Frustrated by the game design

[Boeroer]

Right.

 

It's bad. And that's the nicest thing I can say about it (sorry Josh).

 

Especially bad is that

 

a) PotD scales AR up so all things that improve PER increase in value - immensely. That makes so many weapon/ability options less viable

 

b) double inversion of the dmg reduction (that is the result of underpenetration) leads to a hefty, hefty reduction.

Edited December 25, 2018 by Boeroer

[the_dog_days]

My closet theory is that the PEN and additive Might are due to the devs trying to preemptively mitigate the Rogue multiclass meta. The end result is a confused mess. :/

[Triple - A Foxy Lad]

Any of u systems/maths dudes got a good take on how to 'fix' penetration?

 

from what i can see its achieving its goal of forcing u to switch up or diversify ur damage types - which i like - but causing a lot of unecessary grief in process, esp when numbers hit a certain point.

 

Like I dont have the head for this so i dont know if problem is fundamental concept or a maths thing.

 

I dont know how much can be gleaned from it, but id always quite liked SMT's double risk/double reward system regarding types of damage. U could lose or gain entire turns with it through choice of attack or protection.

[hilfazer]

 

EDIT: speaking of penetration/DR, I salute whoever came up with it.

 

 

inXile.

It is featured in WL2.

Except for overpenetration but it's not a vital part of the system. Obsidian wanted to reward players who stacked way more PEN than necessary.

[Guest Psychovampiric Shield]

My closet theory is that the PEN and additive Might are due to the devs trying to preemptively mitigate the Rogue multiclass meta. The end result is a confused mess. :/

 

I think they looked at PoE 1 and realized that DR did not matter unless it was flat out immunity. Even more so in Tyranny, where, coincidentaly, multiplicative bonuses snowball until damage is in hundreds or thousands points per single hit, so one can just as well wear cloth and spam these attacks as fast as possible.

As for confused mess, tooltips are indeed sometimes incorrect and anyway do not take into account dual wielding. Furthermore, enemt stats are no longer shown out of combat, which makes it harder to rearm correctly without attack-reload cycle.

[hilfazer]

 

My closet theory is that the PEN and additive Might are due to the devs trying to preemptively mitigate the Rogue multiclass meta. The end result is a confused mess. :/

 

I think they looked at PoE 1 and realized that DR did not matter unless it was flat out immunity. Even more so in Tyranny, where, coincidentaly, multiplicative bonuses snowball until damage is in hundreds or thousands points per single hit, so one can just as well wear cloth and spam these attacks as fast as possible.

As for confused mess, tooltips are indeed sometimes incorrect and anyway do not take into account dual wielding. Furthermore, enemt stats are no longer shown out of combat, which makes it harder to rearm correctly without attack-reload cycle.

 

 

They just failed in PoE1's system.

There was a lvl 7 spell giving same amount of DR as lvl 2 spell. Weapons were getting % increases from enchantment but armors were getting flat. And that's not everything.

[Frak]

Might as much as it throws off many people and is hated by many, makes sense logically.

 

I think it's because many associate might with physical strength in RPG's.

 

They should have named it "powah"! And no cap on it. So you could have ... wait for it ... "unlimited powah"! 

[Boeroer]

The reason why (the easy to grasp) flat DR from PoE had to go was that it couldn't keep up with the increasing damage numbers. DR 0 or DR 20 doesn't matter that much once you get hit by a 200-point-damage attack. The reduction is only 10%. While it would be 50% if a 40-point-dmg attack hits you. And scaling it more steeply also wouldn't work because then weaker enemies couldn't hit you at all.

 

So because of player feedback Obsidian decided to alter that DR system. And they came up with PEN which was even more binary in its beta version (it was horrible: PEN was THE GOD stat).

 

Now it got some more stages, but it's still the most important thing - at least at PotD.

 

A percentage based DR would have been better I think. More granular so you're not trying to gain that one point of PER that takes you over the edge - still it would scale with damage. And you could add MIN and MAX values if you wished.

[Ensign]

I honestly think the armor vs pen system is fine. There are some really minor tweaks I would make to it (multiplicative overpen in an otherwise additive system is weird) but I think the core design is sound.

 

I think the tuning of the pen system is poor. There are too few sources of additional pen; armor suffers a similar problem. Those sources of pen that do exist do so at essentially zero opportunity cost with respect to damage. It is important that, given their relative import, each source presents substantial opportunity costs to make investing in it a serious choice. Lots of potential directions here, but at least with respect to high level enemies penetration is king and you want to stack every bit possible because you can't get enough.

