Am I the only one who doesn't think that this is fair. At the end of the day, if we're only given one vote, we're only voting on the first tree. That vote won't accurately gauge what the community wants for the second class. For example, I want both polymorph and berserker but I could only vote for one of them. Therefore it's basically just a popularity contest.

There should be a second vote to determine the second class imo. Having one vote deciding the fate of two classes is just logically flawed in concept. The people who voted for the first tree would effectively have no say in the second tree. Also many peoples' votes for the second tree would likely with the knowledge of what the first tree would be.

Truth is we need all of those skill trees.

But yeah, there should be a secondary vote option.

I assume there will be a second vote once the results of the first are in.

Honestly I have my doubts a second vote will change the outcome.

I am a bit disappointed that my pessimistic prediction came true.

I agree, there should be a second vote

I would also say that this way, it is skewed in a certain way.
Right now, there are no warrior skills even close to the top, id definitly like to know what the second choices of the people that chose Polymorpher were. I suspect alot of people picked Polymorpher because it is a "warrior synergetic" skill line that actually gets votes.

I believe it's more important that we use the Alternative Vote Method.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE

It never occured in my most pessimistic predictions we would only have one vote to decide two skilltrees, so I still cling to the hope there will be a second one.

If there aren't, well... Big disappointment here! i'm interested neither in Polymoprh that I still think people are getting ultra hyped about and having huge unrealistic expectations about what it will actually be, nor in Summoning Master because summons... meh.

I'm quite positive Bard would be second with a second vote and the reported votes of the 1800+ Polymorphers. Maybe it wouldn't be, but a second vote is still the right way to go regardless...

My only problem with having two rounds of votes is that it could be the same majority that chooses both skill trees. In other words, more people would get two skills they want and less people would get at least one skill they want.

Edit:
Actually, I think a Single Transferable Vote better descibes the ideal method: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8XOZJkozfI

PS: The bard would possibly be my last choice.

Master Summoning is the tree I know that half the people who voted for it won't really use extensively.

The entire tree is based on more meticulous/strategic uses for summons.

Heck Master Summoner might be the only tree that has no attribute since it has no direct attacks or even buffs.

I see what you mean.I can't watch youtube here, but I get the issue you're refering to. I tend to agree, as I'm quite sure I won't get anything out of the votes and by extension the two stretchgoals either...

Bard is the only skill whose description actually mentions scenarios other than combats so just for that, it got my initial vote. Every other skills are described as purely combat oriented trees, which doesn't make them uninteresting, sure, but a tad less interesting than a skilltree that could be used during dialogues or stuff.

I absolutely, 0% trust Polymorph to get remotely close to the widely fantasized shapeshifting usage that was discussed back during the campaign, like turning into a mouse to get into a hole in the wall or even taking the appearance of a NPC, but I feel that's what a lot of people got from Polymorph : a "shapeshifting" skilltree, which it probably isn't. There is the Shapeshifting Mask for that :p

Both methods I mentioned are essentially the same. But single transferable vote is designed to also cope with having multiple winners. Basically, if your vote is going to be wasted because you've voted for a loser, then your vote transfers to your next preference. If your vote is going to be partly wasted because you voted for a clear winner, then a portion of that vote will go to your next preference.

It would make voting more complicated as we'd have to rank our preferences, but it means that there'd be far fewer arguments about the results.

For the record, I think I was too harsh on the bard. But I've never played a game where I've enjoyed the class.

If you feel so strongly about that, maybe you should apply it to your parliament first

I'm in Australia, and this is already how it works.

Voted for the polymorph skill )) Like the idea.

Yeah, statistically two separate votes or one double vote is a great difference.

So... yes, please 2 votes!

I agree with Ayvah... as it is, the group that voted for the winning skill tree, already got what they wanted. Also picking the second placed skill tree, means that from the remaining voters, the largest group also got what they wanted.
Having two separate votes could mean that those who voted for the winning skill tree, got their second favorite as well... and everyone else got nothing.

So imho, one vote to decide both skill trees is the fairest solution.

