Bows: Limited ammo?

[ogrezilla]

There shouldn't even be a poll for this...

 

Running out of arrows is good. Smart archers train a secondary weapon... and *omg* it forces the player to manage resources intelligently.. thinking in a game! *omg* how oldskool.

 

/sarcasm

arrow management literally never once required you think think in an old IE game. Not once. It just didn't happen. Even if the number you can hold is limited, as long as they are practically free and unlimited from shops and you can freely return to town whenever you want, then you will never be forced to think about inventory management with standard arrows. The worst that will ever happen is you will walk back to town to get more.

 

Again, I don't really mind it but the people making it sound like managing arrows is anything more than busywork have to be joking. It adds no challenge to the game. There is absolutely no strategy or intelligence required.

Edited October 3, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Osvir]

All Limited Ammo

In which you have to pick up/buy arrows, bullets, pellets and similar to reload your ranged weapons (crossbows, bows, slings, guns)

+ Atmosphere

- Can become a chore (Although hardly an argument as you can easily buy arrows from a store... or make them yourself)

 

Unlimited Ammo/Limited Special Ammo

In which you never run out of standard ammo (A regular arrow will never run out, and either you imagine a story that your character is an Arrow maker and makes arrows out of everything or he is a devious mage-pretending-to-be-Ranger who can summon arrows when no one is looking).

+ You never run out of standard ammo. It is great.

- Not as much atmosphere

[ogrezilla]

I honestly think running out of arrows in a dungeon, stopping what I'm doing and knowing that the enemies in the dungeon will wait for me to leave and come back is worse for the atmosphere of the game than just having unlimited ammo.

[IcyDeadPeople]

I honestly think running out of arrows in a dungeon, stopping what I'm doing and knowing that the enemies in the dungeon will wait for me to leave and come back is worse for the atmosphere of the game than just having unlimited ammo.

 

Why not just keep going and deal with having a shortage of arrows?

[Osvir]

If you, ogrezilla, went into a cave with bow and arrow. Would your arrows be limited or unlimited? In this case, what is most atmospheric?

 

Again there was a long discussion on "bad preparation" before heading into the dungeon in the Cooldown thread yesterday, and if you run out of arrows, are you not specialized with another weapon? Are there enemies in the cave that has arrows maybe? Etc. etc. Otherwise I can think of having a "Unlimited Ammo?" option button included in the game.

 

It's all preference. Sometimes I just want unlimited ammo (In Baldur's Gate I've got the mod), sometimes I do not.

[Jandor]

Limited ammo, but with the ability to recover (some) arrows that have already been shot. Maybe have a 40% chance of the arrow being recoverable, or something like that. Then there can be magical kind of "never-break" arrows.

 

Yes, this. Always bugged me in the IE games, "What, none of the arrows can re-used, NONE!? Why the hell not?"

 

I also don't think characters should be able to use bows with any real success without proficiency in them, crossbows and guns sure, that was one of the main advantages to those weapons. But bows are hard, if you have never used a bow before you won't hit anything unless it's nearly on top of you.

[ogrezilla]

I honestly think running out of arrows in a dungeon, stopping what I'm doing and knowing that the enemies in the dungeon will wait for me to leave and come back is worse for the atmosphere of the game than just having unlimited ammo.

 

Why not just keep going and deal with having a shortage of arrows?

because there is no reason not to go get more arrows. If I'm fighting trash monsters I might clear out the level with a sword or dagger or whatever the archer is trained in, but there's no reason to get into any significant fight without arrows.

If you, ogrezilla, went into a cave with bow and arrow. Would your arrows be limited or unlimited? In this case, what is most atmospheric?

 

I'd obviously have arrows. And probably food and water. Most likely no elves or dwarf friends with me. And I wouldn't be lugging around 6 suits of armor and 8 battle axes. If I went into a tomb to find a skeleton lord, kill everyone on the first floor and simply left, do you think the skeleton lord would just wait for me to come back without trying to refortify the first floor? Its easier to pretend I have arrows in the same way I pretend my characters eat and go to the bathroom than it is to pretend that I'm not living in a world that only exists for my own amusement.

