Sensuki

Nope. He is accurate and his attacks disrupt the enemy. Do you pay any attention to the actual mechanical values of attributes or do you just ignore them and make up stuff like this? Look at the freaking numbers jeez. Actually, even better ... here: public static float GetStatDamageHealMultiplier(int might) { return (float) (1.0 + (double) (might - 10) / 50.0); } public static float GetStatAttackSpeedMultiplier(int dexterity) { return (float) (1.0 + (double) (dexterity - 10) / 50.0); } public static float GetStatEffectDurationMultiplier(int resolve) { return (float) (1.0 + (double) (resolve - 10) / 20.0); } public static float GetStatEffectAreaMultiplier(int intellect) { return (float) (1.0 + (double) (intellect - 10) * 3.0 / 100.0); } public static float GetStatInterruptMultiplier(int perception) { return 1f; } public static float GetStatRangedAttackDistanceMultiplier(int perception) { return (float) (1.0 + (double) (perception - 10) / 20.0); } public static float GetStatConcentrationMultiplier(int resolve) { return (float) (1.0 + (double) (resolve - 10) * 3.0 / 100.0); } public static float GetStatBonusAccuracy(int perception) { return (float) (perception - 10); } public static float GetStatBonusDeflection(int intellect) { return (float) (intellect - 10); } This is what the attributes do currently, range is not working however. Do you see intellect being called for anything but Deflection or AoE ? I don't. Here's what they used to be public static float GetStatDamageHealMultiplier(int might) { return (float) (1.0 + (double) might / 50.0); } public static float GetStatEffectDurationMultiplier(int intellect) { return (float) (1.0 + (double) intellect / 20.0); } public static float GetStatEffectAreaMultiplier(int intellect) { return (float) (1.0 + (double) intellect * 3.0 / 100.0); } public static float GetStatInterruptMultiplier(int perception) { return (float) (1.0 + (double) perception * 3.0 / 100.0); } public static float GetStatConcentrationMultiplier(int resolve) { return (float) (1.0 + (double) resolve * 3.0 / 100.0); } My understanding of what the attributes do comes from the code level. Not make believe. No I'm not. That's just what you believe. All our proposed version did was 1) move Accuracy to Perception to prevent trap builds, making interrupt more useful. Not only does this make perfect sense thematically but it makes perfect mechanical sense as well. 2) We added Deflection to Resolve to balance it against the new Perception, this does not make as concrete thematic sense as Perception does, it depends on what your take on Resolve is. For me it works fine enough. Our reasoning for this was more mechanical, a reaction to the change necessary to prevent trap builds. 3) We added in Action Speed, which makes sense on Dexterity, but the attribute could be renamed to Agility if necessary. Those changes are not that large, and yet you chucked a total hissy fit over them, when all they do is allow you to do two things that you liked to be able to do in the previous system BETTER and also add in a new character concept. Your reaction to these things is completely wacked if you ask me. Our changes does not affect the dialogue importance, they are the same as they were before. Perception and Resolve are now more mechanically viable for combat. Perception governs accuracy and critical chance and stuff in many games. This is not an alien concept. I don't make up fluff examples like this. Only mechanical ones. to be continued

