The best frontman

[Slack83er]

Ok. Maybe I was lacking PoE lore then. I couldn't see a rude and uneducated barbarian be the mouth of the group. I'm too old-school for that. Bards, Paladins, Fighters even...they do the talk. Rogues, Bards, Rangers...they do the scouting.. 

So..this means that in this game the only thing that tells a class apart from the other is the abilities and mechanics??

Ow...

 

Now I'm very confused about what to do.. No fun in being always on the front kicking arses... hit hit hit...

[Belfaldurnik]

I couldn't see a rude and uneducated barbarian be the mouth of the group. I'm too old-school for that. Bards, Paladins, Fighters even...they do the talk.

 

Uhm, what would you do, if you played a party of six Barbarians?

 

In this game, a Paladin should follow the order's favored behavior, which is aggressive/cruel for the Bleak Walkers. Note that you don't lose side-quests or rewards if going that path. Quite the opposite. You gain various opportunities. It's good choice for other classes, too.

 

Rogues, Bards, Rangers...they do the scouting.. 

So..this means that in this game the only thing that tells a class apart from the other is the abilities and mechanics??

 

Class-specific talents, base stats (Health, Endurance, Deflection, Accuracy) and skill bonuses.

[Slack83er]

Uhm, what would you do, if you played a party of six Barbarians?

 

In this game, a Paladin should follow the order's favored behavior, which is aggressive/cruel for the Bleak Walkers. Note that you don't lose side-quests or rewards if going that path. Quite the opposite. You gain various opportunities. It's good choice for other classes, too.

Six barbarians? It's a horde, not a party! (please note I play a barbarian in tabletop, lol)

 

I know about the paladins' particular code of conduct, but I believe it's very restrictive for the advantages it gives you.. You know my real dream? Play a sort of darin buccaneer/pirate. Two weapons or rapier+buckler. That'd be fun and cool!

[JerekKruger]

You know my real dream? Play a sort of darin buccaneer/pirate. Two weapons or rapier+buckler. That'd be fun and cool!

 

Rogue, Cipher, Fighter or, perhaps*, Monk could all be built to do this I'd say.

 

*I say perhaps not because they can't, but I realise some people dislike playing Monks in anything other than the Shaolin style unarmed Asian martial artist.

[Slack83er]

You know... I agree with you, but I find it damn difficult to create the character and go on with it for more than a bit. I always find it very annoying to just punch enemies' faces. This is the reason I look for scouts/vanguards etc. You roam maps just to kill encounters... maybe I'm doing something wrong..

 

That said... Aumaua for a pirate? What does he need? Dex/Mig? Res? 

There's also a specific bg that says I'm a sea raider...

[JerekKruger]

I couldn't see a rude and uneducated barbarian be the mouth of the group. 

 

Well of course, but there's nothing saying Barbarians have to be rude or uneducated.

 

I'm too old-school for that. Bards, Paladins, Fighters even...they do the talk. Rogues, Bards, Rangers...they do the scouting.. 

 

I think you're typecasting. You're assuming that every example of a given class has to be identical to the prototypical member of that class. I suspect that this is (one of) the reasons a lot of people dislike class based systems: they stifle role-playing in a lot of people, forcing them to adopt narrow tropes.

 

For example take the Bard. How many excellent musicians have been utter arseholes? A lot. I think a musician is well represented as a Bard, yet this type would be pretty terrible as a face for the party.

Edited May 13, 2017 by JerekKruger

[Slack83er]

I suspect that this is (one of) the reasons a lot of people dislike class based systems: they stifle role-playing in a lot of people, forcing them to adopt narrow tropes.

This is absolutely true. I find it very difficult to follow a precise and narrow route while interpreting my character. For me, a monk is a monk. A fighter is a fighter. In fact, while playing my first tabletop rpgs, I used to multiclass like hell, trying to adhere as much as I could to what I had in mind. Wanna know my favourite Pc game ever? Divinity II. Classless system.

[Slack83er]

I also want to add a personal feeling: this game is awesome but animations are really crappy. There's no satisfaction at all in seeing you character in combat as it kinda seems a wood statue swinging a toothpick. The only exceptions are mages, who chant something and cast some visual spells..and monks that actually move the hands according to some kind of logical pattern. But then again.. while playing a monk I felt like I'm... opening my way with fists and all, no involvement in what happens in the game... Maybe ciphers are more into lore, and orlans too but... Well...dunno... I'm kinda baffled..

[smjjames]

You know... I agree with you, but I find it damn difficult to create the character and go on with it for more than a bit. I always find it very annoying to just punch enemies' faces. This is the reason I look for scouts/vanguards etc. You roam maps just to kill encounters... maybe I'm doing something wrong..

 

That said... Aumaua for a pirate? What does he need? Dex/Mig? Res? 

There's also a specific bg that says I'm a sea raider...

 

*points slack83er to the rogueish monk concept build*. That one btw, is supposed to have a piratey background (and is also Aumaua), but fights in a close quarters combat style. So, the question should be 'how do you want your pirate to fight?'. I think you should just set it up the way you feel is right for the character you're doing.

[Slack83er]

The concept is fine...but this character won't talk at all. No per, int or res... Just standard phrases...

Moreover, if you read what I said before (that is my own opinion of course, no universal law) I don't correctly understand how a monk could ever be a raider... imo a monk is a monk.

[oaktownbrown]

Here are the dialog checks in 1.x. It doesn't count the White March but maybe someone will have those.

 

Barbarian: 2
Chanter: 1
Cipher: 12
Druid: 1
Fighter: 4
Monk: 2
Paladin: 1 + Order
Priest: 6 (3 unique - without equivalent "Clergyman" background check) + Deity
Ranger: 2
Rogue: 2
Wizard: 3

Kind Wayfarers: 7
Bleak Walkers: 6
Shieldbearers: 3
Goldpact: 2
Darcozzi: 3

Berath: 3
Skaen: 7
Magran: 5
Wael: 5
Eothas: 7

Aristocrat: 8
Artist: 4
Clergyman: 7 (4 unique)
Colonist: 9
Dissident: 6
Drifter: 4
Explorer: 9
Hunter: 10
Laborer: 8
Mercenary: 8
Merchant: 11
Mystic: 5
Philosopher: 11
Raider: 11
Scholar: 13
Scientist: 6
Slave: 7

Aedyr: 12 (5 of them with Aloth)
Deadfire: 9
Ixamitl Plains: 1
Old Vailia: 4
Rauatai: 9 (8 with Kana)
The Living Lands: 9
White That Wends: 14

Aumaua: 7
Coastal Aumaua: 1

Dwarf: 0
Boreal Dwarf: 1

Elf: 1
Snow Elf: 7 (3 with Glaswal)

Godlike: 10
Fire Godlike: 4
Nature Godlike: 2
Moon Godlike: 2
Death Godlike: 3

Human: 1

Orlan: 14 (5 with Captain Aldmar)
Hearth Orlan: 1
Wild Orlan: 1

Male: 7
Female: 12

First number shows amount of conversations where the stat is checked, numbers in brackets include multiple checks per conversation (can be slightly inaccurate):

Might: 38 (42)
Constitution: 12 (12)
Dexterity: 19 (21)
Perception: 42 (47)
Intellect: 40 (55)
Resolve: 55 (81)

Stealth: 4 (5)
Athletics: 22 (30+) (only checked once outside of text adventures, by the Glanfathan Leader)
Lore: 18 (25)
Mechanics: 4 (7)
Survival: 14 (16)

Highest amount checked:

Stealth: 6 (Falanroed/Maw)
Athletics: ? (possibly 11 on Burial Isle)
Lore: 10 (lots)
Mechanics: 8 (Durance)
Survival: 12 (Sagani)

Disposition checks:

Aggressive 39
Benevolent 40
Clever 27
Cruel 52
Deceptive 30
Diplomatic 25
Honest 26
Passionate 33
Rational 30
Stoic 28

Highest unlocks are for Rank 3; Rank 4 is only used to lock options.

