|
Yinlock posted:i'm currently at the early game "dying to a stiff breeze" stage though Wear heavier armor. Melee ciphers can gain focus WAY faster then ranged ones - yes, even blunderbuss ones - but have the downside of being, well, melee, and thus in harms way. Honestly, most characters should wear heavy armor. Wizards and rangers can get away with super light armor if they're pure artillery and druids don't care becaues they follow their ABCs (Always Be a Cat), but for everyone else in early to mid-ish levels, grab that plate. Then your cipher gains Defensive Mindweb and you no longer worry about things like "armor" or "survivability" or "dying" Also the only downside to five characters is one character less banter, though that is a hefty downside. I mostly worried about what NPCs to take based on who I thought/hoped would have interesting poo poo to say rather then mechanics.
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2017 14:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 05:08 |
|
|
I'm kind of entirely ok with Avellone not being involved. He's been vanishing more and more up his own rear end in a top hat for awhile now, and while he gets the occasional hit, he also has a ton of misses, and he's gotten way worse at essentially just rewriting the same characters and themes again and again. Grieving Mother was terrible because she had basically no connection at all to the rest of the game, and when you look at the "what was cut" notes, it looks like she was, in fact, even worse at one point. Durance was an "interesting" NPC but, to be frank, the only reason he's bearable at all is because everyone else in the game dunks on him nonstop, and if he had any other voice actor nobody would care about him. Also Lonesome Road was bad and Ulysses was a bad character who was almost purely just Avellone ranting at you himself about how much he's come to hate the setting (because Avellone NPCs all boil down to him hating something personally, or a character being miserable and being punished for caring about things). My one mechanical worry with the 5 NPC party is that it references the idea of "the classic party plus one!" but that "classic party" isn't, like, a thing in Pillars. The D&D party boils down to "tank, skills, healer, wizard," and ignoring that it hasn't been that since like 2e either, Pillars doesn't have a "skills" class, doesn't really have a singular dedicated "healer" position, and "spellcaster" has ALWAYS been useless as a descriptor. Is my Chanter a spellcaster, or a healer, or a tank? He's in heavy armor, applies steady health regen to everyone around, and summons things. In fact, "tank" doesn't exist at all as there's no actual concrete way to force enemies to attack any one specific character.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2017 23:39
|
|
|
Druids are basically only half a class if you never spiritshift. As was mentioned, you can cast the various lightning storm spells then spirit shift and the storm spells will continue to hit. A lot of their spells are melee or cones for a reason. Druids should never be hiding out in the back.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2017 04:08
|
|
|
Nasgate posted:So im doing a silly stilleto and board rogue build for fun. I know one handed style used to stack with sword and shield. Has that been changed? If not, that's 5% better than vicious fighting. They do not stack. Sword and board can work for rogue...when you hit the expansion and grab one of two medium shields that has a special property with bash. Otherwise, you're losing your single target DPS, which is the only actual thing rogues can be good at. Basic thing to remember: shield on it's own lowers your DPS but raises your defenses, as it excludes a second weapon or a two hander. A shield with the Bash property absolutely destroys your DPS, as it mangles your attack pattern. However, a shield with bash applies the bash whenever you do a full attack, which is why either Dragon's Maw or the Spell Thrust shield are good with rogues and/or barbarians in spite of being bash shields.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2017 11:21
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:I did - I said that they feel very similar, not that they "play the same", because they are casters that use the same casting system. Spiritshifting is hardly unique, either, since you can also make a muscle wizard quite easily. Why are you being such a prick about this? Magnitude. You aren't quite grasping that spiritshift druid, coupled with the two wildstrike talents and the belt, turn you into the biggest single target damage dealer in the game. By like, a lot. This isn't just "you do a bit more damage," this is flat out "you will outdamage everyone in your party guaranteed." That's without the lightning storm spells going. Then you add the fact that the lightning storm spells require absolutely no maintenance at all, and congrats, you're essentially now two characters. And they ALL use shock, so grab that talent to make your damage even more absurd. But what you're also missing is the nature of the spells themselves. Druids want to be up close. It's where all their best spells work. Think about the wizard, most of their best spells. All are at range. But the best druid spells require they be close to the enemy; they're cone spells, or an AoE centered on the druid. So druids, far more then the other two classes, WANT to be close. To put it another way: Wizards CAN be muscly and go to the front, though most of their stats inhibit this. Priests CAN be muscly and go to the front, and are generally fine, but can also hold back and throw out support. Druids need to be on the front lines to be successful. This isn't even touching on the fact that druids are the best at offensive damage spells, wizards the best at more controlling debilitating spells, priests the best at support spells, mind you. I mean, I get it. All three use the same core system. And that would be an issue if there weren't other options. But there are. I mean, poo poo, don't get me wrong - I think fighters and rogues still need more active toys they can play with, and to be frank both of them are near the bottom of effectiveness at least in part for this exact reason. But there are tons of alternatives to Vancian casters - you can play the entire game without interacting with that mechanic once.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2017 11:29
