Activated Skills Tree

[Exentryk]

I agree with you, but monster hunts will be frequent and since Marcin said there will be no presets and we won't have our builds to change quickly, it'll be very boring to take one by one every slot and change it depending on the monster or boss we will face. in the beginning i'm sure it will be interesting and i'll definitely experiment with different skill but since there are 100+ hours i can't imagine doing that all my walkthrough. That's why the balanced or general build as you say it's the best choice imo.

I see now what you mean by presets. It would have been nice to have so you could quickly switch back to your balanced build. Presets in general help players experiment more as well. For example, in "Bravely Default" game, there were no presets, so I was more reluctant to try out a new ability or a new build, as it meant having to change everything from equipment, abilities, jobs etc.
In this case, it's only one set of changes tho, which are the 12 skills. So I am guessing it won't be as huge as a change in Bravely Default. Let's see how it works out.

 

[Geralt_of_bsas]

Thing is that, as we heard from Blacha, the resulting style made out of your skills will need to be dominated in terms of gameplay, you dont just change stuff and then see if its good or not, you have to spend time playing and learning to master new tactics and how to handle the resources you have, this is combined with armor elements and potions and weapons of course.
So you can experiment easy and well, but you'll probably never reach considerable or maximum potential of a preset without investing in surrounding mechanics and systems, and training while playing.

 

[truthinoneword]

Well the odds of me touching or even using alchemy is pretty remote, so omni build here I come!

 

[Xvenger]

Well the odds of me touching or even using alchemy is pretty remote, so omni build here I come!

this. never truly used the potion system in the previous games since I personally didnt really feel their effects or at least, there weren't really any of them that wowed me. but to be fair, I dont remember an rpg that ever got me into it lol.
Not a big fan of temporary buffs that needs upkeep

 

[EliHarel]

Well the odds of me touching or even using alchemy is pretty remote, so omni build here I come!

this. never truly used the potion system in the previous games since I personally didnt really feel their effects or at least, there weren't really any of them that wowed me. but to be fair, I dont remember an rpg that ever got me into it lol.
Not a big fan of temporary buffs that needs upkeep

Read this, it's a great post about alchemy. I have no idea if CDPR had this in mind when designing it for TW3, but I sure hope so.

http://forums.cdprojektred.com/thre...chemy-System?p=1358680&viewfull=1#post1358680

 

[truthinoneword]

Read this, it's a great post about alchemy. I have no idea if CDPR had this in mind when designing it for TW3, but I sure hope so.

http://forums.cdprojektred.com/thre...chemy-System?p=1358680&viewfull=1#post1358680

Even if they did, you still run into the problem of not needing skill points in alchemy. All alchemy is used for is brewing potions and than consuming them for the related buff; same with bombs and traps, you make them an than you lose them. None of that requires skill point investment . Especially when you take into consideration what you are giving up for it.

So lets say I have three slots, and four purchased skills.

Skills available

Faster sword swinging

Igni melts men down to the bone

Quen makes you a living god

Heal faster

Drink one extra potion of which you can already drink three of.... Why?

Skills equipped.

-Faster Sword Swinging

-Igni

- Heal faster

Even if you take into consideration that late game you can equip 12 skills at once. I am still looking at all five signs, Multiple sword upgrades I am sure I will want, and some constant buffs from the general tree. There won't ever be a strong incentive to utilize the alchemy skills as the other trees are just so much more appealing.

But you say "why don't you just buy a few alchemy skills, and use them when not in combat to get the best of both worlds!" Simple reason why; because the skills you can unlock and equip are also finite. So the odds of me wanting to switch out a more appropriate fighting style, or more focused magic style will still be more demanding of my attention than very minor upgrades to a system that is strong enough without them.

A final problem with investing in alchemy Is the fact that your base sword moves, and spells are weak without appropriate skill investment. Whereas alchemy is still reasonably powerful even without points distributed into it.

