Removing non class specific talents was a bad idea

[brankel]

It would be nice if talents were maybe even just open to characters who chose a single class. 

[Harlath]

I agree that characters feel far more samey due the loss of the Universal Talents. This removes much of the fun/creativity from leveling up and creating characters. Adding my voice to similar feedback from a number of other players. Multi-classing alleviates the problem to an extent, but missing out of fast/top tier abilities just to have some character build choices is a shame and multi-classing still doesn't have the breadth of talent choices that POE I had. There were all sorts of interesting ways you could build characters in POE I (explicitly noted by design a few times as something they were keen on), it would be a shame if this went away. A page of general options would be fun and fit the existing system.

Edited November 16, 2017 by Harlath

[Doppelschwert]

I'm firmly with Gromnir on this, and I don't get why people are so nostalgic about the PoE general talents. Most 'builds' in PoE revolved around picking an enchanted weapon, taking all the general talents that were useful for it, and then adding some really boring talents that made your numbers go higher.

Choosing between the class talents was straight forward most of the time as well.

 

Just using multiclasses, you already have 55 configurations to play around with, and several classes have mutually exclusive class-talents, so there are some actual decisions to be made now, since you can't just pick the other options at a later level.

 

I agree that the priest lacks a mean to customize, and also that some subclasses don't seem impactful enough, but there is already much more space for creativity than in PoE. I can now combine a Bleakwalker Paladin with a Beconer Chanter and only take the undead related summons/phrases to have an awesome Blackguard. I can make a kensai by combining a Shattered Pillar Monk with a Devoted Fighter. I can make a druid shifter / barbarian that rages while in animal form, disregarding the druid spells completely. I can combine any martial class with a caster to get just the selection of spells that are relevant and make all kinds of gish type characters.

 

Even if the single class option wasn't there, you'd still be able to recreate almost everything from PoE and much more now. Best of all, there is an actual trade-off to playing a caster now. You remember all the discussions how the fighter sucked? That was mostly because all the talents that are now exclusive to him were general talents.

 

The beta leaves several things to be desired in terms of combat speed and other issues, but the new character system is much superior imho.

[Christliar]

They had to add more general talents (along with trying to differentiate the classes more), a lot of those in P1 were either no-brainers, extremely situational or entirely useless. One of the, if not the only, (almost) not controversial aspects of PoE was the character building, removing options so they can streamline it is a shot in the foot. Had they added more class specific talents, then I can see the justification for removing general ones, but they didn't, making the single-classed characters simply limited.

Edited November 16, 2017 by Christliar

[Breckmoney]

I think everyone can (mostly) agree that there should be some additional options, and I'm pretty sure that's something that'll be improved on over the course of the beta.

 

I personally hope that the options come in the form of additional class specific abilities and talents with maybe a couple of the talents made available to multiple classes. The big pool of general talents were cool for adding a little bit to your class here and there but were supremely uninteresting and mostly just made one or two numbers go up. I'd much rather have a few extra talents that change a lot about how abilities work.

[Aramintai]

For anyone who says that multiclassing is better and more flexible - you do realize that you can only have 2 classes? So you can't get access to all the universal abilities like in POE1. In POE2 those ex-universal abilities are now spread across some classes, but you can't keep on multiclassing to get them all. From what I can see, if nothing changes then builds are gonna be even more cookie cutter, not less. Class specific abilities, for the most part, are sparse and everyone will want to be a fighter for those ex-universal abilities. Personally, I think devs dropped the ball here - they should have either made them available for all classes or replaced them with something different and more creative for the non-spellcaster classes.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

Even if the single class option wasn't there, you'd still be able to recreate almost everything from PoE and much more now.

I think you unintentionally hit the nail right on the head there. They are so lackluster and barebone that the single classes are almost not there. 

The most important thing is to enhance the build diversity for single classes, and right now the game encourages new players to pick single class. A window pops up: "Multiclass is for experienced players". A new player picking a single class right now will be sorely disappointed. I don't need to get the old system back. I'm not nostalgic about it content-wise, I'm just defending any kind of system with options for those inclined to make sane or wacky single class characters.

