Attribute Questionnaire

[Lephys]

Q1: The current hypothesis is that PE must have SIX (6) attributes because the IE games (and D&D) had six attributes. Does nostalgia require that this be so ? Would you be upset if it was 5 or 7 ?

As others have said, as long as it's not like... 1, or 100, I'm fine with it. There are ways to make various numbers of stats work, within a reasonable range, so it doesn't HAVE to be 6. The exact number isn't as important as the way in which they're handled.

 

Q2: Do you think that defenses should be weighed against other prominent combat stats such as Accuracy and Damage ? (as in, should you have to choose between putting points into damage or accuracy instead of into deflection or willpower)

Yes. At least to a degree. I don't think we need "Have absolutely no defense" vs. "Have absolutely no offense" options, but nor do we need bonuses to offense AND defense to be married in the same stats or anything. 

 

Q3: Should Health and Stamina be spread across two attributes or would you prefer that they be married in advancement under one attribute ?

Two separate attributes. Provides a nice dynamic of "I can take a lot of punishment before I can even go down" versus" I can take a lot of punishment before I can't ever get back up, even if I go down pretty eaily." It's sort of like... how fast you can run at a sprint, versus how long you can sprint, or how long you can run, in total, in a day, even if you take breaks between sprints.

 

Q4: What do you think about Deflection be attribute independent ?

Hmm... I dunno. I think at most I'd like to see a more minor modifier from an attribute, rather than have an attribute flat out govern Deflection (as in low Xttribute = 3 Deflection, high Xttribute = 40 deflection). *shrug*. I think most of the modifiers to this are best left to things like equipment (armor), skills (weapon/combat proficiency), and talents.

 

Q5: Should Action Speed be influenced by attributes?

 

I, too, am a fan of the "influenced, not governed" stance.

 

Q6: Should inventory size be handled by attributes like it was in the IE games. If so, how do you see this being handled ?

I dunno... I mean, they're already handling inventory in a different manner, so it throws at least a tiny wrench into my general thoughts on this. But, I guess if we're talking non-Deep Stash stuff, yes? Although, maybe it could be affected by two stats? The key word being "maybe," as this is a rough idea. But, maybe Dexterity increases your inventory space (you can carry more things while still moving unimpeded), and Strength in creases your inventory weight limits? With encumbrance only coming from weight (space would be a hard limit), and only affecting action speed instead of movement speed? *shrug* Just a rough draft of a thought. Feel free to improve upon it, or change it entirely.

[sibakruom]

Q1: To be honest, 6 seems already a bit high for a system that wants to avoid dump stats. The only thing I hope is that attributes don't feel just tacked on, and most aspects of gameplay could be handled by derived stats or skills.
Q2: Having hard-to-hit tanks with poor accuracy does not seem very appealing to me. If anything, I prefer systems where accuracy is mostly irrelevant, and damage mitigation is done via damage absorption. I never liked the concept of damage avoidance tanks, even if it offers more build options.
Q3: No idea.
Q4: Attributes should give a reasonable bonus and that's it, like in D&D 3E. I don't like attributes being the major governing force behind any single value.
Q5: Same answer to Q4.
Q6: No idea.

 

 

 

I was one of the people who complained about the prospect of a three or four attribute system when the first details about the attributes were revealed. I do not however require six attributes, it's just that three or four remind me too much of games I don't like such as Dragon Age, MMOs and ARPGs and I think that a good system can be done with more attributes than that. The other restraints on the system are making it difficult however.

 

 

I would be fine with anything between 5 and 7.  With more Attributes (over 7)  you increase the likelihood of a dump stat.  With less (under 5) you decrease build options.  I personally think 6 is a fine number.  DAO had 3 stats, and they were awful.  Arcanum had 8 and there were more than a few dump stats.  I am not saying using more or less than 5-7 is guaranteed to give negative results, but that it increases the chances. 

 

I must admit I am a baffled by this. Am I the only one remembering that DA:O had 6 stats? Sure, each class had a few dump stats (and sometimes, all except one depending on the build), but this is true for most systems.

[Ganrich]

Eh, I was replaying a lot of aRPGs at the time. I must have gotten DAOs system confused with one of them. I was playing Dungeon Siege 2 at the time iirc. Sorry for my mistake. Let's not derail the thread over it.

