A case for not adding general abilities to Proficiencies

[MortyTheGobbo]

 

D&D 3E feats are the very definition of quantity over quality. Most of them are rubbish.

 

 

 

With much less talents, POE1 is not better. There is always 20-30 % of choice in the pannel that is too specific/not very interresting.

 

But I prefer 200 talents and 30 % of trash, than 60 talents and 30 % of trash.

 

 

Are there any talents in POE1 that add 3 points of endurance to your character? Or work in highly-specific circumstances? Or are basically worse than another talent (like Combat Casting versus simply Skill Focus in Concentration).

[mostundesired]

I focus heavily on weapon style specifically (not even weapon focus, necessarily) because I think that from a flavor perspective, they're the most problematic thing to take away from melee (or ranged) damage dealers. Someone who fights with weapons as their "job", by definition should be better at it than someone who doesn't, and I think it makes perfect sense for them to have a preferred style and be able to specialize in it (or take no style, save a point, and be more of a generalist). 

A rogue that is specialized in two-weapon fighting, feels quite different from one specialized in bows, or 2-handers, even if all their other abilities are more or less the same.

 

And again, this doesn't feel to me like taking something from fighters, based on the precedent of many years of games, it feels like giving it to fighters is actually taking it away from everyone else.

 

Oh, for... I'm kicking myself for persisting with the term "weapon style" this whole time. I think I should say fighting style instead. A Fighter's fighting style, being a better melee combatant, is fulfilled by having higher base deflection, constant recovery, and most of their active abilities just enhancing the melee capabilities most others already have (engagement, accuracy, being able to graze, etc.). It's a matter of better efficacy. Meanwhile, weapon styles is a matter of more efficiency.

 

A character who specializes in dual wielding has faster attack speed while dual wielding to make them more efficient at it. A Fighter who is in melee combat at can more reliably do damage and survive without having to think about active abilities or what afflictions the enemy has applied to them. Still factors in, of course, but not as much. That gives them more efficacy.

 

I think that since what Fighters are losing is the exclusivity of weapon styles, what they should get should be something equivalent thereof. For Fighters, weapon styles gave them higher base efficacy in the form of a minor boost to damage/damage mitigation. It barely makes a difference to their efficiency, since they don't get many multipliers/additives, but it mattered because it was unique to them, and reinforced that they are the ones who have efficacy in melee combat. For other classes, weapon specialization gives them greater efficiency because they now get a higher number to apply multipliers/additives to, and allows them to RP, and that's great, but it comes along with the efficacy boost that was initially unique to Fighters. So if that's the case they should get another efficacy bonus that is unique to them. Doesn't matter what, but something unique. Otherwise, they don't have more efficacy, they have the same exact efficacy as other classes.

 

My initial point was that the way it should be thought of isn't that Fighter is the tank class (pretty much everyone can tank, some better than others), Fighter isn't the "good with all weapons" class (Black Jacket), and Fighter isn't the teamplay class (I think that defines Paladins).They are the melee specialist class. Compensating for the loss of exclusivity by redefining what is exclusive to the class (efficacy) would be just as bad as giving them nothing, imo.

[Answermancer]

I think that since what Fighters are losing is the exclusivity of weapon styles, what they should get should be something equivalent thereof. For Fighters, weapon styles gave them higher base efficacy in the form of a minor boost to damage/damage mitigation. It barely makes a difference to their efficiency, since they don't get many multipliers/additives, but it mattered because it was unique to them, and reinforced that they are the ones who have efficacy in melee combat. For other classes, weapon specialization gives them greater efficiency because they now get a higher number to apply multipliers/additives to, and allows them to RP, and that's great, but it comes along with the efficacy boost that was initially unique to Fighters.

Well, initially unique to Fighters in this game.

 

But yes, I think I understand what you're saying. Would it be correct to say that you think they should have the highest melee efficacy in a passive playstyle? As opposed to a rogue that requires positioning, or a monk that requires wounds, etc.?

