|
Will wands use Strength or Resolve to determine their damage?
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 07:27 |
|
|
Vermain posted:Will wands use Strength or Resolve to determine their damage?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
rope kid posted:Dialogue skills are used far more for checks than straight stats. I think that was true in PoE 1 too, ratio-wise. The issue was that most might checks were for things like 'break down the wall' and could be circumvented by having someone with high might in the party or using a hammer+chisel. Resolve was irreplaceable since your companions couldn't make the dialogue checks for you and it tended to give better rewards or alternate quest solutions. Its not really the raw numbers I'm worried about. Like "i can't break down this wall for a shortcut but Eder can"! and "My character doesn't have enough resolve to pass this check for a sidequest so now I'm stuck in a fight' are very different things even though there are an equal number of checks here. Zore fucked around with this message at 20:17 on Nov 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
rope kid posted:Yes. If it's a weapon-based attack, it uses Strength. So Flames of Devotion would be strength, while Sacred Immolation would be Resolve?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
Meyers-Briggs Testicle posted:I thought focus gain was based off of purely hit vs not hit so accuracy and attack speed were #1 for ciphers. It's based off damage too? Dick Burglar posted:So what counts as "spell damage"? I'm hoping that doesn't mean "anything besides auto-attack." I'd assume martial classes like fighters, barbarians and rogues' attack powers will be tagged for strength-based damage, but what about monks, rangers, and paladins? ...while we're being really experimental, do we really need both Str and Con?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
rope kid posted:Yes. If it's a weapon-based attack, it uses Strength. I can live with this. Ravenfood posted:...while we're being really experimental, do we really need both Str and Con? Been saying this for ages.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
Meyers-Briggs Testicle posted:I thought focus gain was based off of purely hit vs not hit so accuracy and attack speed were #1 for ciphers. It's based off damage too? yes, it's a function of damage (I believe 25% of damage dealt vs 35% in first game). This REALLY hurts for ciphers. Entropy238 posted:It's more or less willpower at this stage. Ravenfood posted:Also, Per still exists as a stat that helps you gain and spend Focus, and works pretty thematically with Ciphers as investigators to boot. The way the math works out on points to spend, prior to this change, as a Cipher, you basically wanted to max Int (for durations and AoE), then Per (because you HAVE to hit; accuracy is twice as important for a cipher as for everyone else, because you're rolling to-hit twice for each cast, once for the focus gain, once for the power cast). Then whatever points you could shave from Con and Res you could dump into either Might or Dex (roughly). Now you'll still have to max Int and Per, but will have to put points in Res AND might. You'll be stuck cutting from con and maybe dex but dex has a huge impact on damage and effectiveness too so there's no go resolution at all. It's just an acre of pain for the class, on top of what's already been done with the grazing removal and the much more stringently limited ability choices (fewer slots per level etc).
