Jump to content

Recommended Posts

First of all, I don't quite get the game. I've played much of DnD or Obsidian games, so that shouldn't be a problem. In fact, I somewhat prefer Obsidian to other RPG studios like Bioware or Bethesda and The Sith Lords are one of my most favoured RPGs of all time. I've played BG2 + ToB(only beating ToB due to a lucky Energy Disc while under Boon of Lathander-a terribly OP combo), KoTOR 1 + 2(1 is much, much too emo for me), NWN 1(only OC) + 2(OC + MotB) and DA:O when it comes to games like this.

 

Now, I can't find a suitable class. The one I wanted to play(support | defensive Chanter) is...well, I hate how Ancient Memory works, let's leave it at that, ok? So, I can't really find what interests me. Plus I've this lingering feeling of blandness. See, I managed to go to Defiance(but was underleveled at level 4 and 3 / 4? /shrug) Bay, but the story didn't hook me. In GV...or shall I name it Charwood, you've cousins(khm! Brothers, yes) and that **** doesn't interest me(unless told like in NWN 1). The whole philosophical nature of PofE doesn't really interest me. I also kinda severely dislike micromanagement. I'd really LOVE to play @normal ToI(or Hard /shrug), but not have to worry about the Vancians(they're braindead and the need to micro them just pushes me towards melee heavy group). Aloth is simply boring and Durance is...I don't know why he hasn't got involved with Raedric with that mentality of his(horrible ugh). Long story short, I SUICIDED because the game was boring me.

 

I...just don't get it(and by all rights, I SHOULD, but then again I wasn't exactly crying for BG / ID 3...KoTOR though ;) ). Is it just me or is a game just a philosophical allegory for something(here I'll agree with rpg codex when they say it's "plato for newbies") with a bland combat?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If there's 80 different things you don't like about the game, maybe you're just not into it...? In the end only you can make the call. 

 

You get more sidequests and such once you get to Defiance Bay, and there's a distinct tone in each chapter of the game. No guarantees you'll like them any more than youdid the start. You should also have met Eder and Kana, so I don't know whether you don't like all the characters or just Aloth and Durance.

 

You can hire custom adventurers and each class can be built very differently, so you don't have to deal with Vancian magic, and you can easily go with a melee heavy group or whatnot if you like, nothing stopping you. 

 

Clerics, paladins, druids, even mages can be built in support/defensive roles.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, I don't quite get the game. I've played much of DnD or Obsidian games, so that shouldn't be a problem. In fact, I somewhat prefer Obsidian to other RPG studios like Bioware or Bethesda and The Sith Lords are one of my most favoured RPGs of all time. I've played BG2 + ToB(only beating ToB due to a lucky Energy Disc while under Boon of Lathander-a terribly OP combo), KoTOR 1 + 2(1 is much, much too emo for me), NWN 1(only OC) + 2(OC + MotB) and DA:O when it comes to games like this.

 

Now, I can't find a suitable class. The one I wanted to play(support | defensive Chanter) is...well, I hate how Ancient Memory works, let's leave it at that, ok? So, I can't really find what interests me. Plus I've this lingering feeling of blandness. See, I managed to go to Defiance(but was underleveled at level 4 and 3 / 4? /shrug) Bay, but the story didn't hook me. In GV...or shall I name it Charwood, you've cousins(khm! Brothers, yes) and that **** doesn't interest me(unless told like in NWN 1). The whole philosophical nature of PofE doesn't really interest me. I also kinda severely dislike micromanagement. I'd really LOVE to play @normal ToI(or Hard /shrug), but not have to worry about the Vancians(they're braindead and the need to micro them just pushes me towards melee heavy group). Aloth is simply boring and Durance is...I don't know why he hasn't got involved with Raedric with that mentality of his(horrible ugh). Long story short, I SUICIDED because the game was boring me.

 

I...just don't get it(and by all rights, I SHOULD, but then again I wasn't exactly crying for BG / ID 3...KoTOR though ;) ). Is it just me or is a game just a philosophical allegory for something(here I'll agree with rpg codex when they say it's "plato for newbies") with a bland combat?

