Experience point system in the beta and onwards

[philby]

I've never been a hardcore roleplayer or grew up with pen and paper games so I'm not religiously for or against one side or another, as long as the game enjoyable to play I'll be happy. I've played the beta a little but so far the bugs have gotten in the way as I can't complete the quests.

 

Some more thoughts on this argument, if there is going to be no xp for defeating enemies and monsters, then maybe it would be ok if all combat encounters were related to objectives and all enemies gave some decent loot. Get rid of the random 'trash mobs' (is this a world of warcraft term?) like the lions or beetles, unless they are specifically guarding some cool artifacts or part of an objective. If I get a quest about an ogre terrorising a village, I'm ok with no kill xp for defeating critters in the ogre's hideout as long as i'll be getting a good chunk of xp for advancing the quest along or completing an objective.

 

If the combat is related to the objective of investigate the hideout and you stealth your way through then you dont lose xp by not killing the critters and the reward for completing that objective could reflect that by extra loot and currency. if you complete the objective with diplomacy once you get to the ogre either way, if the rewards reflect that then it should be alright.

 

. If i know I'm not getting anything for killing a bunch of lions and beetles then really I'd rather not have to bother with them. If during exploring the maps you come across a ruined building with a chest by a wall guarded by shades, I'm ok with no kill xp because the reward is a chest of goodies. If I'm exploring the map and there is a group of shades just hanging around and blocking my way and there is no kill xp then I'm probably just going to get annoyed. If I'm in a 15 level mega dungeon and there is no kill xp, I'm ok with that if get xp for moving to the next level and there is useful loot and items on the way.

 

I think it works sort of similar in the witcher 2, you get such a miniscule amount of xp for killing a drowner or scoiatel warrior, but its balanced by getting alchemy ingredient, swords to sell and put towards the next armour set and you usually level up after advancing a handful of plot points.

 

With regards to skills, I expect to get xp from picking locks and disarming traps damn straight, because these are skills that i am investing time and skill points in and i want to be rewarded for that investment. sometimes i think these games add some replayability by having locked chest etc, i think ok i need to start as a rogue to get into that, or a mage to be able to decipher that scroll etc. otherwise whats the point of having a mechanics skill and locks anyway?

 

Anyway I hope that kind of makes sense, as long as it is clear and the game works i can live with either way

[NeV3rKilL]

I hate the XP system that divinity origianl sin has, and it's you can combat but it's sterile xp, you only lvl up through quests, this means that it's only important the development that you do on cities or zones with tons of quests and not fighting.

 

This can be a good system with a game focused in lore and storyline but Pillars of Eternity is a more varied game where the combat is an important part of it.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

I hate the XP system that divinity origianl sin has, and it's you can combat but it's sterile xp, you only lvl up through quests, this means that it's only important the development that you do on cities or zones with tons of quests and not fighting.

 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't D:OS give pretty hefty amounts of XP for the killing of monsters?

Edited August 20, 2014 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Ink Blot]

Voted for the last option, but I'll post here what I posted in the thread discussing no XP for kills (forgive me if someone has already said something like this, as I've not read through all this thread):

 

Perhaps a solution would be to flag all the creatures in a specific area as belonging to a specific quest/objective or quests/objectives (you have to get past/through/around them to complete the quest anyway). The quest is worth a specific amount of XP. Every creature you kill awards XP, but that number is deducted from the value of completing the quest. For example, if the quest is worth 2000 XP and you kill nothing, you get 2000 XP for completing it. If you kill 10 creatures worth 50 XP each while doing the quest, then the quest reward at the end is 1500 XP. To me, this would strike a nice balance between those that want to avoid as much combat as possible, those that want to kill everything in sight, and those that just want to get some mobs out of their way without having to sneak/be diplomatic.

 

Once the objective is achieved/quest turned in, then the mobs would be flagged as 0 XP (thus preventing someone from turning in the quest, then going back and harvesting a ton of XP by killing the mobs).

[Hiro Protagonist II]

I'm really dreading the mega-dungeon.

[Zansatsu]

 

I hate the XP system that divinity origianl sin has, and it's you can combat but it's sterile xp, you only lvl up through quests, this means that it's only important the development that you do on cities or zones with tons of quests and not fighting.