[house2fly]

Pen was designed to correct an issue with Pillars 1, where combat felt "mushy" because it wasn't sufficiently clear which options would be best in which situations. I feel like this could have been achieved by just making the difference between armour values bigger, rather than introducing a whole new mechanic: if something has 12 pierce armour but 8 fire armour then there's not much reason to use a fire spell instead of your bow, but clearly that would change if they made it 19 pierce armour and 5 fire armour

[hilfazer]

The reason why (the easy to grasp) flat DR from PoE had to go was that it couldn't keep up with the increasing damage numbers. DR 0 or DR 20 doesn't matter that much once you get hit by a 200-point-damage attack. The reduction is only 10%. While it would be 50% if a 40-point-dmg attack hits you. And scaling it more steeply also wouldn't work because then weaker enemies couldn't hit you at all.

 

Weaker enemies did 20% of their damage because PoE1 had hybrid damage reduction. Now they do 25%. Not a huge difference.

 

Besides, if there's a number bloat weaker units are screwed regardless of armor system used.

 

They could also do what they did in FN:V and add consumables with % reduction. Having more consumables worth using in their game would be a bonus.

 

More granular so you're not trying to gain that one point of PER that takes you over the edge - still it would scale with damage.

Isn't this what Josh called 'mushy' and what players disliked about PoE1? I mean, players didn't know if their damage is good enough and when to switch weapons.

[the_dog_days]

 

 

EDIT: speaking of penetration/DR, I salute whoever came up with it.

 

 

inXile.

It is featured in WL2.

Except for overpenetration but it's not a vital part of the system. Obsidian wanted to reward players who stacked way more PEN than necessary.

 

 

 Pen/armor systems have been around before inXile ever existed.

[Boeroer]

I honestly think the armor vs pen system is fine. There are some really minor tweaks I would make to it (multiplicative overpen in an otherwise additive system is weird) but I think the core design is sound.

 

I think the tuning of the pen system is poor. There are too few sources of additional pen; armor suffers a similar problem. Those sources of pen that do exist do so at essentially zero opportunity cost with respect to damage. It is important that, given their relative import, each source presents substantial opportunity costs to make investing in it a serious choice. Lots of potential directions here, but at least with respect to high level enemies penetration is king and you want to stack every bit possible because you can't get enough.

30% dmg bonus from Overpenetration is additive, not multiplicative.

 

Damage bonus from Power Level is multiplicative.

[Bleak]

My 2 cents - I prefer the DnD system by far. 

[Gromnir]

My 2 cents - I prefer the DnD system by far. 

is fair and fine, but hard part for developers is absence of "why."

 

d&d is poor balanced and unintuitive.  sorry, but is not opinion.  perhaps balance is less important to some folks (is never actual meaningless regardless o' protests to contrary) and an obscure and impenetrable system is undaunting to a group o' folks.  not change the is. d&d is poor balanced and unintuitive.  might as well get givens out o' the way, yes?

 

some folks like d&d lore, regardless o' mechanics.  got decades o' history and nostalgia to bolster the d&d settings.  however, when folks talk o' d&d system and mechanics, is so difficult to figure out what exact it is they is preferring.  original white box d&d were considerable different than d20... as much as 4e were different than d20.  have actual had folks become enraged when Gromnir suggested that approval o' ad&d staples such as save-or-die and arbitrary multiclassing rules from bg2 were approval o' the "d&d" qualities o' the ie games.  

 

w/o context, am not certain what it means to "prefer the D&D system," and am betting the developers is likewise baffled.

 

poe developers attempted to divine what were essentials o' the ie games.  squad-based, rt combat with pause?  a class-based system with recognizable classes?  multiple and familiar race options?  got such stuff for poe.  but were thac0 essential?  ad&d saving throws?  racial level caps? aforementioned save-or-die spells and effects? dual-class rules for humans?  ad&d kits or d20 prestige classes... or neither? ad&d attributes wherein 8-15 rare made a difference, but 16+ defined a character... at least until level 8 or so when gear utter trivialized attributes?  

 

*shrug*

 

am never certain what is essential d&d when folks invoke.  can't much argue lore as is subjective, but am thinking you mean something else by invoking "system."

 

am not actual being critical.  lots o' people prefer d&d to poe.  nothing wrong with such an opinion.  however, people rare says why d&d is better, and when they does, as did the genesis poster, they is often self contradictory in their approval. makes extreme difficult for developers to learn anything useful... and developer enlightenment, we suspect, is the prime goal o' posting such observations on the developer's message board, no?

