Experience Point Mechanics - Fighting Enemies

[PrimeJunta]

I hate this lack of choice and only being rewarded for doing what I am told that I must do in order to get xp. It is like playing a playing a PnP session with a really bad DM: "LOL, NOOB, you didn't do it my way so you GET NOTHING."

You know what's really weird? This is exactly the argument I'm making against systemic XP.

 

Reward achieving objectives only, and you leave maximum freedom for the player to find ways to get there. Reward specific ways of achieving the objectives, and you're steering the player towards those specific ways.

 

There are times I feel we inhabit completely parallel realities with different rules of basic logic or something.

[Immortalis]

 

I hate this lack of choice and only being rewarded for doing what I am told that I must do in order to get xp. It is like playing a playing a PnP session with a really bad DM: "LOL, NOOB, you didn't do it my way so you GET NOTHING."

You know what's really weird? This is exactly the argument I'm making against systemic XP.

 

Reward achieving objectives only, and you leave maximum freedom for the player to find ways to get there. Reward specific ways of achieving the objectives, and you're steering the player towards those specific ways.

 

There are times I feel we inhabit completely parallel realities with different rules of basic logic or something.

 

 

That's a bit harsh.. first that person is a different person then who you've been arguing with for the last week. Second.. there is no real black and white right and wrong.. everyone interprets how a mechanic will work a different way.. Even if PoE was released.. we would probably disagree about what we enjoyed about the mechanic or didn't enjoy.

 

You are being pretty obtuse man..

 

[PrimeJunta]

Oh, Immortalis, if only you knew the arguments I've had with Helm.

[Valorian]

 

Would a semiofficial XP-for-kill mod, by an Obsidian developer, anger proponents of the 'killXP-is-the-devil' line of thought?

 

I feel very confident that this type of mod could be done.

 

- Scale down all quest xp by some value that feels right..

- Give a bonus in xp to any quest resolutions that don't use combat (to keep quest rewards semi balanced)..

- There you go..

- Me and stun get xp for killing wood beetles

- People who wanted PoE to be isometric alpha protocol will still get rewards stealthing past the whole game and one shotting the boss.

 

EDIT:

I know your post wasn't directed to me.. but I don't see anything wrong with this.. everyone's happy..

 

 

These are all good suggestions.

 

Oh, but of course, everyone should feel free to comment. The question wasn't aimed exclusively at those who are physically repulsed by combat experience.

[Sarex]

These are all good suggestions.

 

Oh, but of course, everyone should feel free to comment. The question wasn't aimed exclusively at those who are physically repulsed by combat experience.

 

Tbh, I don't even think most of those guys are repulsed by combat experience, I think they just feel the need to defend the game for some reason. I say this because the system we want, where kills/stealth/talking/etc grant xp, wouldn't take away anything from them as this system does for us.

[Helm]

 

I hate this lack of choice and only being rewarded for doing what I am told that I must do in order to get xp. It is like playing a playing a PnP session with a really bad DM: "LOL, NOOB, you didn't do it my way so you GET NOTHING."

You know what's really weird? This is exactly the argument I'm making against systemic XP.

 

Reward achieving objectives only, and you leave maximum freedom for the player to find ways to get there. Reward specific ways of achieving the objectives, and you're steering the player towards those specific ways.

 

There are times I feel we inhabit completely parallel realities with different rules of basic logic or something.

 

Why can killing an Ogre be an objective, but killing beetles not be an objective? In which super duper uber logical parallel reality is this a true statement?

 

Next to the village (like in the demo) are numerous and very dangerous giant beetles (the ones we also saw in the demo) that are eating villagers, so the villagers don't go into the forest anymore. I decide to help out the helpless villagers by slaughtering the beetles (because I'm a nice guy). Then I slaughter the ogre (also in the demo). Why should I only be rewarded with XP for slaughtering the ogre, but not be rewarded with xp for slaughtering the beetles? Doesn't make any damn sense. I'd understand if the beetles were docile creatures, but as we saw in the demo, that is absolutely not the case.

