Buffing your party

[mstark]

What can I say?

 

I want the game to play very much like the old IE games. Yes that means buffs, yes that means some fights wont be possible to beat without buffs, yes that (might) mean it will be possible to abuse the system, but it's not about abusing the system, or steam-rolling every single encounter, it's about enjoying the story. If you didn't figure out to use buffs, too bad. You won't be able to beat some of the most challenging alternative encounters in the game, those who do figure it out will win with a true sense of achievement. Those who don't figure it out will still be able to enjoy the main story, and the majority of the content.

 

I certainly did not figure everything out until after having played BG2 more than once, and read a lot about it online. That's not a bad thing, the game was so good it made be actually do research about it... imagine if your school assignments got you that excited about doing research.

 

Back to buffing, I don't mind it, and if we get action queues it will be a whole lot less tedious. The people saying "no 10 minutes of buffing", well, you'll be happy, because that would never happen.

 

What are the alternatives? Single-click-execute-all-actions-macro, or limiting buffs to a few passive ones that are always active until you switch them? No thanks. I've got either WoW or Diablo 3 for that, and I hate both with passion.

Edited December 10, 2012 by mstark

[Sacred_Path]

Although I agree with you on this, isn't that contradicting your point before about the party of all barbarians which is improved by adding a cleric?

 

Slightly, yes. But you have to agree that a party that really consists only of one class is pretty derpy. Practically forcing you to have at least one caster or tank in the mix is ok IMO.

 

On a related note, how do we feel about buffs stacking with enhancement from equipment?

I prefer them not being stackable (as that normally makes buffs unnecessary after some time and I don't have to bother with them anymore).

 

I'd prefer it if it were handled in such a way that the effects of buffs aren't also found on equipment in the exact same form. I.e. if there's a spell that raises strength, don't add rings of strength. Otherwise I'd also be in the "non-stackable" group.

[PrimeJunta]

On a more serious note, I'm in the pro-buff camp. It adds a lot of variety.

 

What I don't like, though, is the encounter-as-puzzle mechanic, where you have to repeatedly die and reload to find out what they're going to throw at you, then set the right buffs, then win. For example, the game could drop hints about what to expect in a boss fight so you can prepare buffs intelligently beforehand, and, like, throw one mind-controlling wellithid at you so you'll have an idea what to do when faced with a roomful of them.

 

I also dislike generic "make ur character stronger/faster/tougher" buffs, except very short-duration ones that can be used to swing a battle. Long duration generic buffs just end up as chores. MotB had plenty of those, like long-duration damage reduction, AC improvement or stat improvement buffs. They're just boring. If you want to make it possible to do that, just provide items for it instead.

 

The best buffs are specific, and have a great deal of utility in specific circumstances but are near-useless in other circumstances. So, mind-control/elemental/paralysis/any-specific-effect resistance is good. Extra damage to undead/demons/beasts/humans etc., good. Short-duration, high-cost haste/damage reduction/damage boost/ability boost, good. Long-duration of the same, bad.

 

Just my 10¢.

[Sacred_Path]

The best buffs are specific, and have a great deal of utility in specific circumstances but are near-useless in other circumstances. So, mind-control/elemental/paralysis/any-specific-effect resistance is good. Extra damage to undead/demons/beasts/humans etc., good. Short-duration, high-cost haste/damage reduction/damage boost/ability boost, good. Long-duration of the same, bad.

 

Interestingly, I hope there'll be very few of those.

 

Like you mentioned, they're mandatory for quite a few encounters in IE games, where you're often as good as dead if you don't have them active (which you find out by having at least one character be cursed/ charmed/ chunked). It almost never makes for quality gameplay. I get informed about the fact that one character just got paralyzed by a monster, and I have a spell that protects from paralysis. It's not rocket science to figure out what to do before the next encounter. It's even worse if you only see a random spell effect go off, then have to figure out what buff would have protected you. I really hope they put a new spin on that kind of buff. Adding disadvantages as has been suggested is one idea.

 

I could also imagine having few buffs, but having different effects on them. I.e. "Body of Stone" is a high level buff that adds damage resistance, immunity to paralysis and petrification, as well as enhancing melee damage. OTOH it slows you down and possibly makes you more susceptible to certain kinds of energy. It could be cast in all kinds of situations, but is hopefully not your one-key-solution to encounters that use paralysis or petrification.

