XP only for Questing: Some Observations

[SqueakyCat]

I sincerely doubt it will be quest XP. Probably more like challenge XP. A puzzle will give XP whether you solve it or cut the knot. A random encounter will give XP, regardless of whether you talk, fight, or flee. A dungeon will give XP past chokepoints like floor transitions. That kind of thing. Good thing about that design is that you can still give XP for a dungeon with a quest attached even if they don't have the quest.

 

That is if they keep to the equality idea regardless of approach.

 

This would be acceptable if there were other creative ways to earn small pockets of XP beyond just the quest.

 

See, I'm very easy to please and always willing to compromise.

[Cantousent]

hahaha SqueakyCat. Okay okay, I'm indulging a bit right now, so maybe I'm not being as sensible as I should be, but I think Gorth's idea about having no experience and merely upgrading gear based on what people get and basing skills and perks and the like on specific points in the story arc. I don't know if I'd go that far, but it's intriguing.

[Director]

 

I guess it's my own naitivity, but I took the information on the Kickstarter page for PE quite literally -- an isometric, real-time with pause system and designed "to recapture the magic, imagination, depth, and nostalgia of classic RPGs". This design choice, for me, is a departure from the classics like IWD and BG.

 

 

Uh - but BG + IWD didn't have any options for getting things done, it was either kill all the bad guys and complete the quest for full xp, or kill some of the bad guys and complete the quest for less xp. That's kinda dull, and what they seem to want to avoid.

 

Possibly they are injecting some Fallout into your IWD.

[SqueakyCat]

@ cantousent

 

 

I can compromise, but that's a full-tilt surrender!

Edited September 25, 2012 by SqueakyCat

[Director]

hahaha SqueakyCat. Okay okay, I'm indulging a bit right now, so maybe I'm not being as sensible as I should be, but I think Gorth's idea about having no experience and merely upgrading gear based on what people get and basing skills and perks and the like on specific points in the story arc. I don't know if I'd go that far, but it's intriguing.

 

No Design difference between that and awarding a "skill" each level. Your just hiding the leveling system.

[Cantousent]

No Design difference between that and awarding a "skill" each level. Your just hiding the leveling system.

Ah, ya got me. I think it's just too weird for me. I would find it interesting, but I want PE to have boring old experience points. I don't want to surrender either.

[duskwind]

1. Yes, it does prevent you from killing monsters. Because there ceases to be a point to it. If you have nothing to gain, then why do it?

 

Exactly. Why go off looking for random creatures that aren't causing anyone any trouble and slaughter them? It is indeed pointless, so why encourage it by awarding XP? If it's not fun in and off itself, then don't do it. Levelling is never going to be remotely realistic anyway, so why not base it on achieving goals?

[Director]

 

1. Yes, it does prevent you from killing monsters. Because there ceases to be a point to it. If you have nothing to gain, then why do it?

 

 

If I make a combat heavy character, I'm going to achieve the goals in the game by killing people, and not wasting time finding other routes. I fail to see how I'm prevented from doing that.

[aVENGER]

I don't want a game that rewards the PC for sneaking, then speaking, then going back and killing when he was already done with the immediate task by sneaking *or* speaking *or* killing.

 

Well said. This is the main reason why a quest/goal based XP system is inherently more balanced than granting XP for every action performed. In the first case, you get the same amount of XP after completing your goal, no matter how you do it. In the second case, you can potentially get 3x the original XP amount for completing the same goal three times.

 

For example, if the goal of a quest is to "get item X from a guarded location" you should not get 3x the XP amount if you sneak past the guards and steal the item (1x), then talk them into allowing you to enter the locked vault (2x) and finally kill them (3x). It just makes no sense. These kind of situations simply cannot occur within a goal based XP system.

Edited September 25, 2012 by aVENGER

[Cantousent]

EDIT: Sorry, forgot to post the question:

 

"I know this has been answered by implication, but will the PCs be gaining experience only for achieving objectives or will they also gain experience situationally by picking locks and killing monsters and other skill based actions in the game?"

