Experience Point Mechanics - Fighting Enemies

[sibakruom]

Well lets see... we got exactly Zero answers to that question in any of the recent gameplay footage. Instead, we saw Forced combat (rather than any choice...until the Ogre confrontation). We saw Adam having to use up valuable consumables and per day abilities on non-objective based encounters (read: trash mobs), and receiving nothing to show for it, except for a TPK. And, most importantly, we saw pacing that was very similar to the Baldurs Gate games.

 

When this game is still fresh and new, the above can Easily be overlooked. But when it's playthrough #5 do you really think trash mob encounters that net you NOTHING will feel like anything but pointless?

 

Obsidian has stated that PoE would be combat-focused. As such, I expect most non-important combat to be impossible to avoid. So let's take the example we've been talking about: a few unavoidable trash mob encounters leading to a final confrontation that can be solved in many ways.

- kill-XP + objective-XP: each trash mobs encounter give some XP, solving the final confrontation gives some XP (always the same amount, no matter how it's done).

- objective-XP only: only solving the final confrontation gives XP (equivalent to the sum of kill-XP + objective-XP of the previous case).

 

Would you really feel better about having to fight those forced trash mob encounters if they gave a bit of XP? Personally, no. Trash mob encounters will always be filler. And if an objective-XP system leads to the removal of most of those, that would be the biggest point in its favour.

[Silent Winter]

Yes, this is what worries me after the latest gameplay video. Not only is what we've seen full of filler combat, it's hard filler combat. I do not appreciate being forced into a pointless exercise that takes up quite a lot of time (you'll either play optimally and use lots of spells, forcing you to backtrack to the nearest rest spot or play suboptimally and die a lot/take lots of health damage, forcing you to backtrack again). Guess I can level Stealth, though.

No backtracking at least, as you can now rest anywhere (provided no enemies around) as in BG - just need the camping supplies.

Agree that there seems to be hard combat but I don't see it as more or more punishing than in BG.

Will wait and see what the beta-backer feedback is as people can play more freely and explore more of it - if it's wall-to-wall beetles/etc in every area, then I'd be disappointed.

[Zansatsu]

Just my opinion and I could be wrong but if the combat is too challenging with no reward other than an internal pat on the back, and the fact that this game seems to be, at least in part, heavily combat focused, I see people taking the path of least resistance. The will play the game once through to see the story and that's about it.

[Zansatsu]

I will say this though, if when the game comes out, it blows me away and I'm totally converted I will come back and publicly apologize for not being a believer.

[Doppelschwert]

I'd guess filling the bestiary is also a good motivation to slaughter enemies... at least for the completionist in me.

 

Besides, I think you will be able to deal with trash mobs if you only use your per encounter abilities. Adam also only had 5 characters instead of 6 and didn't specialize for the enemy in equipment and stuff. I'd guess there is a broad range of how you can perform depending on both tactical and strategic decisions.

 

I wouldn't take the showing at gamescom as very representative in terms of ressource consumation.

 

So I'm not saying the lack of exp per kill is not an issue, but rather that I can imagine it going both ways, so lets wait and see till monday.

[Stun]

Would you really feel better about having to fight those forced trash mob encounters if they gave a bit of XP? Personally, no. Trash mob encounters will always be filler.

I would, but maybe not for the reasons you think.

 

First off, I'm not so arrogant and elitist as to demand that my RPGs be void of filler combat. I know all great RPGs are going to have it, and I even expect it. (and I suspect their removal will actually make exploration seem rather dull, and maps feel less dense) I simply ask that those encounters at least give me *something* in the way of character advancement.

 

But mostly I want XP for kills in PoE because such a great focus of the game will be on exploration and freedom. I don't want to always feel that the purpose of combat is secondary to some greater objective. Sometimes I just want to kill things because doing so will level me up.

 

I want that awesome feeling that the IE games captured so well: where you see some dangerous and really *tough* looking creature(s) in front of you and the first thing that goes through your mind is....awesome, I bet this guy's worth a ton of XP.

[Namutree]

 

I want that awesome feeling that the IE games captured so well: where you see some dangerous and really *tough* looking creature(s) in front of you and the first thing that goes through your mind is....awesome, I bet this guy's worth a ton of XP.

 

They might still have that; it would just be tied to an objective system. See some hulking monster in the woods, lets call it, "Durga" or something. After you kill it the game shows a list: Durga killed 1/3. Kill three more and you get 300 xp. Now they got you running around looking for more Durga's to kill. It would be exploration, but with a lot of suspense. After all; that corner you haven't checked out might have another Durga to kill.

