Can I even handle a game like PE any longer? Well, I sure hope so!

[IndiraLightfoot]

Wow! This discussion just gets better and better! Thank you, guys!

And the icing of the cake this day:

 

 

Torch of Worst-Case Scenarios +1.

 

 

I just giggled into oblivion over this one!

 

I read it all and found Josh's replies very well informed, and I'm very much on the same pages as him. I also seemed to like every post PrimeJunta made after Josh's replies, along with those of Lephys, so I have not very much to add.

 

 

The problem I found generally with status effects was their immediacy. In BG running across a couple basilisks unprepared was as good as game over for a low level party, because the effect was immediate if the saving throw was failed. If petrification, for example, initially slowed the character upon a failed save for 30 seconds before fully petrifying them, the player would at least have a window of opportunity to try counter it. I never found level drain that bad in comparison after the first few times I encountered it, because while it affected you immediately upon being hit, you still had time to dispatch the enemy before dying from level drain or casting a restoration spell. I think giving the player time to counter status effects would reduce the need for reloading and pre-buffing, and the game flow would be interrupted less often. 

 

 

TRoar: That is a great proposition, and I really do hope that Obsidian implements stuff like that when the dire risks of petrification, aging or what not is on the horizon.

 

Hiro: Hehe, you are making interesting counter arguments, but they seem mostly to be that, cuss-countering. Surely, you must see something good in the problems Josh have identified and are about to rectify or remove? 

Edited January 14, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

Firstly I think what Josh and others mean when they talk about eliminating dump stats is that every attribute will be potentially useful to every class - unlike DnD in which giving a fighter high charisma is almost always a dumb move. That doesn't mean that you can't dump stats to create a particular build. For example if you want a character that deals a lot of damage but is pretty squishy you might boost perception and intellect and dump constitution and strength.

 

 

 

Secondly the aim as I understand it isn't to avoid the possibility of creating bad characters so much as it is about avoiding nonviable characters. In DnD your wizard had better have a certain level of intellect; otherwise you're not going to be able to learn the high level spells that you all but need to succeed. In PoE not having a high intellect is not going to make a nonviable wizard but it is going to make a wizard that isn't great at directly damaging the enemy so you're going to need to invest in a different set of abilities (maybe she's got high resolve so you can focus on AoE spells and spells with status effects) to make a really effective wizard.

 

 

You can but you've got to have a really good understanding of the particular game and DnD in general. If you're a noob like me you're going to get very frustrated very quickly.

 

Edited for clarity.

 

 

Not to sound like an asshat, there is a manual that come with the game. The IE games have very in depth manuals and tell you what stats you should put points into with different classes and what their primary stats are. Even some enounters like on page 63 with some spiders inflicting poison. Therefore, I should really save those healing poison potions if I come across some spiders?

 

I really do think the day of reading a manual is something of the past these days with a lot of gamers with digital downloads and gamers wanting to play straight away instead of reading for an hour or so to find out how to play the game. Not like years ago when you bought a game from a shop and read the manual on your way home.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[IndiraLightfoot]

However, us PnP D&D fanatics had a huge advantage over those who found the computer game BG for the first time. Most of the stuff was like second nature, and then the manual became just a nice hors d'oeuvre or a collectible. Well, otherwise, I do agree. Read the manual, folks. It's not an obsolete practice.  

[PrimeJunta]

The IE games have very in depth manuals and tell you what stats you should put points into with different classes and what their primary stats are.

This is IMO exactly the problem with D&D: that there are primary stats for each class. That makes the stats largely redundant. Why even have stats if the only viable fighter is one that pumps STR, DEX, and CON (in this order) and dumps CHA, WIS, and INT (in this order?) Why not just get rid of the stats altogether and always make fighters strong, tough, and fast?

 

Or, put another way, if you have stats, why not make them useful for all classes, and make the system so that it supports viable smart fighters, wise wizards, and fast clerics?

Edited January 14, 2014 by PrimeJunta

[TRoar]

TRoar: That is a great proposition, and I really do hope that Obsidian implements stuff like that when the dire risks of petrification, aging or what not is on the horizon.

Thanks, Indira.

 

 

Hiro: Hehe, you are making interesting counter arguments, but they seem mostly to be that, cuss-countering. Surely, you must see something good in the problems Josh have identified and are about to rectify or remove?

 

I picked up on that too. Brainstorming, discussing can lead to good innovations and a slicker gaming experience without compromising the depth of the game play. Personally, I'm all for it. The IE was a great engine, and I even wouldn't mind playing new games in it using the 2nd edition rules, but we all know that there was a lot of room for improving it. Onwards and upwards.