I was pumped as hell for this game (and pledged mucho dineros) but when it finally came out, my reaction was decidedly 'Meh'. And while I own the expansion(s), I've yet to play through that content. The thought of slogging through the game again just makes me shudder.

 

So, it's probably just not resonating with you. No big deal. Just wait for Obs' next game.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the idea of severe micromanagement that puts me off Vancians. I can and probably do want an involving class, but I don't want to babysit the whole party.

 

Plus I'm in no mood for philosophy. I usually play RPGs to save the world and such not to ponder existentialist philosophy. So, is there such an element in here(something akin to KoS or to Sion or something like that)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh? philosophy? Well, maybe it's because i'm much into these things in real life, but i did not felt like Pillars was about philosophy. There are some questions, morality grey things that push you to ponder things and decide where your character stands in this grey patched world. But pilosophy? isn't it too much?

 

The first time i played Pillars, i felt like "meh" too. I droped the game during act 2. After WM and some patchs came out, i tried again. Well, it was like a different game. Nowadays, i wonder if i like more Pillars or Baldur's Gate (may still be BG though). There are many things i hate in Pillars (The might attribute, stash, health system, useless immortal pets, healing spells uselesness, rest curing wounds, the fact that camping supplies are limited but you find some of them everywhere in the wilds including in the most unbelievable places (wtf, inside Durgan's Battery? Did the dwarves used to camp in their halls?), rest and food bonuses, use of skills like survival, unics that are not (because of the crafting system), the whole crafting system (which is the absolute worst part of the game to me), overpowered items, soulbounds items (ugly visuals that are wayyyy over the top), lack of many necessary NPC in Caed Nua, arbitrary limit of 8 guards in Caed Nua (are erls limited to 8 guys in their army, too?), the telepatic stuff in Caed Nua, encounters that will always result in a nonsensical fight (especially in WM), the fact that companions will agree to everything from goodie-2-shoes stuff to mass murdering without much of a consequence, the fact that Itumaak (which is fox!) strikes harder than my heavy hitters,... and dozens and more dozens other things...

 

These things hindered me at first. Now, it's more like inconveniences. So, maybe if you try it one more time later, while knowing what to expect from the game, you won't be rebuked in the same way.

Edited by Abel
Link to post
Share on other sites

Play the game on easy or storybook, then you don't have to micromanage the team.

 

Oh God, a game that makes you think?! What horror! What nightmare will the devs inflict on the players next?!

 

If you don't like the game (and it seems you don't like anything about it), then don't play it. That simple.

"Not I, though. Not I," said the hanging dwarf.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The first time i played Pillars, i felt like "meh" too. I droped the game during act 2. After WM and some patchs came out, i tried again. Well, it was like a different game. Nowadays, i wonder if i like more Pillars or Baldur's Gate (may still be BG though). There are many things i hate in Pillars (The might attribute, stash, health system, useless immortal pets, healing spells uselesness, rest curing wounds, the fact that camping supplies are limited but you find some of them everywhere in the wilds including in the most unbelievable places (wtf, inside Durgan's Battery? Did the dwarves used to camp in their halls?), rest and food bonuses, use of skills like survival, unics that are not (because of the crafting system), the whole crafting system (which is the absolute worst part of the game to me), overpowered items, soulbounds items (ugly visuals that are wayyyy over the top), lack of many necessary NPC in Caed Nua, arbitrary limit of 8 guards in Caed Nua (are erls limited to 8 guys in their army, too?), the telepatic stuff in Caed Nua, encounters that will always result in a nonsensical fight (especially in WM), the fact that companions will agree to everything from goodie-2-shoes stuff to mass murdering without much of a consequence, the fact that Itumaak (which is fox!) strikes harder than my heavy hitters,... and dozens and more dozens other things...

Holy crap, what does it take for you to not like a game, if you're willing to put up with a laundry list of issues like this? :blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Play the game on easy or storybook, then you don't have to micromanage the team.

 

Oh God, a game that makes you think?! What horror! What nightmare will the devs inflict on the players next?!

 

If you don't like the game (and it seems you don't like anything about it), then don't play it. That simple.

Since when micro = thinking? Is this the collateral damage of StarCraft lol?

