Jump to content

Ohioastro

Members
  • Content Count

    220
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ohioastro

  1. Played an IE game before? For better or worse, there are no attacks of opportunity in those games. And for the record, many people in the discussion enjoy the idea of engagement but think it needs to be tweaked before it really shines. Even though D&D is irrelevant to this discussion, you were allowed to move within a certain number of feet without triggering free attacks or use a withdraw action iirc, which you can not even do in POE unless the opponent is disabled. My main issue with POE's engagement is that every movement action is an assumption that you are fleeing, so I can't even sid
  2. Look over the achievements; they amount to setting arbitrary limits on what you can do, and the only difference between them and house rules is that they're sanctioned. What else is a solo run in a game designed for a party of six other than "depriving yourself of an element of the game". Maybe I want to do a run with no spellcasters or no tanks; that's not depriving myself of game elements, it is a choice. Now there are some areas where I think balance is appropriate - for example, if one spell at a given level is overwhelmingly better than all of the others, or some are so weak tha
  3. There was a joke running around in D&D circles: A DM intones "you see a party of click-clacks coming around the corner; the players huddle in a corner, look at a book, and yell "November". The DM sighs and says "the click-clacks fall dead..." The IE games were basically like that - if you had memorized exactly what everything did and what hurt it the game was straightforward; but you had no way of knowing, really, outside of meta-gaming. Similarly, a lot of the big fights relied on people standing outside of anonymous doors, buffing like the dickens, and running in casting very speci
  4. Dragon Age 2 used the same environments over and over and over and over. Positioning was useless because enemies parachuted from the sky on top of you. Normal mode was designed so that you could auto-attack with companions and perhaps click an occasional button with your main. Hard mode left the enemies as stupid as on normal mode, but gave them ungodly hit point totals so that battles took forever without being challenging. You could side with the Nazis or the demons, but you couldn't kill both, sadly. Fortunately, it didn't actually matter - because you had to fight exactly the same enc
  5. That sucks. Sensuki was the dude who spent a ****load of time betaing PoE and if he walked away that doesn't look too good, Or it looks like he would never have been happy with the game from the start. I've been lurking the forums since the beta was released and while I think he did a great job finding bugs, I rarely agreed with the changes he pushed for mechanic-wise. That he doesn't even give the game a chance before modding the **** out of it and then leaves it completely out of frustration only tells me he made his mind up a long time ago. It became pretty clear to me in re
  6. Why is the setting relevant in this regard? The moral choices you make, would hopefully make you think, whether you're deciding whether kill a guy names Xanzitorp, who happens to be a wizard, or some guy names Joe, who drives a taxi? Are you unfamiliar with the genre? You kill people (lots, and lots of people) to take their stuff and gain power. The moral dimension is pretty much not present at all, and you specifically don't turn fantasy game 'morality' on random taxi drivers named Joe. That gets you arrested for murder. If you were to take the main 'moral lessons' of this game
  7. In classic D&D you could eventually cast 9/level for a total of something like ~80 spells at higher levels. If the limit is going to be artificially low (like 4), then per encounter is actually fine; the alternative should be many more "per day".
  8. Yes, that's reasonable - the game clearly has the hooks to go deeper, and I'd view not doing so as a function of budget. I'd like that as well - maybe even have some members unwilling to continue with some choices.
  9. I don't understand this. Right now you can choose, at any time, to walk back to an inn and get nice stat bonuses, resting at will, You can delay this a bit with cheap camping supplies. In fact, you should do this - ideally you're resting when you've used your resources. Slightly faster clearing of trash encounters is really the only difference.
  10. I think that balance for trash mob encounters is a chimera; for a variety of reasons, boss encounters should be the gatekeepers for difficulty. There are many reasons: 1) They can be balanced assuming that the players will throw everything that they have into the encounter; so per rest vs. per encounter is not relevant. 2) Terrain can be controlled, avoiding a huge player advantage. Given that you can rest basically at will (if willing to run back to the inn), the per encounter vs. per rest is simply a matter of convenience. And it really does speed up the generic mob encounters at
  11. Clearly Mark Twain also didn't understand storytelling. After all, the Duke and Dauphin run into Huckleberry Finn and Jim, and they have no connection to the main story. Clearly every single character has to have their motives written in all caps, and anything else is just an "exposition dump."
