Pathfinder Kingmaker is bigger then Deadfire

[Takkik]

 

Yep. The best thing is it uses the existing pathfinder rules set so no stupid balancing dramas.

lololololo

 

 

Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing. Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player. Has world changing powers at high levels. These guys, if played with skill, can easily break a campaign and can be very hard to challenge without extreme DM fiat or plenty of house rules, especially if Tier 3s and below are in the party.

(...)

Tier 6: Not even capable of shining in their own area of expertise. DMs will need to work hard to make encounters that this sort of character can contribute in with their mechanical abilities. Will often feel worthless unless the character is seriously powergamed beyond belief, and even then won't be terribly impressive. Needs to fight enemies of lower than normal CR. Class is often completely unsynergized or with almost no abilities of merit. Avoid allowing PCs to play these characters.

 

A+ balance indeed

 

Like every d&d based stuff : Casters can do everything.

But a pen & paper and a video game are different beasts, you don't have a DM and same liberty to use your spell to solve every encounters (combat or not). Still waiting a fantasy game that allow you to cast your spells (charm etc...) to actualy solve social encounters.

[Incendax]

I’m on the opposite side of the spectrum. I really want to play Kingmaker for the story, but I’m afraid the Pathfinder rules will be way too crunchy (I didn’t like 3.5). I’m hoping the rules are mostly invisible and under the hood, quietly running in the background.

[Novem]

I’m on the opposite side of the spectrum. I really want to play Kingmaker for the story, but I’m afraid the Pathfinder rules will be way too crunchy (I didn’t like 3.5). I’m hoping the rules are mostly invisible and under the hood, quietly running in the background.

 

If I remember correctly from the previews I was reading about a year ago (I think it was somewhere in their Kickstarter updates), there will be two "modes". One that mimics the original ruleset, and one that (and I'm paraphrasing here because I don't remember the actual words) "modern RPG fans will be familiar with". I'm sorry my memories on this are rather vague but I thought you might want to know.

[Dorftek]

 

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/owlcatgames/pathfinder-kingmaker

 

officailly confirmed at 90 hours (80 hours base + 10 hours extra stretch goal content) wow thats huge wasnt expecting it to be that big. BG2 was 100 hours. Deadfire is 60 hours.

 

really love that the main plot concentrates on you building your kingdom instead of chasing around a stupid statue

Jesus Christ. The petulance in these forums sometimes. Why are you here?

I've been wondering the same thing...

[Dorftek]

 

 

Just a thought, the one thing Obs are really good at, esp Sawyer is rulesets and balancing. POE was brilliant towards the end in that respect.

Two years of balancing POE1 resulted in a game where you could pick any number of Paladins and Chanters and kill everything with passive aura damage.

 

But at least that one ranged weapon in WM2 was nerfed because it was too strong.

LOL

 

Yeah and to fix that in the second game have a look at what they did to self immolation for the paladin

 

Instead of self immmolation killing enemies like POE1 you actually kill yourself now faster then the enemies can kill you . 43 raw damage every 3 seconds

 

And lets not forget whispers of the endless paths. "I know lets just make the sword completely frickin useless by nerfing the base damage into irrelevance" (Obsidian)

 

ohh and the best one would have to be unlabored blade from POE1 . " I know, because the barbarian can use the weapon really well with frenzy lets just completely nerf the blade to complete and utter uselessness with a 3% proc rate so know one can use it anymore" (Obsidian)

 

NOW THATS CALLED BALANCING EVERYBODY!

FWIW WOTEP is quite far from useless.

[Hurlshort]

The difference between a 60 hour game and a 100 hour game is irrelevant to me. They are both probably too long, but it is more important how long they can keep my attention.

 

Also shouldn't RPG fans want both of these games to succeed? I don't get the pissing contest.

[rheingold]

 

 

Just a thought, the one thing Obs are really good at, esp Sawyer is rulesets and balancing. POE was brilliant towards the end in that respect.

 

 

Two years of balancing POE1 resulted in a game where you could pick any number of Paladins and Chanters and kill everything with passive aura damage.

 

But at least that one ranged weapon in WM2 was nerfed because it was too strong. 

LOL

 

Yeah and to fix that in the second game have a look at what they did to self immolation for the paladin

 

Instead of self immmolation killing enemies like POE1 you actually kill yourself now faster then the enemies can kill you . 43 raw damage every 3 seconds

 

And lets not forget whispers of the endless paths. "I know lets just make the sword completely frickin useless by nerfing the base damage into irrelevance" (Obsidian)

 

ohh and the best one would have to be unlabored blade from POE1 . " I know, because the barbarian can use the weapon really well with frenzy lets just completely nerf the blade to complete and utter uselessness with a 3% proc rate so know one can use it anymore" (Obsidian) 

 

NOW THATS CALLED BALANCING EVERYBODY!

You honestly don’t seem able to grasp the complexities of game design and the relationship between balance, ai, resources, player abilities and compromises. Frankly I don’t have the time or inclination to explain, but balance, overpowered/underpowered has been major issue in rpgs since 1st edition d&d in the seventies. Newer editions were a step up but were still badly flawed. Like many here I loved d&d and was and still am a massive Gygax fan. But boy did it have some idiosyncrasies.

