class difference!

[Razorflame]

Hey dear 1c,

I was wondering wow the classes differ much more than the previous KB games


From TL to CW the warrior always had the most leadership
paladin was semi decent in leadership and potentional a good scroll of resu or the like and was a good undead/deamon slayer

mage was low leadership but ability to cast spells twice in a turn


Now in WOTN things CHANGED alot

the warrior no longer hold the throne of getting alot of leadership
that has been down to semi decent(previously the paladin)

leaving the warrior with barely any spells chances(on first island at least) a very tough start because the rage ability simply doesn't deal enough damage nor does it level up with hero. Furthermore the units really don't get that much stronger than the paladins/skald


As for the skald/paladin

He now hold the throne of having the most leadership and with a FIXED healing spells(which was previously a scroll of some kind) and on top of that he also gets very quick acces to the song of edda making him a big monster

leaving the mage and warrior FAR behind him
it's like a triple buff for the paladin/skald
in leadership wise/ spellwise and just a random buff from scrolls

A warrior has no chance of even competing in the start vs this hero

A mage could potentionaly get stronger in the start but due to leadership wise he would still have a very hard time


As for the mage

he still is pretty weak in leadership and the magic abilities and intellect factor is also a bit harder for him but ok the mage is the only class that has become pretty much the same from all the classes avaible


But what i really wonder is, let us the HAMquestion


What was the reason to CHANCE the leadership factor from the warrior to the skald?
and already giving the skald a spell that is fixed(without even having invested into order magic)


this really baffled me a bit not sure what other gamers think about this.
But it seems a bit odd maybe cause the paladin wasn;'t very favorite in the first 2 chapters

it's also a bit dissapointing that the paladin/skald no longer has any bonusses against demon/undead

so please leave a not here as to why plz

[Nevar]

Well, the Mind/Spirit class needed a buff, imo.

In previous games, Paladins sucked because they were basically trying to be a Red Mage. You know, Jack of all trades, master of none and all that. It kinda sucked compared to the other two, since it's only real trick was solo stack armageddon.

The reason it's not slaughtering undead/demons now (well, not without an Edda) is because a Skald isn't a paladin at all. He's a BARD.

[Razorflame]

i don't think so that the mind/spirit needed a buff

they had some fixed spells at start
and they had ability to resu troop back if it died(nothing for a no loss ofc)
but still it was a good class

and there is nothing with a jack of trades he could get skills easier than the other 2 classes(he got best divided runes IMHO)

so the paladin could go either way

and even if mind/spirit needed a buff
why the hell he gets 3 buffs?

1. being edda
2. being more ldrship
3. fixed healing spell without ordermagic

[dudex]

the hero with the most leadership is usually the best given they are about leveled without it.. personally i think all the heroes should have the same leadership gains.

tho the amount of undead at the start gives skald's a huge advantage because that undead song is pretty damn powerful.

[Nevar]

He needed it.

Why?

Previously:

Paladin vs. Warrior
-Warrior had better Rage, bigger army, probably better stats, two weapon slots.
- Paladin had more mana, extra damage to undead/demons, maybe better morale

But:
What kind of spells would you cast if you're not a mage? Answer: Buffs/debuffs. Do these cost a lot? Pygmy is 15 mana at level 3, iirc, and that had to be the best spell you could use without Intellect. You would almost never cast geyser as a Paladin, for example.

Paladin vs. Mage
- Mage has higher intellect, double casting, smaller army, more mana, better spells.
- Paladin had a bigger army, MAYBE better Rage (you don't have enough Might runes to take every Might talent), plus morale and that bonus versus demons/undead.

This one's no contest, really. Even if the mage has a smaller army, a few damage spells would quickly bridge the gap, and then there's the summons. Who needs a big army when you have two units with 3k+ health and better stats than a black dragon?

Yeah. The mind/spirit class did need a buff.

Also, I don't understand what you're saying about "fixed healing spell without order magic."

I'm not sure giving it Edda (which has questionable value, honestly) and increased leadership was the way to go, but it did need a buff.

