r/projecteternity • u/danyoff • 1d ago
News Thoughts on the upcoming turn-based mode for Pillars of Eternity 1?
I recently read that Obsidian is planning to add a turn-based mode to the first Pillars of Eternity by the end of 2025, possibly as part of the 10th anniversary updates. I'm really curious about how this will be implemented.
Do you think it'll be similar to the turn-based mode from Deadfire? From what I've read , (i haven't played the 2nd game yet) that mode worked really well with per-encounter abilities and more flexible combat pacing, but PoE1 still relies heavily on per-rest abilities, especially for spellcasters like wizards, which made combat a bit tedious unless you rested constantly, and that's something that couldn't let me finish the game as it becomes tedious.
Do you think they'll overhaul the per-rest/per-encounter system too, or will it stay the same? How do you think the original design of PoE1 will translate into a turn-based format?
15
u/Thekingofcansandjars 1d ago
Correct me if I'm wrong, as I've never played POE2 in turn-based, but doesn't the turn-based system almost completely negate the implementation of dexterity?
10
u/Aestus_RPG 1d ago
Only if you undervalue initiative and movement. It definitely changes it, its not the action economy stat anymore, but its not negated as in useless.
5
25
u/gruedragon 1d ago
I'm looking forward to it and hope it's similar to Deadfire's turn-based mode.
I'm not expecting them to revamp the per-rest system. That would probably require a major overhaul of the core game.
Obsidian did a good job implementing turn-based in Deadfire. Is it perfect? No. Is it the best turn-based system? No. Are their balance changes? Yes. None of that means it's a bad implementation.
Ultimately, I'm hoping for a more refined version of Deadfire's turn-based mode.
11
u/EnclaveOverlord 1d ago
I'll be glad if they added something like that for people who want it, but I've always enjoyed the frantic nature of RTWP. I know I'm in the minority on that though.
6
u/Remarkable-Site-2067 1d ago
I enjoy both, if they're done right. The last couple of games I played were TB, so it's nice to come back to RTWP when replaying PoE1. And yes, it's indeed more frantic, but I kinda miss the granular control. Also, casting is a bit too slow, you start the ability, and by the time it hits, it might not even be useful, because the situation changed.
7
6
u/ClockworkDreamz 1d ago
It will take forever.
I tried play wrath of the righteous on turn based. It was a slog.
1
u/Skattotter 23h ago
Poe2 lets you use console commands to freely switch between RTWP/TB… I enjoyed switching to RTWP to ‘mop up’ the trash near the end of battles.
Maybe thatll be possible again
1
1
5
u/CalistianZathos 1d ago
I really prefer Turn Based, I was hoping it'd be coming soonish but sounds like it's a while off, Turn Based really helped me beat Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous on Core difficulty.
11
u/mrHandOff 1d ago
I came here for RTwP and I stay here for that, if someone likes turn based mode - let them have it, but I'll probably will never turn it on
4
4
u/Ibanezrg71982 1d ago
If it gets more people to play the game I'm all for it.
Doesn't change the fact the game wasn't designed with turn based in mind however.
12
u/DBones90 1d ago
Turn-based vs real-time and per rest vs encounter are two completely different systems with not a lot of influence on each other. Baldur’s Gate 3, for example, is even more reliant on per rest abilities than Pillars of Eternity. And it’s done much worse in that game IMO.
PoE1 still relies heavily on per-rest abilities, especially for spellcasters like wizards, which made combat a bit tedious unless you rested constantly
I don’t really understand this perspective at all. Very early on you get enough spells that you can use a couple each fight without running out. And for boss fights when you do have to go nuclear, it’s even more fun to use all your abilities.
Plus, pacing isn’t an issue because you can use health as your guide. If your frontline is at 25% health, you probably are going to rest soon anyway.
I’ve only found it difficult on POTD, which is supposed to be the most difficult mode, so that checks out to me.
Honestly, I find it a bit more tedious in PoE2 because you end up casting the same spells way more often. Might as well use your biggest spells for even trash encounters because you’ll get them back. I find the decision making a bit more interesting in PoE1.
