Update #24: Less than 30 Hours to go! Life and Death, and Audio CD Soundtrack!

[Shoeless Joe Jackson]

I'm not fully decided on this either way but I have faith in the Obsidian developers to come up with a good system.

 

On the one hand, I do like the idea of quest based xp removing the temptation (which I have occasionally indulged in) of butchering the quest giver immediately after finishing the quest for them so you get the additional xp.

 

But on the flipside, I do enjoy seeing the small incremental increases in xp after every little fight pushing my characters that little bit closer towards levelling up. It's a nice feeling. And, if my party just happen to be wandering around in the wilderness and come across an ogre that's not tied to any quest, after we've felled him, no xp? I wouldn't like that. You could say that the developers would tie all these enemies into quests, but that won't really work, you can't have a quest for essentially every monster in the game.

 

Ultimately, people will also still murder the quest-giver if they have any kind of inclination that he/she/it is holding any magical items.

 

I'm not sure what the solution is.

[Uomoz]

MC gone completely bonkers xD.

 

Anyway, love the stamina system, and it's as I predicted so +10 points for me. Love the lore aswell and can't wait to hear more about Life in Death and Death in Life.

[HeedlessHorseman]

These are just two ways that I could see an objective-based experience system playing out. I will use an example of rescuing a villager from goblins. (For this example I am not going to consider options like siding with the goblins or killing both the goblins and the villager.)

 

Objective-based – No Experience from Killing

You can have a full assault or can sneak in and rescue the villager without any of the goblins noticing. You will get the same amount of experience either way at the end of the quest.

 

Objective-based – Experience from Killing

Each quest will have a set amount of experience awarded. I will use 1000 points for this example.

For the direct approach- killing each goblins will award some experience. If there are 4 goblins, each will award 200 experience points. Returning the villager will award the remaining 200 experience points.

For sneaking- getting the villager out of the camp without the goblins noticing will award 800 experience points and the final 200 will be for the villager reaching the village.

[Valorian]

Codex echo chamber.

 

The sad thing about the Codex is that they have a kindergarten level cognitive capacity and are fast at registering new accounts.

If Sawyer said he'll feed them with a plagued chicken, they'd be all extatic.

 

Are you suggesting that all the members disagreeing are codexers?

 

(I'm unsure on the system itself, but trust Sawyer)

 

No.

[Ignatius]

Giving players exp for killing monsters sends the message that if you want to level up and become more powerful, you better get to killing stuff. And that obviously isn't the message Obsidian wants to send and I think it's a sentiment a lot of players agree with, if the constant requests for non-combat related quest solutions is any indication.

 

It's not as though Obsidian won't be rewarding you when the battle is tough, yes you won't get your piddly experience, but in the case of Firkraag, you'll likely get a load of quest experience plus his fat hoard of loot -- which is what everyone really cares about anyway.

 

On the flip side of that, people really like to be rewarded in games. It's part of that whole psychology positive feedback loop. Even if it's as small as 50 XP, they feel like their actions were worth it.

 

So, now I don't know what to think...

Edited October 15, 2012 by Ignatius

[Hobz]

Glad to see they're heading toward objective based xp, granted objective is different from quest. You might wander around, stumble on a cultist ritual performed in a well hidden cave and be inventive : sneak in to swap their magic crystal with a regular stone to screw everything up, or talk the leader into chanting in reverse with a similar result ; without feeling compelled to just kill them all for additional xp.

 

In the end you loose nothing since everyone will be rewarded, but you gain in immersion and you make approaches other than brute force just a "viable", and it seams pretty significant in a game with both expert and iron-man mode.

Edited October 15, 2012 by Hobz

[Infinitron]

Made a poll for this: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61543-are-you-for-or-against-gaining-experience-points-only-for-completing-objectives/

[Zack Fair]

Sorry to duck out, but I need to prep for our D&D game tonight. Objections to the proposed XP system are noted. We're not finalized on any of this stuff; quest-based XP is just an idea that Tim and I are interested in pursuing.

Don't puss y out Josh. You have a great idea in mind, don't change it just because 2 guys want to spend their times grinding monsters to level up. Edited October 15, 2012 by Zack Fair

[Valorian]

In this example, it would be trivial to flag those bandits as no longer worth XP once you've persuaded them not to attack.

