Confirmed - per-encounter spells are getting nerfed

[Fenixp]

junki: Kickstarting a game as a spiritual successor does that to people. Now I'm not saying they're right, playing Pillars was as if somebody was reading my thoughts while playing IE games and then fixing everything I found wrong with them, mechanics focused on resource management being by far my most favourite feature. That being said, this change to per rest spells seems quite interesting, adding more depth to levelling your wizard. Concept is cool. So let's see how well it is implemented and what will it break.

[jsaving]

In a game like PoE where it is already possible to have unlimited rests provided you are willing to take 30-60 seconds of time to reach an inn or your stronghold, there isn't a huge distinction between per-encounter spells and per-rest spells.  Eventually gaining lower level spells on a per-encounter basis is a nice "convenience perk" for those of us who play the game, but precisely because it is a boost to the player rather than the character, curtailing it is likely to antagonize players without solving any balance concerns associated with caster characters.

[Ymarsakar]

 

i really enjoyed being able to cast a lot during encounters at later levels so personally i am a fan of per encouter spells and dont like this change one bit. i find it quite a bit less fun to have my mage autoattack with his silly harry potter wand as oposed to cast spells. if preventing spaming of certain spells why not introduce a cooldown system instead?

 

hopefully the iemod guys are able to work their magic and reintroduce per encounter spells after this change goes live!

 

Because Obsidian and this community eschews any game design improvement that happened after BG, because BG was perfect. /s

 

 

Is that why they made rogues the only class that can find and de activate traps.

[View619]

 

i really enjoyed being able to cast a lot during encounters at later levels so personally i am a fan of per encouter spells and dont like this change one bit. i find it quite a bit less fun to have my mage autoattack with his silly harry potter wand as oposed to cast spells. if preventing spaming of certain spells why not introduce a cooldown system instead?

 

hopefully the iemod guys are able to work their magic and reintroduce per encounter spells after this change goes live!

 

Because Obsidian and this community eschews any game design improvement that happened after BG, because BG was perfect. /s

 

 

Ignoring the fact that armor and weapons are not class specific, unlike the IE games? Also, the fact that skills can be used by anybody and not specific classes.

[zeee]

In a game like PoE where it is already possible to have unlimited rests provided you are willing to take 30-60 seconds of time to reach an inn or your stronghold, there isn't a huge distinction between per-encounter spells and per-rest spells.  Eventually gaining lower level spells on a per-encounter basis is a nice "convenience perk" for those of us who play the game, but precisely because it is a boost to the player rather than the character, curtailing it is likely to antagonize players without solving any balance concerns associated with caster characters.

 

couldnt agree more. add to this the horrendous loading times you have to get through at least twice in order to rest at an in and continue afterwards you are at at least 5 minutes in order to replenish the spell. the time i can spend playing games isn't all that much to begin with and this further diminishes the time i am actually playing the game and progressing through the story. i hope josh and co are willing to rethink this one.....

[Fenixp]

 

 

In a game like PoE where it is already possible to have unlimited rests provided you are willing to take 30-60 seconds of time to reach an inn or your stronghold, there isn't a huge distinction between per-encounter spells and per-rest spells.  Eventually gaining lower level spells on a per-encounter basis is a nice "convenience perk" for those of us who play the game, but precisely because it is a boost to the player rather than the character, curtailing it is likely to antagonize players without solving any balance concerns associated with caster characters.

 

couldnt agree more. add to this the horrendous loading times you have to get through at least twice in order to rest at an in and continue afterwards you are at at least 5 minutes in order to replenish the spell. the time i can spend playing games isn't all that much to begin with and this further diminishes the time i am actually playing the game and progressing through the story. i hope josh and co are willing to rethink this one.....

 

I've got to wonder tho, why would you do that? If you don't have time to go trough contrivances of how the game was never intended to be played, why not just play it as it was intended and save a ton of time? Not only is it perfectly finisheable without constantly travelling back to inns trough all of those loading screens, it's even more enjoyable that way, so just why even do it?

Edited October 2, 2015 by Fenixp

[Gfted1]

^Iirc, the IEMod offeres unlimited Camping Supplies and doesn't break achievements, so maybe that can be a workaround.

[View619]

Just cheat and break the achievements. If you want unlimited rests, there's a console command. People who want to burn spells during every encounter never needed to worry about per-encounter vs per-rest abilities.

[zeee]

 

 

 

In a game like PoE where it is already possible to have unlimited rests provided you are willing to take 30-60 seconds of time to reach an inn or your stronghold, there isn't a huge distinction between per-encounter spells and per-rest spells.  Eventually gaining lower level spells on a per-encounter basis is a nice "convenience perk" for those of us who play the game, but precisely because it is a boost to the player rather than the character, curtailing it is likely to antagonize players without solving any balance concerns associated with caster characters.

