No experience from combat

[hairyscotsman2]

The items and money (to buy items) gained for some combats make up for the lack of xp. Both serve to increase the character power and durability.

Edited August 20, 2014 by hairyscotsman2

[redneckdevil]

I have a question, for anyone who has played the beta....how does the system not work and fail?

Im not talking from a "traditions (aka this is hiw the older games did it) standpoint or "emotional (i dont feel awesome not being rewarded by my every action) standpoint, i mean down to the nitty gritty...is this game unplayable (aka cannot proceed or complete) without kill exp?

we was told that playing the main quest only we would be able to beat the game, so until its proven that we CANNOT finish and play the game doing just the main quests, then its safe to say that kill exp isnt actually needed.

tbh i think both sides (even the side i guess im on for no kill exp because its not needed other than a "feelgood" mechanic) we cannot actually say if its a good idea or no because we dont have the full game infront of us. Now everything in the beta is totally doable without kill exp, but this is a small part.

 

I think with this game we need to open our eyes and enjoy the nostalgia of the old games but realize its the old games feel with a new format. Its like casters, if u want to do nothing but cast spells only then yeah ur gonna be resting OR u can save on ur camping supplies and pick up a musket and stay back range dealing death that way and being smart with ur spells. Ever since i did that to my mage and took that damn wand away from him, ive actually gone 3 hours counting and havent rested yet though i fully agree mileage may vary.

Ok mumbojumbo rant over, im jumping back in and seeing what this pool of blood will give me if i play "nice" hehe

Edited August 20, 2014 by redneckdevil

[Panteleimon]

 

 

Two years and one beta version later, all I can see is that many proponents of Sawyer's XP design have either changed sides or went into hiding after playing the beta

 

Now that you mention it the experience thread in the gameplay discussion forum is missing a lot of people from the previous thread who where very active in the thread before the beta.

 

The one thing that hasn't changed is that the hottest thread on the forum (which is the one about combat xp) is completely ignored by the developers.

 

 

Right, because publicly weighing in on a thread that most closely resembles a middle school cafeteria won't make it degenerate even further into screeching white-noise or anything.

 

The devs are acutely aware of the "passion" level on the forums and have evidently chosen to use it more as a listening post than a sounding board as development progresses.

Edited August 20, 2014 by Panteleimon

[IndiraLightfoot]

redneckdevil: Read the new thread under "Combat and Mechanics":

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/67140-experience-point-system-in-the-beta-and-onwards/

 

Seriously, read the posts in that thread from the beginning, and soon you'll know which problems will arise with the current system in the beta build.

[Dezlok]

i think some kind of xp reward should be in order even if its minimal compared to completing objectives and quests, dont see why this cant be added into the  difficulty scale as well maybe more xp from enemies in lower  settings?

[sparklecat]

 

It's penalising the roleplayer to make it mandatory to wander around killing things without an in-game reason if you want your character to be at the expected level for combat encounters later on down the line.

That's not true afaik. Staying on the critical path only will still provide you the XP needed to complete the game. XP gained on exploration / non crit path is just extra. You should hit the level cap either way but the latter method may get you there faster.

 

Are you talking about the old IE games?  Because I was.

[Gfted1]

 

 

It's penalising the roleplayer to make it mandatory to wander around killing things without an in-game reason if you want your character to be at the expected level for combat encounters later on down the line.

That's not true afaik. Staying on the critical path only will still provide you the XP needed to complete the game. XP gained on exploration / non crit path is just extra. You should hit the level cap either way but the latter method may get you there faster.

 

Are you talking about the old IE games?  Because I was.

 

No sorry, I thought you ware talking about PoE.

[Sarex]

The one thing that hasn't changed is that the hottest thread on the forum (which is the one about combat xp) is completely ignored by the developers.

 

Devs here usually avoid topics where the discussion is heated, because it usually means they have to chose a side and that is not in their interest. They will chime in when someone is factually wrong, or they have some new info that will shed light on the matter.

