Valorian

Last we've heard we'll be able to pick a Talent every 3 levels and a class specific Ability every level. Will there be options for class Abilities though? It's every level for 11 classes. If you can pick just between two options it's already 220 Abilities for 10 levels. Maybe this advancement would be better: 1. Ab/Tal 2. Ab 3. Tal 4. Ab 5. Tal ..

I used my "stalky stalky" ability and discovered an interesting thing for this topic about roles: "Fighters can't sling fire as part of their normal class Abilities, but they will probably have some optional Talents that allow them to use magic." http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3506352&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=472 I presume it's "soul magic". I hope it's something that doesn't feel and look like a spell, and is along the lines of high level abilities in Baldur's Gate 2: ToB -- cleverly presented self-buffing, war cries etc.

The last update, about the stronghold, revealed an attribute: Strength. So most likely Strength is the attribute that "affects bonus damage (and healing) -- regardless of the weapons or spells being used." While I like that they decided to keep the classic name for this attribute and not experiment with various PowerMightBrawniness things, I don't like that it's associated with spell damage (nor would I like Agility being associated with spell accuracy). "The physical attributes are represented as well as the mental attributes..", Josh said on Formspring, but Strength under this system actually becomes both a physical and a mental stat. Because, this is just my guess, wizards cast spells using their mind and not their muscular strength.

Right. I hope things have changed in the meantime because watching a single auto-attack animation being executed by your character 100% of the time is.. I aborted the image in my mind. :D Ok, it would not be the end of the world, but it would be boooring.

I do believe there will be stamina potions. Rare and expensive. I'd rather have the game reasonably balanced and not feel compelled to resort to not using things because they're way too powerful.

Sounds good. It's a satisfying starting difference. The basis for my previous comments about defenses was a photo with all the starting defenses that you posted several months ago; the difference was much smaller. There's another change that I'm also liking. Speaking of damage types, there's currently only 4 non-physical types of damage: fire, frost, shock and.. either acid or something more abstract like magic/spirit/negative energy/etc. damage. I love 'em all! Why not both acid and one badass supernatural type of damage? Undeads want!

I didn't design the stronghold resources/systems in any of the previous games I've worked on. If a system gives out a resource periodically, it should either expire after a number of periods have elapsed or the periods should stop elapsing. Excellent, I'll play the keep game then. Overload of new informations. I feel a little bit crazy right now and I didn't even read about the special things that can happen with your keep, I want suhprays!

It isn't an endless source. Good. Because in your other games with keeps/strategical resources, it was endless.

Depending on the flow of tax income, not really. You understand what endless means, right? It means you can buy all the powerful magical items and potions you want (broken economy affects combat in a negative way, yes) by simply resting, while a small/moderate tax is being collected so that peasants remain happy.

Stronghold tax income is more for balancing maintenance costs (i.e., paying hirelings and repairing damaged upgrades) than a major source of income. Your major source of income will almost certainly be finding money and loot in the world. It doesn't need to be a major source at all. It becomes a problem if it's an endless source.

There's still the damage type switch thing. It will haunt you forever. Even weapon group specialisations won't save you because they'll cover all damage types (why Josh, whyy? ). I want to pierce! Just pierce! Or just slash if slashing weapons are cooler. Oh, so you included the higher DT variation.. Why did I mention that in one of my comments.. somewhere else. I need to say one thing. It's a precious thing (like a snowflake!) to have an informative, stable and pleasant developer to exchange ideas. If you were someone else, you'd maybe say angry things and start barking at people and theatrically leave the topic proclaiming "I'll leave it at that" and then return 10 times and after that write a huge bitter blog post about toxic people, while shaking and eating hot soup. You're very good.

Not designing dump attributes is good. Designing all attributes to be equally (even comparably if you will) useful for every class is not required. I'd rather have 1-2 objectively less important attributes available for my warrior than attribute-like abominations that don't make any sense and are of little use in role-playing (like the 2 you've described a bit already). My point is that you don't have to implement universal-omni-do-all-for-all type attributes to avoid dump stats ruining the system. I'm glad to hear about the inclusion of combat style talents.

