Larian Studios Forums Divinity: Original Sin 2 Divinity - Original Sin 2 - Suggestions and Feedback Combat Abilities & Talents lvling up (Missing on)

Stabbey, we are never going to agree as I did understand what you were saying, you know why? because you're the type of person where if you don't agree to your approach or argument, then it is because we didn't get it, therefor you're always right...

Right now it becomes down to perception of how the game should be played and it's an opinion, that's all

But we both agrees that more talent would be nice to give more opportunities.

As for what you've insinuate in the previous text, I will give an explanation on the skills I'm referring to

Ok, about my opinion on the skills...

When you level up you get 1 point that you need to place in one of the following 17 categories:

--Weapons
Dual Wielding
Ranged
Single-Handed
Two-Handed

--Defence
Leadership
Perseverance
Retribution

--Skill
Aerotheurge
Geomancer
Huntsman
Hydrosophit
Necromancer
Polymorph
Pyrokinetic
Scoundrel
Summonning
Warfare

First of all, when we look at it, we can determine that if you choose one Skills, it allows active impact into your way of playing by allowing you to learn new spells.
If you choose weapon/defense, then you get a passive impact on your game play.
Which determine an immediate difference between the 2. Argument #1

We all agree to my knowledge that the way skills improve at this very moment is very weak. Most skill categories if not all of them, doesn't improve all of the spells available into said skill tree which is somewhat of a non-sens if you were to choose to sacrifice your only point to improve said skill tree.

So if we correct that and improve all spells into said skill tree, then it leads to influence user's to put more point into those. Argument #2

It is to my point of view that having all those great spells at your disposal within a skill tree for placing only 1 point into said skill tree is too strong. Therefor something should be done to diminish that awesome return. Argument #3

#2 and #3 can relate to each other. You know how? By changing how the spells behaves in a skill tree depending how much point you got in said skill tree. Projecting that a maximum 10 points can be placed inside a skill tree (read an opinion somewhere), how this could be address is either to determine that Lvl1 spell which are kind of the beginner's spell may improve up to 10, but may also stop after lvl6 for instance.

All spells as they are right now can easily be modified (or most of them) to be weaker than what they are at this moment and improving to a better spell as you increase your lvl within the proper skill tree.

An example of that is like I said earlier, for instance Backstab which is a very very good skill can at the beginning be weaker. Instead of having a range of somewhat 5 meters to teleport yourself to the target, maybe it should be 1 meter. When lvl2, 2 meters....etc lvl5 = 5 meters. Then at lvl6 it could add teleport through cloud which increase the strength of the skill.

Any damage spell can improve their damage.
Any healing spell can improve their healing.
Any counter spell can unlock more countering effect to their belt...

Now that would change the whole aspect how skill points act improving a skill tree and give this a purpose into specializing yourself into fewer skill tree...

On the counterpart, improving the value of upgrading skill tree for greater bonus will diminishes the interest into improving Weapons/Defence. People might be reluctant to put any points into these. Argument #4

What do you do with that, you separate the two from each other. Back to Argument #1. Instead, when leveling up, and this is up for discussion, you may give 1 point for skill tree, and 1 point into weapons/defence every 2 levels. Or you give 1 point to each and diminishes the bonus from it. Or you give 1 point into weapons/defence in alternance with 1 point into skill.

At this point it depends on the maximum lvl per skill tree. If its 10, then 30 lvl for 30 points meaning 3 specialization or maybe 6 spread around for good lvl1 spell but not the hight end spells....meaning you should receive 1 skill point every level
Of course, if the maximum would be 5, then it change the aspect how you would be giving points....could be alternating then with weapon/defense every level

I'd like to see maximum 10 points per skill tree, 1 skill point per lvl, 1 weapons/defense point each 2 lvl but I do not know what the end game looks like...

The number of points process is up for diagnostic, but this is the concept i'm suggesting

Now that this is said, by putting the following base i'm describing, yes I would agree to downgrade the backstab dagger talent to move it out of the talent's way.

You know why? because now putting 1 point into Scoundrel would only allow to backstab 1 feet away and that spell wouldn't be godlike.