 

http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/raw-numbers-for-poes-dialogue-checks.98722/

 

 

So it looks like a Priest or Cipher would be the best class for dialog. For races, you'd want to pick one that unlocks options and gives high resolve and either intelligence, perception, or might. Orlans and Humans give +1 to resolve and either perception or might. Orlans also unlocks some conversation options (and sometimes innskeepers, guards, and others have things to say to you because you're an Orlan). I think it's a good race to play.

 

Aedyr and Ixamitl Plains give +1 to resolve too. Philosopher is a good background for unlocking conversation; you need to be from Ixamitl Plains to choose a philosopher background. Downside is that it gives you +2 to Lore, not Mechanics, which you need for traps. Lore is good for unlocking options in conversations, though, and sometimes letting you talk your way out of a fight. Drifter is a good background bc it gives +1 to Mechanics and +1 to Stealth. It may not fit in with your fairly rigid concepts about characters, though. Laborer, merchant, and scientist also give +1 to Mechanics.

 

As others have said, you won't be able to unlock all the conversation options because many of them are tied to reputation and if you pick, e.g., the benevolent option, you aren't going to be able to pick the aggressive or rational one there. You can have both benevolent and aggressive reputations but it's hard to have high scores in more than a few, which you'd need (and need them early) to unlock all the conversation options.

 

As others have said, you can use your companions to unlock options in the CYOAs, which is nice, but not in the conversations. However, you can buff your stats to some degree by using potions, food, resting bonuses, equipment, etc. Here is a thread:  https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/86038-metagaming-boosting-resolve-for-dialogue-checks/

Edited May 13, 2017 by oaktownbrown

[Slack83er]

Thank you.

But despite all of this...my problem remains: I can't really find the exact role I'm looking for. I don't like being confined to a precise class but this game won't let me create something unique... I don't really know how to better explain this... I have an idea in mind...but it's vague... I only know I want to be talkative and scouty... but I want to be a leader for the party.. 

do something special...

[scythesong]

That's a bit ironic since the game allows you to play pretty much however you want, the class system helps bring order to the chaos by giving you a "default" specialty which you can work on subverting if you really want to.

[oaktownbrown]

Thank you.

But despite all of this...my problem remains: I can't really find the exact role I'm looking for. I don't like being confined to a precise class but this game won't let me create something unique... I don't really know how to better explain this... I have an idea in mind...but it's vague... I only know I want to be talkative and scouty... but I want to be a leader for the party.. 

do something special...

 

I'm not following because I don't understand how the classes restrict your ability to be a leader, talk, or scout. They give starting bonuses to skills (e.g., stealth) and determine what talents you can take but not much else (except for combat things like starting deflection and accuracy and what you can do in combat). Rogues and Ciphers are good because they both give a starting bonus to both stealth and mechanics (rogue gets +2 to mechanics) but you can have any player be a scout or trap monkey. I used Durance because mechanics (traps) makes his seal spells stronger.

 

Here is a list of classes and backgrounds that give bonuses to stealth:  http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Stealth

 

Mechanics: http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Mechanics

 

I like classless systems too but I don't feel restricted with respect to making someone who is a leader, good in conversations, good at stealth, or good at traps because of PoE's class system. (Parenthetically, IMO you don't need a character to have a particularly high stealth in order to make a good scout but YMMV.) I feel like it's a much bigger restriction in combat. What would you like to do that you can't bc of PoE's system?

[Slack83er]

What would you like to do that you can't bc of PoE's system?

 

 

There's nothing that the class system forbids me to do. But I always get this awkward feeling that what I do with a class can also be done by another. I cannot be unique. There's a lack of proper roles. It's a hybrid... If you do a game with a class system, then stick to it. Don't make wizards experts in disarming traps! (they start with 1 in it) It's rogues' stuff! This way I get the feeling that with 6 fighters I can beat the game just right... as a fighter can scout, beat, disarm, be stealthy, talk, and with proper lore even cast spells..

 

By the way... I'd be more than happy if anyone can prove me I'm wrong and comes out with something unique, for I haven't found anything to date.

[scythesong]

Your problem is that you are overthinking this. You should just play the game and let your experience determine your future opinions.

