Update #40 - Multiclassing Part II

[Jajo]

 

After talking things over with the other system designers, we discussed what the most important aspects of multiclassing were.

• Allowing people to realize hybrid class character concepts.  "I want to be a fighter and a wizard."
• Keeping the overall power of the character competitive with single-class characters.  The character should be viable.  It's okay if it winds up over- or a little under-powered compared to a single-class character as long as it's not fundamentally weak.
• Allowing players to emphasize one aspect of the hybrid more than others.  "I'm a fighter and a wizard, but more of a wizard."

The original design allowed the first and the last aspects, but the middle aspect suffered because of the high degree of flexibility.  It was still easy to make non-viable characters.  A non-viable character can be part of a viable party, but still feels bad to play.  The high degree of flexibility also strained the first aspect, the basic character concept.  A character with 18 levels in fighter and 2 levels in rogue is less of a character concept and more of a strategic build choice.

 

I went back to the drawing board to revisit an idea I had around the same time as the original design, which was based on AD&D 2nd Edition-style multiclassing, where the player chooses to opt into multiclassing at character creation instead of selecting classes level-by-level.  In such systems, the core concept is established from the beginning.  A player who says, "I want to be a fighter and a wizard," can be that (a battlemage) from the beginning instead of picking one class and then alternating to the other later on.  Progression is also easier to understand from the beginning as access to abilities and the increase of their power is consistent from multiclass to multiclass.  A fighter/rogue (swashbuckler) gains access to 2nd level abilities for both classes at 4th level, as does a priest/monk (contemplative), barbarian/chanter (howler), and druid/ranger (beastmaster).

 

 

How are these static class composition progressions (you're basically replacing 11 classes with 55 classes) addressing the third core aspect of multiclassing? It seems to me You're just replacing system that takes care of points 1 and 3 with a system that takes care of points 1 and 2. Multiclassed characters will after all be forced to have multiclass progression in everything, not just abilities*. To take your illustration (and I'm not quite sure what was it supposed to illustrate), one of the ideas behind taking 2rogue/18fighter in 3ed is, that HP pool is not significantly diminished. In PoE2 it would be, since HP is not something, that the player chooses at level up - it is something, that is attributed automatically. Saving throws and BAB also fall into this category - these are all very, very important derived stats.

 

*I do not now what exactly is bundled together in this abstract term, so my concerns might be addressed already.

[draego]

Multiclassed characters will after all be forced to have multiclass progression in everything, not just abilities*.

 

Well abilities aren't exactly forced, i mean when you get them yes but what you take no. You can be a figher/rogue and take 90% fighter abilities. So there is still some flexibility. And you get more overall abilities than a single class. The other defenses in POE are defined by Attributes so there is no progression issue there because they all progress the same. This change would only significantly affect health and maybe starting deflection in POE 2 which would be averaged since i think accuracy is the same for everyone now.

Edited September 21, 2017 by draego

[injurai]

Pretty sure they've got physical based rendering going on, looks fantastic.

[Boeroer]

How are these static class composition progressions (you're basically replacing 11 classes with 55 classes) addressing the third core aspect of multiclassing?

You are able to pick different abilites on every level. You don't get them automatically. So two fighter/wizards can look and play very differently. That's how I guess.

[rjshae]

Very nice, and logical. The expanded class concept allows players a much greater chance of realizing their character concept, as well as providing greater flexibility in play. But why isn't there a necromancer sub-class?

[injurai]

Very nice, and logical. The expanded class concept allows players a much greater chance of realizing their character concept, as well as providing greater flexibility in play. But why isn't there a necromancer sub-class?

 

I don't think we were supposed to notice...

[draego]

 

Very nice, and logical. The expanded class concept allows players a much greater chance of realizing their character concept, as well as providing greater flexibility in play. But why isn't there a necromancer sub-class?

 

I don't think we were supposed to notice...

 

 

Multi-class Berath / Beckoner i suppose and the ability to rename your multiclass (which doesnt exist but there is always hope) boom necromancer - well at least in my head. There could be a wizard spell circle that could fit the theme but we would have to see the specific spells for each circle and the new spells if any.