 

There is one balancing act about the pets: they're fairly easy to whack off and then you're stuck with a semi useless Ranger. Because if you truly want Ituumak / Wolf to hit Plate wearers for 30+...you're gonna have to specialise. But then again Rogues are nearly as squishy and don't bring such damage(lol?). Unless 2h, but then the pet outclasses it on the dps spectrum(as opposed to "SPIKE!" spectrum).

 

There are various silly things here and there, but I've all the faith that P of E 2 will be at least for a class better. Obsidian: You suck at initiating...keep to sequels - that's what you're REALLY GOOD at ;) .

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The first time i played Pillars, i felt like "meh" too. I droped the game during act 2. After WM and some patchs came out, i tried again. Well, it was like a different game. Nowadays, i wonder if i like more Pillars or Baldur's Gate (may still be BG though). There are many things i hate in Pillars (The might attribute, stash, health system, useless immortal pets, healing spells uselesness, rest curing wounds, the fact that camping supplies are limited but you find some of them everywhere in the wilds including in the most unbelievable places (wtf, inside Durgan's Battery? Did the dwarves used to camp in their halls?), rest and food bonuses, use of skills like survival, unics that are not (because of the crafting system), the whole crafting system (which is the absolute worst part of the game to me), overpowered items, soulbounds items (ugly visuals that are wayyyy over the top), lack of many necessary NPC in Caed Nua, arbitrary limit of 8 guards in Caed Nua (are erls limited to 8 guys in their army, too?), the telepatic stuff in Caed Nua, encounters that will always result in a nonsensical fight (especially in WM), the fact that companions will agree to everything from goodie-2-shoes stuff to mass murdering without much of a consequence, the fact that Itumaak (which is fox!) strikes harder than my heavy hitters,... and dozens and more dozens other things...

Holy crap, what does it take for you to not like a game, if you're willing to put up with a laundry list of issues like this? :blink:

 

 

Pretty easy to answer actually. I like the writing, the ambiance, the characters, the character building, the freedom, the lore, the graphics, the designs, the artistic touch, the music, the places, the little stories you find everywhere, the way i have to play the "philosopher" (lol), the creepiness of the visions as a watcher, the story, the side quests, the ability to write notes in the journal, the reactivity of things, some banters, the humour, Osric's breastplate, many things in the stronghold (since 3.0) though it's far from perfect yet, and so on.

 

I found some ways to manage some of the things i don't like, which probably makes me play in a way that was not intended by the devs. The best example is that i don't use the endurance/health system this much. Once one of my character is knocked out in combat, i consider him dead, and reload (hence, all items that give bonuses on unconscious, such as "second chance" won't ever be of any use to me). And then, i use only the health bar, and make use of "Field Triage". Though, this can't make up for the uselessness of healing spells, nor for the miraculous nonsensical healing on rest, which i still really hate. Another example is that i barely use the stash, i use my characters inventories, or the fact that i won't, ever, take talents with Sagani in order to improve Itumaak's damages. Or the fact that i will just never use most of the soulbound items. There are others examples, but i guess you got the point by now ^^.

 

As for not liking a game... Well, take a look at what Fallout 4 is. Or even Fallout 3. This is what it takes: the 4 is dumb to an extent that it lets me speechless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My main problem came when I reached Defiance Bay.   I've been nothing but lost in that town.   I even bought the hint book they put out and that just got me even more turned around.   Quest after Quest in that town don't seem to start as it should, or at all.   I've sent five or six crews into that town and have yet gotten past it.   The rest of the game is a blank to me..  I'll never see WM 1 or 2....  I haven't loaded the game to get the newest update...  what for??  Does it make DB easier to wade through??  I don't think so.

 

Ah well....

 

 

I do agree with Abel that Healing as done in this game is a joke...  It would be nice if Clerics were given a few basic Cleric abilities...  oh, say Turn Undead...  Heal teammates...  that sort of thing....  

 

And as for the magic system here...   yuck!    Everyone is always down on the D&D system  (Vancian??) but at least then you felt like you were a Mage of some power...   Not this wierd "I can effect someone for 6 seconds or maybe weaken there will to swing in a fight for 3 seconds...  sweet!"  I don't know..  seems to me there is alot less thinking involved in picking my spells at rest and knowing what I have and what the spells can do then all this trying to figure out if the spell will turn my foe weepy or just daze them for a heartbeat....

