Jump to content

  

463 members have voted

  1. 1. Magic System

    • Vancian (Memorization)
      190
    • Mana Pool
      143
    • Other
      130
  2. 2. Spell Progression

    • Individual Spells (MM->Acid Arrow->Fire Ball ->Skull Trap)
      292
    • Spells get upgraded (MM LVL 1-> MM LVL 2)
      94
    • Other
      77
  3. 3. Should there be separate Arcane & Divine sides to magic?

    • Yes (D&D)
      268
    • No (DA:O)
      102
    • Other
      93


Recommended Posts

Absolutes are not the best way to establish meaningful dialogue. I'll be honest: I don't like the prospect of cooldowns and the absense of rest.

 

However, its not so much what someone does exactly but why they do it. Though we may disagree with them on the "how," I think we all agree with the devs on "why" this game is to be done. That vision should, I think, bring about plenty of good things we can all get behind. Who knows, the spell system might surprise us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you expect? I know what I expect: a game like Baldur's Gate 1/2, IWD 1/2 and PS:T. That's what the pitch advertised. Supporting cooldowns in a game like that would be the exact same thing as supporting minigames.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pathetic maybe, but it might be effective.

 

Remember, Obsidian's pitch for this game is substantially if not entirely based on nostalgia for some old games that played in a certain way. It's entirely natural to hold certain expectations.

i don't want to support this game based on nostalgia, I want to support it because I expect it to be good. Because the games they are taking as inspiration were good.

Hell, they still are good today, in fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the "FEAR from the cooldown!" comes from the fact that people are interpreting it in different ways.

 

Maybe some are interpreting cooldowns as: You'll be able to cast spells as much as you like (no mana or memorization), spamming them every single fight, but there will be a cooldown.

Yes, this would be horrible.

 

I'm hoping it's something like this: You cast a spell *if* you have enough mana to cast a spell (or have the spell memorized), mana doesn't regenerate on its own inside or outside combat and the spell will have a cooldown - BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT WOULD BE TOO F. POWERFUL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, but there aren't just spells. There are also abilities for non magic classes.

I'm all against too many abilities that can be spammed too often, for reasons I already explained... But that doesn't rule out cooldowns entirely.

That rules out just a specific possible use of cooldown-based abilities.

Edited by Tuco Benedicto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hoping it's something like this: You cast a spell *if* you have enough mana to cast a spell (or have the spell memorized), mana doesn't regenerate on its own inside or outside combat and the spell will have a cooldown - BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT WOULD BE TOO F. POWERFUL.

 

No, that wouldn't be enough either. We'd still be mad (at least with mana and especially mana potions)

Edited by Infinitron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all against too many abilities that can be spammed too often, for reasons I already explained... But that doesn't rule out cooldowns entirely.

 

The same line of thought applies to abilities and stamina, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, that wouldn't be enough either. We'd still be mad (at least with mana and especially mana potions)

 

What if mana potions were rare and worked only outside combat by slowly regenerating some mana? Hardcore enough?

 

Call mana "soul energy" or whatever if it makes it sound more hardcore for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pathetic maybe, but it might be effective.

 

Remember, Obsidian's pitch for this game is substantially if not entirely based on nostalgia for some old games that played in a certain way. It's entirely natural to hold certain expectations.

i don't want to support this game based on nostalgia, I want to support it because I expect it to be good. Because the games they are taking as inspiration were good.

Hell, they still are good today, in fact.

 

 

I donated based on this -

 

"Project Eternity will take the central hero, memorable companions and the epic exploration of Baldur’s Gate, add in the fun, intense combat and dungeon diving of Icewind Dale, and tie it all together with the emotional writing and mature thematic exploration of Planescape: Torment.

Combat uses a tactical real-time with pause system - positioning your party and coordinating attacks and abilities is one of the keys to success. The world map is dotted with unique locations and wilderness ripe for exploration and questing. You’ll create your own character and collect companions along the way – taking him or her not just through this story, but, with your continued support, through future adventures. You will engage in dialogues that are deep, and offer many choices to determine the fate of you and your party. …and you'll experience a story that explores mature themes and presents you with complex, difficult choices to shape how your story plays out."

