Removing non class specific talents was a bad idea

[theBalthazar]

I can perhaps resume my posture in one sentence :

 

sure and certain that I would take more pleasure in the game if the talents are apart. (Or at least many more) Pleasure = more possibilities.

 

You can not do optimal than unleash the concept of Talents in relation to the class.

 

If the developers have an obsession to lose a lot of concepts in the "class" system. They can strengthen everything by creating new abilities. More, now it is the same cost for the player if I understand the new system... ! So there is no problem...

Edited November 18, 2017 by theBalthazar

[Answermancer]

So I personally agree that single-class characters could use access to more passives, and I read through this thread and thought about a lot of the arguments.

 

Aside from the general question of "should there be access to general talents" I think there's also an issue of implementation and UI for the devs, because right now it would be kind of complicated and clash with the current UI I think, especially if they just added duplicate talents to classes because now suddenly a multi-class character could take the same passive twice or something.

 

Anyway, I thought of a weird idea that I briefly mentioned in another thread and made a mockup below.

 

Basically the idea is this:

• Everyone chooses a second class, even "single-class" characters
• They have access to the second class's Tab on levelup BUT:
• They can only choose low-level passives from that class
• They can (probably) only choose a grand total of 1-2 (numbers to be tweaked, obviously)
• They can't choose the class-defining ones like Constant Regen or Sneak Attack

This would let everyone get things like weapon styles. Multi-classes would be unaffected. The UI wouldn't have to change.

 

Here's an example mockup, "single-class" rogue... with access to Two Weapon Style (because I want this, dammit ).

 

 

In fairness, I know this would probably get way too chaotic and complicated and impossible to balance. But I kinda like it as a "maximum flexibility" idea and maybe it could be pared down enough to be sane.

 

Edit, I dunno how to make it look less bad on here, here's an imgur link: 

Edited November 19, 2017 by Answermancer

[draego]

Basically the idea is this:

• Everyone chooses a second class, even "single-class" characters
• They have access to the second class's Tab on levelup BUT:
• They can only choose low-level passives from that class
• They can (probably) only choose a grand total of 1-2 (numbers to be tweaked, obviously)
• They can't choose the class-defining ones like Constant Regen or Sneak Attack

 

Ye i thought maybe they let you pick general talent instead of weapon proficiencies so:

 

* strip modal from weapon proficiencies and add to general pool. So stuff like penetration and or bleed or lower fortitude can by applied to any weapon

* add in some defensive and offensive talents like you mention above 

* and let the player pick general talents instead of weapon proficiencies at predefined levels.

* This way single class magic classes dont lose spells and martial classes can augment there roles. Or allow martial to pick every level instead of class talent but let magic builds access to this list at predefined levels so they dont lose spells.

 

Or

 

* treat single classes as predefined buckets of talents and force all players to multiclass

* since there is no single class picks anymore, allow all player multiclasses builds to get access to high level abilities from both classes

Edited November 19, 2017 by draego

[theBalthazar]

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!" 

 

 

Personally I do not care about the RP. I was resuming highter post.

 

You speak of POE1. You do well, because that's where the problem obviously comes from. POE2 comes after POE1. People do comparison and "feel" if a change is good or not. Perhaps it is because we just start to play to the game. But perhaps not.

 

You have a talent that is conceptually do for everyone.

 

A choice has been made. The Fighter is the only one to have this talent. OK. This can be balancing otherwise. No problem.

 

But question : Why do that ? You have less choice now. Nobody will tell you that this talent disturbed anyone.

 

I understand now two things :

 

1) Fighter and barbarian are perfectly balanced. But Barbarian is now less customisable. (package of abilities, and it is all).

 

2) Fighter and barbarian are not balanced. (What I think, the devs wanted to boost the fighter because it was one of the worst classes of the first game) If there is no balancing, it is worst for obvious reasons.

 

Josh Sawyer himself know there is a problem. Why ? Because they have distributed all the talents witch was in PO1. Except that number of talents was already pretty limited.

