Obsidian's third project

[Zoma]

When was the announcement of Obsidian making an expansion for NWN2? Did i miss something?

 

Check the link at the start of this thread that leads to Chris's interview Mesh. Its not exactly an announcement but rather an unofficial one that assures the interviewee the announcement of expansion will be released very soon.

[Meshugger]

Heh, "something" will be announced "soon".

[Walsingham]

Can someone explain to me what an epic level is?

[Xard]

levels over 20

[Tale]

Can someone explain to me what an epic level is?

Epic level is when your character makes the transition from being a human(elf/dwarf/whatever) to being a super sayajin.

[Zoma]

Epic level is when your character makes the transition from being a human(elf/dwarf/whatever) to being a super sayajin.

 

Come to think of it, I'm surprised no one made a Dragonball module

[Azarkon]

Epic levels aren't a bad idea... I'd like a new take on "epic" storytelling, though - less hack 'n slashing through hordes of balors, ancient dragons, black slaads, etc.; more politics, roleplaying, and using your epic powers for influence & impact.

 

An epic level character should be a major force in the realms, someone directly involved in mediating conflicts, manipulating rulers, and just generally forwarding their own vision for the world. They should not just be random adventurers fighting bigger, meaner monsters. An epic level character should be leading armies and major organizations, should be capable of going up against a power like Amn or Waterdeep single-handedly. Such a character should not be ignored by the major players in a world - Elminster, Khelben, the zulkirs of Thay, ... all should be trying to either recruit the player in a partnership or be plotting his demise.

 

I also dislike the entire philosophy behind scaling monsters to match players. Going into a dungeon and meeting a dozen demon lords and lich kings is not my idea of what epic encounters should be about. If you want to challenge me as a player, give me harder *encounters* - not just harder monsters. For example, instead of sending an endless stream of level 20 enemies (where do they come from? level 20's are on the level of Manshoon, leader of the Zhentarim - and they're used as fodder?), have a group of level 10 adventurers utilizing every dirty trick in the book to try and slay me. Instead of a dungeon full of ancient dragons and balors, give me an army that I have to destroy without being able to rest. In other words, don't make level 30 gameplay the exact same as level 1 except you replace kobolds with balors and skeletons with liches.

 

That's my take on an epic-level expansion.

[Atreides]

Signed.

[Dark_Raven]

That there post is awesome.

[Sand]

Yes, but that is often beyond the scope of an expansion. If there are going to be epic levels then it will more than likely be diablo clone style like HotU, where they just treat epic levels as just another level increase.

[J.E. Sawyer]

I also dislike the entire philosophy behind scaling monsters to match players. Going into a dungeon and meeting a dozen demon lords and lich kings is not my idea of what epic encounters should be about. If you want to challenge me as a player, give me harder *encounters* - not just harder monsters. For example, instead of sending an endless stream of level 20 enemies (where do they come from? level 20's are on the level of Manshoon, leader of the Zhentarim - and they're used as fodder?), have a group of level 10 adventurers utilizing every dirty trick in the book to try and slay me. Instead of a dungeon full of ancient dragons and balors, give me an army that I have to destroy without being able to rest. In other words, don't make level 30 gameplay the exact same as level 1 except you replace kobolds with balors and skeletons with liches.

D&D's mechanics don't really support this sort of stuff. Unless the enemies are equipped with items that are way out of line with what characters of that level have, they stand next to no chance of defeating an individual 20th+ level character, much less a party of 20th level characters. A party of six 10th level characters against a properly-equipped 20th level character is going to get annihilated, especially in a computer environment where the player can reload and adjust to whatever "dirty tricks" the 10th level party has. 10th level characters simply don't have the numbers to get the job done unless they are dramatically inflated. They will fail saving throws, rarely connect with attacks, take far more damage than they receive, etc.

 

And you'd be lucky if a hundred 5th level fighters surrounding a 20th level fighter would put more than a slight dent in the latter's heath. I guess you could give them all bows on an open plain so they could all fire at him every round, with five actually landing shots. Or they could rapid fire and land ten shots. Of course if the fighter's 20th level wizard pal is nearby, they'll all be dead in a round or two anyway.

 

You can pump up an army of 5th level guys to make them have the stats of 10th level guys, but if that's what's required -- why not just start with higher level characters?

[taks]

personally, i prefer area based scaling to some extent. i.e., certain areas are geared towards certain level players, period. if said players stumble into the area prematurely, they get treated with a can of whoop-ass and reload. this forces a little linearity in where you _should_ go, but leaves the non-linearity option there for the adventurous types that want a difficult challenge without the aforementioned scaling.

 

of course, improved AI would help, too. the easiest way to challenge players in most games seems to be to simply give them higher level critters. a group of 10th level players can take down the occasional 20th level baddy in most games simply because the baddy has poor AI and makes the same repeated mistakes (of course, the improved dragon AI in BG2 removed that issue... oy veh!) this is a difficult task to accomplish, however.

