Removing non class specific talents was a bad idea

[Breckmoney]

 

I guess I don't get why it doesn't make sense.

 

 

Analyse of NWN1 and 2

Recall of facts :

 

NWN Feats (Equivalence of Talents in POE) = Class feats + Racial Feats + GENERAL feats + CONDITIONNAL feats (Constitution 21+ etc)

 

Level of liberty = 90 %

 

------------

 

POE2 beta Talents = Class talents.

 

Level of liberty = 20 % (Chose a class and it is all)

I don't think that's a sensible way of looking at it. The number of categories from which you personalize your character doesn't mean anything. You could have the exact same character in both systems. It's all just a defined number of decisions you make when building a character - who cares where they come from or what they're called?

[Doppelschwert]

 

 

I disregard the passive talents because they don't change how you can play the game. All the active abilities come from class talents, and those have stayed roughly the same in number. My conclusion is that all the general talents have achieved is shifting some number upgrades around. Do you have a different build when you trade a talent that adds accuracy for one that adds deflection? How can anyone claim the general talents opened up more builds when they don't change your toolkit in the slightest?

I don't even like quick switch, deep pockets, and arm bearer, but I can acknowledge that they allow you to approach the game differently. The passives all just depend on the assumptions the game makes about your stats. If you take them away and the game balances accordingly, what have you truly lost in terms of options? Nothing, you can play the same characters as before.

 

And the single classes will still get exclusive access to the two highest power level abilities.

 

Hm, let me see if I get you here. I think you mean that almost all those passive talents only change numbers, like, they're only minor adjustments under the hood of a machine? 

And then something like Deep Pockets at least alters gameplay a little bit?

I respect your opinion on this, but know this:

Most people who played PoE 1 had factual and lasting alterations of their playthrough because of their choices of the aforementioned passive talents.

Compare this to a computer. It's like one of them makes the sound system slightly crisper, or the motherboard a bit more reliable, or perhaps, you do get a somewhat faster response time on your hard drive. And for tech nerds (in this case build enthusiasts), all this tech and all these numbers make up fun and important choices for how they build their machine or character.

 

As for the single classes getting exclusive talents. Well, yes, at the end, but I've played through PoE1 a number of times, and it was never necessary for me to reach the top levels. It's too little, too late, I reckon.  

 

 

I appreciate the simile, but I'm well aware of the enjoyment of all these passive upgrades. As a matter of fact, my characters in PoE mostly used the passive talents just because higher numbers were greatly beneficial if you stack them. That being said, increasing numbers is already a thing for equipment, so I don't necessarily need it on my character development as well. Conceptually, it is kind of a boring choice.

 

For the most part, this discussion reminds me about the automatic bonus progression from the pathfinder rpg. In the rpg, it is an unwritten rule that you periodically need to buy magic items that boost your attributes to stay competitive. The bonus progression is an optional rule that just gives you this bonus scaling with level automatically, but also removing a corresponding amount of wealth and access to these items. Gameplay stays more or less the same, but gear suddenly becomes a much more interesting choice, since you can only choose actual effects that alter gameplay as enchantments.

 

The approach to PoE2 is more or less the same in terms of character development, at least when they work on a couple more class-based options. All the numerical upgrades from the general talents can be properly merged into the new balancing (and necessarily will be), leaving you with choices along a different axis with regards to character development.

Again, it's far from perfect at the moment, all I'm arguing is that from a design point of view, those general talents are hardly necessary.

Edited November 17, 2017 by Doppelschwert

[theBalthazar]

who cares where they come from or what they're called? 

 

 

I speak in terme of CHOICE^^. Overall, all the talents perhaps still exist if we add all classes, but the choice overtime is reduced.

 

You must pick ONE class (or two...), and for a reduced amount of talents. It is a regression.

 

It works in NWN because there is LOT of feats. Feats for classes, ok. But otherwise an incredible amount of choice in, for exemple, General feats, or Epic feats. Paradise of character building.

 

In POE1 the choice of talents is already very limited... (it is ok with multiclass talents, but not crazy) Imagine now with a divided number... the fonction has been moved, not "reinforce". If you want class talents, ok. But you must muscle your panel, muscle the choice for players.

