Discussion: the PoE beta xp system

[Captain Shrek]

I guess a little lining out of what trash combat is, will help here:

 

When you have to fight enemies that do not in any way contribute to the game progression, except by making it longer, the combat can be considered filler/trash. Case in point: 

 

1) IWD 2 Golbins : Yeah, there is a goblin invasion going on. But jesus christ, do I have to fight every effing one of them??

2) NWN2 : Zombies and Orcs. WHHHHYYYY?? 

3) Dragon Age: Darkspawns. 

 

Sometimes these "mobs" do make sense, but that does not mean that they should be there for you to make sweet XP-love to. The game content ought to come from encounters that tell a story. Not from dungeon hacks from Diablo. Which makes the entire dungeon level in PoE a brilliant idea: Those who are masochist enough and really like the filler content can go there to extinguish that hunger for morbid gut wrenching. The rest can actually play the game. 

 

To make things absolutely clear, this is not, I repeat NOT equivalent to saying that there should be no combat in RPGs. That particular sentiment has a copyright. This is to point out that fattening up the game with beetles/turtles/wombats is not really helping. 

[Hellraiser789]

 

 

 

It also make you worse in sneaking...

 

 

Currently. If you read the rest of my post (yeah I know they tend to be long...) I said that it would be better to get better in stealthing by USING stealthing. Sure it would require tweaking the system a bit (how much I wouldnt really know - could be a LOT or a LITTLE), but I think it would be better for it. My personal opinion, yours can vary.

 

This ain't no Elder Scrolls!

 

 

True enough. Not saying I would want it to be. But you have to agree, it DOES make more sense.... (IMO at least)

Edited September 24, 2014 by Hellraiser789

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Clever.  PoE looks to me to be a perfectly good spiritual successor to the game.  It doesn't to some folks, often based on very narrow definitions of what a spiritual successor *must* be to them personally.  Why should Obsidian come out with such a statement?  Because some backers think that lack of combat XP means it can't be a tribute to the IE games?  I'm a backer.  I think it is.  Frankly, this proposal is simply baiting Obsidian and they'll likely simply ignore it.  They should.

 

So backers can still call it a spiritual successor. cool.

[Hellraiser789]

I guess a little lining out of what trash combat is, will help here:

 

When you have to fight enemies that do not in any way contribute to the game progression, except by making it longer, the combat can be considered filler/trash. Case in point: 

 

1) IWD 2 Golbins : Yeah, there is a goblin invasion going on. But jesus christ, do I have to fight every effing one of them??

2) NWN2 : Zombies and Orcs. WHHHHYYYY?? 

3) Dragon Age: Darkspawns. 

 

Sometimes these "mobs" do make sense, but that does not mean that they should be there for you to make sweet XP-love to. The game content ought to come from encounters that tell a story. Not from dungeon hacks from Diablo. Which makes the entire dungeon level in PoE a brilliant idea: Those who are masochist enough and really like the filler content can go there to extinguish that hunger for morbid gut wrenching. The rest can actually play the game. 

 

To make things absolutely clear, this is not, I repeat NOT equivalent to saying that there should be no combat in RPGs. That particular sentiment has a copyright. This is to point out that fattening up the game with beetles/turtles/wombats is not really helping. 

 

 

I tend to agree. If every (or most) encounters were tailor made so that everything felt important, thats different. But the worry is that they wont be and youll get stuck killing a ton of trash mobs simply because you didnt invest in stealth, when this is SUPPOSED to be a COMBAT HEAVY game. Should I expect to be able to avoid all of the combat in a combat heavy game? I dont think so (cool feature though). Should I be penalized for going through combat in a COMBAT HEAVY GAME instead of stealthing through stuff? No. Combat heavy games usually reward combat. I think that makes sense. Doesnt mean this system wont work though. Only time will tell.

 

PS: I agree with you, in case that wasnt clear. Going through this forum has actually gotten me really excited for TToN because they are focusing on tailor-made encounters like that. I was iffy about it when I first heard about it, but after debating this stuff for awhile, it actually seems like a great idea, if done right.

[frapillo80]

If the devs see stealth as just as important as combat or dialogue in solving quests and earning xp, I would expect them to create stealth mechanics that are, if not as sophisticated and complex like those of combat, well, at least decently tactical.