 

Feargus: "You will get XP for both - Tim might have covered that in Update 7 (not totally sure thought)." This answers the question for me. I prefer it done differently, but it's the way it is."

Edited September 25, 2012 by Cantousent

[Gromnir]

this is just getting silly.

 

...

 

different tack. for those who object to quest xp rewards, offer us a similarly simple and intuitive system that will result in players getting equal xp regardless o' their play style. sure, "balance" is often ridiculed in these parts, but shouldn't the sneaky player or the diplomat get as much xp awarded to them as does the combat player? get halfway through game and the sneakers has 1/2 as much xp as the combat players would be bad, no? quest rewards ignores complexity o' trying to balance rewards for disparate activities. now some folks like vol needs a digital pat on the noggin for every action they is successfully completing, but is that really an efficient use of developer time and effort? quest xp is inherently balanced and simple to implement... which means developers can spend time actual developing game content 'stead of trying to achieve balanced xp awards in an action-based system.

 

tell us your alternative. give us a simple way to implement.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Volourn]

"different tack. for those who object to quest xp rewards, offer us a similarly simple and intuitive system that will result in players getting equal xp regardless o' their play style. sure, "balance" is often ridiculed in these parts, but shouldn't the sneaky player or the diplomat get as much xp awarded to them as does the combat player? get halfway through game and the sneakers has 1/2 as much xp as the combat players would be bad, no? quest rewards ignores complexity o' trying to balance rewards for disparate activities. now some folks like vol needs a digital pat on the noggin for every action they is successfully completing, but is that really an efficient use of developer time and effort? quest xp is inherently balanced and simple to implement... which means developers can spend time actual developing game content 'stead of trying to achieve balanced xp awards in an action-based system.

 

tell us your alternative. give us a simple way to implement. "

 

Thankfully, I don't believe in equality so that is an absolute non issue. Just like I laugh at peons who beleive that rogues should be the equal of a mage. LAUGHABLE!

[Cantousent]

:Cant's shrug icon: Well, I do prefer mages. ...But I prefer elves. What's a guy to do? I think it will just be one of those things where you'll do whatever and, if you're a metagamer, go back and kill whatever you didn't have to kill in the first place. Feargus got another question about it and said he prefers folks to get xp from all sorts of activities.

[Gromnir]

luckily the developers is a bit brighter. we asked for a solution that makes developer job easier, and you want harder 'cause with imbalanced ad hoc you now you gots key plot-point encounters that potentially is being faced by players with significantly different power levels.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Volourn]

You do realize that the plan is for the game to be non linear with plenty of side quests so people are already going tom have varying xp/level anyways depending what quests they accomplish even if they did it your way, right? Your logic sucks.

 

This isn't some linear adventure ala IWD so they are already going to have characters of different power levels when it coems to facing the 'end game'.

 

Therefore, in conclusion, you admit to preferring a ttotally linear game. That's cool.

 

 

P.S. I'm not here to make the devs' job 'easier'; I'm here hoping to get the game I'd most enjoy for my $. Besdies, I believe Obsidian is gifted and talented enough to handle these challenges. I guess I have a lot more faith in their abilities than you do. If you hate them so much and think they are too sucky to handle developing RPGs why are you interested in their game?

Edited September 25, 2012 by Volourn

[alanschu]

You are right PsychoBlonde, being only rewarded for quest completion does force you to only ever do the quest, but we would be doing quests regardless. The problem only arises, if we only have one option to complete the quest with not alternative path or alternative outcome.

 

I do have a problem with the concept of an NPC handing out worldly experience like it is some sort of currency, it is ridiculous to me. One should gain experience through their actions during the quest and only a item or monetary reward for the quest itself.

 

Edit - When I went to college it was the years of learning that gave me experience, not the guy that handed me the certificate at the end, the certificate was just the reward.

 

 

Experiences is just an abstraction. No game dev is about to just start dolling out experience on a timer since you may be sitting there thinking about doing something and are just "experiencing" life.

[Gromnir]

You do realize that the plan is for the game to be non linear with plenty of side quests so people are already going tom have varying xp/level anyways depending what quests they accomplish even if they did it your way, right? Your logic sucks.