Edited November 17, 2017 by theBalthazar

[IndiraLightfoot]

@Doppelschwert: You're welcome!

And after your clarifications, I reckon we have more similar views than you might expect.

I guess that we both agree on this:

-Multiclassing in Deadfire is great

-Simpler single classes are not a problem per se

-Most of these single classes need to get more talents and be more fleshed out, and this goes for the subclasses as well.

 

I think a slight disagreement may reside in our view on system balance and easy-to-grasp character development.

-I like almost over-complicated systems, systems that aren't perfect, sprawling and fiddly-friendly (Just as an example, I wouldn't mind if they kept PoE1 and then smacked Deadfire multiclasses on top and didn't balance it much.)

-You like fewer and more meaningful choices, and you want to see a better made system, professionally balanced to a certain degree.

[Lamppost in Winter]

 

Good news everyone, our yelling may be fruitful.

[Ganrich]

Even someone like me that is kind of Ok with how things are isn't going to complain about more talents all around. 

[Roda]

It feels unatractive and boring leveling up. Choices, builds make rpg games great for me and I miss heavily that in this beta.

-Skills (survival, athetics, etc) need an improve to feel atractive and not so rol/fixate (a "little" of flexibility).

-Talents tree its the most demoralizing thing I saw in a long time. Empty, Choiceless.

 

Those are my main issues right now.

[Enduin]

I'm not really put off by the lack of Talents as they were in PoE on paper, though I've yet to experience it in action, but if they were to reintroduce them in some fashion I think I would prefer something a bit more substantial and meaningful for Deadfire. 

 

I understand the desire for more numerous and smaller incremental augmentations that can help reshape and make single class characters, especially, more unique, but I'd personally prefer something akin to FO1/2 Perks. A more infrequent choice that carries a more substantial impact on your character. Such infrequency can potentially allow Obsidian to create more unique and powerful options based on race, class and sub-classes as players would only be able to choose a handful, say every 3 or even 4 levels, so the overall pool available wouldn't need to be so large if it were every other level like it was in PoE.

 

This could also help to further differentiate Single Class characters giving them access to certain Talents only available to them. Maybe some providing similar, but not as substantial, benefits that multi-class characters are awarded. Much like cross-class Talents from PoE.

 

The current system heavily front loads 80% of your important character choices to character creation based on your whether you go Single or Multi-Class and then what Subclass you choose, after that your choices are far less dramatic and carry much less weight on the direction of your character do to the overall reduction in choices each level up and what you're choosing. But by introducing these landmark Talents every 3 to 4 levels that offer a not too dissimilar impact as choosing Single/Multi-class and Subclass that could help to improve the feeling of leveling and developing your character over time and give Single Class characters more opportunities to specialize or deviate from the standard path.

[vanyel54]

I completely agree with theBaltahazar. It's all about choice. Because this basically what is a RPG game in the end.

 

Even if you put aside the efficiency of the character, reducing the choice of abilities impact the Role Playing part of the game.

An example: in POE1, you could take superior deflection for +5 deflection. We all agree it's not a game breaker ability (and honestly i almost never take it). 

But if YOU want to play a more bulky character, YOU could do it.

[cheesevillain]

 

I completely agree with theBaltahazar. It's all about choice. Because this basically what is a RPG game in the end.

 

Even if you put aside the efficiency of the character, reducing the choice of abilities impact the Role Playing part of the game.

An example: in POE1, you could take superior deflection for +5 deflection. We all agree it's not a game breaker ability (and honestly i almost never take it). 

But if YOU want to play a more bulky character, YOU could do it.

 

 

 

I had a very different experience than you. If I wanted to play a character who could dodge & parry all attacks, I would choose Superior deflection, and then... I wouldn't feel any different. The effect was too small. The choice wasn't meaningful. Most of the General Talents were nerfed, passive non-choices that didn't make much difference for players. They were cool for some for RP reasons, and they were cool for power gamers who liked squeezing the last few points of juice for their builds, but the General Talents didn't do much for me. A large number of non-meaningful choices does not make an RPG good.

