Let's Make a Stat Overhaul!

[digdigdigidy]

Been trolling through the forums and have noticed a lot of folks wanting changes to the current stat system. I'm having a lot of fun reading y'alls ideas so I figured I'd make a post about it.

 

If you could totally overhaul the stat system would you, and what would you change?

 

For me I think I would make it:

 

Might: Weapon Damage +/- 3%, +/-2 Fortitude 

 

Dexterity: Action Speed +/- 3%, +/-2 Reflex

 

Constitution: +/-3% HP, +1 Deflection +/-2 Fortitude (change name to Resilience)

 

Perception: accuracy +/- 1,  AOE +/- 6%, +/-2 reflex

 

Intellect: Affliction Duration +/-  5%, Spell Damage +/- 3%, +/-2 Will

 

Resolve: Buff Duration +\- 5%, Healing +/- 3%, +/-2 Will (Change name to Wisdom)

 

The reason for each change was to make each stat fit a role while still making each stat seem important, don't know if I succeeded but I was just playing around with this during my free time at work. What are your ideas?

Edited December 18, 2017 by digdigdigidy

[MaxQuest]

Might: Weapon Damage +/- 3%, +/-2 Fortitude

Few questions related to this suggestion:

- do fists quality as weapons?

- do carnage hits benefit from STR? It deals raw damage now.

- what about torment's reach? The damage that is inflicted to main target is affected by STR; while cone damage by RES?

- damage of fighter's Charge and monk's Flagellant's Path is affected by STR or RES?

 

What are your ideas?

Still thinking on it.

 

Atm trying to define the actual end goal, in order to spot the best idea when I see it.

Also, when you note down exactly what you want, the answer often comes by itself.

 

---

Quoting a few Josh's twits as starting point:

if there's a proposal to make a "simple" adjustment to resolve that doesn't wreak havoc on a bunch of other game systems, i haven't seen it. everything i've seen has left a significant blind spot in some other attribute in the lineup. and, as i said before, "no dump stats" wasn't being lived up to with the current resolve spread. and again, it's more important that you *can* make a good build with a stat than it is that you can't dump it.

resolve was already a dump stat for casters unless they planned to be in melee. and remember that no dump stats was a *secondary* concern to no bad builds, which is far more important. in the previous lineup, it was difficult to justify a resolve-based caster.

So the stat system that we are looking for should result first of all in:

- no bad builds (at least not because of stats)

- various builds - there should be more than one stat viable spread per class - and preferably it it would wrap nicely extreme cases as well

- ...

 

And a few secondary concerns:

- no dump stats - judging by Josh's examples: RES should be useful for ranged builds as well? Uhm, what about CON?

- intuitive stats (as I understood some had associations between might and muscle wizards)

- ...

 

---

Edit: hmm, looking at the last quote, it looks like we need a system that would also justify:

- ranged constitution-based casters

- ranged strengh-based priests

Edited December 18, 2017 by MaxQuest

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

As I understand the "no bad builds" goal, the idea isn't so much that anything will be workable as that you should be able to make anything work -- i.e., if you want to make something normally counter-intuitive, like a highly intelligent barbarian or a muscle-bound wizard, here should be a build for that concept.

That doesn't mean that (again for example) a wizard who pumps Might but takes only CC powers should be just as good as one that takes pumps Int and CC powers; just that if you want to build a Mighty wizard you can do that (by focusing on damage powers) and if you want to build a smart wizard you can do that too (and focus on AoE & CC powers, or DoTs).

Honestly I [mostly] like where most of the stats are right now (i.e., first beta build) apart from Perception and Resolve. 

 

I'll also be a bit contrarian and say that I think it's at least somewhat important for stats to stay the same game to game so people can transition characters from one game to the next fluidly. It's not a huge deal if there are minor changes but overall people want to transfer their characters so you want to keep that possible with a minimum of re-drafting.

Edited December 18, 2017 by Dr. Hieronymous Alloy

[Wormerine]

I will cheat, and say that I wouldn’t change stats that much, but go classless. As class heavily defines your character it doesn’t really seem to work well with second defining mechanic of your character aka. attributes. Personally I would like to see attributes be more impactful and visible; Character with high strength and con plays substantially different than a character with high perception and intelligence.

