Class balance and Class System review for PoE 2

[PangaeaACDC]

Some people will always find ways to exploit something in games, your typical extreme min-maxer (plenty of examples in the builds sub forum). Doubt that constitutes the majority of players, however, so I don't think the best solution is to kind of design the game to limit that kind of playstyle, while also limiting it for everybody else. Okay, so some people will rest after every fight. Some people did that in BG too. Personally I like to keep adventuring until I basically *have to* rest. That means not blowing all the top spells on a couple of xaurips, but preserving them to more tricky fights. Could mean going to rest almost dead with loads of spells left, but that's how I like it. Despite resting infrequently, I actually dislike only having two camping supplies (on hard), because it means I can't pick up others I find.

 

Admittedly it's easier to play like this in Pillars, because pretty soon you will have per combat abilities on several characters, but I like that you can play the game in different ways, and I dislike games where you are forced into a certain playstyle, or where you only can save at rare checkpoints and such.

 

For people playing the game more normally, ie not extreme min-maxing and such, I think the game is pretty well balanced the way it is. Fights could be more difficult in general, as I often fight then on autopilot, doing the same every time, but I wouldn't like it if the developers catered too much for the extreme min-maxers eithers, as it might become too difficult for many others, possibly myself included. Seems like no matter how difficult a game is, people will eventually find a way to solo it with a level one cat or whatever.

 

There are things I dislike about the game, but not really the class system. It's more about the incessant and overly long loading screens, the disappointing stronghold system, underuse of party interaction, too few party members, some disappointing companion missions, the binary form of factions -- things like that. Oh, and that absolute bastard that is laughing his balls blue at every goddamn inn!

[Loren Tyr]

Some people will always find ways to exploit something in games, your typical extreme min-maxer (plenty of examples in the builds sub forum). Doubt that constitutes the majority of players, however, so I don't think the best solution is to kind of design the game to limit that kind of playstyle, while also limiting it for everybody else. Okay, so some people will rest after every fight. Some people did that in BG too. Personally I like to keep adventuring until I basically *have to* rest. That means not blowing all the top spells on a couple of xaurips, but preserving them to more tricky fights. Could mean going to rest almost dead with loads of spells left, but that's how I like it. Despite resting infrequently, I actually dislike only having two camping supplies (on hard), because it means I can't pick up others I find.

 

I have to say, I tend to play like this as well, so to a degree it is also self-regulating (or self-regulatable, at least). But given the relative ease and low cost of resting it does start to rely a bit too much on that kind of self-regulation, I think.

 

What factors into this is is probably also the fact that they mostly removed the whole fatigue thing, which while far from perfect does help to impose a bit more constraint on resting, especially in conjunction with the limited camping supplies. As is, you can just go to whatever inn gives you the most relevant bonus, rest there and go back; the main constraint there is basically the number of loading screens that takes, but that'll generally be the same anyway (and I have very little sympathy for people complaining about this being a nuisance; they should just rest less). Similarly, the constraint on the number of camping supplies now is a bit pointless, since you can just shop for more whenever you need to. While the fatigue mechanism only partially counters that, obviously it depends greatly on distance on nearest inn, it does help impose at least a bit more cost on resting, as well as increasing the value of local inn resting bonuses.

[anameforobsidian]

I thought the fatigue system was pretty cumbersome.  It did not stop me from dungeon running.  It did stop me from running around the overland map / traveling / exploring.  On harder difficulties, health was usually gone in dungeons before fatigue was factor.  If you want to force players to rest more often, there could just be abilities that do extra health damage (poison?).

 

@Eric 

I can see the higher levels giving a ton of unused resources (hey every IE and NWN game), especially for your average fight.  However, PE had some beautifully nasty boss fights that ground down literally all of my spell levels before I won (mainly the harder dragons, especially the first time I fought them).  I would say it's already doing better than its predecessors in this regard.

