SMASH!

 

Who is it?

At third question: Other

comment: I don't care, just make the best game ever!

 

On a more serious note, all of these options may add interesting variants to the game, but moderation is the key. I would be sad if it were possible to smash everything and get full rewards for being a full brute.

Edited February 7, 201313 yr by SpaceHamsterBoo

On the subject of not being able to bash chests open, we might as well say that killed enemies can't be looted because it would take away from the rogues pickpocket ability. Your barbarian has to attempt to pickpocket all enemies instead (at reduced skill level) before killing them if he wants anything they're carrying.

That's not really the best comparison. Wizards shouldn't be able to cast "Teleport Pocket Contents," and Barbarians shouldn't be able to tackle people "accidentally" and have them drop all their stuff on the ground, then simply apologize and pick it all up without them noticing.

 

There's no problem with doors being bashable, or locks being magically openable. But, if you make Lockpicking require 75 skill points to pick a given door, and you let a Barbarian easily break that door down just because he has 19 STR (which he's had since LvL 1), that's a bit silly. For one thing, why would someone foot the bill for an EXTREMELY complex lock (back in the day when such things were hand-friggin' crafted by master artisans) to put on a door that a buff guy could simply knock down? Did the person who wanted that door to be a barrier to people just not know about strong people, and/or axes? He just made the door out of quarter-inch balsa wood?

 

You would expect someone to make sure all aspects of a door or chest were fairly level with one another in quality/sturdiness. That being said, I think there are ways to handle it that aren't silly/problematic, and I think those are definitely worth exploring. The implementation just requires a lot of consideration, is all.

What about steel or reinforced doors that are barred from the other side?  Pretty sure a rogue couldn't use lockpicking skills to bypass it.  That's when a barbarian with 19 strength would come in handy.

 

On the subject of not being able to bash chests open, we might as well say that killed enemies can't be looted because it would take away from the rogues pickpocket ability. Your barbarian has to attempt to pickpocket all enemies instead (at reduced skill level) before killing them if he wants anything they're carrying.

That's not really the best comparison. Wizards shouldn't be able to cast "Teleport Pocket Contents," and Barbarians shouldn't be able to tackle people "accidentally" and have them drop all their stuff on the ground, then simply apologize and pick it all up without them noticing.

 

There's no problem with doors being bashable, or locks being magically openable. But, if you make Lockpicking require 75 skill points to pick a given door, and you let a Barbarian easily break that door down just because he has 19 STR (which he's had since LvL 1), that's a bit silly. For one thing, why would someone foot the bill for an EXTREMELY complex lock (back in the day when such things were hand-friggin' crafted by master artisans) to put on a door that a buff guy could simply knock down? Did the person who wanted that door to be a barrier to people just not know about strong people, and/or axes? He just made the door out of quarter-inch balsa wood?

 

You would expect someone to make sure all aspects of a door or chest were fairly level with one another in quality/sturdiness. That being said, I think there are ways to handle it that aren't silly/problematic, and I think those are definitely worth exploring. The implementation just requires a lot of consideration, is all.

I agree that barbarians shouldn't be able to run into someone and have all of their valuables miraculously drop out of their pockets, and then be able to pocket all of them without the victim noticing. I also agree that a "pickpocket" spell wouldn't necessarily make much sense. What would make sense, however, is for a barbarian to have to kill or attack and then loot the valuables off of that guy, or for a wizard to have to use some sort of charm/stun spell and then get their valuables off of them. So, your comparison isn't really in line with the proposed system, whereas mine was. Each class has its own strengths, and should be able to use said strengths to accomplish goals; which is why, as I said before, forcing everyone to lockpick in order to open a locked chest or get through a door doesn't make much sense. What the P:E team is suggesting is that a high level wizard that has spent years adventuring would be unable to handle a locked door without using a gimped lockpick skill that he's been pointlessly practicing (keeping him from putting points in magic-related skills).