 

As it is now, I really don’t care what stats add what bonuses. I leave it in Obs heads to balance those out.

[MaxQuest]

That doesn't mean that (again for example) a wizard who pumps Might but takes only CC powers should be just as good as one that takes pumps Int and CC powers;

That's understandable

 

I'll also be a bit contrarian and say that I think it's at least somewhat important for stats to stay the same game to game so people can transition characters from one game to the next fluidly. It's not a huge deal if there are minor changes but overall people want to transfer their characters so you want to keep that possible with a minimum of re-drafting.

Tbh I don't mind changes to stats even if it results in a sensible re-drafing. Ofc provided that these changes are fitting and balanced.

Reason being: planning your character is fun so fiddling with stats is not a problem. So long as you can transfer the spirit of your PoE1 build to Deadfire, I'm ok even if changes go beyond minimal.

 

I will cheat, and say that I wouldn’t change stats that much, but go classless.

It's kinda late to go classless now) Not to mention that's a good classless system is not an easy task to do.

If it's implemented so so, players will find the best combination that will rule over all other variants. And iterative nerfing will mostly lead to a new fotm rising each patch.

 

As it is now, I really don’t care what stats add what bonuses. I leave it in Obs heads to balance those out.

Obsidian no doubt will arrive to a balanced state. But it may take many iterations.

For instance PoE1 was overally really well balanced, but sometimes it looked like a pointy rock resting on a rock

 

---

OT: Have made a quick comparison table of "how viable a class [x] would be with stat [y] at it's extremes" in my opinion for PoE1 PotD: link

Would be interesting to hear if someone has different point of view.

TODO: do similar thing for current beta.

Edited December 19, 2017 by MaxQuest

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

---

OT: Have made a quick comparison table of "how viable a class [x] would be with stat [y] at it's extremes" in my opinion for PoE1 PotD: link

Would be interesting to hear if someone has different point of view.

TODO: do similar thing for current beta.

 

 

I think you only need the right hand (18-stat) columns, really. I only ever heard Sawyer phrase the design goals positively, not negatively -- i.e, "you should be able to be a smart barbarian if you want", not "you should be able to be a really dumb barbarian if you want." 

 

Looking at the columns on the right yeah Resolve and Con are the weak sisters. 

[MaxQuest]

I think you only need the right hand (18-stat) columns, really. I only ever heard Sawyer phrase the design goals positively, not negatively -- i.e, "you should be able to be a smart barbarian if you want", not "you should be able to be a really dumb barbarian if you want."

Right what I was thinking about, after re-reading Josh's quotes)

The pumped stats being of first concern; and dumped stats of second.

 

And Josh does additional comparison, taking into consideration melee and ranged builds separately. Although it feels a bit weird for ranged barbarians, fighters and constitution-based builds.

 

P.S. Thinking about doing a stat viability check for current beta. Feel free to check sheet 2. Although it's a WIP.

[Enurale]

My Wizard avatar stats from first game : (*)

MIG: 18  --- As high as possible, because might is "powerful stat". Healing, Damage, Fortitude, high conv-action check.
CON: 3 --- As low as possible, because, you already got enouth fortitude from max might, if you play properly and have high defenses esp. dr, you dont need high pool.
DEX: 16 --- High, over average, because, the "action speed" bigger than all other speeds, and you cant get this stat except dex items, its also gives reflex which is important to everyone.
PER: 14 --- High, average, because accuracy really powerful addition to this stat. High dialog checks also important and gives reflex too, its ipmortant for crit and interrupt,but you can get its content from high level items and dex too.
INT: 18 --- As high as possible, the most powerful stat imo for ability/skill/spell duration/area character. Also will important save for control, being out of control extremely dangerous.

RES: 8 --- Low, under average, Its for conversations, if you need deflection, you needed it as sky high, you dont need average deflection bcs loses its meaning at low scores, you will get enough "will" with int.


Every advanturers has this stats, except tanks, monks. Maybe we can add barbs too but they just need a bit more con.

