[spell mastery - please dont do this]

Without resting there is no real natural passage of time.  In BG1 you had one or two weeks to get to Nashkel after recruiting Khalid and Jaheira and/or Xzar and Montaron or they would leave(the same with Minsc and Dynaheir) .  Per-rest mechanics and fatigue over time were two mechanics that essentially by themselves were responsible for giving meaning to what would otherwise be a cosmetic day-night cycle.  This was especially important because normal resting was the most central device used to tell your character's story(through dream sequences) .  That you were having those dreams when and where you chose to rest and not because you were teleported to "Da Camp of Da Heroes" rooted you all the more strongly in the world.

 

 

This is a huge, glow in the dark line between role-players and power gamers. 

[RPGCodex Review #1 - Hŵrpa Dwrp]

Because the aside grabbed my attention in a way that the debate over the "review did not...

 

The iron crisis, it's accompanying economic and military collapse and the impending war between Baldur's Gate and Amn are the single most important events in the region in the game. Anybody who's anybody is involved, good, neutral or evil. Altruist? Not only has everyday life ground to a halt, but war is coming. Mercenary? People will pay big, big money to put a stop the banditry and poisoning of the ore. Power-crazy? The people behind it are the biggest fish in the pond, and you can feed off that power.

 

I always thought that the main plot in BG1 was much more solid than the main plot in BG2, and it managed to largely sidestep the worst tropes of bad D&D writing(the absence of Rivendell, oops "Suldanessellar" and the pointy-eared immortal poet-artist colony within was conspicuous and gratifying) . Looking back on it, I'm reminded of the Witcher games.

 

But to each his own. I like that PoE took a leaf out of BG1's book on that and other notes.

[Trying to play a wizard - what am I missing here?]

Well, with four caster classes the spell schools are bound to be spread thin, no? Rather, the emphasis is on separate classes rather than subdivisions within them. At least that's how it seems to me, but I've not played around much with Chanters and Ciphers.

 

As an aside, the most important thing for me to feel happier with playing a Wizard would be opportunities to apply my abilities outside of combat. That's where the real fun of being a Wizard in the IE games was for me.

[Eurogamer on Combat XP, Turn-Based Battles]

 

 

Also this: "If you want an Orlan with the build of a towering Aumaua, or a human-sized dwarf, you can."

I think thats refering to the Orlan being able of getting the same stats and class as the Aumaua and human but not the racial traits.

 

 

Well, the language of the sentence makes me think they actually meant size - I think they were confusing the Godlike ability to be any class template as a universal thing.

 

 

(Gaming)Journalism at it's finest.

[Asynchronous Combat Abilities Usage]

Perhaps this might be an unpopular opinion, but I feel interupts should be limited to spell casts only. Having basic attacks and physical attacks interrupted makes the game too random and honestly, hard to follow.

 

Does it make sense in real life? Sure. In an RPG? I just feel it takes too much away from the player. Imagine this scenario:

 

A rogue is about to backstab (or whatever) a really low health caster. Just before, she gets hit by an arrow from a ranged creature, and her backstab is interrupted. The caster finishes his spell and kills the rogue / some other party member. 

 

 

That situation sounds fantastic, much better than if the rogue still went through with the kill despite the wizard's team mate putting an arrow through the rogue's rotator cuff. This isn't an MMO/MOBA and removing interrupts in favor of a more 'flat', 'reliable' real time combat system(or making all turns synchronized because you're too used to turn-based combat to adjust) would kill a major tactical part of the game.

 

If the wizard gets shot and is interrupted, his timer starts over of course. Hit those three casters with a fireball and if they were in the middle of casting AND you interrupted them, their timers start over too. It seems perfectly natural to me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's a broken system, I'm afraid because I don't like it.

 

 

This hits the mark, I think.

[A Flawed Design]

I've found a pretty good ex post facto rationalization for this. It keeps me from losing sleep, anyway.

 

Might is a property of your soul. How it manifests depends on what you do with it. So you could have a mighty wizard who is not physically all that powerful, because he's channeled that might into spell power, whereas a mighty barbarian would have channeled it into bulging muscles.

 

Gluteus Maximus the muscle wizard still casts with muscles. Just sayin'.

 

'Intestinal Fortitude' is my personal translation of 'Might'.

 

 

I like it, and I don't think it's unintuitive at all. Thank goodness muscle size isn't the measure of a fighter anymore. That's like saying Hulk Hogan could beat Georges St-Pierre in a real fight without breaking a sweat. Goofy stuff.

