"No Bad Builds" a failure in practice?

[Namutree]

 

There are multiple problems with the current system:

 

1- The stats are not impactful enough and some are more impactful than others. Might comes to mind. Everyone will take might. And likely max it.

2- There are way too many points to be distributed: there really is no question as to how to distribute your point system and I've seen pretty much everyone do the same thing over and over. Add to this the class, race, andd culture boni and you've got 3 or 4 18's 19's in a row. That was a very rare-roll in old DnD games. People would be rolling all day for that. Limit your points to make the questions more interesting.

People rolled all day for that in every IE game that allowed it too! HA! No but seriously they did. So it is a spiritual successor!

 

I rolled until got quite a few points. This is true.

[PrimeJunta]

I actually agree about the unintuitive bit. It's pretty easy to tell that Josh would rather not have attributes at all. As it is they do feel shoehorned-in, with counterintuitive effects that are there in an attempt to make all of them useful.

 

I do like the effort to avoid cookie-cutter builds, but there's got to be a more intuitive way of getting there. We'll see how it is in the next iteration.

[Tartantyco]

One more thing. If we (backers that have access to beta), geeks, have difficulty understanding this system (at least huge % of us) - do you expect that your 17-y-old modern player will understand?

 

It is no more or less complicated than the IE DnD system. It's just unfamiliar, and we don't have a manual or anything. It'll be easier once everything is set in stone and a manual can be provided.

[Shdy314]

 

 

There are multiple problems with the current system:

 

1- The stats are not impactful enough and some are more impactful than others. Might comes to mind. Everyone will take might. And likely max it.

2- There are way too many points to be distributed: there really is no question as to how to distribute your point system and I've seen pretty much everyone do the same thing over and over. Add to this the class, race, andd culture boni and you've got 3 or 4 18's 19's in a row. That was a very rare-roll in old DnD games. People would be rolling all day for that. Limit your points to make the questions more interesting.

People rolled all day for that in every IE game that allowed it too! HA! No but seriously they did. So it is a spiritual successor!

 

I rolled until got quite a few points. This is true.

 

We all did Namu. We all did. 

[Sensuki]

I actually agree about the unintuitive bit. It's pretty easy to tell that Josh would rather not have attributes at all. As it is they do feel shoehorned-in, with counterintuitive effects that are there in an attempt to make all of them useful.

Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep. Which is a pain in the ass really.

[Mrakvampire]

That is why it's better to stick with old-proven Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma + make sure that each class will have 1 primary stat that should be obviously (intuitevily) maxed and 2-3 secondary stats that will be the fuel of diversity. 

[Ahvz]

One more thing. If we (backers that have access to beta), geeks, have difficulty understanding this system (at least huge % of us) - do you expect that your 17-y-old modern player will understand?

 

I have a feeling that the average 17-year-old modern player will have less difficulty understanding the system, because they haven't had the previous experience with D&D to cloud their understanding. 

[Shdy314]

That is why it's better to stick with old-proven Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma + make sure that each class will have 1 primary stat that should be obviously (intuitevily) maxed and 2-3 secondary stats that will be the fuel of diversity. 

It's not "proven". Just well known. People will learn a new system just fine once they have the manual and better tooltips. I have played plenty of systems that werent DnD. If I can learn them so can others.

[Mrakvampire]

 

One more thing. If we (backers that have access to beta), geeks, have difficulty understanding this system (at least huge % of us) - do you expect that your 17-y-old modern player will understand?

 

I have a feeling that the average 17-year-old modern player will have less difficulty understanding the system, because they haven't had the previous experience with D&D to cloud their understanding. 

 

 

Yeah, sure. they had other systems with similar stats. It's not always 6 stats, yes, still, from game to game they deviate slightly and I've never encountered non-intuitive stat system in modern rpg. Even in Dragon Age 2 stats were self-explanatory and better, and it's a disturbing sign!

Edited August 21, 2014 by Mrakvampire

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

 Capacity for success should depend on one's play throughout the game.  Character creation choices are part of that, but they shouldn't be determinative in themselves.  Doing something weird at character creation shouldn't make the game impossible (as was the case with, Icewind Dale, which you could play for 20-ish hours before realizing that your party just wasn't going to cut it anymore and there was nothing you could do but start over and spend more time pressing "reroll"). 