 

After that you test the beta : too little talent and big losses. Don't forget the concept of illusion. The player must feel more choice, more possibilities. Proficiency is here yes : but there is a problem : this is a simple modal. Not always advantageous.

 

If you disable it : it remains nothing.

 

That is why, I had proposed a carrot for players : only one proficiency at the creation (+1 all 5 levels) and a bonus in accuracy. Trust-me : it always works : p

 

The player must feel there is much possibilities and with the maximum potential in each facet. Fonction (inventivity) + Carrot (xp / Boost / Penetration / Accuracy etc.) + RP side (Role play) + Visual (graphic effect).

 

The warrior has all talents. Very good flexibility. He can do everything. Huge risk of imbalance. Not the class between them, but the imbalance for the feeling of player.

 

Proof : Look at Priest dude. With your affirmation : ok this is the choice of developpers, it is ok, he has only spells, and spells must surely have been balance. All is fine.

 

^^... Yes.... You can create a class with 5 spells like the first original sin. But if in the OS2 you have less spells because system balancing, the players will have no surprises, no news. Visually, in terms of feeling etc. Even if it is perfectly balance.

 

This is not a balancing story, but story of a certain level of complexity of game system and true choice/impression of choice (Build). If not, yes, it can be balanced elsewhere, overall, but that's not the question. The question is: why remove impression of choice to all classes compared to the first opus ?

 

In one word : UNLINK. If possible. For create a variety of build.

Edited November 19, 2017 by theBalthazar

[CENIC]

I like how weapon proficiencies are handled now. It was annoying to have to A) spend a talent point to get them and B) you have to pick a "group" of weapons when you really might only want one.

 

General talents should have their own section in character creation/level up too.

[Hariwulf]

I like the new system due to the increased specialization, which provides further differentiation among classes and roles.

 

Not being able to replicate the same character as in POE1 is not a bad thing, the game is vastly different, and so are the classes. I really like the new interpretation.

[Gromnir]

 

 

Josh Sawyer himself know there is a problem. Why ? Because they have distributed all the talents witch was in PO1. Except that number of talents was already pretty limited.

 

as far as we can tell, mr. sawyer has recognized the fact that numerous people is complaining 'bout the change from the open talent aquisition o' poe to deadfire's more insular and discrete base classes.  obsidian is aware and discussing.  is not the same as admitting there is actual a problem. 

 

in the intervening years since iwd, josh has become more politic and reflective.  anybody expecting josh to go all monte-cook-ranger has another thing coming.  heck, josh has largely abandoned the discussion of mechanics issues on these boards. regardless o' his announced reasons for being uncharacteristic taciturn, the obvious pointlessness o' arguing with folks emotional invested in... whatever, has no doubt taken its toll on josh. breaking point reached.  far less confrontational is mature josh. 

 

too bad.

 

am believing this issue is a monkey's paw trap. give folks the changes they desire, and they will understand rue.  have already discussed this earlier, but more choices is what has killed every d&d edition. 2e kits or 3e prestige classes.  the seeming need to add feats and/or spells and gear with every splatbook has done more to ruin each d&d edition than anything else.  don't matter.  more choice makes for more opportunities for breakage. is ironic, but add more inevitable leads to less functional customization as there will be clear correct character generation and development choices.  deadfire expansions and a poe 3 is no doubt envisioned.  keep adding bloat will break the rules.  suggesting such implosion doesn't need happen to deadfire is ignoring axiomatic lessons o' history o' game development. obsidian's deadfire streamlining o' classes were a clear and conscious choice by the developers to avoid mistakes o' other game systems.

 

a couple additional observations based on far too much interplay/black isle/obsidian message board posting:

 

1) there is often a disconnect between board feedback and actual fanbase impressions

 

use a board thread as a barometer for how game purchasers will react to a feature or change is a dubious proposition.  per kill xp were, for example, one o' the most hot contested aspects during the poe beta. not kidding.  multiple threads saw seeming interminable debates.  the 'mount o' energy and emotion invested into per kill xp were... curious.  no  marquess of queensberry rules neither. once game were made available, there were people who commplained 'bout poe's xp scheme.  not many.  sure, the rate o' xp gain were debated, but the lack o' anything other than token xp for killing stuff were a relative non factor.

