Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Definitely not ignore, but you might see armor specialization stuff that mitigates percentages of the penalties, like plate armor specialization = -20 or -25 action speed instead of -30% etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly, though I believe easily accessible passives that would completely mitigate the reduction would properly set a fighter wearing heavy armour apart from a mage doing so. A fighter mage, on the other hand, might have access to talents partly mitigating the reduction.

 

Same thing could, of course, work by simply letting fighters have access to more partial mitigation passives than a mage, if complete mitigation would not fit the system.


"What if a mid-life crisis is just getting halfway through the game and realising you put all your points into the wrong skill tree?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem is though, that just makes heavy armor the only way to go within the class. They're trying to make as many builds as possible viable, so you can't really have a talent that does that or it's simply the best option.

 

Actually it would probably make more sense to make it like: Armor Handling 5% less action speed penalty across all armor types, rather than limit it to Heavy Armor. I doubt they'd even have such a talent but I may be wrong.

 

I think in their game they're not going to penalize any class for wearing any armor or using any weapon ... but as a Wizard, if you're not on the front line, it makes more sense to not wear as heavy armor so you can cast spells faster, or dish out more DPS as a Barbarian or Rogue, but like it's always an option if you need that extra damage protection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Armor speed penalties currently only affect the speed of actions, not movement.  They modify attack animations directly but may wind up dominantly affecting downtime between actions instead (because it allows more scaling before the animations look... not good).

 

Fighters currently have a passive ability called Armored Grace that increases the DT benefit from armor.  The benefit of augmenting DT rather than reducing speed penalties is that it doesn't make the lightest armors irrelevant for fighters.  Of course, in the heaviest armors, they will probably have the highest DT of any class (all other things being equal).  If you want to keep a similar DT to other classes but "gain" speed (lose speed penalty), Armored Grace allows a fighter to use a lighter armor type.  E.g., if a cleric is wearing plate armor with X% speed penalty, a fighter may be able to wear brigandine with the same (effective) DT as the cleric's plate armor and a lower speed penalty.

 

We are not preventing classes from wearing any particular type of armor, but the mechanics of classes may lend themselves more to certain weights.  E.g., many monk abilities (both active and passive) are powered by Wounds.  You acquire Wounds by taking damage, after armor.  Several monk and barbarian abilities are effective for a certain amount of time rather than a certain number of attacks, which encourages faster attacks -- both from the choice of weapon and from a lower armor speed penalty.  Paladins have more targeted-use abilities and "Zealous" auras but are not especially durable.  I.e., the party gains the most benefit from having them on the front lines, but they do not need to be especially fast-acting, so heavier armor often makes more sense for them.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds... nuanced. The aspect I wonder about is how well gaming newcomers will be able to pick up on those nuances and thus fine tune their character's equipment and combat actions?


"It has just been discovered that research causes cancer in rats."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds... nuanced. The aspect I wonder about is how well gaming newcomers will be able to pick up on those nuances and thus fine tune their character's equipment and combat actions?

That's what a manual is for. (there will be a manual that describes a bit more than hotkey configs, right? right?)

 

We were all newcomers to a genre/gaming at some point or another. One either has the patience/desire to discover/learn all those nuances for fine tuning, or doesn't. I'd guess/hope the game is still playable/winnable even if you don't care to bother too much about such details...it'd just be that much harder.


“Things are as they are. Looking out into the universe at night, we make no comparisons between right and wrong stars, nor between well and badly arranged constellations.” – Alan Watts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It sounds... nuanced. The aspect I wonder about is how well gaming newcomers will be able to pick up on those nuances and thus fine tune their character's equipment and combat actions?

That's what a manual is for. (there will be a manual that describes a bit more than hotkey configs, right? right?)

 

We were all newcomers to a genre/gaming at some point or another. One either has the patience/desire to discover/learn all those nuances for fine tuning, or doesn't. I'd guess/hope the game is still playable/winnable even if you don't care to bother too much about such details...it'd just be that much harder.

 

I suspect they may need a tactics guide, in addition to the normal manual. But I suppose that's what walkthroughs are for. ;)


"It has just been discovered that research causes cancer in rats."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds... nuanced. The aspect I wonder about is how well gaming newcomers will be able to pick up on those nuances and thus fine tune their character's equipment and combat actions?

