Please no more Barbarian with Int

[wih]

The root problem is that the game treats battle abilities like spells. Carnage is the worst example, but fighter's knockdown is not much better. Treating them like spells automatically ties them to Intellect and from that all the weirdness ensues.

 

These things are not and should not be spells, simple as that.

[JerekKruger]

Personally I have no problem with smart Barbarians, but I agree that the benefit Intellect brings the Barbarian makes it feel like a requirement rather than an option. Of course, as Boeroer and dragubaba say, you can build a perfectly viable* Barbarian with lower Intellect but I can understand why it might feel like you're hurting your build by doing so.

 

*Not just viable, good.

[Katarack21]

The root problem is that the game treats battle abilities like spells. Carnage is the worst example, but fighter's knockdown is not much better. Treating them like spells automatically ties them to Intellect and from that all the weirdness ensues.

 

These things are not and should not be spells, simple as that.

That's by *design*. It integrates with the lore and setting; the abilities in question and spells all use the same power source, ie soul power. Carnage isn't just a representation of tactics or something; it's actually the character having been trained in how to use their soul-power to enlarge and extend the damage of the weapon swing, just as you can knock down 10 foot tall trolls because fighters use their soul-power for a moment of superstrength to do it.

 

Fireball, knockdown, carnage, lay on hands--it's all soul-power being applied in different ways. In a sense, they *are* spells.

[wih]

 

The root problem is that the game treats battle abilities like spells. Carnage is the worst example, but fighter's knockdown is not much better. Treating them like spells automatically ties them to Intellect and from that all the weirdness ensues.

 

These things are not and should not be spells, simple as that.

That's by *design*. It integrates with the lore and setting; the abilities in question and spells all use the same power source, ie soul power. Carnage isn't just a representation of tactics or something; it's actually the character having been trained in how to use their soul-power to enlarge and extend the damage of the weapon swing, just as you can knock down 10 foot tall trolls because fighters use their soul-power for a moment of superstrength to do it.

 

Fireball, knockdown, carnage, lay on hands--it's all soul-power being applied in different ways. In a sense, they *are* spells.

 

Ok. So this is the solution. Rename Intellect to Soul Power.

[MortyTheGobbo]

Or... it could stay as Intellect and any offence over the subject will remain as self-inflicted as it has always been.

 

I guess Pillars could use different attribute names, since it's moving away from their traditional definitions... but I doubt that would stop the complaining.

Edited October 22, 2017 by MortyTheGobbo

[Katarack21]

Soul Power has a stat; it's called "Might". Might reflects raw strength both physical and soul; thus damage. Intellect reflects knowledge of and skill with use of that power; thus AoE, etc. They actually all work quite well.

[wih]

I guess Pillars could use different attribute names, since it's moving away from their traditional definitions... but I doubt that would stop the complaining.

Would be enough if it lessens confusion.

 

Soul Power has a stat; it's called "Might". Might reflects raw strength both physical and soul; thus damage. Intellect reflects knowledge of and skill with use of that power; thus AoE, etc. They actually all work quite well.

But knowledge and skill are typically things that one acquires through experience? Should this be a primary stat then?

 

Anyway, it seems to me that what you say is closer to how things actually work in the game. I would be much less confused if Might was actually called Soul Power and Intellect... maybe Soul Power Channeling?

[Sedrefilos]

Have we bit on the troll bait?

[Katarack21]

 

I guess Pillars could use different attribute names, since it's moving away from their traditional definitions... but I doubt that would stop the complaining.

Would be enough if it lessens confusion.

 

Soul Power has a stat; it's called "Might". Might reflects raw strength both physical and soul; thus damage. Intellect reflects knowledge of and skill with use of that power; thus AoE, etc. They actually all work quite well.

But knowledge and skill are typically things that one acquires through experience? Should this be a primary stat then?

 

Anyway, it seems to me that what you say is closer to how things actually work in the game. I would be much less confused if Might was actually called Soul Power and Intellect... maybe Soul Power Channeling?

 

Might is *specifically* confusing because in PoE 1 it reflects both raw physical strength *and* the power of ones soul. That's the source of a lot of confusion; people think a high-might wizard *must* be buff as hell, for example, when really which one is being reflected in the stat--physical power or soul power--is expressed through context. For a Fighter, probably physical with some soul; for a wizard, the other way around; for a paladin probably both equally.