Otherwise, no, I would object to remove backstab dagger from the talents, because like I've said, the spells are so powerful for 1 point into a skill tree and right now it is the only thing preventing anybody to get backstab without choosing that class of profession...which is an overall better for the game because like is said backstab is the number one skill on my list of spell....behind teleport which isn't damage related but more crowd control oriented.

Oh and remember that there is a trend going to allow characters to change their weapon for 1AP.... meaning you could have a dagger, backstab for 1AP, change weapon for a 2 hand and hit in the person's back.

The concept you're suggesting implies a MASSIVE balancing overhaul on top if it. If each point into a school is going to have an effect on each unique skill, affecting not just the damage but other things such as range, area of effect, etc., you now have a MASSIVE balancing problem (as if there weren't already enough things to worry about).

While we're at it, why don't we come up with even more way cool ideas? How about synergistic school effects?
Examples:
1) having at least 3 points in both Necromancer and Hydrosophist increases magic damage done to vitality by 15%
2) Having at least 3 points in both Warfare and Scoundrel adds knockdown effect to Blitz Attack and Vault.

Moral of the story: There are many cool, extra things that would be really neat and (maybe) will address the issues after a massive re-balancing. The complaints you are raising have simpler solutions than the ones you are suggesting. It is unlikely that Larian will implement your system. I suggest you develop your own game, and let us know when it's ready. I'm sure it'll be a lot of fun.

Very funny vivalafai.

I'm here to give feedback on the game. This is what the forum is about.

So you think it is a good idea but unlikely because of the effort it would require? Then great, now I will let the makers of DOS2 read it and make their own opinion about it.

But I am sure that it would make the game better. And your idea isn't bad either, good thinking....but that would be a headache to concentrate on multiple crossover.

I think that my idea, conceptually is very easy to come up with ideas how spells could increase, but to implement them requiers coding, testing and balancing...so yes that would be some work

but the game as it is right now, very nice graphics, nice story, great freedom how you'd want your story to go.... the spells and skill tree leveling up, a bit too basic...

Anyway, like you said, there is a strong suggestion to increase all spells within skill tree when leveling them up. Not just part of them. Having their hands into it, it's not that much more trouble to do it better by adding this suggestion.

Wait, hold on. AngeliusMefyrx, when you say "backstab" are you referring to the Scoundrel Skill BackLASH, formerly known as Vault, which teleports the Rogue behind the target and backstabs them?

Because I have not been talking about the Skill, called BackLASH (requires Scoundrel 1). I have been talking about the Talent, called Back-Stabber (no Requirements), which lets basic, normal attacks do critical hits from behind.

Cripes. Confusions like this are one reason why I try to encourage people to use common terminology as used in the game.

Honestly I don't even like, that the separated social skills from the other skills, therefore taking the freedom of allocating more points into non-combat skills if that is what you would like to do. So splitting even more into skilltree-points and combat-point would be even less of my taste.

And I'm repeating myself but both attributes and skills feel pretty basic in what you gain for investing. It's a hefty downgrade from what we had in DOS1, so I really hope, they will put more effort into those. But I don't think it has to be as complicated as Angelius suggestion.

I'm not often Stabbeys opinion, but valueing traits by the time you spend playing with them seems a bit odd. This is only usefull if a trait helps you accumulate 'saving', like 'The Pawn' or 'Far-out-man' who can save you AP during fight or Warlord with can help you can additional AP during fight. But even than it just something that makes it more convenient and speeds up a fight. Because to you can't take saved AP over into the next fight. The only thing that really would pay off if you took it early, would be something that makes buying and selling easier and therefore you help gathering money, because money is a resilient resource. Valueing with the time playing with it, is more something for games like Age of Wonders or Stellaris, where you have more resource management involved.

On the contrary, I think separating combat and social skills is a great improvement for the game. In DOS1, no one was putting points into social skills on their main characters. They put the social skills on companions that will never be used in battle.

The only difference between DOS1 and DOS2 is that, now you no longer need to keep switching among companions to use the social skills and then switch back to your combat-focused companions to progress the game. This is a huge improvement for player's experience.

