Jump to content

Is there going to be any new classes (not including subclasses)


Recommended Posts

I think taking the 11 existing classes and given 4 variants of each, and allowing you to pair any variant into a multi-class is far better. If there was an idea of a new class that is orthogonal to the existing ones, it's premise is probably now represented in some potential build.

 

They won't be surprising us either. If a true new class arrives, it will be in Pillars 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt they will do a pillars three.

 

I hope they do but I doubt it.

 

I've still got those memories from my baldurs gate 2 days when the best game ever made was released, sold above expectation, reviewed above expectations and then was not continued. Oooh that was painful to watch. Never winter nights and icewind dale weren't on par with baldurs gate by any means.

 

Over ten years later and I finally get to play the games I love again (pillars). I am praying to god for pillars three but obsidian has already made comments suggesting they want to go more mainstream and create a dumbed down skyrim equivalent. There CEO feargus said this on a podcast.

 

Here we go again................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feargus has both mentioned Pillars 3 and that the world of Eora could be used for other styles of games. They ought to keep up momentum after Deadfire, and with the console release doing well they're player base will only grow. Having invested so much into their 2D tech, it makes sense to do the third. They'll be busy enough with the Cainarsky IP if that takes off. Only after a 3rd pillars would I want them to expand the IP.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Baldur's Gate saga ended with Throne of Bhaal, and there was no way to continue it after that. The level creep already broke whatever semblance of balance AD&D 2e had at that point. If Deadfire likewise finishes the story of the Watcher of Caed Nua, I have no problem with Obsidian moving on to other projects. I trust them to surprise us and come up with something new and exciting. And I'd rather they did that than recook the same thing over and over.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

would personal prefer reduction.  heck, 0 classes would be ideal. regardless, one o' the biggest poe surprises were obsidian's success in crafting 11 different classes which each played different. sure, am thinking a few o' the classes would benefit from adjustments. am also thinking the developers went a little crazy with the post release and white march "improvements" to classes.  and might as well reiterate how we believe both the barbarian and rogue failed to match developer stated goal o' avoiding class defining abilities or powers. even so, we has congratulated obsidian numerous times regarding their overall success with classes.  to craft so many classes with genuine unique gameplay were, we believed, improbable. 

 

but 11 is more than enough.  fix the current classes, 'cause subclasses and multiclassing is gonna result in a whole host o' balancing headaches.  not need an additional class, with attendant subclasses, to further complicate the situation.

 

HA! Good Fun!

  • Like 2

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt they will do a pillars three.

 

I hope they do but I doubt it.

 

I've still got those memories from my baldurs gate 2 days when the best game ever made was released, sold above expectation, reviewed above expectations and then was not continued. Oooh that was painful to watch. Never winter nights and icewind dale weren't on par with baldurs gate by any means.

 

Over ten years later and I finally get to play the games I love again (pillars). I am praying to god for pillars three but obsidian has already made comments suggesting they want to go more mainstream and create a dumbed down skyrim equivalent. There CEO feargus said this on a podcast.

 

Here we go again................

What basis could you possible have to think so? If you haven't even paid enough attention to know there won't be added anymore classes? They have talked alot about expanding the IP, and Josh has mentioned several times, that he doesn't go into detail about all the lore or regions of the world, so others might have creative freedom for the next games, if he ain't gonna be directing them. 

 

Regarding the classes I'd really like one more. It might be OCD, but it always irritated me, that there is 11 classes and they look uneven in the character creation screen. :biggrin:  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless Deadfire does terribly I'd be very surprised if Obsidian doesn't do another game set in Eora. Whether that's Pillars 3 or something else depends heavily on whether it makes sense to continue the Watcher's story, since Pillars seems to be the Watcher's series, but I can't see any reason they'd abandon the IP.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless Deadfire does terribly I'd be very surprised if Obsidian doesn't do another game set in Eora. Whether that's Pillars 3 or something else depends heavily on whether it makes sense to continue the Watcher's story, since Pillars seems to be the Watcher's series, but I can't see any reason they'd abandon the IP.

Yeah im glad Obsidian has their own ip and hope they don't abandon it so soon. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Josh has spoken of wanting to make a third Pillars in some recent interviews - if it does happen though, it can perfectly be the case that it'll involve a new protagonist who is not the Watcher. In Axe of the Blood God he also mentioned that he is trying to rein back the sheer scope of the games so as to have something more to build towards in the future - they start with a more regional threat the likes seen in the first Pillars and then slowly move towards the more divine and unearthly as they move onwards. Now we have to find a god incarnated into a 15-story-tall statue, who knows where we might take the story next?