 

Newcomers will probably not be as efficient, but efficiency is more important at higher levels of difficulty where the margins of victory become smaller.

 

Additionally, we're designing these mechanics to align with the traditional concepts of the classes.  I believe most players think of barbarians, monks, and wizards as characters that wear light armor.  If you put them in light armor, the mechanics will support that.  If you put fighters, paladins, and clerics in heavy armor, the mechanics will also support that.  You can also play against traditional concepts, and in certain circumstances that will be mechanically more advantageous, but typically there's efficiency loss or little benefit gained.

 

E.g., if the monk is really being slammed by attacks so hard that his or her Wounds are filling up too quickly, it may make more sense to wear heavier armor.  If the monk wears heavy armor all the time, he or she will be protected against more damage (like anyone else), but his or her Wounds resource will take longer to build up, meaning he or she will spend more time in combat building up to the use of Wounds-based abilities.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like sound of this system, because it sound flexible and understanding it will benefit player in the game. So it gives you ability to roleplay better and it gives min-maxers some challege and one even must think what his or her characters wear. So it seem quite good system.

 

And worries of newcommers is not high on my list for this game as in my opinion this is not game for newcomers, but long time gaming veterans and other gamers who like more challenging games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, the armor mechanics sound like really good stuff.
A real difference between light and heavy armor aside from one being better than the other is a thing i always wished for in IE games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see the link between real animals with real abilities and a fictitious monster with a fictitious ability, but since we've learned that Skuldr only force you to up your game when you're playing stealthy, I'm retracting my claim that they were designed to prevent stealth.

Allow me to simplify:

 

Snake is to real world as Skuldr is to imagined world. In the real world, heat is a thing that can be sensed, and there happens to be an animal that can sense it (a snake, that wasn't designed specifically to prevent adventurers from sneaking past it so easily). In the imagined world, some manner of soul essence is something that can be sensed, and a Skuldr is an animal that happens to exist in this particular world and happens to be able to sense souls.

 

The link isn't between a snake and a Skuldr. It's between each animal and its respective "reality."


Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And worries of newcommers is not high on my list for this game as in my opinion this is not game for newcomers, but long time gaming veterans and other gamers who like more challenging games.

 

I am inclined to agree, and I find the system interesting too, but I think it would be advantageous to factor in newer players. Not dumbing-down, but acknowledging that the more people that get into this project = more revenue = longevity.

  • Like 1

sonsofgygax.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't have to factor in the fact that there will be new players into the mechanics at all.

 

You only need to factor them in by your explanation of the mechanics in the game and in the manual, strategy guide etc.

 

(also helper tips and stuff in non-expert mode I suppose).

 

Also one thing that is kind of immersion breaking is a tutorial built into the prologue of the game (see almost every game today).

 

The only one that was non-intrusive was BG1, it had those green helper guys stationed around Candlekeep and that practice arena downstairs. There was also an archer guy that gave a couple tips. Still I'd prefer not to see a tutorial for this game.

Edited by Sensuki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allow me to simplify:

 

Snake is to real world as Skuldr is to imagined world. In the real world, heat is a thing that can be sensed, and there happens to be an animal that can sense it (a snake, that wasn't designed specifically to prevent adventurers from sneaking past it so easily). In the imagined world, some manner of soul essence is something that can be sensed, and a Skuldr is an animal that happens to exist in this particular world and happens to be able to sense souls.

 

The link isn't between a snake and a Skuldr. It's between each animal and its respective "reality."

which rests on the assumption, as I said, that a Skuldr is a predator. Which may not even be the case, and certainly doesn't touch on its importance vs. stealth characters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

which rests on the assumption, as I said, that a Skuldr is a predator. Which may not even be the case, and certainly doesn't touch on its importance vs. stealth characters.

 

 

I just don't get the point of this discussion. What's your problem, exactly? That Skuldrs have an ability that makes stealth more difficult? Or that this ability is grounded in fantasy and magic instead of the theory of evolution?  :blink:

 

More importantly: Enemies that also have special abilities to make stealth more difficult:

  • Animals with keen senses, like wolves
  • Bandits that use traps around their camps
  • Guards with torches

And there are many more possibilities - especially if we take into account that the easiest difficulty for stealth would be a blind and deaf enemy, we get a wide range of stealth difficulties.

