No experience from combat

[Ratoo]

Do we know for sure if you only get XP when you finish a quest or can you get XP for advancing a quest?  It'd be more work to implement, but if quests advanced and gave xp for specific areas or groups, that would be neat.

[Helm]

A dev has actually posted about the xp system!

 

Sking, on 21 Aug 2014 - 01:31 AM, said:

Experience is awarded only through quest progression. At certain points during quests a "Quest Update" scroll pops up in the top left and any experience gained is shown in the Combat Log. 

 

 

You may have just missed it 

http://forums.obsidi...tice/?p=1486643

 

IndiraLightfoot, on 21 Aug 2014 - 6:50 PM, said:

Aluminiumtrioxid: Yeah! I'm quite perplexed and taken aback by that. Like SilentWinter wrote earlier: I had expected at least the rudiments of an intricate and new and fresh objective xp system, where xp triggers went off here, there and everywhere! But as things are now, it's only quest xp as far as we know. It's almost bizarre.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if we*ll see a dev post or some lines in a patch update, reading something like this:

"Our fine-meshed objective xp system didn't make the cut, so we scrapped it for the beta build we brought to Cologne. In the next patch, we will have the xp system in place, and we really welcome your feedback on it."

 

If not, I have no clue what happened.

 

Alright folks, well, this certainly answers that: The quest-only xp system is intended this way (perhaps with some long quest being divided into one or two xp chunks before the final xp lump)! So, no mistake, this is what they meant by objective/challenge xp, it seems. I'll be darned.

 

It's a bit like the quest xp system of M&M X, but without the rest of its xp system: without the teachers, and without those progressing skills from rather fast levels, IIRC.

 

I was pretty certain that Quest based XP was part of the design goal... but at least we know now for certain. Sad.

 

Don't give up hope, my friends.

 

[GreyFox]

Just have to pretend there is a DM handing out your exp when you do a certain amount of thing(s).

 

I also much prefer the "objective" label over "quest". 

 

For the people struggling with the idea...just pretend that when you receive experience in PE its like a checkpoint or save-point...in that you get experience at that time based on the stuff you did since the last time you received any experience. And now you have a new starting point for your exp

[IndiraLightfoot]

GreyFox: It sounds fine, I guess, unless you're a poor completionist like me, who also has a knack for disregarding quest-lines and weaving in and out of maps and places, often with the curiously mixed purpose of exploring for fun (and OCD), seeping in culture and history,  as well as seeking out combat challenges. If I trigger a quest, it will by mistake, or in passing, and I will most likely break the precious quest order, and receive no xp at all. Perhaps I can finish the entire game with a level 1 party. How's that for a path of the damned?

[GreyFox]

GreyFox: It sounds fine, I guess, unless you're a poor completionist like me, who also has a knack for disregarding quest-lines and weaving in and out of maps and places, often with the curiously mixed purpose of exploring for fun (and OCD), seeping in culture and history,  as well as seeking out combat challenges. If I trigger a quest, it will by mistake, or in passing, and I will most likely break the precious quest order, and receive no xp at all. Perhaps I can finish the entire game with a level 1 party. How's that for a path of the damned?

 

Actually you sound like me...I did/do that in the other games as well.

 

As a matter of fact take like Dead Space for example. You can use a button to show you the way to go....I always press it then go in the opposite direction and look around.

 

It is a valid concern about breaking the quest lines and such. Like killing this before you get the "quest" to do it. Hopefully you get credit for it when you do it rather than having to have a farmer tell you to...

[cilantroll]

As a fresh set of eyes in this community...

 

Having put in a number of hours into the beta now, I'll count myself in the camp that wants XP to be rewarded from battle. Reading several pages of this thread, I don't get all the knee-jerk reactions putting down this opinion! It's feedback, and we all reserve the right to express it...