So yes, res/con not equal to mig/int. But this also also natural characteristic for most rgps. Maybe some additional benefit can create a more balanced sight for this stats. A little "unique, not derieved" combat enhancer than flat defense can solve this.

Its important to say, IM HAPPY with first games stats but maybe you can add some more power to weak ones, but never shut the min-max gates.

(*) (im using her as tank at the end of the game, she sees sky high deflection which is no other class can see, like 270, with all party buffs and veil)

Edited December 19, 2017 by Enurale

[MaxQuest]

Looking at the columns on the right yeah Resolve and Con are the weak sisters.

So, I've made a table of how I personally perceive (at the moment) the relative "powerfulness" of classes based on stat in comparison to each other: (for beta1, and somewhat extrapolated for beta2 based on the changelog)

 

 

Does this match your experience as well? Or you feel different?

Edited January 4, 2018 by MaxQuest

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

Looking at the columns on the right yeah Resolve and Con are the weak sisters.

So, I've made a table of how I personally perceive (at the moment) the relative "powerfulness" of classes based on stat in comparison to each other: (for beta1, and somewhat extrapolated for beta2 based on the changelog)

 

spoiler]

Does this match your experience as well? Or you feel different?

 

 

 

Yeah, I'd been looking at your chart. It's hard to disagree. I think I'd want to frame the problem differently; the main issue I see, with the Strength/Resolve change specifically,  isn't so much that a Strength-based weapon mage is worse or better than a Might-based weapon mage, but that it's mechanically more difficult for hybrid builds; you have to choose between being a summoned weapon wizard and a spell wizard in a way you didn't before; Ciphers have to choose to be actively bad at something (either weapon damage & focus gain, or spell damage, or CC duration/effectiveness) where they didn't have to make that choice before. Realistically, you can max out two stats without taking a penalty somewhere else and more if you're willing to take a hit somewhere else, so the stat/class balance ends up looking more like a graphic equalizer than a clear 1 for 1 table. 

 

The broader class balance issue right now though is spell effect durations are orders of magnitutude too short to justify their casting times; for example, for a number of Cipher CC powers, after you adjust for miss/graze/crit, the expected-value durations are so low that statistically you're better off never casting them at all and just using your autoattack instead (extremely min-maxed stats can break out of this problem but only just barely). 

 

TO be honest though I need to spend a lot more time with the new beta before I have anything new to say about stat balance; right now I'm going by the numbers more than by play experience and that's dangerous. I agree with your suggestions about additive/multiplicative damage stats, I'm still pretty sure Perception needs the return to 50% criticals, Con needs something that isn't a reskinned hit point bonus. I don't like Strength/Resolve replacing Might but I understand why they did it I just hope they come up with a better answer.

Edited December 21, 2017 by Dr. Hieronymous Alloy

[deneweth]

I really liked how might was used in PoE1.  If you wanted you could make a *mighty* caster (and it had nothing to do with strength or bench pressing) and they would have more powerful direct damage spells.  You could also focus on intellect and be more of a controller caster, debuffing enemies for long durations, or targeting larger areas/groups to control the battlefield. 

 

Having might increase your auto attack damage, be it with wand, gun, or sword helped those direct damage casters fulfill their party role as strikers/dps.  Now they'll have to choose between spells and auto attacks, which at that point just make a melee or ranged weapon class and have your abilities and auto attacks both scale with might.  I really don't see the point of building a caster that is going to depend on you heavily investing in a stat you would otherwise not invest in.  I'm even more at a loss trying to comprehend the idea behind priests getting to choose between healing, spell damage, and auto attack damage.

 

I should explain that I did not solo tripple crown PoE1.  I didn't really even min-max, just mostly kept everything at 10 and put points in 2 or 3 stats that I wanted that character to utilize.  I don't think it's a problem if not every attribute is used equally.  The goal was accomplished that every stat was useful to every character.  Beyond that who cares what people do in a single player game.  If people are using 18 might and 3 con for *every* build that isn't bad game design, that is them powergaming the system and knowing they can cut corners at con because they have such an understanding of the rules.