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

Grom

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My main problem came when I reached Defiance Bay.   I've been nothing but lost in that town.   I even bought the hint book they put out and that just got me even more turned around.   Quest after Quest in that town don't seem to start as it should, or at all.   I've sent five or six crews into that town and have yet gotten past it.   The rest of the game is a blank to me..  I'll never see WM 1 or 2....  I haven't loaded the game to get the newest update...  what for??  Does it make DB easier to wade through??  I don't think so.

 

Ah well....

 

 

I do agree with Abel that Healing as done in this game is a joke...  It would be nice if Clerics were given a few basic Cleric abilities...  oh, say Turn Undead...  Heal teammates...  that sort of thing....  

 

And as for the magic system here...   yuck!    Everyone is always down on the D&D system  (Vancian??) but at least then you felt like you were a Mage of some power...   Not this wierd "I can effect someone for 6 seconds or maybe weaken there will to swing in a fight for 3 seconds...  sweet!"  I don't know..  seems to me there is alot less thinking involved in picking my spells at rest and knowing what I have and what the spells can do then all this trying to figure out if the spell will turn my foe weepy or just daze them for a heartbeat....

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

Grom

 

 

Aha! like this post for some reason.

 

Actually turn undeads exists. It's the one/encounter spell: Holy radiance. It's basically a turn undead that heals teamates. That will do huge damages on every vessel in the AoE (skeletons, guls, wichts, zombies, constructs and such are vessels). I understood this quite recently actually :p. It's really a turn undead, and it will automatically proc several times in a row once the spell is cast. And the good thing is once it's cast, your priest can do something else while the vessels continue to take damages.

 

As for Defiance Bay, i'm not sure to understand the problem. I don't think it's more complicated than Baldur's Gate or Atkhatla. But if you're struggling with the quests there, try using the wiki or some sites like gamepressure (though their "walkthrough" is really weak for not hinting many possible outcomes of many quests. The wiki at gamepedia is better, but not complete).

 

Agree about the magic system. I would rather more "one target spells", but with more impact. At first, i had the exact same feeling than you. It took me some time to figure out that 6 seconds in Pillars is actually much more important than in Baldur's Gate. But it's true that the simple idea of incanting a spell in order to have a chance to daze 4 opponents for 3 seconds seems pretty lame at first lol. Many spells have areas of effect, and it's not something i like this much. This defeats some purpose of strategy to me. Like "i have this one powerful spell that can petrify one opponent for 50 seconds, but i only got one in my spell book. Which opponent is worth to use it?" And it's the same for priests. They lack self buffs. It's the same idea that the paladin's exhortation that can only profit to allies, not themselves. I would like more egotist options for them. Almost all spells being Aoe spells seems too systematic. More powerful, one targeted ones would add some interesting variations to the all-AoE thing. And would make the battle priest more reliable.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to agree with Abel here.  Is there a story you have to think about?  Yes.  It is really hard thinking?  I don't feel like it is.  Would I call it "deep on philosophy"?  No, I would not.  If I had to rate this game on how deep the philosophy hole goes I would say the shallow end of the pool, maybe nudging into normal depth.  Or in philosophical terms "And thus Zarathustra thought about spaking but changed his mind".

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My main problem came when I reached Defiance Bay.   I've been nothing but lost in that town.

 

 

Yeah... I'd agree that Defiance Bay could have been tightened up a little.  You can get through it, but it always felt to me like a part of the game that's stretched a bit thin, and probably the weakest act.  I did like playing many parts of it... it's just that there's a lot of running back and forth to be done.

I do agree with Abel that Healing as done in this game is a joke...  It would be nice if Clerics were given a few basic Cleric abilities...  oh, say Turn Undead...  Heal teammates...  that sort of thing....  

 

And as for the magic system here...   yuck!    Everyone is always down on the D&D system  (Vancian??) but at least then you felt like you were a Mage of some power...