 

When that ceases to be true I might reconsider my donation.

 

Nowhere in there, however, did I see "Vancian" or "no cool downs" mentioned.

 

You read into that what you wanted to read into that. If you saw "Vancian" or "D&D", well, that's your interpretation but it's not stated as such.

 

Just like BG2 and IWD2 are never mentioned on that front page as inspiration. Maybe you can see them as being implied, but they aren't mentioned specifically. What is: Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Planescape: Torment.

 

And they aren't in this picture on the front page -

ObsidianGames.jpg

 

Now, later, they DO mention all the stuff they've worked on in the "who is Obsidian" section, but if you are looking there for what PE will be like, couldn't we expect 2D cut-outs (South Park), newspapers and steamworks (Arcanum), and FPS mechanics (New Vegas) as well?

 

Me, for example - I want to be able to create my whole party myself. They mention IWD specifically, should I be expecting that? Or pull my donation because "it was implied" even though (I'd argue) it actually seems to imply the opposite?

 

No. If that's the breaking point for me, I shouldn't have donated to start.

 

 

----

 

If you like the part I quoted and donated based on that, and you feel that it was a lie in there... fine, pull your pledge.

 

Don't let the door hit you on the way out. :deadhorse:

Edited by Merin
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, that wouldn't be enough either. We'd still be mad (at least with mana and especially mana potions)

 

What if mana potions were rare and worked only outside combat by slowly regenerating some mana? Hardcore enough?

 

Call mana "soul energy" or whatever if it makes it sound more hardcore for you.

Would work for me. But it'd be hard to balance and rarely is something that's supposed to be rare in theory actually rare in practice in a game.

 

You know what'd be interesting? If casting spells drained Soul Energy, and when you run out, you die. So you can only cast so many spells. Ever.

 

You'd end up managing your soul energy very carefully, always worrying if you should expend some to win a tough fight or abstain and possibly lose the battle. That'd make an interesting setting.

Edited by Jasede

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy crap, Merin. The reason Baldur's Gate isn't in that image because it's Bioware's game, not Black Isle/Troika/Obsidian's.

Edited by Infinitron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy crap. Baldur's Gate isn't in that image because it's Bioware's game, not Black Isle/Troika/Obsidian's. Don't try to reach some esoteric conclusion from that.

 

And way to zone in on something unimportant and misinterpret it. :getlost:

 

Yes, you caught me. The crux of my whole argument was on BG2 not being in that picture. The entirety of my post is now wrong! :facepalm:

 

Or...

 

"Now, later, they DO mention all the stuff they've worked on in the "who is Obsidian" section, but if you are looking there for what PE will be like, couldn't we expect 2D cut-outs (South Park), newspapers and steamworks (Arcanum), and FPS mechanics (New Vegas) as well?"

Edited by Merin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy crap. Baldur's Gate isn't in that image because it's Bioware's game, not Black Isle/Troika/Obsidian's. Don't try to reach some esoteric conclusion from that.

 

And way to zone in on something unimportant and misinterpret it. :getlost:

 

Yes, you caught me. The crux of my whole argument was on BG2 not being in that picture. The entirety of my post is now wrong! :facepalm:

 

The entirety of your post, which is what? That we shouldn't expect a game inspired by D&D games to share their mechanics because those mechanics aren't specifically mentioned in a one-paragraph introductory pitch?

 

Uh, okay.

Edited by Infinitron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it seems to me he knows exactly what he doesn't want -

 

I fiercely dislike the low flexibility on the memorization system in D&D, but I recently I heard a very nice variant to the same idea: Chaos Chronicles' developers are implementing in their new turn based RPG a slot system similar to the D&D one, but instead of memorizing every single spell a caster wnats to use, he simply has a limited number of slots for each spell level, and then as far as slots are available, he can cast freely *any* spell in that level range.

 

To put it simple:

- In D&D a mage who knows six "level 3 spells" and that can cast three of them every day needs to choose exactly which ones he want to memorize for the day.