 

am rare sympathizing with obsidian game developers, particular as obsidian developers appear to purposeful avoid their own boards as a potential meaningful source o' feedback. that said, we do see developer difficulties in gleaning useful information here and elsewheres.  as others have mentioned earlier in this thread, poe2 penetration were added precise because developers read feedback from poe fans and were trying to come up with a system which would appeal more to those complaining fans.  arguable the single worst mechanical change to poe were an attempt by developers to respond to fan base criticism.  well-intentioned and wrong? and lord only knows how developers ever see any kinda fan consensus-- every issue and feature appears to breed a multiplicity o' opinions, and rabid hardcore fan feedback is rare representative o' any kinda meaningful consensus anyways.  add to fact posters is rare clear with their criticism (e.g.  "I prefer the DnD system by far") and is no wonder the developers appear utter lost when they do twitch streams and speak o' fan feedback.  

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited December 26, 2018 by Gromnir

[Triple - A Foxy Lad]

some folks like d&d lore, regardless o' mechanics.  got decades o' history and nostalgia to bolster the d&d settings.  however, when folks talk o' d&d system and mechanics, is so difficult to figure out what exact it is they is preferring.  original white box d&d were considerable different than d20... as much as 4e were different than d20.  have actual had folks become enraged when Gromnir suggested that approval o' ad&d staples such as save-or-die and arbitrary multiclassing rules from bg2 were approval o' the "d&d" qualities o' the ie games. 

 

i like ad&d for its wanton eccentricity. i cant see the er... 'word' THAC0 without laughing. while it plays better as a tabletop system than one would expect, i dont think i could advocate it without tongue in cheek.

 

wasnt biggest fan of 3.x. felt the numbers got out of control too quickly, powergaming sucked up too much time. it seemed better suited to video game than table. i currently play and enjoy 5e. didnt expect to, but there ye go.

 

have repeated this before on forum. am of opinion people dont know what they want, and if they do know, they lie.

[Bleak]

 

My 2 cents - I prefer the DnD system by far. 

is fair and fine, but hard part for developers is absence of "why."

 

 

Time available requires me to be painfully brief, unfortunately. 

Developers definitely do not expect to be enlightened by me, nor do I expect developers to read my posts. I just posted my preference. When I offer feedback, I usually devote time which is mostly wasted as you yourself imply in your last paragraph. Anyway here are some reasons:

 

1) Attributes - what they affect, how they scale. You already know how e.g. a +1 strength bonus affects dice rolls in DnD. Less linear, more impactful. Theme is secondary, but I find DnD attributes much more thematically solid when it comes to what they affect.

 

2) Attack resolution in general. Miss/graze/hit/crit margins and percentages when it comes to the game calculating the resolution and how they change depending on the accuracy/defense gap.   

 

3) The fact that spells go through the same attack resolution and do not feel like a unique kind of attack like in DnD. 

 

I agree that balance concerns are definitely not meaningless, but too much attention to balance always leads to homogenization. Recognizable is not enough. Unique is better. As for unintuitive, let's not open that can of worms.

Edited December 27, 2018 by Bleak

[Gromnir]

 

 

My 2 cents - I prefer the DnD system by far. 

is fair and fine, but hard part for developers is absence of "why."

 

 

Time available requires me to be painfully brief, unfortunately. 

Developers definitely do not expect to be enlightened by me, nor do I expect developers to read my posts. I just posted my preference. When I offer feedback, I usually devote time which is mostly wasted as you yourself imply in your last paragraph. Anyway here are some reasons:

 

1) Attributes - what they affect, how they scale. You already know how e.g. a +1 strength bonus affects dice rolls in DnD. Less linear, more impactful. Theme is secondary, but I find DnD attributes much more thematically solid when it comes to what they affect.

 

2) Attack resolution in general. Miss/graze/hit/crit margins and percentages when it comes to the game calculating the resolution and how they change depending on the accuracy/defense gap.   

 

3) The fact that spells go through the same attack resolution and do not feel like a unique kind of attack like in DnD. 

 

I agree that balance concerns are definitely not meaningless, but too much attention to balance always leads to homogenization. Recognizable is not enough. Unique is better. As for unintuitive, let's not open that can of worms.

 

not much to go on...

