Will warriors be able to kill things now?

[Mygaffer]

Or will dudes in armor just act as MMO-style meatshields again, while the glass cannons kill off the enemies?

You can easily build a fighter do to a ton of damage. If you picked all the defensive abilities and rock a large shield don't be mad when your fighter doesn't do much damage.

[injurai]

Or build a DPS front-line and stack your backline with buffers/debuffers/medics/cc.

 

Pillars is one of the most flexible rpg systems I've played, you just have to learn it and plan your builds out.

 

Looks like things are shaping up to be even more flexible and well communicated in deadfire.

[Katarack21]

It's not actually particularly flexible. You *have* to have some degree of hybrid DPS/Tank up front and hybrid DPS/CC or DPS/Healing in the back. That's the only set up that works, period. You literally can *not* go with pure builds in either direction; you have to have hybrids of either type in both spots.

Edited May 4, 2017 by Katarack21

[Gromnir]

Or will dudes in armor just act as MMO-style meatshields again, while the glass cannons kill off the enemies?

as has been noted already, such were not the case for poe, particular following the release o' the expansions.  is too bad too. poe has classes, which is an inherent flaw, but obsidian did an admirable job o' making the most o' an otherwise bad starting point.  to create so many classes, each with a unique role, is kinda impressive.  unfortunately, as obsidian added levels and responded to player demands, the class roles became blurred.  fighters in poe were never intended to fill the same roles as ie game fighters.  the poe fighter were 'posed to be a low-maintenance "tank."  

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66380-update-81-the-front-line-fighters-and-barbarians/page-1

 

"Overall, fighters are designed to be low-maintenance, reliable, and long-lived even in marathon battles."

 

there were literal dozens o' folks applauding the announced roles for the frontliners, with one exception: karakov. he were the only guy who criticized the fighter as being described a bit like a vanilla mmo tank.  everybody else posting seemed to agree the limited role o' the poe fighter, which would be much different from an ie game fighter, were a good thing.

 

'course once the beta started, folks feigned surprise

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68384-josh-says-poes-fighters-and-rogues-arent-boring/page-1?hl=%20fighters%20%20rogues%20%20boring

 

josh again attempted to clarify the fighter role in poe

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68384-josh-says-poes-fighters-and-rogues-arent-boring/?p=1507492

 

sadly, in response to community pressure, classes such as the paladin and fighter were... altered.  by the time o' white march 2, the poe fighter were once again capable o' dishing out serious hurt while simultaneous able to withstand direct hits from a trebuchet.  the expanding o' roles, while welcomed by the community, were a mistake.  why play a rogue when a fighter could do similar dps?

 

in any event, while is unlikely to happen, we would much prefer the fighter, and other classes, be retooled so they more close correspond to the original roles for which they were assigned.  poe2 developers should improve the fighter by making it a more interesting low-maintenance tank rather attempting to make the fighter good at everything.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Boeroer]

Fighter is an example of how a single ability can turn a class from ok damage dealer to totally awesome damage dealer: Charge...

 

@ MaxQuest: If Take the Hit wouldn't be so bugged (in combination with mind control - you will receive the damage of charmed/dominated foes, even if the mind control ended) it would be a very good ability. Tried it with a super-regenerating fighter once and it was awesome for the overall party sturdyness as long as nobody got mind controlled.

 

Also Guarding Stance would be great if it only stacked with other deflection buffs.

Edited May 5, 2017 by Boeroer

[Fardragon]

more interesting low-maintenance

Aren't these two objectives mutually exclusive?

[Karkarov]

there were literal dozens o' folks applauding the announced roles for the frontliners, with one exception: karakov. he were the only guy who criticized the fighter as being described a bit like a vanilla mmo tank.  everybody else posting seemed to agree the limited role o' the poe fighter, which would be much different from an ie game fighter, were a good thing.

Old Gromnir just threw me under the bus!  I feel like I am at work now

 

But yes, the original posting for fighter sounded very mmo'y.  And the original fighter in Eternity was very mmo'y.  I am not sure where all the classes ended up is better than where they started though.  A lot of mechanics changed in a big way, and I am not totally sure all those changes were for the best reasons.

