[Merged] Cooldown Thread

[ogrezilla]

In this circumstance, what is good about the experience of walking back to the campsite?

 

Simple, it's an experience that rewards you if you have used your spells conservatively and punishes those that don't. It teaches you a valuble lesson that you need to be economical when spending yout LIMITED combat resources. IMO spending your combat resources so carelessly should have a bigger punishment then just an annoying walk.

in that case, I think they either need to make a real consequence or just go all in with convenience. Walking back to town adds no challenge to the game, it just adds busy work.

Edited October 2, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Hypevosa]

A smart player would not find himself in that position.

 

I would have planned more carefully (conserving spells), to avoid such a situation.

 

In this circumstance I would say that you, Sawyer, didn't prepare well enough walking into the dungeon you haven't been in before and that is your own fault.

None of these answers address the question I asked.

 

Essentially they're supporting negative reinforcement. They want you to spank the player for doing something wrong so they learn to do it right. There's nothing "good" about it.

[J.E. Sawyer]

Simple, it's an experience that rewards you if you have used your spells conservatively and punishes those that don't. It teaches you a valuble lesson that you need to be economical when spending yout LIMITED combat resources. IMO spending your combat resources so carelessly should have a bigger punishment then just an annoying walk.

But it doesn't have a bigger punishment. It's a circumstance that arises all the time in IE games.

[alanschu]

I hope you are right.

 

I think I'm pretty clsoe to the truth when I say that people who back this project up most enthusiasticly want that old IE magic back. They want the feel. If the mechanics change too much, that feel will not be there anymore.

 

 

As someone that always found the D&D spell memorization system stupid and artificial, I disagree. Plethora of other reasons to love the old Infinity Engine games.

[Osvir]

Here is something I would like to hear opinions on. Take the following circumstance, which is not uncommon in the IE games and would be somewhat similar to the KotC "campsite" system in circumstances were you are not locked off from backtracking to a campsite.

 

* You are in a location where resting is either prohibited or extraordinarily likely to result in an encounter. You do not know the location of the next campsite/safe resting area.

* You have cast many of your spells and the ones that remain are not entirely appropriate for the encounters you are now facing.

* Because you came from an area where you could rest and are not locked in the location, you have a cleared (by you) path back to the area where you can safely rest.

* It will take you three minutes of real time to walk back to the camp, maybe thirty seconds to reconfigure spells, five seconds to rest, and another three minutes of real time to walk back to where you had left off.

* Because you killed everything between you and the campsite, there are no threats between you and the campsite.

 

In this circumstance, what is good about the experience of walking back to the campsite?

 

I would have planned more carefully (conserving spells), to avoid such a situation.

 

how are you planning for something you've not yet seen? Unless you're reloading a save, there's no possible way you can plan well enough unless you also carry around enough divination spells to see every encounter on the map before it happens.

 

But maybe I've heard something about, maybe there is given situation to use the Search skill a bit more often. What does the game portray to you, giving you something to expect? Sometimes it should be void of explanation, adhering to a mysterious atmosphere, sometimes it could be throughout explained by townsfolk, Quest givers and so forth. In a situation where nothing is known and no one talks about this mysterious dungeon, yes how would you prepare? With variety, trial and error, test the early stage of the dungeon that way you can gather the information yourself and then go back only 1 minute worth of walk and then prepare yourself.

 

Explore and research ahead

[andreisiadi]

What Josh is proposing is: Let's make the game easier so you don't have to walk back to town and rest whenever you make a bad decision.

 

Challenge and tedium are two different things. Your dead grandmother could walk back to town, rest, and come back... even your pet rock could with minor manipulation. It's JUST tedium.

 

If you play the game right then no tedium. If you play the game badly you get tedium. That's how you're motivated to get good at it. You know...next time bring more arrows. Or we could install an "I win" button so the game is never tedious ever again - just boring.

[AlexAB]

Here is something I would like to hear opinions on. Take the following circumstance, which is not uncommon in the IE games and would be somewhat similar to the KotC "campsite" system in circumstances were you are not locked off from backtracking to a campsite.

 

* You are in a location where resting is either prohibited or extraordinarily likely to result in an encounter. You do not know the location of the next campsite/safe resting area.

* You have cast many of your spells and the ones that remain are not entirely appropriate for the encounters you are now facing.

* Because you came from an area where you could rest and are not locked in the location, you have a cleared (by you) path back to the area where you can safely rest.

* It will take you three minutes of real time to walk back to the camp, maybe thirty seconds to reconfigure spells, five seconds to rest, and another three minutes of real time to walk back to where you had left off.

* Because you killed everything between you and the campsite, there are no threats between you and the campsite.

 

In this circumstance, what is good about the experience of walking back to the campsite?

