PoE What class for your main character in PoE?

So, I'm curious.

What class are you going with for your first playthrough of PoE, and are you going to create your own party?

Personally, I'm thinking I'll be going with a Rogue - and I'll be focusing on ranged combat. Since they've implemented ranged sneak attacks, that's like begging me to play my favorite sneaky archer type

Also, I plan to create my own party - which I believe works like it does in the backer beta. So, you go to an Innkeeper and you "hire" a new party member - which you can then create for yourself. Not sure if that's still true for the full version but I'd assume so.

Anyway, what class will YOU pick and why? Will you focus on a particular stat, like INT for the dialogue options or whatever?

I'm not going to play on release day (still busy with MMX and others), but I've been planning, of course, which is normally half the game for me.

I prefer doing my own party, too, but — like in the Baldur's Gate games — I feel like I'd miss out on party banter and interactions. So I'll probably go with one main-character for the first run-through to absorb the lore and make a custom 3-characters or 4-characters party on a later run. Even then, from what I've read, you'd still have only one main character that's used for talent checks etc., which would kinda defeat part of the purpose of having a custom party. I'd prefer to make different characters the current leader based on situation (ranger in the woods, rogue in town alleys). Would make much more sense that way. As it is now, the others won't have any say?

As for my first main character, I'm thinking of going with an Orlan Cipher called Arhu Calin, focusing on science, lore or stealth. That was my character in the Vanguard - Saga of heroes beta back then: a Raki (=cat) psionicist. Unfortunately, psionicists in this game seem to be melee fighters for some reason, which is not really my cup of tea and a fairly strange design choice IMHO. So… not sure yet.

Based on my experience from the BB, only the main character has a say when it comes to dialogues. It doesn't matter which character initiates a conversation - which confused me in the beginning.

Yes, I tried a Cipher briefly - because I love the concept of a psionicist - and it did, indeed, seem like they want them to be melee characters. Not entirely sure, but the skills were melee oriented.

I agree that's a strange (and very bad) design decision, if true.

I also think the design decision to not grant XP for winning battles is stupid and directly counter to one of the most entertaining aspects of the original Baldur's Gate. I always go exploring as soon as I can, and I love to build my characters through fighting and questing at my own pace, as I see fit. I'm still hoping that's some kind of BB thing, and they end up changing that for release. Probably not, though - as it seems like such a typical Obsidian thing to do.

They like to be different "just because" sometimes.

I love the idea of combat not being the focus, but when you design your game to be full of encounters - it's a pretty stupid way of making fights even less entertaining.

Definitely a druid. My inner tree-hugger always goes for a druid PC in the first playthru on any games that have them.

I've deliberately avoided most PoE gameplay and mechanics spoilers before I start. I'm trying to preserve that feeling of knowing very little about the game, reading the manual, and then jumping right in without having any pre-conceived builds or meta-knowledge available.

Like before the internet.

Nephologist said:

Definitely a druid. My inner tree-hugger always goes for a druid PC in the first playthru on any games that have them.

I've deliberately avoided most PoE gameplay and mechanics spoilers before I start. I'm trying to preserve that feeling of knowing very little about the game, reading the manual, and then jumping right in without having any pre-conceived builds or meta-knowledge available.

Like before the internet.

Click to expand...

Definitely the best way to experience a game, though it's excessively hard to achieve if you like to surf and you're curious about gaming in general

Well, for me it is - as the temptation is just too great. But I'm getting very good at not knowing much, but I always end up knowing a little bit.

I find a "little knowledge" goes a long way to sidestep disappointment - because I tend to hype myself based on the potential of a game, and they invariably fail to even get close to that potential.

As such, I like to know a little bit about the weaknesses and what I can realistically expect in terms of scope and features. But details are what I like to avoid until release is very close.

For PoE, it hasn't been that hard. It wasn't a game that was particularly high on my list - and I know Obsidian enough to understand I shouldn't let myself get hyped about a game they've made.

In this case, it turns out to have been the right attitude, because it's actually a bit better than I expected - and I'm pleasantly surprised.