 

[thislsmadness]

Even if they did, you still run into the problem of not needing skill points in alchemy. All alchemy is used for is brewing potions and than consuming them for the related buff; same with bombs and traps, you make them an than you lose them. None of that requires skill point investment . Especially when you take into consideration what you are giving up for it.

So lets say I have three slots, and four purchased skills.

Skills available

Faster sword swinging

Igni melts men down to the bone

Quen makes you a living god

Heal faster

Drink one extra potion of which you can already drink three of.... Why?

Skills equipped.

-Faster Sword Swinging

-Igni

- Heal faster

Even if you take into consideration that late game you can equip 12 skills at once. I am still looking at all five signs, Multiple sword upgrades I am sure I will want, and some constant buffs from the general tree. There won't ever be a strong incentive to utilize the alchemy skills as the other trees are just so much more appealing.

But you say "why don't you just buy a few alchemy skills, and use them when not in combat to get the best of both worlds!" Simple reason why; because the skills you can unlock and equip are also finite. So the odds of me wanting to switch out a more appropriate fighting style, or more focused magic style will still be more demanding of my attention than very minor upgrades to a system that is strong enough without them.

Furthermore to drive a final nail into the alchemy tree's coffin. Is the fact that your base sword moves, and spells are weak with out appropriate skill investment. So your base abilities would suffer much more than a skill less alchemy would.

There is a lot they can do to make Alchemy appealing, there are no inherent limitations. What if one of the alchemy skills is: "Rook also now enhances Geralts reflexes, increasing movement and attack speed by 50%". They've mentioned that really good mutagens will be extremely toxic. An Alchemy skill that significantly increase Tolerance could mean being able to simultaneously equip the best Mutagens in the game.

Its all a matter of CDPR how CDPR balances each tree.

 

[truthinoneword]

There is a lot they can do to make Alchemy appealing, there are no inherent limitations. What if one of the alchemy skills is: "Rook also now enhances Geralts reflexes, increasing movement and attack speed by 50%". They've mentioned that really good mutagens will be extremely toxic. An Alchemy skill that significantly increase Tolerance could mean being able to simultaneously equip the best Mutagens in the game.

Its all a matter of CDPR how CDPR balances each tree.

Well if they go with what the potions could do from the books, than yeah it might be worth it. For example the classic story where Geralt takes the potion, and becomes strong enough to fight toe to toe with a Striga. However even with super human strengthening, and weird effects you are still looking at a temporary boost versus a constant overall boot to everything.

 

[thislsmadness]

Well if they go with what the potions could do from the books, than yeah it might be worth it. For example the classic story where Geralt takes the potion, and becomes strong enough to fight toe to toe with a Striga. However even with super human strengthening, and weird effects you are still looking at a temporary boost versus a constant overall boot to everything.

Yeah, the fact that those boosts are temporary and finite just means they can afford to make them really powerful.

 

[EliHarel]

I, uh, only meant to recommend a nice post to read. Not really sure where that vendetta against alchemy came from, and why it was addressing me via quote.

But since the discussion is already underway, a few points.

Even if they did, you still run into the problem of not needing skill points in alchemy. All alchemy is used for is brewing potions and than consuming them for the related buff; same with bombs and traps, you make them an than you lose them. None of that requires skill point investment . Especially when you take into consideration what you are giving up for it.

You no longer lose the potions, with the automatic refill.

Even if you take into consideration that late game you can equip 12 skills at once. I am still looking at all five signs, Multiple sword upgrades I am sure I will want, and some constant buffs from the general tree. There won't ever be a strong incentive to utilize the alchemy skills as the other trees are just so much more appealing.

But you say "why don't you just buy a few alchemy skills, and use them when not in combat to get the best of both worlds!" Simple reason why; because the skills you can unlock and equip are also finite. So the odds of me wanting to switch out a more appropriate fighting style, or more focused magic style will still be more demanding of my attention than very minor upgrades to a system that is strong enough without them.