 

That said don't buy this "enemies totally ignore engagement" hot air either.  Enemies will not ignore it, on higher difficulties that may happen in some scenarios, but most enemies will still stay in melee with a front liner if they get engaged and are melee enemies themselves.  That said, you put a tank, and a squishy melee side by side, they may switch to the squishy since doing that doesn't break engagement.

Edited May 5, 2017 by Karkarov

[Judicator]

 which would be much different from an ie game fighter

 

This is my main issue. In the IE games, which PoE is supposed to be a spiritual successor of, fighter-types were not only capable of holding back melee enemies, but they were capable of dishing out damage as well. Korgan dual-wielding the Axe of the Unyielding and Crom Frayer was a terrifying sight indeed.

Edited May 5, 2017 by Judicator

[MaxQuest]

@Boeroer, agreed, Charge is awesome)

But still, would you trade something like HoF for it?

 

As for Take the Hit... imho there should be some damage reduction, like nearby allies take 50% of the incoming damage, while fighter takes only 30%. Otherwise what's the point? If I don't want someone get hit, I won't place them on frontline near the fighter. Plus there are cc effects to keep enemies at bay.

[Gromnir]

 

more interesting low-maintenance

Aren't these two objectives mutually exclusive?

 

not at all, particular for folks who is recalling how poe combat were first appreciated at the start o' the beta. one o' the most frequent complaints o' poe combat is related to pace-- is too frenetic.  for those o' us who has played the game to death, such speed issues is forgotten or unnoticeable, but many players, particular new players, see poe combat as fast and unforgiving.  having a dependable tank which needs less micromanagement (while still providing options if a player so desires to use 'em) is gonna be a boon for many.

 

regardless, the objectives is not mutual exclusive.  a low-maintenance class will not demand a player's constant attention, but labeling as such does not preclude the possibility o the developers having provided many combat (and non-combat) options for the player who desires more control o' the particular class.  

 

late edit: am aware 'o the tendency o' low-maintenace to seem boring.  even with all the actual fighter options, if one simple uses as a low-maintenance meat shield, then the fighter very well could seem boring.  however, with 11 classes, one need not like every class, yes?  you wanna play more active tank which produces greater dps?  is monks and barbarians and paladins and chanters which work excellent as tanks.  Gromnir, for example, dislikes chanters.  the chanter class is powerful and works as intended, but we prefer priests and paladins for support as we find the chants and invocations mechanics to be less than ideal to our playing style.  11 classes means roles should be more limited.  more limited roles means a greater likelihood somebody won't like a particular class.  however, eleven classes also means there is likely to be an alternative class available which should meet a player's expectations.  

 

 

 which would be much different from an ie game fighter

 

This is my main issue. In the IE games, which PoE is supposed to be a spiritual successor of, fighter-types were not only capable of holding back melee enemies, but they were capable of dishing out damage as well. Korgan dual-wielding the Axe of the Unyielding and Crom Frayer was a terrifying sight indeed.

 

 

lord, save us from the "spiritual successor" stuff.  it means nothing.  while obsidian never promised such, whatever you mean by such a label is gonna be different than what Gromnir or maxquest or gifted might mean.  whatever is the essential qualities and aspects o' spiritual successor is so elastic as to deprive the shibboleth o' any actual meaning. poe has classes and familiar races and an isometric top-down view o' a multi-character party. is many ways in which poe and the ie games were similar.  why ain't the poe gestalt o' familiar ie features enough to be making it a spiritual successor? 'cause the poe fighter ain't enough like the bg2 fighter?  is different for you than for many others.  pointless to claim spiritual successor failure for a specific feature.

 

(insert eye-roll here)

 

poe fighters were identified, from the earliest days o' the poe development, as being different from the ie class o' the same name... which, ridiculously, is what folks is getting hung up 'pon. if the poe fighter were having been called a defender, and the rogue had been identified as a skirmisher, am suspecting most complaints wherein ghost o' ie were raised would never have happened. why should name be the problem when the developers made very clear the ie and poe versions would be different? nobody were snookered or tricked and nobody save for karakov complained... which ain't throwing him under the bus, but is rather an acknowledgement that he alone o' the folks complaining during the beta who had also posted in the fighter intro thread had some justification for doing so.