 

If this third part does actually happen, I'd also reckon it won't be that open-world Eora project that Feargus is interested in making - I reckon it'll be its own spinoff instead, same way Josh in the future also wants to make a more strategy-based game set in this setting.

  • Like 2

My Twitch channel: https://www.twitch.tv/alephg

Currently playing: Fallout 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd favor the focus on multiclass options for pre-existing classes over the introduction of new ones and hope that any new Pillars games focus more on unique multiclass options (like talents/abilities that require talents or abilities from two different classes) or even progression towards a classless system as Gromnir mentioned, especially if the classless system envisioned for the pnp game turns out well.

 

Well, Josh has spoken of wanting to make a third Pillars in some recent interviews - if it does happen though, it can perfectly be the case that it'll involve a new protagonist who is not the Watcher. In Axe of the Blood God he also mentioned that he is trying to rein back the sheer scope of the games so as to have something more to build towards in the future - they start with a more regional threat the likes seen in the first Pillars and then slowly move towards the more divine and unearthly as they move onwards.

 

I hope that if there is a third Pillars game and it doesn't involve the Watcher (which it hopefully wouldn't), it wouldn't be beholden to this trend of escalating to increasingly out of this world and epic events or that it would build up to such escalation more slowly over the course of multiple games to allow for more of a focus on more "mundane" events, like the threat of war between nations and the various tensions and intrigues that arise in trying to ensure that such a war doesn't (or does) come to pass during the earlier stages (e.g., the first and second games in a possible trilogy or something).

 

That said, given the extent of progression in Pillars 1 and the understandable need to drop the Watcher back down to level 1 in Pillars 2, I'm not sure that they consider it a feasible design choice to limit level progression to the extent necessary to allow a character to pick up where they left off from one game to another (which seems like it'd be more important for a trilogy; pulling the level drain card more than once makes it all the more clumsy and aggravating in my opinion, but I suppose passing the torch to an heir or protege could also work depending on the span of time involved).

Edited by blotter
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Josh has spoken of wanting to make a third Pillars in some recent interviews - if it does happen though, it can perfectly be the case that it'll involve a new protagonist who is not the Watcher. In Axe of the Blood God he also mentioned that he is trying to rein back the sheer scope of the games so as to have something more to build towards in the future - they start with a more regional threat the likes seen in the first Pillars and then slowly move towards the more divine and unearthly as they move onwards.

 

I hope that if there is a third Pillars game and it doesn't involve the Watcher (which it hopefully wouldn't), it wouldn't be beholden to this trend of escalating to increasingly out of this world and epic events or that it would build up to such escalation more slowly over the course of multiple games to allow for more of a focus on more "mundane" events, like the threat of war between nations and the various tensions and intrigues that arise in trying to ensure that such a war doesn't (or does) come to pass during the earlier stages (e.g., the first and second games in a possible trilogy or something).

 

The way I see it, the problem with the present trend of "bigger is better" is that the 'bigger' is only reflected in terms of spectacle and scale instead of actual themes and ideas. In the case of Pillars and Obsidian games in general, however, they have largely been able to match a narrative ambition with an ideological one as well, so I would actually be looking forward to them going all-out and working with a less mundane and more metaphysical premise. In this regard I trust Josh and co. to be keen enough to know when and if the scale of their games is getting out of hand and drowning what thematic content is there.

Edited by algroth
  • Like 1

My Twitch channel: https://www.twitch.tv/alephg

Currently playing: Fallout 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the case of Pillars and Obsidian games in general, however, they have largely been able to match a narrative ambition with an ideological one as well, so I would actually be looking forward to them going all-out and working with a less mundane and more metaphysical premise. In this regard I trust Josh and co. to be keen enough to know when and if the scale of their games is getting out of hand and drowning what thematic content is there.

 

I also have confidence in Obsidian's ability to handle stories and scenarios of more mythic proportions, but even if it doesn't compromise the themes they wish to explore for this game, it has potential disadvantages in the way it allows us to experience the world. The cultures that we're exposed to are more prone to be caught up in the momentous nature of whatever earth-shattering crisis we have to contend with this time around. This can also affect the sorts of events we can expect to be involved with and/or their pace and scope in accordance with the narrative requirements of a game that ultimately needs to draw things back to an epic endgame scenario.

 

Conversely, I think a storyline with a more terrestrial focus on cities or even empires allows for a more thorough and nuanced representation of the cultures involved and their dealings with each other since there isn't the competing presence of an impending apocalypse (or celestial upheaval, or whatever else) to contend with throughout the game. In a setting like Eora where souls and spirits pervade everyday life, I think this not only has the advantage of providing more options and opportunities for getting to know cultures in the world on their own terms but also grants more opportunities to emphasize the strangeness and possibilities of what is "normal" for the setting without having these things become overshadowed by the presence of more extraordinary phenomena.