 

Anyway--I want combat XP. That doesn't make me an MMO-addict; don't dismiss me outright and sneer something like, "Go back to Diablo." Actually, I think the burden of 'proof' or 'justification' in this case rests with the other side, because combat XP is pretty much an assumed or standard part in "all" CRPGs. 

 

I don't understand the argument that people will automatically grind if XP is given for fights. I did no such thing in the BG series at all. Rather, I enjoyed the freedom to explore the surrounding wilderness, run into bandits, and clear out a non-essential dungeon. I'd get some loot, and feel satisfied my party maybe levelled up once, or is close to; it's 'training,' getting wiser the more you experience in the world. And you know, when I felt it was time, I'd go back and advance the main plot. 

 

Right now in PoE--ignoring that combat is very buggy right now--I don't think I'd get that same enjoyment doing side quests, and running into a massive pack of wolves or whatever. If the stick are brutal encounters, where's the carrot?

 

I also don't understand the argument that if given combat XP, people might go slaughter everyone. Whether I'm an average player or not--I don't, and never did in BG. I like to be immersed, and roleplay--I wouldn't go wipe out a town, so my party didn't. And even for players that might enjoy that--townsfolk only gave 5 or 10 XP anyway, and why risk breaking quests, and creating weird ghost towns?

 

Giving XP for kills is not dumb, and only suitable for those with ADHD. It fosters a sense of progression with characters, and reward. Obsidian has gone to the trouble of designing all these weapons, skills, spells, different enemies, and how they all interact--why then take away the satisfaction of victory, of managing 'correctly' what we have available to us to engineer victory from slim odds? It reduces excitement and anticipation, and at least to me, would make combat a chore.

 

The BG series had great and challenging boss fights--the dragons, Jon Irenicus, the very last battle with Melissan--and afterwards (save the last where you finish the game), you came away breathless. The party was in terrible shape--but you survived! And look at the great loot--and the big chunk of experience! I don't want similar, epic experiences upcoming in PoE to fall flat, in any way, and I say that as a fan and supporter.

[GrinningReaper659]

GreyFox: It sounds fine, I guess, unless you're a poor completionist like me, who also has a knack for disregarding quest-lines and weaving in and out of maps and places, often with the curiously mixed purpose of exploring for fun (and OCD), seeping in culture and history,  as well as seeking out combat challenges. If I trigger a quest, it will by mistake, or in passing, and I will most likely break the precious quest order, and receive no xp at all. Perhaps I can finish the entire game with a level 1 party. How's that for a path of the damned?

 

You do bring up a good point, which to me is the strength of objective XP over other forms. I don't see how kill XP is a good solution to the problem you're presenting, it seems to me that comprehensive objective-based XP is the best option here. Any major overhaul of the XP system may at this point be out of bounds, and I admit that I'd rather see it stay as it is now (once the bugs are worked out) then see combat XP needlessly thrown in, but it seems that the moderate and reasonable solution to all this is comprehensive objective XP.

 

 

I know that you want to seep in the blood of your enemi -- err -- I mean seep in the culture and history, and good on you. After all, the xvarts shot first, I was merely defending myself. Objective-based XP affords everyone the opportunity to progress, whether they want to explore a wilderness area peacefully, by massacring all its inhabitants, or myriad possibilities in between. The exploration of a ruins could be an objective; heck some objectives could easily be centered on combat such as clearing a road or area of dangerous monsters while some could be more focused on tasks which must be accomplished diplomatically such as easing tensions between two populations of kith without resorting to slaughtering one side or the other.

[Shdy314]

GreyFox: It sounds fine, I guess, unless you're a poor completionist like me, who also has a knack for disregarding quest-lines and weaving in and out of maps and places, often with the curiously mixed purpose of exploring for fun (and OCD), seeping in culture and history,  as well as seeking out combat challenges. If I trigger a quest, it will by mistake, or in passing, and I will most likely break the precious quest order, and receive no xp at all. Perhaps I can finish the entire game with a level 1 party. How's that for a path of the damned?

