Combat too complex?

[Nail]

Same here!

 

The calculation of recovery speed alone is such an overly complicated coleslaw with double inversion and whatnot...

 

Casting times, per-encounter spells, endless recovery, rather complicated penetration mechanics, totally useless weapon modals... all that stuff makes this beta inferior to PoE - at least for me.

 

Just doesn't feel right. Maybe it's nostalgia or because I'm so used to play PoE that I'm totally biased - but at the current state it's just no fun. I really have to push myself to play it which was never the case with PoE.

I feel you.

[SkySlam]

The fact is that feedbacks are a mixed bag themselves.

A lot of players commented on some iteration of PoE before 3.0 and often without having played the White March, therefore they never knew the highest point of the game nor its final state. Some of the generic complaints are outdated, and I'd say that PoE was very well received in any case (Steam, Metacritic, Blogs etc.).

We know that the vocal minority of complainers is always louder than the majority which enjoyed it.

 

So about Deadfire I didn't like the party going down from 6 to 5 and some other minor tweaks, but I thought "ok, that could help simplification".

After the beta I have to say that combat-wise, Deadfire feels like a completely different game from PoE1, and I'm not sure that multiclassing is enough to justify that! I really don't see the point of changing THIS much!

 

My excitement for Deadfire was that this time around, from the very first playthrough, we could start from 3.0 onward!

Instead, we are back to 1.0, and that's really disappointing, because most of the things are far from set in stone, and I'm not talking about bugs or balance, I'm talking about important game mechanics, the basis of the game!

I suppose that the release date is just the beginning of the long trip to the final state of the game. I'm thinking about waiting another year before playing Deadfire, but I already know I won't be able to resist! Among other things (speed slider/attack-movement speed/casting time/resources), I find the Empower mechanic especially absurd and unjustified, both balance-wise and lore-wise. So much to fix and so little time!!

[Sedrefilos]

If we are at 1.0 that's fine by me. That was the version of the game when I finished it and I was ok with the combat at the moment

Yeah 3.0 was something else but I enjoyed Pillars vanilla nontheless. I'm sure I'll enjoy Deadfire too 'cause I won't go hardcore - I'll play in normal so maybe the weird complications of current combat sistem won't get in the way. Still, as SkySKlam says, I expected 3.0 quality at day 1.

 

Regarding dem feedbackz, what I get happened is this: Many people played Pillars, many people who might have an experience or background in rpgs but mostly action rpgs andthey expected something similar. Because let's face it: a-rpgs are keeping it simple and straightforward. You attack for x-y damage, opponent blocks an ammount determined by their armor. And that's how it goes for the vast majority of games in general. Josh wanted something more nuanced. He wanted to add a level of realism in it to keep thing more grounded and that's what I loved about Pillars 1 combat; it was gamey and realistic at the same time.

Now, may people that played the game gave feedback and said "eeeeh, the game was nice but dem grazes and dem combat rollz confuse me" or something similar

So the team takes that in mind and goes developing Deadfire. This time around they steramline what dem feedbackz rant about but go through China, adding other confusing stuff in the mix. But they do that because they still want that grounded, realistic feel to it! And that's the problem: you can't have both goddammit!

And here's another problem: Sawyer wants to make new things with rpgs and make them open to more people while at the same time keeps adding his niche ideas that are suited for more hardcore fans! And we end with something that both sides like and dislike at the same time, leaving everyone with the feeling that "it has the potential to be great but some way in the middle it looses it".

That was my feeling with Pillars 1. The game sounded great in pre-production, I loved everything they were heading for in regards to gameplay and roleplay and then I play the game and those two just didn't have a consistent quality throughout the end. Then after a year they fixed it with White March; well they fixed the White March content at least.

Now they deliver a more open world, more factions, more choices and concequences, more skills, better technology and I'm feeling they'r gonna underdeliver in mechanics because weird combat systems and non-usable attributes in roleplay :/

 

I know I'm gonna like the game a lot, just not as much as I though I would and really, really, REALLY want the team to make me regret I said these things right now.

Edited February 13, 2018 by Sedrefilos

[Wormerine]

April needs to come now. We are becoming paranoid.