 

Priests and mages shine in the most difficult / most dramatic fights, but that doesn't mean that their overall utility matches the less dramatic classes or that their power is necessarily based on their vancian nature.  Priests immediately have access to generally counter status effects in a way other classes don't (or get too late).  Mages have unparalleled access to petrify, sleep, and terror; those are damn powerful status effects.  They also get better use of confusion than Ciphers do (confusion & the amazing wall of colors).  This has nothing to do with their Vancian nature; Vancian casting just exacerbates the already apparent differences.

 

Also, some classes are built for different situations that are less noticeable by the lack of dramatic tension.  Barbarians, rangers, ciphers, and paladins shine in large groups with lower defenses, but have very build dependent effectiveness against bosses.  That makes their effectiveness less noticeable, but not less present.  Chanters weirdly enough, are probably the class that works best in all situations; after that, probably fighters.

[Elric Galad]

Well, the problem is that most of the difficulty in this game comes from about a dozen of hard battles.

 

Repeated medium battles are rarely a big threat except in the Abbey.

 

So without classes fitted for those battles, you will feel the difference. (Scrolls and items mitigate it a bit)

 

 

Apparently, there is absolutely no consensus on this topic.

 

We should recognize it.

 

IMHO, that's a very good argument for an option.

(I don't think it would be that hard to implement for a NEW game. But I admit it could be harder to balance.)

[mosspit]

For the wanting of changes to rest/encounter system, it probably also boils down to who the game is targeted for. PoE was inspired by IE games and made for gamers who has the inclination to play such games. If PoE2 is targeted differently then the game will also follow the direction of the audience. TBH with cooldowns and add in resources like Stamina or Mana and you have Dragon Age styles. While not negative, it is not exactly innovative either.

 

Good write-up btw, although I naturally have small difference of opinions here and there. Eg, you dislike Take-the-Hit on a main tank but I found it very useful on my runs with a Fighter offtank to extend the endurance/health span of the accompanying anchor tank. This is indirectly a praise to PoE for the flexibility it offers.

[Loren Tyr]

All else aside: given that the whole spells per rest thing harkens back to ye olde D&D, it's about as far away from innovative as you can get. And that origin to a degree has always been part of the problem with it, in that in the translation to cRPG there no longer was a GM to keep the narcoleptics in check when needed. 

 

I'd also say that in terms of target audience, with respect to gameplay it is probably more on the axis of action RPG to 'strategic' RPG (for lack of a better word; ie. slower-paced, pause-and-play style or possibly turn-based RPG). IE games had the resting system because D&D had it, but a certain nostalgia aside I can't imagine that many people are drawn specifically to the somnial component of it. Changing from (or reducing the emphasis on) a per-rest approach to some alternative like a resource- and/or cooldown-based structure doesn't inherently change the pace or mechanical and strategic complexity of the game, and by extension the target audience. 

[mosspit]

I might have worded it poorly but just to be clearer:

 

It is more of a fact that cooldowns and stamina/mana resources are already commonplace in modern gaming. So reverting to a system that is common is not as "exciting". Although good olde IE games were the first to implement these so PoE is in no way innovative in that regards, IE-style games has been a thing of the past. The "innovation" can be thought of bringing back the system that is not common in modern rpg gaming. Which is intended for PoE targeted audience.

 

If PoE2 is intended for a different crowd, so be it.

[PangaeaACDC]

If PoE2 is intended for a different crowd, then I'd be less interested in it. Maybe not interested in it at all. The reason I bought this game is precisely because it is similar to the good old classics. That is what I want. Not another Dragon Age: Turds with staffs (and awesome buttons).

 

I don't want them to re-invent the wheel. What we have works well. They created a very interesting game world, where they can also play around with philosophy and deeper things than "kill the big bad guy". I'd be more interested in innovation here (the story and gameworld), while improving on some of the things that didn't work so well in PoE.

 

I'd be extremely disappointed if they after basically getting a second life with the Kickstarter, decided to say screw those guys, we'll toss out everything and start anew, aiming to go after the big crowds. We know what that means, and it's not higher quality games.

