How does PoE innovate?

[SophosTheWise]

Again with the balance bull****

[Lephys]

Again with the balance bull****

Interestingly enough, "bull****" is a nicely balanced word. It's two syllables, which can be evenly split in half, and it's made up of two words, each of four letters in length.

 

/jest

[Drowsy Emperor]

PoE doesn't really innovate. The whole game was sold on the premise of being like some other games, of offering the same type of experience. So innovation can't really its defining feature. It can't hope to surpass the scale of Baldur's Gate II although it may gun for the narrative quality of PST. I doubt it'll surpass either, but that doesn't make it any less worth playing.

[W.MacKinnon]

 

Okay, I think I'm getting a better idea of the position your supporting. Would it be fair to say that you think rogues shouldn't be the equal of of fighters in combat situations, because fighters are not equal to rogues in non-combat situations?

That's a fairly accurate assessment of my stance, yes. There's more to it of course, but that's good enough.

 

Good, I wanted to make sure putting words in your mouth. I'm sure there's more to it, but I find it can helpful to make brief summaries like this on occasion.

 

 

If so, would that opinon change if rogues were not more skilled in non-combat situations?

You mean, like, if they weren't more skilled at picking locks, disarming traps, silently sneaking into places they're not supposed to be, spying, scouting, and laying traps? That's a loaded question. Of course my entire stance would change. If they weren't the *best* at this stuff, they wouldn't even be rogues, would they.

 

But that's a good point actually. Classless systems can potentially be the best systems. Because the player can pick and choose the specific skills he's going to build his clean-slate character with, without having to adhere to any actual skill sets or arch-types. So of course, if we're dealing with that kind of system we wouldn't be having a rogue vs. warrior discussion in the first place. 

 

Maybe an example would be helpful here as I think I didn't make myself the most clear before. Lets imagine a system where there are two classes, X and Y, and 6 non-combat skills A, B, C, D, E, & F. Class X starts with bonus points in skills A and B, while class Y starts with bonus points in skills E and F. Each class also gets the same number of skill points per level (maybe have the exact number tied to an attribute score of some kind), and you can only put one point into any given skill per level. With this hypothetical system classes X and Y are equally skilled in non-combat situations (assuming each skill has roughly equal utility), but class X will always be better at skills A and B than class Y when comparring two chracaters of the same level. If we mapped this onto the rogue/fighter discussion, we could say that rogue is not more skilled at non-combat situations than a fighter, but the rogue will always be best at the skills you mentioned.

 

So if the non-combat system looks somewhat like the one I've described above, would you still think that fighters should be better in comnbat situations than rogues?

 

 

My understanding is that this is the goal of PoE, rogues are not more skilled in non-combat than fighters, they just work better in some situations over others.

Well, again, I'll wait and see how everything works in PoE. We simply don't have the whole picture yet to make a judgement call on this matter. But there are a couple of specific things that Josh has said. He HAS said that while every class can sneak and pick locks (for example), none will be better at it than a rogue who chooses to focus on those skills. And this is no different than how 3e D&D does it. That's the way it should be. What I'm worried about though is combat. Josh has already defined Rogues as "Heavy Hitters". But since we haven't had the Warrior class update yet, we don't know what that really means. 

 

Well from what I recall of D&D 3e,  a rogue wasn't neccesarily the best at stealth or lockpicking. If another class has those as class skills, they could be just as good as the rogue at any given level. The rogue, however, had an inherent boost to the number of skill points they recieved per level so they could max out those skills without losing functionality elsewhere as would likely be the case with some other class.

 

Actually a Rogue was the best at lockpicking and any class skill on its list - due to a the option of taking Skill mastery at 10th level. That allowed the character to take 10 on any skill check, assuming a skill focus feat, that would ensure success without rolling a dice. That class ability was also tied to the Int score(could take 10 on more skills), which also increased skill points gained a level.

 

It really isn't fair to compare a D&D 3.5 fighter to any other class, as it's sole bonus was feat choice - bar none it was the weakest base class. If someone took the class it was a dip(1-2lvs), a full fighter was worse in every aspect to any other class in the system. It could be out-fought, out-skilled, and out maneuvered by any other class in the system. They were jack of all trades in combat maneuvers, but not in succeeding in using them. Compare fighters from Pathfinder or any other rpg system with fighters. If someone picked a fighter in 3.5 it was a question of when, not if they were going to transition to a Prestige or multiclass.

