Obsidian should rework the classes for POE2

[why]

I get you, Sedrefilos, but that line of reasoning leads straight into an echo chamber. New ideas are good as long as the design team can contexualize those ideas and distill them into something useful. I would suggest even something that, to me, has as little merit as suggesting hard coded weapon and armor restrictions could nevertheless possibly lead to interesting, novel, or, dare I say, elegant ideas.    preferably all three from time to time.  Even Dungeons and Dragons benefited from people suggesting such changes.

 

I think the problem with the OP is mostly stylistic on one hand and the fact that most folks actually seem to enjoy the approach the developers took.  It is probably one of the few criticisms that I think has monumental disagreement by the mass.  There are several people around here who criticize the game regularly from what I've seen.  So, even though the criticism seems a little whacky to me, I don't mind the guy making it.  He just needs to keep his left up and stop leading with his chin is all.

 

Of course, he could just be trolling, but I think he really does seem to hate the freedom of characters to use weapons and armor regardless of class.

[Nonek]

Personally I didn't find Poe's ruleset to be very attractive as a pen and paper gamer, far too 4th edition-ish and centred on combat, I would never use it in a tabletop game, and it is distasteful to be forced to when playing the CRPG. Of course combat heaviness is a pillar of this IE successor, there was a metric ton of filler in the BGs as well, and one had to include such I imagine to keep faith with the IE aesthetic. Still I find the ruleset tainting any enjotment I have, i'd far prefer a system that made more sense, did not have any classes, was far more transparent and ideally was turn based.

 

At the moment there is a dissonance in the game, with an art style and subject matters that lean towards verisimilitude, and a ruleset that just handwaves away any semblance of internal consistency, and spits upon in game logic as not something to be worth aiming for. This also does nothing for me, and i'd far prefer more challenges, preparation, in depth exploration of a role and systems that grew with me rather than gave me everything at the beginning.

 

That is just my personal opinion however.

[SkySlam]

I strongly dislike the idea of being locked to specific sets of weapons & armors for any class.

I enjoy creating the weirdest builds for my characters and I hope it will stay like this in PoE2!

 

If OP wants to roleplay class restrictions, I see no problem in him doing that! He can self-restrict his monks to fight unarmed and his chanters to only use pistols.

Why enforce these rules on every player when we have been given so much freedom?

[Zenbane]

When you criticize a game, you criticize it for what it is. If it is a part of a series, you compare it to the rest of the games in that particular series. You don't compare it with something else.

 

Finer words are rarely spoken on this forum. Meanwhile...

 

Personally I didn't find Poe's ruleset to be very attractive as a pen and paper gamer, far too 4th edition-ish and centred on combat, I would never use it in a tabletop game

 

As a direct retort, I refer to Sed's quote above. I will add that I too would not use PoE's ruleset in a tabletop game, mostly because I would never play a tabletop game.

[Teioh_White]

I strongly dislike the idea of being locked to specific sets of weapons & armors for any class.

I enjoy creating the weirdest builds for my characters and I hope it will stay like this in PoE2!

 

If OP wants to roleplay class restrictions, I see no problem in him doing that! He can self-restrict his monks to fight unarmed and his chanters to only use pistols.

Why enforce these rules on every player when we have been given so much freedom?

That's a disconnect I always seem to have when discussing the genre with other fans. The desire to make builds that fit some idea I have of a character, for reasons other than effective or interesting gameplay. I've never had desire to introduce headcannon a game, and any roleplaying I'm fine just sticking to what the story can reasonably provide for us. (Usually just to the extant to give reasonable excuses for a players decision).

 

I like gear restrictions in games for the gameplay distinctions it can create, forcing weakness and strengths on classes the player has to account for, rather than optimizing all to the similar choices. Constraint often breeds better gameplay than freedom, just due to the sheer difficulty of designing a good system with total freedom.

 

The actual reasons behind aren't of great interest to me; I wouldn't care if everyone just wielded a letter, but Class 1 could only use vowels, or whatever. More just that Class 1 has to take into account it has limitations, and work to ovecome or mitigate those.

[why]

That's fair enough, T_W.  It's also a cogent argument for your case.

