Update #58: Crafting with Tim Cain!

[Elerond]

Ok, now I'm confused. What does crafting as a skill has been removed mean? Can we get a real world in game example of how things are gonna work now? 

 

I think it means that characters will use other skills to craft things. So crafting is still skill based, but there isn't specific skill just for the crafting.

 

I am not hundred percent sure that I am right, there is always possibility that crafting will not need any skills but only recipes and ingredients.

[Tuckey]

Not having crafting as a skill means we avoid this situation called:

 

'leave that one character behind all the time situation - because he/she does the crafting and is useless at combat'

ie Sand in nwn2

ie or that mechanic character in kotor 2

 

I'm glad obsidian is finally learning lol.

[Elerond]

As they already separated skills to two different pools (combat and non-combat), so that you don't need to sacrifice character combat prowess to make character good in non-combat things, thus I would say including crafting skill would not had caused character be any less capable in combat than what they are now. 

[Sensuki]

Tbh I don't have that much problems with the durability gone (though I liked the idea for normal, not magical stuff), my concern is more about the way of communication and the iteration itself.

 

In my opinion this wasn't communicated well enough by Sawyer that he had doubts about these mechnics from the beginning. And the short time between announcement and "180" does let me doubt that this was part of a regular iteration. I fear (and that's more a feeling) that Sawyer just used the public backlash to pull his opinion through.

 

I would have been satisfied with a reaction like this "We saw that many people are upset about the durability mechanics and the crafting skills and we will think about these mechanis in deep. Please give us feedback on the forums about the topic." This kind of very sudden 180 turn without much reason is just strange. But perhaps I'm only upset because of the increasing numbers of sudden 180s in the last time.....

Tim Cain probably forgot to write the usual 'let us know what you think' that Josh and Adam usually say at the end of their updates.

 

I don't think that saying 'I am not 100% sold on Crafting' would have served Josh at all. People reacted negatively to it of their own volition, that would have been putting words in people's mouth and a lot more people would have said, yeah yeah, take it out.

[Zombra]

Hm.  Too bad, I liked the way durability was described.  Nothing would break, just a penalty to use until you did something to keep your equipment working.

 

Also, I'm always sad when skills are removed from a system, especially noncombat skills.

 

I respect the decision made here, though.

[benzeneboy]

If you want to make a money sink in the late game, and keep a crafting skill, why not incorporate something like the socket/jewel system in Diablo for high level equipment.  This is more geared toward reward rather than a punishment like durability and can give a great deal of late stage character customization which players could choose to enjoy or ignore depending on how much they like crafting mechanics and "grinding" for bonus stat points

[Tuckey]

@Elerond; I'd actually forgotten about the non-combat skill points, thanks for reminding me.

[Messier-31]

Crafting? Not important to me. But sure, whatever, as long as the story and characters will be awesome.

[Prometheus]

 

I think it means that characters will use other skills to craft things. So crafting is still skill based, but there isn't specific skill just for the crafting.

 

I am not hundred percent sure that I am right, there is always possibility that crafting will not need any skills but only recipes and ingredients.

 

You will still need to fullfill the prerequisites of the recipe. see bolded part below. they only removed the skill especially for crafting, you will still need other skills for some recipes.

 

 

Update by Tim Cain, Senior Programmer and Designer

 

When you use the central object at these locations, such as the anvil at the forge, you will enter a crafting interface that displays all of your forge recipes, broken down into categories such as armor, weapons, boots, helmets, rings, etc. You pick a category and can see all of the recipes you know for that category. Each recipe has a set of ingredients needed to make its item (or items, as some recipes will make batches of items). Some recipes will have additional prerequisites, including requiring you or a companion to have a certain talent or ability or even skill at an appropriate level. Higher level recipes have more prerequisites and need rarer ingredients.

