Should healing stay in Resolve, or revert back to Strength?

[Ninjamestari]

No idea myself. I decided to block him after he exposed his troglodyte views on violence and evolution. I've been much happier for it.

 

It's always good to see my opposition show their pettiness in public, it kinda reinforces everything I say.

[Raven Darkholme]

So I haven't read the whole topic, since there's been too much OT on page 1 to keep me interested for page 2, but my POV on the topic actually brought up by  Jojobobo:

 

Let's face it guys, Might was too strong in PoE1, almost every class needed it and some curious tank/supporter builds with no Might, were only dreamed up for the sake of .... having no Might in the build.

 

I can totally see your point in PoE losing some of it's uniqueness with Might, but the stat was jsut too good.

Putting Healing AND spell damage into Resolve makes it actually useful, being one of the easiest dumpstats in Poe 1.

[hilfazer]

I'd have been happy with no Vancians at all.

 

I was happy without vancian in PoE. Ok, almost without, because Spell Mastery got introduced.

It's sad OBS took the only vancian thing from PoE, that played a minor role there, and made it a foundation of spell casting in PoE2.

 

PoE1

Spellcaster: "Damn, a fire blight. I can't hurt it with this fire spell of mine. Fortunately i can select any druid spell at any time so i'd just blast it with ice!"

 

PoE2

Spellcaster: "Damn, a fire blight. I can't hurt it with this fire spell of mine. Too bad my only offensive spells are of fire type. In part because there are so few spells to choose per level. Even worse, i can't reset spells by sleeping, i need to level up to choose a new spell. I wish i were one of those D&D vancian casters who can reset their spell selection by resting :("

 

At least wizards have their grimoires.

[Ninjamestari]

 

I'd have been happy with no Vancians at all.

 

I was happy without vancian in PoE. Ok, almost without, because Spell Mastery got introduced.

It's sad OBS took the only vancian thing from PoE, that played a minor role there, and made it a foundation of spell casting in PoE2.

 

PoE1

Spellcaster: "Damn, a fire blight. I can't hurt it with this fire spell of mine. Fortunately i can select any druid spell at any time so i'd just blast it with ice!"

 

PoE2

Spellcaster: "Damn, a fire blight. I can't hurt it with this fire spell of mine. Too bad my only offensive spells are of fire type. In part because there are so few spells to choose per level. Even worse, i can't reset spells by sleeping, i need to level up to choose a new spell. I wish i were one of those D&D vancian casters who can reset their spell selection by resting :("

 

At least wizards have their grimoires.

 

 

Wait, so how exactly does casting work in PoE2? Do you have to pick individual spells to learn as a Priest/Druid and no longer get the full book to cast from?

[Wormerine]

Wait, so how exactly does casting work in PoE2? Do you have to pick individual spells to learn as a Priest/Druid and no longer get the full book to cast from?

Wizards, Priests and Druids can cast 2 spells per spell level every combat. They pick one talent (spell) on lvl up. With recent update priests gain additionally one free spell when reaching new power level (every few levels) based on their subclass. Wizards carry Grimoires which can hold up to two additional spells per level. Grimoires can’t be edited, so they can contain spells you already know or ones you can’t use due to subclass restrictions. Overall less spells to choose from.

 

Personal note: with various Grimoires wizards are quite flexible, though remembering what Grimoires have which spells is tricky and I usually tend to stick to one or two I actually use.

 

Priests feel much better with extra spell per powerlevel.

 

Druids probably suffer the most right now, especially with the split of resolve and strength hurting their melee or spells.

 

I might be completely wrong as those above are my impressions after playthrough with each in my party, no actual data or numbers to back those up. They kinda tend to do the same thing over and over again, but I won’t lie, I was doing the same thing in PoE so it might be just me applying the same solution to every problem. Being able to cast Returning Storm every fight is a bit too good.

[CottonWolf]

Druids probably suffer the most right now, especially with the split of resolve and strength hurting their melee or spells.

