The loss of Vancian casting?!

[Gromnir]

has been suggested... frequent.  

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66382-your-poe-pros-and-cons-5-and-5/?p=1461922

 

have all character actions deplete fatigue and have fatigue at least partial linked to constitution.  

 

never seems to get much traction.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps the vancian arguments is still all topsy-turvy.  is so difficult to get anywhere when every negative is reimagined, inexplicable, as a boon.  high-level bloat is a positive.  huge difference 'tween relative combat effectiveness o' a spell depleted wizard v. one who has recent rested is just a kewl tactical/strategic (you folks ever come to a conclusion?) concern. obsidian tried to add per-encounter to fix vancian and somehow such is evidence o' why vancian is bestest. weak low-level v. op high level is sucky, but somehow good.  dunno.  regardless, is extreme difficult to get far with this debate as everything is all inverted and upside down from some folks.

 

but again, we only see this debate with poe and a small handful o' fantasy crpgs with familiar wizards and priests.  even the folks most dogged arguing for vancian don't suggest adding more vancian to mass effect or fallout or even recent fantasy crpgs.  why not?  

 

btw, this kinda wacky debate is familiar.  thac0. unbalanced level progression for classes. non-linear attribute score bonuses/penalties. etc.

[Midas Touch]

has been suggested... frequent.  

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66382-your-poe-pros-and-cons-5-and-5/?p=1461922

 

have all character actions deplete fatigue and have fatigue at least partial linked to constitution.  

 

never seems to get much traction.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps the vancian arguments is still all topsy-turvy.  is so difficult to get anywhere when every negative is reimagined, inexplicable, as a boon.  high-level bloat is a positive.  huge difference 'tween relative combat effectiveness o' a spell depleted wizard v. one who has recent rested is just a kewl tactical/strategic (you folks ever come to a conclusion?) concern. obsidian tried to add per-encounter to fix vancian and somehow such is evidence o' why vancian is bestest. weak low-level v. op high level is sucky, but somehow good.  dunno.  regardless, is extreme difficult to get far with this debate as everything is all inverted and upside down from some folks.

 

but again, we only see this debate with poe and a small handful o' fantasy crpgs with familiar wizards and priests.  even the folks most dogged arguing for vancian don't suggest adding more vancian to mass effect or fallout or even recent fantasy crpgs.  why not?  

 

btw, this kinda wacky debate is familiar.  thac0. unbalanced level progression for classes. non-linear attribute score bonuses/penalties. etc.

My most enjoyable experience playing a wizard in a vancian system was playing a fighter/mage character in Baldur's Gate 2. Why?  Because the character could stand shoulder to shoulder with the fighters and cut down trash mobs with a sword, then obliterate powerful enemies and "boss" creatures with improved alacrity, spell triggers, and magic missile. 

 

Important to note, is that my wizard didn't use spells in most encounters, because of the limitations of the vancian system.  Sure, I could have rest spammed, but that's a cheesy crutch to compensate for a fundamentally flawed magic system.

 

A magic system where wizards spend most of their time throwing darts is not a good system.  If POE 2 sticks with vancian, all I can say is thank goodness for multiclassing.

 

I think you and I are on the same page for this mechanic!

Edited February 5, 2017 by Midas Touch

[hilfazer]

I find it increasingly funny how people keep saying 'vancian, vancian' while what POE has is pretty much a leveled mana.

 

In vancian you prepare spells, you choose which spells to prepare. In POE there's NO choice (well, almost). You choose your spell right before casting it like in every other spell system.

 

The primary problem with vancian is that caster has prepared wrong spell. In POE it only affects wizards and only a little thanks to grimoire switching.

People mosty have problem with daily limits.

 

 

We already had per-encounter spells in POE. We know how it ended. Now Obs wants to do it again. I'm expecing huge drop in power.

