Removing non class specific talents was a bad idea

[theBalthazar]

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. 

 

 

It is interresting. I feel that in same way.

 

In original sin for exemple we have always twice true choice.  Attribute + Abilities. Or Abilities + Talent.

 

Here, you put your only point, and it is done. Perhaps that is the problem.

 

Merge Ex-general talent + Class talent AND active Abilities (Ex abilities) with the same "money" is what give this feeling I think.

 

This and the weakening of the interrest of each spells. And even more, to no longer have a complete cargo of spells (Druid, Priest), and Wizard (write on the grimoire more possibilities)

 

So this is the feeling of level up the chanter level 1 to 6 in POE1 : p

Edited November 20, 2017 by theBalthazar

[Gromnir]

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.

 

 

your example does not actually show what you believe it does.  you reveal the impossibility o' replicating a specific build in deadfire, and that is all.  the increase in customization options with deadfire compared to poe is beyond question.  the number o' additional wonky/weird/fun potential builds each core class now has available to 'em is expanded by a significant factor. flexibility, overall, has been much expanded. your example is, if anything, woeful misleading.

 

and complaint 'bout fun... well, fun is subjective. your example don't actual show a decrease in fun. is no micrometer-o'-fun which we can utilize to compare poe to deadfire... particular as all we got is beta deadfire with 'bout 1/2 total abilities.  could double-check, but am not thinking you could replicate your aforementioned poe build by level 8 or 9 anyway, eh? is unfair then on multiple levels. regardless, your example don't actual show a decrease in fun.

 

however, am gonna once again concede how a couple classes need a little tlc insofar as their ability trees is concerned. there is considerable motivation to be utilizing a single-class caster as 'posed to a wonky/weird/fun build.  the advantages o' access to higher level abilities and power levels is particular noticeable insofar as casters is concerned.  unfortunate, priests must suffer not only compulsory school prohibitions but also extreme anemic spell catalogs and they not even have equivalent o' arcane veil or wild strike abilities such as the other casters. post level 1 priest customization is choosing two o' four available potential abilities at each ability level? 

 

regardless, we wish folks would stop with the poe build anecdotes.  is no different than when folks shared bg2 examples during the poe beta. yes, is a given how there is more than a few poe-specific builds which deadfire cannot reproduce.  different game made inevitable that some stuff would not carry over from poe to deadfire. however, deadfire allows many more customization options overall. each time a poe example is shared in theses threads it only makes more obvious to us how many additional deadfire builds poe would not be able to replicate.  

 

oh, and am gonna take this moment to indulge in "i told you so." is petty to remind, but pre-poe we were not quiet 'bout our thoughts regarding class-based crpg suckage.  we wouldn't be having any o' these debates if poe had been developed free o' class limitations from the start.  yeah, obsidian did a surprising good job with poe classes, but the flaws in the system began to serious show with a few particular classes and with the expansion bloat. now the developers is trying to find a way to add customizations via multi-class and subclasses w/o letting the whole system collapse under its own weight. the way they has chosen to keep the class-based system vital is by making the base classes more insular and discrete. makes sense. 'course people don't like sense when it means the developers take away bg grandmastery or nerf ranged weapons in iwd or universal accessible talents in deadfire.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited November 20, 2017 by Gromnir

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

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.

 

 

What I'd suggest is that after about level 10, allow players to take weapon passives or the defensive & elemental talents as proficiency slots. 

Slayer talents were usually a trap option, drop them.

Defensive talents should probably be reconstituted as "resist _stat_ afflictions" but as talents.

[Boeroer]

we wouldn't be having any o' these debates if poe had been developed free o' class limitations from the start.

Sure, this also would have been my approach - who needs classes anyway? Even Josh Sawyer thinks this way as he once stated and as his Pen&Paper draft for PoE shows (it's classless). But unfortunately you can't convince D&D/IE games enthusiasts with good arguments...

[JerekKruger]

What I'd suggest is that after about level 10, allow players to take weapon passives or the defensive & elemental talents as proficiency slots. 

 

That's a good idea actually.