 

I don't find nothing much interesting in simply going back to camp, it is true. But what I would find interesting, and I still have a little hope might see its way into this game, at least in some form, is that, now, a whole day has passed. This can mean a lot of things! Examples could include:

• 1d4 of the kidnapped villagers you are trying to rescue die of exhaustion at the feet of the orcs who plan to sell the toughest ones as slaves.
  
• The three escaping goblins flee to the underground, retell about your party's attack, and this results in a new, tougher patrol in the upper floor and making it impossible to get the orcs by surprise now.
  
• The warlock in the underground finishes a serum that more than doubles the strength of a goblinoid who drinks it, but turns him into an homicidal maniac (well, even more than they normally are). From now on, a couple of this enemy type will appear in random fights.
  
• The sleeping dragon in the bottom of the cave stirs and detect your presence. Fortunately, he goes almost right back to sleep, but not before taking one of the most comely villagers as a tribute from the orcs.
  
• Another group of adventurers goes through the cave, picking up some of the magic items for themselves and taking a few of the monsters and traps down.
  
• A traveling group of performers comes to the inn. Their play, should the party watch it, contains subtle clues about the dungeon and its politics.
  
• The orc warchief might decide to move out and go back to the great underground. If the PCs can't save the villagers before they reach that, the quest is failed. Then again, maybe some of the villagers might appear later in the game as slaves to the monstrosities the orcs sold them to.
  
• The orcs could find the wooden cart full of booze the PCs left nearby. If they come back at night, the orcs will be drunk and partying. If they come back during the morning, patrols will be weakened and with a headache.
  

Basically, there is room here to put lots of interesting consequences. Which is why I like the basics of the vancian system so much.

[ogrezilla]

A smart player would not find himself in that position.

 

I would have planned more carefully (conserving spells), to avoid such a situation.

 

In this circumstance I would say that you, Sawyer, didn't prepare well enough walking into the dungeon you haven't been in before and that is your own fault.

None of these answers address the question I asked.

 

Essentially they're supporting negative reinforcement. They want you to spank the player for doing something wrong so they learn to do it right. There's nothing "good" about it.

I think there are essentially two good ways to deal with it. Punish them harshly enough that you simply can't complete the dungeon if you get into that situation. Either require you to try again or set up in game consequences. Or just let you get your stuff back easily without wasting your time walking.

[Hypevosa]

What Josh is proposing is: Let's make the game easier so you don't have to walk back to town and rest whenever you make a bad decision.

 

Challenge and tedium are two different things. Your dead grandmother could walk back to town, rest, and come back... even your pet rock could with minor manipulation. It's JUST tedium.

 

If you play the game right then no tedium. If you play the game badly you get tedium. That's how you're motivated to get good at it. You know...next time bring more arrows. Or we could install an "I win" button so the game is never tedious ever again - just boring.

 

Why hit your dog with a newspaper when it won't sit when you can teach it with treats instead? I would rather see good play rewarded - bad players are already bad, they don't need more punishment than they'll already get.

[ogrezilla]

Simple, it's an experience that rewards you if you have used your spells conservatively and punishes those that don't. It teaches you a valuble lesson that you need to be economical when spending yout LIMITED combat resources. IMO spending your combat resources so carelessly should have a bigger punishment then just an annoying walk.

But it doesn't have a bigger punishment. It's a circumstance that arises all the time in IE games.

if a bigger punishment is not an option, then just let me get my spells back and keep going.

[metiman]

I must admit this is an interesting puzzle in itself. A role playing game has a lot of pretending. I think as long as pretense is preserved whether or not you actually go through the tedious process of leaving the dungeon and making camp is not particularly important. But most cooldowns don't respect narrative requirements.

[TrashMan]

So this large map had 20 level equivalent encounters on it, naturally causing you to use most of your spells, and you'd rather be forced to walk back to the safe resting area and walk back to where you were standing, when nothing new would happen inbetween?

 

I know games are meant to waste time, but they're supposed to do it in an enjoyable fashion >_>

 

 

a) No one is forcing you to go back. Mages arne't incompetent. Scrolls, Wands and WEAPONS. Yes, mages can use weapons. A shocking concept for some, I know.

 

b) Why do you assume absolutely nothnig will happen inbetween?

 

c) It's the same price to pay for many other game mechanics and tings. No biggie.

[Infinitron]

Simple, it's an experience that rewards you if you have used your spells conservatively and punishes those that don't. It teaches you a valuble lesson that you need to be economical when spending yout LIMITED combat resources. IMO spending your combat resources so carelessly should have a bigger punishment then just an annoying walk.

But it doesn't have a bigger punishment. It's a circumstance that arises all the time in IE games.

 

I'm not sure I understand your response here, Josh. Yes, it doesn't have a bigger punishment. And yes, it happens often. How are those two things related to each other, and how do they refute qstoffe's point?

