Features concerns so far

[Greensleeve]

I'm quite frankly impressed at the lengths KaineParker goes to in his discussion with Valorian. 

 

I will just say this: KaineParker are making some very solid, good arguments in favour of obstacle/objective-based XP, as opposed to kill XP. I feel confident that the developers knew these arguments and used some very similar ones in early team meetings where basics, such as XP, were discussed. 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I'm quite frankly impressed at the lengths KaineParker goes to in his discussion with Valorian.

Thank you, I try to be as precise as possible.

 

I will just say this: KaineParker are making some very solid, good arguments in favour of obstacle/objective-based XP, as opposed to kill XP. I feel confident that the developers knew these arguments and used some very similar ones in early team meetings where basics, such as XP, were discussed.

You're too kind good sir.

[Valorian]

 

1) You're funny. You can't point out a SINGLE non-combat ability or talent (from dozens of combat ones) and yet you're still grasping at straws with impetus.

"But umm oh uh.. it's surely their tactic to not reveal a single one in over a year.. wait and see! They just won't stop with non-combat abilities and talents when they start revealing them... uh oh, one day"

Good Lord, if you are going to be all butthurt at least have the courtesy to attack what I'm actually posting. I'm arguing that PE is an unfinished system that we do not have the complete details on, therefore making quantitative statements such as "90% of abilities will be combat related" is impossible as that fact can not be known. If you can't comprehend that an accurate quantitative statement about something can not be made without knowing the quantity of the thing in question, well I have some nice beachfront property you would be very interested in.

 

If you object to my assertion, either link to where it was confirmed that "90% of abilities will be combat related" or prove it using an equation.

 

2) So you've chosen an example of killing you foes by poisoning. You'll become their best friend/cook and then poison 'em all!

If there's a possiblity of doing so, it would be a rarity.

You don't spend the same resources as when you engage in combat. You don't use your per rest abilities and talents and you don't use stamina and other potions, you don't lose health.

Once you know how to poison, you can poison them the exact same way every single playthrough. Combat is unpredictable.

 

Also, yes, you should get XP because you've eliminated them. Bravo!

Example of a solution in a specific situation =/= Possible solution in every situation.

 

Again, you keep making claims that are not absolute. It is possible to have potions and per-day abilities with *gasp* non-combat applications, and the contrary has not been confirmed. Now please answer the question, why should a party who completes an objective using non-combat abilities and resources be rewarded less than one who used combat if the end result is the same?

 

1. How would you systematically reward XP for sneaking past encounters? 2. Do you imagine the whole game as straight corridors with hundreds and hundreds of triggers everywhere for sneaking past encounter XP?

1. Encounter rewards X XP. XP is rewarded for completing encounter. Encounter can be completed by a variety of means, possibly including stealth. 2. No.

 

4) Huh?

The reason why is this: by increasing the dreaded body count by slaughtering citizens, you make the city hostile to you, precluding quests. Also, random citizens are generally worth pitiful XP. InB4.. "But you can poison them and no one will ever know!"

So essentially you will get less XP because you will have no objectives to complete? That seems awfully similar to some evil XP system that ruins immersion and slaughters the sacred cows of butthurt fanboys.

 

It was clear what I meant by "slaughtering a whole city".

Not at all. If you mean a specific thing, then you need to specify exactly what you are taking about.

 

Also, sneaking in PE looks like this:

You have a circle around you and around your enemies. If you can navigate your party member/s (wait, do you need the entire party to sneak past an encounter to get XP?) so that circles don't touch too much, you've succeeded and you get XP? Sounds good Kaine?

If skills such as "stealth" and "awareness" factor in to the radii of the circles, yes it does. Far better than stealth implementations in other party based RPGs.

 

 

1)

Eh, I'm sorry I let you struggle... hoping you'll eventually get it, but sadly you weren't able to implement a gram of logic, inductive reasoning, common sense.. so I'll end your misery right now:

 

Update 7. Non-combat skills are gained separately from combat skills. They should be separate types of abilities, and you should spend different points to get each one. Non-combat skills do not use the same resources as combat skills.

Therefore, if they follow their basic design goals, there will be 0 non-combat Abilities and Talents.

Skills will allow you to do non-combat stuff, BUT every Skill will offer a combat bonus, so even Skills are combat-related.

 

Next...

2)

The result is not the same.

 

 

3)

What does it mean to "complete an encounter" to you? When is XP awarded? At what point do you get XP when sneaking around encounters? What if I sneak around an encounter with just one character?

 

Do I get 10x sneak XP if my party enters stealth mode and follows the edge of a map and reaches another map, avoiding 10 encounters scattered throughout the map without effort? Will there be open areas or just corridors? Yes, consider open areas for this example.

 

Should people be able to get tons of XP by simply micromanaging party members around encounters?

 

 

4)

Right, you need every single word and sentece explained in depth. 

 

5)

Back to 3).

[Lephys]

Awwww, that's cute. He "let" you "struggle." ^_^

 

Hey, Valorian... what does it mean to "complete a combat"? If you only use one sword stroke, instead of 17, do you get awarded XP? How do you know how much experience you actually gained, based on what you did? What if you summon some ethereal wolves, and THEY kill the enemies? But you weren't directly controlling them. Do you only get ethereal-wolf-summoning XP, and not actually combat XP? What if neutral NPCs get the enemy down to 1HP, and you just go spit on him to get rid of that last 1HP, and he dies. Do you get a whole foe's worth of "combat" XP? Or do you get 1HP's worth of spit-that-happened-to-kill XP?

 

Oh, right. Abstraction.

 

Guess what? The death of something is simply an objective. If it dies, however such death was accomplished, you get an abstractedly full amount of XP based on the "combat difficulty" of that foe, whether you actually practiced your active combat or not. So, if you sneak to a rope holding up a chandelier, and you cut it, and it falls and crushes 7 enemies to death, you've just completed the objective "kill those foes" and gotten "combat XP," all by using your stealth skill, and no combat abilities whatsoever. And that fits in with the typical "things die and you gain XP" system.

 

Want to argue for a "gain XP as you fight, and not as things die" system? Be my guest. Until then, welcome to abstraction that doesn't somehow cease to exist just because you're fighting instead of sneaking. The system's already objective based. It's just that killing is ALWAYS an objective, for some arbitrary reason, while other things aren't always.

 

"Hey, Mr. Frodo," said Samwise. "I realize we're supposed to sneak through Mordor and get to that fiery mountain in the distance, but how's about we kill every single orc we come across? Because XP."

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

Update 7. Non-combat skills are gained separately from combat skills. They should be separate types of abilities, and you should spend different points to get each one. Non-combat skills do not use the same resources as combat skills.

Therefore, if they follow their basic design goals, there will be 0 non-combat Abilities and Talents.

Skills will allow you to do non-combat stuff, BUT every Skill will offer a combat bonus, so even Skills are combat-related.

 

You have an uncanny ability to create strawmen and dodge the question. "Non-combat abilities" did not literally mean "Abilities" or "Talents", which in PE terms are resources gained upon leveling, but abilities related to non-combat, hence the lower case "a". Please pull whatever is lodged up your ass out.

 

Now please, as I have asked you to do several times, link to where it was confirmed that the ratio of combat abilities to non-combat abilities is 90% or show the equation you used. "Inductive Reasoning" will not be accepted as an answer, seeing as it isn't suitable for deducing accurate facts.

 

Next...

2)

The result is not the same.

Yes it is, as the encounter is now resolved. Methods should not matter, results should. Doing otherwise punishes people who prefer to role-play non-superviolent bastards or who like using non-combat abilities.

 

If this upsets you so much, I suggest you leave this forum and cry in your closet, because PE will not have combat XP no matter how much you whine about it. Deal with it.

 

1.What does it mean to "complete an encounter" to you? When is XP awarded? 2.At what point do you get XP when sneaking around encounters? 3.What if I sneak around an encounter with just one character?

 

4.Do I get 10x sneak XP if my party enters stealth mode and follows the edge of a map and reaches another map, avoiding 10 encounters scattered throughout the map without effort? 5.Will there be open areas or just corridors? Yes, consider open areas for this example.

 

6.Should people be able to get tons of XP by simply micromanaging party members around encounters?

1. Either bypass, neutralize, kill, or otherwise resolve the encounter. XP is awarded when the encounter is resolved the first time. Sneaking by an enemy, going back to bribe them, then killing them as they walk away should not reward 3x(Encounter XP).

2. Will vary by encounter.

3. Will vary by setting.

4. No, you will at least have to recognize the encounter exists. If you see "encounter A" and cling to the edge of the map, you would only get rewarded for "encounter A", not the encounters you did not use stealth to avoid.

5. Both.

6. No more and no less than they should get by micromanaging party members in combat in the same encounters.

 

4)

Right, you need every single word and sentece explained in depth.

When insulting someone's intelligence, spelling "sentence" incorrectly is ironic.

 

Edited September 28, 2013 by KaineParker

[motorizer]

Why do you need xp for encounters at all?

if you quest is get the magic ring, then the xp should come from getting the magic ring, if your goal is to reach the next level of dungeon then the xp should come from that....who was in your way and what you did about them is neither here nor there..

Edited September 28, 2013 by motorizer

[PrimeJunta]

As an aside, I really like the way Torment: ToN is approaching this through the notion of "crisis." It's broader than "encounter" but accomplishes similar goals – i.e., allowing many different ways to resolve it, and rewarding each of these resolutions in ways suitable to the resolution. See their latest update for details.

 

(Also, :popcorn:.)

[Valorian]

"Hey, Mr. Frodo," said Samwise. "I realize we're supposed to sneak through Mordor and get to that fiery mountain in the distance, but how's about we kill every single orc we come across? Because XP."

 

Leperchaun, the point of asking those questions was to establish when and how is XP rewarded for sneaking around encounters. Those are valid concerns. Your sad attempts at humor are just that.. sad attempts at humor, as usual.

 

 

 

Update 7. Non-combat skills are gained separately from combat skills. They should be separate types of abilities, and you should spend different points to get each one. Non-combat skills do not use the same resources as combat skills.

Therefore, if they follow their basic design goals, there will be 0 non-combat Abilities and Talents.

Skills will allow you to do non-combat stuff, BUT every Skill will offer a combat bonus, so even Skills are combat-related.

 

You have an uncanny ability to create strawmen and dodge the question. "Non-combat abilities" did not literally mean "Abilities" or "Talents", which in PE terms are resources gained upon leveling, but abilities related to non-combat, hence the lower case "a". Please pull whatever is lodged up your ass out.

 

Now please, as I have asked you to do several times, link to where it was confirmed that the ratio of combat abilities to non-combat abilities is 90% or show the equation you used. "Inductive Reasoning" will not be accepted as an answer, seeing as it isn't suitable for deducing accurate facts.

 

Next...

2)

The result is not the same.

Yes it is, as the encounter is now resolved. Methods should not matter, results should. Doing otherwise punishes people who prefer to role-play non-superviolent bastards or who like using non-combat abilities.

 

If this upsets you so much, I suggest you leave this forum and cry in your closet, because PE will not have combat XP no matter how much you whine about it. Deal with it.

 

1.What does it mean to "complete an encounter" to you? When is XP awarded? 2.At what point do you get XP when sneaking around encounters? 3.What if I sneak around an encounter with just one character?

 

4.Do I get 10x sneak XP if my party enters stealth mode and follows the edge of a map and reaches another map, avoiding 10 encounters scattered throughout the map without effort? 5.Will there be open areas or just corridors? Yes, consider open areas for this example.

 

6.Should people be able to get tons of XP by simply micromanaging party members around encounters?

1. Either bypass, neutralize, kill, or otherwise resolve the encounter. XP is awarded when the encounter is resolved the first time. Sneaking by an enemy, going back to bribe them, then killing them as they walk away should not reward 3x(Encounter XP).

2. Will vary by encounter.

3. Will vary by setting.

4. No, you will at least have to recognize the encounter exists. If you see "encounter A" and cling to the edge of the map, you would only get rewarded for "encounter A", not the encounters you did not use stealth to avoid.

5. Both.

6. No more and no less than they should get by micromanaging party members in combat in the same encounters.

 

4)

Right, you need every single word and sentece explained in depth.

When insulting someone's intelligence, spelling "sentence" incorrectly is ironic.

 

 

 

1) Oh Kaine, poor thing.

 

I knew you'd need a step by step explanation, but even then.. I'm not sure if it is going to work, given your immunity to logic.

 

I kept repeating "abilities and talents". Now, why would I mention talents constantly if I was referring to everything?

You're a walking contradiction. You complain that I didn't explain precisely that I meant slaughtering a city without it being a quest, and now you use terms randomly. First, start by learning that abilities, talents and skills are separate entities in PE, and then we can, perhaps, discuss things.

 

2)  So you say PE won't have combat XP. But yet you're hysterically agitating for sneak-around-encounter XP? Your combatophobia has increased considerably in the last few days, I see.

 

 

3) Your tiny point by point answers didn't actually answer anything.

 

But let's have a closer look at point four.

So, for instance, you enter a wide open area, then you click on your stealthy rogue and scout around with him, the rogue sees that encounters "A B C D E F G.. Z" exist. Then the rogue returns to his party and they follow the end of the map to reach another area. Do they get rewarded with XP for sneaking around encounters "A B C D E F G.. Z"?

 

 

4) Perhaps it would be slightly ironic if spelling (actually, missing an "n" because of typing too fast) in a foreign language was any indication of intelligence.

 

Speaking about insults to the aforementioned attribute...

 

Hi, aluminiumtrioxid. You need to let go of the rage, it damages your body and soul. Following me around the forums and rage-liking posts which then get destroyed will not help you establish sanity.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

1) Oh Kaine, poor thing.

 

I knew you'd need a step by step explanation, but even then.. I'm not sure if it is going to work, given your immunity to logic.

 

I kept repeating "abilities and talents". Now, why would I mention talents constantly if I was referring to everything?

You're a walking contradiction. You complain that I didn't explain precisely that I meant slaughtering a city without it being a quest, and now you use terms randomly. First, start by learning that abilities, talents and skills are separate entities in PE, and then we can, perhaps, discuss things.

No, what you keep doing is dodging the question. If you had a gram of intellectual honesty you would admit you were wrong instead of throwing this butthurt tantrum.

 

Again: Prove that it PE will have a ratio of 9:1 combat abilities to non-combat abilities, with "abilities" meaning "a skill or talent", not the PE resource "Ability". Either link to a post where it was explicitly confirmed or show the equation you used to find that ratio. Using Inductive reasoning will not be valid, as that is not designed for absolute proof.

 

2)  So you say PE won't have combat XP. But yet you're hysterically agitating for sneak-around-encounter XP? Your combatophobia has increased considerably in the last few days, I see.

No, I'm explaining how my ideal encounter XP system would look and telling you to go away if the idea of no-combat XP bothers you that much. You should learn English instead of using a translator.

  

3) Your tiny point by point answers didn't actually answer anything.

Says the guy who has been in able to answer how he arrived at a very specific numerical conclusion.

 

But let's have a closer look at point four.

So, for instance, you enter a wide open area, then you click on your stealthy rogue and scout around with him, the rogue sees that encounters "A B C D E F G.. Z" exist. Then the rogue returns to his party and they follow the end of the map to reach another area. Do they get rewarded with XP for sneaking around encounters "A B C D E F G.. Z"?

In my ideal system, yes. However, unless the Rogue was INCREDIBLY adept at stealth or every enemy was sleeping, the chance they would be detected would be almost certain.

 

4) Perhaps it would be slightly ironic if spelling (actually, missing an "n" because of typing too fast) in a foreign language was any indication of intelligence.

Keine entschuldigung.

 

Man up, you lowlife virgin reprobate.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

As an aside, I really like the way Torment: ToN is approaching this through the notion of "crisis." It's broader than "encounter" but accomplishes similar goals – i.e., allowing many different ways to resolve it, and rewarding each of these resolutions in ways suitable to the resolution. See their latest update for details.

 

(Also, :popcorn:.)

That sounds fantastic. I hereby change my opinion of an ideal system to that.

 

I'll try to make sure you stuff down as much popcorn as you can.

[forgottenlor]

@KaineParker. I truly admire your level of patience. I would have left the conversation about 5 posts ago. And personally I could care less how xp is handled.

Edited September 28, 2013 by forgottenlor

[PrimeJunta]

Direct link to the T:ToN "Crises" document. It really is a fine piece of game design IMO and well worth looking at. It's probably too late in the game for PE to take inspiration from it, but perhaps they've been working along similar lines – there is a lot of cross-fertilizaiton between the teams, right down to shared members.

[Valorian]

 

 

1) Oh Kaine, poor thing.

 

I knew you'd need a step by step explanation, but even then.. I'm not sure if it is going to work, given your immunity to logic.

 

I kept repeating "abilities and talents". Now, why would I mention talents constantly if I was referring to everything?

You're a walking contradiction. You complain that I didn't explain precisely that I meant slaughtering a city without it being a quest, and now you use terms randomly. First, start by learning that abilities, talents and skills are separate entities in PE, and then we can, perhaps, discuss things.

Again: Prove that it PE will have a ratio of 9:1 combat abilities to non-combat abilities, with "abilities" meaning "a skill or talent", not the PE resource "Ability".

2)  So you say PE won't have combat XP. But yet you're hysterically agitating for sneak-around-encounter XP? Your combatophobia has increased considerably in the last few days, I see.

No, I'm explaining how my ideal encounter XP system would look and telling you to go away if the idea of no-combat XP bothers you that much. You should learn English instead of using a translator.

  

3) Your tiny point by point answers didn't actually answer anything.

Says the guy who has been in able to answer how he arrived at a very specific numerical conclusion.

 

But let's have a closer look at point four.

So, for instance, you enter a wide open area, then you click on your stealthy rogue and scout around with him, the rogue sees that encounters "A B C D E F G.. Z" exist. Then the rogue returns to his party and they follow the end of the map to reach another area. Do they get rewarded with XP for sneaking around encounters "A B C D E F G.. Z"?

In my ideal system, yes. However, unless the Rogue was INCREDIBLY adept at stealth or every enemy was sleeping, the chance they would be detected would be almost certain.

 

4) Perhaps it would be slightly ironic if spelling (actually, missing an "n" because of typing too fast) in a foreign language was any indication of intelligence.

Keine entschuldigung.

 

Man up, you lowlife virgin reprobate.

 

 

1)

How am I dodging a question about the validity of a statement that I've never made?

 

Again, talking about PE, only in a mental vacuum does "abilities and talents" equate to "abilities --> meaning --> talents and skills".

Are you aware that the category "abilities" is separated from talents and skills?

 

But all right, just for your convenience, let's pretent for a second we're in a parallel universe where your interpretation of what this discussion is about is correct:

 

There is at least 1 class specific ability per level per class (I won't even count individual spells because that would further annihilate your pathetic argument). 11 classes x 12 levels: 132 abilities. If there are any options at all, that would quickly turn into 150+.

Then there's talents. Let's be modest. 50 talents.

 

That's 200 abilities and talents, all combat focused, if you don't count skills which also have auxiliary combat bonuses.

 

Then there's non-combat skills. Do you believe there will be more than 20 skills? Mechanics, stealth, survival, lore, a companion skill, crafting. Go wild.

 

 

2)

So your ideal XP system would be to get XP just fine for sneaking around encounters, yet NOO! XP if you choose the combat route? You keep screaming "because PE will not have combat XP!" Then, with a straight face, you keep advocating XP for sneaking around encounters, while at the same time acknowledging and supporting the idea of no XP for combat.

But right, sorry, you obviously mean something else entirely because what you write is detached from whatever process is going on in your head.

 

Oh, indeed, you're entering the rage phase, so you've started spewing what you really think and want. Not good. 

 

 

3)

My little Klein, missing an "n" while typing fast is one thing.. but what mumbo-jumbo is this: "Says the guy who has been in able to answer how he arrived at a very specific numerical conclusion." ?

 

 

4)

What do you base your assumption on "that unless the Rogue was INCREDIBLY adept at stealth or every enemy was sleeping, the chance they would be detected would be almost certain"?

I mean, unless someone clueless like you is playing the game, I believe it would be fairly easy to figure out what to do: do not cross the circle around your enemy with your circle.

 

 

5)

See, when someone retorts invoking a missing "n", or any other combination of letters, it is a sign that the person has nothing meaningful to say.

 

Also, Klein, no one asked you to apologize. If anything, mother nature owes you an apology... But, since you won't get any, the only thing you can do is sing "Born this way" every day, embracing what mother nature gave you to work with.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

1)

How am I dodging a question about the validity of a statement that I've never made?

 

Again, talking about PE, only in a mental vacuum does "abilities and talents" equate to "abilities --> meaning --> talents and skills".

Are you aware that the category "abilities" is separated from talents and skills?

I was using the definition of abilities. If that confuses you too much, I gave you a definition to help you out. I will only be referring to "Abilities" when I use a capital A.

 

But all right, just for your convenience, let's pretent for a second we're in a parallel universe where your interpretation of what this discussion is about is correct:

 

There is at least 1 class specific ability per level per class (I won't even count individual spells because that would further annihilate your pathetic argument). 11 classes x 12 levels: 132 abilities. If there are any options at all, that would quickly turn into 150+.

Then there's talents. Let's be modest. 50 talents.

 

That's 200 abilities and talents, all combat focused, if you don't count skills which also have auxiliary combat bonuses.

 

Then there's non-combat skills. Do you believe there will be more than 20 skills? Mechanics, stealth, survival, lore, a companion skill, crafting. Go wild.

I don't know what "pretent" is. Is that something you do before constructing a tent?

 

The thing is, I don't have to prove a quantity. If you had any comprehension skills, you would have understood that my argument wasn't "PE will not have 90% combat abilities to 10% non-combat abilities" but "With the information available, you can not make a quantitative statement about abilities". Since you can not prove your assertion that "over 90% of abilities are combat related", your example is flawed.

 

 

2)

So your ideal XP system would be to get XP just fine for sneaking around encounters, yet NOO! XP if you choose the combat route? You keep screaming "because PE will not have combat XP!" Then, with a straight face, you keep advocating XP for sneaking around encounters, while at the same time acknowledging and supporting the idea of no XP for combat.

But right, sorry, you obviously mean something else entirely because what you write is detached from whatever process is going on in your head.

 

Oh, indeed, you're entering the rage phase, so you've started spewing what you really think and want. Not good. 

 

"Rage Phase" LOL, no. I couldn't care less what some double-chinned neckbeard thinks.

 

3)

My little Klein, missing an "n" while typing fast is one thing.. but what mumbo-jumbo is this: "Says the guy who has been in able to answer how he arrived at a very specific numerical conclusion." ?

That is English, if you can't understand it, I suggest using a dictionary to illuminate the big words that confuse you. 

 

4)

1.What do you base your assumption on "that unless the Rogue was INCREDIBLY adept at stealth or every enemy was sleeping, the chance they would be detected would be almost certain"?

2.I mean, unless someone clueless like you is playing the game, I believe it would be fairly easy to figure out what to do: do not cross the circle around your enemy with your circle.

1. Enemy AI being slightly more intelligent than a brick wall.

2. Again, my ideal system, not PE. Learn English. 

 

I sure envy your ability to whine on the internet. I'm sure that is a hit with women.

 

@KaineParker. I truly admire your level of patience. I would have left the conversation about 5 posts ago. And personally I could care less how xp is handled.

It is just something to do so I have something to laugh at during work. Honestly, anyone who takes a moron like Valorian is just as gullible as someone who takes oby or volo seriously. Except he actually rages, so calling him out on his bull**** is funny.

 

Direct link to the T:ToN "Crises" document. It really is a fine piece of game design IMO and well worth looking at. It's probably too late in the game for PE to take inspiration from it, but perhaps they've been working along similar lines – there is a lot of cross-fertilizaiton between the teams, right down to shared members.

I have to say, that looks absolutely fantastic. I'm sure I will get quite a bit of enjoyment out of it.

Edited September 28, 2013 by KaineParker

[Gfted1]

Again, if you feel you cannot contribute to a topic without personal insults then it is best to step out of the conversation and collect yourself.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Again, if you feel you cannot contribute to a topic without personal insults then it is best to step out of the conversation and collect yourself.

Very well then.

 

Laters, Val, try not to break your keyboard or anything.

[Lephys]

Leperchaun, the point of asking those questions was to establish when and how is XP rewarded for sneaking around encounters. Those are valid concerns. Your sad attempts at humor are just that.. sad attempts at humor, as usual.

*Applies aloe vera gel to burn*

 

You actually skirted my entire post, except for the mostly-just-a-touch-of-humor supplement at the end, there, which you apparently decided to "critique". No feedback on the reasoning I presented? ... Bueller? ... ... ... Bueller?

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Lephys, I would just ignore him. I think it is clear that he is either unwilling or incapable of having a conversation. Also, knowing how much you like to type, it would be a waste to wear out your keyboard responding to the equivalent of "YOU'RE WRONG!!!!!!".

[Lephys]

There's a very large difference between disagreeing with someone and simply telling them "you're wrong." Just because everyone doesn't see that doesn't make it not so.

 

Granted, I AM working on my realization of when further typing simply becomes fruitless. I'm only human... -ly programmed.

[Valorian]

 

1)

How am I dodging a question about the validity of a statement that I've never made?

 

Again, talking about PE, only in a mental vacuum does "abilities and talents" equate to "abilities --> meaning --> talents and skills".

Are you aware that the category "abilities" is separated from talents and skills?

I was using the definition of abilities. If that confuses you too much, I gave you a definition to help you out. I will only be referring to "Abilities" when I use a capital A.

 

But all right, just for your convenience, let's pretent for a second we're in a parallel universe where your interpretation of what this discussion is about is correct:

 

There is at least 1 class specific ability per level per class (I won't even count individual spells because that would further annihilate your pathetic argument). 11 classes x 12 levels: 132 abilities. If there are any options at all, that would quickly turn into 150+.

Then there's talents. Let's be modest. 50 talents.

 

That's 200 abilities and talents, all combat focused, if you don't count skills which also have auxiliary combat bonuses.

 

Then there's non-combat skills. Do you believe there will be more than 20 skills? Mechanics, stealth, survival, lore, a companion skill, crafting. Go wild.

I don't know what "pretent" is. Is that something you do before constructing a tent?

 

The thing is, I don't have to prove a quantity. If you had any comprehension skills, you would have understood that my argument wasn't "PE will not have 90% combat abilities to 10% non-combat abilities" but "With the information available, you can not make a quantitative statement about abilities". Since you can not prove your assertion that "over 90% of abilities are combat related", your example is flawed.

 

 

2)

So your ideal XP system would be to get XP just fine for sneaking around encounters, yet NOO! XP if you choose the combat route? You keep screaming "because PE will not have combat XP!" Then, with a straight face, you keep advocating XP for sneaking around encounters, while at the same time acknowledging and supporting the idea of no XP for combat.

But right, sorry, you obviously mean something else entirely because what you write is detached from whatever process is going on in your head.

 

Oh, indeed, you're entering the rage phase, so you've started spewing what you really think and want. Not good. 

 

"Rage Phase" LOL, no. I couldn't care less what some double-chinned neckbeard thinks.

 

3)

My little Klein, missing an "n" while typing fast is one thing.. but what mumbo-jumbo is this: "Says the guy who has been in able to answer how he arrived at a very specific numerical conclusion." ?

That is English, if you can't understand it, I suggest using a dictionary to illuminate the big words that confuse you. 

 

4)

1.What do you base your assumption on "that unless the Rogue was INCREDIBLY adept at stealth or every enemy was sleeping, the chance they would be detected would be almost certain"?

2.I mean, unless someone clueless like you is playing the game, I believe it would be fairly easy to figure out what to do: do not cross the circle around your enemy with your circle.

1. Enemy AI being slightly more intelligent than a brick wall.

2. Again, my ideal system, not PE. Learn English. 

 

I sure envy your ability to whine on the internet. I'm sure that is a hit with women.

 

@KaineParker. I truly admire your level of patience. I would have left the conversation about 5 posts ago. And personally I could care less how xp is handled.

It is just something to do so I have something to laugh at during work. Honestly, anyone who takes a moron like Valorian is just as gullible as someone who takes oby or volo seriously. Except he actually rages, so calling him out on his bull**** is funny.

 

Direct link to the T:ToN "Crises" document. It really is a fine piece of game design IMO and well worth looking at. It's probably too late in the game for PE to take inspiration from it, but perhaps they've been working along similar lines – there is a lot of cross-fertilizaiton between the teams, right down to shared members.

I have to say, that looks absolutely fantastic. I'm sure I will get quite a bit of enjoyment out of it.

 

 

 

Hi Kleine!

Sorry for the delayed response to your... post. Honestly, my motivation to keep communicating with you is rather low, as you're intellectually stimulating as watching a snail crawl. But, like snails, you're part of nature too and it would be unfair for me to outright disregard you.

 

 

You need to get the timeline right, it is not important what you were using or thinking/not thinking, because I defined the point you then responded to, misinterpreting "abilities and talents" to mean "talents and skills" (and whatever else you conjured in your head) out of ignorance.

 

Then, we preDenTed (look, here's your opportunity for another utterly witty retort) that we're in a parallel universe where whatever your brain produces has any meaning whatsoever. And thus I included skills in the equation.

I tried to give you a hint and let you realize that skills, by their nature and Obsidian's design goals, won't be numerically abundant. There are only so many non-combat skills that you can make without landing in the superfluous & never used zone.

 

The problem with you is that when there's an "X" somewhere along the knowledge road, it completely blocks you. Perhaps you do know what the summation of 2 and 2 is, but if I reformulate it into 2 + X = 4, that would undoubtedly confuse you.

 

Oh, here's an opportunity to teach you what irony is, because you previously used the word unsuccessfully. Trying to make fun of someone else's English while writing like this, is irony:

 

 

I'm wondering how the character knows that by killing something, he will gain a certain amount of XP and have a boost to all of his abilities my self.

 

 

The you and AI part. Who is smarter and why? J/k, the answer is obvious.

 

1) How would you exactly instruct AI to do anything about a deterministic system where the player has to micromanage to avoid the enemy's circle to not be seen or detected? Should the AI crazily metagame and start running, like a homing missile, after the character even if it doesn't actually see him? 

2) We're talking about PE here, not about a system that you constructed in your head.

 

 

Thank you for sharing your photo.. I guess. It is rather expensive to be forklifted out of your bedroom I suppose, so instead you spend time practicing typing, yes?

 

 

 

As for being a hit with women.. I wouldn't know. Is there a specific reason why you left out half of humanity? Oh, right, you pointed out that you believe I'm a virgin and therefore, you assumed, I'm desperately trying to be a hit with women. Is that it? Cool.. but I'm not interested in women.

 

So you work as a typist from home? That's neat. Being a typist, I mean. 

Do you often omit words when you're upset and angry though? It kinda spoils your work.

[Gfted1]

Alright, this thread has run its course. Feel free to start a new one if there is anything productive left to say.