KickStarter Solasta Pre-Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[V_K]

Not only that. OwlCat is Russian US$ X dollars in France can produce far less "lines of code" than the same money in Russia.

You have to include in that amount the number of lines of code it will take to fix Russian code. It might not be as bad as Indian but... close.

 

[NJClaw]

Not only that. OwlCat is Russian US$ X dollars in France can produce far less "lines of code" than the same money in Russia.

You have to include in that amount the number of lines of code it will take to fix Russian code. It might not be as bad as Indian but... close.

French code is the worst because it's full of dumb pointless accents

 

[V_K]

Not only that. OwlCat is Russian US$ X dollars in France can produce far less "lines of code" than the same money in Russia.

You have to include in that amount the number of lines of code it will take to fix Russian code. It might not be as bad as Indian but... close.

French code is the worst because it's full of dumb pointless accents

Worse than having a whole different alphabet?

 

[Hobo Elf]

Ended up picking Solasta yesterday evening. It's pretty good from what I played, definitely the most promising new cRPG I've played in years, but it does have some issues both minor and big.

The minor problems:

-A 4th voice option would be nice, just so that a full party of males/females would have 4 unique characters.
-Character models are pretty meh. Elves are humans with pointy ears, dwarves are short and stocky humans and halflings are tiny humans. The dwarves have unique hair and beard options which makes them look pretty good. Humans look fine, but I wish that halflings and elves had more unique options to set them visually apart from the other races.
-Music is decent, but repetitive. Only one combat theme from what I gather. I think in the long run it's going to be pretty annoying.

It would be nice if these things could get fixed, though it's not really a high priority.

As for the major problems:

-The feat list is pretty poor, though I guess that's still a work in progress.
-Fighter class is the least interesting choice in this game due to a lack of feats and their subclasses being rather boring, at least compared to what the other classes can pick.
-The class roster is going to sting, even if the ones they have are well implemented (sans the Fighter). I would've really liked to see a Bard and/or Druid to round up the selection. I know they plan on adding Sorcerers, but I think that's a bit too similar to Wizards to consider it to be a worthy addition.

That aside, the game itself feels great. There's something about Solasta where it really nails that sense of going on an advanture that most games don't really get. The area design with its verticality and usage of light and darkness creates a sense of exploration. Combat feels really great and fluid as well. The UI looks nice and is extremely easy to use. Some of the small details like the dice roll anims are little things that add something fun to the game experience. Even if they don't manage to fix most of my gripes it'll still probably end up being something that'll be fun to play at least a couple of times. In some ways this feels like a modern successor to the Gold Box games that will do the classics justice.

 

[Elex]

Any ETA for the full release? Hopefully later in the year or early next year so that I get plenty of time to play both Pathfinder WotR and BG3.

From what I heard, both WotR and Solasta are aiming for summer 2021 release.

Only Solasta doesn't look like it'll need half a year of patching after release to become playable.

And has less than half the content of WotR

I like both, but solasta is clearly the better one, too much of both pathfinder games content is bloated and exist only to be “the wrong thing to select at level up” Solasta is clearly lacking stuff (the complete class roster spells and levels up to 20), but nothing is wasted or feel useless or pointless: for example, even the ranger that suffer on tabletop on solasta shine during the map travel/exploration.

 

[Hobo Elf]

I've played a bit of Solasta some more yesterday. Got to the Master's Tower or whatever it was called, the dungeon after you visit the dwarven town. After the undead dungeon the game got a whole lot easier (Fireball and your martial classes getting a 2nd attack per round does that), but the encounter design and set pieces still remain entertaining, which I consider to be the most important thing. My one worry for the game currently is that how bad/redundant the Fighter class is. With an already small roster of classes, the Fighter being a false pick kinda sucks. There's really no reason at all to choose a Fighter over a Ranger or a Paladin since both classes are the same but way better. This is because of how poor the Fighter subclasses are. Champion only get is a 5% increase in crit hit. Spellblade is limited to conjuration, evocation, transmutation, and enchantment schools, which means you won't be able to pick spells that could actually be useful for a Fighter, like Shield or Blur. Compared to a Paladin's massively powerful Smiting (among the other Utility and power they provide) or a Ranger with their favored enemy boni, Colossus Slayer adding a d8 damage bonus once per round and Hunter's Mark adding another d6 of damage on top of everything else, the Fighter just isn't competitive. I think the devs could've chosen better subclasses for them.

