Should multi-classing be more limited?

[tinysalamander]

All that numbers tweaks sounds attactive , however, lets take a look at roots.

 

From the game world mechanic point of view.

Spells are cast based on religion or high education (which is a science based religion).

 

Not really. Spells are cast because soul power in PoE. What you are affects how you manifest this power. Gods and religion itself has no power over it.

[JerekKruger]

*frenetically prays that this will not evolve into a discussion about religion*

 

But they're the best and most constructive discussions on the internet 

[MaxQuest]

The reason is hard to imagine a Christian + Muslim is...

... and I started to imagine how to multi-class one, and what the most fitting subclasses are...

[Boeroer]

Unitarian/Nahda with a focus on insight and diplomacy.

[JerekKruger]

... and I started to imagine how to multi-class one, and what the most fitting subclasses are...

 

Catholic Priest/Shia Rogue (Assassin)?

[CottonWolf]

 

All that numbers tweaks sounds attactive , however, lets take a look at roots.

 

From the game world mechanic point of view.

Spells are cast based on religion or high education (which is a science based religion).

 

Not really. Spells are cast because soul power in PoE. What you are affects how you manifest this power. Gods and religion itself has no power over it.

 

 

Yeah, just to add to this. While text of the game is rather equivocal about this in Durance's case, the pre-release information implied that priests abilities don't come from direct divine power tapped from a specific god, but rather the power of the soul of the priest, fueled by their own belief. So in theory, a priest in PoE could believe in anything. A really fervent athetist could be a "priest" if they wanted.

[Jorian Drake]

"Should multi-classing be more limited?"

 

No. This is a single-player game, let the people play as they wish with a large list of options and possibilities. In fact, I would say have some powerful enemy NPCs also use the full might of multiclassing.

[Boeroer]

The Skulking Terror approves this message.

[DozingDragon]

The only permitted multiclass should be the Wildrhymer. Keep on dropping those wild rhymes everybody.

[Boeroer]

"Whoop! Whoop!"

That was the Howler. So maybe he's too legit to quit as well?

[gGeorg]

Well - it's good for us that you are not the designer I'd say.

 

Besides that:

 

- Hiravias, Druid, follower of Wael

- Edér, Fighter, follower of Eothas

- Pallegina, Paladin, dislikes the gods

- Durance, Priest of Magran, VERY ambivalent attitude towards Magran

 

...PoE (with its classes, lore and characters) is obviously not like you think it is. Paladins are not necessarily god believers, but just zealous about a certain thing (read about Darcozzi Paladini). To practice animism doesn't mean you can't believe in the gods.

 

I can totally imagine a Christian + Muslim believer. Should be easy, it's the same god at last: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/i-am-both-muslim-and-christian/

Follower is very different from a dedicated person which has so strong believe that allows him do miracles, e.g. cast.

Lets shift to a more comfort area. I might be a beliver of Electronic and Fallower of PC. However, I am not a Bill Gates to make a mirracle. My belive is not strong enough.

Another example. There were a lot of Fallowers in Egypt but they needed a Moses to make water split. e.g. his strong belive allowed him cast spells.

 

Could you imagine a Moses crossclass to Budhism,   to be able cast a bit of  Budhist spells ?

Edited January 23, 2018 by gGeorg

[Boeroer]

Yeah well... Buddhist spells...   

Point is: one can easily explain any currently allowed multiclass combo with the PoE lore - where believing in the gods and being an animist are no opposites (see Hiravias and ALL other Glanfathans who have an animistic and tribal tradition but still worship the gods - with priests and all), where a paladin like Pallegina hates the gods - because paladins are not Holy Warriors like in D&D but just orders of warriors that fanatically follow an ideal that has nothing to do with the gods per se.

The combos that are not explainable, like Priest of Eothas/Bleak Walker and such are already ruled out. So no need to reduce the choice of the player any further.

Edited January 23, 2018 by Boeroer

[gGeorg]

Yeah well... Buddhist spells...   