[DreamWayfarer]

On the per-rest thing, I agree generic "mana" that regens is a big no (too similar to chanters and ciphers, IMO), as well as 1 spell per encounter and zero per-rest, but what about seeking other methods of giving a more solid cost to the vancian casters? I see a few good alternatives:

 

1)You get a couple "free" per Encounter spells (lets say, 2, as I feel 1 is too limiting). You can stay casting after that, but if you wish to do so, you need... INGREDIENTS. Didn't see that, did you? This alternative changes the fighting itself the least, but maybe it could require a buffing of the base stats of the affected classes, so scrolls and potions aren't always better uses of ingredients than actual spells. The flavor of this alternative also fits Druids quite well.

 

2)You can cast anything you want, but you better not cast it for free (in the jungle, welcome to the jungle, ...). Basically, turn casters into reverse Monks. While if monks want it they gotta bleed, casters take some penalty (maybe Fatigue, maybe damage, maybe something else) after they cast. Very dynamic and with great potential. Not something I'd use for more than one class, however.

 

3)Having slots for per-encounter uses of your spells you can fill between fights, with more powerful spells taking more slots. So you can have 4 level 1 spells that take a single slot each, 1 level 4 spell that takes all your slots, 2 uses of your favorite level 2 spell, or any combination you can fit in 4 slots. This fits Wizards and their spellbooks very well.

Edited July 28, 2016 by DreamWayfarer

[Loren Tyr]

I rather like the penalty that builds up as you cast. Though I'd probably do it explicitly as a kind of reverse Monk style of system, where the (let's call it) 'casting fatigue' builds up as an actual counter, with more powerful spells incurring greater fatigue, and gradually decreases as well; and also make it something that directly affects casting (duration, accuracy, damage, casting time; some combination thereof). So you can keep on casting big spells if you want to, but it would quickly start to deteriorate their effectiveness; but if you alternate more with lower level spells or non-casting activities (maybe even have something like level 0 cantrip-ish spells that incur no fatigue or even decrease it; or similarly have it interact with using implements, which I've always felt should do something more in that regard). That way you have to find a good balance between the spells you're using, and by making it an explicit (negative) resource you can also have things more easily interact with it (eg. high CON decreasing fatigue gain, an item that gives a bonus to highly fatigued casters, etc.), it is easier to balance individual spells, and so on. It also has a nice by-product of increasing the value of lower-level spells even at high caster levels (especially if higher level spells are more severely affected by fatigue). 

 

One further possibility would be to have the fatigue penalty vary across spells, instead of or in addition to having a general penalty; eg. one spell might have -5% damage per point of fatigue while another gets a much longer casting time (might get a bit complicated though). Similarly, you might also have spells or class-specific abilities (perhaps a class kit specific talent) that also give a bonus based on fatigue. 

 

I certainly would use this for just one class, probably the mage class. But I think druids, priests and mages should become mechanically more distinctive anyway, differ on more than just their spell selection.

[DreamWayfarer]

Yes, the fatigue resource (which I would call "Strain"), as well as the different "costs" for different spells were something I had originally intended to include in my post, but instead I choose to distill the idea to its basic form.

 

And notice that I gave three suggestions, and there are three vancian caster classes in the game. I would also like that different classes had different mechanisms.

[Elric Galad]

1)You get a couple "free" per Encounter spells (lets say, 2, as I feel 1 is too limiting). You can stay casting after that, but if you wish to do so, you need... INGREDIENTS. Didn't see that, did you? This alternative changes the fighting itself the least, but maybe it could require a buffing of the base stats of the affected classes, so scrolls and potions aren't always better uses of ingredients than actual spells. The flavor of this alternative also fits Druids quite well.

 

Actually, it is not so far from what I was suggesting in my previous (long) post.

 

Except I'm speaking about 1 spell per encounter per tier instead of 1/2 per encounter in total.

 

Then, in the side-note of this post, I was saying consumables could be used to refresh used abilities.

