Character creation

[Rhulad]

I just want to be able to give up my charisma score for a plus 2 to hit.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I think that point-buy would probably work the best.

[Adhin]

Point buy all the way for me. I never understood the 'questions' thing and getting something thrown out based off that, granted you always get to say 'no thats stupid' and pick your own stuff but I've never seen those systems pick anything remotely close to what i want for what I answered. I think rolling for stats is about as bad of a system as it gets for making a character. Completely takes it out of your hands for making what you had envisioned and, on top of that, isn't a very fair system as far as keeping everyone reletive to eachother.

 

Now if someone wants to make a weaker character would be nice if you could just start (with a warning) with out spending all your points. Or have a toggle to decide how many points you have to spend as if often how things are handled in PnP. Have a few total numbers to determine the kind of adventurers your making, so having just a smaller pool (say 20 vs 30) for folks who wanna make a derpier character would be an easy thing to throw in.

[HangedMan]

Point buy all the way for me. I can't be the only one who has intentionally made an un-optimized character in NWN2 (or other games) for the challenge, either. But...

Point buy, after answering some questions about your character's past (like Darklands or Daggerfall) to generate some base stats, and perhaps also to determine starter items.

Darklands remains my favorite character creation system ever in a CRPG. Anything similar to it would be terrific; heritage, and initial point buy followed by occupation with additional point buy. All of these affecting skills, with some discretionary points to throw around.

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, please, please, please do this. I would love this; so much so, some people might accuse me of having a problem.

[Amentep]

I think I'd have liked Darklands if I'd ever had a chance to play it back in the day.

[Vargr]

It's weird, because even though I don't like random numbers when creating my characters, there's something about it in BG/IWD etc

that makes me like it more than the point-buy of NWN and the like.

 

Maybe it has to do with how in BG/IWD, you know your stats will stay more or less that way all through the game,

whereas in NWN you get a number of bonus points throughout the game...

 

Ack, I dunno.

 

But I just realized, the S.P.E.C.I.A.L system from Fallout 1+2 is one I thoroughly like! Not so much Bethesda's decision to let you pick further points as perks though, in Fallout 3.

 

 

Yup, that's my mind made up. Point-buy based on Fallout's S.P.E.C.I.A.L is what I'd like to see!

Edited October 10, 2012 by Vargr

[Adhin]

It's gambling, more or less. It's the same principle off random loot in games like diablo. Ultimately what it comes down too, y ou roll, see if you got good stuff, chances of getting good are less then crap or mediocore, but its that chance. I hate it but I also can't stand gambling. Things never been much of a draw for me, partly why the dangling carrot of item drops has never done a damn thing for me in Diablo-esk games. Still loved the crap outa D2 mind ya, just wasn't for the items.

 

That said I do like the SPECIAL setup, but thats basically 1st/2nd DnD using point buy instead of random rolls. I don't mind some attribute growth post-character creation but its nice it it makes more sense. For example, augment implacts in FO:NV vs the stat perks. Though getting attribute from perks is a good way to balance its growth overtime and, in away, shows you focusing on your.. strength, for an example, instead of other perks. That said would be nice to see it be a 1 shot perk thats tied with other stuff. For example getting some lore-related perks with a +1 int due to 'brain training' as it where. The generic no real explanation 10 rank attribute perks feels a bit empty in the end.

 

-edit-

Actually point about SPECIAL vs 2nd Edition, I think 2nd edition general handling was mostly superior in its ability to handle growth via items and general monster size types. For example a Giant had 20 str, mountain giants had 21, full sized dragons had 25. People where stuck max of 18. I don't like how they did 0-100 scale in STR for Warriors only, and feel like they left to much useless points in there, for instance 9-13 where all identical, 14 gave like -1 THAC0, then you'd get dmg, then dmg/thac0, then...yeah. It got awkward and more complex then it needed to be. In comparison SPECIAL caps at 10, period, items can't go above it, monsters can't go above it, and anyone can techincally start at 10. So having a Warrior start at 10 cause rawr muscles, but then a dragons stuck at 10 just the same... its weird, kinda loses its flavor at that point.

 

So my vote would be a better thought out progression for a 2nd edition style attribute system. 1-25 or something feels good, 10 middle, cap us at 18 or 20 or something, let the higher progression exist for items only (so feats wouldn't raise above 18 or 20 or whatever it is). Racial modifiers help with that... or to use SPECIAL add 5 ranks to it, 1-15 instead, 10 is max, 11-12 for certain racial considerations. Perk/Feats don't go above that 10-12 margin, items and spells can. Allows bigger monsters to sit at the higher end people can't achieve with out magical support.

 

Least that's how I'd prefer it in general.. and rolling is just a crap gambling system.

Edited October 10, 2012 by Adhin

[Vargr]

It's gambling, more or less. It's the same principle off random loot in games like diablo. Ultimately what it comes down too, y ou roll, see if you got good stuff, chances of getting good are less then crap or mediocore, but its that chance. I hate it but I also can't stand gambling. Things never been much of a draw for me, partly why the dangling carrot of item drops has never done a damn thing for me in Diablo-esk games. Still loved the crap outa D2 mind ya, just wasn't for the items.