 

Slayer talents were usually a trap option, drop them.

 

Hmm... perhaps. They could be decent but I guess if you didn't know which ones to take they were a bit of a trap.

 

Defensive talents should probably be reconstituted as "resist _stat_ afflictions" but as talents.

 

The more specific ones like Mental Fortress should (and are) already. This might be a problem however since as I understand it the resist _stat_ afflictions is really quite good.

Edited November 20, 2017 by JerekKruger

[theBalthazar]

your example does not actually show what you believe it does.  you reveal the impossibility o' replicating a specific build in deadfire, and that is all.  the increase in customization options with deadfire compared to poe is beyond question.  the number o' additional wonky/weird/fun potential builds each core class now has available to 'em is expanded by a significant factor. flexibility, overall, has been much expanded. your example is, if anything, woeful misleading.

 

 

 

El famoso "beyond question" about multiclass. Like multiclass explain all and that explains we have enough already : p G.G. man^^

 

In fact not, we can consider multiclass is the special deal of POE2. It is an additionnal deal. POE2 came after the first game. Logical.

 

Talent was in POE1, you consider that replace in part, not me. IF we consider for exemple that general talent of POE1 would be better for the 2 (without even changing them, admitted that we do not change anything = no cost) In this case, it is not the already existing interrest with multiclass, but more interrest with existing content (existing in POE1).

 

So it is the choice of developpers. It is not us and the "we already have a lot and we should be satisfied". Everything is not on / off in life, we can associate several concepts without problems.

 

Multiclass. Talk to that. Because two classes are conceptully new but also old. Two class of POE1 in a certain point of view. Where are new classes ? ^^ Not totally new in itself. It is interresting obviously, but it does not concern talents.

 

I'll tell you: I'm expecting a lot more from Pillars, Not always have the bare minimum. You don't want multiclass PLUS General talents (and new talents among them) ?

 

Grommir, you give the impression of being satisfied with little, without projecting different associations. Like how the game COULD BE better.

 

I am convinced that the multiclass AND the general pool AND new talents can coexist. Code talents is not crazy to develop (no graphical issue/no model/). It is a principaly a thumbmail + few numbers cleverly organized. And it gives an impression of having a more complete game. A reference : Original Sin 2 compared to 1. Abilities +++ Talents +++ (47 in total).

 

it's stupid, but the player likes the content, and I like it and Boroer love it. (the principle of "build" perfectly optimized) EACH little regulating element is a real pleasure.

 

I want to be amazed and have as much content as possible for all classes. Not take a little here, re-distribute it here and here and tell "Go kind players, have fun with the multiclass is good enough". We do not play at the carpet dealer for the content.

Edited November 20, 2017 by theBalthazar

[Lamppost in Winter]

 

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.

 

 

Agreed on pretty much all of these. Katarack's idea for Scion talents is also good.

 

Assuming they keep the current Injuries system, Field Triage could give one free injury cure per rest.

[Wormerine]

Ignoring the issue of a more limited classes I am liking more and more current system. Skills at your disposal seem to be much more impactful than they were before. Muticlassing allows you to freely mix skills of two classes of your choose, but I wonder how much items could bring into class building.

I finally beat beta, and I think I found at least two items, which gave wearer a skill from other class. I found boots which granted leap, and gountlets which granted ability to graze hits (with abilities like that and spells buffing allies with ability to graze, do we really need deafault graze mechanic?) I wonder if there are some cool builds which could be achieved my mixing single class buffed with well chosed additional skills. If there is a shop with items like that (so you don't have to find them at designer's choosing) it could be very cool.

I am slowly warming up to it. I would welcome a pool of shared skills, but I would rather prefer them to be as impactful as base skills rather than bunch of small boosts.

[JerekKruger]

Katarack's idea for Scion talents is also good.

 

Yep, a good idea indeed.

 

Assuming they keep the current Injuries system, Field Triage could give one free injury cure per rest.

 

This was my original idea, however given Obsidian have been moving away from per rest I'm not sure it's likely.

