Been playing for about two hours. Each time I'm hit with a dialogue option that has a stat or skill attached to it, I've found that when I choose it, nothing really happens. I mean in the sense that nothing really new opens up, no new dialogue, no special action that you wouldn't get had you not picked that special dialogue. Is this for the beta only or am I just not meant to really use that mechanic in Dyrford?

Did you succeed at a Lore check when talking to the alchemist about the girl? I'm pretty sure you can't get that information without the skill.

Hmm.  When I was talking to Medreth, I had a special dialogue choice that added to my journal notes on the quest - that he seemed not really dressed for the part.  Can't yet say what'll come of that, but maybe it's just the specific options you've run into thus far?

What exactly do you mean by "nothing happens"? As an example, I used Lore and Resolve to gain clues as to the disappearance of the nobleman's daughter when talking to the innkeeper.

Edited August 19, 201411 yr by Tartantyco

If you have high enough perception, when you do speech option with intelligence check with Medreth, you note that he(or was it she...) seems annoyed at your question

So thats nice, high enough perception does stuff like that

 

Also, personality based dialog options seem to be less about something happening and more about fleshing out your personality reputation, which felt odd to me at first since I'm too used to things next to dialog options being kinda like what skill checks are in fallout. Also, lore, perception and int checks seem to give you more information about people when you ask them stuff

 

But yeah, not every option with skill is supposed to be useful <_< So far though, lore options  seem to always give you more information

Edited August 19, 201411 yr by BrokenMask

It must just be me, because I've hit everything you guys are talking about. Nothing appears in my notes or anything.

I wanted to give a couple notes on some of the choices we've made for the dialogue system here, so it's easier for everybody to distinguish between what's intended and what's not.

 

One choice we made is that a skill check is not necessarily a "win button" for a given encounter. This is a departure from many recent RPGs, and more in keeping with traditional pen and paper, where, sure, you can do a diplomacy check on an ogre, but he might just read that as you being soft and take it as a reason to rip your legs off. Skill checks in PoE open new paths to take in dialogue, some of them beneficial, some of them inconsequential, and some of them ineffectual. On balance they tend to help more than harm, I'd say. But we didn't want players to turn their brains off and just click the option that had a skill check associated with it, knowing it would lead to the best outcome. We want that element of the unexpected that makes the experience more engaging. To that end, we've also tried to include a number of dialogues where the "optimal" outcome is primarily related to the player paying attention to the character he or she is talking to, and choosing to treat that NPC in a way that the NPC is able to relate to on some level.

 

Another thing you'll see, and you'll see it all over the place in the beta, are personality reputation options. These are things like "aggressive," "benevolent," "cruel," etc. These generally do not lead to a drastically different course in a given dialogue, but over time the game keeps track of what kind of character you're roleplaying as, and there will be reactivity to it - a shady character might prefer to employ someone he knows has a reputation for deceit, for instance. Or a particularly honest player might be able to later use that reputation for honesty as a means of convincing people of his argument. (Personally I think it's cooler when we don't display that a given choice is cruel/benevolent/etc., and there is an option to hide them for a more organic experience.)

 

So for purposes of the beta, it's true, these personality reputation options will seem to do little to nothing. Over the course of the game, we are hoping it helps contribute to a feeling that the specific way you've chosen to roleplay your character in dialogue - not just the big decisions you've made - makes a difference to the way the world relates to you. 

 

** minor beta spoilers**

 

The posters in this thread are correct that in the beta, skill checks can get you new information about the missing noble girl - the bartender, for example, can be persuaded to cough up a useful lead. (And actually two of the ways to convince him require a certain level of personality reputation, either benevolent or honest, which means they're probably not attainable in the beta.) The potion seller gives you the same lead without need of a skill check, but a skill check does enhance your understanding of what's really going on. In either case there should hopefully be a journal addendum once the currier Trygil's name comes up.

 

** end spoilers **

 

Really appreciate the feedback, btw. And if you find that you're experiencing bugs that are causing journal entries not to show up or whatever, please make sure to report them and I'll make sure they get taken care of. Thanks!

Hi Eric, thank you for the clarification, it definitely helps me understand what you guys are going for.

 

I do have kind of mixed feelings about this part though:

 

To that end, we've also tried to include a number of dialogues where the "optimal" outcome is primarily related to the player paying attention to the character he or she is talking to, and choosing to treat that NPC in a way that the NPC is able to relate to on some level.

 

While I agree that it's cool to reward the player for paying attention, I'm worried this sort of takes away from the idea of character skill being important, more important than player skill even. I would think that a character that is good at understanding people (good at Insight in D&D terms, perhaps, I suppose it would be Perception in PoE?) would have these sort of opportunities even if the player's not very good at reading people.
 

Go Obsidian! This is the future of crpgs in terms or roleplay!

No auto win button confirmed. Yay!

The potion seller

 

 

 

Potion seller, you say?

Edited August 19, 201411 yr by Tartantyco

 I'm worried this sort of takes away from the idea of character skill being important, more important than player skill even.

