Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Codex Review RPG Codex Retrospective Review: Pillars of Eternity Revisited

Jaedar

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Messages
9,839
Project: Eternity Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 Pathfinder: Kingmaker
I feel you people complaining about prestige classes in 3.5 also miss that you can take multiple base classes. You don't have to be a fancy red wizard scholar of candlekeep, you can just be a sorceror fighter cleric eldritch knight. Taking only a single base class is like shooting yourself in the foot!
 

Ulfhednar

Savant
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
809
Location
Valhalla
Be more specific. It would be a lie about base D&D3 without prestige classes.

It is entirely true about OD&D, AD&D1 and 2, and D&D3 with prestige classes.


(I don't know how true it is about D&D4 and 5, since I'm not familiar with these systems.)



Because you can skew classes different ways by picking different stat distributions, abilities, talents, and items.



The difference is that with AD&D kits, all you have to do is open your mouth and lick the spoon the game designer is sticking into your mouth like a good little boy, whereas with Pillars /you're/ the one doing the exploration and coming up with the build.



If that was all there was to it, then yeah it wouldn't be all that much. It's not though -- one ranger does the damage himself, another supports the pet doing it, etc. etc., which you're conveniently ignoring.



Enough that it'll make you suffer at PotD (if you're good at the game) or Hard (if you're only reasonably good).

I feel you people complaining about prestige classes in 3.5 also miss that you can take multiple base classes. You don't have to be a fancy red wizard scholar of candlekeep, you can just be a sorceror fighter cleric eldritch knight. Taking only a single base class is like shooting yourself in the foot!
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
17,949
Pathfinder: Wrath
You aren't forced to go with a prestige class, though. You can be a Fighter/Rogue/Bard who specializes in Longbows. Sure, you can add Arcane Archer into that, but only if you are an elf and if you want to. Arcane Archer isn't necessarily better than going only Fighter/Rogue/Bard, it's just a little bit different.
 

Jason Liang

Arcane
Joined
Oct 26, 2014
Messages
8,337
Location
Crait
Actually, I did not. I only rated posts of yours in like the last 2 pages (get over it) and I didn't see any link.
But assume I'm blind, and just give me two builds of the same class and explain to me how they're so off-the-wall and how they play so different from each other.

Fine, here's one.

Melee ranger built around Tidefall and maxing out pet damage, wearing Shod-in-faith. You play it by engaging your target with the pet, then joining in. Tidefall gives the target DoT which the pet exploits. You heal yourself and your pet by occasionally getting critted, which will trigger Shod-in-faith. Stats on main character are primarily defensive without maxing RES, because your job is to assist your pet. It's off-the-wall because it's... not ranged, and it makes your pet the main damage dealer rather than you.

Point of comparison is the "standard" ranger, built around ranged weapons with the pet a tanky meat shield and you the main damage dealer. In this case you'll have the pet in the frontline as you hang back shooting away, healing your pet with your pet-healing talents as necessary. The pet is primarily a "spotter."

Both require you to coordinate the pet and master, but the way you coordinate them is completely different. The first build will have brutal single-target damage output, but it will only be able to attack frontline targets; the second build will be a mage-killer as your tanky pet will be able to scoot behind enemy lines and your ranged ranger will be able to quickly eliminate them at... range. Almost as if they were two completely different kits!

So here's my point.

Now explain why this set up only works with ranger. Why can't you do the exact same thing with Rogue, Monk or Fighter? It seems you've made this setup just to leverage 1 feat so that your pet does more damage (using Tidefall), when Rogues and Monks also have feats that deal more damage.
 

Prime Junta

Guest
So here's my point.

Now explain why this set up only works with ranger. Why can't you do the exact same thing with Rogue, Monk or Fighter? It seems you've made this setup just to leverage 1 feat so that your pet does more damage (using Tidefall), when Rogues and Monks also have feats that deal more damage.

Uh... because rogues, monks, and fighters don't have pets and therefore their base gameplay is completely different?

By your argument, the only difference between a fighter and a wizard is numbers. It's like you're treating this as a spreadsheet and forgetting that there's an actual game there you have to play.
 

Jasede

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
24,793
Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Codex Year of the Donut I'm very into cock and ball torture
While I did join it for a while, ultimately this argument seems completely pointless. This seems to be a matter of deeply personal taste and preference. One group finds making hard, irreversible choices (kits) with drastic, immediate gameplay effects appealing; the other group likes to build their own (allegedly diverse) characters over time in a system offering more choices that, however, occur at gradients too subtle to make the first group happy.