Instead, they seem obsessed with xp balance, which is bound to come out as a bit shoddy in any case, while the current stealth mechanics (and those of IE games as well) remain...bah...

 

1) allocate points

2) click on search

3) don't get too close to the mobs

 

That's it? And they are building roughly a third of quest solving upon this mechanic? This really seems like a bone thrown to stealth role-player. I mean, if stealth had decently complex mechanics, I wouldn't even complain about trash mobs, I'd be happy to waltz stealthily past them...

Edited September 24, 2014 by frapillo80

[Gromnir]

"But I didn't even dream to complain about it, I even gave him, ah, how did he put it? some "no-doubt well-intentioned advice that I delivered in such a polite and endearing manner that he will take it under advisement"...

 

actually, the parts you quote were directed at ph... no taking credit for the other kid's work. you wanna throw some snark our way, have at it, but don't ride ph coattails. is bad form.

 

as an aside, and has mentioned before (we should link this stuff or create a word doc or something) but Gromnir were 'posed to be included in bg2, but if you recall those inexplicably empty maps that were available after you emerged from the underdark, Gromnir and draconis were gonna have "quests" on those maps. due to time constraints, we got cut. our guess is that we woulda' gotten treatment similar to lanfear, but dave and the biowarians felt guilty about the 11th hour cut. heck, we mighta been meant for inclusion along the lines of del or mencar pebblecrusher. anywho, dave were primary responsible for tob design, so he makes draconis and Gromnir portions more substantial than we likely woulda have seen in bg2. were just an odd juxtaposition o' events that resulted in Gromnir being a tob character. dave did make the character an orc as a joke, but other than that, we were surprised by the lack o' brutality. 

 

the biowarians actual regretted almost all their board cameos and attempted character contests as such stuff invariably caused nerd rage for those not chosen. character contests and cameos inspired genuine ugly behavior from the truly worthy who were overlooked.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps quote function is seriously borked for us. weird.

Edited September 24, 2014 by Gromnir

[frapillo80]

"But I didn't even dream to complain about it, I even gave him, ah, how did he put it? some "no-doubt well-intentioned advice that I delivered in such a polite and endearing manner that he will take it under advisement"...

 

"If you don't like it; don't read it. Gromnir is awesome and that's a fact. Don't ever change, Gromnir.

+1 for being able to wade through Gromnir's "in character" writing. I gave up a while back. Gromnir, seriously, cut it out--it's not cute, it's just annoying. I know that sounds harsh but somebody needs to let you know. It dilutes your points and makes you sound childish at best and schizophrenic at worst."

 

actually, the parts you quote were directed at ph... no taking credit for the other kid's work. you wanna throw some snark our way, have at it, but don't ride ph coattails. is bad form.

 

as an aside, and has mentioned before (we should link this stuff or create a word doc or something) but Gromnir were 'posed to be included in bg2, but if you recall those inexplicably empty maps that were available after you emerged from the underdark, Gromnir and draconis were gonna have "quests" on those maps. due to time constraints, we got cut. our guess is that we woulda' gotten treatment similar to lanfear, but dave and the biowarians felt guilty about the 11th hour cut. heck, we mighta been meant for inclusion along the lines of del or mencar pebblecrusher. anywho, dave were primary responsible for tob design, so he makes draconis and Gromnir portions more substantial than we likely woulda have seen in bg2. were just an odd juxtaposition o' events that resulted in Gromnir being a tob character. dave did make the character an orc as a joke, but other than that, we were surprised by the lack o' brutality.

 

the biowarians actual regretted almost all their board cameos and attempted character contests as such stuff invariably caused nerd rage for those not chosen. character contests and cameos inspired genuine ugly behavior from the truly worthy who were overlooked.

 

HA! Good Fun!

I see. My apologies for misunderstanding, and for the involuntary overdose of snarks and coattails.

Which means that you probably didn't see my advice on post diversity...

[Hellraiser789]

If the devs see stealth as jusy as important as combat or dialogue in solving quests and earning xp, I would expect them to create stealth mechanics that are, if not as sophisticated and complex like those of combat, well, at least decently tactical.

Instead, they seem obsessed with xp balance, which is bound to come out as a bit shoddy in any case, while the current stealth mechanics (and those of IE games as well) remain...bah...

