On PE difficulty mechanics, objective xp and combat, stealth, sweet-talking

[Lephys]

You want me to explain why this is true?

 

Alright. It's true because The guys developing this game said so.

 

 

From TIM CAIN:

 

We plan to reward you for your accomplishments, not for your body count.

The key word there being "count."

 

Not that you care. Horse... water...

 

Er.... what makes you think they're going to be tied to a quest? Are you privy to knowledge the rest of us don't have?

Nothing does. But, the sheer fact that it's entirely, 1,000% unobstructedly possible makes me think that it isn't definitely not going to be tied to a quest. Oh, and the fact that they haven't said it won't. Thus, my initial question to you.

 

You don't seem to comprehend the difference between absolution and potential.

 

Whether or not you believe reason is not really any of my concern. You're the one who has to live with the arbitrary certainty that the game's going to suck, for no other reason than that you're too stubborn to even listen to reason.

 

*tips hat*

Edited January 24, 2014 by Lephys

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

MAN I'm an idiot.

 

Yes you are. That's something we both agree on.

[Stun]

 

There goes those random encounters. Not that the random encounters were hard to overcome, except for the wyverns, spiders and ettercaps with poison in the Cloakwood Forest. No fear of being ambushed because you get no xp for kills. Unless Obsidian wants to make us fight for no xp in random encounters. Random encounter?, no xp?, okay just runaway or reload.

... Dear lord...! The only incentive in the entire game is XP! I... I get it now! Why didn't I see this before?! MAN I'm an idiot.

 

Excuse me, but if you're attempting to make a point/rebuttal via humorous sarcasm, you're failing miserably. First of all, getting XP is one of the *fundamental* game play incentives of any RPG. It's tied to the leveling system. And you can't have a role playing game without one of those. Second, It's also fair to say that XP is one of the 2 driving incentives for engaging in combat (loot being the other). Third, what incentives other than XP and loot (which wyverns and spiders don't drop, anyway) can a random encounter offer? Besides: "Oh cool, I get to practice my l33t combat skillz just for fun!!

 

Guys... gold and loot are useless!

Not useless, just not as important. In any *good* RPG, I'd much rather be broke and powerful, than Rich and hopelessly weak. Wouldn't you?

 

Also, a side point. Gold and loot should never EVER be the only rewards for a quest. If your argument is "well, at least I'm getting some loot out of this otherwise pointless endeavor", then we have a problem in game design.

 

 

 

Hey, even if the game DID have guaranteed XP for every single kill, what if you run into a branching path, and you choose a way to go, and you don't run into any enemies on that particular path, and it dead ends in a room full of free loot.

Unearned loot? aka. the Monty Haul syndrome? Yeah, that would constitute another design flaw.

 

Well, obviously you have to reload the game and go a different way, right? Duh...

New to gaming are we? No Lephys, I think most of us would grab the loot, then eventually make our way back and explore the other path. In fact, we'd do that even if the treasure room contained 3 bosses and a portal to a hidden underground city. But that's a commentary on the nature of exploration. A different subject.

 

If there's no point in fighting anything if you don't get XP, then there's no point in doing anything unless you fight something. Because clearly, the slaying of things provides us with absolutely nothing else.

As silly as you're trying to make this entire discussion sound, the truth is not very far off from your sarcasm.

 

Icewind Dale 2 uses D&D 3e's Encounter level XP system, where the amount of xp you get for a kill is dependent on the level of the enemy vs. your party's level. The result is that if your party is substantially higher in level than the enemy, then you get NO exp for killing that enemy.

 

This utterly took all the fun out of soloing, and the game eventually becomes the most boring gaming experience imaginable. Why? because if you Solo IWD2, you will become very high level very quickly. The result is that by the time you get to the Fell Wood, ~75% of all encounters from then on net you NO XP. So most fights became pointless, despite the loot drops. And considering how combat heavy IWD2 is, not getting XP for kills is a major MAJOR buzzkill for the game

Edited January 24, 2014 by Stun

[Azmodan]

 

There goes those random encounters. Not that the random encounters were hard to overcome, except for the wyverns, spiders and ettercaps with poison in the Cloakwood Forest. No fear of being ambushed because you get no xp for kills. Unless Obsidian wants to make us fight for no xp in random encounters. Random encounter?, no xp?, okay just runaway or reload.

 

 

Hi Hiro!

 

Nah man - a random encounter is still a challenge. You will still get an XP value for solving the encounter.

