Allow me to make stupid decisions, please....

[Frisk]

I just thought of this as I was commenting on weapon usage in a different thread.

 

I don't like it when a game prevents me from making "non-optimal" decisions - when I am not allowed to train certain skills, or choose some feats because they are not allowed for my class, or not suitable for my race/gender/whatever.

 

If I want to make an oddball character, with sub-optimal skills or abilities, please let me (assuming of course that I meet any reasonable prerequites)

Edited December 23, 2012 by Frisk

[Utukka]

As long as lore and such is still taken into account, I agree. For example of what shouldn't be....clerics wielding axes, warriors raining down armageddon without magical means, politicians telling the truth. "Good" examples, any class being able to add to stealth, lockpicking, running, first aid, climbing, poetry etc.

[rjshae]

The one exception I'd like to mention is that of skills that normally take an extended apprenticeship to acquire. Realistically, it should be decidedly difficult to acquire such skills, unless you've already attained them as part of your starting class.

[NerdBoner]

The one exception I'd like to mention is that of skills that normally take an extended apprenticeship to acquire. Realistically, it should be decidedly difficult to acquire such skills, unless you've already attained them as part of your starting class.

i think that aside from "apprenticeship" skills you should/will be able to purchase additional skills either through character creation or later on down the line through training.

[JFSOCC]

As long as lore and such is still taken into account, I agree. For example of what shouldn't be....clerics wielding axes, warriors raining down armageddon without magical means, politicians telling the truth. "Good" examples, any class being able to add to stealth, lockpicking, running, first aid, climbing, poetry etc.

 

If everyone can learn anything and get all the feats and learn all the abilities the whole class system is redundant. Why not use classless system like in Fallout and World of Darkness?

Well... "Everything" you could of course have a pool of abilities and skills that are class exclusive, and a pool of skills and abilities that are more general. Not anyone can learn to read minds, but everyone can learn how to use weapons. Edited December 24, 2012 by JFSOCC

[Sacred_Path]

I hope that the powers of balance will rule out "stupid" and overpowered decisions. Allow a fighter to specialize in clubs (usual sub-optimal choice)? Ok, but make it viable.

[Frisk]

Yeah, I agree with the point about extended apprenticeship - it is logical to require certain background for some skills/feat/profiencies/whatever - but when the restrictions seem utterly artificial (like in 2nd edition AD&D, where Warriors could not take the "Ancient History" non-weapon proficiency), I don't see the point. Sure, it may be sub-optimal, and even a waste of slots/points/whatever, but if it fits my idea of what the character should be like, and I want to role-play it in a particular way....please let me.

[Sacred_Path]

I hope that the powers of balance will rule out "stupid" and overpowered decisions. Allow a fighter to specialize in clubs (usual sub-optimal choice)? Ok, but make it viable.

To elaborate: I think stupid/ bad decisions should be possible entirely on the player's side, not in things the devs control. That is, no useless skills, no useless attributes, no useless types of equipment. OTOH, if you decide to make all of your characters physically weak, or make everyone spend their points on the exact same skills, or adopt a playstyle that's not suitable in a given situation, you should be punished accordingly. A stupid decision is sending your fighter into the midst of a big group of enemies, or letting your mage tank. I get that this is not exactly what you want (you want an ill-fitted adventurer who's trying to do his best), but I think allowing for i.e. "bad" dump stats (or stat ranges) for certain classes ****s up the balance too much.

[Utukka]

As long as lore and such is still taken into account, I agree. For example of what shouldn't be....clerics wielding axes, warriors raining down armageddon without magical means, politicians telling the truth. "Good" examples, any class being able to add to stealth, lockpicking, running, first aid, climbing, poetry etc.

 

If everyone can learn anything and get all the feats and learn all the abilities the whole class system is redundant. Why not use classless system like in Fallout and World of Darkness?

Well... "Everything" you could of course have a pool of abilities and skills that are class exclusive, and a pool of skills and abilities that are more general. Not anyone can learn to read minds, but everyone can learn how to use weapons.

 

This^. Class should also define level of specialization to an extent.

[ogrezilla]

As long as lore and such is still taken into account, I agree. For example of what shouldn't be....clerics wielding axes, warriors raining down armageddon without magical means, politicians telling the truth. "Good" examples, any class being able to add to stealth, lockpicking, running, first aid, climbing, poetry etc.

 

What lore reason is there for a Cleric being unable to wield an axe?

