Gromnir

Well, what were you expecting from a game where the core activity is combat? Not to mention that Baldur's Gate had diplomatic/peaceful solutions to quests, and you don't have to kill everything just because you get XP for doing so, so that isn't a problem anyway. Do you play flight simulators and whine that you have to fly a plane too or what? Go play a stealth game or pacifist: the pacification if it bothers you. PoE is a role-play game that allows sneaky and diplomatic. give xp awards for individual kills, and individual lockpicks and individual whatever inevitably leads to an ideal approach for maximizing xp by making the right gameplay and character development choices. quest only xp avoids the need to devise a fair an balanced calculus. quest is simple and guaranteed to result in every player getting exact same XP rewards for completing quests regardless o' how they chose to complete the quest. you don't wanna play a role-play game that offers choices? then go play an rts game. HA! Good Fun!

Bullsh*t, You're stating an opinion as fact. I want XP for completing quests equally as much as I want XP for killing things. Take either of them away from me, And I will respond to the omission the SAME. Incidently, there would be nothing stopping the devs from increasing quest completion rewards for those who completed those quests non-violently, thus equaling out the discrepancy you claim will occur for the violent route. And it's not up Gromnir to decide whether or not a thread discussion is "too old" to be discussed. I don't see a moderator tag next to your name, so stop pretending you're one. asking for both kill and quest xp utterly defeats the Point o' quest only. duh. HA! Good Fun!

we pose this challenge every time this Stoopid debate reappears and we never get an answer: provide an alternative system that is as simple and straightforward to implement as task/quest only xp that will will guarantee that regardless of an individual purchaser's style o' gameplay, they will get as much xp as a fighty, diplomatic, sneaky or whatever else kinda player. go ahead. HA! Good Fun! edited a double "that"

don't be obtuse. if you want xp for individual kills or individual lockpicks you is not actual advocating the quest/task xp reward approach. *sigh* and the reasons why xp for kills and individual activities PLUS quest awards has been beaten to death... beaten beyond death, is that if the fighty character gets more xp 'cause xp from fights ends up yielding more xp, then you is functional encouraging fighty even if you do make diplomatic and sneaky options viable. quest and task xp awards avoids any sorta attempts to balance awards for differing play styles... yadda-yadda, etc. ad nauseum. *groan*' you don't have any idea just how obtuse this all is and how repetitive. HA! Good Fun! ps say something new. give us a new perspective. come up with a new argument. anything. please.

He didn't claim he was being discriminated against. He claimed he was being punished. How else would you describe getting into a nasty fight, having to use up valuable consumables and limited per day abilities and then receive nothing for your hard work...except maybe the need to use up one of your camping supplies, or hike back to the inn for rest? you ain't punished. you get same xp as those who sneak past combats even if you do get 1007 drops n' such that sneaky folks don't get. the guy that does the fight gets valuable loot drops that the sneaky or diplomatic player does not receive. the sneaky doesn't waste potions or camping resources. is a Role-Play game. aren’t you happy you get meaningful choices? regardless, notice we said "punished" not discriminated.... although that is one o' the more feeble semantic arguments we has seen in awhile. am suspecting that loot drops more than make up for camping supplies, but even if they don't, is up to player to decide where is the value. even so, there is no punishment or discrimination for choosing fighty. there is likewise no Punishment for diplomatic or sneaky players when discussing xp rewards, 'cause they is gonna get exact same xp regardless. there is no more simple and elegant method than quest and task xp that will provide all styles o' gameplay with same xp awards. until some codexian grognard or new initiate to the xp morass comes up with such a simple and straightforward system, the argument is functional dead and over. and as there is no conceivable way to better balance than to not try and balance, there is no actual argument. honest. am assuming the reason you never see the obsidian folks join in is 'cause o' the complete and utter boredom they feels everytime some wannabee necromancer attempts to resurrect this mutilated corpse o' an argument even little kiddies who has seen aladdin know that it ain't a pretty picture when you try and raise the dead like you folks is trying. (homage to robin williams added in not-so-sly-fashion) the first person who adds something new to this discussion is gonna send us to the hospital with a heart attack. no matter how clever and/or insightful y'all think you is, this is a +10 year argument and you add absolutely nothing to what has already been beat into what is now nothing more than immature yes v. no nonsense and hair pulling repetition. say something new, anybody. go ahead, we dare you. ... honest think for a moment and ask self if there is possible anything you can say that weren't added in 2002 or any bis/obsidian development since that time. HA! Good Fun!