 

Meanwhile, while now I can choose a class-specific talent every level, in PoE1 I could only make a class specific choice every other level. Unless I was a monk or a priest, in which case I couldn't barely make any; I couldn't even pick my own spells. I want to see more class options in deadfire, but hot damn it's satisfying to finally see a Priest of Berath play differently from a Priest of Eothas, and to be able to choose to make a druid focus on healing my allies or rotting the flesh off my enemies.

[theBalthazar]

 I would choose Superior deflection, and then... I wouldn't feel any different. The effect was too small. The choice wasn't meaningful. Most of the General Talents were nerfed, passive non-choices that didn't make much difference for players. 

 

 

You take the problem upside down.

 

If the talent is not useful, it is because its a general pool ? and you fold it in a the class system to better control it ?

 

No, if it this talent is bad, you pass 5 to 10.

 

If the talent "body control" is take by nobody, pass the bonus +10 to +25. etc. (+10 was very useless, this is the reason...)

 

Each investment must pay his price.

 

It is not the fault of the existence of this talent, but his balancing (in this case).

 

Le biggest mistake to not do when you create a game system is to rigidify the system because you cannot manage all the stuff.  you will tighten to limit the breakage, and it is not good.

 

POE2 is under the sign of OPENING. Multiclass is the things the most refreshing. And conceptually, multiclass is the fact of combo (optimization for each member of your team). The pleasure of build. But in an other hand, you lock the talents ? It is not good.

Edited November 18, 2017 by theBalthazar

[Heijoushin]

Yes indeed, those skill trees are bare as Mother Hubbard's cupboard. I mean, even in Pillars 1, some of the classes didn't have too many unique skills, but somehow laying it out on a diagram at character creation makes you realize how empty it is. 

 

Don't worry chaps, I'm sure they're just saving some content for the Deadfire expansion: The Blue Tides Parts 1&2, which will feature an extra 10 abilities per class. Mark my words...

Edited November 18, 2017 by Heijoushin

[Katarack21]

 

I can't do that in P2 as a pure wizard. The closest I can do in P2 is a Wizard/Ghost Heart Ranger, which is a pretty drastic change to the concept. This is a problem, as I would really like to continue as the character I finished with, even if I've been reset to level zero.

 

If it looks like a duck, acts like a duck, and sounds like a duck, it's a duck. You can build the same character in PoE, only difference is that he's not called a wizard anymore. What's the actual problem? Why does the regular wizard need to be the guy to pull it off? You even keep all the wizard related dialogue options.

I'm not trying to mock you, that's a sincere question.

 

 

 

Because it's *not the same character*. It's not a pale elf wizard. It's a wizard ranger. The kind of people who care about that distinction are the kind of people who are the bread and butter of companies like Obsidian.

[Doppelschwert]

 

 

I can't do that in P2 as a pure wizard. The closest I can do in P2 is a Wizard/Ghost Heart Ranger, which is a pretty drastic change to the concept. This is a problem, as I would really like to continue as the character I finished with, even if I've been reset to level zero.

 

If it looks like a duck, acts like a duck, and sounds like a duck, it's a duck. You can build the same character in PoE, only difference is that he's not called a wizard anymore. What's the actual problem? Why does the regular wizard need to be the guy to pull it off? You even keep all the wizard related dialogue options.

I'm not trying to mock you, that's a sincere question.

Because it's *not the same character*. It's not a pale elf wizard. It's a wizard ranger. The kind of people who care about that distinction are the kind of people who are the bread and butter of companies like Obsidian.

 

With all due respect, that is ridiculous. Who cares what's written on your character sheet?

Wizard being part of the multiclass, you get to keep all the wizard exclusive dialogue options - the character is a wizard for all intents and purposes regarding gameplay. By investing into the ranger skills only every 4 levels, you also keep the same amount of spells as if you were a single class wizard. The only thing you are missing is earlier access to higher level spells, and in exchange for that, you get to be even better at using implements than in PoE due to ranger talents that weren't even accessible in PoE. I even tried it out right now.

Furthermore, if you care about less than 7 ranger talents, you can use the remaining multiclass talents to learn even MORE spells than a singleclass wizard.

