Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Per-Encounter spells ruin casters


  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#1
LampStaple

LampStaple

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 10 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

In Pillars 1, playing a caster really did feel like you were playing a badass mage. And while tons of people hated that spells were per-rest, I think per-rest spellcasting was what allowed casters to feel so amazing.

When all your spells are per-encounter, your highest level spells feel underwhelming. There's no reason not to unleash your full arsenal of strongest spells every fight. This makes casting powerful spells feel mundane. Imagine if in pillars 1 you casted minor avatar and storm of holy fire every fight...

 

The empower system does not nearly come close to emulating this feeling. First of all, you're boosting the spell's EFFECTS and not casting a better spell. Having your numbers be slightly more inflated in a boss fight doesn't feel like anything because bosses have inflated numbers too. In addition to the numbers, it's the spell's effects, the animations, and the consumption of scarce resources (high level spell slots) that makes casting a high level spell feel impactful.

 

Not only that, but the fact that all spells are per-encounter means that the spells' effectiveness seems to have been drastically lowered (damage and debuff spells are near useless but enchantment buffs are incredibly powerful, but I'm just going to write that off as beta balance. I have faith that this will be balanced by release). High cast times and low reliability on most spells makes sense given that they're per encounter, but why be per-encounter in the first place? Spellcasters are traditionally balanced around having scarce resources but powerful effects for spending those resources. Since spellcasts are per-encounter now, that means they're just mediocre effects for spending common resources.

 

Obsidian, I'm begging you to reconsider making all spellcasters per-encounter spellcasters. The resource system of caster classes and non-caster classes feel so homogenized right now that I can barely tell the difference between playing a paladin and playing a wizard. At least split the casters into per-encounter casters and per-rest casters to appease both the people who enjoy being able to blow their load every fight as well as the people who enjoy resource management and being able to pop off in boss fights with spells they can't afford to cast in more mundane encounters.


  • Starwars, Aramintai, demeisen and 3 others like this

#2
Frog Man

Frog Man

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 53 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
Nope.
  • ShadySands, AwesomeOcelot, bonarbill and 7 others like this

#3
KDubya

KDubya

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1184 posts
  • Deadfire Backer

The problem was that people did cast their best spells every time and then just rested. At a minimum you'd rest before any major fight so you'd have the big spells available. Now with everything per encounter you can let loose with everything and the encounter can be balanced based on that.

 

The new limited use empower is pretty much the only resource that needs managing.


  • DCParry, CottonWolf and kanisatha like this

#4
hilfazer

hilfazer

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 372 posts

Obsidian either does not know how to solve rest spamming or does not see it as a problem.

They actually want to encourage players to rest in PoE2.

 

It is not an easy problem to solve.

You do a hard counter like time limit and players will go ballistic on you.

You do a soft counter like supplies&inns an players will complain that there are workarounds.

You can make a proper economy but that's certainly not an easy task. And it's not immune to complainers either.

 

There's one more option - reward players who don't rest often. It could be an XP bonus if Obsidian stops showering us with XPs.


  • draego likes this

#5
Archaven

Archaven

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 801 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

It's just beta. If they tweak the food system to be scarce then you will have an issue.



#6
draego

draego

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 532 posts
  • Lords of the Eastern Reach Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

The problem was that people did cast their best spells every time and then just rested. At a minimum you'd rest before any major fight so you'd have the big spells available. Now with everything per encounter you can let loose with everything and the encounter can be balanced based on that.

 

The new limited use empower is pretty much the only resource that needs managing.

 

Ye i actually tried to play strategic and not rest after every encounter and not spam all my spells and push to see how far i could go but ye i have seen the other side where people would complain 'i have to bactrack to inn after every fight to reload spells and its so tedious'. I never understood this and i like the first system but resting always an issue and there will always be players that rest after every fight.


Edited by draego, 19 November 2017 - 05:37 AM.


#7
theBalthazar

theBalthazar

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 508 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

There negative effects and positive effects.

 

And if I have to choose..

 

Per encounter for me. I was the guy who came back as soon as he had no more devotion of the faithful...

 

I think you do not hesitate to send your spells with this system. Personally I prefer.

 

The empower system does not nearly come close to emulating this feeling.

 

 

If you want this aspect yet : it's the way. Empower IS the feeling of put a big shot. Perhaps the limit of ONE empower ? Indeed. I agree with you (perhaps 2 empower by encounter ? (actually 1) and more empower per rest globally ?), but the concept is here, and the beta is not finished.

 

For me, the best number is 4 spells (by level in POE1) / 2 = 2.

 

2 empowers by encounter.  everyone will be happy with that.