 

What you said about putting a complex lock on a particle board door, on the other hand, is true. That would be pretty ridiculous. Your statement, however, seems to suggest that it's always easier to pick a lock than it is to destroy the door that it's locking, which I don't think should necessarily be the case. I imagine that some locks would be unnecessarily complex for the doors that they're locking, and I imagine that some unusually strong doors would have fairly simple locks. Should it be harder to break a "strong" door than it is to pick a "strong" lock? perhaps, but that doesn't mean that a strong enough character shouldn't be able to break doors/locks when it makes sense to be able to do so. This isn't even touching on the magical destruction of doors by wizards, but I think you get my point.

 

So it seems to me that some doors would be more easily bypassed by a warrior (such as barricaded doors as mentioned by @TRX850), and some (possibly most) would be more easily picked than bashed...

Edited February 7, 201313 yr by GrinningReaper659

Smashing locked doors open negates one of the primary functions of the party rogue, so although it should be possible with some doors, others should withstand most anything the party can throw at them.

 

Smashing chests with mauls, axes, and magical forces should be possible, but it follows that this places the items inside at risk of being destroyed.  Again, having a party member skilled with a lock pick, if not absolutely mandatory, should be highly advantageous.

 

A "Knock" spell, if included, needs to be limited in ability so as not to poach too much of the glory from the rogues.

I agree that barbarians shouldn't be able to run into someone and have all of their valuables miraculously drop out of their pockets, and then be able to pocket all of them without the victim noticing. I also agree that a "pickpocket" spell wouldn't necessarily make much sense. What would make sense, however, is for a barbarian to have to kill or attack and then loot the valuables off of that guy, or for a wizard to have to use some sort of charm/stun spell and then get their valuables off of them. So, your comparison isn't really in line with the proposed system, whereas mine was.

In that case, I simply don't understand how pickpocketing (filching someone's belongings without their notice) is a direct comparison to killing and looting someone, who obviously noticed that they aren't alive anymore. Why would you say "Okay, Rogue... see those guys over there? We're about to kill them anyway, because we're not worried about NOT-killing them, but I want you to first go quietly and deftly steal all their belongings."

 

The Wizard stun spell? Perhaps. I think people would possibly notice, though, unless you still planned it out to all be very subtle. So you couldn't really do it in a crowd like you could pick-pocketing. So, it may not be a direct replacement of pickpocketing, just as the Barbarian's Kill-n-Loot skill isn't.

 

Unlocking a locked door with magic is performing the exact same task as the lockpicking skill, and breaking the door down is simply bypassing the lock. That is my point in the "possibly not a good comparison" bit.

Each class has its own strengths, and should be able to use said strengths to accomplish goals; which is why, as I said before, forcing everyone to lockpick in order to open a locked chest or get through a door doesn't make much sense. What the P:E team is suggesting is that a high level wizard that has spent years adventuring would be unable to handle a locked door without using a gimped lockpick skill that he's been pointlessly practicing (keeping him from putting points in magic-related skills).

I agree here, but I don't know that the answer is as simple as "Wizards are super magical, and therefore should be able to open locks." If that's the case, then, if they are masters of lightning and electricity, why can't they simply stop your heartbeat? That should be realllllllllly easy. Way easier than getting through all that armor with a blade. Or why can't they just turn your blood to sand, or snap your neck? If they can simply use magic to operate complex mechanical devices, then what is the extent of that power?

 

So, would I like to see Wizards doing something different than lockpicking? Yes. Would I like to see breakable doors? Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that it's terrible design to let a guy who's simply magical just go around tripping locks with a spell that somehow just opens the locks, when this Rogue fellow (or, really, anyone who isn't a Wizard in P:E) would have to spend umpteen points in a skill just to be able to open that lock. My point is not that it needs to be 1:1, as in "Omg! You can't let a Wizard's ability sometimes be situationally better than a Rogue's!". Just that we need to consider a better way of handling it than "Well, a Wizard should have no trouble opening 72 tumblers, while it should take a Rogue 17 hours to do the same." That's all I'm getting at. We need to come up with a viable system for various classes, or stick with lockpicking across the board if we can't (even if just for the sake of developer time/resources.)