 

To be honest the devs post more on other forums then here, or at least that was the case in the recent past.

[Helm]

The items and money (to buy items) gained for some combats make up for the lack of xp. Both serve to increase the character power and durability.

You gain resources from combat, but combat also costs resources.

 

The items that you receive from combat are mostly only for crafting. The item drops are usually not high quality, so that people who dislike combat (which I believe are the target audience of this game) don't whine about being deprived of good loot. If you don't like crafting (a substantial amount of players don't) then combat is completely pointless.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

 

 

Two years and one beta version later, all I can see is that many proponents of Sawyer's XP design have either changed sides or went into hiding after playing the beta

 

Now that you mention it the experience thread in the gameplay discussion forum is missing a lot of people from the previous thread who where very active in the thread before the beta.

 

The one thing that hasn't changed is that the hottest thread on the forum (which is the one about combat xp) is completely ignored by the developers.

 

 

Right, because publicly weighing in on a thread that most closely resembles a middle school cafeteria won't make it degenerate even further into screeching white-noise or anything.

 

The devs are acutely aware of the "passion" level on the forums and have evidently chosen to use it more as a listening post than a sounding board as development progresses.

 

Heh! Pretty nice description. Though, I must say that Josh has popped his head in threads and given clear arguments and opinions, and also thrown out interesting questions at times, in topics even more hotly debated than this, so I'd presume that if he feels like it, he wouldn't hesitate for one sec.

[sparklecat]

 

No sorry, I thought you ware talking about PoE.

 

Yeah, I was saying that it's something I don't want to see wind up in PoE - attaching XP to killing optional critters to the point where it's actually a meaningful gain seems like a good way to make it so it's something you have to do if you want to keep up.  If they were to implement kill XP in such a way that it simply became another option - you can do non-essential quests or kill non-essential things while wandering to get you to the level cap faster, or just stay on the critical path for a slower progression - I'd be absolutely fine with that.  But I could see how having both available could lead to much faster progression than they want to have or can reasonably balance for.

[sparklecat]

 

The items and money (to buy items) gained for some combats make up for the lack of xp. Both serve to increase the character power and durability.

You gain resources from combat, but combat also costs resources.

 

The items that you receive from combat are mostly only for crafting. The item drops are usually not high quality, so that people who dislike combat (which I believe are the target audience of this game) don't whine about being deprived of good loot. If you don't like crafting (a substantial amount of players don't) then combat is completely pointless.

 

Well, unless you enjoy combat in and of itself. 

[Helm]

 

 

The items and money (to buy items) gained for some combats make up for the lack of xp. Both serve to increase the character power and durability.

You gain resources from combat, but combat also costs resources.

 

The items that you receive from combat are mostly only for crafting. The item drops are usually not high quality, so that people who dislike combat (which I believe are the target audience of this game) don't whine about being deprived of good loot. If you don't like crafting (a substantial amount of players don't) then combat is completely pointless.

 

Well, unless you enjoy combat in and of itself. 

 

Yes, I do, that is why item drops should also be removed. I am fine with finding what I need in a treasure chest in some corner of the dungeon.

 

I also enjoy sidequesting in and of itself, therefore XP for sidequesting should not be rewarded either.

 

That is obviously the description of the best RPG ever. Why couldn't BioWare think of this?

Edited August 20, 2014 by Helm

[Zansatsu]

The argument against Kill xp seems to be that you can't gain enough lvls doing the main quest line while trying to find non-combat methods to complete your objectives right? That seems like a game design problem that could be fixed quite easily without removing kill xp no? What am I missing? The area's you are directed to through the main quest hubs and even the side quests in the area should coincide with the developers desired character lvl at that point. So should you decide to do a little side questing you shouldn't be outgunned if combat becomes unavoidable no? Should you come across an area that is too tough for you perhaps logically you could say, "well I will mark this on my map to come back to later" because given the lvl cap you should reach no matter what, NO AREA WILL BE OFF LIMITS FOREVER.  Am I taking crazy pills?

