a Coward

[Rikskebab]

Hi

One thing I would like to see in the game:

I would love to be in combat scenarios where i am forced to be a coward. In BG2 i had a

really really hard time with the beholder lair and the mind flayer lair. There i was forced to

either kite like hell or divide and conquer. 

 

But those fights where so rewarding because I was forced into a defensive stance

and had to think creatively in a totally different way than my everyday attack scenario. 

(Kind of like a "Kobayashi Maru" situation (without cheesing ofc))

 

Any thoughts?

 

With Kind Regards

 

//Rikskebab

[okkoko]

well i made a elven barbarian duelwhilding 2 longwords okey so i go down ther in the lair of beholder the thing is if you just go down there oh what.. the first thing always be reedy for something  you going to trigger

[Walsingham]

Hi

One thing I would like to see in the game:

I would love to be in combat scenarios where i am forced to be a coward. In BG2 i had a

really really hard time with the beholder lair and the mind flayer lair. There i was forced to

either kite like hell or divide and conquer. 

 

But those fights where so rewarding because I was forced into a defensive stance

and had to think creatively in a totally different way than my everyday attack scenario. 

(Kind of like a "Kobayashi Maru" situation (without cheesing ofc))

 

Any thoughts?

 

With Kind Regards

 

//Rikskebab

 

I totally agree. There should be fights that one should not have got into in the first place.

[Death Machine Miyagi]

'Coward' may be the wrong term here, since coward doesn't imply a careful tactical approach towards an overwhelming enemy so much as running away shrieking like a little girl. 

 

There needs to be more chances in games like this for your main character to wet himself and run away begging and pleading for his life from any given fight. Maybe evade a powerful enemy by having him leave you alone out of contempt for your complete lack of dignity.

[motorizer]

There should be some fights you can't win. Sometimes retreat should be the best option, and it should be by your choice rather than being forced on you like the infamous mass effect "loss" against the ninja bloke.

 

Lord of the rings = lots of hiding and running away

Star wars   = lots of hiding and running away

 

If you can beat everyone it kind of negates any sense of a threat from the antagonists.

[Rikskebab]

There should be some fights you can't win. Sometimes retreat should be the best option, and it should be by your choice rather than being forced on you like the infamous mass effect "loss" against the ninja bloke.

 

Lord of the rings = lots of hiding and running away

Star wars   = lots of hiding and running away

 

If you can beat everyone it kind of negates any sense of a threat from the antagonists.

I agree, if there always is a possibility that some foe (that might not look powerful) will squish you like a bug, it keeps you on your toes.

 

And it´s never fun to be a bad-ass for too long. I compare that to cheating in old games (in my case Amiga 500) and there if you got unlimited lives or the biggest gun from the beginning it got boring real fast.

[teknoman2]

i think OP has a certain impression that if you dont go straight to the enemy's face and use any (underhanded at times) hit and run tactics you are a coward... he clearly havent played dark souls, where you had to use every trick in the book or get killed instantly

there is no honor in battle, there is only kill or die. so as long as you kill and dont die, everything is valid

Edited October 17, 2013 by teknoman2

[Nonek]

"Better to live one day as a tiger, than a whole life as a worm!"

 

"Whoever heard of a wormskin rug?"

 

Edit: To be serious for a moment, my own humble thoughts on the same situation:

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/60413-impossible-odds/?hl=%2Bimpossible+%2Bodds

Edited October 17, 2013 by Nonek

[Lephys]

I think the OP's emphasis isn't meant to be on the exact definition of "coward". I think he was just using the term to suggest "there should be times when you HAVE to greatly avoid/'run from' a foe -- behavior very similar to cowardly behavior, as opposed to taking something head on with your awesome offensive powers and tactics."

 

I could be wrong, of course. But, since everything seems to make large amounts of sense along the lines of that theory, save merely for the further implications of the word "coward," I'm inclined to think he merely mis-used the word, at worst, than assume actual cowardice is the main thing to take away from his suggestion, and that sort of powerless/extremely-careful behavior and tactics as required by some extremely tricky/deadly foes/encounters are somehow clearly nowhere near what he was getting at.

Edited October 17, 2013 by Lephys

[AGX-17]

Cowardice is a personality trait, not a contextual state of emotion. Practicing the old idiom "discretion is the better part of valor" and rationally recognizing a situation where you know you can't win and thus you should extract yourself from said situation isn't the same as being a coward. "Forcing players to be cowards" takes away player agency and ruins any semblance of RPing by forcing words or emotions or qualities onto the player character, when said character is supposed to be a product of the player, not a product of the developers/writers.

Edited October 17, 2013 by AGX-17

[Tuckey]

Just to add my own thoughts on what AGX-17 said. There is such a thing as a valiant retreat. At the end of the day there is no shame withdrawing from a superior foe. Even Sun Tzu advocated fighting battles on grounds of your choosing and not the enemies.

[Nonek]

If I remember correctly:

 

If your foe is stronger retreat, if equal then seek advantage, if weaker then attack.

[Messier-31]

'Coward' may be the wrong term here, since coward doesn't imply a careful tactical approach towards an overwhelming enemy so much as running away shrieking like a little girl. 

 

I agree - it's called "common sense".

[Walsingham]

*ponders*

 

Should different classes have different tactical options? I mean, (purely for example) a bushido following samurai would be obliged to stand his ground no matter what.

 

Might add an extra layer to classes.

[Messier-31]

*ponders*

 

Should different classes have different tactical options? I mean, (purely for example) a bushido following samurai would be obliged to stand his ground no matter what.

 

Might add an extra layer to classes.