 

you point to a horribly broken bg2 example o' a well nigh unstoppable korgan dual-wielding overpowered weapons as to what is wrong, what is missing, from poe.  no.  just no.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited May 5, 2017 by Gromnir

[Boeroer]

@Boeroer, agreed, Charge is awesome)

But still, would you trade something like HoF for it?

 

As for Take the Hit... imho there should be some damage reduction, like nearby allies take 50% of the incoming damage, while fighter takes only 30%. Otherwise what's the point? If I don't want someone get hit, I won't place them on frontline near the fighter. Plus there are cc effects to keep enemies at bay.

HoF deals more damage, sure. But with Charge you are so fast and mobile while dealing great damage, it's just awesome to zoom to casters, do a Knockdown, zoom to the next and so on. Also great that the target at the receiving end will take the damage of Charge and an additional Full Attack's damage. Most of the time that means instant death. Too bad it comes so late. It would make the fighter a much better class if you could take Charge earlier.

 

You didn't think of Take the Hit + Triggered Immunity.

Besides that little trick - I can't remember if the 50% damage was pre DR or not. If it's pre DR it would be benefical since DR would apply twice. But I guess it was raw damage, right?

However, the trick is (or was) to build one very sturdy fighter with tons of CON and maxed out self heals who doesn't get hit a lot. I simply used a pike setup for the second row. That fighter could attack from the secons row, didn't get hit by enemies a lot and healed damage he got from Take the Hit via Constant Recovery, Rapid Recovery, CLoak of the Tireless Defender, Survival 14, Belt of Bountiful Healing and so on. A lot of damage gets concentrated on him and is not spread over the whole party, so healing is easy: you only need to heal him. That way you can build your front line a lot more damage oriented. Backside is that you always have to stay close.

Edited May 5, 2017 by Boeroer

[MortyTheGobbo]

Another Fighter ability that should be a fixture is Overbearing Guard, I think. Or something similar, at least. Knocking down enemies who try to get past you gets you some actual stickiness. Of course, it comes at level 7, which is fairly early.

[Judicator]

 

 

more interesting low-maintenance

Aren't these two objectives mutually exclusive?

 

not at all, particular for folks who is recalling how poe combat were first appreciated at the start o' the beta. one o' the most frequent complaints o' poe combat is related to pace-- is too frenetic.  for those o' us who has played the game to death, such speed issues is forgotten or unnoticeable, but many players, particular new players, see poe combat as fast and unforgiving.  having a dependable tank which needs less micromanagement (while still providing options if a player so desires to use 'em) is gonna be a boon for many.

 

regardless, the objectives is not mutual exclusive.  a low-maintenance class will not demand a player's constant attention, but labeling as such does not preclude the possibility o the developers having provided many combat (and non-combat) options for the player who desires more control o' the particular class.  

 

late edit: am aware 'o the tendency o' low-maintenace to seem boring.  even with all the actual fighter options, if one simple uses as a low-maintenance meat shield, then the fighter very well could seem boring.  however, with 11 classes, one need not like every class, yes?  you wanna play more active tank which produces greater dps?  is monks and barbarians and paladins and chanters which work excellent as tanks.  Gromnir, for example, dislikes chanters.  the chanter class is powerful and works as intended, but we prefer priests and paladins for support as we find the chants and invocations mechanics to be less than ideal to our playing style.  11 classes means roles should be more limited.  more limited roles means a greater likelihood somebody won't like a particular class.  however, eleven classes also means there is likely to be an alternative class available which should meet a player's expectations.  

 

 

 which would be much different from an ie game fighter

 

This is my main issue. In the IE games, which PoE is supposed to be a spiritual successor of, fighter-types were not only capable of holding back melee enemies, but they were capable of dishing out damage as well. Korgan dual-wielding the Axe of the Unyielding and Crom Frayer was a terrifying sight indeed.

