Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Attributes: The case for turning Might into Strength, and improving the whole system in the process.

Attributes Might Strength Balance

  • Please log in to reply
106 replies to this topic

#21
wpmaura

wpmaura

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 40 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

defiantly agree with OP on this, don't like the idea of might affecting magic and overall damage in general. like his suggestions



#22
Mute_City

Mute_City

    (0) Nub

  • Initiates
  • 4 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

OP You have my sword in this one. I like your system much better than the one currently in the game.



#23
Azrael Ultima

Azrael Ultima

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 167 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

If might isn't strength, and might is "soul power", then we're missing an attribute. What measures a character's physical power/muscles? Why does "soul power" increse physical damage? Does having a strong soul equal physically strong body? There's no way to measure what character is physically weak from the current attributes.

Are we missing an attribute, or are we just missing an entry in your char description where you can put how much muscle mass your char has? I'd say it's the latter.

 

Do you really need the game to tell you that your scrawny mage is physically weak?

 

Mind you, weapons generally aren't terribly heavy because people are intended to wield them for extended amounts of time. Modern assault rifles are actually heavier than most swords.


  • rjshae likes this

#24
Infiltrator_SF

Infiltrator_SF

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 162 posts
  • Location:Montenegro
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer

I think it's really a bad decision to try and mask Str into Might and call it a spellpower attribute as well.. when you think about someone MIGHTY, do you think about Stephen Hawking? Because he's certainly mighty mentally but I wouldn't classify him with that attribute, ever.

 

So instead of trying to sugar-coat strenght just make it a physical attribute like it's supposed to be and, like OP suggested, give mages some other stat to pump in order to maximize spell damage, it's only natural. I think it's stupid to max physical attributes and get spell power in return.

 

Yes, you shouldn't be able to screw up characters like you could in D&D. No, you shouldn't backtrack all the way and make the system retard-proof. You're supposed to plan ahead and make a character into something that can utilize their attributes to achieve specific goals (i.e. battle mage shoud definitely put points into might.. pure mage - NEVER), instead of being able to put a blindfold on, pump random stats and end up with a perfect character anyway.

 

Stats are there to make a difference. If you want everything to work no matter what you pump, just f***ing remove them then.


Edited by Infiltrator_SF, 23 August 2014 - 06:20 PM.

  • Seari and Bloody Hypocrite like this

#25
Pray

Pray

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 130 posts
  • Steam:Pray
  • Xbox Gamertag:Moxiy
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

I honestly feel llike what POE is doing is a drastic step in the right direction, and I personally am ready to embrace the new system; that being said, it's pretty obvious to everyone that it needs some tweaking. Why don't we give it a chance and some time, instead of asking to just take a step back to what's safe and cozey.


  • rjshae, Ganrich and Vizera like this

#26
Mute_City

Mute_City

    (0) Nub

  • Initiates
  • 4 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

I think it's really a bad decision to try and mask Str into Might and call it a spellpower attribute as well.. when you think about someone MIGHTY, do you think about Stephen Hawking? Because he's certainly mighty mentally but I wouldn't classify him with that attribute, ever.

 

So instead of trying to sugar-coat strenght just make it a physical attribute like it's supposed to be and, like OP suggested, give mages some other stat to pump in order to maximize spell damage, it's only natural. I think it's stupid to max physical attributes and get spell power in return.

 

Yes, you shouldn't be able to screw up characters like you could in D&D. No, you shouldn't backtrack all the way and make the system retard-proof. You're supposed to plan ahead and make a character into something that can utilize their attributes to achieve specific goals (i.e. battle mage shoud definitely put points into might.. pure mage - NEVER), instead of being able to put a blindfold on, pump random stats and end up with a perfect character anyway.

 

Stats are there to make a difference. If you want everything to work no matter what you pump, just f***ing remove them then.

 

 

quoting for prosperity



#27
IndiraLightfoot

IndiraLightfoot

    Apex of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 5577 posts
  • Location:Over the Hills and Far Away
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

I don't like this. It'd just get us right back to where we started: cookie-cutter stat distributions for each class, or damn close anyway. This would also add more IMO unnecessary complexity.