 

A different approach could consist of this:

- add random encounters, no XP from combat is a perfect setup for this

- add nighttime ambushes with chance of happening increasing with number of rests in given dungeon, it could decrease over time

- add extra monsters when player enters dungeon again, after a trip to a village for those oh so important inn resting bonuses

- give casters some weak per-encounter spells, so they can do something in every battle while feeling castery and still able to go armageddon with per-rest when situation gets dire

 

Sure it's not perfect, it will surely need testing and tuning. You can grind for loot, yeah, but spawned creatures would carry something cheap or nothing at all until later stages of the game, but at this point economy goes out of the window in every cRPG under the sun so at least this one is not worse (:

 

It can be gamed if someone tries hard enough as it's not supposed to be a hard counter. I'd rather make rest spammers life harder than greatly alter the game for players who play "as designers intended" and find it cool.

[tinysalamander]

A different approach could consist of this:

- add random encounters, no XP from combat is a perfect setup for this

- add nighttime ambushes with chance of happening increasing with number of rests in given dungeon, it could decrease over time

- add extra monsters when player enters dungeon again, after a trip to a village for those oh so important inn resting bonuses

 

Because there wasn’t enough trash encounters in PoE1…

[Midas Touch]

 

A different approach could consist of this:

- add random encounters, no XP from combat is a perfect setup for this

- add nighttime ambushes with chance of happening increasing with number of rests in given dungeon, it could decrease over time

- add extra monsters when player enters dungeon again, after a trip to a village for those oh so important inn resting bonuses

- give casters some weak per-encounter spells, so they can do something in every battle while feeling castery and still able to go armageddon with per-rest when situation gets dire

So long as there are enough per-encounter spells and so long as spells scale in effect with caster level, then I suppose that will be a good enough fix, though not my first choice.  If the devs can't find it in themselves to go with per-encounter spells, then they need to seriously make rods and wands scale in effect with caster level or make passives that dramatically improve them so they feel like something better than throwing darts from BG.

 

I still doubt I'll play a pure wizard though, and I hope Aloth can get some multiclass action.

 

[Aotrs Commander]

I find it increasingly funny how people keep saying 'vancian, vancian' while what POE has is pretty much a leveled mana.

 

In vancian you prepare spells, you choose which spells to prepare. In POE there's NO choice (well, almost). You choose your spell right before casting it like in every other spell system.

 

 

That's a good point. I started postng before I'd picked up PoE again and had sort of forgotten is more 3.x spontaneous caster than true Vancian.

 

We already had per-encounter spells in POE. We know how it ended. Now Obs wants to do it again. I'm expecing huge drop in power.

A different approach could consist of this:

- add random encounters, no XP from combat is a perfect setup for this

- add nighttime ambushes with chance of happening increasing with number of rests in given dungeon, it could decrease over time

- add extra monsters when player enters dungeon again, after a trip to a village for those oh so important inn resting bonuses

- give casters some weak per-encounter spells, so they can do something in every battle while feeling castery and still able to go armageddon with per-rest when situation gets dire

 

 

The more I play over the years, the more I become convinced that the exact opposite is better; make more fights "boss-fights" (with a few "easy" trash fights in between to ease the players into a new session/campaign (tabletop) or area with new stuff (CRPG). Those are the ones that are most interesting. Trash-mob fights that are resolved with the equivilent of just clicking attack... There's not much point to them. If the PCs aren't to be seriously challenged by them, the only good reason they are there is provide a learning/relearning exercise for the PCs to see how their abilities work (more of a line of dominos set up by the DM (or metaphorical DM) to knock down than usual).

 

They only way there are a drain on resources is if the PCs actually use some resources to win them. And to do that, you have to make them enough of a threat the player/players don't go "trash fight, no point using anything, better save that for the more important fights later."

 

Taking them out (almost) alogther makes for a different paradigm, but I think a much better one.

 

 

 

I will be interested to se if Tides of Numenara pulls this off, since that was one of the major flaws of turn-based combat; unimportant trash mob fights are a grindy-chore because you CAN'T just "auto-attack" through them,

Edited February 5, 2017 by Aotrs Commander

[Guest 4ward]

 

 

 

Because there wasn’t enough trash encounters in PoE1…

 

 

the ‚trash encounters‘ in PoE were never of the kind of trash encounters you‘d face in SoA, which is also why per-encounter was introduced in PoE (and not to ‚fix‘ a problem of the vancian system).

