Various Ideas for classes

[JerekKruger]

As selfish wishes go, mine is:

Druid:

- Add some Shapesfiter focus talents like "Your spiritsfit last twice as long" or "You can sfits twice during battle". We paid for it with talent so that is fair. It is up to discussion if usin druid to just punch things in the face is best what you can bring, but for sure it is fun.

 

Honestly I'd like to see spiritshift changed to a modal ability that disables casting, rather than a short term buff.

 

As for shapeshifting, I still believe it needs to be its own class. It is just too flexible an power to be a limited side-feature.

 

Oh that would be awesome actually. I'd love to see something like this in PoE2

[DreamWayfarer]

 

 

I like classes that make full use of all or at least many abilities. If there's an obvious way to minmax it's kind of dull. One good thing about barbs is that they do just this -- you want Per to get carnage to hit, Mig to make it do damage, Int to give it as much range as possible, Con and Res to be able to stay standing while you do your thing, and Dex to hit as often as possible. What to choose, what to choose...?

So you think a class that's designed to need all 6 attribute scores is well designed?

 

Wow.

Yes . They don't need all attributes maxed to be viable, they just need you to pay more attention to skill and items synergies to reach their potential and are not very minmax friendly. If all classes were like that, the game would be cooler, even if somewhat harder.

[Yosharian]

 

 

I like classes that make full use of all or at least many abilities. If there's an obvious way to minmax it's kind of dull. One good thing about barbs is that they do just this -- you want Per to get carnage to hit, Mig to make it do damage, Int to give it as much range as possible, Con and Res to be able to stay standing while you do your thing, and Dex to hit as often as possible. What to choose, what to choose...?

So you think a class that's designed to need all 6 attribute scores is well designed?

 

Wow.

Yes . They don't need all attributes maxed to be viable, they just need you to pay more attention to skill and items synergies to reach their potential and are not very minmax friendly. If all classes were like that, the game would be cooler, even if somewhat harder.

 

Ok, I see what you mean, but the problem with saying this is that there are so many other classes that can dumpstat half the attribute system and still crush the game easily.

 

 

If this were an approach for all classes consistently across the board then I'd have less of a problem with it.

Edited January 2, 2016 by Yosharian

[DreamWayfarer]

 

 

 

 

I like classes that make full use of all or at least many abilities. If there's an obvious way to minmax it's kind of dull. One good thing about barbs is that they do just this -- you want Per to get carnage to hit, Mig to make it do damage, Int to give it as much range as possible, Con and Res to be able to stay standing while you do your thing, and Dex to hit as often as possible. What to choose, what to choose...?

So you think a class that's designed to need all 6 attribute scores is well designed?

 

Wow.

Yes . They don't need all attributes maxed to be viable, they just need you to pay more attention to skill and items synergies to reach their potential and are not very minmax friendly. If all classes were like that, the game would be cooler, even if somewhat harder.

Ok, I see what you mean, but the problem with saying this is that there are so many other classes that can dumpstat half the attribute system and still crush the game easily.

 

 

 

If this were an approach for all classes consistently across the board then I'd have less of a problem with it.

Yes, that is what I mean. It is not that Barbarians aren't working right, it is just that all other classes don't work how Obsidian wanted to with their "make all attributes viable" approach.

[HawkSoft]

How about a broad class that encompasses soul-pairs, rangers with their (summoned) companion and shape-shifters where 2 bodies share the same soul (not sure if this explanation works) ?

 

This would allow for a much wider exploration of what makes a ranger different from a ranged fighter with a pet.

EG, what if the ranger and their companion shared a common health pool? 

[Doppelschwert]

EG, what if the ranger and their companion shared a common health pool? 

 

That's how the ranger was supposed to work. They implemented and tested it in alpha / beta and it turned out it just wasn't fun so they replaced this by bonded grief. Imho, that was a good call.

[Yosharian]

 

 

 

 

I like classes that make full use of all or at least many abilities. If there's an obvious way to minmax it's kind of dull. One good thing about barbs is that they do just this -- you want Per to get carnage to hit, Mig to make it do damage, Int to give it as much range as possible, Con and Res to be able to stay standing while you do your thing, and Dex to hit as often as possible. What to choose, what to choose...?

So you think a class that's designed to need all 6 attribute scores is well designed?

 

Wow.

Yes . They don't need all attributes maxed to be viable, they just need you to pay more attention to skill and items synergies to reach their potential and are not very minmax friendly. If all classes were like that, the game would be cooler, even if somewhat harder.

Ok, I see what you mean, but the problem with saying this is that there are so many other classes that can dumpstat half the attribute system and still crush the game easily.

 

 

 

If this were an approach for all classes consistently across the board then I'd have less of a problem with it.

Yes, that is what I mean. It is not that Barbarians aren't working right, it is just that all other classes don't work how Obsidian wanted to with their "make all attributes viable" approach.

 

Oh they're definitely not working right.  All I'm saying is that I see your point about making all stats important.

 

Barbarians need a ****-ton of work to make them decent.

[DreamWayfarer]

 

Barbarians need a ****-ton of work to make them decent.