 

[Lacrymas]

Seeing as Fireball is the most useful spell in the game, not having Blur or Shield isn't a big deal. Also, you went to the undead dungeon and didn't notice how repetitive the fights get?

 

[NJClaw]

the Fighter just isn't competitive

The Fighter attacks more, gets more feats, and gets better stats. And if what we got in the EA is a valid example of their future encounter design, having Fireball is far better than anything a Ranger or a Rogue will ever bring to the table. The Fighter is more boring than the alternatives, but don't confuse being boring with being weak.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

I've played a bit of Solasta some more yesterday. Got to the Master's Tower or whatever it was called, the dungeon after you visit the dwarven town. After the undead dungeon the game got a whole lot easier (Fireball and your martial classes getting a 2nd attack per round does that), but the encounter design and set pieces still remain entertaining, which I consider to be the most important thing. My one worry for the game currently is that how bad/redundant the Fighter class is. With an already small roster of classes, the Fighter being a false pick kinda sucks. There's really no reason at all to choose a Fighter over a Ranger or a Paladin since both classes are the same but way better. This is because of how poor the Fighter subclasses are. Champion only get is a 5% increase in crit hit. Spellblade is limited to conjuration, evocation, transmutation, and enchantment schools, which means you won't be able to pick spells that could actually be useful for a Fighter, like Shield or Blur. Compared to a Paladin's massively powerful Smiting (among the other Utility and power they provide) or a Ranger with their favored enemy boni, Colossus Slayer adding a d8 damage bonus once per round and Hunter's Mark adding another d6 of damage on top of everything else, the Fighter just isn't competitive. I think the devs could've chosen better subclasses for them.

Myzzrym replace fighter with barbarian pl0x

 

[Hobo Elf]

the Fighter just isn't competitive

The Fighter attacks more,

Nope. They get the same amount of attacks per round as Paladins and Rangers do. Action Surge can be used once per Long/Short rest, but that means that once per encounter you can take two extra swings. Compared to a Paladin being able to Smite with each attack, at level 5 that's about 6 times per Long rest, or a Rangers additive damage boni that last throughout an entire encounter (Hunter's Mark needs to be cast only once, once the target it dead it can be reapplied on a new target without spending a cast slot and it's a Bonus action), it's not even in the same league.

gets more feats, and gets better stats.

Yes, their baseline grants them a single feat or +2 stats more than Paladins and Rangers do. The Paladin and Ranger subclasses grant them access to more feats than what the Fighter will get even with their subs, so in that regard it actually gets evened out. There's a problem here that A) none of the "common" Feats currently implemented are particularly good (apparently some of them don't even work?) and B) those Feats would also be available to Paladins and Rangers. The extra stats aren't that important since a Fighter only needs to cap their STR at 20, which they'll probably do on the first level if you didn't roll long enough to cap it out at level one. CON is fine at 18 and DEX is only slightly useful for an increase in initiative, but it's not the end of the world if it's not that high.

And if what we got in the EA is a valid example of their future encounter design, having Fireball is far better than anything a Ranger or a Rogue will ever bring to the table.

The assumption here is that I'm picking a Fighter because I want a good, solid martial type of character. If the main draw is Fireball then there are better options. Obviously there's the Magic-User, but a Cleric with the Battle domain (I have one in my party) is an even better choice as they have more versatility and buff adjecent party members with +1 AC, +1 Attack and damage and saving throws.

