If this was a new game, I'd be a fine either way. But it's a sequel. I must admit I am not too fond of too many changes of core mechanics in a sequel.

 

Exactly. It kind of ruins the importing system if my characters have to change fundamentally to fulfil the same roles they were before. Small tweaks are fine, but something like this change is just too much.

 

If this was a new game, I'd be a fine either way. But it's a sequel. I must admit I am not too fond of too many changes of core mechanics in a sequel.

 

Exactly. It kind of ruins the importing system if my characters have to change fundamentally to fulfil the same roles they were before. Small tweaks are fine, but something like this change is just too much.

 

 

For me it's more than just the import. It's getting used to major changes in the core mechanics that are only there in Deadfire, not in PoE 1. For me, it's very probable that I will get confused by that.

 

"Ah, how did this work again? This way? Oh, no! That was only Pillars 1."

"Uhm, how was this working again? Wasn't it that... oh no, not in Deadfire, right they changed that."

 

In my head I'll always have to change between the games and remember and learn to know what mechanic applies to which game. The mechanics will be similar enough to easily confuse them I fear. And yet they will be different enough to make me feel unfamiliar with them in Deadfire.

I feel pretty confident that obsidian will do a better job checking the interactions this time around, (no looking death godlikes in the eye)

The Muscle Wizard argument is kind of invalid unless your also willing to bring up all the physical damage types that shouldn't be affected by strength: Guns, Crossbow, Rapier, Stiletto etc.

 

If we're only looking for a reason to make casters choose resolve there is always the old spell failure mechanic. Or perhaps if we do succeed in interrupting a spell then casters will receive massive damage etc.

The Muscle Wizard argument is kind of invalid unless your also willing to bring up all the physical damage types that shouldn't be affected by strength: Guns, Crossbow, Rapier, Stiletto etc.

Its invalid because Deadfire solved the problem by doing dialogue checks mostly based on skills, rather than attributes. Issue wasn't how might influenced combat, but that a game recognized my wizard as a beefcake against my wishes. Previous system, made defining role of your character easy and elegant, while right now you have to dive deeper to see what your class will really benefit from.

 

If we're only looking for a reason to make casters choose resolve there is always the old spell failure mechanic. Or perhaps if we do succeed in interrupting a spell then casters will receive massive damage etc.

The change was not made to make resolve important to casters only, but to make it valuable to everyone. It doesn't only apply to spells but all abilities, which aren't directly tied to weapon attack. Wizards have plenty of spells which don't utilize "resolve" and rolling with low resolve wizard is completely valid. Naturally, it is easier to move existing bonuses from one attribute to another, rather than coming up with new system. I think strenght/resolve works pretty well even right now, but I am always up for a better solution.

Skill checks are fine but if attributes don't matter in roleplay anymore why bother having them in the first place? What does intellect 20 vs intellect 10 mean now? That I can spread my attacks wider? Meh. This is mid 00's mmo mentality. If attributes don't define your character as a character better remove them and keep bare mechanics. AOE, damage, healing, interrup etc as stats and give us points to spread 'em there instead of attributes.

To my surprise, Bethesda realised that and removed them from Skyrim. Since attributes never meant anything for the world why have them? Just pick special perks to define what you do. It worked great imo (I never expected to say something that positive for Bethesda regarding mechanics :D ).

The change was not made to make resolve important to casters only, but to make it valuable to everyone.

Just want to mention that actually the former was presented by Josh as main motivation.

In his tumblr post he mentions:

In my tweet, I briefly stated the motivation for making the Might > Strength / Resolve shift, which was that Resolve is unappealing for caster classes.

And in his twitter post he makes emphasis on ranged casters:

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.

Also, resolve is still a poor stat for ranged rogues and rangers (not to mention ranged fighters, monks and barbarians; although these don't really apply).

Edited January 1, 20188 yr by MaxQuest

Skill checks are fine but if attributes don't matter in roleplay anymore why bother having them in the first place? What does intellect 20 vs intellect 10 mean now? That I can spread my attacks wider? Meh. This is mid 00's mmo mentality. If attributes don't define your character as a character better remove them and keep bare mechanics. AOE, damage, healing, interrup etc as stats and give us points to spread 'em there instead of attributes.

To my surprise, Bethesda realised that and removed them from Skyrim. Since attributes never meant anything for the world why have them? Just pick special perks to define what you do. It worked great imo (I never expected to say something that positive for Bethesda regarding mechanics :D ).

I agree, it seems that different aspects of your character interact with different parts of gameplay, with limited overlap. I am worried it might lead to even more disjointed experience. Idealy, all aspects of your character should interact with all branches of gameplay to unify the experience. 

 

 

Skill checks are fine but if attributes don't matter in roleplay anymore why bother having them in the first place?

