Backer beta: Developer Impressions

[Helm]

 

All non-combat skills are useful. If we add lockpicking to the game, we will make sure that there are locks to pick and worthwhile rewards for getting past them.

All non-combat skills can be used frequently. If you take disarm traps as a skill, you should expect more than two traps in the entire game world. Frequency of application has a large impact on how useful something is.

Combat can be avoided with non-combat skills. There will often be ways to avoid fighting. Yes, we will have the standard methods of talking your way out of a fight or sneaking around an encounter, but there will be other ways too. Perhaps you can re-sanctify a desecrated cemetery to prevent any further undead from rising, or maybe figuring out a way across a ruined bridge will always avoid the bandits on this side of the river.

Avoiding combat does not lead to less experience gain. You shouldn't go up levels any slower by using your non-combat skills rather than your combat skills. We plan to reward you for your accomplishments, not for your body count.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/obsidian/project-eternity/posts/314089

Yeah right. It sounds just like Infinity Engine game, only slightly improved by giving the player the possibility to use a special skills to resolve some encounters in different ways. More variety is always good.

 

They did a good job on sugar coating the truth.

[wanderon]

 

 

You're missing his point. Volourn is clearly pointing out that the game isn't rewarding you XP for your accomplishments. And that is correct. I can show you several non-combat accomplishments you can make in this Beta at least that go completely unrewarded. I can also show you current developer confirmation that only QUESTS will be rewarding you XP.

 

Of course, that passage is from one of Tim Cain's updates. Those can actually be taken with a grain of salt. a LOT of the stuff he said has since been eliminated, changed, rendered too expensive to implement etc.

 

It rewards your accomplishments because all those activites, killing monsters, lockpicking locks, and so forth are done so you can solve a quest. The only way to win this or any similar game is by solving quests.

 

Except that here in the Beta, there's an entire map (the what's-it-called Gorge) filled with monsters, and lock picking, scripted events and a dungeon. But since there's no quest tied to that map, there's no XP to be had in it. Or because of it. Or in reference to it. none at all.

 

 

I wonder if the reason that area exists like that in the beta is because the quest related to that map is tied to the main storyline or something else they don't want to spoil? I would not expect to find a map not tied to any experience giving event in the full game (given the manner in which they plan to award experience).

[Gromnir]

(quote system died on us again)

 

"Gromnir, why does it have to be "as simple and straightforward to implement"?

 

"Surely, when designing a game, the developers should start by asking "What will be most fun and rewarding for players?", and not "What will be the least amount of work for us?""

 

"Note that I'm among those who are fine with the PoE's XP system (although I also enjoyed how XP was handled the Infinity Engine, with the exception of XP scaling in IWD2), so I'm not trying to be combative, it's an honest question."

 

answer:

 

scroll up and read josh quote as provided by indira. balancing a system of xp awards is notoriously difficult on developers and QA.

 

quest xp balances by not balancing. quest and task xp takes the whole complex mess of coming up with a calculus that appropriately awards for various tasks that will have admittedly startling different frequencies of usage and functionally solves the extremely difficult problem of balancing proper xp awards by taking the balancing completely out of the process. developers make certain that there are opportunities to be stealthy in the game, they make lockpicking useful and rewarding. they provide options to utilize diplomacy and/or guile. the developers obviously don't need to provide an appropriate number of combat encounters as there will be more than enough of those, but they must still need makes combats engaging and varied. however, quest/task based xp does not require the developers to find any proper balance or formula for awarding xp in an ad hoc manner. actions do not have an xp value even if developer must still be conscious of whether or not particular skills are reasonably useful and fun. getting xp is not, in and of itself fun. leveling might be, but not getting xp.... save for in the same way timmy gets his gold star for memorizing multiplication tables up to the 3s place.

