illathid

Well pretty much any copy sold at release will pretty much be pure profit, so even a relatively modest release will still get obsidian a fair chunk of cash. I'm pretty optimistic considering what I've seen so far.

Much more reasonable. Do we know for a fact that they're multiplicative though? Like from the code or straight from a dev's mouth? Reason I'm asking is so I can update my DPS spreadsheet properly. Also, some of the numbers I've seen in these screenshots seem a little large even for the number of multipliers at play. I suspect bugz. Josh, help? How are multiple "+XX% or 1.Xx damage" boni combined? Are they all multiplicative, all additive, or a combination? Yeah, good question. I just saw earlier in the thread someone working out the calculations and I assumed they were right considering the numbers put up. Anyways, yeah knowing how all the damage modifiers interact would be nice.

Yeah, I've noticed a similar problem with the robes as well.

This looks spot on. Well done! It fixes pretty much every problem I had with character creation.

So, would this be more reasonable if the damage bonuses were additive rather than multiplicative? That way there's still a benefit for getting more damage bonuses, but they'd be lower overall.

Regarding the la k of feedback for Might, couldn't you put the equipped weapon's damage range in CC as well? That could be helpful too if you're making culture choices based on equipment.

And that is the problem. When Miss is only 5% chance and only if your accuracy is not 5 or more over deflection, it is not longer a real RNG system. You should be thankful there's a miss chance at all. IIRC there wasn't going to be misses in PoE at all originally, just grazes, hits, and crits.

Nipsen, maybe I'm crazy but your example fighter makes just as much sense to me in the old stats system as it does in the new stat system. I don't want to put words in your mouth, but it seems like your complaint is that a Dex/Per/Int fighter went from a situational/secondary build to a generalist/primary build. And you don't like this because it's narratively inconsistent. Is that a fair approximation? I'm really trying to understand what your problem is with the attributes. Please help me.

[Nipsen Quote] Then I guess the most probable thing is that the previous system - that worked surprisingly well - was an accident, and Obsidian simply screwed up and made it by mistake? Which now is made more properly broken again, as was their intention and normal mode? Sounds completely logical. [/Quote] No, I'd suggest that Obsidian thought the system before was good, but could be better. I do play testing for Fantasy Flight Games and one of the things I've learned doing this is just how iterative game design is. The designer will make a system, test it a bunch, tweak it, test it some more, tweak it again, etc. Ok, so you're not mixing up narrative consistency and simulationism. Good. However, now I have absolutely no idea about what your complaint with the v. 301 stat system actually is. What exactly do you think is made the old system more narratively coherent than the new system? Explain it to me like I'm an idiot, because as it stands right now not one stat seems like it is "narratively" out of place. Might = Damage and Healing -damage is no problem, healing is maybe a little weird Constitution = Stamina & Health -no problem Dexterity = Action speed -maybe not the first thing that comes to mind but not ridiculous either Perception = Accuracy and Range -Yep, snipers are typically very detail oriented Intellect = AoE and Deflection -AoE makes sense in the world and deflection is ok. Smart guys know its better to not get hit at all, etc. Resolve = Concentration and Durations -Concentration is a no brainer and durations makes sense (you're keeping the effect going through sheer willpower) Anyways, I get that you like the old system better than the new one, I just have no idea why.

As I think Gromnir has pointed out a few times, the original Fallouts were some of the absolute worst when it came to min/maxing. You're right though that frequent stat increases probably wouldn't be the best fit for Fallout. However, that doesn't mean stat increases on level up are always a bad design choice.

Nipsen, Josh stated that stats should be more handy than simulationist, but so far hasn't said anything about thier narrative standing. Are you conflating simulationism with narrative? Because the two are very different and I don't see how the new stats lack narrative consistency. Also, if you're upset with the changes you shouldn't blame Matt and Sensuki too much. Shortly after they posted their paper Josh said he had already been working on a similar changes to the stats himself. So we probably would have gotten the same or very similar changes this update even if they hadn't posted anything.

Well I know at least some of the portraits are based on actual backers, (not sure which ones) so complaints about symmetry, race, etc. seem a bit misplaced until we know which are which. I mean, there's not much we can do if all the portrait backers were ugly Caucasian males and and young attractive females.