Edited September 21, 2017 by draego

[rjshae]

to find the number of total subclasses, isn't it just a composition of combinations? we have the original 11 choose 2 = 55. then compose 55 choose 2 to get 1485 total. enter this into google for example:

 

(11 choose 2) choose 2

 

In the second pick, the sub-classes are guaranteed to be independent of each other. Hence, if there were 3+1 possible base class/sub-class combinations for each class, the total would be 55 * 4 * 4 = 880.

[Madscientist]

I like this new system a lot .

 

So now mages and priests can or even must (priest) specialize in one type of magic but they cannot use spells of another type. I have played PoE a few times, but I still do not remember each spell and what category it may have. Looks like the game will have a super large manual with tons of lists and tables. The old games had this (BG1+2, Realms of Arcadia, . . .) and I did read all of this (after my first attempt without reading where I created terreble chars and had ne idea what I was doing) and this is fine for me. I hope this complexity does not scare away new players.

 

I have two other hopes:

- Somebody will make a wiki for this. Even if the game comes with a huge manual full of lists and tables there will be many open questions. Like which ability works in combination with what other abilities (carnage, sneak attack, . . .)

- There will be a build maker, like the one for NWN2. In PoE1 I have a save with a lv 16char in an inn and before I start a new game, I create a lv15 hireling to see what abilities and talents can be taken at what level. PoE2 will be even more complex. It would be nice to create a char in another program and then publish this char and others can make comments. This would be better than the PoE class builds now in this forum.

[draego]

I like this new system a lot .

 

So now mages and priests can or even must (priest) specialize in one type of magic but they cannot use spells of another type. I have played PoE a few times, but I still do not remember each spell and what category it may have. Looks like the game will have a super large manual with tons of lists and tables. The old games had this (BG1+2, Realms of Arcadia, . . .) and I did read all of this (after my first attempt without reading where I created terreble chars and had ne idea what I was doing) and this is fine for me. I hope this complexity does not scare away new players.

 

I have two other hopes:

- Somebody will make a wiki for this. Even if the game comes with a huge manual full of lists and tables there will be many open questions. Like which ability works in combination with what other abilities (carnage, sneak attack, . . .)

- There will be a build maker, like the one for NWN2. In PoE1 I have a save with a lv 16char in an inn and before I start a new game, I create a lv15 hireling to see what abilities and talents can be taken at what level. PoE2 will be even more complex. It would be nice to create a char in another program and then publish this char and others can make comments. This would be better than the PoE class builds now in this forum.

 

Ye i would like if Obsidian didnt create a manual and created the wiki themselves in place of manual. this gets the wiki up and running and sets it up to be added to later. 

[joglesby]

Super excited - my RPG-ADD will go wild with this game.

 

Thank you @Doppelschwert for the calc post! I got the same number, but wasn't sure I had done it right - but I trust you.

[Jajo]

 

Multiclassed characters will after all be forced to have multiclass progression in everything, not just abilities*.

 

Well abilities aren't exactly forced, i mean when you get them yes but what you take no. You can be a figher/rogue and take 90% fighter abilities. So there is still some flexibility. And you get more overall abilities than a single class. The other defenses in POE are defined by Attributes so there is no progression issue there because they all progress the same. This change would only significantly affect health and maybe starting deflection in POE 2 which would be averaged since i think accuracy is the same for everyone now.

 

 

Yeah, you're right - I went and checked PoE mechanics again and if they keep it as it is in PoE, only HP would have been affected (and starting deflection, but that's easier to control).

I guess it's not a big issue after all.. certainly not as big as it first sounded to me.

[injurai]

 

I like this new system a lot .

 

So now mages and priests can or even must (priest) specialize in one type of magic but they cannot use spells of another type. I have played PoE a few times, but I still do not remember each spell and what category it may have. Looks like the game will have a super large manual with tons of lists and tables. The old games had this (BG1+2, Realms of Arcadia, . . .) and I did read all of this (after my first attempt without reading where I created terreble chars and had ne idea what I was doing) and this is fine for me. I hope this complexity does not scare away new players.