 

why am we suggesting that alternative xp system must be as simple and straightforward as quest xp? because simplicity, elegance and unbreakability is among the main positive attributes of quest xp from the prospective of the developer. the resources and effort saved by functionally solving the problem of balance by ignoring it is more than inconsequential and those resources can be utilized to improve the game in many other unforeseen ways. we cannot say specific what the resources is used for in the alternative, and "a lot" strikes us as woeful vague and unenlightened, but the resource savings is some where between yowzah and Boing! 

 

so, yes, given that a prime attribute o' quest xp is resource savings, one would expect that the replacement system, particularly in the late stages o' a game beta, would need be equal simple and resource cost-effective to be representing an attractive alternative to the developers. am not being unfair by adding simplicity and straightforward to our challenge... a challenge which still has no takers btw.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited August 27, 2014 by Gromnir

[Anaeme]

In my mind a game like NWN2 struck the right balance. The player got XP for kills, disabling traps, completing quests, etc 

 

All at appropriate levels depending on the amount of effort needed to achieve the desired result

 

With the amount of time left before release, I wonder if Obsidian can implement that kind of change

[Helm]

What do you guys consider 'accomplishment?'

 

On a bit of a tangent, this whole debate reminds me of one of my pet peeves at work. There are two types of people: process-oriented and goal-oriented. Process-oriented people think that activities should be rewarded; goal-oriented people think that accomplishing things should be rewarded.

 

I can't, in general, stand to work with process-oriented people. They're the ones who are concerned that you clock in at the right hours, make sure that everything is properly written down, call endless meetings to properly assign responsibilities, and so on. Goal-oriented people are concerned about what needs to be done in order to get that thing we're working on finished and out the door, what it has to be like, and so on. Of course some process and, in teamwork, a great deal of discipline is needed to actually do that, but I find it extremely important that goals go first, adherence to process second.

 

I think this is behind my dislike of systemic XP. It's process-oriented, the game equivalent of making sure the T-45 form is properly filled and the hours are properly clocked. It rewards activity rather than directed activity. In a game which has goals other than "retrieve the amulet of Yendor from somewhere below level 20 of the dungeon" this just feels wrong. I.e. systemic XP only really works for me if the activity is the goal.

 

This also reveals that I think of XP as primarily an incentive system, not, say, a 'simulation of learning things.'

So you generally have a problem with systemic XP (= combat XP, lockpick XP, etc.), but you think it is fine if it one of the main activities of the game, i.e. the journey is the ultimate goal. That is a pretty good description of Baldur's Gate and probably explains why you liked that game and also backed the spiritual successor.

 

I seriously don't understand what your problem is, you keep on writing that you hate something that you don't actually hate. It is like you are defending a certain principle and don't really even know why yourself.

[Mayama]

In my mind a game like NWN2 struck the right balance. The player got XP for kills, disabling traps, completing quests, etc 

 

All at appropriate levels depending on the amount of effort needed to achieve the desired result

 

With the amount of time left before release, I wonder if Obsidian can implement that kind of change

So people talk NPC's out of the quest, lockpick their save and kill them anyway in the end. Thats what usually happens in every RPG that offers extra xp for every activity on the way to the main goal.

[Ineth]

@Gromnir

Thank you for explaining, that does make sense.

 

One small thing you said got me thinking though:

 

getting xp is not, in and of itself fun. leveling might be, but not getting xp.... save for in the same way timmy gets his gold star for memorizing multiplication tables up to the 3s place.

 

Now that you mention it , I do feel that seeing the XP values pop up after kills in the Infinity Engine games, served as performance feedback in a way. Not just in a "And another one bites the dust, good job, here have a gold star!" kind of way, but slightly more meaningfully - as in:

• "Oh wow, that monster gave 10,000 XP? Now I don't feel bad about having spent so many limited resources (spells, scrolls, item charges, potions, health) in this fight -- it was supposed to be that hard. Gotta remember the tactic I used!"

or conversely:

• "Oh, only 200 XP for each of these monsters? Then I guess there must be an easier way to kill them than how I just did it. Next time I meet monsters of this type, I gotta remember to try out different weapon combinations or spell tactics..."

So getting the kill XP might not be fun in and of itself, but it is also not completely useless.

 

Although in PoE, the bestiary probably already covers that...

 

(PS: Did I mention I love the bestiary? )

[Gromnir]

@Gromnir

Thank you for explaining, that does make sense.

 

One small thing you said got me thinking though:

 

getting xp is not, in and of itself fun. leveling might be, but not getting xp.... save for in the same way timmy gets his gold star for memorizing multiplication tables up to the 3s place.

 

Now that you mention it , I do feel that seeing the XP values pop up after kills in the Infinity Engine games, served as performance feedback in a way. Not just in a "And another one bites the dust, good job, here have a gold star!" kind of way, but slightly more meaningfully - as in:

• "Oh wow, that monster gave 10,000 XP? Now I don't feel bad about having spent so many limited resources (spells, scrolls, item charges, potions, health) in this fight -- it was supposed to be that hard. Gotta remember the tactic I used!"

or conversely:

• "Oh, only 200 XP for each of these monsters? Then I guess there must be an easier way to kill them than how I just did it. Next time I meet monsters of this type, I gotta remember to try out different weapon combinations or spell tactics..."

So getting the kill XP might not be fun in and of itself, but it is also not completely useless.

 

Although in PoE, the bestiary probably already covers that...

 

(PS: Did I mention I love the bestiary? )

keep in mind that tougher critters will likely drop better loot and may even be part o' a quest resolution.  get quest xp for dispatching the ogre serves purpose you were asking for yes? after all, it marked resolution o' a quest, so you know very well that the ogre is significant. am betting most special critters will be tied direct or indirect to quests. killing significant npcs will also be likely to have'em drop loot. drop dirty rags = pathetic foe. drop Excalibur = significant. 

 

*shrug*

 

am doubtful an xp award is or should be the defining measure o' success and significance.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Sartoris]

 

(quote system died on us again)

 

"Gromnir, why does it have to be "as simple and straightforward to implement"?

 

"Surely, when designing a game, the developers should start by asking "What will be most fun and rewarding for players?", and not "What will be the least amount of work for us?""

 

"Note that I'm among those who are fine with the PoE's XP system (although I also enjoyed how XP was handled the Infinity Engine, with the exception of XP scaling in IWD2), so I'm not trying to be combative, it's an honest question."

 

answer:

 

scroll up and read josh quote as provided by indira. balancing a system of xp awards is notoriously difficult on developers and QA.

 

quest xp balances by not balancing. quest and task xp takes the whole complex mess of coming up with a calculus that appropriately awards for various tasks that will have admittedly startling different frequencies of usage and functionally solves the extremely difficult problem of balancing proper xp awards by taking the balancing completely out of the process. developers make certain that there are opportunities to be stealthy in the game, they make lockpicking useful and rewarding. they provide options to utilize diplomacy and/or guile. the developers obviously don't need to provide an appropriate number of combat encounters as there will be more than enough of those, but they must still need makes combats engaging and varied. however, quest/task based xp does not require the developers to find any proper balance or formula for awarding xp in an ad hoc manner. actions do not have an xp value even if developer must still be conscious of whether or not particular skills are reasonably useful and fun. getting xp is not, in and of itself fun. leveling might be, but not getting xp.... save for in the same way timmy gets his gold star for memorizing multiplication tables up to the 3s place.

 

why am we suggesting that alternative xp system must be as simple and straightforward as quest xp? because simplicity, elegance and unbreakability is among the main positive attributes of quest xp from the prospective of the developer. the resources and effort saved by functionally solving the problem of balance by ignoring it is more than inconsequential and those resources can be utilized to improve the game in many other unforeseen ways. we cannot say specific what the resources is used for in the alternative, and "a lot" strikes us as woeful vague and unenlightened, but the resource savings is some where between yowzah and Boing! 

 

so, yes, given that a prime attribute o' quest xp is resource savings, one would expect that the replacement system, particularly in the late stages o' a game beta, would need be equal simple and resource cost-effective to be representing an attractive alternative to the developers. am not being unfair by adding simplicity and straightforward to our challenge... a challenge which still has no takers btw.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

"getting xp is not, in and of itself fun"

 

That's no problem if that is your opinion, but for me it is fun. It is an aspect of the game that I enjoy. I definitely understand that for you, its not. But I enjoy the recognition given to me, in the form of xp, by the accomplishments I make in the game. Before you try to explain to me why I don't actually find this aspect fun or why I'm deluding myself in some way can you please instead try to accept that some people have a different sense of what is fun than you. I understand that this game will reward me for completing quests. I would also enjoy being rewarded for defeating monsters, picking locks, dialogue choices, etc. Different strokes for different folks.

 

"from the prospective of the developer"

 

I fundementally reject the need to tailor all discussion to within only the lanes in the road that you keep trying to establish. Yes I am clear that Obsidian has stated that the game will only provide quest xp. However, I think it is useful to provide feedback that this decision will negativly contribute to my enjoyment of the game.

 

"improve the game in many other unforeseen ways"

 

What if I want to improve the game by having it give combat, skill, and dialogue xp? That is what I want to do. What is so wrong with laying out my preferences? I realize they may not be implemented. So what. I want to provide Obsidian feedback.

 

That to me is what is so toxic about your responses to people in this thread. Your comments center on telling people that combat, skill, and dialogue xp simply will not happen and activly attempt to argue with people who are simply stating their preferences. I don't believe your contributions to this discussion are constructive.

 

Its fine if you want to talk about why you prefer the quest xp system. But please stop trying to tell people their preferences, if different, are somehow invalid. They are well within the designed purpose of this forum to offer those thoughts.

 

Your responses seem to suggest you have a lot of faith in the developers to implement their chosen systems in a way that will lead to you having a fun time with this game. Some of us don't share that optimism, or are at least much more wary of this than you are.

 

It should be completely appropriate to express that concern in this forum and indeed in this thread as the original developer feedback echoed that concern. Please stop trying to tell people their concerns are invalid simply because Obsidian seems to have made particular design choices. Those kind of responses do not contribute to a healthy forumn environment. We should be encouraging the free exchange of feedback, all you appear to be doing is explaining to people why their feedback is wrong or otherwise inconsequencial.

[Zansatsu]

 

In my mind a game like NWN2 struck the right balance. The player got XP for kills, disabling traps, completing quests, etc 

 

All at appropriate levels depending on the amount of effort needed to achieve the desired result

 

With the amount of time left before release, I wonder if Obsidian can implement that kind of change

So people talk NPC's out of the quest, lockpick their save and kill them anyway in the end. Thats what usually happens in every RPG that offers extra xp for every activity on the way to the main goal.

 

Based on what? Stop generalizing this "degenerate gameplay" because you can't RP.

[Tale]

Based on what? Stop generalizing this "degenerate gameplay" because you can't RP.

I think the previous poster's example is bad, but he makes a valid point.

 

If anything, an RPG should be rewarding the player for RP, not asking them to RP to make up for its own design failures.

[Gromnir]

"Your responses seem to suggest you have a lot of faith in the developers to implement their chosen systems in a way that will lead to you having a fun time with this game. Some of us don't share that optimism, or are at least much more wary of this than you are."

 

you should never be able to claim strawman. ever. you use like an automatic weapon, but then claim others is using, and is typical wrong doing so.

 

we have faith that quest xp is balanced and simple.  the reason we have faith that the developers will implement balanced and simple is because it requires 0 Faith. it is the balancing system o' xp that requires no faith because it is requiring Zero balancing.

 

PoE will give you enough xp to reach level 10 or 11... am not recalling which. developers is spreading out so that you get that xp in relative even increments basd on QA gameplay. so, yeah, if you is honestly disturbed that you is not getting xp in dribble amounts o' 10s, 50s and 100s xp denominations that is fundamentally more difficult to balance than quest xp regardless o' fact that you will get approximate same amount o' xp with quest xp during similar amounts o' gameplay time, then we has little sympathy for you, and we believe you is deluding self regarding what you think is fun. you will have similar opportunities to level and improve your character regardless o' quest xp implementation and you will be getting same xp regardless o' how others play the game, but simple failure to see ticks o' 10xp, 50xp, and 100xp will reduce fun?