 

couldnt agree more. add to this the horrendous loading times you have to get through at least twice in order to rest at an in and continue afterwards you are at at least 5 minutes in order to replenish the spell. the time i can spend playing games isn't all that much to begin with and this further diminishes the time i am actually playing the game and progressing through the story. i hope josh and co are willing to rethink this one.....

 

I've got to wonder tho, why would you do that? If you don't have time to go trough contrivances of how the game was never intended to be played, why not just play it as it was intended and save a ton of time? Not only is it perfectly finisheable without constantly travelling back to inns trough all of those loading screens, it's even more enjoyable that way, so just why even do it?

 

that was my point for having per encouter spells so resting isnt needed as much

[Remix]

I think that they should make per-encounter spells a talent that casters have to take. That way you have to sacrafice other utilities in order to do have that advantage and the people that don't want them, don't pick them up.

[Teioh_White]

I'd rather they just do away with them entirely, tighten the resting restrictions on PotD, and just allow unlimited resting on difficulties below PotD. Not that loose resting systems is PoE's creation, it hasn't been implemented well in any IE game that I can think of.

 

Or ditch a resting system for some other resource system, but that'd be something for a fresh game and system, not this one.

[hilfazer]

Their new approach is biased towards buffs (or more generally: duration spells) as you only need to cast one such spell per combat. Now, who has the best buffs? Priests, hands down. But also wizards - they don't buff others but can buff themselves like a pigs. Druids are relatively ****ty at buffs in PoE.

So the weakest Vancian caster gets hurt the most.

[Ineth]

As far as balance is concerned, it's a good change. Casters will still be amazing and better, of course, but at least I can't just stun lock and AoE an entire group every encoutner with one character anymore.

 

Ah yes, the classic   Slicken + Fireball + Fireball + Fireball

[Ymarsakar]

A druid's self buffed storm spells will still stun lock enemies, with phantom and rangers and prone on crit added on top as bonuses.

 

Druid isn't a support class, that's why their aoes do damage and also stun lock plus some other effects.

 

People who spend 5 minutes going through loading screens to complain about loading screens, have OCD issues. Just fight until all melee has red health, it works better that way challenge wise.

Edited October 11, 2015 by Ymarsakar

[gkathellar]

People who spend 5 minutes going through loading screens to complain about loading screens, have OCD issues. Just fight until all melee has red health, it works better that way challenge wise.

 

It makes little difference. My own experience is that once the party hits level 5-7, it is rare that you run out of spells before melee hits red unless you run up against a boss fight or other major encounter. Per-encounter spells just ease things up so that you can play less efficiently. Caster power isn't meaningfully increased or decreased by their presence or absence, because you'll still have your full compliment of spells on the occasions where you actually need them.

[Vorad]

Anyone remembers the "Archmage" from good old 3E? Another way to implement these changes could be by allowing the player to permanently destroy a grimoire slot of his max spell level and replace it with a permanent "spell like ability" per encounter of one level lower. Now that would be a change!

 

Also some extra class talents would be much appretiated especially for wizards, druids, chanters. Their current class talents are abysmal to say the least. Wizard has his arcane veil but that's about it the rest of the talents don't have any interaction with the wizards abilities which are his spells while druids and chanters class talents are even worse! "Metamagic feats" would be nice, generally more interaction between the caster and he's spells.

Edited October 11, 2015 by Vorad

[Teioh_White]

Well, the casters at least get some nice benefits from the Elemental talents, which for everyone else are pretty much non-starters. So they get something to spend there talents on, if one doesn't want to pump a weapon or poor into defenses.  If the devs insist on still having some form of per encounters, I would prefer the current +1 spell slots be turned into a 1 per encounter spell slot, giving some useful talents there for casters to burn. Just push back the minimal level to select those talents a bit.

 

I can't really see how caster power isn't decreased by removing these per encounters, either. Assuming rest restrictions, of course (I do no inns/bought supplies, found ones only). Pre level 8, yes, my casters generally conserve spells, using the bare minimal, until the health levels hit red. Then they end the next few fights by going Nova, with minimal health lost, rest and repeat. Casters are still clearly the best class even in these situations, which makes the soon to come per encounters so nutty.

 

With per encounters? Every single fight is handled by going mini Nova. Completely changes the balance curve. Sure, no impact on the 'big' fights, as those normally come at a time when I'd be resting anyways, but the small ones that would normally cause some wear and tear are rendered pointless. No one hits red hp anymore ever, and it's really the fatigue only that forces rest, as 'big' battles aren't often close enough to get too without hours of travel.  (I'd prefer a system where one can't refill right before an end boss, making it more important to play smart beforehand, but that's something else entirely.)

[sapientNode]

As many have stated I do not understand whatsoever the concern about having or not having encounter spells.

Rest to gain spells or go to an inn or do not use them and utilize another method of fighting enemies.

 

I have used a multitude of tactics thus far throughout my game.  Some have involved 0 caster usage and the end result has pretty much been the exact same thing.

There is not a significant boost in my teams which have 2 or more casters with per encounter casting.