 

This is certainly true, but I'm not sure that different stats forcing you to specialise in different parts of a class' skillset is a bad thing. Like, if you want to dump everything else, you could make a glass cannon ultimate damage druid if you wanted to, otherwise you're forced to specialise in shifting or spells. Seems like a fine trade-off to me.

 

Might being 'soul power' which fueled all the damage for all the characters was a nice refreshing change from the standard bog of strength for melee, and some other stat for magic. It gave PoE a distinct identity from every other RPG. Add in the unique Cipher using focus, Monks with wounds and Chanters building phrases over time and you had a new game system that matched a new renaissance themed game world.

 

In principle, I agree with this, but the actual implementation of Might in dialogue never supported this reading. Might was always 'Do you even lift, bro", there was never any implication of non-physical strength given to the stat (that's actually always been on Resolve). I would have preferred that they keep Might and expand what it's used for in dialogue, but if they're not going to do that, I think changing it to Strength is the right choice.

Edited January 14, 2018 by CottonWolf

[Wormerine]

In principle, I agree with this, but the actual implementation of Might in dialogue never supported this reading. Might was always 'Do you even lift, bro", there was never any implication of non-physical strength given to the stat (that's actually always been on Resolve). I would have preferred that they keep Might and expand what it's used for in dialogue, but if they're not going to do that, I think changing it to Strength is the right choice.

In game there is no link between soul strength and might. I don’t know where this idea came from but it never made into the game. Might is clearly described as a measure of both physical and spiritual strength and in dialogues it was treated as strength.

 

Deadfire already solved the problem of using might as strength check in dialogues by moving most of the checks to skills, with athletics replacing might in that instance. Not ideal, as it further separates different mechanics, but it does address this particular problem.

[CottonWolf]

 

In principle, I agree with this, but the actual implementation of Might in dialogue never supported this reading. Might was always 'Do you even lift, bro", there was never any implication of non-physical strength given to the stat (that's actually always been on Resolve). I would have preferred that they keep Might and expand what it's used for in dialogue, but if they're not going to do that, I think changing it to Strength is the right choice.

In game there is no link between soul strength and might. I don’t know where this idea came from but it never made into the game. Might is clearly described as a measure of both physical and spiritual strength and in dialogues it was treated as strength.

 

Deadfire already solved the problem of using might as strength check in dialogues by moving most of the checks to skills, with athletics replacing might in that instance. Not ideal, as it further separates different mechanics, but it does address this particular problem.

 

 

Yeah, I was agreeing. I was saying, that sure, in theory it was that, but it never actually was in practice.

[Jojobobo]

Let's face it guys, Might was too strong in PoE1, almost every class needed it and some curious tank/supporter builds with no Might, were only dreamed up for the sake of .... having no Might in the build.

 

I can totally see your point in PoE losing some of it's uniqueness with Might, but the stat was jsut too good.

Putting Healing AND spell damage into Resolve makes it actually useful, being one of the easiest dumpstats in Poe 1.

I don't know, I'd say that Resolve now is more unbalanced as a powerful attribute at least for spellcasters than Might was in PoE 1 as it offers spell damage and healing and Deflection and Will. I'm not sure how moving so many benefits into Resolve has solved the problem of their being an overly powerful attribute.

[KDubya]

 

Let's face it guys, Might was too strong in PoE1, almost every class needed it and some curious tank/supporter builds with no Might, were only dreamed up for the sake of .... having no Might in the build.

 

I can totally see your point in PoE losing some of it's uniqueness with Might, but the stat was jsut too good.

Putting Healing AND spell damage into Resolve makes it actually useful, being one of the easiest dumpstats in Poe 1.

I don't know, I'd say that Resolve now is more unbalanced as a powerful attribute at least for spellcasters than Might was in PoE 1 as it offers spell damage and healing and Deflection and Will. I'm not sure how moving so many benefits into Resolve has solved the problem of their being an overly powerful attribute.

 

 

It hasn't solved whatever problem they were trying to solve and instead has made for a whole series of cascading problems that will now need to be addressed. 