 

Totally valid concern. A few things to know about this:

 

- Paying close attention is important sometimes, but for a lot of our "optimal"-feeling options, a skill check will also be involved. So good for you figuring out that some character is susceptible to flattery, but if your Resolve is too low, you won't be able to flatter in a way that doesn't seem hollow.

 

- It's often not the kind of logic that would require a high perception - just common sense in many cases. If you take the Perception option to tell the currier that no woman would ever lay with someone who smells as bad as he does, yeah he probably won't be as forthcoming with you. So maybe you want to think twice about choosing it in the first place even though it says [Perception] in front of it. Looking for some level of thought, not necessarily brilliant levels of deduction. Anything that requires a brilliant deduction will generally be gated behind an appropriate skill check.

 

- I would urge any player to really roleplay his or her character. It's not something I can enforce on my end so much as encourage, but I would want players to choose options based on how they think and what they would say. There are a number of other systems choices we've made here (personality rep and background come to mind, as well as our companion interactions) to try to help the player to develop a character over the course of the story rather than to just play some empty, static avatar. Hopefully it gives a little more meaning to the overall experience.

 

- I have to be careful with my use of "optimal" in reference to quest outcomes. What I generally mean is an outcome that avoids conflict, not necessarily the outcome with the most favorable end result. The idea being, if you're going to skip a fight, we want it to feel like it's a reward for both player and character ingenuity. Otherwise you've just missed out on gameplay. (Which I'll grant you some people prefer.)

 

All that said, if you find that some interaction really forces you to metagame to get the option you want, and requires you to act out-of-character, that's a serious narrative issue, so go ahead and report that as a bug. 

Hey Eric, I have a question relevant to the skill system. Will there be more skills in a later build to diversify point allocation on characters?

Edited August 19, 201411 yr by Osvir

i absolutely love what you are doing with the skill checks in all possible regards - this is the future of CRPG indeed

Eric that sounds so good! I really like the way you are tackling this. And that you can turn off the hints of a behaviour being cruel/honest etc. is just the icing on the cake. I hate "hand holding" in all games but in cRPGs like this even more. Really good choices so cheers to Eric and the rest of Obsidian.

I really like the choices you made for the dialogue system, especially the personality traits. Some are a bit harder to figure out than others (for example, [passionate] is much more complex than the stereotypical [agressive] ), but overall they work very well I think.

 

One thing I noticed though is that sometimes dialogue options I choose don't disappear, they remain but are sort of greyed out. Choosing them again leads to the exact same answer as before. I know other games use mechanics like these to indicate that I've "asked this question before", but it's not quite consistent - other dialogue options disappear entirely after being chosen and I can't quite figure out the difference between the two types. Is this intentional? I'm also not quite sold on the remaining-but-greyed-out dialogue options, it just breaks immersion too much to be able to repeat the same line over and over with NPCs just playing along, instead of hitting you over the head with a pipe eventually.

 

...no woman would ever lay with someone ...

Leave it to the Codex to be the grammar nerds. I think this is supposed to be lie. I'm not sure if it's actual dialogue, but I thought I'd bring it up just in case.

Based on the developer's explanation in this thread, it sounds fantastic what they are doing in regards to the conversation system. I just hope you comminicate it to all the other players in the final game so they will also understand it.

 

...no woman would ever lay with someone ...

Leave it to the Codex to be the grammar nerds. I think this is supposed to be lie. I'm not sure if it's actual dialogue, but I thought I'd bring it up just in case.

 

Busted! No, was just a lazy post - not in the game.

 

Osvir, to your question, I don't have much say over the skill system other than how we do skill checks in dialogue. But our systems guys will be addressing all the beta feedback they can, so I'm sure it'll get evaluated. This kind of feedback is very useful to us - thanks for taking the time.

Just a thought, if you have a reputation for deceit, doesn't that mean you are not actually very good at it? 

 

 

Anyways, I really like the system, but I wonder if it would be advantageous to have a personality "level up" for our characters at the start since we are level 5 and we would enter this area presumably with some personality points built up.

Just a thought, if you have a reputation for deceit, doesn't that mean you are not actually very good at it? 

:D ..but guessing that even if the game keeps track of which way your face keeps turning, the game very deliberately won't comment on your reputation directly. I'd probably let the player open up extra dialogue eventually, for example. That you've grown so comfortable being a tremendous law-abiding zealot, that you can make great speeches about purifying unbelievers and sinners, while alluding to past events and very, very large piles of white ash, without falling over on the ground from laughing fits - that sort of thing.

Just a thought, if you have a reputation for deceit, doesn't that mean you are not actually very good at it? 

 

Yet, still there are politicians.

 

Just a thought, if you have a reputation for deceit, doesn't that mean you are not actually very good at it? 

 

Yet, still there are politicians.

 

 

Zing!

And theirs no low intelligence dialog as far as a can tell. witch a is a huge let down.

It's because it's a next generation game. People can be dumber than dirt but still talk up a pretty good speech. You know, like well trained parrots with script-writers. Very modern.