 

As a counter argument, I would cite the points others have already made regarding distinctions and role playing scenarios already created by character abilities.  There are already tons of restrictions on characters in the game.  My priest of Eothas can't cast wizard spells.  Her buddy Aloth can't use Cipher powers.  Grieving Mother doesn't have an animal companion.  Gear is a poor restriction and strains credulity.  The best argument for restrictions on wizard's use of armor and weapons is training.  I'll own that.  Of course, a practicing doctor, having gone through years of college and medical school, may still join the Society for Creative Anachronism.  He can still learn how to wear armor and fight with a sword and shield.  That's not even a fantasy game.  That's real life today.  So, there's no real reason that a wizard can't use a weapon and having the game put a restriction on such use is non-sensical.  Why should it?  There is plenty enough to restrict in other ways.  Hell,  can't play a dragon.  I can't fly around in a spaceship.  I'm not the living avatar of Ganesh.  The player doesn't have complete freedom.  Just enough freedom to enjoy the mechanics in the way I like best.

 

Conversely, if we're going to restrict weapons and armor just because someone wears a pointy hat and then pretend there's some sort of coherent rationale for it, shouldn't we also restrict being able to pick up any weapon or armor dropped by an NPC of any sex, race, height, weight, etc and throw it on as if it had been fit and sized by a master blacksmith?

[rjshae]

There was a rational reason given for Wizards not to wear certain armor in an old game called DragonQuest. It posited that iron interfered with the process of casting spells. Hence the Wizards in that game were limited to using armor made of bronze or leather. It's game-world specific of course, and there's no reason why other RPGs need to follow suit. But it does make for an interesting mechanic: if you want to prevent Wizards from escaping justice, you clap them in irons.

[why]

I think that idea is workable, rjshae, although with the proviso that wizards could use the equipment but not cast spells or not have the equipment and have access to magic.  In a moment of need, he might eschew his spellcasting for a period of time in order to wield a weapon.  My gut instinct is that this is all hypothetical because I seriously doubt they suddenly put in such restrictions in a sequel.  Allowing freedom to access weapons and armor for all classes isn't a light decision.  From what little I know of the lead designer, it seems this feature is central to his philosophy in this design.

[Guest 4ward]

 

i never had a problem with weapon restriction in BG2, since the weapons are good. With what weapon i kill the enemy isn't important to me as long as that weapon does its job. Weapon restriction meant sometimes that certain guys would be more effective than others in certain battles, so IMO such restriction did help to make chars more distinctive. I admit i'm irked that in PoE i can afaik take all possible weapon groups in a playthrough. If i'm proficient with a group of weapons and i use them in combat, how suddenly i can on my next talent level up choose an entirely different weapon group and then be already proficient with that??

 

Armour restriction wasn't really a problem for me in BG2 either since there was dualclass. Imoen could cast stoneskin for good protection. In PoE is the protection for wizards really that good compared to BG2, what do you think? Are there actually ways of putting a caster in heavy armour and offsetting the speed penalty? I haven't played the game for too long so can't really say. I think dual-classed chars were cool in BG2, they level up slower but then you can also have a smaller party becasue of that, have Jaheira in the party and you don't need another druid or fighter really. She got all cool stuff from that other class. How does PoE's cross class talents compare to that?

[Elerond]

In PoE equipment limitations for wizards that don't effect other classes don't make sense as every class gets their power from same source, which is their soul. They are just schooled/learned to use that power in different ways. Although wizards spell casting already has limitation in PoEs lore as they conjure their soul power through their Grimoires to manifest the power way they want.

[PrimeJunta]

There was a rational reason given for Wizards not to wear certain armor in an old game called DragonQuest. It posited that iron interfered with the process of casting spells. Hence the Wizards in that game were limited to using armor made of bronze or leather. It's game-world specific of course, and there's no reason why other RPGs need to follow suit. But it does make for an interesting mechanic: if you want to prevent Wizards from escaping justice, you clap them in irons.

 

This is the way it's done in NetHack also. Metal armour increases spell failure.

 

Of course this ends up not mattering because everybody ends up wearing dragon scale mail anyway, which is both non-metallic and the best armour in the game.

[Sannom]

Armour restriction wasn't really a problem for me in BG2 either since there was dualclass. Imoen could cast stoneskin for good protection. In PoE is the protection for wizards really that good compared to BG2, what do you think? Are there actually ways of putting a caster in heavy armour and offsetting the speed penalty? I haven't played the game for too long so can't really say. I think dual-classed chars were cool in BG2, they level up slower but then you can also have a smaller party becasue of that, have Jaheira in the party and you don't need another druid or fighter really. She got all cool stuff from that other class. How does PoE's cross class talents compare to that?