 

I say keep the current system but make it more impactful by doubling the mechanical effects and setting the baseline at 10 (penalties below, bonuses above), and make a few minor tweaks. I've made a few proposals; here's another one.

 

MIG: Damage, Healing.

CON: Health/Endurance.

DEX: Accuracy.

PER: Crit chance, Interrupt.

INT:  AoE, Healing, Duration, Recovery time.

RES: Concentration, Duration.

 

I bound two things to attributes that currently aren't, crit chance and recovery time. Both are there to make the relevant attributes more valuable, as they're currently somewhat dumpable. Moved Healing from MIG to INT because it makes no sense on MIG but at least some sense on INT, and moved Duration to RES to make that more attractive. (RES is pretty important already, it's just hard to tell because of the lack of feedback.)

 

MIG: Damage, Healing.

CON: Health/Endurance. I'd like to add carrying capacity here (Already in the Roman armies, there was no correlation between brawn and the capacity to carry heavy loads long distances. It took constitution/endurance.

DEX: Accuracy. Movement speed somehow?

PER: Crit chance, Interrupt.

INT:  AoE, Healing, Duration, Recovery time. How about increased number of talents and/or skills here?

RES: Concentration, Duration. I'd like to move Healing here, since I envision it needs that will-power-like magical determination seen in many fantasy sagas, once again, The Last Airbender, springs to mind.


  • PrimeJunta likes this

#28
PrimeJunta

PrimeJunta

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 4900 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer

Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand items don't have attribute requirements. Does that mean any character can swing around a heavy twohanded weapon?


Yep, just like in all the IE games.

#29
PrimeJunta

PrimeJunta

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 4900 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer

MIG: Damage, Healing.
CON: Health/Endurance. I'd like to add carrying capacity here (Already in the Roman armies, there was no correlation between brawn and the capacity to carry heavy loads long distances. It took constitution/endurance.

 
Would require a whole new inventory system. Probably won't happen. Also encumbrance mechanics are a drag.
 

DEX: Accuracy. Movement speed somehow?


That would work. Then again, DEX is already extremely attractive b/c of the accuracy bonus. Don't see a need to make it even more so.
 

INT:  AoE, Healing, Duration, Recovery time. How about increased number of talents and/or skills here?


Negatory. Currently wizards get one new spell per day, and you get 1 talent per three levels. Those numbers can only be changed in full integers, they'd have a huge impact on how powerful a class is, and you couldn't let them to fall to zero without making the build completely unviable. That means that you'd have to space the benefit out very, very widely -- like allow one extra talent for INT 18, or something like that; even so, it would tend to make it the pump stat for many classes.
 
Same if you tied it to uses per rest/per encounter. Getting one more spell/level/rest, or one more talent use/encounter is enormously significant, so much so that "extra knockdown" is a fighter talent in and of itself. Again, you could not let the numbers fall to zero, and having more uses is so immensely attractive that it would again become the obvious pump stat for most if not all classes.
 

RES: Concentration, Duration. I'd like to move Healing here, since I envision it needs that will-power-like magical determination seen in many fantasy sagas, once again, The Last Airbender, springs to mind.

 
Yep, it would fit there too. I put it on INT because RES is already very attractive because Concentration is so important for frontliners, and moving Duration there from INT makes it even more so.

Basically, when tweaking those I wanted to get as close as possible to having something that's really attractive for both front-line and second-row characters on each ability. Everybody wants to do more damage and hit more accurately. Everybody wants more health (okay, second-liners perhaps less than front-liners). Everybody wants to do things faster (therefore the addition of Recovery Time). Frontliners want to not be interrupted, and everybody wants their duration-limited abilities to last longer.

I think Healing is kind of the odd one out still. You could really put it on whichever ability you think fits best, or perhaps drop it altogether and just not make it possible to pump healing. (I can appreciate why Josh put it on Might though, from a system design point of view -- it's aesthetically pleasing to have the same stat govern the taking and the giving.)

#30
Fearabbit

Fearabbit

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 343 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

I'd really like to discuss various ideas about making the system more intuitive, about the implications of turning Might back into Strength, what needs to be considered and so on.

