Is Might a Dump Stat? Is Perception THE DPS stat?

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

 

But I also know that some.. four people of you? have declared as a foregone conclusion that the stat-system is broken. And that it their task, as clearly more skilled than the developers who made the system, to "save" Obsidian from bombing at release.

 

 

 

Josh published an image of his ideas and calculations for changing the attributes right after S&M released their report. He clearly stated that he had more or less meant to change them in the same way, with one exception, really. That you still go on and on and on about this, well aware of this readily available fact, speaks volumes. Lay your frustrations to rest and cease with this monkey business, or else you will deserve that troll label that people are sticking on you now. Contribute constructively, and don't be so condescending.

Edited September 30, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Damn nipsen. Not quite 2000 words. I do like people putting in the effort. Longknife is still the master of the wall of text.

 

Longknife is okay and not having a go at him or you.

[Hellraiser789]

<Lots of Stuff> (Sorry - It was too long, so I shortened it)

 

 

Look, I think I understand your concern. Why should any one person have more input/influence/whatever than the other backers? I get it (Not that I backed, mind you, so maybe Im out of line here). But I dont think the devs are going "O look at Sensuki's work! Its so amazing, lets scrap all our stuff!". I think they look at it and weigh it and see if it fits their system or not. Plus, a lot of the things Sensuki has suggested Josh has said he was thinking about implementing BEFORE anyway (like action speed?). 

 

About all that business with coding, I didnt really understand that (from your posts or Sensukis), as I have very limited coding experience. And I dont think Sensuki is saying he knows absolutely EVERYTHING about the code. But you have to admit he must of put a lot of work into learning it as best he could. I mean, he's already modding the game! If he can modify the stat system and other things, he must have a decent understanding of the code, no? Not that Sensuki's word should be taken as law, but I dont think his suggestions hurt. I can understand being concerned about it, but I think the devs are smart enough to realize that if something he wants to implement doesnt fit their vision, they wont implement it. If they like the idea, and want to great! but I dont think they necessarily feel they NEED to just because Sensuki said to.

 

As far as the build goes, I havent played the beta, so I dont have a great understanding of the Attributes, Stats, and actual gameplay, but they seem alright, if a bit non-intuitive. But thats why you read the description of the stats right? If I was playing a game for the first time, I would look at all the stats in order to see what they do. I mean, all systems are different, right? As long as its explained, I think it'll be fine. Plus, I think you can still build your character like you want, I dont really see how thats been affected. Also, they're probably going to get tweaked and refined again and again until the devs come up with a set of stats that THEY feel reflect the narrative connection as well as improving combat.

 

This is all my opinion however. I personally LOVE the idea of balanced stats between combat and dialogue options. I loved planescape torment, but I hated how you basically needed to invest in Wisdom, Intelligence, and Charisma in order to get the most out of the game, and then you SUCKED in combat (at least till later). It was a different concept, but I think the point of balancing stats means that no one would have to gimp their character in order to play in a way they enjoyed. (example: INT Fighter, PER Monk, CON Mage).

 

Maybe its different for you. Maybe you loved the old system. I wasnt around to see what that was like, but I have high hopes for the game, and I think its only going to improve. So while I understand that you liked the old system and wished it stayed, I hope you can still enjoy the game without it and appreciate other aspects (like the story and companions maybe?). Hope that helps somehow.

 

PS: If you just want it to be HARDER for you to build your specific build and think the game should penalize you more, I dont understand that at all (Not sure if thats what you meant , but I dont THINK so, at least). However, I DO agree that it would suck if they made the game stupid easy just because people dont understand the attribute system yet. However, I dont think this will be the case, as I imagine the game will receive further tweaks and the difficulty will be adjusted accordingly.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Hellraiser789

[GordonHalfman]

The entire debate about the code seems pointless, since the whole "intellect affects crit severity" thing is something we have no reason to think is true in the first place. Arguing that we can't prove it's not true because they might have perversely put hidden goblins in the code to add this undocumented effect is not making it any more plausible.