 

As far as current system improvements I want clearer feedback. If something doesn’t work, I want to know why. If I am about to empower an ability I would like to know what it will do. If I add points to migh/resolve/dexterity, I would like to be able to figure out how it will influence my performance. Cant make conscious and satisfying decisions if the system is so obtuse.

 

Still as Sedrefilos said: I will probably enjoy my first play through regardless. I usually start understanding systems somewhere in the last 3rd of a playthrough. At this point, I am finally tackling deadly enemies and can’t powerthrough them. At this point you discover these nuances like items buffing constitution on your tank not stacking...

[-dib-]

Agree with the OP. Most of the time, wether I win or lose, I have no idea what’s going on in a fight.

 

Also, it may be an unpopular opinion but I’d like to see a removal of fractions. They make things less readable at a glance, for me at least. But I’m guessing they are used for balancing purposes which seems to precede everything else related to gameplay.

[daven]

Delete!

Edited February 13, 2018 by daven

[Madscientist]

I have played lots of RPG since the middle of the 1990s and I would not say that PoE2 is too complex.

I would rather say that many things are not explained well and the formulas are hard to understand.

 

In defense of the game I must say that the in game encyclopedia is not implemented yet,

but even if it was there like in PoE1, there are several information missing.

 

- The formulas are not there (damage, action speed, . . . ) and those formulas have become more complicated than in PoE1. The most importent change is the use of double inversion for penalties, which makes it impossible to calculate stuff without calculator.

 

- I think that the rules for PoE1+2 are easier to understand than the rules of the IE games, where PoE is their spiritual successor.

Lets look at hit chance. In PoE everything is acuracy - defense +1d100 and the result determines if it is a miss, graze, hit or crit. I think that is easy to understand.

In BG every char had a thcac0. This means " to hit chance armor class zero", so a char had to roll this number or higher if he wants to hit an enemy with armor class zero.  It was influemced by your class, your level, your strengh and your weapon profiency. for both numbers (thcac0 and ac) lower numbers were better. So a sword+2 or an armor+2 was better because it lowered these numbers by 2 points. Yes, every item that gave a bonus to something actually lowered that thing (except for stats, so a potion of strengh really increased your strengh, which could lower your thcac0). And stuff that made you worse increased the numbers (once again, except for stats).

You also had many different saving throws. So if you use the wand with the spell "death breath" that poisons the target, does it roll against the saving throw for wands, breath, death or poison? (The spell does not exist in the game, I just chose the most confusing example.) Lower saving throws are better. I am still not sure if a spell description says "spell uses saving throw vs magic -2", does this make it easier or harder to hit.

This is just one of several examples were PoE is easier to understand than other games.

 

- The good news is that most of these things are not really neccessary to know.

If you are not a power gamer who wants to create the ultimate char and you do not want to play on the hardest difficulty it is enough to know:

when you want to make a char who fights with weapons: give him lots of strengh, select abilities that raise your damage, acuracy and penetration, use buffs that increase these things for your party and cast debuffs that lower these things for the enemy, plus use CC effects on the enemy.

I was able to finish BG2 without knowing anything about the DnD rules (or knowing DnD at all, to be precise), and this knowledge plus positioning and some trail and error was enough to finish the game on normal. I admit that some battles were very hard for me and I fail them a lot even today ( liches, the battle where you can get the staff of the magi and some others). Ok, I did not beat the alpine dragon and the swamp dragons+archmage in PoE too.

 

- I agree that many information are transported in a bad way or even not at all. You should not need to look in this forum to understand the game mechanics. Everything should be found in the game. The in game encyclopedia is already optional (means you never have to look at it if you do not want to), so it does not hurt to put all information inside, including the formulas and some explanation to it.

 

- I do not understand why they changed the system from PoE1 to PoE2, especially the change from DR to penetration.

It was a long way from the initial PoE1 at release to PoE1 version 3+ with lots of changes in between. I think that the system of the final version of PoE1 is very good.

Why did they change so many things? Now they have to do the whole balancing and optimizing again from the start.

If they kept the stat system of PoE1, they could focus all their time on more and better content and new extras such as multi classing and world map exploration.

[Madscientist]

Agree with the OP. Most of the time, wether I win or lose, I have no idea what’s going on in a fight.