So why is the Skuldr a problem? How is it any different? How is his magical soul vision more lame than the excellent nose of a wolf? (Remember, this is a fantasy world.)

 

To me this whole discussion only proves how insubstantial the fears of overpowered stealth were in the first place. If anyone seriously thought that there wouldn't be differences in difficulty for sneaking past different types of enemies, then it's no wonder they also thought stealth was overpowered.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skuldr does look as a predator, an ambush predator most likely. Too slow to stalk his prey, he probably lies in waiting and relies on his soul sonar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing, just amazing, what more can I say.


"Have you ever spoken with the dead? Called to them from this side? Called them from their silent rest? Do you know what it is that they feel?

Pain. Pain, when torn into this wakefulness, this reminder of the chaos from which they had escaped. Pain of having to live! There will be no more pain. There will be... no more chaos."

 

 

Kerghan the Terrible,

first of the Necromancers,

voyager in the Lands of the Dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if it would be possible in a game like this, but it would be cool if there were parts in the game we get ambushed from behind or maybe as your crossing a bridge we get stuck over a cavern and enemy's come out from both sides to flank us. I hope technology has fixed the pathing issues from 15 yrs ago in these games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
which rests on the assumption, as I said, that a Skuldr is a predator. Which may not even be the case, and certainly doesn't touch on its importance vs. stealth characters.

 

 

The only assumption it rests on is the following: If your world, fictitious or not, possesses something capable of being sensed, then a living creature within that world bearing the ability to sense it is not inherently some artificial, forced construct.

 

Forget the snake, if that's somehow confusing to you. Saying that "Skuldr's ability sure is a convenient way to stop people from easily sneaking" is like saying "Those merchant's guards sure are a convenient way of preventing someone from just stealing all the merchant's goods and waltzing away."

 

Neither the Skuldr or the merchants' guards' presence in the world relies specifically on their placement by the dev team, as they could believably exist (under the workings of an established world) "on their own." Now, if a super-poor merchant had 10 decked-out guards, then it would start to seem like maybe they were purely placed as a controlling-the-player choice, rather than a choice that fits the lore where appropriate (the merchant probably wouldn't be able to afford such guards).

 

I don't know how to be any clearer with such an extremely simple point.

Edited by Lephys
  • Like 1

Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if it would be possible in a game like this, but it would be cool if there were parts in the game we get ambushed from behind or maybe as your crossing a bridge we get stuck over a cavern and enemy's come out from both sides to flank us. I hope technology has fixed the pathing issues from 15 yrs ago in these games. 

 

Haha it's not technology that improves pathing really it's the code behind it. Project Eterntiy has "The Pathfinder" working on the gameplay programming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the skuldr hang upside down like a bat in dark places? Waiting for prey to pass underneath before swooping down with claws extended...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nice update and keep up the good work

 

Skuldr sounds like awesome monster, but I bet once this game out I'm going to hate that thing's guts!


I don't normally date planetouched girls, but when I do the Tiefling is already in the sack 

 

stay rolling my friends!  :fdevil: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the skuldr hang upside down like a bat in dark places? Waiting for prey to pass underneath before swooping down with claws extended...

Swooping is bad.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if it would be possible in a game like this, but it would be cool if there were parts in the game we get ambushed from behind or maybe as your crossing a bridge we get stuck over a cavern and enemy's come out from both sides to flank us. I hope technology has fixed the pathing issues from 15 yrs ago in these games. 

It's already done in IWD series, so why not now?  Even in PnP, some of us must have entertained our players by surprising their parties with classic ambushes and/or multiple waves of attacks such as, invisible stalkers, statues turning out to be gargoyles, and some monsters appear out of what's supposed to be mirrors et cetera.  The point is, throwing screwballs to the players through various game-plays but, at the same time, in order not to make the players feel unfair, the settings must be convincing enough for them to expect certain creatures/enemies.  So, if they are tied to the lore, they are even better, producing a synergy effect.  I hope they will come up with a good camp system, which will allow the players to think about their tactics, preparing to handcrafted maps/challenges.

 

PS I was not happy with the same monsters repeatedly appearing out of thin air in NWN2 OC.  It didn't only feel unfair but also repetitive and even silly - honestly, I think it's a result of noob DMing.   :facepalm:
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...