[Fenixp]

is so difficult to get anywhere when every negative is reimagined, inexplicable, as a boon.

Your negative. Someone else's boon. That's how it works with opinions, doesn't it?

 

but again, we only see this debate with poe and a small handful o' fantasy crpgs with familiar wizards and priests.  even the folks most dogged arguing for vancian don't suggest adding more vancian to mass effect or fallout or even recent fantasy crpgs.  why not?

Fallout already has resource management in the form of ammunition, radiation management, permanent injuries, that kind of stuff - with more recent ones even adding food and water (well water was technically a thing in F1 too, but it didn't work much and I think it got patched out). As for why I, personally, would not like to see similar mechanics in all other games - well, that would be kind of boring, won't it? To push my favorite mechanic into all games ever? So that I can play the same game over and over?

 

Personally, I just want PoE II to work with some form of resource management again as that's what I enjoyed about vancian casting in the original - and it seems it will. So... All is good. Hopefully.

Edited February 6, 2017 by Fenixp

[Gromnir]

 

is so difficult to get anywhere when every negative is reimagined, inexplicable, as a boon.

Your negative. Someone else's boon. That's how it works with opinions, doesn't it?

 

but again, we only see this debate with poe and a small handful o' fantasy crpgs with familiar wizards and priests.  even the folks most dogged arguing for vancian don't suggest adding more vancian to mass effect or fallout or even recent fantasy crpgs.  why not?

Fallout already has resource management in the form of ammunition, radiation management, permanent injuries, that kind of stuff - with more recent ones even adding food and water (well water was technically a thing in F1 too, but it didn't work much and I think it got patched out). As for why I, personally, would not like to see similar mechanics in all other games - well, that would be kind of boring, won't it? To push my favorite mechanic into all games ever? So that I can play the same game over and over?

 

Personally, I just want PoE II to work with some form of resource management again as that's what I enjoyed about vancian casting in the original - and it seems it will. So... All is good. Hopefully.

 

poe had per encounter resource management, and a number o' other options limited to a specific class (cipher, monks, etc.)  the presence o' multiple kinds o' resource management does not deter folks here from demanding vancian as well.  and why should vancian be verboten simple 'cause already existing resource management? has been literal hundreds o' fantasy games which had ammo and food as well as spells.  fantasy games have had ammo and food and spells with either vancian or per-encounter, so why deprive fallout or similar games o' something which people here clear see as a feature which adds so much tactical/strategic challenge? again, if vancian is so nifty, then why ain't it nifty elsewhere?  why is only in these games we see this debate? is not ammo or food, so what is the reason?

 

o' and the boon v. negative is what is particular perplexing.  review the aluminumtrioxid posts that a few folks liked immediate.

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/91392-the-loss-of-vancian-casting/?p=1880775

 

what were complained 'bout as a potential evil in poe2 based 'pon assumed application o' per encounter for wizards and priests and druids, were an actual current problem in poe 1 precisely 'cause o' the current vancing casting model. is not subjective.  is fact we current have high level casters able to unload the kinda bloated spell repertoire aluminum were concerned 'bout if per-encounter is implemented in poe2, and others agreed with the perceived problem. the vancian folks either don't see or can't see how the problem they see is inverted.

 

is anything other than axiomatic that a party with vancian casters is a more difficult challenge for developers to create challenging encounters?  the power gulf 'tween depleted and rested vancian casters is not in question.  if such nonsense is a good thing, then make all vancian casters in the game subject to same variation. instead o' full powered opponent casters (who actual have unlimited spells in our experience) create encounters where rng determines if the opponent is powered-up or not, and to what degree. 

 

01

 

p00p.  guess that means you caught thaos before he had a chance to rest.  all he has is 2 first level priest spells when you fight him in the final battle o' the game.  but hey, that is what makes it teh rehl, no? no. is bad for npc, but good for player?

 

regardless o' whether you favor vancian or per-encounter, am thinking we will find few opponents o' better encounter design for poe2.  the presence o' vancian casters in the player's party makes it more difficult to design challenging encounters as the power o' a vancian caster is in large part dependent on the temporal proximity o' the caster to a most recent rest. is an unknown for the developers.  such unknowns make developer job easier or more difficult?  not subjective.

