Solasta Solasta II - coming to Early Access - demo on February 24th

[Nortar]

At the end of the day you also have to keep in mind that we're a business.

We think making the game a little more approachable can help sell more.

we are building Solasta II with multiplayer in mind instead of tackling it on top later.

I suspect that off all the factors multiplayer was the least contribution to BG3 sales. Certainly less than the certain bear scene.
In any case, I hope that prettier elves and even simplier more aproachable gameplay will make you enough money to finally afford 6-chars party and grapling in Solasta 3.

 

[Myzzrym]

I'm all for a more solid foundation, just lamenting that the cost is currently very steep. In addition to subclasses and level 11+ content, there isn't assurance of a dungeon maker component ever being added and all of Unfinished Business must start from scratch with no assurance that much of its features can return as well. Since it is a new engine, there may also be foundational issues that crop up in the process of learning it, just as Solasta 1 had with Unity.

From a business perspective, I understand. Just airing concerns from the external perspective, especially from a community that prizes the mechanics over the graphical uplifts.

Oh absolutely, and I welcome feedback like yours. It's not like we're plugging our ears and ignoring your voices, you make a very valid point that is very likely shared by quite a few of our core players. Don't let me explaining my point of view prevent you from adding yours.

I suspect that off all the factors multiplayer was the least contribution to BG3 sales. Certainly less than the certain bear scene.
In any case, I hope that prettier elves and even simplier more aproachable gameplay will make you enough money to finally afford 6-chars party and grapling in Solasta 3.

My dear Thundershield, I know elves are the least of your priorities, but hey Vaarsuvius wasn't that bad was he? she? they? it? Let's just hope we're more Roy than Elan taking the decisions we made.

 

[Infinitron]

https://www.solasta-game.com/news/191-dev-update-06-class-spotlight-the-rogue

Dev Update #06 - Class Spotlight: The Rogue​

Hello there fine folks,

Who here loves playing Rogues? Fail their Stealth roll at the worst time? Fumble their Sleight of Hand check putting themselves in a very awkward situation? No one? Okay maybe I’m not selling the class very well. For every Rogue out there low rolling on their Sneak Attack damage, there’s another throwing a bucket of dice thanks to a crit (more. MORE!) - and good lord does that feel good, am I right fellow dice goblins? No, just me?

Sherlock knows you’re lying. Everyone loves rolling dice. More dice is more fun. It’s not me having a problem.

Before we start, don't forget to wishlist Solasta II on Steam - it helps us a ton!

They see me stabbin'

If there is one thing the Rogue is known for, it’s their signature Sneak Attack. As long as you have advantage on your attack or a (still very much conscious) friend nearby, you’re doing damage baby! Roll them damage dice!

The Rogue is also a slippery fellow with Cunning Action, which makes them one of the rare classes who can attack and get out in the same turn without getting slapped back. If that doesn’t sound fair, it’s because it isn’t - fighting fair is for LOSERS.

Only thing that matters is who’s alive at the end, eh? No hard feelings.

The last thing Rogues are well known for is their versatility. They not only get plenty of skill proficiencies to climb, run, sing or even think better, they even get expertise to get an even better bonus. Yes sometimes that means you outsmart the 20 intelligence wizard at the spelling bee contest even though you should barely be literate, but hey that’s just how the game goes.

More likely though, you’ll be the one in the party sneaking around undetected, looking out for traps and opening locked doors and chests. You’ll be the one who “knows a guy” to get your friends to places you’re trying to go. You’ll be the one stabbing that smug gloating villain when and where they least expect it, and you’ll make it hurt.

The Rogues of Solasta

You thought just because you’re a D&D expert we wouldn’t have anything for you today? Wrong, my friend! And that’s not because I artificially increased the Investigation DC to 35 for you to fail (which I totally did not do, nuh uh).

I mean aside from all the cool Rogue-related concept art and research doodles you get to see, like this one to select a pose for the character.

For you long-time players, we’re offering our very own retrospective on the subclasses of Solasta I. It’s been a few years - what do we as developers think of them?