 

 

lord, save us from the "spiritual successor" stuff.  it means nothing.  while obsidian never promised such, whatever you mean by such a label is gonna be different than what Gromnir or maxquest or gifted might mean.  whatever is the essential qualities and aspects o' spiritual successor is so elastic as to deprive the shibboleth o' any actual meaning. poe has classes and familiar races and an isometric top-down view o' a multi-character party. is many ways in which poe and the ie games were similar.  why ain't the poe gestalt o' familiar ie features enough to be making it a spiritual successor? 'cause the poe fighter ain't enough like the bg2 fighter?  is different for you than for many others.  pointless to claim spiritual successor failure for a specific feature.

 

(insert eye-roll here)

 

poe fighters were identified, from the earliest days o' the poe development, as being different from the ie class o' the same name... which, ridiculously, is what folks is getting hung up 'pon. if the poe fighter were having been called a defender, and the rogue had been identified as a skirmisher, am suspecting most complaints wherein ghost o' ie were raised would never have happened. why should name be the problem when the developers made very clear the ie and poe versions would be different? nobody were snookered or tricked and nobody save for karakov complained... which ain't throwing him under the bus, but is rather an acknowledgement that he alone o' the folks complaining during the beta who had also posted in the fighter intro thread had some justification for doing so.

 

you point to a horribly broken bg2 example o' a well nigh unstoppable korgan dual-wielding overpowered weapons as to what is wrong, what is missing, from poe.  no.  just no.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Now hold on there. It was Obsidian that marketed PoE as a return to IE-style games like BG and IWD. If they wanted to seperate the IE Fighter from the PoE variant then they should have called it something else.

 

And I hardly consider Korgan broken when Sorcerers are in the game. Not to mention a whole bunch of different multi-class/item combos that were pretty OP. But then, that's part of the fun of BG, which is something PoE is missing, IMO.

[MaxQuest]

HoF deals more damage, sure. But with Charge you are so fast and mobile while dealing great damage, it's just awesome to zoom to casters, do a Knockdown, zoom to the next and so on. Also great that the target at the receiving end will take the damage of Charge and an additional Full Attack's damage. Most of the time that means instant death. Too bad it comes so late. It would make the fighter a much better class if you could take Charge earlier.

Plus you can let your ciphers target the fighter with Ectopsychic Echo, and than let him charge)

 

You didn't think of Take the Hit + Triggered Immunity.

I am too lazy)

I know that Triggered Immunity procs when fighter takes an instance of damage greater than 10% of his max endurance.

For example dragon uses his breath, and immunity vs frost damage was activated. Then he receives raw damage from Take the Hit, and if it passes the threshold [immunity vs corrode] is substituted by [immunity vs raw]. Then he gets a Finishing Blow hit, and the existing immunity is substituted by [immunity vs crush], and so on...

I mean I am too lazy to think of effective way to use it

 

Not to mention that I only need Take the Hit protection in dragon encounters... and these are not the fights were I want to place my party near the fighter.

Edited May 6, 2017 by MaxQuest

[Gromnir]

Now hold on there. It was Obsidian that marketed PoE as a return to IE-style games like BG and IWD. If they wanted to seperate the IE Fighter from the PoE variant then they should have called it something else.

 

And I hardly consider Korgan broken when Sorcerers are in the game. Not to mention a whole bunch of different multi-class/item combos that were pretty OP. But then, that's part of the fun of BG, which is something PoE is missing, IMO.

 

 

fact sorcerers could be broken did not prevent korgan, dual-wielding artifacts, from also being busted. 'tween his berserker abilities and a handful o' potions or spells, you could make korgan immune to just 'bout anything, and dual-wielding with a hammer which raised his strength 25 and an insta-kill axe were silly busted. 

 

oh, and we agree 'bout the naming issue as you would recognize if you read our responses.  shoulda' named the poe fighter different.  defender or something similar.  nevertheless, not only did obsidian explain how a poe fighter would not be functioning the same as a ie game fighter, but they gave reasons as to why the poe fighter would not be able to do exact what you is asking from the developers.  all such explanations were made considerable in advance o' the game release, so no surprises or misleadings can be argued. 

