Part size

[ravencrest1985]

Hello,

 

Im watching you tube videos of pillars of eternity 2 and I have a question. Is party size have been reduced to 5 ?

I understand that there are people who like playing smaller parties and this is fine, but in my opinion, there is better way then reducing party size and this is balancing game that allows playing diffrent party size with same success. The perfect example is baldurs gate , where you could play solo, or in group 2 or more characters without problems. Smaller group is leveling faster then larger. If someone likes smaller groups then he should recruit less people and his party should level up faster. Why limiting people who like to have big party size like myself ? I don't understand this solution , this issue could have been solved to make happy both groups of players :/ better balancing game for smaller team and faster leveling, but still giving opprtunity to have large party. Multiclassing feature  dosen't solve this , baldurs gate and icewind dale gave us multiclassing and didnt limit party size . Why reducing party size to 5 and make one group of players happy when you can rebalance game , keep party size 6 and make most players happy .

[Enoch]

Just a few of the many previous threads on party size:

 

https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/91215-only-five-party-members/

 

https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/94048-my-feelings-on-five-party-members/

 

https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/93142-five-man-party-idk-lets-discuss/

 

On part size, you'll just have to wait until he turns around.

[Wormerine]

Believe, there was a lot of outrage when it was announced and majority of people forgot about the "issue" once beta came out. You really won't feel the lack of the 6th party member gameplay wise.

The reasons for that are simple: Pillars of Eternity is a much more active game than IE were. In IE games majority of characters are passive, with exception of spellcasters. While in PoE you can choose between passive and active abilities when lvl up, a fully functional class will heavily rely on active abilities. 

It is much more prominent in Deadfire, as all abilities are per-encounter, yes, including spells, which means you will have a lot of stuff to keep an eye on.

Designing for larger team comes with a cost - a more busy enemy composition. It is not as simple as allowing people to run with 6 companions. There are quite a few people who would even like to run with all companions at once. 

For what it is worth - in Deadfire beta party of 5 felt great and at no point did I feel the lack of the 6th companion tactics or strategy wise. I am confident that there is absolutely no need for the 6th companion, except the "but it was different in IE games!". It didn't make the game any less complex. 

[hilfazer]

The reasons for that are simple: Pillars of Eternity is a much more active game than IE were. In IE games majority of characters are passive, with exception of spellcasters. While in PoE you can choose between passive and active abilities when lvl up, a fully functional class will heavily rely on active abilities. 

 

 

As Josh himself said we can build our characters (almost) completely passively. Not all classses but many of them. It's supposed to be viable choice.

6 party members wouldn't be too many if a player would build his party in a highly passive fashion.

Also, spellcasters require less micro because they have less spell casts and cast them slower.

Also, AI scripting of Deadfire can greatly reduce input required from player:

[Wormerine]

As Josh himself said we can build our characters (almost) completely passively. Not all classses but many of them. It's supposed to be viable choice.

6 party members wouldn't be too many if a player would build his party in a highly passive fashion.

Also, spellcasters require less micro because they have less spell casts and cast them slower.

Also, AI scripting of Deadfire can greatly reduce input required from player:

Some good points. I certainly disagree about casters. If you take a fight with dragon in PoE1 vs. fight in PoE2 than sure, but I am pretty sure that in couple beta playthroughs I have cast more spells than during my 250h with PoE1. In PoE1 casting is occasional, in Deadfire it's a regular thing. 

 

True, I always forget about the AI scripting. There is something about not playing the game that doesnt doesn't appeal to me. Still, if one asks for more party members but relies on AI scripting to not do stuff, then I would say that something is wrong in the game's design. You either want to make strategic choices or you dont. 

[hilfazer]

 

As Josh himself said we can build our characters (almost) completely passively. Not all classses but many of them. It's supposed to be viable choice.

6 party members wouldn't be too many if a player would build his party in a highly passive fashion.

Also, spellcasters require less micro because they have less spell casts and cast them slower.

Also, AI scripting of Deadfire can greatly reduce input required from player:

Some good points. I certainly disagree about casters. If you take a fight with dragon in PoE1 vs. fight in PoE2 than sure, but I am pretty sure that in couple beta playthroughs I have cast more spells than during my 250h with PoE1. In PoE1 casting is occasional, in Deadfire it's a regular thing. 

 

 

 

I'll explain it with a wall analogy.

In PoE1 you have to scale 20 walls, 19 of them are 0.5m high, one is 4m.

In PoE2 you also have 20 walls to scale but they are all 1m high.

Average height of a wall is way bigger in PoE2 but you succeed while you can't do same in PoE1. That one 4m wall just stops you.

Average isn't everything.

And there are also rest spammers who go nova in every PoE1 battle. We can't ignore them because they are the reason per rest spells and abilities are history.

 

 

True, I always forget about the AI scripting. There is something about not playing the game that doesnt doesn't appeal to me. Still, if one asks for more party members but relies on AI scripting to not do stuff, then I would say that something is wrong in the game's design. You either want to make strategic choices or you dont. 

 

 

AI scripting wouldn't be for people who want 6 party members but for those who find 6 too much to manage all by themselves (current target audience).