 

Priests do get those abilities, though.  They get a range of healing spells (the "restore endurance" line), as well as anti-undead spells, and they can pick them at cast-time, as opposed to needing to memorize them in advance.  I depended on Durance's healing extensively, and his buffs were indispensable.  (Oh... just occurred to me that you might be talking about health instead of endurance.  That's only regained by resting AFAIK, and for good gameplay reasons.  They were trying to avoid the "totally recharge after each fight" mechanic that has been dumbing down CRPGs for decades now.  Around that, I wish they'd gone even further than they did).

​I'd have to disagree about magic, too.  My PC was a wizard, and he felt quite powerful to me.  I'm not sure the class-to-class comparison thing makes so much sense in this kind of game, but his AoE and CC abilities were formidable.  I believe he out-damaged anyone else in my party, although some of that might just be because he was my main character.  Still, I'd only rank ciphers as possibly exceeding the wizard's ability to singlehandedly alter the entire course of a battle.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the idea of severe micromanagement that puts me off Vancians. I can and probably do want an involving class, but I don't want to babysit the whole party.

 

Plus I'm in no mood for philosophy. I usually play RPGs to save the world and such not to ponder existentialist philosophy. So, is there such an element in here(something akin to KoS or to Sion or something like that)?

 

You must have found a way to enjoy BG2/TOB despite Vancians being everywhere, so maybe do whatever you did then? 

 

If you liked KOTOR2, well that one is in your face for 50 hours going on and on about philosophical issues. POE isn't that extreme.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Priests do get those abilities, though.  They get a range of healing spells (the "restore endurance" line), as well as anti-undead spells, and they can pick them at cast-time, as opposed to needing to memorize them in advance.  I depended on Durance's healing extensively, and his buffs were indispensable.  (Oh... just occurred to me that you might be talking about health instead of endurance.  That's only regained by resting AFAIK, and for good gameplay reasons.  They were trying to avoid the "totally recharge after each fight" mechanic that has been dumbing down CRPGs for decades now.  Around that, I wish they'd gone even further than they did).

​I'd have to disagree about magic, too.  My PC was a wizard, and he felt quite powerful to me.  I'm not sure the class-to-class comparison thing makes so much sense in this kind of game, but his AoE and CC abilities were formidable.  I believe he out-damaged anyone else in my party, although some of that might just be because he was my main character.  Still, I'd only rank ciphers as possibly exceeding the wizard's ability to singlehandedly alter the entire course of a battle.

 

I guess that probably you missed both points here. I can't be totally sure about what meant Grom. But if he dislikes healing spells, it's maybe because of the same reasons as me:

 

The thing i would have liked is a system like in Baldur's Gate (not because of nostalgia, spare me this, please). Since resting could only cure between 1 and 4 hp, having a priest or two and healing spells (and healing potions) meant a lot. You could not restore all you life, cure broken limbs, impalements or other lethal injuries just by taking a nap in the forest (dumbest thing ever). because your "immediate health" (endurance) is healed completely at the end of combat, because of this utterly dumb "combat only" thing, because healing spells don't actually heal anything, and because any rest will cure all your party completely, healing spells are... well, utter dumb ****. I hate this. I used to have 2 priests in my parties in Baldur's Gate so that i could venture in a dungeon without resting. My priests were my "long term health pool". And i loved them. My favorite class... in BG at least.

 

As for the wizards. I don't think the point is about being powerful or not. It's about feeling a sense of purpose when you cast a spell. As said, incanting to daze 10 ennemies with an AoE spell for 3 seconds looks lame at first, and lacks purpose (and needs experience to understand it's actually useful). But, like in BG, paralyzing 1 and only 1 foe for 40 seconds sounded more satisfying. Because you knew why you targeted this one foe in particular and the purpose behind it. And while the mass 3 sec daze could be powerful if you take the fight in its globality, the sense of purpose is at best, vague. And it's probably because they made mostly AoE spells. That struck me the first time i played. I was like "Why? Why is that?" I never liked this. Since they are AoE, they had to limit the power and duration of the effects. With more single target buffs, debuffs and spells, the story is different. We swiched from varied strategy (CC and individuals) to global strategy (short durations, mass effects). Sometimes, i would like more pinpoint alternatives.

Edited by Abel
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My main problem came when I reached Defiance Bay.   I've been nothing but lost in that town.