And the translation to video games made it worse, it was never meant for the medium.

Pathfinder and d&d mark 5 are still not great, simplified but not a major step up. POE was very good from a gameplay point of view.

And Deadfire will get there. Cherry picking a couple of nerfs that you don’t like and screaming in all caps on an Internet forum is probably not going to endear you to anyone.

[JerekKruger]

I've been wondering the same thing...

 

Well he is the number one fanboy (though it's sometimes hard to tell) so where else would he be

 

FWIW WOTEP is quite far from useless.

Lies. The number one fanboy couldn't work out how to use it and therefore it is useless.

[rjshae]

Seems like there's another nostalgia-driven fervor for this release, so some disappointment may await. It remains to be seen how good the story will prove, but I'm hoping for the best.

[kanisatha]

I backed Kingmaker (as I did Deadfire). It's shaped up to be a very good game as best as I can tell. Don't at all understand why one would wish to pit one game against another. By that logic nobody should've made another fantasy RPG since Baldur's Gate and we all should be replaying BG for the two millionth time.

 

Btw, I also do not understand the "it's a small studio I've not heard of so I don't have any expectations that their game will be good" mentality. Many big, well-established studios have deeply disappointed me with their games. Everyone has to start somewhere, and I for one am very glad that gamers back in the late '90s didn't write off the games made by nobody's-ever-heard-of studios by the names of Bioware and Black Isle.

[rheingold]

I backed Kingmaker (as I did Deadfire). It's shaped up to be a very good game as best as I can tell. Don't at all understand why one would wish to pit one game against another. By that logic nobody should've made another fantasy RPG since Baldur's Gate and we all should be replaying BG for the two millionth time.

 

Btw, I also do not understand the "it's a small studio I've not heard of so I don't have any expectations that their game will be good" mentality. Many big, well-established studios have deeply disappointed me with their games. Everyone has to start somewhere, and I for one am very glad that gamers back in the late '90s didn't write off the games made by nobody's-ever-heard-of studios by the names of Bioware and Black Isle.

I’m not against small studios at all. My issue is that experience does matter and generally without that they fall quite badly short. There have been a couple of games now including “blackguards”, “original sin 1&2”, “the dwarves” and “sword coast” where I payed close to an AAA game. And that has irritated me. I don’t mind paying full price, but if the game is clearly not in the same league, it definitely shouldn’t come close to the same price.

I have had some great experiences, most notably with expeditions Vikings which was a great game, great value, and awesome and very accessible devs. Not perfect, there was one quite serious problem related to initiative which was frustrating as all heck, hence the only one play through. A couple of smaller issues that if they had the money they’d be able to fix quickly. But a great little game.

Edited July 23, 2018 by rheingold

[Manveru123]

So are you saying that Original Sin 2 is not AAA in its category? Which other cRPG game released over the last 5 years is better? And try to be objective.

[Novem]

So are you saying that Original Sin 2 is not AAA in its category? Which other cRPG game released over the last 5 years is better? And try to be objective.

 

Well, purely objectively, Original Sin 2 is clearly not a AAA game. AAA is the category of game that represents the highest tier of marketing and funding in the industry. You need a budget in the tens of millions at the very least to qualify.

 

Original Sin 2 is a middle market title. Alongside games like Hellblade, Deadfire, and other games with budgets in the single-digit millions.

 

Pathfinder is a step below that, with a budget of a million dollars at most (it could be more, depending on how much was privately invested in the game's development) and what is clearly a rather low marketing budget.

Edited July 23, 2018 by Novem

[Manveru123]

Ok fair enough. Going purely by the definition you are right of course.

 

Doesn't change the fact that the game was worth its price.

[Novem]

Ok fair enough. Going purely by the definition you are right of course.

 

Doesn't change the fact that the game was worth its price.

 

Oh don't get me wrong, I absolutely agree. I actually gave it the rating of "Worth Full Price" on my YouTube channel because the game has a great deal of content and value for an excellent price. I believe the exact quote was "$45 dollars is a steal for this one". I got more out of it than I have most AAA games I've bought.

 

I still don't think that game is as good as everyone else does, but saying it isn't worth the price would be absolutely incorrect as far as I'm concerned.

[rheingold]

OS 2 was a mess. A mess with huge potential but a mess. Hoping that the enhanced edition can try and fix some of the worse,problems, but not confident.

The first act was as good an rpg as I have ever played, and I understand how reviewers who didn’t play past Fort Joy thought it was one of the greatest games ever. It was tight, well written, great characters and good exciting combat.

And then Sven’s head exploded...

 

Appalling stat inflation, bad boss encounter design, constantly having to meta game instead of progressing naturally, (mainly due to the stat inflation), having to play a shopping sim, badly designed abilities and useless stats, narrative and writing turning into goo....

And because of the stat inflation every level became exponentially worse.

Could have been one of the great games, but they were just way to ambitious...

