So, if you find one build in BG1 that's not possible in Pillars, that means that BG1 has more choice than Pillars? Even if there are a half-dozen or more viable builds in Pillars that aren't possible in BG1?
Go back to what I quoted you saying:
you can't make every class do anything (which would defeat the purpose of a class-based system
Having a character that can do everything does not defeat the purpose of class-based systems, because builds like Fighter/Thief/Wizard OR Fighter/Thief/Cleric can do anything - they are jack-of-all trades, master of none, which is interesting. But I'm sure you got that the fist time and you're just being dishonest.
Okay, now I get it: we've not been having the same conversation for the past few messages. Here's what I've been hearing you say -- correct me where I've gone wrong:
1. You: "BG1's class system allows more diversity than Pillars' because multiclassing."
2. Me: "No it doesn't. Pillars' system allows more diversity because of the variety of builds within classes."
3. You: "Fighter/thief/wizard. He does everything any other class does, but not so well. You can't do that in Pillars. Neener neener."
4. Me: "True, that's one build you can't replicate in Pillars, but there are many more builds in Pillars you can't replicate in BG1. Ergo, Pillars allows for more diversity."
It appears that 3 was actually a reply to a parenthetical observation in the post where my main argument was 2 -- I did say that a character that can do anything defeats the purpose of a class-based system. That was carelessly phrased and overly general. What I meant to say was more along the lines of, "allowing any class to pick any ability or talent defeats the purpose of a class-based system." That does not preclude a jack-of-all-trades class of course. So we're actually in agreement on that point.
What I'm still disputing is your original contention that BG1's multi/dual-classing allows for more diversity than Pillars' class system. I would like to see you defend that proposition if you can, rather than go off on tangents.
(For the record, I'm not at all against classless systems -- in fact I prefer them overall -- nor am I against multiclassing; in fact I've repeatedly said I'd like Pillars 2 to implement proper multiclassing rather than the half-baked cross-crass talents it has now.)
"You added strongholds there, now I can ignore the rest of your argument! lolololol"
I don't like arguing with people who keep equivocating and shifting the goalposts. It's dishonest, and makes me disinclined to take any of the rest of it seriously.
"Oh look, he had to use two characters to make something interesting, lolololol" - See how that's annoying?
Good thing I've never made that argument.
Edit: misread you here, looks like you were snarking at my taking objection to your shifting the comparison point from BG1 to BG2 again.
As an aside, I haven't made any solo runs so I don't have much to say about solo builds. I find it more interesting to look for synergies between characters, and having a full party more rewarding tactically and gameplay-wise. I have looked at some solo builds though, and a great many of them show similar creativity with item/ability/spell combinations. But you'll have to find someone else to describe them, as I wouldn't be speaking from experience.
Now a proper reply: I don't know how you think you're a great explorer breaking new grounds. You're just follow breadcrumbs like "DoT build - get every talent and equipment related to DoT". There's nothing greatly creative about that, and worse, you're prone to performing the optimal rotation each battle for maximum DPS.
That was just one example, and a fairly simple one at that. Want a different approach to making use of the Merciless Companion? Okay, how about this: give the ranger Persistence (that'll take care of the DoT, which will give the 50% damage bonus). Then forget everything else about stacking DoT like I described. Instead, give the ranger Stalker's Link (+10 ACC to attack the same target at the pet). Add a Darcozzi paladin with Inspiring Liberation (2/encounter, +10 ACC for, like, 30 seconds), and equip him with Cladhaliath or Shame or Glory (Marking, +10 to the closest party member attacking the same target), but dump his Resolve, and give him Shod in Faith. Then coordinate all three in combat. The ranger will now apply DoT reliably (because +10 ACC), and the pet will hit and crit a lot (because +10 from the paladin's Marking weapon). Now, the pally will have average Deflection, which means he will be critted fairly often. You will
want this, because that will trigger Shod In Faith's AoE healing ability, which will keep both him and the pet from going down in combat. As a cherry on the cake, use Liberating Exhortation to give either the pet or the ranger, or both,
another +10 ACC for most of the fight.
This time, the DoT will be relatively minimal, but the point damage will be scary. This is also an efficient way to play the game, but the builds, items, and equipment used are
completely different, as is the moment-to-moment gameplay.
There's no massive creativity there that you claim. And leads to a race to the bottom for "most DPS build of all", just like happens with WoW. The only reason we don't see much of that in PoE is because most people play in extremely easy difficulties.
:D
You won't get far with "most DPS build of all." What I've left out of these examples (because it's out of scope) is crowd control. None of these will succeed very well if you don't have at least one party member available to do that. Go for maximum DPS, and you will get disabled and then wrecked really quickly.
Again, what you ignored because "strongholds" - A Fighter and a Fighter/Cleric are entirely different beasts, with different access & restrictions to equipment, spells, abilities, etc. And you get the entire class "toolkit" at once. At one point you can use Sanctuary to get a better position, prepare Hold spells for a tough fight versus humanoids, free action for fighting spiders, buff yourself into a warmachine, etc. You prepare & react to the battles, there's no optimal cooldown rotation for maximum DPS or bullshit like that. There's much more freedom here, you always have more options open.
So what? A Pillars paladin, fighter, and priest are completely different beasts, and each of them has room for a pretty broad range of completely different builds, using completely different abilities, talents, spells, and equipment sets. The only difference is that instead of hard restrictions helpfully telling you what you should and shouldn't use,
you need to figure it out by studying what the spells, talents, abilities, and item properties actually do.
Seriously: I've played a lot of the IE games with a lot of different classes and class combos, and while I like them a lot, there's nowhere
near the variety and scope for creativity in their class system than there is in Pillars. In this respect, Pillars beats even the (mechanically) best of the IE's -- BG2 -- hands down. You just don't realize this because you only gave Pillars a cursory glance before ragequitting.
It took me the better part of a year to figure out how much depth there actually is in there, so I don't really blame you for that. I don't think many players do -- just like very few BG2 players figure out the fifteen different ways to kill Kangaxx.
But that still makes your opinion uninformed.
