Removing non class specific talents was a bad idea

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

Yeah all sorts of balance is jacked right now. I've played a pure Cipher and can indeed be rough going if you get a miss streak. The graze gauntlets help quite a bit. My point is that when the game is "finished" they will be balanced around the abilities and items available to them regardless of what those are. If they can't get access to Two-Weapon Style then they'll be balanced assuming that and there won't really be a difference.

 

Like do people want them to add in the generic talents and then rebalance everything? Then you just take an additional talent that isn't very interesting and your character winds up in the same spot.

 

 

 

Well, that speaks to an additional reason I'd proposed using the higher-level proficiency slots for this: those are gonna be wasted anyway. I think most players aren't going to want six weapon proficiencies. They're gonna want, like, two, maybe three, and everything past that is wasted, and it'll just be people clicking random weapons because they don't care.

 

So let people use those slots to individualize their characters further with some talents that let them build their character concept out a bit (i.e., "good at two weapon fighting" or "the resolve of a bear" or whatever) and give some small game benefit.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Dr. Hieronymous Alloy

[Breckmoney]

You simply dont give fighters a weapon style buff talent to replace losing weapon style talents. They already have stances which are essentially specialized styles. You actually give them 3 new talents unrelated to weapon styles but still fighter appropriate and hopefully more interesting then a weapon style buff.

Giving fighters some unique cool abilities and just getting rid of two-weapon/two-handed/one-handed/sword and shield specialization from the game altogether would be great.

[theBalthazar]

The truth is Obsidian was shocked by fighter. They did everything to boost it in the first game. They never succeeded.

 

There was a frustration so...

 

...In the 2...

 

They took revenge. Priest + Wizard kneeling (Was best classes in the first game... coincidence ? : p Contrary for Fighter).

 

-----

 

For proficiency, I agree with Mr Hiero. Less is better, and because I am crazy today, I add a progressive accuracy bonus + 1-6, on level 1 to 20. motivate the player and report the valuable side of this resource.

 

They're gonna want, like, two, maybe three, and everything past that is wasted, and it'll just be people clicking random weapons because they don't care.

 

Edited November 21, 2017 by theBalthazar

[MaxQuest]

This would be better than the current implementation sure but it'd still be fairly limiting -- for example, you've left Rangers out

Ouch I have forgot about this class completely.

* muttering something under his breath *

 

There were literally that much multi-class builds I wanted to make with them so far: [none]

Because of their current abilities and lack of Twinned Arrows talent.

 

Have edited my previous reply (and added ranger).

 

as well as the ranged talents, so what about the gun paladin or gun cipher? What about the melee ranger?

I was referring to weapon style talents exclusively =)

As for Gunner and Marskman, ye, I'd like them to be accessible to everyone.

 

And for that matter, what about wizards and priests using summoned weapons?

I have a feeling that summoned weapons should be better than usual ones, by a margin great enough to compensate.

Edited November 21, 2017 by MaxQuest

[ghostwriter]

 

Choice atm is bad.

 

Take the priest. If we say that it is PERFECTLY balanced. Let's admit this state of affairs. (I do not think so, but let's say that)

 

One of the reason of the global disatisfaction of this topic is : we have less choice in two first levels (and more...). But let's take the two first.

 

1) One school out (Why ? There was too much choice to do that? : p)

2) No general talents if I dislike spells of the first levels.

3) only two spells by level. Spe (constraint)+ One Choice.

 

It is a fact. You can take that in an other way like Grommir and is fabulous "there are already enough choices and fun with the multiclass" but it is fact (and rationnal, what will please to grommir : p)

 

I love the sharing ressource Passive+active (more flexibility), BUT that should not hide a lack of choice...

 

 

Hmm and here I was thinking Gromnir went out of his way multiple times to point out that there were a couple of classes that could use some help. He specifically mentioned priests. Several times. 

 

Of all the debating tactics, flat out lies will always be my favourite haha

[Juodas Varnas]

 

The truth is Obsidian was shocked by fighter. They did everything to boost it in the first game. They never succeeded.

 

There was a frustration so...

 

...In the 2...

 

They took revenge. Priest + Wizard kneeling (Was best classes in the first game... coincidence ? : p Contrary for Fighter).

 

-----

 

For proficiency, I agree with Mr Hiero. Less is better, and because I am crazy today, I add a progressive accuracy bonus + 1-6, on level 1 to 20. motivate the player and report the valuable side of this resource.