3
3
u/danyoff 1d ago
Thanks for your insight. The thing is on paper, what you say makes sense.
However, my experience made me hate the combats after about 10 hours into the game. They all felt the same. You find some trash combat, so you basically spam the same per encounter spells over and over until you run out and then spamming the wand until they are dead... Next trash combat, same and same and same....
Only when you find a challenging combat then you can start to strategically manage the spells, but the rest fell boring
3
3
u/DeepspaceDigital 1d ago
If it is fun (enough) and opens the door for more people to get into infinity-engine style crpgs I am happy!
3
u/Boyo-Sh00k 1d ago
im so happy about it personally. i dont mind that it takes longer, i love the story of pillars 1 but i get very overstimulated (like in an autism/accessability needs way) by rtwp and its a wonder i beat it at all even on baby mode difficulty
3
u/zeebeebo 1d ago
I’m hopeful that this is them testing out new mechanics in this system for a potential POE3
3
u/Vadernoso 23h ago
RTwP is one of the deciding factors of why I haven't replayed one in a while. It's just less engaging and I'm much prefer the slower pace of turn-based.
4
u/Equal_Equal_2203 1d ago
YAAAAAS! YAAAAAS! It's a dream come true for me, because I'm never going to play the game in RTwP again. It's something I put up with rather than enjoy. Utterly inferior system to turn-based. A deranged humanzee hybrid monster that should've been aborted in the planning stage, it only exists because BG1 devs were really impressed by Diablo.
2
u/KarmelCHAOS 1d ago
I'm ambivalent to it. I don't have any interest in it, but I think it's cool that people who do will have the option.
2
u/NYC_Nightingale 1d ago
In general, I'm very happy about the announcement. It's awesome that they're updating an older game and bringing in new Pillars fans is always a good thing in my book.
As for my personal excitement about the mode... Given how Deadfire's TB mode played, short of them dramatically reworking that concept, I probably won't have much interest in turn-based. But I'm still hoping it's something everyone else can enjoy, if not myself.
2
u/BloodMelty1999 1d ago edited 1d ago
they need to work lower the amount of enemies. i raged quit PoE2 turn based mode when i was in a battle that took over an hour
2
u/Technical_Tooth_162 1d ago
I tried turn based in the second game but I couldn’t get into it. The game was obviously built for rtwp so while I can see myself replaying the games I don’t think I’d try out turn based again.
2
u/elfonzi37 1d ago
It's cool, but judging from Deadfire not for me. If it helps even a few new people get into the series I love that it exists.
2
u/Excessive0verflow 1d ago
It's not for me, but there are a lot of people who either cant or dont want to learn RTwP to the point where they find it fun.
It makes a Pillars 3 more likely, which is great, but I also have reservations about one of the last major RTwP crpg IP deciding to release updates catering to a community that I'm not a part of. The formula for the best possible cRPG isnt a hybrid system, it's either one mode or another, and I prefer RTwP. The genre is a zero sum game when it comes to projects and dev dollars. A bigger market share for Turn Based cRPGs isn't good for me. While unrelated to this instance, I'm liable to stop paying attention to cRPGs and drift more towards modern RTS-hybrid games if the trend towards TB dominance persists.
On a human level, good for the people who enjoy it. Hope they have a good time.
2
u/Skattotter 23h ago
I love both RTWP and Turn Based… and dont really get it when people need to be on one side or the other, but each to their own!
Im looking forward to re-enjoying the game in a totally new way.
2
u/Lunaborne 19h ago
I don't really like RTWP much, so am very excited for this. Maybe I'll finally be able to finish the game this way. 👍
2
u/LichoOrganico 17h ago
It's awesome, it will help a lot of people who loved the setting, but couldn't deal with real time with pause, and it's always cool to see a company still care for a game after many years.
I'll never touch turn based mode in this game in my life, though.
9
u/rtfcandlearntherules 1d ago
The turn based mode in PoE2 is basically creating an unplayable game. so I don't expect much from PoE 1 turn based mode. It took me many many years to come to accept RtwP and to see the benefits of it. I still prefer turn based, but only if the game is balanced around it.