If you break a quest by doing it in a strange order that has nothing to do with killxp and is a failure of the devs to fix it during beta. I am not sure why we need killxp for people who claim they want an IE game but expect to try and skip as much of the main quest and side quests as possible. Might as well ask why you are forced to play a class. It's rather intrinsic to the whole experience to go on at least some quests. You have a strange form of OCD. Seems more like ADHD. My OCD forces me to explore everything possible before moving on.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

GreyFox: It sounds fine, I guess, unless you're a poor completionist like me, who also has a knack for disregarding quest-lines and weaving in and out of maps and places, often with the curiously mixed purpose of exploring for fun (and OCD), seeping in culture and history,  as well as seeking out combat challenges. If I trigger a quest, it will by mistake, or in passing, and I will most likely break the precious quest order, and receive no xp at all. Perhaps I can finish the entire game with a level 1 party. How's that for a path of the damned?

 

You do bring up a good point, which to me is the strength of objective XP over other forms. I don't see how kill XP is a good solution to the problem you're presenting, it seems to me that comprehensive objective-based XP is the best option here. Any major overhaul of the XP system may at this point be out of bounds, and I admit that I'd rather see it stay as it is now (once the bugs are worked out) then see combat XP needlessly thrown in, but it seems that the moderate and reasonable solution to all this is comprehensive objective XP.

 

 

I know that you want to seep in the blood of your enemi -- err -- I mean seep in the culture and history, and good on you. After all, the xvarts shot first, I was merely defending myself. Objective-based XP affords everyone the opportunity to progress, whether they want to explore a wilderness area peacefully, by massacring all its inhabitants, or myriad possibilities in between. The exploration of a ruins could be an objective; heck some objectives could easily be centered on combat such as clearing a road or area of dangerous monsters while some could be more focused on tasks which must be accomplished diplomatically such as easing tensions between two populations of kith without resorting to slaughtering one side or the other.

 

If objectives were that varied, that recurring, and that well-blended into the gameplay, I'd be more than satisfied with objective xp. As you probably already know by now, I was until recently a proponent of this new and fresh objective xp system that was coming our way, courtesy of Obsidian - one of my favourite game dev companies. However, seven hours into this beta build (full of bugs, of course, including quest-related ones), playing in my quirky style, as always, I have come to the realisation that it simply doesn't work for me. It's not enough in a game that isn't as ambitious RPG- and dialogue-wise as I hope and believe T:ToN will be. The implemented objective xp in PoE, as it stands, is nothing but quest xp, with the rest of the xp system gutted out (traps, diplomacy, locks, combat, you name it). Apparently, I seem to need a more constant flow of gameplay rewards. It's become a habit, and my CRP-ing's almost become hardwired that way - it was weird to discover it like this, so abruptly, but there you have it.

 

Will I enjoy the game anyway? Hopefully. Will I replay it as much as I did in BG or NWN2, for instance. I really doubt it, as long as the objective xp isn't designed in that varied and more natural and regular fashion you just delineated.

Edited August 21, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Shdy314]

 

 

GreyFox: It sounds fine, I guess, unless you're a poor completionist like me, who also has a knack for disregarding quest-lines and weaving in and out of maps and places, often with the curiously mixed purpose of exploring for fun (and OCD), seeping in culture and history,  as well as seeking out combat challenges. If I trigger a quest, it will by mistake, or in passing, and I will most likely break the precious quest order, and receive no xp at all. Perhaps I can finish the entire game with a level 1 party. How's that for a path of the damned?

 

You do bring up a good point, which to me is the strength of objective XP over other forms. I don't see how kill XP is a good solution to the problem you're presenting, it seems to me that comprehensive objective-based XP is the best option here. Any major overhaul of the XP system may at this point be out of bounds, and I admit that I'd rather see it stay as it is now (once the bugs are worked out) then see combat XP needlessly thrown in, but it seems that the moderate and reasonable solution to all this is comprehensive objective XP.