 

[YourVoiceisAmbrosia]

I think the whole thing is a bit silly. Of all the things to be up in arms about, it has to be durability? A system that wasn't even implemented in most IE games to begin with? How can you possibly compare this with Bioware, who changed an entire ending to a trilogy?

 

I also don't really see any "pandering" here. It seems like the developers were not too sure about the system to begin with and responded to feedback accordingly. For the most part, they've stuck with their decisions and didn't make any significant changes, with a few exceptions. Apparently, though, this is a slippery slope and suddenly they are going to make Dragon Age 2.5 with 87 romances and no RPG elements.   

[rjshae]

 

Ok, now I'm confused. What does crafting as a skill has been removed mean? Can we get a real world in game example of how things are gonna work now? 

 

I think it means that characters will use other skills to craft things. So crafting is still skill based, but there isn't specific skill just for the crafting.

 

I am not hundred percent sure that I am right, there is always possibility that crafting will not need any skills but only recipes and ingredients.

 

Crafting can always be made a skill that you can hire. Since it is tied to a workbench, that workbench can also be associated with the necessary labor. Possibly what the character brings to the table, so to speak, is a combination of their unbroken soul energy and certain special skills. Thus a ring of darting and dodging could be constructed by an expert gold smith, while drawing upon the soul-based focus abilities of a rogue. Characters could still perform certain recipes that don't require specialized crafting skills, such as basic cooking, but do require a hearth and enough time to perform the task.

[Chippy]

I'm uncomfortably astride the fence on this as there was no way of knowing how durability tied into the game mechanics, and we don't know how complicated crafting will be.  There are multiple examples and methods of how it can all tie together at both the workbench and in the field, and I was looking forward to that start game feeling of scrabbling around for every resource possible, and assumed durability would marry well with that.  At the same time I assumed that as game/character progress I wouldn't have been facing Corsomyr blunting on the hide of a dragon, or having that moment before the battle of having to break out the sharpening stone.

 

I trust Obsidian though, so am sure it isn't just about the specifics of a single thing, but the game as a whole.

[Adhin]

Not a big fan of durability systems and 'repair' in the first place, world doesn't really work that way and it's usually just exists as a money sync. Outside of just sharpening your blade (general upkeep) if your weapon is actually becoming damaged your only real option is getting a new one. If your sword chips you don't throw ducted tape at it, 'reforging' its not going to solve the problem. You make a new sword, maybe you melt down your old one to re-forge a new sword entirely but... you make a "NEW' one, not repair.

 

DnD got this, weapons had HP but you don't repair weapons. They don't have direct durability degrade in combat, if something breaks your weapon that ****s broke and you replace it. And in a game like this... that's scripted stuff or horribly unfun monsters that'll constitute constant reloading (rust monsters as someone mentioned). So I'm happy the durability stuffs getting tossed out. I get the concern for the games economy, something I always get kinda whiny about in games. Not a lot of good ways to handle money syncs unless you force that kinda thing on players though which is kinda a bummer.

 

Anyway as for crafting, I like it but I think its kinda a dumb thing for a player, and adventurer, to be doing. It's one of them little irks I got where, I want to be able to make a sword I want... but it doesn't really make much sense for my character to be doing it. I've spent all my chars live adventuring, the whole game 'adventuring' but I'm supposed to also be a better smith then the guys who 'do the smithing' there whole life? I mean it's their freakin' job.

 

That's something I think Diablo 3 got right, initially (one of the few things). You could craft (sorta) but it was handled by an actual blacksmith in the game... course the way they handled the actual crafting was garbage and it was all random BS but ignoring that... going to an actual smith and bringing him supplies and picking the sword/properties you want to craft ultimately has the same effect... you can also tie money into that as your payin' the smith then. Good amount of folks bitch about that cause they want to actually be the one doing it even if the outcomes the same but meh.

 

My thoughts on the whole thing for whatever its worth.