The Fighter is more boring than the alternatives, but don't confuse being boring with being weak.

You're putting words into my mouth. I never claimed the Fighter was boring. Fighter has always been one of my favorite class choices because they are supposed to be no-nonsense and extremely reliable. There's currently nothing in Solasta that a Fighter will bring to your party. If you want a reliable martial class, then Paladin and Ranger have that covered and more. If you want to Fireball for damage you take a Mage. If you want someone who can handle themselves in the frontline and throw Fireballs then the Cleric is a better choice.

 

[Lacrymas]

Paladins also get Fireball.

 

[Hobo Elf]

Paladins also get Fireball.

I forgot about that, but yeah, they do, with the Motherland sub.

Also, you went to the undead dungeon and didn't notice how repetitive the fights get?

Haven't had the feeling of repetition seep in yet at least. Most areas have only a few encounters so places and enemies never feel like the overstay their welcome. It also feels like there are different types of AI based on the enemy, so whatever I'm fighting against, it's like a different kind of creature, instead of just the same enemy with a different model and stats.

 

[Tacgnol]

Funnily enough, a lot of the stuff Hobo mentions about fighters is the general complaints you hear about them in 5e in general.

I'm not a huge fan of the stat cap business that both 5e and Pathfinder 2e have taken to with so much gusto. I always liked the fact that martials were able to continue to have decent scaling on single targets via strength (or dex) modifiers and multipliers.

 

[NJClaw]

Nope. They get the same amount of attacks per round as Paladins and Rangers do.

The Fighter keeps getting extra attacks during his progression, while the other classes don't. They get other ways to improve their damage, but they are usually weaker than a plain extra attack.

You're putting words into my mouth. I never claimed the Fighter was boring.

Putting words into your mouth? I said that. Even with the Battle Master archetype you're mostly auto-attacking, and that's not even in the game. That's what makes it boring to me.

You're dismissing Action Surge and Second Wind as if they didn't exist, while they are two very impactful features in my experience, especially since you can short rest after every major encounter.

I agree that the subclasses feel underwhelming, but I still see reasons to pick a Fighter over a Ranger: you don't lose that much damage potential, but you get a sturdier character in return. It's harder to justify the Fighter over the Paladin though, that's true. I played through the game with Fighter/Paladin/Cleric/Wizard and Ranger/Paladin/Cleric/Wizard, and I felt the first group was better (same thing switching the Paladin for a Rogue).

Even if no Fighter archetype is interesting enough to me, the +2 AC of the Mountaineer makes for the sturdiest character in the game right now. In my Fighter/Paladin/Cleric/Wizard playthrough the Fighter got hit three times in the entire game. There are very few encounters where you can't position yourself with a wall on your side. Though I admit it's sad that Cleric, Paladin, and Wizard got completely broken archetypes while the Fighter got a +2 to AC.

The biggest problem right now are feats. There are no useful ones apart from Sylvan Archer (and even that is just a nerfed 5E PnP feat), so 1/3 of the benefits of playing a Fighter (being able to pick feats without gimping your abilities) has no use right now. I THINK they will add more later, since everything else regarding character creation feels much more polished.

 

[Hobo Elf]

Nope. They get the same amount of attacks per round as Paladins and Rangers do.

The Fighter keeps getting extra attacks during his progression, while the other classes don't. They get other ways to improve their damage, but they are usually weaker than a plain extra attack.

They get the next one at 11th level. I'm not sure if Solasta will go that high up. I was under the impression that the campaign was planned to cap out at the 10th level. You're basically arguing that Fighters are not terrible in PnP, which I agree, but this is not PnP. The issue here is with the implemention in Solasta, which was the root of my argument from the beginning.

You're dismissing Action Surge and Second Wind as if they didn't exist, while they are two very impactful features in my experience, especially since you can short rest after every major encounter.

