Do you want experience from combat?

[Shevek]

 

 

 

seeming unnecessary clarification: even if there were a difference between quest and objective xp, it would not matter in the present context because quest/task/objective xp ALL preclude kill xp.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Maybe thats what needs to change. How about something as straight forward as a one time objective xp bonus for clearing dungeon and wilderness maps of 80% of all hostiles? That rewards a nice chunk of xp for killing while avoiding degenerative scenarios by setting the bar at 80% rather than 100%.

 

Still crappy but not as 100% crappy as no kill xp at all.

No, that would directly reward precisely what they want to avoid incentivizing. They don't want you to get into fights for no other reason than to get XP.

That is silly. So, now we do quests for pig farmers just to get xp? Isnt that degenerative?

 

What does xp do? It drives the character development forward by granting you levels.

 

What do levels do? In this game, they pretty much just make you better at killing. There is almost no character development aimed at nonviolent play (except for a couple skills that do not preclude combat prowess).

 

Think about it. The notion of an xp system that drives combat prowess but that is geared by rewarding noncombat and combat decisions equally is totally illogical (especially when nonviolent options are driven almost exclusively by a stat array that doesnt change past level 1 and is therefore not dependent on experience!).

 

At the very least, they should award xp objective bonuses for clearing hostiles from certain maps or downing epic opponents.

Edited September 7, 2014 by Shevek

[Tartantyco]

Yes, yes, the good old "muh combats, becuz logiks".

 

First of all, this is a pooled XP system. If you want a Skyrim-style direct skill improvement system, you're in the wrong neighborhood. Short of that, there's no point in arguing for causal XP based on "logic."

 

Second of all, leveling does not simply "make you better at killing". Leveling allows you to increase Lore, Stealth, Athletics, Mechanics, and Survival. All skills that have plenty of uses beyond combat. Leveling makes you better at resolving the various challenges in the game. Some of those may be combat related, others dialogue related, or stealth related, and so on.

 

Third of all, just because something is combat focused does not mean that combat has to be directly rewarded.

 

You are simply re-iterating an old argument that didn't fly the first time it was flung weakly into the air like a rancid cabbage.

[prodigydancer]

 If you want a Skyrim-style direct skill improvement system, you're in the wrong neighborhood.

I wonder why. I don't care for TES games all that much but it's only logical to make the next step and remove XP from the equation completely.

Edited September 7, 2014 by prodigydancer

[Shevek]

Tart:

The skill system in this game does not preclude combat prowess. In other words, unlike Fallout, putting points into those skills is not done at the expense combat ability and many of those skills tie into combat in some way. The character development system in this game is about one thing: killing. Your silly statements and childish insults cant change that.

[Namutree]

Tart:

The skill system in this game does not preclude combat prowess. In other words, unlike Fallout, putting points into those skills is not done at the expense combat ability and many of those skills tie into combat in some way. The character development system in this game is about one thing: killing. Your silly statements and childish insults cant change that.

As much as I would love to see any form of xp not tied to quests return or be introduced; xp never made sense to begin with. Leveling may be about combat, but that doesn't really mean anything. How does a lack of kill-xp affect how you play or experience the game? That is what I believe matters. Am I wrong?

[Pendali]

What if I want to role play a badass drifer , that really do not give a rats ass about farmers piglets or missing girls?

Why would my character even bother talking to some lame farmer? or some upstart mayor from broken down mill town.

 

What if it's beneath him to do so?

 

The character will still kill off the aggressive ogre that thinks he can stand in my way tho. And do quests that the character think will benefit him..

 

But what happens to my level progression (xp) If I just want to go exploring for a day or two, and not bother with the boring ppl in the boring towns? what then? with no combat xp it will feel like there is no progression and it will feel like that time spent in the game is wasted.

 

The alternative is that you will have to do every single little side quest that pops up. Making sure that you don´t miss out on any of the precious quest xp.

Combing every town , and all dialog options to make sure you did not miss anything.

That leaves no space left for roleplaying your character. You're just mindlessly doing all quest even the boring stuff you couldn't care less about.