that would work for Gromnir, but josh doesn't approve o' meta-humor. HA! Good Fun!

the current PoE system is borked. there is literal hundreds o' games better than PoE in its current state. nevertheless, your observation is pointless and misguided. in any event, we should all thank God that vol approval does not = better. HA! Good Fun!

ziets didn't know how to end motb well, but that is another issue entirely. am not thinking any single developer gots an infallible crpg vision... 'least we ain't never seen such. we like some ziets and we dislike other o' his work. is no surprise that we thinks he is 'bout half right with his observations. HA! Good Fun!

you ain't punished. you get same xp as those who sneak past combats even if you do get 1007 drops n' such that sneaky folks don't get. regardless, this is a dead issue. serious, is same argument we has been having with same developers since 2002. black isle/obsidian declared victory and planted their flag in the moldering corpse o' ad hoc over a decade ago and the freaking broken and battered remains o' the vanquished keeps twitching and threatening to rise zombie-like every time Gromnir looks away for even five minutes. is disconcerting. perhaps feargus should call in a witch doctor or an exorcist or somesuch and finally give this dead body o' a subject its final rest. HA!Good Fun!

the conan quote works a bit better than the original attributed genghis khan. post conan movie, we gets revisionist quotes for genghis, but the lamb book quotes it thus: "The greatest pleasure is to vanquish your enemies and chase them before you, to rob them of their wealth and see those dear to them bathed in tears, to ride their horses and clasp to your bosom their wives and daughters." alternatively, the bit 'bout horses is given as "to take the finest of their horses between your legs" which just don't sound as right to the modern ear. personally, we likes the movie conan version better, and thanks to internet revisionism, the genghis quote is now typical provided as closer to the conan version. HA! Good Fun!

Yeah, that's my problem, too. No feedback :/ PS I'm using Mr Wolf have used stag, boar, wolf and bear. perhaps bear is bugged, but State o' Maine is having a typical accuracy o' 77 and is frequent doing ridiculous damage... frequent hits for over 75 damage. HA! Good Fun!

quest/task makes perfect sense, and it is simple and unbreakable. regardless o' how you accomplish a goal, no matter how creative or insanely stoopid is your approach, regardless o' whether you go sneaky, diplomatic, fighty or bug exploitative, you will get same xp award for accomplishing a goal. you want the gold-star-on-your-homework feeling from seeing 50 xp awarded for killing a kobold or spider? well, get over it. Gromnir concedes that it is indeed possible that there is a hypothetical perfect balancing formula whereby all players coulds get the right and just xp regardless o' play style, but it would be a complex system and would take considerable effort to implement. quest/task complete ignores the conundrum o' perfect balancing by functional ignoring the problem altogether... and if vol don't get his gold star, so much the better. quest is simple, elegant, and unbreakable... as long as it isn't bugged into absence such as in the PoE beta. HA! Good Fun!

we get impression we is interrupting, but there is no feedback in combat log and there is no graphic indicator that accompanies a successful interrupt, so we have no freaking idea if we is wasting effort or kicking proverbial butt. is a bit frustrating. HA! Good Fun! ps the bear companion does an inordinate amount o' damage

time is not running out. Gromnir has april 1 in the release date poll. yay Gromnir. HA! Good Fun!

our ranger appears to achieve most o' his damage via his animal companion. as such, we has decided that our ranger will be interrupt focused. animal does damage, while our ranger sits back with a fast ranged weapon and concentrates on interrupt. that being said, we would like to have some kinda reliable feedback that shows whether or not interrupts is efficacious. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/67748-ranger-hippies-with-pets-luvhate/?p=1490371 and seriously, we would like a way to see which foes is suffering debuffs. this is particular important for rangers using marked prey. HA! Good Fun!