 

This move feels like a step back towards "charisma for sorcerers, and wisdom for druids".  I realize that having a "hit harder" stat is very appealing to power gamers, but there are also perception checks that can give us better loot, and experience to be won in drinking con-tests.  I think there are better ways to handle this than reverting to the priest stat giving +1 to priesting.

[MaxQuest]

I think I'd want to frame the problem differently; the main issue I see, with the Strength/Resolve change specifically,  isn't so much that a Strength-based weapon mage is worse or better than a Might-based weapon mage, but that it's mechanically more difficult for hybrid builds;

I hear you, and been thinking to note down all pros and cons.

At the moment it's something like that:

 

previous comparison referenced in some replies below

 

Do you think I have missed something?

 

---

Also, I have noted quite a few "the old might was good; just give resolve something useful for casters"; and have briefly brain-stormed a few possible things that could be influenced by RES:

 

Concentration related:

- generate 1 concentration every 100/RES seconds.

- 1 concentration is generated every 8s. 1 point of RES increases the speed of this generation by 5%.

 

Penetration related:

- you act with higher determination. Each point in RES increases your PEN by 3%.

- 1 determination point is generated every 5s. 1 point of RES increases the speed of this generation by 5%. Determination points are automatically consumed on next offensive action, adding 2 PEN.

 

Power level related:

- you act with higher determination. Each point in RES increases your effective power level by 3%.

 

Affliction/Inspiration related:

> each incoming hit or crit, drives you closer to getting resolve (rank 1) affliction (shaken)

> each party kill, drives you closer to getting resolve (rank 1) inspiration

> resolve is used slow down the first, and speed up the second

 

Defense related:

> high resolve converts part of incoming hits to grazes

> low resolve convers part of incoming hits to crits

 

Defense and offense related:

- each point of resolve converts a part of incoming attacks one category down (crit->hit->graze->miss); and a part of outcoming attacks one category up.

 

Also, we could technically separate spells in:

- damage: uses MIG (RES), PER, INT (sometimes), DEX

- heals: uses MIG (RES), INT, DEX

- cc: uses PER, INT, DEX

- buffs: uses INT, DEX

 

and think if it's feasible to make resolve increase the effect of buffs.

Edited January 3, 2018 by MaxQuest

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

Looks good overall. I'd make a few minor quibbles -- i.e., I'd probably substitute the word "addressed" for "solved" sort of thing Maybe mention that healers face the same division-of-roles issue that hybrids do, especially for traditionally "melee" classes like druids and priests. 

 

My hope is that Obsidian will be able to think of something we haven't, honestly, some  new mechanic that's outside the box we're thinking in.

[Erik-Dirk]

You have pretty much listed Res is useless for ranged characters twice which is very misleading in terms of pros and cons
 

You forgot that strength/might is now pretty much useless to casters. (Unless they enter melee, in which case deflection will also be useful again meaning there was never a problem)

Edited January 2, 2018 by Erik-Dirk

[hilfazer]

Strength will be useful for weapon summoning wizards but first summoning a weapon can't be taking whole day.

Strength will be useful for weapon summoning priest but first summoning a weapon can't be taking whole day.

Strength will be useful for spiritshifting druids but first... wait, it's already useful, no?

[Erik-Dirk]

Hilfazer, what's your point?
In all those situations deflection will also be very useful as presumably the caster is in melee.

Mechanically all that has changed for casters is this:

 

Might was always useful, resolve was situational.
Now resolve is always useful, strength is extremely situational.

 

Strength is now more of a dump stat than resolve ever was for Ranged Casters, resolve has always been a useful stat to any melee build.

[curryinahurry]

 

Concentration related:

- generate 1 concentration every 100/RES seconds.

- 1 concentration is generated every 8s. 1 point of RES increases the speed of this generation by 5%.

 

 

 

 

 

This seems to be the simplest, most straightforward solution. 

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

 

Concentration related:

- generate 1 concentration every 100/RES seconds.

- 1 concentration is generated every 8s. 1 point of RES increases the speed of this generation by 5%.

 

 

 

 

 

This seems to be the simplest, most straightforward solution. 

 

 

You could also, say, give people (10+/-[stat]) points of concentration or interruption at the start of each fight. 

