Steven's response to secondary archetypes

I know this has been discussed before, but we have some new info. Steven's answer to the secondary archetypes gave us a better idea of where they may go with secondary archetypes. I was curious what people thought about his answer and what they want to see.

He responded there are various ideas in the table. Secondary archetypes may effect damage values, cooldowns, mana cost, range of abilities, ect. Furthermore, they may effect the visual graphics of spells.

In my opinion, you can't go wrong with changing visual effects. This would only increase the unique customization of the character. However, damage values, cooldowns, and otherwise makes me fear the inevitability of a meta class. I would hate to see every single PvP player running tank or cleric secondary because of their common PvP benefits. That limits builds and "forces" us to commit to a build we don't enjoy to be the most effective.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

nanfoodle

Dygz wrote: »

nanfoodle wrote: »

True a Cleric can never be a replacement for a base class rogue. Much like a Rogue \ Cleric could never play group healer. But secondary archetypes can also change a skill to something else. Steven said as much. I could see Cleric \ Rogue even getting stealth of some type. Maybe even some damage improvements. And a Rogue \ Cleric could also do some backup heals in some way. And to his point a Cleric \ Rogue could spec deep enough that their heal spells could suffer being a main healer but could be a fun class to run with some rangers and rogues in some stealth missions.

If I understand what you wrote above...
(Keep in mind that Secondary Archetypes do not provide brand new Active Skills - I think "change into something else" is paraphrase that could be a bit misleading depending on what, exactly, that is intended to mean.)
I think I said all that...

Sorry 100% dyslexic here and words are not my friends. lol. Something else. Is from what I got from Steven, maybe I misunderstood him.. Bard skill that trades your health with a player, could be Augmented to instead trade your mana pool. This could lead to some options being more impactful then just changing damage types.

Dygz

nanfoodle wrote: »

Sorry 100% dyslexic here and words are not my friends. lol. Something else. Is from what I got from Steven's words. Bard skill that trades your health with a player, could be Augmented to instead trade your mana pool. This could lead to some options being more impactful then just changing damage types.

Cleric/Bard ??
I think it's more likely that a Bard Augment for Mana Restoration placed on a Healing Active Skill would Restore Mana in addition to Healing, rather than removing Healing.
Because the 8-person Group is relying on the Active Skills of the Primary Archetype to do what they do.
Augments allow the Active Skill to also do something else.

I dunno why you say "more impactful than just changing Damage Types".
Changing Damage Types allows my Oracle to stack Elemental Damage with the Spell Hunter in my Group.

nanfoodle

Dygz wrote: »

nanfoodle wrote: »

Sorry 100% dyslexic here and words are not my friends. lol. Something else. Is from what I got from Steven's words. Bard skill that trades your health with a player, could be Augmented to instead trade your mana pool. This could lead to some options being more impactful then just changing damage types.

I think it's more likely that a Bard Augment for Mana Restoration placed on a Healing Active Skill would Restore Mana in addition to Healing, rather than removing Healing.
Because the 8-person Group is relying on the Active Skills of the Primary Archetype to do what they do.
Augments allow the Active Skill to also do something else.

I dunno why you say "more impactful than just changing Damage Types".
Changing Damage Types allows my Oracle to stack Elemental Damage with the Spell Hunter in my Group.

I think I understood Steven saying that some changes you could select with the augment skill is that skill could change the damage type, add to the skill, or change the skill entirely. These type of changes could be more impactful if say a skill that gives a HoT was changed to a DoT that added a debuff, that when attacked returned X% amount of healing when you damage that target.

Dygz

You don't really select the effects of the Augment.
You apply the Augment to an Active Skill. The same Augment could do different stuff depending on which Active Skill it's on.
But, players are not selecting what the Augments do. We are just choosing which Active Skills we want to apply the Augment onto.

"A HoT changed to a DoT that added a debuff, that when attacked returned X% amount of healing when you damage that target..." is basically a HoT that also deals damage and maybe adds a debuff.
That seems possible since the Healing Active Skill is still providing Heals.

I think the quote does not say an Active Skill can be changed entirely. I think the exact words used were "radically" and "fundamentally". And that doesn't mean that the changed Active Skill is not going to fullfill the original impact of the Active Skill. Rather, same original result overall - might have some extra stuff added to it.

nanfoodle

Dygz wrote: »

You don't really select the effects of the Augment.
You apply the Augment to an Active Skill. The same Augment could do different stuff depending on which Active Skill it's on.
But, players are not selecting what the Augments do. We are just choosing which Active Skills we want to apply the Augment onto.

"A HoT changed to a DoT that added a debuff, that when attacked returned X% amount of healing when you damage that target..." is basically a HoT that also deals damage and maybe adds a debuff.
That seems possible since the Healing Active Skill is still providing Heals.

I think the quote does not say an Active Skill can be changed entirely. I think the exact words used were "radically" and "fundamentally". And that doesn't mean that the changed Active Skill is not going to fullfill the original impact of the Active Skill. Rather, same original result overall - might have some extra stuff added to it.

Ya his wording could be taken many different ways. Cant wait for the Augment update. My guess it will be some time after May 1st when we get the last Base Archetype. This is one of the areas has me most intrigued. Between how questing/Events/Story Arcs works in this game and the skills. Its much of what EQ Next wanted to make. I cant wait to see IS pull this off.