 

Also, it may be an unpopular opinion but I’d like to see a removal of fractions. They make things less readable at a glance, for me at least. But I’m guessing they are used for balancing purposes which seems to precede everything else related to gameplay.

 

Please keep the factions in the game.

 

Weather a group likes you or not has absolutely nothing to do with combat mechanics and their complexity.

[MaxQuest]

^ Initially read as factions too) But he meant fractions.

 

Currently the initial damage roll has decimals. Maybe that's what he is referring too.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Deadfire seems to be a lot more complex than PoE, and PoE was signifigantly more math heavy than I remeber the IE games being. That said, I think the issues are mostly bad and confusing stacking rules, lack of progression in the armor/penetration system, uneven application of power level, and recovery time.

 

Stacking rules would probably be the easiest to address, and should get a look immediately. It's unintuitive and dumb that the Paladin aura doesn't stack with the Fighter stance or that stacking an ability and racial doesn't give double resistance.

 

Armor/Penetration is good on paper but for whatever reason it didn't adjust weapons to fit the new system and caps the bonus/penalty. A solution to the penalty would be to have diminishing returns/penalties for being over/under the armor value so loading out on penetration isn't completely useless and there's some benefit to being only a little above the armor rating. I believe MazQuest had a chart with some sort of similar suggestion, but he has too many good ones to keep track of. Weapon balance is an issue in itself, but with the changes to armor the limiting factor for fast weapons has disappeared making them the best to use in most cases while negating the advantage 2-handers had, solving this within the current armor system could be done by giving 2-handers an inherent 2 higher penetration(making them suited to dealing with medium armor instead of light) as well as homogenizing weapon damage like in PoE so we don't end up with clearly bad options like the warhammer.

 

Power Level simply needs to affect more things. As of now, there is little reason for anyone but a caster using direct damage spells to use it on anything but replenishing resources. This would also even out multiclasses by giving them an actual disadvantage for most of their abilities.

 

Enough has been said of casting times, so I'll just say I agree with everyone that it takes too damn long to do anything in Deadfire.

[FreeKaner]

I agree completely that armour/penetration system is very needlessly abstracted. This is also considering that a flat reduction system works good in conjuncture with roll based system of defence rolls. I will never ever understand the removal of DR, especially since it was a minor issue with flat reductions in DR. A system where armour is flat reduction and penetration is percentage would just work better. You simply can't approach the asymmetric reaction of DR to damage/speed with a percentage based system. They should also bring back grazes for spells.

[anfoglia]

I think Deadfire's combat is, on the whole, more accessible for new players, but it's a small difference because the changes are a mixed bag and the game does not make a dent in the biggest obstacle -- communicating information to players.

 

I'll start with the streamlining choices that seem to have worked. Five-person parties are clearer and easier to manage without sacrificing too much tactical depth. Getting rid of per-rest abilities probably is helpful for people not schooled in vancian casting. Dropping the health/endurance split is simpler (even if I liked that mechanic). And inspirations/afflictions should ultimately be a clean system.

 

Other choices appear less successful. I suspect armor penetration will induce headaches in newcomers already fatigued from trying to learn a thousand other tiny icons and combat parameters. I know slash/pierce/blunt damage types/resistances for weapons and armor are fun for experienced players and those who enjoy realistic touches, but if Obsidian really wants combat to be more accessible, it should consider (in a future POE game--it's too late for this one) just collapsing the damage types or making the difference so small it's practically an easter egg (e.g., a hammer will do a flat 3 more damage to plate armor than a sword). Weapons have enough parameters and players have enough defenses as it is. When I started POE (as someone who had played some Pathfinder and muddled through BG2 but was not super experienced with IE games), this was the single most intimidating thing about the character sheet.  

 

Ultimately, however, these changes are marginal. The central challenge this kind of combat system has is communicating information to players. POE's UI was a significant improvement on the old IE games'. Deadfire's is even better (the character filter in the combat log is a particularly nice addition). And it's still not easy enough for a player to see why the Watcher did 32 damage or took 12. The OP described some behavior he couldn't understand. Others have pointed to unclear power level and empower effects. If the team had infinite resources (including time), I think one solution would be a far more hand-holdy systems tutorial accessible from the menu. Start with a one-on-one combat encounter. Automatically pause at every single dice roll and display the detailed view in the center of the screen. Walk the player through what happened and why. Slowly add party members and shift focus among mechanics (try attacking with this spear; try dual-wielding; try casting a spell). After finally working his or her way up to a full party, the player would be comfortable enough to follow the action without automatic display of the detailed combat log.