 

Even with a system where Per/Res give interrupt/concentration, you have to have concentration do something so that melee people care about it and not just casters. Added penetration for extra concentration seems like the obvious answer, then interrupt takes that away. Lot of things would have to be playtested though -- can Concentration go negative, or does it have a floor? What rate of gain/loss "feels" right? How is Interrupt "spent" ? etc etc.

 

A system like that could work and could even provide an interesting added complexity layer on top of the current combat mechanics, as you try to keep opponents off balance, and it would give casters a way to boost spell Penetration, which they sorely need and don't really have right now. Could get overpowered though if it led to everyone overpenetrating all the time or trivialized other Penetration bonuses (why have an estoc if you can just concentrate a bit?). 

 

Seems like it could be worth exploring though and we are still in beta so there's some time.

[hilfazer]

Hilfazer, what's your point?

In all those situations deflection will also be very useful as presumably the caster is in melee.

Mechanically all that has changed for casters is this:

 

Might was always useful, resolve was situational.

Now resolve is always useful, strength is extremely situational.

 

Strength is now more of a dump stat than resolve ever was for Ranged Casters, resolve has always been a useful stat to any melee build.

 

My point is you can make a caster build that will benefit from high Strength.

 

An attribute being a dump stat to a build is not a problem. Ranged Caster is a build.

We had this in PoE1 already - casters who only wanted to cast debuffs/buffs could dump Might. And that's fine because you can still make a caster that uses Might.

 

 

Edit:

Let's no forget taking both high Strength and Resolve is entirely possible.

Edited January 3, 2018 by hilfazer

[Erik-Dirk]

@hifazar

 

My point was always regarding the table by MaxQuest which had essentially the following
 
"Resolve was not useful for casters, now it is really useful."
 

I was merely pointing out that for a fair comparison you have to add the counter

"Might was really useful for a caster, now it's not useful."

Your point seems to be that it is possible to build a caster that benefits from strength, however most of these are builds that will benefit from high deflection (resolve) 
I kind of agree that not all stats should be essential if you focus on a very particular build, however if you accept this then you have to agree that there was never a problem with the mechanics in the first place.

@ maxquest: I also mentioned before that resolve is useless to ranged casters and resolve is useless to ranged builds should be listed as a single item.

 

Also did you intentionally leave out all the role play pros/cons of the change?

Edited January 3, 2018 by Erik-Dirk

[hilfazer]

 

Your point seems to be that it is possible to build a caster that benefits from strength, however most of these are builds that will benefit from high deflection (resolve) 

I kind of agree that not all stats should be essential if you focus on a very particular build, however if you accept this then you have to agree that there was never a problem with the mechanics in the first place.

 

I want to agree with this but to my knowledge RES in POE2 is was even worse than in POE1 because it no longer had Concentration.

 

And RES in POE1 was just bad. It had a reputation of being good only for tanks. Not all classes were fit for this role. Rogues had a reputation of being squishy so they were unfit for a tank role. It means RES was a dump stat for a class and that is a problem.

I don't have beta access, maybe RES in better than in POE1. If every class in Deadfire can make good use of RES then, yes, i agree with you.

 

I'm not saying replacing Might with Strength was a good idea. Might is better than Strength but OTOH new Resolve is better than old one.

In a perfect world OBS would keep Might and make RES good for any class but Josh could not find a way to do this.

 

 

New Resolve has a following problem:

"All casters are tanks!"

It's not neccesarily my opinion because casters have low max HP, but i've seen this more than once. But Might also has a problem:

"All healers are DPS damage dealers!"

This is why i really like moving healing to Resolve. I would keep magic damage on Might, however.

[MaxQuest]

Looks good overall. I'd make a few minor quibbles -- i.e., I'd probably substitute the word "addressed" for "solved" sort of thing

Roger that)

 

Maybe mention that healers face the same division-of-roles issue that hybrids do, especially for traditionally "melee" classes like druids and priests.

Agreed for druids. But I've already included a point about hybrids.

