[RPGCodex Review #1 - Hŵrpa Dwrp]

I found myself agreeing with most of the points but rolling my eyes with how blown out of proportion they are.

 

 

Welcome to rpgcodex.  I had to stand alone arguing that dragon age inquisition was not the worst thing bioware had ever done.  I did not love that game like the first, but people tried to toss so much bile on bioware they made claims that inquisition was WORSE than da2, which was a damn lie.  It was not THAT bad.

 

 

I did agree with many of the combat mechanics, particularly for the mage.  I like having more summons and out of combat debuffs.   I don't give a damn if he is not perfectly balanced because of it, it's not a multiplayer game, deal with it and give me More POWER !!!!!!!!

 

 

 

In the past couple of years, the best gameplay mechanics in an rpg goes to

 

divinity original sin

 

 

and best story goes to...

 

 

pillars of eternity (so far, still not done) - Not like the best ever, but I found the story more engaging than dragon age inquisition and divinity original sin

[My wizard finally hit lvl 9 and I feel like I need to change my name]

to GOD.

 

Oh that spammy fan of flames/missiles/slicken onslaught.

 

 

I finally feel like I am supposed to feel, a man wielding incalculable power, not some twirly little metal stick swinging wolverine type character, magneto!

 

For all those who feel gimped as a wizard, constrained by limited spells without resting a thousand times, take heart, our birth right as spell casters does come.  And while I don't have a player character druid to compare, I feel much more powerful as a wizard than Hirvais (sp).  Also, it seems like the yellow zone for mage AoE spells is much larger than the typical druid spell.

 

 

And I have to say, I think the intelligence duration/AoE size mechanic is fantastic.  It makes sense that the smarter wizards can increase the size and duration of their spell effects, and even better, that that intelligence expands the area where their spells do NOT harm their party members.  It suggests a stat that grants greater control over their own power.  All future rpg games with friendly fire mechanics should incorporate this mechanic.

 

 

I still want a spell that lets me summon a genie to potentially grant a full party rest, but I can wait for mods.

[Wizard buff spells - what's the point?]

 

 

"To be fair. D&D wizards do represent many, many, things wrong with class design."

 

D&D wizards represent the awesomesauce of class design. They are perfect the way they are.

 

 

Can someone link to where the person mentioned hating d&d wizard designs?

 

 

I keep hearing it said that he hates the old wizard designs but I want to see the context.

 

 

 

That said, I preferred the older wizard designs, they were not balanced, but they were not SUPPOSED to be effing balanced.  They were not some dude that's kind of fit and can twirl around a metal stick well.  They are wielders of COSMIC power, beings that can project elemental energies from their fingertips, beings that can stop time, conjure wish makers, conjure armies of undead and elemental servants as meat shields, harness dragons flames and comets from the heavens, change the rules of nature itself.

 

Of COURSE those classes are going to be more versatile and impressive and powerful than some standard fighter.  THAT IS THE POINT !!!!!!!!

 

We want to play as gandalf, not some elf sharp shooter or swordsman.  So do not deny us that fantasy.  The solution to wizards being powerful is to craft harder battles where even all that power is not enough to hold back the impending hordes alone.  Or develop enemies that even a wizard has a harder time defeating where more martial fighters fair better.

 

What is with this "I don't want balance" meme? Yes, all of that is great in a book. Not so much in a game, particularly one with pretentions of difficulty or teamwork. There are ways to do wizards, and make them feel magical and powerful, without unbalancing them and there are ways to design games so wizards have crazy powers, without overshadowing all the other options, but neither of those are what old-school wizards did. Breaking the game, just because it fits your fluff, is not a good thing. It trivializes the game and, if you're playing with other people (like actual D&D), ruins the experience for other players. Even if you're playing on your own, why are you playing a game where you can trivialize every chalange?