 

 

 

So what do you want me to say when Obsidian seems to respond to this ****? I did not pay to Obsidians kickstarter to get some "special" superfan to rewrite and ruin their approach to integrating attributes into game-world narrative logic. I paid into the pot to get Obsidian to make it. I'm assuming that this is what the vast majority of people who are not posting here also did.

 

And I'm also assuming that 99% of the people who sponsored the kickstarter are unaware of the fact that a significant portion of the game is apparently being scrapped because some superfans have decided it's too complex for human minds to understand.

 

The very first release notes for the backer beta explicitly state that perception and resolve were underwhelming and would be changed. These changes or something similar were going to happen anyway. 

 

Instead of writing 10 paragraphs of nonsense about how the previous build let you larp a train conductor with high charisma whose cheery demeanour improves his healing spread something something, try explaining what specific change you don't like and why.

 

Which change is actually making things worse for narrative consistency, or "undermining roleplaying" and why.

 

How exactly is a significant portion of the game being scrapped?

 

The only substantial thing you have to say seems to be that you think Per + Might builds are over-powered now but you don't explain why they would be any more so than Dex + Might builds in the last patch that you thought was so great.

Edited September 30, 2014 by GordonHalfman

[nipsen]

How exactly is a significant portion of the game being scrapped?

 

The only substantial thing you have to say seems to be that you think Per + Might builds are over-powered now but you don't explain why they would be any more so than Dex + Might builds in the last patch that you thought was so great.

Because that build would make sense in the game narratively. The character would be an incredible fighter, but could be knocked down by a feather. I've been going through this before, suggesting that the "dump stats" people were claiming resolve and perception was - actually were useful in combat after all. As well as explained the character well.

 

In dialogue, the per/int heavy fighter would lose the might/intimidate options. They would make better observations and have broader dialogue options. It makes sense in the game-world, it makes sense in the combat rolls. And that makes role-playing better in my opinion.

 

..fast forward a few weeks.

So perception is now more important in combat because it determines the combat roll. Resolve becomes a base stat with dodge defense. Ok, fine. Now, you can make a similar build as the dex-might build - and add a base bonus on deflection, and essentially save an entire maxed out stat for spreading out on other stats you might want, for whatever reason.

 

And by default the fighters are suddenly extremely perceptive in dialogue. Every dps character must have super-heavy instincts (the orc fighter with the serial epiphanies on where the weak spots are -- it's an innate skill). And they have stats to spare - even though they're maxed out in the direction of the character - to add attribute points to, say, intelligence, dex or resolve.

This makes sense - how, exactly. You guys have to explain that. 

 

 

But I also know that some.. four people of you? have declared as a foregone conclusion that the stat-system is broken. And that it their task, as clearly more skilled than the developers who made the system, to "save" Obsidian from bombing at release.

 

Josh published an image of his ideas and calculations for changing the attributes right after S&M released their report. He clearly stated that he had more or less meant to change them in the same way, with one exception, really. That you still go on and on and on about this, well aware of this readily available fact, speaks volumes. Lay your frustrations to rest and cease with this monkey business, or else you will deserve that troll label that people are sticking on you now. Contribute constructively, and don't be so condescending.

 

Oh, no! I'm a troll on a forum! Do you have the link to the post where Josh allegedly says he will change the attributes to the proposed changes, with one exception? That's a pretty specific order, and you will find that post - or you're a forum troll, Indira!

 

Look. As I proved to you, the quotes people are throwing around don't say what people claim they do. And I do react in the way I do because these changes that have been made in the last backer beta undermine very specifically how perception was related to observation and .. perception.. in the dialogue system. And that this belonged to a character that had to compromise on something else - such as dexterity, or might, or constitution. At least one of each.

 

But now I have a priest in the party who not just is extremely perceptive - but also is the main damage dealer, as well as the guy who interrupts with huge critical hits.

 

If dex and perception weren't combined, that wouldn't happen. Neither would perception become so important in combat, nor would it break the dialogue setup seen so far in the beta.

 

This isn't that complicated.

[Sensuki]

The character would be an incredible fighter, but could be knocked down by a feather. I've been going through this before, suggesting that the "dump stats" people were claiming resolve and perception was - actually were useful in combat after all.