[PrimeJunta]

That would be bad, yes. I would prefer to have visibility range a good deal higher than spell effect range, which would give you time to buff up when you spot those wellithids headed your way, before they can use their mind-control ray on you. Or, even better, have a stealthed rogue scout ahead. The IE games did allow this at least some of the time. I should hope P:E does too.

 

I'm not saying there should never ever be ambushes where a bunch of nasties catches you flat-footed, but that should not be the most common type of combat challenge you get. And ideally, I'd prefer that you did something careless to walk into the ambush, rather than the usual cut-scene-followed-by-ambush thing.

[Dream]

The only buffs I like are ones that are fast cast/short duration. When you have those then you end up using them more tactically rather than just "oh, time for combat, lemme cast all my buffs before I start."

 

If they're going to have long duration buffs may as well make them auras (same purpose and less annoying to keep up all the time).

[Lephys]

I'll just put here what I said in another thread, although this is only the buff-related portion:

 

Something should definitely be done about buffs, too. The "I obviously want all the buffs all the time, because they just boost numbers" thing is a little silly. I mean... would you have a cooldown on plate armor? "This gives my warrior +5 AC, but it keeps de-equipping every 20 seconds, and I have to go back in and equip it." Again, I think spell effects here would be better than simple number changes; giving the character some effect or status that they didn't already have, rather than simply boosting things.

 

An example would be the common Barkskin-type spell. Make it turn their skin to wood, changing how things affect them. The damage from piercing arrows might not be stopped much, but slashing blades might get stuck in the thick bark. Also, fire would most likely do MORE damage, as the character's skin would now be MORE flammable, etc. As opposed to simply "You look like a tree, but really it's like you just gained a breastplate temporarily."

[Inertia]

What I did hate about buff spells though, especially in IWD2, was that some of the long-duration ones ('Stoneskin' and 'Armor', I think) covered characters with a monochrome gray color from head to toe. So if I cast those spells at the beginning of each day and once more when they ran out, the affected characters would look like walking gray statues during most of the game. Not good for immersion or identifying with your characters.

 

I remember da2 having a feature where the effects of buffs only showed while in combat. Would you guys like to see a similar feature in PE?

[Hormalakh]

hmm no... that's weird.

[Wirdjos]

I remember da2 having a feature where the effects of buffs only showed while in combat. Would you guys like to see a similar feature in PE?

 

Remembering from DA:O, (I didn't play a whole lot of DA2) the only reason to remove the constant buff auras was to not be a freaky glowing spirit-creature thing during the cinematic style conversations. As I don't see P:E using that style for conversations, I don't think that will be an issue.

 

Count me in the aura camp. I would prefer it if buffing was mostly limited to the chanters. Let them not stack with other chanter's songs (maybe with a little bonus for multiples of the same song) and be somewhat significant. That way the tactical choice is of which buff to choose. I never liked adding multiple buffs just to make my party what it really should have been to start, especially in the Vancian system. If you need single cast buffs, make them short and significant, like Dream mentioned.

[Lephys]

I remember da2 having a feature where the effects of buffs only showed while in combat. Would you guys like to see a similar feature in PE?

 

It's funny that you mention that, because I was JUST thinking about that about an hour ago while reading some of these posts. I don't remember if 2 did it nor not, but, if I recall correctly, in one of the games (if not both), your passive "buffs" actually weren't active until combat. Maybe you still suffered the mana/stamina cap, though (which, for all practical purposes, would just leave an aesthetic difference.)

 

At the very least, though, that definitely would've solved the "everyone's got a giant, shimmering, refractive bubble around them" problem in NWN2. Haha.

 

Also... not at all a fan of the Chanters just being "the buffers." MAYBE if buffs have utility differences instead of purely having mathematical differences (aka, are done well)... MAYbe... u_u

Edited December 11, 2012 by Lephys

[Alexjh]

I'd say the key is making buffs not a chore is making sure that the pure statistical ones aren't the important ones. Things like haste, invisibility, shields, blur etc are very visual powers with very specific purposes, but something like bless is far more nebulous. If you are going to have things like that the key is to give them a specific role rather than just "I summon my Gods to make my numbers go higher!"

