Stealth and 6 member parties

[JFSOCC]

I think you know what I'm getting at.

I've always enjoyed roleplaying sneaky characters, social during the day, busy during the night

 

But travelling with a party means that the options for using stealth effectively are minimal (unless you can somehow have 6 stealthy characters ninjaing through everything)

Stealth is usually a single person job. I like roleplaying a lot, and combat is actually one of the things I care little for.

however, in many ways it is often unwise to avoid combat. combat gives xp, xp goooood.

I was wondering if the team has thought of this, and what they would propose to do in order to make stealth a fun part of the game, and not a gimmick.

Or perhaps will they do away with it entire? (I surely hope not)

 

My suggestion would be something like having multipart missions, where you have to have a team of characters each at their own place.

this way every character in the party gets a moment to shine. it's the stealth characters job to enter the castle through the sewers, get the the gate room and kitchen room, and poison guards (secondary) and open the gate.

 

I enjoyed in baldurs gate II the thieves' guild tests, sort of an obstacle course for the thief, but that too is a job alone.

 

What are your thoughts, perhaps letting a party survive on the highest character's stealth? that would bring it's own issues.

I'm curious what ideas you may have.

[Ieo]

Having one stealth character in my party was absolutely critical in IE games for me--I scout everything whenever possible. Then I sneak back and tromp the party towards any danger and stay stealthed for that initial surrpise attack. Scouting isn't a gimmick either; it's a critical aspect of intelligence-gathering... A trick for designers is to ensure that it's not OP in that respect, too.

[AGX-17]

Well, think of the other 6 as distractions. When you've got a bunch of paladins, clerics, wizards and berserkers running around, the waifish guy in light/no armor seems like a low priority. Maybe he's the client who hired this band of badasses and sorcerers to see him through, we can deal with him (and his gold,) once we've dealt with the lumbering deathbeasts trying to cleave our skulls in twain. Indeed, real life "magicians" use prominent distractions to hide the real trick, diverting audience attention with flourishes and scantily clad women.

Edited October 13, 2012 by AGX-17

[Lysen]

We don't know much about stealth, unfortunately. As Tim Cain explained,

 

Non-combat skills do not use the same resources as combat skills. You don't spend the same stuff for a non-combat skill as you do for combat skills. Some don't use anything at all to use, so you will never find yourself unable to blast an opponent if you get caught sneaking.

 

It seems that you can make everyone in the party stealthy enough.

 

Combat can be avoided with non-combat skills. There will often be ways to avoid fighting. Yes, we will have the standard methods of talking your way out of a fight or sneaking around an encounter, but there will be other ways too. Perhaps you can re-sanctify a desecrated cemetery to prevent any further undead from rising, or maybe figuring out a way across a ruined bridge will always avoid the bandits on this side of the river

 

And another cool quote:

 

Avoiding combat does not lead to less experience gain. You shouldn't go up levels any slower by using your non-combat skills rather than your combat skills. We plan to reward you for your accomplishments, not for your body count.

 

It all sounds very promising and I can't wait to see how they will implement this.

[PsychoBlonde]

But travelling with a party means that the options for using stealth effectively are minimal (unless you can somehow have 6 stealthy characters ninjaing through everything)

Stealth is usually a single person job. I like roleplaying a lot, and combat is actually one of the things I care little for.

 

This depends a lot on how they design the game. If they put in doors that you have to open by killing everything in the room, then yes, stealth is not much of an option. If you have to take your entire party with you everywhere, then yes, stealth is not much of an option.

 

However, if you can sneak in the back door, kill the guardian monster, and then have your one rogue sneak their way up the well and gank that one item you need, stealth IS an option even with a full party. Since they've already talked about not giving XP just for killing things, I think they'll be heading more towards this sort of design philoosophy.

[AlphaShard]

I believe the developers indicated that they were going to use non combat solutions like stealth to encounters.

[Ignatius]

I think PE is more a tactical combat game than a stealth simulator, though there will always be alternative solutions, but stealth is already a major part of tactical combat, to have entire missions dedicated to stealth would be outside the scope of the game. A stealth character already offers plenty enough usefulness to any party, such as scouting ahead and removing traps before the party gets there or getting in position for a back stab, which has worked incredibly well for me in my times with IE games, especially when you start to get up to 5x back stabs. It really makes tough battles a breeze when you can chunk a wizard just as the battle starts, before they even have a chance to cast any of their defensive spells.

 

I dunno, I've just never felt that stealth in the IE games wasn't offering enough bang for the buck. I've always used it, and been satisfied with the utility it offered.

Edited October 13, 2012 by Ignatius

[Chippy]

Being able to send your thief into a building while the party remained outside was great in the IE games. Exceptions in BG1 I think (like the iron throne building or the sewers) come to mind, but if the engine allows it, you have to consider what design limitations insist "you must gather your party".

 

So allowing my thief to move independently would be a huge step for me.