Before we start, just a small reminder that our current goal is to attempt and implement all 12 classes for Solasta II 1.0 release, with each class getting 2 subclasses - one from Solasta I, and one new from the continent of Neokos. It’s important to keep in mind that we are not certain yet if we will be able to achieve that (budget / time constraints), but it’s very much something that we want to have if we can.

The Thief (SRD)

Let’s be honest, the Thief was mostly there because we decided early on during Solasta I’s developpement that we would have all SRD subclasses. It ended up being… not that well suited for Solasta I, mostly because its features aren’t centered around combat when our game was very much about combat.

You mostly get to climb faster and sneak better - and while its defining feature allowing you to use items as a Bonus Action instead of an Action is good, it’s limited by what items exist in Solasta I (compared to your vast imagination on Tabletop).

And you get to wear a fancy leather armor while doing so! Well okay every rogue gets to wear fancy leather armors.

One really fun thing the Thief got in Solasta was that they were able to use all magic items without restrictions, allowing for some fantastic utility… but it only came at level 13. Plus when you take into account the fact that most powerful items need attunement, you’re still limited to 3 slots in the end. Damn!

Final verdict? It was just not that great of a fit in Solasta I, but we probably couldn’t have done things much differently for the Thief due to it being SRD and us wanting to keep it faithful to the tabletop version.

The Darkweaver (Crown of the Magister)

Oh boy, what a mess the Darkweaver was! As the name implies, it was themed around spiders, meaning it had something to do with poison and climbing - and honestly, that sounds pretty cool on paper! Poison is something that’s not very well explored in 5e so we could build on that, and climbing goes perfectly with Solasta’s verticality! Problem is… while it was thematically sound, its features were all over the place and didn’t really do much for you.

You were proficient with the Poisoner’s Kit, which could be achieved by simply selecting a background. Climbing didn’t cost you extra movement - but hey, Thief got that too. You can climb difficult terrain surfaces… but what is a difficult terrain surface? Attacking enemies who are below you gives you bonus damage equal to your proficiency, but Rogues synergize with more dice rolls and not flat damage because they only attack once per turn. Your melee weapons (why melee? I thought you wanted to shoot arrows from above to get bonus damage?) became permanently coated in poison forcing a flat DC 13 (why flat DC?!) Constitution Saving Throw to avoid 2d6 extra poison damage and being poisoned for… one whole hour?! Finally, you could go invisible until the end of your turn using your Bonus Action when not in Bright Light and out of line-of-sight from all enemies… which you could more or less already do by using Cunning Action to stealth, which required the same prerequisites and didn’t dispel at the end of your turn.

Let’s be honest, the Darkweaver was far from our best work - in fact, it was one of the earliest ones when we did not yet take the proper time to sit down and think about how the whole kit would play out. Just to give a little more context: the earlier designed subclasses are generally the more messy ones, because the team was much smaller the amount of time one could allocate each of their tasks was very limited. And for the very same reason, once a feature was implemented we could rarely justify going back to change it (which would require us to code a completely new feature most of the time), instead of working on the rest of the game. So even if a subclass wasn’t great… as long as it worked, we kept it as is. You’re seeing the result of just that, a real piece of history frozen in time!

As much history as this premium doodle of a female halfling rogue!

As you can see, the idea is here but the execution was lacking. Thematically the Darkweaver is pretty interesting - especially with how much Solasta made an emphasis on verticality. Being able to climb around, shoot and poison enemies. We reworked it pretty extensively in the Solasta Sourcebook to lean more into the poison fantasy and make its feature synergistic. For example, you now simply gained climbing speed, and attacking enemies below you triggered Sneak Attack instead of gaining flat damage. You also gained the ability to bypass poison resistance and partially negate poison immunity, which was the main reason why the “Poisoner” fantasy never really worked at higher level in D&D - with most creatures immune to poison. Granted that last one was a little controversial when we playtested it, because as far as I know nothing in the official rules can bypass immunity…

Final verdict? A funny window into the past, one that we can’t be too proud of but that reminds us of where we started from. And also the indication that as long the theme is solid, we could rework it to make it interesting. The Darkweaver is not very likely to be the subclass we choose to keep in Solasta II due to its reliance on specific vertical environments (like cavern walls) and poison (which is a system that is developed in the later stages), but we love it all the same.