You're correct, it's called defender and not defense. Responding to your posts has become a boring mechanical process for me so I sometimes make little typing mistakes. The word defender suggests.. defending. And you need some deflection for that. You're not really a defender if the 3 baddies you engaged stomp you in 2 seconds and proceed to slaughter everyone else.

I understand your point. It could break the economy big time if income from loot isn't properly balanced. Yes. My concern is more limitless loot than a limitless inventory. Like, if they have: a) enemies who drop loot or b) anything that can be sold such as useful herbs, in respawn mode. Or a stronghold that is a money machine.

Josh Sawyer wrote: "Most classes have at least one ability or spell that shifts the defense they are targeting with standard attacks. E.g. barbarians have a Brute Force ability that allows them to temporarily switch over to targeting Fortitude. Against our sample fighter, that would have the two advantages of ignoring the target's high base Deflection and ignoring the bonus provided by the shield." I'd find it much more sensible if the barbarian could turn incoming deflection attacks against him into fortitude attacks. He's the one suddenly resisting attacks with his brute force and formidable physique. Why would the opposite be true? Why would the fighter or rogue suddenly spread his arms and scream [no deflection check]"hit me! I'm gonna resist it!!" ? You'd first need to actually hit the target (deflection or in some cases reflex) and only then make the fortitude defense check, if appropriate.. right?

I don't think breaking the economy is a concern of theirs. Case in point, the bottomless inventory. When they created that they didn't feel that collecting everything to sell was degenerative, instead the walking back and forth to collect everything (due to bag capacity limitations) was degenerative. Go figure. I hopeth it is a concern of theirs! We'll see when Josh returns from his long and relaxing and, of course, deserved vacation. Hi Josh. Alzo, yes, strange things are happening these days. Laidlaw just can't stop repeating how there's no level scaling in Dragon Age:I (!) and of course there won't be any level scaling in Wasteland 2 either. But.. over here, we do have this and other degenerations in our still most beloved P.E. Maybe they switched the design documents with Laidlaw. Could it be? PS. I see how the bottomless inventory can annoy people, but being a compulsive collector of items myself I don't have a problem with it. I find being able to access your magical bottomless bag only in specific areas an acceptable compromise.

The system is obviously sophisticated and complex. Good job! But first, I have to say that I believe the tax thing (and possibly people adventuring themselves and bringing you gold and stuff) is problematic. Could promote degeneration and I'm not being sarcastic. You get tax money as time progresses, no? I explore the world and get money as I travel around (unless traveling around the world or resting doesn't fastforward time). Do you see the possibility for money aplenty and degeneration?

You seem to do a lot of wondering. The fact remains that, as long as some factors utilize the individual points on the 1-100 scale, it still serves a purpose without every single factor (i.e. Accuracy/Defense difference) affecting the scale at a 1:1 ratio. If Accuracy/Defense is the only thing in the entire game that affects the actual results of the miss-graze-hit-crit scale for a given creature/character, then you'd be absolutely correct about any other ratio being pretty crazy. And that is a possibility. However, I can only comment on possibilities, until I know. Why are you unnecessarily complicating things and drowning yourself in confusion even further. What's the problem with a straightforward, logical and intuitive approach where "1" means "1" and "5" means "5" shifting the hit/miss scale accordingly? 7 (base) + 6 (3 levels) + 8 (shield) + 10 (ability) + 5 (talent) = 36 Deflection Why would Obsidian change the ratio here instead of the values? This update is about Engagement. And they mentioned abilities that affect... engagement. (Please, I'm sure you can find something very humorous to say about such abilities u_u n_n ! We can't wait! U_U) Update 36 describes the fighter's basic abilities. I suppose the ability would not be called Defense if the only thing it does is increase the number of engaged targets. It doesn't "seem like an awfully potent ability", because we don't know the actual.. numbers. Even when they do tell us the values, you'll still be very unsure if it's potent or not because of the ratio issue floating in your head.

