A dex based pet skill.
|
Thanks much " Erm, that's precisely what I'm trying to say: it SHOULD be that way, because if it weren't, then there would be no point in having witches, rangers, duelists, marauders, shadows, or templars. I like to call these "classes" for simplicity's sake. If there are no meaningful differences between classes (example: witches can get summons with less investment than duellists or rangers can), then why bother having different starts on the passive tree, and why bother having different classifications of active skills (red, blue, green)? In other words, I WANT the ranger to have a more difficult time doing something that a witch has less effort in doing, and vice versa, because that is precisely what makes the skill differentiation system meaningful. Please no dexterity summons without serious caveats. Underrated stats: Basic human decency, small quantum of respect, microportion of compassion
|
|
|
no.
having that would mean you'd need to have support for it in the dex tree and there's not really any room for it. Build of the week #9 - Breaking your face with style http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_EcQDOUN9Y
IGN: Poltun | |
" Agreed that it should be that way, and I am truly glad that it IS that way. that is where we disagree. You seem to think that the classes are already too homogenized. Where you do have a valid point, and you're definitely not the first to bring it up; I cant help but feel like we are never going to agree on this ;). Being able to bridge across the passive tree into other zones and create your character to fulfill other roles than the standard cliches (dex/bow, int/spells, str/melee) is really what appeals to me most about this game. Personally, when I play an arpg like PoE, it is a quest for perfection. When I theorycraft a build, I can sit on the passive tree for hours playing with different classes and routes to the specific keystones I want to hit with the lowest opportunity cost. Its the depth of customization that so many games of the same genre have failed to meet. This brings me to the point that more varied skill types, such as a dex summon, would not homogenize the classes because the games mechanics for customization already promote diversity so heavily. Its what the game is about. | |
|
I completely agree with the fact that there should be minions more easily available to Dexterity characters especially. The way I see it, minion spells should be like remote skill spells in that there are certain types designed for each attribute. That means Intelligence, Dexterity, and Strength minions. I originally explained this idea in this post but I'll get more into it here.
The main problem I see has already come up in this thread, and that is securing the identities of classes. In this case, some of you want to make it more difficult, or at least more tedious, to make use of the current minion skills. In my opinion, that should be the case, but there should also be alternative minion skills that provide separate functions for the classes of other attributes. The best example of that would be with what I call focus skill minions. One for Intelligence that casts attack spells, one for Strength that uses melee attack skills, and one for Dexterity that essentially is a projectile attack skill. As stated in my linked post, for Intelligence it could be one of those wand-wielding phantoms from Waterfall Caves Level 2 ("Summon Acolyte"), for Strength it could be a living statue that we see in the screenshots of Act 3 ("Summon Living Statue"), and for Dexterity it could be a bird or flying animal of some sort ("Summon Falcon"). These three minion types serve completely different purposes, which, of course, is the goal, much like the remote skill spells. To explain further, each would be linked to an appropriate skill and, when they can, use it; this is called their focus skill. Otherwise, they would perform a default attack. When it comes to additional minions that more resemble the Intelligence-based ones we already have (such as animals for Dexterity and "golems" (inanimate objects brought to life) for Strength), they should also exist, but as I stated, serve separate purposes and functions. Their designated passives on the skill tree will be placed in accordance with the attribute they're designed for and only effect them, and there could be a new cluster added to the middle of the tree for all minions, and another for focus minions. same name in-game
| |
" Very well said. | |
|
I'd very much like a singleton minion that is strong and you only have one of, like a golem or pet. If that's a dex skill, cool, but we definitely need something other than the necro horde in terms of minion options :)
|
|
" Are you under the impression that the tree is finished and they won't be adding more passives because there isn't room? I think its fair to say that eventually the skill tree with be unrecognizable to its current form. I like this idea. Ide like to see some kind of bear pet that works as a semi-tank. You could set it to prevent use of any other minions. Theres many possibilities either way, and it always blows my mind when I see people argue against adding more options into an ARPG. | |
|
Self image, it makes sense for a dex class to use illusion tricks.
Build of the week #2 : http://tinyurl.com/ce75gf4
| |
|
Ranger pets could be supported by the passive tree. You just make a small cluster for minion skills all the way in some corner somewhere. If people want to make a "pure" minion-ranger, they'd have to traverse to the witch/templar side.
This would not invalidate class roles at all. The point of a minion pet for a ranger is for thematics and so there are more ways to play a ranger. A ranger pet would be fun because you could use it to tank while you do ranged attacks. Make it have some kind of opportunity cost (high mana cost or something, maybe it drains mana while active or reserves mana per active pet) and it would be balanced. My Keystone Ideas: http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/744282 Last edited by anubite on Dec 8, 2012, 6:29:54 PM
|