No you're just an idiot who cannot into searching at all. I just pasted two examples. Here's every single one I could find from a quick search on SA, this board and google interviews ------------------------ PE's Attributes system is designed to avoid dump stats, something that continues to be an issue for every edition of A/D&D. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?goto=post&postid=420288807 Some people aren't fans of our overall Attribute design, which I've focused on always providing benefits to characters of any class even if that means the Attributes aren't very realistic. If you want to make a Strength-based rogue, that's viable. So is a Strength-based wizard, an Intellect-based barbarian, etc. As with taking Talents, you may be de-emphasizing some core aspect of your character by using a non-traditional Attribute array, but there aren't class/attribute combos that are fundamentally bad. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?goto=post&postid=419616525 Sure, but we're starting simple because it's a lot easier to add complexity than remove it. There are really two things I want every attribute in PoE to accomplish: 1) If a player makes a character of any class, they can look at the attribute and say, "My character will be significantly better at <SIGNIFICANT_THING> for having raised this attribute." And less vital, but still important: 2) If a player makes a character of any class, they will look at at attribute and say, "My character will suffer significantly for having dumped this attribute." http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?goto=post&postid=423365257 I know this disappoints some people, but PoE is going to have both classes and attributes (ability scores). Exactly what they're named and exactly what they affect is still flexible. My goals for them are what I said before: every attribute can be bumped for some meaningful benefit for every class and every attribute will inflict a meaningful loss for every class if it is dumped (i.e., there are no "opt out" penalties). Meaningful = more than just the bonuses/penalties to the defenses. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?goto=post&postid=423392279 What is to "get around", that one stat affects damage and healing? The way to get around that is to balance the per-point increase to damage and healing from That Stat against the per-point increase to other valuable things from other stats. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?goto=post&postid=423411132 That said, it's always been a secondary goal to prevent dumping. The main goal is to allow people to play a class with any given set of high attributes and have that be viable/fun. So if someone makes a high Dexterity (soon to be Perception) priest, they should be able to reliably lean more on the priest's offensive spells and personal buffs + weapon-based combat. If someone makes a high Intellect barbarian, they should enjoy bigger Carnage AoEs and longer durations for their Wild Sprint, Frenzy, etc. If we can find a way to always make dumping sting, that's cool, but it's more important that when someone says, "I have an idea for a character based on high X, Y, and Z", that's something that fundamentally works pretty well. Perfect balance has never been a goal. I've seen too many people come up with cool character concepts in class-based RPGs -- cool from a role-playing perspective, but fundamentally bad at doing what their class is supposed to do. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?goto=post&postid=434825679 With regards to the attribute system, I've posted previously that players must play to the strengths of their builds. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/64964-update-70-new-year-project-update/?view=findpost&p=1409030 As for attributes and bad builds, let me put it this way: in D&D 3rd Ed., let's say Str, Dex, and Con are the only three stats in the game. You make a fighter and you can have an 18 in one, 16 in another, and a 10 in the last. The things that fighter is good at will shift significantly based on how you place those stats -- but the character is still clearly a fighter. You may be able to make a convincing case that one build is markedly better than another, but they'll all give you different strengths and weaknesses. Now figure out a way to do the same thing for Int, Wis, and Cha in the core rules and that's essentially what we're trying to do for PoE. "No bad builds" is not the same as "all builds are equal" and "all builds are functionally the same". It means that if you distribute your points in different ways across our attributes for a character of any class, the strengths and weaknesses of the character will shift in interesting ways and still be viable. If you dump Resolve for your fighter, you will suffer. If you boost Resolve for your fighter, you will benefit. Some classes in D&D already do this better than others. Monks and paladins have a more difficult allocation of stats to consider than fighters. If you want to shift the difficulty of combat, we have a level of difficulty slider. The attribute system is not meant to be a covert way of haphazardly achieving difficulty. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/64949-can-i-even-handle-a-game-like-pe-any-longer-well-i-sure-hope-so/?view=findpost&p=1407606 I believe every attribute, if dumped, should harm every build because there are two logical consequences if they do not: 1) If I can dump without significant consequence, it is likely (though not necessarily true) that bumping it is similarly without consequence. This means character concepts that bump that attribute are inherently worse off for having done so. 2) If one class can dump stats without significant consequence and others cannot, in practice that class has more attribute points to play with. E.g. fighters vs. monks and paladins in 3.5. When one class has abilities that derive benefits from a narrow range of attributes, it becomes difficult to balance their powers against classes that derive benefits from a broader range of attributes. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/64712-attribute-theory/?view=findpost&p=1401075 Attributes, this is D&D like superficially in the sense that there are six attributes physical and mental. It took us a long time but we made sure that all the attributes are good for all classes. So if you want to make a super genius barbarian, you can, and it's actually good for them because Intellect affects area of effect and duration. For a barbarian, if you want your Wild Sprint last longer, a high Intellect will let it last longer. If you want a bigger AOE on melee attacks, a high Intellect will give you a bigger AOE on your melee attacks. We wanted to avoid—well, not just avoid dump stats, but if you have an idea, like you want to make a super-genius barbarian, I want to make a stupid idiot wizard, I want to make a weakling charismatic fighter, you can do all of that and the system is built so there is a way where you can play with those stats. The other thing, too, is that if you just dump points into the things you typically associate with those classes, like "I want to be a super-strong barbarian," that's great, you're still a really good character and that's fine. But it's the kind of oddball things—my opinion is, if there's only one or two builds you can really make with a character, why have attributes? Why not just say you're a barbarian and you're strong because you're a barbarian. I think that limits the player in a lot of ways, and I'd rather just say "Nope, you can be a super idiot smartie, whatever you want to do, and it's all valid in the game. http://www.gamebanshee.com/interviews/112825-pillars-of-eternity-interview.html Josh: Attributes all determine a variety of bonuses for characters and they are now the main component of a character's defenses, so they are extremely important in that regard. We've put a lot of thought into defining the attributes to ensure that every character class can gain something from a particular build. We're not trying to make everything perfectly balanced, but we do want players to feel like there are viable concepts for every attribute/class combination. Outside of their derived benefits, attributes are the most commonly-checked character elements in dialogue and scripted interactions. We check things like skills, races, and classes as well, but attributes are the stats we check most often. Even the physical attributes will open up possibilities for player to take actions in the context of a conversation. The options that open up are not always beneficial in a conversation, but they do give you a wider range of expression based on your character's build. -------- To be continued