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
A little weird to call this change a move to "caster supremacy" since a lot of standard fighter and paladin builds (especially) would benefit immensely from high Resolve and any CC-oriented caster is still unlikely to put a ton of points in it.CottonWolf posted:So Flames of Devotion would be strength, while Sacred Immolation would be Resolve?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:It's just an acre of pain for the class, on top of what's already been done with the grazing removal and the much more stringently limited ability choices (fewer slots per level etc). To be fair, you could just buff the base deflection/accuracy of ciphers to make up for the loss. 5 Accuracy = 5 per, effectively giving ciphers an extra 5 stat points to mess around with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
I'm honestly not sure why we're introducing multiclassing and now walking back the good system that made multiclassing not lovely? Like goddamn does this screw over hybrid characters a lot unless you're going for Weapon/Weapon or Spell/Spell. And they're already built in weaker than single class characters with the delayed power progression. Entropy238 posted:To be fair, you could just buff the base deflection/accuracy of ciphers to make up for the loss. 5 Accuracy = 5 per, effectively giving ciphers an extra 5 stat points to mess around with. I thought everyone had equal base accuracy in Deadfire?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:The way the math works out on points to spend, prior to this change, as a Cipher, you basically wanted to max Int (for durations and AoE), then Per (because you HAVE to hit; accuracy is twice as important for a cipher as for everyone else, because you're rolling to-hit twice for each cast, once for the focus gain, once for the power cast). Then whatever points you could shave from Con and Res you could dump into either Might or Dex (roughly). Basically, if they're drastically changing how stats work, I don't think its unreasonable to think that numbers on specific abilities will be tweaked. Besides, I like systems that reward all-around success and avoid having dump stats and/or give a worthwhile benefit to every stat. Sure, it might be better to give my barbarian that +4 strength gauntlet, but if I give it to my Cipher instead, I'm still getting some decent benefit. In the old system, there wasn't too much of an advantage to equipping Resolve items on a any class that wasn't front-line, so just tank it and don't worry about it. Now there's a huge reason to. The more I think about it, the more I like the change provided there's some reason to not just turn every mage into the weakest thing on the planet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:24
|
|
|
Zore posted:I thought everyone had equal bases in Deadfire? Whoops, forgot that. Maybe through an ability then? rope kid posted:A little weird to call this change a move to "caster supremacy" since a lot of standard fighter and paladin builds (especially) would benefit immensely from high Resolve and any CC-oriented caster is still unlikely to put a ton of points in it. If this change goes through there's really very little reason at all to push for melee damage on Paladins imo – they already only hit about as hard as Chanters do. edit: assuming you're not going as part as a physical multiclass combo
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:24
|
|
|
I dislike the change
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:...while we're being really experimental, do we really need both Str and Con? I strongly support the merge Con and Str movement. Full iconoclasm. Bring forth the Body attribute. E: Always max Bod. CottonWolf fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Nov 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
Zore posted:I'm honestly not sure why we're introducing multiclassing and now walking back the good system that made multiclassing not lovely? This is the second, possibly third time in the past few weeks where I've stated a change, given a reason for the change, and within a page of posts someone says, "I don't know why this change is being made." Additionally, this is the time to try these changes and get feedback. We can sit back and theorize and do nothing; shrug our shoulders at an obvious weak point in the current arrangement; or try a new idea in the beta while we still have time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
Zore posted:I'm honestly not sure why we're introducing multiclassing and now walking back the good system that made multiclassing not lovely? Also, ropekid already brought up that it only affects spell damage, so a CC-focused caster can continue to ignore Resolve since they're going to be focusing on non-damaging spells in general. I don't know, I never really put too many points into Might for my Ciphers anyway. I used a few, sure, but they mostly went into Int and Per. I also just don't like min-maxing and tanking specific stats because I think its weird and video-gamey in general, so I never dumped Resolve, which possibly explains that. Resolve always seemed a bit weak in PoE1 since all it modified was a few defenses, the effects of which could be mitigated with positioning. This gives it some much-needed power and there are already ways to increase melee damage that also benefit spells (dex and per). Its ok if your hybrid has all-around decent stats instead of a few god-tier stats as long as the scaling isn't exponential or something like that, plus it makes the pure melee classes have a bit more identity in some ways. e: gently caress it, make it really simple and give diminishing returns with stat gains or do what early point-buy systems did and make really high levels of stats cost more points. There, hybrid characters are back on top of the pile, plus they have more options for getting the full benefits from magical equipment. Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 20:36 on Nov 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