(I always try to find a way to understand everyone and find something both can agree on. It's clear I am firmly in camp 1, PJ in 2. I think that's why it's really hard to even argue about it because we come from completely opposite preferences/perspectives in this matter.)
 

Prime Junta

Guest
(I always try to find a way to understand everyone and find something both can agree on. It's clear I am firmly in camp 1, PJ in 2. I think that's why it's really hard to even argue about it because we come from completely opposite preferences/perspectives in this matter.)

Yeah I suppose it may be pointless to argue about it in terms of "better" or "worse" since these are games, and "better" or "worse" boils down to "more or less enjoyable" which is always subjective.

There may be other arguments worth having here though.
 

luj1

You're all shills
Vatnik
Joined
Jan 2, 2016
Messages
12,877
Location
Eastern block
"better" or "worse" boils down to "more or less enjoyable" which is always subjective.


slow-motion-slap-face.gif
 
Joined
May 1, 2013
Messages
4,499
Location
The border of the imaginary
DnD 3.5e system is infinitely more fun and diverse than Piles of Shit can ever be. I can't figure out wether Prime Junta is a retarded shit poster or his nose is so deep in josh swayer's ass with obshitian shillings in his wallet that he cant and wont see what he is typing with his DnD prestige classes is colouring book "argument".

You could take prestige classes as early as lv 7 in nwn2
 
Self-Ejected

Lurker King

Self-Ejected
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,865,419
This seems to be a matter of deeply personal taste and preference.

That's because you are assuming that preferences about specific types of games, that require specific types of models of reality and systems, with specific type of gameplay, is completely arbitrary. Just because you are too lazy to think about these subjects or are assuming relativism it doesn't follow is arbitrary. Far from it.
 

Sizzle

Arcane
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
2,471
This seems to be a matter of deeply personal taste and preference.

That's because you are assuming that preferences about specific types of games, that require specific types of models of reality and systems, with specific type of gameplay, is completely arbitrary. Just because you are too lazy to think about these subjects or are assuming relativism it doesn't follow is arbitrary. Far from it.

 

Ulfhednar

Savant
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
809
Location
Valhalla
DnD 3.5e system is infinitely more fun and diverse than Piles of Shit can ever be. I can't figure out wether Prime Junta is a retarded shit poster or his nose is so deep in josh swayer's ass with obshitian shillings in his wallet that he cant and wont see what he is typing with his DnD prestige classes is colouring book "argument".

You could take prestige classes as early as lv 7 in nwn2
Considering how strongly D&D 3.5 embraces multiclassing, it seems premature for an honest comparison to the Pillar's system, as we have limited information about how multiclassing/subclassing will be implemented.

That said, I think Pillar's current system with only single classes easily rivals any cRPG implementation of AD&D, so I am pretty hopeful about PoE 2.
 
Last edited:

Jasede

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
24,793
Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Codex Year of the Donut I'm very into cock and ball torture
This seems to be a matter of deeply personal taste and preference.

That's because you are assuming that preferences about specific types of games, that require specific types of models of reality and systems, with specific type of gameplay, is completely arbitrary. Just because you are too lazy to think about these subjects or are assuming relativism it doesn't follow is arbitrary. Far from it.
You're a fucking moron if you are such an asshat you can't read my consistent posts and still not grasp I am the opposite of a relativist. When I extend a relative olive branch it is because the argument has grown boring and is not making headway; I can still deep down prefer my way without rubbing it in someone's face and being an asshole about it.

Sadly a kind of moron like yourself, shat out from a disgusting cunt, wouldn't grasp these subtleties.
 

Old One

Arcane
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
3,679
Location
The Great Underground Empire
Prestige classes: Build your character in this specific way to meet the requirements.
This is off on a tangent, but I've always considered prestige classes to be little more than a crass marketing ploy by WoC. They promote every garbage product they make by saying it includes a few new prestige classes. Their customers have a carefully-cultivated craving for them.

Carry on...
 

Fenris 2.0

Augur
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
181
Location
Franconia
Discussing Presitige Classes is more interesting then PoE;

so: being able to join the Knights of Solamnia after being knighted because of a very heroic deed and taking the appropiate Prestige Class is cool, becoming a Tempest to optimize Dual Wield by taking some pretty useless Feats for a Dual Wielder is not.
 

Prime Junta

Guest
:stupid:
This is how I encouraged use of prestige classes in my campaign (partly because all but one didn't care all that much for minmaxing). One of them got to pick Royal Explorer after being appointed one by the King of Zhou for story reasons. (I had to waive some of the requirements, but since I'm DM I get to do that when narratively appropriate.)
 

