Nerfing single-class design to balance multiclass combinations...

[Hebruixe]

What do you guys think about this? Was it done right? Or did they screw it up? What would you change?

 

Personally I find it a bit frustrating. I prefer for roleplaying reasons not to multiclass, because it cheapens/dilutes the class fantasy. But sticking with an individual class now feels like a handicap, because they get so fewer spells & abilities per level. Especially if you choose a subclass like Fury or Evoker, which take away even more spells from your arsenal. This really bums me out.

 

I'm happy that multiclassing was done so well. Obsidian did a great job there. But I really wish that single-classing had gotten treated better.

 

I thought of a solution to the balancing predicament: Offer players superior subclasses that are exclusive to single-class characters (i.e., can't be used in multiclass combinations). That way they could be tuned to compete with multiclass awesomeness without being limited the necessary balancing restrictions of multiclass-capable subclasses. 

 

This could be as simple as, for example, adding a "POE1 version" of wizards, who were able to learn all of their class spells in the original game. That's fair, right? If you don't multiclass, you should be allowed to totally master the entirety of your class. The limitation of picking and choosing spells should be reserved for multiclass characters.

 

What do you guys think? Does something need to change or are you happy with how it is? Let me know below!

[pstone]

Its not that much of a handicap, in the beginning you start even (so multiclass are a bit better off), but later you start to get stronger power levels than the multiclass comparison and even later you get the best powers that are not even available to multiclass. That said, finding good combinations is a lot of fun, and power level isn't that important...

[SunDD]

No. There has to be a drawback to multi-classing, otherwise there will no incentive to choose a single class.

[Boeroer]

Single classes actually get more ability points than multiclasses.

[Dongom]

Monk single class is the most OP...

[Boeroer]

With Barbarian it's also hard to decide. It seems a single class barb is a great thing.

[Witness41920]

Single classes get more abilities throughout the game. 

 

Single classes can get their base power level up to 10 before any items or other modifiers (mostly important for spellcasters but works for others too).

 

Single classes advance their ability trees faster and can reach abilities that multi-classes can't.

 

Multi-classes get more abilities and can use them more frequently but ultimately they're less powerful (quantity over quality). 

 

In most multi-class combinations your defenses end up slightly worse than if you were a single-class and your health ends up slightly better (usually). 

 

I'd say it's a pretty even trade, honestly. 

[pi2repsion]

Single class get to use low-tier abilities at low levels, access to mid-tier abilities at mid character levels and high-tier abilities at high character levels. And while multiclass may start with more, they get more abilities as they progress in levels than multiclass so they end up with a bit more. In the end their abilities operate at power level 9 - 10 with if they pick Prestige - before other modifiers.

 

Multi class get to use low-tier abilities for most of the game and mid-tier abilities at high character levels. They reach power level 7.

 

So, no, single class has not been nerfed. Nor is it in a bad position compared to multiclassing in general. There are a few - a very few - multiclass combinations (using specific subclasses) that are very powerful due to combinations of passives and active skills from two classes and subclasses that are very, very, strong (and might be subject to balancing ), and there are some that are competitive with single classing, and certainly the element of fun in multiclassing two classes that don't work that well together but play differently shouldn't be ignored as an option, but in general single class is considerably more powerful than multi classing at medium and high levels due to the way the system is designed.

 

The advice at the start of the game to go with single classes as a new player is good. So many traps avoided.

Edited May 10, 2018 by pi2repsion

[evilcat]

So far i prefer current system.

In case of casters it could be better to go single class, for more power level, and higher level spells.

Martial classes are more tempting, since single may offer not enought cool abilities.

There are some combinations of subclasses which are really good, but it is also a joy to discover them.

As long as there is over the top difference of ease of playing vs enemies let it be. 

The prospect that there is 55 combination * all specializations is great. Really encourages to just roll 5 mercenaries with player builds.

Edited May 10, 2018 by evilcat

[ppscurry]

Single class wizard seems pretty strong to me on potd solo, one empowered wilting wind and the room goes boom. Fighting a dragon? No problem, throw a Crushing Doom and watch the dragon kneel throughout the fight! 

[Erik Dirk]

BG had the same problem for low level casters but the became powerhouses late game.

The only class I can't see getting properly balanced is cipher, even if they scale focus gain with power level a barbarian is still going to receive focus at a faster rate.

[flamesium]

Single classes seem plenty powerful to me. No doubt there are a few multi combos which are game breakingly good, but if people really want to try hard enough to find them in order to break the game for themselves then let them I say. The vast majority of players won’t play like that.