 

 

Or, put another way, if you have stats, why not make them useful for all classes, and make the system so that it supports viable smart fighters, wise wizards, and fast clerics?

 

I like that idea.

Edited January 14, 2014 by TRoar

[Robsidious]

It seemed to me as though Josh's intent, in that whole elaboration of the old games' issues, wasn't to just say "So we're throwing all that out," but rather, to tweak. 

 

What we we just talking about ITT about assuming the worst to protect oneself from disappointment...

 

It is simply my fear that features I liked will be removed or changed into something that loses what I liked. What will happen to random rest encounters for example? I'm sure the devs are considering all manner of ways to tweak, fix, replace, remove and enhance all the features of the IE games, however as I mentioned (to me) Josh's list read like a list of problems to be fixed without recognition of the good aspects of those issues. Now that doesn't mean that this represents his attitude towards design (I more or less stated that I didn't think this to be the case) but I felt the need to express my wish that he takes my preferences into account in considering what it may be that I, and perhaps others, enjoyed regarding the issues he described.

 

On the subject of character systems, did people really get halfway through games and find they couldn't proceed? This blows my mind, I didn't realise this was even possible, unless perhaps you intentionally tried to do so. That's not amusing to me, just baffling.

 

Thanks Lephys for your post, but it didn't help me personally to conceptualise how Josh's proposed system will work. This could just be my a fault on my part sure, I just don't get it for whatever reason. The concept of a forgiving and flexible character system sounds fantastic on the face of it, I just sincerely can't imagine how it would work. Probably why I'm not a systems designer ;-) I'm looking forward to seeing what the team comes up with though. 

 

Also, I think Prime Junta makes a great point about the lack of variety in ways to build characters. That more than anything suggests to me that we can do better than the IE character systems. Being able to build an intelligent fighter or wise wizard without gimping yourself would be a dream come true, but I can't foresee how this can be done. Hopefully Josh does ;-)

[Robsidious]

Hmm, actually rereading Josh's post I do feel like I over-reacted somewhat. This doesn't change the substance of my concerns and I'm happy I expressed them, however his post is more reassuring than my initial impression perceived. This...

 

Some of these things can be toggled by player difficulty settings, but other elements can be redesigned to still be interesting without being obnoxious. 

 

is the sort of thing I want to hear. Torch of Worst Case Scenarios +1 indeed   

[PrimeJunta]

On the subject of character systems, did people really get halfway through games and find they couldn't proceed? This blows my mind, I didn't realise this was even possible, unless perhaps you intentionally tried to do so. That's not amusing to me, just baffling.

:me raises hand:

 

It's happened to me a couple of times. The last time was NWN2 I think. There's that one part in the main quest where you're dropped solo in the middle of a bunch of elite vampires, with no prior warning. IIRC I was playing a drow, working my way towards arcane trickster. Had low CON, a 2-level handicap from the race, and neither high enough stealth nor enough magic to beat the vicious little things.

 

I suppose it's conceivable that I could have save-scummed my way through that, but that's not my idea of fun.

[Stun]

Firstly I think what Josh and others mean when they talk about eliminating dump stats is that every attribute will be potentially useful to every class - unlike DnD in which giving a fighter high charisma is almost always a dumb move.

Bah. This is the Great Myth being perpetuated.... again.

 

There are no dump stats in D&D, there are only crap DMs who don't bother making use of all of a character's stats. And of course there are D&D based video games who's developers are too lazy to hold characters accountable for all their stats.

 

In True (A)D&D, all stats are important to all classes. Otherwise they'd have been eliminated in subsequent editions. For example, Charisma is vital to any fighter who wishes to own a stronghold and gather men-at-arms to his banner. Charisma is also vital if this fighter wishes to tame and ride an exotic mount like a Pegasus, or a Hippogriff, or a Nightmare. Or if the Fighter happens to find himself on one side of a nation's political conflict and must rally allies. Again, a lot of DMs are simple-minded and can't be bothered to put any of this 'complex' stuff into their gaming sessions. But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist, or that it isn't actually listed in the players handbook or the DM's guide. Because it most certainly IS.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Stun

[PrimeJunta]

@Stun, that's true for tabletop gaming. Totally not true for computer games.

[JFSOCC]

There are a bunch of ways: <snip large post>

In one single post you addressed pretty much all my fears about combat. I found myself nodding along, because yes, I had these problems during my playthroughs.

[Metabot]

 

Exactly, I'm not sure what other indication there could be other than MMO style color coding and then of course we'll exclamation points and question marks over npc's heads.

Uh... dialog?

