Stun

There's definitely something wrong with this screenshot. It's NOT how things looked in the gameplay demos. Look at the door in that picture. Look at where the door knob is. It's above the people's heads. That can't be right.

Camping supplies, Yes. I guess those don't count. I guess it doesn't really matter that they're a limited resource either, and that you most certainly CAN use them all up... fighting trash mobs for no in game reason. And then lets not forget the real kick in the balls: The "objective's" Boss is in the next room. You look at your party and realize that everyone's used up their powerful per day talents and spells. Everyone's Hurt. Hey no problem, just rest. No wait, you can't. You've used up your camping supplies in your previous struggles-for-no-reason. Oops, looks like your options are limited now: 1) Backtrack to the nearest inn to get some rest (hey! didn't you say No Backtracking?) 2) Take on the Boss at half strength and without all your big guns and hope he doesn't rip your now-impotent party to shreds. 3) Pray that you can talk your way to a resolution against the boss, even though that is neither what you wanted to do, nor does it jive with your own personal roleplaying. At least if they had given you XP for your efforts against the trash mobs, the blow here wouldn't feel so....pointless.

I would, but maybe not for the reasons you think. First off, I'm not so arrogant and elitist as to demand that my RPGs be void of filler combat. I know all great RPGs are going to have it, and I even expect it. (and I suspect their removal will actually make exploration seem rather dull, and maps feel less dense) I simply ask that those encounters at least give me *something* in the way of character advancement. But mostly I want XP for kills in PoE because such a great focus of the game will be on exploration and freedom. I don't want to always feel that the purpose of combat is secondary to some greater objective. Sometimes I just want to kill things because doing so will level me up. I want that awesome feeling that the IE games captured so well: where you see some dangerous and really *tough* looking creature(s) in front of you and the first thing that goes through your mind is....awesome, I bet this guy's worth a ton of XP.

An Ignus strip show would have been really hot.

I can conclude it because the game is being designed around quest XP - that's what the designers have said. Balanced around quest xp, maybe. But the developers have also said that they're trying their hardest to make the game feel IE'ish. Wellllll? The IE games had *both* quest XP and Kill XP. Having to engage in No-XP combat in those games would have been an absolutely insufferable chore after the 10th encounter...let alone the 10th playthrough. So how exactly is PoE designed to address this while still maintaining the stated objective of feeling "like you're coming home again"....as Josh so succinctly put it in the demo yesterday morning? Well lets see... we got exactly Zero answers to that question in any of the recent gameplay footage. Instead, we saw Forced combat (rather than any choice...until the Ogre confrontation). We saw Adam having to use up valuable consumables and per day abilities on non-objective based encounters (read: trash mobs), and receiving nothing to show for it, except for a TPK. And, most importantly, we saw pacing that was very similar to the Baldurs Gate games. When this game is still fresh and new, the above can Easily be overlooked. But when it's playthrough #5 do you really think trash mob encounters that net you NOTHING will feel like anything but pointless? Yes but they've only been showing off the combat - they didn't try talking the ogre down or avoiding the beetles - and nobody's saying combat won't be great and fun to engage in - I'm looking forward to fighting those beetles, ogre, and all the rest. This isn't about not liking combat. Really, So what? Avoiding the Beetles is literally no different from fighting them....except maybe doing the former will be cheaper. As for the Ogre... again, so what? The IE games also had Bosses you could talk down. Giving players non-combat Options is great. Who ever argued otherwise? But if Developers are trying to get us to explore non-combat, Role-playing solutions more often, then I can't think of anything more ham-fistedly overzealous than eliminating kill XP outright in order to force such a playstyle. They should have just boosted the rewards for the non-violent solutions to everything, and then let the player decide how he wants to handle the hostiles on the map. That way all ALL playstyles are rewarded. Not just the Goal-oriented Questing playstyle.

All this tells me is that I should make a party of Stealth-based rogues so I can sneak in, grab all the cool loot, then get the hell out of there. No point in engaging in combat when the system is designed to not actually reward you for it. And definitely no point in Engaging in any trash mob encounters that might be tough enough to require me to use up valuable consumables and/or my per day abilities, when I could just save all my spells, talents, and resources for the Big Boss encounter at the end of that dungeon that I'm exploring.