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:I dunno, I think you're overstating how important front-lining is to a Druid and how meaningful a difference that is to gameplay. The most playtime I had with a Druid was in PotD, so the "front line" was pretty nebulous anyway, but the actual decisions I made with her were pretty much the same as those I made with Aloth in my first run - assess encounter strength, pick 1-3 spells, target AoE for max effect and fire away, repeat until rest. Maybe you're bad at using druids? Like, all your arguments appear to be "Druids are fundamentally the same as wizards. I know this because I always played my druid the same way I played my wizard." And like, sure. That's your call. But don't come whining about it when you're the one who did it that way. Incidentally, one good thing about a five man team - maybe enemies can be challenging without resorting to just vomiting crowd control on you nonstop? I actually do get complaints that a priest still feels needed - not because of healing, but because so many encounters end up just being "These baddies are hard because they stun/charm/dominate/entangle/whatever you, nonstop!" It's not even so much a "challenge" as it is "a real big irritation." I've been replaying and I hit Durgan's Battery and boy do I love fighting Sirens that just mix between mass paralyze and stun! It's the loving worst come on ropekid you know this is garbage gameplay
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2017 14:48
|
|
|
The actual best change that could be made to PoE2 as far as graphics go isn't making the characters look better, it's giving each one a toggle to show their helmets or not.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2017 02:39
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Incidentally, one good thing about a five man team - maybe enemies can be challenging without resorting to just vomiting crowd control on you nonstop? I actually do get complaints that a priest still feels needed - not because of healing, but because so many encounters end up just being "These baddies are hard because they stun/charm/dominate/entangle/whatever you, nonstop!" It's not even so much a "challenge" as it is "a real big irritation." I've been replaying and I hit Durgan's Battery and boy do I love fighting Sirens that just mix between mass paralyze and stun! Hi, repeating this because I'm still replaying and going through Longwatch Falls, just to reiterate, gently caress off with enemies who's only challenge is constantly stacking paralyze or stun. There is a difference between fights that are challenging (I enjoy the hell out of that last fight in Durgan's Battery with all the dwarf statues) and fights that exist only to irritate you (everything involving lagufaeths). I feel like the problem was thus. Hard CC was the best option for players to take; slicken was the champion level 1 spell, not anything that did damage, for a reason. The response to that appears to have been "Ok, now the baddies also you mass CC." All this does/did was create an arms race where you either win too easily because every enemy is controlled, or you just stare at the screen and wait for your characters to be able to actually act. Both answers are garbage! Less crowd control in general please.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2017 03:16
|
|
|
oswald ownenstein posted:BG/IWD style MP is probably not as hard as you think. It has nothing to do with the in-game mechanics and everything to do with the actual game engine. They've said before that their engine is NOT built for multiplayer in the slightest. It ain't happening.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
Michael Bayleaf posted:Is there a better melee damage choice for my first play through? I figure if I like it enough I'll play it a billion times like I have baldur's gate so I'll save a pure spell caster for later GENERAL MELEE CLASSES: Barbarians are the masters of getting into the middle of a fight and making everyone inside die. They do not have the best burst damage or single target damage, but every attack hits everything around them - and later, you get Heart of Fury, which makes one enemy and all the enemies around them just melt. Barbarians clear trash like no other, and if you get weapon with special effects on them, can throw that on everything in sight. Some of the funnier barbarian builds turn them into awesome tanks. PLAY A BARBARIAN IF: you want to hurt lots of things around you, you don't want to worry about status effects, you want to tank things be using a rapier, you like shredding things with your weapons. The NPC Barbarian is Maneha, who you get somewhat later in the game and even then only if you have both expansions. She is fun and flirts with Pallegina and has amazing armor. Chanters are technically melee classes in that they can (and should) melee, but they don't really get any bonuses for it and have no direct weapon attacks. They are generally just kinda ok until level 9, at which point they set everything around them on fire forever. Their invocations let you summon more friends, or do blast attacks at enemies. Chanters are extremely low management; turn on your chant and let them do their thing until they have spat enough fire to use an invocation. NPC Chanters, far as I know, are still bugged in ways that make them just terrible. PLAY A CHANTER IF: you don't want to pay that much attention to your class and/or don't want a lot of confusing moving parts, you want to set everything around you on fire forever, you like summoning more