Level scaling and its misuse

[Malekith]

 

*popcorn bag ends*

In the devs place i would go the Torment way. Have quests give XP in the thousands and kills give 36XP for grinding fanatics. All problems solved.

We do not negotiate with fanatics.

But... but imagine the butthurt

[Bitula]

I don't understand the part that, if in PE at least some valuable loot can be picked from corpses, why would anyone sneak past a battle risking loss of potential loot. Also if any foe has at least cheap loot on them (armour, weapons), why isn't it an advantage for diligent players to pick it and sell it?

[Darkpriest]

 

bosses shouldn't be subject to level scaling, period.

 

Wizardry 8 did this very well where on your first playthrough, you inevitably got pwned by a level 5 or 6 giant ****roach. This taught you early on that you can't save those level ups infinitely.

That was important because players would soon notice that it's preferrable to stay on level 1 or 2 two train up your skills, because on level 3 monsters started to have ranged attacks and on >3 they started to paralyze you.

 

That said I hope there won't be level scaling in PE at all. It takes away the open-world feeling completely. I'd rather the XP was scaled to your level (ECL).

Bosses should always have a set level but mooks should be capable of surpassing their bosses?

 

A legitimate boss fight (i.e. not one meant as an anti-climax or used for comic effect,) should always be a challenge. What is a boss, if not a challenge?

 

Err not really... for example. Is a king the toughest opponent or his best knights? Bosses can be masterminds, people with influence and money and other similar power giving attributes, not always being the raw magic/physical power and resilience...

 

It's just how you design the things out in relation to a confrontation with such a boss...

[Gfted1]

I don't understand the part that, if in PE at least some valuable loot can be picked from corpses, why would anyone sneak past a battle risking loss of potential loot. Also if any foe has at least cheap loot on them (armour, weapons), why isn't it an advantage for diligent players to pick it and sell it?

Welcome to inventory "deep stash" which only allows you to access the "top" few slots of your backpack and forces players to go to a rest spot to access the rest of their backpack. This is somehow supposed to prevent the "degerative gameplay" of looting every last bauble, although Im not exacty sure why that would prevent people from going back and forth to collect loot or what they are trying to prevent.

[PrimeJunta]

@Gfted1, close, but no cigar. The degenerate strategy the "deep stash" obsoletes is trekking back and forth between a dungeon and a shop in order to sell off the loot. The trekking back and forth is not needed because you can just plonk the stuff you intend to sell in the deep stash, and it'll be there when you get to the shop.

 

Why not just remove carry limits altogether? Because this would completely remove inventory management (=the need to think about what you're bringing with you) from the game, and inventory management is a small but significant facet of strategic resource management.

 

Same thing with resting mechanics -- the rest-spamming in NWN effectively made all spells per-encounter, and health regenerate fully between encounters, unless you intentionally handicapped yourself by making up an arbitrary code of conduct about resting. IMO having to manage resources like health and spells between encounters makes the game a lot more interesting. That's why I liked the curse in MotB so much -- it discouraged rest-spamming very effectively, which meant that you weren't just spamming meteor swarms in every encounter.

[Gfted1]

@Gfted1, close, but no cigar. The degenerate strategy the "deep stash" obsoletes is trekking back and forth between a dungeon and a shop in order to sell off the loot. The trekking back and forth is not needed because you can just plonk the stuff you intend to sell in the deep stash, and it'll be there when you get to the shop.

I dont follow. How is that any different from the preexisting inventory mechanics? Is the "deep stash" infinite? Inventory already had a finite limit either by weight restrictions or slot restrictions. So if a player wants to pick up every single item to sell it they they will run into the same wall and have to travel back and forth every time their inventory fills up, whether that be a "deep stash" or normal method. It will all be there when you go to the shop.

 

Youre probably closer to the truth in your second paragraph that its a form of "strategic resourse management" ( ) but again, the old method did the same thing, you could only carry so much before hitting some limitation. To me, "deep stash" just sounds like another silly method of negative reinforcement that forces the player to only have direct access to amount of slots because thats somehow "tactical" and nobody will travel back to a rest spot to get that item they need out of their pack, right?