This is the premise of your post I don't get. It's unbased that the alchemy tree will offer only very minor upgrades to the skills. We can't know that. In fact, we have reason to believe otherwise. In TW2, the alchemy tree was surprisingly powerful, so why should we expect it to benegligible in TW3?

I had a save game in TW2 near the Operator so I could toy around with different builds, and I found that a heavy alchemy one with a few touches in swordsmanship was much stronger than a heavy swordsmanship build with a few touches in alchemy. With a heavy swordsmanship build I didn't reach the amount of damage, regeneration and sign power (obviously) as I did with an alchemy build. So I'm not sure where does the assertion of "very minor upgrades" is coming from.

Furthermore, what you're writing is almost exactly what that post I linked to aimed to correct, so I'm left all the more puzzled. That post I linked to clearly suggested that if potions only offer things you already have, but better, they won't be as attractive and the game won't be as tactical. Instead, potions should offer you things you can't get any other way.

Furthermore to drive a final nail into the alchemy tree's coffin. Is the fact that your base sword moves, and spells are weak with out appropriate skill investment. So your base abilities would suffer much more than a skill less alchemy would.

Again, see TW2. Maybe our experiences were different, but when I toyed around with a swordsmanship-heavy build, and an alchemy-heavy build, the latter outperformed the former in almost every aspect.

 

[truthinoneword]

I, uh, only meant to recommend a nice post to read. Not really sure where that vendetta against alchemy came from, and why it was addressing me via quote.

But since the discussion is already underway, a few points.


You no longer lose the potions, with the automatic refill.


This is the premise of your post I don't get. It's unbased that the alchemy tree will offer only very minor upgrades to the skills. We can't know that. In fact, we have reason to believe otherwise. In TW2, the alchemy tree was surprisingly powerful, so why should we expect it to benegligible in TW3?

I had a save game in TW2 near the Operator so I could toy around with different builds, and I found that a heavy alchemy one with a few touches in swordsmanship was much stronger than a heavy swordsmanship build with a few touches in alchemy. With a heavy swordsmanship build I didn't reach the amount of damage, regeneration and sign power (obviously) as I did with an alchemy build. So I'm not sure where does the assertion of "very minor upgrades" is coming from.

Furthermore, what you're writing is almost exactly what that post I linked to aimed to correct, so I'm left all the more puzzled. That post I linked to clearly suggested that if potions only offer things you already have, but better, they won't be as attractive and the game won't be as tactical. Instead, potions should offer you things you can't get any other way.


Again, see TW2. Maybe our experiences were different, but when I toyed around with a swordsmanship-heavy build, and an alchemy-heavy build, the latter outperformed the former in almost every aspect.

When you say outperformed are you talking DPS? Because the swordsman tree offered more than just raw damage. It gave you an enhanced dodge, crowed control in your basic attacks, the ability to instantly kill a large group of men, negated enhanced back damage, and provided a large amount of buffs in a singular skill that increased survivability. When matched up with a decent magic investment as well you basically became unstoppable.

All I remember the alchemy tree proving is enhancement form poisons which didn't come up that much, the option to drink more potions which didn't seem necessary, and this weird rage mode which didn't measure up to well to the slow time spell/ group kill combo.

Also I have no vendetta against alchemy other than I don't like crafting systems in games. I just used your post as a great way to address some of my problems with it.

 

[Enclave996]

Levelling in the Game

I had a question. In The Witcher 2 you basically had to choose between being a master with sword, a master with signs, a master at alchemy or a jack of all trades but master of none.

Thing is, Geralt is supposed to be pretty amazing with all of those things. In this game will it be possible to master everything with enough levelling up or will we be restricted again to only truly mastering a single "discipline"?

 

[EliHarel]

Actually, Geralt isn't supposed to be all of those things. CDPR took some much required creative liberty with the Signs and Alchemy and made them much more significant than they were in the books. In general, and for Geralt in particular. In the short stories they have some presence, but in the main saga I actually believe that Geralt never once used potions for battle (let alone in the extensive way we can in TW2 and TW3), or Signs (let alone the... etc).

