Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Attributes


  • Please log in to reply
168 replies to this topic

#61
Fenixp

Fenixp

    (12) Mage

  • Members
  • 1917 posts
  • Steam:Fenixp
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

No. Strength would also influence your Mage's damage with weapons and the level of armor he would be able to wear. If you want to be able to fight back when something engages you in melee, put a few points in strength.

"damage with weapons and the level of armor he would be able to wear." is one problem in and of itself, but let's gloss over that for now - you seem to be missing the implications. Might is +3% to damage. Always. Even with healing spells. It's always the statistic that influences the endurace shift you're going to cause and it always influences it in the same way (well... More or less, Obsidian still has some work to do for the abstraction to work 100%, but they're getting there.)

Now... What about Paladin whose meele attacks may be semi-magical? Does the damage buff get split between Strength and Intelligence? What about other abilities of other characters? What about wizard spells that summon weapons? Is the weapon damage fixed? Which abilities and spells are considered intelligence-based, strength-based or combination thereof? Can I tell that at a glance without remembering descriptions for dozens of abilities? To make these work, you're going to have to come up with more "ifs" for your system.

There's your advantage of clearly laid-out rules right at the base level of attributes. The more exceptions, limiters and modifiers you add, the more confusing is your system going to become down the line for any reasonably complex system.

Edited by Fenixp, 20 April 2017 - 10:23 AM.

  • rjshae, illathid, gogocactus and 2 others like this

#62
1varangian

1varangian

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 126 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

It's effectively the first iteration of a more or less new system, PizzaSHARK. I agree with your points (to an extent, tank with dumped CON isn't particularly effective in my experience), but I want Obsidian to work with it and improve it (in many areas) as opposed to completely obliterating and remaking it into another DnD clone.

The increased Endurance from Con isn't actually at all important.

 

Good DR and especially Defenses are much more important. A single Priest can effortlessly fix situations where you can't avoid taking damage with Consecrated Ground. Also Second Wind makes Con a lot less important since everyone gets a big insta heal that increases with a skill rather than Con.

 

For my first Fighter I played a non-min/maxed Greatsword wielder with balanced stats, 10 Con and a focus on Deflection and the rest of the defenses + Vigorous Defense for emergencies. He tanked just fine while dishing out good dmg.

 

I would also argue that Int *is* a complete dump stat for Fighters. The increased duration is insignificant when a typical duration (Disciplined Barrage, Vigorous Defense) goes from 15 seconds to 18 seconds twice per fight. A constant +4 in Deflection or Accuracy or +12% damage matters exponentially more.


  • zimcub and Ninjamestari like this

#63
1varangian

1varangian

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 126 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

 

No. Strength would also influence your Mage's damage with weapons and the level of armor he would be able to wear. If you want to be able to fight back when something engages you in melee, put a few points in strength.

"damage with weapons and the level of armor he would be able to wear." is one problem in and of itself, but let's gloss over that for now - you seem to be missing the implications. Might is +3% to damage. Always. Even with healing spells. It's always the statistic that influences the endurace shift you're going to cause and it always influences it in the same way (well... More or less, Obsidian still has some work to do for the abstraction to work 100%, but they're getting there.)

Now... What about Paladin whose meele attacks may be semi-magical? Does the damage buff get split between Strength and Intelligence? What about other abilities of other characters? What about wizard spells that summon weapons? Is the weapon damage fixed? Which abilities and spells are considered intelligence-based, strength-based or combination thereof? Can I tell that at a glance without remembering descriptions for dozens of abilities? To make these work, you're going to have to come up with more "ifs" for your system.

There's your advantage of clearly laid-out rules right at the base level of attributes. The more exceptions, limiters and modifiers you add, the more confusing is your system going to become down the line for any reasonably complex system.

 

You're misunderstanding the whole thing, or maybe you want to for argument's sake.

 

I'm strongly advocating the removal of all unnecessary modifiers that Pillars currently has that don't really add depth or anything meaningful to combat.

 

There's nothing overly complicated in my proposed system that hasn't been done successfully in other games before. It seems your preferred system would be one where there wouldn't be attributes at all where you could put your points directly into "damage" regardless of class or weapon or spell. To each their own but that's too simplified for me.

 

Obsidian's baggage here is DnD. It has an attribute system. It works well. It lets you create the kind of character you envision and the stats have a lot of weight in combat. Comparisons are inevitable. Obsidian created a system that is really similar to DnD but it has big flaws. And those flaws are not "it's not DnD" - they are about mechanics and expression.


  • Ninjamestari and Lephys like this

#64
Ninjamestari

Ninjamestari

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 459 posts

You're misunderstanding the whole thing, or maybe you want to for argument's sake.

This. He does that a lot.



#65
Fenixp

Fenixp

    (12) Mage

  • Members
  • 1917 posts
  • Steam:Fenixp
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

maybe you want to for argument's sake.