The main heroes were the only ones who got additional points from talking traits, so please refrain from such generalizations.

Also it sounds even less effective to use one companion never in combat, because he has no combat skills.

Anyway even if you want to play that way, it should be your choice and not forced by a game whose selling point is freedom of choice and multiclassing.

There were 4 companions you could recruit, but you could only have 2 in your party. Nothing stops you from recruiting all 4 though, and they level up with your party, so you could pick two to help you in combat and spend the level-up points from the others all on Barter and Crafting and such.

I support the separation of combat and non-combat Abilities, but I think for D:OS 2, it's better to improve the Combat abilities rather than do another separation of Combat and Skill abilities.

So having to go back to hall of heroes, just to get the 'trader' sounds not ineffective for you?

If somebody wants to put of such effort, it's their choice. But it was never really necessary, the fights were not that hard even in tactician, that a few points in social would kill you.

Kalrakh, my suggestion was to separate Weapons/Defense from Skills and give you 1 points in Weapons/Defense and 1 point in Skill when leveling up.

Assuming lvl10 Skill tree would be the maximum for skills (30 points mean 3 skill tree max out maximum....) and that proper bonuses be set for Weapons/Defense knowing you would get an overall 30 points.

Stabbey, I'm sorry but most of the time when I am posting suggestion, I am not on my computer at home... The only time I did that was when reporting bugs because I was living them...so I alt-tab the game and went on the website. So I didn't get always the term right but tried to get the proper words for proper understanding to what I was talking about. Yes I was referring to the talent one.

Why? To me right now, the most valuable attack in the game is the rogue, it is so OP. With an Elf, you use that bonus that gives +dam +1Ap -Constitution. You get +2 AP from one of the Scoundrel skill. You can even get Haste or have Haste cast on you. it's 8AP to backstab and hit constantly... it really kills any target even bosses, including almost the final boss. Of course I've put everything in 2 hand weapon bonuses beside 1 in Scoundrel and 1 in Huntsman.

But truthfully that talent is pretty much set for someone playing backstabbing skill with daggers. It just opens the door for all 4 character's in the party to do so by removing it as a talent. Although I doubt that all 4 characters wants to equip daggers anyway...but if they do, it's their way of playing it. Truthfully I don't see this a talent either.

But to me assassin are OP, one way of weakening or assuring that anybody who want's to be an OP assassin is to ensure that they have to specialize themselves into it to be OP; therefor the skill changes I was listing.

I think you were the one in the other thread that agreed to having 2 points into Aerothurge to allow Teleport.... it goes in the same way I'm thinking, I've just elaborated this a little more over here to allow flexibility of having it at lvl1.

You start the game with 3 skills, they ain't lots of skills to choose from; 4 per skill tree.... becomes hard to decide to make some require more points than 1 when you need 3 of those available at lvl1... (of course teleport isn't one of them, but teleport isn't the only skill that you would want some sort of specialization)

Okay, glad that is cleared up, so I'll post my original planned reply.




So if I am understanding this right, getting rid of the Backstab Talent is fine IF Backstabbing is tied to points in Scoundrel so that at Scoundrel 1 you can backstab at 0.33 meters and more points into Scoundrel increases the distance at which you can backstab...

...but getting rid of the Backstab Talent and tying it to lower-damage daggers so that a character can backstab at the current 2 meters (with no increase) if they have a dagger equipped is totally unbalanced??

Again, I am proposing that daggers (and Backstab) will deal LOWER DAMAGE than they do now in exchange for no longer requiring a Talent.


First of all, the game uses meters, not feet as its unit of measurement. They are not the same thing. 1 foot is approximately 1/3 of a meter, and 1 meter is about the smallest distance in the game

1 foot is approximately 1/3 of a meter, and 1 meter is about the smallest discrete distance in the game. I tested this. If I try to move a character 0.3-0.4 meters, that circle literally overlaps with where I am standing. Your 0.3 meter backstab range requires the Rogue to literally be clipping inside the target before it can backstab.