Until yesterday I knew nothing at all about the game (I did back it on KS). I'm playing a priest. Considered an Enchanter but description sounds too 'buff bot' to me?

wolfing said:

Until yesterday I knew nothing at all about the game (I did back it on KS). I'm playing a priest. Considered an Enchanter but description sounds too 'buff bot' to me?

Click to expand...

I haven't played an Enchanter - but the BB Priest is very "buff botty" so far, but that's probably just how I use it.

DArtagnan said:

I haven't played an Enchanter - but the BB Priest is very "buff botty" so far, but that's probably just how I use it.

Click to expand...

Well my 3rd option would be a wizard but I learned wizard is one of the first companions you get (and I'm not planning on creating the party from scratch, at least not in the first playthrough).

I'm still unsure, I really like the Cipher, Chanter, Druids, Priests, Monk, Ranger. I also like the Orlan, Godlike and Elve races a lot. So many choices. I will play with the companions, but I will also make adventurers for the Stronghold, so I guess everyone will be made eventually.

My current ideas are:

• Cipher Orlan with pistol/blunderbuss that focus on mechanics and stealth.
• Moon Godlike Dovakhin Chanter or Death Godlike Priest mace&board scholar.
• Wood Elf Ranger with a pet lion that focus on stealth and survival with a warbow…or a druid with a staff.
• Nature Godlike or Pale Elf monk with athletic that punch things very fast.

I really like the Cipher-rogue idea, might change the race though.

A very good question, DArtagnan. I haven't quite figured it out yet. It's hard when it's a completely new system, such as PoE or D: OS. I have no idea how much time I spent creating (and re-creating) characters in D: OS, but it was a pretty solid gaming session.

I normally play Paladin types, but they seem a bit over the top fanatical here. I'm also looking at Chanter and Cipher, because they're quite original, but that could end up being a complete miss as it's hard to know exactly how to play them right now.

I guess it is very tough if you give XP for combat, to reward the none combat oriented characters in a proper way, as to not favour the "kill everything" approach.

GothicGothicness said:

I guess it is very tough if you give XP for combat, to reward the none combat oriented characters in a proper way, as to not favour the "kill everything" approach.

Click to expand...

That's indicative of controlling design behavior, which is never a wise choice. You don't want to design a game in such a way as to tell players they shouldn't do what they want to have fun with, because it won't pay off.

What you want to do is use math, which is relatively simple. You make sure that the XP rewarded for killing or grinding does NOT give an unfair advantage over other ways of earning XP. But it should obviously provide a reward - as it takes time and effort to do. But don't design the game so that being overly powerful in combat is the only way to success.

A smart way of doing that, for one, is to make combat something you can AVOID and get a similar amount of XP for doing that - through stealth/diplomacy/bribery/intimidation and so on.

You could also give much larger amounts of XP for completing quests and exploring carefully. A zillion other RPGs have done this.

Designing a game around wanting to block OCD optimizers is not smart. It's very very….. NOT smart.

To actively discourage fighting is to tell players they shouldn't enjoy combat so much, which - again - is not smart in a game full of combat.

Well, I think so - but then again, I don't agree with everything Obsidian does.

I usually play a monk if available but since they turned monks into more of a berzerking fighter I'm not really sure what I'll play. Monks should be disciplined fighters, strike fast and get out of harms way.

Probably rogue or ranger. Assuming they haven't reinvented those classes as well.

Yeah, for a fan-service faithful recreation of BG/IWD - they sure made some strange design choices. Almost as if they're too arrogant to do what people expect and mostly want them to do.

DArtagnan said:

Yeah, for a fan-service faithful recreation of BG/IWD - they sure made some strange design choices. Almost as if they're too arrogant to do what people expect and mostly want them to do.

Click to expand...

Another time where Dart is channeling my thoughts exactly.

I'll most likely play a wizard.

crpgnut said:

Another time where Dart is channeling my thoughts exactly.

Click to expand...