Its just the solution can be any one of the following:

1) Kill them

2) Sneak around them to a pre-determined map-end marker

3) Talk to them and avoid a fight based on reputation (maybe you have a good reputation with Group X, the Group these mercenaries are from)

4) Polymorph your enemies into hamsters and then turn them to stone, then pick up the stone hamsters and sell them at the next town

5) Charm them and walk to the pre-determined map-end marker

6) Talk to them and pay them double for not killing you

 

How about them apples? All of the options above would resolve the random encounter. I as a GM would be willing to give you XP equivalent to option 1, at least, in reward for taking any of the above actions.

[Azmodan]

Third, what incentives other than XP and loot (which wyverns and spiders don't drop, anyway) can a random encounter offer? Besides: "Oh cool, I get to practice my l33t combat skillz just for fun!![/i}

 

 

Hi Stun,

 

Just like to point out that Wyverns drop Wyvern heads and spiders can drop spider poison sacks.

 

What if you had a ranger/druid equivalent in the party which could be all like: "Yo spider dudes, it coo, it coo - just relax lil' bros and we be on our way..." 

Again as a GM I would reward that. As I would reward any other approach that overcomes the challenge.

 

I'm confident that the level designers at Obsidian are two steps ahead of me. If the random encounters are all going to be uniformly "spawn in middle of small area map, in combat against a generic band of enemies" then that would tell me, that random encounter thinking hasn't evolved since BG1. That would make me a sad panda.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Azmodan

[Azmodan]

 

Question: When one of the developers says: We plan to reward you for your accomplishments, not for your body count. Does he mean:

 

a) We will definitely be rewarded for killing things

b) Racking up a big body count in this game is a way to gain rewards

c) a & b

d) None of the above 

e) Absorbing the Bronze Sphere will give you as much XP as all the previous murdering combined....

[Stun]

Hi Hiro!

 

Nah man - a random encounter is still a challenge. You will still get an XP value for solving the encounter.

 

Prove it.

 

 

Hi Stun,

 

Just like to point out that Wyverns drop Wyvern heads and spiders can drop spider poison sacks.

Spiders don't drop anything in BG1. (and no, the quest-based spider carcass in Bereghost is not loot. Nor is that spider a random encounter)

 

 

e) Absorbing the Bronze Sphere will give you as much XP as all the previous murdering combined....

So? Edited January 24, 2014 by Stun

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

 

There goes those random encounters. Not that the random encounters were hard to overcome, except for the wyverns, spiders and ettercaps with poison in the Cloakwood Forest. No fear of being ambushed because you get no xp for kills. Unless Obsidian wants to make us fight for no xp in random encounters. Random encounter?, no xp?, okay just runaway or reload.

 

 

Hi Hiro!

 

Nah man - a random encounter is still a challenge. You will still get an XP value for solving the encounter.

Its just the solution can be any one of the following:

1) Kill them

2) Sneak around them to a pre-determined map-end marker

3) Talk to them and avoid a fight based on reputation (maybe you have a good reputation with Group X, the Group these mercenaries are from)

4) Polymorph your enemies into hamsters and then turn them to stone, then pick up the stone hamsters and sell them at the next town

5) Charm them and walk to the pre-determined map-end marker

6) Talk to them and pay them double for not killing you

 

How about them apples? All of the options above would resolve the random encounter. I as a GM would be willing to give you XP equivalent to option 1, at least, in reward for taking any of the above actions.

 

 

1) no xp for kills in PoE.

2) run away like I said

3) Most people in this thread defending PoE's skill check are saying "Speech>10 = win" is a terrible design. Especially talking your way out of a random encounter.

4) Waste of spells. I'd rather run away.

5) Again waste of spells (see 4) or charm talking is a terrible design (see 3)

6) I'd rather run away and save my money.

 

Also, due to limited rest stops, it's probably the best option to run away instead of wasting valuable health on a random encounter with seemingly no good reward for it.

 

My view comes down to Risk vs Reward. Is it worth the Risk? Random encounters? No. Unless there's a really good reason why I need to engage the enemy, I'll run to the side of the screen and get out of there.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[Elerond]

 

Hi Hiro!

 

Nah man - a random encounter is still a challenge. You will still get an XP value for solving the encounter.

 

Prove it.

 

 

 

 

If there is random encounters in the game, then are there any actual reason that is based on something that have be said by developers that you would not be rewarded with XP by solving them by some means given you by designers? If not then burden of proof is on you IMO.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Stun, I took the liberty of reading your posts in this thread as a whole, so then I summarize them here with my comments. I think you are making your points clear and concise, and I do think that you will be pretty happy about PE after all (but only Josh & Co can confirm this):

 

 

wouldn't it make more sense if XP was doled out across the board? You know, in difficult, varied ways with speech, stealth, quest, and combat? It just seems odd to me that they'd decide to totally block out the ability to gain exp from partaking in what will probably be the most prolific part of the game.