Edited October 22, 2017 by Katarack21

[Sedrefilos]

Conversations with might had to do with "bullying" and scripted interactions with psysical strength, so I believe might in Pillars is strength eventually. Now why someone finds it weird to have your spells powered by your might is beyond me. If magic power in Pillars comes from within it sounds very reasonable that your might makes them stronger. In other games (DnD for instance) it has to do with reading and learning etc it's a differnet approach.

[Blades of Vanatar]

Random thought... what if INT attribute would mean Intensity?

- increases the duration of CC spells

- reduces the duration of DoT spells that deal fixed damage, making the same amount being applied faster; while DoT's with no fixed damage just linger for longer and thus deal more damage

- a more intense storm usually covers a wider area, so there: increased AoE

- if a beneficial spell was casted with higher intensity - it's effect will linger for longer - hence +% duration.

 

So a barbarian with high INT would just mean that he makes a more intense use of his ability to slash several enemies in one swing.

 

On a similar note DEX could be renamed to Quickness - as this is what it actually does.

And PER to Finesse - as being more exact allows you to easier hitting the vital spot. Additionally goes well with fast weapons needing to crit more often then slow harder-hitting ones, in order to overcome DR. And there is no problem with Quickness and Finesse influencing Reflex either.

But those stats also affect in game choices. Finesse for some of the Perception dialogue choices? It wouldn't fit.

 

I'd like it if they added a seventh Stat. Something along the lines of luck or karma. Or Finesse for ACC bonus and have Perception cover the dialogue, interrupt, etc...

[Gromnir]

What the hell are you people on about. I made a barbarian with base INT of 7 and slaughtered my way through the game. The few outlying mobs I missed because of lower INT were compensated with higher damage on those I did hit. Is this one of those things that somebody comes up with and others pick up creating an echo chamber of feigned outrage just because why not.

 

(image)

 

anecdotal is never particular persuasive.  is kinda traditional hereabouts to use singular examples and individual past experience as some kinda proof. 

 

 

is the math which reveals how intelligence at particular levels o' investment dramatic increase carnage efficacy.  even boeroer notes "sweet spots" for intelligence investment.  1.5 m radius from the target is the base carnage aoe radius.  intelligence and other equipment may expand (or reduce) the radius.  a 7 intelligence, unmodified, results in a minus 18% to the base aoe radius. sure, with certain high level equipment and in unique encounters wherein smaller-than-human sized adversaries seem to functional stack, a meager intellect will provided impressive carnage results, but is no way to ignore the math.  1.5m.  

 

but yeah, we wouldn't doubt there is somebody who completed a triple-crown solo run with a basement intellect barbarian wielding noting but an unenhanced butter knife and wearing durance's robes.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Katarack21]

 

What the hell are you people on about. I made a barbarian with base INT of 7 and slaughtered my way through the game. The few outlying mobs I missed because of lower INT were compensated with higher damage on those I did hit. Is this one of those things that somebody comes up with and others pick up creating an echo chamber of feigned outrage just because why not.

 

(image)

 

anecdotal is never particular persuasive.  is kinda traditional hereabouts to use singular examples and individual past experience as some kinda proof. 

 

 

is the math which reveals how intelligence at particular levels o' investment dramatic increase carnage efficacy.  even boeroer notes "sweet spots" for intelligence investment.  1.5 m radius from the target is the base carnage aoe radius.  intelligence and other equipment may expand (or reduce) the radius.  a 7 intelligence, unmodified, results in a minus 18% to the base aoe radius. sure, with certain high level equipment and in unique encounters wherein smaller-than-human sized adversaries seem to functional stack, a meager intellect will provided impressive carnage results, but is no way to ignore the math.  1.5m.  

 

but yeah, we wouldn't doubt there is somebody who completed a triple-crown solo run with a basement intellect barbarian wielding noting but an unenhanced butter knife and wearing durance's robes.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Again, it's the difference between "optimal" and "viable". A 7 int is *viable*--almost any stat arrangement is, actually.