Not sure how you can conclude that the game is designed around Quest XP when all the game play footage videos we've seen have been ALL about, frequent, and numerous, *forced* enemy encounters that are based on exploration, rather than quests. If you're *forcing* people to engage in combat, then why aren't you rewarding them for it? And we're going to find out whether or not unrewarded combat in this game quickly makes combat feel like an unnecessary chore. And no, arguing that combat is still rewarded because it constitutes "a step" in some far away greater objective that you'll be rewarded for later, will NOT make that feeling disappear, no matter how "logical" the notion sounds on paper. Obsidian is banking that we won't miss its absence. But only we can be the judges of that. We'll see.

WTF! If you're going to falsely claim that they're part of the Objective that you're getting XP for then YES, they in fact MUST be mechanically tied to the objective. otherwise, you're not getting XP for dealing with them.

They were pretty in the way considering they were ON the road up north and all along the east side, but you could still get past without wiping out 2/3rds of the local ecosystem. Sounds like a pretty decent balance between "kill kill kill" and...not. At the end of the day it places the emphasis where it belongs, on the quest and journey as a while, not some dang wildlife. He missed them the first time. Period. Something designed to be an obstacle (your words) fails to be one when it's so easily missed. (not avoided. MISSED) And we weren't discussing the balance between "Kill kill, Kill" and "pleasant stroll through the forest".

Well, I wouldn't call them an Obstacle when Adam had to actively search for some of them. lol

This is false and confirmed as such in the video. You're only prevented from *resting* when hostiles are around. But you can still leave the area, or enter the dungeon within the area, while hostiles are still around. Adam clicked on the entrance of one of the ruins and got the scripted event. The option to pick the lock was there but he chose not to do it. he then walked away and.... engaged in more combat.

In fact, if you run away from the beetles, get to the Ogre den, then kill the Ogre and receive the Objective XP reward...what then? Can you claim that the beetles were part of the Quest objective, even though you're still totally free to deal with them AFTER receiving the XP rewards for completing the Objective?

I want to focus on this, because it's false. Running away from encounters specifically designed to challenge your party and (according to you) also designed to justify the "objective XP" that you're gonna get at the end of the quest, is every bit the degenerate behavior that Kill Grinding is. You are literally doing what the developers did not mean for you to do. And this is why I asked you how you know that areas will be inaccessible until you deal with those beetles. Because if, for example, the Ogre den IS closed off to you until those beetles are slain, or scared off, or stealthed-past, then that's totally fine. But if not, then we've got a design problem: you were able to bypass the beetle threat without employing ANY skill whatsoever, and therefore, your objective XP rewards should be lessened as a result. I doubt they will be, though, because the OGRE is the objective, not the beetles.

I'll ask again. Where are you getting this from? Is that dungeon inaccessible until the beetles are slain? Are you prevented from accessing ANY Area transition on the entire map until you've dealt with the beetle threat? As for delayed XP....will the rewards be less if you run away from the beetles and just make a bee-line to the Ogre den?

You're awfully sure of things, to have so little information. Ok, let me clarify. Beetles better NOT drop dragon hoards, or 6-packs of powerful alchemical mixtures (potions), otherwise this game has far bigger design issues than anything we're discussing here.

The opening up of more areas? Has it been confirmed that the beetles scattered around in these wilderness maps will unlock new areas/dungeons upon their deaths? Also, I'm pretty sure that whatever loot beetles drop will not be good enough to justify the resources/per day abilities that will have to be expended to prevent a total party wipe, like the one we saw in the Demonstration. Listen, I for one have come to terms with the fact that "fun" will often times have to suffice as the reward for engaging in combat. Lets just leave it at that, instead of inventing justifications that aren't actually there. We don't know that either, as Adam did not do a pacifist run through the area in order to get to the Ogre. For all we know the only thing that he was rewarded for was for dealing with the Ogre....and not anything else. So Volourn's question remains: why did they Get XP for slaying the Ogre, but none for slaying the Beetles and the spider?

