Update #70: New Year Project Update

[SunBroSolaire]

Just noticed something... Palagina has a +2 movement modifier for 'Zealous Charge'. Would that be movement speed? I thought all characters were going to have the same running speed to avoid the annoying IE thing where your Wizards make it across the map 90 seconds before your fighters.

[rdmcnz]

Absolutely captivated by the character sheet, combined with the lovely background with wild flowers and all. Immediately I was playing the game, analysing my party (including trying to scroll down the records).

The thought that came to mind was playing the game with a duo of characters akin to Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser - and whoever else tags along. I love that we have that option with the Adventurer's hall!

 

Loving the artwork and the care taken in putting together a good system that everything runs on.

 

Really looking forward to this adventure :-D

[Shevek]

Might is a poor stat name if it affects both physical and magical damage. I would recommend something more neutral like "power" or, to channel VTm, "potence." Also, intelligence is too often associated with magical damage so I would call that something else as well - like "reason" or some such.

Edited January 15, 2014 by Shevek

[Grimo88]

Frermas mes Canc Suolias?

 

The conlang sounds Italian. Roughly 'Fratellanza de Cinque Soli' if you made it into Italian? Or any Romance language would be close enough.

 

Which gives us 'Brotherhood of the Five Suns'? I noticed the paladin portrait has 5 Suns on her chest. 

 

Sorry if someone already worked this out! I've only just scanned through forums! 

 

Just wanted to look smort. Er... smart. 

[Lephys]

I remember reading some quote from Sawyer saying that his focus is on making sure all attributes are viable options for all classes in combat. How the attributes are used in dialogue is more up to the writers. The examples you listed above don't describe a problem with the attribute system, but with the writers implementation of stat- and class-checks.

 

In your example with the Brute not being intimidated by a mighty warrior PC, but by a mighty wizard, what hinders the writers from checking both the class and Might-stat of the PC to determine if the Brute is intimidated by the PC? So a Warrior might attempt to lift the Brute with physical force and fail if his might is too low, while a wizards tries to pick up the brute with magic - with a lower might check - and fails if his/her might is too low.

No... no no no...

 

Okay, let me try this a different way. Does everyone in the entire world have soul powers? And does everyone do everything with soul powers? Like, people walk around, not using muscles to do the walking, but with soul magic that "telekinetically" animates their legs into bipedal locomotion? If so, then... well, that's kind of a bland world. If not, then obviously there's a subset of people who either have soul powers that are too weak to do as much as they could do with their own physical bodies, or simply lack soul powers altogether. Thus, these people still retain physical capabilities, do they not? If so, then this is something represented in the game world.. Thus, it's acknowledging that people come in various shapes and sizes, and have various strengths and weaknesses of physiology, regardless of the possession and/or potency of soul magic.

 

So, the question is, do we just pretend that the only thing that exists is soul power and not even implement anything that ever even acknowledges the differences in people? Or do we actually differentiate between what's "magical" and what isn't?

 

Does that make sense?

 

If they don't want to do it, then fine. But what I'm pointing out is the fact that the world bears factors that are affected by that distinction, and that doesn't change just because you pretend the distinction doesn't exist.

 

In the Wheel of Time, there's a blue root called forkroot that inhibits people's abilities to use magic, essentially. So, people find themselves in situations where they've been drugged with this forkroot. The ones who rely solely on their magical abilities have no need for honing their physical bodies, so, with their magic taken away, they're basically useless. However, others have actually trained with swords and exercised, and are capable of a lot more, even without their magical abilities.

 

With just "Might," and no distinction between physical and magical capability, you cannot have that situation, or any even remotely similar situation, anywhere in the entire game or its story. OR, if you do, the stat makes it redundant. "Oh no, you can't use magic here! So we can't check your Might... you can still physical means, though! Better check your Might, u_u... Oh look! Same value! 8D!"

 

Also, checking class doesn't solve anything. All that would do would ignore the fact that a Wizard COULD be both big and strong AND magically potent. Like in D&D. I always play a Wizard in D&D campaigns, and I usually take a bit more Strength than most people, and it's helped out a lot before. Someone starts going crazy? Strength check. Yep, I can restrain them with my arms and we can dose them with something, instead of my wasting some spell on them. Maybe I can carry something that no one else can because everyone else's injured or something. Etc.