 

 

Yeah... I'd agree that Defiance Bay could have been tightened up a little.  You can get through it, but it always felt to me like a part of the game that's stretched a bit thin, and probably the weakest act.  I did like playing many parts of it... it's just that there's a lot of running back and forth to be done.

I do agree with Abel that Healing as done in this game is a joke...  It would be nice if Clerics were given a few basic Cleric abilities...  oh, say Turn Undead...  Heal teammates...  that sort of thing....  

 

And as for the magic system here...   yuck!    Everyone is always down on the D&D system  (Vancian??) but at least then you felt like you were a Mage of some power...

 

 

Priests do get those abilities, though.  They get a range of healing spells (the "restore endurance" line), as well as anti-undead spells, and they can pick them at cast-time, as opposed to needing to memorize them in advance.  I depended on Durance's healing extensively, and his buffs were indispensable.  (Oh... just occurred to me that you might be talking about health instead of endurance.  That's only regained by resting AFAIK, and for good gameplay reasons.  They were trying to avoid the "totally recharge after each fight" mechanic that has been dumbing down CRPGs for decades now.  Around that, I wish they'd gone even further than they did).

​I'd have to disagree about magic, too.  My PC was a wizard, and he felt quite powerful to me.  I'm not sure the class-to-class comparison thing makes so much sense in this kind of game, but his AoE and CC abilities were formidable.  I believe he out-damaged anyone else in my party, although some of that might just be because he was my main character.  Still, I'd only rank ciphers as possibly exceeding the wizard's ability to singlehandedly alter the entire course of a battle.

Paladin maybe? That Lay on Hands and Liberating Exhortation can pretty severely change the outcome too.

 

In other news, I am enjoying my Paladin. Its gameplay style is very enjoyable. I wouldn't say necessarily say it reaches the top of the fun classes, but what it does combine is very fun gameplay with very useful things. I don't understand the hype about the Fighters tho. Paladins seem better.

 

In other words, I also don't understand why people don't like Raedric. He is very reasonable. I tried talking with him, he listened and semi-sanely(please do understand his situation!) responded. Later I went to Kolsc who pouted something about "word poison" and what not and attacked even tho I wanted to parlay. The fkkin kid! Then the whole shack attacked my Shieldbearer who promptly used LoH(with +15 Def, ofc) and shrugged it off. I really don't understand why people don't understand his predicament. Maybe those are people who pick Passionate answers(I'm Honest / Diplo / Bene / Stoic)? /shrug

 

(answers which I have no use in picking are Cruel, Passionate and Deceptive-aggro somewhat too)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 


 

The thing i would have liked is a system like in Baldur's Gate (not because of nostalgia, spare me this, please). Since resting could only cure between 1 and 4 hp, having a priest or two and healing spells (and healing potions) meant a lot. You could not restore all you life, cure broken limbs, impalements or other lethal injuries just by taking a nap in the forest (dumbest thing ever). because your "immediate health" (endurance) is healed completely at the end of combat, because of this utterly dumb "combat only" thing, because healing spells don't actually heal anything, and because any rest will cure all your party completely, healing spells are... well, utter dumb ****. I hate this. I used to have 2 priests in my parties in Baldur's Gate so that i could venture in a dungeon without resting. My priests were my "long term health pool". And i loved them. My favorite class... in BG at least.

 

 

Ah, ​I see your point about healing and "long term pool".  Maybe that could be addressed in a PoE-like system simply by making endurance not recharge after fights, and that's what priests can heal, while leaving health as rest-to-rest depletion (leaving aside that resting is too common in PoE even with the 2-camp limit).   I wouldn't mind seeing something like that.  I still found the current form of healing useful though (at least in PoTD) because while endurance does recharge after fights, you still need enough of it to survive the fight :biggrin:.  Maybe there are builds where it doesn't matter as much, but it seemed to matter for my play style.  I seemed to need it on a regular basis, especially in WM.  That's not even getting into how powerful their buffs and debuffs are.