What you said about putting a complex lock on a particle board door, on the other hand, is true. That would be pretty ridiculous. Your statement, however, seems to suggest that it's always easier to pick a lock than it is to destroy the door that it's locking, which I don't think should necessarily be the case. I imagine that some locks would be unnecessarily complex for the doors that they're locking, and I imagine that some unusually strong doors would have fairly simple locks. Should it be harder to break a "strong" door than it is to pick a "strong" lock? perhaps, but that doesn't mean that a strong enough character shouldn't be able to break doors/locks when it makes sense to be able to do so. This isn't even touching on the magical destruction of doors by wizards, but I think you get my point.

 

So it seems to me that some doors would be more easily bypassed by a warrior (such as barricaded doors as mentioned by @TRX850), and some (possibly most) would be more easily picked than bashed...

My statement seems, to you, to suggest that, but it does not actually suggest it. All I'm saying is, why would you put a jigsaw-killer-level puzzle on a lock for a swinging saloon door when the hinges could be broken off by a small child with a hammer? Sure, that might actually occasionally happen, if the person's a rich idiot or something. But, well... look at portcullises and fortress doorways. They don't close those big doors, then put a little padlock on them and hope no one picks it. "Man, these doors will NEVER be broken down, 'cause they're 2-foot-thick oak, so let's just put this lock on to make sure they stay closed, and hopefully no one skilled with locks will ever try to break in." No, they don't give it that weakness. They drop a giant iron or hardwood bar across the doors. On the same token, you would not put a huge iron bar across the latch of a flimsy, soft-wood door.

 

Of course, I didn't say that it bashing will never be easier than picking, or vice versa. But, you're not going to run into a friggin' steel door with a little copper padlock on it. Again, unless someone in the game world is literally a complete moron. Why would someone spend all that time and effort on such a door if it weren't going to be secured by some similarly difficult-to-bypass locking mechanism? It doesn't make any sense. If some commoner wants to put a lock on their door, then yeah, you could probably break the door down pretty easily, just like I could kick in a common modern-day house door if I wanted to (and I'm not even THAT big and strong). But, they're also not going to have a legendary Interdimensional Space Lock on there. They're just going to have a simple lock on there.

 

And this ties back into the Lockpicking-for-all thing. Again, I still think it would be cool to do it differently, BUT, how problematic is it, really? In a party-based game? If you don't have someone put lots of points into lockpicking (even if you have a Rogue), then it'll probably be easier to break down whatever doors you can with your burly Barbarian than it will be to pick the locks with your party's collective Lockpick skill of 3. So, going with just a simple "let's toss in door-bashing for strong guys," there will be a very low threshold (pun totally intended) at which point you will no longer be able to break down doors. Simpler doors, accompanied by their simpler locks, will be break-down-able. Decently reinforced door? You're probably gonna hafta pick it, and it's probably gonna be decently tricky. You're most likely never going to have "Oh, look! Someone just put a small piece of masking tape on this latch to keep this reinforced iron door closed. I'll just use my lockpick to tear that, and VOILA!"

 

And as for Wizards... well, like I said, you just have to figure out a good, reasonable limitation for that. *shrug*. I mean, technically they should just be able to go around blowing up houses and looting them all. But, that gets a bit ridiculous. And if you DON'T allow that, then suddenly it begs the question "why can't they do that? They can obviously create huge, explosive fireballs at will. *shrug*"

 

If you have any thoughts on that, I will gladly roll with them. I'm just not thinking of anything, right at the moment.

@Lephys

 

The arbitrary power level of wizards concerning what they can and can't do is a problem, not really sure exactly how that would best be handled.

 

I agree with most of what you've said. My problem still comes down to thinking that this... "lockpicking is the only way to get past a locked door or chest" ...is an illogical system; and it seems that you agree.

 

You said "how problematic is it really?" Well, that's a good question. I guess most people probably won't mind the proposed system but, imo, alternate ways to get past locked objects are important.