So I am forced to assume that you meant to say 1 meter, not 1 foot. That is only about a 50% smaller distance than the current distance, but that distance is based on the 2.0 meter distance for all dagger attacks. I also tested this. If you run towards an enemy's face and stop 2 meters away, you can hit them with your daggers for only the standard 2 AP attack cost, you don't need to move closer. So unless you're planning on reducing the dagger attack range to punish all dagger attacks not just backstabbing, there's no basis for cutting the range in half.




You do not have any business complaining about characters backstabbing even if they are not that profession, given that you have said that you prefer to put 1 point into most/every skill school. So you making that argument is not credible.

It's hypocritcal for you to complain about that, especially in the context of complaining that players are forced to pick one talent each time, which is exactly what Rogues have to do when picking Back-stabber.




I will use math to show that seems like an implausible move for most people.

You are forgetting that backstabbing requires you to be in a specific area behind your target. So you need to spend AP to move there.

• Even at point-blank range from the front, it's about 6.2 meters to get behind an enemy to backstab, so that means moving there will cost 2 AP without 1.2 meters worth of +movement.
• It costs 2 AP to attack with daggers, not 1 AP (even if you only have 1 dagger equipped).
• It costs AP to change weapons. Just to change weapons, you still need extra AP to attack.
• It takes more than one backstab to kill a target of the same level.
• If you are dual-wielding, it will cost you 1 AP each to put the daggers back on for your next backstab. (Surely you aren't going to backstab only once, right?)
• It will cost AP to move to that new target and AP to backstab them.

4 AP per turn, plus 1 from Flesh Sacrifice (Elf only) and 2 from Adrenaline. 2 AP to move behind a target. 2 AP to backstab once. 1 AP to switch a single weapon. 2 AP to attack once. The target is unlikely to be dead from 1 backstab and 1 regular attack. (The target is also unlikely to be dead if you add in a full round of your party's attacks as well.)

Next turn you have only 3 AP because of Adrenaline. It costs you 2 AP to re-equip both daggers, after which you have 1 AP which isn't enough to get behind another target, much less attack. And now Flesh Sacrifice and Adrenaline are on cooldown for 4 / 3 turns respectively.

If a player wants to waste their turns and AP swapping weapons instead of dealing damage, they will be doing LESS damage overall than sticking with one weapon and using standard attacks.

First you should stop assuming....all these maths you've done base on an idea I've given

The example I've gave, it's an example with approximate distance. I'm giving the general idea. The Dev works with ideas to make it possible. Could be 2 feet's. Could be 1m if they judge that this is the proper distance it should be.
If they want to lvl the basic skills 3 times to achieve it's maximum because this is what feels right, fine with me. I give the idea, they work with it.

Backstabbing is OP for rogue. Forcing them at this very moment to waste a talent for it is ok with me. Now if the game changes and the daggers don't do as much damage, or the critical doesn't do as much, or you can get 1 critical per round....how the game is change is not for me to decide, but if the rogues don't do that much damage in the end, then most likely, that talent won't be necessary anymore to make them waste a talent. So yeah sure, lowering the rogues damage is an option that I haven't promote or denied.
The thing is you need a strategy to lower that damage without affecting the rest of the game therefor you can't lower the damage of "daggers".

Nevertheless, the skill changes I was proposing here would answer the call for the rogue, but also teleport as well as increasing the damage to magic where you don't seem to get any buff for putting more points in said skill tree ...lower the lvl1 skills that are really OP as it is and let people lvlup their skills...so that would be one way of achieving that too.
You don't like? your right to do so, we all have our own opinion. If i am correct, even in eyes of the beholder, magic would improve as you would level up...

Now as for the switching weapon thing.
Backlash is 1 AP
Adrenaline gives 2 AP (only scoundrel)
Flesh Sacrifice gives 1 AP (only elves)
Haste gives 1 AP
Switching weapon would be suggested to 1 AP

Now you can start from there. Oh btw, my mage usually plays first and teleport my target near my rogue but you rarely waste more than 1 AP movement anyway.