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68384-josh-says-poes-fighters-and-rogues-arent-boring/?p=1507492

 

is there a flaw in josh's reasoning, or is you simple arguing nostalgia?  you ain't demanding a return to the flawed ie game approach is required simple 'cause o' nostalgia, eh? spiritual successor is meaningless, but even if you see as some kinda gestalt, it sure as heck don't require obsidian to enshrine every ie game/d&d mistake.  making fighters equal capable at absorbing and delivering damage in ie games were a mistake as discussed by josh in the link.  use dual-wielding korgan hurts your argument as it is an example o' the overpowered nonsense possible in bg2. 

 

folks in this thread were pointing out just how fantabulous the poe fighters were at doing damage.  such a reality, sadly, were the result o' the obsidian developers letting the poe fighter getting out-o-hand. the poe fighter as it existed in the 3.0 builds were not the fighter described by josh way back in june o' 2014.

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66380-update-81-the-front-line-fighters-and-barbarians/?p=1460938

 

poe 2 developers should take the chance to correct the class role slippage which occurred during the beta and post release o' poe.  numerous classes were given superpowers which blurred their class identities.  mistake.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

[MortyTheGobbo]

Honestly, the fighter in IE games wasn't meaningfully different from rangers or barbarians. They all get up close and deal damage. All that changes is where they get numbers from. Paladins actually differ in that they get magic.

 

"Fighter" as D&D defines it is a lousy class concept, basically. It means the generic class that doesn't have anything too special about it. Defining it as the durable defender might not be ideal, but it's a much better starting point. Particularly in Deadfire, where multiclassing will hopefully let you strike a balance between tankiness and damage by multiclassing a fighter with barbarian and/or rogue. Emphasis on hopefully, since it's a very ambitious plan.

Edited May 6, 2017 by MortyTheGobbo

[Judicator]

 

Now hold on there. It was Obsidian that marketed PoE as a return to IE-style games like BG and IWD. If they wanted to seperate the IE Fighter from the PoE variant then they should have called it something else.

 

And I hardly consider Korgan broken when Sorcerers are in the game. Not to mention a whole bunch of different multi-class/item combos that were pretty OP. But then, that's part of the fun of BG, which is something PoE is missing, IMO.

 

 

fact sorcerers could be broken did not prevent korgan, dual-wielding artifacts, from also being busted. 'tween his berserker abilities and a handful o' potions or spells, you could make korgan immune to just 'bout anything, and dual-wielding with a hammer which raised his strength 25 and an insta-kill axe were silly busted. 

 

oh, and we agree 'bout the naming issue as you would recognize if you read our responses.  shoulda' named the poe fighter different.  defender or something similar.  nevertheless, not only did obsidian explain how a poe fighter would not be functioning the same as a ie game fighter, but they gave reasons as to why the poe fighter would not be able to do exact what you is asking from the developers.  all such explanations were made considerable in advance o' the game release, so no surprises or misleadings can be argued. 

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68384-josh-says-poes-fighters-and-rogues-arent-boring/?p=1507492

 

is there a flaw in josh's reasoning, or is you simple arguing nostalgia?  you ain't demanding a return to the flawed ie game approach is required simple 'cause o' nostalgia, eh? spiritual successor is meaningless, but even if you see as some kinda gestalt, it sure as heck don't require obsidian to enshrine every ie game/d&d mistake.  making fighters equal capable at absorbing and delivering damage in ie games were a mistake as discussed by josh in the link.  use dual-wielding korgan hurts your argument as it is an example o' the overpowered nonsense possible in bg2. 

 

folks in this thread were pointing out just how fantabulous the poe fighters were at doing damage.  such a reality, sadly, were the result o' the obsidian developers letting the poe fighter getting out-o-hand. the poe fighter as it existed in the 3.0 builds were not the fighter described by josh way back in june o' 2014.

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66380-update-81-the-front-line-fighters-and-barbarians/?p=1460938

 

poe 2 developers should take the chance to correct the class role slippage which occurred during the beta and post release o' poe.  numerous classes were given superpowers which blurred their class identities.  mistake.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

I wouldn't really consider him overpowered when half the enemies can just flat out stop time itself, summon demons, and insta kill all your squishy party members within a turn.