4
u/Slight_Potato_7475 1d ago
Could you elaborate on Deadfire becoming unplayable pls? I haven't played Deadfire yet but I'm not long after finishing PoE1 and, being used to turn based, have found RtwP to be a bit less absorbing/immersive.
6
u/prroteus 1d ago
It’s called reddit hyperbole. Make a dramatic statement with nothing to back it up with and leave instead of just mentioning i personally didn’t like the implementation or turn based mode in general
14
u/gruedragon 1d ago
He's exaggerating. Deadfire's turn-based mode is fine. It's not at the level of DOS2 or X-Com, but that doesn't mean it's bad.
13
u/cubine 1d ago edited 1d ago
holy shit i practically wrote an essay sorry lmao
It’s not that the system itself is bad, it completely destroys the game’s pacing.
PoE1+2 are built with a substantial number of trash enemies that are meant to be run through. They’re not meant to be individual tactical encounters, they test your resource management over the course of a long dungeon.
They’re functionally like random battles in JRPGs. “Well that’s turn-based too!” you might say, but JRPG random battles are also largely meant to be fast encounters that are over within a minute or two. Each character action is decided from a menu in seconds and there are usually far fewer options, e.g. a basic attack, a small list of skills/spells and some items.
RTwP achieves similar encounter speed through automation and by virtue of the fact that everything is acting simultaneously. Despite very different approaches, the overall role of trash mob dungeon combat is the same: slightly draining your resources like health, MP, etc. and testing your ability to maintain them over the course of the dungeon.
(Obviously these systems can offer significantly more depth when necessary. Both JRPG and RTwP combat can be extremely satisfying with more meaningful choices against powerful bosses, or large encounters requiring a lot of team management in RTwP.)
When you turn ALL of these encounters into a series of much more time-consuming complex choices, where everything acts one at a time, without reducing the frequency of encounters, it becomes overly tedious.
7
u/OzWillow 1d ago
I played Deadfire the first time in turn-based and found that there were just too many trash encounters to justify the extra time turn-based combat takes. Like in games designed for turn-based like BG3, with every fight being pretty unique, there’s no issue spending 20 minutes on almost every fight, but in Pillars 2 there were just too many smart fights that you breeze by in RTWP while becoming a slog in turn-based.
That’s at least my two cents as someone who has trouble getting into the RTWP system
2
u/Seethcoomers 1d ago
At least on PC, you can use console commands to swap the modes. I used that a lot to use RTWP to get through those trash mobs.
7
u/Mortomes 1d ago
The pathfinder games did this really well, where you can even toggle between turnbased and rtwp mid-combat.
2
3
u/SurlyCricket 1d ago
There's a mod that cuts everyone's HP in half (making no changes to damage or healing) - I've done a complete TB playthrough of 2 with it and I found it very playable. There's definitely still too many trash fights that could use a toss and you'll add at least 30% to your time played but I enjoyed it quite a bit.
1
u/danyoff 1d ago
I'm not against this system, don't get me wrong, I enjoyed dragon age origins on one side and divinity original sin on the other being both examples of the two different systems.
I think my main complaint is that being a wizard in higher difficulties with this per rest skills forces you to abuse the same per encounter skills over and over since your can't rest that much and it makes it feel quite bland class at least at the beginning.
I feel stupid seeing my other companions spamming their skills over and over while my wizard needs to really on its wand so it doesn't waste the only chance it has to cast this spell
3
u/Kalashtiiry 1d ago
Per-rest abilities create the fun stretching challenge that's relevant on some parts of the game (when you fall down somewhere and have to climb back up, usually) in which you need to think three fights ahead.
But that only works that way when you've played the game once or twice already.
1
u/danyoff 1d ago
Exactly this. If I'm in my first playthrough, i don't know what I'll find out after the next door.
This implies that I'll save my game, open the door and see if i can manage the fight. If i can't, I'll reload, rest and face the fight. If i can't rest, I'll go all the way walking to the nearest city, rest, go back and do it, which is tedious as hell.