Personally though, I'm really not that concerned about Balance. You can have a great game without it. What I'm worried about is if they go overboard and we end up getting a game that tries so hard to "correct" the "flaws" of the IE games that it ends up being a totally alien experience. The IE games Rewarded you immensely for combat. That's what they did. And while those games would have probably been better if they had more non-combat exp-gaining opportunities, the solution isn't to outright eliminate the ability to gain exp from engaging in combat. The solution is to just hand out more exp for non-combat skill use.

 

Stun, you want PE to be as much in keeping with BG2 and similar IE games as possible (although of course with D&D being left out). That goal you share with Monte Carlo and many, many others. In the post above your emphasis is on the fear that Obsidian will "totally black out" or "outright eliminate" xp from engaging in combat. To make things simple: You would much rather have kept the kill xp system from the IE-games. 

 

 

I have mixed feelings about a system that doesn't reward exp for kills. It does indeed promote true role playing. And that's good. The problem with it though is that it's a bit too extreme for my tastes. It's not a matter of getting less exp for doing something. It's a matter of getting NO exp for doing something.... even if that something happened to be a very difficult combat encounter that required a lot of teamwork, strategy, consumables and time.

 

This is a great post and very clarifying as well. You recognize that an xp system other than a kill xp one promotes true role playing. Your fear is, once again, getting NO xp for doing something (killing, but also for other actions during a quest, a part of a quest, an objective or what not).

 

 

But what about something much bigger... and longer... like "Find and defeat the source of evil in this 15 level mega dungeon? Are you going to be ok settling on a deferred lump sum XP reward from a 15-20 hour long (or even longer than that) quest? Me personally, I shudder at the thought. And yeah, I know, there are ways to work around that, such as throwing a bunch of mini-objectives at us in every level of the dungeon; or holding our attention and motivation via frequent loot drops.

But there's no substitute for the real thing: Combat exp. It's the definition of the concept, after all. EXP is shorthand for experience points, remember? If I'm a fighter, shouldn't I be getting experience for fighting?

 

I get you loud and clear. The example is an extreme one, but it would in many ways suck if we would haul our asses through all of those levels (or even just a third of them) and not getting any xp. Even worse, if something happens during that play session you would get nothing (*shiver* indeed!). I know the feeling. In Dishonored, if you go for no-kill playthroughs, you can have acts that take one and a half hour if you are a completionist like me, only to find at the end info splash screen that a single guard you silently rendered unconscious died (perhaps from some rats having devoured him in some dank corner).

A fighter should be rewarded xp for fighting. Basta!

 

 

No, because with a differed lump sum system like the above, a player (even without using any skills) can simply skip the majority of those actions, and still be rewarded the same as someone who meticulously took the time to do everything.

That's not to say that Quest XP is a bad idea all the time. It's not. It's a great idea almost all the time. It just shouldn't stand on its own.

Look, what's wrong with the system BG2 used? You got quest/Objective XP at the end of every major questline in BG2. But you also got XP for the individual stuff you did during that quest. Like for killing things, solving puzzles, disarming traps, unlocking chests. etc.

 

Stun, to be honest, I adore that kind of system from the IE games and have nothing against it whatsoever.

And indeed, it would be awful if there were some very fast and lazy, let's call it cheap and dirty, way through an objective xp/quest xp-segment, and still you get rewarded the same as someone doing brilliant and varied combat for hours through the same content.

 

 

OK. Here's one example.  Enemy adventuring party (like the one that the $10,000 backers get to create) ambushes you while you're in the wilderness. It's a tough fight, you emerge victorious. You gain 0XP. Why? Because we will not be getting XP for killing things in POE..

On the other hand, we have hordes of hostile monsters and undead... you know, possible denizens of the 15 level mega dungeon. Are they ALL going to be combat objectives? I doubt it. It'd be terrible dungeon design if they were. I mean, what happens if you miss a single skeleton on level 2? Will it constitute quest failure?

And what about the exploration they promised us? Do you see them not allowing us to roam around a hostile map without being on a quest to? Because if we're not on a quest, then everything we kill on those maps will net us ZERO xp.
 

Once again, very nice examples!

That adventuring party ambushing our party. I mean, either that event is treated as an objective that needs surviving to get the xp (I used to deal out xp that way when I was DMing sometimes, instead of end of session-xp), or we don't get a single xp. It can't be both, right? The same goes for random encounters.