The Shadowcaster (Crown of the Magister)

The Shadowcaster suffers from a few similar issues as the Darkweaver, being designed in the earliest days of Solasta I - but to a much lesser extent as it mostly relies on spellcasting, which is already well charted. The original idea was to have a more lethal version of the Arcane Trickster, less centered around the theme of subterfuge and misdirection and more about being a magically empowered assassin.

The challenge here was, of course, mostly trying to make it different enough from the official 5e Arcane Trickster, which ended up in the Shadowcaster getting access to… Divination, Illusion, Necromancy and Abjuration schools. Which, let's be honest, didn’t give them a great selection of spells for what they were intended to do.

Another limitation was that you couldn’t cast most spells while dual wielding, so it forced Shadowcasters into using bows. And until level 13, there wasn’t any great synergy between the fact that you were a Rogue and your ability to cast magic - before that you basically had a Misty Step on a short rest, and the ability to retaliate using a cantrip when enemies targeted you with magic. But the kit was already fairly solid, it only needed a little shaking up!

Let’s take a mandated break from all the reading with another bit of research on armor visuals. Options, options…

When we reworked it in the revised Sourcebook version, we changed it to the Conjuration, Evocation, Necromancy and Transmutation schools instead, greatly improving their spell list, and allowing them to Sneak Attack with attack spells at level 3 instead of 13 (thus making it the defining feature of the Shadowcaster). A fairly simple change, but one that brings out its identity right out of the gates.

Final Verdict? I think the Shadowcaster is interesting and always had potential, which we unfortunately didn’t manage to bring out straight from the start. It’s one of the more likely subclasses to appear in Solasta II, if we decide we want to include a spellcaster Rogue archetype.

The Hoodlum (Lost Valley)

The last of the four brothers and the biggest of the bunch, who joined the crew with the release of Lost Valley. The Hoodlum’s whole shtick was “what if the standard bully / brute henchman you’re used to meeting and beating up in the back alley became an actual archetype”? It is a result of Solasta I not having Multiclassing, which made us experiment with more hybrid subclasses - what about a Strength Rogue?

So it was born, able to sneak attack with non-finesse weapons, use medium armors, shields and martial weapons, giving enemies disadvantage when hitting them with a sneak attack, and getting a strange power to blind enemies which, let’s face it, is basically pocket sand.

This archetype came up later and stood fairly solid on its own, giving players an option to live a very different fantasy - play dirty and hit very hard with a single blow every turn - which many enjoyed, quite a bit. Which is not to say it was without flaws, with the biggest issue being that it fell into the design issue of “I have to know in advance that I’m going to make a Hoodlum Rogue”. You would usually dump Strength and stack Dexterity as a Rogue, but the Hoodlum made you want to have Strength to use all these non-finesse weapons, so you’d end up having to play a weird Strength Rogue at level 1 & 2 with no real synergy. And pocket sand, although funny and thematic of fighting dirty, is a little ridiculous - ideally we would have loved to have something else.

Final Verdict? Honestly, the Hoodlum fits a role - being able to Sneak Attack with non-finesse weapons is something unique to this archetype. However, in Solasta II classes will only have two subclasses at 1.0 launch, so is it a good idea to lock one archetype behind a weird Strength build when the vast majority of Rogues want to build Dexterity?

Maul-wielding rogues are fun and all, but they don’t necessarily appeal to the primary Rogue fantasy.

The… ??? (Solasta II)

Now I wouldn’t want to spoil the surprise too much. As stated before we are experimenting on new subclasses for Solasta II, and you will see some of them in the upcoming demo - although please keep in mind that they may yet change!

What do YOU think this new subclass’ theme will be?

Article by Tactical Myzzrym

 

[Nortar]

My dear Thundershield, I know elves are the least of your priorities, but hey Vaarsuvius wasn't that bad was he? she? they? it? Let's just hope we're more Roy than Elan taking the decisions we made.

Oh, a man of culture!
And I salute you for making proper dwarves in Solasta.