Protection spells in PoE are good but the lack of contingencies and pre-buffing means that you need to spend time at the beginning of every battle to set them up.

 

As far as weapons and armor restrictions for classes, I really don't want hard-set limitations but I would really like it if it was made crystal-clear that martial classes are extremely advantaged when it comes to their mastery. You want a muscle wizard badly? You can make one, but he would have to sacrifice some of his arcane might and will never be as good as a figther when it comes to weapons and armor.

 

I don't know... maybe re-introduce specializations for singular weapons and restrict the grouped ones to martial classes? Create generic talents to reduce the disadvantages of weaing armor and have fighters get them for free, plus a high-end one that they're the only ones to get?

Edited December 20, 2015 by Sannom

[tinysalamander]

I don't know... maybe re-introduce specializations for singular weapons and restrict the grouped ones to martial classes? Create generic talents to reduce the disadvantages of weaing armor and have fighters get them for free, plus a high-end one that they're the only ones to get?

 

It's not like casters actually want weapon specializations that badly. And if one wants to be a melee battle mage he is most likely know what kind of weapon he wants to use.

 

Armor decreases action speed. Boo-hoo. Naked wizards galore. I've heard somewhere that more exposed skin increases the amount of magic power you can use. I guess it has come to this

[Sannom]

Armor decreases action speed. Boo-hoo. Naked wizards galore. I've heard somewhere that more exposed skin increases the amount of magic power you can use. I guess it has come to this

Wheel of Time?

[tinysalamander]

Wheel of Time?

 

It was Ar tonelico 3 for me. Worst game in the series, AFAIC.

[why]

I like Sannom's post about this.  It doesn't create absolute restrictions, but it does still convey the advantage of mastery and makes that mastery easier to achieve for someone who specializes in that manner of combat.  Granting martial classes benefits from perk choices is not the same as flat out denying druids the ability to use armor.

 

I also agree about games being clearer generally.  There are some things about Pillars still confuse me, but part of that is probably because the ruleset is new. Still, there's a lot to digest in the way things relate to one another.

[Zenbane]

 

I don't know... maybe re-introduce specializations for singular weapons and restrict the grouped ones to martial classes? Create generic talents to reduce the disadvantages of weaing armor and have fighters get them for free, plus a high-end one that they're the only ones to get?

 

It's not like casters actually want weapon specializations that badly. And if one wants to be a melee battle mage he is most likely know what kind of weapon he wants to use.

 

Armor decreases action speed. Boo-hoo. Naked wizards galore. I've heard somewhere that more exposed skin increases the amount of magic power you can use. I guess it has come to this

 

 

lol @ naked wizards galore

 

I have always liked the Battle Mage type class (Elder Scrolls, Grimrock), and of course one of my PoE favorites is the Paladin, who wears full plate armor and casts spells just fine.

 

These last few posts were a fun read, and I found myself thinking about the different types of spell casting that can occur in a fantasy setting:

 

1) Purely spoken spells (can be countered with a Silence spell)

2) Hand-weaving spells (spell failure increases with heavy armor & weapons)

3) Rune memorization spells (limited to once per day, requires tactical counter spells to block)

 

It would be interesting to see all 3 in a single RPG, as I do not think it has been done before. Typically, a game supports only 1 type of spell casting, or at most a combination of two; where the most common is the combination of Purely spoken spells for mages and Hand weaving for hybrids (they can wield a weapon but not a shield in order to cast with a free hand). If a game uses Rune memorization then that type of spell casting is typically the only type available.

 

Anyway, lots of good ideas coming out of a misguided thread lol

[redneckdevil]

In a game where LORE has it that PRIESTS of Magran have a temple where they make firearms....

 

As a long time dnd tabletop gamer, they made the right decision imho by not restricting weapons and armor. Simply because it doesn't make all classes equal when using the same weapons. The classes feel different even if they have the same equipment on and tbh that's an accomplishment. A major one.