[Razorflame]

eh dafuq?

your comparison is weird

the only advantage a warrior had on paladin was it's higher leadership

the paladin on the other hand could get quicker order/distortion magic cause he gets those mind runes faster
and stoneskin or healing does alot in a battle and those are cheap buffs

just 2 minor examples

and i already said mage was pretty much the same through all series

as for the skald

go start him and look in his spellbook
he has a healing spell (in previous series it would have been a scroll instead of spell)

edda is ok
just give the higher leadership to warrior which he needs badly
and remove the healing spell and make it a scroll instead

edda alone is enough to reap havoc on the first island

[Nevar]

(1)the only advantage a warrior had on paladin was it's higher leadership

(2)the paladin on the other hand could get quicker order/distortion magic cause he gets those mind runes faster
and (3) stoneskin or healing does alot in a battle and those are cheap buffs

just 2 minor examples

and i already said mage was pretty much the same through all series

as for the skald

(4) go start him and look in his spellbook
he has a healing spell (in previous series it would have been a scroll instead of spell)

edda is ok
just give the higher leadership to warrior which he needs badly
and remove the healing spell and make it a scroll instead

(5) edda alone is enough to reap havoc on the first island

1.) No. Warrior also got more rage and had more might runes to be used in the might tree.
2.) Earlier, yes, but late game, Warrior could get some Order/Distortion, too.
3.) Exactly, and those spells cost less than 10 mana, which means the Warrior can use them just as much as Paladin, which means the Paladin doesn't have an advantage over the warrior with these spells at all.:grin:
4.) I'm almost sure Paladin Amelie had Healing in her spellbook at the start, too. This isn't a new buff.
5.) True, but if you only use song of Helheim, then that pretty much means you're just making up for the fact that "Holy Anger" isn't in this game. The other songs are mediocre, imo. Basically, it's like he got the Paladin's old anti-demon thing, but it only works for 6 rounds instead of the whole battle.

[Fatt_Shade]

Skald/Paladin needed buff comparing to last 2 games tL and AP/CW. There Warrior had best rage skills and most attack/crit% and initiative for archers and hit enemy for 30k+ critical , Mage with x2 spell cast and 70+ intellect builds could dish out geyser/fire rain/death star/black hole ridiculous dmg in every turn. And Paladin had basically nothing medium army, medium intellect, and some bonus to undead/demon which were limiting considering if you have 60 attack more then enemy defense dmg is max there is no need to lower his defense further so it`s also medium bonus in some way.
Now roles have changed Warrior still have most amount of rage and highest attack/crit% due to most might runes , Mage stayed same as before with mana/intellect/x2 spell, and Paladin got some lds bonuses and changed Holy anger to Edda to pester enemy undead/demons.

[namad]

paladins were always awful...


the fixed healing ability is a) his ultimate final ability and b) useless in a no-loss run... that's right the skald's ultimate ability does LITERALLY NOTHING AT ALL in a no loss run! in fact... his ability is only really at all useful if you get OBLITERATE! which if you're doing that a lot... well it's not good!


edda? at level 2 when I first got edda it was absolutely useless, the drawbacks often outweighed the bonuses, now maybe at level 40 or something edda will rock? who knows? I don't know exactly how it scales... I'd say the paladin got ONE BUFF, the one BUFF HE ABSOLUTELY NEEDED! he has the highest leadership now, but his abilities are still the WORST ABILITIES...


you can't possibly sit there with a straight face and tell me that the spirit tree isn't still the worst tree of the three, at least now they're admitting the spirit tree is the worst, and so it's balanced by having the best leadership, seems fair to me! edda and rez after battle ultimate? don't hold a candle to alchemy+high magic! now the might tree might seem a bit weak, but... in this game... the rage system has been... UPGRADED! you have 3-5 separate rage rest cooldown timers that work simultanously now as well as improved rage bonus skills, even if the non-rage related might skills are a bit lax...


it seems like they're really focused the three classes well this time around between rage/magic/and weird gimmicks but at least your leadership rocks?

whereas before it was might/redmage/magic which was just a less well defined split... I never found rage abilities in the might tree all that key in the first 2.5 games in the series... heck... in crossworlds my mage had some fairly good rage abilities that didn't feel like I needed the might tree!!!!


using awaken dragon PLUS another spell every turn? (thanks to high magic?) makes up for a lot of the missing rage abilities from the might tree in older games? I wonder is awaken dragon even still in wotn? it seemed a bit op...



although really big question is.... can you still use guard droids+repair droids+SACRIFICE to reproduce infinitely many troops in your army? mid-battle, nearly endlessly, not only allowing you to rez, but to grow entire stacks of troops you didn't have enough of to begin with? that was CRAZY OP is that still in?