[Bitula]

^{Ah so if you deep stash junk then later you cannot replace it with valueable items in the same dungeon unless you find a place to rest. But that will simply encourage exiting the dungeon to sell the stuff, or visiting the latest resting place, then returning, which is the possible worst solution. Bad design decision.}

 

^{Edit: font size}

Edited January 31, 2013 by Bitula

[Bitula]

 

^{Ah so if you deep stash junk then later you cannot replace it with valueable items in the same dungeon unless you find a place to rest. But that will simply encourage exiting the dungeon to sell the stuff, or visiting the latest resting place, then returning, which is the possible worst solution. Bad design decision.}

 

^{Edit: font size}

 

> 

 I dont follow. How is that any different from the preexisting inventory mechanics? Is the "deep stash" infinite?

 

Both wrong. 

 

As far as i understand yes, the deep stash is infinite but you can take out something in safe areas only. You can put something in it at any time though. That makes the inventory management a valuable part of the tactics as you have limited space for things you can access, but at the same time you don't have to go back and forth to sell stuff.

 

Hmmmm, well that sounds better,  though not too realistic. Or will it be a "magic bag of infinity" or so? Btw, but then this won't discourage to want to kill every foe for a potential valuable loot, not if though I like these sort of design level anti-combat directions. So whether the XP is quest based or both quest and encounter or instance based is not yet decided. Hope it wont be just quest based.

[PrimeJunta]

I dont follow. How is that any different from the preexisting inventory mechanics? Is the "deep stash" infinite?

Not sure if it'll be infinite or merely very, very big. Either way, it'll be much bigger than your normal inventory.

Inventory already had a finite limit either by weight restrictions or slot restrictions. So if a player wants to pick up every single item to sell it they they will run into the same wall and have to travel back and forth every time their inventory fills up, whether that be a "deep stash" or normal method. It will all be there when you go to the shop.

Not if the deep stash is infinite or very big -- big enough to hold all the salables from a couple of dungeons for example.

Youre probably closer to the truth in your second paragraph that its a form of "strategic resourse management" ( ) but again, the old method did the same thing, you could only carry so much before hitting some limitation. To me, "deep stash" just sounds like another silly method of negative reinforcement that forces the player to only have direct access to <x> amount of slots because thats somehow "tactical" and nobody will travel back to a rest spot to get that item they need out of their pack, right?

My understanding is that your normal inventory is roughly as big as what we're used to; the deep stash is in addition to that. It's just a simple change in mechanics to make it a little less tedious for packrats to packrat, while retaining the strategic layer of inventory management. Sort of like the car trunk in Fallout 2, the storage locker at the inn in The Witcher, or the party chest in ... games that have the party chest, except that you can magically throw things in wherever you are, and it's always with you when in a shop, in addition to being available in camp.

 

I don't know if there will be an ingame explanation for it. Personally I don't care; it's not like the inventory systems in the IE games were realistic or anything, what with being able to run around lugging multiple suits of plate armor and enough iron to equip a small army.

[Gfted1]

I see. Well if its infinite (or huge) I guess thats a help. So assuming thats true, combined with this post from Sawyer:

 

Players making five trips in and out of a dungeon after clearing it to haul all of the loot out.

 

the degenerative gameplay that is being removed is not looting everything thats not bolted down, its removing the act of walking back and forth several times?

[Somna]

 

 

I see. Well if its infinite (or huge) I guess thats a help. So assuming thats true, combined with this post from Sawyer:

 

Players making five trips in and out of a dungeon after clearing it to haul all of the loot out.

 

the degenerative gameplay that is being removed is not looting everything thats not bolted down, its removing the act of walking back and forth several times?

Pretty much. Why it's such an issue...who knows? Admittedly, not having to care about encumberance is nice.