​About single target vs AoE, yeah, wizards do focus more on AoEs in this game.  I tend to prefer that (coupled with limitations about how often you can do it, so it doesn't turn into AoE-spam every fight), especially given that many fights have huge crowds of similar strength creatures.  I guess there are some other classes that more address the single-target aspect.  Ciphers seem pretty good at it.  Anyway, it feels quite purposeful to me: you can negate the effectiveness of an entire crowd of things with one cast.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly what is this 3-second Daze spell that keeps coming up? Because I'm starting to wonder, I've never seen it myself (maybe it's shy?) .

 

And in the same vein, what are these many many single-target wizard spells that BG supposedly had, that PoE doesn't? Because this thread does seem to have a heavy whiff of nostalgia to it, and this seems no exception. Skimming through the first six levels of BG2 spells, there really aren't that many (and conversely, there are plenty of PoE AOE spells that have a fairly small radius, so they're not that far beyond single target anyway). Most of the CC spells were AOE: Grease, Horror, Hold Person/Undead/Monster, Confusion/Chaos, Web, Slow, Stinking Cloud, Sleep. The main exception is the Charm-type spells, which still are in PoE; they just moved to the Cipher. And it's not like there was such a dizzying array of single target damage/destruction spells; not counting useless crap lke Larloch's Minor Drain and the like, we have: Magic Missile, Chromatic Orb, Melf's Acid Arrow, Agannazar's Scorcher, Flame Arrow, Vampiric Touch, Polymorph Other (ish), Flesh to Stone/Disintegrate (which never hit on major targets anyway, so this is close to Minor Drain territory)... and that's it, up to level six. And the levels above that only add a Finger, a Hand, a Fist and Imprisonment. PoE wizards actually have more of these kinds of spells than BG2 did, even without correcting for the smaller number of spells. 

 

As for the priests, and the utter tedium of having to run through a whole battery of healing spells all the time... *yawn*. Didn't get any better with temples either until you got enough gold that it didn't matter anymore. It also made Priests beyond boring as a class, because you had to memorize endless healing spells, leaving rather little room for spells to be used in combat. At least IWD2 got rid of that problem (mostly) with the spontaneous casting system, but it was still a chore. The PoE Endurance/Health approach is a vast improvement on this. I also don't see how healing on rest is "the dumbest thing ever" by the way. We're not exactly shooting for realism here (Cthulhu be praised!), it's a hit point system either way; the relevant considerations here are those of gameplay, not of believability. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ah, ​I see your point about healing and "long term pool".  Maybe that could be addressed in a PoE-like system simply by making endurance not recharge after fights, and that's what priests can heal, while leaving health as rest-to-rest depletion (leaving aside that resting is too common in PoE even with the 2-camp limit).   I wouldn't mind seeing something like that.  I still found the current form of healing useful though (at least in PoTD) because while endurance does recharge after fights, you still need enough of it to survive the fight :biggrin:.  Maybe there are builds where it doesn't matter as much, but it seemed to matter for my play style.  I seemed to need it on a regular basis, especially in WM.  That's not even getting into how powerful their buffs and debuffs are.

​About single target vs AoE, yeah, wizards do focus more on AoEs in this game.  I tend to prefer that (coupled with limitations about how often you can do it, so it doesn't turn into AoE-spam every fight), especially given that many fights have huge crowds of similar strength creatures.  I guess there are some other classes that more address the single-target aspect.  Ciphers seem pretty good at it.  Anyway, it feels quite purposeful to me: you can negate the effectiveness of an entire crowd of things with one cast.

 

Actually, i can't remember the last time i used an healing spell in Pillars. Not in the last 100 hours of my current playthrough, at least. It's because of my own playstyle. Just an example so that you understand why. I play on hard. Now, imagine i go, at lvl 9, in Durgan's Battery, and that for some roleplay reasons i refuse to sleep and camp inside the Battery, and that i won't go back to town before the dungeon is cleaned either. For the same kind of reason. In short, that means i will have to clean all 3 lvl of the dungeon without any rest. I barely ever use camping supllies, aside from roleplay reasons: "Oh, it's night, we don't see anything in this forest".

 

Now, imagine that one of my character lose enough health to be knocked out. Basically, that means that he won't last until the end. And now, to the point. Actually, if i HAVE to use healing spells (for endurance) in combat, this means i lost. Because i have to endure the whole dungeon without resting, i have to get over every fight before any of my party member lose too much endurance. And the obvious consequence: i never use healing spells or healing potions. And barely use second wind.