Interrupts were actually broken in v257 and v278. They were also being applied on misses.

 

CHA-CHING - didn't know that did you?

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68518-interrupt-occurs-on-misses/?hl=interrupt

 

So that may have added to the "feeling" that Perception was not dumpable.

 

..fast forward a few weeks.

So perception is now more important in combat because it determines the combat roll. Resolve becomes a base stat with dodge defense. Ok, fine. Now, you can make a similar build as the dex-might build - and add a base bonus on deflection, and essentially save an entire maxed out stat for spreading out on other stats you might want, for whatever reason.

 

And by default the fighters are suddenly extremely perceptive in dialogue. Every dps character must have super-heavy instincts (the orc fighter with the serial epiphanies on where the weak spots are -- it's an innate skill). And they have stats to spare - even though they're maxed out in the direction of the character - to add attribute points to, say, intelligence, dex or resolve.

This makes sense - how, exactly. You guys have to explain that.

No they're not. You actually have to pick Perception for that. Constitution and whatever attribute governs Deflection are actually better if they want to be tanking. If they want to do DPS - Might and Perception are better. If they want to spread evenly they can do that.

 

Once again you're making things up.

 

Look. As I proved to you, the quotes people are throwing around don't say what people claim they do.

No, you didn't.

 

And I do react in the way I do because these changes that have been made in the last backer beta undermine very specifically how perception was related to observation and .. perception.. in the dialogue system. And that this belonged to a character that had to compromise on something else - such as dexterity, or might, or constitution. At least one of each.

If you have a problem with Accuracy on Perception, then you must hate a lot of character systems, because it's a really common thing. And you're starting to sound more and more like smudboy.

 

Tell me, do you hate turn based combat because it doesn't fit the narrative as much as RTwP ???

Edited September 30, 2014 by Sensuki

[IndiraLightfoot]

Nipsen: Your wish shall be fulfilled.

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68526-how-to-fix-the-attribute-design-in-pillars-of-eternity/?p=1508219

 

Plus Josh's other replies in that thread and then of course, as evident by this recent patch, the changes he did make. It's one of the most popular posts of all time, you cannot have missed it.

 

P.S. I hope you won't charge a fee for each bridge you burn now, like a good troll would do.

[Sensuki]

I've already linked him that post before and several others. He conveniently ignored my post with all of the Josh Sawyer attribute quotes.

 

 

nipsen accuses me of suiting myself rather than the overall design goals ha ha ha ok

Edited September 30, 2014 by Sensuki

[nipsen]

PS: If you just want it to be HARDER for you to build your specific build and think the game should penalize you more, I dont understand that at all (Not sure if thats what you meant , but I dont THINK so, at least). However, I DO agree that it would suck if they made the game stupid easy just because people dont understand the attribute system yet. However, I dont think this will be the case, as I imagine the game will receive further tweaks and the difficulty will be adjusted accordingly.

I obviously didn't say that I wanted it to be made harder. I said that I wanted people to have to make some sort of tradeoff. I specifically said that I didn't want to see a massively powerful build get free bonus stats and abilities.

 

And yes, you're absolutely right. The changes will basically mean that Obsidian has to rebalance the entire game. And my worry is that you're going to be able to go through the game on auto if you choose the Might-per-con builds. Not just because the stats are changed, but because Obsidian will "find out" that "everyone" wants all the interesting encounters thrown out. No need to interrupt people, no need to understand the stat buffs, no need to use magic carefully. Because now you don't need to, and this is what "everyone wants".

 

 

 

You had to spread points across several different stats to get that build "optimal" in the last build

No you didn't. It was a non choice for every character. Pump Might, Intellect, Dexterity and maybe Con and dump Per and Res. Everyone was doing it.

 

Well, this was discussed in another thread. You were getting squad-wipes from stat-ability attacks because you dropped con and res. And you didn't get interrupts because you dumped Perception. More than a few people wondered why so many of you were completely powerless against the spiders, because they weren't. People were wondering why your fighters didn't interrupt when theirs did. And you ignored it. I said why you shouldn't ignore it in a nice way, and you ignored it.