 

I think that might be fine, sure, although honestly I think it's a little boring as far as class fantasy goes. Either way I am in favor of them getting something new to make up for this loss.

 

I'm truly sorry if I'm still not understanding what you're saying, by the way.

[mostundesired]

Well, initially unique to Fighters in this game.

 

But yes, I think I understand what you're saying. Would it be correct to say that you think they should have the highest melee efficacy in a passive playstyle? As opposed to a rogue that requires positioning, or a monk that requires wounds, etc.?

 

I think that might be fine, sure, although honestly I think it's a little boring as far as class fantasy goes. Either way I am in favor of them getting something new to make up for this loss.

 

I'm truly sorry if I'm still not understanding what you're saying, by the way.

Very close. In terms of best efficacy in a passive playstyle, yes. But that doesn't mean I want Fighters to play passively. I think the active abilities they have should be in the vein of in the fray, disciplined strikes, that one charge move that I can't remember. Stances. They don't have to do anything, but when they do, it makes a difference. Saving your rogue when they're making a break for it. Locking down an enemy going for your ranger. Hitting swaths of CC'd enemies. Making sure a tough enemy goes down after everyone unloads on it (phrasing). Things like that. Basic things that can change the fight entirely when applied correctly.

[Aramintai]

So, from what I've gathered from the last stream general passive abilities (weapon styles, for example) will be both in abilities (where we pick active abilities as well) and talents (where we pick proficiencies) and we'll be able to take them from either, but without duping obviously.

 

Personally, sounds kinda lazy and confusing. Passive abilities and talents will overlap instead of being unique. I'd rather passive abilities were all placed into talents (because who needs more than 2-3 proficiencies anyway) and make some actually new active abilities and modals for classes (especially fighter) instead of just copy pasting from POE1.

Edited December 1, 2017 by Aramintai

[Lamppost in Winter]

Yeah, I would hope this is just for testing purposes for a more elegant solution.

[AndreaColombo]

I doubt that. Josh specifically stated on SA that it was done so they wouldn’t have to design about 9 more passive talents for martial classes.

[Aramintai]

I doubt that. Josh specifically stated on SA that it was done so they wouldn’t have to design about 9 more passive talents for martial classes.

Hence - lazy. Fighter ability tree is like a barren field, lol.

[KDubya]

What will be bad is Fighters on level up to second level (and third level as a multiclass) will have a choice of taking the other active skill not taken at creation OR taking one of the weapon styles that will also be available via using a 'free' proficiency pick.

 

Considering how poor Knockdown is, being forced to either take that or 'waste' the ability pick on a style that you could get for free later is a poor choice. Even if Knockdown were improved its still a bad deal as special resources are limited and if you never intend on using knockdown why should you be stuck with only that as a choice?

[Answermancer]

Yeah, I really think they should at least design some new passives for Fighters.

[MortyTheGobbo]

This bodes poorly. Let's hope they get feedback about it and change their minds before the beta is over.

[theBalthazar]

The history of knockdown is weird.

 

I remember in POE1, it had won +accuracy +%damage, because when you C.C. only one target, the is minimum !... 

 

the choice had been good. This was more useful and more logical.

 

Now, with POE2. WTF... It is worst than version 1.0 of POE1 !...

[dunehunter]

Fighters need Pommel Power!

 

Pommel Strike, Pommel Blow, Pommel of Devotion.

Edited December 1, 2017 by dunehunter

[MortyTheGobbo]

The more I think about it, the more it feels like the worst possible outcome. Originally, those abilities belonged to two classes and it rustled people's jimmies. Which I disagree with, but that's less important. So now those abilities are back and available to everyone, while still occupying space as passive class picks for fighters and barbarians. So how those picks are greatly devalued, since anyone can spend proficiencies on them, and they will, since otherwise there are more proficiencies than they'll need. Meaning that, like KDubya said, at one point fighters will be stuck picking either a devalued passive or an active they've already passed up on.