friends without daily spell requirements. The NPC Chanter is Kana Rua who is a fresh behind the ears college graduate who really, really wants to have grand adventures and is like a small puppy in his excitement. You get him extremely early on. Ciphers can be played both at range and in melee; the latter gets more focus faster, but of course, is riskier. Ciphers build up focus as they attack, which you can spend on mental effects; they're sort of the game's "psionics." Most of their effects involve either stealing an enemy's stats to make yourself better and them worse, or using mind control; while ciphers do have a limited amount of direct damage spells, they are typically far better off pushing for debuffs, stat stealing, and single-target crowd control. Unfortunately, they have no direct weapon attacks. Ciphers have the most unique dialogue options in the game. PLAY A CIPHER IF: you enjoy having lots of things to manage in each encounter, you want to throw around effects without being bound to daily spells, you like having a lot of unique dialogue options, you want to turn enemies against each other one at a time, you like buffing yourself at the expense of another. The NPC Cipher is Grieving Mother who is loving terrible, and you get her pretty late on if you even bother to pick her up. She is boring and interacts with nobody. Fighters are what most people think of when they think "melee." Fighters are above and beyond all else extremely dependable; they don't have many abilities, and they tend not to be very exciting, but the ones they have are respectable and almost always hit. Fighters are the kings of consistent DPS; they lack the burst or AoE of other classes, but make up for it by being extraordinarily good at not dying while being equally extraordinarily good at killing whatever is currently in front of them regardless of what's going on around them. Fighters do not require much babysitting, much like Chanters, and can to some degree be fire and forget. Later, they get charge, which is loving awesome. PLAY A FIGHTER IF: You like being extremely tough, you want to never worry about requiring status effects or circumstantial bonuses, you like knocking baddies on their asses, you like charging straight through enemy ranks to stab their squishes, you like big armor and big weapons, you don't want to manage a lot. The NPC Fighter is Edér who is the best NPC who is always by your side and is super down for everything with his wry farmer charm, even with his god being dead. You get him almost immediately once the proper game starts. Monks are probably the most active non-caster in the game. In theory it's simple; the more you get hurt, the stronger you get and the more powers you can unleash. Of course, eventually you have to decide if you want to KEEP wounds which power passive abilities, when to spend them, which powers to use, etc. Monks are, like barbarians, very tough in that they have a very high health modifier rather then having a high deflection modifier. Monks can use weapons (and can be extremely good with them), but can be just as good bare handed. They can also unleash absolutely incredible amounts of damage, and nothing stops you from monking it up in heavy armor. PLAY A MONK IF: You like getting stronger the more you get hurt, you like having a wide array of abilities for different situations, you like punching things in their stupid goddamn faces, you like a class with a good level of complexity without being overwhelmed. The NPC Monk is Zahua, who is only available in the DLC, but easy to get mid-game. He loving loves suffering and  Paladins are a strong mix between standard melee and support. Paladins are typically extremely good at alpha striking - making a single extremely powerful attack - though rear end in a top hat Paladins (Bleak Walkers) can be amazing at consistent damage as well once they get two specific items. With paladins, one should generally figure if they want to skew harder into attacking others or supporting allies, though a good paladin will have a mix of both (ALWAYS get Liberation Exhortation). PLAY A PALADIN IF: You like firing a gun really loving hard at someone before joining the melee, you want your dialogue dispositions to matter more then they would to others, you like leading the rest of your team into battle and supporting them as you fight, you enjoy being an effective force multiplier while not casting spells. The NPC Paladin is Pallegina, a bird lady from the Vailian Republics, who is pretty cool and fun to have on your team, and can actually be pretty warm and respectful (sometimes) if also very opinionated and proud. You'll get her in early mid-game. Rogues are in a rough spot. Their claim to fame is meant to be murderous single target DPS, but that's not a position you entirely require in PoE, especially when so many fights involve mass swarms of enemies. They're squishy in a game where you can't really tank, they have very few good character builds, and a good amount of their super single target DPS gets wasted because of overkill. While other classes have gotten buffed over time and got amazing new high level abilities, Rogues got left behind hard. I generally do not recommend them. Nonetheless, here we go: rogues operate by doing extra damage to targets that have negative status effects, and they themselves can apply a limited number of those status effects, although generally they will need other NPCs to step in to help. This greater damage can get higher and higher depending on situational powers taken, making rogues something of an assassin class. PLAY A ROGUE IF: you want to care a lot about inflicting status effects on enemies with others, you believe there's no kill like overkill, you really want to dual wield, you want to be real loving precise about where your character is so you don't get stomped. The NPC Rogue is The Devil of Caroc, a pretty cool and interesting character were it not for the fact that she is absolutely loving terrible mechanically. She requires the DLC and you get her semi-late in; she will likely be your last NPC. Note that unless you play on PotD, you have a lot of leeway. PoE is not an overly difficult game, so don't feel like you have to minmax, or that you can't play as a rogue, or that you can't have the Devil of Caroc on your team.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2017 11:18