 

BUT the main reason why, is that their design caters to both sides. You don't want restrictions with weapons and armor, hey there isn't one. You want restrictions on weapons and armor, hey ONLY equip the characters to what you think they should be restricted to. You don't want a priest carrying a pistol or duel wielding Sabres? Then equip ur priest with what u think they should wear. Simple as that.

[Sannom]

I think the three classes that need to be reworked for PoE 2 are the priests, druids and chanters. The priests and druids need some more limitations on their spellcasting, like the wizard with their grimoires. Adam Brennecke already expressed his belief that options for those two classes in each given were too damn numerous, so I think a revamp will happen. As for the Chanter, it really needs more class-specific talents, as they're really short on those at the moment.

[evilcat]

I agree that Chanters need something. Their martial abilities are like everyone else, and spellcasting... if you combine 2 spells of Priest you preatty much outclassed Chanter. Some more class specific talents would be good. Examples:

Trance - when chanting chanter gets bonus DR

Crescendo - each chant during combat gets you stack of might and AS. The longer you sing, the more angrier you hit.

Encore! - usable after casting invocation. Chanter instantly recovers recently used stacks and can invocata again.

Fudge - Chanter sing so horribly that enemies will do everything to stop him, +1 egnagement

Song of freedom - allies under Chanter effect also benefit from bonus against mind control

Everlasting song - You songs linger longer than usual

Broadcast - aoe of you song is larger

Binding spirits (neutral talent) - summons last twice as long.

Edited December 20, 2015 by evilcat

[Ganrich]

An idea I had for chanters was a talent that lets them cast scrolls once per encounter without consuming it. It would make the talent for an extra 2 quick slots more interesting to them as a byproduct. Thus giving them 2 interesting talents that is unique to chanters. It is also lore friendly as their ability to memorize the scrolls is what is being used. If the chanter casts a second scroll in combat then that scroll gets consumed as normal.

 

This gives them the ability to be a spellsword (or a better one), or a more solid support in the back line. There could be limitations placed on what scrolls work and don't work, but I didn't want to muddy the idea up with technicalities.

Edited December 20, 2015 by Ganrich

[anameforobsidian]

Honestly, a lot of people complain because chanters work as designed, a slow hands-off caster.  If I wanted to improve it, I would just allow more active builds.

[Zenbane]

I feel like the odd man out, considering that I love Chanters as-is. For context: I have always hated the Bard class in every damn game that implements it. The whole, "jack of all trades, master of none," concept annoys me to no end. To specialize is to excel, and if diversity is required then multi-classing is perfectly viable. But a Bard is neither a pure specialist nor a multi-class powerhouse; it's just something that sucks at everything so tries to do it all at once to compensate: quantity over quality with a heavy reliance on dumb luck.

 

So when I reviewed the Chanter class the first day I purchased PoE, I was like, "oh hell no, this is a Bard in Knights clothing, you aint fooling me." But then I read reviews and Chanter build threads (not just here, but on Steam and YouTube), and suddenly I realized that this was more than just a revamped Bard. As a second line damage dealer (Pikes) with constant Buff/Debuff combinations running in tangent, and the occassional spell (like Summoning a creature that can Stun enemies with each attack) opens up all sorts of amazing combat tactics.

 

Chanters feel like what a true Battle Mage is meant to be, and I can't really see much in the way of problems; although I am always happy with balanced improvements.

[Ganrich]

I don't think anyone is saying Chanters are bad. As someone who likes the Bard concept I also really like Chanters, but they don't do anything in a large portion of the combats but auto-attack. I just think they need a way to be more active in combat.

[evilcat]

Battlemage would be different class than Chanter. It would be more "channel spells through our weapons". The best attempt to battlemage is something like Pathfinder Magus: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/magus but perception may vary.

 

The problem with Chanter is:

1. Has no talents connected to abilities. So it feels "neutral".

2. As game progress Invocation are more and more restiction. Casting 3rd tier Invocation after 20sec of combat is a bit too late for a party.

3. His auras are not so strong. If we pair low level +5 defence chants then... it is almost as good as circle of protection from spells (far inferior), and Priests could do more things than just this effect. If we go for high level chants we can forget about invocations.

 

Chanter could hold the stick as everyone else, but... maybe everyone else is also better at holdin stick. For example Druid with Returning storm could be a better Battlemage.

 

Most classes as levels progress are better and better (with casters skyrocking) but chanter... is always the same.

Very good at low levels thou.