Cantousent

I might not have paid enough attention, but I didn't take Cat's post as wanting every location to have corpses hanging from trees. I can't remember who brought up DIablo, but I agree with him in that I don't want the game to be completely forlorn and set in permanent night time. I sure as hell don't want a 'Twilightesque' game. :Cant's shuddering icon: I think some horror elements would work well. I think the part with not only helps convey that idea, but also helps convey the innately horrific nature of soul magic in the first place. The way souls work in PoE is in, of, and by itself potentially horrific. The fact that so many children are stillborn because of lack of souls that the people have come to more or less accept it and live with it is something truly bizarre on one hand, but absolutely reasonable on the other. Human *do* learn to live with horrifying realities in their lives. :Cant's resisting making a political joke icon: So, the game already has built in 'grittiness' in the first place. I would argue less 'grit' and more 'horror,' personally. Now, where I agree completely with my feline friend is in the Spider cave. There are bones and whatnot everywhere, but I think there should be something more... atmospheric to the area. That specific scene, and a few others, really will make an impression. I do *not* want the game to be dark and brooding everywhere. A few dark and brooding scenes, a few horrific scenes, and a few scenes centered on the criminal underbelly of the city will stand out. If the whole game is built around such locales, then the real gems in the design won't stand out. The backdrop of high fantasy lets people cleanse their palates between various tasting of horror, comedy, romance, etc. etc. etc. I've always hated 'romance' in CRPGs, but I romantic elements aren't always bad. ...Or, hey, forget romance. From a sexy point of view, the most mature 'romance' in a video game was TNO and Annah of the Shadows. The design team threw over kissy faced romance and depicted raw sexual heat, but it was subdued and it was brief. ...And that makes sense in a setting where the PC is trying fighting for his life while trying to regain his memory. He's not worried about settling down and having little TNO's and bat tailed brats running around the house. At any rate, what I'm trying to say is... I can't really remember, but I trust Obsidz to have a delicate touch in these matters and that they'll get it right. ...And get rid of lock picking XP!

So.. What your saying is that you support combat xp? Laughed out Loud. I also appreciate Ineth's mad charting skillz! Good stuff, man! Anyhow, there I don't think that forum polls are strong in and of themselves, but that can provide a catalyst for good conversations. ...And sometimes the debate can have an impact on how people see the issue. Sometimes, although rarely, it can encourage people to change positions. More frequently, it can encourage people to modify positions in some way or another, and that's nothing to sneeze at. I've never thought Obsidz had a lot of love for the online community, but I *do* believe that sometimes discussions here can make an impact on the designers.

I'm not really arguing against that, per se, but DnD itself has wolves, worgs, and dire wolves. I do think that sometimes it can come across as a little bit of WoW naming if you have three categories of each monster or the like. However, as long as it's not glaring, I don't think it's necessarily bad. Elder Lion kind of sounds like someone running a town hall meeting rural Massachusetts to me, though.

I agree, but I think the more important consideration is in the argument itself. Articulate your thoughts in a manner that is at least thought provoking, if not convincing, and you can have some impact. I'm not sure that I'm either thought provoking or convincing at this point, but I *want* to be, at least, and I have some hope as longa s I try.

While I agree with the sentiment, I am enjoying the irony of this statement. Call it a slow wit, but the irony seems to escape me. Edgar Allan Poe :Cant's huge grin icon: He doesn't want gritty like strangekitty, but he thinks Poe is rather moody and dark himself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Allan_Poe (sorry, Grom, but wiki *does* have its uses.) Beg pardon for talking for you, frag. Edit: blame the ouzo x2

October 9, 2014

I hadn't read the thread and I was worried that the point I was going to make was already stated. Hot damn, Curry already said the same thing. The problem is that a lot of folks won't want to waste time when faced with the choice of buffing or doing something else. Make it a little easier and perhaps a little less painful to take the time to buff at the start of combat and I think it won't be an issue at all. Buffs can be incredibly powerful, which offsets losing precious time that you can't damage the enemy or heal your comrades.

I've kind of thought for some time that ol' boney is kind of like Grom. He's got a persona. He's a belligerent ol' curmudgeon. ...But either way, I like the affirmative aspect of this poll. It's not scientific, but at least it gives folks a chance to affirm what they think will be *good* rather than rail about the binary question of kill or quest-only XP. Most *most* of us won't be violently put off by something other than our personally preference, although I'm vehemently opposed to any XP for what I term incidental activities. This poll gives me the chance to face folks who want kill or lock picking XP by merely affirming what I *do* want without railing *against* what other folks want. For my part, I can now be part of the Molotov ****tail throwing crowd and march out against lock picking XP. I might not be *violently* opposed to the proposition, but I'm certainly going to keep advocating a different design decision, which I have *always* said folks should do for what they want in the game. Maybe I'm talking a bit out of the bottom of my cup right now, but I think the debate itself is healthy, even if it does get heated and even if the polls will never be entirely scientifically accurate.