 

Again there was a long discussion on "bad preparation" before heading into the dungeon in the Cooldown thread yesterday, and if you run out of arrows, are you not specialized with another weapon? Are there enemies in the cave that has arrows maybe? Etc. etc. Otherwise I can think of having a "Unlimited Ammo?" option button included in the game.

 

I am specialized in another weapon. It doesn't matter though, because I have no reason not to go buy more arrows. There is no consequence for my poor preparation. I can simply stop what I'm doing and walk back to town. And since I'm going back, I'll take back everything I can carry. I will actually gain money when I run out of arrows because otherwise I would probably leave a lot of the junk items on the ground.

Edited October 3, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Osvir]

I am specialized in another weapon. It doesn't matter though, because I have no reason not to go buy more arrows. There is no consequence for my poor preparation. I can simply stop what I'm doing and walk back to town.

 

Are you willing to risk it when the Tomb is later re-fortified and more difficult? :D you could continue exploring with the other weapon (Scimitar?) and defeat the Skeleton Lord, with some tactical decisions after all no?

 

EDIT:

And I wouldn't be lugging around 6 suits of armor and 8 battle axes. If I went into a tomb to find a skeleton lord, kill everyone on the first floor and simply left

And since I'm going back, I'll take back everything I can carry. I will actually gain money when I run out of arrows because otherwise I would probably leave a lot of the junk items on the ground.

 

Pack-A-Mule:

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/60995-pack-a-mule/

Edited October 3, 2012 by Osvir

[ogrezilla]

if that is actually a possibility, great. But since it never has been I'll assume it still isn't. I know I could put these limitations on myself. But particularly on the first time through a game, I am not going to purposely make things harder when I don't know what I will be going up against. Good game design wouldn't require me to pretend there are consequences for half baked limitations.

 

I'd be cool with a pack mule I guess.

Edited October 3, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Osvir]

What can I say bro, I'm a dreamer this doesn't mean I expect that any of what I or anyone else says here will be taken into consideration at all. I just like to dream.

[ogrezilla]

What can I say bro, I'm a dreamer this doesn't mean I expect that any of what I or anyone else says here will be taken into consideration at all. I just like to dream.

somewhere along the line I said my preferred solution would be to include stricter consequences so I'm with you. There are quite a few design choices that sort of let you know what the designers intentions are, but they don't seem to be enforced. Basically anything that can be solved simply by walking back to town.

Edited October 3, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Elerond]

I had to consider this little bit. Because limited normal ammunition like in IE games is nearly pointless as your character can carry 60 arrows in hie or her ammution slots and then you could carry more ammutions in your inventario slots. And only hindrance of carrying so much arrows was that you lose some volume from your inventario, which was not really never issue for 6 character party. So I nearly voted for unlimited ammunition, but then I got idea that if you put realistic weight and size for arrows, so that you can carry max 100 arrows per character and even that starts to hamper them. This will force your character put skill points to arrow crafting or you probably will run out ammutions in wilderness. In this idea cost of the standard arrows should be significant, because it forces player to invest more in arrows and balances bit more some issues from IE games.

 

So yes if ammution number is highly limited and there is good crafting sytem to support that.

Unlimited ammution is ok if limited ammution really mean virtually unlimited.

Edited October 3, 2012 by Elerond

[Starglider]

I don't see the need for a stack limit if the total weight is being tracked. All ammo of the same type should just auto-stack into one slot.

[Labadal]

Limited ammo. If the bowman runs out of arrows, try to have a spare weapon ready at hand. You could use that character more like a rogue, even if he/she doesn't get sneak attack bonuses.

[ogrezilla]

Limited ammo. If the bowman runs out of arrows, try to have a spare weapon ready at hand. You could use that character more like a rogue, even if he/she doesn't get sneak attack bonuses.

or just walk back to town and get more arrows.

[Labadal]

Limited ammo. If the bowman runs out of arrows, try to have a spare weapon ready at hand. You could use that character more like a rogue, even if he/she doesn't get sneak attack bonuses.

or just walk back to town and get more arrows.

 

I personally don't do it, but it's up to each player to do as he/she likes.

[ReyVagabond]

Yes all amunition should be limited this is a Stragy game, with pause, Arrows should be powerfull enough that you dont need to many and they should be heavy pelaties for Point black shots so you need to change to melee or flee if fighting in melee range.