 

Also, PoE's class system is not based on profession, and even D&D tries very hard to shake off that trope except it seems the players don't seem to want to get rid of it.

So in PoE fighters can be sneaky, have a clever disposition and can be intelligent and perceptive. This means that they can be competent spies and thieves instead of just traditional soldiers.

A PoE rogue can have a brutally honest disposition and be athletic/wilderness-savvy instead of sneaky. This means that they can be wilderness guides or traders instead of burglars.

 

In PoE, each class is designed around having different specialties in combat, specialities that will ALWAYS be a part of that class unless you go out of your way to reject them (in which case, it's your loss). These specialties show up as class-specific talents and abilities (eg. spellcasting).

 

Fighters, for example, will always have a tanky element. It's practically intrinsic to the class unless you go out of your way to create a squishy fighter, for whatever reason.

The character creation window  should give you enough info about each class and what they can do so you know what to expect when you choose your class. If you think the information there is not enough though, feel free to ask around here about what unique thing each class brings to the table.

Edited May 14, 2017 by scythesong

[oaktownbrown]

 

What would you like to do that you can't bc of PoE's system?

 

 

There's nothing that the class system forbids me to do. But I always get this awkward feeling that what I do with a class can also be done by another. I cannot be unique. There's a lack of proper roles. It's a hybrid... If you do a game with a class system, then stick to it. Don't make wizards experts in disarming traps! (they start with 1 in it) It's rogues' stuff! This way I get the feeling that with 6 fighters I can beat the game just right... as a fighter can scout, beat, disarm, be stealthy, talk, and with proper lore even cast spells..

 

By the way... I'd be more than happy if anyone can prove me I'm wrong and comes out with something unique, for I haven't found anything to date.

 

 

 

You're right that six fighters can beat the game, or six rogues, six wizards, or six whatever. But so can one, though soloing is definitely easier with some classes than others.  You don't NEED a party at all, much less a mixed party.

 

Ppl play with a party because they think it's more fun, not because they have to. And they play with "party X" because they think it's more fun, whether party X is a party of six rangers or a party that tries to use all the companions about equally and tries to make sure that there are different combos throughout the game (i.e., try to make sure that Grieving Mother is in pretty much every possible party composition, same with Pallengina, Durance, Aloth, Sagani, Hiravias, Kana, Eder, Devil, Maneha, and Zahua and try to make the amount of time in the various compositions roughly equal). The latter is how I'm playing PoE because I want to play around with lots of combos rather than maximizing, e.g.,  Maneha's stats and equpment, to play with a certain party composition. I'd rather build characters who work well with lots of combos and doing that forces me to be flexible, adapting to other party member as well as various equipment and foes. But YMMV and probably does.

 

I agree that if you build two characters the same way, they will be able to do pretty much the same things out of combat, regardless of class. E.g., if you max mechanics for a fighter, s/he will be able to disarm traps almost as well as a rogue. The rogue, with +2 in mechanics, will always be somewhat better (assuming that you invest an equal amount of points for each) at it because it will always be cheaper for her/him to get to the next level in mechanics than it will be for the fighter. But you can't max every skill (or even most of them) so a fighter who is good at lore but dabbles in mechanics will never be as good at picking locks as a character who is good at mechanics. So, if I want, my druid can be better at picking locks than using scrolls. That, to me, is one thing that is appealing about a well-made classless system.

 

It sounds like that bothers you. Why do you like a classless system if you think that you have to build characters a certain way?

 

I do wish that I could customize my druid more and decide at the beginning if I'd rather have longer/stronger spiritshift but no/few spells (or maybe only charm beast, talk to beast, etc spells), lots of spells but no/limited spiritshift or, e.g., maybe specialize in healing/buffing spells and get more of those (and stronger spells and fewer elemental spells and CC, etc. or vice-versa). Or maybe that I could learn X number of scrolls at level up (priest, wizard, or druid), kind of like a wizard. I do wish that there was more flexibility because I like a classless system but, to me, the problems with a class system in PoE relate to combat limitations, not role-playing ones.