[pcgamers beta review.]

You'd be the same if you'd witnessed the decline of the RPG over the last 15 years ...

 

 

 

 

Absolutely right. Heh, seeing all those great company logos on the tombstones made me sad.

[On "Degenerative Gameplay" - Fixing the Incentives for Healing and Scouting]

 

So if it turns off when combat starts then you can't choose to search for traps in that area while your comrades are fighting off the enemy? I seem to recall areas in the IE games where battle zones were trapped - BG final battle for one.

Yep. That's why it won't work in a system where it's "group-check-or-nothing". In BG, if you wanted to handle the traps while the rest of your party was fighting Seravok & Co., you kept your thief out of combat so that they could do a dedicated search.

 

 

Absolutely. It was actually a nail-biting experience to have all your people run interference to buy the thief time to disable those traps before Sarevok/Tazok closed and forced you into the traps.

 

The idea about having it structured as a passive ability that stops when the character is performing actions is definitely a good one, I think. It removes an "activity" for the player to do(push a button, tolerate dawdling speed, etc.) but not in a negative way.

 

Wouldn't it make sense to have an individual pulse check with perception as a main factor, possibly modified somewhat by class and skill(mechanics being the natural choice)? A rogue might have an edge on other classes due to his 'profession', but nothing would stop your super-perceptive Paladin mechanic from handling things.

[Backer Beta Patch Coming Soon]

 

 

He was nice enough to respond to a direct question in brief. Stop acting like a complete baby.

 

Throwing insults at other people doesn't help your argument and is just troll click bait. Refrain from throwing insults and your posts might be taken seriously.

 

Not to mention pretending to be a moderator. last I checked, it wasn't up to Panteleimon to dictate what gets discussed on a developer's thread.

 

 

I never told you what to discuss, thanks. I just saw your poor conduct and couldn't help myself. It's considered a social virtue where I come from.

 

 

 

 

I am legitimately excited for the patch. Can't wait to be able to relax a little bit and be more adventurous, fight the same battle a few times and all that.

[Backer Beta Patch Coming Soon]

 

He was nice enough to respond to a direct question in brief. Stop acting like a complete baby.

 

Throwing insults at other people doesn't help your argument and is just troll click bait. Refrain from throwing insults and your posts might be taken seriously.

 

 

I called him on his conduct, nothing more. If you don't want to be scolded, behave properly.

[Backer Beta Patch Coming Soon]

That's right Mods, remove a Developer's post from this thread.

 

He was nice enough to respond to a direct question in brief. Stop acting like a complete baby.

[Backer Beta Patch Coming Soon]

Couple hours until the end of the workday, we'll see.

[Do you want experience from combat?]

No, mostly these forums are quite small and the same group of posters constantly wants to grind their 'combat XP' axe and wring their hands any chance they get.

[A different view on the whole XP controversy]

 

I would like to direct you to my post a few places up. I'm a Pro Combat XP player who suggested 3 approaches none of which are combat XP required. So why don't you take your garbage somewhere else.

 

 

 

 

None of your suggestions have ANYTHING to do with combat XP.  They're modifications you think people who are looking for combat XP would be interested in. That's super, but has nothing to do with my post, unless my specifically mentioning COMBAT XP threw you off. As far as I'm concerned, your first two suggestions are fine(I think the only reward for filling out a bestiary entry should either be an advantage against those monsters or XP, though) and the third has no place in the game. But that's just my opinion. They're thoughtful suggestions, which is always good.

 

So why don't you give your parents a call and ask them to teach you some manners?

[A different view on the whole XP controversy]

 

You really think that the majority of "pro-kill-xp" players is interested in something like that? Just read through those threads. You quickly find out that its not a discussion about logic and game mechanics its about personal preference, or with other words they just want it. Theirs no logical argument for it, just go on and read through it. All their so called negative side effects that will accour when you remove kill-xp cant be proven because their is zero way to prove it. Its a very "religious" debate.

 

 

That is exactly what combat xp proponents want, we even proposed a compromise numerous amount of times as a solution. But yeah it's hard to find those posts when they are drowning in the sh1t that are your posts. It's only the quest xp guys that are all or nothing on this issue.

 

 

There can't be compromise when that compromise is diametrically opposed to one or both sides. In this case, "compromise" is victory in disguise for the combat XP crowd, and pretending otherwise is incredibly disingenuous. There would be no real concession from the combat XP group, other than, what, having weakling enemy groups not give XP? Man oh man! How generous!