 

Take Firkraag, for example. What if there was a level check on the quest, and if your level < design level, and you had accepted the quest, someone approached you as you were exiting the inn. Dialog:

 

"Psst... I noticed you talking to that guy earlier. Want a piece of intel? Cost you 10 GP but might save your life."

"[Give 10 GP] Done. What you got?"

"The Baron is a bastard. He's done this before. No-one who took that job ever came back. If you do head that way, you better be prepared for the fight of your life."

 

 

Oh yea I totally agree with this.

[Metabot]

@Stun, that's true for tabletop gaming. Totally not true for computer games.

 

Well wouldn't it be nice if it were true for computer games? And I know you're going to say well Josh is trying to address that, but what I mean is wouldn't it be nice if computer games strived more towards emulating the tabletop experience in terms of creativity.

[JFSOCC]

The IE games have very in depth manuals and tell you what stats you should put points into with different classes and what their primary stats are.

By telling you what you should invest in, that manual is essentially removing a core feature of role playing games: player choice.

[PrimeJunta]

Well wouldn't it be nice if it were true for computer games? And I know you're going to say well Josh is trying to address that, but what I mean is wouldn't it be nice if computer games strived more towards emulating the tabletop experience in terms of creativity.

 

 

How, specifically, would you accomplish that?

[PrimeJunta]

By the way, I totes get the appeal of "spreadsheet gaming," i.e., figuring out how to make a power build. That was a big part of IE games. However it is a part I'd be willing to ditch if I got more room for different character concepts in exchange.

 

Put another way, given a choice between "What is the best cleric build?" and "What is the best way to play a fast, dextrous, and intelligent cleric?", I'd rather have the latter.

[Stun]

 

Well wouldn't it be nice if it were true for computer games? And I know you're going to say well Josh is trying to address that, but what I mean is wouldn't it be nice if computer games strived more towards emulating the tabletop experience in terms of creativity.

 

 

How, specifically, would you accomplish that?

 

It's not hard. It's also not new. Planescape Torment pulled it off. Is there a dump stat in PS:T? Nope. Each one of the Player's stats is checked, over and over, from the beginning to the end. Doesn't mean you can ever fail to beat the game if you build your TNO wrong, but you'll suffer immensely if you choose to dump, say, Wisdom on your warrior. Edited January 14, 2014 by Stun

[PrimeJunta]

@Stun, I hate to break this to you, but no IE game is as bad as PS:T when it comes to having "the right build." If you don't pump WIS and hit some (rather high) thresholds in CHA and INT, you're just not going to have a very good time. It's even more constraining than most other IE games. 

 

The fact that the game intentionally subverted AD&D 2e by making the pump stats the opposite of what you'd expect doesn't change the fundamental problem. You're every bit as locked-in as in any other IE game -- and much more so than in most. BG2 for example at least allows a range of enjoyable builds, even if most of them are casters. I'm a huge PS:T fanboy, but structurally it's closer to a linear adventure game where you either solve problems and get rewards or don't, than a wRPG where you define your character and meet challenges using a variety of ways.

[Metabot]

I think implementing the total freedom of pnp would be impossible, but trying to get as close as possible would be incredible.

[PrimeJunta]

@Metabot, what are your thoughts on sandbox games? The Elder Scrolls and Fallout series, Arcanum etc. attempt something like this. Some even go some way towards succeeding. There are always trade-offs, of course, but there is a special magic to them when it works out.

 

(Looking forward to The Wild Hunt actually. I like it that there's a series like The Witcher which trades off variety in character concepts to get more personal storytelling and more focused gameplay challenges. Wouldn't want all games to be like that of course.)

[Reever]

 

 

* Pre-buffing alters the difficulty of fights enormously.  About halfway through IWD's development, a QA tester (who went on to become a pretty well-respected developer) came up to Black Isle and was furious at the difficulty of a fight in Lower Dorn's Deep.  He had been trying to legitimately get through it for 2 hours and hadn't succeeded.  Kihan Pak and I loaded it up and beat it on the first try.  He asked to see what we were doing.  Naturally, we were pre-buffing for 5-6 rounds before we even went into the fight.  Because there was no opportunity cost to using buffs, this was "the way" to get through fights, but it was tedious -- and for people who were not D&D veterans, it was not something they ever thought to do, which resulted in a full roadblock (see also: Burial Isle misery, which was also pretty easy for me and Kihan).

 

2. This game is presumably for a niche market. Not necessarily for casual players. It sounds like you want this game to be partially mainstream so all can play even if new players don't have any prior knowledge of the rules system or setting. I don't understand why you want to go out your way to make the game mainstream when it's a niche game for mostly serious crpg players. If people want a mainstream game without having to do in depth research skills, spells, tactics, and just sit back and relax, then there's always arpg's like Diablo 3.

