Spell mastery

[falchen]

Having per rest spells when you can rest anytime is just needless busywork anyway, there are enough camping supplies everywhere and if you run out you can always backtrack.

 

If they have to keep vancian-like for any sequels, I'd go back to Baldur's gate system where you have to memorize spells separately. The spells were practicaly per encouter already but since you had a limited amount of spell slots to fill that actually created some decision making, like do I want two fireballs and one dispell magic, or maybe switch one of those out for lighting bolt...

 

The other option would be to actually restrict resting in some meaningfull way but that would create a bunch of other balance issues of their own.

Edited February 22, 2016 by falchen

[Infinitron]

[Gfted1]

They should make it like D3 with regenerating mana. Toss is a few abilities to reduce spell mana costs and/or increase mana regeneration.

[archangel979]

They should make it like D3 with regenerating mana. Toss is a few abilities to reduce spell mana costs and/or increase mana regeneration.

No.

[Gfted1]

Im flexible, Cooldowns are cool too. Anything to stop the busywork.

 

Also, auto-replenishing Health.

[Sceptenar]

Im flexible, Cooldowns are cool too. Anything to stop the busywork.

 

Also, auto-replenishing Health.

Sounds like you want a game that is nothing like Pillars of Eternity, Baldur's Gate or Icewind Dale. Maybe you should give Dragon Age: Inquisition or Diablo 3 a try? I for one would prefer to keep the vancian system with added per encounter abilities. PoE being like the cRPG's I grew up with is kind of the selling point of PoE. There are already plenty of bland modern "RPGs" out there, we really don't need to turn PoE into another one.

[Gfted1]

Agreed! Moving all spells /  skills / class abilities to per encounter was a suggestion of mine in one of the versions of this thread.

 

D3 does have awesome combat though.

​

[PugPug]

Did they fix the bug that makes high-level vancian casters treat per-encounter spells as per-rest?

[Gfted1]

^If you are referring to the recent change, that's not a bug, its a feature.

[falchen]

Baldur's gate already had replenishing health and abilities recharging with each encounter though. Pillars tried to address this but they went about it in a "have your cake and eat it too" kind of way, rather than picking one way and see it through.

[Gfted1]

I had to rest to Heal and recover spells in BG. Weird.

[Sceptenar]

Baldur's gate already had replenishing health and abilities recharging with each encounter though. Pillars tried to address this but they went about it in a "have your cake and eat it too" kind of way, rather than picking one way and see it through.

Unless you're talking about the console Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance series, then no they did not have replenishing health and abilities. Everything was recovered by resting in BG1 + 2.

[falchen]

 

Baldur's gate already had replenishing health and abilities recharging with each encounter though. Pillars tried to address this but they went about it in a "have your cake and eat it too" kind of way, rather than picking one way and see it through.

Unless you're talking about the console Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance series, then no they did not have replenishing health and abilities. Everything was recovered by resting in BG1 + 2.

 

Which you could do anytime with no restrictions.

[Tigranes]

You had random encounters, but that itself was an awkward solution. Resting in a D&D system is never supposed to be as free as it was in the IE games, which effectively made a Super Easy Spam Mode available with the flick of a hotkey. POE's camping supplies isn't 'overdesign', but a restoration to a normal state - which also makes it easier to design encounters keeping in mind that normal players (not the ones who go back to town 8 times) will not have unlimited firepower.

 

The problem we have now is a weird historical legacy rather than a discrete problem, where IE trained a lot of people to play in a 'rest whenever use all the spells I like whatever' way. It's not IE's fault, either - it's tough to represent D&D resting and its restrictions in a meaningful way in a CRPG. So they did the best they could, and IE itself wasn't bad. It's just that after 15 years of deregulation, POE tries to restore some sensible restrictions, but discovers that it's jarring with some players' expectations. 

 

At this point I'd probably support just getting rid of the rest mechanic. You can get more meaningful and balance-able long-term resource management with mechanics like addiction, healing supplies, wounds, upkeep. But I don't know if Obsidian's willing to make huge systemic overhauls for POE2.