 

I guess  I don't understand because we seem to like classless systems for different reasons. I like them because of their flexibility but you seem to dislike the flexibility you get with PoE's skills. Would you like it better if the same thing were used in a classless system? If so ,why?

Edited May 14, 2017 by oaktownbrown

[Slack83er]

The answer is rather easy. The classless system doesn't put a label on me about who I am. I can indeed be a wizard with mechanics, but I'm not defined by the wizard label. I could choose to have just 2 spells and be a fighter and that wouldn't make me a bad mage. Sure in PoE I can choose to be a mage with sword and board but I'll never be a tank because PoE wants me to stick on the mage label=squishy. This way I'll never be unique because who I am is defined by class and not by my own capabilities.

[Slack83er]

Il also add, forgive my double post, that role-wise this also forces me to play as a specific class, and you may notice this from the fact that some dialogue options are available only to certain classes. Dialogue should follow my morale and not the fact that I'm a wizard and not a fighter.. for example. So what happens is..I don't feel I got my own character but a character who is on a precise rail, no matter what I do to customise him to my tastes.

Edited May 14, 2017 by Slack83er

[scythesong]

So you're arguing that classes are restrictive because they don't let you play the way you want to play. You want to play a classless system so you can cherry pick the things you want without suffering any drawbacks. I mean, why even bother adding tanky classes if the wizard - the class that specializes in modifying the battlefield itself and which does well as a crowd control specialist/damage dealer/temporary physical combat specialist - can ALSO stand toe-to-toe against dragons without breaking a sweat.

 

Well unfortunately, PoE's system would eat you alive and spit out your remains in molecule-size if you try to implement that kind of system here. The thing is that in PoE many of your enemies reflect your character and thus, are bound by the same mechanics. Both you and your enemies follow similar character creation guidelines and thus share similar basic strengths/weaknesses - your limitations are also their limitations. Such is the balance of PoE.

 

This isn't Skyrim. Skyrim using the PoE system would be like being constantly forced to fight 3 other dovahkins as a matter course at higher difficulties. Sure, you'd be "unique" and you would not be defined by any preset limitations, but the same would also apply to your enemies.

While I guess some people wouldn't mind fighting armies of characters who lack any limitations/weaknesses just as they do, I'm not one of those people. I like a challenge, but masochism is a different thing.

 

PoE does a very good job of giving you dialog options which reflect the type of character you make. Obviously a cleric would be able to comment on faith-related issues, a cipher on issues of the mind and memory, and so on. You are NOT supposed to experience every dialog option in the game.

It would be extremely confusing if a benevolent, passionate character suddenly had the option to murder a fellow party-mate that's only supposed to be available to cruel characters, or for your elf to somehow have firsthand experience about the bitter hardships hearth orlans have to deal with, or for your goody-two-shoes paladin to suddenly intimately know about the rituals practiced by some cult to an evil god.

Edited May 14, 2017 by scythesong

[Slack83er]

Scythe, while what you say is undoubtedly true, I continue to prefer a system that doesn't stick a label on me. If you go just some posts up, you'll see my favorite game ever has been Divinity II. A game that lets you be who you want to be. Sure, you start off by picking some kind of class, but soon discover that your choice doesn't interfere at all with any choice you will make in the future, and that it was just a way to introduce you to the game. PoE wants to make me choose a career, to specialize in just ONE thing, and do it with the drawback that if you want to spread your abilities a little too thin, you'll become some sort of Jack-of-all-trades but utterly MASTER OF NONE AT ALL. I'm not discussing "balance" per se, which is good in fact, I'm just arguing that I (and that's only me, so I admit I'm just a little too picky perhaps) find this class system too restricting for my personal tastes. Imho the best result are achieved as follows:

 

Class System: Every single class is adept at doing specific tasks. Rogues, this way, will be the ONLY ones that will be able to pick locks for example. This method clearly encourages you to build up a party of character that will complete one another. This is the base of the first editions of D&D.

 

Classless system: There's no class. There's concept. You are who you want to be. No special need to look for a group or party as you, and you alone, choose which things you can do, and which you can't. If you don't choose to learn lockpicking, noone will do it for you. 