 

Now, I'm not having anything against some fights and I don't might reading a bit into some mechanics (as I did when I started playing P:T), but maybe some people also want to play this game for the story. I'm not backing a dungeon crawler which I can play only after reading a 60 page manual (I'm exaggerating here, but you get my point).

This Kickstarter certainly was certainly targeted at IE players of old, but I don't think all of them are/can still be so hardcore (or want to be, for that matter).

 

[Metabot]

Well I don't think skyrim's character system is really robust enough. Fallout new vegas maybe but there's always more reactivity that can be added.

[Stun]

@Stun, I hate to break this to you, but no IE game is as bad as PS:T when it comes to having "the right build." If you don't pump WIS and hit some (rather high) thresholds in CHA and INT, you're just not going to have a very good time. It's even more constraining than most other IE games.

Totally disagree. The game achieves its role-playing brilliance because of the way every stat is constantly represented. You're at the pillar of skulls. High Charisma and Wisdom will allow you to negotiate with it without having to make a serious sacrifice. But if you've got high Dex, you can give them Morte, get your information, then pull Morte back off.

 

In Curst Prison, you will get your ass kicked by Cassius in battle.... unless you're a really good fighter (high str, con), or unless you talk or pickpocket your way to victory (Cha, Dex).

 

Lenny in the lower ward. Charisma will allow you to negotiate information from him. Dexterity will allow you to out maneuver him. Strength will allow you to knock him down when he tries to run.

 

And then there's Vhailor. You can *will* your way to success (Wis). Lie your way to success (cha). Bully your way to rewards (str), or outsmart him (int)

 

Btw, intelligence in PS:T actually has the lowest threshold (the highest intelligence check in the game is only 19). Compare that with Wisdom (24 required to merge with TTO) or Charisma (23 required for the final Nordom upgrade), or Dexterity (23 required to pull Morte off the Pillar, or Strength (22 required to force open Luis's drawer)

 

The fact that the game intentionally subverted AD&D 2e by making the pump stats the opposite of what you'd expect doesn't change the fundamental problem

Nope. There's no problem, and PS:T doesn't make the pump stats the opposite of what they are in pen and paper. I don't know how mentally challenged your DM was (or if you ever even played pen and paper AD&D), but my DM never allowed our warriors to just ignore the value of Wisdom and Intelligence. Ever. In *our* gaming sessions, My DM flat out made our schemes backfire if we failed our Intelligence/Wisdom checks. We'd come up with a brilliant solution to a problem, then our DM would roll the dice, then say: "nope, sorry, none of you are smart enough to pull this off!".

 

That's called true role-playing enforcement. Sadly absent in computer games. But PS:T probably came the closest to capturing it.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Stun

[Metabot]

It's still a game and still requires you to learn how to play regardless of if you just want to play for the story. If you want a passive role in storytelling watch a movie or something.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Metabot

[PIP-Clownboy]

 

 

* Pre-buffing alters the difficulty of fights enormously.  About halfway through IWD's development, a QA tester (who went on to become a pretty well-respected developer) came up to Black Isle and was furious at the difficulty of a fight in Lower Dorn's Deep.  He had been trying to legitimately get through it for 2 hours and hadn't succeeded.  Kihan Pak and I loaded it up and beat it on the first try.  He asked to see what we were doing.  Naturally, we were pre-buffing for 5-6 rounds before we even went into the fight.  Because there was no opportunity cost to using buffs, this was "the way" to get through fights, but it was tedious -- and for people who were not D&D veterans, it was not something they ever thought to do, which resulted in a full roadblock (see also: Burial Isle misery, which was also pretty easy for me and Kihan).

 

2. This game is presumably for a niche market. Not necessarily for casual players. It sounds like you want this game to be partially mainstream so all can play even if new players don't have any prior knowledge of the rules system or setting. I don't understand why you want to go out your way to make the game mainstream when it's a niche game for mostly serious crpg players. If people want a mainstream game without having to do in depth research skills, spells, tactics, and just sit back and relax, then there's always arpg's like Diablo 3.

 

 

 

I don't see why you can't have all those good things (research/tactics) without pre-buffing. Mass pre-buffing seriously sucked and I'm glad to see it gone. Removing a bad/tedious decades old mechanic doesn't necessarily correlate to being mainstream. 

 

In fact, pre-buffing had the opposite effect. Let me just make myself immune to everything so I can auto-attack for the win. Yeah, real tactical. 

Edited January 14, 2014 by PIP-Clownboy