To an extent, yes. So how would you solve it? Your strength already influences physical damage. Do you also want to remove active skills from meele characters? And:
 

It seems your preferred system would be one where there wouldn't be attributes at all where you could put your points directly into "damage" regardless of class or weapon or spell.

Also yes, because I feel it leads to very interesting emergent combos in character creation that designers of the game never envisioned (just like all mechanical solutions to problems do.) The biggest issue I've always had with systems like DnD (and a similar trap you're slowly falling into yourself while envisioning your own system) is that designers try to think of all possible combos and create individual exceptions and conditions for what they believe would be good ways for players to play their game (a tendecy you have actually shown yourself by implying that low-Int mages are not a good thing).

The thing with systematic solutions, like a +Damage stat encapsulated into some fluff to make sense in-universe, is that designers don't have to do any of that. They just give player a system and player can do whatever he wants with it, and then what players does with it will most likely work if it makes at least a bit of sense. PizzaSHARK is right about balance being poor - but I still adore the sentiment and wish Obsidian to continue in that direction. And ... Well, we already have tons of games with DnD-like systems in place, I really don't think we need another one.
 

Obsidian's baggage here is DnD. It has an attribute system. It works well.

Eeeeeh... We already agreed to disagree on that :-P Anyway, "Let's not try new things" was never much of an argument for anything in my book.

Edited by Fenixp, 20 April 2017 - 11:17 AM.

  • rjshae, illathid, draego and 1 other like this

#66
Durgarnkuld

Durgarnkuld

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 24 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

The lack of imagination and stubbornness in this thread alone is astounding.

And sad.


  • Bill Gates' Son, Ninjamestari, Lephys and 1 other like this

#67
rjshae

rjshae

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 4615 posts
  • Location:Seattle, WA
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

The lack of imagination and stubbornness in this thread alone is astounding.

And sad.

 

Sorry you feel that way. It's just a bunch of folks expressing their opinions. Nothing to dump on really. :)


Edited by rjshae, 20 April 2017 - 12:39 PM.

  • illathid likes this

#68
1varangian

1varangian

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 126 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

 

maybe you want to for argument's sake.

To an extent, yes. So how would you solve it? Your strength already influences physical damage. Do you also want to remove active skills from meele characters?
 

 

I didn't suggest anything of the sort and I won't be fueling silly exchanges either. Have a nice day, Fenixp. :)



#69
Fenixp

Fenixp

    (12) Mage

  • Members
  • 1917 posts
  • Steam:Fenixp
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

I didn't suggest anything of the sort

I said you did? But the questions I was asking you in both of my previous posts are actually questions you have to start asking when designing a new system. (Notice how 2nd and 3rd DnD edition's spells and abilities often have their own rules and conditions they play by outside of just their effects) I can guarantee you that Obsidian went through the same process, albeit a longer one. And so far (to my knowledge), majority didn't come up with consistent answers that would always manage to apply in the same manner for all applications. Except for the system devised by Obsidian. Now they have to streamline stuff like attack speed and the way stacking works and the system has the potential to be absolutely amazing.

Edited by Fenixp, 20 April 2017 - 09:23 PM.


#70
4ward

4ward

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 287 posts

 


 

There are plenty of spells available that mostly deal damage and/or have effects that last for a short duration. These are going to be least impacted by a low Int. To me it's mainly a matter of tuning your spell selection to your attributes. Low Mig/High Int: go for Aoe spells with long durations; High Mig/Low Int: targeted spells with short durations; Low Mig/Low Int: maybe jack up your Dex and Per, focusing on rapidly spamming a target with damage spells.

 

yes, true, though i don‘t like the approach that spells are ‚designed‘ by the player, i feel shoehorned like playstyle and roleplaying are too much emphasized for what happens in combat. I like BG2 better, because there‘s a good amount of spells to choose from and more importantly some spells are designed that you can use them for different playstyles. For example, skulltrap in BG2 can be used as a trap to lure enemies into or for teleporting enemies while it also can be used to simply launch it into an enemy group. So it supports different playtsyles but also gives the player the freedom to choose. If it‘s decided by attibutes then the player is using them the same way no matter the encounter IMO. So i say give me more spells to choose from and design them so i can use them depending on the situation. Also in the old games i could protect my caster without losing speed. In Pillars i have to have high dexterity to offset it somewhat. Arcane veil is one protection, but the protections in BG2 are better and once i decide to use armour i also decide to give a higher DEX score and then i‘m set with that for the whole game, in BG2 it‘s upon me to decide for every battle how well i‘m going to be protected. So, again, less decisionmaking, at least that‘s how i feel about it. Then, melee system, making repositioning harder, then spells hitting/critting/grazing so they don‘t give incentive to counter or that the decision whether to counter or not is rather disregarded by the player (if there actually would even be counterspells as in BG2 in the first place). Much better and clearer for decisionmaking is a spell that either has an effect, has half the effect or has no effect. Health/endurance giving less incentive to heal, in BG2 it‘s more annoying to die so you rather heal there. The list goes on… In BG2 i feel the progress, i get robe of vecna and my casting action is sped up, i get AC3 bracers i get hit less and so on… I‘m not saying there‘s a right or wrong and you‘ll disagree of the above i‘m sure, it‘s just i‘m missing the reactivity of combat as in the old games and i don‘t care if it‘s called d&d or whatever. Btw, in d&d you dual or multiclass if you want more attributes to play a role for your char. Well, whatever, it doesn‘t matter anyway, nothing will change whatever it‘s said here, just killing the time before game release...