Maybe you could just have 3 aspects of it? I mean, maybe on a tougher door, the hinges would still be the weakest point, and with a crowbar or or something, or a sledgehammer and chisel, your Strength-based guy would use his structural knowledge of the door to break off the hinges. Or, well... I said 3 aspects. Really, you could just do 2, I think? (The details of this are coming to me as I go. I apologize). Breaking and picking.

 

The classes would just have slightly different ways of doing these. A Wizard could probably melt or even freeze the hinges off, but maybe he can't sustain a constant flow of magic for long enough to blowtorch through an iron door, and maybe a fireball would blowback too much before it actually broke the door down. *shrug*. I dunno. Wizard power is still tricky. Obviously it's going to be abstracted to some point, but I keep thinking maybe there's some logical foundation we could at least build upon as a solid moderator of that.

 

Also, I'm not sure how all the other classes would do it. Maybe for some classes, the only option would be lockpicking, and for some, smashing (well, except I suppose you could build a Wizard or Rogue with 20 STR?). If all classes can simply bash the door, or use Monk/nature/deity/mind powers on a door to break it down, then you might as well have a simple bash and a simple lockpicking, methinks. I'm not sure there'd be much benefit from all that work for every single class, if they didn't actually have different limitations and situational usefulness, etc.

 

But, yeah, aside from "Why can't Wizards just nuke the whole building and walk around the door?", I think maybe the structural knowledge skill bit might work, for breaking doors, regardless of how it's done (with arcane elements or a giant shoulder/hammer)?

 

This is like a puzzle. I like puzzles like this, heh. I'm just slow is all. I'll think on it more.

What if non-rogue classes had to take a lockpicking feat/talent before they could put skill points into it?  It'd separate the men from the boys the serious hybrid-lockpick character from the casual opportunist.

^ While that's not a bad idea, I think they're already going with "Rogues get a permanent bonus/modifier", which pretty much takes care of that. 8\

I believe most people agree that without the rogue it might be harder and riskier, but it shouldn't be impossible. Not having a rogue would limit the ease, of opening closed doors and chest, to the point that it makes sense of having a rogue, but not game breaking if you don't.

So you might not pass without notice when you investigate the don's mansion, since you left a door of its hinges, and the don WILL know you've been around to investigate him, but at least you could get in to do so.

 

However, if you had a rogue, you could have avoided informing the don of your presense.

Yes to all. 

 

You must be able to smash / picklock / lock / spelllock / knock the doors. There is no need to think rogue skills will be useless unless you are designing a game similar to Diablo where you can smash anything. 

 

And also keep in mind that doors have two basic properties:

 

1. The material and structure of the door

2. Quality of the lock

 

Doors can be wooden, steel-reinforced, metal, stone, granite. There is already a varying degree of difficulty here against smashing. Naturally you don't want to smash a metal door all day when you can use magic or rogue skill in mere minutes and do it in a very silent way. But you must also be able to kick a door open if it is a very simple wooden door and have no descent lock, especially if you want a loud and showy passage through. Smashing option will gradually be ineffective and finally useless once the door becomes stronger material and with better lock mechanism. So you eventually have to rely on mages and rogues to pass through these doors after a certain difficulty level for such encounters. It is also true for lock mechanisms. You can break simple locks and open the door, but you need magic or lockpicking skills to unlock better quality ones.

 

Knocking on doors of the houses should also be implemented. It was just too weird to picklock and enter a house of a person just to talk to them. You may be able to pick lock at nights using the cover of darkness, and find the residents sleeping, but you should run the great risk of catching the residents' and city watch's attention once you attempt to break into homes during daylight.

In Arcanum, you could destroy any door with weapons or spells, but guards and NPCs instantly aggroed on you if you do it, the same for lockpicking spell which was "too loud". You could even crack safes with dynamite. Items also detiorated inside bashed containers.

So unless you've played somebody who was okay with slaughtering whole city full of police, you either stayed on right side of the law or put points into lockpicking (and sneak, because if somebody seen you lockpicking, they'd call guards too).