And as for the hordes of monsters that we hopefully will slay in good order, will they just be cobwebs brushed aside in order to reach the Holy Grail Indiana Jones-style at the end, and after runnin gout of the dungeon, then Indy got that xp of his? That would be ridiculous and just plain wrong.

The last example here is your best one in that post; and it actually reveals something important about PE. It can't be quest xp only, because else it would destroy the whole exploration concept of the game! It simply has to be accomplishments like Tim Cain said, and these must mean chunk-by-chunk xp. I'd love to have Josh confirm this, but most likely, we can almost talk of encounter xp as part of PE's system. And if it's not, I am more or less on your side, Stun, in this argument, coz how else are they going to solve it. Quest xp just won't cut it.

 

 

For that matter, no where in update #7 does Tim Cain use the word "objective" when describing the XP system. Instead, he uses the word accomplishments, and he makes it clear that Racking up a bunch of Kills =/= ACCOMPLISHMENTS... so...
 
From TIM CAIN:

We plan to reward you for your accomplishments, not for your body count. 

Question: When one of the developers says: We plan to reward you for your accomplishments, not for your body count. Does he mean:

a) We will definitely be rewarded for killing things
b) Racking up a big body count in this game is a way to gain rewards
c) a & b
d) None of the above
 
  In cRPGs, Objectives get their own journal entries. But I've never played an RPG that updated your quest journal every time you killed a wolf. or a goblin.

 

Racking up a bunch of kills is probably not an accomplishment, but killing the enemies in an encounter so the toggle turns to peaceful green again, as it were, bloody well be counting as one.

Once again, Josh, please confirm!

But till then, my answers to that multi-choice question is: C! We will be rewarded for killing things (encounter-wise and quest-wise), and if we do that a lot, there will be more rewards coming our way.

 

Also, a side point. Gold and loot should never EVER be the only rewards for a quest. If your argument is "well, at least I'm getting some loot out of this otherwise pointless endeavor", then we have a problem in game design.

Icewind Dale 2 uses D&D 3e's Encounter level XP system, where the amount of xp you get for a kill is dependent on the level of the enemy vs. your party's level. The result is that if your party is substantially higher in level than the enemy, then you get NO exp for killing that enemy.

This utterly took all the fun out of soloing, and the game eventually becomes the most boring gaming experience imaginable. Why? because if you Solo IWD2, you will become very high level very quickly. The result is that by the time you get to the Fell Wood, ~75% of all encounters from then on net you NO XP. So most fights became pointless, despite the loot drops. And considering how combat heavy IWD2 is, not getting XP for kills is a major MAJOR buzzkill for the game

 

Gold and loot shouldn't indeed. And may I add, each encounter should reward you with a bit of xp as well, it simply has to.

 

That IWD2 scenario is really scary, and I see now what your worst fear is: A PE where if you don't take quests you wander around in limbo getting no xp at all, and hence no char progression etc. That would be a buzzkill and indeed a very pointless game. With this many solid arguments on your side, I just wish for Josh or Tim to pop in and tell us that our party doing exploration and combat without necessarily any quests on will still be rewarded for true accomplishments, that is, encounters.

Edited January 24, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[DCParry]

 

Hi Hiro!

 

Nah man - a random encounter is still a challenge. You will still get an XP value for solving the encounter.

 

Prove it.

 

 

Hi Stun,

 

Just like to point out that Wyverns drop Wyvern heads and spiders can drop spider poison sacks.

Spiders don't drop anything in BG1. (and no, the quest-based spider carcass in Bereghost is not loot. Nor is that spider a random encounter)

 

 

e) Absorbing the Bronze Sphere will give you as much XP as all the previous murdering combined....

So?

 

 

First off all, no need to be offensive. Also, it is disingenuous at best to demand someone prove something when you have in fact offered nothing resembling "proof" for your assertions. 

 

 

First of all, you are looking at random encounters as merely wandering bodies, instead, of, you know..  an encounter. If experience is awarded on reaching goals and objectives, one might reasonably argue that overcoming (i.e. not getting slaughtered by) a random encounter is an objective. Hence, resolving said encounter in some manner will net you some experience. The point is your are not being rewarded for killing the enemies per se, but if killing the enemies completes the objective, you are rewarded. Just as avoiding the enemies might give you experience, or tricking them. 

 

Being wilfully obtuse does make your argument any more valid than anyone else's. 

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

 

Hi Hiro!

 

Nah man - a random encounter is still a challenge. You will still get an XP value for solving the encounter.

 

Prove it.

 

 

 

 

If there is random encounters in the game, then are there any actual reason that is based on something that have be said by developers that you would not be rewarded with XP by solving them by some means given you by designers? If not then burden of proof is on you IMO.