#71
Psychevore

Psychevore

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 245 posts
  • Steam:Psychevore

Resolution is already pretty much an automatic dump stat on pretty much every character I've ever made. Removing the defensive stats from it makes sure I will always dump it on everyone to the absolute minimum.

Except on spellcaster, where'd I'd max it out and dump strength to the bare minimum.

I don't think the proposed changed are any good.



#72
Ninjamestari

Ninjamestari

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 459 posts

One thing that could improve all the attributes would be to get rid of the whole Fortitude - Reflex - Will - Defence scheme and instead just have certain abilities introduce attribute checks. The general guidelines could be:

 

Strength - used in checks against knockback and knockdown effects and such

Constitution - used in checks against poisons and diseases

Dexterity - used when dodging attacks

Perception - used to measure reflexes, IE to check if you notice something early enough to attempt a dodge roll

Intelligence - used to combat illusions

Resolve - used to defend against direct mental attacks, such as fear, sleep and charm.

 

Perception is still the problem child, I'd find a replacement for it to represent that spiritual strength stuff. It's too easy to make perception affect absolutely everything. Maybe wits to represent the ability to think quick on your feet and split second decision-making, or something like that

 

EDIT: the point is, there's no need to over-simplify the defensive rolls and not to include several at once when the computer is handling the dice. For example, let's say your character is being strangled; if your strength isn't enough to resist the force applied against your throat, then constitution could determine the amount of time you can go on without oxygen before passing out, or something like that.


Edited by Ninjamestari, 21 April 2017 - 03:48 AM.

  • Lephys and Messier-31 like this

#73
Messier-31

Messier-31

    (12) Mage

  • Members
  • 1803 posts
  • Location:Łódź, Poland
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

One thing that could improve all the attributes would be to get rid of the whole Fortitude - Reflex - Will - Defence scheme and instead just have certain abilities introduce attribute checks. The general guidelines could be:

 

Strength - used in checks against knockback and knockdown effects and such

Constitution - used in checks against poisons and diseases

Dexterity - used when dodging attacks

Perception - used to measure reflexes, IE to check if you notice something early enough to attempt a dodge roll

Intelligence - used to combat illusions

Resolve - used to defend against direct mental attacks, such as fear, sleep and charm.

 

I see your point, but tell me: what's wrong with this?

 

Attribute_effects.png?version=cf4901881d


  • rjshae, Sedrefilos, anameforobsidian and 3 others like this

#74
Ninjamestari

Ninjamestari

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 459 posts

You mean besides everything that has already been mentioned a few dozen times?



#75
Messier-31

Messier-31

    (12) Mage

  • Members
  • 1803 posts
  • Location:Łódź, Poland
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

Yes, because the abovementioned graph is a paraphrase of the above-abovementioned attribute checks suggested by You.


  • illathid, Sedrefilos and HooAmEye like this

#76
Ninjamestari

Ninjamestari

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 459 posts

Actually the graph you posted is simply a depiction of the current system. I really don't understand what you wished to accomplish with it.



#77
Messier-31

Messier-31

    (12) Mage

  • Members
  • 1803 posts
  • Location:Łódź, Poland
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

I don't understand what you are trying to achieve as well.

 

I rest my case.


  • illathid and HooAmEye like this

#78
KaineParker

KaineParker

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 2734 posts
  • Location:Houston, Texas
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer

One thing that could improve all the attributes would be to get rid of the whole Fortitude - Reflex - Will - Defence scheme and instead just have certain abilities introduce attribute checks. The general guidelines could be:
 
Strength - used in checks against knockback and knockdown effects and such
Constitution - used in checks against poisons and diseases
Dexterity - used when dodging attacks
Perception - used to measure reflexes, IE to check if you notice something early enough to attempt a dodge roll
Intelligence - used to combat illusions
Resolve - used to defend against direct mental attacks, such as fear, sleep and charm.

 
I see your point, but tell me: what's wrong with this?
 
Attribute_effects.png?version=cf4901881d

Magnitude, class values for certain stats, and concentration being poorly implemented. Otherwise it's pretty good. Move over nerds, it's muscle wizard tyme.
  • gogocactus, draego and tinysalamander like this

#79
Ninjamestari

Ninjamestari

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 459 posts

I don't understand what you are trying to achieve as well.

 

Now that has been abundantly clear from the very beginning.



#80
HooAmEye

HooAmEye

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 169 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

Man, you reaaly need to stop insulting people


  • rjshae, illathid, Messier-31 and 1 other like this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users