|
|
|
Agreed. Rogue schtick of "single target awesome damage" just isn't one that comes up a ton, and there's heavy diminishing returns on it in the first place. People love to brag about their killing blows, but those mostly involve lots of damage being wasted on overkill. And outside of that, they don't...provide anything else. I feel the monk chassis isn't entirely unworkable, but it starts from a place that doesn't exist (which is why I was nervous about the five man team being described as a "traditional D&D team plus one more" - that team doesn't exist here!). There isn't room for "squishy but damaging" in a game where enemies will all gravity towards killing squishy and there's little to no tools to stop that. But even beyond that initial chassis, rogues need more oomph. Like, consider high level powers. Right as fighter starts to drift out, they get Charge, which is amazing. You can charge directly through the enemy line and stab every squishy THEY have without fear. Barbarians get Heart of Fury which is just amazing in every way. But rogues? Rogues get extremely situational escape methods. And I get what they were going for - again, the rogue is more of an assassin then anything else; pick target, murder, run away - but that doesn't need doing, and thus the escape methods aren't really useful. Rogues don't need more ways to escape the fight, because they have to be IN the fight to actually do their job in the first place. It's just very confusing design that doesn't click with the rest of the game. The rogue feels like it came from a different game and got stapled in. EDIT: Defensive Mindweb might be the most powerful ability in the entire game. Sure, it makes monks less good. But it doesn't matter. Because you're invincible.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2017 12:15
|
|
|
Furism posted:Also, don't roll a Godlike. Their racial bonus are not enough to compensate for the lack of head slot. This is only true if you have no NPCs. If you are not playing solo this is unbelievably wrong; fire godlikes can do absolutely absurd damage, moon godlikes never die. If you ARE solo...then it's still hard to weigh the pros and cons.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2017 14:40
|
|
|
Samuel Clemens posted:Say what now? They'll just...stop chanting. At least, Kana does. And he just starts suddenly having multiples of the chant I gave him. It's weird. Harrow posted:I'd say monk is probably the most. Melee wizard is very "hit buttons" but I found that a lot of the buttons you hit are self-buffs, and that's not really my style. I'd much rather do the monk thing where you start out relatively passive but eventually just turn into a flurry of "press button, awesome thing happens" once you get a few wounds. As much as I enjoy cipher for it's dialogue options and always end up going melee, it suffers hard from having no weapon attacks, which puts it in a similar position as the wizard. It can self-buff and debuff and give some crowd control, but it's weapons will never matter beyond grabbing more focus and auto-attack DPS. If you want a melee class with lots of stuff to do and a focus on melee, the answer is monk every time.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
3e style multiclassing is a goddamn sin and the best they can do here is make it Less Terrible. Sorry not sorry.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 05:31
|
|
|
Clever Spambot posted:Given the two main options i prefer the 3e style system because it is as complicated as you want it to be. If you want it to work like the 2e style multiclassing you can just alternate each level because (ignoring the weird exp splitting between classes with different level values crap) that is functionally what it did. Allow me to illustate exactly why 3e's multiclass system is a pile of garbage: No it does not functionally do that. At level 2, you will be a level 1 fighter and a level 1 wizard. Ok, sure. Same as with 2e multiclassing. At level 4, you are a level 2 fighter, and a level 2 wizard - except in 2e, you'd be level 3 in both. Uh oh. By level 20, you are a level 10 fighter and a level 10 wizard, which is downright crippling, because you are HALF the levels of everyone else. Because the levels STACK NOTHING! And because you can't do both at the same time! You have one action - you can Fighter, or you can Wizard. And you're terrible at both! Your character is fundamentally useless in every way possible. In AD&D 2e, that same character is likely level 18 in both, and guess what? They can Fighter pretty good, and they can Wizard pretty good - not at the same time, and not better then a pure class wizard or fighter - but good enough that they add to the table. See, what 3e missed - ok, no, one of the manner things that loving awful engine missed - is that not all levels are created equally. In fact, they're pretty specifically unequal. Level 20 is worth more then level 10. Like, a LOT more. What AD&D got right is in understanding, well, exactly that. Being level 5 in Wizard and Fighter means you are less of a fighter and less of a wizard then their pure class options at level 6 - but only one step behind. The pure class fighter has an extra attack, the pure class wizard has a whole new level of spells, and remember, those spells scale with their wizard level, so all their previous spells are likewise stronger. But it's only one step ahead. Being one level behind isn't crippling in the slightest, and indeed, the idea is you can use one to boost the other. You can't Fighter it up as well, but you can throw some wizard buffs on yourself and be almost as good, or maybe even just as good but in a different way. The only reason things in Baldur's Gate broke down was because of the absurd levels you reach in the end. You essentially hit a point where further levels in your pure class actually don't matter, because they're so high up, which breaks the multiclass system. And the only reason dual classing worked is because of intense amounts of metagaming - you could literally know when the "campaign" was going to end, and choose your breaking point accordingly. 