 

The problem with your reasoning is that you expect everyone to have read up on all the dev posts before even playing the game. If you're some dude who just saw PoE and figured "Hey, this looks kinda like Baldur's Gate and I loved that game. Lets give it a try." you'd be pretty surprised by how different some classes were. You shouldn't have to do homework before buying a game.

 

I can't agree that making fighters that can, you know, fight is a mistake either. It makes no sense that the only class that can master weapons will be outperformed by a half-mad savage or some forest hippie.

[Gromnir]

 

I wouldn't really consider him overpowered when half the enemies can just flat out stop time itself, summon demons, and insta kill all your squishy party members within a turn.

 

The problem with your reasoning is that you expect everyone to have read up on all the dev posts before even playing the game. If you're some dude who just saw PoE and figured "Hey, this looks kinda like Baldur's Gate and I loved that game. Lets give it a try." you'd be pretty surprised by how different some classes were. You shouldn't have to do homework before buying a game.

 

I can't agree that making fighters that can, you know, fight is a mistake either. It makes no sense that the only class that can master weapons will be outperformed by a half-mad savage or some forest hippie.

 

you can make korgan effective ignored by demons with a low-level priest spell or scrolls.  you can negate most insta-kills with his kit abilities or scrolls.  as for the rare time stops, that is why you got your own wizards in a party, but chances are you wouldn't need 'cause your likely super-speed korgan with weapons o' doom has likely killed any but a handful o' bg2 foes in a matter o' seconds.  is not much need to argue this further.  if you are honest not seeing grandmaster korgan, dual-wielding hammer o' thunderbolts and the axe of yielding as an example o' bg2 op, then poe is clear not the game for you.  such munchkiny nonsense is exact the kinda ie bagage the obsidian developers were ridding themselves o' when they built poe.  still got got all kinda poe features which is familiar to the ie fan w/o the busted arse korgan example, so claims o' spiritual successor failure is dubious at best.

 

as for complaining justified ignorance, am unmoved.  nobody in their right mind is gonna assume everything 'bout poe would be identical to the ie games, particular as the ie games were so varied.  would be impossible to make poe like all the ie games.  even so, if you contributed to the kickstarter, then you would get emailed developer updates.  read or not is on you. if you were late to the party and simple bought on a whim, then feign ignorance 'cause thac0 were abandoned or dual-classing were missing or the aforementioned insta-kills were removed would be a prime example o' recognizing ye olde warning to the foolish: caveat emptor.  again, the reasonable person is gonna assume changes would be made.  you not care enough to check what is different is on you. 'course is moot as you is now informed.  so congrats.  problem solved, eh?

 

every class in the game is having combat use, so all classes fight.  if is simple the naming nomenclature which continues to baffle you, then am amused, but am doubtful there is much help coming your way.  get a name-change from fighter to defender seems unlikely at this point, yes? 'course to simple demand poe fighters who can fight ignores reality and the developer response to your complaint.  perhaps you did not notice, but poe is a squad-based, tactical combat game with rpg elements.  to play poe w/o one or two tanks makes it more difficult for your party to fight effective. heck, we rare do a potd run without a tank and an off-tank. nevertheless, chanters fight. priests fight. ciphers fight.  fighters do indeed fight.

 

*shrug*

 

also, if you are gonna refuse to read or respond to the actual developer reasons for making the poe fighter, "low-maintenance, reliable, and long-lived even in marathon battles," as 'posed to being able to chunk everything and withstand trebuchet strikes as were the case with 2nd edition fighters, then am not gonna be able to make much headway.   we linked.  don't wanna read?  don't understand?  am not seeing how to help you.

 

am repeating self.  until we get word from obsidian, am not seeing a reason to prolong the agony.  am actual a bit curious 'bout obsidian plans for a number o' poe classes which mutated with every build... and for the rogue which largely kept its original role and thus became marginalized. 'course is gonna be nothing but conjecture 'til we hear from the developers or get our hands on the beta.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Judicator]

Honestly, the fighter in IE games wasn't meaningfully different from rangers or barbarians. They all get up close and deal damage. All that changes is where they get numbers from. Paladins actually differ in that they get magic.