[Loopy]

Have you seen the Viking unique skill Absolute Rage? Holy crap that thing looks powerful. 50% chance for +25% attack bonus every hit, 2x critical chance on counter attacks, +50% crit damage? This is like a potential 3x your maximum damage range on every counter attack, and +50% crit damage alone will be great for any kind of ranged attack build. I mean Higher Magic is pretty damn awesome, but this comes close.

Soothsayers get Creation. I can't overstate how powerful this is. In AP we had Magic light (+% to healing, pretty bad overall) and summoner (+% to summoning, VERY nice). Now Creation does both, along with all other non-combat spells, AND gives increased duration. As far as I can tell so far it works on _everything_ non-combat, including spells and parts of spells that don't normally get boosts from intellect. Stone Skin at +52%? Hell yes. Blind for 4 turns? Yum. Even on those skills where intellect worked before it's still the equivalent of +40 intellect as far as making spells last longer, which is insane.

What does Skald have? A resurrect that works randomly, which you shouldn't need most of the time, and which can be done on your own? Not really worth my time IMO. Edda is just kind of meh for everything except undead, where it provides mana (that you don't really need at the beginning of battle) and rage (which warrior already has more of and uses better).

I think it's very well balanced now. Skald skills just aren't that great. Outside of your started skills all you really have to look forward to in your tree is some +crit and +morale. Skald was simply by far the weakest class in TL and still much weaker in AP. They needed these buffs. With the sadly constrained first island Skald may have an advantage in no-lossing, but outside of that I think the other classes have a much more exponential power climb.

[Zechnophobe]

I really agree that the change was fairly needed. Before you had no speciality of the Spirit class. They sorta had a grab bag without any of the best stuff for either.

Now might = best at rage, magic = best at spells, and spirit = best at leadership.

The only problem I see now, is that 'boss' fights where you don't get to use Rage are rather a problem for warriors. They lose out on their biggest perk. I feel like something should have been done to make rage more useful, even if you aren't using your chest. Heck, I'd love it if they could finally find a way to integrate 'rage' abilities into boss fights in a meaningful way.

[Fatt_Shade]

@Loopy About your comment that Creation is great skill and giving spells longer duration. I`m bitching about that for long time. Check intellect description in hero screen : every 20 points of intellect certain spells last longer. This was in the Legend, AP and CW and never worked. So now they make skill that does that, but still no bonus from high intellect. Gj 1C :-(
In HoMM3 babies mod this was fixed i have no idea how, but it`s doable which means if they fix it in game Creation + this stats boost some spells will be super overpowered.
Expl intellect 61 means +3 turn for spells and +2 from Creator and 2 basic from Sheep spell = 7 turn, or fear 9 turns . . .

[Zechnophobe]

@Loopy About your comment that Creation is great skill and giving spells longer duration. I`m bitching about that for long time. Check intellect description in hero screen : every 20 points of intellect certain spells last longer. This was in the Legend, AP and CW and never worked. So now they make skill that does that, but still no bonus from high intellect. Gj 1C :-(
In HoMM3 babies mod this was fixed i have no idea how, but it`s doable which means if they fix it in game Creation + this stats boost some spells will be super overpowered.
Expl intellect 61 means +3 turn for spells and +2 from Creator and 2 basic from Sheep spell = 7 turn, or fear 9 turns . . .

The 20 intellect thing works on some spells, just not ALL spells. It seems to only effect spells that have variable durations. So Magic spring gets longer, I think haste and stone skin do, but polymorph does not.

It's just another instance of poorly described mechanics only understandable via trial and error :P.

[DGDobrev]

I tend to disagree that paladins were bad. It was just hard to play them as a third option. Everyone was so obsessed with Warrior and Mage playstyle, that he failed to see how a mix of them could do well. Here's an example of how to play a weird Paladin in KBAP/KBCW:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDGmNH-8FFY

I do find the Skald to be a bit overpowered. I suppose the warrior took a leadership nerf cause some of the new skills would make him a beast of he had too big of an army. Still, as far as buffs go, the difference between lvl 1 Stoneskin and lvl 3 stoneskin is big, and the Warrior won't be able to see much from it until late game. Having healing as a set spell is just plain awesome - it makes the skald a prime target for a no-loss play, especially if you can get some higher HP units quickly.