Edited May 4, 2018 by hilfazer

[ravencrest1985]

Hello,

 

Thank you for your response, I think the only thing left is wait for game release and enjoy. This reduction party size feels to my like, you were invited year ago to birthday party where there was a big XXL cake with lot of cream. This year you wait for such big cake, but when you arrive on party , cake is not only smaller, but without cream. Its like giving you something what was fantastic in previous game , pillars of eternity 1 and now taking it away. I think if somone didn't like 6 party size team in pillars1 , he could have 5 party members and problem is solved. Game didnt force player to have max team members, some people played it solo. I only hope that dosen't become trend and in next pillars 3 there won't be 4 members party size. 

[daven]

Like the others have said, at first there was outrage just because WE DON'T LIKE THINGS THAT'RE DIFFERENT! Then when it was explained and tested for ourselves we realised oh yeah it actually makes sense and is a better design decision.

 

Except for the few who are still outraged because WE DON'T LIKE THINGS THAT'RE DIFFERENT!

[TheisEjsing]

Hello,

 

Thank you for your response, I think the only thing left is wait for game release and enjoy. This reduction party size feels to my like, you were invited year ago to birthday party where there was a big XXL cake with lot of cream. This year you wait for such big cake, but when you arrive on party , cake is not only smaller, but without cream. Its like giving you something what was fantastic in previous game , pillars of eternity 1 and now taking it away. I think if somone didn't like 6 party size team in pillars1 , he could have 5 party members and problem is solved. Game didnt force player to have max team members, some people played it solo. I only hope that dosen't become trend and in next pillars 3 there won't be 4 members party size. 

This is the best damn metaphor I have ever seen! It almost brought a tear to my eye!

[HAWmaro]

I still hate it, and allways will.  But it' ultimatly not a big deal, 5 is not far from 6, If it was 4 then I won't get the game.

[Ganrich]

I still hate it, and allways will.  But it' ultimatly not a big deal, 5 is not far from 6, If it was 4 then I won't get the game.

 

I am ok with 5 too.  I would have been one of those raising a stink at 4.  I didn't like 4 in DA, and didn't like it in Tyranny.  Both of those are OK games, but I feel like with 4 you need a tank, a healer, a mage/ranged Damage, and a Rogue.   It feels too confining for interesting party compositions.  I always liked 6, but I can live with 5, and I enjoy it in the beta.  I hardly notice it anymore. 

[AlphaShard]

It really did bother me at first, but I can live with it so long as the game is balanced for it and it does seem that way. I know Josh loves to buck tradition anywhere he can. 

[Archaven]

For me 6 will be the best. There's a total of 11 classes. Not sure if it's possible to add more classes? Animancer or Necromancer anyone? I highly doubt it. With 5 characters limit we can only cover all 10 classes if all were to be multiclassed. The 6th can actually cover the last class pure class of your given choice in my opinion. This is important to people who just want to play the game once and experience all of it's classes and get as much out of everything in 1 playthrough.

Edited May 5, 2018 by Archaven

[JerekKruger]

I don't like cake so I guess that's why I'm fine with the change.

[gloomseeker]

If it means that pathfinding won't be such an issue then I'm all for it. 

 

Reducing the party size did work in Tyranny although it did lower the scale of battles a bit too much IMHO. 

 

But yeah, six is the sweet number. Too bad we have to lose a spot. 

[JerekKruger]

Six is a perfect number.

[AlphaShard]

I don't like cake so I guess that's why I'm fine with the change.

 

 

Six is a perfect number.

 

Contradicting statements?

[JerekKruger]

Contradicting statements?

 

Not at all. I didn't say it was the perfect number of characters for a party, just that it's a perfect number

[Sedrefilos]

5 was always the magic number for me. WoW nailed it before everyone else

[Boeroer]

It's 'High Five', not 'High Six', right?

[kanisatha]

Like the others have said, at first there was outrage just because WE DON'T LIKE THINGS THAT'RE DIFFERENT! Then when it was explained and tested for ourselves we realised oh yeah it actually makes sense and is a better design decision.

 

Except for the few who are still outraged because WE DON'T LIKE THINGS THAT'RE DIFFERENT!

Or those for whom having companions to take along with you on your adventures is a huge part of their enjoyment of the game and now they have one less of those companions to take along. Enough with the straw man of people being unhappy over things being different.

[daven]

 

Like the others have said, at first there was outrage just because WE DON'T LIKE THINGS THAT'RE DIFFERENT! Then when it was explained and tested for ourselves we realised oh yeah it actually makes sense and is a better design decision.

 

Except for the few who are still outraged because WE DON'T LIKE THINGS THAT'RE DIFFERENT!

Or those for whom having companions to take along with you on your adventures is a huge part of their enjoyment of the game and now they have one less of those companions to take along. Enough with the straw man of people being unhappy over things being different.

 

Well is 7 party members better than 6?

 

Where does it end?

[HAWmaro]

 

 

Like the others have said, at first there was outrage just because WE DON'T LIKE THINGS THAT'RE DIFFERENT! Then when it was explained and tested for ourselves we realised oh yeah it actually makes sense and is a better design decision.

 

Except for the few who are still outraged because WE DON'T LIKE THINGS THAT'RE DIFFERENT!

Or those for whom having companions to take along with you on your adventures is a huge part of their enjoyment of the game and now they have one less of those companions to take along. Enough with the straw man of people being unhappy over things being different.

 

Well is 7 party members better than 6?

 

Where does it end?

 

Yeah and 4 makes the combat "more fluid" than 5, and with 3 it's even better /sarcasm.  Where does THAT end? I guess we could just have a solo game without party.

Edited May 5, 2018 by HAWmaro

[daven]

Soz then, no need to be like THAT!

[HAWmaro]

sorry couldn't resist