 

If PoE was basing the Fighter off of the D&D 3.5E version, ha - worse class ever. Hopefully it doesn't, not really coming in on either side of your argument guys, but hopefully the Fighter is better balanced then the D&D version that's for sure.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

^Even in Pathfinder, the Fighter is outclassed by other warrior classes. Fighters just can not compete with the extraordinary or supernatural abilities possesed by other martial classes. PoE seems to be providing them with enough unique abilities to be able to stand out more than just a higher chance to hit and slightly more damage.

[Volourn]

"bar none it was the weakest base class. If someone took the class it was a dip(1-2lvs), a full fighter was worse in every aspect to any other class in the system. It could be out-fought, out-skilled, and out maneuvered by any other class in the system. They were jack of all trades in combat maneuvers, but not in succeeding in using them."

 

No.

[Tamerlane]

Well, I mean, there was always the monk...

 

3.X was a strange and dark time.

Edited April 26, 2014 by Tamerlane

[cornishr]

I don't particularly care if it innovates or not.

[Bryy]

I don't need inovation.

I just need "Baldur's gate HD".

I can guarantee you'll be disappointed.

[Hassat Hunter]

Yup, OE's drive to "innovate" the IE-games makes more than a few of us worried.

 

If I knew some of the things back then I did now, I probably wouldn't have backed and waited review from forumgoers here about it's quality before purchase...

[neo6874]

 

Well from what I recall of D&D 3e,  a rogue wasn't neccesarily the best at stealth or lockpicking. If another class has those as class skills, they could be just as good as the rogue at any given level. The rogue, however, had an inherent boost to the number of skill points they recieved per level so they could max out those skills without losing functionality elsewhere as would likely be the case with some other class.

Not exactly. The "rogue skills", like trap disarming, pickpocketing, stealth etc. were cross-class skills for everyone not of the rogue class, meaning those other classes are only able to put 1 point in them for every 2 levels they gain, not every level like a rogue can.

 

And furthermore, only a rogue (or other "rogue-like" classes in other books -- e.g. "Complete Adventurer") could even hope to find a trap that was DC 20+ (via the "Trap Finding" class ability)

 

 

Actually a Rogue was the best at lockpicking and any class skill on its list - due to a the option of taking Skill mastery at 10th level. That allowed the character to take 10 on any skill check, assuming a skill focus feat, that would ensure success without rolling a dice. That class ability was also tied to the Int score(could take 10 on more skills), which also increased skill points gained a level.

ANYONE can take 10 at any time when they are not under duress (i.e. not in combat, or falling off a cliff, etc). The Skill Mastery ability removes the "not under duress" clause to the taking 10 rule -- so if I'm in a fight, I can take 10 on a tumble check, or hide/move silently so I can get sneak attack damage.

[Sedrefilos]

I guess it'll innovate in terms of role playing at least.

[Volourn]

"I guess it'll innovate in terms of role playing at least."\

 

No, it won't.

[Lephys]

What will happen, Volourn? Because, apparently everything no.

[tajerio]

What will happen, Volourn? Because, apparently everything no.

 

No.

[Lord Gorchnik]

What will happen, Volourn? Because, apparently everything no.

 

No you. 

 

Innovative or not I am just cautiously optimistic about everything until we actually get a working and stable feature to test out.  Until then just chill.....ax?

[Lephys]

 

What will happen, Volourn? Because, apparently everything no.

 

No.

 

Haha.

 

I think I figured it out. Volourn is "The Nothing" from The Neverending Story. The No-Thing. What kind of thing is he? The "no" kind. The No Thing. Yup. Definitely... u_u

[constantine]

 

 

I don't need inovation.

I just need "Baldur's gate HD".

 

 

You can buy Beamdog's Enhanced Edition of the BG games and better forget that you are gonna get something like that with PoE. And thank god for that matter. We are very forgiving to the games of our childhood but this does not mean they are the Holy Grail of video games.

 

Obsidian respects retro, while enhancing/changing & adding things that should be there.

 

 

Innovation or not, there's no point in staying over a definition, PoE will most likely be the Baldur's Gate of modern years, but not Baldur's Gate.

[Bryy]

BG1 is a museum, anyway.

[Falkon Swiftblade]

I might be wrong, but I suspect if the PoE team is successful in their implementation, then the group dynamics might actually be the most rewarding part and innovating thing about this game. From the sound of things each class serves very distinct roles and operate in unique ways. I don't recall ever getting to play anything like a Psionicist type of character in a CRPG, so a similar class in this game is going to be fun.