Torches!

[Osvir]

Actual darkness in dungeons without a lightsource? Yes please. A game where torches actually means something would be awesome.

 

Torches aren't just Torches but a limited amount of wood that you can carry with you for camping resting as well? Weighing tons. Either you've got 12 torches in your backpack (as you wouldn't be able to carry more on 1 character) or 1 camp for 3 torches. This way you'd be both conservative with using torches and, more importantly, abusing the "Camp" function.

 

Could "Camping" cost resources?

 

Yea, that sounds real fun.

 

I can't gauge if you are being sarcastic or not.

 

I'm still curious about that... could "camping" cost some sort of resource?

 

Food or some "wood"/light source.

 

In Might & Magic Food is just a "number", you don't get to choose if you want apples or beef, it is just "Food = 12" and that's that. Simplistic and works for immersion (simple and rocking it). It would make resting less abusing. "Can't rest because I don't have enough resources"~ heck, if you don't have enough resources you could rest as well, but it'd up the ambush encounters by +50% or something (with resources you'd rest with 25% chance of random ambush/encounter or something~conceptual thoughts).

 

What do you guys think? Would it cause more problems than it is worth?

Edited December 8, 2012 by Osvir

[Dream]

Actual darkness in dungeons without a lightsource? Yes please. A game where torches actually means something would be awesome.

 

Torches aren't just Torches but a limited amount of wood that you can carry with you for camping resting as well? Weighing tons. Either you've got 12 torches in your backpack (as you wouldn't be able to carry more on 1 character) or 1 camp for 3 torches. This way you'd be both conservative with using torches and, more importantly, abusing the "Camp" function.

 

Could "Camping" cost resources?

 

Yea, that sounds real fun.

 

I can't gauge if you are being sarcastic or not.

 

I'm still curious about that... could "camping" cost some sort of resource?

 

Food or some "wood"/light source.

 

In Might & Magic Food is just a "number", you don't get to choose if you want apples or beef, it is just "Food = 12" and that's that. Simplistic and works for immersion (simple and rocking it). It would make resting less abusing. "Can't rest because I don't have enough resources"~ heck, if you don't have enough resources you could rest as well, but it'd up the ambush encounters by +50% or something (with resources you'd rest with 25% chance of random ambush/encounter or something~conceptual thoughts).

 

What do you guys think? Would it cause more problems than it is worth?

 

Considering it's worth nothing, yes.

Edited December 8, 2012 by Dream

[Osvir]

How and why?

 

EDIT: Motivate.

Edited December 8, 2012 by Osvir

[Dream]

How and why?

 

EDIT: Motivate.

 

You'd be adding complexity to the game for no reason other than to add complexity and "realism" to it. What fun does it add to the game, another resource to manage? You may as well add outhouses and require characters to manage their toxicity levels by taking ****s 'cause it's more "real."

[Grotesque]

Torches! Do I need to say more? I guess I do.

 

Will there be expendable torches resources for deep dungeoneering and will it be an equipped slot (taking up the Sword slot). Seeing as it is a party game, one character who doesn't do much in battle could handle the light sourcing.

 

Perhaps be able to place flares, or markers in the dungeon (and not only on the mini-map).

 

It'd be easier to make something scary~horror if torches are included. Of course, Wizards should have abilities to light up (Gandalf style) as well as Flame Swords and the like.

 

Thoughts?

 

There's nothing scary about an isometric overhead view and combat results determined by random number generators.

 

 

Yeah, tell that to Diablo 1 players too

[Osvir]

Whilst I see your point (underneath your unnecessary attitude), I wonder how you come to the conclusion that taking a **** needs to be included because of having to have a camp resource. Regardless, to me it isn't about having it be more "real", sure about the complexity, I kind of want some complexity, a.k.a. depth.

 

A, I think it adds more tactical features and decisions. Should I use the wooden sticks for Torches or for a Camp fire? (Decisions, decisions)

B, Danger and preparation (Light sources).

C, Setting a Camp requires resources. "Camping out" does not. Setting a camp implies that this is a place you'll return too. You could set the camp up in one location on the map, and when you want to move the camp forward you'll gather it up and set it @ new location. It'd cost resources to set a fire, just as it'd cost resources to craft herbs (a Camp could serve as a general "go-to" place for crafting various "on-the-field" items)

D, "Fun" is "Perspective"

 

C Scenario:

I enter a dungeon, clearing the "LZ", I set up a camp (not resting or anything) move forward, take down some monsters/enemies whatever and then I go back, gather the camp together and move it forward. A mobile Command Center~ Pack Mules could serve this function as well. There could be areas where the "Camp" doesn't even fit physically (even more mitigating "where" you can Rest).