3e multiclass adds absolutely nothing positive at all on the mechanical level. It gives you the freedom to completely ruin your character because you didn't know what you were doing. It is flat out the worst multiclass system I think has ever been created. It wasn't poorly thought out, because it wasn't thought out at all, because the 3e devs didn't stress test poo poo with their game. The entire engine collapses almost immediately as a result of it. Like, what are the benefits? "I mean, if my characters gets super interested in magic, I can take a level in mage, and thus not only make my main class worse, I can't actually do anything with my mage level because level 1 spells don't do jack poo poo at level 12!" The only thing 3e multiclassing adds is a stupifying need for game expertise and equally stupifying amounts of trap options (which was to some degree intentional - 3e was made with the idea of punishing players who don't theorycraft enough). There are "fixes." The one ropekid is suggesting is similar to a later 3e supplement, Tome of Battle, where previous levels in another class count as "half" towards your martial class (though in this case it counts as 1/3). Except this introduces yet another new problem - taking a level in rogue at level 2 makes you, broadly speaking, somewhere between a level 1 rogue and a level 2 rogue. But taking that single level of rogue at level 10 makes you a level 4 rogue. And sure, that kinda fixes one problem with 3e style multiclassing, but now it unleashes an equally hellish problem where you need to be exact on when you take your rogue level, and how multiclassing at different TIMES can radically change your general power level. So yeah. there are "fixes." But none of them actually fix the myriad of problems. gently caress 3e multiclassing, and good luck trying to iron that out in any successful manner, because it's a piece of poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 10:30
|
|
|
Cipher/barbarian would be awe inspiring; cipher/rogue, unless things change significantly, a complete waste. Multiclassing in any game at all that has it is all about matching synergies and maintaining the action economy. Cipher/barbarian is amazing because, running on the assumption that your barbarian smacks build focus, your barbarian half makes you gain focus lightning fast due to Carnage (and, god help you, HoF would take you from 0 to max instantly). Cipher/rogue has almost no synergy at all - like, sure, Biting Whip adds even more to your sneak attack damage, but what then? Your rogue half isn't built for gathering focus. Assumably you'd take the path of self buff with cipher powers -> attack with rogue powers, but you aren't getting a ton of bang for your buck. Cipher/Monk is also fantastic; build wounds while you spend your focus, build focus while you spend your wounds (and it'd probably be bar none the most active class combo in terms of actions). Other good combos: Fighter/Druid - or, well, any melee character/druid - for synergy with Firebrand and the storm spells, and god help us if spirit shift allows your other class abilities, because suddenly druid/monk is the most terrifying thing in the game, and druid/rogue turns into the TRUE single target blender the rogue always wanted to be - god, can you imagine the backstab? Likewise, anyone can use Chanter levels, as their chants are effectively free in the action economy. Wizard isn't a terrible multiclass...but that's almost entirely only because of how good their summoned weapons are; lose that, and they lose a lot of utility. My worry with this multiclassing is, well, this. Synergy matters a lot. The classic wizard/fighter isn't all that strong unless you have a system that allows massive pre-battle buffing simple because, as I said earlier, you are doing one action at a time - you are Wizarding, or you are Fightering. Most people, when they think of a "wizard fighter" or similar, imagine someone who's turning their weapon into fire as they attack and deflecting enemies with magic shields and shooting lightning as they stab people and the like, but the action economy largely prevents this. This is why the 4e Swordmage was a trillion times better then any horrible 3e mash up - it was built from the ground up to support combining fighting and magic. Other RPGs do similar; Tales of Maj'Eyal has hybrid classes, but they're build around a talent tree only that hybrid gets access too that combines the fightin' and magicin', whether it's the Arcane Blade who has a chance to cast a spell against anyone they melee attack, or their opposite, the Reaver, who makes a free attack whenever they cast a spell. Now, in PoE, this is fixed with variant spell speeds - a fighter/wizard can sorta work because they can focus on fast cast buff spells and summoned weapons, but you'll never have the dude who has a sword in one hand and a fireball in the other in any satisfactory fashion. If you have strong synergy, the whole is stronger then the sum of it's parts. If you have terrible synergy (ranger/cleric just to pick one at random) then you have a set of completely conflicting actions, and you will almost never be as good as the pure class, regardless of what percentage power of them you have. Of course, this is all going of the idea that you will generally hold both classes at roughly equal levels. I haven't even tried looking at dipping. EDIT: My Cipher uses close to exclusively low level powers...other then Defensive Mindweb. That's because once you cast Defensive Mindweb, almost nothing else matters, so all that's left is to divide the enemy amongst each other. ProfessorCirno fucked around with this message at 06:33 on Feb 3, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 06:30