#8
Aramintai

Aramintai

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 413 posts
  • Location:Riga, Latvia
  • PSN Portable ID:Aramintai
  • Steam:Aramintai
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

I don't mind per encounter system in theory, however right now in the beta I can't properly appreciate the idea because casting times are abysmal and actually landing an oompfy aoe spell is feat in itself.


  • dukeisaac likes this

#9
cheesevillain

cheesevillain

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 218 posts
  • Deadfire Backer

In Pillars 1, playing a caster really did feel like you were playing a badass mage. And while tons of people hated that spells were per-rest, I think per-rest spellcasting was what allowed casters to feel so amazing.

 

 

I'm happy you were happy. I wasn't happy. My wizard didn't do anything in most fights, and that made him feel useless and weak. To me, Vancian magic makes wizards feel like wimpy computer programmers, not mighty masters of magic.

 

It's not like wizards hit that much harder than the other classes. They hit slightly harder, and in return they barely got to fight at all.

 

According to the Devs spells are actually intended to be more powerful in PoE2 than they were in PoE1, balanced by the drawbacks that (1) casting times are longer, (2) interrupts are more powerful, and (3) you have fewer spells you can cast per individual combat than in PoE1. Right now, playing wizards feels terrible, but that's just a tuning issue. We need grazing, or something equivalent. I like the design, which allows me to cast more often, and cast more powerfully.

 

The empower system does not nearly come close to emulating this feeling. First of all, you're boosting the spell's EFFECTS and not casting a better spell. Having your numbers be slightly more inflated in a boss fight doesn't feel like anything because bosses have inflated numbers too. In addition to the numbers, it's the spell's effects, the animations, and the consumption of scarce resources (high level spell slots) that makes casting a high level spell feel impactful.

 

 

I was pretty meh about empower until I actually started using it. It's not somehow a replacement for problems with the wizard class, but it does feel great to use.


Edited by cheesevillain, 19 November 2017 - 12:05 PM.

  • Lamppost in Winter, MortyTheGobbo and LampStaple like this

#10
Sedrefilos

Sedrefilos

    (11) Wizard

  • Members
  • 1602 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

There is only 1 way to solve rest spamming: don't use rest mechanics at all. Although I like it as a concept, I've never seen it implemented well. The new resting system looks better, imo, but, if one thinks rest-spamming is indeed a problem, I don't believe it'll solve it.

 

I'm always a fan of DA:O style: survive the encounter or game over + wounds for the fallen to spice up things. So build better and fewer encounters.

 

I'd love to see a rest mechanic that will be meaningful enough to represent what it supposed to be, but until then, DA:O style ftw.


Edited by Sedrefilos, 19 November 2017 - 02:21 PM.


#11
Hariwulf

Hariwulf

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 46 posts
  • Location:Currently: Finland
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

In my experience, per-rest mechanics takes away the "badassery" if anything, and having to spam sleep to refill spells was very annoying.

Use "Empower" on a spell, that will be fun. Having the right spell at the right time is very satisfying. Spellcasters are on steroids in POE2.



#12
PugPug

PugPug

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 261 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

Was it also badass to plink away with your wand through most fights so as to save your badass spells? Do you think Eder really appreciated that? Or making him go to bed when he wasn't tired?


  • DCParry, kanisatha and MortyTheGobbo like this

#13
tinysalamander

tinysalamander

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 349 posts

Or making him go to bed when he wasn't tired?

 

He used that time to recover from foxpetting.



#14
Blades of Vanatar

Blades of Vanatar

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 677 posts
  • Location:Khatovar
If they just create lots of interesting encounters that have triggers that bring more enemies into the fight it would stop players from just unleashing everything from the get go. Less crap fights more scripted fights. A good mix of both is perfect. They did so with the WM 2 expansion.
  • Ganrich likes this

#15
demeisen

demeisen

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 334 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

There is only 1 way to solve rest spamming: don't use rest mechanics at all.

 

​Only one way, except for the other way, which is to have real rest limits.  POE1 didn't: you could effectively rest as much as you wanted, either by backtracking to an inn, or even on PotD there were more camp supplies than you could use anyway.  In effect there was no limit.

​If there would be a real limit, then there can be no rest spamming, per-rest spells can be powerful but balanced by not having very many, and having to consider when to use them.  There's still plenty for casters to do even when not using those spells.  POE1 had some ability to turn low level spells into per-encounter.

Or, as LampStaple suggested, have two subclasses.  Weak spells & per encounter, and strong spells & per rest.  Then you can pick what suits your style.