[Chippy]

Not a big fan of durability systems and 'repair' in the first place, world doesn't really work that way and it's usually just exists as a money sync. Outside of just sharpening your blade (general upkeep) if your weapon is actually becoming damaged your only real option is getting a new one. If your sword chips you don't throw ducted tape at it, 'reforging' its not going to solve the problem. You make a new sword, maybe you melt down your old one to re-forge a new sword entirely but... you make a "NEW' one, not repair.

 

DnD got this, weapons had HP but you don't repair weapons. They don't have direct durability degrade in combat, if something breaks your weapon that ****s broke and you replace it. And in a game like this... that's scripted stuff or horribly unfun monsters that'll constitute constant reloading (rust monsters as someone mentioned). So I'm happy the durability stuffs getting tossed out. I get the concern for the games economy, something I always get kinda whiny about in games. Not a lot of good ways to handle money syncs unless you force that kinda thing on players though which is kinda a bummer.

 

Anyway as for crafting, I like it but I think its kinda a dumb thing for a player, and adventurer, to be doing. It's one of them little irks I got where, I want to be able to make a sword I want... but it doesn't really make much sense for my character to be doing it. I've spent all my chars live adventuring, the whole game 'adventuring' but I'm supposed to also be a better smith then the guys who 'do the smithing' there whole life? I mean it's their freakin' job.

 

That's something I think Diablo 3 got right, initially (one of the few things). You could craft (sorta) but it was handled by an actual blacksmith in the game... course the way they handled the actual crafting was garbage and it was all random BS but ignoring that... going to an actual smith and bringing him supplies and picking the sword/properties you want to craft ultimately has the same effect... you can also tie money into that as your payin' the smith then. Good amount of folks bitch about that cause they want to actually be the one doing it even if the outcomes the same but meh.

 

My thoughts on the whole thing for whatever its worth.

 

From my POV it would have depended on what worn actually meant though, it might have been blunt, hardened, bent, etc, which usually happens with poor materials (which I expect to have at the start of the game) - so yeah, throw it away (like handheld razor blades) or in the interest of saving money try the repair.  But here it gets interesting - as how complicated does it get - do we assume the low quality stuff is like aluminium that continues to bend until broken, or do we start talking about types of steel that have a stress point that spring back unless the bending/striking force exceeds that point... and then I can see where Obsidian might start to get annoyed, as then we have to consider giants with aluminium warhammers striking gnomes wielding adamantine shields... and that's not even taking into account the higher level functions of crafting like tempering and case hardening with what I assume will include progressively rarer and more exotic materials - which would require as much quality in the tools that craft them.

 

So yeah, it seems to get more complicated and involved with every other mechanic in the game for something that everyone might not enjoy.  One thing that did spring to mind though-we always assume a low starting age for our adventurers, buy I always appreciated the PS:T and KOTOR2 approach, with an older more experienced protagonist with a wealth of life experience behind them - so what if we had a starting career choice similiar to Arcanum and could pick a type of smith?  Equal opportunities and inclusivity in mind, I can't see why starting my adventuring career at 50 or over should be an issue.

Edited July 8, 2013 by Chippy

[Adhin]

I highly doubt it would of been that complicated, was probably just 100 units or something with higher durability for higher grade/magical items. I just meant once a weapon gets that worn down (or chipped or whatever) 'repairing' it usually isn't much of a repair. You try to repair a chip in a sword and its still weak at that point, you just got a cutting edge back is all and it wont be long till its gone. I mean look at Skyrim, they removed weapon repair and a buncha folks got all up in arms about it... being all pissed it was gone and that you couldn't repair in the field anymore. It was just a buncha crazy talk, who the **** is carrying a forge with them in a dungeon? How do you plan to 'fix' your completely trashed sword? With some magically consumable smithy hammer that lets you repair mid dungeon?

 

It's a gold sync, plane and simple, they're not meant to make any sense really. Which isn't a bad thing, really, gold syncs are the only real way to keep a constant-gold spawning economy in check. Hopefully they come up with some good lite gold syncs for us, maybe revolving around are keep with some kinda monthly upkeep cost or... something. Could do it via consumables that let you heal up the actual health pool not the stamina pool (currently resting does that) by a tiny bit. I dunno really...