Edited November 16, 2017 by IndiraLightfoot

[MortyTheGobbo]

For anyone who says that multiclassing is better and more flexible - you do realize that you can only have 2 classes? So you can't get access to all the universal abilities like in POE1. In POE2 those ex-universal abilities are now spread across some classes, but you can't keep on multiclassing to get them all. From what I can see, if nothing changes then builds are gonna be even more cookie cutter, not less. Class specific abilities, for the most part, are sparse and everyone will want to be a fighter for those ex-universal abilities. Personally, I think devs dropped the ball here - they should have either made them available for all classes or replaced them with something different and more creative for the non-spellcaster classes.

 

I mean, if some talents that weren't specific to classes were also obligatory and taken by almost everyone, I'd say it was a problem in itself.

[Doppelschwert]

I think this is all very simple:

 

1)

Single classes, as you are all insisting, are specialized packages that streamline you into a functional character. That's why they are recommended - you can't screw up easily, which is good when you are new.

Multiclasses on the other hand allow for a lot of creativity, which can be overwhelming for new players but rewarding for experienced players.

 

In PoE, single classes had to fill both roles, now they don't.

 

2)

Casters and martials are closer to each other in terms of options. There ARE more class talents for the martials than they were in PoE, and less for the casters. I think this is the major reason for all the complaints here; not saying that is wrong, since some classes like priests and rangers really do lack options.

 

3)

You get build diversity by going down different upgrade paths for the martials, and by choosing different spells for the casters.

If an ability has multiple different upgrades, they are mutually exclusive in PoE2. This is where your build options lie. Stating that single classes don't have options is a blatant overstatement. Those choices also go a long way to the synergies with your remaining party members. If the abilities / spells are not attractive enough to make the choice hard, then that is an balancing problem, and not a design problem.

Edited November 16, 2017 by Doppelschwert

[Christliar]

Or, or, hear me out here, this may get tricky - everyone has a lot of options? It's not like you don't gain anything by going single-class, you gain the most powerful abilities of that class. Why does something have to cater to new players? The game is Pillars of Eternity 2, not Pacifier Simulator. It's expected that a sequel will require a bit of knowledge from the previous game.

[IndiraLightfoot]

I think this is all very simple:

 

1)

Single classes, as you are all insisting, are specialized packages that streamline you into a functional character. That's why they are recommended - you can't screw up easily, which is good when you are new.

Multiclasses on the other hand allow for a lot of creativity, which can be overwhelming for new players but rewarding for experienced players.

I fear that you are right, but I reckon it's a mistake, for two reasons:

-New players (judging from the state of the current beta) is getting a subpar Deadfire experience - vanilla light

-Experienced players almost lose their incentive to play a single class character as things are right now

 

In PoE, single classes had to fill both roles, now they don't.

 

2)

Casters and martials are closer to each other in terms of options. There ARE more class talents for the martials than they were in PoE, and less for the casters. I think this is the major reason for all the complaints here; not saying that is wrong, since some classes like priests and rangers really do lack options.

Here, I think most of us are in agreement. Some single classes are obviously worse than others. Also, given how bad the state is for casters, I'd agree that martials got the long end of the stick, for the most part (ranger is one exception.)

 

3)

You get build diversity by going down different upgrade paths for the martials, and by choosing different spells for the casters.

If an ability has multiple different upgrades, they are mutually exclusive in PoE2. This is where your build options lie. Stating that single classes don't have options is a blatant overstatement. Those choices also go a long way to the synergies with your remaining party members. If the abilities / spells are not attractive enough to make the choice hard, then that is an balancing problem, and not a design problem.

I'll admit that when arguing, we do tend to overstate our points, but the options for single classes in this beta are so limited compared to multi-classing that an experienced player like me would never consider touching a single class character. That can't be good.

[ghostwriter]

I think you unintentionally hit the nail right on the head there. They are so lackluster and barebone that the single classes are almost not there. 

 

Even if the single class option wasn't there, you'd still be able to recreate almost everything from PoE and much more now.

The most important thing is to enhance the build diversity for single classes, and right now the game encourages new players to pick single class. A window pops up: "Multiclass is for experienced players". A new player picking a single class right now will be sorely disappointed. I don't need to get the old system back. I'm not nostalgic about it content-wise, I'm just defending any kind of system with options for those inclined to make sane or wacky single class characters.

 

 

The thing is, the system you're talking about didn't have to accommodate a complex multiclass system alongside it. I don't think anyone would be against having more build diversity for single class characters, but how would you do that without making multiclassing more complicated, inelegant and hard to balance? It's not as easy as just adding back the missing general talents because that would force players to choose between picking those talents and their core class abilities. This is especially problematic with the more limited spell selection of casters, which I discussed in an earlier post in more detail.