1) allocate points

2) click on search

3) don't get too close to the mobs

 

That's it? And you are building roughly a third of quest solving on this mechanic? This really seems like a bone thrown to stealth role-player. I mean, if stealth decently complex mechanics, I wouldn't even complain about trash mobs, I'd be happy to waltz stealthily past them...

 

Yeah, its kind of like,

 

DEV1: "Lets add all these super awesome and complex combat features, and make combat super challenging so it plays a huge role in our game!"

 

DEV2: "But what about stealth players..?"

 

DEV3:"O we will give them this little stealth ability and itll be cool."

 

PLAYERS: "OMG IM GETTING PENALIZED FOR USING STEALTH IN A COMBAT HEAVY GAME!!!!"

 

DEV2: "What did you do?!? You said you added stealth!"

 

DEV3: "I DID! I just didnt think it was a big deal....fine lets make all xp quest xp so no one feels a need to participate in combat"

 

DEV1: ".....but i worked so hard to make combat awesome...."

 

 

PS: I didnt mean to attack anyone specifically with the above remarks, it just struck me as a pretty funny scenario...

Edited September 24, 2014 by Hellraiser789

[Gromnir]

 

"But I didn't even dream to complain about it, I even gave him, ah, how did he put it? some "no-doubt well-intentioned advice that I delivered in such a polite and endearing manner that he will take it under advisement"...

 

"If you don't like it; don't read it. Gromnir is awesome and that's a fact. Don't ever change, Gromnir.

+1 for being able to wade through Gromnir's "in character" writing. I gave up a while back. Gromnir, seriously, cut it out--it's not cute, it's just annoying. I know that sounds harsh but somebody needs to let you know. It dilutes your points and makes you sound childish at best and schizophrenic at worst."

 

actually, the parts you quote were directed at ph... no taking credit for the other kid's work. you wanna throw some snark our way, have at it, but don't ride ph coattails. is bad form.

 

as an aside, and has mentioned before (we should link this stuff or create a word doc or something) but Gromnir were 'posed to be included in bg2, but if you recall those inexplicably empty maps that were available after you emerged from the underdark, Gromnir and draconis were gonna have "quests" on those maps. due to time constraints, we got cut. our guess is that we woulda' gotten treatment similar to lanfear, but dave and the biowarians felt guilty about the 11th hour cut. heck, we mighta been meant for inclusion along the lines of del or mencar pebblecrusher. anywho, dave were primary responsible for tob design, so he makes draconis and Gromnir portions more substantial than we likely woulda have seen in bg2. were just an odd juxtaposition o' events that resulted in Gromnir being a tob character. dave did make the character an orc as a joke, but other than that, we were surprised by the lack o' brutality.

 

the biowarians actual regretted almost all their board cameos and attempted character contests as such stuff invariably caused nerd rage for those not chosen. character contests and cameos inspired genuine ugly behavior from the truly worthy who were overlooked.

 

HA! Good Fun!

I see. My apologies for misunderstanding, and for the involuntary overdose of snarks and coattails.

Which means that you probably didn't see my advice on post diversity...

 

the material you quoted weren't yours.  "I even gave him, ah, how did he put it? some "no-doubt well-intentioned advice that I delivered in such a polite and endearing manner that he will take it under advisement"..." bad form mate.

 

and no, we didn't read, but don't feel bad or emasculated or somesuch as we ignore many posts. is so much noise.

 

in any event, to stay on topic, we believe that the reflection that went into development o' kickstarter, and all the QA feedback the developers got, plus the two years o' arguing that were largely ending dismissive of kill xp, should not be ignored because some folks is loud on message boards.

 

"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."

 

tim cain were going in the right direction. throw a minor bone to the kill xp proponents? sure, why not? even so, we see no reason to give more than a token bestiary quest.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[frapillo80]

 

 

If the devs see stealth as jusy as important as combat or dialogue in solving quests and earning xp, I would expect them to create stealth mechanics that are, if not as sophisticated and complex like those of combat, well, at least decently tactical.

Instead, they seem obsessed with xp balance, which is bound to come out as a bit shoddy in any case, while the current stealth mechanics (and those of IE games as well) remain...bah...

