Do all classes have an ability resource cost now?

[MaxQuest]

 

Thanks for clarification. Could you link the source, please?

I have a feeling that you are confusing power source points with empower charges. The latter are indeed restored on rest.

Post 6, no?

 

No

[smjjames]

Still seems like that particular combination would be pretty powerful with the right build. Subclass would also have an affect on it.

[Achilles]

 

 

Thanks for clarification. Could you link the source, please?

I have a feeling that you are confusing power source points with empower charges. The latter are indeed restored on rest.

Post 6, no?

No

I guess I have no idea where all this hand-waving about this being a departure or change is coming from then. Oh well.

[Infinitron]

We have, what, a year or so before release? So, there will definetly be lots of adjustments to how the mechanics work, especially once it gets into Beta.

 

Likely the reason we haven't gotten more information is that they haven't gotten the mechanics to where they feel it's balanced and are happy with it.

 

Yep, like I said, the idea of having both a per-rest and per-encounter resource, with the latter being tied to a stat (per-class!) that also determines ability power and more, seems a bit over-elaborate, so it wouldn't surprise me if something gets the axe.

Edited May 5, 2017 by Infinitron

[Achilles]

Still seems like that particular combination would be pretty powerful with the right build. Subclass would also have an affect on it.

Right, but the idea is to make it where any one option is inherently any more obvious than another. I suppose we won't know until the beta how good (or poor) a job they've done with that.

[smjjames]

Offtopically, what is IE? I've seen it mentioned in various places on the forum and I keep thinking Internet Explorer, but I know it's not that.

[Achilles]

Infinity Engine

[rjshae]

If it were me I'd get rid of the negative numbers and replace them with a matching number of icons. For example, -4 becomes @@@@. That will make it look less like a math problem.

 

Numbers are harder to get confused over than abstract icons though. Not to mention that there isn't all that much space in those thumbnails.

 

Not as long as the number of icons remain low and their footprint is small. Humans can easily recognize 3-4 objects at a glance.

[Gromnir]

Might as well be a fatigue mechanic; abilities scale with resource and usage decreases it, although that's probably unlikely. Regardless, it will be interesting to see if this apparently new mechanic will make the game feel more tactical.

 

fatigue shoulda' been adopted from the start o' poe, but obsidian is inching towards daylight.  if there is a poe3, then perhaps we see genuine fatigue. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Gfted1]

Offtopically, what is IE? I've seen it mentioned in various places on the forum and I keep thinking Internet Explorer, but I know it's not that.

Its the game engine the classics of yore were built upon (BG series, IWD series, PT).

[Achilles]

 

 

If it were me I'd get rid of the negative numbers and replace them with a matching number of icons. For example, -4 becomes @@@@. That will make it look less like a math problem.

Numbers are harder to get confused over than abstract icons though. Not to mention that there isn't all that much space in those thumbnails.

Not as long as the number of icons remain low and their footprint is small. Humans can easily recognize 3-4 objects at a glance.

True, however since some abilities are one point per use, you would have some thumbnails with 10 icons over them.

[smjjames]

 

Offtopically, what is IE? I've seen it mentioned in various places on the forum and I keep thinking Internet Explorer, but I know it's not that.

Its the game engine the classics of yore were built upon (BG series, IWD series, PT).

 

 

 

Yeah, I looked it up when Achilles said what it was.

[MortyTheGobbo]

 

 

 

Hm, so how does it fit into the idea of per-rest power points that empower per-encounter abilities? That doesn't seem to be it, since abilities simply cost Zeal in this example. Maybe they're exclusive to the formerly-Vancian casters, while other classes get their own resources.

 

As far as I know, the per-rest "power points" and these per-encounter resource points are two different things. One is a resource cost for using abilities, the other is a resource for boosting their power.

 

Although if this per-encounter resource concept is a new thing, it wouldn't surprise me if the per-rest power point concept gets cancelled or folded in to it somehow.

 

 

Maybe. If I'd seen that post on its own, I'd assume that Zeal, Discipline etc. are different names for the power points that can be used to empower per-encounter abilities. But on the screenshot, we can see that abilities seem to have Zeal costs just to use. Something doesn't add up.

 

 

There's a name for those per-rest power points. They're explicitly called "Empower", and they were described as causing an ability to function as if the user's Power Source (such as Zeal or Discipline) was N points higher. It would therefore be unusual if Empower was the same thing as those Power Source-derived points. More importantly, going from the screenshot it would seem to imply that the game had backtracked on making almost all of its abilities per-encounter and not per-rest, as there's no mention of the ability's Zeal cost being optional.

 

So my assumption until shown otherwise is that it's not the same thing.

 

 

That does make sense, in light of what we know.

 

 

9 Zeal unless she used an ability in a previous fight and hasn't rested since. Then it would be a number lower than 9. Perhaps 0, in which case she should rest so that she could have 9 again. I know this because Josh has stated that power points are only restored by resting (again, I suspect that this will be different for monks and chanters, but I have no evidence for this).

Thanks for clarification. Could you link the source, please?

I have a feeling that you are confusing power source points with empower charges. The latter are indeed restored on rest.

 

Per the very first post in the thread, there is a progression for Sworn Enemy that will allow her to get Zeal back if the targeted enemy is defeated (unclear if the enemy has to be defeated by her). Also unclear if other classes will have access to something similar.