I think they made it a Talent because they carried it over right from D:OS 1. But in D:OS 1, you could pick 2 Talents at the start and get a third one at level 3 before any notable combat. The Talent Tax was not as much of an issue in D:OS 1 because you could get other Talents much earlier.

You yourself said that you doubted that all 4 characters want to equip daggers. I agree with that.

I have not had as much time as I would have liked to play this patch, but I intend to see if I can get a Rogue to work well and see if it really is as powerful as some people say. Right now though, the Rogue is often the first one focused down and killed (sometimes from full health in one turn).

I am building my Rogue with a point into Aerothurge for Teleport, Netherswap, and Favourable Wind. I've put some Attribute points into Finesse, Memory, Wits, and Con.

I've never played DOS1

add me to steam, ill make a game if you want to try one that is already set

Never happened to me about them focusing on my rogue, it's always my wizard, so this is why he ended up using a shield.

Or just to give you an idea, the Dragon is lvl7 (298 Physical Armor and 345 health), so are my characters. Prior to my rogue, my Wizard casted Haste on my Rogue. On one round with my rogue I've used Flesh Sacrifice, backlash, throwing knife and back hit, Adrenaline , back hit and I had 1 AP left to teleport away (should have put 1 point into Polymorph to learn invisible instead of Huntsman for First Aid, would even be better because I would have most likely killed the Dragon next round). What was left:
0/298 armor
239/345 health
My warrior then did a battle stomp and blitz
0/298 armor
134/345 health

Can you imagine if my warrior was another rogue...the Dragon wouldn't have had time to play...

Dragon healed himself and the fight continued until I killed him, but that's the difference of damage between a rogue and a fighter.

Of course the 2 hand swords fighter didn't have more AP or that Elf skill to boost damage but it is 400 to 100 at this moment.
400 can kill anything beside bosses....and even some bosses

Maybe I'm complaining on the wrong skill, the throwing knife in the back may have alone removed 150+ armor.
Because if I do the math (I'm out of the game right now) I think my rogue was doing 75 damages for a hit in the back while my knight did 50 damages using skills in front of the dragon... it's those additional AP and throwing knife in the back and adrenaline which are making this unbalanced...and of course the fact that my knight using my offensive skills didn't do as much as basic back hits with the assassin...

I do understand your idea and I'm totally against it, just as others mentioned. It would totally screw with mages, because they hardly need those battle skills, they need to be able to level more skill trees.

Also it limits options instead of giving more, defying the concept of the game: Play how you wish to. Just like splitting of social skills did.


Physical damage is op not necessary the rogues themselves. If you put as much effort into the warrior as you put into the rogues damage, he probably would not have been not much worse. Comparing the damage of somebody who had only 4 AP with somebody who had had how many, I guess 7, at his disposal is a pretty flawed comparison. Physical anyway depends on weapons, for a real comparison both would also need comparable weapons.

Well, I wanted the damage rate to increase from lvling their skill tree as it sometimes feels weak....

But right now it is defying the concept of specialization ...increasing your skill tree as they don't get as good as spreading your points around...not as easy task to find a middle ground...

Weapons are comparable as it is the both the best you can find in the game
Rogue has adrenaline, warrior doesn't.... but it is a rogue skill....
My warrior had Warfare which in this case was useless so yes it accounts for some missing points.
Still you start at 400 to 100 ...this is a long way to go...
Like I said, 400 you kill just about anything beside bosses...and it is very easy to achieve with a rogue

I'll add you and maybe play a little when I have some reliable free time, I'm still fairly busy at the moment.

Nothing prevents Warriors from getting 1 point into Scoundrel and getting Adrenaline (and Cloak and Dagger, for that matter). It doesn't require a dagger, I just tried.

One AoO from my warrior (who accidentally skipped his turn), one Throwing Dagger from my Rogue, and four regular attacks from the warrior killed Source Hound Gracie (The Warrior started out with 6 AP on their turn because they skipped a turn, so 2 regular attacks, Adrenaline, and 2 more regular attacks.) The warrior very nearly soloed that enemy in 1.5 turns. Could have been faster if I hadn't wasted 2 AP by skipping a turn when I had 4 AP. And that's without using Rage.