 

I think there still needs to be interesting choices even for a Single class character. Letting them master the whole class would be boring for most players.

 

They could have had a few abilities exclusive to single-classers spread across the lower levels to make them feel a little more specialised during early and mid game though. This would be a useful way of including abilities which might otherwise synergise ‘too well’ with abilities in other classes.

[evilcat]

There is a thing, that some classes could use some extra level 1 passive/active. Like FIghter or Rogue. You have some choice but not much. Monastic Order is niche, Speed is questionable. Arms bearer is ok, but sometimes you dont really need it.

Could be something generic like 4 defenses. Or +2 health per level. Even 4 weapon styles.

It is easy to find some good powers on Cipher (many options) but harder on rogue.

Edited May 11, 2018 by evilcat

[Balbanes]

Or just let characters save ability points to spend whenever they want. Most games let you do that these days.

[whiskiz]

What do you guys think about this? Was it done right? Or did they screw it up? What would you change?

 

Personally I find it a bit frustrating. I prefer for roleplaying reasons not to multiclass, because it cheapens/dilutes the class fantasy. But sticking with an individual class now feels like a handicap, because they get so fewer spells & abilities per level. Especially if you choose a subclass like Fury or Evoker, which take away even more spells from your arsenal. This really bums me out.

 

I'm happy that multiclassing was done so well. Obsidian did a great job there. But I really wish that single-classing had gotten treated better.

 

I thought of a solution to the balancing predicament: Offer players superior subclasses that are exclusive to single-class characters (i.e., can't be used in multiclass combinations). That way they could be tuned to compete with multiclass awesomeness without being limited the necessary balancing restrictions of multiclass-capable subclasses. 

 

This could be as simple as, for example, adding a "POE1 version" of wizards, who were able to learn all of their class spells in the original game. That's fair, right? If you don't multiclass, you should be allowed to totally master the entirety of your class. The limitation of picking and choosing spells should be reserved for multiclass characters.

 

What do you guys think? Does something need to change or are you happy with how it is? Let me know below!

 

"I prefer for roleplaying reasons not to multiclass"

 

Imo gameplay > ( > > > > > > > ) roleplay

 

Though i do think it's a good and fair idea to make non multiclass subclasses to balance soloclass, like your example of a subclass for soloclass that opens up all wizards spells, etc.

 

I guess that's where the Tier 8 and 9 abilities come into play, but that's basically end game before you see any compensation, which is unfortunate.

 

But only caring about it for roleplay reasons and not trying this awesome and new feature instead, is kinda..

 

Edit: Nvm apparently there's a few more benefits to soloclassing than just access to T8 and T9, it's just those other benefits seem much more subtle - unless expressly stated like here on the forums.

Edited May 11, 2018 by whiskiz

[Anaximander]

What do you guys think about this? Was it done right? Or did they screw it up? What would you change?

 

Personally I find it a bit frustrating. I prefer for roleplaying reasons not to multiclass, because it cheapens/dilutes the class fantasy. But sticking with an individual class now feels like a handicap, because they get so fewer spells & abilities per level. Especially if you choose a subclass like Fury or Evoker, which take away even more spells from your arsenal. This really bums me out.

 

While I can understand you concern, I think your argument is predicated on misinformation. The table below is a good source for understanding character progression between multiclass and single class characters:

 

• https://pillarsofeternity2.wiki.fextralife.com/file/Pillars-of-Eternity-2/new_multiclassing_table.jpg

 

As others have pointed out, single class characters in fact get more abilities than multiclass (1 more to be exact), have faster progression (e.g. accessing tiers earlier), and also gain access to 2 additional tiers of abilities (8 and 9).

 

Until I had the opportunity to test in-game, I was worried that multiclass characters would feel ability-starved, but I am happy to say it works quite well now that I've had time to experience the progression first-hand.

 

I honestly think the balance is very good in its current state; Multiclass characters gain flexibility (and have potential for great synergy) at the cost of deep specialization and access to more powerful options earlier - which also thematically makes sense as a trade-off.

Edited May 11, 2018 by Anaximander

[XANi]

With Barbarian it's also hard to decide. It seems a single class barb is a great thing.

You can go utility with him without losing much on damage

 

I've gone barb/cipher on story companion. Ability to mindcontrol one enemy, steal armor from another and then just smack them to death is great. Basically what you lost on damage you gain in buffs/debuffs