[JFSOCC]

Q1. I would not be upset with different amounts of attributes, within reason.

Q2. Yes, that seems a decent way to do it.

Q3. I'd like both to be affected by different attributes, with perhaps some overlap. multiple paths to victory!

Q4. Not entirely. I'd like there to be an attribute which has an effect on deflection.

Q5. Depends, if there is a speed attribute, then certainly.

Q6. Yes and no. Attributes should affect it to some degree, but there should be alternatives to expanding your inventory space. (like traits)

Edited January 1, 2014 by JFSOCC

[Gumbercules]

Was going to answer the questionnaire questions individually, but realized that my answer to each is "don't care / depends." I'm not good at theorycrafting and none of the questions bring up concerns that I feel strongly about. As far as I'm concerned Josh can deviate from D&D attribute conventions as much as he wants as long as the end result is intuitive and promotes meaningful tradeoffs.

[Tsuga C]

 

QUESTIONNAIRE

Q1: The current hypothesis is that PE must have SIX (6) attributes because the IE games (and D&D) had six attributes. Does nostalgia require that this be so ? Would you be upset if it was 5 or 7 ?

 

Q2: Do you think that defenses should be weighed against other prominent combat stats such as Accuracy and Damage ? (as in, should you have to choose between putting points into damage or accuracy instead of into deflection or willpower)

 

Q3: Should Health and Stamina be spread across two attributes or would you prefer that they be married in advancement under one attribute ?

 

Q4: What do you think about Deflection be attribute independent ?

 

Q5: Should Action Speed be influenced by attributes?

 

Q6: Should inventory size be handled by attributes like it was in the IE games. If so, how do you see this being handled ?

 

1. I'm quite happy with 6-8, but not more or less.

2. Undecided as I don't know the details of the system (e.g. how many points do we have available).

3. Single attribute.

4. I'd prefer it depend upon Dex. and, perhaps, some skill/feat/ability into which we place points.

5. Yes--Dex. comes to mind and possibly Str., too, especially when carrying a burden.

6. I'd prefer it remain largely as it was in D&D.

Edited January 3, 2014 by Tsuga C

[Hamenaglar]

Q1: The more the merrier. I would be disappointed with less than six, but would be comfortable with up to 12 attributes.

 

Q2: Somewhat, yes. But playing unkillable characters that can't kill anything is not fine. What I'm more concerned is that there should be two equally viable forms of defense. Avoidance of damage (dexterity and light armor) and absorption (constitution and high armor). Middle ground as well should be viable.

 

Q3: Depends on other choices. All attributes should have value, if the only value of constitution is stamina (that can be regenerated) then that attribute might not have much value. On the other hand, I like the idea of a small guy that is frail but has a lot of endurance (long distance runners?).

 

Q4: I think it should both be attribute and skill (weapon proficiency?) dependent. Attributes governing deflection should be dexterity and maybe perception or intelligence. For instance having helmet (or simply poor vision) negatively impacts your field of vision and you can't see all the blows coming.

 

Q5: Normally I'd say yes. But if dexterity would be the main attribute then it might be overpowered (to hit chance, action speed and defense). I'm not sure we should have action speed as such. Might be a lot of problem for balancing. So this answer really depends on a lot of other things.

 

Q6: Yes. Carry weight should be governed by strength and constitution/endurance. However number of slots might be influenced by intelligence (better organizing your backpack?).

 

[Lioness]

Q1: No x 2. Whatever works. As long as the 6 points you mentioned in the start are adhered to.

Q2: Don't mind either way.

Q3: Separate.

Q4: On what then would it depend ?

Q5: No

Q6: I like to see the weight and encumbrance limitations being separate: I mean there might be people who are strong enough to carry around the weight equivalent 2 extra suits of armor, 5 different 2H weapons,  a 4 man tent and a 12 foot ladder but not the items themselves due to how clumbersome that would be. Weight limitation is strength based, encumbrance is not.

[jamoecw]

PE's current attribute design appears to be a bit bogged down by player expectations and nostalgia and the current design has combat stats spread across attributes very thinly due to the removal of defenses from the equation.