 

Point is: one can easily explain any currently allowed multiclass combo with the PoE lore - where believing in the gods and being an animist are no opposites (see Hiravias and ALL other Glanfathans who have an animistic and tribal tradition but still worship the gods - with priests and all), where a paladin like Pallegina hates the gods - because paladins are not Holy Warriors like in D&D but just orders of warriors that fanatically follow an ideal that has nothing to do with the gods per se.

 

The combos that are not explainable, like Priest of Eothas/Bleak Walker and such are already ruled out. So no need to reduce the choice of the player any further.

"animistic and tribal tradition" there is the difference of Fallower and True beliver. As you said, they have Animists leaders AND Priests. They are not the same person. Its Animist beliver (caster) and God Fallower. Or a Priest (caster) who comply animistic tradition, he celebrates animists holidays for example.

 

Hate gods is very strong emotion. That is the point. Palegina is strong god beliver, devoted. And she hate them. That is ok. As in PoE lore, the spells are not direct power cahnnel from god. Are not given as a service. Casting rather rise from the power of soul who belives in something.

[Boeroer]

I made my point. No need to discuss this further.

Edited January 23, 2018 by Boeroer

[TomReneth]

From a practicality standpoint, it would probably make their lives less of a living hell when trying to keep it balanced to not have 11 classes that can be mixed nearly without limit. That said, doing it this way is ambitious and I look forward to trying it out.

 

And, of course, I look forward to the fireworks! I can't even begin to imagine how much this game is going to get rebalanced, since changing anything in any class is going to have ripple effects... O.o

[Raenvan]

Even without multiclassing, first priority should be given to balance single classes, which requires nerfing low-level strong passives among others. If all single-classes had comparable progression (roughly equally strong abilities on every level), multi-classing based on power levels could be automatically satisfactory in some degree.

 

It seems easier to me to balance 11 single classes than all their combinations, after all 

[CottonWolf]

Even without multiclassing, first priority should be given to balance single classes, which requires nerfing low-level strong passives among others. If all single-classes had comparable progression (roughly equally strong abilities on every level), multi-classing based on power levels could be automatically satisfactory in some degree.

 

It seems easier to me to balance 11 single classes than all their combinations, after all 

 

Don't nerf the strong passives. They're the only actually interesting ones. Besides, getting rid of the strong passives doesn't make multiclassing any less desirable, it just makes it moreso, because you have to look for real synergies to counter the decrease in power, which is something single classes can't do. The only way to solve that problem is to make passives less good for multiclass characters, but that means taking out any that cause step change effects, or putting them so late in the progression trees that multiclass characters functionally can't take them.

[Raenvan]

Don't nerf the strong passives. They're the only actually interesting ones. Besides, getting rid of the strong passives doesn't make multiclassing any less desirable, it just makes it moreso, because you have to look for real synergies to counter the decrease in power, which is something single classes can't do. The only way to solve that problem is to make passives less good for multiclass characters, but that means taking out any that cause step change effects, or putting them so late in the progression trees that multiclass characters functionally can't take them.

 

I also like passives, but some of them are simply too strong at their levels, especially if you compare them to same-level abilities of other classes. Overpowered multiclasses are often based on two of the best single classes, and - in some sense - work similarly to picking a single level for its huge bonuses in other games. Consider this example from other thread:

 

 

 

Consider what is in my opinion the best melee the Paladin/Berserker. They will always have carnage and the +20 defensive boost to everything that Paladins have. They will always have Frenzy and Flames of Devotion. They will have all of this at 2nd level.  This gets them extra damage, extra penetration, fire lash, extra attack speed, extra health, and better defensive boosts than four separate abilities would yield for defense, plus their attacks become AoE due to Carnage.

 

To fix this, the mentioned passives should be toned down (and upscaled later with power levels) to match other classes' low-level abilities. (Mechanically halving multi-class passives might not be enough.)