 

1) d&d attributes is far less intuitive.... and am still not certain which d&d you are speaking 'bout. lack o' intuitiveness  is not actual subject to debate, is it?  3e attributes have every second point value provide gains, so +1 does not actual necessarily provide any benefit, and the +1 benefit, when it does actual provide a benefit, provides vast different benefits depending on class choice.  the benefits o' strength 18/26 v. 18/27?  there is skills which is modified by strength... and size modifies strength, but a few skills which is modified by strength might actual be diminished by size.  strength doesn't affect ranged thac0 or damage, save for when it does.  etc.

 

2) is not an observation 'bout d20 or d&d. gonna need clarify, but if you are saying miss/graze/hit/crit is less intuitive or more oblique than thac0 or d20 than am gonna need more of a response, 'cause am not agreeing.  

 

3) am agreeing that the poe combat resolution mechanics is more unified and rational than d&d, particularly ad&d.  already mentioned the complete arbitrariness o' ad&d saving throws, but we can post the charts if need be.  if different is necessarily superior, then you might wanna argue ad&d is superior, but is tough to find another positive other than different.  d20 makes caster dc utter and complete dispositive and is suffering from clear thresholds. if you don't have enough points in your prime casting attribute, you will fail regardless o' tactics or strategies or buffs or debuffs or whatnot.  etc.  'course if different is genuine important, am gonna note how poe, unlike d&d, offers much more variety o' gameplay.  chanters have phrases and invocations. is a much different mechanic than monk wounds or the more traditional casters. and 'course there is cipher focus which is generated by doing damage to foes.   fighters have active abilities they may start using at early levels as 'posed to being reduced to making auto-attacks overandoverandoverandover.  d&d core classes is easily dividing caster and weapon combat.  less variety.  sure, all poe classes use same combat number crunching, but such is rational and does not change fact poe offers more core gameplay variety. 

 

not enumerated, but the oft mentioned balance = homogenized bit is actual reversing reality.  in games with poor balance, such as d&d and fallout, there is correct and wrong builds 'cause o' clear difference in efficacy.  during development, poe developers noted how few different fo builds were actual utilized in spite o' the open rule system.  d&d suffered similar, but worse.  d20 has literal prerequisite feats and skills for a variety o' optimal builds.  poe/deadfire made suboptimal builds much more viable than d&d counterparts.  sure, d&d has decades o' splat books to provide options, but few such options is ever actual utilized.  given the relative brief time poe has existed, the options per offering ratio is far greater for poe/deadfire.  even the s'posed terrible poe options, 'according to the hardcore build monkeys, is usal not just effective but powerful.

 

https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/96769-rogues-do-not-suck/?p=1993983

 

is kinda funny, but when full poe2 were released, most o' the "rogues suck" complaints disappeared... though such threads were replaced with a few "priests suck" threads... but priestly suckage were more 'bout  curiously unbalanced spell lists and not lack o' efficacy. priests has clear right and wrong options for spells.  lack o' balance is what harmed priest class playability.  unbalanced spell lists means all priests has a tendency to look alike.  homogenized.

 

and why on earth would we wanna ignore the can o' worms which is d&d when it comes to being counter intuitive?  simple do a google search with terms: d&d; counter; intuitive.  will keep you busy for a long time.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[draego]

wow i couldnt agree with Gromnir more on all counts. im shocked

[Triple - A Foxy Lad]

2) Attack resolution in general. Miss/graze/hit/crit margins and percentages when it comes to the game calculating the resolution and how they change depending on the accuracy/defense gap.   

 

this where i prefer poe tbh. the hard pass/fail rng of d&d is kinda fun when ur on tabletop, if for no reason other than to laugh at someone else crit failing, but in a video game is often just annoying - esp if ur characters slightly undertuned and the 1-20 spread isnt enough to make up for it. ur often just sat there with ur fingers crossed hoping for crits, or banging ur head in frustration when ur spellcaster crit fails that ranged touch attack on a high level spell. poe's miss/graze/hit/crit spread is at least more forgiving and predictable.

 

like with an actual dm, u can at least sort of 'fail forward' with d&d, but in a video game, not so much. 

[Ensign]

 

30% dmg bonus from Overpenetration is additive, not multiplicative.

 

Damage bonus from Power Level is multiplicative.

 

 

Not the damage from overpenetration, but the threshold for overpenetration (2x armor) and bonus from critical hits (1.5x penetration).  I like how those behave at the beginning of the game or when you're still in fine equipment, but late game with legendary gear and max level enemies neither of those functions all that well.

 

I think it'd work better with, say, +2(3?) pen on crit and +3(4?) pen over armor for overpen, or similar - something that made it work consistently throughout the game.