*sigh* need we have any further proof that combat xp sux than for vol to be in favor o' it? as has been stated hundreds o' times, this same fight has raged with largely the same developers since approx 2002 when black isle were working on bg3 and then fo3. black isle developers went over all the positives and negatives o' quest/task xp awards and soundly beat the ad hoc proponents into utter stoopid submission. we had thought that the ground had been made forever infertile with the blood spilled by the idiotic protests o' the ad hoc proponents, but it seems that at least some o' you is too stubborn to realize that you is well and fully vanquished. quest is simple, elegant and does not require Any balancing to be providing same reward to all players regardless o' play style. there is no balancing algorithm that can possibly compete with the simplicity o' completely avoiding the need to balance. HA! Good Fun!

actually, bg were ridiculous broken in favor o' ranged. iwd, at the minimum, made adjustments to grandmastery and ranged weapons. one o' the more ridiculous bg2 board battles were the fight to save ranged combat efficacy. *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

leferd said: He helped flesh out some of the world lore and pantheon of gods during preproduction. well, that explains the following: "Loved the richness of the world and the hints I got about the story. " uh, yeah, well, am sure if you contributed to world richness you will see such in every painting hanging in the local inn, but so far we have gotten very little from which we can point to world depth. honestly, we wanted to kill sid halfway through his spiel. am kindia disagreeing with his impression o' the mouse-over of logs too. the logs themselves is o' so brief and seeming leaving information out that we feel like the mouse-over is telling us half of the relevant info. as stated elsewhere, we got 0 idea how interrupts figure in, and yet two abilities is focused 'pon creating and resisting interrupts. combat logs, in general, is very disappointing and we would wish for an option by which we could save more detailed text logs in a PoE file for later perusal. complete disagree regarding xp for combat. combat xp is an anachronism leftover from crpgs o' the past.... which is kinda ironic. hell, d&d pnp didn't actual award any xp during adventures-- were s'posed to be awarded after completion o' an adventure. clearly the old pnp approach wouldn't work in a crpg lasting tens o' hours and s'posed awarding 10 to a dozen levels, but combat kills xp is bad design and leading to difficulty in balancing. our problem with PoE xp awards is that they don't work. if you can't get combat xp and quest xp is a crap shoot even if you load from main screen, then something is serious freaking wrong. combat xp wouldbe better than no xp. unlike george, we got very good use from aoe Offensive spells, but we couldn't be slap-happy and stoopid 'bout using 'em. dunno, maybe george never played the d&d crpgs with friendly-fire active. am agreeing with george that inventory seems limited, but we haven't quite figured out stash yet and sometimes our inventory is bugged regardless... we actual have one or two less inventory slots and so gear disappears? we don't mind the micromanagement o' combat, and as we has noted elsewhere, starting at level five means we gets thrown into the deeper end o' the pool to try and start learning, but we will agree that bugginess o' combat is frustrating-- is frustrating to point that playing demo frequent feels like work rather than fun. that is bad for a game. in general, we think we agree and disagree with george in equal measure. is a good thing actually. is good to see different perspectives. HA! Good Fun!

I think we're dealing with a psychological effect here at least partly. It just feels "wrong" that dumped stats still give bonuses, even if they're small. am suspecting that you are identifying the bulk o' the problem... at least insofar as recognizing the psychology o' feeling wrong. PoE is doing different than the ie games, or arcanum or fallout. for the codexians, that is not proper and is therefore wrong. PoE does not effective force melee combatants to choose physical stats and at least boost one such stat to max. by mid levels, a mage in most crpgs might as well not even bother to carry a weapon for all the good it does them. mages boots mental stats and get benefit o' powerful spells. melee combatants boost str or dex and must suffer penalties due to lower intelligence or weak will saves. PoE is not using ability scores to force players to follow largely predetermined paths. a mage will be able to use a weapon in PoE and still get use from it at 8th level. *gasp* as we can see from matt's numbers, the values o' placing points in dex, might or both is hardly inconsequential, but they is not end-game determinate either. is different, but different is not bad. different is not even a problem that needs be overcome with fixes. as we noted in another thread, am hopeful there is other avenues for players to customize and diversify, but the numbers don't suggests a genuine problem, unless the problem is simple recognizing that PoE is not doing as wotc or bis or troika has done in past games. HA! Good Fun!