 

This isn't some linear adventure ala IWD so they are already going to have characters of different power levels when it coems to facing the 'end game'.

 

Therefore, in conclusion, you admit to preferring a ttotally linear game. That's cool.

 

 

P.S. I'm not here to make the devs' job 'easier'; I'm here hoping to get the game I'd most enjoy for my $. Besdies, I believe Obsidian is gifted and talented enough to handle these challenges. I guess I have a lot more faith in their abilities than you do. If you hate them so much and think they are too sucky to handle developing RPGs why are you interested in their game?

 

the game will not be complete non-linear... and you complete miss the point. if you got loads of xp awards for combat, but less opportunities for other activities, then you gotta grind much longer and harder as a sneaky player or diplomatic player to get relative similar power. you create a whole new level o' frustration for players.

 

you is being ridiculous, as usual.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Volourn]

"if you got loads of xp awards for combat, but less opportunities for other activities"

 

The one being ridiculous is the one pretending that i claimed I wanted such a situation. Nowhere did I ask to receive xp only or mostly from combat. Don't be silly.

[Cantousent]

Feargus just responded to a question by asserting that combat will be necessary to complete the game, which of course means that combat is king. You know, I think it's time to repsect that the design tema wants a combat or at least encounter driven game. No biggie. I disagree iwth the exp. scheme, but that's the way it is.

[Sylvius the Mad]

 

But you can't tell stories like I Have No Mouth But I Must Scream If there must be a possible happy ending.

The thing I like about roleplaying is the ability to create narratives through gameplay. The choices I make for my character tell a story. That story may bear little or no resemblance to the story the one the developers wrote.

 

If I can ever, though gameplay, tell a story of Harlan Ellison's quality, that's pretty much the best game ever made.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Feargus just responded to a question by asserting that combat will be necessary to complete the game, which of course means that combat is king. You know, I think it's time to repsect that the design tema wants a combat or at least encounter driven game. No biggie. I disagree iwth the exp. scheme, but that's the way it is.

I already know that I disagree with Feargus on this. You might think that's crazy. How can I possibly disagree with Feargus when he's describing a game about which he clearly possesses more information than I do?

 

Because I flatly reject the definition of "complete the game" on which his statement relies. A roleplaying game has no fixed end point. A roleplaying game has no winning conditions. There is no sensical definition of "complete the game" which is not unique to a playthrough.

[Volourn]

wut?

 

i swear i beat bg1 when i killed sarevok and i swear i beat pst when the final confrontation was over.

 

R00fles!

[Sylvius the Mad]

wut?

 

i swear i beat bg1 when i killed sarevok and i swear i beat pst when the final confrontation was over.

 

R00fles!

You're using the same definition as Feargus.

[Cantousent]

I already know that I disagree with Feargus on this. You might think that's crazy. How can I possibly disagree with Feargus when he's describing a game about which he clearly possesses more information than I do?

 

Because I flatly reject the definition of "complete the game" on which his statement relies. A roleplaying game has no fixed end point. A roleplaying game has no winning conditions. There is no sensical definition of "complete the game" which is not unique to a playthrough.

Okay, I will admit I"m not at my best right now to answer this, but all's I would ask is that you keep in mind Feargus was answering a specific question and, while he's the head of the project, he's still part of a team. I think you might want to give it a little time. Yes, that was the question asked and I did convey the essence of his answer, but I also think you might want to get more info from the likes of Sawyer and Cain, which is also what el Jefe said.

[Sylvius the Mad]

 

Okay, I will admit I"m not at my best right now to answer this, but all's I would ask is that you keep in mind Feargus was answering a specific question and, while he's the head of the project, he's still part of a team. I think you might want to give it a little time. Yes, that was the question asked and I did convey the essence of his answer, but I also think you might want to get more info from the likes of Sawyer and Cain, which is also what el Jefe said.

I'm not objecting to the design. I'm claiming he's describing the game incorrectly.

 

I don't really care if the authored narrative requires combat, because the authored narrative isn't an important part of my gameplay.