 

oh, and respec were gonna destroy the game... even if a player didn't use the feature.  never quite understood that complaint, but it were debated tirelessly by true-believers on both sides on the issue. honest.  

 

2) feel, regardless o' facts, is important

 

our personal pov is to put reasonable and rational before feels.  unfortunate, feels is ultimate what matters.  if the fans find the deadfire changes to be irredeemably stifling, then they are, regardless o' how superior is deadfire customization.  am guessing josh tends to fall on the reason v. feels spectrum similar to where Gromnir would be found. can be a flaw not to recognize/accept the feel of fans.  

  

HA! Good Fun!

Edited November 19, 2017 by Gromnir

[ghostwriter]

use a board thread as a barometer for how game purchasers will react to a feature or change is a dubious proposition.  per kill xp were, for example, one o' the most hot contested aspects during the poe beta. not kidding.  multiple threads saw seeming interminable debates.  the 'mount o' energy and emotion invested into per kill xp were... curious.  no  marquess of queensberry rules neither. once game were made available, there were people who commplained 'bout poe's xp scheme.  not many.  sure, the rate o' xp gain were debated, but the lack o' anything other than token xp for killing stuff were a relative non factor.

 

oh, and respec were gonna destroy the game... even if a player didn't use the feature.  never quite understood that complaint, but it were debated tirelessly by true-believers on both sides on the issue. honest.  

 

You don't even have to go as far back as PoE 1 to see this pattern of behaviour... Remember the threads when it was announced that party size was going to be cut down to 5? A few days into the Deadfire beta and this doesn't even seem to be on anyone's radar.

 

There is very often difference between what people on these forums immediately insist they can't live without, and what is actually best for the game as a whole.

[Gairnulf]

The majority of general talents in PoE were fluff anyway. I am glad some of them will serve a more important task - to shape a clearer image of some class or another.

 

I could say that I will very much miss the ability to make a muscle wizard, equip him with sword, shield, and grimoire at the same time, and then cast spells while taking advantage of the shield deflection bonus.

 

Or just ignore the fact that I have a grimoire in my (apparently) third hand, and whack at enemies with the sword instead. Why do this with a wizard who has 1/3 of a fighter's base deflection, 2/3 of a fighter's base accuracy? I don't know, no one really knows, but the game allows me to.

 

I could also say I'll miss the ability to create a fighter who shoots at enemies with wands from the backline. And if I gave him the irreplacable, no really, talent Weapon Focus Adventurer, this would give him +6 accuracy with the wand, which at level 7 would mean an increase of 1/6 (a "whole" 54 instead of the base 48!), and would be progressively unimportant as the character levels up.

 

But I would not say I am sorry, because I will indeed not miss those silly anti-choices one bit. When I choose a character and pick a path for its development I prefer 5 choices that matter to 15 choices that are token and cosmetic. I wouldn't mind more choices in character-building, as long as they have been tested, provided for, and don't lack meaning.

 

In the case of Deadfire, 55 multiclassing options and 3 specializations (more for a couple of classes) for each of 11 classes (or no specialization) is far, far better than having general talents which change next to nothing.

 

A major source of irritation I had in PoE was that formally it was a class-based game, but in reality the eleven classes could be grouped into four groups (the four core D&D classes, fighter, mage, thief, cleric) and within those groups they played largely the same. I am glad this problem has seen attention.

Edited November 19, 2017 by Gairnulf

[Lamppost in Winter]

The majority of general talents in PoE were fluff anyway. I am glad some of them will serve a more important task - to shape a clearer image of some class or another.

 

I could say that I will very much miss the ability to make a muscle wizard, equip him with sword, shield, and grimoire at the same time, and then cast spells while taking advantage of the shield deflection bonus.

 

Or just ignore the fact that I have a grimoire in my (apparently) third hand, and whack at enemies with the sword instead. Why do this with a wizard who has 1/3 of a fighter's base deflection, 2/3 of a fighter's base accuracy? I don't know, no one really knows, but the game allows me to.