 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't D:OS give pretty hefty amounts of XP for the killing of monsters?

 

You aren't wrong. You get a lot of experience from killing monsters. I quite like the D:OS system. Feels very rewarding.

[Helm]

I'm really dreading the mega-dungeon.

What? Why? Now you can beeline to the 15th level of the dungeon to pick up the epic loot. Who cares about the skellies, just run past them.

 

It's a feature.

 

 

I am of course being sarcastic.

 

[Volourn]

"I hate the XP system that divinity origianl sin has, and it's you can combat but it's sterile xp, you only lvl up through quests, this means that it's only important the development that you do on cities or zones with tons of quests and not fighting."

 

Uh.. Others covered this. D:OS is really generous when it comes to kill xp. It doesn't hurt the game at all like some the anti xp for kill crowd claim.

 

Why? Because, xp is to be sued to reward the layer for upcoming obstacles, missions, and role-playing. When you have a battle with beetles, lions, or ogres and you successfully overcome them you should be rewarded for it. PERIOD.

Edited August 20, 2014 by Volourn

[Helm]

Voted for the last option, but I'll post here what I posted in the thread discussing no XP for kills (forgive me if someone has already said something like this, as I've not read through all this thread):

 

Perhaps a solution would be to flag all the creatures in a specific area as belonging to a specific quest/objective or quests/objectives (you have to get past/through/around them to complete the quest anyway). The quest is worth a specific amount of XP. Every creature you kill awards XP, but that number is deducted from the value of completing the quest. For example, if the quest is worth 2000 XP and you kill nothing, you get 2000 XP for completing it. If you kill 10 creatures worth 50 XP each while doing the quest, then the quest reward at the end is 1500 XP. To me, this would strike a nice balance between those that want to avoid as much combat as possible, those that want to kill everything in sight, and those that just want to get some mobs out of their way without having to sneak/be diplomatic.

 

Once the objective is achieved/quest turned in, then the mobs would be flagged as 0 XP (thus preventing someone from turning in the quest, then going back and harvesting a ton of XP by killing the mobs).

I answered you in the other thread too, I don't think this will work without some tuning.

 

The high-risk task (killing enemies) and the low-risk task (avoiding enemies) would still both reward the player with exactly 2000 XP. It would be exactly the same as what we already have, just obfuscated to give the illusion that the player is actually being rewarded for his hard work.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

The high-risk task (killing enemies) and the low-risk task (avoiding enemies) would still both reward the player with exactly 2000 XP.

 

And I'm still not seeing why is that a bad thing.

 

I mean, by taking the logic of "the high-risk road should always yield a better reward" to its logical conclusion, players should gain more xp for wading through traps than what they'd get for disarming them.

[Helm]

 

The high-risk task (killing enemies) and the low-risk task (avoiding enemies) would still both reward the player with exactly 2000 XP.

 

And I'm still not seeing why is that a bad thing.

 

I mean, by taking the logic of "the high-risk road should always yield a better reward" to its logical conclusion, players should gain more xp for wading through traps than what they'd get for disarming them.

 

Because it is completely binary, you already know the outcome of your actions. Avoiding or engaging the trash mobs always yields the same reward.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Because it is completely binary, you already know the outcome of your actions. Avoiding or engaging the trash mobs always yields the same reward.

 

 

And that is wrong because it discourages experimentation upon replays, am I guessing correctly?

[Helm]

 

 

Because it is completely binary, you already know the outcome of your actions. Avoiding or engaging the trash mobs always yields the same reward.

 

 

And that is wrong because it discourages experimentation upon replays, am I guessing correctly?

 

This only applies to quest objectives, not to trash mobs. Like I wrote, you already know the outcome of (not) engaging trash mobs.

[Stun]

 

Because it is completely binary, you already know the outcome of your actions. Avoiding or engaging the trash mobs always yields the same reward.

 

And that is wrong because it discourages experimentation upon replays, am I guessing correctly?

 

Maybe only for powergamers.

[Nomadmerc]

If the current system stays in place one of the most downloaded mods will be whomever mods the game to a better experience system.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

 

Because it is completely binary, you already know the outcome of your actions. Avoiding or engaging the trash mobs always yields the same reward.

 

 

And that is wrong because it discourages experimentation upon replays, am I guessing correctly?