 

This questionnaire will ask some very important questions about what you as a player want to see in Eternity's attribute system and will allow you to give your perspective on some of the nostalgic points of the IE games attributes.

 

This is not a poll as the player's opinion is more important than their vote and it will give the designers a chance to read through what you have to say and perhaps get some ideas or better understand what things are or are not important to the majority.

 

For the record here are some of the main design goals

 

• No dump stats
• Dumping a stat is harmful to every build
• Every attribute must be useful for every character (class)
• Attributes must be reasonably balanced
• It should be hard to make a bad character
• No Attribute shall govern multiple defenses

 

QUESTIONNAIRE

Q1: The current hypothesis is that PE must have SIX (6) attributes because the IE games (and D&D) had six attributes. Does nostalgia require that this be so ? Would you be upset if it was 5 or 7 ?

 

Q2: Do you think that defenses should be weighed against other prominent combat stats such as Accuracy and Damage ? (as in, should you have to choose between putting points into damage or accuracy instead of into deflection or willpower)

 

Q3: Should Health and Stamina be spread across two attributes or would you prefer that they be married in advancement under one attribute ?

 

Q4: What do you think about Deflection be attribute independent ?

 

Q5: Should Action Speed be influenced by attributes?

 

Q6: Should inventory size be handled by attributes like it was in the IE games. If so, how do you see this being handled ?

no, though more attributes helps to fine tune and to allow more diverse builds, that being said making them balanced and useful gets harder the more you have.

well the exact wording you use makes it pretty obvious that one would want to have offense balanced with defense, though the choosing part in parenthesis is confusing, unless you are suggesting that you have offensive attributes with their own pool of points and defense attributes with their own pool of points, which would be fine.  it would allow decoupling of offense and defense, allowing someone to have good reflexes without being accurate or what have you.  doing so gives more control over building your character, which is a plus.

well this is a tough one, generally you want more offense, because that is how games are usually balanced towards.  so having only one stat affect how well you take hits means more points for attack.  that being said taking hits is inevitable and you always want to boost that stat, no matter what, so splitting it in two helps to balance it.  also splitting it allows you to fine tune your character, which is always good.  you could have it be one stat but that you end up getting to fine tune the mix later on, so making you really tough to drop in a fight makes you easier to kill, and making you harder to kill makes you easier to drop in a fight.  while you can't have both, but you can have neither.  not a bad way to make it, though you still have the constitution problem, so hardly ideal.

currently it is now tied to level and class, which is fine.  if a class emphasizes melee then they should have higher deflection, if not then they should have less.  of course ranged non magical attacks become stronger against the back lines then.  i guess if shields are really good at deflection, scaling up quite a bit with size, at the expense of offense then you can still protect your back lines when you have to.  you could also separate offensive and defensive attributes, and make the attribute that governs deflection less good than the others, and then have it scale off of level could work.

it would be the simplest method to give some combat ability to strength (having it mitigate armor penalties to attack speed or something like that), but as it has been said, 'should' is a tad strong of a word.

inventory size was affected by attributes in IE?  i thought it was carry weight in IE.  any way, being able to have more stuff, means that your pack mule will need it, but not so much for everyone else.  of course if low carry capacity affected your ability to have rings and such then everyone would need some strength, but then this just becomes required attributes for equipping things, which sawyer said he didn't like.  so i guess i don't see how this fits for 'penalty for dumping' criteria.  of course i don't see the full picture, so there might be something i am missing.

 

i had suggested moving AoE from resolve to strength, and health to resolve from strength.  that way cleave, bullrush, whirlwind, etc. abilities for a fighter become better at crowd control, which fits for a big lumbering oaf.  health gets paired up with duration, so that health is mixed in with something that is useful for immediate combat, and it fits that someone who has a strong will would overcome injury better.  i think that is the simplest way to fix the strength issue in sawyer's model causing the smallest change in how it works.  as far as getting all archetypes i think armor encumbrance mitigation for strength fits and would give a slight bonus that helps both tanks (by making them more mobile), and people who want a 'hulk smash now' kind of guy (with higher DPS for slow weapons while wearing armor). small changes with small effects so as to not mess with anything we don't know anything about (like how strength affects text encounters, or if their are strength requirements for something in the game) seems like the way to go.

Edited January 7, 2014 by jamoecw