 

Indeed. If you rolled up a few monks, then you're in for trouble and a much tougher game later on, for instance. I think this is one point where the ambitions for PoE is trying to surpass the PnP-based D&D system that the IE games were trying to base themselves on.

 

 

 

People need to stop thinking about Eternity's stats like it is D&D.  This is not D&D.

 

 

This can't be repeated enough, it seems. It can still be a spiritual successor of the IE games. My suggestion is this: Increase the six attributes to eight, perhaps even ten, if needs be, and make all attributes have at least two unique aspects that are coveted, whether it be healing, critting, elemental defences or what not. It's time for more daring solutions. We are geeks, we can handle complexity and confusion - no, but seriously, stop this crazy cramming of a trillion beneficial effects into merely a few attributes. If this is done well, we will see even more diverse character builds, which is something I'd love to see, at least.

Edited August 21, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Namutree]

That is why it's better to stick with old-proven Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma + make sure that each class will have 1 primary stat that should be obviously (intuitevily) maxed and 2-3 secondary stats that will be the fuel of diversity. 

It definitely would have been better to utilize the IE attribute system with a few minor tweaks for the sake of variety, but at this stage there's really no point in bringing it up. It won't be changed; so let's focus on the tweaks this new attribute system needs. 

[Mrakvampire]

I would like to see an example of modern western rpg that uses something non-intuitive like "Might".

[Mrakvampire]

 

That is why it's better to stick with old-proven Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma + make sure that each class will have 1 primary stat that should be obviously (intuitevily) maxed and 2-3 secondary stats that will be the fuel of diversity. 

It definitely would have been better to utilize the IE attribute system with a few minor tweaks for the sake of variety, but at this stage there's really no point in bringing it up. It won't be changed; so let's focus on the tweaks this new attribute system needs. 

 

 

I'm still convinced that game is on early stage of development and changes to stat system can be made. Cause at best we would see PoE in spring 2015.

[Namutree]

 

 

 Capacity for success should depend on one's play throughout the game.  Character creation choices are part of that, but they shouldn't be determinative in themselves.  Doing something weird at character creation shouldn't make the game impossible (as was the case with, Icewind Dale, which you could play for 20-ish hours before realizing that your party just wasn't going to cut it anymore and there was nothing you could do but start over and spend more time pressing "reroll"). 

 

Indeed. If you rolled up a few monks, then you're in for trouble and a much tougher game later on, for instance. I think this is one point where the ambitions for PoE is trying to surpass the PnP-based D&D system that the IE games were trying to base themselves on.

 

 

 

People need to stop thinking about Eternity's stats like it is D&D.  This is not D&D.

 

 

This can't be repeated enough, it seems. It can still be a spiritual successor of the IE games. My suggestion is this: Increase the six attributes to eight, perhaps even ten, if needs be, and make all attributes have at least two unique aspects that are coveted, whether it be healing, critting, elemental defences or what not. It's time for more daring solutions. We are geeks, we can handle complexity and confusion - no, but seriously, stop this crazy cramming of a trillion beneficial effects into merely a few attributes. If this is done well, we will see even more diverse character builds, which is something I'd love to see, at least.

 

It's WAAY to late for that unless poe gets delayed.

[Enoch]

I would like to see an example of modern western rpg that uses something non-intuitive like "Might".

 

In its present state, it would probably be clearer to call it "Power," which carries less association with purely physical strength. 

[Namutree]

 

 

I'm still convinced that game is on early stage of development and changes to stat system can be made. Cause at best we would see PoE in spring 2015.

 

Obsidian is not opposed to releasing buggy games. Poe will not likely be delayed, and even if it is; it will only be delayed a month or so. Don't expect any radical changes from where we are now. Only tweaks.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

It's WAAY to late for that unless poe gets delayed.

 

 

 

Perhaps you're right. All I know is that D:OS shifted pretty heavily in the attribute department until the very end, with the release days away. Systemic adjustments, even pretty major ones, are actually pretty fitting to do during lengthy betas, at least for games with unproven systems. The earlier, the better. It doesn't hurt trying, at least if we're being optimistic here.

Edited August 21, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Mrakvampire]

 

 

 

I'm still convinced that game is on early stage of development and changes to stat system can be made. Cause at best we would see PoE in spring 2015.

 

Obsidian is not opposed to releasing buggy games. Poe will not likely be delayed, and even if it is; it will only be delayed a month or so. Don't expect any radical changes from where we are now. Only tweaks.

 

 

"Faith manages" ©

[Ahvz]

 

Yeah, sure. they had other systems with similar stats. It's not always 6 stats, yes, still, from game to game they deviate slightly and I've never encountered non-intuitive stat system in modern rpg. Even in Dragon Age 2 stats were self-explanatory and better, and it's a disturbing sign!

 

What you mean is, of course, you've never encountered a system that deviated further from D&D norm than maybe renaming a stat to something else, or adding in a stat for a unique mechanic. Dragon Age 2's system is only superior in your eyes because it's closer to D&D. 

 

Unlike D&D /= unintuitive. And I'm thinking most people coming in from less D&D-inspired games will take one look at Might, read the description, and go "okay, I can work with this" instead of "where's my strength stat?"

Edited August 21, 2014 by Ahvz

[Fearabbit]

You've grown used to systems where each class had favored attributes, guys. Yes the new system is a bit unintuitive but I'd rather have an unintuitive system that aims for innovation than the same old one with its same problems. I do not consider a wizard to automatically be a glass cannon, for example. If that is the idea you have of a wizard, it's because you've played too much D&D to think of other possibilities.

 

My only concern is that a "battlemage" might be unbalanced. If you make a mage with 18 Might and put him in the frontline with a greatsword, he will be great at fighting AND his spells will be powerful. But I don't know, I'm not part of the beta unfortunately. Has anyone tried that out?

[Sensuki]

Perhaps you're right. All I know is that D:OS shifted pretty heavily in the attribute department until the very end, with the release days away. Systemic adjustments, even pretty major ones, are actually pretty fitting to do during lengthy betas, at least for games with unproven systems. The earlier, the better. It doesn't hurt trying, at least if we're being optimistic here.

Another member (perhaps on the RPGCodex) posted this but Josh is a lot more rigid when it comes to feedback than Sven of Larian is.

[Mrakvampire]

 

 

Yeah, sure. they had other systems with similar stats. It's not always 6 stats, yes, still, from game to game they deviate slightly and I've never encountered non-intuitive stat system in modern rpg. Even in Dragon Age 2 stats were self-explanatory and better, and it's a disturbing sign!

 

 from less D&D-inspired games 

 

 

Examples of those games, please.

[Mr. Magniloquent]

After an extended absence, I've been lurking the Beta forums for the last day or two, and I have a question for some of the...responses about the attribute system.

 

While it is clear that (theoretically), some attributes may have comparatively diminished usefulness, can this be attributed to scenario exposure? I see numerous complaints about the uselessness of Resolve and Constitution to many characters. Are there enemies in the Beta which have sufficient attacks (ranged, magical, or otherwise) which can target these attributes? Are there instances within the Beta where attributes have significance beyond combat such as dialogue, crafting, "cut-scene" choices?, etc?

[Shdy314]

You've grown used to systems where each class had favored attributes, guys. Yes the new system is a bit unintuitive but I'd rather have an unintuitive system that aims for innovation than the same old one with its same problems. I do not consider a wizard to automatically be a glass cannon, for example. If that is the idea you have of a wizard, it's because you've played too much D&D to think of other possibilities.

 

My only concern is that a "battlemage" might be unbalanced. If you make a mage with 18 Might and put him in the frontline with a greatsword, he will be great at fighting AND his spells will be powerful. But I don't know, I'm not part of the beta unfortunately. Has anyone tried that out?

Doesn't work currently. They don't get any abilities to make them good at that and few spells to help them with that. Maybe once you level a bit and the per rest spells become per encounter. Also every class has inherent hp, deflection and accuracy in both melee and ranged. Wizards inherently suck at ALL of those. So currently battlemage is not a good idea.

 

Want to be a fighter caster try other classes like cipher.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Shdy314

[Sensuki]

The AI actually is the reason why you don't need to put any CON on ranged characters, pretty much nothing ends up attacking them.

 

Not exactly the case in the IE games, ESPECIALLY in BG2 where you had fear, hold, confusion, smart AI targeting, and all sorts of nasty save or bad things happen effects and stuff.