 

Personally the most fun I have when playing these games is when I can survive a fight with the hardest most difficult enemy I can find and the longer this single engagement is lasting the more fun I'm going to have trying to figure out a way to beat that enemy.. if it takes half an hour to beat that single pack then that will be super awesome. But what happens if there is no combat xp at the end of that fight? you will be feeling like you wasted your time. And that the creators want you to wait until you get enough "quest xp" so that all fights are easy? (or in your level range) So now you're only doing simple easy fights? cos you don't get anything at all for trying your best and playing good. So now you will only play mediocre fights or skipp fight as much as possible. And boom! Now fights are boring and there´s no fun left in that particular aspect of the game anymore.

 

:S

 

PS: If they want you to play a game where you do not invoke fights for no good reason.. Then they need to have a world that works the same way and creatures in that world that do not attack you for no good reason either. as it is now a beatle will attack you as soon as they can smell you. and the weird druids in the forest will attack you for no good reason as well. In my mind the enemies (AI) are simply not intelligent enough to pull of what they are trying to do with the game. cos that part will never feel "alive" anyways.

Edited September 7, 2014 by Pendali

[Tartantyco]

Tart:

The skill system in this game does not preclude combat prowess. In other words, unlike Fallout, putting points into those skills is not done at the expense combat ability and many of those skills tie into combat in some way. The character development system in this game is about one thing: killing. Your silly statements and childish insults cant change that.

 

Stop trying to move the goal posts. You're also wrong about Fallout.

[Namutree]

What if I want to role play a badass drifer , that really do not give a rats ass about farmers piglets or missing girls?

Why would my character even bother talking to some lame farmer? what if it's beneath him to do so?

The character will still kill off the aggressive ogre that thinks he can stand in my way tho. And do quests that the character think will benefit him..

 

But what happens to my level progression (xp) If I just want to go exploring for a day or two, and not bother with the boring ppl in the boring towns? what then? with no combat xp it will feel like there is no progression and it will feel like that time spent in the game is wasted.

 

Personally the most fun I have when playing these games is when I can survive a fight with the hardest most difficult enemy I can find and the longer this single engagement is lasting the more fun I'm going to have trying to figure out a way to beat that enemy.. if it takes half an hour to beat that single pack then that will be super awesome. But what happens if there is no combat xp at the end of that fight? you will be feeling like you wasted your time. And that the creators want you to wait until you get enough "quest xp" so that all fights are easy? (or in your level range) So now you're only doing simple easy fights? cos you don't get anything at all for trying your best and playing good. So now you will only play mediocre fights or skipp fight as much as possible. And boom! Now fights are boring and there´s no fun left in that particular aspect of the game anymore. 

The fights definitely aren't easy. Right now the trash mobs are at least 2x as difficult and 4x more dangerous than BG1/BG2.

[Shevek]

Move the goal posts? What are talking about? Do you care to have a conversation or shall we spout idioms at eachother?

[Tartantyco]

Move the goal posts? What are talking about? Do you care to have a conversation or shall we spout idioms at eachother?

 

You're trying to change the criteria by demanding that they detract from combat ability, and by ignoring all their effects simply because some affect combat. That's how you're moving the goal posts.

 

It doesn't matter if some, or all, of them affect combat(And necessarily at the expense of combat ability if not all of them affect combat), leveling isn't all about killing things. Leveling influences your ability to sneak, interact with objects, resolve puzzles, quests, and the like.

[Shevek]

Arguing that the overwhelming majority of character development in this game is not laser focused on combat is silly. Are you intentionally being silly? Or, maybe you are trying to play Devil's Advocate? Perhaps you can point me to all those speech based skills and talents?

[Cantousent]

Personally, I like the combat and have gone out of my way to kill specific groups in the demo, basically anyone I view as hostile, on principle.  I agree with Tart, who is basically giving a stock answer to the question of logic as regards experience.  The reason it's a stock answer is because it's the most sensible one, namely that experience is and will always be removed to some degree from reality no matter what.  How realistic the devs get will always be balanced by their vision about what will make the game fun and serve their artistic vision.

 

...And Sawyer has always seemed primarily concerned with combat systems and character parity.  I think too much so sometimes.  ...But it's not like the system came from someone who hates combat and only cares about the dialogue or story elements.  That doesn't mean his vision is therefore necessarily correct, but it does mean that at least one person who likes combat doesn't feel shafted by quest only XP:  the lead designer.