  12. You're basically flattening all of the nuance in the delivery and the situation. If you asked Eder whether his problem was 'answered' or whether he was given a full 'closure', his lines throughout his entire quest say the opposite. Eder didn't set out to say, "did my brother fight for X or did he fight for Y?" He wanted to know why, he wanted to know what drove his brother, and so on. Your interpretation is basically like saying "you cheated on me, now I want to know whether you kissed him 3 times or 4 times." Similarly, you find with Sagani that Persoq was the white deer and so on. But a
  13. Min-maxing has risks. Assigning 2 18 stats is free, while the third involves reducing other stats. This can bite you hard in things like saves and durability (glass cannons shatter if the enemy reaches the backfield.) In fact, I'd view 18x3 characters as objectively weaker in many cases than ones that don't reduce saves or hit points.
  14. The exp curve doesn't solve the fundamental difference between controlled linear environment like IWD and open world games like PoE. The changed curve could well be better, but there is just a structural issue if I can do something at level 4 or level 10.
  15. which has approximately nothing to do with that shirt, which has no naked anything as far as I can tell. Attacking that guy with a twitter firestorm was grossly inappropriate. I sympathize with your point on the silly PoE controversy, but if you're defending flooding the guy with thousands of hate messages for the shirt that he wore I lose a *ton* of respect for you.
  16. From looking over the quest logs, the structure of the game is You arrive in Defiance Bay at relatively low level (or you can); There are a lot of open choices and quests, not level scaled, that take up the bulk of the game; There are a few quests in Act II once the events in Defiance Bay play out. All of this talk about "too much exp" misses the point: how do you balance things that can be encountered by a party anywhere from level 4 to level 10 without level scaling? "balanced encounters" don't match with "open world exploration and no level scaling". Period. Everything
  17. Never had any of those problems. Have you tried troubleshooting hardware issues in the bugs subforum?
  18. I was level 10 when I hit act 3; without bounties I'd have been level 9. There actually aren't that many quests in Act III - far fewer in twin oaks than in defiance bay. About half of the companion quests finish in act 3. I checked my last save: Main line quests: 3 Act 3; 5 Act 2; 5 Act 1 and Prologue. Quests: 7 Act 3; 13 Act 2; 3 Act 1 (excluding companion quests and stronghold ones) Tasks: 2 Act 3; 7 Act 2; 4 Act 1. So, no, players shouldn't start Act 3 2/3 of the way through, because the vast majority of the quests are in Act 2. And if you do a lot of side quests in Act 2 you'
  19. I think that actually knowing how much exp is available is relevant when designing an exp system.
  20. What's missing from this discussion is actual data, and the answer is knowable. If you want the game changed document how much exp there is, rather than simply asserting that there is too much. I think that this won't do anything for the people who find the game too easy, because that's a product of deeper factors. (Speaking of which...I'm also not seeing any objective target for what acceptable difficulty is.
  21. I think that this is completely a matter of groupthink. You have a bunch of people beating their chests about how good they are and how easy the game is. And this is the current shiny object that is trotted out as an excuse. If this was slashed I *guarantee you* that it will take less than a day for the same people to be back here complaining about the same thing with a different target. There's just no end to it. The basic reason is simple: this is an open world game (which allows you to control what level you do things at). You can take advantage of terrain, which is a huge edge. A
  22. The entire issue around experience strikes me as forum groupthink. There is one set of things - bounties - with very high experience rewards. Leave those aside and there is no issue with experience, period. The people complaining about experience would not be satisfied - at all - if it was changed; they'd just move seamlessly to yet another complaint that the game is easy mode. And it's extremely selfish for vets to demand changes to the base game (easy / normal / hard) that will have a really negative impact on inexperience players. These players *need* to be over-leveled to complete
  23. Stealth also lets you steal things in town without getting the reputation hit for being a thief.
  24. Here is an example: If you set autopause to "seeing enemies" you don't need to use stealth running at all. It will stop you before they see you; you can then cancel movement with the x button, enter stealth, and prep. It is very rare to have hidden treasures outside of very logical areas (e.g. they are not at random spots in hallways; they're in cluttered rooms, temples, and so forth.) The exception is when you're going through dungeon corridors that have traps...which is, well, a staple of games like this since about forever. So when I see claims like this I just have to scratch my hea
  25. Game players are amazingly conservative. That really hit me when I saw posts here complaining...about being able to get loot from multiple corpses at once instead of clicking on every.single.one. A large fraction of the complaint posts here amount to people being upset that this game isn't an exact copy of Baldur's Gate, or that it violates their longstanding habits of how games work (how dare they make Might increase spellpower, or have it be sensible to have intelligent barbarians! Everyone knows that barbarians are stupid and mages are weak!) Not all criticism is equal. It's valuab
×
×
  • Create New...