As a dungeon connoisseur, I both agree and disagree with this. Atmosphere is, of course, the most important thing to nail in dungeon design. But that does not mean that "dark" is the rule. And we haven't seen nearly enough of the caves and dungeons in this game to make any sort of judgment call on the matter anyway.

lol I did miss Stale Mary. A chick that teaches a man how to listen. I've seen Romances spawn from much less.

I agree but I'm not worried. 3-4 months is plenty of time to polish up a playable beta. And judging by Josh's language in this morning's pod-cast thing, he seems to think so too.

With enough creative interpretation of the definition of "Romances", we can argue that PS:T has about a dozen Romanceable NPCs. 1) Annah - Because you can kiss her 2) Fall from Grace ("Don't forget me" - that's the last thing she implores you before the game ends) 3) Dakkon - You saved his life; he owes you his, and the both of you proclaim that your 2 deaths will be as one 4) Ravel - as disgusting as the Promancer mind can be 5) The Lady of Pain - you have a memory of one of your past incarnations falling in love with her, and even breaking Sigil law so that you can meet her and gaze upon her beauty 6) Dieonarra - because she calls you "my love" (All promancers eat that sh*t up) 7) Vivienne - she hugs you and gives you some of her scent 8.) Fell - he dedicates his entire studio to you. And that studio is a *shrine* devoted to your flesh. If that's not love then what is? 9) Nemille's sister (I forget her name...Alinwynne?) She and one of your past incarnations had a courtship 10) Tainted Barse's Daughter in Curst - you save her life and she hugs and kisses you 11-12-13) Mabbeth, Marta, El-vine - all 3 are aspects of Ravel, and thus are romances by extension. But lets get real. None of these are Romances. Not even close.

I don't understand why (or when) we've somehow allowed the promancers to convince us that PS:T had romances when it did not. Dieonarra is not a romance. She is a plot device designed to invoke the emotion of regret. She's also a Ghost (a specter, to use the official D&D undead species-type) If she's a romance then so is Dakkon, Vhailor, Ignus, Ravel, and Nemille's sister in the Clerk's ward.... since all of them were also plot devices designed to invoke regret. But if we must grotesquely broaden the term "romance" so that any well-written NPC falls into the definition, then yes, I liked all 6 or 7 of PS:T's "romances". But I'm not going to play that silly word-play game. PS:T did not have romances. it just had very well-written characters all around. Promancers are trying to associate their cause with every deep, thought provoking NPC ever written so that they can then turn around and say: "See? Romance = Well written characters! If you're against romance, then you're against good writing in video games!"

Sensuki isn't a dev. We would need a developer to answer those questions. We fans can only go by what was shown to us in the demos. And from context. In the infinity engine games, if you click on the 'select all' button and then click on a target, your characters would auto-attack that target until its dead, then they'd move on to the next target automatically. That is the default AI in the system. We didn't actually see this happening in the PoE demos, but it's hard to determine why. If Adam did not select his entire party, then his entire party will not automatically start attacking the enemies on the screen. This is in line with how the infinity engine games operated.

A small part of the RPG experience? We're getting this from you?! You judge games by their romances, Bruce. If Romances were really a "small part of the RPG experience", then by all means, Admit that they're not important. AGREE with me that they're little more than window dressing - Gimmicks that add flavor to a game and little else. Of course you won't do any such thing, because in your mind, Romances have become a fundamental, almost vital, part of an RPG experience. And you're not alone. That's the problem I'm talking about. RPGs are not soap operas. But look at Bioware. Their games are interative soap operas. One need only visit BSN for 5 minutes to see the truth behind my words. On the Bioware forums, RPG stands for Romance Player Games in the minds of it its 3 million+ members. There is no way anyone can play a modern day Bioware game and claim that Romance is 'a small part of the RPG experience'.

I'm hoping there will be enough spells in the game to accomplish such a task. Not sure of Josh is a big fan of the Hold/Stun/paralyze/entangle line of magic. But in the IE games, those were an option.

Har har har. I see what you did there. Lephys Jr.