 

taks

[Oerwinde]

I also dislike the entire philosophy behind scaling monsters to match players. Going into a dungeon and meeting a dozen demon lords and lich kings is not my idea of what epic encounters should be about. If you want to challenge me as a player, give me harder *encounters* - not just harder monsters. For example, instead of sending an endless stream of level 20 enemies (where do they come from? level 20's are on the level of Manshoon, leader of the Zhentarim - and they're used as fodder?), have a group of level 10 adventurers utilizing every dirty trick in the book to try and slay me. Instead of a dungeon full of ancient dragons and balors, give me an army that I have to destroy without being able to rest. In other words, don't make level 30 gameplay the exact same as level 1 except you replace kobolds with balors and skeletons with liches.

D&D's mechanics don't really support this sort of stuff. Unless the enemies are equipped with items that are way out of line with what characters of that level have, they stand next to no chance of defeating an individual 20th+ level character, much less a party of 20th level characters. A party of six 10th level characters against a properly-equipped 20th level character is going to get annihilated, especially in a computer environment where the player can reload and adjust to whatever "dirty tricks" the 10th level party has. 10th level characters simply don't have the numbers to get the job done unless they are dramatically inflated. They will fail saving throws, rarely connect with attacks, take far more damage than they receive, etc.

 

And you'd be lucky if a hundred 5th level fighters surrounding a 20th level fighter would put more than a slight dent in the latter's heath. I guess you could give them all bows on an open plain so they could all fire at him every round, with five actually landing shots. Or they could rapid fire and land ten shots. Of course if the fighter's 20th level wizard pal is nearby, they'll all be dead in a round or two anyway.

 

You can pump up an army of 5th level guys to make them have the stats of 10th level guys, but if that's what's required -- why not just start with higher level characters?

 

Hence why some people don't like epic levels, because combat encounters don't make sense anymore. I remember playing Throne of Bhaal and wondering where the hell all these level 30 monks were coming from, since some of the most powerful people in the realms were like level 22. Reading the ending text about Edwin challenging Elminster and losing horribly. Unlikely when Edwin is 16 levels higher than Elminster.

 

Epic levels are stupid unless the story and such is based around leadership roles, and the combat encounters are with small parties of similar leveled highly equipped adventurers... and are rare. Epic levels shouldn't be about combat, because at that point, everything that will make sense is just going to be too easy. Unfortunately in computer games, all the masses want is combat.

[Sand]

Which is why I don't want epic levels..

[Volourn]

"Unlikely when Edwin is 16 levels higher than Elminster."

 

How did Edwin accomplish that? I believe Elminster is level 29ish in 2E. the amx level for a wizard in TOB is mid 30s is it not? Your math seems to be off...

[Kelverin]

Which is why I don't want epic levels..

 

DnD loses it's charm after about 10 - 12 th level. Time to start a new campaign.

Edited March 17, 2007 by Kelverin

[Azarkon]

D&D's mechanics don't really support this sort of stuff. Unless the enemies are equipped with items that are way out of line with what characters of that level have, they stand next to no chance of defeating an individual 20th+ level character, much less a party of 20th level characters. A party of six 10th level characters against a properly-equipped 20th level character is going to get annihilated, especially in a computer environment where the player can reload and adjust to whatever "dirty tricks" the 10th level party has. 10th level characters simply don't have the numbers to get the job done unless they are dramatically inflated. They will fail saving throws, rarely connect with attacks, take far more damage than they receive, etc.

 

Hmm... While I agree with you that the D&D mechanics are not ideal for this sort of thing, I definitely think that lower level characters can still pose a very real challenge when they are used to exploit the player's vulnerabilities Heck, if I recall correctly IWD 2 featured several fights involving the use of low-level enemies such as orcs and goblins behind obstacles and choke points that I thought were quite difficult despite the fact that said enemies died extremely fast when you actually got to them. Maybe more adpative scripting? For example, if the PC is a wizard, have the party buff up with magic protection spells, potions, and scrolls beforehand...

 

There must be a better way to do this than just throwing a bunch of leveled monsters at the player, thus making it seem like level 30 is just level 3, except with bigger numbers.

[Blank]

You mean like when my level 30 Charizard went up against a level 20 Blastoise and got his butt handed to him by the stupid turtle?

Edited March 17, 2007 by Blank

[ramza]

You mean like when my level 30 Charizard went up against a level 20 Blastoise and got his butt handed to him by the stupid turtle?

 

Do you still play Pokemon?

[Atreides]

Good points. I think this is one area where the devs can show their ingenuity at exploiting D&D rules/combos to take down higher level characters, using coordinated AI and strategy. If anything it could be too hardcore and casual players may start wondering why the game's so tough.

[Sand]

We need good hardcore tough computer role playing games with smart AIs. If it is too tough for the pansies, well that is what the difficulty slider is for.

[Diamond]

A simpler solution: more werewolves.

[Meshugger]

A simpler solution: more werewolves.

 

[Volourn]

Oh, SNAP!

[Musopticon?]

My god, that was a true zinger.