Yep, that's pretty much what I've been trying to say. Both are valid design choices that serve different purposes. One isn't inherently better than the other. Some of them might change with time and effort. One thing that always bothered me about increasing attributes is that it treats physical and mental attributes the same way. Attributes like strength, dexterity and endurance would certainly change with time. The more you work out, the fitter you are - hence your strength and endurance increase. (I know PoE uses might, I'm using strength as an example). But when you look at mental attributes, this doesn't really apply. Okay, maybe an attribute like resolve might change, but intellect? People with average intelligence will never become geniuses, no matter how much effort they put in. They could do intense mental work for a decade, but their basic intellect would change marginally at best. yeah, but that puts simulationism over gameplay which is just about the worst thing you can ever do (in my opinion at least).

Ok, let's start at the top. First, what's wrong about min maxing? Remember the Stormwind fallacy. Second, you've not actually explained why gaining attributes through character progression is bad. You said it's not realistic, but simulationism can die in a fire when it comes to system design. You said it's bad RP, how? You said it's not fun for being reward for doing nothing at all, but leveling by definition is not nothing. Also, your destinction between feats and attributes is nonsensical. Imagine PoE had a talent called "Schmight" that could be taken multiple times and gave you 2% damage and healing each time you selected it. According to what you've said this would be completely fine as it's a talent and not an attribute increase, which is utterly rediculous. Regarding the rest of what you've said, all I'll say is that by so far I don't think you have met your burden of proof in showing that attribute gain on level up is never an acceptable design choice for an RPG.

That's just like... your opinion man. A big part of many narratives (fantasy, sci-fi, sports drama, etc.) is the idea of progression and advancement. Of character being able to do theirs the could do before or be better at the things they could all ready do. Having attribute changes on level increases is one way to show this. This is especially true if any of the benefits of these attributes can not be gained any other way, like increased action speed or AoE size. Also, you come off as super condescending with all of your side comments about entitlement and meta gaming. It really doesn't help your case. Just FYI.

Ummm... What? You my have a preference for static attributes, but there is nothing inherently wrong about having stat increases on level up. Attribute increases are one form of character progression that can occur in an RPG. this doersn't mean they are necessarily right for PoE, but they could easily be included in an RPG system and not have it devolve into "some powergaming hack n slash numbers game."

According to Wikipedia, Fallout's budget was $3,000,000 in 1997, which when adjusted for inflation gives us $4,445,831. However, animating sprites takes a lot less work than trying to do the same thing with 3d models.

Actually, Fallout had these 17 years ago: While little details like these aren't bad to have, they certainly don't make or break a game. But then again, I love playing WWII games that still use NATO counters instead of models...

Just went through character creation. I like the new stats system (default at 10, lower gives penalties, etc.), I understand most of this doesn't do much to change the math, but it seems more familiar to us IE veterans. However, it is still weird that you pick your culture after assigning attributes. During character creation I'll usually decide on my stat array, decide what culture I want based on fluff, and then have to go back and change my stats. It just doesn't make for the best experience. New portraits are great though. EDIT: I also really like being able to click on abilities and talents from the character sheet to find out what they do!

Gromnir has been doing his charachter for ~15 years now. You aren't the first to complain about it and you aren't going to be the last. Hell, Bioware put a charachter in Throne of Baal (I think?) based on him. When ever I read any of Gromnir's posts, they all sound like Jim Cumming's Gromnir in my head.

This is great. Much better than what's in right now regardless of how many slots a character has. Well done!

Just ignore him. Malignacious shows up every few months asking about rag doll physics, particle effects, and other graphical filigree and the response is always the same.

A valid note illathid. Obviously the "appropriate" inventory design depends on the game in question. And yes, of course, we're talking about PoE here Indeed! To be specific, I want a shared inventory because of how the actual act of looting occurs. In IE games, your party leader would always be the one to pick up item. This meant they could be a general holding space, and you could set up your other party members as organization tools (Edwin carries scrolls, Viconia caries potions, etc.). In PoE however, whichever party member is closest to the loot will pick it up, and it defaults to going in that character's inventory. This means you have to always switch to your clearing house character or the appropriate organizer (needless micromanagement), or have items picked up go to whichever character (which makes organization even harder). By having a shared inventory it would mean I would have much less to fuss over.

I'm for unlimited looting, free accessibility except combat, and a shared inventory. At least for PoE.

I think part of the push back on making Exploration/Bestiary XP a quest would be that you'd need to find the quest giver first, and potentially hand it in. Now those aren't necessary component of making it a quest, but if you don't need to pick the quest up from someone and XP is handed out at appropriate intervals then it really would be a moot point.