 

Recently saw "The Postman" (A classic movie nowadays with Kevin Costner). For inspiration:

 

EDIT: And the most important scene in that movie includes a freezing man and a zippo lighter.

Edited December 8, 2012 by Osvir

[PrimeJunta]

You'd be adding complexity to the game for no reason other than to add complexity and "realism" to it. What fun does it add to the game, another resource to manage? You may as well add outhouses and require characters to manage their toxicity levels by taking ****s 'cause it's more "real."

 

Not at all, you'd be adding complexity to the game to discourage rest-spamming. Surely you can't actually like NWN-style "sit down for six seconds anywhere at any time to recharge all resources" derpiness that nerfs the whole idea of resource management?

 

 

There are other ways to do this, of course, but resource-limited camping is one of the better ideas IMO.

[Osvir]

**nevermind

Edited December 8, 2012 by Osvir

[Dream]

I kind of want some complexity, a.k.a. depth.

 

That's your problem; complexity is not the same thing as depth. It's easy to make a game as complex and convoluted as possible, but it's hard to make it deep. A game that's deep looks simple to begin with, but as the player plays more he discovers more as well. The depth comes from basic features opening up and expanding (first a player finds out he can cast spells, then he learns there are spells that do things other than straight damage, then he learns certain spells work better against certain enemies, then he learns certain spells work well together, etc.). A complex game simply overloads the player with numbers and features and then calls it a day. One is fun and the other isn't.

 

 

Not at all, you'd be adding complexity to the game to discourage rest-spamming. Surely you can't actually like NWN-style "sit down for six seconds anywhere at any time to recharge all resources" derpiness that nerfs the whole idea of resource management?

 

BG/IWD/PST did it fine, why pick a game that didn't as evidence of why it needs to be "fixed?"

[Tamerlane]

The resting mechanic in the IE games was anti-good.

 

Every time you hit the "rest" button in one of those games, something innocent and pure withers.

[PrimeJunta]

BG/IWD/PST did it fine, why pick a game that didn't as evidence of why it needs to be "fixed?"

 

You have a strange sense of humor, Dream. (You are joking, right?)

 

Edit: In case you weren't joking, what, specifically, do you think was different in the resting mechanics between the IE games and NWN that made the former 'fine' and the latter 'not fine?'

Edited December 9, 2012 by PrimeJunta

[Dream]

BG/IWD/PST did it fine, why pick a game that didn't as evidence of why it needs to be "fixed?"

 

You have a strange sense of humor, Dream. (You are joking, right?)

 

Edit: In case you weren't joking, what, specifically, do you think was different in the resting mechanics between the IE games and NWN that made the former 'fine' and the latter 'not fine?'

 

In all honesty I don't remember what NWN's mechanic was. However, if it was the same as the IE games then forgive me for taking you at your word and assuming you wouldn't make **** up since "sit down for six seconds anywhere at any time to recharge all resources" is hardly an accurate description considering how often one would hear "you cannot rest here." Here's a modified statement for you:

 

BG/IWD/PST did it fine, why make up a system that doesn't as evidence of why it needs to be "fixed?" Better?

[PrimeJunta]

In all honesty I don't remember what NWN's mechanic was. However, if it was the same as the IE games then forgive me for taking you at your word and assuming you wouldn't make **** up since "sit down for six seconds anywhere at any time to recharge all resources" is hardly an accurate description considering how often one would hear "you cannot rest here." Here's a modified statement for you:

 

BG/IWD/PST did it fine, why make up a system that doesn't as evidence of why it needs to be "fixed?" Better?

 

Okay, I may have been exaggerating a little. Consider "anywhere" struck out. There were no-rest areas here and there, 'tis true.

 

Even so, the rest mechanic was fundamentally broken in all of the IE games, and the "no-rest areas" were a ham-fisted attempt at mitigating that fundamental design flaw.

 

I take it you're conceding your "complexity for no reason" point, since you're no longer arguing it?