I also think that from a gameplay RPG perspective it's not good letting you master everything. If by maximum level I'll be able to have all skills it'll feel uninspired. It doesn't require any careful planning, no hard build decisions. It's just a "sure, have it all" route which I don't enjoy. I think part of what makes RPGs' mechanics memorable is that you need to decide on a path and choose one skill over the other.

 

[caspartine]

I think it's safe to presume the concept of the open world gives us the possibility to max all out, unless there's a level cap before capping your talents.

 

[geraltthebleidd]

i think maybe you can master only alchemy and sword , 2 perks or only one perk ...it would be unrealistic if geralt is a master at everything and i think for the world it would be less dynamic and difficult because i think there are monsters who doesn't like fire or other things... if you have every magic for every creature i think this is a bummer for the fights

 

[EliHarel]

I think it's safe to presume the concept of the open world gives us the possibility to max all out, unless there's a level cap before capping your talents.

Level cap at 50. You can't max out everything.

i think maybe you can master only alchemy and sword , 2 perks or only one perk ...it would be unrealistic if geralt is a master at everything and i think for the world it would be less dynamic and difficult because i think there are monsters who doesn't like fire or other things... if you have every magic for every creature i think this is a bummer for the fights

Why alchemy and sword? In TW2 the three trees were more or less equal in the amount of upgrades they had. It makes no sense for TW3 to be a step back in that regard. It'll want to be a stop forward and make alchemy even more appealing as a tree of its own (I believe it was actually the strongest tree in TW2, just unattractive because it broke your rhythm with the need to constantly drink to utilize your bonuses). So I think it's safe to assume you can master one tree with a bit of dabbling in another.

 

[Lieste]

There is a "build" mechanic that limits what your focus can be.

You should be able to unlock and thus have available many of the skills across the whole skill tree, but you only have limited focus on these specials, and have to prepare during rest periods. You can use a mix of skill types, but get steep bonuses for concentrating active focussed skills. Initially into one area, possibly later across several.

 

[Enclave996]

Actually I find a game that expects you to learn everything can be more immersive than a game that forces you to pick and choose.

It allows creatures to have very specific strengths and weaknesses that you need to learn about and exploit to defeat them. If however you don't have the ability to learn everything then that means every monster needs to be beatable by every play style. You suddenly cannot really have an enemy that can only be defeated by magic since not everybody playing will have competent magic skills. Instead it would have to be defeatable via magic or sword.

 

[EliHarel]

Actually I find a game that expects you to learn everything can be more immersive than a game that forces you to pick and choose.

It allows creatures to have very specific strengths and weaknesses that you need to learn about and exploit to defeat them. If however you don't have the ability to learn everything then that means every monster needs to be beatable by every play style. You suddenly cannot really have an enemy that can only be defeated by magic since not everybody playing will have competent magic skills. Instead it would have to be defeatable via magic or sword.

Maybe in theory if we're talking about a game with a protagonist who's a mechanical blank slate. In TW3 Geralt already starts with all Signs, just no their upgraded version - and we already know of one occasion where you'll need a certain Sign to defeat a certain monster - as well as the ability to drink potions. If we were talking about a game where Geralt can't do any of these to begin with, then maybe it would have offered significantly less variety. That's not the case.

 

[caspartine]

Actually I find a game that expects you to learn everything can be more immersive than a game that forces you to pick and choose.

It allows creatures to have very specific strengths and weaknesses that you need to learn about and exploit to defeat them. If however you don't have the ability to learn everything then that means every monster needs to be beatable by every play style. You suddenly cannot really have an enemy that can only be defeated by magic since not everybody playing will have competent magic skills. Instead it would have to be defeatable via magic or sword.

Kinda feel like this is a good thing. Compare Skyrim - shitty story with no replay value, and on top of it, jack of all trades character developement...nope.
Great story + meaningful choices AND a choice of character progression is a way to go. And then once more...and again...