Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Character Rollaholic - Mea Culpa


  • Please log in to reply
113 replies to this topic

#41
Lephys

Lephys

    Punsmith of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 7245 posts
  • Location:The Punforge
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Sure, Sawyer hasn't explicitly said they won't bend and twist simple mathematical calculations into an unintuitive mess, but I guess there's the possibility. He hasn't confirmed that 1 point of damage (per weapon description) translates into 5 points of damage (on the target) either, but we'll have to live with the dread of not knowing.


So you don't actually know, then... Seemed like an awful lot of words to say "I don't really know for sure." Your complimentary belittlement is always appreciated, though. Helps keep me grounded, ^_^

Not that I possess reasoning skills, as you well know, but it just seems like maybe there could be a non 1:1 translation between attack/defense values and points on the 1-100 to-hit scale.

Exhibit A:

Level is a big factor in your total defenses, but the character's class determines the starting point of each defense stat (which can be further modified by attributes, spells, abilities, talents, and equipment).  For example, fighters start with the highest Deflection score and they maintain that advantage as they level up.  If a fighter really wants to focus on holding a line in melee over doing damage, he or she can equip a shield and gain an even larger Deflection bonus.  Unless you're higher level than the fighter, it's very unlikely that your Deflection-based attacks will come close to his or her Deflection defense, meaning you'll wind up missing a lot more than 5% of the time -- and it will probably be impossible to crit them.  If you want to hurt fighters, use attacks that target Reflexes or Psyche, which are their weakest base defenses.


It seems as though, either the Fighter's gonna get a crap-ton more points of starting difference than has been hinted at thus far, OR points actually don't translate 1:1. I mean, just because you're up against a Fighter, and you're not higher level than he is, you'll probably "wind up missing a lot more than 5% of the time"? Doesn't sound like a 3% shift to me.

Of course, it could be. It simply seems as though it might not be as you've assumed, is all.

Yours in Inferiority,

- Lephys

#42
Valorian

Valorian

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 971 posts
 

So you don't actually know, then...
Not that I possess reasoning skills, as you well know, but it just seems like maybe there could be a non 1:1 translation between attack/defense values and points on the 1-100 to-hit scale.


No. Like I said, he hasn't confirmed that 1 point of damage (per weapon description) doesn't translate into 5 points of damage (on the target) either. We can't live with the dread of not knowing. You should ask for clarification immediately.

It seems as though, either the Fighter's gonna get a crap-ton more points of starting difference than has been hinted at thus far, OR points actually don't translate 1:1.
Yours in Inferiority,

- Lephys


What about.. neither.
Class abilities Lephys, like the one the fighter gets at level 1 (-accuracy +defense).

#43
Lephys

Lephys

    Punsmith of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 7245 posts
  • Location:The Punforge
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

No. Like I said, he hasn't confirmed that 1 point of damage (per weapon description) doesn't translate into 5 points of damage (on the target) either. We can't live with the dread of not knowing. You should ask for clarification immediately.


Excellent point! I wonder about that, too! I mean, if you have 30 Power, and then you've got a sword that deals 5-10 damage, do you deal 35-40 damage, as opposed to some other person with only 10 Power, with the same sword, doing only 15-20? Or does your Power modify your weapon's damage? Maybe stats, like Power (or whatever it shall be named) ARE on a d100 scale, but represent a percentage multiplier, so that 30 Power equals 130% of 5-10 damage?

I mean, I know logic and mathematics prove that numbers on a scale of 1-100 can only be added to produce other effects on a scale of 1-100, and that multiplication and other operations are quantum warpings of the math. But... you know... people like me don't know that. And I need people like you inform me just how incapable of comprehending it I am, while failing to actually explain, because of that very incapacity.

Numbers are pretty... 8P

What about.. neither.
Class abilities Lephys, like the one the fighter gets at level 1 (-accuracy +defense).


You mean Defender? The one that trades attack rate for the ability to engage +2 targets via the melee engagement system? Is it going to boost their Deflection value AND decrease their attack Accuracy AND decrease their attack rate AND grant them an additional 2 engagement targets? That seems a bit excessive... o_o

Also, Josh didn't mention an ability. He just mentioned a Fighter starting with more Deflection than other people. I figured he was referring to a passive difference, like the one you said was flavor because it was only a measly 2-3 points of advantage. Of course, maybe he wasn't...

I'm just curious for the details of the official system. You said you knew them, so I got a bit excited. But it turns out there are a few stray ones. Which is nothing to worry about. You were just trying to help, on account of my feeble-mindedness.

We'll find it all out, in due time, ^_^

#44
Valorian

Valorian

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 971 posts
 

No. Like I said, he hasn't confirmed that 1 point of damage (per weapon description) doesn't translate into 5 points of damage (on the target) either. We can't live with the dread of not knowing. You should ask for clarification immediately.


Excellent point! I wonder about that, too! I mean, if you have 30 Power, and then you've got a sword that deals 5-10 damage, do you deal 35-40 damage, as opposed to some other person with only 10 Power, with the same sword, doing only 15-20? Or does your Power modify your weapon's damage? Maybe stats, like Power (or whatever it shall be named) ARE on a d100 scale, but represent a percentage multiplier, so that 30 Power equals 130% of 5-10 damage?

I mean, I know logic and mathematics prove that numbers on a scale of 1-100 can only be added to produce other effects on a scale of 1-100, and that multiplication and other operations are quantum warpings of the math. But... you know... people like me don't know that. And I need people like you inform me just how incapable of comprehending it I am, while failing to actually explain, because of that very incapacity.

Numbers are pretty... 8P

What about.. neither.
Class abilities Lephys, like the one the fighter gets at level 1 (-accuracy +defense).


You mean Defender? The one that trades attack rate for the ability to engage +2 targets via the melee engagement system? Is it going to boost their Deflection value AND decrease their attack Accuracy AND decrease their attack rate AND grant them an additional 2 engagement targets? That seems a bit excessive... o_o

Also, Josh didn't mention an ability. He just mentioned a Fighter starting with more Deflection than other people. I figured he was referring to a passive difference, like the one you said was flavor because it was only a measly 2-3 points of advantage. Of course, maybe he wasn't...

I'm just curious for the details of the official system. You said you knew them, so I got a bit excited. But it turns out there are a few stray ones. Which is nothing to worry about. You were just trying to help, on account of my feeble-mindedness.

We'll find it all out, in due time, ^_^

 

I'm wondering if you ever understand anything anyone says.

The subject wasn't modifiers, power or strength, but Lephys' maths: 1=5.

Yes, Defender. -attack speed, +defense
http://eternity.gamepedia.com/Fighter
http://forums.obsidi...omes-but-first/

Seems the wiki has it wrong.

#45
Lephys

Lephys

    Punsmith of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 7245 posts
  • Location:The Punforge
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

I'm wondering if you ever understand anything anyone says.

The subject wasn't modifiers, power or strength, but Lephys' maths: 1=5.


You seem to do a lot of wondering. The fact remains that, as long as some factors utilize the individual points on the 1-100 scale, it still serves a purpose without every single factor (i.e. Accuracy/Defense difference) affecting the scale at a 1:1 ratio. If Accuracy/Defense is the only thing in the entire game that affects the actual results of the miss-graze-hit-crit scale for a given creature/character, then you'd be absolutely correct about any other ratio being pretty crazy. And that is a possibility. However, I can only comment on possibilities, until I know.

Yes, Defender. -attack speed, +defense
http://eternity.gamepedia.com/Fighter
http://forums.obsidi...omes-but-first/

Seems the wiki has it wrong.


If that's the case, then it seems like an awfully potent ability, unless the attack speed decrease is quite drastic, I suppose.

And I don't know anything about how the wiki has it. I was referring to update 44:

  • Fighters' Defender mode allows them to engage two additional targets and increases the range at which they engage targets. This gives fighters much greater capability to control the area around them.

That's +defense, +2 engagement targets, +engagement range, with only -attack speed as a cost. Just seems a bit heavy on the benefits for a single, modal ability, for what it's worth. *shrug*

I thought maybe they had replaced the increased defenses with the engagement bonuses, which still sort of works as a looser meaning of "melee defenses increase," since engagement is directly related to melee combat, and I think you suffer a defensive penalty versus attackers with whom you aren't directly engaged (flanking bonus or something?). I dunno, though. I couldn't find anything beyond neat pairs in the Engagement update, so it may just be that additional attackers simply don't have to worry about breaking engagement when they move or switch targets. I thought I had read something about additional attackers actually getting a bonus, though (because you're not actually reading and responding to their attacks, because you're pre-occupied), but I don't know that I'm not mis-remembering.

#46
Valorian

Valorian

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 971 posts

 

I'm wondering if you ever understand anything anyone says.

The subject wasn't modifiers, power or strength, but Lephys' maths: 1=5.


You seem to do a lot of wondering. The fact remains that, as long as some factors utilize the individual points on the 1-100 scale, it still serves a purpose without every single factor (i.e. Accuracy/Defense difference) affecting the scale at a 1:1 ratio. If Accuracy/Defense is the only thing in the entire game that affects the actual results of the miss-graze-hit-crit scale for a given creature/character, then you'd be absolutely correct about any other ratio being pretty crazy. And that is a possibility. However, I can only comment on possibilities, until I know.

 


Why are you unnecessarily complicating things and drowning yourself in confusion even further.

What's the problem with a straightforward, logical and intuitive approach where "1" means "1" and "5" means "5" shifting the hit/miss scale accordingly?
7 (base) + 6 (3 levels) + 8 (shield) + 10 (ability) + 5 (talent) = 36 Deflection

Why would Obsidian change the ratio here instead of the values?





 

I was referring to update 44:


This update is about Engagement. And they mentioned abilities that affect... engagement. (Please, I'm sure you can find something very humorous to say about such abilities u_u n_n ! We can't wait! U_U)
 

Update 36 describes the fighter's basic abilities.

I suppose the ability would not be called Defense if the only thing it does is increase the number of engaged targets.

It doesn't "seem like an awfully potent ability", because we don't know the actual.. numbers. Even when they do tell us the values, you'll still be very unsure if it's potent or not because of the ratio issue floating in your head.
 



#47
Lephys

Lephys

    Punsmith of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 7245 posts
  • Location:The Punforge
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

I suppose the ability would not be called Defense if the only thing it does is increase the number of engaged targets.


Well, it isn't called "Defense." It's called "Defender." Also, the word "defense" merely suggests protection, but not the target of that protection. Defender allows the Fighter to engage more targets, thereby "defending" his allies against those targets' attempts to rush past him and attack said allies.

*shrug*

Anywho, back to the actual topic, I'm sure that, however all the mechanics specifically work together to affect things, the dev team has put (and/or is putting) careful consideration into how the starting differences are a significant factor in rolling a character. And I patiently await an official update on the matter, details and all.

#48
Silent Winter

Silent Winter

    (10) Necromancer

  • Members
  • 1594 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

For a minute I thought I'd clicked the wrong thread :p

 

When I get PE installed, I'll probably roll up a quick test-character to check out the first area and then spend ages rolling up various characters to explore the character creation system before settling on one I like best.


  • JFSOCC likes this

#49
Valorian

Valorian

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 971 posts

 

Well, it isn't called "Defense." It's called "Defender." Also, the word "defense" merely suggests protection, but not the target of that protection. Defender allows the Fighter to engage more targets, thereby "defending" his allies against those targets' attempts to rush past him and attack said allies.

 

 

You're correct, it's called defender and not defense. Responding to your posts has become a boring mechanical process for me so I sometimes make little typing mistakes. :yes:

 

The word defender suggests.. defending. And you need some deflection for that. You're not really a defender if the 3 baddies you engaged stomp you in 2 seconds and proceed to slaughter everyone else.



#50
KaineParker

KaineParker

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3020 posts
  • Location:Houston, Texas
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer

For a minute I thought I'd clicked the wrong thread :p


Me too.

#51
J.E. Sawyer

J.E. Sawyer

    Project Director

  • Developers+
  • 2995 posts
  • Location:Santa Ana, California

*We can't specialise in a single weapon. You need to specialise in an entire category of weapons. Ok. That's digestible.

*Attributes. Attributes will govern different, even vastly different, aspects of my character. How will having a universal "damage" and "accuracy" stat (whatever the final name is) help define my character from a rpg standpoint? It won't and it bothers me.

*Finally, something that hasn't been mentioned yet. Combat styles. I'm talking about weapon and shield, two-handed, ranged weapons, dual wielding. I'm afraid, considering their design philosophy of extremely flexible characters that constantly need to switch weapons and whatnot, that being able to specialise in combat styles is unlikely.

 

Gaining proficiency or specializing in categories of weapons has existed (at least as an option) in several editions of A/D&D, including Combat & Tactics (2nd Ed.), 4th Ed., Pathfinder, and 3.5 UE's Weapon Groups.

 

Structuring Attributes so there aren't dump stats promotes more role-playing options because non-viable builds should be much less common.  Speaking as someone who has played a lot of gimmick builds and characters with sub-par ability arrays for a given class, while it can be very enjoyable to role-play a high-Cha fighter in 3.5/Pathfinder, those characters are typically (barring the use of a lot of special/house rules) pretty ineffective at doing the job their class is supposed to do.  Choosing to play certain character concepts becomes an implicit difficulty slider and I don't think it's in the players' interest to link those two things.

 

We have combat style Talents and they should allow you to stick with a fighting style even if an enemy's specific armor strengths/weaknesses promote switching to a different damage type.  You also typically have another option: switching a character's targets.  We try to structure fights so you have a variety of enemies to contend with.


  • Wombat, anubite, Elerond and 3 others like this

#52
Valorian

Valorian

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 971 posts

Not designing dump attributes is good. Designing all attributes to be equally (even comparably if you will) useful for every class is not required. I'd rather have 1-2 objectively less important attributes available for my warrior than attribute-like abominations that don't make any sense and are of little use in role-playing (like the 2 you've described a bit already).

 

My point is that you don't have to implement universal-omni-do-all-for-all type attributes to avoid dump stats ruining the system.

 

 

I'm glad to hear about the inclusion of combat style talents.  :biggrin:


  • Tsuga C likes this

#53
Gfted1

Gfted1

    Forum Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 5891 posts
  • Location:Chicago, IL
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Thank god I wont have to switch weapon sets for every mook for every fight. :thumbsup:


  • Tsuga C likes this

#54
J.E. Sawyer

J.E. Sawyer

    Project Director

  • Developers+
  • 2995 posts
  • Location:Santa Ana, California

Overall, weapon/damage type switching should be occasional, not frequent.  We currently have seven damage/resist types.  In the vast majority of cases, on any given creature or type of armor, most damage types have the same DT as the base DT.  One, two, or possibly three damage types will have a higher or lower DT.  Those differences will also be consistent, so if you see someone in mail -- whether it's run-of-the-mill or some awesome magical variant -- their relative DT is always going to be worse for Crush than the base.  If you see someone in plate, their relative DT for Shock is always going to be worse than the base.  If there are two size variants of a monster, its relative damage type strengths/weaknesses will typically be maintained between the variants.


  • Wombat, Elerond, Jarmo and 1 other like this

#55
anubite

anubite

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 488 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

Will there be mono-like encounters? Like, a room full of monsters that are immune/highly-resistant to fire? Or will those not be present at the game at all?

 

I agree that most encounters should be varied so as not to make certain playstyles gimped, but if there's a single instance or two in the game where players who rely on certain strategies/builds need to do something radically different in a single room to move past it... that could be interesting. Though, maybe it's not worth it?

 

My flimsy question is: How true are you sticking to that design philosophy? Will it be permitted to have encounters ever designed that way?



#56
J.E. Sawyer

J.E. Sawyer

    Project Director

  • Developers+
  • 2995 posts
  • Location:Santa Ana, California

Will there be mono-like encounters? Like, a room full of monsters that are immune/highly-resistant to fire? Or will those not be present at the game at all?

 

I agree that most encounters should be varied so as not to make certain playstyles gimped, but if there's a single instance or two in the game where players who rely on certain strategies/builds need to do something radically different in a single room to move past it... that could be interesting. Though, maybe it's not worth it?

 

My flimsy question is: How true are you sticking to that design philosophy? Will it be permitted to have encounters ever designed that way?

 

We may have encounters like that.  I think it's good to mix up encounters so they're not constantly balanced around maximal uses of resources or overly formulaic.  Sometimes it's nice to just roll a bunch of scrubs in an otherwise difficult dungeon.  Sometimes it's nice to see the balance of enemy types/resistances radically shifted.  As long as it doesn't present an insurmountable roadblock, it becomes an opportunity to think/use your characters a little differently.


  • Wombat, anubite, Elerond and 4 others like this

#57
Jarmo

Jarmo

    (9) Sorcerer

  • Members
  • 1216 posts
  • Location:Finland
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

blah..blah..blah... Those differences will also be consistent, so if you see someone in mail -- whether it's run-of-the-mill or some awesome magical variant -- their relative DT is always going to be worse for Crush than the base...blah...blah...If there are two size variants of a monster,....typically .....

 

Consistency is bliss. Very much appreciate it where ever when ever seen.

 

 

Will there be mono-like encounters? Like, a room full of monsters that are immune/highly-resistant to fire? 

 

We may have encounters like that.  

 

 

Hopefully not the other way around... "oh, the blue skin rats, they can only be hurt with electricity".

Not with fire, not with swords, not with nuclear armageddon, only electricity, 14 amps will do nicely.


  • Lephys likes this

#58
Tsuga C

Tsuga C

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 646 posts
  • Location:Michigan, USA
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Thank god I wont have to switch weapon sets for every mook for every fight. :thumbsup:


I simply hope that there won't be too many "mook fights". Once per chapter (every other chapter, maybe?) I can see the party being demi-human meat grinders laying waste to a small horde of opponents, but more often than that and it would pall.
  • JFSOCC likes this

#59
Valorian

Valorian

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 971 posts

Thank god I wont have to switch weapon sets for every mook for every fight. :thumbsup:

 

There's still the damage type switch thing. It will haunt you forever. :biggrin:  Even weapon group specialisations won't save you because they'll cover all damage types (why Josh, whyy? ;( ). I want to pierce! Just pierce! Or just slash if slashing weapons are cooler.

Overall, weapon/damage type switching should be occasional, not frequent.  We currently have seven damage/resist types.  In the vast majority of cases, on any given creature or type of armor, most damage types have the same DT as the base DT.  One, two, or possibly three damage types will have a higher or lower DT.  Those differences will also be consistent, so if you see someone in mail -- whether it's run-of-the-mill or some awesome magical variant -- their relative DT is always going to be worse for Crush than the base.  If you see someone in plate, their relative DT for Shock is always going to be worse than the base.  If there are two size variants of a monster, its relative damage type strengths/weaknesses will typically be maintained between the variants.

 

Oh, so you included the higher DT variation.. Why did I mention that in one of my comments.. somewhere else. :disguise:

 

I need to say one thing. :geek:

It's a precious thing (like a snowflake!) to have an informative, stable and pleasant developer to exchange ideas. If you were someone else, you'd maybe say angry things and start barking at people and theatrically leave the topic proclaiming "I'll leave it at that" and then return 10 times and after that write a huge bitter blog post about toxic people, while shaking and eating hot soup.

 

You're very good. :yes:


  • Lephys likes this

#60
Gfted1

Gfted1

    Forum Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 5891 posts
  • Location:Chicago, IL
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

I simply hope that there won't be too many "mook fights". Once per chapter (every other chapter, maybe?) I can see the party being demi-human meat grinders laying waste to a small horde of opponents, but more often than that and it would pall.


My understanding is that PE will be a combat centric game, so most likely there will be a lot of battles. You prefer a more story driven approach?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users