Edited February 8, 201313 yr by Shadenuat

I think it might work best with only-destructable doors (barred from the other side... no lock), only-pickable doors (door's too sturdy, lock's too complex), and only magically-sealed doors (Some kind of enchanted, fused together stonework that you literally can't affect without magic, for example?).

 

That isn't to say you wouldn't have combos. Also, with things like doors that are barred from the other side, rather than locked, it might be that there's a switch (or even a LEVER, 8D!) that your Strongman-less party could get to in order to unbar the door mechanically, if they took the time to go out of their way and get to it (maybe a Rogue could only get to it by sneaking into someone's personal quarters and finding the switch). *shrug*

 

And again, that isn't to say ALL barred doors would even be breakable, or that all of them would even have a switch/mechanism to unbar them.

 

Basically, you'd have the exact same thing as the barrier of a lock on a door in a game where only a Rogue can lockpick (Don't happen to have a Rogue? Well, you miss out on THAT particular bit of content, behind that door or in that chest.), except you have several other abilities akin to lockpicking, each with THEIR unique barrier types. Then, you could have any combination therein. Some doors would be magically sealed and locked. Some doors would be locked and breakable. Some doors would be breakable and magically sealed. Maybe. The magical sealing is a bit iffy. *shrug*. But, from a mechanic standpoint, that works really well. Just have to figure out how to best tweak it for sensical immersion (without destroying the mechanic's functionality).

 

And, on a side note, regarding magical-unlocking... What if magic folk could unlock a lock without lockpicks, but they still had to have a "lockpick" skill (that was more like... lock lore?)? I mean, why would a wizard even know the inner workings of a particular lock, or have a spell for that particular lock? A telekinesis spell, for example, allows an object to be manipulated form afar, but the mage must be able to SEE the object, and he must direct it himself. He knows the object is there, and he knows, based on his perception and the knowledge of his immediate environment, how to use his object-floating ability to guide the object safely to his hand. It doesn't just instantly teleport all objects within a radius to his pack.

 

I think that's the only problem I have with the typical "Knock" spell. Sure, there might even be different tiers, but how does the spell just solve a mechanical puzzle, all on its own?

 

Another alternative for that might be to have them be able to both cut through doors AND cut through locks/locking-mechanisms (aside from undoing "lock" enchantments of whatever sort). But, their skill (similar to lockpicking, requiring points for progression) would be some combo of structural knowledge and magical precision? I mean, anyone can swing a sword and cut someone (a person's a big target), but that doesn't mean they could be a surgeon. That kind of precision requires skill. Whether you're directing a scalpel, or channeling fire, I would think (verisimilitudily?... verisimilitudeously?).

 

Annnnnnywho, just my thoughts. I just think Wizards blowing doors away would get a bit ridiculous, and instantly manipulating unseen tumblers in the perfect manner, inside a god-knows-exactly-how-it's-designed lock seems a bit overboard, too. If the Wizard doesn't even need mechanical knowledge of the lock to work magic on it to manipulate it in such a complex manner, why can't he just dismantle enemy organs with the snap of his fingers?

 

"Some kind of living thing? ORGAN ROULETTE!!! MUAHAHAHAHAHA! World's in trouble? I CAST 'SAVE THE WORLD'! Annnnnd we just won. u_u"

 

Oh, and I think bashing chests is questionable, too. Maybe a crowbar/hammer combo as a tool (rather than numerous lockpicks) would work with a forceful opening without damaging things? But, again, it'd be more of a precise force than just a Link Downward-Kneeling-Hylian-Thrust attack on it with a giant axe. And once you got to a decent bit of reinforcing (maybe 25% up the quality-ladder in door/chest materials?), you'd have to go after the lock? Or maybe for chests, everyone's skill just applies to the lock/locking mechanism. Maybe wooden doors are the only thing that can be bashed? (Or maybe metal ones with weak enough barrings).

 

I apologize for the cavalcade of thought, here. If I were capable of being more concise, I would in a heartbeat, haha. It's a curse.