 

But I'd like you all to respect the premise of this thread, which is that having a Might attribute is unintuitive. You can either ignore this thread if you disagree, or propose your own solutions that deal with this in some way - if you can find a way to make Might intuitive, go ahead. Making suggestions where the main point of this thread isn't addressed is not the idea here. (To be sure, your suggestions aren't bad, they just avoid the main point of this thread.)

 

I also just don't want to have the same discussion as everywhere else here, where one side says why the current system is better and the other why the old one was better. We have the highly popular "no bad builds, a failure in practice" thread for that and lots of other threads too.


Edited by Fearabbit, 24 August 2014 - 04:00 AM.


#31
IndiraLightfoot

IndiraLightfoot

    Apex of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 5577 posts
  • Location:Over the Hills and Far Away
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

Fearabbit: I see what you mean. Lazily, I just used this thread since it started with "Attributes:...". I should have considered the entire thread title more, obviously.

 

Still I'll add one more reply to PJ, and then we will need to move to another thread:

INT: You are right. I was stuck in D&D thinking there.

As for Healing, the fact that it can be moved around is at least good news when you need to balance the six attributes.

DEX: Accuracy just seemed so alone there, heh.

Carrying capacity limits - it doesn't really bother me that much - it can be good for certain gameplay reasons, even.


Edited by IndiraLightfoot, 24 August 2014 - 04:07 AM.

  • PrimeJunta likes this

#32
Captain Shrek

Captain Shrek

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 580 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

To make a attribute list intuitive the designer should really try and relate to the gut feeling associated with the words. If an attribute called might associates with both physical strength and mental "might", that is automatically confusing. Normal people do not view the word that way.

 

On a tangent, this makes me feel that the designer of this game generally wanted to create an attribute called "damage modifier" but the art/writing team did not let him. Which in turn makes me suspicious that the class system is simply a facade for a simplistic "action RPG" character creator where the most important gameplay mechanic is dealing damage. The classes simply change the visual profile of how that is being done: A wizard is an archer who has colored sparkly arrows. 



#33
PrimeJunta

PrimeJunta

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 4900 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer

On a tangent, this makes me feel that the designer of this game generally wanted to create an attribute called "damage modifier" but the art/writing team did not let him. Which in turn makes me suspicious that the class system is simply a facade for a simplistic "action RPG" character creator where the most important gameplay mechanic is dealing damage. The classes simply change the visual profile of how that is being done: A wizard is an archer who has colored sparkly arrows. 

 

That's not how the game plays at even this early stage. For one thing, most wizard attack spells are AoE damage of various types (burning hands clone, fireball, wall of fire, cone of cold effect that also slows, and so on). There's only one point-damage spell sequence that I've come across (Magic Missile-ish). Archers OTOH exclusively deal point damage/debuff.

 

Seriously, there are plenty of criticisms you can legitimately level at P:E, but "all classes play the same minus the special effects" isn't one of them. They really do feel diverse.


  • rjshae, IndiraLightfoot and Ganrich like this

#34
Captain Shrek

Captain Shrek

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 580 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

 

On a tangent, this makes me feel that the designer of this game generally wanted to create an attribute called "damage modifier" but the art/writing team did not let him. Which in turn makes me suspicious that the class system is simply a facade for a simplistic "action RPG" character creator where the most important gameplay mechanic is dealing damage. The classes simply change the visual profile of how that is being done: A wizard is an archer who has colored sparkly arrows. 

 

That's not how the game plays at even this early stage. For one thing, most wizard attack spells are AoE damage of various types (burning hands clone, fireball, wall of fire, cone of cold effect that also slows, and so on). There's only one point-damage spell sequence that I've come across (Magic Missile-ish). Archers OTOH exclusively deal point damage/debuff.

 

Seriously, there are plenty of criticisms you can legitimately level at P:E, but "all classes play the same minus the special effects" isn't one of them. They really do feel diverse.

 

May be I should have been clearer.

 

What I mean was that the Wizard simply is damage/buff engine in this game. It would be a pity to waste the amazing potential of wizardry on that. 