 

They might have something like that.

[Valorian]

 

I would, but maybe not for the reasons you think.

 

First off, I'm not so arrogant and elitist as to demand that my RPGs be void of filler combat. I know all great RPGs are going to have it, and I even expect it. (and I suspect their removal will actually make exploration seem rather dull, and maps feel less dense) I simply ask that those encounters at least give me *something* in the way of character advancement.

 

But mostly I want XP for kills in PoE because such a great focus of the game will be on exploration and freedom. I don't want to always feel that the purpose of combat is secondary to some greater objective. Sometimes I just want to kill things because doing so will level me up.

 

I want that awesome feeling that the IE games captured so well: where you see some dangerous and really *tough* looking creature(s) in front of you and the first thing that goes through your mind is....awesome, I bet this guy's worth a ton of XP.

 

 

Yes, good combat is like a good cake.

Good combat with xp rewards is like a good cake with tasty icing on it.

 

People shouldn't be discouraged from engaging in combat. Complex tactical decisions are good for the brain.

[Stun]

No backtracking at least, as you can now rest anywhere (provided no enemies around) as in BG - just need the camping supplies.

Camping supplies, Yes. I guess those don't count. I guess it doesn't really matter that they're a limited resource either, and that you most certainly CAN use them all up... fighting trash mobs for no in game reason. And then lets not forget the real kick in the balls: The "objective's" Boss is in the next room. You look at your party and realize that everyone's used up their powerful per day talents and spells. Everyone's Hurt. Hey no problem, just rest. No wait, you can't. You've used up your camping supplies in your previous struggles-for-no-reason.

 

Oops, looks like your options are limited now:

 

1) Backtrack to the nearest inn to get some rest (hey! didn't you say No Backtracking?)

2) Take on the Boss at half strength and without all your big guns and hope he doesn't rip your now-impotent party to shreds.

3) Pray that you can talk your way to a resolution against the boss, even though that is neither what you wanted to do, nor does it jive with your own personal roleplaying.

 

At least if they had given you XP for your efforts against the trash mobs, the blow here wouldn't feel so....pointless.

Edited August 15, 2014 by Stun

[Tartantyco]

fighting trash mobs for no in game reason.

 

I'm not quite sure how you come to this conclusion. If there are enemies between you and the objective, then they are part of the challenge, filler or not. The idea that you have to be directly rewarded for everything you do for that to be of value in the game is just nonsense.

 

Here's the Orge quest challenge: You have to find and kill the ogre. To get there, you have to travel through dangerous territory, so make sure you've planned ahead with the necessary provisions. If you can't fight your way through the "filler" mobs to get to the ogre and kill him, then you're not entitled to the XP you would get for completing that quest.

 

The quest isn't simply fighting(Or talking with) the ogre, it's also the journey there. That's what you get XP for.

[Sarex]

I just hope they won't be stubborn and are willing to change it for the expansion or the next game, if it really does turn out to be a bad decision.

Edited August 15, 2014 by Sarex

[Stun]

I'm not quite sure how you come to this conclusion. If there are enemies between you and the objective, then they are part of the challenge, filler or not.

My apologies if I'm getting the 2 threads where we are discussing this mixed up but I thought I already addressed this point like 3 times.

 

What happens if I'm NOT ON AN OBJECTIVE? Josh said this game will focus heavily on exploration. That means that we should be able to enter a map, and start exploring it. So NO, I'm NOT ok with losing out on XP simply because I decided to clear out that map before getting some "objective" to "go-there-and-do-this". In *my* situation, the enemies I encounter are not "in between me and any objective"....except for maybe my objective to gain combat experience by combatting them.

 

PS:

The idea that you have to be directly rewarded for everything you do for that to be of value in the game is just nonsense.

I don't recall asking to be directly rewarded for everything I do. I'm pretty sure I'm only requesting to be rewarded for...you know... engaging in my character's profession, which I value pretty darn highly in a Role Playing Game. Edited August 15, 2014 by Stun

[Tartantyco]

What happens if I'm NOT ON AN OBJECTIVE? Josh said this game will focus heavily on exploration. That means that we should be able to enter a map, and start exploring it. So NO, I'm NOT ok with losing out on XP simply because I decided to clear out that map before getting some "objective" to "go-there-and-do-this". 