 

You as a DM would deny me XP for helping out the villagers by resolving their beetle problem, you would only give me XP for resolving their problem with the ogre. You (and Sawyer for that matter) are this terrible DM that I am talking about.

[Tartantyco]

Why can killing an Ogre be an objective, but killing beetles not be an objective? In which super duper uber logical parallel reality is this a true statement?

 

 

Dealing with the ogre, that specific ogre, is an objective. It's an objective because the farmer wants you to deal with the ogre. Nobody wants you to deal with the beetles. If somebody wanted you to deal with the beetles, then you could get XP for it.

 

To make it really simple, you get XP because the developers wanted to give you XP for dealing with the ogre. That specific ogre. It's not meant to be "logical". XP-for-kills, as explained sooooo many times already, isn't "logical" either. Why? Because XP levels you up, and you can assign your leveling points in any way you want to. How does a thief get better at lockpicking by stabbing beetles? Explain that to me, please.

[BrokenMask]

 

These are all good suggestions.

 

Oh, but of course, everyone should feel free to comment. The question wasn't aimed exclusively at those who are physically repulsed by combat experience.

 

Tbh, I don't even think most of those guys are repulsed by combat experience, I think they just feel the need to defend the game for some reason. I say this because the system we want, where kills/stealth/talking/etc grant xp, wouldn't take away anything from them as this system does for us.

 

So you think its not possible that we genuinely think its great idea to not reward exp for individual kills?

[Tartantyco]

So you think its not possible that we genuinely think its great idea to not reward exp for individual kills?

 

Sarex is basically just trolling at this point.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Next to the village (like in the demo) are numerous and very dangerous giant beetles (the ones we also saw in the demo) that are eating villagers, so the villagers don't go into the forest anymore. I decide to help out the helpless villagers by slaughtering the beetles (because I'm a nice guy). Then I slaughter the ogre (also in the demo). Why should I only be rewarded with XP for slaughtering the ogre, but not be rewarded with xp for slaughtering the beetles? Doesn't make any damn sense. I'd understand if the beetles were docile creatures, but as we saw in the demo, that is absolutely not the case.

 

You as a DM would deny me XP for helping out the villagers by resolving their beetle problem, you would only give me XP for resolving their problem with the ogre. You (and Sawyer for that matter) are this terrible DM that I am talking about.

 

 

...If the villagers are really as bothered by the beetles as you paint them to be, they will probably task you with clearing the forest of them.

 

I mean, it's not like the beetles crawl into the village at night and threaten to kill their loved ones if they dare to complain about them to the next adventurer

[Helm]

 

Why can killing an Ogre be an objective, but killing beetles not be an objective? In which super duper uber logical parallel reality is this a true statement?

 

Dealing with the ogre, that specific ogre, is an objective. It's an objective because the farmer wants you to deal with the ogre. Nobody wants you to deal with the beetles. If somebody wanted you to deal with the beetles, then you could get XP for it.

To make it really simple, you get XP because the developers wanted to give you XP for dealing with the ogre. That specific ogre. It's not meant to be "logical". XP-for-kills, as explained sooooo many times already, isn't "logical" either. Why? Because XP levels you up, and you can assign your leveling points in any way you want to.

 

You're missing the point. Dealing with the ogre can be an objective, so dealing with the beetles can be an objective too.

 

I have been told that this is completely illogical, because beetles can't be objectives for some reason. So please explain to me why beetles cannot be objectives and cannot be rewarded with objective xp. Are beetles not worthy of being an objective or what is the problem? What about spiders? Can killing 20 spiders not be an objective either?

 

How does a thief get better at lockpicking by stabbing beetles? Explain that to me, please.

Probably in the same way how a thief gets better at lockpicking by chopping off an ogre's head and completing the objective? You know, like in the demo?

