No more GM sucker punches, and the gameplay challenges thereof

[Ffordesoon]

I'm aware of all this. What's your point?

Edited April 16, 2014 by Ffordesoon

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

For example, can you tell me the difference between Dispel Magic and Remove Magic? I don't mean the differences the descriptions inform you of, but the actual, functional difference? As far as I can tell, there are none. They are the same spell. It's just that one is something that clerics get, and the other is something that wizards get. Why don't they get the same spell? Because one is for wizards only and one is for priests only? Why?

Ah.

 

See? I'm playing this thing right now, and scanning the spell descriptions like an illuminated text, and still simple stuff like this escapes me. And I am in the target audience!

 

 

I was highlighting these two points you made. Saying they are the same spell which they're not, the difference being one is for the cleric and the other is for the mage which is not true (both spells are for the Mage and only one for the Cleric), and playing the game right now and not finding any difference between the two spells.

[Ffordesoon]

Yes, but what is your point in making that point? What is the objective here?

[Hiro Protagonist II]

You stated something which isn't true. I was simply stating that these things are in the game. If a poster were to read things that were unfamiliar with the IE games or hadn't played them in a long time, they may take what you're saying to be true. Right click on the spell in the game gives you what the spell does. Reading the manual tells you the same and what class can use them. There is a list of Priest and Wizard spells in the manual. There's been a lot of criticism about the IE games and your post came across as another one of these criticisms that was completely unfounded.

[Ffordesoon]

...Fair enough. I would hope that someone reading this thread would read on to see me cop to my mistake, but you're correct that someone could read what I wrote and get a false impression. For that, I apologize.

[Karkarov]

...Fair enough. I would hope that someone reading this thread would read on to see me cop to my mistake, but you're correct that someone could read what I wrote and get a false impression. For that, I apologize.

Yeah, where do you get off man?  I mean it isn't like over half of the 2nd ed players handbook which was like 250 pages was just spells or anything.  How could you not have memorized it all by now?  Haven't you had enough time in like 10-20 hours of Baldur's Gate to memorize it all yet?

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

Yeah, where do you get off man?  I mean it isn't like over half of the 2nd ed players handbook which was like 250 pages was just spells or anything.  How could you not have memorized it all by now?  Haven't you had enough time in like 10-20 hours of Baldur's Gate to memorize it all yet?

 

 

No need to memorise the 2nd ed players handbook. Just right click on the spell in the game and read it. It says it in one sentence. Not hard. Of is that too hard for you? And why do you need to go to the 2nd ed players handbook?

Edited April 17, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

No need to memorise the 2nd ed players handbook. Just right click on the spell in the game and read it. It says it in one sentence. Not hard. Of is that too hard for you? And why do you need to go to the 2nd ed players handbook?

Yes, but only in the spellbook section. So to look up the effects of a particular spell, Ffordesoon would have to open the spellbook, find the correct spell level section, then right click the icon. Doing this for every spell is time consuming, especially considering many of them had similar names and functions. NWN2 was far superior in spell management to the IE games, because you can view spell descriptions with far less rummaging around.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

You wouldn't do it for every spell. Like Magic Missile, Identify or Fireball. That's a bit of an exaggeration.

[Volourn]

Seriously, if you can't remember what the spells do after using them a couple of times you likely just don't have the brain power to play these types of games and it doesn't take genius levels to do so since even I can do it.

[Karkarov]

 

 

Yeah, where do you get off man?  I mean it isn't like over half of the 2nd ed players handbook which was like 250 pages was just spells or anything.  How could you not have memorized it all by now?  Haven't you had enough time in like 10-20 hours of Baldur's Gate to memorize it all yet?

 

 

No need to memorise the 2nd ed players handbook. Just right click on the spell in the game and read it. It says it in one sentence. Not hard. Of is that too hard for you? And why do you need to go to the 2nd ed players handbook?

Maybe I am insinuating no one (short of photographic memory) could possibly memorize all the spells and effects and needing to look up the different between spell deflection and spell reflection is probably normal for most players and hardly a big deal. Also maybe you should cut him some slack, I believe he even said he has never played D&D 2nd ed outside these games and frankly the IE games are a .... shaky translation of the system at best.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Maybe I am insinuating no one (short of photographic memory) could possibly memorize all the spells and effects and needing to look up the different between spell deflection and spell reflection is probably normal for most players and hardly a big deal. Also maybe you should cut him some slack, I believe he even said he has never played D&D 2nd ed outside these games and frankly the IE games are a .... shaky translation of the system at best.

 

 

No one is saying you should be able to memorise all the spells. I've only played pnp 2nd ed for a couple of months in 1990. And that was a Thief. After that no D&D until BG was released. And I only recall the mage in our pnp game used Magic Missile and Identify. That was it. So I was pretty much new to this as well. You don't need to be a D&D veteran to be able to read the spell descriptions. That's just basic reading.

 

I've never played 3rd or 3.5 edition pnp at all. And yet I could still work out how to play IWD 2. All the different feats and stuff was bewildering to me and yet I did something that seems to be lacking with a lot of gamers today. I read things like a manual, I read descriptions on what things do. And no, I didn't need to spend a week reading. I could read something in a minute or less and understand what this or that did. I took the time to read and learn. For some reason, if it's not handed to you in less than 5 seconds, it's all too hard. Seriously, how long does it take to press 'W' for your Wizard spell book, go through the numbered pages and find Dispel Magic and Remove Magic? 5 seconds? 10 seconds? It took me about or less than 5 seconds myself. Why the rush to need to know the answer this instant?

 

Also, there a thing called trial and error. Experimentation. You read and try a fireball, does massive damage. Read the description a bit more and think, yeah I'll keep using this one. Try something else, and it's a piss weak spell. Think to myself, well that wasn't great, I won't use that. Try something else instead.

 

And I have no idea what you mean by shaky translation of the system. As I said, I only had a couple of months with it back in 1990. And why does it matter? I have no idea why that would even matter considering the rules in BG are quite easy to follow, provided you're willing to do some reading. You don't need to go back to the 2nd ed Players Handbook to read up and understand how spells work.

 

 

 

Yes, but only in the spellbook section. So to look up the effects of a particular spell, Ffordesoon would have to open the spellbook, find the correct spell level section, then right click the icon. Doing this for every spell is time consuming, especially considering many of them had similar names and functions. NWN2 was far superior in spell management to the IE games, because you can view spell descriptions with far less rummaging around.

 

 

Also Kaine, one of the issues seems to be reading and understanding what the spells do. Ffordesonn either read the spells and assumed they were the same, or didn't read the spells and assumed they were the same. If it's the former, then he misinterpreted the descriptions, if it's the latter then he needs to read the descriptions. It would have been the same in NWN2. Not reading the descriptions properly.

Edited April 17, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[Gromnir]

tomb of horrors were the classic sucker punch adveture. a popular module for d&d fans, but am not understanding why. the module is a series of insta-kill traps and monster encounters and it is not as if a clever party has some particular advantage over a foolish party. many groups has gotten through pnp tomb o' horrors with nothing save luck and the liberal use of the PMD approach to dungeon clearing. using summoned critters and/or low-level characters to set-off and/or test traps is effective if crude.  the thing is, a computer version o' tomb o' horrors would be almost pointless. oh, so there is sphere of annihilation in that hole? okie dokie, reload. tomb o' horrors, as ridiculous as it were, cannot survive the computer reload.

 

as an aside, our personal fave for the jerk dm/gm is level drain undead... particularly when such undead has access to polymorph.  d&d vampires got loads of special weakness, none of which is useful if you do not know you is being attacked by vampires. a polymorphed or disguised vampire is gonna get in amongst your party and after you waste spells protecting against the wrong kinda foe, you sudden realize that you is facing vampires. fun? not really.  negative plane protection were effective against vampire level drain, but it had a ridiculous short duration in d&d 2e. death ward were a better option in d20, but a smart vampire who waits til party spells is depleted before attacking is gonna have a field day. and in any event, chances are you only get 1 player protected by death ward before the vampires is turning your party from a very capable 9th level group into the equivalent o' a bunch o' 4th level n00bs.  

 

unlike the gotcha monsters such as rust monsters and disenchanters, vampires is a staple. if a dm plays vampires as smart as they is 'posed to be, virtual any level appropriate party is gonna get serious sucker punched by vampires. 

 

in a computer game, reload. everybody suddenly gets protected by deathward and has vampire killing weapons at the ready. etc.

 

*shrug*

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Volourn]

If you are too wussy to deal with vampires that's your problem not the vampire's issue. Poor little Grom can't handle losing levels.

[Gromnir]

*chuckle*

 

the 9th level group fighting vampires has a chance. the party that a minute into combat is now the equivalent o' 4th level is pretty much doomed. level disparity is too great. if we got a reload option, chances are we don't wait for the inevitable wipe.  epic battle becomes a slightly annoying reload moment.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Lephys]

*chuckle*

 

the 9th level group fighting vampires has a chance. the party that a minute into combat is now the equivalent o' 4th level is pretty much doomed. level disparity is too great. if we got a reload option, chances are we don't wait for the inevitable wipe.  epic battle becomes a slightly annoying reload moment.

 

HA! Good Fun!

The funny thing is, your party literally does become "too wussy to deal with vampires," as per Volourn's exact words. ^_^

[Mr. Magniloquent]

That polymorphed vampire encounter definately sounds like a sucker-punch if I've ever heard/read one.

 

A DM that I used to play with had an affinity for Rust Monster and Black Pudding surprises. A little known fact about Black Puddings in D&D, is that their acid attack destroys armor and metal items on contact. Even as a Wizard player, the threat was real. After one particulary awful encounter, I demanded to be able to extract components from the creatures, to make a salve which would permanently protect metal items from rust and corrosion. The DM grudging agreed to a questline where my Wizard made this happen. It's not difficult to believe the enthusaism and gusto the rest of my party had in supporting my Wizard's efforts.

[Endrosz]

^ The Black Pudding's metal-destroying ability was implemented Eye of the Beholder 2, and I vaguely remember seeing a few in Temple of Elemental Evil, in the later Temple levels? They're not very obscure, thanks to being favored by a lot of GM, not just yours. If it destroys your precious magical loot, you'll remember it for sure.

[Hormalakh]

^not if the campaign's on the computer. Black puddings and rust monsters just become encounters with high reload rates.

 

Now if their effects were unknown until after the party finished the quest...

 

... Players would be pissed and feel like they were really sucker punched.

Edited April 18, 2014 by Hormalakh

[Volourn]

Perhaps have a % based on 'damage' taken  and have it be slow acting so it takes  a day or so to take effect. To balance things out,  these obviously should be rare encounters and  power magic items like atificats should obviously be immune or HIGHLY resistent. Afterall, I don't see Thor's Hammer being destroyed by a random  4HD monster. L0L

[Hassat Hunter]

Yeah, in an online game I worked on, one of the developers also wanted "rust damage" enemies to make weapons and armor useless.

The rest of us obviously found that a bad idea and canned it, fortunately.

 

Later he tried a 'item stealing monster', same result.

Some thing just don't add to fun.

[Hassat Hunter]

Well, true, depends on the game.

It wasn't for that game anyway, probably stated it wrong, yeah, my bad.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Perhaps have a % based on 'damage' taken  and have it be slow acting so it takes  a day or so to take effect. To balance things out,  these obviously should be rare encounters and  power magic items like atificats should obviously be immune or HIGHLY resistent. Afterall, I don't see Thor's Hammer being destroyed by a random  4HD monster. L0L

I could see it working if items had a durability value and the special attacks targeted that directly. Enchantment could increase resistance as well.

[Ffordesoon]

 

Yeah, in an online game I worked on, one of the developers also wanted "rust damage" enemies to make weapons and armor useless.

The rest of us obviously found that a bad idea and canned it, fortunately.

 

Later he tried a 'item stealing monster', same result.

Some thing just don't add to fun.

 

Well a roquelike game named ADOM that I play has both. Rust Monsters who can destroy metallic items (besides artifacts), water and water attacks of creatures can make metallic items rust, fire/ice/acid/thunder attacks also can destroy equipment. There are also creatures that can disarm you or steal your equipment.

 

So this are not a bad ideas.

Not for a roguelike, no. Because roguelikes have no story to get invested in, so there's no reason to be angry when your character is permadead. The only objective you're emotionally invested in is beating a complex and borderline unfair system, not making it to the end of a good authored story. It's a bad mechanic for a narrative cRPG like PoE, though, because authored story is front and center. You are being told a story, and you want to see what happens next. Which is why sucker punches can work really well in dungeon crawlers, but feel out of place and infuriating in something like PoE or Baldur's Gate.

 

It works differently in tabletop. I believe the reason why old-school AD&D players are attached to that stuff is because character death at the gaming table is often a positive memory for everyone involved. I'll always remember the time my snooty sorceress threw a designer shoe at a dragon before she was obliterated, for example, and I talk of it fondly with others who were there. Given that Gary Gygax was the master of the sucker punch that killed thousands of characters in all sorts of devilishly amusing (at the table) ways, I believe they harbor a certain residual fondness for the openly adversarial relationship between player and GM that Gygax's modules fostered, and that they like sucker punches in their cRPGs because of that fondness.

 

Which is fine, but it doesn't really work in a game that swings Arnesonian in the way PoE does.

[Volourn]

It works in games too. And, I don't feel sucker punch when I have characetr instea killed in a CRPG. If you do you aren't playing for the right reassons. Games are to be challenging. That is why they are games. if you just want a story (I like stories in games too) read a book, watch tv, or watch a movie. I don't watch that silly Throne show but people seem to LOVE that show BECAUSE it kills off popular and unpopualr characters alike.

 

'Borderline unfair'. OMG! 'It's so unfair mummy, the mean game killed my character! WAAAAAAAAAA!" Why do people want their hands held and be comforted while playing games? Baseball should go to 4 strikes since it's not fair that a pitcher only needs 3 strikes to get a batter out while a batter needs 4 balls to get a 'free' pass. LMAO