It only feels like a science project because they're using Percentages and very poorly showcasing what the percentages give on the UI. What would help is if they displayed the combat stats for a character in the attribute screen during character creation so you'd know what they do when you raise them.

We are also at Beta v301 Full release is probably going to be v1000 Still got a long way to go build wise

Not quite. It could be if you balanced all of the changes. Splitting them into two distinct pools would be a way of allowing smaller benefits and larger ones to exist together in different spaces without offering 'trap choices' which is something that they want to avoid. You don't write a 'how to balance an RPG' and then renege on what you said when it's convenient.

Yeah that's the one. 5-button 1.1a

I think it would be fine on Resolve with Concentration, and Intellect should be kept the same as the last build, YMMV.

Accuracy doesn't rely on Perception. The Accuracy bonus from Perception is added to your Accuracy score. The bonus you get from Perception is actually pretty small compared to what you get from Class, Progression, Items and Buffs. Might does not scale with level, and Might gives a higher per point bonus than Perception does to DPS if ACC-DEF = +6 or higher.

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68526-how-to-fix-the-attribute-design-in-pillars-of-eternity/?view=findpost&p=1508219 Here is proof that they were already going to add in Action Speed into the system before we proposed ours, and they were also going to move Accuracy to Perception. Deflection was not added into the attribute system because of our paper, but because the community wanted it. It was not solely because of Mine and Matt's paper. People had been asking for attribute based Deflection for a while because AC was in the IE games system. There were only a few people (such as Karkarov) who didn't want it.

I think they should give something too.

I rarely had to reload because of bad rolls. I only did it for real cheesy stuff like stealing Drizzt's Frostbrand Scimitar.

Our system aims for balance of the mechanical benefits that each attribute gives. Attribute Design in Pillars of Eternity is not how I would design them if I was going to make a D&D style game. Our design tries to find the best balance within the constraints of our understanding of the design goals that Josh has laid out. http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=9059 Here is some info from the Attribute System first revision in late 2013: Does Intellect Damage and Healing make narrative sense to you? Combat and Narrative (Dialogue/Scripted Interactions) are different. You are starting to sound like smudboy who thinks that Turn based combat is worse than RTwP because it makes less "narrative sense". I don't have anybody's ear. I don't have exclusivity on feedback. And I will not stop doing anything that I am doing. You will just have to suffer my presence. Our system wasn't used. I made it into a mod. I do not care what they do for attributes now, as I can just make whatever I want into a mod. If you want the original system I can mod it back in for you and send you the link.

His posts here, His posts on Something Awful, his posts on badgame.net, his Tumblr and Twitter, his interviews (including the RPGCodex Q&A 2013 where he first revealed what he wanted to do with the attribute system). In PE BB v301 Attribute System Perception no longer helps with Interrupts. In the "Sensuki&Matt516 system" Perception still affects Interrupt, but it also affects Accuracy now too because Interrupt relies on the Accuracy score to be effective, therefore making an Interrupt based build a good build. Intellect doesn't help with more severe criticals, it increases your Deflection thereby reducing the chance of being critted. In the old system, Intellect did not do anything to critical hits, it increased the base duration of abilities, which has nothing to do with attack damage. Not sure where you're getting at with that. No. I don't know where you're getting this idea from, it's just something you are imagining. There are no dialogue only stats. All Attributes will probably be used pretty equally in dialogue. Attribute design needs to be balanced in the dialogue system SEPARATELY to how it is balanced for combat. In other systems they are both taken into account, but not in Pillars of Eternity, they are separate systems. Intellect was fine but Perception and Resolve were completely dumpable in combat. You might not have thought so but pretty much everyone else did, including the developers. They do something, but the bonus is not great on it's own and High Perception combined with Low Accuracy is a trap build. Your Interrupt is not useful if you are only missing and grazing. Our version is no different in this regard IMO, but I couldn't care less about roleplaying though, I'm more interested in the combat systems. No it's not.

afaik they do 10-16 by default unless they've been changed in the most recent version. Against high DT they're pretty bad.