 

I will admit something, however.  Even though I have been against 'kill XP' for years, I was playing the demo last night and I saw that I was sooooo close to leveling.  I wondered how many mooks I'd have to kill to level so that I could go into a tougher area.  lol  So, even the quest XP crowd has been habituated in how it views combat XP.  On the other hand, while this does admit that I wanted to level and had to remember I couldn't do it with a quick killing spree, it also shows the effects kill XP has on our actions by incentivizing us to play a certain way.  That's the biggest reason I disagree with folks who claim that kill XP doesn't alter the game for anyone else.  Of course it does.

[Tartantyco]

Arguing that the overwhelming majority of character development in this game is not laser focused on combat is silly. Are you intentionally being silly? Or, maybe you are trying to play Devil's Advocate? Perhaps you can point me to all those speech based skills and talents?

 

Mechanics, Lore, and Survival are speech related for certain. Athletics may also be, but I haven't seen any examples. In addition, they are used for plenty of other environment interactions, in addition to their direct non-combat applications, such as sneaking and identifying. Maybe you should educate yourself a little more about the game before you start making these broad statements?

 

Regardless, even if it was 100% combat focused, that's still not an argument in itself for Combat XP.

[Shevek]

Sure it is.

[redneckdevil]

What if I want to role play a badass drifer , that really do not give a rats ass about farmers piglets or missing girls?

Why would my character even bother talking to some lame farmer? or some upstart mayor from broken down mill town.

 

What if it's beneath him to do so?

 

The character will still kill off the aggressive ogre that thinks he can stand in my way tho. And do quests that the character think will benefit him..

 

But what happens to my level progression (xp) If I just want to go exploring for a day or two, and not bother with the boring ppl in the boring towns? what then? with no combat xp it will feel like there is no progression and it will feel like that time spent in the game is wasted.

 

The alternative is that you will have to do every single little side quest that pops up. Making sure that you don´t miss out on any of the precious quest xp.

Combing every town , and all dialog options to make sure you did not miss anything.

That leaves no space left for roleplaying your character. You're just mindlessly doing all quest even the boring stuff you couldn't care less about.

 

Personally the most fun I have when playing these games is when I can survive a fight with the hardest most difficult enemy I can find and the longer this single engagement is lasting the more fun I'm going to have trying to figure out a way to beat that enemy.. if it takes half an hour to beat that single pack then that will be super awesome. But what happens if there is no combat xp at the end of that fight? you will be feeling like you wasted your time. And that the creators want you to wait until you get enough "quest xp" so that all fights are easy? (or in your level range) So now you're only doing simple easy fights? cos you don't get anything at all for trying your best and playing good. So now you will only play mediocre fights or skipp fight as much as possible. And boom! Now fights are boring and there´s no fun left in that particular aspect of the game anymore.

 

:S

 

PS: If they want you to play a game where you do not invoke fights for no good reason.. Then they need to have a world that works the same way and creatures in that world that do not attack you for no good reason either. as it is now a beatle will attack you as soon as they can smell you. and the weird druids in the forest will attack you for no good reason as well. In my mind the enemies (AI) are simply not intelligent enough to pull of what they are trying to do with the game. cos that part will never feel "alive" anyways.

Ok lets go with badass drifter who doesnt want to talk to a pig farmer.

Now imagine urself sitting down at a table with a GM/DM and u are playing pnp. The GM/DM tell you that in town while walking u overhear guards questioning the locals about a missing girl and u walked past a very loud cursing farmer who is visually and vocally upset about losing some pigs.

GM/DM-what do you do?

Player-nothing, im a loner and a drifter and dont want to get involved. I head outside of town to start exploring and killing everything that gets in my way.

GM/DM-soooo u dont wanna participate in the quests i have prepared for ya? You just want to do ur own thing?

Player-Yes, i just want to explore and fight and dont want anything to do with any of the stories u already prepared.

GM/DM-ok, well good luck, im gonna head out then. Heres a link to a pdf with monster stats on it, knotch urself out.