 

[Alienman]

Myzzrym Just seems you might be falling into the AAA gaming trap, where graphical fidelity always must increase. Costs will skyrocket to very little gain for RPG veterans. New mechanics above all, even if the new faces look good. Not saying it will be like that, but a sequel with fewer toys would be disappointing. I’m looking forward to Solasta 2, though.

 

[Infinitron]

They have to try to narrow the graphical fidelity gap between Solasta and BG3 because Solasta II's best chance of becoming a hit is grabbing some of the BG3 player base. It's a long wait until Larian's next game.

 

[Lacrymas]

But first we need to figure out why BG3 is successful in the first place. I certainly don't know.

 

[Nortar]

But first we need to figure out why BG3 is successful in the first place. I certainly don't know.

Is not it obvious?
In order of decreasing relevance.

1. Romances, duh.
2. Larian coffers budget!
3. Good visuals.
4. Full VO.
5. Options to select your pronounce, penis shape and skin disease.
6. Well known IP.
7. Number of devs involved in production.
8. Multiplayer.
...
48. C&C.
49. Story.
50. Combat mechanics.

Naturally you have to have at least 4 out of the top 8 options to have a chance at making a semi-decent game in post BG3 era.

 

[Lacrymas]

А wide array of kooky and zany companions are definitely before number 6. I constantly see fan art of the BG3 companions and how zany and kooky they are.

 

[Litmanen]

But first we need to figure out why BG3 is successful in the first place. I certainly don't know.

Is not it obvious?
In order of decreasing relevance.

1. Romances, duh.
2. Larian coffers budget!
3. Good visuals.
4. Full VO.
5. Options to select your pronounce, penis shape and skin disease.
6. Well known IP.
7. Number of devs involved in production.
8. Multiplayer.
...
48. C&C.
49. Story.
50. Combat mechanics.

Naturally you have to have at least 4 out of the top 8 options to have a chance at making a semi-decent game in post BG3 era.

1.1 It's a great game.

 

[mediocrepoet]

I have to admit, this cracked me up.

Anyway, becoming a meme game with a lot of streamers showing stuff off like the gnome falling cock video and the timing of it all certainly helped. Being a 5E tie in and appealing to both the Critical Role type audience as well as Biowhores certainly didn't hurt it either.

 

[InD_ImaginE]

Larian has been hyped since DOS 1 having coop and DOS 2 also exploded popularity wise with streamers with the memetic "emergent gameplay"/barrel stacking shits.

The fact that their next game is a Critical Role + Bioware succession party just make it even more popular.

Anybody trying to replicate it without foundation bound to fail.

 

[Litmanen]

I have to admit, this cracked me up.

View attachment 60863

Anyway, becoming a meme game with a lot of streamers showing stuff off like the gnome falling cock video and the timing of it all certainly helped. Being a 5E tie in and appealing to both the Critical Role type audience as well as Biowhores certainly didn't hurt it either.

I don’t think your message was directed specifically at me, but I’d like to clarify something: the last BioWare game I played was KOTOR. Before that, I played BG1 and BG2. I absolutely hate Mass Effect (though I admit the setting is fascinating), and as for NWN, I don’t even consider it a game—just a glorified construction set.

Regarding Critical Role, I’ve never cared about them because I generally don’t care about YouTube or 99% of its content.

As for BG3, I enjoyed it simply because it’s undeniably a good game. It’s not perfect, and I do not masturbate thinking at it.

On the other hand, Solasta is a nice game if you think of it as the "Temple of Elemental Evil for the 5E". It’s perfect if you approach it that way. That said, it’s quite weak in terms of story, dungeon design, dialogues and pretty much everything else. While it’s true that you can’t compare the two games due to their vastly different budgets, you also can’t ignore the fact that BG3 is leagues ahead in almost every way.

Even the combat, Solasta’s strongest feature and something I genuinely like until I played it, feels a hundred times better in BG3. They just play in different leagues and Solasta has its merits, for sure. But I think it is stupid to continually compare the two games and say that BG3 is shit.

 

[Lacrymas]

Focusing on tactical gameplay would be the best choice for Solasta II tbh.

 

[InD_ImaginE]

Focusing on tactical gameplay would be the best choice for Solasta II tbh.

best choice for you or for them?