 

 

This only applies to quest objectives, not to trash mobs. Like I wrote, you already know the outcome of (not) engaging trash mobs.

 

 

Ok, I think I might be misunderstanding you.

 

Are you saying solving the kill xp problem by giving out xp for individual kills, but subtracting it from the quest xp total is bad, because then the player will know the outcome of engaging the trash mobs? As in, he'll know that in the end it's more convenient to avoid opponents, therefore noncombat resolution becomes the optimal solution, because it's faster/easier and yields the same reward?

[Shdy314]

Uh.. Others covered this. D:OS is really generous when it comes to kill xp. It doesn't hurt the game at all like some the anti xp for kill crowd claim.

 

Why? Because, xp is to be sued to reward the layer for upcoming obstacles, missions, and role-playing. When you have a battle with beetles, lions, or ogres and you successfully overcome them you should be rewarded for it. PERIOD.

It absolutely hurts the game. Plenty of people have complained in D:OS that the stealth and few charisma options totally screw those players. You will be a much lower level if you do not kill everything possible. It is awful. Putting points in charisma will make you feel like a fool. You are either wildly mistaken or desperate to prove your point at any cost.

 

You are rewarded with loot and lore. PERIOD.

 

I would like some xp for things like new maps discovered because exploration should be an encouraged part of the game.  Perhaps some for overcoming the scripted text events.

This is still the beta and smoothing out xp rewards is what betas are for. We still have no idea what xp will look like in Wasteland 2 (in terms of quantity and how fast we will level etc.) for the final game and that beta is much more comprehensive. Obviously anyone that feels the need to declare the end of the world at this stage has an agenda. The same tired agenda we have been hearing for way too long.

 

The IE games only had kill xp because 2e DnD onwards had it which those games were based on. Not because it was brilliant. 1e DnD did not exactly have kill xp. Only treasure had actual rules for gaining xp though the phb did suggest "“…the Dungeon Master will award experience points to the character for treasure gained and opponents captured or slain and for solving or overcoming problems through professional means."

 

Kill xp was awful in DnD and I never played in a single campaign where anyone actually bothered tracking that junk. I am sure there are some super hardcore people out there who did but it was never my experience because it is inherently a dumb idea. Furthermore all the DMGs suggested other times to give out xp rewards. From gaining treasure, to completing quests or doing "kewl" things.

Edited August 20, 2014 by Shdy314

[CatatonicMan]

Personally, I'm thinking the main problem isn't that XP is quest based, but that not everything falls under the umbrella of a quest.

 

For example, consider a game structured by discrete levels. Everything/anything done in a given level would be captured in the end-of-level reward, whatever that may be. Since everything in the game is in one level or another, everything a player does in the entire game is rewarded.

 

This transfers quite well to a single dungeon in an open world game. Deal with the evil wizard in his evil tower, and get the reward. It doesn't matter how you deal with him, which allows a player freedom to achieve their goal without worrying about getting shafted in resources.

 

The problem we have now arises because some areas aren't covered by a quest umbrella. Wandering around on the world map or random dungeons killing dudes ends up being wasted effort because there's no quest attached to it.

[Shdy314]

Personally, I'm thinking the main problem isn't that XP is quest based, but that not everything falls under the umbrella of a quest.

 

The problem we have now arises because some areas aren't covered by a quest umbrella. Wandering around on the world map or random dungeons killing dudes ends up being wasted effort because there's no quest attached to it.

No the problem is people deciding to go grind monsters knowing there is no kill xp. Having fun and getting loot then being shocked they didn't also get xp on top of it for grinding.

 

IndiraLightfoot:

They did pick up a convo-hidden quest, but then decided to go into the Gorge six hours away and fight some pretty tough prides. I was proud after having survived those. Then I decided to do a little adventuring in Dyrwood Village again, and thereafter I went away to Dyrwood Crossing, and pretty much cleaned up there. Without return to the village, I pushed away a certain heavy stone feature, and found myself in some ruins with pesky cultists with some pretty rich loot to beat. I did everything there, and I only had a couple of doors to pick (Mechanic 7), when I went back to the village (all in all, five hours of playing), to rest for a second time at the inn.

