![]() Not to mention the fact that out of a few similar choices, many players may develop their personal favorites, making that playthrough that much more personal.Īs for the topic itself, I'd like a bit wider variety of Per Encounter spells to pick from. And that doesn't suit a game like Pillars of Eternity. If there's three spells that can be used to achieve the same goal, so what? Is it really a bad thing that the game allows that tiny feeling of tactical choice? I hate the idea that there is a single right answer to every challenge the game presents, because that also means there's an absolute right way and wrong way to play it. I don't agree with that, because that's what a bunch of recent mainstream games does - streamline everything, have as little of everything as possible, and hopefully attract the maximum number of players, none of whom will get as invested because there isn't that much to invest in. Edited Februby InfinitronĪ bunch of people seem to be of the opinion that a smaller number of spells intended for a specific situation is better than having a wider variety of options that may not be as distinguished from one another, just for more choice. What you're saying is that fantasy can't or shouldn't be achieved in a computer roleplaying game, which is preposterous. The ability to roleplay a wizard with lots and lots of spells which are useful in all sorts of situations is a design goal of this game, and part of the fantasy that it's trying to evoke. ![]() ![]() Thanks for telling us what we find tedious and how most of us play the game Resting because I casts spells? That is annoying, and obviously discouraged because supplies are limited and are limited even more as you increase difficulty. Whats the big deal if a caster does sling or spam spells? That's their role.Īlso resting because a party member is injured doesn't seem weird or out of place, same for resting because my party trekked half way across country. The planning the vancian camp advocates sounds a lot like the " not using your spells because you're saving them for emergencies" approach those in the per encounter camp hate being forced into. Unless you have meta knowledge every battle does take place in a vacuum essentially. This is the big problem with per rest, and limiting how many times one can rest. And you can do this without dumbing the game down. Six spells to cure six different conditions isn't more tactical, or better, than a single cure 'em all spell. In reality, most of us pick a subset of the laundry list of spells and just use those as standard tools. You can have a smaller tool-set that's still perfectly enjoyable - ciphers and chanters in this game manage to have interesting tactical choices without dozens of things or without having to stop and rest. Having played plenty of other games, there is no particular reason to keep this approach. It's the fact that you have to slog through a bunch of filler fights, not using the tools to make them quick, because it's annoying. Furthermore, the reason why most people complain isn't the set-piece battles - which are designed around everyone doing everything. You can trivialize trash encounters with spells, and the only balancer is making it tedious to do so. My quarrel with it is that it's never been a good system, period. ![]() What we need for POE2 is a better per-enc/per-rest balance to begin with.) There was nothing hugely wrong with the old spell mastery. (That said, I don't really find the current change a particularly good solution. It just comes down to: do you want each battle to basically take place in a vacuum, completely irrespective of the rest of the dungeon, as if you're in an arena, and do you want to be able to smash enemies with a non-stop spam of spells? Or do you want to your dungeon to actually feel like a dangerous trek, where you are thinking about the next fight and your party's resources when you battle, and the decision to use a high level spell is a meaningful one? At the same time, there are plenty of camping supplies and resting spots, such that you don't need to go ten battles without a rest if you don't want to. Having, say, 2 mages in the party cast 20 spells in that timeframe is kind of overkill. POE battles tend to be pretty quick - the winner is generally decided in less than 10 rounds. Just like people who end up with 900 potions/consumables because they were afraid of using them up, it's just the player's idiosyncrasy rather than the game 'forcing' them to hoard. Neither is it necessary to do this to win.īy the same token, nobody is forcing you to save all your spells and just sit there firing arrows or swinging staves all day long. These games were never made so that the player uses all the best spells in a single fight, and then rests 8000 times. It's not even intended design, whether in IE or POE.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |