Josh Sawyer on dealing with grognards

[Monte Carlo]

The Goodwin's law of Piracy is now in operation. This thread is doomed.

[Sarex]

Hollywood is literally Put...I mean....Oba...I mean Hitler.

[catspwnme]

I love it. No quest markers..thank you!! That thought didn't even cross my mind wether they would or would not be in PoE.

[Karkarov]

Whether you want to split hairs and say, No you don't need a Paladin is just avoiding the issue that you do need a tank in your party with games like D&D 4th ed. While PoE seems to be taking quite a bit from 4th ed, I hope it doesn't go to the point where you do need to have different builds (Controller, DPS, Tank, Leader) in your party just to get through the game. It seems Josh is saying you could do the game with any class or role. eg. party of rogues and won't need certain builds. If it turns out we need at least one of the 4 roles in a party when the game is released to finish the game, like a controller (eg.Wizard) or Leader (eg. Healer) then this goes against what he just said with having certain builds in a party to get through the encounters. Also, a role like a tank is a build.

Well here is the problem you are playing D&D Crap Edition.  I wouldn't touch it with a 20 foot pole as it is basically just a bad WoW clone as far as combat design goes. Also only D&D would be stupid to associate "healer" with "leader".  I wouldn't let the cleric of any group I ever ran with be in charge of a picnic much less my group in general.  In the real "Trinity" there is no such thing as a leader or a buffer or a controller.  There is tanks, healers, and DPS.  Everyone has some level of "controller" powers, everyone has some kind of buffs, everyone has some kind of debuffs.  The idea that a class exists only to "control mobs" or "buff the party" is a sign of bad class design.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

You guys had two controllers and still didn't manage to control the battlefield whatsoever.    I think it's not exactly the system's fault...

 

So you play D&D 4th ed? What about Lair Assault type encounters? If not, then perhaps looking them up and educating yourself?

Edited March 31, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

Well here is the problem you are playing D&D Crap Edition.  I wouldn't touch it with a 20 foot pole as it is basically just a bad WoW clone as far as combat design goes. Also only D&D would be stupid to associate "healer" with "leader".  I wouldn't let the cleric of any group I ever ran with be in charge of a picnic much less my group in general.  In the real "Trinity" there is no such thing as a leader or a buffer or a controller.  There is tanks, healers, and DPS.  Everyone has some level of "controller" powers, everyone has some kind of buffs, everyone has some kind of debuffs.  The idea that a class exists only to "control mobs" or "buff the party" is a sign of bad class design.

 

LOL.

 

You really have no clue do you. Maybe you missed the point that PoE is taking a lot from that 'crap version of D&D'. Also, PoE has healers called Leaders. or haven't you been reading the updates? You must think PoE and the dev's are stupid to associate "healer" with "leader".

 

Update by Josh Sawyer, Project Director

 

Pillars of Eternity's heavy hitters all differ in how they bring the pain to enemies, but we hope you enjoy the concepts and mechanics we've presented here. As always, these are our current designs and implementations, but will be adjusting them in the months to come. We will be doing three more class pair updates in the future: The Leaders of the Band (chanters and priests), The Front Line (fighters and barbarians), and The Mob Rulers (wizards and druids). Let us know what you think of today's update and please vote on which of the three class pairs you'd like to see covered next. As always, thanks for reading and for your continued support.

 

All four roles, straight from the 'crap version of D&D' and WoW. You must be so happy.

Edited March 31, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

You guys had two controllers and still didn't manage to control the battlefield whatsoever.    I think it's not exactly the system's fault...

 

So you play D&D 4th ed? What about Lair Assault type encounters? If not, then perhaps looking them up and educating yourself?

 

 

 Well, those are designed with the assumption that TPKs are not only possible, but likely, even with a 'correct' party composition, so...

Edited March 31, 2014 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Hassat Hunter]

I very much hate the notion of "tank, DPS and healer" playing just ONE MMORPG.

I really hate to see the same BS in my offline 'good' RPG...

[nipsen]

..Maybe as long as a cleric, druid and a monk can perform similar tasks as a fighter. Or a specialized fighter can have a similar role as a rogue, etc. I mean, it's not optimal, but I always played with things like that in iwd2 and bg. Using a druid to heal and put down slow and so on in case of swarms. That then would make the light fighter more useful than just a heavily armored fighter. Or using the druid to take care of fast fighters or out of range wizzards, while putting the cleric on heal, buff and damage types, and so on.

[Tamerlane]

I want my magic users to be literally reskinned artillery. Everything else is newbie WOW 2e bull****.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

 

You guys had two controllers and still didn't manage to control the battlefield whatsoever.    I think it's not exactly the system's fault...

 

So you play D&D 4th ed? What about Lair Assault type encounters? If not, then perhaps looking them up and educating yourself?

 

 

 Well, those are designed with the assumption that TPKs are not only possible, but likely, even with a 'correct' party composition, so...

 

 

So do you play 4th ed?

 

And if we did have a tank, we would have beaten it. Party composition is important and you need all four roles for them. And the likely outcome when we play Lair Assault type encounters is we win, not a TPK. Teamwork is a must with all four roles in them. We rarely get TPKs and some of the closest encounters we have is one man left standing. Resurrection at Temples are a great thing.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

 

You guys had two controllers and still didn't manage to control the battlefield whatsoever.    I think it's not exactly the system's fault...

 

So you play D&D 4th ed? What about Lair Assault type encounters? If not, then perhaps looking them up and educating yourself?

 

 

 Well, those are designed with the assumption that TPKs are not only possible, but likely, even with a 'correct' party composition, so...

 

 

So do you play 4th ed?

 

And if we did have a tank, we would have beaten it. Party composition is important and you need all four roles for them. And the likely outcome when we play Lair Assault type encounters is we win, not a TPK. Teamwork is a must with all four roles in them. We rarely get TPKs and some of the closest encounters we have is one man left standing. Resurrection at Temples are a great thing.

 

 

Occasionally, I did; the fine chaps I play with, however, were not that keen on it. We tried a Berserk-inspired low-magic game, but returned to Dark Heresy fairly swiftly.

 

Still, in 4e, it's generally pretty hard to die. Most of the time, you can get by even with a suboptimal party composition. On the other hand, Lair Assault games are specifically marketed as the highest tactical challenge the system could offer, so I really don't understand how you expected to win with a non-optimized party. If you went in with a all roles covered, but with poorly optimized characters, you'd probably have died anyways.

[Lephys]

In the real "Trinity" there is no such thing as a leader or a buffer or a controller.  There is tanks, healers, and DPS.

AKA People Who Hurt Things, People Who Prevent People From Getting Hurt/Soak-Up Hurtiness, and People Who Un-Hurt Things That Have Already Gotten Hurt.

 

It's a true mystery why that doesn't somehow form the core of legitimately deep/complex gameplay. 8P

 

Sorry... just felt the need to comment on the Trinity, in general. Continue, u_u...

Edited March 31, 2014 by Lephys

[Fatback]

Can someone please point me to a party based computer game with no trinity that had good boss encounters?

[Ffordesoon]

I'm sorry, but the idea that there was no "trinity" in the IE games is patently false. I can't tell you how many fights in BG1 I won with Khalid and/or Minsc tanking and everyone else in the back shooting arrows or throwing bullets, and I'd have Jaheira heal Khalid if his health got too low. And if you're wondering where the DPS is, it's the arrows, which would always do more damage per second than a fighter. Tank, healer, DPS. And I won like eighty percent of the fights this way.

 

And, for that matter, what is buffing if not another form of healing? Yeah, it may not directly be healing you, but there's a reason why the healer classes in any MMO are called "support classes."

[Karkarov]

 

All four roles, straight from the 'crap version of D&D' and WoW. You must be so happy.

 

Not quite, they are explaining it that way so people will "get it".  They have been very clear no class in the game is a "one trick pony" who can only do one thing and be totally worthless at anything else.  You can't play D&D with a team of fighters and expect to win unless the DM literally designs it so you can, which won't be happening in Eternity.  So the fact that it is possible means the fighter can obviously do more than just get punched in the face and not fall down.

 

Also again, no, there are three roles in real Trinity games, hence the name "Trinity".  WoW does not have four roles, adding a fourth role also does not make it more complex or interesting.  It actually makes it worse and dumbs it down farther.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

Not quite, they are explaining it that way so people will "get it".  They have been very clear no class in the game is a "one trick pony" who can only do one thing and be totally worthless at anything else.  You can't play D&D with a team of fighters and expect to win unless the DM literally designs it so you can, which won't be happening in Eternity.  So the fact that it is possible means the fighter can obviously do more than just get punched in the face and not fall down.

 

 

Also again, no, there are three roles in real Trinity games, hence the name "Trinity".  WoW does not have four roles, adding a fourth role also does not make it more complex or interesting.  It actually makes it worse and dumbs it down farther.

 

 

No. nice try though.

 

Why would Obsidian try to explain it that way for people to get it? To list four roles? Is Obsidian marketing the game to WoW players now? I didn't realise people who played the IE games needed for it to be explained that way.  And here's some questions for you:

 

Why would Obsidian explain it this way for 'players to get' if you say 'It actually makes it worse and dumbs it down farther'.?

Considering you think it's stupid to associate 'leader' with 'healer', you must think PoE and the dev's are stupid to associate "healer" with "leader"?

Why would Obsidian explain the game to the casual crowd with WoW terms if this game is aimed at a niche market?

 

No, the fact is there is a lot taken from 4th ed with PoE. The roles, a lot of the abilities of the classes. Many things. Have you actually played 4th ed? 4th ed turned the roles upside down. Because there are four roles in the game. Not three.

Edited April 1, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[Archaven]

What I get in reading the interviews are that the Devs are trying to make the game as generic as possible. I hope I get the meaning wrongly

[Stun]

Can someone please point me to a party based computer game with no trinity that had good boss encounters?

Why? Are the two supposed to be related somehow?

 

And what defines a "good boss encounter"?

 

I'd argue that BG2 and Temple of Elemental Evil had plenty of rather good Boss battles. I'd also argue that in BG2's case, some of those bosses were more easily/efficiently dealt with by NOT employing the classic trinity battle plan (what good is a Tank against Irenicus at the tree of life?; How is crowd control or healing going to help against Kangaxx?)

 

Personally, I'd sooner see the elimination of the entire "boss" cliché outright. When I think back to the most memorable (and most fun) battles in my years of playing RPGs, They're almost never against the "bosses". The encounters that stick in my mind the most were against enemy parties. The Holy Avenger battle in IWD2. The Bounty-hunter battles in BG1. The Arcane Brotherhood Assassins in IWD: Heart of Winter. The Enemy adventurer Party at the beginning of Trials of the Luremaster. The Berserker Lodge in Mulsentir (MoTB). Those were the real good stuff. They were the funnest battles because instead of facing some alien entity with "special unique attacks" and a silly-bloated Health pool, you faced a party of enemies similar to your own, using all the same powers and defenses your own party uses, same strengths and weaknesses that you had. etc.

 

Plus those battles always yielded the coolest loot for everyone in your party. It was, after all, the equipment they were using. lol

Edited April 1, 2014 by Stun

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

What I get in reading the interviews are that the Devs are trying to make the game as generic as possible. I hope I get the meaning wrongly

You are.

[Fatback]

May should not have had the word boss in there the ie games had your "trinity".

 

So now I ask can someone point me in the direction of a game the breaks away from the trinity and has interesting and fun encounter design. Mild sarcasm but I would rather enjoy playing a game like that.

[Stun]

So now I ask can someone point me in the direction of a game the breaks away from the trinity and has interesting and fun encounter design. Mild sarcasm but I would rather enjoy playing a game like that.

The IE games Broke away from it.

 

Lets pause a moment to clarify something here. The fact that if you wanted to you could build a "trinity" party and totally succeed in steamrolling through all enemy challenges in the IE games does not mean that those games were specifically designed and balanced around being played with a trinity party. So saying that the IE games had your trinity is true, but it's irrelevant. And to argue that it's the same as the extreme lengths that WoW takes the trinity (which I hope no one here is trying to argue) is absurd.

 

In BG1, using a trinity was completely unnecessary. And In BG2, it was actually inefficient/suboptimal.

Edited April 1, 2014 by Stun

[Ffordesoon]

So how, then, do you know it's true of PoE? Because they used some words that sound kind of like MMO words (even though they didn't originate with MMOs) in an update?

 

You can have a trinity party in the IE games. You can presumably have one in PoE. One of the oft-stated design goals of PoE is to allow you to build your party however you like and have it be, if not optimal, beatable. How could that work if the design was based on the MMO-style trinity?

[Stun]

So how, then, do you know it's true of PoE?

I never claimed it was.

 

I just said that I found it odd that the Devs would specifically assign these combat role titles to the classes in PoE. Bioware devs never did any such thing before the release of the BG games. Nor did Black Isle do it before releasing the Icewind dales. Moreover, even the rule sets they used (AD&D 2nd, and D&D 3rd) never assigned those roles to the classes either.

 

The fact that Obsidian is doing it here suggests that the game will be balanced around a party specifically made to fill those roles. I just hope it isn't. The IE games weren't.

Edited April 1, 2014 by Stun

[Sarex]

I'm sorry, but the idea that there was no "trinity" in the IE games is patently false. I can't tell you how many fights in BG1 I won with Khalid and/or Minsc tanking and everyone else in the back shooting arrows or throwing bullets, and I'd have Jaheira heal Khalid if his health got too low. And if you're wondering where the DPS is, it's the arrows, which would always do more damage per second than a fighter. Tank, healer, DPS. And I won like eighty percent of the fights this way.

 

And, for that matter, what is buffing if not another form of healing? Yeah, it may not directly be healing you, but there's a reason why the healer classes in any MMO are called "support classes."

 

While there were such roles in the IE games, they weren't strictly defined. In IWD2 I never had a cleric or a fighter, not even in "heart of fury" mode, my party comp was Paladin/druid/rogue/bard/monk/wizard. I used my paladin/monk/wizard as tanks, I used my paladin/druid/bard as healers, and I used all of them, except the bard, as dps.

 

So yes while you could say there were those kind of roles, they weren't set and were as flexible as you could want them. To compare it to any MMO or rpg today is a travesty.

Edited April 1, 2014 by Sarex