#16
LampStaple

LampStaple

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 10 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

 

In Pillars 1, playing a caster really did feel like you were playing a badass mage. And while tons of people hated that spells were per-rest, I think per-rest spellcasting was what allowed casters to feel so amazing.

 

 

I'm happy you were happy. I wasn't happy. My wizard didn't do anything in most fights, and that made him feel useless and weak. To me, Vancian magic makes wizards feel like wimpy computer programmers, not mighty masters of magic.

 

It's not like wizards hit that much harder than the other classes. They hit slightly harder, and in return they barely got to fight at all.

 

According to the Devs spells are actually intended to be more powerful in PoE2 than they were in PoE1, balanced by the drawbacks that (1) casting times are longer, (2) interrupts are more powerful, and (3) you have fewer spells you can cast per individual combat than in PoE1. Right now, playing wizards feels terrible, but that's just a tuning issue. We need grazing, or something equivalent. I like the design, which allows me to cast more often, and cast more powerfully.

 

The empower system does not nearly come close to emulating this feeling. First of all, you're boosting the spell's EFFECTS and not casting a better spell. Having your numbers be slightly more inflated in a boss fight doesn't feel like anything because bosses have inflated numbers too. In addition to the numbers, it's the spell's effects, the animations, and the consumption of scarce resources (high level spell slots) that makes casting a high level spell feel impactful.

 

 

I was pretty meh about empower until I actually started using it. It's not somehow a replacement for problems with the wizard class, but it does feel great to use.

 

 

Do you have a link to the devs saying that spells are intended to be more powerful with longer cast times/stronger interrupts? If they do end up tuning casters that way, I'd be fine, I'm just disappointed that casting fireball at an opponent is roughly equivalent to building up a large sneeze at them and I attributed that to the fact that casters are no longer limited by per-resources.

 

In any case, I'm still disappointed that they homogenized ALL casters by turning them into per-encounter casters. I still very much believe they could have achieved a balance in different casting styles to appeal to different players; clearly, there are tons of people who prefer per-encounter, but there are also people who enjoy per-rest. I stand by my opinion that Wizards should be a per-rest style caster; Wizards embody the archetype of a caster who is meticulously preparing and planning and just spamming per-encounter spells doesn't feel wizard-y. A Druid's "nature" themes would make sense as a per-encounter caster. There's plenty of room for different styles of unique casting - after all, Ciphers and Chanters are already unique casters in that they generate resources to cast spells, while Druid, Priest, and Wizard all cast spells from a finite pool of resources. I don't think it'd be unreasonable to at least take ONE of those three homogenized casting styles and switch them from per-encounter resources to stronger per-rest resources - after all, they feel a bit same-y right now and this would be a great way of mechanically differentiating the themes of the casters.



#17
injurai

injurai

    (9) Sorcerer

  • Members
  • 1238 posts
  • Location:Not the oceans
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

Auto-casting + repeatedly using your only per-encounter spells was equally frustrating.

 

I think the point of empower is to keep that sense of unleashing a torrent of arcane.

 

However it's possible that maybe empower should have been a magic-user only thing.



#18
SaruNi

SaruNi

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 178 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

Agree that a strong enough Empower should have additional effects and animations....

 

But the rest spam issue is a really strong counterargument. 

 

It would be interesting if the system also went in the opposite direction---not just per rest, but some sort of mechanic that limits the highest-powered spells to a few usages per level or per life. Maybe powerful spells causing the caster major injuries, or sacrificing a level, and/or powerful spells bound to scrolls or self-consuming grimoires or other items that only have limited uses....



#19
Lamppost in Winter

Lamppost in Winter

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 188 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

I marginally preferred per-rest spells gameplay-wise, especially as I learned to use them more efficiently so I wasn't just saving them all for the Big Boss Battles.

My problem with them is that you'd never run into an enemy caster who's saving their spells for the next thing; they're always fighting at full power, which puts some gulf between enemies and players.

 

Personally I think long casting times but stronger spells is a fine way to balance per-encounter spells. I just hope they can get the "stronger spells" part right.


Edited by Lamppost in Winter, 19 November 2017 - 07:31 PM.


#20
vanyel54

vanyel54

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 30 posts
  • Location:Paris France
  • Deadfire Silver Backer

The per rest system work better for me.
With the POE2 system, you will always ending using the same spells and it will become a little boring. I like to administrate my pool of spells and to use discover other way to win when i have no more shadowflame/returning storm/devotions :no:
Once more (as for the abilities/talents tree problem), it's less choice and strategic thinking.
Sure, the per rest need some tweaking (2 camps in potd is a bit low) but you don't need to throw it all like that.


  • demeisen likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users