Edited August 17, 2014 by Helm

[Helm]

 

Next to the village (like in the demo) are numerous and very dangerous giant beetles (the ones we also saw in the demo) that are eating villagers, so the villagers don't go into the forest anymore. I decide to help out the helpless villagers by slaughtering the beetles (because I'm a nice guy). Then I slaughter the ogre (also in the demo). Why should I only be rewarded with XP for slaughtering the ogre, but not be rewarded with xp for slaughtering the beetles? Doesn't make any damn sense. I'd understand if the beetles were docile creatures, but as we saw in the demo, that is absolutely not the case.

 

You as a DM would deny me XP for helping out the villagers by resolving their beetle problem, you would only give me XP for resolving their problem with the ogre. You (and Sawyer for that matter) are this terrible DM that I am talking about.

...If the villagers are really as bothered by the beetles as you paint them to be, they will probably task you with clearing the forest of them.

 

I mean, it's not like the beetles crawl into the village at night and threaten to kill their loved ones if they dare to complain about them to the next adventurer

 

Yes.

 

A farmer offers you 25 objective xp for each beetle you deal with. This objective is completely optional too. Sounds good to me.

 

I  wouldn't need to have an objective like this in my quest log, but whatever.

[Tartantyco]

Probably in the same way how a thief gets better at lockpicking by chopping off an ogre's head and completing the objective? You know, like in the demo?

 

 

...

 

The point is that it is not anymore logical to get XP from kills, so arguing that objective-XP is illogical when you're arguing for an equally illogical is inconsistent. Why are you wasting our time misrepresenting arguments?

 

Nobody that I know of on the objective-based XP side is arguing that the system is logical. We're arguing that it provides a better gameplay result than XP-for-kills.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

Next to the village (like in the demo) are numerous and very dangerous giant beetles (the ones we also saw in the demo) that are eating villagers, so the villagers don't go into the forest anymore. I decide to help out the helpless villagers by slaughtering the beetles (because I'm a nice guy). Then I slaughter the ogre (also in the demo). Why should I only be rewarded with XP for slaughtering the ogre, but not be rewarded with xp for slaughtering the beetles? Doesn't make any damn sense. I'd understand if the beetles were docile creatures, but as we saw in the demo, that is absolutely not the case.

 

You as a DM would deny me XP for helping out the villagers by resolving their beetle problem, you would only give me XP for resolving their problem with the ogre. You (and Sawyer for that matter) are this terrible DM that I am talking about.

...If the villagers are really as bothered by the beetles as you paint them to be, they will probably task you with clearing the forest of them.

 

I mean, it's not like the beetles crawl into the village at night and threaten to kill their loved ones if they dare to complain about them to the next adventurer

 

 

Yes.

 

A farmer offers you 25 objective xp for each beetle you deal with. This objective is completely optional too. Sounds good to me.

 

I  wouldn't need to have an objective like this in my quest log, but whatever.

 

 

Excellent, then we can agree that rewarding combat can be done in a way that completely fits into the current paradigm.

 

...What were we talking about?

[Orphansmith]

Really? There are people complaining about this? Killing random things for XP was a bad idea, just like using gold as XP was a bad idea back in the old days of D&D.

 

If you need XP to validate going out of your way to get into combat I'd argue that it isn't the combat you're interested in. And if you think the changes are there to placate stealth or social players then why are you here and not doing something more to your speed like a MOBA or FPS? Are you going to complain about the same kind of concept when Torment comes out?

[Immortalis]

 

 

 

Next to the village (like in the demo) are numerous and very dangerous giant beetles (the ones we also saw in the demo) that are eating villagers, so the villagers don't go into the forest anymore. I decide to help out the helpless villagers by slaughtering the beetles (because I'm a nice guy). Then I slaughter the ogre (also in the demo). Why should I only be rewarded with XP for slaughtering the ogre, but not be rewarded with xp for slaughtering the beetles? Doesn't make any damn sense. I'd understand if the beetles were docile creatures, but as we saw in the demo, that is absolutely not the case.