 

You can't lose out on XP that you can't get. Further more, exploration is a reward on its own, and "filler" mobs is the risk you take for exploring. In return, you find new quests that you can get XP from, and you find new items to equip your characters with, and you find out more about the world.

 

 

I don't recall asking to be directly rewarded for everything I do. I'm pretty sure I'm only requesting to be rewarded for...you know... engaging in my character's profession.

 

That is precisely what you're asking for. Also, I'm pretty sure all the other players will be quite happy to know that you've defined what their characters' professions will be.

[Sarex]

Also, I'm pretty sure all the other players will be quite happy to know that you've defined what their characters' professions will be.

 

Facepalm! What would you say are the possible professions in PoE?

[sibakruom]

 

What happens if I'm NOT ON AN OBJECTIVE? Josh said this game will focus heavily on exploration. That means that we should be able to enter a map, and start exploring it. So NO, I'm NOT ok with losing out on XP simply because I decided to clear out that map before getting some "objective" to "go-there-and-do-this". 

 

You can't lose out on XP that you can't get. Further more, exploration is a reward on its own, and "filler" mobs is the risk you take for exploring. In return, you find new quests that you can get XP from, and you find new items to equip your characters with, and you find out more about the world.

 

I think Stun's fear in this case is:

- clear a map, kill a particular monster and get no XP for it.

- later, find a quest in town that asks you to kill this particular monster.

- you directly get the XP for completing the objective "report its death," but miss the XP for completing the objective "kill the monster" (because you skipped it by doing stuffs out of order).

 

That would indeed be a problem if it could happen.

[Stun]

You can't lose out on XP that you can't get.

You can however, waste a whole lot of time doing things that are utterly pointless in game. The very notion is silly. A combat focused RPG that does not reward you for combat. yeah. That makes sense. No wait. it doesn't. at all.

 

 

Further more, exploration is a reward on its own

So is helping out a victim of a pig-stealing Ogre. The difference is you get XP for that. Sounds needlessly arbitrary to me.

 

 

Also, I'm pretty sure all the other players will be quite happy to know that you've defined what their characters' professions will be.

Obsidian decides what the professions will be. I might Play through this game as a Fighter. That means my profession is that of.... FIGHTING. Now what happens if I enter a dungeon and start plying my trade?? Nothing, of course. I must first change my profession to that of "problem-solver", or "treasure hunter" or "full time amateur sparring partner to monsters" Edited August 15, 2014 by Stun

[Amentep]

Besides, everyone knows that chunking monsters is a reward in and to itself.  Hence Gauntlet's popularity.

 

A perfect example why Sacred is probably a dead franchise as of Sacred 3. A RPG game that is combat focused with almost no progression is about as boring as watching paint dry. We are now comparing apples to oranges again.. but so is Gauntlet..

 

By Josh's logic.. Combat in Sacred 3 should be fun enough on it's own.. No need to bribe players with silly things like Item drops.. They should just enjoy stomping the **** out of stuff and call it a day. Don't like my decision? Don't buy the game.

 

 

Heh, I'm enjoying Sacred 3 so far (but it is early yet).  But then I like button mashing games (I've like almost all of the Gauntlet games, for example).  The biggest problem I have isn't the weird progression (you have progression on skills, armor and weapons, and being able to "refund" skill buys allows you to easily try out different build advancement) but that its a Diablo-like game with almost no loot to speak of.  'Tis a weird approach.

 

Mind you I thought Sacred 2's combat wasn't much to write home about (although there's something almost zen about wiping out mobs there, and I admit the blowdart sound is pretty nice to hear wiping out enemies that you can't even see on screen. "Foop, foop, foop" then collect the loot.).

 

Edit: And really, I'm looking for Unbended to give me what I like about the Sacred series.

Edited August 15, 2014 by Amentep

[Zansatsu]

The real problem i'm having with this whole discussion is the fact that both sides think they are right because they are. Myself and others gain a lot of enjoyment from combat and the idea of it crafting our character into a powerful warrior while others find that tedious.  So I've just admitted you're right so lets drop all the attitude back and forth.  But you guys need to understand the REASON this topic has been discussed a ton of times is that a lot of people feel this way on both sides.  This will affect a large portion of the audiences feelings about this game and may turn us away as it would you in the reverse.  We aren't wrong and neither are you. Pepsi or Coke.  

[Tartantyco]

Facepalm! What would you say are the possible professions in PoE?

 

There aren't any professions. Certainly not "pest control". It's an RPG, and characters are defined by the players. That's the point.