 

 

Burden of proof is on the person who makes the claim. Azmodan made the claim and it's for him to prove it. Not for anyone to disapprove it. That's shifting the burden of proof onto someone else and in this case it's not for us to prove a negative.

 

We can only speculate on what might happen in random encounters going off the IE games. The only two randoms that were moderately difficult for low-mid level parties were the Wyverns/Spiders and the Bandits with Ice Arrows. The bear or Winter Wolf encounter near Nashkel might be troublesome on the first time, but after you've levelled, it was easy. The bear never dropped anything. Everything else was a waste and I always ran to the edge of the map to continue my game.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[Elerond]

 

 

 

Hi Hiro!

 

Nah man - a random encounter is still a challenge. You will still get an XP value for solving the encounter.

 

Prove it.

 

 

 

 

If there is random encounters in the game, then are there any actual reason that is based on something that have be said by developers that you would not be rewarded with XP by solving them by some means given you by designers? If not then burden of proof is on you IMO.

 

 

Burden of proof is on the person who makes the claim. Azmodan made the claim and it's for him to prove it. Not for anyone to disapprove it. That's shifting the burden of proof onto someone else and in this case it's not for us to prove a negative.

 

We can only speculate on what might happen in random encounters going off the IE games. The only two randoms that were moderately difficult for low-mid level parties were the Wyverns/Spiders and the Bandits with Ice Arrows. The bear or Winter Wolf encounter near Nashkel might be troublesome on the first time, but after you've levelled, it was easy. The bear never dropped anything. Everything else was a waste and I always ran to the edge of the map to continue my game.

 

But Azmodan claim was counter example against Stun's claim that there is no XP from combat, so Stun needs to so proof that his/her claim has any merits before there is any need for Azmodan to give any proof for his/her claim IMO. 

[Stun]

First off all, no need to be offensive. Also, it is disingenuous at best to demand someone prove something when you have in fact offered nothing resembling "proof" for your assertions.

so Stun needs to so proof that his/her claim has any merits before there is any need for Azmodan to give any proof for his/her claim IMO.

I beg your pardon. I asserted that we will not be getting XP for killing things. I then linked us to Update #7, where there's a direct quote from Tim Cain, confirming that we will not be rewarded XP for body counts. ie. Killing things.

 

 

First of all, you are looking at random encounters as merely wandering bodies, instead, of, you know..  an encounter. If experience is awarded on reaching goals and objectives,

You mean accomplishments

 

one might reasonably argue that overcoming (i.e. not getting slaughtered by) a random encounter is an objective.

In other words, one might reasonably argue that ALL combat will net an XP reward.... despite the fact that we were told otherwise by one of the developers of this game.

 

 

 

 

 

The point is your are not being rewarded for killing the enemies per se, but if killing the enemies completes the objective, you are rewarded.

What's the difference? If an Enemy attacks you, then at that point, responding IS the objective. ALWAYS. (unless the objective is to just stand there and die.) So what would be the point in Tim Cain telling us that racking up a body count will not net an XP reward, if what he really means is: You will always get XP for engaging in combat? Edited January 24, 2014 by Stun

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

If experience is awarded on reaching goals and objectives, one might reasonably argue that overcoming (i.e. not getting slaughtered by) a random encounter is an objective. Hence, resolving said encounter in some manner will net you some experience. The point is your are not being rewarded for killing the enemies per se, but if killing the enemies completes the objective, you are rewarded. Just as avoiding the enemies might give you experience, or tricking them. 

 

 

So running away rewards you xp for overcoming the encounter?

 

 

 

But Azmodan claim was counter example against Stun's claim that there is no XP from combat, so Stun needs to so proof that his/her claim has any merits before there is any need for Azmodan to give any proof for his/her claim IMO. 

 

 

How do you define combat in a random encounter? If you define it by killing the enemy, then there is no xp for killing enemies. But if it rewards you for overcoming the encounter, then look at my above response to DCParry.

[Elerond]

 

 

If experience is awarded on reaching goals and objectives, one might reasonably argue that overcoming (i.e. not getting slaughtered by) a random encounter is an objective. Hence, resolving said encounter in some manner will net you some experience. The point is your are not being rewarded for killing the enemies per se, but if killing the enemies completes the objective, you are rewarded. Just as avoiding the enemies might give you experience, or tricking them. 

 

 

So running away rewards you xp for overcoming the encounter?

 

 

 

But Azmodan claim was counter example against Stun's claim that there is no XP from combat, so Stun needs to so proof that his/her claim has any merits before there is any need for Azmodan to give any proof for his/her claim IMO. 