We will see how this KB plays out. It may just turn out to have made all the 3 classes interesting.

[BB Shockwave]

Those people who love to go "munchkin" on this game and don't mind using the same army in all their walkthroughs always did, and always will complain that the Paladin sucked...

But he didn't.

He was not an uber powerhouse that could be (ab)used to steamroll everything. So what? I never play these games for a 4-hour gametime walkthrough or such sillyness. I had a lot of fun with my Paladin in both TL and AP/CW. In TL, they provided a nice balance between mage and warrior, letting me use a little of both skill trees (a warrior has trouble mastering magic schools and a mage has trouble with the might tree) - plus some added bonus. Also, leadership. Paladin had a lot of Regalia slots - came in handy to increase my army size. Basically, I got to use all but the most powerful spells and Rage spirit skills, trying out all the aspects of the game on my first walkthrough. It was fun. When I replayed as a Mage, I now knew what spells I want to focus on.

In AP, the Paladin got easy access to some great skills like the inititative/speed-raising random Adrenaline, good Rage and spell abilities, plus Resurrection after battle which is just great. Not to mention her class-specific medals that boost Paladins and Inquisitors a LOT.

WotN changed things, but it's unfair to say the larger army means the Paladin will be overpowered now. Unless you are doing Impossible and have calculated everything with minute detail, you will not notice much of a difference. The Warrior will still have an easier time mastering army-boosting Might skills and rage skills, the Mage will still have easier access to the (now 4!) magic schools. It's still balanced.

[jake21]

In the previous two games I found paladin better than mages at the end game (but still far behind warrior; warrior; esp in crossworld with insane better special skill was simply easy as cake). At the start of the games I found mage did pretty good because they started off with decent spell that was better than low troup count (early game is like level 1-5; late games is level > 20).

I haven't fully played WOTN yet; but my initial impression is that skalad is significantly easier both at start and end of game; mage weaken from previous games at the start due to weaker spell (my sooth had a bit of time up to level 17; but after I fed my first valk lots of items (which gave me lots of rage) things were a lot easier; though i was no were close to no loss).
-
My summary would be that they went a bit overboard in improving skalad (paladin) and debuffing warriors; though warriors are not bad - mages are always a bit more of a challenge.

(these comments are on impossible). Note that I find no-loss impossible in crossworld not too difficutl but can sometime take a bit of time; while impoisslbe is not too bad in legend; I was never really able to get no-loss impossible in legend (I think better players have done this). For WOTN no-loss is going to be difficult due to start of game but skalad should be feasible; other two classes I have my doubts.

[BB Shockwave]

Warriors will never be as effective at spellcasting as mages - due to lacking mana and int. plus slots to equip items that boost these stats, and lack of runes to update all spell schools to level 3 (they can, but would need to sacrifice a lot of runes for that). A Mage will always have a bigger spell selection and mana pool.

The paladin was - and always will be -somewhere inbetween, which was just fine. While a warrior will mostly cast mana-cheap debuffs and buffs, a paladin can use more costly summons, resurrections, time back. He will still not be able to cast such damaging spells as a mage, or cast twice per round.

[Fatt_Shade]

Am I seeing right here ? In might skill tree Viking specific skills are Persistance (total crap and really similar to Shield of rage) and Absolute rage ??? So any class can get Bloodlust and Runic power, how is Rage domain of Warrior class if any can get this 2 mostly rage oriented skills ???
Mage is best in magic and spell dmg, Paladin have greatest army and dmg undead/demons, Warrior have best rage skills NO wait he doesnt :-(

[Loopy]

Bloodlust and Berserker (req for Bloodlust) cost a metric ton of might runes. And if you want to be a true master of rage you need the other rage abilities, which will improve damage by up to 60%, give you a 60% chance to use rage twice a turn, and give you a ton of rage. Those happen to be on the opposite end of the tree. Other classes aren't going to have a chance at filling the entire tree in, so they will need to decide between starting with rage or gaining and using it much more efficiently. And TBH I think Bloodlust is pretty bad in comparison, chugging a rage potion is just as good and the other end of the tree has some awesome things.

In the end I would much prefer no unique skills at all, letting rune availability determine what you can get. The first unique skill of each tree is pretty meh except Edda vs undead, and the second unique would be damn hard to reach even if it was available.