 

As for backgrounds I agree to some extent, 50's a bit much to 'get into adventurin' really. I'd expect some higher starting level then 1 for it. PST it made sense what with the whole soulless immortality thing going on with amnesia thrown into the mix. I can understand you working at a smithy in your 20-30s (weather it was your own or not) and you got wrapped up into things but then that's a bit hard to explain how you just kinda... picked up mage spells on the spot or whatever. Which, to me anyways, kinda brings up a point of how I view classes, they're a way of life.. its what you've done up to that point but your still green so to speak. Though on principle I agree with ya in the general sense of the idea of having backgrounds that work for more then some 18-20 year old who just stepped out into the world.

 

...seriously though 50+ as a 'start of an adventuring career' is an issue cause... your 50+ in old ass medieval times. Considering magic can't close up wounds and make you all good to go I doubt its excessively prolonged any humans live unless they've spent most of it honing there souls energy like a monk or something. And being 50, starting off as a lvl 1... can't see that of being much of a goal up till that point you know? It's possible though I guess, just kinda bizar.

[TrashMan]

Personally I was more interested in item durabiltiy than crafting. Sad to see it go.

 

Many anti-durability arguments are downright RETARDED.

"Oh, I didn't like the durabiltiy system in game X so it can't possibly work here!"

"Oh, I didn't want to be bothered with it!"

"What? Having to cary a sidearm in case my main weapon is damaged? So tedious! So stupid! Who would EVER carry a sidearm?"

"But magican weapons should NEVER break...because magic"

 

Really?

I could go to a mental ward and write down statements that make more sense.

 

You people are a cancer that's killing good games and are removing all depth from them.

Yes I said it. Feel free to hate me, cause I sure as hell hate you.

 

 

 

That said, I think the system could have been designed better.

 

Instead of a wepon/armor damaged on every hit, a %chance based on the power of the hit and the materials involved.

Resting restores part of the durability in a simialr way to resting or healing. Durabiltiy damage is basicly split into repairable and non-repairalbe. The higher the crafting skill, the more damage is repairable. But you can never repair all of it no matter how much you rest-spam. You need to visit a proper blacksmith.

However, you can repair most of it.

 

Sicne there is a random element to durabiltiy damage and the chance to damage a wepon is low in the first place, you can go for a long time wihout any significant weapon damage. Or if you go on bashing foes in mithril plate with all of your might with a normal steel sword, you might see that weapon degrade really fast.

 

Basicly something like a 5% chance for 1 point of durability damage - if the material of your weapon and whatevery you're striking are the same. Difference in materials changes the chance, so you have literally 0% chance to damage a high-quality weapon agaisnt leather armor.

 

Also, weapons CAN break. Even magical ones. But they aren't destroyed. They can be re-forged (and it's not redicolously expensive either)

[Chrononaut]

Well I don't have a particular view on durability/crafting because they weren't IE mechanics. I just think that J.Sawyer's design approach is flawed and will probably result in a crapload of skills and mechanics being streamlined or removed from the game. This skill/mechanic is hard to balance and ~according to my research of watching people play computer games~ people don't use it much. Therefore = Remove it.

 

I see it as an inevitable result of trying to make skills or attributes have too broad an effect in the game. If you give yourself the task of trying to tie a skill like crafting into every other part of the game's system, instead of giving it a specific usage, then according to that philosophy the chances are it'll get removed are very high.

 

I would much rather a traditional "adventure game" approach to skills, as in specific skills that have specific uses. ie use "skill" on "item", get "result". That's the only way PE will be a large amount of skills, trying to give skills multiple uses and tied them into other game systems will lead to a streamlining of the whole game, a whole lot less total number of skills with a more broad use. I hope you guys like MMO's because all I've read seems to indicate a very build-centric approach.