 

so 5-6 arrows per encounter and a the ability to recover them from dead bodies with a chance of brake so its not posible to recover them.

[ogrezilla]

Limited ammo. If the bowman runs out of arrows, try to have a spare weapon ready at hand. You could use that character more like a rogue, even if he/she doesn't get sneak attack bonuses.

or just walk back to town and get more arrows.

 

I personally don't do it, but it's up to each player to do as he/she likes.

so do they balance encounters for people who do or don't keep themselves fully supplied?

[Labadal]

Limited ammo. If the bowman runs out of arrows, try to have a spare weapon ready at hand. You could use that character more like a rogue, even if he/she doesn't get sneak attack bonuses.

or just walk back to town and get more arrows.

 

I personally don't do it, but it's up to each player to do as he/she likes.

so do they balance encounters for people who do or don't keep themselves fully supplied?

 

They should balnace encounters for people who can use tactics. If your ranger runs out of arrows, I bet there's something you can he can do. I've played lots of games where I run out of arrows, but I don't exit the dungeon each and every time to buy new ones. I ALWAYS keep a melee weapon in reserve for my archer, just in case. He'll probably not be very useful for some time, but can still help out in battle.

[ogrezilla]

Limited ammo. If the bowman runs out of arrows, try to have a spare weapon ready at hand. You could use that character more like a rogue, even if he/she doesn't get sneak attack bonuses.

or just walk back to town and get more arrows.

 

I personally don't do it, but it's up to each player to do as he/she likes.

so do they balance encounters for people who do or don't keep themselves fully supplied?

 

They should balnace encounters for people who can use tactics. If your ranger runs out of arrows, I bet there's something you can he can do. I've played lots of games where I run out of arrows, but I don't exit the dungeon each and every time to buy new ones. I ALWAYS keep a melee weapon in reserve for my archer, just in case. He'll probably not be very useful for some time, but can still help out in battle.

you didn't answer my question. Should the game be balanced around my party always being fully prepared or should it be balanced around someone who allows their party to go into fights in sub-optimal conditions. If the game mechanics don't discourage me from always being fully prepared, I would say that's what the game is designed for and thus how it should be balanced. You have the option of adding extra challenge, but the people who use the mechanics how they are designed should be the ones who are seeing the challenge as it was designed. Otherwise, its bad game design.

 

I would personally prefer the game to be designed for what you are describing. But assuming the player will add his or her own limitations to get the intended results is bad design. That's pretty much the definition. If your design doesn't give the intended results, something is wrong with the design.

 

edit: this has strayed off topic. I want arrows to either be limited for real (I can't go get more at any moment so it actually adds strategy or challenge to the game) or just unlimited. The walk back to town to get more is boring tedium that adds nothing to the game.

Edited October 4, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Labadal]

Limited ammo. If the bowman runs out of arrows, try to have a spare weapon ready at hand. You could use that character more like a rogue, even if he/she doesn't get sneak attack bonuses.

or just walk back to town and get more arrows.

 

I personally don't do it, but it's up to each player to do as he/she likes.

so do they balance encounters for people who do or don't keep themselves fully supplied?

 

They should balnace encounters for people who can use tactics. If your ranger runs out of arrows, I bet there's something you can he can do. I've played lots of games where I run out of arrows, but I don't exit the dungeon each and every time to buy new ones. I ALWAYS keep a melee weapon in reserve for my archer, just in case. He'll probably not be very useful for some time, but can still help out in battle.

you didn't answer my question. Should the game be balanced around my party always being fully prepared or should it be balanced around someone who allows their party to go into fights in sub-optimal conditions. If the game mechanics don't discourage me from always being fully prepared, I would say that's what the game is designed for and thus how it should be balanced. You have the option of adding extra challenge, but the people who use the mechanics how they are designed should be the ones who are seeing the challenge as it was designed. Otherwise, its bad game design.

 

I would personally prefer the game to be designed for what you are describing. But assuming the player will add his or her own limitations to get the intended results is bad design. That's pretty much the definition. If your design doesn't give the intended results, something is wrong with the design.

 

edit: this has strayed off topic. I want arrows to either be limited for real (I can't go get more at any moment so it actually adds strategy or challenge to the game) or just unlimited. The walk back to town to get more is boring tedium that adds nothing to the game.