As for priests:

 

> under MIG/RES, we could have:

1. melee buffer - offtank who buffs (dumped MIG) (can't heal)

2. melee phys-damager - based on summoned weapons (maxed MIG) (also could heal)

3. ranged phys-damager - iirc priest of Wael can summon ranged weapon? (maxed MIG) (also could heal)

4. ranged fire-priest - squishy, spell-damager (who is also able to heal)

 

> under STR/RES, we can have:

1. melee buffer - offtank who buffs (dumped STR, high RES) (can heal now) (basically a bit slower, but tankier fire priest)

2. melee phys-damager - based on summoned weapons (maxed STR, flat/low RES) (can heal... somewhat, but prolly won't since is focused on phys dmg)

3. ranged phys-damager - iirc priest of Wael can summon ranged weapon? (maxed STR, dumped RES) (can't heal now)

4. ranged fire-priest - spell-damager (who is also able to heal) (and is sturdier now)

 

So yes, casting priests were buffed; while weapon-based priests lost their healing potential.

The question is: is this bad? I'm asking because:

- there could be a scenario where spell-damage is reverted back to MIG; while Healing Done left in RES.

- if a character is specialized on dealing damage, he doesn't want to lose active time on healing; there could be some dedicated support for that (for example some offtank lifegiver or wayfarer).

 

 

 

My hope is that Obsidian will be able to think of something we haven't, honestly, some  new mechanic that's outside the box we're thinking in.

Maybe they will.

But so far we can theorycraft further. It's entertaining)

 

Another approach could be: think of possible playstyles and character roles inside of party. And adjust stats in such a way, that would empower roles that are lacking something.

 

You forgot that strength/might is now pretty much useless to casters. (Unless they enter melee, in which case deflection will also be useful again meaning there was never a problem)

Let's come to a common definition of caster.

For example by casters I meant: wizards, druids, priests, ciphers and chanters.

 

- So with the new system: RES is useful for casters that cast spells; STR is useful for casters that deal damage with weapons.

- With the old system: MIG was useful for all of them; while RES was useful only for melee ones (and even than resolve impact was quite marginal, because 15 deflection doesn't really make a lot of difference, unless you have a lot of it)

 

Or you use another definition for 'casters'? Like any character, who is focused exclusively on actual casting? (including support paladin and scroll-rogue?)

 

You have pretty much listed Res is useless for ranged characters twice which is very misleading in terms of pros and cons

 

@ maxquest: I also mentioned before that resolve is useless to ranged casters and resolve is useless to ranged builds should be listed as a single item.

I did.

I wanted to accentuate that Josh has emphasized RES as not being useful for ranged casters, when in fact, it wasn't useful for any ranged character.

 

But now that you mentioned it, I see that it was confusing.

Is it better this way?: before / after

 

Also did you intentionally leave out all the role play pros/cons of the change?

Nope. That's why I was asking if I've missed something.

Although I have a feeling that 1st (now 2nd) point is related to RP perspective. I will edit it to make more clear.

Edited January 3, 2018 by MaxQuest

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

Agreed for druids. But I've already included a point about hybrids.

As for priests:

 

> under MIG/RES, we could have:

1. melee buffer - offtank who buffs (dumped MIG) (can't heal)

2. melee phys-damager - based on summoned weapons (maxed MIG) (also could heal)

3. ranged phys-damager - iirc priest of Wael can summon ranged weapon? (maxed MIG) (also could heal)

4. ranged fire-priest - squishy, spell-damager (who is also able to heal)

 

> under STR/RES, we can have:

1. melee buffer - offtank who buffs (dumped STR, high RES) (can heal now) (basically a bit slower, but tankier fire priest)

2. melee phys-damager - based on summoned weapons (maxed STR, flat/low RES) (can heal... somewhat, but prolly won't since is focused on phys dmg)

3. ranged phys-damager - iirc priest of Wael can summon ranged weapon? (maxed STR, dumped RES) (can't heal now)

4. ranged fire-priest - spell-damager (who is also able to heal) (and is sturdier now)

 

So yes, casting priests were buffed; while weapon-based priests lost their healing potential.

The question is: is this bad? I'm asking because:

- there could be a scenario where spell-damage is reverted back to MIG; while Healing Done left in RES.