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

But first we need to figure out why BG3 is successful in the first place. I certainly don't know.

Lessons developers should learn from Baldur's Gate 3:

• Tactical, turn-based combat sells
• An RPG should have at least a semblance of exploration
• A considerable amount of interactivity with the world can be accomplished, even in a game with turn-based combat
• Quests can have various Choices & Consequences associated with them, and there can also be consequences for player actions outside quests
• RPGs can have a fairly non-linear structure

Lessons developers will learn from Baldur's Gate 3:

• Sex sells, especially with viral marketing
• Aside from a single player-generated character, the party members should be pre-generated and have ludicrously convoluted backstories
• Vast amounts of money should be spent on voice-acting and motion-capture, especially for those pre-generated companions
• Embrace the worst fantasy setting possible
• Players don't care about basing your game on a poor ruleset, such as "D&D 5th edition"

 

[Nortar]

But first we need to figure out why BG3 is successful in the first place. I certainly don't know.

Is not it obvious?
In order of decreasing relevance.

1. Romances, duh.
2. Larian coffers budget!
3. Good visuals.
4. Full VO.
5. Options to select your pronounce, penis shape and skin disease.
6. Well known IP.
7. Number of devs involved in production.
8. Multiplayer.
...
48. C&C.
49. Story.
50. Combat mechanics.

Naturally you have to have at least 4 out of the top 8 options to have a chance at making a semi-decent game in post BG3 era.

1.1 It's a great game.

You missed the point, but Zed has already explained it much better.

 

[scytheavatar]

One of the reasons why Larian became so successful is because they did their own thing and refused to follow trends even in the CRPG space. You see them say fuck you to RTWP, unlike the likes of Owlcat and Obsidian who felt the need to pander to old sensibilities. The best studios set trends which others are forced to follow. Tactical Adventures would be wise to learn that from Larian, rather than think they can become Larian by following them.

 

[Infinitron]

One of the reasons why Larian became so successful is because they did their own thing and refused to follow trends even in the CRPG space. You see them say fuck you to RTWP, unlike the likes of Owlcat and Obsidian who felt the need to pander to old sensibilities. The best studios set trends which others are forced to follow. Tactical Adventures would be wise to learn that from Larian, rather than think they can become Larian by following them.

"Better graphics" isn't really a trend.

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

One of the reasons why Larian became so successful is because they did their own thing and refused to follow trends even in the CRPG space. You see them say fuck you to RTWP, unlike the likes of Owlcat and Obsidian who felt the need to pander to old sensibilities. The best studios set trends which others are forced to follow. Tactical Adventures would be wise to learn that from Larian, rather than think they can become Larian by following them.

"Better graphics" isn't really a trend.

"More expensive graphics" might be.

 

[anvi]

I liked the first one and looking forward to this. I'd like to see it focus on the tactical battles and having as many spells and abilities as possible. Also hoping the DEI party doesn't ruin it.

I like swanky graphics but I like depth and challenge more than anything, KOTC1/2 prove how good that can be even with simple graphics.

 

[scytheavatar]

One of the reasons why Larian became so successful is because they did their own thing and refused to follow trends even in the CRPG space. You see them say fuck you to RTWP, unlike the likes of Owlcat and Obsidian who felt the need to pander to old sensibilities. The best studios set trends which others are forced to follow. Tactical Adventures would be wise to learn that from Larian, rather than think they can become Larian by following them.

"Better graphics" isn't really a trend.

LOL try telling that to the other CRPG devs.......... why did it take that long for someone to try and make a high production CRPG like BG3?

 

[Infinitron]

 

[NJClaw]

I don't see the option "they were all very underwhelming compared to what any other class had to offer". With the Lowlife background giving proficiency in Thieves' Tools, there was no reason whatsoever to have a Rogue in the party. I still played the class a lot, but every time it was a clearly suboptimal pick.

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Probably the SRD Thief or Hoodlum. Thief blooms too late and has item and attunement problems mentioned by the devs. Hoodlum is a good STR based duelist.

Edit: I also agree with NJClaw the rogue subclasses are meh and that lowlife makes rogues unnecessary. I have made several parties and tend to just have a bard instead.