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

Five man party ? idk... let's discuss


  • Please log in to reply
106 replies to this topic

#21
Wormerine

Wormerine

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 359 posts
  • Location:Poznan
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

I'm *really* unhappy about the five man party. It just annoys me to limit my options and tell me it's for my own good 'cuz combat was to hard.

It's not even combat that annoys me about this, though. It's having to replay through a whole game again in order to get the storyline of one additional character I'm interested in.

 

... I am sure Deadfire will work as any other modern RPG and give you all the story, even if you barely use someone. 

 

I don't remember ever hearing Obsidian saying that combat was to hard and that is why they reduce the party size. If I remember well, they said that they found that your party forced them to put bigger pacts of enemies which made combat more busy than it needed to be. I find it to be a good reason. It doesn't make combat easier, or more shallow, just cleaner. Of course, we will be only able to judge it fully once we get our hands on it. 


  • Karkarov and injurai like this

#22
JFutral

JFutral

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 105 posts
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer

 

 

 

Like this ;)

 

 

I've seen a couple of solos, including rogue and wizard. I am amazed at any of the solo games and gamers. I am not that good.

 

Joe

 

ETA: I will jump for joy if the reason is to help with load times!


Edited by JFutral, 07 July 2017 - 01:47 PM.


#23
smjjames

smjjames

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 698 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

 

 

 

 

Like this ;)

 

 

I've seen a couple of solos, including rogue and wizard. I am amazed at any of the solo games and gamers. I am not that good.

 

Joe

 

ETA: I will jump for joy if the reason is to help with load times!

 

 

I seriously doubt that reducing the party size to 5 has any significant affect on load time. You could easily test that by only having four companions rather than five in the party.


  • Karkarov likes this

#24
Gromnir

Gromnir

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 7024 posts
  • Location:Sleeping in my office.
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

it's too early to worry but too late to do anything 'bout.

 

poe is a relative decent class-based system, but it is still class-based.  the player o' a crpg with classes need be more concerned with the roles fulfilled by each member o' a prospective party.  reduce the number o' party slots, and it becomes much harder to fulfill the roles a player may feel to be necessary.  a classless system, so long as there is a high degree o' customization, is less likely to suffer such a problem as roles is far less fixed.  need a little more party tankiness or dps and is simple a matter o' altering skill or feats (nomenclature is not important) or whatever for individual or multiple characters within the party.  'course poe2 is gonna have multi-classing.  as such, class roles will be far more fluid in poe2 than were the case in poe.  

 

worry 'bout party size is all kinda silly as the necessity and desirability o' roles is, more than anything, a function o' encounter design.  tanky-dps-support is not subject to some kinda universal or golden ratio.  use poe1 as a guide for poe2 is understandable, but suspect.  for example, d&d 3e and pathfinder pnp were designed and playtested 'round a 4-man party to generate cr and such. obsidian developer encounter design is gonna determine what roles and ratios work.

 

won't know 'til the beta if the party-size reduction is a serious hurdle.  will be too late to change once we are at the beta stage. as such, it's too early to worry but too late to do anything 'bout. solution won't be to alter party size but to make minor changes to encounter design.  pointless topic from our pov.

 

HA! Good Fun!


  • Varana, JerekKruger, GuyNice and 1 other like this

#25
dam

dam

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 180 posts
  • Location:France
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

 

 


How do we feel about it ?

How is it going to impact our play style ?

Do we think it will be detrimental, particularly at higher difficulty settings ?

What's positive about this change ?

How are other RPGs doing it ?

 

 

Speaking only for myself, I think this is a mistake by Obsidian to go with just 5.  I prefer no party size cap at all, honestly, but that's another design path beyond the scope of this game.

 

Less party members means less flexibility objectively, and in my opinion, will lead to less enjoyable, less tactical combat overall. 

 

But, this topic has been discussed to death already though, so at this point I'm just hoping the game is moddable enough to allow for more party members for those that want them.

 

At least Obsidian realized the mistake it was to go with 4 in Tyranny, hopefully they will eventually come to realize 5 is mistake as well, but it's going to be well after the release of Deadfire.