 

I have two other hopes:

- Somebody will make a wiki for this. Even if the game comes with a huge manual full of lists and tables there will be many open questions. Like which ability works in combination with what other abilities (carnage, sneak attack, . . .)

- There will be a build maker, like the one for NWN2. In PoE1 I have a save with a lv 16char in an inn and before I start a new game, I create a lv15 hireling to see what abilities and talents can be taken at what level. PoE2 will be even more complex. It would be nice to create a char in another program and then publish this char and others can make comments. This would be better than the PoE class builds now in this forum.

 

Ye i would like if Obsidian didnt create a manual and created the wiki themselves in place of manual. this gets the wiki up and running and sets it up to be added to later. 

 

 

In-game wiki would be best, and they'll have something not too far off from that.

[Messier-31]

 

Rymrgand's the god of entropy rather than decay per se. Berath is the god of death, mortality, and cycles, among other things. Even the decay-based magic of druids probably emphasizes ties to the natural order, wherein the remains of the fallen fuel the emergence of new life, so it would likely be a closer match for the process of life in death and death in life that Berath represents as opposed to the final collapse that Rymrgand brings.

 

I meant decay is more related to Rymrgands portfolio than Beraths, but this is a value judgment and  there can be an explanation of why Berath is related for decay. Anyway i think that fits more naturally with Rymrgand:

Berath: Cycles, doorways, inevitability, mortality, death and life itself.

Rymrgand: Winter, famine, entropy, bad luck, plague, natural disasters .

 

 

https://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/The_Enigmatic_God_of_Cold

 

Young students are often confused by Berath and Rymrgand's seemingly overlapping roles in holding dominion over death. Berath oversees the cycle of life, death, and rebirth; Rymrgand oversees the cold, destructive act of death itself - this difference is often difficult for novices to appreciate until they've lost a loved one and endured the absence for a time - it is Berath that determines we will be reborn just as certainly as we will die, but Rymrgand is the executioner's axe - Rymrgand shows us that all life ends in stillness.

Edited September 21, 2017 by Messier-31

[Gromnir]

we got a few concerns, but will wait 'til beta to see how multiclassing works in reality rather than on paper.  we mentioned previous how we were little concerned with obvious systematic blunders being a problem with multi and sub classes.  real problems will arise with the the perhaps ironic predictably unanticipated synergies. am not simple guessing; am knowing combinations o' talents, abilities, gear and bugs will break any number o' classes and class combos.  history tells us many such game busters will go unnoticed 'til beta.

 

our main concern is it appears the developers will continue to respond to deadfire concerns via tumblr, twitter, something awful and numerous other sites. is mildly irksome to see relative indifference to board feedback save for when queries is funneled into a developer chat feedback thread. hopeful the choice to disregard obsidian fandom at the obsidian site is a temporary, if overlong, experiment.  again, am not over concerned at the moment, but if such casual insouciance towards obsidian board feedback is the new norm and it continues once the beta begins, we will be more than a little disappointed... if not particular surprised.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited September 21, 2017 by Gromnir

[injurai]

we got a few concerns, but will wait 'til beta to see how multiclassing works in reality rather than on paper.  we mentioned previous how we were little concerned with obvious systematic blunders being a problem with multi and sub classes.  real problems will arise with the the perhaps ironic predictably unanticipated synergies. am not simple guessing; am knowing combinations o' talents, abilities, gear and bugs will break any number o' classes and class combos.  history tells us many such game busters will go unnoticed 'til beta.

 

our main concern is it appears the developers will continue to respond to deadfire concerns via tumblr, twitter, something awful and numerous other sites. is mildly irksome to see relative indifference to board feedback save for when queries is funneled into a developer chat feedback thread. hopeful the choice to disregard obsidian fandom at the obsidian site is a temporary, if overlong, experiment.  again, am not over concerned at the moment, but if such casual insouciance towards obsidian board feedback is the new norm and it continues once the beta begins, we will be more than a little disappointed... if not particular surprised.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

It is odd, the only reason I'm here as opposed to elsewhere is because if you wanted to interact with the devs on Pillar 1, here was the place to be back then. I'm not keen on paying through a pay wall to get to Josh's general forum of choice either. Though I respect his methods to gather more objective opinions.