 

The stats are now more dumpable, hybrid melee/magic are nerfed as are healing melee and the net gain is ......... I'm not sure what was gained.

[Yosharian]

So I wanted to make a thread to specifically target a singular issue, rather than the more wide-ranging debate on Strength, Resolve and Might. What I wanted to see opinions on (more for my own curiosity, as I don't have beta access) is, if we take the division of physical damage in Strength and spell damage in Resolve as set in stone, should healing still belong in Resolve?

 

Broadly speaking, I think how Might and Resolve played in PoE 1 was:

 

1) For offensive DPS builds, Might allowed for a degree of self-sustainability as it provided healing.

2) Tanks focussed on high defences, and so when you paired high defences to a middling Might for healing they would also be self-sustaining.

 

In PoE 2 from an outsider perspective, what it seems like from the raw mechanical changes to the stats:

 

1) Tanks now benefit more, as if you pump Res you get healing on top of Deflection.

2) Casters benefit way more, getting Damage, Deflection and healing.

3) Physical attackers lost any kind of defensive benefit, no longer being self-sustaining to any degree if they dump Res, which is a stat that is otherwise useless to them (while casters can dump Strength with zero cost, apart from a loss of Fortitude).

 

I guess I liked in PoE 1 that you can make any class self-sufficient to a degree without the need for a Cleric for support and healing, and you could do so this while making them maximally damaging - with both DPS and damage. It seems like in PoE 2, this is no longer the case, high damage + DPS melee attackers (dumping Resolve) will need some sort of cleric support for survival - or they will have to move away from maximal damage or DPS to have some Resolve and stay alive without a cleric. Casters on the other hand can go for maximal offences without any concern.

 

So I guess there's a couple of questions here:

 

1) Do you feel like I've accurately represented the current situation, or do you think I've exaggerated the problem, or not factored in larger interplay with healing? As mentioned, I don't have beta access, so I'd not thoroughly well versed in all the ins and outs of PoE 2.

2) With these factors considered, do you think healing should revert back to Strength, or are you happy with the current system?

 

There's been a lot of debate about how much the fanbase should be making these threads (particularly when they're made by people without Beta access, aka me), and how much they are/aren't interfering with the devs' design processes.

 

I made this thread mainly out of my own curiosity (it's a question I'd like to see discussion on), but in terms of it impacting on the devs' decision making why don't we approach this topic as more or less operating as a independent focus group for the devs, which they can either use the feedback from or leave at the wayside at their own discretion? If the devs' have an overarching vision for attributes that they think will work in the long term, then by all means they should stick with that - I would never suggest otherwise.

 

If we're taking the focus group approach, I'd like to see as objective and logical arguments as possible on the mechanistic ramifications of both approaches, so I'd massively prefer it if people check all their "muscle wizards suxxed" arguments at the door. This isn't about those subjective arguments, it's about us trying to rationalise which approach we think has the potential to make a more mechanically fluent game.

 

Have fun!

Begs the question: why do we even need a stat that boosts spell/healing damage?

[Jojobobo]

 

So I wanted to make a thread to specifically target a singular issue, rather than the more wide-ranging debate on Strength, Resolve and Might. What I wanted to see opinions on (more for my own curiosity, as I don't have beta access) is, if we take the division of physical damage in Strength and spell damage in Resolve as set in stone, should healing still belong in Resolve?

 

Broadly speaking, I think how Might and Resolve played in PoE 1 was:

 

1) For offensive DPS builds, Might allowed for a degree of self-sustainability as it provided healing.

2) Tanks focussed on high defences, and so when you paired high defences to a middling Might for healing they would also be self-sustaining.

 

In PoE 2 from an outsider perspective, what it seems like from the raw mechanical changes to the stats:

 

1) Tanks now benefit more, as if you pump Res you get healing on top of Deflection.

2) Casters benefit way more, getting Damage, Deflection and healing.

3) Physical attackers lost any kind of defensive benefit, no longer being self-sustaining to any degree if they dump Res, which is a stat that is otherwise useless to them (while casters can dump Strength with zero cost, apart from a loss of Fortitude).