Edited November 20, 2017 by JerekKruger

[Lamppost in Winter]

 

 

 

Assuming they keep the current Injuries system, Field Triage could give one free injury cure per rest.

 

 

This was my original idea, however given Obsidian have been moving away from per rest I'm not sure it's likely.

 

 

There's still non-empower per-rest stuff in the game; like the Leap on the Bounding Boots. Besides, injury cure is tied to the rest system so a per-rest resource that cures injuries wouldn't be too far off.

[Gromnir]

Grommir, you give the impression of being satisfied with little, without projecting different associations. Like how the game COULD BE better.

 

 

 

 

*chuckle* 

 

lack o' specific criticisms is not a problem for us.  you clear haven't been paying attention, even in this thread.  have observed, to the point o' it being spammish, how a few o' the classes need improvements to their talent trees.  is a balancing issue as the most desirable talents is gonna be the talents the developers is most reluctant to provide, but we specific recommended expanding the talent tree o' the priest.

 

am not needing go through every complaint and alternative Gromnir recommended for poe as we would be here a LONG time.  regardless, not only did we recommend alternatives in this thread, but am suspecting the criticism o' our failure to offer improvements will meet with some amusement from long-time posters.

 

...

 

actual, 'pon reflection, our single biggest complaint and suggestion for poe were already corrected/adopted in deadfire.  can't recall how many times we asked for greater feedback from the combat log.  more than once we pointed out how long it took for the community to figure out if crit damage were additive or multiplicative, or how long it took to figure out traps were busted... and how they were busted. our suggestion (and we were hardly alone, so am not trying to take credit) o' being able to scroll-over accuracy and other aspects o' the combat log to get more detailed feedback were adopted by obsidian, and improved.  hold-shift is sparkly.  single biggest improvement we has seen thus far in the beta, and is much overlooked.

 

btw, we has specific recommended obsidian not cave to the demands o' those demanding universal talents.  we gave specific and detailed reasons why am against such.  absence o' universal talents would improve the game compared to the proposed alternatives. happy?

 

silliness.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Amentep]

Hi!

 

While leveling up I get the feeling that the build options - especially for single class characters - are extremely limited compared to PoE1. Because all talents got removed (or translated to abilites) and there are only class specific abilites now. Talents that used to be pickable by every class (Quick Switch for example) are now part of a calss (in this case fighter). I don't understand this decision. Some classes share abilites (like Druid and Monk both can take Bull's Will or Bear's Fortitude), but it's a lot less than before.

 

Perhaps I'm wrong (and its probably been suggested before as I only skimmed the thread) but it seems to me that perhaps the idea is that if your PoE was picking a lot of "fighting" talents for your druid, you were already creating a Fighter-Druid multiclass and that idea is being codified into the multiclass system.

[Gromnir]

 

Hi!

 

While leveling up I get the feeling that the build options - especially for single class characters - are extremely limited compared to PoE1. Because all talents got removed (or translated to abilites) and there are only class specific abilites now. Talents that used to be pickable by every class (Quick Switch for example) are now part of a calss (in this case fighter). I don't understand this decision. Some classes share abilites (like Druid and Monk both can take Bull's Will or Bear's Fortitude), but it's a lot less than before.

 

Perhaps I'm wrong (and its probably been suggested before as I only skimmed the thread) but it seems to me that perhaps the idea is that if your PoE was picking a lot of "fighting" talents for your druid, you were already creating a Fighter-Druid multiclass and that idea is being codified into the multiclass system.

 

you are correct, but now there is a handicap for making such a character.  in poe your druid could pick the fighting talents and still get the highest level druid abilities.  unfortunate, to get similar deadfire results, one needs make hard choices.  deadfire multi-class provides many more opportunities to customize than were possible in poe, but one need sacrifice a power level and ability tier to do so. is the real issue at work, though is not being admitted by many.  sacrifice perceived power to get similar to what they already had in poe is unacceptable to many. is largely an entitlement issue.