 

There are plenty of things that can't be done with magic that CAN be done by physical means, and vice versa, and I don't think just letting magic power do literally everything in the entire world and checking it as separate from physical capability is a very good idea, ideally. It eliminates an entire subset of possible scenarios/factors/situations.

 

And what hinders the writers from scripting in reaction modifiers so that the reaction from being a Orlan godlike with high resolve is negative, but not as negative as if s/he had low resolve?

 

 

Nothing does. I... think you didn't understood the point of that example. It was, "If you wouldn't merge these two obviously separate aspects, so why merge physical and magical capabilities into one measurement?"

 

If the writers forget to differentiate such checks between classes it's not the attribute systems fault, it's the writers or that most evil thing of all - lack of time and it wouldn't be different if magical and physical damage was influenced by different attributes.

It's not the writers that determine such things, anyway. They write the scenario, and the mechanics allow them to write an accompanying line for something. How can they write one line for a reaction to a hideous character, and one line for a reaction to a beautiful character, for example, if there's no measurement of character beauty to check against? So, yeah, it would be different if magical and physical damage were influence by different attributes. If they have the time to write different outcomes for a given check, then they have the time to do so. Yet, even having the time, if they have no way of checking against just one or the other, then they can't tie those lines of text to the actual attribute system.

Edited January 15, 2014 by Lephys

[Mor]

What Concentration(Resolve) does? I believe that JS once said that all attributes will have combat value, so maybe some kind of spell failure chance.

 

Edit: NM found JS comment on the first page.

Edited January 15, 2014 by Mor

[bulldog]

I was initially thrilled about this project but I'm getting more and more excited with each update.   Everything I've seen from Obsidian so far looks top notch but of course I would expect nothing less.  Thanks and keep up the good work.

[ManifestedISO]

This will be graduate-level adventuring ... I'm hoping for some reference material to study before taking this course.

[Robsidious]

Those screenies are just glorious. So, so beautiful.

 

I think I need to squee a bit here. Leaving any issues aside for the moment, I just want to say this update has made me very, very happy. And not just because of ooh pretty. Not just because of this update. The depth of lore, attention to detail and care with which this game is being crafted is an absolute pleasure to behold. It's like seeing a long-cherished dream slowly becoming real, before your very eyes.

 

A big thank you to Josh and all the crew, for taking the time to engage with us on the forums. It's especially nice in updates to have some questions answered and is greatly appreciated. It is no small thing being entrusted to bring back the Infinity Engine magic, and in some ways is not an enviable task. Thank you for your dedication, patience and passion. I imagine that working at Obsidian must be really nice, different in a very special way, now that Eternity is cooking in your kitchen.

 

Respect.

[Metabot]

What Concentration(Resolve) does? I believe that JS once said that all attributes will have combat value, so maybe some kind of spell failure chance.

 

"Concentration is similar to Concentration in 3E/3.5 (somewhat similar to Poise in Dark Souls) but it is for everyone, not just spellcasters.  Concentration prevents you from playing hit reactions when you take damage.  If you cannot maintain Concentration, you will play a hit reaction and your attack/reload/spell is interrupted.  We're still defining the system (in fact, I was messing around with the formulae before I sat down), but that's the general idea."

[Zed]

Just noticed something... Palagina has a +2 movement modifier for 'Zealous Charge'. Would that be movement speed? I thought all characters were going to have the same running speed to avoid the annoying IE thing where your Wizards make it across the map 90 seconds before your fighters.

this was super-annoying in the IWDs in particular (in BG it was mostly boots of speed but I never used those).

 

one solution:

only have +movement speed take effect in single-selection.

 

another:

do not have +movement speed :D

[Lephys]

I think maybe everyone's going to always have the same permanent movement speed, but there are things that will temporarily increase that in combat (Barbarian's Wild Rush ability, or whatever it's called, for example) or decrease that in combat (stuff like Slow).

