Solo play

[ComMcNeil]

Hey,

 

I did not find a thread about this specific topic, but should there be one, please post a link.

 

Basically, there are many topics regarding the XP rewards, how they should be handed out and how they are distributed etc.

But I guess, most of these have party play in mind. My question is, what is the stance on solo playthroughs?

Sparked by the whole Project:Eternity, I got in the mood to play BG2 again, this time as a solo character. Even though many mechanics are clearly not directly intended for solo play, it is definately fun to overcome challanges you struggled with earlier, in a party of 6, now alone without really breaking a sweat.

 

Will PE endorse players who choose do to things solo? Will it punish them by giving them less XP, reward them by giving them more XP, maybe even acknoledge the fact that the player only has one single character and build this in some dialogue or quests (which would be freaking awesome)?

 

What I would like to see is a method similar of BG (and the D&D rules in general), that you get a fixes amount of XP for the encounter based upon relative difficulty, which is divided amongs your party members. BUT what should change is, that XP should not be static. Meaning, like in the "real PnP D&D", encounter give less XP, if you are higher level, at least it was that way in 3rd edition, I think 4th has gone back to fixed XP values. Nevertheless there should be a mechanic in place that tries to prevent your power from skyrocketing once you get to encounters that yield more XP.

 

In my current BG2 playthrough, the beginnig with my sorcerer was fairly ok, I needed to pick the quests I could do, levels came in a reasonable speed and it seemed balanced. But not at the end of chapter 2, I get levels in a matter of minutes, as monsters tend to give more than 10k XP each, and are practically dead in a few seconds due to my overpoweredness. (I heard the problematic encounters come again in ToB but I digress)

 

However, dont think I would like the devs to invest much development time in such an optional part of the game, as its more something that the player decides for himself - just like expert or ironman modes. If its not balanced, well, than its not balanced. I am sure the playerbase will create appropriate challanges for itself.

 

 

What are your opinions on the matter, anyone likes playing such games solo as well?

[Luridis]

I don't see the difference really... The game will be single player. They're balancing it for a party you partially control, with the AI controlling the rest. If they intended not to do so then they might as well make one homogenized hero like Skyrim or The Witcher. The point of this kind of game is to play a character and see how your interactions play out in the world. That would include the people who decide to follow you; who's help you need to survive. Though, not from a meta-game perspective, but from a RP perspective. If every class has to do everything because they're all expected to operate independently, then you might as well toss the class structure in the trash. Having Obsidian's intended setup means your character has weaknesses, ones that need to be compensated for with the companions recruit.

[Sensuki]

Hopefully they don't even take solo play into consideration. So that if you want a real challenge like you said then it will be a challenge.

[Humanoid]

I believe Tim mentioned at least in passing that it's a valid option, not sure if it was in one of the updates or in one of the third-party interviews. I will start the game with the intention of soloing, but am not bound to the idea, so I'll see how it develops naturally.

 

That would include the people who decide to follow you; who's help you need to survive. Though, not from a meta-game perspective, but from a RP perspective. If every class has to do everything because they're all expected to operate independently, then you might as well toss the class structure in the trash. Having Obsidian's intended setup means your character has weaknesses, ones that need to be compensated for with the companions recruit.

 

The other angle is that that your character does have weaknesses, ones that are compensated by the other abilities in your character's skillset. A situation where the only solution to a given problem is to throw more bodies at it is just as artificial as the scenario of one character being able to do everything as per the other games you cite.

 

That said, it should be very much a valid roleplaying option to hire a bunch of goons from the Adventurers' Hall on a short-term contract, if a soloing character decides that they must absolutely wipe out that pesky group of tough foes. Perhaps my definition of solo is a bit looser than those who might swear off having a second portrait in the interface for even a split second...

[ComMcNeil]

They're balancing it for a party you partially control, with the AI controlling the rest.

 

iirc it was not said that this is the case, but rather that they wanted to make a game where you completly control every one of your characters (and have the option to let the AI take over if you dont want to control everyone)

 

Hopefully they don't even take solo play into consideration. So that if you want a real challenge like you said then it will be a challenge.

 

The problem with BG was that you level so fast that the balance was really whacky. The beginning was harder than in a party, the mid game was easier until you hit the cap, then it got harder again. If its just plain harder by design, I would be OK with that - probably meaning that a solo char would earn the same amount of exp than a single char in a 6 person group. I guess that would make it very hard to practically impossible to solo the game.

[Hassat Hunter]

Monsters don't give XP per kill in PE... which immediately eliminates many of the problems you described.

 

Besides that PE will obviously be made with a party in mind. I don't think they should design it with making it viable for a single character, as that would mostly gimp encounters. However more power to the solo player, as it will become a real challenge, and you have some bragging rights (of feel-good-for-yourself) rights if you completed it succesfully...

[Kane_Severance]

What makes a solo player challenge a challenge at all is that the game is designed around being played with a party. It's about using all the tricks of your trade to survive where you probably should have died. If they balance the game with solo play-throughs in mind then what's the challenge?

[Malkaven]

I don't mind the solo play option/challenge but I always hated the feeling that I'm being penalized by having a full party because XP is split across the board. If you chose a fighter in Baldurs Gate and you had a full party it is going to take a LONG time before you level. You will easily be half way through Chapter 2...