I agree that the subclasses feel underwhelming, but I still see reasons to pick a Fighter over a Ranger: you don't lose that much damage potential, but you get a sturdier character in return. It's harder to justify the Fighter over the Paladin though, that's true. I played through the game with Fighter/Paladin/Cleric/Wizard and Ranger/Paladin/Cleric/Wizard, and I felt the first group was better (same thing switching the Paladin for a Rogue).

Even if no Fighter archetype is interesting enough to me, the +2 AC of the Mountaineer makes for the sturdiest character in the game right now. In my Fighter/Paladin/Cleric/Wizard playthrough the Fighter got hit three times in the entire game. There are very few encounters where you can't position yourself with a wall on your side. Though I admit it's sad that Cleric, Paladin, and Wizard got completely broken archetypes while the Fighter got a +2 to AC.

The biggest problem right now are feats. There are no useful ones apart from Sylvan Archer (and even that is just a nerfed 5E PnP feat), so 1/3 of the benefits of playing a Fighter (being able to pick feats without gimping your abilities) has no use right now. I THINK they will add more later, since everything else regarding character creation feels much more polished.

I'm not ignoring Surge or Second Wind, it's just that they aren't as good as what a Paladin offers. Being refreshable on Short Rests is nice, but it's not enough to bring them up to par with Lay on Hands or Smite (at level 5, Action Surge can't compete with a Paladin being able to Smite for 2d8 four times and 3d8 2 times, adding an extra d8 to both levels of Smite if it's Undead). The game is very generous with resting and you'll never go into a major fight without a Long Rest, unless you handicap yourself on purpose.

The Ranger can also Heal and they have consistent extra damage output that don't need to be refreshed with rests, apart from Hunter's Mark, but you only need to cast that once per rest since it's a channeled effect. They have worse armor but the difference of a few points of AC isn't the end of the world.

The Feats they have in-game are poor and apparently some of them, such as the Sylvan Archer don't even work. I hope they add more and better ones sooner than later. Contentwise the game is pretty alright now and I'd rather they finish implementing the systems before moving on to more content. The Champion, for example, doesn't even have its 7th or 10th level Feats implemented yet.

 

[NJClaw]

They get the next one at 11th level. I'm not sure if Solasta will go that high up. I was under the impression that the campaign was planned to cap out at the 10th level. You're basically arguing that Fighters are not terrible in PnP, which I agree, but this is not PnP. The issue here is with the implemention in Solasta, which was the root of my argument from the beginning.

Well fuck shit now you ruined my day. I don't know why, but I thought they planned on going all the way up to level 20.

I might be biased toward it, but I'm still enjoying the Fighter more than the Ranger in this game. I finished my 4-Fighters playthrough without problems, while I almost dropped the 4-Rangers one. If they offered us to drop one class and get the Barbarian, I would prefer dropping the Ranger. I can't believe they would ship the game with only the feats that are currently in, and I hope the ones they add will be at least as good as Sharpshooter, Sentinel, and Polearm Master (if not better), so that the Fighter might at least have a chance to compete with the Paladin.

 

[Harthwain]

They get the next one at 11th level. I'm not sure if Solasta will go that high up. I was under the impression that the campaign was planned to cap out at the 10th level. You're basically arguing that Fighters are not terrible in PnP, which I agree, but this is not PnP. The issue here is with the implemention in Solasta, which was the root of my argument from the beginning.

Well fuck shit now you ruined my day. I don't know why, but I thought they planned on going all the way up to level 20.

Indeed, the level cap is going to be 10:

The release version of Solasta will include Act 2 and Act 3 in full, as well as adding many side quests such as the Legendary Monster Hunt from our Kickstarter stretch goals, or the characters’ background quests. It will also unlock access to additional locations to explore – and of course plenty of loot to boot. It will also bring party up to level 10! As a whole, Solasta should take around 40h to complete, although that number may very well vary depending on the difficulty level.