CottonWolf posted:I strongly support the merge Con and Str movement. Full iconoclasm. Bring forth the Body attribute. There must be some RPG that uses Body, Mind, and Soul as attributes, but I can't think of one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
Cipher powers were more about buffs and cc than damage anyway (at least the way I played them) so that's not that much of a deal imo.Samuel Clemens posted:There must be some RPG that uses Body, Mind, and Soul as attributes, but I can't think of one. I want to say Jade Empire...? Soul might have been called Chi or something though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:Yeah, but before a bunch of moaning about specific class balancing happens, If I can't wail and gnash my teeth what is the internet even for Avalerion posted:Cipher powers were more about buffs and cc than damage anyway (at least the way I played them) so that's not that much of a deal imo. roughly half to two thirds of cipher powers do damage Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Nov 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
rope kid posted:I gave the reason in the tweet. The reason is to make resolve more desirable a trait, correct? I would argue it still isn't for most characters. Almost all the archetypes who dumped it in game 1 are still going to dump it; you don't need spell damage for Rogues/Monks/Rangers/Barbarians etc. Personally I would have experimented with moving things away from Int instead of might. Test having Resolve affect the length of buffs/debuffs which would make it valuable to just about everyone who doesn't want it for defenses while still leaving Int as desirable for AOE. This isn't supposed to be an attack on your design or some dumb 'change bad' thing, and I apologize if it came off that way. I just feel that the stated reason probably won't really make resolve any more desirable and fractures a system I liked in the first game. Betas are for testing things out though so, we'll see how it goes 
Zore fucked around with this message at 20:40 on Nov 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
Zore posted:Personally I would have experimented with moving things away from Int instead of might. Test having Resolve affect the length of buffs/debuffs which would make it valuable to just about everyone who doesn't want it for defenses while still leaving Int as desirable for AOE.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
rope kid posted:I gave the reason in the tweet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
rope kid posted:I think that leaves Int with a narrow niche. Rogues, rangers, and most monks would gain very little from it. Yeah, that's true, but as it is I can't really think of a reason to take new Resolve on a Ranger, Rogue, Monk or Barbarian. Sure it'll pump defenses, but it did in game 1 and people still completely dumped it on those classes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
On the bright side, you can now build spellcasting classes that are more or less as equally good at CC as they are dealing damage through spells. Typical stat spread for a Wizard might look like: Might: 6 Con: 8 Dex: 14 Per: 15 Int: 18 Res: 17 You can also wear a shield and be super-duper tanky and ward off aggro too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Zore posted:The reason is to make resolve more desirable a trait, correct? Though I do like the idea of separating AoE and duration from one stat because right now, that's a no-brainer for both attack and defense on anyone that tosses any kind of spell around. I like this idea better than the current change, even though I personally think it fucks ciphers over more than the current one. I also do think that while "might = damage" has a lot of gameplay benefits, it just feels difficult to conceptualize. e: rope kid posted:I think that leaves Int with a narrow niche. Rogues, rangers, and most monks would gain very little from it. Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 20:51 on Nov 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
frajaq posted:I dislike the change Yeah I'm disappointed in it as well. Having a universal +%damage attribute was a cool bit of unique flavor to PoE's system and I think made building characters a lot more intuitive. And I gotta say I wasn't a fan of separate weapon and spell damage attributes in Tyranny. I dunno maybe it'll turn out to be a great change but with it being a bit of beta experimenting hopefully Obsidian isn't locked in to the change if it doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
Entropy238 posted:On the bright side, you can now build spellcasting classes that are more or less as equally good at CC as they are dealing damage through spells. Typical stat spread for a Wizard might look like:
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
rope kid posted:An unintended but not entirely unexpected side effect of this is that a "traditional" caster built up with low Str/Con and high Int/Res will wind up with bottom-of-the-barrel Fort and fantastic Will defenses. Seems about right to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:56
|
|
|