[Dream]

Okay, I may have been exaggerating a little. Consider "anywhere" struck out. There were no-rest areas here and there, 'tis true.

 

Even so, the rest mechanic was fundamentally broken in all of the IE games, and the "no-rest areas" were a ham-fisted attempt at mitigating that fundamental design flaw.

 

I take it you're conceding your "complexity for no reason" point, since you're no longer arguing it?

 

I never stopped arguing it, you just haven't given a single counterpoint outside of "it doesn't work because I think that it doesn't work, as evidenced by me saying it doesn't work."

 

The rest mechanics in the IE games weren't broken; they revolved around resting at an inn (guaranteed) or outside (chance to be ambushed). The "no rest areas" were dungeons which I would hardly call ham-fisted since resting in dungeons would be a terrible ****ing idea considering they're crawling with bad guys. This necessitated one to prepare before entering a dungeon and manage the resources that were available to them (spells, health, etc.), or be forced to leave halfway through.

 

Adding another resource to this system for the sole purpose of having to manage it is the definition of adding complexity for no reason.

[PrimeJunta]

Before we continue, Dream, one question: what are your thoughts about metagaming? Problematic or not?

 

By "metagaming" I mean abuse of mechanics to get desired results. For example, using the save/reload mechanic to get around a failed skill check or to get better random loot, grinding for XP, min-maxing, farming, or rest-spamming.

 

I believe that metagaming is unequivocally a Bad Thing, and that one core measure of how good a game system is, is how good it is at marginalizing metagaming.

 

For example, if game F lets you open a chest by saving before your lockpick attempt and reloading and trying again until you succeed, but game G gives you the same result with every reload, then in my opinion game F's lockpick mechanic is worse than game G's.

 

I'm asking because I think there's a possibility we're talking at cross-purposes. I.e., if you do not see metagaming as problematic -- which is, naturally, an entirely legitimate position to take -- I will bow out of the discussion at this point.

[Osvir]

First of all, that's your opinion Dream, I don't personally think the IE games did this any good (which is my opinion). Likewise, there are some who don't care.

 

Here's what has been said before, and is equally important as today's discussions:

 

Proposal for a new rest button

Death and Resting

Rest/Restoring Spells

Resting System

Solutions to the degenerate rest

Thoughts on Resting Mechanic #1

Thoughts on Resting Mechanic #2

Arcanum, Stamina+Endurance and Rest/Camp System

Rest, Injuries and Recuperation

[Dream]

Personally I don't see an issue with metagaming in a single player game. What does it matter how other people play a game when it has no effect on you? Besides, it's impossible to design a game with no metagaming.

 

However, if you did want to design a game without metagaming (or with it limited at least) then simply using the old system and preventing players from metagaming is the absolute worst decision you could make. In your example of game F vs game G take two players. Player A does not like to metagame and so both games play out the same for him (he chooses not to reload in game F). Player B, on the other hand, dislikes losing to RNG in games and so ends up happy with game F but is pissed off with game G. You're of the opinion that a single player game that leaves half the players annoyed and angry is better why exactly?

 

See, if you actually want to minimize metagaming and not piss off a portion your players then what you need to do is design a system that does not rely on whatever behavior caused players to metagame in the first place. In this instance the solution would be to make lockpicking a straight skill threshold as opposed to a roll of a pair of (weighted) dice.

 

First of all, that's your opinion Dream, I don't personally think the IE games did this any good (which is my opinion). Likewise, there are some who don't care.

 

It is my opinion, and the reverse is yours. However, since we don't know how the majority of players feel about this then the safe option would be to go with what the IE games did since that's what this game was advertised as being a spiritual successor of (otherwise you end up with a game like dragon age which, after all the "improvements," ended up being a spiritual successor in name only).

[Osvir]

With spell memorization not being a part of resting, with the new system of magic that has been proposed by Obsidian, resting wouldn't be for the same purpose as the IE games. Hence why it isn't a safe bet anymore.

 

As it currently stands, "Resting" is only used for "Stamina" regeneration in P:E. As "Stamina" is something you regain over time, regardless (lots of time for Sandwich). This makes resting pointless, and it would be better to remove it.

 

But because​ it is advertised as a spiritual successor people both want it in and they want to see it improved. That is at least the feeling I get about it when I read threads here. So we begin to discuss "What purposes could resting have?".