 

Even if skill checks are more common overall, the beta has enough examples of attribute checks in dialogue and scripted interactions that it seems premature to conclude that the developers are planning to make them irrelevant to roleplaying aspects of the game, especially with the introduction of a requirements system that allows them to check for multiple distinct categories (e.g., skills, backgrounds, race, class, attributes, etc.) when determining if you qualify for particular options in dialogue/scripted interactions. At various points throughout the beta, it checks for Strength (if you try to force the door open at the Poko Kohara ruins), Dexterity (during the scripted interaction at the desert well to catch the gems - after the Athletics check), Intellect (I think it was an alternative to background check in dialogue), and Perception (passively checked during a dialogue in Tikiwara and also later on the notice some details about the door to the ruins in Poko Kohara, if memory serves).

 

Skill checks are fine but if attributes don't matter in roleplay anymore why bother having them in the first place?

 

Even if skill checks are more common overall, the beta has enough examples of attribute checks in dialogue and scripted interactions that it seems premature to conclude that the developers are planning to make them irrelevant to roleplaying aspects of the game, especially with the introduction of a requirements system that allows them to check for multiple distinct categories (e.g., skills, backgrounds, race, class, attributes, etc.) when determining if you qualify for particular options in dialogue/scripted interactions. At various points throughout the beta, it checks for Strength (if you try to force the door open at the Poko Kohara ruins), Dexterity (during the scripted interaction at the desert well to catch the gems - after the Athletics check), Intellect (I think it was an alternative to background check in dialogue), and Perception (passively checked during a dialogue in Tikiwara and also later on the notice some details about the door to the ruins in Poko Kohara, if memory serves).

 

It's good to hear attribute checks are still in. My assumtion, though, is based from what devs said ("attributes are checked way fewer times than skills and than Pillars 1" - at some Q&A) and what beta testers claimed here and there in the forums. Also, from what let's plays I watched, I don't remember seeing any attribute check while I've seen numerous skills checks. Haven't watched any let's play to the end, though - mostly parts here and there from various let's plays.

My assumtion, though, is based from what devs said ("attributes are checked way fewer times than skills and than Pillars 1" - at some Q&A) and what beta testers claimed here and there in the forums.

 

And that's where you've taken the assumption too far. The developers did say that skill checks will be more common than attribute checks, but that isn't equivalent to saying that attributes don't matter in roleplay anymore, as you concluded above.

 

I don't know what to tell you about the Let's Play videos as I haven't watched any of them, but it's worth noting that some the attribute-specific checks that I encountered weren't clearly labeled in dialogue. The first Perception check that I mentioned didn't involve a choice at all, it was just extra information with the attribute's symbol in brackets before it as I clicked through the dialogue, if memory serves. Similarly, the Strength check isn't gated by your Strength score; it's just that you'll fail to force the door open and get injured if your Strength's below 20 (some food can help with that in the latest version of the beta). In cases like those, you wouldn't even necessarily know that there was attribute-specific content to miss.

With the either/or checks you can have more variety in how you meet a check as well. Like you could have low Insight but enough Perception to notice somebody isn't telling the whole truth. Stuff like that.

 

The Muscle Wizard argument is kind of invalid unless your also willing to bring up all the physical damage types that shouldn't be affected by strength: Guns, Crossbow, Rapier, Stiletto etc.

Its invalid because Deadfire solved the problem by doing dialogue checks mostly based on skills, rather than attributes. Issue wasn't how might influenced combat, but that a game recognized my wizard as a beefcake against my wishes. Previous system, made defining role of your character easy and elegant, while right now you have to dive deeper to see what your class will really benefit from. 

If this change has been made for role play reasons I'd argue that the strength of a quick nimble assassin breaks immersion to a far greater degree, at least a caster moving a boulder could be explained by use of telekinetic powers or magically enhance strength etc. 

 

The Muscle Wizard argument is kind of invalid unless your also willing to bring up all the physical damage types that shouldn't be affected by strength: Guns, Crossbow, Rapier, Stiletto etc.

Its invalid because Deadfire solved the problem by doing dialogue checks mostly based on skills, rather than attributes. Issue wasn't how might influenced combat, but that a game recognized my wizard as a beefcake against my wishes. Previous system, made defining role of your character easy and elegant, while right now you have to dive deeper to see what your class will really benefit from.

 

I think the underlying issue is that the attributes in Pillars 1 weren't really well-defined.

 

The description of Might says that it represents physical as well as spiritual might, but then you also have Resolve. I have no idea what the difference between "spiritual might" and "resolve" is. In my mind those two terms are synonyms, so having a character with high might and low resolve or vice versa makes no sense at all.

 

In my opinion this change makes defining your character much easier, because Strength and Resolve are now clearly differentiated.

I don't think any stat has to be useful for literally any type of character, but should be useful for different builds within a class. A ranged rogue has no use for Resolve, but a melee one does.