[Erik-Dirk]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consider what is in my opinion the best melee the Paladin/Berserker. They will always have carnage and the +20 defensive boost to everything that Paladins have. They will always have Frenzy and Flames of Devotion. They will have all of this at 2nd level.  This gets them extra damage, extra penetration, fire lash, extra attack speed, extra health, and better defensive boosts than four separate abilities would yield for defense, plus their attacks become AoE due to Carnage.

 

To fix this, the mentioned passives should be toned down (and upscaled later with power levels) to match other classes' low-level abilities. (Mechanically halving multi-class passives might not be enough.)

 

 

 

I don't quite follow your logic here; if passives scale with power level wont this mean multiclass passives will always be greater than 50%?

Mechanically halving passives for multiclass wont be quite enough by itself, as they will often build better upon each other, however while the higher tiered passives may not be better than lower tiers they are still useful which multiclass either get later or can't get. For this reason the Paladin/Berserker should be slightly more powerful before taking these into account. The issues is that currently they get 100% passive benefits which is obviously going to cause imbalance.

 

A straight 50-60% reduction to multiclass passives is worth exploring and likely easier to implement.

 

While resistances may be harder to implement there are always ways the ability can be modified.

E.g. Confuse immunity: Damage to allies is halved

       Paralyzed Immunity: Action Speed/movement is halved

       Armour penetration/Armour: Perhaps introduce 75% damage reduction for under penetration less than 1 or ability is applied 50% of the time

[IndiraLightfoot]

Don't nerf the strong passives. They're the only actually interesting ones. Besides, getting rid of the strong passives doesn't make multiclassing any less desirable, it just makes it moreso, because you have to look for real synergies to counter the decrease in power, which is something single classes can't do. The only way to solve that problem is to make passives less good for multiclass characters, but that means taking out any that cause step change effects, or putting them so late in the progression trees that multiclass characters functionally can't take them.

 

Instinctively, I must agree with this post, since multi-classing should be fun and creative and all that jazz. If we were to impose special passive ability penalties for multi-classed characters, it would just be a contrived downer, methinks.

But Reanvan is still right about some toning down too, for key passives, but very slight toning, please. This is a single player game. It should be fun, remember?

[Jorian Drake]

Yeah well... Buddhist spells... 

Onmyoji, ect

 

http://www.abuddhistlibrary.com/Buddhism/D%20-%20Chinese%20Mahayana%20Buddhism/Authors/Hsing%20Yun/On%20Magic%20and%20the%20Supernatural/The%20Buddhist%20Perspective%20on%20Magic%20and%20Supernatural.htm

 

A straight 50-60% reduction to multiclass passives is worth exploring and likely easier to implement.

I personally prefer passives over active skills usually, especially if a warrior or rogue character. A multi-class character is supposed to be equally trained/talented in its two classes, and only loses higher powers & abilities due to not focusing on only one of them. Why would the powers they get be less potent than that of other characters? These are supposed to be fully learned and/or trained, not just 50%.

Edited January 24, 2018 by Jorian Drake

[Boeroer]

I agree. The fun of multilclassing is to find synergies. If you find synergies and they are merely as good as a single char's things AND multiclass chars will have lower Power Level AND don't get the highest tier abilities: what's the point of multiclassing then?

 

Scaling with Power Level on the other hand can be a good thing to cushion the big impact things like Faith and Conviction will have right at the start of the game.

 

But not 50%! 

[Jorian Drake]

I agree. The fun of multilclassing is to find synergies. If you find synergies and they are merely as good as a single char's things AND multiclass chars will have lower Power Level AND don't get the highest tier abilities: what's the point of multiclassing then?

 

Scaling with Power Level on the other hand can be a good thing to cushion the big impact things like Faith and Conviction will have right at the start of the game.

 

But not 50%!

I think his intent is something like how the Bard class is usually depicted in early editions. However, a Bard now is equal to and in some ways better in things than other classes it was patched together from. It isn't anymore just a weaker version of multiple classes.