Source: https://www.solasta-game.com/news/96-solasta-early-access-date-reveal-october-20th-2020

 

[Hobo Elf]

They get the next one at 11th level. I'm not sure if Solasta will go that high up. I was under the impression that the campaign was planned to cap out at the 10th level. You're basically arguing that Fighters are not terrible in PnP, which I agree, but this is not PnP. The issue here is with the implemention in Solasta, which was the root of my argument from the beginning.

Well fuck shit now you ruined my day. I don't know why, but I thought they planned on going all the way up to level 20.

I might be biased toward it, but I'm still enjoying the Fighter more than the Ranger in this game. I finished my 4-Fighters playthrough without problems, while I almost dropped the 4-Rangers one. If they offered us to drop one class and get the Barbarian, I would prefer dropping the Ranger. I can't believe they would ship the game with only the feats that are currently in, and I hope the ones they add will be at least as good as Sharpshooter, Sentinel, and Polearm Master (if not better), so that the Fighter might at least have a chance to compete with the Paladin.

I'm not trying to get you to stop liking what you like, I just desparately want the Fighter to be brought up to snuff with the other classes. The game isn't super hard (despite some people claiming so on the steam forums) and can be finished, at least so far, with pretty much any kind of party comp. But the lack of interesting options available to the Fighter, while everyone else has monstrous subclasses, is pretty unfair and I hope that it's something that will get fixed for release and is just a work-in-progress issue.

 

[Lacrymas]

There are some feats like Sentinel and Spell Sniper which are waaaay too powerful in 5E though. To the point of everyone picking the same 5 feats over and over.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

5e is

Spoiler

poo

 

[Rinslin Merwind]

Sorry for interrupting your conversation, but all that talk about paladins being better than fighter (and how fighters subclasses suck)awoken feeling in me that I cannot contain any longer...

* takes deep sigh*
It's would be better if Paladin remained a subclass to fighter!

It's doesn't make a sense for a title "warrior of God" being granted 1 level noob that can't hit shit. Instead Paladin should be a subclass locked behind several levels of fighter (having prerequisites or not - debatable), because it's absolutely logical for God/Gods to choose a skilled and experienced warrior to grant their powers. Not to mention that Paladin does NOT feels unique enough to be more than "religious fighter with more spells with MAD requrements". This is problem of tabletop version of D&D/Pathfinder, not Solasta's, but lately every time when Paladin mentioned - I have desire to say this.

 

[Lacrymas]

Paladin is a better subclass for Cleric, but I've been advocating for condensing the base classes forever, not only Paladin. Barbarian and Monk as Fighter subclasses, Ranger and Bard as Rogue, Paladin as Cleric, Sorcerer as Wizard.

 

[Thonius]

And how the heck do you expect wizards making $ out of it?

 

[rusty_shackleford]

wotc doesn't even know what a paladin is, you can be a non-lawful good paladin in 5e

wotc are tards, all of their products suck

 

[Hobo Elf]

Sorry for interrupting your conversation, but all that talk about paladins being better than fighter (and how fighters subclasses suck)awoken feeling in me that I cannot contain any longer...

* takes deep sigh*
It's would be better if Paladin remained a subclass to fighter!

It's doesn't make a sense for a title "warrior of God" being granted 1 level noob that can't hit shit. Instead Paladin should be a subclass locked behind several levels of fighter (having prerequisites or not - debatable), because it's absolutely logical for God/Gods to choose a skilled and experienced warrior to grant their powers. Not to mention that Paladin does NOT feels unique enough to be more than "religious fighter with more spells with MAD requrements". This is problem of tabletop version of D&D/Pathfinder, not Solasta's, but lately every time when Paladin mentioned - I have desire to say this.

In 5th edition Paladins don't even need to follow a god, iirc. They just need to have some kind of ideal to uphold and that's enough to grant them Paladin powers.

I don't disagree with you and Lacrymas, however. The expansive class and Feats in general (used to be class baseline abilities) seem to exist just to sell more supplementary books.