 

I could also say I'll miss the ability to create a fighter who shoots at enemies with wands from the backline. And if I gave him the irreplacable, no really, talent Weapon Focus Adventurer, this would give him +6 accuracy with the wand, which at level 7 would mean an increase of 1/6 (a "whole" 54 instead of the base 48!), and would be progressively unimportant as the character levels up.

 

But I would not say I am sorry, because I will indeed not miss those silly anti-choices one bit. When I choose a character and pick a path for its development I prefer 5 choices that matter to 15 choices that are token and cosmetic. I wouldn't mind more choices in character-building, as long as they have been tested, provided for, and don't lack meaning.

 

In the case of Deadfire, 55 multiclassing options and 3 specializations (more for a couple of classes) for each of 11 classes (or no specialization) is far, far better than having general talents which change next to nothing.

 

A major source of irritation I had in PoE was that formally it was a class-based game, but in reality the eleven classes could be grouped into four groups (the four core D&D classes, fighter, mage, thief, cleric) and within those groups they played largely the same. I am glad this problem has seen attention.

 

I will say, flavour and role-playing are a major reason (though not the only one) I like having generic talents to take. I liked in PoE1 I could further define my Wizard with talents like Field Triage, Secrets of Rime, Envenomed Strike, etc., to speak to the background I had thought of.

 

I don't necessarily need the PoE1 talents to come back as they were. Mainly what I want is a list of, say, Fallout style, universal feats that add utility and flavour to characters, and some of the passives to not be arbitrarily restricted by class (e.g., weapon talents, Superior [Defense], Deep Pockets).

Edited November 20, 2017 by Lamppost in Winter

[theBalthazar]

My pov is simple : you have less choice in this niche of talents. It is fact not a "feeling". I have the feeling of this fact if you prefer : And quickly, we can understand this is entirely true. More than less is the rule dude. Buyers of the game -since youre taking about- that want new things when they discover the game. A simple fact. It is visual, by music etc.

 

The feeling is perhaps not the good word. Level of fun ? Level of complexity ? Level of new things ? Guys have the "feeling" there is less choice in this niche if you prefer. Do not play on words.

 

It is the feeling of the void in the priest panel is an illusion ? No. Feeling is not totally against rationnal thing you know ?. Right.

 

In addition, do not deny the feeling too much, this is what is most important in a game. If you have not a good feeling, you don't play to this game = bad buzz. For me, it is a mix with new things + More options for build + Logical things + Consistent world etc.

 

------

 

There is very often difference between what people on these forums immediately insist they can't live without, and what is actually best for the game as a whole.

 

 

For discussions. Lol... Guys, the purpose of all this is... discussion. Don't take the role of the guys over the melee by commenting on the finery the uselessness of certain debates.. We discuss and the developers do what they want with these returns. Point.

 

And since you like things strictly logical. From a strictly logical point of view there is less choice in the talents, for each class (atm). It is a fact.

 

At the level of the sensations, you can not say that this observation is false. If not prove it. We can talk of multiclass yes. But multiclass is a new thing. It is normal to have more choice in abilities side. And for the moment there is not a crazy number of new things on the spells side. It is credible to think that we can imagine 2-3 news spells per line. It's still only 20% new things each level. We're not even there yet. They have changed the concepts (Inspirations etc.), but there are very too few new spells on abilities. So even on this side, it's still not madness. It is a beta, I'm ok, The game is far from complete, it does not prevent to say things.

Edited November 20, 2017 by theBalthazar

[Boeroer]

In PoE I could build an Island Aumaua wizard with ArmsBearer + Marksman + Quick Switch and 4 blunderbusses, take Penetrating shot and have a lot of fun with it (using Combusting Wounds).

 

One can say "but now you can multiclass with ranger!". Well that doesn't give me penetrating shots nor does it give me quick switching abilites or even two or one additional weapon slots. To do this build I would have to multiclass with Black Jacked (slot), Devoted (penetration - doesn't even work because only melee) and Ranger (Marksman) to achieve the same goal.