So, we've come full circle to someone who uses the argument that old IE system was great, but doesn't actually want the old IE system used. I mean, unless by the "old" you cite in your post, you're not referring to every IE game which all had quest experience. In every one, talking to some other guy after you killed the first guy actually *did* yield you experience. In every IE game, killing a guy didn't just make you better at fighting, it could also make you better at casting non-combat spells, picking locks, playing music, talking to folks, etc etc etc. The system was always set up so that your specific actions did not yield improvement only for the ability associated with the action. If you fight someone with a mace, why is it that you improved in your ability to cast cleric spells? In at least one IE game, there were portions (usually minimal, to be sure) where some people, myself included, received no kill XP. For example, in IWD2, if you were a completenik or played with less than a full party, you didn't receive XP when the CR of the encounter was signifcantly less than the level of the party. So, in at least one IE game, there were periods of no kill XP, but you still received quest XP when you talked "to another guy" who gave you the quest to fight the first guy. Maybe you think there should be kill XP. Fine. Fair enough. ...But no quest XP?

No, I don't think it should overdo the gritty aspect. I think some areas should be on the gritty side or even absolutely sinister. ...But I don't want Max Payne with elves. ...And I don't want Warhammer. It has its moments, but it takes gritty to cartoon levels. I also like the idea of letting folks be as heartless and cruel as possible, as Lephys said. My take on absolute altruism or complete villainy is that staying dedicated *should* be hard. (please note, I did *not* say 'good' or 'evil'.) It should take real resolve on the part of the player to keep to either philosophy. I think removing kill XP helps that cause greatly. As long as there is a substantial gameplay incentive for folks to kill everything, you're going to have people who aren't truly committed to villainy going out of their way to kill. Remove that, and you're only going to have the dedicated amoral types. Maybe there should be a few in game rewards for staying to the straight (or crooked) and narrow path, but most of the rewards should be story driven intangibles. I rarely state things definitively, but there will be folks who are so dedicated to following a particular code (even if other folks can't really figure out what the hell it is) that their favorite rewards will be how they craft their characters. Since I'm not a good guy in real life, I go out of my way to play a goody two shoes type in every game (note: this has nothing to do with alignment). For me, the reward is in keeping my characters to my code. Getting back to the corpses on trees idea, I think that's okay. ...But have some areas that are Tolkienesque. Have areas that provide levity. I see this game as a wonderfully prepared meal where there are sweet dishes and savory dishes and the interplay of salty, tart, tangy, and sugary flavors. It can have areas of desolation without going all out Diablo. At least that's my particular take.

I don't want to get too far away from the Wasteland topic, but I think it's important to separate your attitudes about logical (or even illogical) arguments and the folks who make them. ...And remember that you might disagree with someone on one topic today and be on the same side tomorrow. That's actually true for you, my angelic friend. I've disagreed with you and agreed with you on various topics. On the other hand, I've also found that getting in between combatants is a good way to smacked on both sides of the head at the same time. <.< Which means I'd better keep my head down after making this post. Then again, if folks get really belligerent, they'll probably just lock the thread. BTW: Wasteland 2 is a great game, but I don't know what else can be learned from it to include in PoE. ...But I'm sure we'll keep discussing it. lol

I agree with the idea of having some areas simply appear sinister. I also hope that they treat 'mature' as something more meaningful than adolescent wish fulfillment. Death, for example. People should be horrified by their loved ones dying. It shouldn't be five minutes of weeping for your recently murdered wife followed by a lengthy conversation about how you're worried about iron prices going up because of the societal upheaval in Ironia. More like, "I don't ****ing care that you're on a quest to uncover the plot for the throne of Ironia. If you want to help me, I'm going to make my life's mission to find the bastard who murdered my wife and kill him!" Of course, some folks won't have the resolve to carry through with that goal, but that's beside the point. A woman who is worried about her missing children won't talk to you about the latest village intrigue. I know this is an ongoing problem in cRPGs, but I trust that Obsidz will treat these matters conscientiously. I don't want the grit to be overdone or cartoonish, but a little bit of moral ambiguity and some facets of the ugly underside of various societies could enhance the game. On the other hand, I don't mind 2 dimensional stereo-types, as long as the design team is using them intentionally for a purpose. There are people who fit certain stereo-types in real life, after all. And all this time I just thought you were happy to see me!