(Could be applciable to non-casters too for balance purpose.)

 

 

I like a lot of ideas in this thread, but I'm sure I would have liked them even more for an "original game". 

 

I personnally prefer ideas not so far from PoE current mechanics. I believe it would be a risk for Obsidian to change completely their mechanics because of players' exceptations. Some posts really support it.

 

New mechanics would be more acceptable if they choose to design a new class... like "Animancer" 

Edited July 28, 2016 by Elric Galad

[Climhazzard]

Was just looking through chanter chants looking for synergies, I can see some but I was thinking they could use a few more.

A few good ones are...

 

Level 3  +10 deflection overlapping level 2 frightened.

Level 5 100% to healing recieved overlapping level 4 15% of damage restored as endurance.

Level 2 Fear/terrified protection overlapping level 1 will/fortitude buff.

 

I'm not sure how much intelligence is need to make them overlap, especially the 2nd one, but i can see uses for them.  I feel like more chants ought to be designed like this to synergize with other chants in various ways.  So you don't just stick to using one fire damage aura by itself.  And if you did use it, it wouldn't be by itself, maybe it would be with another chant that lowers enemy damage resistance.

 

Invocations could use some work, some feel pretty cool, like the cone paralyze that covers most of the screen, while others feel entirely to situational considering that you rarely have the resource to use them on demand.

 

 

Back to the OP, I don't really mind how the game is designed around per encounter/per rest management, with classes being stronger at one or the other.  But it needs to be well balanced...  Like my monk has some questionable per rest abilities such as mortification of the soul and clarity of agony, these aren't even the worst examples of bad per rest abilities on an essentially per encounter class, meanwhile wizards/priests/druids can pick mastery spells to be per encounter from their large selection of very useful per rest abilities.... /shrug.  I don't think they should try re-inventing the wheel, PoE works very well the way it is, and they'd have more time to design levels, story, etc, I just think they need to polish it some, make it shiny...

[DreamWayfarer]

Actually, it is not so far from what I was suggesting in my previous (long) post.

 

Except I'm speaking about 1 spell per encounter per tier instead of 1/2 per encounter in total.

 

Oops. Must have skipped that part by accident. And I also meant per-tier.

 

New mechanics would be more acceptable if they choose to design a new class... like "Animancer"

Not sure about naming the class "animancer", as as far as we know, the closest thing to animancy non-Watchers can do on the field are some Wizard and Cipher techniques. I know the lore is not solid enough to say it isn't possible, but it would be a big change from the connotations the term has currently.

[Elric Galad]

What I would call animancer is a kind of scientist who has scientific abilities to manipulate souls. Different from Cipher who does it as a natural ability.

Gameplay-wise, I'm imagining it as a kind of necromancer, who can perform pre-battle "rituals"...

 

But it could also be a background rather than a class.

 

I've been surprised that you can't actually play one in Pillars (except if you consider it simply as a subcase of "Scientist")

[Fenixp]

With a flick of animancer's doodad, a corpse animated and rose to its feet. Another flick and it walked across the room. "What kind of sorcery is this!?" asked one of the onlooking men. "This is no sorcery, my friend. This is SCIENCE!" animancer replied and started cackling ominously.

[DreamWayfarer]

What I would call animancer is a kind of scientist who has scientific abilities to manipulate souls. Different from Cipher who does it as a natural ability.

Gameplay-wise, I'm imagining it as a kind of necromancer, who can perform pre-battle "rituals"...

 

The problem is that the animancers we've seen in game are generaly around big machines full of adra lenses and copper wires that would be hard to adapt for use on the (battle)field, and when there is fighting to be done they are Wizards.

 

But it could also be a background rather than a class.

 

I've been surprised that you can't actually play one in Pillars (except if you consider it simply as a subcase of "Scientist")

I think it is actually Scholars who get the choice of being researchers of the arcane (who also have the choice of having gone to Dyrwood because what they wanted to study was ilegal/not well regarded in their homelands). Screams animancer to me.