 

This is just an example - I don't expect to replicate all of my wonky/weird/fun builds. It just shows that a lot of flexibility and fun has be taken away - at least for me.

 

There are planty of more examples where this comes from. This feeling of loss could be softened if some quite generic talents returned as rather universal passive abilites (some are already in like Bull's Will and so on - at least partially because they are pickable in different classes). I would just expand this a bit more. And if it's only for RP or the fluff or the joy of building weird stuff that somehow works.

Edited November 20, 2017 by Boeroer

[KDubya]

In PoE I could build an Island Aumaua wizard with ArmsBearer + Marksman + Quick Switch and 4 blunderbusses, take Penetrating shot and have a lot of fun with it (using Combusting Wounds).

 

One can say "but now you can multiclass with ranger!". Well that doesn't give me penetrating shots nor does it give me quick switching abilites or even two or one additional weapon slots. To do this build I would have to multiclass with Black Jacked (slot), Devoted (penetration - doesn't even work because only melee) and Ranger (Marksman) to achieve the same goal.

 

This is just an example - I don't expect to replicate all of my wonky/weird/fun builds. It just shows that a lot of flexibility and fun has be taken away - at least for me.

 

There are planty of more examples where this comes from. This feeling of loss could be softened if some quite generic talents returned as rather universal passive abilites (some are already in like Bull's Will and so on - at least partially because they are pickable in different classes). I would just expand this a bit more. And if it's only for RP or the fluff or the joy of building weird stuff that somehow works.

 

On the other hand if everyone could take Arms Bearer that would take away from the uniqueness of the Black Jacket and infringe on the Fighter. Black Jackets have a pretty big downside of no fighter regen, letting everyone gain access to their "thing" would cheapen what they have.

 

 

In this game having lots of weapons to swap to is a Fighter thing. Rogues get sneak attack, Barbarians get carnage and Fighter get fighter type perks like multiple weapon sets or stances or the ability to move better in armor.

 

I found that the general feats and especially the crossclass ones reduced the uniqueness of certain classes. Rogues were especially susceptible to being outclassed by anyone taking apprentice sneak attack and some mechanics, while easily accessible regeneration made Fighters not so unique and easily replaced by someone better or at least good enough but with their own perks that Fighters didn't get.

 

In the case of Devoted I've found that proficiency with a ranged weapon gains from the penetration. Not sure if bug or feature? 

[theBalthazar]

In the other hand if everyone could take Arms Bearer that would take away from the uniqueness of the Black Jacket

 

 

One of the worst subclass of the beta. I prophesy nobody will never take this subclass if it stay like that.

Edited November 20, 2017 by theBalthazar

[Nail]

Maybe more utility skills would be fine, still I don't have enough points to cover everything there is now just in single class

The idea is simple, you need more skills - multi class...

For now it's just full damage / full defense / mix of both.

Pretty plain and simple, almost without any room for imagination.

[Boeroer]

Multiclassing doesn't give you more skills.

[Nail]

Multiclassing doesn't give you more skills.

What about skills / passives from second class?

[ghostwriter]

 

 

There is very often difference between what people on these forums immediately insist they can't live without, and what is actually best for the game as a whole.

 

 

For discussions. Lol... Guys, the purpose of all this is... discussion. Don't take the role of the guys over the melee by commenting on the finery the uselessness of certain debates.. We discuss and the developers do what they want with these returns. Point.

 

 

Of course we should have discussions, that's the entire purpose of the forums. I was just pointing out that this is definitely an aspect of these discussions that the devs should take into consideration. Especially before making any major changes to an already well functioning, simple and elegant multiclass system.

Edited November 20, 2017 by ghostwriter

[KDubya]

Multiclassing doesn't give you more skills.

 

It does give you more 'stuff' though.