#35
PrimeJunta

PrimeJunta

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 4900 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer

What I mean was that the Wizard simply is damage/buff engine in this game. It would be a pity to waste the amazing potential of wizardry on that. 

 

Uh... so what's a wizard in the IE games?



#36
Captain Shrek

Captain Shrek

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 580 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

 

What I mean was that the Wizard simply is damage/buff engine in this game. It would be a pity to waste the amazing potential of wizardry on that. 

 

Uh... so what's a wizard in the IE games?

 

 

Pretty good damage dealer with  actual non combat spells. Just check the NWN2/BG2 spell list how huge it is and contains a LOT of non-combat-only situation spells. That is telling: NWN/IE games had a different problem. They did not have the content to justify the spell list. Which would imply the fix should have been to include the content, not remove the spells. 



#37
PrimeJunta

PrimeJunta

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 4900 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer

Pretty good damage dealer with  actual non combat spells. Just check the NWN2/BG2 spell list how huge it is and contains a LOT of non-combat-only situation spells. That is telling: NWN/IE games had a different problem. They did not have the content to justify the spell list. Which would imply the fix should have been to include the content, not remove the spells. 

 

:thinks:

 

I honestly can't think of too many non-combat spells I regularly used. There was Knock I suppose. Light, of course, which was extremely rarely necessary.  I think I used Wizard Eye at times, which was genuinely cool. And scads of pre-buffs, of course, which I'm delighted they've removed since they got really tedious, especially at the higher levels. What specifically do you have in mind?*

 

*PnP DnD is different of course, but I don't think any of the computer games had spells like Contact Outer Plane, Augury, (Limited) Wish, and so on.



#38
Azrael Ultima

Azrael Ultima

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 167 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

I think it's really a bad decision to try and mask Str into Might and call it a spellpower attribute as well.. when you think about someone MIGHTY, do you think about Stephen Hawking? Because he's certainly mighty mentally but I wouldn't classify him with that attribute, ever.

Mighty wizard doesn't sound particularly odd to me, but it doesn't make me imagine a body builder in a robe.

Might doesn't refer to physical prowess, but to power in general. A mighty warrior can axe things good. A mighty wizard can lightly toast entire armies at once. A mighty healer heals mighty quickly. (and this is starting to sound a mightte ridiculous)

 

Or a mighty politician for that matter. I wouldn't expect him to pound people with a waraxe, though he might have henchmen to do so for him.


  • Vizera likes this

#39
Captain Shrek

Captain Shrek

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 580 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

Oh I don't know:

 

I guess most summon spells that deal with outer planes could easily have had non combat content which was absent. Then there are all the spells like Friends, Wish, True Sight, Infravision, Spook, Horror, Emotion, Know alignment, Farsight in BGs which could have easily had a story based role. NWN2 has way more spells than that which are non combat utility. The real problem is that they are useless as MOST if not all the "spell using"encounters are combat based. 


Edited by Captain Shrek, 24 August 2014 - 06:56 AM.


#40
Fearabbit

Fearabbit

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 343 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

Again, this is way off-topic guys.

 

By the way, I like the narrative reason to have a "soul power" attribute. I don't think the game needs to be boring and old-fashioned about its attributes - if a new attribute fits the world perfectly, then definitely put it in! That said, I have a problem with Might being that attribute and boiling down to both physical and mental damage.

 

It would've been cool if the "soul power attribute" had a very specific purpose for each class, to show how souls influence every part of life, but in different ways. Fighters use it to guide their strikes, resulting in higher crits; ciphers basically have a "soul duel" with their enemy, so that the time needed to gather Focus is shorter the higher the soul's power is; chanters can invite more souls to their "reenactments", and so on. These are just examples, but having it do something very specific instead of being a generic damage modifier would have been more interesting, I believe, and would have driven home the point that this extra power does not come from mental or physical capabilities, but from somewhere else.

 

(In that case I still would have implemented a Strength attribute though. 7 attributes - 3 mental, 3 physical, one for the soul's power. That would have been nice.)


Edited by Fearabbit, 24 August 2014 - 07:00 AM.

  • Bloody Hypocrite likes this





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Attributes, Might, Strength, Balance

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users