 

Now im not trying to be rude, but it seems alot of people are viewing it a sandboxesq rpg when it highly seems like the devs are being the GM/DMs and presenting u with a campaign for u to interact with, not to totally ignore.

The devs point of view of trying to get rid of "kill exp" could be just like a GM/DM point of view of keeping the players interacting and not ignoring the quests they give you. Basically not participating in what they are offering.

basically i think they see it as not a single player game where only YOU the player is involved, but as a game where you are the only one playing a character but they are the GM/DM presenting you with what they have to offer and keeping the players inline with the challenge they set up.

hopefully im makimg sense and in no way trying to be rude to u or anything. It just seems crpg have more in common with D&D premade campaigns than an actual sandbox game.

Edited September 7, 2014 by redneckdevil

[Tartantyco]

Sure it is.

 

See? You can't even make a basic argument in favor of it.

[Racker]

I kind of like the idea of making avoiding combat as viable as engaging in it; that opens the door for a more open ended experience, since you can make stealth/diplomat type parties that could be as viable as a combat-oriented party.  But it seems like the best way to accomplish that would be to award exp for both combat and non-combat; exp for defeating enemies, and exp for clearing an area stealthily as well. 

[kinexsci]

I'm not sure if this has already been suggested, but I believe a simple solution to help both parties is to tag combat encounters to quest lines. By doing this, combat-oriented players can receive xp following each successful combat encounter. Experience earned from each combat encounter would then be subtracted from the total xp granted from the completion of the quest. This way, anyone that completes the quest without performing combat would gain an equal amount of xp from finishing the quest. As well, once the quest line is complete, the mobs connected to the quests would no longer provide xp for going back and killing them, so there's no bonus incentive for completing quests one way or another. 

[Shevek]

 

 

Sure it is.

See? You can't even make a basic argument in favor of it.

I havent heard a basic argument from you against it. So why should I bother? Edited September 8, 2014 by Shevek

[Caladian]

 

 

Sure it is.

See? You can't even make a basic argument in favor of it.

I havent heard a basic argument from you against it. So why should I bother?

 

The argument is easy, for PoE, it was designed to NOT be in it.  You still can gain the necessary levels via their XP system.

 

Note, I am not saying that it shouldn't be expanded, just not every battle.

[Bulkbu]

If I have to engange in a random brawl somewhere in the metro I'm certainly wiser afterwards (given some selfreflexive thinking). If I go on the "quest" to buy some groceries for my girlfriend however, experience is very limited.

Sure, "game mechanics" are different in real life, but I would argue that as closer a RPGs ruleset comes to what makes sense in the real world, the better.

It just doesn't make sense to not gain anything from fighting for your life.

[Namutree]

Where are these arguments that it doesn't make sense coming from?

 

A) It's a video game! Whether it makes sense or not doesn't matter. This isn't Sim Adventurer.

 

B)  Xp never made sense in the first place. Taking what was an unrealistic mechanic and making it unrealistic isn't a change.

 

Let's discuss how the exclusion of kill-xp helps/hurts the game experience rather than discuss the realism of a fantasy video game.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

A) It's a video game! Whether it makes sense or not doesn't matter. This isn't Sim Adventurer.

 

The arguments over the last 2 years have always had people arguing about whether something in real life is implemented or not in a video game. Similarly, you'll have people justifying why something is in the game due to something comparable in real life. Personally, I'll take fun over realism any day. For some people (not me), this is immersion breaking and they need the realism behind it to justify something.

 

Disclaimer: I'm not in favour of the current xp system in PoE. I much prefer how it was implemented in the IE games.

[Pendali]

 

What if I want to role play a badass drifer , that really do not give a rats ass about farmers piglets or missing girls?

Why would my character even bother talking to some lame farmer? or some upstart mayor from broken down mill town.

 

What if it's beneath him to do so?

 

The character will still kill off the aggressive ogre that thinks he can stand in my way tho. And do quests that the character think will benefit him..

 

But what happens to my level progression (xp) If I just want to go exploring for a day or two, and not bother with the boring ppl in the boring towns? what then? with no combat xp it will feel like there is no progression and it will feel like that time spent in the game is wasted.

 

The alternative is that you will have to do every single little side quest that pops up. Making sure that you don´t miss out on any of the precious quest xp.