 

My prototype Juggernaut is a Devoted/Shattered Pillar. At the start of combat I've got four or five clickable powers from both classes, a single class would only have the one. I can click Disciplined Barrage for an accuracy boost and then click Swift Strikes for a attack speed boost and then as soon as I hit someone I gain 'wounds' to spend on Torment's Reach. All the while I can use a shield and work to stay unhittable. No glass cannon just a big cannon

 

Single classes might be useful for casters (not sure haven't done much with them) but for melee I can't see any reason not to multiclass. I mean why be a pure fighter when you could make a fighter/monk who gets a spammable Force of Anguish or a Fighter/Barbarian who gets carnage. If nothing else you get double the choices for where to spend your level ups.

[Boeroer]

 

Multiclassing doesn't give you more skills.

What about skills / passives from second class?

 

I guess you mean abilites?

 

Skills are things like mechanics and so on.

Edited November 20, 2017 by Boeroer

[Nail]

 

 

Multiclassing doesn't give you more skills.

What about skills / passives from second class?

 

I guess you mean abilites?

 

Skills are things like mechanics and so on.

 

Yes, I meant abilities / passives.

[Wormerine]

So far my impression is that changes “gameplay wise” are,for the better. Classes are more distinct, they nicely complement each other in combat. All of them bring something unique to the table. Creating characters is fun - choosing between subclasses, multiclassing, thinking how you can combo strengths and mechanics of both classes.

 

What is not fun though is levelling up. It feels to me that after choices made in character creation there isnlt much to do afterwards. Our paths are pretty much laid out for us. Multiclassing doesn’t seem like an expansion of what was possible in pIllars1, but rather a more clearer but more limited rebranding of PoE1’s system.

[Nail]

So far my impression is that changes “gameplay wise” are,for the better. Classes are more distinct, they nicely complement each other in combat. All of them bring something unique to the table. Creating characters is fun - choosing between subclasses, multiclassing, thinking how you can combo strengths and mechanics of both classes.

 

What is not fun though is levelling up. It feels to me that after choices made in character creation there isnlt much to do afterwards. Our paths are pretty much laid out for us. Multiclassing doesn’t seem like an expansion of what was possible in pIllars1, but rather a more clearer but more limited rebranding of PoE1’s system.

Let's not forget it's not path of exile

[JerekKruger]

Here are my thoughts on the Pillars of Eternity universal talents and how they should be implemented (if at all) in Deadfire:

• Weapon Focuses: I'm happy to see these removed altogether. As others have said, for characters who used a weapon these were basically mandatory so the bonus wasn't really a bonus at all. Not sure why it's currently included in the Barbarian tree, a class previously know for its poor accuracy. If any classes are going to have this I think it should be Fighters and/or Rogues.
• Weapon Passives (Two Weapon Style, Two-Handed Style, One-Handed Style, Weapon and Shield Style, Marksman, Gunner, Dangerous Implement): other than Dangerous Implement, which is now part of Scepter Proficiency, I'd like to see these remain in the game. I'd also like to see them appear more widely in class trees. They don't necessarily need to be universal, but I think martial classes should have access to all of them (or a large subset of them).
• "Slayer" talents (Beast Slayer, Primal Bane etc.): I'd like to see these made universal.
• Combat Modals (Savage Attack, Penetrating Shot, Cautious Attack etc.): many of these have been rolled up into specific Weapon Proficiencies, which seems fine to me.
• Defensive talents (Snake's Reflexes, Mental Fortress, Superior Deflection etc.): I'd like to see these made universal.
• Elemental talents (Scion of Flame, Secrets of Rime etc.): I'd like to see these made universal. At the very least have them included in the trees of Mages, Priests and Druids.
• Utility talents (Quick Switch, Deep Pockets, Arms Bearer): I'd like these to be universal, although this would cause some problems with the Black Jacket. That said, as it is right now the Black Jacket is not great, so hopefully it'll be reworked anyway.
• Wound Binding and Field Triage: healing has changed in Deadfire so it's not clear how these would work, but if an interesting implementation were found I'd be happy to see them included as universal talents.
• Bloody Slaughter: terrible in Pillars, shouldn't be included in Deadfire. Also change Death Godlikes so they don't suffer from the same problem as Bloody Slaughter.

[Katarack21]

Have the Scion talents grant +penetration with the available elements and available to mages. It would go a ways towards helping.