[Luckmann]

[...]

 

At this point I'd probably support just getting rid of the rest mechanic. You can get more meaningful and balance-able long-term resource management with mechanics like addiction, healing supplies, wounds, upkeep. But I don't know if Obsidian's willing to make huge systemic overhauls for POE2.

 

I really wouldn't mind having rest limitations and upkeep mechanics, but Obsidian seems to have been rather hesitant to include the latter, before. If anything, I'd like to see resting restricted further, where you can only rest in designated areas, and become automatically under attack (without consuming your supplies) if you try to rest in many areas. Making camp next to a group of enemies, inside a dungeon, should never be an option - nor should it be an option in a city, on the streets.

 

This would, obviously, necessitate a rebalancing of rest-related game mechanics, but I'd still love to see it.

[PugPug]

^If you are referring to the recent change, that's not a bug, its a feature.

 

No, I'm talking about the bug of AI not using per-encounter spells when per-rest abilities is unchecked.

[demeisen]

This would, obviously, necessitate a rebalancing of rest-related game mechanics, but I'd still love to see it.

 

I've had the very same thought.  I hope they might do something like that in whatever the follow-on to PoE is.  It might be easier to get there while balancing a brand new environment with that in mind from the start.

 

My dream here is another PoE-ish game set in the same universe, with similar lore, etc, starting again with L1 characters, using the PoE engine + all the refinements there have been since V1.  Adding some new stuff for the new story and world, and new places to explore, but not "jump the shark" type stuff.  Keep it solid, don't throw out all the goodness of PoE1.

 

I've been out of touch with PoE since I finished it after 1st release, so there are probably rumors I'm not up to speed on.  Anyway, Obsidian: if you're listening, you have a bunch of guaranteed buyers for more awesomeness where PoE came from.  Please, let me throw more money at you

[Ohioastro]

One of the advantages of the RPG renaissance is that we can see a lot of different idea in play.  For example, in the roguelike TOME (which I like a lot, and yes it's difficult!) you have resource pools for melee (stamina) and spells (mana) that regenerate slowly in combat and quickly out of combat.  Each of the many classes has a list of abilities, basically intermediate between the handful of melee and many spells of PoE.  Repeat usage of abilities is metered by cooldowns, but they're also resource based.  In PoE terms, all abilities are (sort of) per encounter, in the sense that you're drawing from a limited pool where recharge matters only in really extended battles and with the proper gear.  If there were two spell pools (instant and total) similar to that of health, you could dispense with the limited number of spells and replace them with a limited resource pool, and when the large pool was drained you'd need to rest.  You could even set up a parallel system for melee and replace those per encounter (etc.) abilities with ones drawing from a two tier resource.

 

The point is that there are a lot of paths that achieve similar ends that lead to more dynamic and interesting game play.

[Doppelschwert]

 

^If you are referring to the recent change, that's not a bug, its a feature.

 

No, I'm talking about the bug of AI not using per-encounter spells when per-rest abilities is unchecked.

 

 

Ah, that explains a lot. Thanks.

[Sethanon]

Wow, a long discussion, only read first page.

 

My opinion:

 

Now its much better. Wizards were OP. I could cast 6 or 7 fireballs every battle. Without resting. It was just...crazy. My wizard had almost 40% of all kills, I played on Hard. I mean, it wasnt even fun after few hours of such playing.

People who complain probably didnt play old IE games, or they want to have game much easier. Lower your difficulty.

 

But about this possibility of having 1 spell per encounter...I think its not so big deal for wizard, its basically like if he choosed talent for +1 spell on first level. I would rather choose some other ability, even from Utility section. I dont need this per encounter thing.

[Eisenheinrich]

deleted bc rubbish

Edited February 24, 2016 by Eisenheinrich

[PugPug]

 

^If you are referring to the recent change, that's not a bug, its a feature.

 

No, I'm talking about the bug of AI not using per-encounter spells when per-rest abilities is unchecked.

 

 

Also... please acknowledge so we know the bug is at least logged? And again, I do not know whether it was fixed in 3.0 and have no means to test it.