Gobblecoque posted:Yeah I'm disappointed in it as well. Having a universal +%damage attribute was a cool bit of unique flavor to PoE's system and I think made building characters a lot more intuitive. And I gotta say I wasn't a fan of separate weapon and spell damage attributes in Tyranny. I dunno maybe it'll turn out to be a great change but with it being a bit of beta experimenting hopefully Obsidian isn't locked in to the change if it doesn't. It's difficult to move active/offensive stats to Resolve without them being taken from somewhere else or winding up being of marginal value to the overall class spread. We discussed a few other ideas, like Resolve accelerating the buildup of "natural" Concentration (i.e. everyone gets Concentration after enough time in combat has passed, but high Resolve gets there/regenerates faster) or the use of Empower being time-gated based on Resolve. The former is still defensive and the latter is of marginal value. Moving around existing bonuses that are already on attributes tends to drop them in value significantly. Might seemed the most resilient to splitting the bonus.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
With the Concentration stat gone, Resolve had zero value to me in the beta. So I'm pro-this change, though since I'm multiclassing a Barbarian most of my secondary stats were at 10 anyways.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
Paladins will be sick with this change. A Pally tank would want deflection, healing, and spell damage bonuses. To get all of that in one stat is kinda nice. Ditto for Priests/Druids. Multi classes will have to make a choice of what they want to do. If you're a Fighter/Mage for example, you can probably choose between having Str/Dex/Int and basically relying purely on summons and buffs or you sacrifice one of those in order to maintain respectable spell damage.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
Druids are gonna be a bit hard up for stats, actually. If you lean on wild shape you need a lot of STR, whereas if you focus on being a caster you need high RES. I guess you can build for both, but that means you're gonna have terrible CON and DEX probably. I still wish I could get wild shape without having to take the spellcasting side. I'd love to be able to hulk out and claw somebody's eyes out at a moment's notice, but I don't really care about flinging spells. Rope kid, give us a Lycanthropy feat or something 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
Woah. Weird to see might go. I was skeptical at first, when the PoE 1 beta dropped, but it grew on me. RIP might 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:Woah. Weird to see might go. I was skeptical at first, when the PoE 1 beta dropped, but it grew on me. Given that it still effects gun damage, I'd have named it Technique or something rather than Strength. But you can argue endlessly about attribute names (and we have). Samuel Clemens posted:There must be some RPG that uses Body, Mind, and Soul as attributes, but I can't think of one. gently caress. Now I'm imaging Pillars as a three attribute system with Body (Weapon Damage, Health and Action Speed), Mind (Duration, AoE, Accuracy) and Soul (Magic Damage, Healing, Empower). It'd be perfect given the setting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
I'm against this change but is there really anybody that gets hosed over by it besides Ciphers? (Assuming that damaging Cipher actives are of equal value as other options, which they mostly aren't right now.) Every other hybrid I've played so far didn't use damaging spells a lot. At most I expect this to be the last step needed to complete the ascension of Perception to the god of stats for offensive characters, Ciphers included. I guess for some Paladins it'll be an issue to not be able to get a big boost to heals and weapon damage anymore, maybe? e: I guess Druids really might have some issues here especially since Perception doesn't help their heals (which are good), but I never felt really strapped for stat points with them. Wizard Styles fucked around with this message at 21:54 on Nov 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
Wizard Styles posted:I guess for some Paladins it'll be an issue to not be able to get a big boost to heals and weapon damage anymore, maybe? Depends on the build. You can be an ultimate healy tank with Sacred Immolation running constantly with high Res now. Possibly bad for pure offensive Paladins given the damage of FoD and Sacred Immolation increasing off different stats. A Res/Int/Con Paladin would be an absolute beast though. Just a wall that things die in front of. CottonWolf fucked around with this message at 21:55 on Nov 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
It kind of makes sense, but now hybrid builds are a little bit harder to pull off. I liked being just as good at meleeing dudes as a druid as I am at blasting them with sunlight and grasshoppers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
gosh, baldurs gate 2 had strength and int as two stats, that must be why fighter/mage multiclasses were the weakest in the game! I like the idea that 10-20% physical/spell damage is the MAKE OR BREAK for some peoples class choices, oh god I do 18 damage instead of 21 RIP your jack of all trades builds, you can't be good at everything 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 22:04
|
|
|
rope kid posted:No, we're not locked into it. I think that's pretty solid reasoning, i'm glad the issues with resolve are being addressed. I think your other ideas are more interesting than splitting Might, though. What if you, like someone said, have Resolve now affect the length of buffs/debuffs, but then gave your natural concentration and empower time gate ideas to Int? Lore wise I think that works as well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 22:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 07:27 |
|
|
i like this change because now resolve is the goku stat to me instead of the get outta my head charles stat.
Iretep fucked around with this message at 22:11 on Nov 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2017 22:08
|
|