E3 Previews (POSSIBLE SPOILERS)

[Sensuki]

I imagine the scope for skills has decreased dramatically since that Kickstarter update.

[Karkarov]

However, I am very much looking for new info on the in game mechanics that are tied to those skills (like with stealth sneak mechanics), because without it 5 skills in party of 6 means that we can always max every skill, making scripted interaction skill checks useless (you'll always have access to all the special options) and the choice what skill to level less meaningful then in previous IE games.

Not necessarily.  When you are in a multi choice story moment and you choose say an athletics based response it might mean all characters in the party have to make an athletics check.  It could also mean that is just how you the protagonist handle it and all other party members do something based on their own choices.  We don't know enough to be sure, we certainly don't know enough to be positive when making skill checks the game just takes the highest skill from the whole party and applies it to everyone.

[Quetzalcoatl]

 

I thought it would be 5. There's no further possible way to break down the 4E D&D skill list than what Sawyer has done.

We haven't been pitched the 4E D&D skill list. So i won't be speculating on possible break down of that list, assuming that breaking it down was necessary at all.

 

However, I am very much looking for new info on the in game mechanics that are tied to those skills (like with stealth sneak mechanics), because without it 5 skills in party of 6 means that we can always max every skill, making scripted interaction skill checks useless (you'll always have access to all the special options) and the choice what skill to level less meaningful then in previous IE games.

How were skills meaningful in the IE games? You needed one character with the required thief skills in your party and that was it. Even Baldur's Gate 2 recognized this by turning many of the otherwise inferior thief companions into dual-classed thief/mages (Imoen, Jan Jansen, Nalia).

 

And yes, you'll probably have access to all skills, but that's the case in every party-based RPG where you can learn skills. With PoE the skills are at least designed to give additional benefits even if you have multiple characters with lots of points in the same skill (i.e. Survival increases the duration of consumables, so it's useful to have on every character). It's not a perfect solution, but it's much better than the alternative.

 

We also don't know enough about the skill progression and what the skills do to judge if having access to high levels in all skills will be really viable.

Edited June 24, 2014 by Quetzalcoatl

[Gfted1]

...(i.e. Survival increases the duration of consumables, so it's useful to have on every character).

Link?

[Quetzalcoatl]

 

...(i.e. Survival increases the duration of consumables, so it's useful to have on every character).

Link?

 

http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Skill

[Sarex]

http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Skill

 

What skill bonuses do Paladins get?

[Mor]

 

However, I am very much looking for new info on the in game mechanics that are tied to those skills (like with stealth sneak mechanics), because without it 5 skills in party of 6 means that we can always max every skill, making scripted interaction skill checks useless (you'll always have access to all the special options) and the choice what skill to level less meaningful then in previous IE games.

Not necessarily.  When you are in a multi choice story moment and you choose say an athletics based response it might mean all characters in the party have to make an athletics check.  It could also mean that is just how you the protagonist handle it and all other party members do something based on their own choices.  We don't know enough to be sure, we certainly don't know enough to be positive when making skill checks the game just takes the highest skill from the whole party and applies it to everyone.

 

It might and it could, or not. Which is why I am looking for more info to dispel that uncertainty. Speaking of which, did they got rid of the ridicules notion from a while back, that skill checks would only apply to the PC?

 

And yes, you'll probably have access to all skills, but that's the case in every party-based RPG where you can learn skills.

I was thinking about Fallout skills and said that 'you'll be able to max all skills', the keyword being max. Because if you can max them all, why have them at all? that being said in the context of:

 

With PoE the skills are at least designed to give additional benefits even if you have multiple characters with lots of points in the same skill

Indeed, which is why I said that without those in game mechanics, those skills are mostly meangless. Hence my initial query about the in game mechanics associated with the skills that we are not familiar with ( Athletics and Lore ) http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Skills

[Karkarov]

It might and it could, or not. Which is why I am looking for more info to dispel that uncertainty. Speaking of which, did they got rid of the ridicules notion from a while back, that skill checks would only apply to the PC?

