Josh Sawyer's tweets and teasers, part 2

[Boeroer]

I have not seen the high level spells nor do I know which impact the earlier gain of higher level abilities will have in the early/mid/late game. Therefore I can't say if a single class nuker is better or worse than a multiclass one. I can only say that Fury/Evoker was fun to play in the Beta (with MaxQuest's casting speed mod).

[SaruNi]

lol

 

Has nothing to do with “authority”. Has everything to do with who is in a better positon to know what they are talking about. Replace “Josh” with “anyone who has seen the full game” and tell me that this is still an appeal to authority.

 

Josh admits he doesn't know for certain: "Multiclass casters can very easily wind up with redundant spells if players don’t think carefully about what options are available to them.  A sorcerer who takes AoE damage spells from both the druid and wizard lists is probably not going to be as effective as a single-classed druid or wizard doing the same."

 

If higher level spells (taking casting time into account) or single-class boosting trinkets definitely made single-class significantly more powerful, he wouldn't need to qualify it by admitting that he's not certain. And the reason he gives---redundant spells---seems inconsistent with what he previously said was the main issue his developers were finding with casters, running out of spells. 

 

High-level spells not in the beta will presumably only be applicable late in the game, and (again) be limited by long casting times. While it's possible that there are early to mid game items that make single class superior, it doesn't seem especially likely.

 

The idea that the head game designer can't possibly have made a logical or empirical error about an aspect of the game he hasn't empirically examined is partly an appeal to authority. (Appeals to authority generally contain the assumption that the authority does in fact know better than what otherwise available logical or empirical evidence suggest. Like many "argumenative fallacies" it's not necessarily fallacious, except as part of a rigorous deductive proof.) 

[Achilles]

I have not seen the high level spells nor do I know which impact the earlier gain of higher level abilities will have in the early/mid/late game. Therefore I can't say if a single class nuker is better or worse than a multiclass one. I can only say that Fury/Evoker was fun to play in the Beta (with MaxQuest's casting speed mod).

Were you duplicating spells between classes?

[SaruNi]

 

I have not seen the high level spells nor do I know which impact the earlier gain of higher level abilities will have in the early/mid/late game. Therefore I can't say if a single class nuker is better or worse than a multiclass one. I can only say that Fury/Evoker was fun to play in the Beta (with MaxQuest's casting speed mod).

Were you duplicating spells between classes?

 

 

Josh specifies "AoE damage spells from both the druid and wizard lists"---so he doesn't seem to just be referring to taking spells which target the same defense or do the same type of elemental damage.

Edited March 22, 2018 by SaruNi

[Achilles]

 

Has nothing to do with “authority”. Has everything to do with who is in a better positon to know what they are talking about. Replace “Josh” with “anyone who has seen the full game” and tell me that this is still an appeal to authority.

The idea that the head game designer can't possibly have made a logical or empirical error about an aspect of the game he hasn't empirically examined is partly an appeal to authority. (Appeals to authority generally contain the assumption that the authority does in fact know better than what otherwise available logical or empirical evidence suggest. Like many "argumenative fallacies" it's not necessarily fallacious, except as part of a rigorous deductive proof.)

I’m assuming that you’re familiar with the term “Strawman” as well.

[Achilles]

 

 

I have not seen the high level spells nor do I know which impact the earlier gain of higher level abilities will have in the early/mid/late game. Therefore I can't say if a single class nuker is better or worse than a multiclass one. I can only say that Fury/Evoker was fun to play in the Beta (with MaxQuest's casting speed mod).

Were you duplicating spells between classes?

Josh specifies "AoE damage spells from both the druid and wizard lists"---so he doesn't seem to just be referring to taking spells which target the same defense or do the same type of elemental damage.

Jesus.

 

He goes on to say that the multiclass *does* make sense if you’re self-buffing with one class and then nuking with the other. How much clearer does he need to be in order to break through your wall of pedantry? I’ve never seen so much devotion to parsing a tweet before.

 

You love the concept. Good for you. Play it upon release and then come back and tell us all how amazing it was. Just please admit that you’re ****ing guessing right now though.

[bleedthefreak]

A difference between "viable" and "optimal" 

[SaruNi]

A difference between "viable" and "optimal" 

 

Anyone on Twitter care to ask him if he's taking the effect of lashes on spell damage and the longer casting time of higher-level spells into account?