[BB Shockwave]

Yes, this is really odd that the skill that lets you use Rage abilities twice per turn is... not warrior specific. With that logic, Higher Magic should be available to everyone, not just mages. :)

[Fatt_Shade]

As BB shockwave said making those skills available to all classes make less difference in builds. There is 30 common skills and ONLY 2 unique per class, this seem odd. Why not make more class specific skills instead just rearanging old ones. 4 unique skills :
1) Viking class - Blodlust , Absolute rage , Runic power , +1 more maybe Anger (this making warrior able to make highest dmg/unit and most rage versatile class)
2) Skald - Edda, Resurrection, Jarl, Belief making him best at protecting his huge army,and highest moral to troops available equaling with warrior due to +30% stats to units but no rage skills to max.
3) Why the f..k would Alchemy be only Mage class skill ??? Unique for mage should be - Higher magic, Thesis (or what ever is it called here) Destoyer , Creator making him best at magic and spells END of story. No other class should be able to have huge amounts of mana and intellect as mage. Period.

@Loopy And TBH I think Bloodlust is pretty bad in comparison, chugging a rage potion is just as good Potions arent available because of randomness of game, and you travel to other island = hello you have 0 rage, have fun in first battle here.

[Loopy]

The difference in builds is rune availability. If all classes had all skills builds would still be vastly different. I just checked, and a warrior that spends zero of his magic runes outside of the magic tree (ignoring things like Anger,Icy Rage, Runic Power, Sense Weakness, and Tactics) will get level one of Higher Magic at level 31. And at this point they will have only level 1 in each school, meaning their double cast will be even weaker than a single cast from a better leveled spell. To get a level 3 spell and multiple levels of higher magic will require well over 50 warrior levels. A Mage can get this around level 15 or so. At level 20 a Mage is pumping a huge array of level 3 spells along with Creation and Concentrate/Transmute to fuel themselves.

So no, I don't get why you think builds will suddenly become the same if unique skills were unrestricted. The only class who really have a chance to use those abilities is the Paladin, and only through a lot of sacrifice in other parts of the build. That gives more variety in builds, not less.


FWIW I've found potions on practically every island. You should only need to chug one for hard battles. Bloodlust just doesn't add that much, a flat gain at the beginning of battle isn't as great as vastly stronger abilities and faster rate of gain. Of course both is the best. The point is that other classes will have a very hard time getting both, while warriors get them as easily as mages get magic abilities.

[Bhruic]

The difference in builds is rune availability. If all classes had all skills builds would still be vastly different. I just checked, and a warrior that spends zero of his magic runes outside of the magic tree (ignoring things like Anger,Icy Rage, Runic Power, Sense Weakness, and Tactics) will get level one of Higher Magic at level 31. And at this point they will have only level 1 in each school, meaning their double cast will be even weaker than a single cast from a better leveled spell. To get a level 3 spell and multiple levels of higher magic will require well over 50 warrior levels. A Mage can get this around level 15 or so. At level 20 a Mage is pumping a huge array of level 3 spells along with Creation and Concentrate/Transmute to fuel themselves.

I assume that's just taking runes from leveling into consideration? Because this game seems to give out a lot more runes when adventuring, unless I'm just being very lucky. It's not uncommon for me to open a chest and get, say +3 might runes. You are still likely to skew towards the tree for your class, but there's quite a bit of mobility thanks to world map acquired runes.

[Fatt_Shade]