[JerekKruger]

The more I think about it, the more it feels like the worst possible outcome. Originally, those abilities belonged to two classes and it rustled people's jimmies. Which I disagree with, but that's less important. So now those abilities are back and available to everyone, while still occupying space as passive class picks for fighters and barbarians. So how those picks are greatly devalued, since anyone can spend proficiencies on them, and they will, since otherwise there are more proficiencies than they'll need. Meaning that, like KDubya said, at one point fighters will be stuck picking either a devalued passive or an active they've already passed up on.

 

Yep. I wanted to see the old universal talents become universal again but this solution is bad. There is essentially no cost to taking these passive talents. I don't know exactly how many proficiencies characters will get in Deadfire, but based on the beta I'd say it'll be at least six and more likely eight or more. Very few characters use more than two weapons (and given the way the new weapon proficiencies work you don't even need to take them to use a weapon) so that means almost every character will take at least four of the old generic talents (more likely six or more). For a lot of characters that'll be enough to get everything they want and, perhaps, more.

 

If, on the other hand, you simply added those talents to all classes passive ability trees and made them spend a point on acquiring them then there would be a cost. Would a Wizard really want to sacrifice a spell pick to take two-handed style? Well if they intend to focus on using summoned weapons then maybe, but it won't be a no brainer pick anymore.

 

And, as you say, Fighters are really hurt by this change.

[theBalthazar]

The feeling of choice is more important than perfect balancing.

 

[1 choice  / 2 choices] is better than [0 choice / 1 choice]

 

Because in the second situation you have less choice.

 

If you consider fighter have enough accuracy, you can stay with the first step only (Weapon focus in my exemple). If you specialize, 2 talents. (Superior weapon focus).

 

So, you have 3 choices : 1) No weapon focus + 2) Weapon focus only + 3) WF+Superior weapon focus.

 

In your version non-Fighters have 0 choice.

 

The train passes and you can not be in it because this not provided by the game, even if you wanted to put your point in something better, than the little choice you have (especially in single class).

Edited December 2, 2017 by theBalthazar

[MortyTheGobbo]

 

The more I think about it, the more it feels like the worst possible outcome. Originally, those abilities belonged to two classes and it rustled people's jimmies. Which I disagree with, but that's less important. So now those abilities are back and available to everyone, while still occupying space as passive class picks for fighters and barbarians. So how those picks are greatly devalued, since anyone can spend proficiencies on them, and they will, since otherwise there are more proficiencies than they'll need. Meaning that, like KDubya said, at one point fighters will be stuck picking either a devalued passive or an active they've already passed up on.

 

Yep. I wanted to see the old universal talents become universal again but this solution is bad. There is essentially no cost to taking these passive talents. I don't know exactly how many proficiencies characters will get in Deadfire, but based on the beta I'd say it'll be at least six and more likely eight or more. Very few characters use more than two weapons (and given the way the new weapon proficiencies work you don't even need to take them to use a weapon) so that means almost every character will take at least four of the old generic talents (more likely six or more). For a lot of characters that'll be enough to get everything they want and, perhaps, more.

 

If, on the other hand, you simply added those talents to all classes passive ability trees and made them spend a point on acquiring them then there would be a cost. Would a Wizard really want to sacrifice a spell pick to take two-handed style? Well if they intend to focus on using summoned weapons then maybe, but it won't be a no brainer pick anymore.

 

And, as you say, Fighters are really hurt by this change.

 

 

I'd be more in favour of outright removing such talents or restricting them to the five "martial" classes, myself. But that's beside the point, really. There are different ways to go about it and the one they picked for now is the worst of both worlds.

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

So now those abilities are back and available to everyone, while still occupying space as passive class picks for fighters and barbarians. So how those picks are greatly devalued, since anyone can spend proficiencies on them, and they will, since otherwise there are more proficiencies than they'll need. Meaning that, like KDubya said, at one point fighters will be stuck picking either a devalued passive or an active they've already passed up on.