Edited December 27, 2018 by Ensign

[Frak]

  simple do a google search with terms: d&d; counter; intuitive.  will keep you busy for a long time.

 

 

 

I probably agree with most of your post, but this is just an internet platitude. You can google ANYTHING and be kept busy for a long time. The internet is strange. Very strange.

 

*Goes to search 'purple eggs dinosaurs'*

[Silvaren]

I agree with Gromnir.

 

PoE ruleset was designed mostly by Josh Sawyer and he had long experience with D&D and AD&D before even joining Interplay. He knows what works well, what doesn't. Ofcourse Josh has his personal preferences in terms of game mechanica and he spoke about it in one of his videos. One of the principles behind PoE was to make unified core system. So it is accuracy for regular attacks, abilities and spells against certain types of defense. Defense instead of saving throws isn't new. I knew this type of stats from Star Wars Saga (d20 system). In D&D 3 while casting spell there was only one roll - target's saving throw against DC of 10 + attribute bonus + lvl of spell + misc. In PoE it's still one dice roll but instead of saving throws character which makes an attack roll the dice against static defense. So it's similar but the roles are switched. In D&D fluid defense vs static DC, in PoE fluid attack vs static defense. It isn't much different.

 

Miss,graze,hit,crit are better imho than simply miss/hit/crit. At lower levels characters in D&D miss often. It's boring during the game both p&p a video adaptation. I remember my paladin swinging sword without any luck for turnes. Misses at lower levels made most people to stop playing Temple of Elemental Evil. Grazes are good option, can provide some satisfaction. And unification of core system is good for that. You can graze with debuff which is way better than all or none (like most debuffa in D&D). In D&D spells work in two ways. All or nothing, all or half damage (or small damage like 3k6 from failing Finger of Death).

 

Instant killing spells or abilities aren't good if you can build character with high enough bonuses to make DC impossible to pass. I remember my solo runs as sorcerer and priest of Talos in Icewind Dale 2 or as sorc in NWN. I understand that instant killing spells are OP and I know that Josh doesn't like it either.

 

Josh made interesting presentation of attributes system in PoE during GDC iirc. In AD&D scaling was terrible. In D&D were empty levels. No matter if your character has 10 or 11, 12 or 13 etc. It's stupid just like Bethesda's so called "Fallout 3" with skills like lockpicking. No matter if your character has it set to 50 or 74, it's the same value from system perspective. It's bad design.

 

PoE attributes are way better in terms of scaling. They have lower impact on the game but still are pretty important to conisder. Resolve still is dump stat in some builds but it isn't the scale of D&D or even greater in second AD&D. Builds may change priorities. Like CC wizard focusing on Per/Int/Dex doesn't need Might at all while Evoker does. PoE give players more arbitrary choices during character creation.

 

Ad&D wasn't intuitive at all. Thied edition changed it mostly for goos but 4th (while provides unification to core gameplay and character progression system) confused players with number of choices during character creation (all those powers). D&D 5 simplifies thing once again.

 

PoE has two layers of mechanics. Simple on the surface (attack rolls, defensive, miss, graze, hit, crit) and complicated layer deeply burried under the first (action speed and recovery, additive/multiplicative formulas, stacking, armor penetration). It shouldn't be so complicated but understanding of that deeper layer and player's mathematic skills aren't necessery to have fun with the game.

 

The reason for overcomplication, high numbers value and other things which are problematic to calcuate come from game being designed as computer RPG, not RPG.

[Verde]

I think PoE's combat and mechanics are vastly better than DnD minus a few areas -

 

1) Might dictating damage. Mighty Wizards. Stop it Obs.

 

2) Spellcasting...first we had per rest now we have per encounter and fixed Grimoires and it never reaches the epicness or feel of made duels in BG2. But I do think the PL system is a big step in the right direction.

 

3) Active and Passive skills aren't balanced. There are far too many useful Passives and not as many Actives.

 

However I don't mind not going back thr THAC0 ever again (unless it's BG2 ofcourse ) and the lack of stat checks. I wonder how Kingmaker compares to DnD?

Edited December 27, 2018 by Verde

[greenpine82]

In my personal view, the problem is "1 attack roll type (Accuracy) vs 4 types of defense (Deflection, Fortitude, Will, Reflex ) ".

 

E.g: https://pillarsofeternity2.wiki.fextralife.com/Vile+Thorns

 

Currently, we can increase the success rate of the spell's condition effect by increasing the Accuracy. The difference in defense type is just the scores not the types.  Should we treat "the Fortitude, Will, Reflex" as second layer like Armor Rating?