 

In the worst case, I'd worry that following up Deadfire with a third game that deals with something even more out there would effectively cement expectations for anything that could come after, making any more "down to earth" looks at the setting unlikely for other Pillars games. Then again, it's also possible that Sawyer's interest in building on the scope of the games doesn't have to entail things like the birth and death of gods, the Beyond spilling into the living world, the vengeful spirits of Engwithans rising up to tear down modern civilization, or other such scenarios. For example, a budding world war could still provide a fairly strong foundation for developing some of the aspects of the setting I was referring to above while still outdoing preceding games in scope by emphasizing travel to or dealings with multiple countries (though it'd be necessary to determine how something like that could work out given disparities in naval power and technological development between these countries).

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really hope that we get a third game. When they announced romances I started wishing that it's just the beginning stages of the relationship, that would be followed up by in a third in a maturation of the relationship, and concluded in a big "Throne of Bhaal" type expansion. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

In the case of Pillars and Obsidian games in general, however, they have largely been able to match a narrative ambition with an ideological one as well, so I would actually be looking forward to them going all-out and working with a less mundane and more metaphysical premise. In this regard I trust Josh and co. to be keen enough to know when and if the scale of their games is getting out of hand and drowning what thematic content is there.

 

I also have confidence in Obsidian's ability to handle stories and scenarios of more mythic proportions, but even if it doesn't compromise the themes they wish to explore for this game, it has potential disadvantages in the way it allows us to experience the world. The cultures that we're exposed to are more prone to be caught up in the momentous nature of whatever earth-shattering crisis we have to contend with this time around. This can also affect the sorts of events we can expect to be involved with and/or their pace and scope in accordance with the narrative requirements of a game that ultimately needs to draw things back to an epic endgame scenario.

 

Conversely, I think a storyline with a more terrestrial focus on cities or even empires allows for a more thorough and nuanced representation of the cultures involved and their dealings with each other since there isn't the competing presence of an impending apocalypse (or celestial upheaval, or whatever else) to contend with throughout the game. In a setting like Eora where souls and spirits pervade everyday life, I think this not only has the advantage of providing more options and opportunities for getting to know cultures in the world on their own terms but also grants more opportunities to emphasize the strangeness and possibilities of what is "normal" for the setting without having these things become overshadowed by the presence of more extraordinary phenomena.

 

In the worst case, I'd worry that following up Deadfire with a third game that deals with something even more out there would effectively cement expectations for anything that could come after, making any more "down to earth" looks at the setting unlikely for other Pillars games. Then again, it's also possible that Sawyer's interest in building on the scope of the games doesn't have to entail things like the birth and death of gods, the Beyond spilling into the living world, the vengeful spirits of Engwithans rising up to tear down modern civilization, or other such scenarios. For example, a budding world war could still provide a fairly strong foundation for developing some of the aspects of the setting I was referring to above while still outdoing preceding games in scope by emphasizing travel to or dealings with multiple countries (though it'd be necessary to determine how something like that could work out given disparities in naval power and technological development between these countries).

 

 

Well, Sawyer did mention upping the stakes in relation to more divine, metaphysical or similarly extraordinary events and focuses in the Axe of the Blood God interview. Personally I do like this as it is usually what catches my interest the deepest, over more mundane, social or political matters. I will say too that whatever large-scale crisis, be it in the shape of something otherworldly or just a large enough worldly threat (such as war in a large enough scale - see Tyranny for example), will inevitably have a huge impact on the society of that time and transform it with regards to a more peaceful or stable time. But having said all of this, it too is a possibility that the 'stakes' as Sawyer described are not going to come in the shape of a world-changing phenomenon necessarily, and more of a personal threat that forces the player to embark on a journey that takes them to places where no one else has been and so on. In that interview Sawyer mentions something along the lines of 'the gods not being done with you', and I think that indicates a focus on a more personal conflict which may or may not tie into a larger conflict. I see The Mask of the Betrayer as a likely template of what could await a potential third game: a journey that stems from our need of survival and sends us into new lands, the Beyond, and deeper into the history of gods, the cosmogony of Eora and so on, without necessarily presenting a grave new threat to the people of Eora. In fact this example would open us up to exploring Engwithan culture to a much deeper degree than we so far have. This is also why, in spite of being in agreement with your concerns, I don't think it's necessarily an either/or: I don't think dealing in a less earthly conflict will necessarily reduce the detail on what cultures we may interact with.