 

And now you have decided that "everyone did it", because you ignored everything else but your own point of view.

 

And no other point of view can exist, because "everyone does it this way". So apparently even if there was another option here, I suppose it doesn't matter -- because you find it so complicated it cannot be understood by human minds. And so the system is too difficult to understand and must be scrapped in the full game for a less interesting system. One that clearly makes even less sense. But now you're happy, so now the game isn't broken any more. And now it's what "people want".

 

It's obnoxious, and you cannot argue with it. That problem is of your making, and it wouldn't have mattered to me if it wasn't for the fact that the devs clearly do make changes at least inspired by your input.

 

 

 

Look. There was one claim I had a problem with. And it has to do with how you cannot know that a reverse engineered compile code represents all conditionals in the actual code. This is fact.

The code is .NET assembly Managed C#. The only code that does not decompile properly is some of the Unity related stuff because the decompiler cannot understand it. I can recompile the code using an intermediate language and I have done so and already made a few mods. So have others.

 

Also why don't you use a practical example instead of an abstract analogy?

 

Every example I give is a practical example, you always use an ice cream analogy or dance about architecture or something. You just make stuff up.

 

So when you find out yourself that the stats that are actually used in the game to calculate the combat stats come from a different place in the code -- like I said -- then I'm also wrong. And you posting the code from the stat-sheet still proves that I don't understand code and are full of ****.

 

And my specific example was that if they create objects and run through them to seed tables, then they could reference that without using the "intellect" variable in your example later. 

 

This doesn't require 50 pages of explanation.

 

But it is connected to and similar to for example your interpretation of "linear damage". The paper you put up has the starting point that 1% increase in a bonus will cause one percent increase of a chance in every combat situation. And you also seem to assume that 1% increase is equally valuable across the board. At least as far as I can tell.

 

This isn't a good starting point - even if the product you end up with on paper has perfect internal consistency inside your weird set of assumptions - and I don't mind telling you that. Specially, when as pointed out up to a very high number of times now -- that what you're posting as "proof" of how the "system really works" may actually not reflect the combat rolls in an as consistent manner as you suggest.

 

Then me pointing out that you may be assuming the wrong things is relevant.

[Sensuki]

But it is connected to and similar to for example your interpretation of "linear damage". The paper you put up has the starting point that 1% increase in a bonus will cause one percent increase of a chance in every combat situation. And you also seem to assume that 1% increase is equally valuable across the board. At least as far as I can tell.

 

INCORRECT. Learn to read and stop making assumptions.

 

And my specific example was that if they create objects and run through them to seed tables, then they could reference that without using the "intellect" variable in your example later.

They do not run objects through seed tables, who the hell would do that? That is the most retarded thing I've heard you say yet.

 

Classes create objects of other classes to invoke methods. I have checked all of the relevant classes and nowhere does any class apply an intellect bonus to anything that it's not supposed to.

 

CharacterStats class has a property public int Intellect, which controls the character object's intellect bonus

 

The following code is

 

public int Intellect
  {
    get
    {
      int num = this.BaseIntellect + this.IntellectBonus + CharacterStats.RaceAbilityAdjustment[(int) this.CharacterRace, 3] + CharacterStats.CultureAbilityAdjustment[(int) this.CharacterCulture, 3];
      if (num < 1)
        num = 1;
      return num;
    }
  }

For the actual value of intellect to affect anything, a class or method has to inherit the intellect property from this class. I have checked all of the relevant classes and nothing calls "int intellect" except "CalcDefense" for Deflection and the AoEStatModifier method.

 

Check it yourself if you like.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Sensuki

[prodigydancer]

No enough drama ITT. Need moar drama.

[nipsen]

Nipsen: Your wish shall be fulfilled.

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68526-how-to-fix-the-attribute-design-in-pillars-of-eternity/?p=1508219

 

Plus Josh's other replies in that thread and then of course, as evident by this recent patch, the changes he did make. It's one of the most popular posts of all time, you cannot have missed it.