 

-I didn't die once. No reloads. I used six camping rations in that time. Some encounters were hard, but I was happy to survive those. It was loads of fun.

-I by-passed heaps and heaps of what I though were counting as objectives. I was mightily surprised to see that my xp gain during 5 h of RL time, or 26 h of in-game time, amounted to zilch and nada!

Edited August 20, 2014 by Shdy314

[Sarex]

No the problem is people deciding to go grind monsters knowing there is no kill xp. Having fun and getting loot then being shocked they didn't also get xp on top of it for grinding.

 

What you call grinding others call exploration.

[Shdy314]

 

No the problem is people deciding to go grind monsters knowing there is no kill xp. Having fun and getting loot then being shocked they didn't also get xp on top of it for grinding.

 

What you call grinding others call exploration.

 

I am going to go see what is in the gorge. Exploration.

 

I am going to the gorge to fight prides. Grinding.

 

You do know what grinding is right? Of course without kill xp I suppose farming is the more accurate term.

Edited August 20, 2014 by Shdy314

[Immortalis]

 

Personally, I'm thinking the main problem isn't that XP is quest based, but that not everything falls under the umbrella of a quest.

 

The problem we have now arises because some areas aren't covered by a quest umbrella. Wandering around on the world map or random dungeons killing dudes ends up being wasted effort because there's no quest attached to it.

No the problem is people deciding to go grind monsters knowing there is no kill xp. Having fun and getting loot then being shocked they didn't also get xp on top of it for grinding.

 

Sorry even if people did this.. which doesn't matter.. how does that affect you? You don't want kill -xp because it makes you mad someone might munchkin the game?

 

They will do it anyways.. This is a very poor reason to base a mechanic around. "I'm mad some people might do something I won't do in a single player game.."

Edited August 20, 2014 by Immortalis

[Shdy314]

Oh yay! It is this tired old argument. I must dislike kill xp because I care how others spend their time. I do not. I do not care if you mod the game to give yourself godlike powers. It is a matter of design.

 

Good design is deciding what you want to encourage players to do because that is where you want them to focus. Where you have the most to offer them in your game. For example an FPS that wants wild and crazy fights builds the game so you do not have to take cover. A more realistic one is designed so that you do. As rough examples.

 

Obsidian decided they wanted players to focus on quests. Adding xp rewards on top of loot encourages grinding rather than questing. I am glad Obsidian wants to focus on their quests rather than design it like a JRPG.

[Volourn]

"It absolutely hurts the game. Plenty of people have complained in D:OS that the stealth and few charisma options totally screw those players. You will be a much lower level if you do not kill everything possible. It is awful. Putting points in charisma will make you feel like a fool. You are either wildly mistaken or desperate to prove your point at any cost.

 

You are rewarded with loot and lore. PERIOD.

 

I would like some xp for things like new maps discovered because exploration should be an encouraged part of the game.  Perhaps some for overcoming the scripted text events.

This is still the beta and smoothing out xp rewards is what betas are for. We still have no idea what xp will look like in Wasteland 2 (in terms of quantity and how fast we will level etc.) for the final game and that beta is much more comprehensive. Obviously anyone that feels the need to declare the end of the world at this stage has an agenda. The same tired agenda we have been hearing for way too long.

 

The IE games only had kill xp because 2e DnD onwards had it which those games were based on. Not because it was brilliant. 1e DnD did not exactly have kill xp. Only treasure had actual rules for gaining xp though the phb did suggest "“…the Dungeon Master will award experience points to the character for treasure gained and opponents captured or slain and for solving or overcoming problems through professional means."

 

Kill xp was awful in DnD and I never played in a single campaign where anyone actually bothered tracking that junk. I am sure there are some super hardcore people out there who did but it was never my experience because it is inherently a dumb idea. Furthermore all the DMGs suggested other times to give out xp rewards. From gaining treasure, to completing quests or doing "kewl" things."

 

No.

 

 

"Obsidian decided they wanted players to focus on quests. Adding xp rewards on top of loot encourages grinding rather than questing. I am glad Obsidian wants to focus on their quests rather than design it like a JRPG."

 

L0L

[Immortalis]

I am glad Obsidian wants to focus on their quests rather than design it like a JRPG.

Did you seriously type this out and say.. "yea I made a good argument"