- In Chaos Chronicles a mage who knows six "level 3 spells" and that can cast 3 of them every day doesn't need to memorize crap, he just can cast any of these spells for a max amount of three of them.

 

He's describing Vancian vs. non-Vancian. He doesn't say "I fiercely dislike all magic in D&D." He said "I fiercely dislike the low flexibility on the memorization system in D&D."

 

I never said he was, go back and read my original post if you are incapable of recalling what I said.

 

Is he talking about 4E? Is he talking about D&D Next? Are you?

 

What the hell does this have to do with anything?

 

The are two points being debated -

Vancian ("fire and forget")

and

cool downs.

 

He doesn't know the name of the system or the fact that's been in D&D games all along, he barely just found about it through Chaos Chronicles which is a game that isn't even out. I'd say it's pretty apparent he doesn't know enough about the system to be proposing a fix to a very well working and established system like Vancian casting. How the hell is that lost on you?

 

You gave me one example that is exactly what I've been saying, and none showing using D&D against D&D. I see another game system's magic mechanics being contrasted to Vancian style mechanics.

 

It's clear what he wants and doesn't want.

 

It's clear he doesn't understand the nature of the argument he's in because he doesn't even know the origin, common use-of, or name of the system he's proposing. Aside from that, my biggest complaint wasn't that it was an argument out of ignorance, but that it was an argument out of ignorance THAT KEPT GETTING REPEATED for over a dozen pages.

 

Tuco is one example, there are plenty of other examples in this thread alone -- I'm not going to reread a 20 page thread to pick out two names to give to you. Get over yourself.

 

The fact that Sorcerers in BG2, IWD2, a couple other classes in 3E, and ALL OF 4E, isn't Vancian is irrelevant.

 

What are you even on about? The reason I brought up Sorcerers in BG 2 and IWD 2 is because you said there are no sorcerers in IE games when clearly two of the five IE games have sorcerers.

Edited by mikayel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IE games weren't detemined by their magic system and I don't think that PE will be either, even if it uses some kind of event-based magic sytem.

 

But still I hope that PE will use some unique system or mixed system from typical magic system (memorization, point-based, event-based, as powers, skill-based or cost/reagent based). And one should remember that there is good and bad implementation of every common approach for magic system, so overall mechanic ideas should not be blamed for bad magic systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, that wouldn't be enough either. We'd still be mad (at least with mana and especially mana potions)

 

What if mana potions were rare and worked only outside combat by slowly regenerating some mana? Hardcore enough?

 

Call mana "soul energy" or whatever if it makes it sound more hardcore for you.

Would work for me. But it'd be hard to balance and rarely is something that's supposed to be rare in theory actually rare in practice in a game.

 

You know what'd be interesting? If casting spells drained Soul Energy, and when you run out, you die. So you can only cast so many spells. Ever.

 

You'd end up managing your soul energy very carefully, always worrying if you should expend some to win a tough fight or abstain and possibly lose the battle. That'd make an interesting setting.

 

It entirely depends on what developers have in mind - if they want to have mana potions being rare, they'll be rare. Unless they do something dumb as having herbs that are needed for the potion to be brewed respawn after a certain period.. endlessly. Or shops with endless supplies of potions and this kind of stuff.

 

I wouldn't like soul energy to be drained permanently. This would make wizards worthless. I'd like (a portion of) soul energy to be replenished after resting... or we can call it "meditation". ;)

 

You'd only be able to meditate in quiet places, for example. The ones who use stamina would "rest" to replenish it.

Edited by Valorian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He doesn't know the name of the system or the fact that's been in D&D games all along, he barely just found about it through Chaos Chronicles which is a game that isn't even out. I'd say it's pretty apparent he doesn't know enough about the system to be proposing a fix to a very well working and established system like Vancian casting. How the hell is that lost on you?

Says who? You?

Go and re-read my post. I stated that the novelty was that they are applying the system to the mage (and every other class of casters, clerics included, in fact). They are ditching the memorization system entirely, and I'm all for that.