 

 

I know that you want to seep in the blood of your enemi -- err -- I mean seep in the culture and history, and good on you. After all, the xvarts shot first, I was merely defending myself. Objective-based XP affords everyone the opportunity to progress, whether they want to explore a wilderness area peacefully, by massacring all its inhabitants, or myriad possibilities in between. The exploration of a ruins could be an objective; heck some objectives could easily be centered on combat such as clearing a road or area of dangerous monsters while some could be more focused on tasks which must be accomplished diplomatically such as easing tensions between two populations of kith without resorting to slaughtering one side or the other.

 

If objectives were that varied, that recurring, and that well-blended into the gameplay, I'd be more than satisfied with an objective xp. As you probably already know by now, I was until recently a proponent of this new and fresh objective xp system that was coming our way, courtesy of Obsidian - one of my favourite game dev companies. However, seven hours into this beta build (full of bugs, of course, including quest-related ones), playing in my quirky style, as always, I have come to the realisation that it simply doesn't work for me. It's not enough in a game that isn't as ambitious RPG- and dialogue-wise, as I hope and believe, T:ToN will be. The implemented objective xp in PoE, as it stands, is nothing but quest xp, with the rest of the xp system gutted out (traps, diplomacy, locks, combat, you name it). Apparently, I seem to need a more constant flow of gameplay rewards. It's become a habit, and my CRP-ing's almost become hardwired that way - it was weird to discover it like this, so abruptly, but there you have it.

 

Will I enjoy the game anyway? Hopefully. Will I replay it as much as I did in BG or NWN2, for instance. I really doubt it, as long as the objective xp isn't designed in that varied and more natural and regular fashion you just delineated.

 

I think most people can get behind some xp rewards for locations you discover in the wilderness. Sure quests may bring you there anyways but it's good to give the player a cookie for exploring the world.

[Gromnir]

btw, the only thing wrong with quest and task experience is that like so much else in the game, it is not freaking working.  if our quest log disappears same as our companion mage's grimoire, then we ain't getting xp for doing quests and task.

 

and serious folks, if you thinks you is coming up with a new pov on this, you ain't. back in 2001-2003, the black isle folks were alternatively working on either baldur's gate 3 or fallout 3, and at that time the advantages and disadvantages o' ad hoc v . quest and task based xp awards were debated into insensibility. the black isle/obsidian guys has been vocal proponents o' quest awards for a Long time, and we has yet to see a new argument in favor o' an ad hoc approach.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[colinrr100]

Forgive me if I am repeating something already suggested, I came into this discussion late skipped through most of the 21 pages. Since they have a reputation system why not use that to solve this little debate. If you actively seek and destroy all life in the territory you build a reputation for cruelty and recklessness. If you avoid monsters that threaten civilization you earn a reputation for cowardice and selfishness. But if you fully explore a map without killing the forest animals you earn reputation for pioneering and cleverness. With this you choose how you want to be perceived and "grow" your character without XP per kill.

[GreyFox]

Forgive me if I am repeating something already suggested, I came into this discussion late skipped through most of the 21 pages. Since they have a reputation system why not use that to solve this little debate. If you actively seek and destroy all life in the territory you build a reputation for cruelty and recklessness. If you avoid monsters that threaten civilization you earn a reputation for cowardice and selfishness. But if you fully explore a map without killing the forest animals you earn reputation for pioneering and cleverness. With this you choose how you want to be perceived and "grow" your character without XP per kill.

 

If I'm making my way through a forest and some beetles or lions attack me and I defend myself there is no reason in the world I should get some sort of recklessness or cruel reputation.

 

Furthermore about that in general...who the hell is telling everyone I'm cruel to animals?

Are there city and state spies in the trees watching me? I never understand that nonsense...how things that happen deep away from society affect my standing with a civilization that would have no way of knowing about these events.