I've seen that post and was aware of cost refunds.

 

Maybe. If I'd seen that post on its own, I'd assume that Zeal, Discipline etc. are different names for the power points that can be used to empower per-encounter abilities. But on the screenshot, we can see that abilities seem to have Zeal costs just to use. Something doesn't add up.

I suppose it's quite simple:

1. there are power source points (and we know how they are calculated, thanks to update #7)

2. they are used to compute related power level

3. power level determines spell progression for ex-vancian classes (wizard, druid and priest). (i.e. to what spells they have access to, and how many of each rank can they cast per-encounter). Also it determines the size of per-encounter resource pool for paladins.

4. while empower is per-rest stuff. I.e. there is a limited amount of charges, which can be used to augment some of your spells or abilities.

 

 

Likewise. The Empower points might be the new pacing mechanic, to force resting - since they're apparently removing the endurance/health split.

[smjjames]

If they're going to force resting, then I hope they increase the camping supplies cap, or remove it alltogether. Seems like that would be rather annoying as a pacing mechanic.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

So we've got resource cost for abilities that draw from a pool instead of the per-encounter/rest abilities of PoE. Spells are broken up into level based chunks, and I assume Chants/Focus/Wounds will be unique pools with other martial classes possibly drawing from a common pool or having seperate pools.

[rjshae]

 

 

 

If it were me I'd get rid of the negative numbers and replace them with a matching number of icons. For example, -4 becomes @@@@. That will make it look less like a math problem.

Numbers are harder to get confused over than abstract icons though. Not to mention that there isn't all that much space in those thumbnails.

Not as long as the number of icons remain low and their footprint is small. Humans can easily recognize 3-4 objects at a glance.

True, however since some abilities are one point per use, you would have some thumbnails with 10 icons over them.

 

Huh? One point per use = @

[Achilles]

...x10 over a small area

[Achilles]

If they're going to force resting, then I hope they increase the camping supplies cap, or remove it alltogether. Seems like that would be rather annoying as a pacing mechanic.

That's one way to look at it. Another might be that they are trying to make resting less optional/bring it more in line with how they intended it to be used in Pillars 1

[MortyTheGobbo]

The major difference is that when you run out of empower points, it just means you can't go all out. Meanwhile, when you run out of health, you either rest or die. And when you run out of daily spells, the caster's usefulness drops sharply.

[MortyTheGobbo]

Double post, but we have a clarification on how it works now.

[Achilles]

Double post, but we have a clarification on how it works now.

Thanks for posting that.

 

Infinitron, MaxQuest - I stand corrected. You guys were right and I was wrong.

[anameforobsidian]

Is this a good thing? I can see two sides:

 

Good:

1. It could be that it isn't that big of a change.  After all, abilities were use limited in the original Pillars.  This another type of limit.
2. Balancing could be easier.
3. It might be easier to read the UI with multiclasses.

Bad:

1. It could hurt class variety to have all of them using a resource.  Are ranged rogues and rangers going to feel similar because you have to take the exact same considerations in combat?
2. It could move classes away from their original core design.  Fighters were designed to be low maintenance does adding an automatic active resource change the build to make active abilities more attractive?
3. Bond is a really stupid name for a power-source.
4. Will this combined with the lack of dailies encourage rote behavior?  

 

In general though, I never found this to be a big issue.  I caused the change.

Edited May 5, 2017 by anameforobsidian

[DigitalCrack]

Is this a good thing? I can see two sides:

 

Good:

• It could be that it isn't that big of a change. After all, abilities were use limited in the original Pillars. This another type of limit.
• Balancing could be easier.
• It might be easier to read the UI with multiclasses.

Bad:

• It could hurt class variety to have all of them using a resource. Are ranged rogues and rangers going to feel similar because you have to take the exact same considerations in combat?
• It could move classes away from their original core design. Fighters were designed to be low maintenance does adding an automatic active resource change the build to make active abilities more attractive?
• Bond is a really stupid name for a power-source.
• Will this combined with the lack of dailies encourage rote behavior?

In general though, I never found this to be a big issue. I caused the change.

agreed on "Bond"...

[MortyTheGobbo]

Class variety is going to be unchanged. Those five classes already share a resource in Pillars 1 - they all use a mixture of individual per-encounter, per-rest and passive abilities. This puts them in a different category than the three casting classes, and the three classes that build up their resource.

Edited May 5, 2017 by MortyTheGobbo

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Bad:

• It could hurt class variety to have all of them using a resource.  Are ranged rogues and rangers going to feel similar because you have to take the exact same considerations in combat?
• It could move classes away from their original core design.  Fighters were designed to be low maintenance does adding an automatic active resource change the build to make active abilities more attractive?
• Bond is a really stupid name for a power-source.
• Will this combined with the lack of dailies encourage rote behavior?  

In general though, I never found this to be a big issue.  I caused the change.

 

1. No. A Rogue still relies on sneak attacks and status conditions while the Ranger relies on using the critter. Classes should have abilities that are different enough that they are differentiated that way.

 

2. Possibly, but that depends on whether or not there's plenty of passive abilities to choose from. You could build a Fighter packed with passives and only hit the Accuracy or Defense boost ability they have when it wears off.

 

3. Agreed.

 

4. I don't see how, but that's going to rely more on encounter design than resource management.