 

P.S. I hope you won't charge a fee for each bridge you burn now, like a good troll would do.

So he's basically saying that they noticed your complaining, there was an internal deliberation. And they've decided to decouple interrupt from a stat, change accuracy to perception. And now everything works. Except my super DPS priest, who is transformed from an old gnome to a superman. And Obsidian will have to rewrite the entire dialogue setup unless they want to keep having super-perceptive damage dealers having exceptional insights to how people act.

 

Brilliant.

 

It's unbelievable. Obsidian have their own testers and developers, but hey -- why not just "do what the people want" instead. Because then everyone on the forums are happy, and that's all that matters.

 

This is so disappointing in so many ways.

[nipsen]

 

INCORRECT. Learn to read and stop making assumptions.

 

Ok. Then why the proposed stat changes? Are you finally admitting now that the entire idea was to create bonus stats to spread around to the previous dump-stats? To, as I said, make that maxed out might build character with no drawbacks?

[Sensuki]

Why don't you actually read the freaking paper properly instead of just sticking your nose up in the air, all of the reasons are stated in the paper. 

[nipsen]

 

The character would be an incredible fighter, but could be knocked down by a feather. I've been going through this before, suggesting that the "dump stats" people were claiming resolve and perception was - actually were useful in combat after all.

Interrupts were actually broken in v257 and v278. They were also being applied on misses.

 

CHA-CHING - didn't know that did you?

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68518-interrupt-occurs-on-misses/?hl=interrupt

 

So that may have added to the "feeling" that Perception was not dumpable.

I can see why you would benefit from dumping perception in that case, since it would not give you any drawbacks..?

 

Doesn't this instead explain how your might builds were even weaker than you thought?

[IndiraLightfoot]

Complaining? I'd say most of us wanted to help Josh reach his goal of no dump stats, but at the same time, we were safe in the knowledge that he would do well without us.

 

I still don't get why you're so upset about it all, Nipsen.

 

I read your cool piece on the General forum, like a month ago. You're a really talented guy.

http://thedigitalfragment.com/

 

And your music taste is impeccable. You know that two and two always makes a five.

 

Don't throw your hands or lose your temper over these banalities. You are meant for greater things.

 

Ha det, min venn!

Edited September 30, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Sensuki]

I can see why you would benefit from dumping perception in that case, since it would not give you any drawbacks..?

 

Doesn't this instead explain how your might builds were even weaker than you thought?

WHAT????????????

 

That's the exact OPPOSITE of what the bug does. It actually inflates the value of Perception because it applies to misses due to this bug. In the actual system, Interrupt is reliant on the ability to actually score a hit. If you have a low accuracy, it doesn't matter how high your interrupt is, you won't score any interrupts on misses and your grazed hits will reduce your interrupt roll by 50%. 

 

The entire reason we recommended combining Accuracy and Interrupt was to prevent this from happening, so that now you can't screw yourself over by making a High Interrupt but Low Accuracy character. This issue is the entire reason why I sought to create the paper in the first place.

 

Obsidian chose to instead remove interrupt from the system, which was NOT something we recommended.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Sensuki

[nipsen]

Why don't you actually read the freaking paper properly instead of just sticking your nose up in the air, all of the reasons are stated in the paper. 

I've skimmed through it. And what I conclude from it is that you want a simpler system than the one Obsidian proposed. That is something Obsidian has responded to, apparently, going by Josh's post. They seem to have picked up on that you simply are not able to successfully distribute skill points that affect the combat in more than one way. Namely, something that is more aligned with D&D. Where one stat governs the class you pick.

 

Success!

[Sensuki]

No, we wanted to remove the trap builds possible due to Interrupt dependency on Accuracy - something which you keep conveniently ignoring.

 

Notice that Obsidian removed interrupt from the Attribute system right? Are you unhappy about that?

Edited September 30, 2014 by Sensuki

[nipsen]

 

I can see why you would benefit from dumping perception in that case, since it would not give you any drawbacks..?

 

Doesn't this instead explain how your might builds were even weaker than you thought?

WHAT????????????