 

"Fighter" as D&D defines it is a lousy class concept, basically. It means the generic class that doesn't have anything too special about it. Defining it as the durable defender might not be ideal, but it's a much better starting point. Particularly in Deadfire, where multiclassing will hopefully let you strike a balance between tankiness and damage by multiclassing a fighter with barbarian and/or rogue. Emphasis on hopefully, since it's a very ambitious plan.

 

Well, considering that Barbarians were mechanically a Fighter kit, it makes sense that they're so similar.

 

I disagree. They're not generic, they're the most pure warriors in the setting, other warriors like Paladins and Rangers are basically Fighters with gimmicks.

 

 

 

I wouldn't really consider him overpowered when half the enemies can just flat out stop time itself, summon demons, and insta kill all your squishy party members within a turn.

 

The problem with your reasoning is that you expect everyone to have read up on all the dev posts before even playing the game. If you're some dude who just saw PoE and figured "Hey, this looks kinda like Baldur's Gate and I loved that game. Lets give it a try." you'd be pretty surprised by how different some classes were. You shouldn't have to do homework before buying a game.

 

I can't agree that making fighters that can, you know, fight is a mistake either. It makes no sense that the only class that can master weapons will be outperformed by a half-mad savage or some forest hippie.

 

you can make korgan effective ignored by demons with a low-level priest spell or scrolls.  you can negate most insta-kills with his kit abilities or scrolls.  as for the rare time stops, that is why you got your own wizards in a party, but chances are you wouldn't need 'cause your likely super-speed korgan with weapons o' doom has likely killed any but a handful o' bg2 foes in a matter o' seconds.  is not much need to argue this further.  if you are honest not seeing grandmaster korgan, dual-wielding hammer o' thunderbolts and the axe of yielding as an example o' bg2 op, then poe is clear not the game for you.  such munchkiny nonsense is exact the kinda ie bagage the obsidian developers were ridding themselves o' when they built poe.  still got got all kinda poe features which is familiar to the ie fan w/o the busted arse korgan example, so claims o' spiritual successor failure is dubious at best.

 

as for complaining justified ignorance, am unmoved.  nobody in their right mind is gonna assume everything 'bout poe would be identical to the ie games, particular as the ie games were so varied.  would be impossible to make poe like all the ie games.  even so, if you contributed to the kickstarter, then you would get emailed developer updates.  read or not is on you. if you were late to the party and simple bought on a whim, then feign ignorance 'cause thac0 were abandoned or dual-classing were missing or the aforementioned insta-kills were removed would be a prime example o' recognizing ye olde warning to the foolish: caveat emptor.  again, the reasonable person is gonna assume changes would be made.  you not care enough to check what is different is on you. 'course is moot as you is now informed.  so congrats.  problem solved, eh?

 

every class in the game is having combat use, so all classes fight.  if is simple the naming nomenclature which continues to baffle you, then am amused, but am doubtful there is much help coming your way.  get a name-change from fighter to defender seems unlikely at this point, yes? 'course to simple demand poe fighters who can fight ignores reality and the developer response to your complaint.  perhaps you did not notice, but poe is a squad-based, tactical combat game with rpg elements.  to play poe w/o one or two tanks makes it more difficult for your party to fight effective. heck, we rare do a potd run without a tank and an off-tank. nevertheless, chanters fight. priests fight. ciphers fight.  fighters do indeed fight.

 

*shrug*

 

also, if you are gonna refuse to read or respond to the actual developer reasons for making the poe fighter, "low-maintenance, reliable, and long-lived even in marathon battles," as 'posed to being able to chunk everything and withstand trebuchet strikes as were the case with 2nd edition fighters, then am not gonna be able to make much headway.   we linked.  don't wanna read?  don't understand?  am not seeing how to help you.