 

In a way I like how PE is handling some of the rep...in that your standing is different with each faction or city.

[PrimeJunta]

GreyFox: It sounds fine, I guess, unless you're a poor completionist like me, who also has a knack for disregarding quest-lines and weaving in and out of maps and places, often with the curiously mixed purpose of exploring for fun (and OCD), seeping in culture and history,  as well as seeking out combat challenges. If I trigger a quest, it will by mistake, or in passing, and I will most likely break the precious quest order, and receive no xp at all. Perhaps I can finish the entire game with a level 1 party. How's that for a path of the damned?

 

If that happens then the quest/XP system is broken. For quest/objective XP to work, it has to be robust; if it doesn't allow for doing things in the 'wrong' order then it's broken.

 

I'm not too worried about this either; FO:NV had something similar and the quests triggered and completed just fine. The only way you'd lose them is if you did something that changed the landscape so much that they'd become redundant, like killing someone important to the quest or completing another quest that depopulated an area.

[Helm]

Do we know for sure if you only get XP when you finish a quest or can you get XP for advancing a quest?  It'd be more work to implement, but if quests advanced and gave xp for specific areas or groups, that would be neat.

Each quest has little mini objectives and you get some XP for each one you complete. That is the only way to get XP in this game. You won't get any XP for combat, solving puzzles, learning spells, picking locks, disarming traps, etc. like in the IE games.

 

BTW, the quest system is also broken. If you leave the village to go exploring without talking to everyone first and then clear out the surrounding areas, then you could end up receiving absolutely no XP at all.

[Namutree]

If Obsidian forces us to do quests for xp; I want my money back. If this claim is true; anyone whom gave money to this project on the basis of the IE experience is entitled to a refund in full. Not a single IE game did something so awful and game breaking. 

 

OBSIDIAN! DONT GO DOWN THIS ROAD! GIVE US OBJECTIVE OR KILL XP! LET US EXPLORE AND HAVE FUN!!!

[Tartantyco]

If Obsidian forces us to do quests for xp; I want my money back. If this claim is true; anyone whom gave money to this project on the basis of the IE experience is entitled to a refund in full. Not a single IE game did something so awful and game breaking. 

 

OBSIDIAN! DONT GO DOWN THIS ROAD! GIVE US OBJECTIVE OR KILL XP! LET US EXPLORE AND HAVE FUN!!!

 

Oh look, another kill-XP proponent who has an extremely narrow definition of the IE experience.

[Ahvz]

I'm okay with this system, but I wouldn't mind if the quest XP was split into smaller, more frequent rewards. I also would be okay with less quest XP if exploration XP could be added - perhaps for just lighting up certain notable areas in a map/dungeon. I think that would go a long way towards making the people who use kill XP as exploration XP happy, but still not only incentivize combat solutions.

[Namutree]

 

If Obsidian forces us to do quests for xp; I want my money back. If this claim is true; anyone whom gave money to this project on the basis of the IE experience is entitled to a refund in full. Not a single IE game did something so awful and game breaking. 

 

OBSIDIAN! DONT GO DOWN THIS ROAD! GIVE US OBJECTIVE OR KILL XP! LET US EXPLORE AND HAVE FUN!!!

 

Oh look, another kill-XP proponent who has an extremely narrow definition of the IE experience.

 

Actually I'm a proponent of BG-style exploration and non-quest level progression. Whether they achieve this through kill-xp or objective xp doesn't really matter as long as the basic effect is achieved.

 

There is nothing narrow about not being forced to do quest in order get xp for an IE game. Can you or anyone in the world give me even one example of a play through of an IE game they ONLY got xp from a quest? Xp is not some trivial detail; it is central to the game's system. Are you suggesting that the leveling system (Which is fueled by xp) isn't important in a game about leveling up?

Edited August 22, 2014 by Namutree

[Zierry]

No xp for killing? Can you tell me why i cleared whole map from animals. I am feeling like killing maniac even then before.  