 

As to the separate debate about going from a 3.0 system to a 1.0 system, I'm basically okay with it. I mean, I happened to like where POE ended up. Like everyone else, I was excited that POE2 would be building on such a solid base that it could focus on creating huge amounts of high-quality content. The thing is, even with the dramatic systems changes, we're still getting huge amounts of high-quality content and major new systems like companion relationships, naval exploration, AI scripting, and multiclassing. And I think the combat is in a better place than POE 1.0. So it doesn't seem like the change has cost Deadfire anything I was really excited about.

Edited February 13, 2018 by anfoglia

[Guest Blutwurstritter]

One problem i have with the system of PoE is that there are so many factors that go into the optimization problem. In the IE games it was straightforward and the number of parameters was low. As examle take a melee fighter, all you needed was strength to hit/deal damage, dexterity for armor class and constitution for hitpoints. That makes 3 parameters with no interference and it did not require an excel sheet or online applet  to build a character as intended. 

In PoE it is not clear what combination of dexterity, might and perception gives good performance. You would have to solve a multi-variable optimization problem to get a clue, and it becomes even more convoluted if you try to include the effects of equipment, talents and traits, already assuming you knew the game mechanics in detail.

Does PoE2 improve this or is it still as convoluted as before ?

[Gfted1]

^Iirc, that's a "feature" and carries over to PoE2.

[anfoglia]

One problem i have with the system of PoE is that there are so many factors that go into the optimization problem. In the IE games it was straightforward and the number of parameters was low. As examle take a melee fighter, all you needed was strength to hit/deal damage, dexterity for armor class and constitution for hitpoints. That makes 3 parameters with no interference and it did not require an excel sheet or online applet  to build a character as intended. 

In PoE it is not clear what combination of dexterity, might and perception gives good performance. You would have to solve a multi-variable optimization problem to get a clue, and it becomes even more convoluted if you try to include the effects of equipment, talents and traits, already assuming you knew the game mechanics in detail.

Does PoE2 improve this or is it still as convoluted as before ?

 

I think the challenge of optimizing a build in POE is partly a byproduct of something POE does well -- the attributes are (generally) useful for any character and so a huge variety of builds are "good" in the sense of being viable.

 

I also think you may be overrating how straightforward optimizing was in the IE games. If you're a first-time player with no detailed knowledge of the game mechanics, how do you know what amount of DEX is "good enough" for a fighter? How do you know how far you can drop your mage's CON? (never mind advanced questions like "when should you dual class?"). I'm not sure a smaller number of useful stats for a given class actually answers much of the optimization question, and it brings real risks that a player will unknowingly create a build that is not just suboptimal but unworkable.

Edited February 13, 2018 by anfoglia

[Sedrefilos]

IE mechanics were mediocre the best. DnD any edition translates bad in computer games. Pillars is very clear as to how good you get with what when allocating attribute points, there's no doubt about that.

[Wormerine]

 

One problem i have with the system of PoE is that there are so many factors that go into the optimization problem. In the IE games it was straightforward and the number of parameters was low. As examle take a melee fighter, all you needed was strength to hit/deal damage, dexterity for armor class and constitution for hitpoints. That makes 3 parameters with no interference and it did not require an excel sheet or online applet  to build a character as intended. 

In PoE it is not clear what combination of dexterity, might and perception gives good performance. You would have to solve a multi-variable optimization problem to get a clue, and it becomes even more convoluted if you try to include the effects of equipment, talents and traits, already assuming you knew the game mechanics in detail.

Does PoE2 improve this or is it still as convoluted as before ?

 

I think the challenge of optimizing a build in POE is partly a byproduct of something POE does well -- the attributes are (generally) useful for any character and so huge variety of builds are "good" in the sense of being viable.