By the time I have gotten to per encounter casting all my melee is strategically decked out to deal massive damage and hold and entire army of trash mobs.

Occasionally I go for the slicken mechanic when I am blocked and I need to get that druid on his ass before he throws insects on me but other than that the amount of time spent throwing slickens and fireballs is far more efficiently spent casting higher level spells and knocking things on their ass with melee and wiping the floor with enemies with my Rogue and Monk.

I would put forth a challenge to someone who wants to spin numbers and prove that a caster with the current per encounter spell can dish out more damage with their weak level 1 and 2 spells versus a caster or a fully equipped melee who never has to cast.  Sure there are situationals that this will be proven but overall per encounters do not make anything OP.

 

In fact I can clean a map and not have per encounter and be ready for a rest and still have spells left over in my level 1 and 2s.  This is on PoTD

In this particular type of game I simply can not understand the argument over who is more powerful.

I mean seriously out of all the classes my rogue is top damage across the board.  With high int she can pretty much solo things and destroy them.  She has some per encounter abilities but they take way less time to manage and it is more rewarding.

 

Do people who think caster X is so OP and needs nerfing have party aoe damage turned off or something?

And most of the dialog is about this slicken spamming.  What about Druid?

 

Why ask the developers to nerf **** and create even more restrictions on top of other restrictions on top of other restrictions which in the end does improve the games quality.

I mean PoE is a micro managing horror as it is.

 

Changing per encounters without fully retrofitting the resting mechanic will change nothing.  And for those who are looking for a greater challenge either discipline yourself or go get iemod and make all spells per rest.  The solution to this issue already exists.  A change to the system is pretty much just fluff.

there are numerous things that could be refined in this game as it is.

[Karkarov]

Yes, you can abuse the rest mechanic to ensure that your spell slots are always available. But that's a player choice and not everybody wants to rest after each battle; some players actually try to limit resting for role-playing/challenge purposes.

Or because having to run back to town and buy supplies again is boring as all hell and playing like a munchkin makes you feel like an anal douchebag especially considering the game isn't "that hard" to begin with.

[Remix]

This is why I think having per encounter spells would function best as a talent that casters have to take. It limits other abilities that they can take on and gives people the option not to take it if they don't want to.

Edited October 12, 2015 by Remix

[hilfazer]

This is why I think having per encounter spells would function best as a talent that casters have to take. It limits other abilities that they can take on and gives people the option not to take it if they don't want to.

Such talent would be taken as often as Field Triage or Wound Binding. Or even less often as HP healing has a chance to be useful in combat (it's possible to loose all Health in a single fight if you heal enough). Per-encounter spells have no effect on fights that matter.

 

I don't know how many people take Field Triage or Wound Binding, but i never do. And i rarely rest on PotD.

[tinysalamander]

This is why I think having per encounter spells would function best as a talent that casters have to take. It limits other abilities that they can take on and gives people the option not to take it if they don't want to.

 

Which means those who want it now have to spend talents on it, and those who don't got nothing. This fixes… what exactly?

[Gfted1]

^Then they could spend those unused talent points on different talents?

[tinysalamander]

^Then they could spend those unused talent points on different talents?

 

Exactly like they can do now.

 

EDIT: What I'm saying is just because someone gets less it does not mean you get more.

Edited October 12, 2015 by tinysalamander

[gkathellar]

 

This is why I think having per encounter spells would function best as a talent that casters have to take. It limits other abilities that they can take on and gives people the option not to take it if they don't want to.

Such talent would be taken as often as Field Triage or Wound Binding. Or even less often as HP healing has a chance to be useful in combat (it's possible to loose all Health in a single fight if you heal enough). Per-encounter spells have no effect on fights that matter.

 

I don't know how many people take Field Triage or Wound Binding, but i never do. And i rarely rest on PotD.

 

Yeah, pretty much.

 

People keep bringing up Slicken spam as some kind of wonderful scapegoat, but in most fights a single casting of Slicken will shift things far enough in your favor that anything else is just gravy. Personally, the spell I spam once the per-encounters roll around is Ghost Blades, because it requires no thought and is totally routine - like many, many of the fights in PoE.

 

The only thing per-encounter spells really do is minimize the energy needed to deal with the game's overabundant trash mobs. If Obsidian wants to get rid of per-encounter spells, they should also deal with the problem that per-encounter spells address. But right now, it seems like they're taking the Paizo approach: keep the problem, remove the convenience, and make casters stronger because it's a rules update and that's what rules updates are for.

 

^Then they could spend those unused talent points on different talents?

 

These aren't new, bonus talent points we're talking about. The proposal in question involves stripping out the convenience characters have at present, and asking players who want said convenience to spend an already limited resource on it.

 

That's why hilfazer has the right of it - you'd be sacrificing your maximum strength, which you use in boss fights and other non-trivial encounters, for slightly easier trivial encounters. That's a trap option if I ever heard of one.