Excellent point! I wonder about that, too! I mean, if you have 30 Power, and then you've got a sword that deals 5-10 damage, do you deal 35-40 damage, as opposed to some other person with only 10 Power, with the same sword, doing only 15-20? Or does your Power modify your weapon's damage? Maybe stats, like Power (or whatever it shall be named) ARE on a d100 scale, but represent a percentage multiplier, so that 30 Power equals 130% of 5-10 damage? I mean, I know logic and mathematics prove that numbers on a scale of 1-100 can only be added to produce other effects on a scale of 1-100, and that multiplication and other operations are quantum warpings of the math. But... you know... people like me don't know that. And I need people like you inform me just how incapable of comprehending it I am, while failing to actually explain, because of that very incapacity. Numbers are pretty... 8P You mean Defender? The one that trades attack rate for the ability to engage +2 targets via the melee engagement system? Is it going to boost their Deflection value AND decrease their attack Accuracy AND decrease their attack rate AND grant them an additional 2 engagement targets? That seems a bit excessive... o_o Also, Josh didn't mention an ability. He just mentioned a Fighter starting with more Deflection than other people. I figured he was referring to a passive difference, like the one you said was flavor because it was only a measly 2-3 points of advantage. Of course, maybe he wasn't... I'm just curious for the details of the official system. You said you knew them, so I got a bit excited. But it turns out there are a few stray ones. Which is nothing to worry about. You were just trying to help, on account of my feeble-mindedness. We'll find it all out, in due time, ^_^ I'm wondering if you ever understand anything anyone says. The subject wasn't modifiers, power or strength, but Lephys' maths: 1=5. Yes, Defender. -attack speed, +defense http://eternity.gamepedia.com/Fighter http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/63020-project-eternity-update-36-off-to-our-elfhomes-but-first/ Seems the wiki has it wrong.

No. Like I said, he hasn't confirmed that 1 point of damage (per weapon description) doesn't translate into 5 points of damage (on the target) either. We can't live with the dread of not knowing. You should ask for clarification immediately. What about.. neither. Class abilities Lephys, like the one the fighter gets at level 1 (-accuracy +defense).

I should've known better than to think you'd not answer like an arse. I think I can retain my manners in spite of this, though, with some effort. Would you be so kind as to show me where (even on that gamepedia page) anyone definitively confirms that, just because your actual chance to hit for a given attack will be on a scale of 1-100, your actual Attack/Defense values will directly correspond to that scale and those chance-to-hit rolls, 1:1? In other words, even "logic/mathematics" allows for the possibility that, say, 1 point of difference between your character's Attack value and the opponent's Defense value translates into a 5-point shift on the Miss-Graze-Hit-Crit scale. It's ok Lephys. Take a deep breath, suppress the logorrhea and read the explanation: The explanation is quite simple. There's no reason for a "1" to represent any other number when, you know... you can transform the "1" into a "5" and use it instead. If 1 point of difference translates into a 5 points shift, using a d100 would be superfluous. Sure, Sawyer hasn't explicitly said they won't bend and twist simple mathematical calculations into an unintuitive mess, but I guess there's the possibility. He hasn't confirmed that 1 point of damage (per weapon description) doesn't translate into 5 points of damage (on the target) either, but we'll have to live with the dread of not knowing. I'm going to include your favorite "humoristic"-post smileys to make you less upset about things having simple and logical explanations: u_u 8P n_n