Lhynn

Arcane
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
9,825
Grunker Prime Junta 3E charbuilding is frontloaded and shit, PoE charbuilding is frontloaded and shit. Most games charbuilding is frontloaded and shit, and its by design. And i hate it.
This is the reason im so in love with 5e, its completely up to the player what comes next, all choices are at least worth considering, it doesnt punish free form gameplay and almost every alternative is viable. This is how systems should be designed imo, its a beauty.
 

Ibn Sina

Arbiter
Patron
Joined
Jul 12, 2017
Messages
921
Strap Yourselves In
Obsidian is trash. Never have I been exposed to such a dull and uninspired fantasy setting like that of PoE. That fact that they made the black people Italians and the faux historian Josh Swayer excused it by basically saying that he does not know any other civilizational trope to associate them with and thus went for the tried and true Euro angle. He could have used Swahili culture for instance, which was a hot bed of trade and commerce all the way to the 17th century. Or he could have made the Vailans similar to Imperial Mali in its glory days, with its powerful Mansa ruling an abundantly rich empire all across the Niger river. Its trade and Influence extending all the way to the Nile bastion and North Africa. There are dozens of interesting and colorful cultures they could have used , but they made them Italians, which shows how extremely dull and uninspired the writers of this setting are. They know nothing about the world.
 

Hell March

Educated
Joined
Dec 31, 2010
Messages
64
Grunker Prime Junta 3E charbuilding is frontloaded and shit, PoE charbuilding is frontloaded and shit. Most games charbuilding is frontloaded and shit, and its by design. And i hate it.
This is the reason im so in love with 5e, its completely up to the player what comes next, all choices are at least worth considering, it doesnt punish free form gameplay and almost every alternative is viable. This is how systems should be designed imo, its a beauty.

Clearly you're not using "frontloaded" in the way I'm used to hearing it--that's usually used as a criticism for games that have character building and leveling systems bound to their starting point. 3.5, with it's many problems, is the exact opposite of frontloaded because the choices you make at character creation have only a slight bit of impact on how you would end up at high levels, not counting dumb stuff like Rogue/Fighters being better off starting as Fighters than Rogues because of the extra HP. 5E has characters that are almost fundamentally complete at character creation because of the archetype system. Clerics have to make a choice of domains at character creation which have class features that they literally will not get for another 5 levels.

And in POE every feat/talent/whatever is completely inconsequential so the only leveling mechanism that actually matters is the Wizard picking spells.
 

Lhynn

Arcane
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
9,825
Clearly you're not using "frontloaded" in the way I'm used to hearing it--that's usually used as a criticism for games that have character building and leveling systems bound to their starting point. 3.5, with it's many problems, is the exact opposite of frontloaded because the choices you make at character creation have only a slight bit of impact on how you would end up at high levels, not counting dumb stuff like Rogue/Fighters being better off starting as Fighters than Rogues because of the extra HP.
In 3E if you havent mapped your character build before you named your character you are doing it wrong. Hilariously wrong in fact, you will more than likely end up with a useless gimp. The system was designed with a lot of bad options that will ruin your character, in fact almost every feat, every skill and every class in the game is a trap choice, this also includes around 90% of the prestiges.
This is the shit that traumatized sawyer so bad that he ended up doing a 360º, and ended up being equally bad for different reasons.

5E has characters that are almost fundamentally complete at character creation because of the archetype system.
This is false, you can make a paladin/wizard/rogue and still end up being good, not as strong as a pure class but fairly flexible and with tons of valid options in any given encounter. You can suddenly at level 10 as a cleric take a level in barbarian and get something out of that choice, your character wasnt ruined, you just opened another venue for the character in exchange for closing a different one.

Clerics have to make a choice of domains at character creation which have class features that they literally will not get for another 5 levels.
Every class is like this, subclasses, which for example as a wizard you pick at level 1, as a fighter at level 3, grant different features until level 17 or so. But a ton of characters can take just the first level of wizard for the level 1 class feature, or the first level of cleric for the first level features and pick a different class to advance. This will not really diminish the character, it will simply open new options at the cost of not opening a different door.

It is true that the first levels of classes tend to be really great compared to the ones that follow, but this is because the ones that follow build up on existing skills, and mechanically theres always more value on specializing than on becoming more flexible, unless you give a real boost to said flexibibility.

Also in true Dnd fashion a rogue/barbarian is a great combo, you can larp conan and be effective!

