archangel979

Progression by completing a challenge is not a reward... it's simply progression.Even if you wanna call it a reward for some unhelpful reason it is not at all comparable to something like kill xp. I didn't first mention Portal in this discussion and I even said it is not comparable. And all games are about receiving some mental reward for your actions during the game. In Portal that is gained by progressing to next area. But PoE has trash mobs and to many people fighting those is not rewarding by itself and they want a traditional reward that worked well in 100+ games before - XP. I've been playing bg2 recently and after each fight with tought trash mobs I like to check how much more XP my guys need to next level. The fights are easy and drops are almost meaningless and XP is only real reward. And I don't want really tough fights vs trash, I want those to be around a quest or some special encounters with named enemies. Random beetles or wolves will never be to me more than trash mobs.

Except in Portal you get immediate reward by advancing to next area. And Portal and cRPG games are not really comparable.

it was best one for that game. There is no universal best xp system.

Victory should be its own reward. And it is when the battle is challenging. On the other hand, XP award s don't make easy and boring fights any more interesting.Xp certainly makes them more bearable.

Attributes should not be balanced for all possible builds. It should be enough that all classes have some use from each attribute, but every class does not need to have same amount of use from them, we go into boring same classes zone there. The goal of this design was already accomplished if all classes have some use from each attribute, because compared to IE games that is a big change where classes needed 2-3 attributes only and rest were completely useless.

and lets finally call Might something else that does not resemble strength.

So nobody commented my suggestion to call health endurance and endurance health. It makes more sense that way.

I liked crafting in later NWN2 when they finally implemented real D&D crafting system. I would like to see something similar with crafting needing special talents, a noticeable cost (like XP or permanent loss of Soul in some way) and components gained from enemies in the world (for the really rare and poweful crafting recipe) but let you create really powerful stuff like in NWN2. Also I still want hidden recipes that would unlock PoE versions of Flail of Ages, Anheg armors and such. Oh and I don't want be able to craft wherever but at special places that can only be found in civilization or special places like wizard towers and such.

This is better than current system but not much (I consider current system faulty). Since I don't really see it being changed my addition to this topic would be to call Health the numbers taking damage and Endurance the pool underneath. In my understanding Endurance is long term and fits more for a pool that lets you continue to fight longer.

Wasteland 2 that also runs on Unity had big performance problems earlier in the beta, but they worked on it and made it 2x better near the end of beta. Don't worry people, I am sure OE will be working on performance issues as they get closer to release.

Also by reading Sawyer posts here I got a feeling he does not check out any of the changes in the game before making decisions about them. Any change should be first implemented and tried out in same 10 - 100 combat scenarios and then decided or talked upon. And he admits he does stuff from his head instead of trying it in the game. This paper is probably more complex than any research OE has done. Another option would be to have parallel backer beta download (Steam games have this option where people can try out beta patches) where they change different little numbers and ask for people to test out these little changes and give feedback. Have this parallel beta change every few days with another thing to try out. Then based on feedback implement one of the into real beta build.

That sounds to me like brushing things under the carpet. You build a house from ground up. Attributes being not influential enough must be solved first because any changes will affect all parts of the game, but mostly combat balance. And it might not be enough to do cosmetic changes like in your paper. You just changed color of the curtains while the whole floor might need to be replaced. I am sorry to be so blunt, but it needs to be said. All the 2% here or there I read in this topic just confirms the article I linked before.

Some thoughts from me: 1. Nobody mentioned perceived problem with attributes not being influential enough with their current bonuses. Ignoring that issue makes most of the paper worthless as it is like talking about topping of the cake while ignoring the cake itself. 2. I know the approach was from gamist perspective but I am sad nothing was done about Might. 3. Saywer AoE system in combination with 10 being average attribute brings a question of what is going to be the base AoE area where friendly fire works and what happens if AoE penalty reduces AOE. 4. I also want to mention I support a way to increase range of attacks/spells. At least through talents.

That's not a 4e things, my 3.0E DnD Master Manual also suggest 4 encounters per adventuring days (aka each normal difficulty encounter should take about 25% of the party resources). yes. But 3.5 didn't have encounter powers or short resting between encounters. You could make single encounters that used up most party resources.