[kozzy]

I don't mind it to be honest, should take away some of the grindy aspects of some rpgs. If they do add exp for killing enemies I hope it is just a little bit and that you get a hell of a lot mroe for doing quests.

Edited August 20, 2014 by kozzy

[damage991]

I'd also feel like combat was more rewarding if there were exp from killing monsters.  Even if it was minimal.

[redneckdevil]

redneckdevil: Read the new thread under "Combat and Mechanics":

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/67140-experience-point-system-in-the-beta-and-onwards/

 

Seriously, read the posts in that thread from the beginning, and soon you'll know which problems will arise with the current system in the beta build.

Ty but i have read the thread ) reason why im asking is because im not yet seeing any actual ingame problems by not having kill exp. Im mainly seeing "i killed something so i want to be rewarded" or "without kill exp i dont see a reason to explore and waste resourses" or "the older games all had kill exp" or "with no kill exp im wasting resourses and not being rewarded".

3 of those reasons are basically an emotional problem and not an ingame problem. I dont mean to call said people "emo" or anything bad, not at all, just saying that those are problems in the emotional level and not a physical problem.

The "wasting resourses and not being rewarded" is kinda flawed. If ur in the field with a bunch of insects or animals, u may feel that way because those are situations where only crafting materials (and i havent touched crafting yet so cant vouch) so out in the wild, i was cautious. Then i went underground the tower...the murderhobo came out and i slayed everyone down there. Basically wanted to know what the secrets were and also because this run everyone was dropping phat loot. Got tons of weapons, gold, and magical items that i was able to quickly buy me a sweet expensive weapon from th shopkeeper.

so my opionion on the outdoors wikdlife and a reason to use resourses for it is a very old tried and true method that u wouldnt have to resort to kill exp.....its the chance for hidden loot, events, or knowledge. With that players will have a drive to explore and know they are gambling for a chance for something nice and u dont have to resort to kill exp. Players will weigh in if they feel like they wanna use resourses and explore. That way the players are driven either by reason or curiosity to explore or not to explore. Just an idea, came to me as i remembered older games how i woukd explore old areas where i had to fight but was to high lvl to gain any exp but still took my time to see if i missed anything or not and thought something like that could help with the "resourses" arguement about exploring.

[Tartantyco]

Pretty sure I heard Sawyer say that the main storyline is level scaled.

[Amentep]

Two years and one beta version later, all I can see is that many proponents of Sawyer's XP design have either changed sides or went into hiding after playing the beta (to be clear, I absolutely do not blame these fans for originally giving Sawyer the benefit of the doubt).

I'm always willing to give the developers the benefit of the doubt. And in theory a well balanced system that is fun for players can be done with objective XP or Kill XP.

 

Theory into practice is always the tricky bit.

 

 

The items and money (to buy items) gained for some combats make up for the lack of xp. Both serve to increase the character power and durability.

You gain resources from combat, but combat also costs resources.

 

The items that you receive from combat are mostly only for crafting. The item drops are usually not high quality, so that people who dislike combat (which I believe are the target audience of this game) don't whine about being deprived of good loot. If you don't like crafting (a substantial amount of players don't) then combat is completely pointless.

 

And see for me that's just...well not a good approach to take. If I'm going with a stealthy or diplomatic path, I would want/expect the rewards I receive to make it so that I'm better at stealth or diplomacy.

 

For me as a player, if the fighter path gets better armor/weapon drops that provide combat related bonuses - why would I care? I'm not completing it as a combatant so that loot is irrelevant to my experience. It'd be a problem (IMO) if the only way to get leather armor that provides a super stealth bonus is to kill a character the same way it'd be a problem if the only way to get my fighter's best in-game weapon is to get past a series of locked doors, traps and sticky diplomatic situations where combat would always lead to TPK.