|
|
|
AngryBooch posted:Ranger/cleric sounds really good though. And they were a really good multi-class in Baldur's Gate. For what it's worth, Ranger/cleric was incredible in Baldur's Gate because it was literally broken and gave the cleric full access to the entire druid spell list. Which it uh, wasn't supposed to. An actual ranger/cleric working as intended in Baldur's Gate wouldn't be bad at all, but it wouldn't be nearly as good. For what it's worth, clerics in general in BG were way more powerful then they would normally be in AD&D because many of the best weapons in the game were cleric weapons, and bonuses against larger opponents (something cleric weapons were terrible at) were never programmed in. In general it's really hard to comment on how BG did things because it's design warped a lot of poo poo. The absolutely absurd levels you could reach and the fact that it was all pre-programmed (as it was, you know, a game) meant you could metagame with ease. Dual classing, kensai or not, is significantly weaker and more risky if you don't know when the campaign ends. ...Also Kensai is dramatically overrated. It's all about the berserker. AngryBooch posted:Also, dipping a Rogue into one level of Cipher is gonna be extremely good if Soul Whip is still straight up +20% damage on all attacks as the Rogues are kings of stacking all those damage bonuses. And then you get Biting Whip for an additional +20%. A Rogue 17/Cipher 1 gets level 3 cipher powers. Eyestrike blinds at level 1. Phantom foes flanks at level 2. Fractured volition hobbles at level 3. All these status allow sneak attacks. And then if two are affecting them, deathblows. They're done. And Rogues don't loving miss. Like I said, I haven't looked deep into dipping, but is it better then a shapeshift focused druid/rogue? High level rogue abilities are, to put it frankly, not exciting in the slightest. Unless some real awesome poo poo is added, you aren't missing out if you don't get those level 9 abilities. In return, combining rogue damage with spiritshift damage would be obscene.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 07:22
|
|
|
I admit I'm pretty into the idea of cipher/monk, but that's mostly because I like monk mechanics more then cipher mechanics, and cipher fluff more then monk fluff.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 07:39
|
|
|
Basic Chunnel posted:I don't think restricting combinations would go over well, with veterans or newcomers. Even if they're not as inexplicably arbitrary as 2e racial restrictions. Oh my god I forgot about that piece of poo poo and how much I hated it. NWN2 was so not a great game.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 10:55
|
|
|
Yeah, in further reflection, cipher/monk doesn't have a ton of synergy in their abilities, more in how they collect it - as I said, they spend Wounds to get Focus, and gain Wounds while spending their Focus (assuming they're being attacked). That said, there is a small level of synergy there so long as you view monk as your "primary" class, and cipher as your secondary or supplementary class - as you gain focus doing Monk poo poo, spend it on buffs to be better at Monk poo poo. While it's true ciphers specialize in single target lockdowns and their big awesome end game thing is defensive mindweb, they have a ton of other abilities that mesh perfectly, albeit at higher levels; Body Attunement and Pain block at level 4, Borrowed Instinct and Tactical Meld at 5, and of course Time Parasite at 7. What I am far more interested in, I admit, is this question: Hieronymous Alloy posted:Ok, another multiclassing question I haven't seen asked: is one level in the class enough to open all the conversation options? I find monks vastly more fun to actually play, but I find Ciphers more interesting to be. I'd give up one level of monk in order to gain Cipher dialogue options, for sure. Or will that not even be a thing in PoE 2?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 13:54
|
|
|
Not to spam it but I'd love to get confirmation regarding how multiclassing will work with class-based dialogue options.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2017 01:39
|
|
|
Monks are super active and strong and I will always recommend them. EDIT: Also don't assume all soulbound weapons are the best. Their inability to be Durgan-ized is a very big limitation.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2017 07:37
|
|
|
Avalerion posted:Only thing I don't like about them is wounds, you are generally trying to minimize damage, so their gimmick does not mesh with being buffed up to the teeth or ccing the bad guys so they don't go around to hitting you. To be honest I never really found myself wanting for wounds even when decked out in plate (though later I gradually move to lighter and lighter armor). At least until Defensive Mindweb. My issue was with their complete dearth of class dialogue.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2017 09:17
|
|
|
Yeah, as far as soulbound items go, Stormcaller is great if you're a ranger, Twin Sting is also pretty good for rangers if only for it's insect swarm proc, the dragon shield is good for certain barbarians due to HoF, and unlabored blade is (I think? Maybe it got patched?) excellent for barbarians because of the fire bug proc. Oh, and the plate armor is fantastic for paladins. Grey Sleeper's good until you can get the Blade of the Endless Paths! Ydren's Redeemer is good against Vessels (again, good for barbarians). Uh...Greenstone Staff is pretty good for monks that want to go with weapons - it's a good alternative to Tidefall. The scepter isn't a bad backup for druids due to it's chance to recharge your spiritshift. Abydon's Hammer is super good, but again, I don't think it'll end up as good as Blade of the Endless Paths - so another side weapon. The mace though, it's just plain no good at all. And once you DO get Blade of the Endless Paths, you can go ahead and put the Grey Sleeper away. In the end, soulbound weapons often end up as secondary ones. EDIT: The actual big problem with PoE's itemization, I think, is how awful most shields are. Light shields are not bad, medium ones are not great and tend to only get used in specific situations, large shields are just plain bad. Even without the loss of accuracy, losing the damage of dual wielding or a two hander is often times to much in of itself. That you ALSO lose your accuracy by a big chunk is just adding salt. ProfessorCirno fucked around with this message at 11:28 on Feb 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2017 11:25