 

I think we need another Q&A.

[draego]

we got a few concerns, but will wait 'til beta to see how multiclassing works in reality rather than on paper.  we mentioned previous how we were little concerned with obvious systematic blunders being a problem with multi and sub classes.  real problems will arise with the the perhaps ironic predictably unanticipated synergies. am not simple guessing; am knowing combinations o' talents, abilities, gear and bugs will break any number o' classes and class combos.  history tells us many such game busters will go unnoticed 'til beta.

 

our main concern is it appears the developers will continue to respond to deadfire concerns via tumblr, twitter, something awful and numerous other sites. is mildly irksome to see relative indifference to board feedback save for when queries is funneled into a developer chat feedback thread. hopeful the choice to disregard obsidian fandom at the obsidian site is a temporary, if overlong, experiment.  again, am not over concerned at the moment, but if such casual insouciance towards obsidian board feedback is the new norm and it continues once the beta begins, we will be more than a little disappointed... if not particular surprised.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

I hate to remotely agree with anything your write but ye it bugs me a little bit. There is a reason though Josh doesn't answer post though. its not just for kicks. not saying i agree.

 

https://steemit.com/...-of-eternity-ii - I actually feel that I get more out of engaging with a conversation when they don’t know I’m reading or watching it. As soon as they know they’re engaging with the developer directly, well first there are tone considerations that go into it – I feel that it is more genuine and interesting when the interactions are player to player. I get a lot of that by going to the different communities and just seeing what they are talking about. 

 

I mean he says that then answers on other forum/outlets but it is what it is i guess. Maybe he feel obligated because he has to pay for something awful forums and the other sites are social media not forums. So basically we are his little rat laboratory.

Edited September 21, 2017 by draego

[rjshae]

 

Very nice, and logical. The expanded class concept allows players a much greater chance of realizing their character concept, as well as providing greater flexibility in play. But why isn't there a necromancer sub-class?

 

I don't think we were supposed to notice...

 

Perhaps it's just a particular of this soul-based setting? Animancers taking on the role of Necromancers, for example.

 

I wonder whether the metaphysics skill provides Animancy lore?

[blotter]

Perhaps it's just a particular of this soul-based setting? Animancers taking on the role of Necromancers, for example.

 

Pillars 1 established that necromancers and animancers are distinct from each other, so I'd expect that to remain the same case unless they're planning to retcon that bit of lore.

 

Maybe the schools that we're seeing here were selected because they provide a more consistent basis for the separation and organization of spells, whereas a necromancy school might not. For example, is Concelhaut's Parasitic Staff a necromancy spell because it drains life energy, or a conjuration spell because it allows you to materialize an object? Similar questions can be asked regarding Concelhaut's Draining Bolts re: necromancy vs evocation or Ryngrim's Enervation re: necromancy vs illusion.

 

Mind you, that's just an off-the-cuff explanation on my part. I haven't actually read through all the spells to see if this applies to all or most of the more necromancy-oriented spells in Pillars 1, or if likely examples of Pillars 1 spells that may fit into the various schools that did make the cut are comparatively free of such ambiguity in terms of where they fit.

 

I wonder whether the metaphysics skill provides Animancy lore?

 

I wouldn't be surprised if it was used primarily in the contexts of animancy, but it may extend beyond that somewhat. Making sense of what you encounter in the Beyond seems like it'd be an appropriate application for the skill, for example, and studies into the Beyond most likely to be of interest to both animancers and non-animancers.

Edited September 21, 2017 by blotter

[JerekKruger]

-I really don't like the idea of having established abilities for multi-classes, would prefer to choose the class1 and class2 abilities at levels 4, 7, 10,13, 16,and 19

 

I may be wrong, but I suspect that this was just to keep things simple in the video and that you will be able to choose each class ability. If not I suspect Obsidian will come under pressure to make it that way after the Beta hits.