[Gfted1]

Yeah, sounds good to me too. If I and my party members can each carry a (nearly) infinite amount of crap, I dont really care about having to travel to a rest spot to get something out of it. Ill be doing enough of that to rest anyway so it will be a total non-factor to me.

[PrimeJunta]

the degenerative gameplay that is being removed is not looting everything thats not bolted down, its removing the act of walking back and forth several times?

Yes, that's correct.

[TRX850]

 

We basically get to park one of these outside every dungeon. :\

[Helm]

A deep stash is fine I guess.... but it should at least not have unlimted space.

[Gfted1]

We basically get to park one of these outside every dungeon. :\

Even better, you get one of those strapped to you and each of your party members backs! Maybe Ill kill everything that moves for their loot just to see what the gold total will be at the end.

 

I hope similar items stack or thats going to get messy quickly.

[Helm]

We basically get to park one of these outside every dungeon. :\

Way too small. This is better.

 

[Lephys]

 

We basically get to park one of these outside every dungeon. :\

Way too small. This is better.

 

 

 

 

 

... That's no moon! It's a BACKpack!!!

 

But yeah, the very nature of the "degenerate gameplay" that keeps popping up (or the only legitimate stuff... people can slap the label on whatever they want) has almost nothing to do with players doing stuff wrong. It's about the fact that players shouldn't HAVE to perform certain actions in order to accomplish what they want.

 

Imagine a hallway filled with traps, with a big shiny treasure chest at the end. A player hates traps. He just wants the chest. Well, normally he'd either have to get past the traps and get the chest, or not get past the traps and do without the chest. Big deal. We all like loot, but we're not toddlers. It's an optional chest. Other players who can get past the traps and get the chest will lack high enough OTHER skills to get other cool stuff, and they'll have to deal with it to.

 

Annnnywho, imagine it's not binary. The game will allow you to get that chest, IF you have all your characters run in circles for 47 minutes straight. You just suddenly teleport to the chest. The people who are fine with the traps as an obstacle will either say "Okay, I'll just not worry about it," or they'll get through the traps and get the chest. There shouldn't be any other option (in this specific example) that doesn't involve somehow getting past the traps. That's the entire purpose of a hallway filled with traps. It's a barrier. You either CAN get past it, or you can't. But, running in circles for 47 minutes is LITERALLY just a waste of people's time, and has absolutely nothing to do with anything else. You might as well have to write a 500 word essay on why you think you should get that chest without going through the traps, and then instantly gain all the loot. It doesn't make any sense.

 

You shouldn't even be able to do that. Not because "Oh no, you ran in circles for 47 minutes and got the chest o' loot, and I didn't." No, it's because it's horrendous game design.

 

Everyone always wants to make it about "So what... that player is bad because he CAN get to the loot, no matter how stupid it is, and he wants to get to the loot?". But it's not about that. It's not the player's fault. It's the design's fault.

 

Now, if a player pitched a fit and said "This is crap! There are traps, and I don't want to have to get past traps! I should be able to run around in circles for 47 minutes, and then instantly get all the loot in the chest somehow!", THEN I'd say that's degenerate... I dunno, toddler tantrum? That's about as reasonable as "THIS GAME SHOULD GIVE ME ICE CREAM! AND MAGIC POWERS! AND IT DOESN'T! >_<"

 

Getting to shiny loot... not degenerate. Wanting all the shiny loot... not degenerate. Getting to shiny loot simply because you wasted your own time? Degenerate.

[Gfted1]

Getting to shiny loot... not degenerate. Wanting all the shiny loot... not degenerate. Getting to shiny loot simply because you wasted your own time? Degenerate.

In that case, hopefully Sawyer will prevent me from degeratively having to schlep for 47 minutes back and forth to rest.

 

Im easy to please, throw me a portal stone or pocket dimension.

[Lephys]

In that case, hopefully Sawyer will prevent me from degeratively having to schlep for 47 minutes back and forth to rest.

 

Im easy to please, throw me a portal stone or pocket dimension.