- if a character is specialized on dealing damage, he doesn't want to lose active time on healing; there could be some dedicated support for that (for example some offtank lifegiver or wayfarer).

 

 

 

It's . . . a loss of versatility if nothing else. For example, in the first game, most healing for most players  probably came through heal-over-time effects like Consecrated Ground. Few priests spent their whole time healing; there was a lot of autoattack time mixed in there; you'd cast a few heals or buffs then wait and autoattack until some more direct intervention was needed. 

 

So now you need to choose: weapon-based offense, or spell based offense. If you pick spell based offense, you lose on healing ability (because each offensive cast and offensive power choice is a healing cast and healing power choice you no longer have; you can't do spell offense and spell defense both); if you pick weapon based offense, you also lose healing ability (because you've had to shift points from Res to Str). No matter what you pick, you're worse off than you were in the first game. In this sense it's a special case of the general rule that the Might->Str change forces players to "choose something to suck at," with the additional wrinkle that the choice is trinary rather than binary (instead of choosing between weapon offense or spell offense, you're choosing between weapon offense, spell offense, or spell defense).

 

For a more concrete example: look at the hammer of abydon. In the first game, it was often best given to your primary healer -- a good strong weapon, but one that also boosted healing.  A similar weapon in Deadfire, though, would be wasted on a healer. 

[MaxQuest]

It's . . . a loss of versatility if nothing else.

Weapon-based priests lost the healing efficiency (since RES is likely to be dumped in favor on STR), while

Buffing-offtanks (that had low MIG, high RES) gained the healing efficiency.

 

So now you need to choose: weapon-based offense, or spell based offense.

True that.

 

In PoE we have to specialize into:

- buffer + ~offtank (like 2/12/18/10/19/17) vs

- damage_dealer + heals (like 18/9/17/12/19/3)

 

In current beta we have to specialize into:

- weapon_damage_dealer + [buffs if learnt] (like 18/12/17/10/18/3) vs

- spell_damage_dealer + [heals if learnt] + [buffs if learnt] (like 3/10/18/10/19/18) vs

- healer + ~[spell_damage if learnt] + buffs if learnt] (like 3/14/18/6/19/18) vs

- buffer + ~{[offtanking] or [weapon_damage] or [spell_damage and/or heals]} (like 3/14/18/6/19/18)

 

In my current oppinion the main limiting factor to versatility is the amount of spells we can learn.

I am not sure how I feel about two different attributes being responsible for damage though...

 

For example, in the first game, most healing for most players  probably came through heal-over-time effects like Consecrated Ground. Few priests spent their whole time healing; there was a lot of autoattack time mixed in there; you'd cast a few heals or buffs then wait and autoattack until some more direct intervention was needed.

Yeap, personally I haven't spent much time healing as well.

Most of healing was coming passively from Shod-in-Faith boots, Beloved Spirits and Silver Tide racial (had chanter and priest moon godlikes with maxed MIG/INT). Ofc had some Moonwell scrolls and Healing potions for emergency, but almost never used them.

 

No matter what you pick, you're worse off than you were in the first game.

Fire priest gets buffed though. Because he completely dumps STR. And:

- if he remains ranged - he remains as before but with extra 15 deflection

- if he goes melee - he can also passively offtank (provided a bit of PER will be traded for CON)

And just in case: no I am not going to be biased because I've published that build ))

 

For a more concrete example: look at the hammer of abydon. In the first game, it was often best given to your primary healer -- a good strong weapon, but one that also boosted healing. A similar weapon in Deadfire, though, would be wasted on a healer.

I was giving it to my primary dotter... since MIG coefficient was multiplied by INT coefficient for the total damage calculation.

20 -> 24 MIG, or ~ +9% in healing (x1.42/x1.30) would not make much difference.

 

But yes in Deadfire it would be wasted on healer, and on dotter. It would go to someone with high INT AND accuracy, in order to make use of the aoe stun.

Edited January 3, 2018 by MaxQuest

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

But yes in Deadfire it would be wasted on healer, and on dotter. It would go to someone with high INT AND accuracy, in order to make use of the aoe stun.

 

 

Yeah, it'd still have a use. Just a much narrower range of uses =(