Edited February 8, 201313 yr by Lephys

So.....doors may require brawn, thievery, or magic to overcome.  That's not punishing rogues.  That's including them in the solution.

 

Maybe the real scenario is when a player is in a tight spot:

 

"I wish I had a rogue with me right now."

 

Because they are always (?) better at unlocking doors?  It still feels like a square peg in a round hole.  The solution is lurking somewhere around here, hiding, as always.

@Lephys Some good ideas there.

 

I've been trying to come up with some alternatives to the proposed system that I dislike, but I'm having trouble finding time to do so (and write out what is sure to be a long post associated with the ideas). Anyway, if I do think of anything good, I'll try to find time to post.

@Lephys Some good ideas there.

 

I've been trying to come up with some alternatives to the proposed system that I dislike, but I'm having trouble finding time to do so (and write out what is sure to be a long post associated with the ideas). Anyway, if I do think of anything good, I'll try to find time to post.

 

I appreciate it, and I look forward to reading them, ^_^. And I know how it is with the time-finding. No worries.

Edited February 8, 201313 yr by Lephys

knock on the door: yes!

smash down the door: yes! but more options are needed here. you can break down the door, or if you have certain stats (based on the type of lock), you can break the lock without destroying the door, thing that may be useful in the case of chests. you can take a hammer and bash the chest to pieces, risking to damage the items, or try to break the lock without damaging the goods (harder)

What if during a lockpicking attempt, you also had to make a move silently check? (with a small bonus, since you're not actually walking, but you are still moving).

- If you succeed at lockpicking and succeed your move silently check, no problem.
- If you succeed at lockpicking but fail your move silently check, nearby monsters may be alerted.
- If you fail at lockpicking but succeed your move silently check, then no loot and no monsters are alerted.
- If you fail at lockpicking and fail your move silently check, then no loot and you may alert nearby monsters.

The noise you make could be the lockpicks breaking, or the lock tumblers grinding, or heavy armour clanging, or a combination depending on the outcome.  So the act of lockpicking plays more to the archetypal stealthy rogue, and helps further delineate from other classes.  Which is not to say you couldn't have a stealthy lockpicking fighter or priest etc.
 

What if during a lockpicking attempt, you also had to make a move silently check? (with a small bonus, since you're not actually walking, but you are still moving).

That's a very interesting aspect to the act of picking a lock, but I think it would probably be more easily handled by the lockpicking skill itself. I think there was mention of, say, a lockpicking skill of 45 being able to pick a difficulty-50 lock, but it would simply take more lockpicks rather than more time/attempts (the use of a larger quantity of lockpicks is representative of the extra time/attempts, without making the player wait). So, maybe... EXAMPLE TIME:

 

If your skill is 45, and you pick a difficulty-50 lock, you make noise (or you have a higher chance of making noise). If it's 50, and you pick the same lock, you have a lower chance of making noise. If your skill is 55 and you pick the same lock, you have little-to-no chance of making any noise.

 

*shrug*

You could make the same Move Silently skill check (with partial bonus) for Disable Trap and Set Trap for the same reasons, i.e. play to the archetype and make it slightly more difficult for non-rogue classes.

I'm taking all these options for granted!

Love all these ideas.

I think when you smash the door there should be a huge downside, like it alerts all enemies in a 50ft radius.

This is kind of a fledgeling thought, but what if, say, a Wizard could create a magical "bubble" around the door and your party, so that a character could perform loud actions (such as bashing a door/breaking the hinges, etc.) while still failing to alert nearby enemies?

 

Maybe, as a jumpstart on balancing, the ability to control sound within a radius could only be maintained for a brief duration (5 seconds?), and your characters with crappier door-breaching skills would take a bit longer (maybe 10 seconds) to loudly bypass the door than would those with higher skill values?

 

This way, the ability to mute your door-breaching actions is conditional, so it's not simply "As long as you have a Wizard, you're never loud." Also, you might have to choose that spell over something else, rather than having it as some simpler part of a default tome set or something. *shrug*. Specific party builds, FTW! Also, teamwork. u_u