While I'm with you on that time-saving intent, a portal stone or pocket dimension only makes the trips QUICKER, essentially only eliminating half the problem (now you get to still waste your time, but the total time wasted is reduced.)

 

Hence the intent behind the "stash." The basic idea is "if all that stuff you 'couldn't' pick up is going to lure you back anyway, you might as well be able to go ahead and pick it all up." Since you didn't even have access to all the loot in the other games (and most of it served no other purpose than to be tranpsorted back to a merchant and sold), it's mildly silly to demand that our inventory access not be limited.

[Gfted1]

While I'm with you on that time-saving intent, a portal stone or pocket dimension only makes the trips QUICKER, essentially only eliminating half the problem (now you get to still waste your time, but the total time wasted is reduced.)

 

Hence the intent behind the "stash." The basic idea is "if all that stuff you 'couldn't' pick up is going to lure you back anyway, you might as well be able to go ahead and pick it all up." Since you didn't even have access to all the loot in the other games (and most of it served no other purpose than to be tranpsorted back to a merchant and sold), it's mildly silly to demand that our inventory access not be limited.

Semantics. Youre just replacing "loot" with "resting". I could easily say "if all my health cant be regenerated in the field its going to lure me back to a rest spot anyway, I might as well be able to heal anywhere".

[Lephys]

Semantics. Youre just replacing "loot" with "resting". I could easily say "if all my health cant be regenerated in the field its going to lure me back to a rest spot anyway, I might as well be able to heal anywhere".

Negatory, Ghost Rider. It would be the same as having a scenario in which you could not recover ALL of your hitpoints in one rest, then saying "Well, if I'm always going to make 5 trips to make sure I get ALL my hitpoints back and not just part of them, then I might as well be able to heal up to full when I DO rest."

 

The problematic trips were caused by the limitation on the QUANTITY of loot you could acquire at once, out of however much was available at the time. It had nothing to do with the frequency of loot drops, so a direct resting comparison would have to do with how many missing hitpoints were available to be healed, NOT how often the act of healing was available.

 

Your example, translated back to loot context, would be "Well, if I can't get all the loot in the cave after this first bout of combat, then the rest of the loot in the cave is just going to keep luring me further through the cave to kill all the other things, so I might as well get all the loot in the cave at any point I choose."

Edited February 1, 2013 by Lephys

[Gfted1]

You have no idea how much health will be recovered by resting or how long it will take. 10 points per 24 hours? 48? Who knows. Youre simply replacing one reward (loot) for another (health) and then claiming its different.

[Lephys]

Actually, I'm simply being reasonable.

 

It doesn't matter how much health it is. The relationship remains the same. It's a finite amount (you can't heal MORE than 100% of all your health), JUST like the amount of loot you get in a dungeon is finite. You can't obtain an item of loot until it's available, just like you can't obtain a single point of health until it's available (in P:E's case, when you get to a rest point.)

 

The only difference is that the amount of total loot in an area is dependent upon the developers' decisions on how much loot to put in there (and what you choose to do/whether or not you can get to all of it, or some of it), and the amount of healing available at a given rest area depends upon how much health you lost on the way there.

 

Implying that healing should be available more often is the same as implying that loot should be available more often. How much of the available loot you're capable of carrying (out of the total loot in an area) before leaving that area to sell stuff off and potentially have to return to the area to pick up more is the same as being limited by how much healing you can obtain at a rest area, and having to (for some reason) leave and come back again to heal some more, until you've successfully obtained all the healing available in that area.

 

 

In other words, the healing either takes one "trip," or more than one. And the loot gathering either takes one "trip," or more than one.

 

Whether or not we always fully heal at a rest area in P:E and how long resting takes both have nothing to do with the comparisons above. If you'd like to discuss whether or not we should heal to full, or how long it should take, we could do that.

Edited February 1, 2013 by Lephys

[Gfted1]

Traveling back and forth when bags are full = degenerative. Traveling back and forth when health bar empty = not degenerative. Whatever. Guess we will have to disagree.