 

I also think you may be overrating how straightforward optimizing was in the IE games. If you're a first-time player with no detailed knowledge of the game mechanics, how do you know what amount of DEX is "good enough" for a fighter? How do you know how far you can drop your mage's CON? (never mind advanced questions like "when should you dual class?"). I'm not sure a smaller number of useful stats for a given class actually answers much of the optimization question, and it brings real risks that a player will unknowingly create a build that is not just suboptimal but unworkable.

Yeah, I think this is what PoE does well. What it doesn't do well is explain what description: "extra point of Dexterity adds +3% extra attack speed" means, and how does it interact with different weapons and fighting styles. The thread about action speed is still beyond my understanding calculating animations, recoveries, it's all a very tangled mess. 

 

I think PoE is fine on a basic level (having 60% hover over an enemy is way more readable to me than behind the scenes literal dice rolls) but when you try to understand its subtleties, it becomes very unaccessible. I still don't get how people achieve those insane DPS builds and how they find wizards to be underperforming. But then again, I thought I understand PoE system, and than dived into some of the thread here and I accepted that I know nothing.

[Madscientist]

One problem i have with the system of PoE is that there are so many factors that go into the optimization problem. In the IE games it was straightforward and the number of parameters was low. As examle take a melee fighter, all you needed was strength to hit/deal damage, dexterity for armor class and constitution for hitpoints. That makes 3 parameters with no interference and it did not require an excel sheet or online applet  to build a character as intended. 

In PoE it is not clear what combination of dexterity, might and perception gives good performance. You would have to solve a multi-variable optimization problem to get a clue, and it becomes even more convoluted if you try to include the effects of equipment, talents and traits, already assuming you knew the game mechanics in detail.

Does PoE2 improve this or is it still as convoluted as before ?

 

I think this is a feature and not a bug.

 

Both PoE and BG have relatively complicated rules, thats almost always true for large party based RPGs.

 

- Assuming you know the rules very well:

  + In the IE games it was easy to create an optimized char. Max out some stats and dump others. This is even more true if you know where to find what items. One of the first shops you find sells a belt that raises your strengh to 19 (but you had to collect some money to efford it). Some classes or class combinations are much better than others. Kensai->mage or ranger/cleric are good examples.

  + In PoE there were several ways to create a useful char of any class and you could discuss forever which one is optimal (pro tip: look which builds got the ultimate achievement ).

I think it is better when there is no obvious optimized coockie cutter build.

 

- If you do not know the rules well ( I think this is more importent for most players)

  + In the IE games it was very easy to create a bad build and for beginners it is hard to see which choice is bad. some examples:

  - Only very high or very low stats have an effect, nothing happens in the middle

  - How can a new player know that some classes are better than other, like a fighter->mage is good but a mage->fighter is bad.

  - The requirements for classes, multi classes and especially dual classes are really obstuse. Only human can be a paladin, only half elfs can be a ranger/cleric and you got to have      several minimum stats for dual classing. Other restrictions come on top of that. Why can clerics only use blunt weapons, which weapons can a fighter/thief use for backstab.

 

- In PoE it may be hard to create an optimized char, but it is easy to make a viable char.

Think a bit about what char you want to have and you will likely be able to create such a char. If your idea makes some sense your char will probably be able to finish the game without big problems. It is surely possible to make a bad char (ranged barbarian with low mig and int could be a good candidate), but unless you desperately try to be bad you should be able to create a useful char.

 

In general I like the concept of PoE much better than the concept of the IE games.

In the IE games it is easy to get an optimized char and it is also easy to make a very bad char.

In PoE it is easy to make a viable char but it is hard to make an optimized char and its also hard to make a bad char. I think this is much better and more interesting.

Edited February 13, 2018 by Madscientist

[anfoglia]

Yeah, I think this is what PoE does well. What it doesn't do well is explain what description: "extra point of Dexterity adds +3% extra attack speed" means, and how does it interact with different weapons and fighting styles. The thread about action speed is still beyond my understanding calculating animations, recoveries, it's all a very tangled mess. 