 

fine. is good to know. Gromnir Does have faith that even the more incompetent developers could use the considerable resources that would go into the ultimately pointless balancing attempts other than quest/task, and use those resources to improve the game in a multitude o' un knowable and non-specific ways.

 

you don't believe balancing is actual necessary? is a pointless observation. is a major goal mentioned many times as part o' oriiginal kickstarter and since that time, so effort will be expended to balance. choice therefore becomes infinitely simple: do you want the developers to spend a tiny fraction o' resources on balancing xp rewwards that will result in perfect balance, or some other far more respource intensive system that will by necessity end up less balanced. you simply cannot make a more balanced system than quest/task, because it complete ignores the balancing calculus.

 

that being said, yes, if the ticks o' 10s, 50s and 100s o' xp is essential to your fundamental enjoyment o' the game, as peculiar as that is striking us, then we understand your need to argue... though we again, find your timing... amusing.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Sartoris]

"Your responses seem to suggest you have a lot of faith in the developers to implement their chosen systems in a way that will lead to you having a fun time with this game. Some of us don't share that optimism, or are at least much more wary of this than you are."

 

you should never be able to claim strawman. ever. you use like an automatic weapon, but then claim others is using, and is typical wrong doing so.

 

we have faith that quest xp is balanced and simple.  the reason we have faith that the developers will implement balanced and simple is because it requires 0 Faith. it is the balancing system o' xp that requires no faith because it is requiring Zero balancing.

 

PoE will give you enough xp to reach level 10 or 11... am not recalling which. developers is spreading out so that you get that xp in relative even increments basd on QA gameplay. so, yeah, if you is honestly disturbed that you is not getting xp in dribble amounts o' 10s, 50s and 100s xp denominations that is fundamentally more difficult to balance than quest xp regardless o' fact that you will get approximate same amount o' xp with quest xp during similar amounts o' gameplay time, then we has little sympathy for you, and we believe you is deluding self regarding what you think is fun. you will have similar opportunities to level and improve your character regardless o' quest xp implementation and you will be getting same xp regardless o' how others play the game, but simple failure to see ticks o' 10xp, 50xp, and 100xp will reduce fun?

 

fine. is good to know. Gromnir Does have faith that even the more incompetent developers could use the considerable resources that would go into the ultimately pointless balancing attempts other than quest/task, and use those resources to improve the game in a multitude o' un knowable and non-specific ways.

 

you don't believe balancing is actual necessary? is a pointless observation. is a major goal mentioned many times as part o' oriiginal kickstarter and since that time, so effort will be expended to balance. choice therefore becomes infinitely simple: do you want the developers to spend a tiny fraction o' resources on balancing xp rewwards that will result in perfect balance, or some other far more respource intensive system that will by necessity end up less balanced. you simply cannot make a more balanced system than quest/task, because it complete ignores the balancing calculus.

 

that being said, yes, if the ticks o' 10s, 50s and 100s o' xp is essential to your fundamental enjoyment o' the game, as peculiar as that is striking us, then we understand your need to argue... though we again, find your timing... amusing.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

"we have faith that quest xp is balanced and simple.  the reason we have faith that the developers will implement balanced and simple is because it requires 0 Faith. it is the balancing system o' xp that requires no faith because it is requiring Zero balancing."

 

So you have faith because... you... don't have faith? Wha...?

 

Do you... do you even read the things you type? Are you responding for any purpose other than to try to say other people are wrong for expressing their preferences?

 

How about I remove the offending word the following way.

 

Your responses seem to suggest you believe that have a lot of faith in the developers will to implement their chosen systems in a way that will lead to you having a fun time with this game. Some of us don't share that optimism, or are at least much more wary of this than you are.