[Novem]

Act 2 was actually my favorite area of the game, but yes I agree that it's a mess. It has great combat, but the UI is pretty terrible (especially on reflection after having spent the past month playing Pillars), the game doesn't really have a care in the world for worldbuilding, and it's actual roleplaying systems are pretty awful (one-dimensional attributes system, little character variance or identity, HAVING TO BUY SKILLBOOKS).

[rheingold]

Part of the reason I’m upset about OS2 is I had such high hopes after Fort Joy. And I enjoyed part of act 2, but then the problems just got exponentially worse until for my own sanity I had to bail. So much potential ruined by rookie game design mistakes like doubling stats very darn level. Come on guys, how is that going to work in an rpg? And the writing fell apart. I am going to give the enhanced edition ago, but judging by the devs comments they haven’t picked up on the main issue regarding terrible attributes like wits, a bad initiative system which is fatal in a turn based system and the hideous stat inflation... so not to hopeful.

Deadfire, while I am disappointed in the story is frankly a much better game. The attributes, classes, general system work well, unlike OS2.

Unfortunately neither of them have a good story.

[Novem]

Honestly I have to say my biggest problem is the UI. All that damn clicking and dragging with an overpopulated skillbook. The nightmare that is inventory management. Trying to find the right spells on an overloaded ability bar (especially if you try mixing consumables in...).

 

But yea the writing is definitely in second place. Especially the last two acts, where so many things from throughout your experience just go hilariously unresolved, the game pulls out stuff that it's never even hinted at before, and characters show up only to just stand there instead of serving any narrative purpose.

 

And while those balance issues (or at least the one's you mentioned) never really stood out to me, I think this is just because a game I recently played called Trails of Cold Steel really lowered my standards. I've never played a game so thoughtlessly poorly balanced and designed in my entire life, taking an excellent combat system arcing it perfectly into the garbage can. But... ehehehe, I guess I should stay on topic.

[Manveru123]

Funny how you say things like "could have been one of the great games" or "deadfire is a better game", when DOS sold around 1.7 million copies and was a smashing hit, especially for its budget. Pillars 1 and Deadfire combined might reach that number.. eventually

 

The game had great narrative, fantastic characters, combat that actually required using a brain.. I started the game on a ship, in just my underwear. Near the end, my waifu was singing a song on a demon's corpse. A demon who previously possessed her. Not to mention that other characters have great personal quests too.

 

It kinda lost pace near the end, yeah, but it did not really impact my overall experience.

 

It triggers my funny bone each time someone mentions balance. Realize already that single player games without competitive environment don't give a **** about balance. They might patch some stuff up sometimes, but Obsidian is the only company that tries to do MMO balancing on a single player game. And somehow their games aren't breaking selling records because of that. Shocking I know.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Funny how you say things like "could have been one of the great games" or "deadfire is a better game", when DOS sold around 1.7 million copies and was a smashing hit, especially for its budget. Pillars 1 and Deadfire combined might reach that number.. eventually

 

*cough*

[Manveru123]

 

Funny how you say things like "could have been one of the great games" or "deadfire is a better game", when DOS sold around 1.7 million copies and was a smashing hit, especially for its budget. Pillars 1 and Deadfire combined might reach that number.. eventually

 

*cough*

 

Here's some medicine for your coughing.

 

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2018/07/steam-data-leak-reveals-precise-player-count-for-thousands-of-games/

[Vitalis]

 

 

Heard about this game two days ago. Seems quite interesting. Watched the first few episodes of a Let's Play of the closed beta, and it seems to imply that the companions you start with change drastically based on choices made during the tutorial phase. Alas, I know nothing of Pathfinder's rulesets and all, but I'm sure I'll figure it out.

You can read all about them here:

 

http://www.d20pfsrd.com

 

While not as broken as 3.5, it still has its share of broken aspects. I can almost guarantee that plays will lack most of the race options, race substitutions, and class archetypes that the system provides. I can almost guarantee that the CMD rules are going to be altered or nonexistent.

 

 

Do you mean DD 3.5 edition? How is that broken? In my view, it's brilliant.

 

 

Fighters are absolutely worthless unless you play a class from Tome of Battle, which is a book that most DMs ban on principle. Most of the classes that rank in Tier 3 and below are poorly balanced and require extreme min-maxing in order to make them even slightly useful in combat, and I'm not even going to get into the mess that is the Truenamer class. Wizards/Druids/Clerics will always be better at doing everything any other class can do in the game, unless you really **** up building one.

 

Seems like there's another nostalgia-driven fervor for this release, so some disappointment may await. It remains to be seen how good the story will prove, but I'm hoping for the best.

 

The game is based on the official Kingmaker Campaign Module that Paizo produced:

 

http://paizo.com/store/pathfinder/adventures/adventurePath/kingmaker

 

It has been noted as having a loosely structured story, with no clear end goal or BBEG.

 

https://rpggeek.com/thread/771793/kingmaker-right-you-nearly-spoiler-free-evaluation

[Gfted1]

How do you measure commercial success besides profit generation?

[Shadenuat]

I'd rather have an engaging story, excellent worldbuilding and good writing

What game is that, pray tell