 

You can however, waste a whole lot of time doing things that are utterly pointless in game. The very notion is silly. A combat focused RPG that does not reward you for combat. yeah. That makes sense. No wait. it doesn't. at all.

 

 

First of all, stop making XP into the only possible reward. Second, why does it follow that a combat-focused RPG has to reward you for combat? To jump genres, do shooters like Doom reward you for combat? No.

 

So is helping out a victim of a pig-stealing Ogre. The difference is you get XP for that. Sounds needlessly arbitrary to me.

 

 

Don't quote me out of context. I specifically pointed out why exploration is rewarding on its own, without XP-for-kills.

 

Obsidian decides what the professions will be. I might Play through this game as a Fighter. That means my profession is that of.... FIGHING.

 

 

No, Obsidian decides what the classes will be. A "fighter" is not a profession, it is a description of skillsets. Soldier would be a profession.

[PrimeJunta]

A combat focused RPG that does not reward you for combat. yeah. That makes sense. No wait. it doesn't. at all.

Shadowrun Returns is a combat-focused RPG with no combat XP. It has many problems, but XP mechanics are not among them (IMO as always).

[Elerond]

Mass Effects are action rpgs where you don't get xp from combat

Vampire: The Masquerade – Bloodlines is very combat oriented rpg, which don't have xp from combat.

[Stun]

There aren't any professions. Certainly not "pest control". It's an RPG, and characters are defined by the players. That's the point.

In a class based System, Characters are defined by their character classes.

 

 

 

First of all, stop making XP into the only possible reward. Second, why does it follow that a combat-focused RPG has to reward you for combat? To jump genres, do shooters like Doom reward you for combat? No.

1) Obviously XP isn't the only reward for combat. Loot is also a reward, but killing things for just loot is 10 times worse than any problem or issue we are discussing here. So I choose to focus on EXP....which stands for Experience Points. And while it should make total sense that engaging in combat would directly result in a gain of combat experience, I seem to be debating against people who insist that solving a local villager's pig problem, even non-violently, is the better way ONLY way to gain combat experience.

 

2) Why does it follow that a combat focused RPG should reward you for combat? Good question! Though totally obvious. Not being rewarded for something that you'll be doing for the majority of the game is simply a bad idea. Verging on bad design, depending on a game's pacing.

 

3)Shooters tend to not grant XP for kills, true. Of course, most of them don't grant XP for anything, because they lack a leveling mechanic, and they're not RPGs anyway -and- most of them usually aren't advertised as spiritual successors to the Infinity engine games either. (for some reason, this utterly relevant point keeps getting forgotten)

 

 

Don't quote me out of context. I specifically pointed out why exploration is rewarding on its own

Sure... Taking in the sights, admiring the flora, observing the fauna, watching the effects of the wind on the trees and grass. I'll play Skyrim if I want that type of "reward".

 

No, Obsidian decides what the classes will be. A "fighter" is not a profession, it is a description of skillsets.

You're stating an opinion as fact. It is both. Edited August 15, 2014 by Stun

[Zansatsu]

I can name a hundred RPGs that are classic iconic games where you do. Including all the games that inspired this one. Again it comes down to preference.

Edited August 15, 2014 by Zansatsu

[Stun]

Mass Effects are action rpgs where you don't get xp from combat

Vampire: The Masquerade – Bloodlines is very combat oriented rpg, which don't have xp from combat.

Baldurs Gate 1 & 2, and Icewind Dale 1 & 2 are four very combat Oriented RPGs that have Combat XP.

 

I'll rank them a wee bit higher than Mass Effect, Vampire Bloodlines, and Shadow Run returns. If you have a point here, then make it. But until then, citing exceptions to the rule doesn't really get us anywhere.

Edited August 15, 2014 by Stun

[sibakruom]

It's not necessary to reward combat to make a game combat-focused. If you want players to participate in combat instead of just sneaking around, no need to be subtle about it: force them to fight (like Shadowrun Returns did, if I understand PrimeJunta correctly). Then "combat" becomes just "normal gameplay," and if this is not a gameplay I enjoy in itself, then yes, I'm probably playing the wrong game.

That being said, even an objective-XP system could favour combat without forcing it. Honestly, it wouldn't shock me if, while exploring a map, we encounter a particularly tough group of wild animals, and killing the whole group results in the message: "XP granted for killing <wild animals>: 500." No quest associated with them or anything. They're just sitting there and killing them earns XP.
"Objective" can mean a lot of things, and is not limited to explicit quests (which would be a mistake).