[Boeroer]

You can say all that (threshold, low INT gimps) about every AoE ability in the game. In certain situations it doesn't matter if your INT is 10 or 15: you will scratch the circles of some enemies and damage them the same way as if your AoE covers their circles in whole.

 

The only thing with the barb is that Carnage is an integral part because you get it automatically. You can't omit it. And this has to be balanced out in some way so the class is not too strong. So you get less ACC and low deflection and all that. If you want to play a ranged barb there will always be the feeling that you wasted the best thing of the barb. I think most people have the same feeling when lowering INT with Carnage. They think "if I already have an auto AoE attack that grows in size with INT I should put a lot of points into it or else it's a waste."

 

And it's true that Carnage gets better with a lot of INT. But again: it may be that it doesn't matter a lot of times if you have 10 or 15 INT because it's enough to just barely scratch enemies, you don't have to cover them completely with your AoE. And it needs a LOT of additional INT to reach the next line. So, either make a barb with a LOT of INT or leave it a mediocre levels. It's of not much use to put 1 or two points more INT if you can't reach the next row of enemies with it.

 

It would have been better to give the barb another automatic ability than Carnage. It should be an optional pick at lvl-up. That way you could have played a dumb barb (maybe even ranged) without the feeling that you're throwing away your best tool.

 

I would have preferred that there are no fixed, automatic abilities for any class.

Edited October 23, 2017 by Boeroer

[Gromnir]

 

 

What the hell are you people on about. I made a barbarian with base INT of 7 and slaughtered my way through the game. The few outlying mobs I missed because of lower INT were compensated with higher damage on those I did hit. Is this one of those things that somebody comes up with and others pick up creating an echo chamber of feigned outrage just because why not.

 

(image)

 

anecdotal is never particular persuasive.  is kinda traditional hereabouts to use singular examples and individual past experience as some kinda proof. 

 

 

is the math which reveals how intelligence at particular levels o' investment dramatic increase carnage efficacy.  even boeroer notes "sweet spots" for intelligence investment.  1.5 m radius from the target is the base carnage aoe radius.  intelligence and other equipment may expand (or reduce) the radius.  a 7 intelligence, unmodified, results in a minus 18% to the base aoe radius. sure, with certain high level equipment and in unique encounters wherein smaller-than-human sized adversaries seem to functional stack, a meager intellect will provided impressive carnage results, but is no way to ignore the math.  1.5m.  

 

but yeah, we wouldn't doubt there is somebody who completed a triple-crown solo run with a basement intellect barbarian wielding noting but an unenhanced butter knife and wearing durance's robes.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Again, it's the difference between "optimal" and "viable". A 7 int is *viable*--almost any stat arrangement is, actually.

 

kinda missing the point. you can play a viable and gimped barbarian, particular as this is a game wherein you play a party o' characters.  have one relative underpowered character (even if only underpowered compared to alternative barbarian builds) in a party-based game is always viable. no biggie.  

 

am also one o' the most consistent voices on these boards speaking 'bout how poe is less attribute driven than most crpgs.

 

https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/84838-optimal-starting-stats-and-late-game-signifficance-for-wizard/?p=1782213

https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/84616-paladin-30-build-what-would-be-different-now-to-previous-builds/?p=1778990

https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/80561-where-does-a-intellect-paladin-fit-in-the-party/?p=1709701

https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/77293-weapon-choice-for-a-priest/?p=1656958

 

etc.

 

however, the barbarian has certain intellect thresholds (anachronistic) 'cause of carnage.  reaching higher thresholds produce a clear superior barbarian, which is exact why we got so many players with genius barbarians in poe. the barbarian only shines when facing mobs, which is already an inherent limitation.  not all poe encounters (even pod encounters) result in mob combat.  as such it makes sense to maximize a barbarian's efficacy 'gainst those mobs.  unfortunately, one cannot use typical poe approach to viability o' stats for the barbarian precise 'cause o' carnage. one point of intellect increase is not equivalent to one point o' increase o' other attributes... excepting might, and worse, every point o' intellect increase is not equal to every other point o' intellect increase.  

 

the viability argument is swell and all but it is ignoring reality.  josh has noted how balance is always important in a single player crpg.  not need have all builds or classes (or whatever) be equal in power.  however, if one build or class (or whatever) is disproportionate superior, then the viability argument collapses 'cause on average, most folks will not self-gimp to play the viable but demonstrably underpowered build. 

 

the intelligent barbarian problem stems from the obvious design flaw which some folks seem to wanna refuse to ignore:  carnage is a class defining ability.  'cause barbarian efficacy is inextricable linked to a single ability, and the ability in question is an instantaneous aoe effect, intelligence will be disproportionate important and will exhibit thresholds. the ubiquitous intelligent barbarian is precisely why the poe developers wanted to avoid class defining abilities.

 

"You can say all that (threshold, low INT gimps) about every AoE ability in the game."

 

*chuckle*

 

such an observation is true... but barbarian is a class with a singular defining aoe ability.  

 

"And it needs a LOT of additional INT to reach the next line. So, either make a barb with a LOT of INT or leave it a mediocre levels. It's of not much use to put 1 or two points more INT if you can't reach the next row of enemies with it."

 

preaching to the choir.  have already addressed this point multiple times. you don't seem to realize how you is agreeing with Gromnir 'bout the problem.  

 

folks enjoy playing their barbarian characters, so is gonna be a tendency to defend.  is ok to like the barbarian.  we had fun playing our poe barbarians.  however, to like our barbarian doesn't mean we need ignore the problems or flaws.  carnage is a class defining ability.  once folks make such an admission, the problem which is tending to lead to genius barbarians becomes clear and indefensible. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Ascaloth]

I like to think of Intellect for martial classes as the practical application of the "I studied the blade" meme.

 

For example, any dumb Fighter can learn how to Knock Down an enemy flat on his arse. The high-Intellect Fighter on the other hand, instinctively groks centre of gravity to the extent that he knows how to hit the enemy just right to leave the latter winded for as long as possible.

 

Similarly, any dumb Barbarian knows how to flail around his weapon and smack a few blokes all at once. But the high-Intellect Barbarian has the brainpower to figure out in a split second, just how to hack with his weapon - the exact angle, the exact amount of momentum - such that it hits as many enemies as possible.

 

As such, I don't mind high-INT Barbarians that much. 

[Boeroer]

preaching to the choir. have already addressed this point multiple times. you don't seem to realize how you is agreeing with Gromnir 'bout the problem.

 

I'm completely aware that we agree on the mechanics. I also added that the problem with Carnage is that you get it automatically (class defining). I don't try to oppose tou, I'm just trying to point out some details that might be of interest to the readers of this thread.

 

I don't have a problem with the intelligent barb. The points you make are true. It just doesn't bother me that much because I don't care a lot about immersion or meeting fantasy tropes or fulfilling expectations or making every class playable in a lot of different ways (as long as the class itself if fun to play even if it is a one-trick pony). But I get the point. My solution, as I said above, would be to remove all automatic abilities. That way you'd have more freedom for char development and you're not stuck with a barb who has to invest in INT just to make Carnage better.

Edited October 23, 2017 by Boeroer

[Goddard]

No dumb Ranger Barbarian that talks to Rodents? 

[Lephys]

the problem ain't intelligent barbarians.  the problem is carnage. there weren't s'posed to be class defining abilities in poe.  nevertheless, carnage is indeed a class defining ability, and the best way to squeeze the most juice outta of carnage is to boost intelligence. the problem is barbarians being defined by carnage.

 

But Gromnir...! The attribute system has rendered dump stats (and by default, pump stats) extinct! o_o. That was the whole point in going with the stat functions we have now. The cons of "this is all weird stuff to be attributed to these character measurements" was all worth the absence of any go-to or undesirable stats! For sooth!!!!! *faints*

 

 

What the hell are you people on about. I made a barbarian with base INT of 7 and slaughtered my way through the game.

 

So your rebuttal to "Here's a flaw in the design of attributes as they relate to class mechanics" is really "No, see guys? The effect of stats on your character basically don't matter at all! 8D!"

 

???

 

Oh, well nevermind then. Obviously it's an optimally-designed system. We stand corrected.

 

 

I like to think of Intellect for martial classes as the practical application of the "I studied the blade" meme.