 

They're gonna want, like, two, maybe three, and everything past that is wasted, and it'll just be people clicking random weapons because they don't care.

 

 

Was the Fighter bad?

I remember Edér as a fighter in my party basically carrying my party through most of the fights, while the priests and wizards would just get nuked in the first second of the fight 

 

I mean, yeah, the Fighter's kit was kinda BORING but i don't think it was bad at all.

[DigitalCrack]

 

You simply dont give fighters a weapon style buff talent to replace losing weapon style talents. They already have stances which are essentially specialized styles. You actually give them 3 new talents unrelated to weapon styles but still fighter appropriate and hopefully more interesting then a weapon style buff.

Giving fighters some unique cool abilities and just getting rid of two-weapon/two-handed/one-handed/sword and shield specialization from the game altogether would be great.

Almost. I would simply make weapons styles general proficiencies and then give the fighter cool new abilities to replace the loss of boring buffs.

 

Edit: The stances were such a neat idea for fighters that they could simply add an upgrade talent for each stance or maybe an active for each stance that can only be used while using a specific stance.

Edited November 21, 2017 by DigitalCrack

[Wormerine]

Ok. Just as a heads up, the only character I have created and tested so far was unarmed monk, occasionally switching to dual hatchets and kicking some serious butt. So I am mostly listening to feedback rather than providing with informed preference. So from replies so far I have gathered two arguments:

 

1) Using weapons without fighter perks seem to be not good enough, thefore using other classes that rely on weapons seem bad unless you multiclass with fighter. In that case I would say the issue doesn’t lie in extra perks but rather in base balance. My impression is that Obsidian want player to be able to use any combination of weapon effectively without spending talents on it, while fighters get even better at it because, well... fighters are boring and they don’t get the cool stuff.

 

2) people don’t care that much about balance and what factually works but care about RP. “I envisioned my character to focus on those weapons so I want to pick a talent which makes him more effective with that weapon”, even if upgrade is minor and if he can use this weapon anyway.

 

Naturally both arguments are completely valid in consideration. I will have to mess around with beta a bit more and see if Paladins/cypher really feel as weak with their use of weapons as suggested. Personally I am gradually warming up to it. It does feel like Deadfire goes for a more defiened class system, which PoE1 felt more like open character creator with classes adding some unique mechanics on top of that. Here it’s opposite with classes being a big defining factor in what your character does. However, if you build a priest and put him in armour and have him fight in a front line - isn’t he a priest/fighter? Isn’t it more natural for player to multiclass fighter (class which focuses on using armour and weapons effectively) with priest (guy who believes in gods and cast spells with his faith) than using perks to make a priest into a fighter?

[Gromnir]

@ jkruger: only needed response to the reply/quote mess: we keep saying reasonable and rational. is an observation 'bout the lack o' both necessary qualities and defaulting to a feel response.

 

though we will say we don't  mind if you wanna quibble over insinuation v. opinion.  *snort* every other development o' a sequel has faced similar issues.  the folks demanding bg grandmastery or lamenting the state o' iwd ranged were similar riled.  those folks lamented the loss o' the distinctness o' their previous builds.  rare did such folks come out and says that their concerns were simple power-related.  you see insinuation?  fine.  would be foolish and unreasonable to ignore parallels to every other sequel development we has followed.  this time is different?  this issue is different?  

 

people are not asking for universal access to field triage.  be reasonable.

 

*chuckle*

 

in the absence o' rational and reasonable, we look to dozens o' similar parallels, including every bis/obsidian sequel.  

 

and to kat21... you are simple repeating same empty argument.  there is no question you can build a weapon-based druid in deadfire.  is ridiculous to claim otherwise.  the method o' achieving is multi-class. the fact deadfire and poe weapon-focused druids is not the same is a given, but so what?  you get more options from deadfire, far more.  sure, you cannot exact replicate every old poe build, but such is not a flaw in and of itself.  is no more meaningful than any other random observation. "i like trees." well, good for you. 

 

the method obsidian would use within the current system to addresses concerns 'bout lack o' customization in the 1/2 talent trees we has seen for classes so far is to make adjustments to individual classes.  again, am assuming overall scheme stays same. add talents  to a class is relative insular changes.  even so, add talents to priest tree and one must consider impact o' not only multi-classing, but the plethora o' gear we ain't even seen yet.  make changes to priest alone is having impact on many other classes.  can't see how universal talents much complicates balancing? multiply the possible changes and breakages one would need contend with if only making adjustments to the priest. nightmare.