1) allocate points

2) click on search

3) don't get too close to the mobs

 

That's it? And you are building roughly a third of quest solving on this mechanic? This really seems like a bone thrown to stealth role-player. I mean, if stealth decently complex mechanics, I wouldn't even complain about trash mobs, I'd be happy to waltz stealthily past them...

Yeah, its kind of like,

 

DEV1: "Lets add all these super awesome and complex combat features, and make combat super challenging so it plays a huge role in our game!"

 

DEV2: "But what about stealth players..?"

 

DEV3:"O we will give them this little stealth ability and itll be cool."

 

PLAYERS: "OMG IM GETTING PENALIZED FOR USING STEALTH IN A COMBAT HEAVY GAME!!!!"

 

DEV2: "What did you do?!? You said you added stealth!"

 

DEV3: "I DID! I just didnt think it was a big deal....fine lets make all xp quest xp so no one feels a need to participate in combat"

 

DEV1: ".....but i worked so hard to make combat awesome...."

 

 

PS: I didnt mean to attack anyone specifically with the above remarks, it just struck me as a pretty funny scenario...

It is pretty funny indeed...

But I sympathize with stealth role players who are getting the (other) short end of the stick, that is, the usual, barebone, boring mechanics, just thinly disguised by the sudden load of stealth-connected quest-xp which, admittedly, compared to IE games must be a great step forward for them.

 

P.S. Apologies for the amount of edits in my posts, it's just that I can't stand my own typos.

Edited September 24, 2014 by frapillo80

[Namutree]

As long as OE puts discovery-xp that ISN'T tied to quests I'll be happy.

[Cantousent]

So backers can still call it a spiritual successor. cool.

Damned straight I can!  :huge grin:

 

On a serious note, Hiro, I don't think it should matter at this point whether someone is a backer or not.  What should matter right now is who has the better idea.  They could do away with the backer badge thing or whatever it's called.

 

I trust Obsidian to do the game right, otherwise I would not have backed it.  When I decided to back it, I did so understanding that they were the ones designing the game and would undoubtedly do it better than me anyway.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

I'd call it a spiritual successor too. I just don't like the arguments from some people who claim it's not, Obsidian never said it was, and so on, to try and shout down those who call it one.

[frapillo80]

Edit: sorry, I seem to have quoted a previous post of mine for no reason at all, and I have no idea how I did it...

Edited September 24, 2014 by frapillo80

[Immortalis]

 

A lot of people like whatever Joshes decision is.. There is a lot of koolaid drinking.. When I suggested bestiary gives xp everyone told me to shut up it wasn't needed.. The minute Josh says it though, everyone praises him for dropping a divine olive branch upon the masses..

 

Was it your idea? Then they should have given you credit, or at least acknowledged that it had been suggested before. I wasn't there for that conversation, and I'm sorry people trolled you. I can only say you are not alone in that experience.

 

If I had my druthers, we'd have good ol' combat XP like in the IE games. But (surprisingly to me) a lot of people don't want it in the game. (I don't get it, either, but if that's what they want, then it's OK for OE to provide a compromise that gives each group of supporters some concessions.) Until I learned about the (your) bestiary unlock idea, I didn't think a compromise was even possible. It can be made to work reasonably well, provided that

- the amount of experience granted by bestiary unlocks is sufficiently motivating

- the bestiaries are revealed gradually enough that we don't quickly cap out on this reward

- the bestiaries themselves provide interesting/useful information, so that we get not only an XP reward but a tactical/lore reward

- the player is notified when an individual tier in a bestiary unlocks, so that after winning a tough fight they receive, if not an immediate XP reward, a promise that they are getting closer to a sizable chunk of experience. Something like "Spider Bestiary Updated".  When the final tier is revealed, they should see "Spider Bestiary Unlocked (10,000 XP or whatever)"

 

If the fanbase were overwhelmingly in favor of combat XP, I might be more stubborn on this point. The fact that a compromise is even possible was news to me.

 

 

I don't mean it like that.. It was a natural solution lots of people mentioned.. The point isn't to say "oh look at me I'm so ****ing smart" the point was to say when I had the idea everyone crapped on it but when Josh had it.. now it's the solution to all our problems.

 

It is / was a good idea and I'm glad he's talking about idea's like this with his team.

 

As for the fan base not being overwhelmingly in favor of it.. it's almost a split 50 - 50 in every poll (I know I know don't say anything about forum polls) that we have had.. 50 - 50 isn't a couple of children crying in the corner while Gromnir sings them a lullaby.. It's time to please both parties.

[Immortalis]

 

 

A lot of people like whatever Joshes decision is.. There is a lot of koolaid drinking.. When I suggested bestiary gives xp everyone told me to shut up it wasn't needed.. The minute Josh says it though, everyone praises him for dropping a divine olive branch upon the masses..

 

Was it your idea? I really think they should have given you credit, or at least acknowledged that it had been suggested before. I wasn't there for that conversation, and I'm sorry people trolled you. I can only say you are not alone in that experience.

 

If I had my druthers, we'd have good ol' combat XP like in the IE games. But (surprisingly to me) a lot of people don't want it in the game. (I don't get it, either, but if that's what they want, then it's OK for OE to provide a compromise that gives each group of supporters some concessions.) If the fanbase were overwhelmingly in favor of combat XP, I'd be right with you in saying "not good enough".

 

this is an argument that has lasted in fits and starts for two years. we have seen nothing posted in the past three months that is genuine new... which is part of our concern. the obsidian were actual clear 'bout what they meant... two years ago. folks fully debated two years ago. folks had polls two years ago... polls that had far more total responses than the recent versions. folks has offered many perfect options over the course of two years. folks who believe they came up with a clever angle is likely repeating something that were discussed to death a long time ago. in spite of developer clarity, there is even folks who is still getting twisted up over semantics: objective v. quest v. task or other names confuse some people. in spite of developer efforts, people is at least pretending like this is the first time they has seen such nomenclature. is amusing and sad.

 

oh, and these same developers were seeing and hearing and responding to these same complaints Years ago when they were developing bg3 and fo3. 

 

but yeah. there is folks who is reflexive defending any developer response. is actual likely confusing to developers. check some o' the developer updates and how people responded compared to complaints the developers is getting these days. nothing has changed from two years ago or from any number o' developer updates, and typical the developers were painful clear regarding mechanics and rules issues, but is actually funny to see some folks complaining today that were acting like women at a 1960s tom jones concert. how many rage monkeys were throwing their digital panties on stage just a short time ago? a developer responds and there is a tendency to overreact. it is unfortunate for the developers, but the ecstasy some experience from basking in a developer's presence (*snort*) is short lived.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

The difference is back then Josh had the excuse "Well I played the beta and it's awesome.. and you haven't so you don't know yet how awesome it will be" Now after the beta released we still are at a 50 - 50 split in the "polls".

 

We weren't blinded by the awesomeness of this design.. it was just a bunch of OnEnter triggers dumping XP on your face.. Woooooo..

 

HA! Beta Not So Fun!

 

 

FYI: Gromnir I just killed you in BG2.. And you dropped XP.. Conspiracy?

[frapillo80]

 

 

 

"But I didn't even dream to complain about it, I even gave him, ah, how did he put it? some "no-doubt well-intentioned advice that I delivered in such a polite and endearing manner that he will take it under advisement"...

 

"If you don't like it; don't read it. Gromnir is awesome and that's a fact. Don't ever change, Gromnir.

+1 for being able to wade through Gromnir's "in character" writing. I gave up a while back. Gromnir, seriously, cut it out--it's not cute, it's just annoying. I know that sounds harsh but somebody needs to let you know. It dilutes your points and makes you sound childish at best and schizophrenic at worst."

 

actually, the parts you quote were directed at ph... no taking credit for the other kid's work. you wanna throw some snark our way, have at it, but don't ride ph coattails. is bad form.

 

as an aside, and has mentioned before (we should link this stuff or create a word doc or something) but Gromnir were 'posed to be included in bg2, but if you recall those inexplicably empty maps that were available after you emerged from the underdark, Gromnir and draconis were gonna have "quests" on those maps. due to time constraints, we got cut. our guess is that we woulda' gotten treatment similar to lanfear, but dave and the biowarians felt guilty about the 11th hour cut. heck, we mighta been meant for inclusion along the lines of del or mencar pebblecrusher. anywho, dave were primary responsible for tob design, so he makes draconis and Gromnir portions more substantial than we likely woulda have seen in bg2. were just an odd juxtaposition o' events that resulted in Gromnir being a tob character. dave did make the character an orc as a joke, but other than that, we were surprised by the lack o' brutality.