[rjshae]

 

Perhaps it's just a particular of this soul-based setting? Animancers taking on the role of Necromancers, for example.

 

Pillars 1 established that necromancers and animancers are distinct from each other, so I'd expect that to remain the same case unless they're planning to retcon that bit of lore.

 

That there is a demonstrated difference wasn't clear to me; they may in fact just be two sides of the same coin.

 

Anyway, one can perhaps build a Wizardly necromancer out of a Transmuter sub-class, as it effectively eliminates the two non-necromantic spell types of illusion and enchantment. Perhaps there will be a few Necromantic talents to help in the process, like an alternative Form of the Fearsome Brute? They could have Vivimancer and Necromancer tracks for the Transmuter.

Edited September 21, 2017 by rjshae

[blotter]

That there is a demonstrated difference wasn't clear to me; they may in fact just be two sides of the same coin.

 

I spent a while looking into this and you're actually more right than I had expected. I guess it's good for me to reread things from time to time.

 

Helig notes the distinction when he discusses his research into necromancy and animancy as separate fields, which wouldn't make much sense if they were identical. There's also a dialogue in which the distinction in how they operate is very briefly discussed (the use of magic vs the use of artifacts/technology). In the latter case, they are indeed two sides of the same coin in that both share similar purposes that are pursued in different ways. However, the difference in means employed is treated as significant within the setting and it most likely has implications in terms of the specialties of each discipline and what they can accomplish.

 

I'm not sure we can expect to see any gods created through necromancy as opposed to animancy, for example. However, its lack of reliance on gadgets may allow necromancy to be more versatile in terms of its combat applications.

 

The guidebook also mentions necromancy in passing, stating that it originated in ancient Ixamitl. Therefore, it most likely predates Pandgram's unintentional creation of undead via animancy.

 

Still, the guidebook doesn't actually note magic use vs artifact use as a criterion for distinguishing necromancy from animancy, so you could argue that the distinction's support lies mostly in the preconceptions of npcs, which can obviously be mistaken. The closest the guidebook actually comes to reinforcing magic vs technology distinction is in its description of the Ethik Nol's blood rites and how they facilitate the transfer of soul essence through those present, working in contrast to the methods that are generally associated with animancy. There's no real basis to claim that the ways in which necromancy is performed are similar to Ethik Nol rituals, though.

 

Anyway, one can perhaps build a Wizardly necromancer out of a Transmuter sub-class, as it effectively eliminates the two non-necromantic spell types of illusion and enchantment. Perhaps there will be a few Necromantic talents to help in the process, like an alternative Form of the Fearsome Brute? They could have Vivimancer and Necromancer tracks for the Transmuter.

 

Having necromancy appear as a subcategory for spells could work, but I'm not sure why it'd have to be tied to Transmuters. If evocation is about the manipulation of energy in Pillars, then using it to break down souls, force them into bodies, and so forth might make sense under the assumption that souls are collections of energy. Alternatively, if conjuration involves gaining or barring access to the Beyond, then it might be the best fit for necromancy that deals with summoning/binding spirits.

Edited September 21, 2017 by blotter

[Karkarov]

I think this one was a good decision. Better to take a step back and rethink than trying to fix a system that is way too complex to take out all pitfalls in a reasonable amount of time and that's too complicated so that even the own designers don't get it right.

I also can't see why you would only get half of the power. 7 out of 9 is not 50% - and also people tend to forget that certain synergies can be OP no matter the power level. Like if you could combine Soul Whip with Carnage and so on. The rogue is a good example in PoE 1 how high level abilites do nothing for your power.

Yeap.  Seriously considering making my melee cipher into a cipher/fighter in Deadfire.  I certainly won't miss the highest tier Cipher, or Fighter, skills.  The added HP, possibly higher bonus accuracy, Constant Recovery, and synergy between say Soul Blade and Devoted though?  That seems cool.

[draego]

I believe they stated the accuracy will be the same for all classes to start. I think health and defense will start different. 

[injurai]

I believe they stated the accuracy will be the same for all classes to start. I think health and defense will start different. 

 

That's curious... could we get a source and reasoning on that?