And in POE every feat/talent/whatever is completely inconsequential
This is not true tho. In PoE your choices do have consequences, you can end up with a shit character thats a pain to play, or you can end up with one that can solo the entire campaign.
The problem with PoEs system does not lay in the importance of the choices in any given build.

so the only leveling mechanism that actually matters is the Wizard picking spells.
This isnt true either. As a wizard you can pick up every spell in the game as you adventure anyway.

Your ignorance is pretty staggering, go back to lurking, come back in 2020.
 

Serious_Business

Best Poster on the Codex
Joined
Aug 21, 2007
Messages
3,909
Location
Frown Town
So... "Piles of Shit", eh? Instead of "Pillars of Eternity". I see...

*foot on table*

*lights up that cigar*

I understand now.

*spits on the ground*

You're gonna clear that shit up right now

So, as I was saying. It's all about Balders Gate. You heard about that game?

Old... school... design!

*throws the fucking table*

What the fuck are you even reading!
 

Hell March

Educated
Joined
Dec 31, 2010
Messages
64
In 3E if you havent mapped your character build before you named your character you are doing it wrong. Hilariously wrong in fact, you will more than likely end up with a useless gimp. The system was designed with a lot of bad options that will ruin your character, in fact almost every feat, every skill and every class in the game is a trap choice, this also includes around 90% of the prestiges.
This is the shit that traumatized sawyer so bad that he ended up doing a 360º, and ended up being equally bad for different reasons.

Feats and skills (as systems) aren't traps because they are things that everyone gets and are all equally meaningless with the exception of magic feats + Use Magic Device skill. Furthermore, it is very unlikely you will ever make a choice that will "ruin" a character, outside of doing something like playing a Bard without Perform which no decent DM would ever allow you to do. You can of course make tons of bad choices and end up with something suboptimal, but it is almost impossible to screw up a character so bad that they are significantly worse than their bare chasis. Meanwhile, you can do this in 5E, by picking flatout inferior archetypes like the Berserker Barbarian or the Champion Fighter.

The core problem with 3E is that the difference between the classes in power is unbelievably wide. It is so wide that there is probably no game in existence with it's level of imbalance. The issue with feats and skills are not that you are trapped by taking them, it's that relying on them for a character build (exception, Use Magic Device) is a waste of time because spellcasting is the only class feature that provides a significant increase in power. "Ruining your character" is not the problem, having a character concept that is unplayable from the start is the problem.

If you are trying to optimize your character concept then you are indeed doing something incredibly wrong by not mapping out a build, but this is no different than 5E or really any game ever made.

This is false, you can make a paladin/wizard/rogue and still end up being good, not as strong as a pure class but fairly flexible and with tons of valid options in any given encounter. You can suddenly at level 10 as a cleric take a level in barbarian and get something out of that choice, your character wasnt ruined, you just opened another venue for the character in exchange for closing a different one.

But that's not what I said, I said that characters are fundamentally complete at character creation in 5E. It is true that some effective multiclass dips can greatly increase a character's effectiveness, but since not focusing on a core concept has been a bad idea since the concept of classes have ever existed, you will still be leveling one class over all others, meaning your build is defined by the class features you determine at level 3ish. It's like a World of Warcraft subclass.

Every class is like this, subclasses, which for example as a wizard you pick at level 1, as a fighter at level 3, grant different features until level 17 or so. But a ton of characters can take just the first level of wizard for the level 1 class feature, or the first level of cleric for the first level features and pick a different class to advance. This will not really diminish the character, it will simply open new options at the cost of not opening a different door.

Multiclassing has no significant diminishment on character in 3E either, unless you're playing a Druid because a druid's base chasis is totally nuts.

This is not true tho. In PoE your choices do have consequences, you can end up with a shit character thats a pain to play, or you can end up with one that can solo the entire campaign.
The problem with PoEs system does not lay in the importance of the choices in any given build.

I've never played a solo-run but I have played Path of the Damned and I can assure you that outside of making flatout retarded choices like maxing perception and dumping constitution, you pretty much cannot screw up a character in PoE. The game is so tactically vapid that as long as you put good armor on your tank and have some sort of of hard cc, you will win every time. I remember picking several feats for the Druid companion that I later learned he had absolutely no use for, and gave him really garbage equipment, he was still effective. Likewise my main character was a chanter, generally considered to be the worst class in the game, I had terrible Resolve and it still never mattered.

I'm sure you can somehow game the system and get insanely powerful characters but none of it matters when the game is so vapid, simplistic and meaningless.

This isnt true either. As a wizard you can pick up every spell in the game as you adventure anyway.

I was really only being kind when I said that, it barely matters at all.
 
Last edited:

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom