as the combat-output would turn the attributes into "combat winner" skills? yeah, i guess so.

 

i haven't fully thought this out, but i just wanted to throw it out there. i don't think every attribute has to be combat-based is all i'm saying. but at the same time the devs have to make sure that the non-combat portions of the game are just as important as the combat portions of the game.

 

So that one character can take all the non combat attributes and dump the combat attributtes and the other characters will dump the non combat skills?

If I understand your idea correct it would work for a single character game but not for a party game.

 

 

well, i would assume that these attributes would work in concert with other mechanics. So for example, lets say you've got a group of goblins you have to fight. If you want you can fight them, sneak by them ,or talk them out of a battle, a character with a high story-mental attribute (possibility of winning a dialogue challenge) could step in and take a shot at it. but then he's got to know skill:languages to be able to talk with the goblins or maybe skill: item crafting to be able to craft a nice shiny object to give the goblins as a tribute, etc. if he's got story-creative attribute, he can get a few different options (i.e. chances) to do this. if he fails, then he would be pretty useless in combat (assuming he has low combat-oriented attributes), and the rest of the party sort of comes in and cleans up the mess.

 

the idea is sort of a mish-mash of the D&D attribute system and the attribute system in King of Dragon Pass, where some attributes could come in handy for certain "challenges" that occur during the game.

Edited July 19, 201312 yr by Hormalakh

People do have some basic characteristics such as strength, agility, intelligence, resistance to pain (let's call it constitution) and I believe it's very good to have it reflected in an RPG. It's a way to make the characters more real, they're still virtual, but you have something concrete to asssess their basic characteristics.

 

Well, they won't be reflected in this particular RPG.

 

Thankfully, thanks to the Kickstarter Revolution, you'll soon have plenty of RPGs that DO simulate those basic characteristics. So there is indeed no reason to cry.

Edited July 19, 201312 yr by Infinitron

 

People do have some basic characteristics such as strength, agility, intelligence, resistance to pain (let's call it constitution) and I believe it's very good to have it reflected in an RPG. It's a way to make the characters more real, they're still virtual, but you have something concrete to asssess their basic characteristics.

 

Well, they won't be reflected in this particular RPG.

 

Thankfully, thanks to the Kickstarter Revolution, you'll soon have plenty of RPGs that DO simulate those basic characteristics. So there is indeed no reason to cry.

 

 Come on, even you can do better than "buy something else if you don't like this feature".

well, i would assume that these attributes would work in concert with other mechanics. So for example, lets say you've got a group of goblins you have to fight. If you want you can fight them, sneak by them ,or talk them out of a battle, a character with a high story-mental attribute (possibility of winning a dialogue challenge) could step in and take a shot at it. but then he's got to know skill:languages to be able to talk with the goblins or maybe skill: item crafting to be able to craft a nice shiny object to give the goblins as a tribute, etc. if he's got story-creative attribute, he can get a few different options (i.e. chances) to do this. if he fails, then he would be pretty useless in combat (assuming he has low combat-oriented attributes), and the rest of the party sort of comes in and cleans up the mess.

 

the idea is sort of a mish-mash of the D&D attribute system and the attribute system in King of Dragon Pass, where some attributes could come in handy for certain "challenges" that occur during the game.

 

If you want to use your attribute system, all systems should go the same direction. So you can either "buy" a combat skill or a non combat skill. And I'm still not sure I would like your system in a Party based game.

Come on, even you can do better than "buy something else if you don't like this feature".

 

In this much, he has a point. While I'm not personally worried about the new stats system (as long as other systems like feats pick up the slack), the folks at Obsidian have made it very clear they're interested in input from the community... especially since so many of us have already paid for the product.

Edited July 19, 201312 yr by KillerClowns

We would like your character concepts to be viable regardless of how you distribute your Attributes.

Eh... not sure if serious.

 

Also, no questions about rape? You disappoint, Codex.

 

 

People do have some basic characteristics such as strength, agility, intelligence, resistance to pain (let's call it constitution) and I believe it's very good to have it reflected in an RPG. It's a way to make the characters more real, they're still virtual, but you have something concrete to asssess their basic characteristics.

 

Well, they won't be reflected in this particular RPG.

 

Thankfully, thanks to the Kickstarter Revolution, you'll soon have plenty of RPGs that DO simulate those basic characteristics. So there is indeed no reason to cry.

 

 Come on, even you can do better than "buy something else if you don't like this feature".

 

 

What else is there to say? We might be able to affect minor things like that Crafting skill, but ultimately, Josh Sawyer has his overarching design philosophy and we're not going to change that. Whether you agree with it or not, it's a good thing that he can now pursue his creative vision to its fullest extent.

Edited July 19, 201312 yr by Infinitron

If you want to use your attribute system, all systems should go the same direction. So you can either "buy" a combat skill or a non combat skill. And I'm still not sure I would like your system in a Party based game.

 

i didn't really understand what you said, but maybe this may clarify: all skills are both combat and non-combat. they are the same skills. Sawyer has said as much already,

 

http://www.formspring.me/JESawyer/q/478748375852797478

 

There's only one set of skills. Skills can be used out of combat for a variety of purposes and they grant auxiliary combat bonuses.

Edited July 19, 201312 yr by Hormalakh

 

We would like your character concepts to be viable regardless of how you distribute your Attributes.

Eh... not sure if serious.

 

He's completely serious, sadly.

 

In Sawyer's mind:

 

Accessibility (for disability) >> Intricate ability stats system that requires planning and trade-offs

 

Whether you agree with it or not, it's a good thing that he can now pursue his creative vision to its fullest extent.

It is not a good thing. This is not his money. This game is not for the realization of his childhood ability fantasies.