 

You can't be serious about claiming that pedantry is obsidians bread and butter - they care for a much wider audience.

Edited November 18, 2017 by Doppelschwert

[JerekKruger]

Yes indeed, those skill trees are bare as Mother Hubbard's cupboard. I mean, even in Pillars 1, some of the classes didn't have too many unique skills, but somehow laying it out on a diagram at character creation makes you realize how empty it is.

 

Generally speaking, apart from losing access to generic talents most classes have roughly the same number of abilities as they did in Pillars, but you're right that the way they're laid out at the moment makes them feel very limited.

 

Hopefully once higher level abilities are added to the tree (and hopefully when most generic talents are returned) it will feel less so. One thing that is definitely appreciated by me is the increase in upgradeable abilities, and I think a big way Obsidian could make the tree feel more populated would be to increase the number of such upgrades.

 

With all due respect, that is ridiculous. Who cares what's written on your character sheet?

 

Plenty of people.

 

Wizard being part of the multiclass, you get to keep all the wizard exclusive dialogue options - the character is a wizard for all intents and purposes regarding gameplay. By investing into the ranger skills only every 4 levels, you also keep the same amount of spells as if you were a single class wizard. The only thing you are missing is earlier access to higher level spells, and in exchange for that, you get to be even better at using implements than in PoE due to ranger talents that weren't even accessible in PoE. I even tried it out right now.

 

Losing access to high level abilities might very well be a deal breaker for someone who wants to build am "arch mage" style wizard who uses implements (not exactly an odd build I'd say).

 

Furthermore, if you care about less than 7 ranger talents, you can use the remaining multiclass talents to learn even MORE spells than a singleclass wizard.

 

The same sort of people who don't want their pure wizard concept being a Wizard/Ranger probably don't want to take talents with names that evoke bows or guns or hunting.

 

You can't be serious about claiming that pedantry is obsidians bread and butter - they care for a much wider audience.

 

Bread and butter is probably an exaggeration, but Obsidian is one of few companies catering to role-players, and for many role-players these things do matter.

 

If my character concept is your typical scholarly mage then no amount of in game benefits from multiclassing would make me do so. I'll only multiclass if it fits my concept (or I'm trying something like Triple Crown Solo and aren't focusing on the story side of things).

Edited November 18, 2017 by JerekKruger

[Katarack21]

 

 

You can't be serious about claiming that pedantry is obsidians bread and butter - they care for a much wider audience.

 

Bread and butter is probably an exaggeration, but Obsidian is one of few companies catering to role-players, and for many role-players these things do matter.

Bingo. There was some hyperbole in my statement, but there was some truth, as well. Obsidian caters to a little more of a dedicated role-playing crowd than than is typical of the modern audience; that's part of why many of their games are considered "niche". PoE in particular, being an isoliner RPG that owes much to games from 25 years ago, is an unusually niche game with an audience that skews a little older and a little more towards the old school.

 

You may not understand, but to *me*, if my character sheet says wizard/ranger that's a completely *different* character. Somewhere in that characters background is a completely different story, a different path where they became a different thing entirely, certainly not a wizard who specializes in instruments but a wizard with *ranger* training instead.

[Doppelschwert]

I do consider myself a roleplayer, but I don't care what the talents or classes are called on a technical level. To me, playing a role relates to how I can interact with the game world, which is mostly unaffected by all the complaints people are having. I'd understand the complaints if the multiclass forced you to interact with the gameworld differently, but it doesn't.

 

I can agree that if having appropriate names are such big issue that it impairs your ability to enjoy the game, PoE2 changed things for the worse. However, that seems rather stubborn to me, and I'd rather like the devs to stick with their original vision instead of bringing the general talents. More options for all the classes? Sure, but I don't need the general talents back.

 

If you feel like focusing on implements is central to your concept, maybe you should consider taking that multiclass. If it's not worth the high level spells, maybe just play a regular wizard and use implements... without the minor buffs from another class. The game will hardly become unwinnable due to the lack of a couple talents, and there will still be spells and equipment to help to support that role.