Because original BG1 was based on popular RTS games at the time so OE decided to base PoE on popular RTS games at this time. I don't mind these changes, but recovery time needs to go. If the game actually played smoothly like Warcraft 3 or DOta 2, but with more units and lots of crazy abilities it would be crazy fun. But damage output for all units (both our and enemy) needs to be dialed down to accomplish this. Nobody should be dying in 4-5 seconds. I don't want super long battles of Warcraft 3 either but something in between.

Now that I think about it more, the system is like 4e D&D a lot. In 4e everyone can heal itself outside combat with his own Hit Die (in effect a random health pool). But healing spells are not free but use the target's Hit Die. Once you are out of these Hit Die you need to rest to get more. No other way around it. So these Hit Die that cannot be replenished but with rest are equal to Health in PoE. And when someone heals your Stamina with a healing spell and you get damaged more you lose more Health which is like losing Hit Die in 4e due to being healed. Also the adventuring day in 4e is based around 4 encounters on average. Sounds familiar? :D Only difference is that 4e version of PoE Stamina does not regenerate fast after combat but in 4e you get hit less so it does not need to.

Where can I see these changes of OE? Is there a twitter or some blog post?

I want someone to make a isometric cRPG using D&D 5e rules. Unfortunately OE made a deal with Pathfinder and we will get a Pathfinder one instead. But I am still waiting for a KS for the next Vampire game (either team based, isometric Vampire the Masquerade or single character FPS like Vampire Bloodlines) Or Kotor 3

I liked Psions more than Wizards anyways so I don't mind playing a Cipher for a fun power class.

This is hilarious as he just posted on his blog this:

What does it matter, it is not like we know OE is going to change anything or anything based on Sensuki/Matt document.

Yea, it seems like a mess and it will not be fixed in this time until release. Best we can hope for is redesigned attributes, more intuitive Health/Stamin with a bit longer Adventuring day and all the feedback implemented that Sensuki asked for and more (like in BG games when you hit someone with a weapon there is a small red animation that plays and you know you hit them). Damage numbers help but I for one don't want to play with damage numbers over the head, that is not classic RPG style.

I think the assumption that it's unrealistic is off here. Even if an attack hits your armor, you'll feel the blow, regardless of how much damage that put to your ripcage. That can interrupt your momentum during swining your weapon or mess with your concentration during spellcasting, and that is actually the condition on when an interrupt can incur - on not being missed. I understand why someone would be against the system, but IMO realism is not an argument here. The blow you feel is decided by the damage you take. The Bludgeon weapons did better vs plate armor because you felt this blow which translates into that armor being less effective in stopping damage and that damage than being translated into higher chance to interrupt, No need to add another crazy mechanic to simulate what is already a part of Health/Stamina. Tabletop and PnP games have easy rules because people want to play the game when they sit together around the table instead of doing maths. The computer does the maths for you, so that is one issue. The other issue is, that the feedback is independent from this. You'll see a roll in your log when it's implemented. Interruption against 67 - success. That's not any different if you went with another system to come up with the numbers. I don't think the numbers matter, as long as you understand how they come about. Was anyone who is complaining about interrupt now complaining about the way saves are calculated on spells in DnD 3.5? That's even more arbitrary, because the saves don't fall into only one of 7 categories, like interrupt does, before applying stats. Easy rules does not mean bad rules. PnP rules work, mathematically and often are realistic. No need to design convoluted systems just because you are working on a cRPG. 1+1= 2 is better than 2x2-2. As I said before, this is a question of flavour. Tying more stuff to damage done makes the attributes watered down and linked to each other, while they are independent right now. I don't want to need points in might in order to make my points in perception worthwhile. The people liking this suggestion are ironically also the people that wan't more diversity in the attribute system. It is question of immersion and making this less convoluted. By adding this to damage, you can choose to raise Might or Perceptions or both. This can be fixed by changing some attributes, Perception is a dump stat anyways and will need to be changed.

Small chance with it being buried deep in here. And for its own topic, I would need to do the math so it works with d100 and I don't really feel like doing math today :D

Basing interrupts on damage done is way more intuitive than some crazy system based on type of weapon only. They don't even need to change how the bonus from Perception and Resolve works, just change that 50 into damage done. Than you can still have armors that give a bonus to interrupt or to concentration. EDIT: And they don't even need to add different interrupt bonuses for weapons, just have amors have different DT vs different type of weapons which is both realistic and intuitive. So with some weapons you will be able to do more damage depending on armor and have a higher chance at interrupt.