 

Interesting, but... since it's a role-playing game, it is the player, *you*, who plays the role and should have some freedom in deciding whether attack or not. Maybe your fellow companions should be expected to do some action in regards to their beliefs, but the PC? I guess you could do something contradicting your "nature", but have some consequences of that action later on. Like a paladin losing powers due to an evil deed.

[Nonek]

The wife was rather put out when I told her that, in point of fact, the Spartan sent back from Thermopylae to warn his people by Leonidas ritually commited suicide immediately after delivering his message. Such codes of conduct sound like a fine feature, though hard to maintain.

[motorizer]

The lack of combat xp is a good thing for this IMO

Since there is less incentive to fight on when anyone in their right mind would retreat.

[Walsingham]

 

*ponders*

 

Should different classes have different tactical options? I mean, (purely for example) a bushido following samurai would be obliged to stand his ground no matter what.

 

Might add an extra layer to classes.

 

Interesting, but... since it's a role-playing game, it is the player, *you*, who plays the role and should have some freedom in deciding whether attack or not. Maybe your fellow companions should be expected to do some action in regards to their beliefs, but the PC? I guess you could do something contradicting your "nature", but have some consequences of that action later on. Like a paladin losing powers due to an evil deed.

 

 

OK, so perhaps only a couple of classes would have restrictions?

[teknoman2]

maybe you can take it out of the class system and put it as part of a faction system. 

you are a fighter not afiliated with anyone

you join a samurai like faction

you must adhere to the creed of the faction or face the consequences

you are at a situation where the creed works against you and you decide to forget it and do it your way

the faction learns of this and you are ordered to kill yourself

you give them the finger and walk away

bounty hunters and members of the faction are coming for you on a daily basis

you either run somewhere out of reach, or destroy the faction to ge them off your back

[Giantevilhead]

That's really just a matter of not blocking off areas based on your character level. Most older RPG's are like Baldur's Gate, Might and Magic, Wizardry, etc., are like that. They don't stop you from going into an area filled with level 20 monsters if you're only level 4. However, if you're clever, you can navigate some of those areas and defeat much more powerful enemies or steal their loot. For example, in the Might and Magic games, if you had the invisibility spell, you can try to sneak into very high level dungeons and steal some of the loot.

[J.E. Sawyer]

We currently have (and will continue to make) optional encounters that are too macho for your projected level going into them.  There's an encounter in our vertical slice area that wipes almost everyone on the team who goes into it.  It can be beaten with an "underleveled" group, but it requires a lot of tactical retreating and careful party management.

[C2B]

Hi

One thing I would like to see in the game:

I would love to be in combat scenarios where i am forced to be a coward. In BG2 i had a

really really hard time with the beholder lair and the mind flayer lair. There i was forced to

either kite like hell or divide and conquer.

 

But those fights where so rewarding because I was forced into a defensive stance

and had to think creatively in a totally different way than my everyday attack scenario.

(Kind of like a "Kobayashi Maru" situation (without cheesing ofc))

 

Any thoughts?

 

With Kind Regards

 

//Rikskebab

Love stuff like this.

 

I spoke of this before, but one of my dream rpgs is one focused on survival rather than winning fights. And I don't mean a stranded on a desert island kind of game, but rather being thrown into a world where the gap between your charachter and enemies/npcs is insane.

Edited October 18, 2013 by C2B

[Death Machine Miyagi]

We currently have (and will continue to make) optional encounters that are too macho for your projected level going into them.  There's an encounter in our vertical slice area that wipes almost everyone on the team who goes into it.  It can be beaten with an "underleveled" group, but it requires a lot of tactical retreating and careful party management.

 

Sounds great, especially if said challenge feels fair to the game and not like the game is just cheating all to hell to beat you. 

 

Also, on the subject of cowardice, I'm really hoping P:E will have no fights like the first fight against Malak in KOTOR: that is, a fight where you spend the whole thing beating the living crap out of your opponent only for the game to inform you that 'he's too much for you' and you have to run away (i.e. the plotline demands that you can't win, so you 'lose' no matter how easily you were winning). Nothing feels cheaper than that.

[Valorian]

 

We currently have (and will continue to make) optional encounters that are too macho for your projected level going into them.  There's an encounter in our vertical slice area that wipes almost everyone on the team who goes into it.  It can be beaten with an "underleveled" group, but it requires a lot of tactical retreating and careful party management.

 

Sounds great, especially if said challenge feels fair to the game and not like the game is just cheating all to hell to beat you. 

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure they're designing a symmetrical system, meaning that humanoid enemies have access to classes/abilities/talents just like the player character. Of course, if I encounter a "sirine" or "wraith" in the game, I'd expect these creatures to have certain unique properties, such as on hit effects, that are not necessarily available to the player.

 

The type of cheating that I'd like to not be exposed to in PE is level scaling.

[forgottenlor]

Hi

One thing I would like to see in the game:

I would love to be in combat scenarios where i am forced to be a coward. In BG2 i had a

really really hard time with the beholder lair and the mind flayer lair. There i was forced to

either kite like hell or divide and conquer. 

 

But those fights where so rewarding because I was forced into a defensive stance

and had to think creatively in a totally different way than my everyday attack scenario. 

(Kind of like a "Kobayashi Maru" situation (without cheesing ofc))

 

Any thoughts?

 

With Kind Regards

 

//Rikskebab

 

I loved these encounters because you had to think "outside the box." There were actually a number of ways to beat/avoid them. They just weren't beatable with standard tactics. I remember in the mind flayer layer looking through my inventory, checking my spell list, and thinking "Hmmm. Would this work?" After a number of failed experiments I actually think I cleaned out the whole layer.