 

*Offtopic: I'm still halfway convinced Obsidian is doing 5 just to drive Baldur's Gate/Icewind Dale fans up the wall. :o

 

Less stuff accessible at any given time, yes - but less tactical...? I suppose it depends from your definition, but I disagree. I always found tacticts to be about using well what you have at your disposal. Creating effective combinations, good combos - those are tactics. Choosing from more stuff - not so much. I really disliked Tyranny's or DA combat, but it wasn't the amount of characters I could take with me - having two more would just add busywork. It was that the combat in those game was choiceless. You would just fire your abilities whenever they were available and wait for the combat to end. Darkest Dungeon uses 4 character for each run and its always very engaging - both in creating a party and in combat itself. On the other hand, I do prefer a bigger paries in Long War over original XCOM. It all depends on game and character design, not amount of stuff you have. I am more curious about the ability/class/power points changes over party size as those will have more impact on the game.

 

 

Aye I pretty much agree here (except for the parts where you dislike DAO or Tyranny's combat).

Being tactical about a given situation is making do with what you have on hand.

 

 

While I'm uneasy about having only a 5 man party, I'm sure we'll find ways to deal with it.

I for one cannot imagine a single second that Obsidian are pushing this on a whim.

 

 

Besides, having less characters might yet give us more incentive to replay the game.

One has to pray the loading times will be much better than POE's though.

Only reason I'm not playing more of it, the horrendous loading times as the game progresses.

And I'm running from a SSD...



#26
Karkarov

Karkarov

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 2628 posts
  • PSN Portable ID:Karkarov
  • Xbox Gamertag:Karkarov
  • Steam:Karkarov
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Watcher
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

Rack up one more vote for, "Why don't we actually try playing the game before assuming it will fail?"


  • Sedrefilos, Messier-31, injurai and 4 others like this

#27
Katarack21

Katarack21

    Chief Eldritch Abomination of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 2098 posts
  • Steam:Katarack21
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

 

I'm *really* unhappy about the five man party. It just annoys me to limit my options and tell me it's for my own good 'cuz combat was to hard.

It's not even combat that annoys me about this, though. It's having to replay through a whole game again in order to get the storyline of one additional character I'm interested in.

 

... I am sure Deadfire will work as any other modern RPG and give you all the story, even if you barely use someone. 

 

I don't remember ever hearing Obsidian saying that combat was to hard and that is why they reduce the party size. If I remember well, they said that they found that your party forced them to put bigger pacts of enemies which made combat more busy than it needed to be. I find it to be a good reason. It doesn't make combat easier, or more shallow, just cleaner. Of course, we will be only able to judge it fully once we get our hands on it. 

 

You'll miss *that characters* storyline. That's what I meant by "in order to get the storyline of one additional character I'm interested in." In PoE, I can have five companions with me, so I get all five of their storylines--their character arcs, their comments, etc. In Deadfire, I'll get to take 4 with me. There's 8 companions, and five of them seem cool to me. So that's at least one second playthrough--and if I want that companions whole story line it'll have to be a complete play through (in the sense that I won't get to see what they have to say about something unless they are their, so their "whole storyline" is their commentary on every part of the game).

And I took the comments from Obsidian about reducing the party size because of player complaints regarding the "busy" nature of combat  to be effectively "making it easier". They're reducing overall complexity of combat by reducing the party size, is how I took it.



#28
injurai

injurai

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 990 posts
  • Location:Not the oceans
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

Can't you just swap companions out when doing their quests. Sure you'll miss out on some flavor text and chime in dialogue. But I don't think you'll miss that much.


  • Karkarov and Bill Gates' Son like this

#29
smjjames

smjjames

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 698 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

I think his point is to experience the whole game with that particular companion, especially now that inter-companion relationships will deveop.

 

Most of us are probably going to run with Eder, Pallegina, and Aloth for the first run while switching out the fourth companion as needed/desired, and then for the second run, do those other companions.

 

I suspect that wanting to play with the three returning companions each time is part of why some are complaining or don't like the lowered party size.


Edited by smjjames, 07 July 2017 - 06:05 PM.

  • kanisatha and Wormerine like this

#30
injurai

injurai

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 990 posts
  • Location:Not the oceans
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

Ahh, I keep forgetting about the expanded relationship mechanic. Yeah that will be interesting. With so few party members it kind of makes you wonder why side-kicks exist at all other than the woo the backers during the campaign.



#31
smjjames

smjjames

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 698 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

I suppose the sidekicks might be employable as crew members, or to help keep a healer safe. TBH, kind of hard to see the sidekicks having any real function, other than to attract the backers or appease those that want bigger parties.

 

We haven't seen or heard anything about the sidekicks since the last bit about Ydwin, so, it's possible that feature got cut? Things get cut all the time in game development for various reasons.



#32
Katarack21

Katarack21

    Chief Eldritch Abomination of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 2098 posts
  • Steam:Katarack21
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

I think his point is to experience the whole game with that particular companion, especially now that inter-companion relationships will deveop.