[ogrezilla]

What Josh is proposing is: Let's make the game easier so you don't have to walk back to town and rest whenever you make a bad decision.

 

Challenge and tedium are two different things. Your dead grandmother could walk back to town, rest, and come back... even your pet rock could with minor manipulation. It's JUST tedium.

 

If you play the game right then no tedium. If you play the game badly you get tedium. That's how you're motivated to get good at it. You know...next time bring more arrows. Or we could install an "I win" button so the game is never tedious ever again - just boring.

tedium is boring. an I win button would make it easy. I don't want easy. I just don't want tedious either. I'd rather run out of arrows and be forced to continue on without arrows. If that's not an option, I'd rather just have arrows handed to me. Walking back to town isn't a punishment. I'll do it because I have to. But I'll enjoy the game less because of it. It's not enough of a deterrent to make me actually care about managing my arrows.

[TrashMan]

Essentially they're supporting negative reinforcement. They want you to spank the player for doing something wrong so they learn to do it right. There's nothing "good" about it.

 

You talk as if negative reinforcement is a 100% bad thing....

[DocDoomII]

Here is something I would like to hear opinions on. Take the following circumstance, which is not uncommon in the IE games and would be somewhat similar to the KotC "campsite" system in circumstances were you are not locked off from backtracking to a campsite.

 

* You are in a location where resting is either prohibited or extraordinarily likely to result in an encounter. You do not know the location of the next campsite/safe resting area.

* You have cast many of your spells and the ones that remain are not entirely appropriate for the encounters you are now facing.

* Because you came from an area where you could rest and are not locked in the location, you have a cleared (by you) path back to the area where you can safely rest.

* It will take you three minutes of real time to walk back to the camp, maybe thirty seconds to reconfigure spells, five seconds to rest, and another three minutes of real time to walk back to where you had left off.

* Because you killed everything between you and the campsite, there are no threats between you and the campsite.

 

In this circumstance, what is good about the experience of walking back to the campsite?

Since that kind of situation is just a time sink, the only good that can actually come from it is that the game would last a little bit longer.

Edited October 2, 2012 by DocDoomII

[Jaesun]

Here is something I would like to hear opinions on. Take the following circumstance, which is not uncommon in the IE games and would be somewhat similar to the KotC "campsite" system in circumstances were you are not locked off from backtracking to a campsite.

 

* You are in a location where resting is either prohibited or extraordinarily likely to result in an encounter. You do not know the location of the next campsite/safe resting area.

* You have cast many of your spells and the ones that remain are not entirely appropriate for the encounters you are now facing.

* Because you came from an area where you could rest and are not locked in the location, you have a cleared (by you) path back to the area where you can safely rest.

* It will take you three minutes of real time to walk back to the camp, maybe thirty seconds to reconfigure spells, five seconds to rest, and another three minutes of real time to walk back to where you had left off.

* Because you killed everything between you and the campsite, there are no threats between you and the campsite.

 

In this circumstance, what is good about the experience of walking back to the campsite?

 

What is good, is that I learned I did not prepare as well as I should have, and must take the deterrent of walking back and now will try again. This time with alternate tactics/spells.

[ogrezilla]

Here is something I would like to hear opinions on. Take the following circumstance, which is not uncommon in the IE games and would be somewhat similar to the KotC "campsite" system in circumstances were you are not locked off from backtracking to a campsite.

 

* You are in a location where resting is either prohibited or extraordinarily likely to result in an encounter. You do not know the location of the next campsite/safe resting area.

* You have cast many of your spells and the ones that remain are not entirely appropriate for the encounters you are now facing.

* Because you came from an area where you could rest and are not locked in the location, you have a cleared (by you) path back to the area where you can safely rest.

* It will take you three minutes of real time to walk back to the camp, maybe thirty seconds to reconfigure spells, five seconds to rest, and another three minutes of real time to walk back to where you had left off.

* Because you killed everything between you and the campsite, there are no threats between you and the campsite.

 

In this circumstance, what is good about the experience of walking back to the campsite?

 

What is good, is that I learned I did not prepare as well as I should have, and must take the deterrent of walking back and now will try again. This time with alternate tactics/spells.

except this time its easier because part of the cave is already cleared. its not really a punishment. its just a waste of time.

[Lv99Wizard]

JESawyer's post implies cooldowns will be on the order of 5 minutes long. I don't think introducing this mechanic will qualify the game as a successor to the IE games. Instead, it pushes P:E into MMO territory.

 

In terms of the original question:

 

Here is something I would like to hear opinions on. Take the following circumstance, which is not uncommon in the IE games and would be somewhat similar to the KotC "campsite" system in circumstances were you are not locked off from backtracking to a campsite.