[Hassat Hunter]

"Durability is great"
"I rather had it 95% less likely to occur than the plan"
 

But hey if our arguments are so 'retarded' why don't you come up with good counter-arguments. Since I seen lacking few.

That you need 3 weapons for 1 dungeon to cope with breaking is not a good argument. That for you (and you alone) it illustrates weariness of your character does not make a good mechanic. Also the fatigue penalty (I hope it returns) is already there for that. That it's good in a infinite gold economy is not a good argument, since PE is *not* that.

Give me good arguments first, then you can complain about ours.

Edited July 8, 2013 by Hassat Hunter

[Cultist]

Personally I was more interested in item durabiltiy than crafting. Sad to see it go.

 

Many anti-durability arguments are downright RETARDED.

"Oh, I didn't like the durabiltiy system in game X so it can't possibly work here!"

"Oh, I didn't want to be bothered with it!"

"What? Having to cary a sidearm in case my main weapon is damaged? So tedious! So stupid! Who would EVER carry a sidearm?"

"But magican weapons should NEVER break...because magic"

 

Really?

I could go to a mental ward and write down statements that make more sense.

 

You people are a cancer that's killing good games and are removing all depth from them.

Yes I said it. Feel free to hate me, cause I sure as hell hate you.

And as a cancer, we know that the one true cure is to cut cancer out.

 

Now, let's play that retarded argument game together:

"We need durability, because depth!"

"We need durability, bceause this time we will surely make it right! others have failed, but we will succeed!"

"Of course people will be happy to roleplay real knight with several degrading sidearms, taking time to wear their Full Plate Armor before each battle and taking it off after and changing into common clothes. Everyone loves realism!"

 

I, personally, am fed with experimenting on RPGs, uh-huh, enjoy your Derp Age 2, and I expect to play a classic Infinity engine game, without timers glued to my equipment.

 

Also, have you noticed that majority of durability approving comments here, on SA and kickstarter were in a way of "it is only mildly annoying" or "the effect is minor, I can ignore it"?

[TrashMan]

"Durability is great"

"I rather had it 95% less likely to occur than the plan"

 

But hey if our arguments are so 'retarded' why don't you come up with good counter-arguments. Since I seen lacking few.

 

The change of frequency and the way degradation is applied to something more closer to real life and less ..."tedious" is hardly  a bad move

 

 

 

That you need 3 weapons for 1 dungeon to cope with breaking is not a good argument.

 

It is. Because it makes sense. What makes sense is a good argument.

 

Quod Errat Demonstratum

 

People in the middle ages always had a backup.

Archers had short swords

Knights had a secondary weapon and a dagger in adition to their man weapon.

 

Most weapons were made to take abuse and weren't easy to break. But it could happen. And you could loose your weapon in a fight, it can be knocked out of your hand, etc.. (and this is possibly also a in-game move/talent)

Having a backup makes sense. Going into prolonged comabt wihout it doesn't.

 

If your weapon breaks while in the dungeon no one is FORCING you to go back to town to re-forge it. You have a backup, the dungon is pefectly doable with it. You are given a choice. A credible, sensible, logical choice.

One you do not want to even exist.

 

 

 

That for you (and you alone) it illustrates weariness of your character does not make a good mechanic. Also the fatigue penalty (I hope it returns) is already there for that. That it's good in a infinite gold economy is not a good argument, since PE is *not* that.

 

Wut the hell you on son?

Weariness? When have I ever meantioned that? Or infinite gold economy?

[TrashMan]

And as a cancer, we know that the one true cure is to cut cancer out.

 

Now, let's play that retarded argument game together:

"We need durability, because depth!"

"We need durability, bceause this time we will surely make it right! others have failed, but we will succeed!"

"Of course people will be happy to roleplay real knight with several degrading sidearms, taking time to wear their Full Plate Armor before each battle and taking it off after and changing into common clothes. Everyone loves realism!"