Combing every town , and all dialog options to make sure you did not miss anything.

That leaves no space left for roleplaying your character. You're just mindlessly doing all quest even the boring stuff you couldn't care less about.

 

Personally the most fun I have when playing these games is when I can survive a fight with the hardest most difficult enemy I can find and the longer this single engagement is lasting the more fun I'm going to have trying to figure out a way to beat that enemy.. if it takes half an hour to beat that single pack then that will be super awesome. But what happens if there is no combat xp at the end of that fight? you will be feeling like you wasted your time. And that the creators want you to wait until you get enough "quest xp" so that all fights are easy? (or in your level range) So now you're only doing simple easy fights? cos you don't get anything at all for trying your best and playing good. So now you will only play mediocre fights or skipp fight as much as possible. And boom! Now fights are boring and there´s no fun left in that particular aspect of the game anymore.

 

:S

 

PS: If they want you to play a game where you do not invoke fights for no good reason.. Then they need to have a world that works the same way and creatures in that world that do not attack you for no good reason either. as it is now a beatle will attack you as soon as they can smell you. and the weird druids in the forest will attack you for no good reason as well. In my mind the enemies (AI) are simply not intelligent enough to pull of what they are trying to do with the game. cos that part will never feel "alive" anyways.

Ok lets go with badass drifter who doesnt want to talk to a pig farmer.

Now imagine urself sitting down at a table with a GM/DM and u are playing pnp. The GM/DM tell you that in town while walking u overhear guards questioning the locals about a missing girl and u walked past a very loud cursing farmer who is visually and vocally upset about losing some pigs.

GM/DM-what do you do?

Player-nothing, im a loner and a drifter and dont want to get involved. I head outside of town to start exploring and killing everything that gets in my way.

GM/DM-soooo u dont wanna participate in the quests i have prepared for ya? You just want to do ur own thing?

Player-Yes, i just want to explore and fight and dont want anything to do with any of the stories u already prepared.

GM/DM-ok, well good luck, im gonna head out then. Heres a link to a pdf with monster stats on it, knotch urself out.

 

Now im not trying to be rude, but it seems alot of people are viewing it a sandboxesq rpg when it highly seems like the devs are being the GM/DMs and presenting u with a campaign for u to interact with, not to totally ignore.

The devs point of view of trying to get rid of "kill exp" could be just like a GM/DM point of view of keeping the players interacting and not ignoring the quests they give you. Basically not participating in what they are offering.

basically i think they see it as not a single player game where only YOU the player is involved, but as a game where you are the only one playing a character but they are the GM/DM presenting you with what they have to offer and keeping the players inline with the challenge they set up.

hopefully im makimg sense and in no way trying to be rude to u or anything. It just seems crpg have more in common with D&D premade campaigns than an actual sandbox game.

 

 

Well I do see both veiws and I get what they are trying to do, but with the way this game is set up , with all the combat spells you have got.. I just don't think this is a good idea at current.

Maybe if they made sleep , "spider web"/hold and poison type spells last much longer and more powerful.. then the setting of it would make more sense.

 

In a world where you are able to kill or make friends with an Ogre, you should be able to just subdue him as well.

 

I believe they are trying a bit too hard to make the wheel all over again and have´nt scheduled for all the butterfly effects.

But by all means if they put the extra effort in and manage to pull it off and the game is still fun to play afterwards. Then it should be worth it right?

[Namutree]

 

A) It's a video game! Whether it makes sense or not doesn't matter. This isn't Sim Adventurer.

 

The arguments over the last 2 years have always had people arguing about whether something in real life is implemented or not in a video game. Similarly, you'll have people justifying why something is in the game due to something comparable in real life. Personally, I'll take fun over realism any day. For some people (not me), this is immersion breaking and they need the realism behind it to justify something.

 

Disclaimer: I'm not in favour of the current xp system in PoE. I much prefer how it was implemented in the IE games.

 

I am VERY unhappy with the current xp system as it is now. I just don't like the, "It's not real" argument in a game that requires more than a few doses of the suspension of disbelief. 

 

I'm not really the biggest fan of kill-xp, but almost anything is better than xp coming from quests exclusively.