Edited March 23, 2018 by SaruNi

[Gromnir]

A difference between "viable" and "optimal" 

quote from earlier in the thread: "thankfully, 'cause o' poe/deadfire rules flexibility, relative bad builds is still gonna be viable and even fun."

 

...

 

is possible am being being punk'd by josh, but am s'posing it is possible this is one o' those rare issues 'bout which the two o' us is simpatico.

 

 

am s'posing the only question is whether Gromnir is fulfilling betelgeuse role or adam maitland. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[DexGames]

Josh Talk // GDC Slides :

http://paranoidproductions.com/miscwritings/RulesOfTheGame2018.pdf

[Page 126 for his part of the Talk]

[illathid]

 

 

lol

 

Has nothing to do with “authority”. Has everything to do with who is in a better positon to know what they are talking about. Replace “Josh” with “anyone who has seen the full game” and tell me that this is still an appeal to authority.

I would argue someone who has played the class combo in question is in a better position to know what they're talking about regardless of whether the have seen the full game or not.

That person is making assumptions off of partial data. No one know what more than half the levels look like.

 

 

Both are making assumptions off of partial data. The full data set would include both what all level look like and how it actually functions in play. Given the imperfect nature of both sources, it's perfectly valid to prefer one to the other as neither has total authority.

[Achilles]

 

 

 

lol

 

Has nothing to do with “authority”. Has everything to do with who is in a better positon to know what they are talking about. Replace “Josh” with “anyone who has seen the full game” and tell me that this is still an appeal to authority.

I would argue someone who has played the class combo in question is in a better position to know what they're talking about regardless of whether the have seen the full game or not.

That person is making assumptions off of partial data. No one know what more than half the levels look like.

Both are making assumptions off of partial data. The full data set would include both what all level look like and how it actually functions in play. Given the imperfect nature of both sources, it's perfectly valid to prefer one to the other as neither has total authority.

1) Josh admitted that he hadn’t played it therefore made it clear he was extrapolating.

2) I’ll take a educated guess over an uneducated one any day.

[illathid]

 

 

 

 

lol

 

Has nothing to do with “authority”. Has everything to do with who is in a better positon to know what they are talking about. Replace “Josh” with “anyone who has seen the full game” and tell me that this is still an appeal to authority.

I would argue someone who has played the class combo in question is in a better position to know what they're talking about regardless of whether the have seen the full game or not.

That person is making assumptions off of partial data. No one know what more than half the levels look like.

Both are making assumptions off of partial data. The full data set would include both what all level look like and how it actually functions in play. Given the imperfect nature of both sources, it's perfectly valid to prefer one to the other as neither has total authority.

1) Josh admitted that he hadn’t played it therefore made it clear he was extrapolating.

2) I’ll take a educated guess over an uneducated one any day.

 

 

1) Not sure what your getting at here.

2) But why do you consider one to be educated and one to not be? Both are missing some pretty fundamental information about the nature of the thing in question. This actually reminds me of an mind experiment about epiphenominal qualia. Given this, I have a feeling we may just disagree about this at a fundamental philosophical level and so further discussion would be useless. Happy to continue if you'd like though.

[Achilles]

1) if we’re going to talk in terms of “guessing” (which I don’t think is accurate); Josh admits that he is whereas the people posting here are claiming to know.

 

2) Because one designed the game and has played it in its entirety. He has *access* to all of the information, though he hasn’t hasn’t taken the time to *apply* it to this specific example. Or to put it another way, the portion of information that he is “missing” is significantly smaller than anyone who has played the beta. Thought experiment: Level 20 wizard has access to a fireball spell that is twice as powerful and when empowered is half the casting time of the vanilla spell. He knows this. None of the theorycrafters do. Right now it might seem even money re: who is right, but after the game ships it becomes obvious that he was right all along. What’s the “right” move here? Reserve final judgement until *all* the information is available.

[SaruNi]

1) if we’re going to talk in terms of “guessing” (which I don’t think is accurate); Josh admits that he is whereas the people posting here are claiming to know.

 

 

WTF seriously? I made it very clear from the beginning and consistently throughout our discussion that we don't know, and listed several plausible factors (i.e. extremely powerful high level spells, or lashes no longer applying to spells) that could make multiclass nukers definitively suboptimal. 

 

The beta does give us good logical and empirical reasons to believe that Josh's guess may be mistaken though. Sure, the final game could be so radically different from the beta that any conjectures count as a "completely uneducated"; but it seems at least as likely that Josh isn't taking some of the game's counterintuitive features into account. (For example, intuitively one would think that higher power level makes a single-class wizard's AoE nukes do more damage than a multiclass casting the same spell, but the effect of druid and priest lashes on spells makes that false. Likewise, one might assume higher-level spells are much better than lower-level spells, but the combined effects of level scaling and higher-level nuke spells having longer casting times and/or situational restrictions makes that questionable, especially in short to medium length fights. Perhaps the rest of the higher level spells don't follow that pattern---it's possible, but seems unlikely.)

 

Seems like you're projecting your own issues onto this discussion tbh.

Edited March 23, 2018 by SaruNi

[Achilles]

The beta does give us good logical and empirical reasons to believe that Josh's guess may be mistaken though.

This right here. The beta gives us a good logical and empirical look at what’s possible up until level 9. Everything past that is conjecture.

 

The fact that you’re more comfortable positing that *anyone* (emphasis added, just in case you feel like trotting out “appeal to authority” again) who has played the full game is wrong rather than you is the problem.

[SaruNi]

 

The beta does give us good logical and empirical reasons to believe that Josh's guess may be mistaken though.

This right here. The beta gives us a good logical and empirical look at what’s possible up until level 9. Everything past that is conjecture.

 

The fact that you’re more comfortable positing that *anyone* (emphasis added, just in case you feel like trotting out “appeal to authority” again) who has played the full game is wrong rather than you is the problem.

 

 

Oh ffs. Now you're retreating from misrepresenting your past posts with "all I'm claiming is we don't know, they're claiming they know!!" to your original "how dare you question the head game designer!!" now barely veiled behind the desire to avoid a blatant appeal to authority. Do you agree that we don't know, or are you just bsing because you want to "win" an argument on the internet? Either way, not going to bother with you anymore unless you present logic and evidence rather than whiny ridiculous outrage and derogatory labels.

[Achilles]

Now you're retreating from misrepresenting your past posts with "all I'm claiming is we don't know, they're claiming they know!!" to your original "how dare you question the head game designer!!" now barely veiled behind the desire to avoid a blatant appeal to authority.

I’m questioning your reading comprehension skills now. You just accused me of making the argument I went out of my way to state that I was not making, because you got confused on the same point earlier.

 

Appeal to Authority: believe what this person says because [title]

 

What I am saying: give more credence to person with more information than person with less.

[Achilles]

Bestiary/UI stuff

 

https://twitter.com/jesawyer/status/977271838442164224

[illathid]

1) if we’re going to talk in terms of “guessing” (which I don’t think is accurate); Josh admits that he is whereas the people posting here are claiming to know.

 

2) Because one designed the game and has played it in its entirety. He has *access* to all of the information, though he hasn’t hasn’t taken the time to *apply* it to this specific example. Or to put it another way, the portion of information that he is “missing” is significantly smaller than anyone who has played the beta. Thought experiment: Level 20 wizard has access to a fireball spell that is twice as powerful and when empowered is half the casting time of the vanilla spell. He knows this. None of the theorycrafters do. Right now it might seem even money re: who is right, but after the game ships it becomes obvious that he was right all along. What’s the “right” move here? Reserve final judgement until *all* the information is available.

 

Ok, I've found our point of disagreement. I would disagree that Josh necessarily has access to more information than the people who have actually played the class combo in question. Actually playing a class or class combo can give you information that isn't apparent from a purely academic standpoint. I would argue that to a third party it's impossible to tell which is actually more or less information. So you're right that we should withhold judgement until all information is available, but at the same time it is not illogical to trust one source or the other more.

[Achilles]

That is indeed our point of disagreement

[Enoch]

Tumblr post on naughty bits.

 

Edit:  Unlike most things that could be described as I have above, this link is work-safe.

Edited March 26, 2018 by Enoch

[The Sharmat]

Will Hiravias' question finally be answered?

[InsaneCommander]

Will Hiravias' question finally be answered?

 

 

So it seems. And who knows, maybe a miracle happens and after some time you find an egg in your room.

[The Sharmat]

On release day, a legion of waifu enthusiasts will be dismayed to learn the nudity rating refers solely to statues of the angler-fish headed local rendition of Ondra. Minus one very particular group of fetishists, anyway.