 

How do you people play pen and paper rpgs? Usually, there is not a class that does exactly what you want, so you have to build around it somehow. The names often don't align as a result, but if you have all the tools that the concept you had in mind needs, why wouldn't you go with it and have fun anyway?

Edited November 18, 2017 by Doppelschwert

[Katarack21]

If you add on a class, it's not just a "name" on your sheet. A class is a *character concept* in and of itself. To me, if I'm playing a wizard/ranger I have to explain where that wizard came from--and that explanation is intrinsically going to create a character very, very different from the character that is a straight wizard who specializes in implements.

Sure, it may have all the *gameplay* that I wanted, but it's not the *character* that I wanted.

[Doppelschwert]

I take it that most of the problems could be resolved if you were able to give your class a custom name?

[draego]

I do consider myself a roleplayer, but I don't care what the talents or classes are called on a technical level. To me, playing a role relates to how I can interact with the game world, which is mostly unaffected by all the complaints people are having. I'd understand the complaints if the multiclass forced you to interact with the gameworld differently, but it doesn't.

 

I can agree that if having appropriate names are such big issue that it impairs your ability to enjoy the game, PoE2 changed things for the worse. However, that seems rather stubborn to me, and I'd rather like the devs to stick with their original vision instead of bringing the general talents. More options for all the classes? Sure, but I don't need the general talents back.

 

If you feel like focusing on implements is central to your concept, maybe you should consider taking that multiclass. If it's not worth the high level spells, maybe just play a regular wizard and use implements... without the minor buffs from another class. The game will hardly become unwinnable due to the lack of a couple talents, and there will still be spells and equipment to help to support that role.

 

How do you people play pen and paper rpgs? Usually, there is not a class that does exactly what you want, so you have to build around it somehow. The names often don't align as a result, but if you have all the tools that the concept you had in mind needs, why wouldn't you go with it and have fun anyway?

 

If this were true then POE2 did change things for the worse. There should be no multiclassing and the game should move to less classes or no classes with just open talents to let you develop the character you want. What they did is make classes more specialized and only allow you pick from two buckets and then gimp those by not letting you get to higher level talents because they claim they want to make the single classes still feel fun and viable. They also would not have forced the weapon proficiencies. They should have removed all modal abilities to one giant bucket of abilities and let players choose what weapons they want their character to role with whatever modal. I agree in some ways the game has allowed some more freedom but at the cost of other freedoms from POE1. I think all people are saying is why cant we have both sets of freedom from both POE1 and 2.

 

I feel like in the current system they should force you to multclass and let you get access to the higher level abilities plus all the modal stuff i mentioned

Edited November 18, 2017 by draego

[theBalthazar]

Even in terms of roleplay...

 

I want a Barbarian spe Two hand. Singleclass. I want to excel in one class.

 

RP speaking I can imagine a powerful man, focus on his muscle, able to do +15 % with a great sword. Big sword.

 

In our case, if I want this, I am in obligation of take Barbarian + Fighter.

 

So the RPG aspect does not precede my choice. The game precedes my choice = Bottleneck.

 

talents must follow a certain logic inherent to the game and to the universe portrayed. All rest must be allocate to flexibility.

Edited November 18, 2017 by theBalthazar

[BrettNLowe]

This is exactly what I was talking about earlier. You want a single-class barbarian that excels in two-handers? Great! Roll a barb, take two-hander proficiencies. Done. You'll be good with a variety of two-handers, and have the stronger Barb power source and higher abilities.

 

I challenge anyone to find a similar post in the Pillars 1 forums saying "I have a Barb concept that excels in Soldier weapons, but I just can't do it because only Fighters get Weapon Specialization and Weapon Mastery, for 25% more damage! My concept isn't being allowed!"

[Doppelschwert]

I challenge anyone to find a similar post in the Pillars 1 forums saying "I have a Barb concept that excels in Soldier weapons, but I just can't do it because only Fighters get Weapon Specialization and Weapon Mastery, for 25% more damage! My concept isn't being allowed!"

 

This is a very good argument - I'd like to see that as well.