Not that I know of.  I believe we agree that more info is needed before we can make a real decision about how important skills will be.  I expect when the backer beta finally hits new info will flood the forums and wiki. Will be nice to finally have it and know for sure how the game has shaped up.

[Quetzalcoatl]

I was thinking about Fallout skills and said that 'you'll be able to max all skills', the keyword being max. Because if you can max them all, why have them at all?

What are we discussing again? I was talking about party-based RPG's, which Fallout is not. Fallout's skill system wouldn't work for this game.

 

By the way, you might want to read this: http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Scripted_interaction

 

These checks are sometimes for the character interacting with the scene, and other times for the whole party. Characters can become injured by being below the threshold of an attribute or skill check in a scripted interaction.

Edited June 24, 2014 by Quetzalcoatl

[Hiro Protagonist II]

We haven't been pitched the 4E D&D skill list. So i won't be speculating on possible break down of that list, assuming that breaking it down was necessary at all.

 

However, I am very much looking for new info on the in game mechanics that are tied to those skills (like with stealth sneak mechanics), because without it 5 skills in party of 6 means that we can always max every skill, making scripted interaction skill checks useless (you'll always have access to all the special options) and the choice what skill to level less meaningful then in previous IE games.

 

 

Josh has said in the past he doesn't want noobs to make a bad character. So when you cut down the skills into 5 main ones, it protects the noob from themselves. So a Mage will be able to put points into Athletics like a Fighter and it will be meaningful for the Mage. So you can make a bouncy, jumping from the rooftops, Mage which you couldn't do in the IE games. That's called choice!

 

Cut down the skills to 5 and all of a sudden, it opens up all possibilities for different characters.

 

I want a bouncy, athletic, jumping over rooftops, Mage.  

[Lephys]

^ I think it's more that he doesn't want noobs who are actually trying to make a good character to inadvertently make a bad character. An RPG asks "What do you want your character to do?", then presents you with shiny skill/ability/stat choices, and you see one and go "Oooooh! Survival! That'd be cool if my dude was all Survivaly, right?!", only to find out 17 hours into the game that 10 points in Survival helps you murder things 10% more effectively, but those same 10 points in Survival only affects how well you find clumps of mushrooms when walking about in nature-ish areas.

 

When you make all the skills actually matter in the game, there's a lot more man-hours put into each one, so fewer on a relatively tight budget makes sense.

 

You can still easily make a bad character. Roll with 3 Dex and 20 Might, then use nothing but a dagger and a buckler the whole game. Boom... you kind of suck.

 

He just wants to eliminate that "Aww crap, I didn't know that, halfway through the game, this was going to be SO ineffective!"

 

It's 2 problems, really:

 

1) Something not telling you exactly what will be mechanically affected by it (like Survival just being all "Be really good at aspects of survival!", but then really only significantly affecting mushroom-procurement)

2) Something like Survival only affecting something like mushroom procurement, despite taking the exact same currency (skill points) as some other skill that makes you attack faster and more accurately, and/or allows you to accomplish any number of other tasks.

 

Also, I'd just like to point out that they still can check multiple things at once, be it two skills, a skill and a stat, two stats, etc.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Thanks for agreeing with me. And as you've pointed out, it protects noobs. Especially those who don't read the manual. What is this manual thing you speak of? Seems to be a relic of the 90s. Today I want a game to tell me stuff. Why doesn't the game just tell me! And it stops creating characters that as you've said, aren't as viable in the latter part of the game.

 

Lower the amount of skills and it's harder for the noob or inexperienced gamer to make a bad character. Every player, regardless of noob or elite and everywhere in between, regardless if you've read the manual or not, needs to have a viable character throughout the game. Otherwise it's bad game design. And the dev's don't want players making bad characters because you could put a 3 in a stat. It also tries to stop the min/maxing powergamer we saw in the IE games. None of that rubbish. Better to have a more streamlined game with viable characters. There's a good discussion in the Wasteland thread about this.