Honestly the ONE thing that won't make me mad at the result is if Polymorph isn't another intelligence tree.

It REALLY shouldn't be up to the community to balance the game this way.

You sir sound like you need a little run-off voting. I wish we did it here in the states, basically you select your favorite, then you choose the vote you want if the first one loses.

The secondvote has started and the summon master is leading at the moment.

I chose the bard (again). We already have tons of summons.

VOTE FOR BARD!

We need bad ass bards.

Bard-asses.

Can you tell I'm a writer?

That was my thinking of well. The bard seemed like the most interesting that wasn't simply an extension of what you can already do.

Dang I voted for unarmed combatant only to find it isn't going to win.

If I known I would have voted for Master Summoner since that three is going to be interesting (and I summoned a lot in the previous game as it is)

Though I will say one of the major reasons I suddenly disliked Bard was the Song that covers everything in Bacon Grease. :P

Also I know it is a joke but the vote comes off as very disingenuous when you basically tell people what to vote for and everyone does. I honestly wonder if bard got so many votes on its own merits.



No, it is pretty much that.

It is a tree that takes all the buffs, debuffs, and Area Denials that is already in other trees and keeps it for itself.

While Master Summoner takes summons and creates a whole new tree based off of manipulating them in new ways. Of which the only thing we had previously is "Destroy summon".

Trust me when I say you really, really don't want me to sing.

For the first poll, we got Polymorph. For the second, we might get Summoning Master. I'm sure there is a recovery plan for bards if they don't make it. Bard Summoning or Bard Polymorphing would be so bard-ass !

This can be really useful in combat if you are as awful as you say !

TBH, I did and do not like this "vote a skilltree" thing.

Especially a lot of stuff promoted in "summoning mastery" for example is extremely meta, and actually a must even without that "goal". For example the single->multiple summons trait/perk/spell, that already was a insufficiency in D:OS no other path had. There was no "you can only cast 1 fire spell each round" or something similar.

So making that optional was, imho, actually a bad decision. Unless it meant to be done anyway, which on the other hand, would make the choice pointless. So yeah... not a good idea, imho.

That's btw why I voted for most interest in the modding tools. Already wanted to dig into it with the EE but... well, ya know, quite some shortage there reagrding that. ^^

Now I almost want there to be a talent for being able to sing, and depending on whether you have it or not, Bard Skills switch from a supporting nature to a damaging one.

No matter what, Bard has my support, anyways!

I wish I could back to throw in my vote. RIP Unarmed Combatant. :(

Yet another mage!
I was hoping we were getting unarmed fighter or alchemist (my vote) but no, more mages! Like there arent enaugh bloody mages already.

Well fine, Summoning Master better be straight up Pokemans then!

Dang, this is dissapointing. Unarmed Combatant, Alchemist, Bard, would have all been really great choices that are often unexplored in RPGs.

They already said what Summoning master is.

It isn't about having more summons, it is about manipulating the summons you already have. So if your summon is about to die, you can make it self-destruct to deal extra damage to enemies.

Doesnt even give you more summons? That means you HAVE to be a Wizard to use it?
Now thats absolutley lame.

I was hoping to at least get some more interresting summons than Elementals.

Wew lads, youve done great for voting on this, you sure like boring things.

We should get to vote until Bard makes it in and even if it is dead last. mysteriously came in dead last.

Haha. The other options actually don't seem that interesting really.

Unarmed combatants can't use weapons. But weapons are fun! Why should I be excited about a mechanic being removed? Oh wait, they're getting "knuckles" and "claws" anyway. So I guess their key feature is grapples? It's not clear how this would be implemented.

Alchemists. This at least would introduce some interesting new mechanics, but oh god. My experience with these kinds of classes is that it involves a lot of the wrong kind of inventory micromanagement.

Bard? What is he doing, really? Buffing and debuffing? Is he a rogue-lite? I'm kind of unsure how bards ended up being an RPG class in the first place. You wouldn't take a painter into battle either. Maybe the Larian writers are so keen on this skill because this is as close as they can get to having actual writers in combat. XD

Summoning master actually appears to open up a range of cool new mechanics.