Edited December 26, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Osvir]

As long as lore and such is still taken into account, I agree. For example of what shouldn't be....clerics wielding axes, warriors raining down armageddon without magical means, politicians telling the truth. "Good" examples, any class being able to add to stealth, lockpicking, running, first aid, climbing, poetry etc.

 

If everyone can learn anything and get all the feats and learn all the abilities the whole class system is redundant. Why not use classless system like in Fallout and World of Darkness?

Well... "Everything" you could of course have a pool of abilities and skills that are class exclusive, and a pool of skills and abilities that are more general. Not anyone can learn to read minds, but everyone can learn how to use weapons.

 

Well, that depends on how you read minds. Do you use a tool as an apprentice, something a curious Fighter picks up and at a start it fizzles but at some point he finds the Super Saiyan within and upgrades his hairdo one level, and learns to use minor 0.009 Cipher abilities. These thoughts go into the "Wall of Text" thread in my signature.

 

A Grimoire, what if my Fighter chooses to use it and my Wizard tutors some basis of projection. Would the Fighter be able to cast magic in this case? Honestly, that is exactly what I'd like. So in a sense it'd be a very loose classless system, but having all of the classes (almost like Final Fantasy Tactics) in a "Class Tree" where you can cycle different Class Trees and upgrade your character freely into whatever oddball composition you'd want. You could be Señor Vorpal Kickasso, being an 1/8th of a Level of everything.

 

Basically, having all of the classes on a spread sheet in front of you in different brackets, so the classes (as a whole) are defined already. This way you can pursue your Fighter class honestly and purely, or you could direct your Fighter into a path of a Wizard. Innately as the Fighter is he wouldn't make a too good Wizard, but pursuing it would make him more Wizard than Fighter, obviously, or pursuing both of it and you get a Fighter/Wizard. Heck you could make a 1/11th Character as well

 

If there are tools laying around providing knowledge (such as a Grimoire), learning to use it from scratch (non-Wizard) should be a steep upwards hill but not entirely fruitless, imo.

Edited December 26, 2012 by Osvir

[Karkarov]

I think part of good design is making sure no skill is "gimped" so while I agree with you in theory I will borrow a 3rd Edition D&D implementation. A Fighter in 3rd Ed is obviously not a master of stealth, by nature he is not well trained in moving silently or hiding in shadows. HOWEVER, he can still learn these skills just at greater cost and a longer investment period, also he is limited in that while he can ultimately become good at it he will never be as good as a rogue is. So you pay a price, get what is considered a "sub optimal" choice for your character, but it is still a viable choice that gives you a skill that IS useful just not ideal for your chosen class.

[Utukka]

As long as lore and such is still taken into account, I agree. For example of what shouldn't be....clerics wielding axes, warriors raining down armageddon without magical means, politicians telling the truth. "Good" examples, any class being able to add to stealth, lockpicking, running, first aid, climbing, poetry etc.

 

What lore reason is there for a Cleric being unable to wield an axe?

 

Honestly, I don't even remember it from the games I've played. All I remember is that in BG and other games, pure clerics couldn't use swords, axes etc.something with it being against their Ethos. I imagine Oblivion could write whatever they wish, the point was just that as long as it fits in "their lore", then I'm ok with it.

[ogrezilla]

As long as lore and such is still taken into account, I agree. For example of what shouldn't be....clerics wielding axes, warriors raining down armageddon without magical means, politicians telling the truth. "Good" examples, any class being able to add to stealth, lockpicking, running, first aid, climbing, poetry etc.

 

What lore reason is there for a Cleric being unable to wield an axe?

 

Honestly, I don't even remember it from the games I've played. All I remember is that in BG and other games, pure clerics couldn't use swords, axes etc.something with it being against their Ethos. I imagine Oblivion could write whatever they wish, the point was just that as long as it fits in "their lore", then I'm ok with it.

gotcha. it just seemed like an odd example with the rest of what you said.

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Developers have stated that they will be attempting to make all skills reasonably equal in implementation--IE: all skills are placed into the game because they will provide some sort of tangible and regular benefit. What combination of these skills will be "optimal" is largely dependant on what you are trying to accomplish, so...you should be able to do as you will.

[AGX-17]

Why do you immediately assume developers making the intent and capabilities of a race or class clear from the outset is casual hand-holding garbage that will naturally make you the best at everything like Fallout 3?