 

I believe the goal is to prevent your passive (out-of-combat) movement speed from differing, as that's not even tactically significant anyway. It doesn't really matter if one of your party members moves faster than the others if there's nothing currently threatening you at the moment. There's no time-sensitivity when you're just traveling about in the woods.

[Graham]

I love everything about this update but if I have to name something in particular, then it's the UI. Fantastic.

 

 

Imo banshee is a wraith,ghost, a creature betwean worlds, belonging neither here nor there yet...maybe should be bit more translucent?

 

We will probably be working on a shader soon to make ghosts/spectres etc. appear more appropriately... spectral.

 

You could even make it so that such creatures switch between a visible and an invisible or less visible state.

[Skie Nightfall]

That UI!

[applesaucers]

There are plenty of things that can't be done with magic that CAN be done by physical means, and vice versa, and I don't think just letting magic power do literally everything in the entire world and checking it as separate from physical capability is a very good idea, ideally. It eliminates an entire subset of possible scenarios/factors/situations.

This is true of every attribute in every RPG, though. Attributes are arbitrary by nature and there's always potential for more atomized attributes. A single strength attributes ignores that there's many kinds of strength and a single intelligence attribute ignores that there's many kinds of intelligence. Splitting charisma is rad, but all the systems with a unified speech stat still worked well enough.

 

edit: Maybe a better example-- a high dexterity character can throw a ball wherever they want, hit any ball that comes their way, and round the bases very quickly. But just a glance at any baseball game will tell you these are wildly different skills.

Edited January 15, 2014 by applesaucers

[Cultist]

What a hell is:

+1 Resolve (Suppressed)

Suppressed like in BG - where you can't wear two +1 Rings and get +2 in total ? Is +1 suppressed by +2 or what?

Edited January 15, 2014 by Cultist

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Please please please get rid of pallegina as an NPC name. it offends my sensibilities so.

 

I agree, the name needs to be changed. It looks like a portmanteau of two words being Paladin and a word ending in gina joined together.    Probably due to being a female paladin.

[Silent Winter]

Like most here, I can't stop looking at that environment and the UI ... (well, obviously I can, since I'm posting this, but I keep going back to it )

Loving it!

[silvercross]

Am I the only one who can't cope with words like "Elardh Dwr", "Frermas mes Canc Suolias" or the name of the banshees? I wish I could, but whether my head nor my tongue knows how to handle these. Will there be something like a pronounciation guide in the collectors edition of the game?

 

With a lot of these games, I don't even bother with trying to pronounce or saying things properly. It's a good thing most of the names (especially character names) start with different letters. For instance, "Elardh Dwr" just becomes "El D" and "Frermas mes Canc Suolias" becomes "F mes something". xD

 

 

With the character screen, the records column doesn't seem to be near as important as the rest of the information displayed. Something like a minimal inventory screen would make better use of the space, so you could instantly see how different loadouts affected your stats.

 

a great idea. A sort of mini-inventory. Derived stats like defenses, concentrations, damage output and anything else to help deliver the information quickly without having to switch over multiple screens would be ideal. that way you can make informed decisions quickly without having to hunt for the information you need.

 

 

Third this idea! I made a brief (and rushed) mock up of this:

 

http://i.imgur.com/knvLcMG.jpg

 

(I linked it rather than post it directly, because it's a long image. Tried to make it small as possible, but it can't be helped.)

 

I had fun making this though, hahaha. RPG pack rats FTW. Obviously the real UI would consider more situations and be consistent as to what does what, but I think I presented the general idea.

Edited January 15, 2014 by silvercross

[ItinerantNomad]

...

 

D&D is a disease that has poluted the minds of everyone who's come across it. It should be treated like a band-aid and all mention of it ripped from any future fantasy RPG.

 

The way you are thinking pretty much defines the problem I see with D&D RPGs and many of the derivatives. In a word, mixing the ideals of abstracted mechanics with a sort of zeal for verisimilitude. In a PnP setting, these things don't really matter, because ultimately the DM gets to decide what's what and hand-waving can occur. However, in a computer RPG once "stats" that are meant to "sort of, kind of" represent adjustable values to combat and story viability have to take on a role that they are ill-prepared for.