 

and sure, there is a few unique builds which cannot be replicated by deadfire.  is multiple classes which may have the talents a player wants, but being limited to a dual multiclass prevents the possibility o' achieving such builds. 'course, as as been stated innumerable times and is not actual being contested, deadfire gives back more than it takes-- while there is poe builds made impossible in deadfire, the total number o' customization options has increased significant.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited November 20, 2017 by Gromnir

[JerekKruger]

but one need sacrifice a power level and ability tier to do so. is the real issue at work, though is not being admitted by many.  sacrifice perceived power to get similar to what they already had in poe is unacceptable to many. is largely an entitlement issue.

 

I assume you have evidence for this statement, what with you preferring rationality over feelings.

[Gairnulf]

Classless vs character class system is a pointless argument without comparing actual implementations of either, Either can be executed well or badly. In the case of PoE, where the IE games are the spiritual ancestor, it makes sense that the rules move towards more sharply defined classes, and in my opinion it should be the lack of clearly defined classes that should be considered an experiment and a deviation from the norm.

 

I don't hate classless systems, as a matter of fact I've had great fun with games with classless systems.

[Gromnir]

 

but one need sacrifice a power level and ability tier to do so. is the real issue at work, though is not being admitted by many.  sacrifice perceived power to get similar to what they already had in poe is unacceptable to many. is largely an entitlement issue.

 

I assume you have evidence for this statement, what with you preferring rationality over feelings.

 

is perfect rational to, in the absence of rational and reasonable criticism regarding the current scheme, suggest an alternative reason for universal talents is actual at work.  even proponents o' universal have admitted deadfire provides more options. folks admit how it is indeed possible to play a weapon-focused druid in poe and deadfire just as amentep has observed.  nevertheless we got complaints 'bout naming nomenclature for chrissakes.

 

what you don't seem to realize is that the folks wedded to the old system actual has not yet provided the kinda evidence you is demanding.  is an appeal to feel.  as we stated earlier, and you seeming failed to notice, is a fundamental truth that there is no way to reject with reason and rationality what boils down to feel.  we observed it is a mistake to assume fans is reacting with rationality or exhibiting reason.  past a certain point, is a mistake to try and argue against feel... but again, am repeating self.

 

is no evidence for your feels other than the absence o' reason and rational.  so, congrats?

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Sedrefilos]

Classed is better for Pillars since it is a party game. Even if it was classless, you would "class" each companion eventually, since you'd need them to fill specific roles.

Same happened to me with Tyranny and Wasteland 2.

Classless is better for single character games, imo.

[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 ).

 

Pillars2MorePassivesMockup.jpg

 

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: 

 

 

Did anyone see this idea I posted the other day? It was the middle of the night so I'm not sure.

 

Anyone have any thoughts?

 

Too crazy/complicated to balance? (This is probably true, IMO)

 

Not far enough for "universality" of talents?

 

​Bad because it doesn't help multi-classers at all?

[KDubya]

 

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 ).

 

Pillars2MorePassivesMockup.jpg

 

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: 

 

 

Did anyone see this idea I posted the other day? It was the middle of the night so I'm not sure.

 

Anyone have any thoughts?

 

Too crazy/complicated to balance? (This is probably true, IMO)

 

Not far enough for "universality" of talents?

 

​Bad because it doesn't help multi-classers at all?

 

 

Why should everyone get access to weapon styles and weapon focus?

 

If you want to be good at melee multi with a Fighter and take the weapon style and stance of your choice. Being masters of martial skill is what fighter do. Why should your Rogue be able to cherrypick the best abilities from a Fighter and keep the power level of a pure Rogue?

 

Now if you want your Rogue to be better at melee you need to sacrifice a little power level and multi with a Fighter. I really do not see the problem with increased access to abilities from another class coming at the cost of a reduced power level.

 

TANSTAFL

[Katarack21]

 

 

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 ).

 

Pillars2MorePassivesMockup.jpg

 

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: 

 

 

Did anyone see this idea I posted the other day? It was the middle of the night so I'm not sure.

 

Anyone have any thoughts?

 

Too crazy/complicated to balance? (This is probably true, IMO)

 

Not far enough for "universality" of talents?