@Loopy Warrior that spends zero of his magic runes outside of the magic tree (ignoring things like Anger,Icy Rage, Runic Power, Sense Weakness, and Tactics) will get level one of Higher Magic at level 31. And at this point they will have only level 1 in each school, meaning their double cast will be even weaker than a single cast from a better leveled spell. To get a level 3 spell and multiple levels of higher magic will require well over 50 warrior levels OK he will get double cast late in game but will still be able to take it. WHY? Isnt this in some part role playing game , so why there is so little differences in hoer classes available? And who said warrior need to use double cast to dmg enemy ? (how about mass haste + mass weakness in same turn ? or x2 stone skin or any other abuse of buff spells that would make his units even more dangerous to enemy troops). That mechanic shouldnt be able at all.
if you ever try Neverwinter Nights (1 not 2) or any of those kind of games you`ll know that each class is unique completely from others , and make every play is much different in play style because of that. Here every class have 45 skill, only 2 unique=4% difference , 15 medals 3 unique = 20% difference.
Not much of role playing if of 3 available classes only this is difference. Randomness of items/reward/units available makes every play a bit more different but in the end many of skills lvled up are same for every class.
In AP/CW i had pet dragon on 60lvl with each class, why is that possible if only warrior should be able to advance to highest rage skill lvl`s ? And mage is only class able to make ridiculous amounts of dmg with spells, and that is OK but limit other 2 classes in same way.
And you are talking about rune availability, and skill upgrades. Not all those skills should be available at all not just depending on runes in game. To make player on start decide what to do, not to wait all game and save runes to get some skill not meant for him.
At level 20 a Mage is pumping a huge array of level 3 spells along with Creation and Concentrate/Transmute to fuel themselves. This is with expectation you play first. What if there is opponent with all archer 100% crit (+mass precision spell = +30% dmg to all) army and high initiative that decimate your troops in first turn ? This isnt possible so far, because there is no multiplayer of any kind (not even death match :-( But i think (and i `ll do it in my game) that more unique and difference between classes should be implemented in game.

[Zechnophobe]

I'd much rather have level 3 spells than double cast. And realize that pushing all your magic runes into the tree like that is preventing you from getting a lot more useful skald and viking skills.

[Loopy]

I assume that's just taking runes from leveling into consideration? Because this game seems to give out a lot more runes when adventuring, unless I'm just being very lucky. It's not uncommon for me to open a chest and get, say +3 might runes. You are still likely to skew towards the tree for your class, but there's quite a bit of mobility thanks to world map acquired runes.

Well, from what I can see the average finding of runes (for my character at least) is 2 runes of each type every 3 levels. For a warrior that is a 33% increase over just level ups in magic runes, which would equate to getting those abilities about 25% earlier. But keep in mind that the mage would also find runes, getting their abilities earlier too.

@Loopy OK he will get double cast late in game but will still be able to take it. WHY? Isnt this in some part role playing game , so why there is so little differences in hoer classes available? And who said warrior need to use double cast to dmg enemy ? (how about mass haste + mass weakness in same turn ? or x2 stone skin or any other abuse of buff spells that would make his units even more dangerous to enemy troops). That mechanic shouldnt be able at all.

If you sacrifice enough of your other abilities to do so, yes they should be able to do that. Mass haste and mass weakness? TWO level three spells? If you manage to get enough magic runes then you deserve to use that.

if you ever try Neverwinter Nights (1 not 2) or any of those kind of games you`ll know that each class is unique completely from others , and make every play is much different in play style because of that. Here every class have 45 skill, only 2 unique=4% difference , 15 medals 3 unique = 20% difference.
Not much of role playing if of 3 available classes only this is difference.

I've probably played more RPGs then you can name. Funny that you should mention a game where you can multi-class and turn your warrior into a mage if you sacrifice enough warrior abilities. Need I also mention that skills in NWN are basically the same as King's Bounty ability trees? You have strong benefits in your own class skills but other ones aren't blocked off, just harder to get.

Let me name some other good RPGs that you may have heard of that don't enforce rigid classes, instead letting you choose based on a system of advantages vs drawbacks: Arcanum, Deus Ex, Diablo 1, Fallout. All of them better than NWN IMO.

Randomness of items/reward/units available makes every play a bit more different but in the end many of skills lvled up are same for every class.
In AP/CW i had pet dragon on 60lvl with each class, why is that possible if only warrior should be able to advance to highest rage skill lvl`s ? And mage is only class able to make ridiculous amounts of dmg with spells, and that is OK but limit other 2 classes in same way.

Who told you that only warrior should have the highest rage skills? Can only mages use the highest spells? No. Are mages still a lot better at using spells than warriors? Yes.

Without unique skills mages are still vastly different from warriors. If you think otherwise then go do a playthrough where you kill things with spell damage on your warrior. I'll sit and wait.

This is with expectation you play first. What if there is opponent with all archer 100% crit (+mass precision spell = +30% dmg to all) army and high initiative that decimate your troops in first turn ? This isnt possible so far, because there is no multiplayer of any kind (not even death match :-( But i think (and i `ll do it in my game) that more unique and difference between classes should be implemented in game.

You don't need to make more differences. Different amounts of runes for each class is already a huge difference. Every skill is different. A mage skill is vastly less expensive for a mage than a warrior.