 

Well, I want the game to assume that I will always have arrows (be fully prepared). It is then up to me to make sure I have arrows or have another backup plan if I don't. Let's say I use a ranger that is great with a bow. I would still assume that he would survive in battle, but not be nearly as effective.

 

In NWN2, I ran out of arrows on many occasions, and the game seemed to be designed around players being fully prepared. I had to come up with other plans. In this case, my rogue was the archer. So I had to use traps, wich was a way to help the rest of the party, despite not having any ammo.

[ogrezilla]

Limited ammo. If the bowman runs out of arrows, try to have a spare weapon ready at hand. You could use that character more like a rogue, even if he/she doesn't get sneak attack bonuses.

or just walk back to town and get more arrows.

 

I personally don't do it, but it's up to each player to do as he/she likes.

so do they balance encounters for people who do or don't keep themselves fully supplied?

 

They should balnace encounters for people who can use tactics. If your ranger runs out of arrows, I bet there's something you can he can do. I've played lots of games where I run out of arrows, but I don't exit the dungeon each and every time to buy new ones. I ALWAYS keep a melee weapon in reserve for my archer, just in case. He'll probably not be very useful for some time, but can still help out in battle.

you didn't answer my question. Should the game be balanced around my party always being fully prepared or should it be balanced around someone who allows their party to go into fights in sub-optimal conditions. If the game mechanics don't discourage me from always being fully prepared, I would say that's what the game is designed for and thus how it should be balanced. You have the option of adding extra challenge, but the people who use the mechanics how they are designed should be the ones who are seeing the challenge as it was designed. Otherwise, its bad game design.

 

I would personally prefer the game to be designed for what you are describing. But assuming the player will add his or her own limitations to get the intended results is bad design. That's pretty much the definition. If your design doesn't give the intended results, something is wrong with the design.

 

edit: this has strayed off topic. I want arrows to either be limited for real (I can't go get more at any moment so it actually adds strategy or challenge to the game) or just unlimited. The walk back to town to get more is boring tedium that adds nothing to the game.

 

Well, I want the game to assume that I will always have arrows (be fully prepared). It is then up to me to make sure I have arrows or have another backup plan if I don't. Let's say I use a ranger that is great with a bow. I would still assume that he would survive in battle, but not be nearly as effective.

 

In NWN2, I ran out of arrows on many occasions, and the game seemed to be designed around players being fully prepared. I had to come up with other plans. In this case, my rogue was the archer. So I had to use traps, wich was a way to help the rest of the party, despite not having any ammo.

Ok, I agree. I felt like the older games were designed for you to be much more careful than you actually needed to be. Thus if you just kept yourself fully supplied they ended up being easier than they were meant to be.

[ReyVagabond]

Personaly i dont want the game to be balance around me beeing fully prepared each encounter.

 

For example, i want that to consider that i leave BACE with enogh resoureses for a journey, lets say my archers have 2 bucks of arros each, and they use it carefully and recover most of their arrors from the things they killed. now lets say i find a mistic dungeon, with half resourses. and i Go in, well half resourses may be enogh to complete or not and ill have a hard time, or ill have to load before entering go back to BACE and get fully loaded for the Dungeon.

 

Another thing is, Becuase one of the problem i had with neverwinter was that close to 70% i had to rest after each encounter.

 

Personaly i love the we have to camp in dungeons, Even i want a be a main ficture of the game, Resting in a dundeon, you have to pic what will be your sleap rotation, gathering close reseourses like wood or stuff like that, crafting small things like Arrows and some venoms, etc.

 

In conclution i dont want the game to be balanced for optimal resourses each enconter.

 

And i dont want to have an encounter where i need to fire 200 arros to a dragon. i want Short sweet Tactical action!

[silverjace]

I say limited ammo, add that bit of tactical micromanagement. However, this is only if you can hold a large stack of ammunition and not have it take up a lot of your inventory.

[Osvir]

I say limited ammo, add that bit of tactical micromanagement. However, this is only if you can hold a large stack of ammunition and not have it take up a lot of your inventory.

 

Granted you would have the inventory space to carry more than a quiver or two.

 

edit-

typo

Edited October 5, 2012 by Osvir