Edited June 24, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[DCParry]

 

Also, I'd just like to point out that they still can check multiple things at once, be it two skills, a skill and a stat, two stats, etc.

 

I think this is a good point to note. There could be a lot of differentiation between characters with the same skill level but different stats. Does a athleticism differ if you have a high constitution as opposed to dexterity? Could be either two checks - one skill, on attribute for success or a check on one modified by the other. So for a lore check, having no matter how high an intellect you have, you cannot instantly decipher an ancient forgotten language, but perhaps a high perception gives you chance to notice patterns/irregularities in wall carvings that help you associate it with a more modern language or tell that it is a warning or some such. 

 

The bottom line is we don't know yet. Also, I have noticed that most of the time the skills are called "skill sets", which imply that each skill has either a wider application than we might assume or even branching specializations (not likely, but again, we don't know enough yet). 

[curryinahurry]

 

...

 

It is difficult and time consuming to make RPG that don't abstractions that aren't in odds with real world examples. PoE has only five skills for two main reasons, first it focus isn't in simulation, but in exploration, tactical party based combat and story telling, and secondly they wanted all skills to be useful for every character, which becomes that much harder to do more skills you add. 

 

 

I'm not concerned with simulationist aspects of gameplay; I'm concerned about options in exploring character builds, transparency of rules, and symmetry of design.  Specifically, I expect Obsidian to keep its promise of allowing us to pursue unconventional builds.  The whole aspect of 'party roles' already rubs me the wrong way.  Coupled now with this streamlined skill system, and begin to wonder how far we are going to be allowed to stray off the path.  Maybe it will be fine,  I'm not making any accusations, but I am concerned. 

 

 

 

 

Cut down the skills to 5 and all of a sudden, it opens up all possibilities for different characters.

 

I want a bouncy, athletic, jumping over rooftops, Mage.  

 

 

I'm not so sure.  It depends on how many skill points we get and what is possible within the system realistically.  A high dex + athletics mage sounds plausible, but if it comes at the cost of lore & int that are needed for crafting and a bunch of other magely pursuits, then what would be the value?  Also, if scripted scenes are done on a party average or highest number like Mor suggests, then there is absolutely no point in building a mage that way.  Again, I'm not saying it can't happen,  but I'm going to be concerned until we get more information.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

That's why you can create an INT Fighter or Barbarian which is what a lot of people are looking forward to from posts I've read in the past. And that translates into a Fighter or Barbarian who has a high lore skill. And I haven't read crafting being restricted to the Mage class. Every class should be able to craft, thus the high INT Barbarian will be able to craft stuff. No more bad characters for gamers. Even if you think you may have stuffed up by making a high INT Barbarian, you really haven't. The game has saved you from your noobness.

 

One thing for sure, this game will turn everything upside down with characters being able to do things and it'll be fun seeing all these builds players come up with. Bouncy, rooftop jumping Mage, Intelligent pipe smoking Barbarian, ... The more I think about the possibilities, the more fun I'll have playing this. And as a powergamer, it'll be good to create characters just for the sheer fun of it and seeing how the game 'reacts' to it.

Edited June 25, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[Lephys]

And as you've pointed out, it protects noobs.

I don't think you realize that noobs are just people who are new to the game. Not people who don't read manuals, or people who want to put no thought into playing a game but still win anyway. Every single one of us is actually going to be a noob when the game comes out. Although, I suppose we (the backers/people following the game) do have the advantage of at least knowing about some of the systems and such before the game even releases, much less before we play it.

 

I don't think Josh Sawyer ever expressed his desire for people who don't give a crap about learning how the game works and such to still rock at the game and/or be rewarded for their laziness. This is the guy who said "If you don't like reading, don't play this game." Not "Don't worry, we're making sure you can HATE reading and still enjoy it, ^_^!"

 

 

I think this is a good point to note. There could be a lot of differentiation between characters with the same skill level but different stats. Does a athleticism differ if you have a high constitution as opposed to dexterity? Could be either two checks - one skill, on attribute for success or a check on one modified by the other. So for a lore check, having no matter how high an intellect you have, you cannot instantly decipher an ancient forgotten language, but perhaps a high perception gives you chance to notice patterns/irregularities in wall carvings that help you associate it with a more modern language or tell that it is a warning or some such.