[camelotcrusade]

So I have been enjoying my Skald and finally sunk points into level 2 Edda - a 10% power increase - just to see if it was multiplicative or additive.

Sadly, it is multiplicative and it makes almost NO difference for the points you spend on it. Most of the songs have their activation chance go up by 1% when you do this. Some show literally no change. For 1/8/1. I mean, come on. I guess I should be glad it's useful out of the gate and doesn't require 3 levels to be worth it, but I'm a little insulted by the "upgrade."

Also, RE balance I am really feeling the impact of alchemy being wizard only. It's much harder to be a hybrid wizard than it used to be (I used to take every spell and still have enough runes to max level most of my favorites). Not complaining, just noting the change seems impactful.

[Zechnophobe]

So I have been enjoying my Skald and finally sunk points into level 2 Edda - a 10% power increase - just to see if it was multiplicative or additive.

Sadly, it is multiplicative and it makes almost NO difference for the points you spend on it. Most of the songs have their activation chance go up by 1% when you do this. Some show literally no change. For 1/8/1. I mean, come on. I guess I should be glad it's useful out of the gate and doesn't require 3 levels to be worth it, but I'm a little insulted by the "upgrade."

Also, RE balance I am really feeling the impact of alchemy being wizard only. It's much harder to be a hybrid wizard than it used to be (I used to take every spell and still have enough runes to max level most of my favorites). Not complaining, just noting the change seems impactful.

Alchemy is completely valuable now. Crystals give you wanderer scrolls, and they also let you create items (which you could, for instance, feed to your Valkyrie ladies).

I got a plan that lets me build a demon tongue, which gives, IIRC, rage and crit chance to demons. As a skald I could make three and equip them all... Would give me a crap ton of rage and crit chance!

[Fatt_Shade]

@Loopy
If you sacrifice enough of your other abilities to do so, yes they should be able to do that. Mass haste and mass weakness? TWO level three spells? If you manage to get enough magic runes then you deserve to use that.

Why would warrior deserve that ? Dont we already have enough advantage on AI controlled troops as it is.

I've probably played more RPGs then you can name. Funny that you should mention a game where you can multi-class and turn your warrior into a mage if you sacrifice enough warrior abilities. Need I also mention that skills in NWN are basically the same as King's Bounty ability trees? You have strong benefits in your own class skills but other ones aren't blocked off, just harder to get.
Good for you, and NWN was just first to come to mind. But there is available lots of classes to chose on start and making game more versatile with multi/class build with some unique benefits from it and it was great. But in KB there is only 3 classes with each own benefits, why confusing them more with so much similar skills and only 2 different in each hero class (as i said of 45 skills only 2 unique per class, not nearly enough to make each class different experience playing).

Who told you that only warrior should have the highest rage skills? Can only mages use the highest spells? No. Are mages still a lot better at using spells than warriors? Yes.
Game developer told me that with their skill distribution in first game. In the Legend warrior had Anger which gave him best rage generation=enough rage to improve rage spirits to highest lvls, mage had Alchemy and High magic and he DID have opportunity to improve spells to highest lvl as you asked paladin and warrior could take couple of 3rd lvl spells but that`s it ,not nearly as mage class. So spell domain was (still is) mage class, why not rage domain for warrior (was only in tLegend not in AP/CW not here in WotN)? That was my idea.
In AP/CW there was no difference in rage skills, so every class had same choice and on pet dragon 60 lvl they were all same, while on other hand no class could compare to mage in spell dmg output. Why would paladin/mage have same dmg with rage skills like warrior? Why would mage with double cast of awake dragon be possible to use rage skills x3 times per turn if warrior/paladin cant. I once did this just for fun : got helm with antena used mad rage+mana flow and cast 3 lightning orb in every turn just to see what will happen. I had 10 of them hovering around before i run out of mana for waking dragon any more, and this was around 20lvl hero so later maybe could have more of them with more mana. So you tell me, could warrior ever do this? NO, and rage skills are supposedly his specialty.
And you contradict yourself here. Mages are best in spells, so why warrior arent best in rage skills?
WotN give every class skill to 60% double use rage amulet, but only mage can double cast spells. How is that class difference?

What i said to make 4 unique skills/hero class i did in my game, but just said that it should be considered since now to much is common in classes to make playthrough unique for 3 different plays.