Lodrig

Radical would imply that some original purpose is preserved but most of how it achives it is different. But Fundamental is absolutly a word which would imply a skill has been changed to now fuffill a different purpose. The only stronger word which could be applied would be 'totaly changed' which would implay nothing, not even the flavor of the original skill remained.

SmileGurney

Yoh wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

That would not be a perfect world.
64 true Classes (the D&D definition) would be too difficult for the devs to balance - even in the best world.

I'm not sure how true this often used statement is. I play Pathfinder 2e, and you'd be surprised at how many character options and complexity you can have, and still be balanced, so long as you put in the effort into the system in the beginning and get your damn math right.

It's absolutely doable, it's just not easy.
But honestly, I don't balance is really that important. I think it's more important for the secondary archetype options to be distinct and interesting, otherwise what is the point?

Why have a system like this if your not going to do anything with it. But it seems like they very may be doing something interesting, so I'm willing to wait and see.

I have never played the paper version of Pathfinder, but I played a fair bit of Pathfinder Kingmaker and Wrath. Both obviously utilise the paper Pathfinder system as their inspiration. A lot of active abilities are shared across multiple different classes, yet those games manage to provide a solid class identity, thanks to skills which are unique for specific classes, their passives and general skill combinations etc.

This is why, I would not mind if some active skills from the secondary archetype were made available as you progress your character. Not just passive augments, or primary archetype skill modifiers based on the augments. This would definitely provide more flexibility in how you could build your character and more gameplay variety. Obviously at the cost of larger balancing headaches for Intrepid

Dygz

Lodrig wrote: »

Radical would imply that some original purpose is preserved but most of how it achives it is different. But Fundamental is absolutly a word which would imply a skill has been changed to now fuffill a different purpose. The only stronger word which could be applied would be 'totaly changed' which would imply nothing, not even the flavor of the original skill remained.

"Fundamentally change" could mean that an Active Skill which Summons many Minions is modified to Summon one big Minion.
A Healing Active Skill might change from Single Target to AoE (or vice versa) and also include a DoT.
"Radically" and "fundamentally" are used to counter the claims of "just flavor" and "just cosmetic".
We'll have to see how radical the changes actually are, but an Augmented Active Skill still fulfills its original purpose.

"The intent behind the Augment system is not to provide new Active Abilities. They're intended to augment existing Active Abilities that are provided through your Primary Archetype; and so your Secondary Archetype selection completes your Class selection, of which there's 64 types and you get Augment skills that can apply certain attributes and mechanics to your existing Active Skills.
So, if you have certain abilities, like a Backstab as a Rogue Primary Archetype, and you take that Healer Secondary Archetype selection, now the properties of your Backstab will still remain the same as an Active Ability, however it might include things like Life Steal, or it might include things like susceptible weakness to the target, and reduces their healing because the definition of what those Augments are intended to provide based on the Archetype selected for the Augments is within the Schools of magic that live for that Archetype: so a Cleric is about balancing Life and Death and the control of those types of Hit Points."
---- Steven

Lodrig

Dygz wrote: »

"Fundamentally change" could mean that an Active Skill which Summons many Minions is modified to Summon one big Minion.
A Healing Active Skill might change from Single Target to AoE (or vice versa) and also include a DoT.
"Radically" and "fundamentally" are used to counter the claims of "just flavor" and "just cosmetic".
We'll have to see how radical the changes actually are, but an Augmented Active Skill still fulfills its original purpose.

Both thouse examples would only be Radical changes at best, not Fundamental ones. You seem to have a habit of interpreting Steven's statements in ways which are biased towards continuity with prior statements even when that breaks the normal definition of words. The statement your quoting from Steven is indeed not a Fundamental change, but he did not claim it was. So their is no basis to think Steven has a broken understanding of the word Fundamental.

Steven used that term "very fundamental changes" for the first time recently in response to the continued questioing of how much change augments can/would do. It was clearly couched in the implication that this would not be the norm, that only a few skills would get that level of change and most would be lesser. You could even interpret it as speculation or ambition rather then a promise, but saying that it's not a material change the game design he is communicating to us and that it is identical to past statements is not tennable.

Dygz

It's Steven's vision of what "radical" and "fundamental" mean; not anyone else's, because he is the Creative Director of the game.
I'm not aware of Steven providing examples of the traits he attributes to the radical category as something separate from the traits he attributes to the fundamental category. For all we know, he uses those terms interchangeably.

What he has tried to be consistent about is that the Active Skills have the greatest impact.
That is how the devs will balance so that typical encounters are designed for an 8-person Group with one of each Primary Archetype.
It's all speculation and ambition until the design is implemented.

You can interpret anyway you want to.
We will test Augments in A2 and learn what radical and fundamental truly mean.

willsummon

The Bard showcase showed that it is likely for most, if not all Archetypes will, not just weapon tree, but in the talent tree the player will specialize in a "stance" and "tool/weapon" that will effect how the playstyle of the talent tree is expressed.

We have seen this with the Ranger, as well.

This type of talent tree style will likely carry over to the class talent trees in more noticeable ways than the Archetype trees.

Diamaht

There will always be something considered meta, no matter what you do. They should even out the classes the best they can and then not worry about it. As the game changes and the years go on, every class will have its time in the sun. It's a non issue, and not something you can solve anyway.

With that being a reality, they should give us as much class diversity as they possibly can through the augments. The variations should feel like completely different experiences. That makes for a far better video game than boring, perfect and impossible to achieve balance.

Child Item