 

furthermore, which talents is folks clamoring to be having made universal accessible?  inspite o' jk three wise monkey routine, there is clear talents which folks is clamoring for to be general accessible, and many others they is less concerned 'bout. classes is, like it or not, requiring defining features and abilities.  is no point to a class if all talents is general accessible. is far less motivation to multi-class when multi-class carries with it the handicap o' power level reduction and ability level diminution w/o making particular compelling builds achievable only through multiclass. is a trade-off. start making certain talents general accessible and you necessarily diminish the appeal o' multiclass.

 

etc.

 

but am simple repeating self as is kat21.  

 

game has been in our hands less than a week.  we advocated obsidian waiting to make any kinda changes for obvious reason we has had game for so little. is immediate obvious what poe builds cannot be replicated in deadfire, but none o' us has experience with the full range o' possibilities o' deadfire.  compare the two systems (and again, we only got 1/2 o' deadfire talents n' a fraction o' gear) and find deadfire lacking would seem a premature conclusion for obsidian to make at this point.  sure, some folks has already played dozen o' hours and has reached a conclusion they will not budge from regardless o' developer feedback or recognition this kinda reaction has happened with pretty much every sequel evar, but obsidian should be more measured.  most o' us has played, at most, a couple-handful of different builds, and not have much time invested in such builds... and only at levels 6-8 (or 9). premature.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Breckmoney]

 

 

You simply dont give fighters a weapon style buff talent to replace losing weapon style talents. They already have stances which are essentially specialized styles. You actually give them 3 new talents unrelated to weapon styles but still fighter appropriate and hopefully more interesting then a weapon style buff.

Giving fighters some unique cool abilities and just getting rid of two-weapon/two-handed/one-handed/sword and shield specialization from the game altogether would be great.

Almost. I would simply make weapons styles general proficiencies and then give the fighter cool new abilities to replace the loss of boring buffs.

 

Edit: The stances were such a neat idea for fighters that they could simply add an upgrade talent for each stance or maybe an active for each stance that can only be used while using a specific stance.

But wouldn't it be even more fun if you just got rid of generic +number abilities and gave everyone new abilities that were thematic to their class? Like I understand it's a lot of work and if Obsidian decides to just make a generic talent bucket that's fine with me too, but I'd prefer if they were more tailored to individual classes. Edited November 21, 2017 by Breckmoney

[hilfazer]

What is the bonus for wielding 1 1h weapon and having other hand empty?

Judging by 1H Style description it is no longer accuracy.

[theBalthazar]

compare the two systems (and again, we only got 1/2 o' deadfire talents n' a fraction o' gear) and find deadfire lacking would seem a premature conclusion for obsidian to make at this point.  

 

 

True. Perhaps we don't have all the passives.

 

that does not prevent us to question what we are being offered -now-. Who will say that it is a final and irrevocable judgment? No one. These topics are used to discuss, to see what is not yet optimal ... So, to feel the approach of game system, and his shortcomings with regard to the things that were here before (POE1) > totally "rational" things (this is also not full game  for you too  : p )

Edited November 21, 2017 by theBalthazar

[molotov.]

What? There are no more talents? What were they thinking? The devs had the time - and still have - to make multiclassing, subclasses and a general talent pool, because they don't have to work on a new endless path of caed nua - that thing was so big that they could have made a game with that - and they already have their engine ready.

The team had some suspicious and bizarre ideas, like the removal of the health/endurance system - I still don't get it -, the 5 member party, the removal of some racial abilities, but now they removed the talent pool? The talent pool was fantastic, 50% of the fun of that game was with that pool, I discovered my new favourite build because of that - the semi tank rogue with 100% crits oh! -, they are taking away an amazing part of the game, and they are doing this to not scare the new public imo, I watched several videos of beta testers and they are not messing with the multiclass system - well.. they are not even reading the spells - so... just think about having multiclass, subclasses and a talent pool? New players would run away from the game... and we suffer because of that, again, like Gromnir stated, the game is a product after all.

At least they are separeting the social skills of the stats, that was so terrible on the first game, I could not play with a dps fighter as the leader because I had no intelligence to make any discussion interesting.

[DigitalCrack]

 

 

 

You simply dont give fighters a weapon style buff talent to replace losing weapon style talents. They already have stances which are essentially specialized styles. You actually give them 3 new talents unrelated to weapon styles but still fighter appropriate and hopefully more interesting then a weapon style buff.

Giving fighters some unique cool abilities and just getting rid of two-weapon/two-handed/one-handed/sword and shield specialization from the game altogether would be great.

Almost. I would simply make weapons styles general proficiencies and then give the fighter cool new abilities to replace the loss of boring buffs.

 

Edit: The stances were such a neat idea for fighters that they could simply add an upgrade talent for each stance or maybe an active for each stance that can only be used while using a specific stance.

But wouldn't it be even more fun if you just got rid of generic +number abilities and gave everyone new abilities that were thematic to their class? Like I understand it's a lot of work and if Obsidian decides to just make a generic talent bucket that's fine with me too, but I'd prefer if they were more tailored to individual classes.

If they would no doubt i would rather have your suggestion. But I don't see it as a likely option given the time it would take. Edited November 21, 2017 by DigitalCrack

[theBalthazar]

[morhilane]

What is the bonus for wielding 1 1h weapon and having other hand empty?

Judging by 1H Style description it is no longer accuracy.

The +accuracy for holding a 1h weapon was never part of a talent. Everyone has that feature starting from level 1.

 

The one-handed weapon bonuses was converting 15% hits into crits in POE1, but converted 10% misses into grazes in POE2.

[Boeroer]

Like dual wielding results in an automatic speed gain even without Two Weapon Style.

[dunehunter]

 

What is the bonus for wielding 1 1h weapon and having other hand empty?

Judging by 1H Style description it is no longer accuracy.

The +accuracy for holding a 1h weapon was never part of a talent. Everyone has that feature starting from level 1.

 

The one-handed weapon bonuses was converting 15% hits into crits in POE1, but converted 10% misses into grazes in POE2.

 

 

Yeah the change is stupid because its a fighter talent but fighter already have talent to make them graze, its kinda weak/pointless compare to other weapons style.

[Katarack21]

 

 

 

and to kat21... you are simple repeating same empty argument.  there is no question you can build a weapon-based druid in deadfire.  is ridiculous to claim otherwise.  the method o' achieving is multi-class.

 

A druid with fighter levels is *not* the same as a druid with weapon capabilities. You like to talk about rationality, but your statement here is as *irrational* as it gets. As I've said before, a multi-class character inherently plays differently--with different stats *across the board* and a whole *suite* of fundamental capabilities that are very distinct from those of a single class character.

 

A druid with fighter levels and a druid with some weapon talents *don't play the same* and are *not equivalent characters*. To say they are is irrational.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Katarack21

[CENIC]

Josh has spoken...

 

https://twitter.com/jesawyer/status/933088736954408960

[JerekKruger]

Josh has spoken...

 

https://twitter.com/jesawyer/status/933088736954408960

 

Looks pretty good to me.

[Doppelschwert]

I hope you are all happy now

 

Now everyone can metagame, get a single weapon proficiency for the chosen endgame weapon and fill the rest of the proficiencies with the dire needed passives. Have fun with the power creep...

 

At the same time, you missed the opportunity to campaign for more class related talents rather than a pool of generic talents.

I'm also looking forward to all the complaints about the fighter being a boring / weak choice for (multi)class.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Doppelschwert

[anfoglia]

I hope you are all happy now

 

Now everyone can metagame, get a single weapon proficiency for the chosen endgame weapon and fill the rest of the proficiencies with the dire needed passives. Have fun with the power creep...

 

We'll see. There may not be that many passives that are helpful for a given build. If it becomes a problem, Obsidian can limit your choice to every 5th level or add a weapon mastery option (i.e. a second proficiency point in a given weapon for some modest bonus) to make your choice a little harder.

[JerekKruger]

At the same time, you missed the opportunity to campaign for more class related talents rather than a pool of generic talents.

 

No we haven't. The beta probably has months to run and the two aren't mutually exclusive.

[Doppelschwert]

Let's be real here - would you rather:

 

Have 5 weapon proficiencies, or 2 weapon proficiencies and a boost to reflex, foritude and will?

Spend a talent to get a passive upgrade, or a weapon proficiency?

 

I'm pretty sure I know what the answer will be 90% of the time.

 

 

Besides, the class trees will feel as empty as they did before, because literally nothing changed. In fact, this has just worsened the problem for all the classes with access to those passives, because why would they spent a talent to get them when they could just use a prophiciency instead.

 

It's almost funny, but if people start claiming now that the single classes have been redeemed through this change, they are beyond redemption.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Doppelschwert