[Archaven]

Yes indeed, those skill trees are bare as Mother Hubbard's cupboard. I mean, even in Pillars 1, some of the classes didn't have too many unique skills, but somehow laying it out on a diagram at character creation makes you realize how empty it is. 

 

Don't worry chaps, I'm sure they're just saving some content for the Deadfire expansion: The Blue Tides Parts 1&2, which will feature an extra 10 abilities per class. Mark my words...

 

If they are saving the base mechanics of multi-classing which is the selling point of deadfire, then they are discouraging and off-putting their fans.

[Gromnir]

I take it that most of the problems could be resolved if you were able to give your class a custom name?

 

*chuckle*

 

Gromnir made this suggestion during the fig campaign.  am personal not a victim o' name psychosis, but it is a real problem for some folks.  no matter how many times the developers o' poe explained how the poe fighter and rogue and paladin were not having the same roles as ie game fighters, rogues and paladins, some folks could not give up the ghost. describe what a poe fighter is.  show how the poe fighter has more useable abilities at level four than any 12th level bg2 fighter could have.  explain how increased number o' classes requires more limited roles.  whatever.  didn't matter.  the names created insurmountable expectations.  

 

am seeing a level o' obtuseness at work we cannot accept.  there is a huge number o' multi-class, subclass and skill additions which allow a deadfire player to achieve levels o' customization impossible in poe. undeniable. is not even worthy o' argument to ask whether poe or deadfire offers more potential customization. nevertheless, 'cause a deadfire player cannot replicate with a single class all the options which were available to 'em in poe, many folks is angered. is ridiculous.  the deadfire single-class character has access to higher level abilities and has superior power levels n' such. providing the single-class character the capacity to access those particular powerful poe general accessible talents would be overkill, no?  and let's be honest, the folks complaining 'bout the changes is not clamoring to have their deadfire character get access to field triage or deep pockets. there is very specific talents players is wanting made general accessible.

 

in deadfire, a single-class paladin player who wanna tank is only gonna get weapon and shield style by multiclassing as a paladin/fighter. good. the poe paladin were envisioned as being a durable and low maintenance support class.  somehow, by end o' wm expansions, you could play a paladin which were superlative worthy as a seeming ambulatory fireball who could heal and produce extreme damage while also tanking as well as any fighter.  what exact is the point o' adding multi-class if folks could achieve with a single class everything they want... plus increased power levels and higher level abilities. a deadfire single-class paladin can still tank like a champ, but dropping dex to 3 is gonna be far less viable.  great. forces the player to make hard choices. is a rpg, and yeah, a rpg is 'bout providing the player with choice, but choices w/o hard consequences is fraudulent.  with all the possible multi-class options, the player has loads o' choices, but is s'posed to be agonizing to need choose 'tween a single class and the numerous multi-classes.  

 

bah.

 

is bg grandmastery.  is iwd ranged weapons. is any number o' similar well considered and desirable, but unpopular, changes we has seen in other sequels.  sure, the scale o' the change may be greater than bg2 nerf o' grandmastery, but the level o' customization afforded by deadfire multi-class is also much better.  got a huge number o' deadfire multiclasses.  the only way to keep the new options distinct is to keep the base classes far more insular and discrete than were the case in poe. 

 

but yeah, as ridiculous as it seems to Gromnir, allowing customized name changes may actual solve some o' the problems a few folks is facing.  if from the start o' development the poe rouge had been called landsknechts and poe fighters were renamed defenders, 1/3 of the complaints from the ie game purists woulda' instant disappeared.  would not have been the level o' entitlement w/o the name.  would not have been so many expectations 'bout what a fighter should be v. what the poe fighter actual was. as deadfire is a sequel, a simple name change is unlikely to bear the same kinda fruit, but it would help many get over their similar entitlement/expectation issues.

 

however, once again we will admit how a couple o' classes need a little love regarding their available ability trees. if the only meaningful single-class choice is picking a subclass, then am thinking obsidian needs reevaluate.  however, providing a field triage or deep pockets branch simple to make more options available is gonna be doomed, 'cause folks don't simple want choices.  what they actual want is their favorite talents to be returned to 'em w/o the need to multiclass.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited November 18, 2017 by Gromnir