Don't make me queasy

DArtagnan said:

That's indicative of controlling design behavior, which is never a wise choice. You don't want to design a game in such a way as to tell players they shouldn't do what they want to have fun with, because it won't pay off.

What you want to do is use math, which is relatively simple. You make sure that the XP rewarded for killing or grinding does NOT give an unfair advantage over other ways of earning XP. But it should obviously provide a reward - as it takes time and effort to do. But don't design the game so that being overly powerful in combat is the only way to success.

A smart way of doing that, for one, is to make combat something you can AVOID and get a similar amount of XP for doing that - through stealth/diplomacy/bribery/intimidation and so on.

You could also give much larger amounts of XP for completing quests and exploring carefully. A zillion other RPGs have done this.

Designing a game around wanting to block OCD optimizers is not smart. It's very very….. NOT smart.

To actively discourage fighting is to tell players they shouldn't enjoy combat so much, which - again - is not smart in a game full of combat.

Well, I think so - but then again, I don't agree with everything Obsidian does.

Click to expand...

In some ways I agree with you. But in almost all such a games, the combat build was by far the most rewarding one. Maybe they wanted to encourage other approaches?

Also for example if there is any kind of re-spawn in the game, getting XP for combat gives you a "well" of XP, if you go out of the way to another area "too early" and kill some stuff and get some loot and XP, it give you an advantage, it goes on and on. In a mission based game such as Deus Ex and otheres, it is much easier, just give the player greater rewards for being none-lethal in that mission for example.

GothicGothicness said:

In some ways I agree with you. But in almost all such a games, the combat build was by far the most rewarding one. Maybe they wanted to encourage other approaches?

Click to expand...

Maybe it was rewarding according to time spent doing it? I mean, if you don't provide an alternative to fighting - then you can't expect people to not fight.

That's my point. Don't take away the fun - just provide other kinds of fun.

Also for example if there is any kind of re-spawn in the game, getting XP for combat gives you a "well" of XP, if you go out of the way to another area "too early" and kill some stuff and get some loot and XP, it give you an advantage, it goes on and on. In a mission based game such as Deus Ex and otheres, it is much easier, just give the player greater rewards for being none-lethal in that mission for example.

Click to expand...

That's an ancient design approach. Respawns in a game like this is usually a bad idea, but if you must have them - you simply adjust XP accordingly. The most obvious way is to provide diminishing returns to avoid the well problem, which stems all the way back from Bard's Tale and before.

Almost no players really enjoy the grinding process (they enjoy the optimization process), but if you implement diminishing returns, you provide "something" for people who get really OCD about that stuff, and they should be allowed to enjoy the game. It won't break any balance.

It's really easy to avoid.

Also, it's a singleplayer game. Fretting about game balance when the only opponent you really have is yourself and your own nature, is yet another design mistake.

Just goes to show that I don't agree with Obsidian about what makes a game fun.

My impression was always that they have a TON of RPG experience, but they lack the ability to think creatively all the way, and they seem to "react against" what they don't like - rather than create something new that they really like.

I haven't decided between a Wizard or Cipher yet. I've also done my best to stay clear of not only the backer beta, but other general hyping mechanisms which would spoil or bias my experience with too much pre-knowledge. I'll thus be diving into the manual and learning about the game for the first time as I go.

I'm also intending to structure my party around companion npcs in the world based upon role-playing considerations discovered through playing the game as naturally as possible; as I think given Obsidian's strengths, this in theory at least should lead to a richer role-playing experience than the more IWD party oriented path.

Reading the various threads on the game as the interest rises is certainly exciting; looking forward to reading about all of the various approaches players come up with on the 'Watch as I may hold off for awhile until I have enough free to time to really dedicate to the game.

Edit:
After much deliberation, I actually went for a straight up dwarven fighter! I think it's a nice handy way of getting used to the combat style and engine with both a sense of familiarity and the excitement of a new beginning.

Haven't planned out my full party yet, but I absolutely want to try a monk after the backer update about those mechanics. May stick to some classic classes and test the "you can build them with whatever stats" line.