Skaen's is far and away the best, and the others are all kind of crappy.

Edited by gkathellar
  • Like 2

If I'm typing in red, it means I'm being sarcastic. But not this time.

Dark green, on the other hand, is for jokes and irony in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it unlikely to ever happen ? I think the devs are more or less aware of the gamebreaking risk of per encounter spells.

 

They would have to create insanely powerful non-caster abilities at level 15 to compensate future per encounter confusion...

This is a risk of a big amount of work, lot of balance patches, etc...

 

This risk can be managed by adding just one little option. And this option does not even imply possible discontent from players.

 

IMHO, this would be a great cost saver for them.

 

 

By the way I admit that it is for psychological reason that I prefer playing the official game rather than IE mod. I don't want to be allowed to customize rules by myself, because I would feel like playing against myself ^^

Edited by Elric Galad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe devs should bring back immortal fighters and summons that don't vanish after battle, machine gun ciphers and one shot paladins and rogues, so we could get people complain how weak traditional casters are compared to other classes as balance don't matter in SP games. So that everybody can have fun with the game.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe devs should bring back immortal fighters

 

This was really never a thing in non-trivial fights, except at the farthest end of optimization.

 

we could get people complain how weak traditional castersare compared to other classes

 

C'mon, man, people are still complaining about that. They were wrong then, and they're wrong now.

Edited by gkathellar

If I'm typing in red, it means I'm being sarcastic. But not this time.

Dark green, on the other hand, is for jokes and irony in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Maybe devs should bring back immortal fighters

 

This was really never a thing in non-trivial fights, except at the farthest end of optimization.

 

we could get people complain how weak traditional castersare compared to other classes

 

C'mon, man, people are still complaining about that. They were wrong then, and they're wrong now.

 

 

During early days of beta when large shields gave +30 deflection and and you could put multiple stat enchantments in armor you were able to make such tank fighters that any enemy in beta could not hit them (and if my calculations are correct with those deflection bonuses from beta fighter could have deflection that is over 200 in level 12, meaning that even adra dragon can't really hit them).

 

Yes I know, but in this thread people have said that its ok that classes aren't balanced as game is single player which is why it don't matter that traditional spell casters become so powerful in end game, and by that logic it should not also matter if you give other classes back things that were nerfed away from them to make game more balanced, fun and challenging (I personally liked quite lot when level one chanters were able to kill everything without ever risking themselves as they were able to summon new skeletons and sent them kill enemies to other side of map and kill enemies with attrition).

Edited by Elerond
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

During early days of beta when large shields gave +30 deflection and and you could put multiple stat enchantments in armor you were able to make such tank fighters that any enemy in beta could not hit them (and if my calculations are correct with those deflection bonuses from beta fighter could have deflection that is over 200 in level 12, meaning that even adra dragon can't really hit them).

 

Oh, okay, during the beta. That explains my confusion.

 

Yes I know, but in this thread people have said that its ok that classes aren't balanced as game is single player which is why it don't matter that traditional spell casters become so powerful in end game, and by that logic it should not also matter if you give other classes back things that were nerfed away from them to make game more balanced, fun and challenging (I personally liked quite lot when level one chanters were able to kill everything without ever risking themselves as they were able to summon new skeletons and sent them kill enemies to other side of map and kill enemies with attrition).

 

I take your point, and I appreciate it.

If I'm typing in red, it means I'm being sarcastic. But not this time.

Dark green, on the other hand, is for jokes and irony in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe devs should bring back immortal fighters and summons that don't vanish after battle, machine gun ciphers and one shot paladins and rogues, so we could get people complain how weak traditional casters are compared to other classes as balance don't matter in SP games. So that everybody can have fun with the game.

Fine with me so long as it is by design rather than by accident.

 

As an example, a fighter who's immortal if the player doesn't equip him right or use his abilities right is unlikely to be much fun to play, unless he is an NPC with a great backstory explaining his immortality, and is something I'd normally consider poorly designed, while a fighter class who required the player to equip and specialize in a certain way to achieve immortality when the player played well, but failed to achieve immortality when played poorly or with minimal tactical considerations (positioning/ability use), could be a quite funny class design to play. You'd probably want to give it a more thematic name hinting at its awesome powers than fighter, though. Likewise, if you make a cipher class to have all sorts of different abilities to use with a resource system that gradually refills in combat, and it turns into a machinegun against your intent and in combat doesn't represent the class as it is otherwise presented in the game, thus creating a clear dissonance, that's bad, whereas if the cipher operating as a machinegun fits into the theme or story being told (and is fun to play), that's great.

 

I've played fantasy CRPGs where melee damagedealers were the most powerful, where ranged damagedealers were the most powerful, where casters were most powerful, and a few other combinations during my 30 years of playing singleplayer CRPGs, and I can't say that it matters much to me who comes out on top of the different classes in a game. I just examine what is available and tailor my party (or single character) to the theme I want to achieve and challenge I want to face and go with that. It isn't as if my party members in a party based singleplayer CRPG game are in competition with each other, after all. It is all about putting together a party that, together, meet my various goals.

 

(Same goes for races.)

 

And, of course, regardless of what sort of class balance there is in a game, there will be players complaining about it. Nerf this, buff that, ad nauseam. That pretty much goes without saying. But who cares? Other than those who agree with them that class balance is important, but for whatever reason prefer another class balance, that is. :D

Edited by pi2repsion
  • Like 4

When I said death before dishonour, I meant it alphabetically.

Link to comment
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...