 

Is that all right with you? Did I get rid of the scary word now?

 

And I seriously fail to see how me saying that you believe the developers will implement the quest-only xp system in a way that will cause you to have fun is at all a strawman.

 

In case you need to be educated, from wikipedia:

 

The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:

1. Person 1 asserts proposition X.
2. Person 2 argues against a false but superficially similar proposition Y, as if that were an argument against Person 1's position.

 

 

 

In what way is saying that you think the developers will create a game you enjoy with quest-only xp an incorrect representation of your beliefs? Seriously how?

 

Moreover, I'm not even using that summary of what you are saying to argue with you! I'm not trying to argue with you! At this stage I've simply accepted that you are slavishly devoted to the quest-only xp system and believe that is the best choice.

 

I, and some others, believe differently. And that's ok.

 

Do you understand that Gromnir? I'm not arguing with you. All the things I've wanted to say have been said. At this point I'm just enjoying watching you flail around in your sad attempts to defend a system that you seem to be irrationally attached to.

Edited August 27, 2014 by Sartoris

[Gromnir]

we have faith because faith is, in point o' fact, unnecessary. you can't be this slow on accident. there is no calculus needed to balance, no algorithm or ad hoc methods spawned from an attempt to make sure stealth or diplomats get enough xp. no faith is required, because no balancing occurs. Gromnir has faith that the obsidian developers will never drown in a pool o' balancing because they will necessarily never attempt to swim in that pool.

 

congrats.

 

as for strawman, we never said that the system that obsidian will implement will create fun. that is your strawman. xp is an abstraction. exp is a measure that allows us to eventual level. you really need a copy o' Copi.

 

we ignored the noise. 

 

 

"Do you understand that Gromnir? I'm not arguing with you. All the things I've wanted to say have been said. At this point I'm just enjoying watching you flail around in your sad attempts to defend a system that you seem to be irrationally attached to."

 

and Gromnir is enjoying you continuing to make yourself look increasing foolish. if we is both having fun, so much the better, but your fundamental inability to play the game is resulting in diminished returns. if we could train you to tip your little fez at the end o' your jig, we could perhaps make this organ-grinder performance earn us some money, but we can't even teach strawman to you, so that seems unlikely.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited August 27, 2014 by Gromnir

[ManifestedISO]

Quoting wikipedia, intentional grounding, spot of the foul, fourth down.  

[Gromnir]

Quoting wikipedia, intentional grounding, spot of the foul, fourth down.  

 

am gonna concede that quoting wikipedia is a pet peeve of ours. if henry kissinger or the Pope quoted wikipedia definitions or "evidence" to us we would heap nothing but scorn and derision 'pon them. 

 

if mother teresa were still alive, we might give her a free pass, but our understanding were that she had no personal property save a bucket and one change o' clothes, so we thinks that the internet might be a bit outside her comfort zone. furthermore, the whole living saint angle would make us back away from our typical, "quoting wikipedia deserves a steel-toed boot kick to the head" response.

 

hmmm... we might expand the free-pass list beyond the Pope and henry kissinger, if given enough time. 

 

mike ditka?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYJrJO25BD4

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Marceror]

I'm sure Mother Theresa would be moved by your benevolence.

[Volourn]

I'm still trying to figuring out why it's acceptable that PE has a worse xp system than SRR. That's embarassing.

[Helm]

I'm still trying to figuring out why it's acceptable that PE has a worse xp system than SRR. That's embarassing.

Some don't care because they can hardly wait to stealth their way through the game for a whole 3 hours of fun.

 

Or maybe the just have low standards, i'm not sure.

[sb5]

I like kill XP. One of the most fun way to play Fallout 2 is to kill everyone unrelated to the main quest and don't do quests at all IMO. I want to kill endless amounts of monsters and everyone else inhabiting your world. It's just a fun way to play a game, especially linear games become boring rather fast.

 

I also like it when the amount of XP is not limited. When you can choose how to advance rather than being told you need to do hero stuff, it's a step back. You might as well display a percentage value of how much game you've absolved.