But this is exactly what they are doing -- except of course it is applied on a game-wide scale and the underlying programming might be a bit different. If you are able to resolve an encounter without violence, you get the XP once and don't get it twice for killing. I am sure there will be story-less encounters that can only be resolved through violence (e.g. a mindless animal or automaton or whatever) and in that case, you are back to the XP for killing system.

 

 

What about enemies that are not tied to quests? Things that want to kill you without having the party trying to steal a quest item from them?

[Infinitron]

The sad thing about the Codex is that they have a kindergarten level cognitive capacity and are fast at registering new accounts.

If Sawyer said he'll feed them with a plagued chicken, they'd be all extatic.

 

That's not really true. Josh has actually gotten a lot hate on the Codex, for cooldowns and other things. It's just that objective-based systems have been proven to work great for games based more on choices and consequences and reactivity than on sandboxy romping, and that particular subgenre of RPG seems to be Obsidian's core competency.

Edited October 15, 2012 by Infinitron

[Meshugger]

Please, pleaaaaase keep the idea of objective-based XP. It was one of the best things about Vtm: Bloodlines. It would make so much sense in terms of approaching different objectives in different ways.

 

Also, as a bonus for the best user name in the forum: Zap Rowsdower:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJd3g6LGSFc

Edited October 15, 2012 by Meshugger

[MaximKat]

What about enemies that are not tied to quests? Things that want to kill you without having the party trying to steal a quest item from them?

Well, if they want to kill you, you can either pay them in kind and collect a bunch of non-quest loot from their corpses, or run away.

[Althernai]

What about enemies that are not tied to quests? Things that want to kill you without having the party trying to steal a quest item from them?

That's exactly the type I was talking about when I mentioned mindless animals and such -- you get XP for killing those.

[Merin]

This thread has 177 members currently viewing out of 64,623 pledging.

 

Hardly an adequate sampling.

Seeing as only 4 people out of those 177 are against the idea, we can say with 99% confidence level that less than 10% in the whole "population" share their opinion. Math FTW. And that's assuming that the sample is uniform, which it's usually not, in favor of those unhappy with something, as we all know.

 

It helps the minority if they only see people who agree with them.

[Valorian]

The sad thing about the Codex is that they have a kindergarten level cognitive capacity and are fast at registering new accounts.

If Sawyer said he'll feed them with a plagued chicken, they'd be all extatic.

 

That's not really true. Josh has actually gotten a lot hate on the Codex, for cooldowns and other things. It's just that objective-based systems have been proven to work great for games based more on choices and consequences and reactivity than on sandboxy romping, and that subgenre of RPG seems to be Obsidian's core competency.

 

Yeah, he's gotten a lot of hate for cooldowns because you didn't even understand how it works. It was more like Jaesun anc co.: OMG it's Warcraft/Bioware!!...

 

Quest only xp (because it's actually quests and not objectives). Since killing an opponent that wants to kill you is an objective in itself and should hand out xp to further hone your combat skills...

By using the word "objective" instead of "quest" they're trying to persuade naive people into thinking how it's a great system and how it makes mucho sense. When in fact it doesn't, at all.

[Lt. Lizard]

I consider objective-based XP to be pretty much the best thing that can happen to story-driven RPGs, so i am really excited by the news.

 

And that Health/Stamina thing sounds like something from Darklands which makes me more happy than I care to describe.

 

The only way how this could get more positive for me would be if Sawyer stopped by my house and gave me a cookie.

[Valorian]

What about enemies that are not tied to quests? Things that want to kill you without having the party trying to steal a quest item from them?

That's exactly the type I was talking about when I mentioned mindless animals and such -- you get XP for killing those.

 

Yeah, because outside quests you can only kill mindless animals and such..

[makryu]

I think there are alternatives to go either way with the XP system:

 

- make a distinction between quest-related kills and the general mayhem you provoke by finding the random assortment of monsters during exploration;

 

- double xp by killing after accomplishing an objective in a non-violent way is avoidable by "flagging" quest-related monsters as worth 0xp after the award for a nonviolent solution has been given;

 

- for nonviolent multiple solution quests, the first way you accomplish it removes the xp gain you'd have by doing it the other ways.

 

- establish a "unique monster" system in which only those are actually worth a xp reward;

 

- give out xp for exploration goals, such as reach a certain landmark, find secret routes, etc.; I honestly think this one would be good only if the game has large optional areas and/or exploration is made more challenging by including environmental obstacles (don't know if that could be effectively added to an IE-like game);

 

- I think these are ideas to consider. In my opinion, and please don't burn me in a fire because of this, I think the developers would do well to take a look at how Xenoblade Chronicles did it, as in that game landmarks and secret areas awarded you with level-based xp awards, and the unique monster system there actively provided incentive to pursue these monster fights, which were much more valuable, both in terms of xp and loot, than fighting common enemies (they didn't fully realized it, though, as in late game you were still forced to grind quite a bit).