 

I guess I liked in PoE 1 that you can make any class self-sufficient to a degree without the need for a Cleric for support and healing, and you could do so this while making them maximally damaging - with both DPS and damage. It seems like in PoE 2, this is no longer the case, high damage + DPS melee attackers (dumping Resolve) will need some sort of cleric support for survival - or they will have to move away from maximal damage or DPS to have some Resolve and stay alive without a cleric. Casters on the other hand can go for maximal offences without any concern.

 

So I guess there's a couple of questions here:

 

1) Do you feel like I've accurately represented the current situation, or do you think I've exaggerated the problem, or not factored in larger interplay with healing? As mentioned, I don't have beta access, so I'd not thoroughly well versed in all the ins and outs of PoE 2.

2) With these factors considered, do you think healing should revert back to Strength, or are you happy with the current system?

 

There's been a lot of debate about how much the fanbase should be making these threads (particularly when they're made by people without Beta access, aka me), and how much they are/aren't interfering with the devs' design processes.

 

I made this thread mainly out of my own curiosity (it's a question I'd like to see discussion on), but in terms of it impacting on the devs' decision making why don't we approach this topic as more or less operating as a independent focus group for the devs, which they can either use the feedback from or leave at the wayside at their own discretion? If the devs' have an overarching vision for attributes that they think will work in the long term, then by all means they should stick with that - I would never suggest otherwise.

 

If we're taking the focus group approach, I'd like to see as objective and logical arguments as possible on the mechanistic ramifications of both approaches, so I'd massively prefer it if people check all their "muscle wizards suxxed" arguments at the door. This isn't about those subjective arguments, it's about us trying to rationalise which approach we think has the potential to make a more mechanically fluent game.

 

Have fun!

Begs the question: why do we even need a stat that boosts spell/healing damage?

 

Personally I'd say there's always a need for both yes, just not in the same stat necessarily (even if healing didn't go back to Strength, it went to Con for example).

 

As mentioned what I liked about PoE 1 was there were two separate (but not mutually exclusive) approaches to some tankiness - loads of healing or high defences. To have them concentrated in one stat has only served to over-simplify the defensive situation, much like people were complaining that when all damage increases belonged in Might the offensive situation was over-simplified, as by increasing Resolve you now have a one-size fits all approach to defence (compounded even more by offering an additional advantage - in spell damage).

 

I think there does need to be a stat that boosts spell damage too, otherwise it would be too difficult a task to moderate how damaging to make spells (even with some benefits tied to power level).

[Yosharian]

 

 

So I wanted to make a thread to specifically target a singular issue, rather than the more wide-ranging debate on Strength, Resolve and Might. What I wanted to see opinions on (more for my own curiosity, as I don't have beta access) is, if we take the division of physical damage in Strength and spell damage in Resolve as set in stone, should healing still belong in Resolve?

 

Broadly speaking, I think how Might and Resolve played in PoE 1 was:

 

1) For offensive DPS builds, Might allowed for a degree of self-sustainability as it provided healing.

2) Tanks focussed on high defences, and so when you paired high defences to a middling Might for healing they would also be self-sustaining.

 

In PoE 2 from an outsider perspective, what it seems like from the raw mechanical changes to the stats:

 

1) Tanks now benefit more, as if you pump Res you get healing on top of Deflection.

2) Casters benefit way more, getting Damage, Deflection and healing.

3) Physical attackers lost any kind of defensive benefit, no longer being self-sustaining to any degree if they dump Res, which is a stat that is otherwise useless to them (while casters can dump Strength with zero cost, apart from a loss of Fortitude).

 

I guess I liked in PoE 1 that you can make any class self-sufficient to a degree without the need for a Cleric for support and healing, and you could do so this while making them maximally damaging - with both DPS and damage. It seems like in PoE 2, this is no longer the case, high damage + DPS melee attackers (dumping Resolve) will need some sort of cleric support for survival - or they will have to move away from maximal damage or DPS to have some Resolve and stay alive without a cleric. Casters on the other hand can go for maximal offences without any concern.