[Crowseye]

As long as lore and such is still taken into account, I agree. For example of what shouldn't be....clerics wielding axes, warriors raining down armageddon without magical means, politicians telling the truth. "Good" examples, any class being able to add to stealth, lockpicking, running, first aid, climbing, poetry etc.

 

What lore reason is there for a Cleric being unable to wield an axe?

 

Honestly, I don't even remember it from the games I've played. All I remember is that in BG and other games, pure clerics couldn't use swords, axes etc.something with it being against their Ethos. I imagine Oblivion could write whatever they wish, the point was just that as long as it fits in "their lore", then I'm ok with it.

gotcha. it just seemed like an odd example with the rest of what you said.

 

There are post-Medieval writings that have been interpreted as suggesting that since the spilling of blood was considered in some way impure, the clergy, when they were asked to kill, used methods of combat (maces, staves) and execution (hanging, burning) that did not involve the intentional spilling of blood. Early role-playing games (specifically D&D) ran with the idea and through imitation it's become a fairly widespread stereotype.

 

In any case, with respect to the topic, somebody mentioned 3/3.5e. I'll also throw in Morrowind as an example of a game that uses a system where one's class dictates one's area of specialization, favored attributes, and major and minor skills that affect proficiency and/or progression, yet it's possible for other classes to make use of skills unrelated to their class's strengths if one so chooses. Although I would argue Morrowind ultimately undermines many of the class differences, there's no reason why some of the same concepts can't be applied to a more rigid class system.

[ogrezilla]

As long as lore and such is still taken into account, I agree. For example of what shouldn't be....clerics wielding axes, warriors raining down armageddon without magical means, politicians telling the truth. "Good" examples, any class being able to add to stealth, lockpicking, running, first aid, climbing, poetry etc.

 

What lore reason is there for a Cleric being unable to wield an axe?

 

Honestly, I don't even remember it from the games I've played. All I remember is that in BG and other games, pure clerics couldn't use swords, axes etc.something with it being against their Ethos. I imagine Oblivion could write whatever they wish, the point was just that as long as it fits in "their lore", then I'm ok with it.

gotcha. it just seemed like an odd example with the rest of what you said.

 

There are post-Medieval writings that have been interpreted as suggesting that since the spilling of blood was considered in some way impure, the clergy, when they were asked to kill, used methods of combat (maces, staves) and execution (hanging, burning) that did not involve the intentional spilling of blood. Early role-playing games (specifically D&D) ran with the idea and through imitation it's become a fairly widespread stereotype.

 

In any case, with respect to the topic, somebody mentioned 3/3.5e. I'll also throw in Morrowind as an example of a game that uses a system where one's class dictates one's area of specialization, favored attributes, and major and minor skills that affect proficiency and/or progression, yet it's possible for other classes to make use of skills unrelated to their class's strengths if one so chooses. Although I would argue Morrowind ultimately undermines many of the class differences, there's no reason why some of the same concepts can't be applied to a more rigid class system.

so they shouldn't use an axe based on their beliefs. That seems more like a roleplaying/moral decision. There is no good reason that a cleric shouldn't have the skill to carry an axe. Let him be ostracized by other clerics and priests. Then let him kill those other clerics and priests with his axe if he so chooses.

[Osvir]

Something I did real quick.

 

 

 

Red is "Picked Level" and Grey is "Locked out".

 

Could you choose "Class" level up every level? This would allow for the oddball, but it would also allow for a purely focused "Class" direction as well. Basically, the Character levels up (as a character) and gets to choose 1 Class at Level Up to get better in. So the Character would be some like this:

 

Character Level

Level 1: Fighter

Level 2: Wizard

Level 3: Fighter

Level 4: Barbarian

Level 5: Ranger

 

So basically a Level 2 Fighter+ Lvl1 Barb/Wiz/Rang. It wouldn't mean that the Ranger gets level 5.

 

Likewise, instead of choosing Upgrades when you level up, is there a way to choose Upgrades before you level up? This might go better in the 'resting' mechanics thread but w/e... could you pre-decide the Class direction/experience before gaining the experience? (Kind of like "Research").

 

Example:

Telling my Rogue at Camp "I want you to gain Offensive Experience" which makes the Rogue get Offensive Abilities, or I can tell the Rogue "I want you to gain Utility Experience" and he instead gains experience and abilities correspondingly.

[.Leif.]

Don't make stat requirements for classes. Let me play a human (or Orc, or Amumua) chanter with 9 charisma. Let my mage specialize in battle-axes

[Crowseye]

As long as lore and such is still taken into account, I agree. For example of what shouldn't be....clerics wielding axes, warriors raining down armageddon without magical means, politicians telling the truth. "Good" examples, any class being able to add to stealth, lockpicking, running, first aid, climbing, poetry etc.