 

For example, any dumb Fighter can learn how to Knock Down an enemy flat on his arse. The high-Intellect Fighter on the other hand, instinctively groks centre of gravity to the extent that he knows how to hit the enemy just right to leave the latter winded for as long as possible.

 

This is, indeed, a lovely thought. If only Intellect worked that way. Instead, any additional effectiveness that would stem from smarts and result in higher damage is all bundled into Might, which should really just be named "Damage." Which is yet another facet of how the stats are too all-encompassing. Intellect is reduced to making circles bigger. So it can never do more interesting things like increase the number of jumps chain lightning makes because your character knows how to channel it most efficiently (no increase in actual POWER, just an increase in intelligent usage), or allow for more/higher-damage critical hits because a Fighter knows where to hit someone, etc.

 

The vast majority of the posters here seem to be hellbent on pretending that isn't the case, and/or celebrating the lack of interest in trying to design this in a better way, and/or condemning anyone who tries to constructively illustrate flaws in the system as some kind of crazy fanatic who's nitpicking about stuff that doesn't affect the game at all.

What the hell are you people on about. I made a barbarian with base INT of 7 and slaughtered my way through the game.

 

So your rebuttal to "Here's a flaw in the design of attributes as they relate to class mechanics" is really "No, see guys? The effect of stats on your character basically don't matter at all! 8D!"

 

???

 

Oh, well nevermind then. Obviously it's an optimally-designed system. We stand corrected.

[teknoman2]

 

I don't even understand where the "stupid barbarian" originated. Conan the Barbarian spoke (and read, and wrote) like, a dozen languages and often translated ancient runes etc as well as being a master tactician in the Howard books.

Well, the term barbarian implies the human being in question is uncivilized or primitive, and was how the Greeks designated people of non-Greek culture (who they largely saw as inferior, culturally at least). It doesn't necessarily mean barbarians are stupid but it sort of came to existence as a derogatory term that implied them being all of this.

 

in ancient greece it was more of a lingustic term than something to do with culture. barbarian (or varvaros as is pronounced in greek) literally means "he who's speech is made of var" with "var" being a sort of slang for incoherent/unstructured speech.

most languages are build on the mutual agreement that "something" should be called "something" but greek was different; the words were in and of themselves both a description of that "something" and a mathematical representation of it. considering how much thought they would put into every word they created for everything around them, they considered languages that were based on simply agreeing that "this sound should represent this something" inferior.

[DexGames]

I don't understand,

If you don't play one, what does it fondamentaly change for you that they exist ?

To the point where you have to ask OBS to remove something from the game lol.

[Gromnir]

I don't understand,

If you don't play one, what does it fondamentaly change for you that they exist ?

To the point where you have to ask OBS to remove something from the game lol.

am not certain who you are replying to, but we personal noted how we played and enjoyed our barbarian.  however, our enjoyment o' our barbarian character(s) does not blind us to the flaws.  we sure as heck didn't ask for obsidian to exorcise the barbarian from deadfire.  heck, we don't even want genius barbarians to become implausible in deadfire.  

 

have noted multiple times how the problem, as we see it, is carnage.  barbarian's carnage is a class defining ability which is heavily dependent on might and intellect, and intellect has curious value thresholds which make it far more likely for a knowledgeable player to choose to play their barbarian as a genius.  is particular unfortunate as a player new to poe, and even many veteran players, will be unaware o' the intellect thresholds.  put 16 into intellect? what a waste. 

 

am not asking for the barbarian to be removed or even for genius barbarians to be hamstrung.  nevertheless we see how carnage, as a class defining ability, tends to diminish the functional customization potential of the barbarian. the carnage problem is glaring and irrefutable, but nevertheless we got players defending the flaw and developers using the "genius barbarian" as an example o' poe's customization flexibility. from our pov is a bizarro universe issue. doesn't make sense.

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Boeroer]

I'm not defending the flaw, I'm just showing how/why you can play a barb who didn't go to university.

 

The points you make are true.

 

If I'm not misinterpreting it: seems that Carnage might not be an automatic ability in Deadfire any more. Because subclasses' features don't alter Carnage but rather Frenzy (look at the Berserker)...?

Edited October 26, 2017 by Boeroer