 

​Bad because it doesn't help multi-classers at all?

 

 

Why should everyone get access to weapon styles and weapon focus?

 

If you want to be good at melee multi with a Fighter and take the weapon style and stance of your choice. Being masters of martial skill is what fighter do. Why should your Rogue be able to cherrypick the best abilities from a Fighter and keep the power level of a pure Rogue?

 

Now if you want your Rogue to be better at melee you need to sacrifice a little power level and multi with a Fighter. I really do not see the problem with increased access to abilities from another class coming at the cost of a reduced power level.

 

TANSTAFL

 

The problem is that a lot of people *don't* think weapon focus and weapon styles *should* be "abilities from another class". You're point about rogues is good--but what about Paladins? Their often front line fighters that play a similar tank role to fighters, and I *always* want weapon skills on my Paladins. In addition, the lore says Paladins are almost always trained members of an order--they've been taught martial skills, just like fighters.

 

Both mechanics and lore correlate to it being a good idea to have those skills available for Paladins. Mechanically--but not lore wise--you *want* those skills on a barbarian, too. You're argument is that those are and should be fighter skills--the argument lots of people are making is basically that they are to mechanically useful for to many classes to be gated behind one class.

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

Did anyone see this idea I posted the other day? It was the middle of the night so I'm not sure.

 

Anyone have any thoughts?

 

Too crazy/complicated to balance? (This is probably true, IMO)

 

Not far enough for "universality" of talents?

 

​Bad because it doesn't help multi-classers at all?

 

 

 

It's too complicated and it doesn't really solve the problem, imho. It'll confuse people who picked single class, doesn't solve the problem for multiclass people who want more unique / diverse builds.

[Answermancer]

Why should everyone get access to weapon styles and weapon focus?

 

If you want to be good at melee multi with a Fighter and take the weapon style and stance of your choice. Being masters of martial skill is what fighter do. Why should your Rogue be able to cherrypick the best abilities from a Fighter and keep the power level of a pure Rogue?

 

Now if you want your Rogue to be better at melee you need to sacrifice a little power level and multi with a Fighter. I really do not see the problem with increased access to abilities from another class coming at the cost of a reduced power level.

 

TANSTAFL

Well, I don't think it's cherrypicking the best abilities, and the threshold for which passives are available could be lower. Keep in mind this would make passives from various classes available to casters, which they are currently sorely lacking in.

 

And I would argue that rogues absolutely should get two weapon fighting and one weapon fighting options without having to multiclass, but then I am a rogue fanboy.  

 

It's too complicated and it doesn't really solve the problem, imho. It'll confuse people who picked single class, doesn't solve the problem for multiclass people who want more unique / diverse builds.

Yes, I'm inclined to agree that it's too complicated and confusing.

 

Part of the idea was to try to change the existing UI as little as possible (I work on UI a lot professionally so I think that anything that would lower the requirement for them to redesign everything would be good).

 

I think multi-class builds already have a lot of diversity, this was strictly a replacement idea for helping single-class without adding a universal talent pool.

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

Yes, I'm inclined to agree that it's too complicated and confusing.

 

Part of the idea was to try to change the existing UI as little as possible (I work on UI a lot professionally so I think that anything that would lower the requirement for them to redesign everything would be good).

 

I think multi-class builds already have a lot of diversity, this was strictly a replacement idea for helping single-class without adding a universal talent pool.

 

 

 

Yeah, that's part of why i was thinking add a general talent pool to the "proficiencies" menu. It's already there so you wouldn't need a complete redesign.

[Boeroer]

You mean like proficiencies for elements for example? Like Scion of Flame giving you a modal for fire based abilities (mainly non-weapon related spells I guess)? Maybe not a bad idea...

[mortimermcmire]

I think you're both coming at the design from the wrong angle, at least ux-wise.

 

If you're going to add generic talents its much easier to add them to every class in the same talent menu and set a condition where if its picked disallow the same character from getting the same thing twice. 

 

I don't think the proficiency window can be modified in that way