 

and the attempt to fix vancian casters (twice by the way) with different alternatives o' per rest abilities to vancian casters is somehow viewed as a flaw o' per encounter?  how does that make any sense whatsoever? 

 

this kinda stuff ain't subjective, and yet somehow it is.

 

etc.

 

nevertheless, we will admit that as insane as it sounds, it is possible folks does simple prefer the curious power curve o' vancian casters as they has suffered in every crpg to include 'em. perhaps folks does like being relative weak at low levels only to become op at upper levels.  strikes us as a rather silly notion, but yeah, that one is pure subjective.  you win?

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited February 6, 2017 by Gromnir

[Doppelschwert]

I'm with gromnir.

The only time I went through PoE and both parts of WM was with a full party without casters, e.g. Monk / Fighter / Rogue / Barbarian / Ranger / Chanter.

I won't claim the main game was much harder this way, but I was not able to complete the optional high level content of the Add-Ons and some of the bounties with this party, whereas much of the content I did could've been done with casters much sooner.

 

It would definitely not hurt to have the casters more in line with the rest with regards to full potential, and dismissing vancian is a necessary step in this direction.

[Ninjamestari]

I think there are better ways to limit access to that high level mega-spell-of-doom than simply having limited slots. Perhaps those bigger spells require costly or rare reagents. Maybe they require preparation components, such as your mage has to complete a ritual out of combat and then he/she can unleash that mega-spell-of-doom as the first action once combat begins. Hell, the most powerful spells might even inflict permanent stat penalties if one is really feeling hard core, the caster sacrificing a part of their soul to power the ultimate-mega-spell-of-doom-and-destruction.

 

Vancian as is isn't a very interesting system to me, and the only thing I'd keep from D&D is the ability to craft scrolls and learn spells from them to add to your spellbook. That search for spells is an integral part of the Wizard fantasy for me.

[Infinitron]

Josh Sawyer speaks! https://www.twitch.tv/videos/120695299?t=20m58s

[Lamppost in Winter]

Josh Sawyer speaks! https://www.twitch.tv/videos/120695299?t=20m58s

 

 You seem to have a reputation among them.

The idea of spells being harder to cast, but more powerful, is one I'm on board with. Still not sold on Empower, but we shall see.

[Infinitron]

 

Josh Sawyer speaks! https://www.twitch.tv/videos/120695299?t=20m58s

 

 You seem to have a reputation among them.

The idea of spells being harder to cast, but more powerful, is one I'm on board with. Still not sold on Empower, but we shall see.

 

 

I'm not sure they're going to be that much more powerful if you don't use the Empower though.

Edited February 9, 2017 by Infinitron

[limaxophobiacq]

I hope there still will be spells that are faster though. Protections like the 'Prayer Against X' spells aren't very usefull if you can't cast them before the effects you're protecting against hit.

[Gromnir]

Josh Sawyer speaks! https://www.twitch.tv/videos/120695299?t=20m58s

so, unless we missed something, still no vancian in poe2.

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Lamppost in Winter]

 

 

Josh Sawyer speaks! https://www.twitch.tv/videos/120695299?t=20m58s

 

 You seem to have a reputation among them.

The idea of spells being harder to cast, but more powerful, is one I'm on board with. Still not sold on Empower, but we shall see.

 

 

I'm not sure they're going to be that much more powerful if you don't use the Empower though.

 

 

 I was going off his comment that spells will "take a little longer, but will feel a little more influential".

[SaruNi]

I hope there still will be spells that are faster though. Protections like the 'Prayer Against X' spells aren't very usefull if you can't cast them before the effects you're protecting against hit.

 

Unless they also remove/reduce the duration of the affliction. Sure, you have to avoid letting it get cast on the priest (or item or scroll user if they remain options) after entering combat... maybe by having a tanky character with resistances scout ahead and initiate, or by first scouting ahead and then taking out-of-combat consumables / equipping items that boost defenses. (A Rogue or Ranger or Paladin subclass which gets extra resistances to afflictions could be interesting, especially if it can be used in conjunction with party AoE to avoid friendly fire.)