 

Also I think calling single classes lackluster and bare bones when they're at 6th-9th level with barely any unique equipment might be a little premature.

[veteran81]

Or, or, hear me out here, this may get tricky - everyone has a lot of options? It's not like you don't gain anything by going single-class, you gain the most powerful abilities of that class. Why does something have to cater to new players? The game is Pillars of Eternity 2, not Pacifier Simulator. It's expected that a sequel will require a bit of knowledge from the previous game.

Bingo. This is PoE2 not a brand new game that exists outside of the PoE universe.

 

It makes me nostalgic as to how seamlessly gameplay was from BG 1 to BG 2 and guess what no one complained! And it's a was huge success and commercial succes, so much so that even the dang EEs are fun and amazing.

 

Obsidian spent all this time reinventing the wheel with PoE1 to be similar but different from the IE universe (and I thought they did a really awesome job) so I don't get why they are trying to seemingly reinvent the wheel *again* ?! Why there's nothing wrong with thier original system they developed in PoE 1 (all of this imo) they should of just added to the system (like how a part 2 is supposed to) not cut this core mechanic out here and replace it with new core mechanic now here.

Edited November 16, 2017 by veteran81

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

I think you unintentionally hit the nail right on the head there. They are so lackluster and barebone that the single classes are almost not there. 

 

Even if the single class option wasn't there, you'd still be able to recreate almost everything from PoE and much more now.

The most important thing is to enhance the build diversity for single classes, and right now the game encourages new players to pick single class. A window pops up: "Multiclass is for experienced players". A new player picking a single class right now will be sorely disappointed. I don't need to get the old system back. I'm not nostalgic about it content-wise, I'm just defending any kind of system with options for those inclined to make sane or wacky single class characters.

 

 

The thing is, the system you're talking about didn't have to accommodate a complex multiclass system alongside it. I don't think anyone would be against having more build diversity for single class characters, but how would you do that without making multiclassing more complicated, inelegant and hard to balance? It's not as easy as just adding back the missing general talents because that would force players to choose between picking those talents and their core class abilities. This is especially problematic with the more limited spell selection of casters, which I discussed in an earlier post in more detail.

 

Also I think calling single classes lackluster and bare bones when they're at 6th-9th level with barely any unique equipment might be a little premature.

 

I agree. Therefore, adding a number of carefully selected talents - some maybe shared between just a few classes - is the way forward. Surely, there is a reasonable amount of such "neutral" talents that wouldn't upset any balancing problems. And truth be told, I don't think you can balance the current multiclass system very well - the number of combinations is too great.

 

EDIT: Lackluster and barebone comes from my previewing the tree options for the single classes. I mean the lack of choice and diversity.

Edited November 16, 2017 by IndiraLightfoot

[Ganrich]

For anyone who says that multiclassing is better and more flexible - you do realize that you can only have 2 classes? So you can't get access to all the universal abilities like in POE1. In POE2 those ex-universal abilities are now spread across some classes, but you can't keep on multiclassing to get them all. From what I can see, if nothing changes then builds are gonna be even more cookie cutter, not less. Class specific abilities, for the most part, are sparse and everyone will want to be a fighter for those ex-universal abilities. Personally, I think devs dropped the ball here - they should have either made them available for all classes or replaced them with something different and more creative for the non-spellcaster classes.

 

Did you use PoE1 talents to spec in such a way that cannot be done with 2 classes being multiclassed?  If so you were probably spread thin.  That melee Cipher people build can now be done by MCing with Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Druid, Rogue, or Barbarian.   So, there is 6 different melee Cipher builds right there.  That's not including different subclasses.  1/6th of which include the Fighter.  Where previously in the first game it was Weapon focus feat, dual wield feat, and so on for every weapon based build.  Now you get some variety. 

 

Will they vary in efficiency?  Of course.  That might matter in triple threat solo games, but I'm doubtful it will be so lopsided that most gamers will care.  My best PoE experience was a Wood Elf mid-ranged Archer Chanter with deep pockets, a slew of scrolls crafted, and a lot items with per day actives.  Also, the cross talent Wounding shot and envenomed strike. Basically, you fired a shot or two, cast a scroll or two, and then used an Invocation.  Stayed in the middle of your party so they got buffs, but far enough back that the Wood Elf Passive kicked in on most everything.  It was a positioning nightmare, but it was a blast.  Troubadour/Trickster build does a very similar thing (it has deep pockets) with a ranged weapon equipped.  Or you could do it by mixing Ranger/Chanter without deep pockets, but pick up an animal companion or a Ghost Heart.  Or you could do it with a Cipher which will bump weapon damage and add a variety of spells.