 

You as a DM would deny me XP for helping out the villagers by resolving their beetle problem, you would only give me XP for resolving their problem with the ogre. You (and Sawyer for that matter) are this terrible DM that I am talking about.

...If the villagers are really as bothered by the beetles as you paint them to be, they will probably task you with clearing the forest of them.

 

I mean, it's not like the beetles crawl into the village at night and threaten to kill their loved ones if they dare to complain about them to the next adventurer

 

 

Yes.

 

A farmer offers you 25 objective xp for each beetle you deal with. This objective is completely optional too. Sounds good to me.

 

I  wouldn't need to have an objective like this in my quest log, but whatever.

 

 

Excellent, then we can agree that rewarding combat can be done in a way that completely fits into the current paradigm.

 

...What were we talking about?

 

 

Well the thing he is describing is xp for kills as well.. Now it's just playing the word game of what we do we call it..

 

 

P.s. I noticed this topic is derailing the PoE thread on the codex..

Edited August 17, 2014 by Immortalis

[Tartantyco]

Well the thing he is describing is xp for kills as well.. Now it's just playing the word game of what we do we call it..

 

 

It's one thing to have XP for specific kills, and a completely different thing to have XP for any kills.

[Helm]

 

Probably in the same way how a thief gets better at lockpicking by chopping off an ogre's head and completing the objective? You know, like in the demo?

 

 

...

 

The point is that it is not anymore logical to get XP from kills, so arguing that objective-XP is illogical when you're arguing for an equally illogical is inconsistent. Why are you wasting our time misrepresenting arguments?

 

Nobody that I know of on the objective-based XP side is arguing that the system is logical. We're arguing that it provides a better gameplay result than XP-for-kills.

 

I never wrote that objective xp is illogical.

 

You're the one writing that combat xp is illogical or something.

[Volourn]

"Unfortunately Stun will still wonder why you get 1500 XP for entering one cave but not the other, and this thread will go on and on and on."
 

Well, it's a good question. Just like why is the ogre worth 3k xp+ and the beetles are not when they are a challenge to be overcomed?

 

 

"never mind, I'm done with this discussion."

 

Good riddance. If you can't handle disagreement you shouldn't be posting on the internet. My apologizes that there's not enough of a hivemind.

 

 

"I simply disagree with the premise that rewarding xp upon enemy kills encourages behavior that is 'boring'. In fact, receiving xp upon killing an enemy is exciting, because it's the game telling you you've just overcome a significant challenge."
 

Dingaling we have a winner.  Again, ogre vs beetle.  Currently, PE is telling us that ogre is worthwhile and the beetles are trash because he's worth xp.

 

 

"You don't find repetitively killing the same enemies over and over boring?"
 

Not if the combat is fun and rewarding. then again, i personally don't go hunting every last xfart on the map for  7 xp each. DID YOU!?!

 

 

"Stun, do you believe that combat will be boring in Pillars of Eternity if you are not rewarded XP from kills?"
 

I'm not Stun but I'll answer: No, i don't think it'll neccessarily be boring but it will be less rewarding. Why are the beetles not worthy of xp but entering the cave is?

 

 

"Combat won't be rewarded with XP because the developers want to encourage the player to avoid combat as much as possible. Obsidian Josh Sawyer is going to great lengths to make combat as unrewarding as possible, a substantial amount of item drops will contain useless vendor trash, so that people who strongly dislike combat (which is basically everyone who didn't like the IE games) don't whine about being deprived of good loot"

 

O RLY? This has to be tongue and cheek, right? L0L

 

 

."This is like the guy who said Icewind Dale sucked cause he had to spend days grinding yeti's.. what are you talking about...?"

 

That guy is a fool. You don't need to grind yetis.

 

 

"why the hell combat isn't pointless in Shadowrun, VtM Bloodlines, Deus Ex, etc?"