Yeah! My simplest thought is basically that, instead of just "If X > SomeNumber, you get to do something! Else, you fail!", there could be several different opportunities in a given situation.

 

For example, if some book checks your INT or something, so that you can discern specific/useful information from it, maybe at 8, you discern one thing. At 10, you discern two things. At 14, you discern 3 things. Heck, maybe there's a Lore check in there, too, for one piece of information you could possibly get from that book. Regardless of your Intellect, you'd have to be learned enough in lore to know what contextual stuff you need to know in order to make some specific connection.

 

OR, a simpler example would simply be jumping onto a rooftop (scripted interaction). Maybe it checks Athletics AND Stealth. Athletics is for making the jump, and Stealth is for not making a lot of noise (or being seen) while doing it, etc. You end up with a multi-layered outcome.

 

But, yeah. I just wanted to emphasize the fact that it's possible to have multi-faceted results, rather than just "this AND this AND this are good enough, or FAIL!" Although, you could have that, too, which would also make for interesting character effects. When you happen to replay someone with enough Resolve AND Might AND Mechanics, you get to do/see something spiffy in your playthrough,

Edited June 25, 2014 by Lephys

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

I don't think you realize that noobs are just people who are new to the game. Not people who don't read manuals, or people who want to put no thought into playing a game but still win anyway. Every single one of us is actually going to be a noob when the game comes out. Although, I suppose we (the backers/people following the game) do have the advantage of at least knowing about some of the systems and such before the game even releases, much less before we play it.

 

I don't think Josh Sawyer ever expressed his desire for people who don't give a crap about learning how the game works and such to still rock at the game and/or be rewarded for their laziness. This is the guy who said "If you don't like reading, don't play this game." Not "Don't worry, we're making sure you can HATE reading and still enjoy it, ^_^!"

 

Just need to correct you there. What you're talking about are newbie/newbs which are totally different to noobs.

 

 

 

Contrary to the belief of many, a noob/n00b and a newbie/newb are not the same thing.

 

Newbs are those who are new to some task and are very beginner at it, possibly a little overconfident about it, but they are willing to learn and fix their errors to move out of that stage.

Noobs on the other hand, know little and have no will to learn any more. They expect people to do the work for them.

 

 

 

So no. Not everyone will be a noob when they start playing the game. In the course of playing the game, there will probably be noobs though.

[curryinahurry]

That's why you can create an INT Fighter or Barbarian which is what a lot of people are looking forward to from posts I've read in the past. And that translates into a Fighter or Barbarian who has a high lore skill. And I haven't read crafting being restricted to the Mage class. Every class should be able to craft, thus the high INT Barbarian will be able to craft stuff. No more bad characters for gamers. Even if you think you may have stuffed up by making a high INT Barbarian, you really haven't. The game has saved you from your noobness.

 

One thing for sure, this game will turn everything upside down with characters being able to do things and it'll be fun seeing all these builds players come up with. Bouncy, rooftop jumping Mage, Intelligent pipe smoking Barbarian, ... The more I think about the possibilities, the more fun I'll have playing this. And as a powergamer, it'll be good to create characters just for the sheer fun of it and seeing how the game 'reacts' to it.

 

I think I was unclear in my wording on mages and crafting; I meant lore skill may be necessary not would be necessary.  Also, lore is a skill separate from intellect, so while their will be synergy, you would forego another skill to pump lore.  

 

Maybe you're right about the possibilities and I'm being a bit too pessimistic, but the moment they started with 'roles' I started to get wary, and the limited skills isn't changing my mind.  

 

BTW, it's impossible to idiot-proof a product; so all of these decisions about streamlining must be weighed at the tipping point with fun; and specifically where does the fun of customization cross the line into the frustration of bewildering complexity.

[redneckdevil]

Have we heard anything about if we are able to max out all the skill or not yet?