 

What lore reason is there for a Cleric being unable to wield an axe?

 

Honestly, I don't even remember it from the games I've played. All I remember is that in BG and other games, pure clerics couldn't use swords, axes etc.something with it being against their Ethos. I imagine Oblivion could write whatever they wish, the point was just that as long as it fits in "their lore", then I'm ok with it.

gotcha. it just seemed like an odd example with the rest of what you said.

 

There are post-Medieval writings that have been interpreted as suggesting that since the spilling of blood was considered in some way impure, the clergy, when they were asked to kill, used methods of combat (maces, staves) and execution (hanging, burning) that did not involve the intentional spilling of blood. Early role-playing games (specifically D&D) ran with the idea and through imitation it's become a fairly widespread stereotype.

 

In any case, with respect to the topic, somebody mentioned 3/3.5e. I'll also throw in Morrowind as an example of a game that uses a system where one's class dictates one's area of specialization, favored attributes, and major and minor skills that affect proficiency and/or progression, yet it's possible for other classes to make use of skills unrelated to their class's strengths if one so chooses. Although I would argue Morrowind ultimately undermines many of the class differences, there's no reason why some of the same concepts can't be applied to a more rigid class system.

so they shouldn't use an axe based on their beliefs. That seems more like a roleplaying/moral decision. There is no good reason that a cleric shouldn't have the skill to carry an axe. Let him be ostracized by other clerics and priests. Then let him kill those other clerics and priests with his axe if he so chooses.

 

I wasn't offering a suggestion about if/why clerics should have their weapon selection limited in PE, simply providing a reason for why many RPGs already had such prohibitions incorporated into their lore ... so as to reaffirm that Utukka didn't just imagine it or pull the idea out of thin air. There is actual precedent for it as a gaming convention.

[ogrezilla]

 

I wasn't offering a suggestion about if/why clerics should have their weapon selection limited in PE, simply providing a reason for why many RPGs already had such prohibitions incorporated into their lore ... so as to reaffirm that Utukka didn't just imagine it or pull the idea out of thin air. There is actual precedent for it as a gaming convention.

ya I know that. Not trying to argue with you guys; you're just relaying information. Thanks for that. I just think its one of the dumber examples of class restrictions. Again, not trying to argue with you guys; more using your quotes to piggyback off of for my own ideas. In general, I get the idea of some special cases of restrictions. But in my opinion, moral restrictions do not need to be enforced with complete inability to use something.

[Osvir]

Don't make stat requirements for classes. Let me play a human (or Orc, or Amumua) chanter with 9 charisma. Let my mage specialize in battle-axes

 

A Wizard with 9 Strength wielding a Battle-Axe? Eeeeeeeh... sounds iffy.

 

EDIT: Unless the game follows some mechanic where if you don't have the "requirement" (if there is going to be anything like that) you instead wield the weapon in question as a struggle (slower attack speed, bad accuracy, lesser damage, cost more Stamina to use).

 

Give an sledgehammer to someone who is weak and let him go mad at a destructible wall against someone who has great physique against another wall, who will take it down first? The weaker person would have to rely more on technique, parallel to their strength, but the strong guy would take it down first most likely (what with fatigue and all).

Edited December 30, 2012 by Osvir

[ogrezilla]

Don't make stat requirements for classes. Let me play a human (or Orc, or Amumua) chanter with 9 charisma. Let my mage specialize in battle-axes

 

A Wizard with 9 Strength wielding a Battle-Axe? Eeeeeeeh... sounds iffy.

 

EDIT: Unless the game follows some mechanic where if you don't have the "requirement" (if there is going to be anything like that) you instead wield the weapon in question as a struggle (slower attack speed, bad accuracy, lesser damage, cost more Stamina to use).

 

Give an sledgehammer to someone who is weak and let him go mad at a destructible wall against someone who has great physique against another wall, who will take it down first? The weaker person would have to rely more on technique, parallel to their strength, but the strong guy would take it down first most likely (what with fatigue and all).

I don't think he said anything about stat requirements for equipment. I assume his hypothetical mage has enough strength to use battle-axes.

[Osvir]

Ah, so that was a strawman pretty much?

 

It was more general thoughts/brainstorming I guess, "What could be a problem with it unless addressed/discussed?".