 

 

How do you define combat in a random encounter? If you define it by killing the enemy, then there is no xp for killing enemies. But if it rewards you for overcoming the encounter, then look at my above response to DCParry.

 

 

Random encounter's in games like PoE happen usually when player moves between two placing in map, and game usually loads random encounter map. Which can easily made such that player needs to go through blockade made by enemies by violence, cunning or stealth, and with some planing all these approaches give player challenge which level depends on how s/he has made his/her party, which level said party is and what is game's difficult level.  

 

So in high level objective system player gets xp when s/he gets through the blockade in every path or combination of paths s/he take. In low level objective system player gets xp from every enemy s/he kills, every successful skill checks when player interacts with objects laid by designer to make non-combat option possible. With single path approach bot high and low objective systems gives player same amount xp, but in multi path approach it is much more difficult for encounter designer to limit amount of gained xp to same level regardless of how player solves the encounter.

 

If encounter can be solved only by combat, then high level and low level xp gain is same, although in low level system player usually gains xp in smaller increments and s/he needs to kill every one in the encounter to gain max amount of xp, if there is possibility get out of the encounter before all enemies are dead. 

Edited January 24, 2014 by Elerond

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Random encounter's in games like PoE happen usually when player moves between two placing in map, and game usually loads random encounter map. Which can easily made such that player needs to go through blockade made by enemies by violence, cunning or stealth, and with some planing all these approaches give player challenge which level depends on how s/he has made his/her party, which level said party is and what is game's difficult level.  

 

So in high level objective system player gets xp when s/he gets through the blockade in every path or combination of paths s/he take. In low level objective system player gets xp from every enemy s/he kills, every successful skill checks when player interacts with objects laid by designer to make non-combat option possible. With single path approach bot high and low objective systems gives player same amount xp, but in multi path approach it is much more difficult for encounter designer to limit amount of gained xp to same level regardless of how player solves the encounter.

 

If encounter can be solved only by combat, then high level and low level xp gain is same, although in low level system player usually gains xp in smaller increments and s/he needs to kill every one in the encounter to gain max amount of xp, if there is possibility get out of the encounter before all enemies are dead. 

 

 

The fact is there is no xp for kills. We all know this and it can't be disputed.

 

If we're taking the IE games as an example, and going by my view of Risk vs Reward for a random encounter, if the reward isn't worthwhile to engage in combat, then the best option is to not engage in combat at all. Because there is no xp reward for killing, you're going to waste valuable spells and health on a purely random encounter. Then overcoming the obstacle through other means (if possible) seems the best option. Also, we know there are limited rest spots in the game. So why waste spells and valuable health on killing for no xp for kills in a random encounter with so little reward in loot?

 

If that means fleeing to the edge of the screen like in the IE games, then that would be one of the best options, especially if the rewards are some random loot that can be picked up anywhere in the game. If overcoming the encounter by other means instead of killing the enemy nets you xp, then a non combat method is preferable.

 

Seriously, why waste valuable spells and health in a purely random encounter when a rest spot might be miles away? Unless there's some really cool loot, then it's not worth it. Again, Risk vs Reward. I don't see the risk in engaging in combat if I can run away in random encounters like you could do in the IE games. And if overcoming the random encounter nets you xp though non-violent means, then running away seems the best option.

[Elerond]

 

Random encounter's in games like PoE happen usually when player moves between two placing in map, and game usually loads random encounter map. Which can easily made such that player needs to go through blockade made by enemies by violence, cunning or stealth, and with some planing all these approaches give player challenge which level depends on how s/he has made his/her party, which level said party is and what is game's difficult level.  

 

So in high level objective system player gets xp when s/he gets through the blockade in every path or combination of paths s/he take. In low level objective system player gets xp from every enemy s/he kills, every successful skill checks when player interacts with objects laid by designer to make non-combat option possible. With single path approach bot high and low objective systems gives player same amount xp, but in multi path approach it is much more difficult for encounter designer to limit amount of gained xp to same level regardless of how player solves the encounter.

 

If encounter can be solved only by combat, then high level and low level xp gain is same, although in low level system player usually gains xp in smaller increments and s/he needs to kill every one in the encounter to gain max amount of xp, if there is possibility get out of the encounter before all enemies are dead. 

 

 

The fact is there is no xp for kills. We all know this and it can't be disputed.

 

If we're taking the IE games as an example, and going by my view of Risk vs Reward for a random encounter, if the reward isn't worthwhile to engage in combat, then the best option is to not engage in combat at all. Because there is no xp reward for killing, you're going to waste valuable spells and health on a purely random encounter. Then overcoming the obstacle through other means (if possible) seems the best option. Also, we know there are limited rest spots in the game. So why waste spells and valuable health on killing for no xp for kills in a random encounter with so little reward in loot?