 

So I guess there's a couple of questions here:

 

1) Do you feel like I've accurately represented the current situation, or do you think I've exaggerated the problem, or not factored in larger interplay with healing? As mentioned, I don't have beta access, so I'd not thoroughly well versed in all the ins and outs of PoE 2.

2) With these factors considered, do you think healing should revert back to Strength, or are you happy with the current system?

 

There's been a lot of debate about how much the fanbase should be making these threads (particularly when they're made by people without Beta access, aka me), and how much they are/aren't interfering with the devs' design processes.

 

I made this thread mainly out of my own curiosity (it's a question I'd like to see discussion on), but in terms of it impacting on the devs' decision making why don't we approach this topic as more or less operating as a independent focus group for the devs, which they can either use the feedback from or leave at the wayside at their own discretion? If the devs' have an overarching vision for attributes that they think will work in the long term, then by all means they should stick with that - I would never suggest otherwise.

 

If we're taking the focus group approach, I'd like to see as objective and logical arguments as possible on the mechanistic ramifications of both approaches, so I'd massively prefer it if people check all their "muscle wizards suxxed" arguments at the door. This isn't about those subjective arguments, it's about us trying to rationalise which approach we think has the potential to make a more mechanically fluent game.

 

Have fun!

Begs the question: why do we even need a stat that boosts spell/healing damage?

 

Personally I'd say there's always a need for both yes, just not in the same stat necessarily (even if healing didn't go back to Strength, it went to Con for example).

 

As mentioned what I liked about PoE 1 was there were two separate (but not mutually exclusive) approaches to some tankiness - loads of healing or high defences. To have them concentrated in one stat has only served to over-simplify the defensive situation, much like people were complaining that when all damage increases belonged in Might the offensive situation was over-simplified, as by increasing Resolve you now have a one-size fits all approach to defence (compounded even more by offering an additional advantage - in spell damage).

 

I think there does need to be a stat that boosts spell damage too, otherwise it would be too difficult a task to moderate how damaging to make spells (even with some benefits tied to power level).

 

> even if healing didn't go back to Strength, it went to Con for example

 

that is an excellent idea, only self-healing though, doesn't make sense for healing others to be boosted by the healer's con

 

it'd be a great way to boost the value of con

[MaxQuest]

The original problem was that once the devs took away concentration and interrupts from stats, that Resolve ceased to be useful. That issue should have been fixed by finding something for Resolve such as reduced duration of enemy afflictions.

Agreed. Resolve could get something useful.

But after fiddling with different attribute bonuses, am a bit wary regarding: "RES reducing duration of enemy afflictions".

 

In PoE1 it was rare to find an enemy with less than 8 RES, and there were quite a few with 17-18. Average RES of encountered creatures being around 13-14. And than there are also bosses with inflated stats (like Gafonerkos with 26 RES).

 

So what I am trying to say, that this change could potentially hurt our cc-focused characters, unless base duration of all cc-spells is increased by ~15%.

 

Btw, what do you think if RES provided a chance to upgrade the incoming inspirations and afflictions instead?

 

> even if healing didn't go back to Strength, it went to Con for example

 

that is an excellent idea, only self-healing though, doesn't make sense for healing others to be boosted by the healer's con

 

it'd be a great way to boost the value of con

Jumping on the "gief self-healing to CON" bandwagon.

Kidding, already there

[Ninjamestari]

I'd rather have self-healing as part of resolve than constitution if the choice is between those two. I think they should just take Perception as a stat away completely as that is way too important for everyone, and instead add a separate stat for magic damage, such as Wits.

[MaxQuest]

I think they should just take Perception as a stat away completely as that is way too important for everyone, and instead add a separate stat for magic damage, such as Wits.

Well, not completely for everyone...

A character can actively do one thing at a time: damage, heal, buff, debuff.

A dedicated support doesn't need PER for healing and buffing. In current beta, he can easily get away with something like: 3/17/18/3/19/18.