 

* You are in a location where resting is either prohibited or extraordinarily likely to result in an encounter. You do not know the location of the next campsite/safe resting area.

* You have cast many of your spells and the ones that remain are not entirely appropriate for the encounters you are now facing.

* Because you came from an area where you could rest and are not locked in the location, you have a cleared (by you) path back to the area where you can safely rest.

* It will take you three minutes of real time to walk back to the camp, maybe thirty seconds to reconfigure spells, five seconds to rest, and another three minutes of real time to walk back to where you had left off.

* Because you killed everything between you and the campsite, there are no threats between you and the campsite.

 

In this circumstance, what is good about the experience of walking back to the campsite?

 

The obvious answer is nothing - but the question is loaded. This experience can be minimised by game design as well as player strategy. The real question is, is this occasional inconvenience worth the sacrifice of a Vancian system? I don't believe so.

 

In terms of compromise, how about this:

-Put rest on cooldown. This ability (fluff wise could be a direct teleport to the players house) would allow the party to recharge spells etc instantly but can only be used X times per day. It has 100% success rate.

-Have the option to backtrack to an inn if you don't have your teleport spell.

-Have the option to rest in-spite of the danger, in the hopes that your melee characters can get your party through.

 

Cooldowns eliminate a lot of player choice and planning which is at the core of the IE games and I believe it would be very difficult to implement it and retain the feel fans are yearning for.

[dlux]

In this circumstance, what is good about the experience of walking back to the campsite?

This is the reason why we have fast travel.

[Hypevosa]

So this large map had 20 level equivalent encounters on it, naturally causing you to use most of your spells, and you'd rather be forced to walk back to the safe resting area and walk back to where you were standing, when nothing new would happen inbetween?

 

I know games are meant to waste time, but they're supposed to do it in an enjoyable fashion >_>

 

 

a) No one is forcing you to go back. Mages arne't incompetent. Scrolls, Wands and WEAPONS. Yes, mages can use weapons. A shocking concept for some, I know.

 

b) Why do you assume absolutely nothnig will happen inbetween?

 

c) It's the same price to pay for many other game mechanics and tings. No biggie.

A) if your party cannot succeed without some spells from the wizard then you're essentially being forced to go back. Mages suck with weapons, if they can't hit, they cannot help.

 

B) I don't assume nothing will happen in between, if you look at my previous posts, I leave room for that exception, and then proposed that hitting the button essentially runs the game on fast forward, automatically taking you to a place you can rest and then bringing you back, only stopping if you run into an enemy party.

 

C) Just because it's been done before doesn't make it a good thing.

 

Essentially they're supporting negative reinforcement. They want you to spank the player for doing something wrong so they learn to do it right. There's nothing "good" about it.

 

You talk as if negative reinforcement is a 100% bad thing....

 

It is. A bad player will already suffer alot for being bad - why waste their time with more punishments?

 

Instead you could reward them for doing well, so they strive to do better, instead of just getting complacent with their walking back and forth to get rest. Ya know?

Edited October 2, 2012 by Hypevosa

[andreisiadi]

Josh was hoping everyone would say "walking back to town is bad" so then he can say "Cooldowns will fix that."

 

I would like to think it's pretty obvious for everybody.

 

edit:typo

Edited October 2, 2012 by andreisiadi

[J.E. Sawyer]

I'm not sure I understand your response here, Josh. Yes, it doesn't have a bigger punishment. And yes, it happens often. How are those two things related to each other, and how do they refute qstoffe's point?

They don't refute qstoffe's point; they reject qstoffe's point as an answer to the question, "What is good about the experience of walking back to the campsite?"

 

Instead of answering my question, he chose to answer his own, presumably, "What is good about not running out of spells?"

[Amentep]

But that answer nor yours is really answering the question as asked since the question is about a situation where you HAVE used the spells and that you CHOOSE to walk back, so what good is the experience of walking for the player?

 

And that is my deterrent to playing sloppily.

 

But there's an assumption built in there that the only way you could get into that situation is if you played sloppily.

 

I've been in games where despite my planning bad rolls have led me to exhaust more spells that I had planned on in a fight. Now maybe this is just because I'm not hardcore enough, but in my experience it happens.

 

At any rate does it really act as a deterrent? And what point is a deterrent built around something that could be part of random chance (unless we're talking about removing the possibility of spells being interrupted and lost and other measures to ensure that no random chance could deplete resources) move from being encouraging smart gameplay to just annoying the player? EDIT: And doesn't the fact that the player isn't experiencing success encourage smarter gameplay without a 6 minute walk?

Edited October 2, 2012 by Amentep

[DocDoomII]

In this circumstance, what is good about the experience of walking back to the campsite?

This is the reason why we have fast travel.

Fast travel is one of the evils of recent cRPG.