 

 

 

That's an mmo model of mages where we have to pretend the guy who can incinerate his enemies with a thought is going to have a hard time taking out a warrior, this is a single player party based game, it's ok to have unbalanced characters in terms of power.  baldurs gate might have gone a bit overboard with the knock spell where even rogues lock picking skills were redundant, but in terms of bringing destruction to bare there is zero reason a mage should EVER take a back seat to any other class.  They are not bound by the constraints of the physical world, by Reality.  They are gods among insects, any pretense to the contrary is just massaging the egos of people who prefer to play warriors/rogues as their primary archetype.  As if a character that has mastered "stab stab" could EVER hope to match someone who can bring down the fires of heaven.

[Paladin Aura AoE is Half or less the size it should be]

I just realized that the Aura Area is Half of what it should be!

 

Comparing it to Crucible of the soul, which should be half of the Aura size, it has the same range.

 

I tested it with different Intelect scores and the range is consistent with that assessment

 

This effectively means that my paladin with Intellect 3 has to be standing inside someones green circle to share the aura, even an inch away from that position will not be enough to share it.

 

When i built this character i knew my aura areas would be smaller and i was even prepared to put up with lower durations from other effects, but i figured that 1.5m would be the distance that reach weapons will cover, and it should be more than enough to support people fighting side by side, but apparently instead of a 1.5m aura i got stuck with a 1.5cm aura   

 

PS: I tried to post pictures but the upload failed every time, they were around 150kb and .jpg so i don`t know what happened.

 

 

 

....

 

 

I'm sorry but this is hilarious.  I'm imagining a mentally retarded paladin who's intellect is so minuscule that his core auras are so short they don't even extend outside himself.

 

 

 

It's like your player character is matt damon from team america world police.

[Wizard buff spells - what's the point?]

"To be fair. D&D wizards do represent many, many, things wrong with class design."

 

D&D wizards represent the awesomesauce of class design. They are perfect the way they are.

 

 

Can someone link to where the person mentioned hating d&d wizard designs?

 

 

I keep hearing it said that he hates the old wizard designs but I want to see the context.

 

 

 

That said, I preferred the older wizard designs, they were not balanced, but they were not SUPPOSED to be effing balanced.  They were not some dude that's kind of fit and can twirl around a metal stick well.  They are wielders of COSMIC power, beings that can project elemental energies from their fingertips, beings that can stop time, conjure wish makers, conjure armies of undead and elemental servants as meat shields, harness dragons flames and comets from the heavens, change the rules of nature itself.

 

Of COURSE those classes are going to be more versatile and impressive and powerful than some standard fighter.  THAT IS THE POINT !!!!!!!!

 

We want to play as gandalf, not some elf sharp shooter or swordsman.  So do not deny us that fantasy.  The solution to wizards being powerful is to craft harder battles where even all that power is not enough to hold back the impending hordes alone.  Or develop enemies that even a wizard has a harder time defeating where more martial fighters fair better.

[I can't seem to add spells into a grimoire]

Not sure if this is working as intended but...

 

I went to the inn and hired a grimoire bot.  Created a level 1 wizard, added some level one spells I did not have memorized, then took his grimoire and dismissed him.

 

I thought this would give me a new grimoire to use but it seems I can't add any spells to that grimoire.  Is that working as intended to keep people from getting easy grimoires to fill up or is it a bug?

 

I was still able to learn the spells I have yet to learn (wizard starts off in a crippled state, while they have more total spell options, the fact that they have to scratch and claw their way to learn them means that priests/druids that get their entire slate of spells for use each level functionally have better access and variety of spells to use... at least at the start.

[What class are you doing your first play through with?]

I suppose it's not critical what class you are since this is a party based game, but the pc is usually the most powerful since it's the one you create from scratch so... which class has the most draw for you?

 

 

I always, ALWAYS play a wizard class in these games, but I've always wanted to play one of those d&d psionics and it seems like that is kind of what a cipher is with mental powers.  I was turned off by the idea of having to strike the enemy with weapons since I did not want to play as a battlemage, but I've since learned you can use ranged weapons to build up their powers as well so that is doable.

 

My trepidation over the wizard lies with the reports I've heard that the druid is better, similar if not stronger power plus healing and shapeshifting....

 

I guess the wizard is more diverse since they can swap out grimoires, but it does cast a pall on my usual first class choice.