 

If that means fleeing to the edge of the screen like in the IE games, then that would be one of the best options, especially if the rewards are some random loot that can be picked up anywhere in the game. If overcoming the encounter by other means instead of killing the enemy nets you xp, then a non combat method is preferable.

 

Seriously, why waste valuable spells and health in a purely random encounter when a rest spot might be miles away? Unless there's some really cool loot, then it's not worth it. Again, Risk vs Reward. I don't see the risk in engaging in combat if I can run away in random encounters like you could do in the IE games. And if overcoming the random encounter nets you xp though non-violent means, then running away seems the best option.

 

 

In my example I compared IE like XP gain mechanism to PoE's XP gain mechanism in imaginary random encounter scenario.

 

You assume in your run away example that there is possibility to run away from random encounters, and why would you risk losing valuable health and spells for couple points of xp (as Baldur's gate 2 as example most of random encounter's gave you only marginal amount of XP and loot was most of the time only reason why one bothered with them).

 

In my random encounter scenario, you can't avoid that counter as only way to get away from the counter is to pass the blockade in some means provided you and you get xp reward when you do so, even if you choose combat option .

[Azmodan]

1) no xp for kills in PoE.

2) run away like I said

3) Most people in this thread defending PoE's skill check are saying "Speech>10 = win" is a terrible design. Especially talking your way out of a random encounter.

4) Waste of spells. I'd rather run away.

5) Again waste of spells (see 4) or charm talking is a terrible design (see 3)

6) I'd rather run away and save my money.

Hi Hiro!

 

1) You kill them, the game does a check when you exit the area. Enemies dead = 100% then you get 100% of XP allocation.

2) Sneak away is what I said. That requires skill. And resolves an encounter. Game checks for "alert enemies", if none are present you get your XP. Maybe they are patrolling an area, and you can walk around them or lure them into a house and have your rogue lock them inside.

3) I specifically pointed out reputation that your party gains with various groups in PoE. If the Enemy in this scenario is actually mercenaries working for a criminal faction you are best buddies with, you resolve the encounter. Oh will you look at that?! Reputation is not just another bar to fill!

4) Or maybe there's a merchant that collects little hamster statues made of people. You know... because that's original

5) That's a subjective call - because the outcome desired is to resolve the encounter. Roleplaying, occasionally calls for schools other than Evocation and Conjuration.

6) What if they are faster and stronger than you on this particular occasion? What if "paying off" the mercenaries actually results in a boost to reputation with that faction? What if these mercenaries are actually freedom fighters against a local tyrant, who are waylaying travellers on the roads, playing at Robin Hood, and if you have the reputation of an altruist, making a contribution to them actually not only resolves the encounter but gives you a mini-quest: "Kill the Sheriff of X"?

 

[Azmodan]

Hi Stun!

 

1) Prove it - as soon as the game is in alpha, I'll send you a screenshot

2) Spider venom sacks - in Neverwinter Nights spiders drop them  

3) So? -- I just thought that your multiple choice was somewhat poor... had a wiff of the strawman to it.

So I remedied what I considered an oversight to include the greatest example of a game developer rewarding accomplishments rather than body count.

 

I'm soooo mega excited about all the stuff in Update #7, #14, #32 and significantly in #39! W00000t :D    

 

The only thing I'm missing out on right this second, is a "kirby doing cartwheels" emoticon to convey how awesomely in support of the XP model I am.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Giving it more thought. I'd be very surprised if random encounters are put into the game. I think PoE will be more like IWD where you click on an area and you're teleported there. No random encounters, no danger at all. I very much doubt it will be like the Baldurs Gate games.  The reason being for the reasons I outlined and there is next to no reward to get involved in combat. The loot would be trash. We know, which has been confirmed by Obsidian, that most if not all of the high powered magic items will have fixed positions in the game. 

 

Also, I very much doubt Obsidian will spend the man hours creating intricate random encounters that rewards players with multiple ways of overcoming a random encounter. A random encounter is supposed to be something simple, like waylaid by bandits or coming across a merchant and also a means for escape if you want to flee. If you block that avenue for fleeing than you're limiting the choices of the player, and that is bad game design for something as frivolous as a random encounter. So for me, most random encounters are pointless because no xp for kills, trash loot and just as easy to run away, unless it's something worth while like a wandering merchant.

[Elerond]

Random encounters can be simple and rewarding:

 

For example of rewarding random encounter:

Your party comes across with merchant caravan which is under attack from bandits, monsters, enraged animals.