 

I, personally, am fed with experimenting on RPGs, uh-huh, enjoy your Derp Age 2, and I expect to play a classic Infinity engine game, without timers glued to my equipment.

 

Timers glued to equipment?

Again, you have such a limited view. Tunnel vision. It's sad.

 

Also, not everyone has "failed" creating a good durabiltiy system.

and I'm glad you acknowledge your arguments are retarded. Saves me the trouble of pointing the obvious.

 

 

 

Also, have you noticed that majority of durability approving comments here, on SA and kickstarter were in a way of "it is only mildly annoying" or "the effect is minor, I can ignore it"?

 

Name me one mechanic that someone COULDN'T label as "annoying".

I dare you.

Name me one mechanic that you can guarantee here everyone will like and no one will find anyoying.

Name one mechanic or improvement of mechanic one cannot dismiss out of hand using ignorance as a shield?

 

Because if "X annoys me tehrefore it shouldn't be in a game" is an argument you actually want to make, then realise that I can use that same argument to attack EVERY. SINGLE. MECHANIC. EVER.

 

O you know....you could actually use your brain for a bit and try to figure out the *WHY* behind it

[Cultist]

You act like a mother, who tries to persuade her child to eat food child hates, telling that "It's tasty! Don't say it's not because it is! Eat!".

 

I never said anything about mechanics that will satisfy everyone. But durability got axed for good because people voiced their disapproval. So there was an option - try to fix a mechanics that is, at best, not-so-annoying, or remove controversial mechanics completely.

We won.

[Lucidbro]

"Durability is great"

"I rather had it 95% less likely to occur than the plan"

 

But hey if our arguments are so 'retarded' why don't you come up with good counter-arguments. Since I seen lacking few.

That you need 3 weapons for 1 dungeon to cope with breaking is not a good argument. That for you (and you alone) it illustrates weariness of your character does not make a good mechanic. Also the fatigue penalty (I hope it returns) is already there for that. That it's good in a infinite gold economy is not a good argument, since PE is *not* that.

Give me good arguments first, then you can complain about ours.

 

Well given that it is you guys who wanted the system out, the onus would be on YOU to provide the sufficient reasoning, in the first place would it not? But he has a point here, you have to admit. What this all essentially boils down to is, "I can't be bothered". Next thing we know you guys will want to remove inventory and party management. Since wanting "depth" has now been branded as invalid. 

 

....I'll just go play shooters now.

[Lucidbro]

You act like a mother, who tries to persuade her child to eat food child hates, telling that "It's tasty! Don't say it's not because it is! Eat!".

 

I never said anything about mechanics that will satisfy everyone. But durability got axed for good because people voiced their disapproval. So there was an option - try to fix a mechanics that is, at best, not-so-annoying, or remove controversial mechanics completely.

We won.

 

So, who won in Dragon age 2?

[Malekith]

 

You act like a mother, who tries to persuade her child to eat food child hates, telling that "It's tasty! Don't say it's not because it is! Eat!".

 

I never said anything about mechanics that will satisfy everyone. But durability got axed for good because people voiced their disapproval. So there was an option - try to fix a mechanics that is, at best, not-so-annoying, or remove controversial mechanics completely.

We won.

 

So, who won in Dragon age 2?

 

i don't see what DA2  has to do with it.

We backed an IE successor. Inventory and party management were part of the IE games. Even if many people  asked to be removed Sawyer would be right to tell them to **** off.

They paid for an IE type game, that's what they will get. If they didn't wanted an IE game, they should be more carefull with their money.

But item durability wasn't part of the games. It's an added feature (included for the wrong reasons) that most people find annoying. If you are a fan of id, more power to you.

When they deside to make an Arcanum successor you will be right to excpect the feature in and cry if they remove it for fan feedback.

hell, i hate item durability but i would never ask to be removed from an Arcanum successor. Just keep it away from my IE game.