 

These are some suggestions that I've caught whilst reading (the jist of it)~what the general discussion has been about regarding resting and things you can combine with it:

Crafting, Party Banters, Ambushes, Inventory Management, Preparation, Regeneration

Edited December 9, 2012 by Osvir

[PrimeJunta]

Personally I don't see an issue with metagaming in a single player game.

 

Thank you. In that case, I have no interest in what you may have to say about game mechanics. I won't be wasting your time in pointless discussion in the future.

[Nonek]

I'm all in favour of as many mechanics being implemented as possible, so long as they're internally consistent. This short sighted view that rpg's should strip everything away that's superfluous to the story results in such games as Dragon Age 2, where we have nothing but alternate combat and conversation in corridors. Fun but lifeless, pointless and catered for the lowest common denominator. If we must prepare, research and use caution when we step into the wilderness then it becomes a much more trying endeavour, and all the more satisfying when we overcome thanks to our ingenuity, planning and determination.

 

Even the presence of backhouses can be used to build flavour. Infiltrating that enemy castle, you notice that one guard keeps rushing off to the jakes because of his irritable bowels, thus opening a weakness in the outer perimeter. Seeking to spring an accomplice from the old Irongate prison you acquire a map from an escapee, who made his dash for freedom through a weakened grate set under the water closet. The more features that are present, the more opportunity for depth and role playing.

 

Adding complexity to an rpg isn't a bad thing in and of itself, so long as it's used to add life and options to the gameworld.

[Adhin]

Personally I like my dungeon's dark, isometric or otherwise and I like requiring some kind of light source. I would prefer options beyond torches, of course, but I'd also like it if torches where handled better then just 'takes up a weapon slot'. Always felt that was bad management. Yeah in skyrim you can use a torch to block if you really wanted and attack and all that but... well this also comes down to I think most RPG's have poor inventory management as far as equipment slots for weapons are concerned.

 

All the infinity engine games had 2-3 'weapon' slots and an off hand slot. If you wanted to dual wield that kind of screwed up your ability to have a bow pre-equipped. Meant a lot of inventory management fiddling to deal with. Thrown weapons took up a weapon slot, couldn't be done with an off hand weapon either for that matter. I think a mildly more advanced system from Dragon's Dogma would actually work great, especially if all equipped items are shown on the characters.

 

Which is actually getting me a bit off course so I'll just end with this. I would love to see a basic 2 weapon swap like thing and torches not really be placed into either. Having torches be a side thing, like a belt slot like item that you hold in your hands while weapons are sheathed. Could make your mages do it, or whatever, but ultimately to do much outside of swinging it at enemies you'd have to drop it. Could prove an interesting tactical choice, who's using the torch, then who drops it where to keep the area lit while they fight.

 

Issue of course is making it not to irritating of a thing to deal with but that's how I'd prefer it in the end, and not taking up a weapon slot. That's always extremely clumsily handled in every game I've ever seen played since I can remember.

[Grotesque]

[Jobby]

I'm in agreement with OP and most of the people in this thread that torches (and asscoiated held lighting) are a good idea, they add immersion, atmosphere and realism.

In regards to those arguing against them i dont see why they would need to be any different or have any different radius from the daytime FOW, all it would add in this regard is dynamic lighting.

 

I think their implementation must not be a royal pain in the arse though as many other posters have stated, so i'll present this in bullet point form to make it quicker.

1. I can't be bothered with having to pause the game and swap my torch for a sword everytime i fight a badguy, either make them a non-equipable item that your character holds when their not fighting or have a light slot on the equip screen that can be used for lanterns, torches, crystals etc..
   
2. Consumable torches sounds like another annoying mechanic, i'm usually all for increasing complexity and depth but this just sounds like it would piss people off, one infinite torch will still give that feeling of immersion and atmosphere.
   
3. Simple button to turn torches off is a great idea, cant remember whose it was sorry! But it would add tactical depth for hiding in the shadows (if that skill is at all light based), especially if one race or class has NV which you only see whilst having that one character selected.
   

[Hormalakh]

Just remembered that Arcanum uses light as a game mechanic as well as dynamically.

[Lephys]

Would having to deal with darkness really be such... *applies shades to face*... torch-ture?

 

. I had to... My alignment is LOLful Good.

 

Vote for torches!

 

(This message was brought to you by the Foundation for the Advocacy of Dynamic Lighting And Torches [FADLAT])