Yeah I'm also not a huge fan of per encounter stuff either. I read the post, good analysis ... I haven't tried a leather armor / fast attacking fighter but I would assume that Stilettos would do more damage due to -5 DT.

Where are you getting this information from? Intellect in PE BB Attribute System v1 only affected Durations and AoE. It would have some effect on the magnitude of non-damaging hits where the effect duration scales with grazes and crits. However only at a flat percentile value of -50% (0.5% per attribute point) or +50% (+1.5% per attribute point). Your video is an image, you should have added in a youtube UI over the top of it if you wanted to trick me into opening it. Let me answer your questions first. Was dodge/deflection added as a non-class specific bonus - that you can skew an existing variable with a stat?Yes Was it never in the game until now?Never a part of attributes, yes. Does it add value to a stat that had none before?Yes it does, which is the entire point of adding it. If so, why?Because to meet Josh's design goals properly, the attributes need to give more balanced benefits It is at the moment, because they changed the way the Attributes give bonuses. 10 is 0 and anything less actually gives negative effects. I think it's dumb because adding Deflection and AoE together is pretty crap for most classes. It's really good for Paladins and Chanters though. Intellect as it was before was way better. I also don't think it makes that much sense from an RP perspective unless you go by that D&D splat book that had Intellect based Fighter stuff ... Duellisty type thing. Durations and Concentration together on Resolve makes sense to me from an RP perspective, but I think Deflection and Concentration makes more sense, and Durations and AoEs should go together on Intellect. Here's the thing though, I'm not sure if you've read much of Josh Sawyer's posts about the attribute system, but he has said he wants it to be a gamey system rather than a simulation-y system where the attributes are balanced via the combat benefits, with 'making sense' from an RP perspective being a secondary concnern. That's how it's been all along, we took that into account when designing our alternate system and this new version goes even further in the 'making less sense' department IMO even though they think it makes more sense than ours. My understanding is that this stuff doesn't really matter too much in combat because the attribute system revolves around balance in combat. This stuff is only important for Dialogue and Scripted Interactions. And it already does what it's supposed to do there. Well you're flailing your arms around ignoring the actual reasons for things, and making your own up due to your negative experience with ... what game was it ? Gears of War or something.

Intellect never increased the threat range. Dude, it's clear that you know less about the mechanics underneath than most other people do as you keep making false claims and chucking a tantrum over nothing. We didn't say anything about adding Deflection to Intellect, that wasn't our idea and I agree it's dumb, but not in the way you think it is. The only thing more unintuitive is Intellect and Resolve really. Didn't realize you were a manchild, but okay.

or run on the spot.

Notice how Feargus said in his interview with Matt Barton a few weeks ago that they were going to announce release ... but they haven't? If they don't do it soon, it might actually be next year, which would give me a sigh of relief tbh.

Slow will not solve the problem of normal speed being not right, so I don't intend to test with it on.

Yeah it shows that I've had 2 hours sleep in 48 hours xD Cognitive Ability 0

Base Accuracy with acc bonus from Per inclusive is 10 less than it used to be at the same score in Dex from v278. Base Deflection is the same at 10 Int. The total amount per point that you get from attributes probably needs to be raised a bit.

Yeah well ACC-DEF = 31 is going to lead to a lot of crits, and a lot of benefit from the Might bonus too. I *think* that is a 38% chance to Crit, which is pretty High. The Hearth Orlan thing probably makes it 48%, which is like w0w imba ?

That looks really good, but I'd also like to be able to see Weapon Damage and Weapon speed displayed somewhere, but I suppose the tooltips could be used.

Due to the recent Attribute system changes, you now get absolutely fark all Accuracy from Dexterity, therefore you are going to see A LOT MORE grazes in this build. The new system probably isn't right yet.