There's nothing creative in dumping completely unrelated effects together and calling it an attribute.

 

If you want to use your attribute system, all systems should go the same direction. So you can either "buy" a combat skill or a non combat skill. And I'm still not sure I would like your system in a Party based game.

 

i didn't really understand what you said, but maybe this may clarify: all skills are both combat and non-combat. they are the same skills. Sawyer has said as much already,

 

http://www.formspring.me/JESawyer/q/478748375852797478

 

There's only one set of skills. Skills can be used out of combat for a variety of purposes and they grant auxiliary combat bonuses.

 

What I mean is that your attribute system makes no sense, if you divide your system in skills and combat abillities(abillities,spells and talents) as in Project Eternity. In your system you wouldn't be able to fight properly with the wrong attributes, but you would still get combat abillities.

 

Whether you agree with it or not, it's a good thing that he can now pursue his creative vision to its fullest extent.

It is not a good thing. This is not his money. This game is not for the realization of his childhood ability fantasies.

There's nothing creative in dumping completely unrelated effects together and calling it an attribute.

 

 

Since pretty much every other CRPG in existence works the way you want, I'd say it's creative enough.

 

BTW, we already knew this was coming last month: http://www.formspring.me/JESawyer/q/467028439484888174

What I mean is that your attribute system makes no sense, if you divide your system in skills and combat abillities(abillities,spells and talents) as in Project Eternity. In your system you wouldn't be able to fight properly with the wrong attributes, but you would still get combat abillities.

hmm good point. perhaps all attributes should have combat and non-combat applications. which brings me back to why do we need attributes in the first place outside of character creation flavor?

Edited July 19, 201312 yr by Hormalakh

 

It is not a good thing. This is not his money. This game is not for the realization of his childhood ability fantasies.

 

it is all that. we all gave them the money so that they're able to create a game based on their own vision. they promised us an ie like experience which consists of a party based rtwp rpg with isometric pre-rendered backgrounds. obsidian never said that they want to mimic (a)dnd and its attribute allocation.

Edited July 19, 201312 yr by Semper

BTW, we already knew this was coming last month: http://www.formspring.me/JESawyer/q/467028439484888174

Thanks for the link. I wonder what he means by unconventional. Even this bit doesn't sound too different from some systems I've seen.

 

I appreciate the intent well enough.

Since pretty much every other CRPG in existence works the way you want, I'd say it's creative enough.

Creativity is a phenomenon whereby something new and valuable is created.

 

It lacks the latter.

 

@Semper

It's not his game and it's not his money. He's just a developer in the team.

When he self-funds his game, then it'll be all that.

 

Edited July 19, 201312 yr by Valorian

 

Since pretty much every other CRPG in existence works the way you want, I'd say it's creative enough.

Creativity is a phenomenon whereby something new and valuable is created.

 

It lacks the latter.

 

If the design achieves the intent, I'll value it.

 

BTW, we already knew this was coming last month: http://www.formspring.me/JESawyer/q/467028439484888174

Thanks for the link. I wonder what he means by unconventional. Even this bit doesn't sound too different from some systems I've seen.

 

I appreciate the intent well enough.

 

 

Well, as you can see, some people do consider this system highly unconventional indeed.

It's not his game and it's not his money. He's just a developer in the team.

 

afaik together with adam he's the lead designer so it's basically his game. he's responsible for what goes in and out. kickstarting a game doesn't mean that the community has a right to dictate in which direction they've to develop the game they promised. it's nice that they consider our input, but their own (and especially the lead designer's) vision is above everything else.

Loved everything except the part about PE being conservative as far as new IPs go. Why??????????

 

I'd guess they'd like to avoid pulling a Torment.

A game getting great reviews and a cult following within 10 years,

but is too alien for most players and a total flop as far as sales go.

 

Most players includes me, I liked torment, but I liked BG and IWD setting more.

Familiar/boring/whatever. Hey, I'd like a real historic setting even better...

 

 

Since pretty much every other CRPG in existence works the way you want, I'd say it's creative enough.

Creativity is a phenomenon whereby something new and valuable is created.

 

It lacks the latter.

 

If the design achieves the intent, I'll value it.

 

 

 We would like your character concepts to be viable regardless of how you distribute your Attributes.

 

... Let's hope it doesn't.

 

 

@Semper

Thank your for the clarification about what kickstarting means and about Sawyer's developer-hierarchy-status within the PE team.

I'd guess they'd like to avoid pulling a Torment.

A game getting great reviews and a cult following within 10 years,

but is too alien for most players and a total flop as far as sales go.

 

As one fond of exotic worlds, I'd just like to say: Torment: Tides of Numenera. $4,188,927. I think there's a market for strange and fascinating worlds.

More "gamist" than "simulationist".

 

That's the wrong direction. Simulationist is better.

 

 

This crap is pulled straight out of your garden variety Asian MMORPG, RIP in piece Project Eternity

 

 

So what is the problem with that method aside from association with Asian MMORPGs?

 

The most obvious being that is removes most planning from chargen, makes it impossible to make/customize a character specialized in specific weapons.

 

I mean why should a character who has say a high Agility score be able to wield a Long Sword or a Spear with equal proficiency.

 

wrong example, perhaps a crossbow would be better.  why would more strength increase the damage of a crossbow?  higher dexterity boosts accuracy with weapons, thus increasing the chance to hit (this was even a feat with D&D).  but more damage? that would be strength, unless you have a nonphysical weapon (turn undead) or a weapon that uses mechanical operation for its strength (like a crossbow).

More "gamist" than "simulationist".

 

That's the wrong direction. Simulationist is better.

 

For better or for worse, that is not the policy of Obsidian Entertainment.