 

I'd be more inclined towards a system that doesn't penalize you for going completely nonviolent, and any kill xp system would prevent that. But I also think that you should get very tangible rewards from randomly exploring, even when no quests demand you to do so.

Edited October 15, 2012 by makryu

[GarfunkeL]

Funny, only having quest-XP did not prevent me from exploring every nook and cranny in Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines. Because there were lore bits and loot to be found.

 

Monte Carlo and his sycophants are demanding that this game validates and rewards their playstyle exactly, to the last dot. That's absurd hubris. Monster-slaying giving XP has always been a problem and a silly way to reward the player. Remember how old D&D actually gave you more XP for finding loot and gold than for killing monsters? Removing XP from slaying monsters also removes the absolutely ridiculous "feature" of RPGs where the so-called heroes are industrial-scale mass murderers, since there's no drive to it.

 

Plus, no killing-XP rewards and promotes alternative endings to quest and alternative methods to solving quests - killing everything isn't the best choice since it won't reward you with additional XP.

 

So please Josh, don't listen to the whiners and implement this oh-so-rare system!

[MaximKat]

Quest only xp (because it's actually quests and not objectives). Since killing an opponent that wants to kill you is an objective in itself and should hand out xp to further hone your combat skills...

You're missing the point. The objective is not getting killed, killing an opponent is just one way of reaching it. Let's say we're talking about a team of assassins sent after you. You can kill them, or you can sneak away, or you can pay them twice what they were promised for you head and find out who hired them.

[Valorian]

Quest only xp (because it's actually quests and not objectives). Since killing an opponent that wants to kill you is an objective in itself and should hand out xp to further hone your combat skills...

You're missing the point. The objective is not getting killed, killing an opponent is just one way of reaching it. Let's say we're talking about a team of assassins sent after you. You can kill them, or you can sneak away, or you can pay them twice what they were promised for you head and find out who hired them.

 

My objective is to not get killed and to prevent them from trying to kill me ever again... and I can do that only by eliminating them completely.

So you're the one who's missing the point big time.

[MaximKat]

My objective is to not get killed and to prevent them from trying to kill me ever again... and I can do that only by eliminating them completely.

Does anything prevent you from doing just that?

 

Then again, if we're talking about the guild of assassins for hire, perhaps paying them to put you on a "no kill" list would be a better idea than just killing the first team and then having 3 more hunting you.

Edited October 15, 2012 by MaximKat

[Hobz]

What about enemies that are not tied to quests? Things that want to kill you without having the party trying to steal a quest item from them?

That's exactly the type I was talking about when I mentioned mindless animals and such -- you get XP for killing those.

 

Yeah, because outside quests you can only kill mindless animals and such..

 

Objective does't necessarily means "quest given buy an npc in the inn". If you stumble upon a secret dungeon (or basicly anything beside random trash encounters) while wandering around, obviously you'll be rewarded.

[Valorian]

My objective is to not get killed and to prevent them from trying to kill me ever again... and I can do that only by eliminating them completely.

Does anything prevent you from doing just that?

 

Then again, if we're talking about the guild of assassins for hire, perhaps paying them to put you on a "no kill" list would be a better idea than just killing the first team and then having 3 more hunting you.

 

It doesn't. But I want xp awarded for this objective. I killed them I completely removed the threat and I want an xp award to further hone my (combat) skills.

I'll kill the next 3 hunting me as well.

 

 

What about enemies that are not tied to quests? Things that want to kill you without having the party trying to steal a quest item from them?

That's exactly the type I was talking about when I mentioned mindless animals and such -- you get XP for killing those.

 

Yeah, because outside quests you can only kill mindless animals and such..

 

Objective does't necessarily means "quest given buy an npc in the inn". If you stumble upon a secret dungeon (or basicly anything beside random trash encounters) while wandering around, obviously you'll be rewarded.

 

Why would discovering a secret door/dungeon give xp and killing an enemy not?

[KDarkmoon]

Hrmm. No healing? What's to keep this from becoming ponderous rather than fun? I can already see the need for a cheat/trainer I guess.