because beefier abilities necessarily lead to a dual problem... but am just repeating self. first, it is not necessarily a positive that the defining characteristics o' your cipher or ranger be necessarily determined at first level. the more you beef up abilities, the the more important you make them in character development, the more essential they become to your character build. this is not a complex notion and is, we would suggest, undeniable. first level is already extreme important for character development, but in PoE 1st level is particularly focused on allocation o' ability points. beef up abilities necessarily makes 1st level choices increasing vital. giving disproportionate value to level 1 choices is bad for a number o' reasons... scroll up if you need a full repeat o' the tedious exploration o' the notion, but short list looks like this: subsequent leveling choices is diluted, you increase likelihood of dump stats, failure (too powerful, too weak or too boring) becomes fixed at the very start of the game, etc. and keep in mind, Gromnir is not getting his arse handed to him in PoE combats... am not needing more power per se. second, if you beef up abilities, to make talents and other customization options compelling and meaningful they need also be beefier. am recognizing that "balance" is a vile and dirty word in these parts, but as soon as you power up some aspect o' character development, you must necessarily increase other aspects or those subsequent choices will become meaningless. balance becomes much more difficult if you add steroids to your ability beef. is an oft repeated example we use, 'cause is indicative o' the lack o' trust we have in the community to be reasonable 'bout character development choices. early in iwd2 development, the game were still an ad&d game and kits were proposed. kits is a first level customization aspect and is potential very significant. josh offered a handful o' potential kits to the black isle boardies to gauge approval/disapproval. josh's kit suggestions was hated. am not thinking we is exaggerating by using "hate" descriptor. is one o' those few times Gromnir were genuine shocked by board reaction. as many is aware, josh and Gromnir do not always agree on game issues, but we thought his kit suggestions were, at worst, lacking personality. as a whole, they were balanced and well designed additions. you can't imagine how much the josh kits were targets o' board vitriol. ad&d, more than d20, had all significant character development choices occur at level 1, and kits could be offering a significant amount o' beef to characters. in response to board hate, josh develops alternative kit. am forgetting the name, but it mighta' been called the Juggernaut o' Death. the kit were so freaking overpowered it were comical. clearly josh were having a bit o' fun with the community. ... the community didn't get the joke. boardies loved the new kit. superlatives flowed like water o'er niagara falls. new kit were bestest kit ever and legion were the folks anticipating using it in their first play-through o' iwd2. fans is wacky when it comes to issues o' balance and power. fans, sadly, should not be trusted. fans will choose the God Power nine times outta ten even if is obvious game breaking and even if they claim they want balanced. fans says silly stuff like, "I don't see beefier abilities opposed to more and better talents at all. Why not have both?" you want juggernaut o' death, not balance.. you want juggernaut even if getting makes game too easy. less is frequent more. we has played some beta and we don't believe our characters feel weak, but the lack o' talents has made so we has less differentiation than we would like to see. ability scores already offer an element o' differentiation, but clear not enough to satisfy. makes sense that we should let obsidian use largely unseen talents to fix diversity problem before making wholesale changes to abilities. if talents ain't enough o' a fix, then sure, abilities can be tweaked, but for reasons above, bloat o' abilities is a bad place to start given they already afford noteworthy, if insufficient, diversity. HA! Good Fun!

am uncertain about specific numbers or your chosen example, but yeah, am believing that individual talents should be of significant importance to character customization. am also in favor o' having talents be free o' class restrictions. if a druid or wizard can figure out some way to makes a firearms specialization work for his/her build, so much the better-- am wanting more options and more build viability, not less. prerequisites that channel classes into taking specific talents or talent trees is an approach we find antagonistic to diversity and customization. HA! Good Fun!

if what we got is all we get, then yeah, the ability distribution sux. nevertheless, Gromnir would prefer to look backwards and assume that ability scores is just one small aspect o' what is total character development. ability scores should not be so significant that other customization options pale by comparison. in point o' fact, we would rather that ability scores were less significant than subsequent level-up options. is not that current abilities is insignificant, 'cause they ain't. even so, keeping the abilities in current relative muted state compared to past d&d crpgs, fallout and arcanum, allows obsidian to use subsequent leveling customization to develop meaningful build diversity. but yeah, if current state is final state, then we need major changes. HA! Good Fun!

Neither does decimal point, spreadsheet balance. actually, we could benefit greatly from some spreadsheets explaining what is actual going on in combat. nevertheless, we don't recall asking for such. ironic perhaps, you is the guy asking for power, which is most easily measured with hard numbers. Gromnir is more interested in relative fun and feel o' usefulness. HA! Good Fun!