 

In fact, I think depending on multiclass combinations a character could gain an unique ability or two, like a Spiritualist could with chant get rid of possessing demons, or how a Mindstalker might be able to steal memories (to find treasure, to get the location of a chest's key), or a Seer getting a Vision power.

 

btw, I would probably still multiclass if it is weaker due to roleplay reasons, as how I imagine someone like a street urchin who stole to survive become a Cipher as well as she grows up. However, I don't like the idea of weakening, as earlier mentioned this is a single-player game, we don't even compete with other players in it and thus any such balancing isn't required to begin with.

Edited January 24, 2018 by Jorian Drake

[Erik-Dirk]

I agree. The fun of multilclassing is to find synergies. If you find synergies and they are merely as good as a single char's things AND multiclass chars will have lower Power Level AND don't get the highest tier abilities: what's the point of multiclassing then?

 

Scaling with Power Level on the other hand can be a good thing to cushion the big impact things like Faith and Conviction will have right at the start of the game.

 

But not 50%! 

I think your totally missing the point, 

As a simplified example lets pretend 3 classes receive a different passive but receive the same passive each level.

Character 1: 10% increased damage each tier

Character 2: 10% Increase attack speed each tier

Character 3: 5% increase in speed + 5% increase in damage.

The third character will obviously be the most powerful.

Therefore level 0 abilities could be nerfed by 50% and at the start of the game a multiclass will still be more powerful.

 

Now at level 20

Single class will have access to 10 tiers of passives

Multiclass will have access to 16 (8 if they're halved)

So yes multiclass are 20% weaker

 

Lets change the nerf to 62.5%

8*0.625=10

Therefore assuming relatively even value of the strongest class passives multiclass should be 62.5% of a single class. (not that far from 50%)

Ideally they should scale for balance; level 0 abilities should be 50%, tier 7 80% but I don't necessarily see this working.

 

We can also completely remove the slightly arbitrary power level penalty for multiclass.

Edited January 24, 2018 by Erik-Dirk

[Raenvan]

Option 2: Halve every passive for multiclass, This comes out with a slight advantage to multiclass when there is synergy, We could get rid of power levels and perhaps reduce the restricted access to only the highest tier.

 

 

To fix this, the mentioned passives should be toned down (and upscaled later with power levels) to match other classes' low-level abilities. (Mechanically halving multi-class passives might not be enough.)

 

I don't quite follow your logic here; if passives scale with power level wont this mean multiclass passives will always be greater than 50%?

Mechanically halving passives for multiclass wont be quite enough by itself, as they will often build better upon each other, however while the higher tiered passives may not be better than lower tiers they are still useful which multiclass either get later or can't get. For this reason the Paladin/Berserker should be slightly more powerful before taking these into account. The issues is that currently they get 100% passive benefits which is obviously going to cause imbalance.

 

A straight 50-60% reduction to multiclass passives is worth exploring and likely easier to implement.

 

You're right about multiclass passives being greater than 50% with power scaling. This might not be a big problem, though, I'd guess that ~70% would be still acceptable. Also agree that the straight reduction could be worth exploring, but I don't like the idea of getting rid of power levels completely that you suggested in a previous post.

 

Let me try to outline the expected effects of passives subject to power scaling.

1. At low character levels, say 1-6, multiclasses often remain better, since their power level is the same or just 1 below single classes. Hopefully not a big issue if the most overpowered passives are (selectively) toned down both for single classes and multis. No more +20 paladin defenses here, for example.
2. Power scaling hurts multiclasses in midgame, although their bonuses exceed 50%. The amount depends on the applied curve (simple proportional scaling, initial value+slope, etc.). Singles and multis might be balanced.
3. On high character levels (say 16-20), single classes can shine due to some high-level abilities not available to multis.

I'm not fully convinced that power scaling should affect all abilities, neither all passives. It'd be wise to start with a dozen of selected, strong, low-level passives first.