 

The stats are now more dumpable, hybrid melee/magic are nerfed as are healing melee and the net gain is ......... I'm not sure what was gained.

I'm still thinking of that change as an experiment.

During Beta1, melee phys dps was quite ahead of spellcasters. So one of the reasons why Obsidian did the change, could be because it nerfs flexibility and self-sustainment of such dps'ers, while buffing pure casters. The thing is though, that casters suffered not because of lack of deflection, but because they had close to no comparable impact, being too slow to decently contribute to the fight.

 

1) Do you feel like I've accurately represented the current situation, or do you think I've exaggerated the problem, or not factored in larger interplay with healing?

I think you've described it pretty accurately.

As for the second question: you didn't mention how big of a problem it is,.. so can't say if you exagerated or not ;p

 

2) With these factors considered, do you think healing should revert back to Strength, or are you happy with the current system?

Depends, what we compare.

 

Between:

v1: Beta2 with STR: +3% weapon dmg; RES: +3% spell dmg, +3% healing received, +1 deflection; and

v2: Beta2 with STR: +3% weapon dmg, +3% healing received; RES: +3% spell dmg, +1 deflection;

 

I would probably still choose v1. Because:

- healing coming from strength is a bit strange (although yes, this argument doesn't really apply, since you asked: from mechanical point of view)

- healing coming from strength would be in detriment for supportive spellcasters. Priests and Druids have quite a lot of healing spells. And if you don't need them to deal phys. damage, but want them only to buff, cleanse and heal your party, how would you achieve this?

 

Nevertheless, you have a point when speaking of reduced self-sustaining of some phys. attackers (like barb, fighter, monk). It was a bit odd to realize that athletics won't provide decent healing to a pure-dps monk I'm making.

 

A half-workaround could be make RES provide "+3% spell healing" instead of "+3% all healing".

While another variant would be to revert back to MIGHT, and give RES something new, something useful, as suggested by KDubya.

[Jojobobo]

Depends, what we compare.

 

Between:

v1: Beta2 with STR: +3% weapon dmg; RES: +3% spell dmg, +3% healing received, +1 deflection; and

v2: Beta2 with STR: +3% weapon dmg, +3% healing received; RES: +3% spell dmg, +1 deflection;

 

I would probably still choose v1. Because:

- healing coming from strength is a bit strange (although yes, this argument doesn't really apply, since you asked: from mechanical point of view)

- healing coming from strength would be in detriment for supportive spellcasters. Priests and Druids have quite a lot of healing spells. And if you don't need them to deal phys. damage, but want them only to buff, cleanse and heal your party, how would you achieve this?

 

Nevertheless, you have a point when speaking of reduced self-sustaining of some phys. attackers (like barb, fighter, monk). It was a bit odd to realize that athletics won't provide decent healing to a pure-dps monk I'm making.

 

A half-workaround could be make RES provide "+3% spell healing" instead of "+3% all healing".

While another variant would be to revert back to MIGHT, and give RES something new, something useful, as suggested by KDubya.

 

For me personally I don't think it's too conceptually weird it going back to Strength. If strength is now about being big and muscly, healing a few ways could be seen as knitting muscles back together (amongst other things) in some respects. I don't think the devs would need to explain too much to expand Strength's scope to incorporate healing.

 

Supportive spellcasters will presumably still keep some damage dealing spells, and therefore will likely have some Resolve for the spell damage and hence some Deflection (or you may just want to build them like a tank anyway, in which case still more Resolve and Deflection) so in some ways they have that in their camp, and can probably still muster some effective healing too with maintaining a base 10 level of the healing stat (if Survival bonuses are still a thing, or +healing items). If they are supportive, having both spell damage and healing would mean they can also deal some heavy hits on the side - which seems to compromise the challenge of making someone effective in a support role (because they do loads of damage too, so it's trivial to have them as both heavy offence and support at the same time).

