Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mutonizer

  1. Interesting and sorry to be a bit of a downer but upon reading, immediately it brought up a couple issues to my mind... 1) What if we don't want a stronghold and be a good little lording for some X or Y faction? Seems all these things will be heavily forced upon you rather than being actual decisions the player needs to take. Why not have multiple options with the same general concept: Stronghold to rule the land, Bandit camp to rob the land, Mercenary camp to fight for it. Each offering slightly different options, with some hints of "good, neutral, evil" aspects to them that can be tied to the story and the choices made by the player. 2) The details seem to imply that one can only improve by gaining Prestige and it's implied that Prestige means people "like you and know you better". What if instead you choose Notoriety, does that mean you lose money or something? What are the other options than being a "good" lord? 3) What about Paladin and Priest orders? It seems that they already don't really matter overall despite their background but will Strongholds be structured based on your class, especially if they have specific options such as for Paladins and Clerics or be generic and the same for everyone? I mean, if you're a Bleak Walker Paladin, you'd expect things to be run slightly different than a Shieldbearer Paladin. Likewise, if you're a Priest of Skaen, or even the outlawed religion of Eothas, where does THAT makes sense that you get a Stronghold somehow and be left to rule as you please unless you actually conquer it by force or something. 4) Prisoners, nice. Hopefully a Priest of Skaen will be able to torture them aplenty and do "unspeakable rites", as it's described in the character creation lore for them. Right? 5) What if we don't want all those extra companions? Do we HAVE to take them in no matter what? 6) So while exploring in the middle of nowhere, we'll get news about what's happening miles away at our keep somehow? What's the reasoning behind this? So yea, cool concept, but seems very gimmicky, like some kind of pet mini-game or something because: "reasons", rather than something properly designed and interesting to fit in with the entire story of your character.
  2. Well, arrows/bolts are intended to be treated as a resource usually. They are powerful (allowing you to inflict damage without taking any and whatnot) but, just like say mage spells or cleric spells, you got a limited amount before you need to take a break and get more (via supplies or crafting, etc). You're not supposed to use them all the time, on everything. If you don't design your game to treated them as such, then yea, might as well remove them totally from the game.
  3. Playing poorly (over a long period of time) means you don't care much or can't be bothered (which, if the game has a poor interface or too twitchy, is comprehensible). In the present case, from what I've seen so far, playing poorly means you don't like the ultra micro-management required for combat. I don't call it tactic or even strategy because it's more than that and all the combat I've seen so far in videos and streams feel more like someone playing DOTA than someone playing a BG1 or 2 game. The "No bad build" concept also means that there are no "good build" either, which means, by simple deduction, that NOTHING you, as a player, decide to do, equip or improve, actually matters in the grand scheme of things, since all was designed to be doable by anything. This goes hand in hand with a d100 system, which, instead of smoothing the random factor by using a 3D6 or something for example to resolve contest checks, makes it even more important, especially with how the ACC vs DEF is handled, majorly favoring getting hit all the time, no matter your DEF. All in all, ignorance (and it's consequences) is not a problem because you learn in the end, and get better at it. Sure it's rough at first, but you overcome it. The problem with this system is that there's nothing to learn, since there's not chance of screwing up. It's built that way at it's core. But this goes way beyond game mechanics, it's a real philosophy of our time, transpiring through the entire game core concept, which goes hand in hand with "everyone is great", "we're all equal", "nobody should fail at anything" and the best of all: "you have no responsibility to take, don't worry, it's not your fault". Basically, we're not allowed to suck anymore...
  4. Maybe it can even be per action? For instance, if you hold ctrl while clicking on the target, it'll auto-pause once the action is finished. Maybe a mix of both, or heck, even a full auto-pause setting PER character instead of globally (ala character scripts we had in BG series) that you can change on the fly. For example, when fighting random mobs, you don't really need the precise auto-pause but when you're fighting dangerous caster mobs, you might want very finely detailed auto-pause and whatnot. Overall, still makes the game twitchier than usual, bit like a DOTA game really (all animation based I think as well).
  5. From what I've seen so far (watched a lot of video and streams, most very helpful), there seems to be a huge issue with the concept of Health & Stamina (which I first liked when I heard about it). Here are a couple example that I've seen and some I'm guessing will happen. 1) Party has one fighter meant to "tank" and "engage" as much as possible while the others are free to do whatever. The team is fighting overall very easy but also very hard hitting critters (when they hit) so they're not using any real resources, just bows and guns. The fighter has very high DEF but sometimes the critters get lucky and get a hit in. After three or four fights, fighter is at 1/3 Health while the entire team is completely, 100% fresh. There is NOTHING you can do but go back to an inn (since resting doesn't give the crazy bonus to attributes). 2) You just rested and come back fresh into a dungeon. Move 3 feet and miss-click, your cleric setting up a deadly trap that you knew about and should have avoided easily. Cleric is now at 1/2 Health, entire team is 100% fresh...Again, NOTHING you can do but immediately go back to the inn, rest and hike the way back... 3) You arrive at the Boss, you know it. Entire team is fully ready but your damn fighter did a marvelous job at keeping all enemies engaged and the team safe. He's at 10% Health, while the others are full Health and full spell slots. Nothing you can do but suck it up, hike ALL THE WAY back to the inn (and since some dungeons will be quite big, have fun with that), rest to get the bonus the hike ALL the way back. 4) You just went to the inn and rested, and are on the way back to the dungeon, to fight that damn boss. Random encounter on the way (not sure if there will be some, let's say there will be): very easy die in one hit but crazy accuracy monsters. You wipe the floor with them but once again, fighter took some hits and is back at 1/2 Health...Nothing you can do but suck it up, once again, and hike all the way back to the inn to rest. 5) You totally suck and just mass group "click click click" auto-attack like a blind man on steroid with whatever's coming your way.Mobs hits some characters, then some others, some go down, it's total clusterfrak every fight. You reach the boss finally, and notice that your entire team is between 1/2 and 3/4 Health...you engage, fireball in the lot, lose some people, but nobody dies due to Health issue (just KO with 0 stamina, because they die too fast to be healed, unlike a fighter) See where I'm going with this? The Health and Stamina system, especially if you have the "dead" option activated, means that any attempt to properly "tank" anything and succeed, means you get actually penalized. The only reasonable option here is to max CON on EVERYONE, and just spread the damage as much as possible. From what I've seen, either some "tank" classes (fighter and paladin, but I'm guessing also ranger pet and druid) need some Health restoration abilities or buffs, or there need to be a way to heal Health somehow which doesn't include resting.