Ill be honest, i really hope that at the end, we will not be all maxxed out in everything. Im really hoping we can create characters that start off strong in some areas and weak in others and at the end of the game be extradenary in the areas we started out strong in and be decent in the areas we was weak in. Or if we focused on all the skills, we would be good in all but master of none.

i would really hate to when we near ingame that everything is maxxed out because we would lose the things that make our characters act diiferent outside of combat.

[Elerond]

 

 

...

 

It is difficult and time consuming to make RPG that don't abstractions that aren't in odds with real world examples. PoE has only five skills for two main reasons, first it focus isn't in simulation, but in exploration, tactical party based combat and story telling, and secondly they wanted all skills to be useful for every character, which becomes that much harder to do more skills you add. 

 

 

I'm not concerned with simulationist aspects of gameplay; I'm concerned about options in exploring character builds, transparency of rules, and symmetry of design.  Specifically, I expect Obsidian to keep its promise of allowing us to pursue unconventional builds.  The whole aspect of 'party roles' already rubs me the wrong way.  Coupled now with this streamlined skill system, and begin to wonder how far we are going to be allowed to stray off the path.  Maybe it will be fine,  I'm not making any accusations, but I am concerned. 

 

 

Heavily abstracted (or streamlined as you said) skill system is much better basis for RPG system where you can build unconventional builds, as such skill system has much lesser change make some builds virtually useless. This is because of that in heavily abstracted skill systems there is lesser change for useless skills that make game become harder if you invest in them, as you don't have some other skill that you actually need in the game.

 

Class based system usually causes it that some classes are better in some party roles than others.  Josh has said that you have ability to build all classes towards roles which they aren't necessary best choice in game and if you choose to do so it should not make your character nearly useless, which is the case usually the case in class based crpgs, but instead be valid way to build your character(s).

 

I don't say that you could not or should not be concerned, but to me PoE seem to be going towards such system that will give you all those things that you listed.

[curryinahurry]

Have we heard anything about if we are able to max out all the skill or not yet?

 

 

From what we know, only one skill can be maxed out per character.  The issue of concern has been more related to whether, within a party, all skills can be maxed out and how they will be viewed within the scripted scenes.  Will these scenes rely on the PC, party average or each character depending on the situation.

 

 

 

 

Heavily abstracted (or streamlined as you said) skill system is much better basis for RPG system where you can build unconventional builds, as such skill system has much lesser change make some builds virtually useless. This is because of that in heavily abstracted skill systems there is lesser change for useless skills that make game become harder if you invest in them, as you don't have some other skill that you actually need in the game.

 

Class based system usually causes it that some classes are better in some party roles than others.  Josh has said that you have ability to build all classes towards roles which they aren't necessary best choice in game and if you choose to do so it should not make your character nearly useless, which is the case usually the case in class based crpgs, but instead be valid way to build your character(s).

 

I don't say that you could not or should not be concerned, but to me PoE seem to be going towards such system that will give you all those things that you listed.

 

 

I would agree with your argument if every skill has and impact in combat.  If that is the case, then synergies with attributes could have real impact in all situations.  If skills are mostly non-combat related (as they seem to be), why would you want your low dex, high int rogue to take a point in lore at a given level over one in stealth (which will help make up a potential deficiency in combat). Remember, fewer skills likely means fewer skill points.  We don't know how many skill points we get per level, but I remember someone saying we would likely only be able to max one skill by the end of the game.  

 

I'm playing a bit of devil's advocate with this, and once we have more information, it might be fine, but I'm not really seeing any advantage in terms of class viability if most skills are non-combat related.  Certainly, its less work for Obsidian.  Which is reasonable, but leads to most skills being passive attributes in scripted sequences (like pick-pocketing and tracking) and gives us less authorship in the game world.

[Elerond]

 

Heavily abstracted (or streamlined as you said) skill system is much better basis for RPG system where you can build unconventional builds, as such skill system has much lesser change make some builds virtually useless. This is because of that in heavily abstracted skill systems there is lesser change for useless skills that make game become harder if you invest in them, as you don't have some other skill that you actually need in the game.