 

That said I do like the SPECIAL setup, but thats basically 1st/2nd DnD using point buy instead of random rolls. I don't mind some attribute growth post-character creation but its nice it it makes more sense. For example, augment implacts in FO:NV vs the stat perks. Though getting attribute from perks is a good way to balance its growth overtime and, in away, shows you focusing on your.. strength, for an example, instead of other perks. That said would be nice to see it be a 1 shot perk thats tied with other stuff. For example getting some lore-related perks with a +1 int due to 'brain training' as it where. The generic no real explanation 10 rank attribute perks feels a bit empty in the end.

 

-edit-

Actually point about SPECIAL vs 2nd Edition, I think 2nd edition general handling was mostly superior in its ability to handle growth via items and general monster size types. For example a Giant had 20 str, mountain giants had 21, full sized dragons had 25. People where stuck max of 18. I don't like how they did 0-100 scale in STR for Warriors only, and feel like they left to much useless points in there, for instance 9-13 where all identical, 14 gave like -1 THAC0, then you'd get dmg, then dmg/thac0, then...yeah. It got awkward and more complex then it needed to be. In comparison SPECIAL caps at 10, period, items can't go above it, monsters can't go above it, and anyone can techincally start at 10. So having a Warrior start at 10 cause rawr muscles, but then a dragons stuck at 10 just the same... its weird, kinda loses its flavor at that point.

 

So my vote would be a better thought out progression for a 2nd edition style attribute system. 1-25 or something feels good, 10 middle, cap us at 18 or 20 or something, let the higher progression exist for items only (so feats wouldn't raise above 18 or 20 or whatever it is). Racial modifiers help with that... or to use SPECIAL add 5 ranks to it, 1-15 instead, 10 is max, 11-12 for certain racial considerations. Perk/Feats don't go above that 10-12 margin, items and spells can. Allows bigger monsters to sit at the higher end people can't achieve with out magical support.

 

Least that's how I'd prefer it in general.. and rolling is just a crap gambling system.

 

 

Not sure about how it worked in Fallout 1/2, but in Tactics Super Mutants and Deathclaws had Strength over 10. I think Super Mutants could have 12 and Deathclaws 14. Using a power armor could boost a human's strength up to maximum of 12, I think.

 

 

What I like about SPECIAL is that there's lower values, and each point feels significant.

And Fallout did a great job and making characters feel different based on what stats you had.

I loved how a character with really high strength would make an enemy slide along the floor if killed by a powerful strike. Sometimes keep sliding until

it hit a wall.

 

I'd love to see something like that in P:E. Though not too over the top. Keep it so it sits well with the rest of the game.

 

 

Ah, and about attribute growth post character creation... I'd like to see that achieved through the game world.

Have a few, very limited, let's say "ordeals" your character can be exposed to. As a result, a stat connected to the ordeal and how you chose to

conquer it is raised by one. These ordeals should be very, "very" few, however.

[AGX-17]

if you want terrible stats, can't you just not use all of the available stats? You don't need to roll for that

 

Never my problem, but actually you usually can't. The games won't let you continue until you've spent it all.

(alhtough you can splurge it all on charisma or something, but still)

 

In the ideal situation, Charisma would not be a dump stat. With really high Charisma, you should have people in towns lining up trying to get in your good graces in the hopes of getting a shot at sex with you, rough types trying to force themselves on you, and your animal magnetism should be like Steve Jobs' Reality Distortion Field, allowing you to rally even the most cowardly or skeptical individuals to lay down their lives for your noble cause or your petty whims.

Edited October 11, 2012 by AGX-17

[Adhin]

@Vargr: Basically wasn't anything above 10, or if they're was, items on players couldn't. Was same way in FO3/NV. But either way thats exactly what I was talking about as far as a generally good system with each point having an impact. That was ultimaetly my biggest issue with 2nd edition and partially with 3rd. You have these fields of null zones in the stats which are kinda bogus. I still prefer a 10 base system though... don't gadda use negative values for negative effects. And 0 can mean death.

 

-edit-

By that, I mean, I enjoy 10 being the no bonus point. Everything under is the negative scale of a 11-20, and 21-25 is item/monster only stat range.

Edited October 11, 2012 by Adhin

[Ignatius]

I always preferred manual stat allocation with the option to lower stats to very low levels in favor of boosting others. i.e. 6 WIS/18STR. Of course, this usually just leads to munchkin type characters. I don't know, I typically find a way to mangle the system to give me the most optimal stats no matter what system it uses. Then again, I'm going of my experiences in BG2/IWD2 where you could gimp certain stats and still do fine. It's Obsidian's job to avoid these issues and make all stats have a certain amount of importance.

Edited October 11, 2012 by Ignatius

[Radres]

Both variants, point buying and dice rolling have their advanteges and disadvanteges.

 

1) Point Buying:

-doesn't have the "Roll again to get better stats" routine.

-Easier to balance the game. Because as a developer you know the maximum amount of skillpoints the user gets. If you also limit the max. points a skill can have, the easier it gets to balance the game.

-Being very good at one thing (STR for example) will lead to being very bad at another thing or being medicore at everything else.

This is a kind of balance. But ultimately it limits character creation options in favor of balancing.

2) Dice Rolling:

-The amounts of skill points you get will depent don the roll

-It offers the possibility to create a truly powerful character which could lead to balancing problems

-Offers more variety to character generation from truly overpowering to laughably whimsy.

 

I'm not favoring any of those. They both have their perks. so ultimately it will depend on how the devs want to create the game and how free they let the user be in creating a character.