  6. From what I understood, there are no "rounds" per se and everything is based around an animation delay for a given action (swing, cast spell x, etc) and once that animation loop (which I'm guessing is based duration * armor % mod and other factors, which shorten or lengthen the animation itself) a new one begins depending on what was queued up. That means if you have a "one done animation" auto-pause (which is what is implied I think by the OP), you'd have your ultra mega fast rogue pausing your game CONSTANTLY (probably every half seconds at higher level with gear and whatnot) while your defensive warrior in full plate wielding a 2t hammer will auto-pause every 10 seconds. That also makes the game VERY twitchy compared to a standard "turn based" (even falsely turn based as in the BG series, since it was a simulation of real time, but turns still existed, therefore you could pause properly each beginning of turns) because you risk losing VERY precious moments if you're not careful. It also means that if you miss-click with your 10 second delay fighter, you're really, REALLY screwed because there is then nothing you can do about it for 10 seconds THEN must be ready for it RIGHT when that animation's done with (or hope the queue works) because otherwise, it'll loop again. Another major problem is that spells are not cast when you ask them to be cast, but at the end of their proper animations, which are not indicated anywhere. So for every single spell, you'll need to memorize the precise seconds needed (and do the math from the modifiers you might have) and hope there is no interruption (which basically reset your entire animation loop) or it'll land seconds after you actually needed it. So all in all, sure they could make a "on action done" auto pause, but unless they make it "per character" (ie: I don't need to pause on my rogue actions, but the other characters are important), it's totally unpractical.
  7. There are indeed purely logical flaws in the attribute system but also some based on game mechanics. From what I've seen so far, from videos and streams: In the world of Eora, doing push-ups and eating your vegetables not only make you big and strong, but also, someone, ultra "magically strong". This makes no sense whatsoever. The "magical" side of Might feels completely artificial and, if just for a simply logical (if not RP) perspective, need to be changed. An obvious choice would be to move all the magical part of Might into Resolve, where it obviously belongs. Intellect boosting the Area of Effect of effects without, from what I've seen so far, ANY way to "reduce" the size of the Area of Effect is completely stupid. Just as stupid as boosting the duration of effects, without any way whatsoever to cancel an effect. In all the videos I've seen, a "clever" mage who likes to land nice and precise fireball and whatnot in the middle of battle would actually want the LEAST amount of Intellect possible, so he could land that spell in the melee very precisely, without wiping out his entire team. Meanwhile, big bad dumb "blow it all to pieces" mages would indeed go for high intellect...That makes no sense. A solution for this would be to offer a UI change for effects with Area of Effect: Allow the player to change the size of it when choosing where to cast it, ranging from minimum size (3 INT) to maximum size (size + max INT bonus) for example using ALT+mouse-wheel. That way, the higher your INT, the more variation in the size you'd get from very small to very large, depending on the situation. Also, there needs to be a way to cancel any current active effect you have, be it on you, someone or anywhere else. Attributes never give any penalties, only bonus. This to me seems to legitimate dump stats to a point I've never seen before. If you don't get penalties for having low attributes, especially since you're checks are using a d100 system + modifier, this pushes for ultra specialization with things like 18/18/18/3/3 and whatnot. And if this is allowed, the game, no matter the difficulty, risk of becoming a total cake walk for min/maxers, or, the other way around, a total nightmare for non min/maxers. That, or you'll have to make these mean nothing whatsoever in the long run (ie: due to level and item bonus over shadowing base attribute ones), and someone who keeps 3/3/3/3/3/3 won't see much differences from someone with 18/18/18/18/18 in the long run. 3/14/18 seems to be the current logical attribute split to choose. 3 because you don't need it whatsoever, 14 to get dialog option, 18 to max it. Anything in between feels wasted, especially in a d100 system and some defenses being split over two or three attributes. Skills seem to be totally separated from Attributes. If this is the case, once again, where is the logic of it? a 3/3/3/3/3 character with 7 athletics can do feats that a 18/18/18/18/18 with 6 athletics can't? Also, despite the obvious intent to avoid ultra specialization, flat requirements for skill levels, without any (apparently) purely chance based factor or check whatsoever (ie: to unlock the door in the ruined tower of the leather-worker?) will force players to do the exact opposite and go for ultra specialization, for fear on missing out. In my opinion, there needs to be d100 checks, linked to one or two attributes, as well as skills (which would weight more of course).
  • Create New...