|
|
|
So uh, PoE1 question, but was it ever figured out just what connected the potential ending slides for the second DLC? Namely, what on earth decides whether or not the Readcerans are dickheads or not? Far as I can tell you HAVE to massacre the Iron Flail no matter what. Also ropekid please please please for PoE tabletop don't fall into wizard supremacy.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2017 10:42
|
|
|
Planescape: Torment's pitch documents are amazing because all they do is talk up how much of a badass the PC will be and how there will be hot babes everywhere for you to romance. It legit doesn't resemble the actual game that happened in any way at all.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2017 14:28
|
|
|
I've never played Age of Decadance but I had an RPGCodex account a fuckin' decade ago, and even back then the place was filled with nazis and "ironic racism." I severely doubt it's ratio of non-nazis to nazis has gotten better since; most likely they just stopped bothering with the "ironic" part.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2017 05:43
|
|
|
Seriously, if White March is any indication of direction, PoE2 is going to be a pretty drat big step up.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2017 06:03
|
|
|
One thing I'm wondering is how choices show up in-game. I forget, but did they confirm/deny that non-carried over saves will have a moment for "WHAT HAPPENED AT x?" to establish a background similar to how Witcher 3 did it? Basically, I'm wondering if me going with the Doemenels and getting the "good" (aka subtle) ending will cause in-game stuff to differ from, say, taking the Crucible Knights to their "good" ending, or how it would differ from taking the Doemenels to their "bad" ending. Could be cool, could also lead to angst if certain endings were made to be far worse then they initially appeared (can you imagine the strife if certain god choices ended up being far more ruinous? People bicker enough about Galawail vs Hylea as is!)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2017 13:37
|
|
|
I basically never heal with my priest - they're semi-mandatory because of a) how good their buffs are, and for me at least, far more importantly, b) they can give immunity to and cancel out crippling debuffs. Healing? Pfff. That's what Shod-in-Faith is for!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2017 14:05
|
|
|
Lucinice posted:For quests I recently tried doing "The man Who Wait's" and "Cinder's of Faith" and those didn't go well. And for a while I've had trouble finishing the "Missing Sentries" task. My currently my party composed of my character ( a chanter), Eder, Pallegina, Durance, Aloth, and Kana. Normally I run Sagani instead of Kana but I had him out for a while and didn't want him to get underleveled. Not having him in the party hasn't changed much. I have yet to use the adventurer recruiter though because I just haven't had the money. My personal feelings + what I've done with NPCs at that level (note: I almost always play Ciphers): Eder is mixed tank and steady damage. Plate and estoc. I found he doesn't need a shield (fighters have great deflection anyways) and instead I focus on pumping up his health regen like the fighter only cloak you get from the docks. Sanguine Plate lets him Frenzy, which makes him a goddamn power house, and he just does not die. Pallegina is likewise tank + damage - to be frank, I feel PoE doesn't really HAVE dedicated "tanks," which is why shields so rarely get much use outside of those with a specific shield bash, or small shields with good secondary abilities. And speaking of, Pallegina gets one of those! The one from Gilded Vale, specifically, which boosts the defenses of everyone else. Durance is...well he's a cleric. I stick him with a gun so he can hang out in the back and he rains down buffs and debuff immunities. I feel like I didn't actually use him a ton at these levels. Aloth is control. Aloth can do ok damage, but he's not really built for it, which is fine. Slicken, Combusting Wounds, Curse of the Blackened Sight, DAoM, Expose Vulnerabilities, Confusion, Ninagauth's Shadowflame, etc. It's not that he doesn't do ANY damage - he's just more set to debuff and control. Kana doesn't get used much, and this might be a problem for you as well, because Chanters, frankly, are just kinda ok-ish before they get gently caress You, I'm A Dragon. That said, I usually stuck him with the not as good pre-Dragon constant damage chant, and made him a tank. Plate + medium shield. I'm not worried about Kana not doing a lot of damage because, well, that's not why he's here. His damage comes from his chants, not from his sword.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2017 06:01
|
|
|
tithin posted:What level should I be fighting these giant assholes in the iron flail camp, because I get the feeling 12 isn't it. As with much of the game, make it easy by bringing a cipher. They aren't immune to the level 2 paralyze.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2017 23:43
|
|
|