 

Are you actually trying to imply that I didn't know about sorcerers? I played Baldur's Gate 2 form start to finish seven time, and two of these playthrough were with a Sorcerer and with a Bard. What would you like to hear to be convinced? That sorcerers are based on Charisma instead of INT? That they don't need to memorize spells but they can't learn form scrolls and that at parity of level they have more level limitations on the spells they can use compared to the mages?

 

I played pretty much any relevant RPG available on PC today since the late '80s, starting from Ultima IV.

I don't need you to teach me how games work. In fact, I can probably teach something to you.

 

It's clear he doesn't understand the nature of the argument he's in because he doesn't even know the origin

 

Tuco is one example

No, what's clear here is just that you are jumping to conclusions and making wrong statements. Factually wrong, I mean. Not just different opinions.

 

EDIT: but the most interesting thing, thinking about it, is that even if you were right (and you aren't) that's irrelevant anyway.

Even if someone was unaware of exceptions like sorcerers, doesn't matter. People have any right to talk about the system they prefer, even if they can't exactly name it in a proper manner.

Edited by Tuco Benedicto
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Says who? you?

If the quote is by me, then yeah.

 

Go and re-read my post. I stated that the novelty was that they are applying the system to the mage (and every other class of casters, in fact). They are ditching the memorization system entirely, and I'm all for that.

 

There's no novelty there -- point per level casting has been used on Divine classes, Arcane classes, and every combination there-of prior to Chaos Chronicles. The game is just opting to use it as its main mode. If I misunderstood your post, my apologies, but it seemed like you weren't too familiar with the three magic systems in D&D (I'm counting Warlock casting in there as well, even tho it's not quite the same as Arcane or Divine magic).

 

Are you actually try to imply that I didn't know about sorcerers? I played Baldur's gate 2 form start to finish seven time, and two of thse playthrough were with a Sorcerer and with a Bard.

I played pretty much any relevant RPG available on PC today since the late '80s, starting from Ultima IV.

I don't need you to teach me how games work.

 

Bard's used Vancian casting in BG 2. Good for you dude, then you should know the name of the casting system and that Chaos Chronicles isn't doing anything new with it -- if I mistook that to mean you weren't aware of spell-points-per-level then I apologize.

 

No, what's clear here is just that you are jumping to conclusions and making wrong statements. Factually wrong.

 

Hardly. If you don't know the name of the system, or its history, then you don't know enough about the system other than saying what you like or what you don't like -- which is fine -- but many people posted that they basically want spell-points-per-level casting without knowing what to call it or what its like, nor its limitations. "Sorcerer" style casting has many limitations that Vancian casting is superior to, the only thing Sorcerer style casting is better at is allowing one to be more of a piece of artillery in blasting magic (and even then Wizards can be just as good if they decide to only pre-memorize damage spells). Otherwise, Vancian is superior to it.

Edited by mikayel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hardly. If you don't know the name of the system, or its history, then you don't know enough

That's one of the most ridiculous statements I've read on this forum so far, and that's something.

So you are saying that -for instance- no one should propose a skill-based system similar to the one used on Fallout 1 and 2 if he isn't aware that's called S.P.E.CI.A.L.?

Do you realize that isn't just a wrong concept, but it's also very stupid?

 

Also, are you at least aware that two threads were merged and that when I made that first reply it wasn't part of this very same thread dedicated to the Vancian system, but it was part of the other one?

Edited by Tuco Benedicto
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy crap. Baldur's Gate isn't in that image because it's Bioware's game, not Black Isle/Troika/Obsidian's. Don't try to reach some esoteric conclusion from that.

 

And way to zone in on something unimportant and misinterpret it. :getlost:

 

Yes, you caught me. The crux of my whole argument was on BG2 not being in that picture. The entirety of my post is now wrong! :facepalm:

 

The entirety of your post, which is what? That we shouldn't expect a game inspired by D&D games to share their mechanics because those mechanics aren't specifically mentioned in a one-paragraph introductory pitch?

 

 

Not precisely, but I'm going to hazard a guess that this is as close as I'm going to get with you... so yeah, sure.