No, they don't. You just don't want to use them in a party with no support characters, but with the right weapon and buffs they are very powerful, even if on their own they are underpowered.

[Boeroer]

I totally disagree. They just need a bit of creativity to make them decent.

 

I admit that they are not the best choice for solo games.

Edited January 2, 2016 by Boeroer

[Yosharian]

 

Barbarians need a ****-ton of work to make them decent.

No, they don't. You just don't want to use them in a party with no support characters, but with the right weapon and buffs they are very powerful, even if on their own they are underpowered.

 

With the right weapon and buffs any character can be powerful.  That's not a reflection of the balance of that character.

[DreamWayfarer]

I never said that they aren't underpowered compared with other classes. Only that they don't need a "****-ton" of work to be decent.

Edited January 2, 2016 by DreamWayfarer

[Midas Touch]

Sounds like the most optimal Barbarian starts with 13 on each stat, since they need something from all six.  Think of all the missed dialogue opportunities with that spread!

[Karkarov]

Sounds like the most optimal Barbarian starts with 13 on each stat, since they need something from all six.  Think of all the missed dialogue opportunities with that spread!

Lol I do admit I get a laugh every time someone posts about hating a build because it has weak dialog options in a game where the dialog options never offer more than some extra flavor text.

[PrimeJunta]

 

I like classes that make full use of all or at least many abilities. If there's an obvious way to minmax it's kind of dull. One good thing about barbs is that they do just this -- you want Per to get carnage to hit, Mig to make it do damage, Int to give it as much range as possible, Con and Res to be able to stay standing while you do your thing, and Dex to hit as often as possible. What to choose, what to choose...?

So you think a class that's designed to need all 6 attribute scores is well designed?

 

Wow.

 

Of course, I'd have thought it was obvious to everyone.

 

Why? Because it means that if you vary the attribute distribution, you'll get materially different builds which will play in different ways, and I like variety. D&D might as well not have an attribute system because there's really only one optimal way to distribute the stats for each class. There won't be an optimal stat distribution: instead, there will be a big bunch of them, each of which requires a different set of equipment and tactics to make it work.

 

That, incidentally, was Josh's objective when designing the classes. He didn't completely succeed for most of them, but some do make you think about the stats. The barbarian, monk, and paladin are notably successful in this respect; the caster classes less so. (CON is still too dumpable IMO except for monks and maybe barbs who kind of expect getting wailed on a lot.)

Edited January 3, 2016 by PrimeJunta

[PrimeJunta]

That's how the ranger was supposed to work. They implemented and tested it in alpha / beta and it turned out it just wasn't fun so they replaced this by bonded grief. Imho, that was a good call.

 

Yeah the shared health pool was a disaster. You had to baby the pet like you wouldn't believe, and the ranger would keel over most of the time anyway. The current system is much better, I actually like rangers now. One of those ideas that sound cool on paper but really don't work when you get down to it. They put a lot of work into it, said that it was difficult to implement, and over a lot of the beta it didn't even work properly, so I'm especially glad they had the rocks to drop it when it was obvious it wasn't working.

[DreamWayfarer]

Sounds like the most optimal Barbarian starts with 13 on each stat, since they need something from all six. Think of all the missed dialogue opportunities with that spread!

That is not how it works, you know. You can take some stats as prioritary for your especific build.

Edited January 3, 2016 by DreamWayfarer

[Karkarov]

 

That's how the ranger was supposed to work. They implemented and tested it in alpha / beta and it turned out it just wasn't fun so they replaced this by bonded grief. Imho, that was a good call.

 

Yeah the shared health pool was a disaster. You had to baby the pet like you wouldn't believe, and the ranger would keel over most of the time anyway. The current system is much better, I actually like rangers now. One of those ideas that sound cool on paper but really don't work when you get down to it. They put a lot of work into it, said that it was difficult to implement, and over a lot of the beta it didn't even work properly, so I'm especially glad they had the rocks to drop it when it was obvious it wasn't working.

I do miss the days of battle against NPC rangers and watching them fall like a house of cards when I dropped their pet.  For a long time in the beta when doing testing against everyones favorite npc group I would target the boar above all others simply because it took out 2 dd instead of 1.

[evilcat]

Lets be a bit racist:

There could be a subtype of Humans with trait "get a bonus talent at level 1", since:

- Having all humans have same trait is not exiting

- Wood Elf, Island Aumaua, Boreal Dwarves already have equivalent of free talent (sometimes literally).

- Some classes (mostly martial) are more talent starving, and having some space to play with less popular talent could be rewarding.

- Being versalite and keen learner fits humna lore.

- Level 2 talent comes rather fast and initial talent selection is limited, so it will never be spend on something very strong what others cant get. 

Edited January 4, 2016 by evilcat

[DreamWayfarer]

That would be terribly OP, and I don't think humans are stated to be more versatile than other species. It wouldn't be so unfeasible if other races could get to chose between different Talents, but currently nope.

 

If different human groups had different talents, I'd stick to their peculiar lores, like if Ocean Folk had something related to their seafaring.

Edited January 3, 2016 by DreamWayfarer

[doublezee]

I want a class with an AoE taunt. Fighter, barb, paladin, ANYone.