 

It *is* pointless for the most part in BL. never played Deus Ex. XP is handled well in SRR mostly ebcause it is linear and you get xp at end of each mission that is supposed to reward you for the entire mission. So, out of the three, it worked in 1. However, 'xp for kiill's (which I didn't technically argue for) has worked for decades and din't make any game thast featured it 'worse' or 'less fun'.

 

 

"Bloodlines isn't a combat focused game."

 

Yes, it is. It has TONS of unavoidable trash combat.

 

 

"Shadow Run is an episodic game. There is no open world. You are on rails fighting the same things before the same event happens. There is no fork in the road. Wether each mob gave x amount of xp or the end of the level gives x amount xp doesn't matter. There's only one direction to go and there's no turning back."

 

Yup.

 

 

"Romance is hardly a game Mechanic."

 

It can be. It can also add to role-playing. But, wrong thread, anyways.

 

 

"But what about the beetles? What if have the ability to communicate with them and make them my buddy beetles who help me in some way? WHY shouldn't I get XP for that? WHY shouldn't I get XP if I decide to kill them instead because they are extremely dangerous and kill civilians hunting or looking for food in the forest? Why should I only get XP for the Ogre, why should I only get XP when I am told where to go and what to do?
 
I hate this lack of choice and only being rewarded for doing what I am told that I must do in order to get xp. It is like playing a playing a PnP session with a really bad DM: "LOL, NOOB, you didn't do it my way so you GET NOTHING."

 

Winna posta.

 

 

 

"I mean, it's not like the beetles crawl into the village at night and threaten to kill their loved ones if they dare to complain about them to the next adventurer"
 

Yeah, but they are right on/near the road. Roads are only created to be sued by travelers and I doubt all travellers are adventurers. And, the beetles are instantly hostile and therefore a threat tot eh village and others. In fact, they are more of a threat of the ogre since accoridng to the quest he is only taking sheep not killing people. And, he can be negoitated/talked to - the beetles can't be (though a druidic spell would be nice too or a way to get them away from the road).

 

 

"We're arguing that it provides a better gameplay result than XP-for-kills."

 

No. The GAMEPLAY doesn't actually change, right?

[Helm]

 

 

 

Next to the village (like in the demo) are numerous and very dangerous giant beetles (the ones we also saw in the demo) that are eating villagers, so the villagers don't go into the forest anymore. I decide to help out the helpless villagers by slaughtering the beetles (because I'm a nice guy). Then I slaughter the ogre (also in the demo). Why should I only be rewarded with XP for slaughtering the ogre, but not be rewarded with xp for slaughtering the beetles? Doesn't make any damn sense. I'd understand if the beetles were docile creatures, but as we saw in the demo, that is absolutely not the case.

 

You as a DM would deny me XP for helping out the villagers by resolving their beetle problem, you would only give me XP for resolving their problem with the ogre. You (and Sawyer for that matter) are this terrible DM that I am talking about.

...If the villagers are really as bothered by the beetles as you paint them to be, they will probably task you with clearing the forest of them.

 

I mean, it's not like the beetles crawl into the village at night and threaten to kill their loved ones if they dare to complain about them to the next adventurer

 

 

Yes.

 

A farmer offers you 25 objective xp for each beetle you deal with. This objective is completely optional too. Sounds good to me.

 

I  wouldn't need to have an objective like this in my quest log, but whatever.

 

 

Excellent, then we can agree that rewarding combat can be done in a way that completely fits into the current paradigm.

 

...What were we talking about?

 

Yep, now we're getting somewhere.

 

What if the game had a bounty hunter that gives the player completely optional objectives to kill specific enemies/monsters and rewards the player for each kill with xp and gold?

 

That wouldn't be much different from combat xp really, but I guess people are only happy if they are told what to do and have the corresponding quest in their quest log I guess.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

"why the hell combat isn't pointless in Shadowrun, VtM Bloodlines, Deus Ex, etc?"

 

It *is* pointless for the most part in BL. never played Deus Ex. 