 

PoE... stands right in the middle of the two, imo. And doesn't excel in neither. You choose a class, but what you do can be accomplished by anyone, thus your choices have no particular weight in the overall big picture of the game. I've seen mages tank, and dwarves being powerful magicians. I'm quite sure this was done with the idea of ultimate freedom in mind, but to me, this is an overall failure.

[JerekKruger]

So you're arguing that classes are restrictive because they don't let you play the way you want to play. You want to play a classless system so you can cherry pick the things you want without suffering any drawbacks. I mean, why even bother adding tanky classes if the wizard - the class that specializes in modifying the battlefield itself and which does well as a crowd control specialist/damage dealer/temporary physical combat specialist - can ALSO stand toe-to-toe against dragons without breaking a sweat.

 

Classless systems don't allow you to do everything, at least not the good ones. A level cap ensures that you have limited points to spend so you still have to make compromises. The point is that in a classless system you get to decide what those compromises are, rather than being restricted by a preexisting class.

 

There are pros and cons to both class based and classless systems, but it's not at all accurate to claim people who prefer classless simply want have what they want without drawbacks.

[Belfaldurnik]

Il also add, forgive my double post, that role-wise this also forces me to play as a specific class, and you may notice this from the fact that some dialogue options are available only to certain classes. Dialogue should follow my morale and not the fact that I'm a wizard and not a fighter.. for example.

 

That's not true, and since you've not given a rationale I cannot agree with it at all. In the White March, for example, related to the Pargrunen Dwarves you get special talk options if you're a Mountain Dwarf. You may get the same or similar options only with sufficiently high Lore skill. In other cases, people may approach you in special ways, if you're a Death Godlike, and they would do so based on your appearance alone. During conversation, there may be a variety of stat checks, but the game cannot offer an infinite number of options. And it can happen, that different dialogue paths still lead to the same result. If an escaped Orlan slave, who's got problems with slave hunters, trusts you because you're an Orlan, too, it would be wrong to hope for the same reaction, if being a Death Godlike with bad reputation or Cruel 4 disposition rank. Similarly, if you've supported one of the opposing factions in the city of Defiance Bay, the other factions will no longer work with you, and while in the real world you may find ways to renegotiate that, the game only offers a finite number of role-playing paths.

 

You seem to be in search of the holy grail of a single main character that won't miss anything at all. That won't work.

[Slack83er]

Belf, you haven't caught the meaning of my quoted post. First and foremost there's nothing wrong in wanting to get the most out of an experience. That doesn't mean I'm searching for the grail, but only that I want to interpret a character who is free to be who he wants. Nothing wrong in getting special options if you're a particular race such as a godlike. They're somewhat exotic and feared. But I'll give you an example of what I don't like. Stereotyped classes. Let's just think at Aufra, Calisca's sister. You get the option of helping her out in a particular way if you're a paladin. Why can't I act with chivalry even if I'm a rogue? Yes yes, I can help her nonetheless, but the dialogue is different. This is what I don't like. A proper rpg should give you the possibility of different attitudes...like angry, chivalrous, covetous or the like. (Dragon age comes to mind) But here the game states that if you're not a paladin you can't be chivalrous. That's sticking a label on a character. So, to sum it up, you are talking about races, which is something I can agree with you on. I'm talking about classes. The only thing that defines who you are, or what you do in this game.

[scythesong]

Actually you can act Benevolent/Passionate around Aufria, though of course you need to establish such dispositions beforehand for a non-paladin. Establishing disposition is the tricky part since there are disposition-increasing dialog options you may not want to take anyway (disposition-based dialog options can be either good or bad, depending on the situation) but it gets a lot easier since these dialog options are practically everywhere.

 

And as far as "evil" paladins are concerned, I think they get a special "make sure you pay me" or "just suck it" dialog option for quests like this. PoE goes the extra mile a bit when it comes to paladin orders by establishing precedents (like the cruel Bleak Walkers, the enterprising Goldpact Knights, and the altruistic Kind Wayfarers).

Edited May 14, 2017 by scythesong