 

Calling for "compromise" doesn't automatically give you the moral high ground in a debate, and the artificiality of that claim in this case is plain. Pulling the dictionary out is the poor man's last resort, but I think a lot of people are forgetting that 'compromise' doesn't have just the one definition:

 

"To reduce the quality, value, or degree of something, such as one's ideals."

 

So far it doesn't look like this view of the XP debate is any different, but given it has nowhere to go that's no surprise.

[Replayability and PoE - a reality check]

I love that you mention Frodo because he and Sam are classic examples of good character development.  Frodo starts out happy about life, adventurous, maybe a little sly but honest and forthright....  By the end though he is basically a walking shell, withdrawn, anti social, and just wants to leave life behind and move on with the elves to wherever it is they go.  At the critical moment when it was all on the line he even fails and actually gives in to the ring. 

 

Sam on the other hand started out as a good natured but maybe a little naive gardener who was just along for the ride and had no clue what was really going on.  At the end of it all though he found his courage, even though they fail to show it in the movie he resists the rings influence at one point, becomes pretty smart himself, and in many ways is the real hero of the group.  Once again in the sadly cut part of the book it is Sam who organizes and leads the shire in rebellion against Sauruman who took over after his defeat at Helm's Deep.  In my opinion it is Sam who is the real protagonist of LotR not Frodo.

 

 

I hate to drag the thread further OT, but oh well.

 

Frodo and Sam's story is also one of the best and most sympathetic depictions of two friends who go off to war together and come back to their silly little soft homeland as veterans and have to face the next battle, reintegration. And Frodo just can't do it, because his wounds never really heal(and civvies are goofy). The most personally meaningful part of the books, for me. Tolkien never could have written it if he hadn't been in the trenches, and at the Somme.

[Pretty disappointed, this launches in December?]

 

 

 

 

I agree that when Karkarov started his post with "friendly advice" in the form of hurling insults and finishes his post with "If you don't have something good to say, don't say anything." it came off a little nonsensical.  Also, I never stated destructible environments and elements affecting elements as my "top two qualifications for a BG successor" ... Please read the above response to Endrosz. 

 

 

Look, if you haven't played the beta, you have no business speaking to it's successes or flaws and any academic discussion belongs in the general forum. That AND drunkposting just makes you look like a fool.

 

It's easy to get tired of the same squad of ~8 guys wailing like a broken record about how the game and it's creators suck, are monsters, with nothing productive to add. Maybe you would prefer "if you can't say anything (productive), don't say anything at all" better?

 

Regardless, you listed graphical gimmicks as top of your list for features you would look for in a BG successor, and that was informative to your priorities to me. Also funny.

 

 

You have me confused with khermann since I did not drunk post...at least today.

Also, http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/67489-the-general-suggestions-thread/?p=1487070.

 

Yes, I listed some graphical "gimmicks" that I would like to see in PoE.

 

 

 

It's possible to use "you" generally.  I didn't confuse anything.

 

 

The game is not only terrible, but it doesn't resemble the IE games at all. The bugs have nothing to do with the fact that the game is bad.

Obsidian has absolutely no interest in fixing Sawyer's absurd design, so I guess you're right, it might be better to just shut up and watch this game miserably fail. So many people have dropped support of this isometric stealth simulator simply because Obsidian completely ignores their backers.

 

 

Judging by your forum titles, you didn't have any support to drop, nor are you a backer. I suspect the only face around here that resembles those weeping caricatures is your own.

[Pretty disappointed, this launches in December?]

 

 

I agree that when Karkarov started his post with "friendly advice" in the form of hurling insults and finishes his post with "If you don't have something good to say, don't say anything." it came off a little nonsensical.  Also, I never stated destructible environments and elements affecting elements as my "top two qualifications for a BG successor" ... Please read the above response to Endrosz. 

 

 

Look, if you haven't played the beta, you have no business speaking to it's successes or flaws and any academic discussion belongs in the general forum. That AND drunkposting just makes you look like a fool.

 

It's easy to get tired of the same squad of ~8 guys wailing like a broken record about how the game and it's creators suck, are monsters, with nothing productive to add. Maybe you would prefer "if you can't say anything (productive), don't say anything at all" better?

 

Regardless, you listed graphical gimmicks as top of your list for features you would look for in a BG successor, and that was informative to your priorities to me. Also funny.

[Would team based turn based work well here?]

 

No.

 

They have already "ruined" Torment, don't take PoE away from me.

 

 

 

A man after my own heart.

[Pretty disappointed, this launches in December?]