 

Pretty sure I heard Sawyer say that the main storyline is level scaled.

IIRC he said it was scaled within ranges, ie if you're expected to get to a point, it might be scaled to parties of the 5-7 level, but won't scale up/down if you hit there at level 3 or 8.

Edited August 20, 2014 by Amentep

[Volourn]

"I would be surprised -and disappointed- if Obsidian doesn't reconsider the way XP is handled."

 

Feel free to be dissapointed. Even one of Obsidian's bosses was told his opinion was wrong. This thread isn't really to convince Obsidian of anything. They made up their minds. There will be no combat xp in the game. If we're lucky, they'll improve the overall xp intake but otherwise no go. This is no SRR that is for sure.

 

 

"Sorry, I don't debate with people who start making it personal, Stun.  I'm done here."

 

You are the one who made it personal. You attacked everyone who liked Diablo or was pro xp rewards. btw, I'm no Diablo fan. I played Diablo1 and somewhat enjoyed and I did even't bother with 2 or 3 but hey if you are gonna flame people expected to be flamed back.

 

 

"Achievement:
- "You moved the mouse!!!"
- "You clicked once!"
- "You clicked twice!""

 

STOP THE. HYPERBOLE. Nobody has asked for that. All we asked is to be rewarded for overcoming challenges. Period.

 

 

"People act like this is self-evidently a bad thing, but I'm actually not sure why. Why is gaining 0 XP a bad thing? What exactly are you being deprived of here?

 

Personally, I think it's cool when you can't count on the inevitable level-up to rescue you from a tough encounter. You have to make due with what you have. No level-up for you until the quest is over."
 

Not being rewarded for overcoming a challenge *is* a bad thing.

 

 

"I would say even 2 or 3 quality combat sequences per rest is more than your average DnD tabletop campaign, unless you're just running something really kill heavy.  Additionally, from a role playing perspective, I think it would make sense that the large majority of characters would want to engage in life or death situations as little as possible, and especially when it isn't necessary for some tangible objective.  For those that truly feel that murder is an important part of progression, then the value provided in the loot, or in not having to parlay with those you encounter seems sufficient enough."

 

Huh? Ifa DM allows a party to res every 2-3 encounters, they aren't very good. I certainly wouldn't allow the party to rest after a battle before they 'face' the boss  (though in pnp terms like 'boss' isn't thrown around a lot. On top of that the problem with PE is you can't parlay a lot. Most encounetrs are instantly hostile and aggresive.

 

 

"How on earth is kill-XP any different from your complain.

You have to slaughter anything that moves, otherwise you are denied character progression.

It forces you to be murderhobo, instead of playing quests and adventures."

 

Nope. You can level up just fine in BG without murdering every last xfart for 7xp. Please tell me you didn't feel the need to do that when playing BG?

 

 

"Actually, I like dev's approach of "just be you" or "pretend to be a different personality" or role-playing.  If you are interested in EXP, there are many other CRPGs, which allow you grind to your heart's content.  For a story-focused role-playing game, the implementation makes sense."

 

This doesn't make sense. It's not about grinding. I mean you can't really avoid the beetles for instance. They're basically right on the road. LMAO And, this is combat heavy.

 

 

"My personal experience of playing some PnP RPGs and the way some of Obsidian devs kept the tradition of introducing PnP essences into CRPGs.  In fact, while being counted as Infinity Engine games, Planescape:  Torment was totally of it's own."

 

O RLY? Funny enough, PST gave the player combat xp....

 

 

"Basically, their games tend to be story-focused game with clear design goals rather than loot'n EXP CRPGs but let's see how the quests are designed."
 

They're both 'story focsed' and 'combat heavy'. Every single PE game including this one has LOTS of combat. I mean all the classes are geared to combat. Very few non com,bat skills, and no non combat spells. Yet people are pretending the game isn't focused on combat. Come on.Even Obsidian hasn't denied this. L0L

 

 

"that Kill XP can encourage combat as the primary solution to problems"

 

Except PE encourage and forces you into lots of combat. There's not a lot of choice in the matter except, say, ogre which you get xp either way. But, you can't talk to the beetles, lions, or even the humanoid cultists. They are insta hostile.