 

The more I fiddle the more I am ok with Single classes being streamlined, but SOME classes for sure need a bit more:  Rangers for example.  No sense playing a stalker single classed if key abilities flat out don't work.  My exception is the Evasive Shot or whatever it is called.  It requiring a ranged weapon makes sense. 

 

I am ok with streamlining because the core class plus 3+ Subclasses gives enough variety even with limited build variety.  You can still have ranged rogue, melee rogue, item using rogue, etc.  You just have a narrow path after CharGen with single class.  Eh, it is what it is.  I still think it may be hard to see how everything looks when we definitely aren't seeing the full class trees. 

Edited November 16, 2017 by Ganrich

[IndiraLightfoot]

 we definitely aren't seeing the full class trees. 

 

Aren't we? Source?

 

I was under the impression that the preview trees are the real deal.

[Ganrich]

 

 we definitely aren't seeing the full class trees. 

 

Aren't we? Source?

 

I was under the impression that the preview trees are the real deal.

 

Pretty sure the level cap is 20 if we look at the fig page.  So, we aren't seeing some max level abilities by my estimate.  WM2 cap was 16.  So, every class should have a bit more at the level cap than we are seeing here.  However, Josh changing how you gain access to higher level abilities might have changed things in a way where level 20 is the new 16.  I doubt it, though.  going from 16 to 20 should give the equivalent of two more spell levels, and if we get the exact same abilities some backers might get together with pitchforks. 

 

Now, I am not saying those high level spells/abilities will drastically change anything, but it could make a difference. 

 

EDIT:  opened the beta and looked.  Max level Wizard spells are 5th level on CharGen preview.  So, that requires a 9th level wizard in PoE1.  The spell levels count to level 10, but 6-10 have no spells listed.  So we aren'tt seeing everything. 

Edited November 16, 2017 by Ganrich

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

 

 we definitely aren't seeing the full class trees. 

 

Aren't we? Source?

 

I was under the impression that the preview trees are the real deal.

 

Pretty sure the level cap is 20 if we look at the fig page.  So, we aren't seeing some max level abilities by my estimate.  WM2 cap was 16.  So, every class should have a bit more at the level cap than we are seeing here.  However, Josh changing how you gain access to higher level abilities might have changed things in a way where level 20 is the new 16.  I doubt it, though.  going from 16 to 20 should give the equivalent of two more spell levels, and if we get the exact same abilities some backers might get together with pitchforks. 

 

Now, I am not saying those high level spells/abilities will drastically change anything, but it could make a difference. 

 

I didn't mean high level branches on the trees. Now I see what you mean.

[Ganrich]

I believe that during the first Beta Obsidian added feats/talents as it went on.  So, that could happen to some degree here as well.  I might be not be remembering correctly.  So, don't quote me. 

[Boeroer]

This is not about multiclassing. I think this just works fine atm. The problem are the very streamlined single classes. Not enough choice of abilities basically. This could easily be solved with some more abilities that everybody can have. This also doesn't mess up the balance of multiclassing. You just make sure that you can't take the same ability twice (like you can atm with Bear's Fort on monk/druid for example).

 

I just don't get it why my paladin can't take Weapon & Shield Style anymore.

[IndiraLightfoot]

To boil it down for me:

-If more such exclusive talents for single classes turned up, 

-And if a pool of shared talents between classes akin to one another was made

-And a decent pool of common "basic" talents was created

 

Then, I'd be a happy camper.

[Ganrich]

This is not about multiclassing. I think this just works fine atm. The problem are the very streamlined single classes. Not enough choice of abilities basically. This could easily be solved with some more abilities that everybody can have. This also doesn't mess up the balance of multiclassing. You just make sure that you can't take the same ability twice (like you can atm with Bear's Fort on monk/druid for example).

 

I just don't get it why my paladin can't take Weapon & Shield Style anymore.