[Tartantyco]

 Xp is not some trivial detail; it is central to the game's system. Are you suggesting that the leveling system (Which is fueled by xp) isn't important in a game about leveling up?

 

 

I guess I missed the memo where they were removing all XP.

[Wintersong]

If Obsidian forces us to do quests for xp; I want my money back. If this claim is true; anyone whom gave money to this project on the basis of the IE experience is entitled to a refund in full. Not a single IE game did something so awful and game breaking. 

 

OBSIDIAN! DONT GO DOWN THIS ROAD! GIVE US OBJECTIVE OR KILL XP! LET US EXPLORE AND HAVE FUN!!!

BG games used AD&D and this game doesn't use anything similar!! How could the experience be similar if we don't use a retro-clone???? And don't get me started on the lack of dual classing for humans. Or multiclassing for non-humans!!!!     

 

You can still go to explore without xp on kills. Fun factor is subjective though. Be it killing stuff, reading the world's flavor texts, dealing with the companions,... so to each his own.

 

But if there is no "ethereal reward" for killing stuff, it's obvious that you need a robust system as alternative. Things like killing the ogre first should be acounted for, so the quest system can actually be a real alternative. Dropping some rewards for reaching certain points isn't bad per se. But xp on killing is only one of the many ways that you can use to reward players so they level up. Main issue is that a game is a scripted non-dynamic enviroment so whatever system you use, it must be rock solid.

[Giubba]

 

 

If Obsidian forces us to do quests for xp; I want my money back. If this claim is true; anyone whom gave money to this project on the basis of the IE experience is entitled to a refund in full. Not a single IE game did something so awful and game breaking. 

 

OBSIDIAN! DONT GO DOWN THIS ROAD! GIVE US OBJECTIVE OR KILL XP! LET US EXPLORE AND HAVE FUN!!!

 

Oh look, another kill-XP proponent who has an extremely narrow definition of the IE experience.

 

Actually I'm a proponent of BG-style exploration and non-quest level progression. Whether they achieve this through kill-xp or objective xp doesn't really matter as long as the basic effect is achieved.

 

There is nothing narrow about not being forced to do quest in order get xp for an IE game. Can you or anyone in the world give me even one example of a play through of an IE game they ONLY got xp from a quest? Xp is not some trivial detail; it is central to the game's system. Are you suggesting that the leveling system (Which is fueled by xp) isn't important in a game about leveling up?

 

 

Closest thing is Torment but even Torment had a certain amount of fight.

[Namutree]

 

If Obsidian forces us to do quests for xp; I want my money back. If this claim is true; anyone whom gave money to this project on the basis of the IE experience is entitled to a refund in full. Not a single IE game did something so awful and game breaking. 

 

OBSIDIAN! DONT GO DOWN THIS ROAD! GIVE US OBJECTIVE OR KILL XP! LET US EXPLORE AND HAVE FUN!!!

BG games used AD&D and this game doesn't use anything similar!! How could the experience be similar if we don't use a retro-clone???? And don't get me started on the lack of dual classing for humans. Or multiclassing for non-humans!!!!     

 

You can still go to explore without xp on kills. Fun factor is subjective though. Be it killing stuff, reading the world's flavor texts, dealing with the companions,... so to each his own.

 

Never said we need kill-xp or nothing. We need kill-xp OR exploration-xp. Leveling is at the heart of any rpg; this is not some minor issue. I simply cannot level without doing quests. This fact is game breaking. ALL the IE games let you gain xp without doing quests. This game was pitched as a spiritual successor; not just some RPG Obsidian felt like making. 

 

We were promised the epic exploration of BG. Can any one please tell me how such a thing is even possible when the primary benefit of exploring is simply gone.

Edited August 22, 2014 by Namutree

[IndiraLightfoot]

Namutree: You're supposed to be item hunting, mostly to craft something nice, like a folklore music box with an integrated coffee grinder.