 

There are also drugs etc. that grant resistances.

Edited February 9, 2017 by SaruNi

[ShadySands]

Quicken spell feat?

[Gromnir]

Quicken spell feat?

quicken spell talent.  will provide a +.3 to speed, which will not stack with the Harry Potter's Horn Rimmed Glasses of Alacrity, but will stack with the .2 speed bonus from Ajax the Lesser's Shield of Speed and possibly with a paladin aura, but maybe not spells.  however it will definite stack with with spell-like abilities. mostly.

 

'bout march o' 2019 we will actual know how the quicken spell talent works in poe2.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[morhilane]

I hope there still will be spells that are faster though. Protections like the 'Prayer Against X' spells aren't very usefull if you can't cast them before the effects you're protecting against hit.

 

How Afflictions works was changed. They can now be removed by applying the appropriate Inspiration buffs. Josh gave the example of the Barbarian Frenzy now granting the Fit&Strong inspiration (gives con/might bonuses) which can be used to remove Sickened and Weakened afflictions (but those afflictions can also be used to remove Fit&Strong).

 

The change makes affliction immunity a lot less important because you now have tools to remove them. It wouldn't even be surprised me if the Prayer Against X now granted inspiration instead of immunity too.

[hilfazer]

 

 

The change makes affliction immunity a lot less important because you now have tools to remove them. It wouldn't even be surprised me if the Prayer Against X now granted inspiration instead of immunity too.

 

 

I wouldn't be surprised as well but i'd be disappointed.

 

The big problem of affliction removal is that they can be reapplied 0.5s later equally easy.

 

Got poisoned by a spider? No problem, you drink an antidote and you're fine! Half a second later spider hits and poisons you again. You've just wasted your round and and antidote, congratulations.

 

Liberating Exhortation sounded great but didn't work as well because it wasn't suspending afflictions gained after it was cast.

 

Enemies with afflictions on hit could ruin this mechanic, i hope Obsidian will not let that happen.

[demeisen]

I'm not super attached to Vancian, other than that it's a means to an end.  If they can come up with a better means, I'm fine with that too.

 

My basic plea to Obsidian is: Please allow me the chance to fail.

 

The important thing to me is that there is long term resource consideration.  When most abilities are per fight, you never end up in a position where you've been exploring a dungeon for a little too long, everyone is ground down, you're getting low on resources, and an unexpected encounter forces you into pure panic survival mode.  Can I live through it with what's left on my back?  A wizard with 3 remaining spells he's never tried before, some weird potion, and a fighter who's utterly exhausted and doesn't have many fancy moves left in him?

 

I already feel PoE went too far with so many per-encounter abilities, though I appreciate that it did have some measure of longer term resource management too.  Also, the more that recharges between fights, the more devalued "trash fights" are.  Rather than have to figure out how to beat the lesser groups with the absolute minimum resource expenditure so you can fight your way out of a crypt to see the light of day, you don't have to think at all.  Just destroy them, and you know your abilities will regen before the next fight.  The smaller encounters become pointless and tedious, when they are not part of a longer term journey through a dungeon where each small fight grinds my party down a little bit more.

 

That's my only real plea to Obsidian for PoE2.  Let me back myself into a corner, if I use my resources poorly trying to get through that dungeon or mountain pass.  Please allow me to fail.  That's why there are 35 year old games I think have better game-play than many brand new games.  They were worse in most every detail, but you could back yourself into a seemingly impossible corner... and if you you found a brilliant way to get yourself out of it against all the odds, it was actually a rewarding experience.  Modern games make sure players never get into those corners, and thus, deny them the rewards that go along with avoiding or escaping them.

 

So please give me the freedom to fail.  Even as a pre-game selectable option, if necessary due to market forces.

[Infinitron]

Only long term resource now (other than consumables of course) is if your characters are knocked out and become wounded.

Edited February 9, 2017 by Infinitron

[Ganrich]

Only long term resource now (other than consumables of course) is if your characters are knocked out and become wounded.

Empower?