 

I just don't think it's fair to look at SC characters in a vacuum when discussing the variety of the class system of the game.  MC and SC characters are both parts of a whole.  Ying and Yang if you will.  So, it IS about MC IMHO.  Because what we are looking at are ramifications of adding MCing to the game. 

 

That said, this is one of the reasons why I said (when we were asked about it around the Fig Campaign) I would've much preferred a MC system akin to 3rd edition than this 2nd edition-esque system.  The way Munchkin builds in 3rd edition turned people off was because (predominantly) of how skill points (arbitrary skill caps based on class level, and skill point carry over from one level to the nex) and Feats were distributed, and people used the MC system to maximize.  Also, powerful level one abilities were a problem.   None of those issues would be present here, really.  Then you could have a 1 level fighter for Sword and Board Talent, and go the rest pure Paladin.  It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be better than this IMHO.  I'm still a bit fuzzy on how high level abilities unlock as you level when MCed. 

 

I don't necessarily disagree that I think giving the Pally a Sword and Board talent, and a 2 hander talent would be a bad thing.  Given the UI we have... I just don't see how we can get universal talents/feats without a huge overhaul.  Adding Talents to some class trees?  I think we could definitely get that. 

@IndiraLightfoot -  I could definitely see exclusive talents for SC being possible.  High level class talents will definitely be there.  The other two on your list... I have much less hope for. 

[morhilane]

-And a decent pool of common "basic" talents was created

It's called weapon proficiency, it contains like half of POE1 general talents.

[draego]

 

-And a decent pool of common "basic" talents was created

It's called weapon proficiency, it contains like half of POE1 general talents.

 

 

These are not the same as the general talents some of those like penetrating shot or vulnerable attack or savage attack could be applied to any weapon. now weapons come with a pre baked model for something resembling one of these effects and new ones. This is not the same and provides less options . So all weapons can be used by all classes so it better than nothing i mean POE1 already allowed that and i am working to find synergies like the wareaxe modal is bleed and that triggers predator's sense for my ranger animal which is nice but i dont get to use any other weapon to do this therefore its not a general talent in the same since.

 

what would be nice is if they uncoupled all the modals from weapons and added back in most of the defensive talents like others have already mentioned here to a general talent pool and let the player choose what they want to do . That would be actual general talents and would make characters more flexible. And maybe instead of the weapon proficiencies screen you get access to this list of general talents to choose from so casters dont miss out on spells and martial classes can augment their build design. 

Edited November 17, 2017 by draego

[cheesevillain]

 

-And a decent pool of common "basic" talents was created

It's called weapon proficiency, it contains like half of POE1 general talents.

 

 

 

This isn't quite true, but it's close. There were 45 general talents in PoE1 base game. There are 31 Weapon Proficiencies in PoE2.

 

The 6 weapon focus talents and 5 modal fighting talents are rolled into the weapon proficiencies.

 

Some of the other talents are rolled into the weapon proficiencies as well. The Hold the Line talent gave extra engagement, and now the halberd modal does the same.

Superior Deflection is replaced by the dagger modal. We don't have weapon and shield style, but now there are three different shield modals to choose from, and 12 single weapon modals to mix & match.

 

This isn't perfect, but I have to say I really like most of the modals, and I would try most of them with most classes, and they've done a whole lot to differentiate classes I've made while building them. In contrast, the pool of general talents in PoE sometimes felt like a trash dump, and most of them were not fun or useful with most classes.

 

There were talents like field triage and wound binding that could have been recovery items, not talents. An elemental resistance talent such as "Secrets of Rime" should have been an enchanted cloak, or the reward for the Rymrgand mission. There were 5 talents like "Beast Slayer" which I bet were mostly used by power gamers who respecced his classes before, say, a difficult dragon fight.

 

And of course, there were talents that should have been class-specific but weren't. Bloody Slaughter should have been for Barbs, Shot on the Run should have been for Rangers, and Envenomed Strike DEFINITELY should have been for rogue. Remember how cruddy it was that the PoE rogue capstone ability was playing dead?

 

There's someone out there who made a pale elf from the White that Wends playing a Priest of Berath (but he pretends its a priest Rymrgand) and the class wouldn't be complete without "Secrets of Rime". I feel bad for that guy, but we're not missing generalized talent tree. What IS a problem is that some classes have specific holes that need to be filled. The Priest of Skaen and Stalker subclasses should both be melee capable, but they don't have the abilities they need to be played that way.

Edited November 17, 2017 by cheesevillain