 

On average, I'd say that any significant amount of buffing should at most be required for one fight in four, it certainly shouldn't be a prefight ritual every single time.

 

One option actually perhaps would be an ability to prepare a preset routine of pre-fight spells that you can cast the bunch of them automatically, that way you don't have to manually do loads of buffing every time when you know what you want.

[Lephys]

One option actually perhaps would be an ability to prepare a preset routine of pre-fight spells that you can cast the bunch of them automatically, that way you don't have to manually do loads of buffing every time when you know what you want.

 

True 'dat. It might actually be prudent to have those be set as behaviors, and have them initiate along with combat. It's somewhat like initating a stance, or the Human Torch from the Fantastic 4 going all "FLAME ON!", or the Hulk hulking out. That would really depend on how all the other combat factor specifics work, though. In some ways, it's better to have to pick your targets and which buffs to use each time, rather than having them be pre-pickable.

 

That's kind of the idea, really. If combat is dynamic enough, you don't really automatically know that your battle with these 5 goblins is going to go exactly like your battle with those 5 goblins earlier in the cave. I think that if the buff ability allows for the quite-good strategy of putting it on the same person multiple times in a row, then that tells you that either the buff is too generic and math-boosty and could be improved with a utilitarian purpose, or the combat could easily be more dynamic.

Edited December 11, 2012 by Lephys

[Adhin]

I was always pretty happy with the 3.5 changes in relation to a lot of the 'buffs'. That being a lot more stuff didn't stack. Ultimately what that meant, in computer playing terms, the better your equipment.. the less time you spent buffing. And the more combat or utility spells your 'buffers' could then memorize which made them more useful. Ultimately I don't mind some buffing but NWN which broke some stacking rules (then forced a hard +12 cap)... well it took 'forever' to buff. And im talking in a PW where you got 2-3 people doing the work for a group heh.

 

Most of the infinity engine games I didn't feel it was an issue since most where short term 'in the fight' moments. Either way I hope they have some stack-canceling rules in place so it's not just about applying every buff available. If they got a ton of buffs, and each one has full effect always, then they have to balance around that time sync and it just becomes a little silly. Also never been a fan of the kind of gameplay that breads. Run into monsters, get killed, reload, buff to tackle encounter you shouldn't have any business knowing about.

 

...it's a bad loop of degenerative gameplay they've already stated they don't want to promote. It's, in part, one of the reasons they're doing a dual bar system for 'health'.

 

-edit-

Oh forgot, DA:O, yeah I liked there mana/resource max being cut off to sustain buff/auras. Though as per why you would turn it off (besides the glow) was they just removed the max, they didn't 'cost' anything so going into a fight with full stamina or mana, then using some abilities 'then' activating your buff meant you, ultimately, got some free buff as you used the 'cost' on abilities prior. DA2 and every game to use that system since makes it also cost so there literally is 0 reason to ever turn buffs off (which I think is bad).

 

Also don't think it'll apply to PE, as they're using a 'number of abilities' in a circle/tier/whatever that, the whole level of stuff has its own seperate cooldown. For instance say you can cast 3 fireballs and 5 magic missiles. 3 fireballs and your Tier 3 line gets put on cooldown for 30 seconds or whatever, but you could still cast MM or anything from a higher or lower teir of spells. Kinda like that, wont need to rest to refresh spells that way.

 

I also believe they'll be doing a buncha low level stuff for mages with out any cooldowns (like magic missile may never have a cooldown as its part of the lower tier things). Something about spells your mage 'knows' (lower lvl stuff) vs powerful spells in his spell book (book having CD's per tier, personal lower lvl spells not).

 

Anyway, faster buffs, yay, slow buffs boo.

Edited December 11, 2012 by Adhin

[Valsuelm]

I'll start. I don't really like having to spend 10 minutes buffing my party. It takes away from the action. There's gotta be other ways ot making buffs "tactical."

 

That's good. In the IE games fully buffing your party with spells and pots wouldn't take more than about a minute, unless of course you forgot where you put that stack of oil of speed pots (better inventory management tools is something I'd like to see in PE).

 

Once you took the time to learn what the buffs did (read the dang tooltips), you were good to go for the most part.