 

 

And then there is the monk.  The monk is the only fighter that I've ever enjoyed playing, I always liked the idea of my characters powers coming from within, NOT from external weapons.  That is what both mages and monks have in common.  THEY are the power, not their trinkets and metal sticks.  Choices choices.

 

 

I've already made it through the first area as a wizard, but I may reroll a cipher and druid to see how they play as well.  

[Can someone help me make an legendary Wizard?]

you guys serisouly trying to fight with a lvl 1-2 wizard alone with no companions? Is this your first RPG....ever?

 

 

I tried to solo a bear in a cave as a lvl 2 wizard and kept getting my ass handed to me.  I eventually left... but I WILL return to enact my vengeance.  

 

I do worry though, people keep saying the wizard is weak compared to the druid and cipher... is that just early on or does that scale to later on as well?  wizards are always weak in games like baldurs gate early on, but later they become the single most over the top powerful things in existence, stopping time, summons up the wazoo, dragons breath and comets raining from the sky, even opening locks, stone skin and other defenses that make them immune to damage for a bit.  Is none of that incalculable power going to materialize later on?

 

If not I may just reroll a cipher or druid/chanter.

[In what order will you play the upcoming 3 rpgs]

As much as I hated and despised DA2, I have high hopes that Inquisition will be a return to form for bioware.  They have already fixed some unforgivable issues like the scope of the game with more varied locations (even with like 4-5 maps D:OS was VASTLY more epic in scope than DA2), and no longer having a locked camera.

[In what order will you play the upcoming 3 rpgs]

I suspect we'll get wasteland 2 first next month (hopefully)

 

but soon after (likely November) we will have both pillars of eternity and dragon age inquisition drop.

 

 

Assuming they all dropped right on top of each other, which do you play first?

 

 

 

Personally, I like to play what I'm anticipating the least from first, and the most from last so that I can still have that to look forward to.

 

If I did that with divinity original sin though I probably would have played that first, not expecting much.

 

 

I want to try wasteland 2 first since I am more into sci fi/fantasy settings vs the more real world constraints of something like a wasteland series.  But who knows, that might be better than everything.

[Divinity: Original Sin]

 

You don't get an 87 on Metacritic by making a crappy game. Original Sin is one of the best crpgs of the last 5 years.

 

Make it 14. BG2 was released in 2000. 

 

 

 

How can someone who enjoys roleplaying games not care about the story of the game they are playing?  You don't care about how your character fits into the world or why your character fits into the world?  That's like saying you don't like shooting guns in an FPS, it's one of the integral parts of an rpg - you're playing a character IN a story!  

 

 

The problem is that many people don't play RPGs or FPS, they just play games. I play all kinds of different games which different design approaches and different strengths. The olny purpose they have is to be fun and entertaining.

 

So I don't care if Divinity: Originial Sin is an RPG by the books or not. That's totally unimportant to me. Important is whether the game "works" as a package and whether it's fun to play. And by the way, game design philosophy is much more complex than making a game in genre X or Y. Whole books have been written on the topic. Having a deep immersive story is only one element in a much bigger puzzle and it's quite common sense in design philosophy that good games focus on certain strengths instead of trying to cater to everyone and trying to include everything. The main story is just not the biggest focus of Divinity: Original Sin and that's ok because it has other strengths like engaging combat, good exloration and a high degree of systemic freedom. If that makes the game less RPG then it shall be so.

 

 

 

I don't think the narrative for D:OS is as strong as something like bg2, but then bg2 had the single greatest video game villain of all time, Jon Irenicus, voiced by David Warner (WHY CAN'T ANYONE GET HIM TO RETURN !!!!!).

 

Bit the story is still orders of magnitude better than action "rpgs" like diablo or torchlight.  I don't even consider those rpgs, they are hack and slash games in a fantasy setting.  That means it's an rpg?  Not to me.

[Divinity: Original Sin]

One of the things that hearkens back to days of old is how magic is more powerful than melee.  As it SHOULD BE !!!!!!!!

 

In dragon age origins, magic was still the most powerful force in the game, by far.  Fast forward to the train wreck that was dragon age 2... Did you ever try casting a fire ball?  I've blocked out most of my memories of that game, but the damage was so low, I almost think it HEALED my enemies.