 

the biowarians actual regretted almost all their board cameos and attempted character contests as such stuff invariably caused nerd rage for those not chosen. character contests and cameos inspired genuine ugly behavior from the truly worthy who were overlooked.

 

HA! Good Fun!

I see. My apologies for misunderstanding, and for the involuntary overdose of snarks and coattails.

Which means that you probably didn't see my advice on post diversity...

the material you quoted weren't yours. "I even gave him, ah, how did he put it? some "no-doubt well-intentioned advice that I delivered in such a polite and endearing manner that he will take it under advisement"..." bad form mate.

 

and no, we didn't read, but don't feel bad or emasculated or somesuch as we ignore many posts. is so much noise.

 

in any event, to stay on topic, we believe that the reflection that went into development o' kickstarter, and all the QA feedback the developers got, plus the two years o' arguing that were largely ending dismissive of kill xp, should not be ignored because some folks is loud on message boards.

 

"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."

 

tim cain were going in the right direction. throw a minor bone to the kill xp proponents? sure, why not? even so, we see no reason to give more than a token bestiary quest.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Apologies for the bad form as well, it's just that since you started that post referring to me, I wrongly thought that your following words were referring to this:

 

P.S. Do you ever write anything that is not on the tune of " You think you don't like [current implementation of feature x] , but that's just because you only want a carbon copy of BG1/2/whatever. [Current implementation of feature x] is the best thing since sliced bread. Obsidian are never late, nor are they early. Obsidian arrive precisely when they intend to."?

 

Oh, and apologies for this self-quote as well, it's just that I was feeling soooooooo emasculated, I'm sure you understand...

[Lephys]

The general idea is that your character's progression is tied to his accomplishments, as a character. That's why completing certain quest objectives that may only involve gathering information from conversations, then utilizing existing character skills, etc, to achieve something specific often grants XP, in the general form of "quests." You're awarded XP because you're accomplishing something pertinent to the playing of a character role in a world, despite the fact that your character learned absolutely nothing pertaining to any of the things that you get to improve upon level-up.

 

So, the problem isn't "Oh no, combat can't = XP." The problem is simply that combat shouldn't always = XP, if for no other reason than that everything else doesn't always give you XP. At least have the game be consistent. If I'm going to get XP for every single instance of combat, then I want XP every single time I successfully get some random NPC to believe a lie. Why? I'm improving my deception skills, obviously.

 

Even in a purely simulationist game, you don't gain generic level-up XP for combat success. You get improvements directly to your combat skills via the act of fighting, rather than the act of killing. I mean, if you didn't gain actual experience in combat until something died, what good would sparring be? That's the "problem" in other games: Everything that isn't combat doesn't reward you for the very act of doing it. But combat does. You killed something? XP! It's not even combat, as I pointed out, but killing. It's basically objective XP, except "make something not-alive anymore" is a global, persistent objective.

 

Anywho... (We've been over all that already in oodles of threads)

 

The current problem with quest-only XP is simply that it's too restricted. You still get XP for combat, even, just not often enough, or sometimes you miss out on it because of silly reasons (you didn't "get" the quest yet!, etc.).

 

My initial thought was just that objectives would be designated, decently often, for combat encounters. The spider queen, for example. Maybe once discovered, you could gain an objective to take her down, based on the idea that, if left unchecked, spiders would breed like crazy in this location and cause danger to nearby civilization, etc. Basically, put more reasons for stuff's death to be useful in the game world, into the game, more often. That way, if you're a combative-type player, you don't "miss out."

 

I think that's really the most significant question: "Does anyone miss out for having a certain playstyle?" "Miss out" here applying to the tackling of the same scenario/goal. For example, if killing the spider queen satisfies a combat-specific objective, and sneaking past her does not, then that doesn't mean the sneaker "misses out" for being a sneaky player, because sneaking isn't seeking to achieve the same objective. They're mutually-exclusive actions at that point. That, and not-fighting stuff is not the same thing as specifically sneaking past it.

