Only five party members?

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

Why on earth move down to five party slots?

 

 

 

The biggest change from the original is that Deadfire will have a five-character adventuring party. The original had six players, and Obsidian’s 2016 RPG Tyranny had four. How did the designers decide that five is the magic number?

 

 

 

“We’ve been playing with a five-character party for most of development and really like how encounters work with that size,” Urquhart said. I can see how this came about — six characters can be cumbersome, while four can seem … limiting. Five enables for you to cover every major RPG role — tank, damage-dealer, ranged, magic, and healing — while still giving the player room to experiment with character builds.

 

 

http://venturebeat.com/2017/01/26/pillars-of-eternity-ii-deadfire-is-obsidians-first-stab-at-crowdfunding-on-fig/

 

This is really harshing my buzz, as it were. I really enjoy the traditional six member party in PoE and the way it let me play around with different companions and party compositions. Five party members is really constraining and really cuts off options.

 

Plus it just makes for weird formations. How can I have two columns when they're uneven? Aaaaaarg 

 

[Lamppost in Winter]

I'm not too concerned with the drop to 5 (I'm no IE veteran, though I did get used to the 6 member party), but I do find it really weird they would make this decision, especially since PoE was built a lot on tradition and nostalgia. To hazard a guess, they might have smaller encounter sizes this time around since some complained about the massive numbers of enemies on higher difficulties in the original. 

[Amentep]

I'm not crazy about the change. Guess I'll learn to like it, but it seems a really odd change to make after using 6 for the original

[Monara]

Oh... That's very disappointing. 5 is so restricting. I hope this is not a sign this game will be an oversimplified action rpg like Tyranny. I was so excited about this game too

[jones092201]

I always feel like that sixth spot allows you to bring along that character you like but doesn't really help your party composition that much. It's like when I'm playing a rogue and I don't really need the devil of caroc, but I want to feel like she was a part of my adventure. Like how many of us feel about our younger siblings who just want to hang out with our cool friends...who probably weren't that cool anyway.

[TheRealDrMcCoy]

I personally would like to have more, not less people to travel with. Everyone I meet, preferably. I already had a hard time deciding who to leave behind in the first game...

[Quillon]

I personally would like to have more, not less people to travel with. Everyone I meet, preferably. I already had a hard time deciding who to leave behind in the first game...

 

Same but not being able take 1 is just as annoying not taking 3 companions for me so it doesn't make much difference cos there'll most certainly be more companions than the party limit. Limiting it to 5 prolly helps with visual clarity, battlefield confusion, management etc. Also making the slow mod = default mod is for the same cause I guess.

Edited January 27, 2017 by Quillon

[jones092201]

I personally would like to have more, not less people to travel with. Everyone I meet, preferably. I already had a hard time deciding who to leave behind in the first game...

I'd agree, only that makes encounters really difficult to manage. I have a hard enough time as it is. I think that, in order to manage 10-12 characters, per encounter skills would need to be simplified. Don't think that's something we want, right? But maybe for a few battle scenarios, peppered throughout the game?

[Karkarov]

Jones hit the nail on the head a few posts up.  That sixth slot hardly ever mattered anyway, it was always a "warm body" character.  Hey he is sort of funny, guess I can bring him.  I don't need a rogue but I guess it saves me from wasting points on those skills.... That is how character six almost always ended up.

Personally I am good with five characters, like they said, it is enough to cover all the main bases without also having redundancy.  Unless you choose to have redundancy and a gap somewhere else .

[Monara]

I always feel like that sixth spot allows you to bring along that character you like but doesn't really help your party composition that much.

That may be true but when every spot in your party is absolutely essential to its functioning that really restricts your options a lot. It's like they said, you get a tank, a magic user, a healer and a damage dealer and the only possible variety is the last slot which will be offtank, second caster or second other damage. There is very little room for hybrid roles this way.

[Tarbomb]

I'm guessing it has to do with balancing in regards to the multiclassing. I'm not horribly disheartened if it works, but lets be happy it isn't 4 like in Tyranny, because I feel that was one of the harder nails in its combat coffin. Perhaps it'll be changed later or be modded in?

 

The plus side is that with multiclassing theoretically we won't need 6 chars because we won't need a dedicated support member, I just really hope it doesn't spiral into how easy Tyranny was on PoTD. We are here to give feedback so lets see how it progresses and if it should be changed!

[InsaneCommander]

And here I thought that, having played the game twice already, there was no risk of spoilers.

 

If only five characters of my custom party will make it into the sequel, then it means one of them won't survive the White March part II.

[Ganrich]

On the Fig comments section someone said Sawyer has confirmed the 5 man party. I haven't seen it personally. He probably did it on the something awful forums.

[Quillon]

It was Feargus: http://venturebeat.com/2017/01/26/pillars-of-eternity-ii-deadfire-is-obsidians-first-stab-at-crowdfunding-on-fig/

 

Then Josh confirmed it again on Twit..tumblr.