 

Class based system usually causes it that some classes are better in some party roles than others.  Josh has said that you have ability to build all classes towards roles which they aren't necessary best choice in game and if you choose to do so it should not make your character nearly useless, which is the case usually the case in class based crpgs, but instead be valid way to build your character(s).

 

I don't say that you could not or should not be concerned, but to me PoE seem to be going towards such system that will give you all those things that you listed.

 

I would agree with your argument if every skill has and impact in combat.  If that is the case, then synergies with attributes could have real impact in all situations.  If skills are mostly non-combat related (as they seem to be), why would you want your low dex, high int rogue to take a point in lore at a given level over one in stealth (which will help make up a potential deficiency in combat). Remember, fewer skills likely means fewer skill points.  We don't know how many skill points we get per level, but I remember someone saying we would likely only be able to max one skill by the end of the game.  

 

I'm playing a bit of devil's advocate with this, and once we have more information, it might be fine, but I'm not really seeing any advantage in terms of class viability if most skills are non-combat related.  Certainly, its less work for Obsidian.  Which is reasonable, but leads to most skills being passive attributes in scripted sequences (like pick-pocketing and tracking) and gives us less authorship in the game world.

 

It has stated that all skills will give some short general benefits inside and/or outside combat that they are useful for every party member outside of scripted events and conversations. And in scripted events and maybe also in conversations skill test is for general level in party instead of highest one.

 

So you should get value on your skill points regardless on what skill you put them and regardless on which classes your characters are. 

 

This is of course bases on information that we have given and how I remember it (meaning that it could contain errors).

[Karkarov]

That's why you can create an INT Fighter or Barbarian which is what a lot of people are looking forward to from posts I've read in the past. And that translates into a Fighter or Barbarian who has a high lore skill. And I haven't read crafting being restricted to the Mage class. Every class should be able to craft, thus the high INT Barbarian will be able to craft stuff. No more bad characters for gamers. Even if you think you may have stuffed up by making a high INT Barbarian, you really haven't. The game has saved you from your noobness.

Actually based on the Front Line update thread a high int Barbarian could not only be viable, but may actually be a very strong stat choice for them...

[Bryy]

 

That's why you can create an INT Fighter or Barbarian which is what a lot of people are looking forward to from posts I've read in the past. And that translates into a Fighter or Barbarian who has a high lore skill. And I haven't read crafting being restricted to the Mage class. Every class should be able to craft, thus the high INT Barbarian will be able to craft stuff. No more bad characters for gamers. Even if you think you may have stuffed up by making a high INT Barbarian, you really haven't. The game has saved you from your noobness.

Actually based on the Front Line update thread a high int Barbarian could not only be viable, but may actually be a very strong stat choice for them...

 

The most deadly foes are the smart and strong ones.

[Lephys]

Just need to correct you there. What you're talking about are newbie/newbs which are totally different to noobs.

 

 

 

Contrary to the belief of many, a noob/n00b and a newbie/newb are not the same thing.

 

Newbs are those who are new to some task and are very beginner at it, possibly a little overconfident about it, but they are willing to learn and fix their errors to move out of that stage.

Noobs on the other hand, know little and have no will to learn any more. They expect people to do the work for them.

 

 

 

So no. Not everyone will be a noob when they start playing the game. In the course of playing the game, there will probably be noobs though.

As fascinating as that is, I'm gonna hafta go ahead and point out that, unless Josh specifically used the term "noob" in anything he said, you're still arbitrarily applying your own context to his sentiments on the matter.

 

Also, I'm gonna go ahead and declare that the spelling "nube" means a 3-legged cat. There, now it means that, because someone (me) deemed it so, just as with the mispelling/1337spelling of "newbie" meaning something completely different (yet very specific) just because some random person decided it does, and everyone rolled with it.

 

I wasn't really aware there were two different meanings like that, and I honestly feel like that's pretty ridiculous. But, whatever. People will be people.

Edited June 26, 2014 by Lephys