 

 

I don't hold grudges. Everyone should be passionate about a cRPG. But I will cut you evaluate your reasoned argument if you try and tell me what you think I know is something I think I know.

Here is some friendly advice.  If you haven't even played it, either take it to the non beta general discussion forum or shut up.  Also maybe don't post while drinking because you just look like a moron.

 

:snip:

 

Or in simple terms.... where I grew up we have a saying.  If you don't have something good to say, don't say anything.

Need to live your advice before you start giving it...cheers kherman

 

 

Completely nonsensical post, but not something unexpected from the guy who thinks destructible environments and being able to freeze water are the top two qualifications for a BG successor.

[Pretty disappointed, this launches in December?]

 

Points that, to me, would be considered in the "Spiritual Successor to Baldur's Gate":

1)  Elements that can affect other elements like Divinity.

      - I.e. - Freeze hitting Water making Ice.

2)  Most objects can be destructible.

 

 

 

 

 

Ahahahaha, WHAT?

 

That's like saying Jodorowsky's Dune film would have been a faithful adaptation of the book. Good to know Battlefield 4 is the long-awaited mega-selling Baldur's Gate 3.

[Pretty disappointed, this launches in December?]

Right cause those mass effect games and dragon age origins were totally ****, nothing good about them at all.

 

Seriously guys, Bioware is fine.  Things change and companies adapt as time moves on, we should do the same.  As in getting over hating Bioware because they decided to make Mass Effect 2 instead of Baldur's Gate 3.

 

 

 

The reality is they haven't just moved past a 2D gameworld, they've moved past anything other than a mass-market 'interactive cinematic experience'. They're philosophically in the same ballpark as Bungie. Their CFO or whatever, along with other decision-makers, have publicly stated that they will not make another game in the style of Dragon Age: Origins(and we aren't just talking about technical aspects, here) .

 

But this really isn't the thread for this, so I'll leave it there.

[Focused Class Analysis: The Wizard]

So yeah, the class is rather impractical to use ATM and very situational in its utility.

 

 

In any of my playthroughs of the beta BB Wizard did 2-3 times more damage than any character in party only using Fireball&Fan of Flames.

The problem is that they can only use those abilities so many times before they need to rest where something like a rouge can consistently pump damage without needing to ever rest or worry about hiting allies.

 

 

Well, sure, but that was ALWAYS the case with wizards in IE games until you got up to higher levels.

 

Playing through BG1(roughly the same level range as PoE, though they might calculate levels differently) as a wizard mostly involved a lot of quarterstaff/sling/wand work and saving my spells for serious enemies. It was only towards in the second half of the game where you really came into your own. I'm not saying that it has to stay that way, but they have to do something to keep from going the Dragon Age route of being able to toss endless fireballs forever.

 

As for hitting allies, at least wizards have the possibility of hitting many hostiles at once. I use BB Wizard's jumping lighting and various AoE abilites to full effect every game. Couldn't do it without him.

[Why so set against giving us any (non-combat) health healing?]

 

 

Mutonizer doesn't seem to have access to the beta, only observing youtubers. Just because someone streams does not mean that he knows what he is doing. In general almost anyone with beta access here on the forum thinks that we have no real clue about how combat will be because it has bugs that cause cluster****s, no readability implemented and zero balance.

 

 

 

Probably the most salient point in regards to the "Great Wall of Text". From an academic standpoint that's fine, but if you're going to dissect the PoE beta, you should probably actually try it first.

[Do you want experience from combat?]

 

 

In fact *some* of the quest xp-only people are deliberately painting this as a binary choice when it isn't.

 

The *vast* majority of 'combat xp' proponents are in fact (as Msxyz points out) 'wider spread of xp reward methods' proponents, amongst which combat is only one.

sorry mc, but it kinda is binary. a primary value o' quest/task is that it avoids balancing. if you create categories that include kill/combat and quest and whatever, you has invalidated the point o' quest/task. you has necessarily reintroduced balancing.

 

so, get with the program private joker. you may not like quest xp, but don't pretend that the debate is as difficult to grasp or mutable as you pretend.

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68043-do-you-want-experience-from-combat/?p=1496598

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

See? There is no such thing as compromise in their side of the argument.

 

 

 

You do understand that beliefs or systems can be diametrically opposed, right? That compromise between the two can be either impossible or simply victory in disguise for one at the expense of the other? That a call for compromise doesn't automatically give one side the moral high-ground vs. the other?

 

Leave the 'kumbaya diplomacy' at the door.