 

Buffing overall was fine as is in the IE games. The only thing I think that could possibly use some improvement is a clue as to when to use some of the less oft used buffs in advance, rather than having to wipe unexpectedly and spectacularly (though that itself was sometimes fun... it wasn't very immersive) to find out that you should probably use buff(s) X in encounter X. As well as a clear timer when buff X is going to expire would have been nice.

 

I'mma say something potentially controversial, since it looks to me from reading this thread and others that MMOs have left a big impression on some of the players who post here.

 

I've played a lot of games that have put me in direct contact with a large number of other RPG players (PnP and MMOs). I used to lead a very successful raiding guild back when WoW was a better game (my guild opened the AQ gates if that means anything to you). One of the arguments that would occasionally come up when I was attempting to build that guild to be successful (not an easy task) was whether buffing was important or not. I'd hear the arguments that it's a pain, or the arguments that mats were expensive, or that the buffs themselves didn't even do much, or yada yada yada. With only a couple exceptions out of many dozens or scores of players I ever played with all of those who opposed buffing were frankly at best lazy players but usually bad too. They were almost invariably the same people who generally healed the wrong people (despite having specific healing assignments), did subpar dps for their class/gear, stood in fire, usually didn't have things hotkeyed, often didn't even understand what buff X did because they never bothered to read their toolips and think, blamed RNG for most of their woes, 'what's a macro?', etc. The exceptions were some very young players (teens) who had natural talent that were eventually convinced of the importance of buffs. For the majority of those who were good players (didn't stand in things, intuitively understood mechanics, didn't need hands held, took initiative, generally kicked ass, etc) buffing was a no brainer that they didn't think twice about doing, excepting maybe to think 'Which buff is most appropriate here?' (an option that Blizzard took away for the most part (if not completely by now) in later patches in their many dumbing downs of WoW).

 

Game talents do for the most part transcend specific games within a genre and oft even related genres. Those that tend to be good at one game are usually good at another, those that tend to be not so good at one game are usually not so good at another. Hence most of the good players in WoW, the IE games, et al already knowing by the time they're decently far into the game (certainly by max level) that buffs are important on their own. This is going to be true most of the time in any game.

 

That said. Learning that some things like buffs takes experience if you've never played a game with them before (or if the game was so easymode that while they existed they weren't needed). I totally can understand and appreciate a newbie not knowing. We were all newbies once. I don't have much sympathy for the guy or gal who doesn't take the time to learn what's right in front of them though, and I don't want PE to be a game balanced for those that don't take the time to read tooltips and think. There's a whole market full of games like that nowadays, in fact it sometimes seems really hard to find a modern game that isn't geared for these folks.

 

For the guy Sawyer mentions who never thought to buff that made it to Dorn's Deep (that I'm guessing inspired this thread)... I'd say what did you think all those potions/scrolls/spells that dropped from innumerable monsters, chests, storekeeps, et al before lower Dorn's Deep were for? Seriously now, you paying attention to the game you're playing?

 

A CRPG 101 manual might be nice in PE, but does PE want to do that? I'd say yes actually, as while the majority won't no doubt at least some players will cut their RPG teeth on PE, and a refresher for others won't hurt. Tutorial maybe, manual definitely I'd say.

 

Also, fire and forget buffs that some in this thread have mentioned as being good that are common in the modern day MMO are arguably not buffs. If you have them up 100% or near 100% of the time they add almost nothing tactically to the game. A large number of buff possibilities do add to the tactical possibilities of an encounter. They can make something that is very tough or even near impossible for a class (or party) at a given time possible or even easy. Are they always needed? No. As much as I like overall what buffs bring to the table I generally save buffing for the tougher encounters in the IE games, same for WoW (yea the basics were up all the time as they cost little to zero resources, but potting was reserved for when you really needed it), and other games. Why do I like them? For the tactical options and potential encounter/game dynamics they provide.

 

And on that note. Good game buffing mechanics do require resources. Be they a part of a certain # of spells that are cast per day, a somewhat limited supply of a certain type of pot, a buff on a cooldown timer, etc. Bad buffing mechanics are something that costs zero resources other than remembering to cast it every X minutes (see modern WoW, SWTOR, or many other MMOs for many examples of this). Buffs that require resources add to potential encounter dynamics and the game experience for those savvy enough to use them, buffs that do not require resources add little to nothing to the game.