Yeah.

I had really hoped Unarmed Combatant, trap master and Alchemist had got more votes.

I don't understand why Larian felt the need to limit the skill trees to 2. The resources to build all of them exist.

Balancing maybe? Make better what you already have and add only new skills that work best?

Vote =/= no implication that "it works best"

Unarmed combatants could actually throw enemies around, use grapples, all sorts of things that physical fighters right now cannot do, which would be realy great for teamplay.
Pin down an enemy and have your friend stab him in the gut.

Bards for the most part tend to be either hybrids or buffers, which in a party based game is ok.

Alchemist could be realy cool, throwing other potions like granades? damn right! Poisons? Yes please.

Imagine what kinda stuff you could do with that. Instead of having to use abilities, you could make your normal attacks have all kinds of effects based on the poisons.

Such as imagine having a poison that makes your enemy incorporeal, making him unable to participate in the fight, or have a poison that disintigrates his armor.

Imagine throwing health potions as a ranged heal, imagine having potions as a form of liquid. Like Acid or Water.

Imagine throwing a pool of healing potion on the ground healing anyone that stands in it, how cool would that be? Or a pool of fire resistance potion? Crazy stuff like that!

None of this is any different to what mages can do or could be made to do. Of course, an alchemist would have their own group of abilities, so when implemented it would be easy to differentiate them.

However, the conceptual differentiation is that alchemists are forced to craft their spells ahead of time. This adds a whole new crafting minigame that -- to me -- really seems more like tedious micromanagement than anything fun. Crafting a weapons and armour is kind of fun, but having to collect the ingredients and craft every potion for every action I want to perform in combat ahead of time sounds tedious.

That said, I fully support the concept of the Full Metal Alchemist variety of "alchemy". That looks fun.

And thats the point, but you have it the wrong way.

WHY would we make this into something a mage does when you might aswell have a martial do it?
Even tho i dont agree with you because no a mage would not grapple or throw enemies.

So far there are 3 trees that arent mage based. Only ONE of them is a fighter tree.
one is the rogue tree and one is the archer tree.
Then you got 5 mage trees.

WHY would we need more mages?
All these trees are based on the same stat. Why would we want more mages when Martials could do all these things?

I was referring specifically to the alchemist.

But I'll address the unarmed combatant:

Grapples could be interesting, and it'd be nice to have more non-mage abilities. But the problem with building this into an "unarmed combatant" is that it's restrictive instead of additive. When you build a warrior with a weapon, you can't just start investing points in unarmed in the same way as a fire mage can invest points in water magic.

In D:OS, Larian have done a much better job of creating cohesion between the magic skill groups. As a mage, you might cast an earth spell to lay down some oil and then immediately follow-up with a fire spell to set it all on fire. How awesome is that?

But a warrior/rogue? You could get bow skills but you'll need to equip a bow. You could get melee skills but you need to use a melee weapon. If we'd voted differently, we could have gotten unarmed skills, but then you'd need to ditch your weapon entirely. All of these skill groups basically mandate that once you pick your skill group you have little room left for any creativity. The closest I ever got to this was by combining Bull Rush with Bully to deal some bonus damage, but it was hard to pull off.

For the record, my first vote actually went to the Juggernaut because it could potentially open up some skills that could be added to the other martial skills, instead of just creating a new niche.

Who says you will have to be unarmed to use unarmed skills?

It could easily be viable with a weapon drawn, but just not gain benefit from it.

OR have a specific Unarmed combatant weapon that is compatible with the Marshal skillsets.

You're right. It's a silly assumption that being unarmed means not being armed.


Absolutely. The "unarmed" title is a little misleading as Larian planned to provide "unarmed" weapons such as knuckle dusters and claws. However, standard weapons such as swords were explicitly out-of-scope for an effective unarmed combatant.

The effect is that armed and unarmed specialisations will be incompatible.

If the skill group were labelled "marshal" or "brawler" or "grappler" or whatever and lacked the weapon-restrictions then I would definitely be more supportive of this.