 

While I like the idea of spell-healing belonging to Resolve on paper (and presumably ability healing belonging to Strength), I think practically this has some potential to get a little confusing if Deadfire maintains some healing abilities (Unbending, Savage Defiance) as "spell-bindings" on items. Still, I guess it wouldn't be too hard to rationalise and would be a better solution than the current state of affairs, so possibly it could be better (and feels more appropriate in some ways, if they're partitioning damage they may as well partition healing).

[SonicMage117]

I vote resolve, it makes more sense to me in Mage/Cleric language for it to be resolve vs strength... especially now that mutiple classing has been introduced to PoE players for the first time.

[dunehunter]

On the other hand, ties healing to Might will make melee dps build really powerful because they can not only do tons of damage, but also self sustain due to healing.

[Ninjamestari]

 

I think they should just take Perception as a stat away completely as that is way too important for everyone, and instead add a separate stat for magic damage, such as Wits.

Well, not completely for everyone...

A character can actively do one thing at a time: damage, heal, buff, debuff.

A dedicated support doesn't need PER for healing and buffing. In current beta, he can easily get away with something like: 3/17/18/3/19/18.

 

Yeah, but it's still a completely binary "all in" or "none at all" pick, at least  it was in PoE 1, so for me Perception is the prime candidate to be axed. Str can be made more interesting by tying it to using heavier equipment and armor in some way And Res is a wonderful stat to boost passive abilities, such as constant regen and paladin auras. You could even add duration to Resilience and add skillpoints to Int. The point I'm making here is that you don't need to think purely on "might" vs "str + res", as there are countless other options available to make the stats more interesting. Think outside the box people, the feeling I'm getting that neither of these supposed options is actually any good, so they should just both be canned and the whole thing thought over again.

[Jojobobo]

On the other hand, ties healing to Might will make melee dps build really powerful because they can not only do tons of damage, but also self sustain due to healing.

In PoE 1 you were a little hard pushed to entirely self-sustain without a big focus on healing (if your class lacked heal abilities, then you pretty much needed Veteran's Recovery, a +healing% item, using items with their own heals, and likely using the healing bonus from Survival too). This all comes at a cost of not taking other items, or having different Survival bonuses (+acc for example), and it ties up a Talent slot - making it a dedicated cost.

 

It seems like the PoE 2 makes casters super self-sustaining (Deflection and healing and damage), while melee builds classes get squat. I would say that by moving healing back to Strength, now both casters and melee classes are a little self-sustaining (one gets healing, while the other gets Deflection to tank and therefore needs less healing in the first place).

[CottonWolf]

I'm on the put healing on Constitution train, autoattack and weapon skill damage being on Strength, and deflection and "magic" damage being on Resolve, feels right, and it gives Constition a reason to exist.

[Jojobobo]

Yeah as mentioned putting it on a "neutral" stat, where taking it doesn't benefit either style of build so much, also works. I think my main reservation about adding it to Con is that it then makes your characters absurdly bulky if they take it, as characters get both healing and endurance from investiture - so it might become a balance issue itself. Still, Con definitely needs something.

[Raven Darkholme]

Self healing in Con would be fine balance wise, but it might be quite confusing to players new to this genre of games to have healing and self healing separate.

I keep hearing how people are confused by 4 different defence types, idk if it puts anyone off of playing the game in the end, but it totally might happen.

[Fashion Mage]

Something I tend to see people not mention is the fact that strength would still influence the damage one deals with implements or any ranged weapon (unless those count as spells for whatever reason). So it's not necessarily a dump stat. I'm fine with resolve affecting spell power and strength affecting weapon damage, especially as long as it gets rid of the muscle wizard/priest thing. Minor Blights and Spirit Lance were commonly-used and powerful spells in PoE1, so that already inspires some thought into whether strength would be useful or not on a wizard rather than just being a black or white decision.

 

Healing should be placed in resolve, or might if it comes back. Thematically it doesn't really make sense in constitution, and gameplay-wise I don't really see why a self-defensive stat should influence the effect of a primarily supportive mechanic.

Edited January 21, 2018 by Fashion Mage