Well no, I wouldn't want to start with that assumption. For 2 reasons. 1) Beefing up the effects of the attributes would not only lead to powerful characters. It would also lead to severe penalties for people who decide to dump some of those stats in order to max out the others. 2) If we don't necessarily want more powerful characters then why are we asking for the talents to be beefed up? In any event, I mostly agree with the rest of your post, which is why I didn't bother addressing it. Something should indeed be done to make the talents stand out, be more interesting, more unique, more meaningful, and to give us a reason to look forward to that next level up. But I'm looking at the big picture. Right now the entire system... the stats, the spells, the talents and even item properties, feel very soulless and...BORING... If one needs a spreadsheet to determine the difference between someone who's 1st level and someone who's 8th level, we've got a friggin problem: Josh Sawyer has sacrificed fun to appease his lord Balance. THAT is the assumption I want to begin with, and then work from there to propose solutions. 1) your first point runs contrary to every crpg with ability points we can name... any d&d crpg, arcanum, fallout, etc. powerful abilities without dump stats is what PoE seems to be aiming for, and that becomes less likely if key character development is all happening at level one. 2) Gromnir were assuming you wanted the game to be more fun. bad on us we s'pose. power don't equal more fun. in point o' fact, power is one thing that leads to one o' the two most common complaints about all crpgs obsidian/black isle has ever developed: it was too easy. one would assume that players wants their characters to feel useful and that they wants to believe their character development choices had meaning, but heck, if power is all it takes, game development just got a whole helluva alot easier. HA! Good Fun!

Why are you presenting this as an Either/Or, when we could have both and the entire character customization process would only *benefit* from it? let's start with an assumption that people don't necessarily want more powerful characters but rather want more opportunity for unique and diverse builds, yes? increase power is ez as all it requires is some juggling o' numbers, yes? people want their character development choices to have meaning, and currently it appears that their ability point allocations has less meaning than previous ie games. is fair summation? it is very possible that obsidian will conclude that abilities Should be inflated. am not certain at this point what is the bestest route. as we has noted elsewhere, the mechanics o' the game is so obscured by buggy gameplay that it is difficult to see where things is wrong much less where gameplay may be improved. that being said, we would suggest starting by addressing post level one improvements. Gromnir would indeed like to see player's find build that makes 'em special (if not necessarily powerful) snowflakes. however, perhaps ironically, this becomes more difficult as you increase the relevance o' abilities. level one choices should not overshadow all decisions that follow. currently, the level one choices is highly focused on abilities: race, culture and ability point allocation. the aforementioned is all related to ability point allocations. the moment obsidian boosts abilities, post level one improvements such as talents will necessarily need be inflated as well if they is to be relative as important as the level one character development choices-- this is obvious, no? inflate the importance o' level one choices and we is back to a system where not only is the value o' subsequent leveling diminished, but level one will be the time when players decide what is the Best builds, and so we will get most ciphers looking same and most mages looking the same, and most rangers looking the same. ... as is our way we will indulge in questionable metaphor and request that obsidian attempts to improve diversity o' builds by working from the arse end o' character development issue. the more RELATIVE impact you impart to ability scores, by necessity you is making level one choices more significant. this is not a strength but a flaw. if players currently believe that there is a sameness to all builds 'cause o lack o' meaning in their ability point distributions, we would wish for obsidian to take the less obvious route to a solution to sameness and devote efforts to talents and other potential customization options first, post level one options. yes, this will make it more difficult to immediate see the variations between character builds 'cause at level one there will be a sameness due to diluted ability point powha, but in the long run we believe obsidian will provide themselves and players with more opportunities to meaningful diversity, and for meaningful leveling experiences. also, keep in mind that we don't have ie style multi-classing or dual-classing. these is post level 1 options for diversity that will not be available to us in PoE that was staples (if broken) in ie games. Gromnir is attempting to look at long range and see how best to achieve long view diversity and satisfactory leveling. for the reasons we has now beaten into a pulpy mess, boosting relative power o' ability scores would seem to work at cross purposes with our goals. HA! Good Fun! edit: freaking font size always goes wonky