 

If someone truly has a better idea for buffing. Let's hear it. I honestly don't think anything suggested so far in this thread is better than what the 2nd edition IE games had. If they don't like it, meh... some of us do and it was a part of the IE games, so we'd like buffing along those lines. Disagree or agree, just please don't exaggerate like some of you are. Buffing really doesn't take that much time once you learn how to do it. That you think it takes a long time tells me you likely didn't take the time to read the tooltips (yea... that takes time but it's how you learn to play), and/or your main experience with buffing is in a modern day easymode game where the buffs really don't add to the encounters because they cost no resources or the encounters themselves are just so easy you never need buffs to beat them.

 

PE is going to be a tactical combat game. Buffs do add a lot of potential dynamics to that combat. They also can be incredibly useful out of combat (ie: Potion of Master Thievery, Invisibility, Water Walking, etc).

Edited December 11, 2012 by Valsuelm

[Jotra]

Buffing your party: what's awesome about it? What's not? Go!

 

I'll start. I don't really like having to spend 10 minutes buffing my party. It takes away from the action. There's gotta be other ways ot making buffs "tactical."

 

I absolutely hated the high lvl combat in NWN2 and the main reason was the crazy amount of buffs. I hope Obsidian keeps the amount of buffs very low.

[Hormalakh]

-snip-

All very good points and I'm glad you mentioned them. I do agree with you that some of this "poor play" can be due to laziness. Probably not all of it. In any case, thanks. As for 10 minute buffs, I was exaggerating, as I'm sure you could tell. I really don't have a good response to your post otherwise.

Edited December 11, 2012 by Hormalakh

[Blackstream]

The only thing bad about buffs is in games where you can, and end up basically encouraged to, prebuff. It's extremely immersion breaking, yet also extremely optimal (as every buff you prebuff is one more action you can spend in battle kicking the opponent's ass), to prebuff for a fight your party can't possibly know is coming.

 

It's a somewhat minor thing, to be fair, I'm not gonna cry if PE doesn't address/fix this issue. The obvious 'solution' is to disallow any combat casting until combat is initiated, but I don't really like that. I mean, it'd be fairly simple to classify certain spells as 'in-combat' only, and certain spells as free cast (friend, long term buffs and summons (anything that lasts hours you could reasonably choose to want to keep up all the time), utility spells, etc), but thinking far far ahead, I'm predicting that top difficulty all higher difficulty modes activated playthroughs are going to revolve around careful prebuffing, and the strategy of that isn't really something I want to see go away either.

 

So yes, buffs are cool. In simple gameplay terms, it's an opportunity cost where you sacrifice actions that could be used to hurt or control the enemy to try and get an upper hand by improving your party instead. It makes combat more interesting and strategic, because you not only have to ask yourself if it's worth your cleric's time to give everyone +1 strike, or if you should be healing, or casting another hold person spell and hoping the dice roll in your favor, or just swinging your mace some more. And then it's further interesting, because in a lot of games, there's maintenence issues too. You casted that buff, and it's really nice, but in a few turns, you'll have to cast it again to keep it up. Have enough buffs going and pretty soon it's all your buffer is doing. So you got a tricky balancing act to do.

[Sacred_Path]

The only thing bad about buffs is in games where you can, and end up basically encouraged to, prebuff. It's extremely immersion breaking, yet also extremely optimal (as every buff you prebuff is one more action you can spend in battle kicking the opponent's ass), to prebuff for a fight your party can't possibly know is coming.

 

True, though in most cases, scouting should enable you to tell monsters are around. NPCs going hostile out of the blue shouldn't happen too often.

[AGX-17]

I thought DA:O did a decent job by making them sustained spells that took a chunk of mana and reserved it for the buff spell/skill.

 

Just as an odd aside, this subject reminded me of the JRPG Seiken Densetsu 3 (1995,) Because it was a class-based action RPG that came oddly close to RTwP gameplay, and the start of most late-game fights consisted of tedious buffing of your party and debuffing enemies. So let no one say that Demon's Souls and Dark Souls are the only JRPGs to emulate WRPGs.

 

Also the rogue character had the highest damage numbers, the highest DPS and a full set of debuff skills depending on how you proceeded along a class tree. I can only assume the designers were frustrated D&D players.

Edited December 12, 2012 by AGX-17