 

In this encounter you have two major choices;

 

First one is that you can sneak past the fight, which gives you encounter passing experience, which for example could be 600 xp points. But this also means that some nearby village is supply blocked and prices there rise for example 20% higher what they would normally be.

 

Second one is that you can help merchant caravan vanquish their attackers, which will give you encounter passing experience (600 xp) and additionally you reputation will rise within that faction which caravan belongs and caravan will sell you supplies, for example, 20% cheaper than normally.

 

So sneaking past the fight maybe easier and safer choice but helping caravan is at the end probably much more rewarding option to choose.

 

And of course there could be option number three where you help attackers or kill caravan after you have dealt with the attackers, which will give you much better loot, but you will become as bandit/outlaw within that faction where caravan belongs.

 

Second possibly rewarding encounter could be  ambush, where your party is attacked from multiple fronts. In this encounter there is two obvious choices:

 

First option of course is to fight until all the attackers are dead, which rewards you with encounter xp (for example 1000 xp points), loot from dead bodies (which worth for example is 200-500 coins) and you reputation in nearby city/town/village will rise as use removed some bandits/monsters that have plagued them.

 

Second option is to flee, which will reward you encounter xp (1000 xp), but if attackers belong in some faction in game you will get reputation within that faction that you are coward, which will probably cause you problems in future when you deal with that faction again and possibly near by city/town/village will hear that you aren't very heroic band of adventures and will think less about you.

 

Then there can of course be other options like that you can cause landfall (or broke a bridge or something like that) when you retreat, which will deal with attackers and you get encounter xp, but it will cause blockade on the road which will hinder nearby settlements and lower your reputation in them.

 

Then there could be encounter where you will come cross with bandit toll on road, where you of course have options to pay (possible to persuade), fight, sneak past. Pay (persuade) option is probably easiest, but also gives you smallest reward and is probably bad for your reputation, sneak option is not necessary any easier than fight option, but it is safer and as it don't deal with bandit menace it also probably means hindrance for surrounding area. Where fight option deals with bandits and rises your reputation within law biding  settlements and factions in the area and you of course get loot.

 

And if you do some of these more and add some random factors in these encounters you can easily have rewarding random encounters in the game that aren't probably too taxing to make. IMO.

[teknoman2]

i thik they will use a deus ex style of xp... you wander around and come across a cave, you go in and take a look, you get some exploration xp. you sneak into a building and overhear a conversation about a robery, you get spying xp. you do something with that info, you get objective xp.

in a random encounter situation, you have some bandits asking a toll to cross a bridge. you can pay, you can fight, you can cast haste and run across and so on. the objective is to reach the other side and once you do it you get the xp. if you had per kill xp, there would be no reason to choose any alternative to fighting

it's a much better system imo, than the BG style, talk to the guy, convince him to do things your way, get conversation xp, then kill him for the kill xp, then go get quest xp

[Silent Winter]

I'm thinking "random encounter" is being differently defined by peeps in this discussion.

 

Hiro's talking about the oft-coming random monster attacks as you travel between, say, Beregost and High-Hedge or wherever.

Others are coming up with examples of 'scenarios' that, though  they may occur at random, are in fact set-pieces made by the developers.

 

I agree it's less likely that we'll have the former in PE (though they may still be in - I don't have any info for sure) in which case, they're irrelevant to this discussion.

 

Encounters while exploring the map (so not based on trying to do a quest but just enemies you run across in the wilderness areas) can still be rewarded indirectly under the current system as I highlighted in my last post.

 

Once again "Objective" does not equal "journal-entried quest" (unless one of the devs pops up to correct my misinterpretation of the phrase "Objective xp".

Edited January 24, 2014 by Silent Winter

[Hassat Hunter]

Ah, another Objective XP discussion.

And look, it's already desolving into a flamefest and namecalling.

 

Also, the same "points" are pointed out again, like the mega-dungeon cannot possible reward more than once for all of it, everyone will run away or stealth if there's no XP carrot for killing, XP can only be given for quest resolution since what other objective could there be?, "killing will be ruined, you ruin IE games" and of course how it can't have tactical combat without giving XP per bloody enemy defeated.

It's like a broken record out there.

 

I think I've already had this conversation about 3 times. Look them up if you want. I probably will just continue on reading this facepalming from time to time. Since from what I learned so far, it's hard to pass through to the combat XP fanatics that combat can be meaningful, fun or anything more than a grind without each and every kill giving XP.

If that's the only reason you play combat in IE-games, you can't possible say you like the combat in IE games.