Did they talk about how they're handling this between specific classes? (I'm merely curious if I missed it). All I remember seeing is Josh saying that, for example, a Rogue (and a couple of other classes?) will get a + 2-or-3 permanent bonus to Stealth. But, as far as I know, we don't know how the DCs will be handled, or how point gaints will be paced, etc. Even though 3 isn't much out of 100, like you said, how do we know 3 points won't be valuable? For example, with the attack/defense numbers, any class that gets a +3 to attack will have, say, 10 instead of 7 attack at the beginning. But that number isn't compared to 100 to get your to-hit chance table. It's compared to the enemy's defense. So, if the average enemy defense is 7 for that level/area/what-have-you, then the person with 10 could potentially have significantly shifted hit and crit chances, as compared to the person with only 7 attack (any doesn't-get-a-bonus class), depending on how the math is handled. Maybe each additional point of difference between your attack and the foe's defense offers a diminishing effect, so that even a few points of difference is significant, but gaining a level and getting 7 points ahead doesn't give you a 70% chance to crit and no chance to miss. *shrug* I just don't know that it's worth deciding that a few points doesn't matter, until we know how they're handling the math. And if "we" know that info already, actually, and I just missed it, then please disregard all this, and I would like to know that info as well if you'd be so kind as to point me to it. I do understand the concern for the points being too insignificant, though. I sincerely hope they aren't. 1. They did. We (or rather, some of us) know 3 points won't be very valuable because logic/mathematics. 2. There's no reason to warp the mathematics. The shift of 2 points will be a shift of 2 points. How do we know? Because logic/mathematics. Using logic/mathematics and applying it to what has been written about shifting the to-hit scale, we can safely assume that a character with 3 more accuracy points compared to the target's defense will crit on 93-100 instead of 96-100 and have a 3 points lesser window to outright miss on the other end of the scale. 3. It's ok Lephys. This will perhaps help you: http://eternity.gamepedia.com/Attack_Resolution

Yes. There's a tear-sized drop of tactics involved (armor type will be shown in a tooltip anyway) and much more [please-why-you-force-myPC-to-fight-with-flails-he-loves-his-swords] tedium. Removes an aspect of a character concept, but doesn't strenghten combat tactically. Sure, keep the bad damage type penalties, but halve them. Positioning, intelligent usage of abilities and spells, and prioritizing targets offers enough tactical cogitation. This can be addressed with starting proficiencies (if you lack them, you can still use the weapon, but with considerable penalties). Indeed, warrior classes have weapon proficiencies from lvl 1 because they enjoy the benefits of.. being warriors. Tough luck for the mage who has to spend a talent slot and pick the proficiency to not be lousy at hitting with weapons. Oh, there's also (yes I totally wanted to write this before I clicked the reply button) the strange case of defenses in PE and the difference between classes in this regard. In short, all classes have the same starting defenses* and they improve universally by +2 for all classes as they level up. *The flavor difference at start that amounts to a few points, on a d100 doesn't count. In most cases the difference between classes is less than +1 translated to d&d mathematics. They could have capitalized on the fact that they use a d100 by differentiating the defenses advancement to +1/2/3, or make the starting difference meaningful, but they chose to have warrior classes and library classes be equally skilled at not getting hit. Of course, we can expect pickable class specific talents that will bump your defenses. Which doesn't suppress the uniform and sterile advancement system though. Also, I'm sure that in the new and improved attribute system with no dump stats whatsoever, the wizard will benefit from the universal defense stat as every other class. It will make his magical defense shield more magical.

I'd say a fortitude defense check against poison is needed, after the reflex or deflection defense fails and the attack hits the target (also, a graze shouldn't trigger the fortitude check). Please, correct your log.

Oh yes, being able to create a variety of character concepts, to customise and combine (talents, abilities, skills, attributes..) at char creation and as you advance: is teh important. Everyone wants to have a unique snowflake, right? What I'm not liking is the moving towards generic rather than specific. Few examples. *We can't specialise in a single weapon. You need to specialise in an entire category of weapons. Ok. That's digestible. *Attributes. Attributes will govern different, even vastly different, aspects of my character. How will having a universal "damage" and "accuracy" stat (whatever the final name is) help define my character from a rpg standpoint? It won't and it bothers me. *Finally, something that hasn't been mentioned yet. Combat styles. I'm talking about weapon and shield, two-handed, ranged weapons, dual wielding. I'm afraid, considering their design philosophy of extremely flexible characters that constantly need to switch weapons and whatnot, that being able to specialise in combat styles is unlikely. You see, I'd love to build my character as someone who is a master of, let's say, dual wielding! If every humanlike thing in the universe, with the same +damage and +accuracy stat as my character is able to dual wield as effectively as him, then I simply can't pretent there's anything special about his particular dual wielding expertise, or dual wielding expertise in general - because it doesn't exist. Everyone and ther grandmother, with adequate +accuracy and +damage, can switch to two weapons and be awesome (Bio style) at it.