 

am repeating self.  until we get word from obsidian, am not seeing a reason to prolong the agony.  am actual a bit curious 'bout obsidian plans for a number o' poe classes which mutated with every build... and for the rogue which largely kept its original role and thus became marginalized. 'course is gonna be nothing but conjecture 'til we hear from the developers or get our hands on the beta.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

It's clear we're not going to agree, so I'll just say two things. You can easily make OP characters in PoE as well, so Obsidian failed if their goal was to avoid that, and those powerful builds and crazy spells/weapons in BG2 made the game more memorable and fun IMO. Epic level/high level campaigns always end up with cheesy munchkin builds, it's the logical conclusion after dozens of hours of killing progressively more powerful monsters. Even "hardcore" games like Dark Souls are affected by this.

Edited May 8, 2017 by Judicator

[Borissimo]

Fighters are in an awkward spot due to the classes' D&D legacy, I think. They had to be the "generic" fighting class that didn't have anything too special about it, except for "reliability".

 

Actually, if fighters in PoE are a problem, it's because they didn't follow their D&D legacy. PoE was clearly inspired by the 4th edition of D&D. The "encounter" concept, talents, and the idea of "engagement" all have clear analogues in that edition. Now in 4e, Fighters were an awesome class from day 1 and continued to be one of the funnest classes in the game even after many other classes had been added. Unfortunately, this coolness did not carry over to PoE.

 

A 4e Fighter "marks" any enemy that he attacks, regardless if the attack hits or misses. Marked enemies have an accuracy penalty when attacking anybody other than the fighter, and if a marked enemy does decide to attack someone other than the fighter (and the fighter is in reach), the fighter gets a free attack against it. Furthermore, if an enemy "breaks engagement" with the fighter and the fighter's opportunity attack hits, the enemy stops moving. These mechanics are incredibly simple yet genius, turning the fighter into a credible tank that dishes out good damage and requires a lot of thoughtful play.

 

Why Obsidian didn't borrow some of these ideas is a bit of a mystery, considering the designers clearly had an intimate knowledge of 4e. Perhaps they thought fighters would be good enough without these tanking tools and only hindsight reveals that they weren't. What I learned playing 4e is that "tank" does not have to mean "boring," and while I get that that having a limp turtle who does nothing but cower on the front lines is stupid, I do wish that the concept of tanking were more fully realized in PoE. As it stands, there are only two options for each character: ranged damage-dealer and armor-wearing melee damage dealer.

[MortyTheGobbo]

I'm really not sure if PoE has any 4e inspiration, except for per-encounter powers. As novel and borderline heretical a concept as actual abilities for non-magical classes was for 3rd edition D&D, it's hardly unique to RPGs as a whole. Attacks of opportunity are older than 4e too, and engagement is a variant of this concept.

 

That being said, 4e fighter is an example of a class that manages to be a tank, while still being able to actually fight. And like you said, it's accomplished in simple, but effective ways.

 

Of course, while we can talk about how to make a fighter a fun tank, they're not the only class that can fulfil this role. Or rather, they shouldn't be.

[rjshae]

I think that trained fighters should really benefit from being in a fighting formation. Their abilities should benefit those arrayed in the same formation. They gain this somewhat with the Guardian ability, but more could be done.

[smjjames]

I think that trained fighters should really benefit from being in a fighting formation. Their abilities should benefit those arrayed in the same formation. They gain this somewhat with the Guardian ability, but more could be done.

 

Battle formations would have to be a thing first in order for that to work. As it is, they mostly fall apart on contact with the enemy.

[rjshae]

 

I think that trained fighters should really benefit from being in a fighting formation. Their abilities should benefit those arrayed in the same formation. They gain this somewhat with the Guardian ability, but more could be done.

 

Battle formations would have to be a thing first in order for that to work. As it is, they mostly fall apart on contact with the enemy.

 

Yes, in the shifting tides of battle, lines change and reform. But fighters should benefit from conditions that don't especially favor the barbarian, if only to distinguish the two. Veteran fighters should benefit from fighting as a team... barbarians not so much. If you form a line with a fighter, you should be better off.

[Guest 4ward]

 

it doesn‘t need to be formation, something like two chars bonding. If i select my fighter and then another guy from my party then click on bonding then both chars stay close improving their defense rating, they can block, tank and be those guys you don‘t need to micromanage that much like gromnir&co like it. The player could abandon bonding whenever he likes. Better than that crap of engagement system.