 

Who says that "strength, dex, intellect, wisdom, etc" are attributes even worth defining, for your character? Why strength but not education? Both are improvable with practice, in any world. Why not beauty? Why not personality as an attribute? Resourcefulness or cleverness? Wit? Any arbitrary attribute could be used. Outside of some interesting mechanic, they sort of mix and muddy the picture. What if all stats were just colors instead of "attributes"?

 

In the world of PoE, people do have strength and use that physical strength to get their jobs done. But people are probably resourceful too and just because one attribute isn't in the system doesn't mean it doesn't exist in the game.

 

This is why I tend to want abstract ideas reflecting the names of attributes: to give a broader, and more vague description of what each attribute represents. That way, this burden of "explaining itself" is removed from the attribute and players can focus on what it's meant to do: represent mechanical "sliders" to adjust your character's combat prowess and CYOA solutions.

 

http://hiddenway.tripod.com/articles/attrib.html

The best possible model of a character would use a huge number of parameters, and an immense set of formulae, to evaluate the outcome of every possible event. Of course, such an exact model would require computing resources beyond anything the human race is likely to acquire in the immediate future, never mind the lone GM with only a set of dice and a simple pocket calculator.

 

To simplify our model to the point where it becomes useful requires repeated application of the 80-20 rule: 80% of the cases are handled by a simpler model, and the remaining 20% are dealt with by special cases, or via a judgement call by the GM.

Edited January 15, 2014 by ItinerantNomad

[Cultist]

Movement is a movement speed? Wouldn't it turn into BG2 situation when some of your party members had Boots of Speed and you have to wait constantly until rest of the party will catch up?

[Metabot]

Third this idea! I made a brief (and rushed) mock up of this:

 

http://i.imgur.com/knvLcMG.jpg

 

(I linked it rather than post it directly, because it's a long image. Tried to make it small as possible, but it can't be helped.)

 

I had fun making this though, hahaha. RPG pack rats FTW. Obviously the real UI would consider more situations and be consistent as to what does what, but I think I presented the general idea.

 

 

NVm

Edited January 15, 2014 by Metabot

[ItinerantNomad]

Movement only matters during combat. Otherwise everyone moves at the same rate. Unless this has been changed...

[Lephys]

 

There are plenty of things that can't be done with magic that CAN be done by physical means, and vice versa, and I don't think just letting magic power do literally everything in the entire world and checking it as separate from physical capability is a very good idea, ideally. It eliminates an entire subset of possible scenarios/factors/situations.

This is true of every attribute in every RPG, though. Attributes are arbitrary by nature and there's always potential for more atomized attributes. A single strength attributes ignores that there's many kinds of strength and a single intelligence attribute ignores that there's many kinds of intelligence. Splitting charisma is rad, but all the systems with a unified speech stat still worked well enough.

 

Then, as I pointed out earlier with the three different types of persuasion-type methods, why not just have a "Persuasion" skill and be done with it, instead of representing intimidation, compulsion, and logical appeal?

 

edit: Maybe a better example-- a high dexterity character can throw a ball wherever they want, hit any ball that comes their way, and round the bases very quickly. But just a glance at any baseball game will tell you these are wildly different skills.

And Perception covers both seeing AND hearing, and yet you can still hear things in dense fog that you cannot see, and see things under water that you cannot hear. If a bandit is sneaking up on your party in the dead of night, and he accidentally trips over something and makes a bunch of noise, do you want your 20-Perception character to just instantly know exactly where he is and make a headshot, or would you rather the game represent the fact that you could hear him, but not see him?

 

If you don't feel a strong need to split them, then fine. But I'd appreciate it if people at least acknowledged that there does exist a reason to do so... that a distinction would serve an actual purpose.

[rjshae]

There's probably a number of ways to rationalize the meaning of Might to cover both physical and mental strength. One might view at it as a form of Qi in Chinese culture, providing a life force that sustains a living being. Perhaps then capabilities of the old Strength stat in D&D is now represented by the combination of Mgt and Con, while Intelligence is Mgt and Int? It's a bit of a fudge, I know.