AngryBooch posted:What if the PoE tabletop game catches that RTwP spirit by having everyone write down their action and target in secret at the beginning of the round, reveal them all at the same time, then make your rolls to see what happens when the party fighter is charging in while the wizard is casting fireball at the enemy front rank like a loving mook LARRY WHAT THE gently caress? Fun fact - there is a game that works this way! It is Spellbound Kingdoms and it is all about swashbucklary, and it generally works really well, since there's no such thing as a "basic attack." You pick a fighting style (some of which are magic, though only certain classes get that) and grab it's corresponding move sheet, and move a token around it as you do your moves, so you're never flat out blind to what the enemy might do, as you can see their token move around and know "ok they're building up for their big super attack, I have to either disrupt them this turn to stop them, or pick my best defensive move after and hope I have enough passion to draw on my inspiration to carry me through the battle!" Because Mood is a thing, as are Inspirations, and the more inspired and passionate your character is, the stronger they are. Agean90 posted:she looks like a character from fire emblem Captain Oblivious posted:There aren't NEARLY enough extraneous accessories for her to be a Fire Emblem character. Yeah, she's clearly far more Suikoden.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 23:37
|
|
|
So, looking at what ropekid has said about the tabletop game, does that mean...we actually ARE going to get gently caress You: Suck My Dick: Josh Sawyer's Personal Dream RPG Experience?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 09:09
|
|
|
Basically, tempering requires you trigger 2 convincing lines for each area of argument. You have to convince the Eyeless that remembering the past isn't always a good thing, and that people have to be more responsible with their actions - and they'll know if you're bullshitting based on your own past. That means stuff like not helping the Crucible Knights with their lovely Robocop plan, and not tying the dwarven souls to the White Forge, and having companions on-hand that will agree with you. Most of the triggers aren't super difficult as you have 4 options for most of them and thus only need to clear half, but there's one where you only have 3 options instead of 4, and they kinda grouped all the hard ones together there - that's the one that people usually fail at. I forget where I found it on Obsidian's forums, but someone actually edited one of the game files to basically let you always go with tempering, if you can find it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2017 00:02
|
|
|
I will never understand how people can put Grieving Mother in any place but last. She's the worst NPC, easily, because she is ultimately boring.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
Like I'm not gonna rag on Avellone or call him a bad writer or whatever, but I question how people think he's perfect. Nothing's perfect. And in his case, he absolutely gets samey - and real fuckin' preachy. Like, Lonesome Road was just loving awful. After all the myths and everything built up around Ulysses, it was incredibly difficult to find an opinion he had that wasn't in the end just an echo of Chris Avellone's thoughts. Yes, we get it, you hate that Fallout broadly moved to a post-post-apocalyptic setting, none of that is actually original though! For all the words he desperately tried to spew out to justify things, it was just two penny nihilism. It was loving high school. Grieving Mother stands out, and not in any sort of good way. She's so goddamn special. She doesn't interact with anyone or anything. She's completely insular. She is, in effect, an NPC who was not written to be an NPC. GM feels like someone made their own PC and got cranky they weren't the actual PC. And like, when you look at how she was intended to turn out, she would've in fact been even WORSE. Durance's intended expansion was likewise loving awful. Like, GM is already way over the top in how ~*~important~*~ and ~*~symbolic~*~ and all that poo poo she is. Now you want to give her a private special dungeon experience of exploring her psyche and ugh just gently caress off. Durance at least mostly fits the game, but if the other NPCs didn't constantly give him poo poo, he would've been too insufferable to manage. He still has some issues, but thankfully most of his narrative ones were cut, it would seem. Grieving Mother didn't make me really start to feel for how bad the Hollowborn tragedy is - Derrin did. She just annoyed the poo poo out of me when she deigned to interact with the game she was in. As for his other games? Kreia is Avellone hating Star Wars. She's also pretty goddamn Ravel, because Avellone reuses ideas constantly. Samey and preachy. And she's also kinda great, don't get me wrong, I love Kreia as a character, but I would've loved her more if I hadn't played Planescape: Torment, and I would've loved her more if I had never read a single interview and realized that she's treated like little more then a mouthpiece at times. I don't think Avellone is a bad writer. I think people need to stop calling him a brilliant one though. Not everything has to be a goddamn philosophy thesis.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 13:58
|
|
|
Samuel Clemens posted:Avellone's writing strikes me as the opposite of high-concept. I don't know how he even managed to pitch Planescape: Torment. Oh gently caress if you haven't read the actual pitch you need to. It is AMAZING. It can be found here. Anyways PST was amazing, no doubt about it. It was also made almost 20 years ago.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 16:05
|
|
|
The actual hosed thing from that bit of the pitch is that it categorizes "human babes" separate from "asian babes" and like there is a lot going on to unpack there.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 05:08 |
|
|
Under the vegetable posted:watch a video lp because the dark id sucks How can one human being be so consistently wrong?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2017 08:35
|
|