[Zansatsu]

 

Based on what? Stop generalizing this "degenerate gameplay" because you can't RP.

I think the previous poster's example is bad, but he makes a valid point.

 

If anything, an RPG should be rewarding the player for RP, not asking them to RP to make up for its own design failures.

 

Agreed, but removing combat xp entirely is not the only solution to this supposed problem.

[Gromnir]

 

 

Based on what? Stop generalizing this "degenerate gameplay" because you can't RP.

I think the previous poster's example is bad, but he makes a valid point.

 

If anything, an RPG should be rewarding the player for RP, not asking them to RP to make up for its own design failures.

 

Agreed, but removing combat xp entirely is not the only solution to this supposed problem.

 

with quest xp, you get combat xp. you also get stealth xp.  you get diplomacy xp. you get we-never-expected-you-to-complete-that-quest-that-way xp. quest xp does not discriminate or punish. however you choose to accomplish a task or quest, you receive xp. thus, if you killed every bug, mammal and mystical beast on the map and vanquished the ultimate boss with a hammer blow to the head, you is receiving combat xp. 

 

everybody wins. nobody loses. socialists everywhere should be rejoicing. 

 

and yes, we know that ain't what you meant by combat xp, but functionally, quest xp simply removes the need or point o' distinguishing.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited August 28, 2014 by Gromnir

[Zansatsu]

 

 

 

Based on what? Stop generalizing this "degenerate gameplay" because you can't RP.

I think the previous poster's example is bad, but he makes a valid point.

 

If anything, an RPG should be rewarding the player for RP, not asking them to RP to make up for its own design failures.

 

Agreed, but removing combat xp entirely is not the only solution to this supposed problem.

 

with quest xp, you get combat xp. you also get stealth xp.  you get diplomacy xp. you get we-never-expected-you-to-complete-that-quest-that-way xp. quest xp does not discriminate or punish. however you choose to accomplish a task or quest, you receive xp. thus, if you killed every bug, mammal and mystical beast on the map and vanquished the ultimate boss with a hammer blow to the head, you is receiving combat xp. 

 

everybody wins. nobody loses. socialists everywhere should be rejoicing. 

 

and yes, we know that ain't what you meant by combat xp, but functionally, quest xp simply removes the need or point o' distinguishing.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Thank you gromnir, I'm aware of your position. I also understand how quest only XP works. Not sure how socialism fits into all this? Not a fan of it myself, I guess you are? Looks like there is something else we don't agree on!

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

 

Based on what? Stop generalizing this "degenerate gameplay" because you can't RP.

I think the previous poster's example is bad, but he makes a valid point.

 

If anything, an RPG should be rewarding the player for RP, not asking them to RP to make up for its own design failures.

 

Agreed, but removing combat xp entirely is not the only solution to this supposed problem.

 

with quest xp, you get combat xp. you also get stealth xp.  you get diplomacy xp. you get we-never-expected-you-to-complete-that-quest-that-way xp. quest xp does not discriminate or punish. however you choose to accomplish a task or quest, you receive xp. thus, if you killed every bug, mammal and mystical beast on the map and vanquished the ultimate boss with a hammer blow to the head, you is receiving combat xp. 

 

everybody wins. nobody loses. socialists everywhere should be rejoicing. 

 

and yes, we know that ain't what you meant by combat xp, but functionally, quest xp simply removes the need or point o' distinguishing.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Thank you gromnir, I'm aware of your position. I also understand how quest only XP works. Not sure how socialism fits into all this? Not a fan of it myself, I guess you are? Looks like there is something else we don't agree on!

 

actually, no. am not a socialist. bad assumption there. regardless, quest xp does solve problems o' balancing combat xp and other varieties o' xp... which makes us all the more perplexed when people come up with gut-level rejections o' a simple and elegant mechanic that makes style o' play a non factor in balancing xp rewards. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Zansatsu]

What can I say, sometimes messy is just more fun.