 

 

"I'm really enjoying a PnP game I'm in at present where my character basically leaps at every opportunity to avoid a fight.  We're getting a lot of "roleplaying XP" because she'll usually try to negotiate instead if it's feasible.  It's nice for that to be a realistic option in any rpg, IMO.  Less metagaming helps with immersion for me."

 

That's fantastic! But, you ain't getting that in PE. Youa re gonna be forced to fight  A LOT in PE. You should be rewarding for surviving a tough battle just a smuch if you wer eable to use dialogue skillz to convince the prince  to show his shirtless chest to you.

 

 

"I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm saying it hampers your progress further on down the line if you skip XP rich areas where the goal is basically just to slaughter everything in sight."
 

Not as much as you think. BG2 gave you over the top quest xp to more than make up for it. Not to mention lockpicking, scribe scrolls, and opening doors also gave generous xp. Plus, BG2 just like PE is combat heavy and combat focused. And, theya re both story focsued but they both have unavoidable combat.

[hairyscotsman2]

can't play the beta myself but judging from recent posts in this thread:

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66528-experience-point-mechanics-fighting-enemies/page-27

 

it seems it really is just quest-xp (as opposed to 'objective-xp' for doing things) - in which case, I don't like that you can only be rewarded xp for completing certain things.

I honestly thought we'd be rewarded 'wow, you found a hidden cave' xp or 'way to solve those puzzles' xp or even 'didn't get killed while spelunking' xp

Missed opportunity with the whole objective-xp vs. kill-xp thing

Not really. I see that they've grasped an opportunity to encourage players to keep to the main story unless they're given a reason to deviate from it.

[Helm]

 

"I'm really enjoying a PnP game I'm in at present where my character basically leaps at every opportunity to avoid a fight.  We're getting a lot of "roleplaying XP" because she'll usually try to negotiate instead if it's feasible.  It's nice for that to be a realistic option in any rpg, IMO.  Less metagaming helps with immersion for me."

 

That's fantastic! But, you ain't getting that in PE. Youa re gonna be forced to fight  A LOT in PE. You should be rewarding for surviving a tough battle just a smuch if you wer eable to use dialogue skillz to convince the prince  to show his shirtless chest to you.

I LOLed.

 

[Amentep]

"that Kill XP can encourage combat as the primary solution to problems"

 

Except PE encourage and forces you into lots of combat. There's not a lot of choice in the matter except, say, ogre which you get xp either way. But, you can't talk to the beetles, lions, or even the humanoid cultists. They are insta hostile.

To be fair, the game forcing combat with hostiles that spot you is a separate issue to whether the experience point system encourages killing as the optimality solution path. One is a result of the world and narrative, and one is a result of the game system.

Edited August 20, 2014 by Amentep

[Stun]

 

How are you forced? You keep saying that, but that was simply never the case in IE games.

By the need to keep up level-wise to progress.

 

You'll have to do that in PoE too. As I can't imagine it being so horribly imbalanced that it can be beaten straight out of the prologue with a 1st level character.

 

But for what it's worth, BG1 can, in fact, be soloed, and beaten with a level 1 character.

Edited August 20, 2014 by Stun

[Volourn]

"To be fair, the game forcing combat with hostiles that spot you is a separate issue to whether the experience point system encourages killing as the optimality solution path. One is a result of the world and narrative, and one is a result of the game system."
 

Yeha, but one of the major complaints from the anti combat xp brigade is that it forces one to choose combat over dialogue because it is mroe rewarding. However, in a combat heavy game like PE(or the IE) you don't actually get the option. It's not a matter of combat or dialogue. It's you must fight. There is no optimal solution just one solution.