 

As for the AoE. I will agree that it's convenient, and that the system avoid the spam. I agree about the encounters too, where you often see large groups of the same kind of creature. And i will even agree about the fact that considering all this, the AoE thing could make sense. Still, even while comparing "dispel magic" in BG and "suppress affliction" in Pillars, for some reason, i feel that one is fulfilling, the other is frustrating. I much prefer "liberating exhortation. And i love the secondary effects of first level spell "chromatic orb", even if it's not as convenient or powerful as "slicken".

Link to post
Share on other sites

the relevant considerations here are those of gameplay, not of believability. 

 

This. Consider i think the exact opposite. Gameplay mechanics taking the upper hand everywhere in a RPG. I have a huge problem with this since... ever :)

 

The spells you list... are ones i used a lot in BG :o . But i would agree that fireball was really convenient :D

Edited by Abel
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
In other words, I also don't understand why people don't like Raedric. He is very reasonable. I tried talking with him, he listened and semi-sanely(please do understand his situation!) responded. Later I went to Kolsc who pouted something about "word poison" and what not and attacked even tho I wanted to parlay. The fkkin kid! Then the whole shack attacked my Shieldbearer who promptly used LoH(with +15 Def, ofc) and shrugged it off. I really don't understand why people don't understand his predicament. Maybe those are people who pick Passionate answers(I'm Honest / Diplo / Bene / Stoic)? /shrug

 

He's a murderous lunatic, there's very little reason there. Did you not see the tree full of corpses? The abominations in the basement? His dead wife? The whole Eothasian temple thing? Not that Kolsc is without his faults, and you have to wonder about the ratio of "desire for power" to "concern for the local population" in his motivations, but he's a definite improvement nonetheless. 

 

 

Ah, ​I see your point about healing and "long term pool".  Maybe that could be addressed in a PoE-like system simply by making endurance not recharge after fights, and that's what priests can heal, while leaving health as rest-to-rest depletion (leaving aside that resting is too common in PoE even with the 2-camp limit).   I wouldn't mind seeing something like that. ​

 

Honestly, that would be even worse than the BG system. You'd have the wonderful tedium of having to waste spells on healing all the time, but now there is also a maximum on how much you can actually heal per rest because of the separate health pool. If anything, this will just lead to people healing more often, because your priest is continuously running out of spells. 

 

Aside from that, it is also likely to result in a situation where you *have* to have a priest in your party, which is wholly undesirable as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

the relevant considerations here are those of gameplay, not of believability. 

 

This. Consider i think the exact opposite. Gameplay mechanics taking the upper hand everywhere in a RPG. I have a huge problem with this since... ever :)

 

The useless spells you list... are ones i used a lot in BG :o. But i would agree that fireball was really convenient :D

 

 

And you think a hit point system is believable? We have characters getting hit by an endless array of swords, arrows, bullets, arcane fire and frickin' bolts of lightning without so much as slowing down... that's not really how it works in the real world. 

 

Which useless spells are you referring to? I only listed Larloch's Minor Drain, really (though there's plenty of other gunk, obviously). 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, imagine that one of my character lose enough health to be knocked out. Basically, that means that he won't last until the end. And now, to the point. Actually, if i HAVE to use healing spells (for endurance) in combat, this means i lost. Because i have to endure the whole dungeon without resting, i have to get over every fight before any of my party member lose too much endurance. And the obvious consequence: i never use healing spells or healing potions. And barely use second wind.

 

I take it you never used healing potions and healing spells during combat in the BG games either, then? 

 

 

As for the AoE. I will agree that it's convenient, and that the system avoid the spam. I agree about the encounters too, where you often see large groups of the same kind of creature. And i will even agree about the fact that considering all this, the AoE thing could make sense. Still, even while comparing "dispel magic" in BG and "suppress affliction" in Pillars, for some reason, i feel that one is fulfilling, the other is frustrating. I much prefer "liberating exhortation. And i love the secondary effects of first level spell "chromatic orb", even if it's not as convenient or powerful as "slicken".

 

 

Again, how is this not just nostalgia? You prefer the old ways, for some reason that cannot be articulated. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...