Jump to content

mjahkal

Initiates
  • Posts

    2
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral

About mjahkal

  • Rank
    (0) Nub
    (0) Nub

Badges

  • Pillars of Eternity Backer Badge
  • Pillars of Eternity Kickstarter Badge
  • Lords of the Eastern Reach Backer Badge
  • Deadfire Backer Badge
  • Deadfire Fig Backer
  1. That is something to be said about stat/roll based combat and a turn based system giving player time and space to analyze the situation and choose the best tools for the job.It's like D&D was designed to be turn-based or something! D&D, like any and all other pnp games, was not 'designed' to be turn based but rather *had* to be turn based because that is the only way you can do things with a bunch of people seated around a table. It is a limitation of pnp gaming, and the point of progressing to computer gaming is to overcome the limitations and weaknesses of pnp gaming.Whilst I agree with the other poster that mentions both PnP and videogames having their own strengths and limitations, I also agree with the overall point here. TTRPGs, at least the likes of DnD and its offspring as far as I'm aware, are largely driven by the act of speech and performsnce, and by consequence the information always had to be delivered sequentially, not simultaneously. In terms of combat, it *has* to be developed a move at a time as everyone can't just shout their moves on the spot at the same time and hope the rest to follow what is happening and what everyone is doing and respond adequately. Videogame as a medium removes the need to render actions and situations into words - why not show them instead - and so it allows for several actions to occur or be depicted simultaneously. For TTRPGs the turn-based system is a necessity whereas for videogames it is not, and hence you cannot assume that just because a tabletop source has turn-based combat it is also the ideal or superior form for its videogame adaptation. They're not the same systems working within tge same mediums and boundaries and shouldn't strive to necessarily be alike. Now with regards to RTwP as applied to the IE games I do feel many of its worst aspects are leftovers from the TT experience directly shoehorned into the videogame medium. But already Pillars, and Deadfire since, have been designed not as duplicates or representations of tabletop systems but systems built specifically for a videogame - it's why Josh has largely altered systems, combat and so on for the TT PoE. Already these games flow much smoother and feel more intuitive and rewarding as RTwP experiences over tgeir predecessors. It's a mistake to assume the system in these games was "made to be turn-based", it's certainly a departure from that and I'm sure the TB mode on Deadfire is likely to be wildly different than its RTwP experience. Personally I do far prefer RTwP combat to TB in general - I find it way more immersive and intuitive, whilst the pacing doesn't feel anywhere as clunky. But that's me of course. If you prefer TB instead then you do you - though I don't see why we have to go ahead and behave like utter asshats with all the "sorry fans, what I prefer is superior" remarks. Don't be a ****, seriously. (Written from my phone so apologies for any typos) I always love rude posts telling people not to be rude. I have been following this closely because, like most older people who hold TT to be their first love, I feel that RTwP is a bizarre abortion designed to dilute and spoon feed complicated tactical decisions to children who can't possibly be bothered to do things like read or do basic math. See how insulting that was? Regardless, 90% of the vitriol I have seen around this topic has been from the RTwP side of the argument. I do not see how a 100% optional, completely ignorable add-on is ruining their experience, but they are certainly up in arms about it. The simple fact that has to be acknowledged is that these games are supposed to be spiritual successors to the old Infinity Engine games which were based on 2nd edition Dungeons and Dragons. Yes, Dungeons and Dragons is a turn based system. If you enjoyed Dungeons and Dragons, mechanically, then the RTwP system may seem odd and offputting. (it always did to me). I don't hate people who like RTwP, and I do not want anyone destroying their games of preference. That being said, these games originate from a Turn Based origin and I, for one, am excited to see that option being presented. I booted the game up yesterday, played about 20 minutes, then went and bought all of the DLC for the game to support Obsidian's decision. The gameplay went from an annoyance that I had to bear to get to the story to an entertaining part of the game. I understand that not everyone feels this way, but I don't understand the people who are freaking out because other people are being allowed to play in a different manner than them. This makes no sense.
  2. After giving a quick play of the turn based mode I do have one suggestion. I have been away for a long time (I kinda hate RTwP), but the announcement drew me back. I made up a chanter real quick with the verse that deals raw damage to enemies in a radius. Sadly, there was no sort of tooltip or the like in the game to tell me if my ability was actually working. After some observation I was able to tell that the damage appeared to happen right at the beginning of my turn, but with the camera jumping around it was easy to miss. Perhaps the damage numbers that pop up could have their source beside them? That would take a lot of text though, at least in some cases, so I see why that might not work. What about icons indicating the type of Damage along with the numbers? This might make it easier to figure out why someone is taking damage, or even help the player figure out that certain damage types are less effective against certain monsters? Just a thought.
×
×
  • Create New...