 

Does "occupying space" really make sense? It's not like there's a hard limit on the number of options in each class ability tree. 

 

I figure at some point near the end of beta they'll do a general UI revamp anyway. Hopefully by then fighters will have some *new* abilities in their tree as "replacements."

[theBalthazar]

% of new things on Fighter

In the skin of a random player, not hardcore but a simple guy who buy the game.

 

Active abilities

 

Disciplines barrage = POE1

Knockdown = POE1

Vigourous defense = POE1

Unbending = POE1

Into the fray = POE1

Guardian stance = POE1

Conquerer stance = NEW !

Mob stance = NEW !

 

-----------

 

Passive abilities / Ex Class talents exclusive

 

Constant recovery = POE1 (core abilitie)

Rapid recovery = POE1

Armored grace = POE1 

Confident aim = POE1

Determination = NEW !

Fearless = NEW !

Weapon specialization = POE1

 

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

 

Ex general talents connected to Fighters

 

Body control = POE1

Two handed style = POE1

Weapon and shield style = POE1

Two weapons style = POE1

One handed style = POE1

Hold the line = POE1

Arms bearer = POE1

Unstopabble = POE1

Quick switch = POE1

Superior deflection = POE1

 

25 items.

4 new things.

 

16 % of new thing which are all rather unimportant liabilities.

 

There are indeed some improvements in some abilities, but they already existed.

 

Be careful, If I am a new player, I am not totally impressed by the novelty, at first glance.

Edited December 2, 2017 by theBalthazar

[MortyTheGobbo]

 

So now those abilities are back and available to everyone, while still occupying space as passive class picks for fighters and barbarians. So how those picks are greatly devalued, since anyone can spend proficiencies on them, and they will, since otherwise there are more proficiencies than they'll need. Meaning that, like KDubya said, at one point fighters will be stuck picking either a devalued passive or an active they've already passed up on.

 

Does "occupying space" really make sense? It's not like there's a hard limit on the number of options in each class ability tree. 

 

I figure at some point near the end of beta they'll do a general UI revamp anyway. Hopefully by then fighters will have some *new* abilities in their tree as "replacements."

 

 

Apparently, that's not their intent, if Josh indeed said that on SA. For all intents and purposes, those are still the passive abilities of the fighter and barbarian classes, except now everyone else can get them too.

[AndreaColombo]

I was referring specifically to this one post (screenshot for the benefit of those who are blocked by SA's random paywall):

 

[JerekKruger]

Thing is, you'll pretty much be forced to build an active Fighter anyway, unless you want a crapload  of weapon proficiencies you're never going to use.

[theBalthazar]

9 new abilities is nothing.

 

13 + 60 = 73 choices in POE1

 

13 + 16 = 29 choices in POE2, with +4 levels.

 

So, even 9 is strict minimum to link POE1... : p

 

There is 3 choices :

 

1) You keep POE1 system.

 

2) You keep POE2 system and there only convergence of few general talents.

 

3) You keep POE2 and create a bunch of new talents.

 

If you want repel the first solution, with general talents, each class must have a great bunch of talents. So the third option is the only way.

 

Attractive talents ! Exemple : Yesterday I created a druid. First level. Nothing inspires me. I told myself that if I could, I would have taken an interesting passive abilitie. But yeah... There is not a lot of choice. 

 

Or create a waiting turn. If nothing inspires me, I keep my point ? For ulterior levels, more interresting ?

Edited December 2, 2017 by theBalthazar

[Katarack21]

You should build nine new Fighter-specific passives that are interesting and unique rather than gimp other classes to make Fighter feel special by grafting generic talents to their tree.

Edited December 2, 2017 by Katarack21

[MortyTheGobbo]

I mean, it's easy for us armchair designers to say "just design nine new abilities that are balanced and properly fit the class!". But... I don't think there's another answer.

 

The fact that it's always the fighter who always ends up on the chopping block when a class needs to be playable on autopilot is getting kind of old, too.

Edited December 2, 2017 by MortyTheGobbo