  • Like 2

My Twitch channel: https://www.twitch.tv/alephg

Currently playing: Fallout 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Sawyer did mention upping the stakes in relation to more divine, metaphysical or similarly extraordinary events and focuses in the Axe of the Blood God interview. Personally I do like this as it is usually what catches my interest the deepest, over more mundane, social or political matters.

 

All things being equal, I don't necessarily favor one over the other, but more mundane events are so rarely the focus of fantasy RPGs (at least past a certain point when it lapses back into the struggle to thwart a dark god's conquest, slay or banish an ancient evil, or whatever else) that I think it'd be a nice change of pace. Also, I often find that delving deeper into more mundane scenarios lends greater impact to extraordinary events and revelations when they do occur within settings.

 

Also, in Eora, where people basically weaponize their souls and traumatic events can seed locations with the memories of the dead, I'd still expect there to be a great deal of room for the unearthly/metaphysical in the midst of wars or other man-made forms of upheaval.

 

(Edit: Throw in differing conceptions of gods that are worshipped in all these nations, as well as questions of how intra-faith conflicts between distinct cultures play out when the faithful can actually commune with their gods, and there's even more room for the metaphysical even when it's the not be-all and end-all for the plot.)

 

I will say too that whatever large-scale crisis, be it in the shape of something otherworldly or just a large enough worldly threat (such as war in a large enough scale - see Tyranny for example), will inevitably have a huge impact on the society of that time and transform it with regards to a more peaceful or stable time.

 

I agree that massive wars and intrigues that can steer the fate of nations can have widespread and long-lasting changes of these nations by definition, but at the same time, they also reflect more of an organic progression of events and conflict for the nations affected insofar as they involve less disruption from sudden and overriding external factors like colossal adra statues animated by gods. These more mundane events emerge wholly from the histories of the nations involved and their contribution to present-day dynamics between them, which I think reveals more about the nations in question than when changes are driven by more supernatural/otherworldly/deific upheaval.

 

This is also why, in spite of being in agreement with your concerns, I don't think it's necessarily an either/or: I don't think dealing in a less earthly conflict will necessarily reduce the detail on what cultures we may interact with.

 

Perhaps not necessarily, but it does tend to work out that way. Especially when the less earthly conflict in question is the driving focus or ultimate narrative destination point for the game. I'd argue that in all likelihood, a Pillars game for which the focus is on the growing threat of war between nations would almost certainly feature more detail on the nations involved, their histories, and their conflicts than a Pillars game where these nations were significant but we ultimately leave them behind to fulfill our destiny in the Beyond or whatever. This is because a larger number of key figures in the game would be tied to these nations and the developments between them wouldn't be a focus for only an act or two, but rather throughout the game as a whole.

 

It's also not simply a matter of what information is presented but also how it's presented: a Pillars game that had war or intrigue between nations as its driving focus would also be more likely to invest extensively into in-game reactivity as it pertains to shifts in the power dynamics and allegiances between nations and the nations' internal stability (or lack thereof) since the narrative would be more firmly and persistently linked to such developments. In a Pillars game where things ultimately progress to a journey into the depths of the Beyond, a confrontation with one or more gods, or some other similarly otherworldly climax, city or nation-based developments and outcomes are more likely to be relegated to end slides or passing comments in dialogue as opposed to culminating in scenarios that we can more actively witness or participate in.

 

In fact this example would open us up to exploring Engwithan culture to a much deeper degree than we so far have

 

The Engwithans are a definite exception to this since any story that digs more deeply into them is almost certain to be complimentary to further delving into the nature of the gods and the Beyond. To be honest, however, in light of what's already been revealed about the Engwithans, I wonder if any further revelations would seem like trivia by comparison.

 

In any case, I'm personally more interested in the nations that are currently active and have more potential to change for better or worse, but to each their own.

Edited by blotter
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of those are good points, really. I agree with much of what you write, but would still not discard the other option as viable for a fascinating premise for a third game. For the most part I do think the question falls to what they have in mind going into a third part and what they would wish to develop from a thematic standpoint. It's true that a story that is more immediately centered on a present-day Eoran culture will see that culture likely developed to a much better degree, thanks to in-game reactivity, a reaction to the development of conflict up to par with the player's actions and so on; but while all of this would be pretty interesting I also wouldn't miss it if the story simply didn't require it. I didn't really feel Mask of the Betrayer was worse off for not involving the Thayans or Rashemen deeper in its story than it did.

My Twitch channel: https://www.twitch.tv/alephg

Currently playing: Fallout 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...