Actually, my perspective is that we'll never make this a reliable poll for making important decisions. I just think of it as a fun poll and another excuse to argue with you guys :Cant's wry grin icon;

Personally, I don't think it's Sawyer. I think there's a faction that does and the big cheese is in it.

I think 'other' is reasonable option as someone could simply then type 'don't care.'

My problem with the Baron's castle scenario is if you can get into the castle some other way, perhaps even a more clever way, and get no experience, but if you pick the lock you get XP. I don't want to make one turn in a dungeon, kill some creep and take his key (or pick his pocket or convince him to give me the key) and get no experience when I get past the door whereas if I go the other way and find the door first (completely by chance) and pick the lock to get experience, and then find the same key later. Give experience for getting into the castle, one method of which can be picking the lock.

Strictly speaking, my wandering friend, I'd think that 'don't care' is entirely represented by not voting. After all, you're happy with whatever anyone decides. This is an entirely affirmative poll. There is no 'don't care' option because you can vote all the things about which you 'do care.' However, I think you could make a case for including the option 'whatever the design team's instinct is.' Don't care seems to me to put yourself out of the argument altogether. I think it probably has some value in a poll with a single choice, but not as much in this one. Anyhow, out of curiosity, did you vote and for which options? I voted for quest/objective/Specific Encounters/and beastiary (which I've never really liked but always saw as a decent compromise for some folks).

Psychological studies have shown that something people really covet, and which is considered slightly shameful and dirty, is usually not picked when presented with that option in a questionnaire, for example: "Do you want combat xp?" "No." doofus! :Cant's **** eating grin icon:

I've always thought the don't care option was best represented by not voting.

Plus, some results failed to get more than a third votes. I think we can take lack of vote for an option means you *don't* want it.

If some small kernal of the discussion leads to a better game in some way, we all win. Other imspiring messages to follow

Yeah, I don't think everything should award the exact same XP. I think some results are superior and should receive superior rewards, some in terms of story based or other intangible awards, some in terms of character ability, some in terms of loot, and some in terms of XP. I know I know! Someone will say, "isn't that arbitrary?!" Of course it's arbitrary. The idea that the ultimate mission is to get rid of the arbitrary nature of rewards is akin to the idea of absolute freedom. I mean, someone decides the manner in which XP is doled out to the party, which things count as quests or not, which activities will grant XP in the first place, and the ultimate resolution to quests which grant a huge chunk of XP, but having that same person decide which results are better than other will just be too 'arbitrary?' I also don't think every method should always grant the exact XP. Some times, the ideal way to overcome an obstacle really *is* combat. Sometimes, it's with a glib tongue. Sometimes, avoiding danger and going around the obstacle is ideal.

I get you, Curry, and that's really the point. I've never really thought that it should be a question of quest or kill XP. I continue to believe that XP should be awarded for achieving objectives and better results should yield better rewards. Essentially, I like 'quest' XP just fine as long as it's sufficiently broad to cover more things than just 'talk to the farmer, kill the ogre, and return to the farmer.' I also don't mind some objectives or 'quests' being combat centric or even exclusive to combat. I mean, I'd like to see a fair sprinkling of 'quests' that can only be accomplished by certain approaches. I think the beastiary idea is a pretty shoddy attempt to placate folks, but since it has actually worked to placate a lot of folks, I guess it does what it needs to do. I'd rather have some objectives with real meat on their bones that net XP for combat people. Put in some stuff in there for smooth talkers, cheats, and sneaks also. EDIT: Damn it.

On the flip side, if the player hasn't heard the rumor previously, the PC could himself be the source of a rumor that he can spread, recording the encounter in his journal and spreading his account of the encounter to others. Makes the PC's place in the world a little more dynamic and that would *really* be exploration. Hell, if the player finds ol' Spidey Mommy before he hears a rumor, or better yet, there isn't even a rumor worth spreading before he meets her, then he's not just chasing after what others have said. He's searching out new things for himself. He could even make it a five year mission. Whether he actually spreads the rumor or just keeps it to himself would be *his* choice. Write a ballad of your own exploits, have it commissioned, or simply leave it all in the dark cave where you fought her. ...And some encounters might entice the player to do something shameful or illegal and he would go to great lengths to hide his activities.

Read your own poll you onery bastard!