I think PoE is fine on a basic level (having 60% hover over an enemy is way more readable to me than behind the scenes literal dice rolls) but when you try to understand its subtleties, it becomes very unaccessible. I still don't get how people achieve those insane DPS builds and how they find wizards to be underperforming. But then again, I thought I understand PoE system, and than dived into some of the thread here and I accepted that I know nothing.

 

 

Like you, I don't really go in for the serious number crunching. I'm glad others do. Because if they and Obsidian can get the subtler elements to the point where they don't imbalance the game for casual players (on every difficulty level), then I'm basically fine with it all staying inaccessible to me. A dagger can secretly be better than a sword for X build as long as I, the naive player who looks at the rules and (reasonably) thinks a sword is a good fit for X, can pick one up and feel like it's powerful and works as intended.

[JFutral]

I think PoE is fine on a basic level (having 60% hover over an enemy is way more readable to me than behind the scenes literal dice rolls) but when you try to understand its subtleties, it becomes very unaccessible. I still don't get how people achieve those insane DPS builds and how they find wizards to be underperforming. But then again, I thought I understand PoE system, and than dived into some of the thread here and I accepted that I know nothing.

 

 

 

To me that is a big minus. It shouldn't take an applied mathematics masters degree to figure out to make a fighter who is strong enough wielding the weapon of their choice to do massive damage and take damage, AKA either Minsc or Dorn. Or how to make a wizard on par with either Edwin or Dynaheir. This is a simplicity that doesn't even exist in PoE I. Not that you can't build them, but it is a simpler design in BG/D&D.

 

I'm torn on how they have structured MC. It is nice to be able to multi-class ANY two classes. Sometimes it takes a bit more thought. I built a ranger/wizard and had to decide which one was going to be the primary class and use the second class secondarily as some added support. there was no way to distribute enough of the 15+ attributes all the related fields to come up with a power house at both. This time I opted for primary ranger, with some wizard spell support to handle CC with my wolf. Besides there are so many limitations placed on wizards, he was going to be a fighter most of the time anyway. The joy of casting spells is long gone.

 

In reality PoE was always _kind  of_ multi-class already. You could build a viable melee wizard that could continue to contribute even when spells were depleted. And there were those smaller versions of class specific skills, that added a bit of flavor. I think the Chanter is superior to the D&D/BG Bard. But in PoE I the wizard was still a wizard first.

 

Just some more musings.

 

Joe

Edited February 13, 2018 by JFutral

[CottonWolf]

Power Level simply needs to affect more things. As of now, there is little reason for anyone but a caster using direct damage spells to use it on anything but replenishing resources. This would also even out multiclasses by giving them an actual disadvantage for most of their abilities.

 

Everyone has their pet Deadfire mechanics issue. This is mine.

[Wormerine]

 

I think PoE is fine on a basic level (having 60% hover over an enemy is way more readable to me than behind the scenes literal dice rolls) but when you try to understand its subtleties, it becomes very unaccessible. I still don't get how people achieve those insane DPS builds and how they find wizards to be underperforming. But then again, I thought I understand PoE system, and than dived into some of the thread here and I accepted that I know nothing.

 

To me that is a big minus. It shouldn't take an applied mathematics masters degree to figure out to make a fighter who is strong enough wielding the weapon of their choice to do massive damage and take damage, AKA either Minsc or Dorn. Or how to make a wizard on par with either Edwin or Dynaheir. This is a simplicity that doesn't even exist in PoE I. Not that you can't build them, but it is a simpler design in BG/D&D.

Well, but building a melee combat specialist who hits hard, and can take a lot of hits is still easy - favour strength, resolve and constitution. Same with casters - resolve will give you the biggest boom. But they will suffer in other areas. Why have attribute system at all, if your class defines what attributes you have to take? At this point you might tie attributes to classes and not allow players to distribute them at all.

 

A big boon of PoE system is that, like me, you can create character by your roleplaying desires and have him work fine, even on a hard difficulty. I will leave min-maxing to rocket engineers.

[JFutral]

 

 

I think PoE is fine on a basic level (having 60% hover over an enemy is way more readable to me than behind the scenes literal dice rolls) but when you try to understand its subtleties, it becomes very unaccessible. I still don't get how people achieve those insane DPS builds and how they find wizards to be underperforming. But then again, I thought I understand PoE system, and than dived into some of the thread here and I accepted that I know nothing.