 

Most of us are probably going to run with Eder, Pallegina, and Aloth for the first run while switching out the fourth companion as needed/desired, and then for the second run, do those other companions.

 

I suspect that wanting to play with the three returning companions each time is part of why some are complaining or don't like the lowered party size.

Exactly. I suspect that the relationship system will vastly reward more time spent with each companion, as opposed to switching them out as-needed for different quests, etc.



#33
JerekKruger

JerekKruger

    (12) Mage

  • Members
  • 1941 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

Rack up one more vote for, "Why don't we actually try playing the game before assuming it will fail?"

 

And another.

 

I trust the Deadfire team to do a good job, and trust they didn't make the decision on a whim. I've enjoyed CRPGs with party sizes of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 in the past, so I can't see why I wouldn't enjoy 5.


  • Karkarov, Sedrefilos and draego like this

#34
MortyTheGobbo

MortyTheGobbo

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 245 posts

I honestly don't mind it. Keeping track of all the teammates in Pillars was difficult, increasingly so on high levels. A lot of abilities sat unused just because I couldn't focus on that one party member. Cutting the size down to five should help with that.


  • Karkarov, Bill Gates' Son and JerekKruger like this

#35
Wormerine

Wormerine

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 359 posts
  • Location:Poznan
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

I think his point is to experience the whole game with that particular companion, especially now that inter-companion relationships will deveop.
 
Most of us are probably going to run with Eder, Pallegina, and Aloth for the first run while switching out the fourth companion as needed/desired, and then for the second run, do those other companions.
 
I suspect that wanting to play with the three returning companions each time is part of why some are complaining or don't like the lowered party size.


That is a good point, though for me this kind of replayinility is a good thing. I do see though, how other people might prefer to experience more companions fully on each of their runs.

#36
tid242

tid242

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 69 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

Rack up one more vote for, "Why don't we actually try playing the game before assuming it will fail?"

 

 

Couldn't agree more.  My only caveat being that it would be nice for party members left in the boat to "keep up" a little better experience-wise than they tended to be in PoE1..

 

It seems like pretty much all RPGs since I was a little kid was like this, old Sega games (Phantasy Star, Shining Force, etc) ended up with the 'strong' core party, and then the 'training wheels' side party that mostly just hung out and got drunk (I'm pretty sure this is all they had going on at home base).  Some of this was scaling where some chars just never amounted to anything (*cough* Chester, from Shining Force 2 *cough*), but a lot of it was that the alcoholics at home base just never got any XP... 

 

The scaling deficiencies should theoretically not be an issue in PoE2, but the XP deficiencies could def be closed..

 

good discussion, even if it is a re-hash.  With multi-classing I'm a /lot/ less concerned about smaller party size anyway, TBH..

 

cheers,


  • Karkarov and JerekKruger like this

#37
Archaven

Archaven

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 662 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

This has been discussed since the beginning of the fig crowd-funding. I don't like it at all . But there's nothing much we can do since Obsidian said it's final. IMO lesser characters are easier and manageable maybe on controllers. And they Feargus have hinted the game to be consoles during the Figstarter. So is really no brainer the idea is to make it consoles.



#38
Wormerine

Wormerine

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 359 posts
  • Location:Poznan
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

This has been discussed since the beginning of the fig crowd-funding. I don't like it at all . But there's nothing much we can do since Obsidian said it's final. IMO lesser characters are easier and manageable maybe on controllers. And they Feargus have hinted the game to be consoles during the Figstarter. So is really no brainer the idea is to make it consoles.

I really don't see why taking away one characters would make the game easier to play with a controler, especially as you will be able to have multiple animan companions and (possibly?) summons. Whatever thinking process behind it was, I am convinced it wasn't better controller support. So far UI looks as PC focused as it was before.


  • Bill Gates' Son, Varana, anameforobsidian and 4 others like this

#39
Spiegel

Spiegel

    (0) Nub

  • Initiates
  • 2 posts

I'd prefer a well-rounded four person party actually. Mage/Rogue/ and two warriors.



#40
rjshae

rjshae

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 4548 posts
  • Location:Seattle, WA
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

Reducing the party size in general makes it tactically less interesting. If you get attacked by a second force in the flank or rear now, you'll be fighting them with your glass cannon. Yawn. It'll be much more difficult for a rogue to get a flank attack benefit. Yawn. If the barbarian runs off to battle in an island, it'll leave the rest of your party barely able to protect your wizard. Yawn. I guess we'll see.


  • Wormerine and RedKnight like this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users