 

In Deus Ex, it's usually a hassle having to avoid enemies whenever you try to do anything of importance, so engaging in combat (which usually consists of shooting them in the head with a tranqulizer dart from behind a crate, or crawling up to them and hitting them with a charge prod, because you thankfully don't have to kill everything) is meaningful.

 

I half-expect myself to clear maps in PoE, too, because I don't want to be forced to exclusively level stealth on the whole party, and that means avoiding enemies at certain points will probably be a huge pain in the ass.

[Immortalis]

 

 

 

 

Next to the village (like in the demo) are numerous and very dangerous giant beetles (the ones we also saw in the demo) that are eating villagers, so the villagers don't go into the forest anymore. I decide to help out the helpless villagers by slaughtering the beetles (because I'm a nice guy). Then I slaughter the ogre (also in the demo). Why should I only be rewarded with XP for slaughtering the ogre, but not be rewarded with xp for slaughtering the beetles? Doesn't make any damn sense. I'd understand if the beetles were docile creatures, but as we saw in the demo, that is absolutely not the case.

 

You as a DM would deny me XP for helping out the villagers by resolving their beetle problem, you would only give me XP for resolving their problem with the ogre. You (and Sawyer for that matter) are this terrible DM that I am talking about.

...If the villagers are really as bothered by the beetles as you paint them to be, they will probably task you with clearing the forest of them.

 

I mean, it's not like the beetles crawl into the village at night and threaten to kill their loved ones if they dare to complain about them to the next adventurer

 

 

Yes.

 

A farmer offers you 25 objective xp for each beetle you deal with. This objective is completely optional too. Sounds good to me.

 

I  wouldn't need to have an objective like this in my quest log, but whatever.

 

 

Excellent, then we can agree that rewarding combat can be done in a way that completely fits into the current paradigm.

 

...What were we talking about?

 

Yep, now we're getting somewhere.

 

What if the game had a bounty hunter that gives the player completely optional objectives to kill specific enemies/monsters and rewards the player for each kill with xp and gold?

 

That wouldn't be much different from combat xp really, but I guess people are only happy if they are told what to do and have the corresponding quest in their quest log I guess.

 

 

I'm too stupid to have an adventure on my own. Please give me an MMO style quest to collect 6 bear asssholes then a ogre head before I am allowed to level up.

Edited August 17, 2014 by Immortalis

[Tartantyco]

 

 

Probably in the same way how a thief gets better at lockpicking by chopping off an ogre's head and completing the objective? You know, like in the demo?

 

 

...

 

The point is that it is not anymore logical to get XP from kills, so arguing that objective-XP is illogical when you're arguing for an equally illogical is inconsistent. Why are you wasting our time misrepresenting arguments?

 

Nobody that I know of on the objective-based XP side is arguing that the system is logical. We're arguing that it provides a better gameplay result than XP-for-kills.

 

I never wrote that objective xp is illogical.

 

You did so right here, dude.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

What if the game had a bounty hunter that gives the player completely optional objectives to kill specific enemies/monsters and rewards the player for each kill with xp and gold?

 

 

As long as the game provides you with enough opportunities to gain the same amount of xp doing noncombat-oriented stuff the combat-focused guys can't do (because, say, they have brought swift vengeance to the eeevil guy whom you can trick into revealing said noncombat-type quests if you have an appropriately high noncombative reputation), I see no problem with it.

[Helm]

 

 

 

Probably in the same way how a thief gets better at lockpicking by chopping off an ogre's head and completing the objective? You know, like in the demo?

 

 

...

 

The point is that it is not anymore logical to get XP from kills, so arguing that objective-XP is illogical when you're arguing for an equally illogical is inconsistent. Why are you wasting our time misrepresenting arguments?

 

Nobody that I know of on the objective-based XP side is arguing that the system is logical. We're arguing that it provides a better gameplay result than XP-for-kills.

 

I never wrote that objective xp is illogical.

 

You did so right here, dude.

 

I wrote that is unlogical if a killing a beetle cannot be an objective. I never wrote that objective xp in general is illogical, because it isn't.