[Ganrich]

It was Feargus: http://venturebeat.com/2017/01/26/pillars-of-eternity-ii-deadfire-is-obsidians-first-stab-at-crowdfunding-on-fig/

 

Then Josh confirmed it again on Twit..tumblr.

Yeah, I just wanted more of a confirmation than the venturebeat article.

 

http://jesawyer.tumblr.com/post/156419783766/hallo-josh-es-wird-gemunkelt-das-f%C3%BCr-deadfire

 

It's in German, but it's there.

[john_boy]

Prefer six

[dukeisaac]

I also prefer six. I dont buy the 'its easier to manage for the player' argument either. If you're having a hard time, then its on you. Then again, if its a question of bettter pathing, AI and such... then yeah, I guess. In any case, I feel this needs to be fleshed out more by the devs. So far, it feels like they know its going to create pushback and decided to wait before broaching the subject. Hype and all.

 

Still pledged though and still going to play the **** out of this game. POE is my favourite game ever (casual gamer here)

Edited January 27, 2017 by dukeisaac

[Enoch]

Comes down to some pretty subjective preferences, so it surprises me that Obsidz are planning on rocking the boat by changing this. 

 

For my part, 5 or 6 are fine with me.  But 4 feels too few, and 7 somehow crosses the line into way too much hassle.  I guess with the cap at 5, I no longer have to avoid Rangers in the party. 

 

(But, really, I'm still going to avoid Rangers.)

Edited January 27, 2017 by Enoch

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

I always feel like that sixth spot allows you to bring along that character you like but doesn't really help your party composition that much. It's like when I'm playing a rogue and I don't really need the devil of caroc, but I want to feel like she was a part of my adventure. Like how many of us feel about our younger siblings who just want to hang out with our cool friends...who probably weren't that cool anyway.

 

 

Yeah, this. Plus five members means asymmetric party formations aaaarg 

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

I also prefer six. I dont buy the 'its easier to manage for the player' argument either. If you're having a hard time, then its on you. Then again, if its a question of bettter pathing, AI and such... then yeah, I guess. In any case, I feel this needs to be fleshed out more by the devs. So far, it feels like they know its going to create pushback and decided to wait before broaching the subject. Hype and all.

 

Still pledged though and still going to play the **** out of this game. POE is my favourite game ever (casual gamer here)

 

 

and if it's easier to manage for the player then that player can play with a five member party if they want

 

Six members leaves the option for five. Opposite isn't true.

[Silent Winter]

Boo! - Roleplaying > 'filling the combat roles' (and combat was fine in PoE1)

It was hard enough (but still hit the sweet-spot) with a 6-member party to get the team I wanted.

Will this also mean fewer companions to choose from?

[Monara]

I just can't get over this. I'm so disappointed. I've been looking forward to this announcement ever since I started playing the first game and now this.. All my excitement just turned into sadness. Due to my chronic illness I don't get outside the house much and these games are one of the few things I can still enjoy. It is very important to me. I don't want a simplified version of PoE. I would just play Tyranny or Diablo 3 if I wanted that kind of combat. I just can not understand why they would change such a fundamental part of the game that has worked so well since Baldur's Gate almost 20 years ago.

 

Can anyone please rationalize this for me and help me live with this? Any good reason for doing this? I'm going to cry myself to sleep now, hopefully tomorrow morning there will be some explanations

[Lamppost in Winter]

I just can't get over this. I'm so disappointed. I've been looking forward to this announcement ever since I started playing the first game and now this.. All my excitement just turned into sadness. Due to my chronic illness I don't get outside the house much and these games are one of the few things I can still enjoy. It is very important to me. I don't want a simplified version of PoE. I would just play Tyranny or Diablo 3 if I wanted that kind of combat. I just can not understand why they would change such a fundamental part of the game that has worked so well since Baldur's Gate almost 20 years ago.

 

Can anyone please rationalize this for me and help me live with this? Any good reason for doing this? I'm going to cry myself to sleep now, hopefully tomorrow morning there will be some explanations

Well, my guess at this point is smaller encounter sizes. Others have suggested spell effects and pathfinding.

 

We don't know much at this point, and I think it's jumping the gun to assume that a 5 member party=dumbed down action RPG. They'll release more news soon, so see then.

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

Can anyone please rationalize this for me and help me live with this? Any good reason for doing this? I'm going to cry myself to sleep now, hopefully tomorrow morning there will be some explanations

 

 

http://i.imgur.com/uTwYDXo.png

 

 

More seriously there may be technical reasons for it in the game engine, or maybe it just let them design the maps differently, but it definitely "feels wrong." Hopefully it's still something that can be changed. Six party members is tradition in these kinds of games for a lot of reasons.

[dukeisaac]

Someone mentionned multiclassing in another thread and it got me wondering if it might be part of the equation. Indeed, if you can multiclass most if not all of your party, then the 6th member might be considered superfluous... Add to that the engine, pathing, AI, and considerations about in-game clarity, it migth add up to the answer.

 

Or not.