 

In BG2, a fireball would disintegrate scores of weaker enemies upon contact, it was a force to be feared.  When I first used a fireball spell in D:OS, it was a return to old form, it was extremely powerful.  As it should be.  Same thing happened with NW2 mask of the betrayer, my wizard was a god made flesh.

 

This is not some mmo where all abilities and classes need to be perfectly balanced in terms of general damage output and utility.  It is both RIGHT and proper for a mage to wield orders of magnitude more power than the bloated jock who swings around a metal stick.

 

I LOVE that we are seeing that power unshackled more and more in newer games on the market.  Magicka took off all the shackles, it was pure power to unload at your fingertips.  Lichdom looks promising (worried about story and monotony, but we'll see).  REALLY excited for pillars of eternity and DA:I (looks like they took a lot of the critiques to heart).

[Divinity: Original Sin]

The main thing I wish was in the game was more physical character customization.  I hate having my male characters look like bluto sized football jocks with jaw lines shaped like rocks.  

 

The biggest thing I hate about the witcher series is Geraults appearance, it's like walking around as a zombie almost.  I know, I'm shallow, but that kind of stuff takes me out of it.

[Divinity: Original Sin]

"So I take you never bought any new game in your life? its 50$ for 50-100 hours of fun that is like 1$ for each hour."

 

I've bought more games than years you've been alive, bud. And, the some. And, that's only in the past year or so.

 

1. There is no guarantee any game is fun.

 

2.  50-100 hours. L0L Yeah.

 

3.  When I buy things I want to own them. I prefer my games in boxes not on the evil internet. It's one thing tos pend $5 on a crappy passe game on GOG. Itr's another to spend $50 on a new release that might be crappy or merely okay. That's a HUGE risk.

 

And, while everyone is praising it as 'the best thing ever'; I know they are lying and over hyping it. At best, I'm sure I'll have fun  and it'll be a good game. At worst it'll be Alpha Protocol all over again.

 

 

Hype can sometimes lead people astray, people said they loved Batman Arkham Asylum and it did nothing for me personally.  But I can't imagine any person who likes games like baldurs gate / magicka / with some turn based tactics thrown into combat disliking this title.  This is about the safest bet I've seen in a long time.  With one exception.  People who have only waded into heavily voiced rpgs like dragon age 2 and the mass effect series might get a bit shell shocked at the initial tedium if reading through all the text.  I did and I loved baldurs gate 2, but that came out a LONG time ago and I had to get used to more reading again.  Once you get over that hump I think you'd be fine.

 

I think this was totally worth the full purchase price, and I hope more people pay while it's high so the devs are rewarded more for their efforts.  I have spent far more to get far less in the past.

 

You will likely wait until this goes on sale, but I'll make a bet with you.  Once you do finally play this game, ask yourself was this title actually worth the full launch purchase price.  I bet you will say yes.

[Divinity: Original Sin]

I wonder what the obsidian guys think of this game?

 

Anyways, I am loving it so far.  2013 was a very very dark year for me.  There were like no rpgs released, it was a black whole of rpg gaming content, and this year look at what we have:

 

divinity original sin

wasteland 2

pillars of eternity

dragon age inquisition

 

This is the best year for rpgs in like, ever.  I'll throw in age of wonders 3 just because I like it and am a fan of that series.

 

 

I think divinity OS is the best release of the year so far though.  Hopefully the others get even better.  People are right to say that the world is not exactly the most unique, but that is perfectly tolerable due to the fact that you can do so much stuff.  I had no idea that you could teleport people, and there are few things in gaming more satisfying than portion some bomb carrying enemy into a cluster of other enemies and watching him nuke them all.  It's just incredibly satisfying gameplay.  Shades of magicka in the spell system in the combos.

 

I was put off by the large chunks of text at the start but I acclimated to the difference and got more in tune with my older bg2 days.  I think I'd been thrown too much modern dragon age/ mass effect style everything voice overs.  It made having to read all the text kind of a chore and I think that may be the biggest turn off for people at the start.  But once people adjust I suspect they will become engrossed.