 

Context is important. So is language. They didn't say Dungeons & Dragons, nor mention rules mechanics. All they said was - "Project Eternity is an isometric, party-based computer RPG set in a new fantasy world developed by Obsidian Entertainment" (yep, no D&D mentioned in there) and "Project Eternity will take the central hero, memorable companions and the epic exploration of Baldur’s Gate, add in the fun, intense combat and dungeon diving of Icewind Dale, and tie it all together with the emotional writing and mature thematic exploration of Planescape: Torment." Nothing bolded implies D&D - and that's the context of what they were offering.

 

"Combat uses a tactical real-time with pause system - positioning your party and coordinating attacks and abilities is one of the keys to success. The world map is dotted with unique locations and wilderness ripe for exploration and questing. You’ll create your own character and collect companions along the way – taking him or her not just through this story, but, with your continued support, through future adventures. You will engage in dialogues that are deep, and offer many choices to determine the fate of you and your party. …and you'll experience a story that explores mature themes and presents you with complex, difficult choices to shape how your story plays out." Which, again, doesn't say D&D anywhere.

 

"We are excited at this chance to create something new, yet reminiscent of those great games and we want you to be a part of it as well." Original but with the feel of. No mention of D&D. This is like "spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate" giving you DA:O, or "spiritual successor to Wasteland" giving your Fallout. Different mechanics, similar feels in game design theory.

 

If you insist on reading "D&D" into the project, that is your prerogative. But I promise you - you are going to be very disappointed.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really understand how people can argue this much over such a small thing. Everyone is basically splitting hairs about the exact same concept: Resource use vs resource gain.

 

There really needed to be an "I don't care" option because it isn't really different either way, as the designers will obviously balance the game around the system of choice. People act like it's set in stone that there must be exactly 10 enemies between point A and point B in the game and whatever system is chosen will dramatically alter the outcome of the difficulty in the area. The only thing that matters is that it's balanced, and there goes a lot of different things into it besides simply picking how to spend and gain resources. D&D (and especially the videogames based on it) is notorious for it's extremely faulty magic system where magic is very hard in the beginning but eventually lets you replace virtually any other party member if you min/max correctly. Likewise, systems with mana potions are usually way too generous with them and let you buy a ridiculous stack, leading to severe imbalance because the developers haven't thought about the economy in spending all of your gold on potions and simply living off the loot you find (which is usually better anyway).

 

The D&D system hinges entirely on a DM deciding when something is and isn't appropriate or simply cut down the wizard by adding enemies that do nothing but laugh in the face of spells. This can never be reality in a videogame, which is why a game like BG can be immensely easy and hard at the same time for a spellcaster: If you play it completely blind with little knowledge of the core system, you are likely going to have a very hard time. However, if you're great at D&D or have played the game before, you'll breeze right through it because you already know which spells to pick to be able to get out of anything it can throw at you. The other systems tends to be exploited because the developers generally don't give any consideration to the economy of a singeplayer game: You can buy heaps of potions and with the right upgrades/spells, you can cast indefinitely.

 

There are lots of potential fixes for each possible system but arguing whether you'd rather have a blue mana orb or a scroll icon that says "5" is a bit silly, IMO. All systems you can ever think of are easy to break by either ignoring the in-game economy or failing to consider the options available upon spell selection and how many you can choose at any given point in time. Why is it of the utmost importance that it's done like in D&D, Dragon Age or Diablo, when the only thing that matters is that you can only gain X resources between point A and B, with only Y potential spells to use?

Edited by Zinn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just to back Merin's last post, one of the first times they talked about real time with pause, they also said that it's a system that can be messy when it's an adaptation of a turn based system, but this won't happen for this game as it's going to be designed as real time from the start.

So yeah, that pretty much rules out D&D.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just to back Merin's last post, one of the first times they talked about real time with pause, they also said that it's a system that can be messy when it's an adaptation of a turn based system, but this won't happen for this game as it's going to be designed as real time from the start.

So yeah, that pretty much rules out D&D.

 

Did I say I was expecting D&D? Licensing issues alone ruled that out from the start.

 

In fact, I never said I personally was expecting anything at all. I only defended the idea of expecting certain mechanics - in isolation, not necessarily as part of a greater system.

Edited by Infinitron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would RTwP really interfere with the magic system though ?


Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...