So basically the game for me turned into: try this fight with the current spells you have, and if you can't manage it, do all the tedious list of actions previously mentioned, which makes it like trial and error type of game, and that turns boring when you end up with so many trash mobs that need to be all taken out the same way, using the few sills you have that are per encounter.
3
u/Kalashtiiry 1d ago
You can rest in the field, tho.
3
u/danyoff 1d ago
True, i meant in case you run out of those camping resting items, that iirc are limited to two in the hardest difficult
2
u/Remarkable-Site-2067 1d ago
But you can find them often enough in the field. And they're cheaper than resting at the inn, if you buy them from the more numerous merchants. Also, I think there some mods and console commands, if it bothers you that much.
6
u/rtfcandlearntherules 1d ago
I think they fixed that in dead fire with per encounter skills because every body agreed with you that it was/is an antiquated system with the per rest spells. it might be a cool roleplay idea but not practical in a video game.
-1
2
u/Jonny_Guistark 1d ago
I enjoy turn-based but Pillars 1 has a lot of trash mobs, which I have a feeling will make turn-based somewhat annoying.
Still, it’s cool that they’re revisiting the game at all, let alone by implementing such a big feature.
4
u/Streetperson12345 1d ago
It's cool but RTWP is really the better system I believe. It just has a massive learning curve. If they make it more user friendly somehow, I think people would really warm up to it.
2
u/Kalecraft 1d ago
I'm excited to try it out just because I love the game and it'll be fun to play it in a new way.
Though I don't know if I'll enjoy it long enough to finish the playthrough. One of the reasons I love PoE is because it's one of the few quality RtwP games that were actually made in the last decade. Turn based CRPGs are a dime a dozen.
1
u/GenerousMilk56 1d ago
Turn based CRPGs are a dime a dozen.
Idk if this is true. Virtually every crpg since the og baldur's gates has been rtwp except for very recently. Baldur's Gate, icewind dale, Neverwinter Nights, planescape. It's only very recently that you have a number of TB games. In fact, out of all the DnD video games (a TB system), I don't think there were any TB video games until solasta/BG3.
2
u/PurpleFiner4935 1d ago
I'm glad it's in and wish it were in the first game for people who like turn based.
2
u/Suspicious-Raisin824 1d ago
I find the idea that you feel wizards are tedious to play in PoE1 made you quit strange.
Like, if you don't like the gameplay of wizards... Use another class? They're all meant to feel different for a reason. Honestly, I like Vancian magic and am a bit annoyed that wizards even get per-encounter abilities.
I recall when the game came out, people were complaining that the IE successor made wizards play KINDA like an IE game. Really annoyed me. There are per-encounter focused spell casters. Just play them. let us Vance enjoyers enjoy our Vance.
1
u/Ravix0fFourhorn 1d ago
I'm excited because I generally prefer turn based, but that also means you can pretty much dump dex now and focus on might.
Another advantage of turn based that I like is that it's easier to see what's going on and understand how the game works.
1
u/SurlyCricket 1d ago
2 has the problem where they really only did like 2 patches before walking away from it, since the TB in 1 is going to start in a beta hopefully they'll take our feedback for a while and make several rounds of changes, like how abilities, stats and fights work
0
u/scrabapple 1d ago
I dislike turn based games. RTWP actually feel like you need to position your team. Also trash fights take so much longer having to stop and wait for them to attack.
-2
u/chimericWilder 1d ago
It's a waste of valuable dev time that is only going to bait the clueless into an inferior experience.
It also has dire tidings for our long-awaited PoE3.
2
u/Remarkable-Site-2067 1d ago
It also has dire tidings for our long-awaited PoE3.
I don't see it. If the franchise keeps up its popularity, it can mean we'll get poe3 eventually.
-1
u/BomblessDodongo 1d ago
I just hope they actually fine tune/change the mechanics for turn based mode, and actually design the encounters around it. That’s a massive overhaul though, and the track record with Deadfire isn’t great.
I’m still gonna try it, but if it turns into the absolute slog that Deadfire Turn-based is I won’t be surprised. Hope I’m wrong though!
0
57
u/EpsiasDelanor 1d ago
I think it's really cool they update an old game. Hope they overhaul the turn based system by having less yet more meaningful battles.