 

To me that is a big minus. It shouldn't take an applied mathematics masters degree to figure out to make a fighter who is strong enough wielding the weapon of their choice to do massive damage and take damage, AKA either Minsc or Dorn. Or how to make a wizard on par with either Edwin or Dynaheir. This is a simplicity that doesn't even exist in PoE I. Not that you can't build them, but it is a simpler design in BG/D&D.

Well, but building a melee combat specialist who hits hard, and can take a lot of hits is still easy - favour strength, resolve and constitution. Same with casters - resolve will give you the biggest boom. But they will suffer in other areas. Why have attribute system at all, if your class defines what attributes you have to take? At this point you might tie attributes to classes and not allow players to distribute them at all.

 

A big boon of PoE system is that, like me, you can create character by your roleplaying desires and have him work fine, even on a hard difficulty. I will leave min-maxing to rocket engineers.

 

 

All I am going to say is I pretty much disagree with everything you've said there. I don't see how it is less roleplaying with a slightly dimwitted gorilla who loves his hamster. Seems the heart of roleplaying to me.

 

Joe

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

I don't know yet if Deadfire is gonna be too complicated or not.

 

That sounds crazy -- if I haven't figured it out yet, doesn't that mean it's too hard? No, not really, because the rules can be as complicated as the tax code so long as the boil back to simple principles. For example, in PoE 1, the formulae for counting the relative benefit of stat points were extremely complex, but boiled back to "advance stats evenly, don't spike things too much", and it worked out.

 

If once the balancing and rules changes are figured out and settled down everything is reducible to some rules of thumb, that's all that's necessary.

[Silvaren]

Rules of PoE 1&2 are simpler to understand (in comparison to Infinity Engine games), but much harder to calculate. They were designed for computer RPG only - lots of percentage values and numbers difficult to duplicate via dice rolls. Very high numbers or multipliers.

 

For example casting times. In Infinity Engine games combat is quasi-real time. Truly it's turn based, but every character act simultaneously in individual rounds, which starting point is different on the timeline of combat, it depends on delay of a weapon or casting time (or initative in Icewind Dale 2 beacuse D&D 3). While playing IE games you know that each round last 6 sec and you know your character's attacks per round number, casting time of all spells etc. In PoE it's hard to calculate how long or how often you will cast spell with X Dex, X armor. Even if you know formula of actual attack speed and how modifiers aplly. Most power gamers from PoE community have been testing damage output in certain period of time etc.

 

I don't need this knowledge to finish entire game even on PotD. We have tools we can do anything. I'm now replaying PoE 1 once again and for the first time I'm searching for builds,exploits, synergies (with The Ultimate challenge in mind) and it feels like I'm discovering deep mechanics of PoE for the first time. Game provides crazy tools. I finished all infinity engine games with solo char (except Planescape Torment) without a sweat, but PoE seems harder, trickier. To make mechanically more than average character I have to combine optimal attributes, skills, class abilities, general talent and gear (gear separately is more complex and has greater impact on gameplay than in infinity engine games). Crazy tools for power gamers.

 

I can't find these tools in Deadfire - at least in current beta. Simple gear, no general talents pool, no passive abilities for priest and wizard. To scratch the surface of complex builds from first PoE I have to pick multiclass char and even then some subclasses are better than others and some abilities are too good, just no-brainer choices. Multiclassing is great for stricte RP concept of character too which can be build in the way it doesn't suck in combat and fulfil certain fantasy.

 

I miss old tools. Maybe PoE is too complex mechanically, but player doesn't need to know everything to win the fight. Casuals will play once or twice through the game, mostly for the story or characters, lore. Hardcore players will master the game, playing it over and over. More tools, the old ones, won't hurt bigger selling target.

 

Modals... as mastery skills with weapon of choice they seem to harsh, tradeoff with too little to gain, more like amateurs' endeavour. Only 1h spear has nice modal for tanks, scepter was awesome for evoker (boosting damage not only during autoattack but even with spells - I'm not sure if it works the same in current build, and range of scepter now ), maybe medium shield modal can be good or some penetration with huge penalties.

 

/sorry for bad english

Edited February 13, 2018 by Silvaren