 

But, if there are reasons to do other things, then there should be reasons to fight. Not just "YOU GET XP!" I mean actual game-world reasons. Again, you don't get XP for completing conversations... you get XP for accomplishing certain things within certain conversations. For the others, you just get information, etc. This is hardly different from fighting something and only getting loot, or reputation/faction "score", etc., and not XP.

 

With the new bestiary-threshold thing... I dunno. I think it's still too vague. For one thing, as others mentioned, why no XP from human(oid?)s? That, and I'm wondering how it works, exactly, because Josh made the example of the difference between having to kill 50% of all ogres, and 100% of all ogres. So, does this mean that if there are 100 ogres, you have to kill 50 ogres, total, (for example -- I realize the percentage could be different), so that you suddenly get a big chunk of XP for killing 50 ogres? If so, that should really be staggered.

 

Using the same example parameters, you could instead have like "kill 5 Ogres" allow your character to increase his combat experience pertaining to ogre combat. Maybe you get 100XP. Then, if you kill 5 more, you get 50. Then the next 5 gets you 25, etc. until none.

 

Either that, or just have it awarded with every ogre you kill, but decrease in value each time. *shrug*. To achieve what's being achieved, I think that'd work a lot better than just having "kill X things" objectives, regardless of whether or not they're tied to the bestiary. But, of course, none of that has anything to do with whether or not you're completing any kind of objectives of any kind (pertaining to the game world), so you still have the exact same scenario as standard kill XP on top of objective/quest XP. So, I don't know what that's accomplishing as separate from just adding in "every time something dies, you get XP."

 

As I said, I really just think the best way to do it is to designate, with feasible game-world-pertinent objectives, what things are XP-worthy and what things aren't. Either that, or design your game to directly improve combat skills via successful combat.

 

One last thing: as much as they always get bashed, quests/tasks such as "I really need some spider venom sacs to make some serum to treat these sick villagers" at least serve as pretty good reasons for combat XP. I mean, sure, you don't get XP for the act of killing the spiders, but through no other means than combat can you acquire the spider venom sacs. So, if you want that XP, you HAVE to kill the spiders. Yet, you don't just run around in the woods and think "Are there ANY spiders left in the entire world? If I miss any, I miss XP!" But, yeah, you can't sneakily pilfer venom sacs from spiders, nor can you sneak past spiders and end up with venom sacs, NOR can you diplomatically talk the spiders out of their venom sacs, etc.

 

So, I dunno... I really think combat objectives is the way to go. Either removing a threat, or gathering resources someone needs, or getting to things that can only be gotten to if you get past foes, etc... I think that's the best way to reward combat, as just tossing in "you get XP when stuff dies" is just sort of spilling the sugar in the cake mix.

Edited September 24, 2014 by Lephys

[frapillo80]

@Lephys:

 

Agreed, but in order to achieve all this, there's need for a much more sophisticated implementation of the quest xp system than the crude, arbitrary feeling thing I keep reading about and seeing in videos...

(I mean even more arbitrary feeling than the standard levels of RPG arbitrary, which are admittedly pretty low...)

Edited September 24, 2014 by frapillo80

[Hiro Protagonist II]

frapillo, do you want a beta key to try out the game?

[frapillo80]

frapillo, do you want a beta key to try out the game?

Argh, I've being trying to resist the temptation up to now (I've took a dive in the forums only these last two days because I am a bit sick and with not much to do). Although having read and seen so much about it in a short time has somewhat defeated the purpose. But thanks just the same!

Edited September 24, 2014 by frapillo80

[Hiro Protagonist II]

I've given away a couple of keys and have one left. If you want one, you can have it. Otherwise anyone else can have it.

[frapillo80]

I've given away a couple of keys and have one left. If you want one, you can have it. Otherwise anyone else can have it.

But wouldn't be unfair towards the other backers? I am just asking, I am quite new to kickstarters...

 

Ok, I'll be strong: I also have to be back to work tomorrow, so forum-holiday is almost over. But, thanks, really. This was more difficult than deciding whether backing or not...

Edited September 24, 2014 by frapillo80

[Hiro Protagonist II]

No, not at all. When you play the game, it'll give you a good idea how good/bad it is and what improvements the game would need to make it better.

Edited September 24, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[frapillo80]

No, not at all.

I am weak. Weak. Ok, yes, and thank you very much indeed.