 

That's the exact OPPOSITE of what the bug does. It actually inflates the value of Perception because it applies to misses due to this bug. In the actual system, Interrupt is reliant on the ability to actually score a hit. If you have a low accuracy, it doesn't matter how high your interrupt is, you won't score any interrupts on misses and your grazed hits will reduce your interrupt roll by 50%. 

 

The entire reason we recommended combining Accuracy and Interrupt was to prevent this from happening, so that now you can't screw yourself over by making a High Interrupt but Low Accuracy character. This issue is the entire reason why I sought to create the paper in the first place.

 

...and that wouldn't make sense in the game-world?

 

The priest is a bumbling old man, but he can spot details as if having someone spy on others behind their backs. And yet, he's not extremely efficient in combat.

 

How does that not make sense in the game-world? Isn't what would make sense that perception determines the ability to make an interrupt. But that the attack roll has to actually connect to do any damage? If so - as always - your interpretation of what is a bug really rests on you simply not accepting that a mechanic like this is supposed to be there.

 

And now Obsidian obeys. Glorious.

[Sensuki]

 

 

 

The primary goal is fûcking balance you idiot. Not making sense in the narrative.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Sensuki

[nipsen]

No, we wanted to remove the trap builds possible due to Interrupt dependency on Accuracy - something which you keep conveniently ignoring.

 

Notice that Obsidian removed interrupt from the Attribute system right? Are you unhappy about that?

Yes. I don't think it's well thought through.

 

And I don't find it a trap build to make a perceptive character with zero chance to hit. He is perceptive, but he can't hit.

 

How would anyone manage to create a character like that and expect it to hit in combat? He doesn't have a high hit. Why would he hit anything then?

[nipsen]

 

The primary goal is fûcking balance you idiot. Not making sense in the narrative.

At the cost of narrative consistency, because it's a completely different part of the game, and that should be ignored utterly. Yes, I get it, you have no concept of degrees. Fine.

[Sensuki]

And I don't find it a trap build to make a perceptive character with zero chance to hit. He is perceptive, but he can't hit.

It's a trap build for combat. This is about combat balance. Like I've told you 1000 times - the combat and narrative balance are being kept totally separate. It's the combat that determines your progression through the game. Not the narrative. You can't break the narrative, you will always be able to progress. You can be terrible at combat though, and that's something they want to prevent.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Sensuki

[IndiraLightfoot]

PcWorld interview with Adam and Josh, Nov 2013:

 

"Adam Brennecke (AB): And it’s really easy to make a bad character [in the IE games].

JS: In the old games, yes. So we would like—a good way of saying this is if you want to make a character that totally fits the archetype of the character you conceive, like let’s say you say, “I want to make a character who’s a wizard and that character has a high intellect”—in our game it’s intellect, not intelligence. Or if you say “I want to make a rogue,” and the rogue has a high dexterity. Those are great characters! They work great. They might not work exactly how you think they’re going to work, but they’re good characters. You make a fighter with a high strength—also a good character. Doesn’t exactly work the way you think it might, but it’s a good character.

If you play against type. If you’re like, “I want to make a muscle-wizard. It has a high strength and a high con”—that’s also a very good character. If you want to make a fighter with a high intelligence and a high resolve, that’s also a good character.

Might not be the most optimal character, but it’s not a bad character.

It’s not impossible

JS: No, it’s not impossible. You get something. Every class gets something out of the ability scores. Every class can work with given arrays. There aren’t weird, like, “FYI: after ten levels this character’s not going to be viable.”

So it’s just about doing stuff like that to make people feel like, “Go into it, there’s no hidden gotchas, make the character you want to make, and if you find it’s not quite playing the way you thought you’ll be able to adjust and you’ll be okay. It won’t always be optimal, and we’re not trying to make everything perfectly balanced. The goal is to say, “Don’t not consider it.”

 

We have to consider, what if someone wants to make the foxing idiot wizard or the weakling fighter? They’re going to have some problems, but whatever you dumped—if you dumped this and jacked something else, you’re going to get something else neat out of it. And hopefully what that turns into is not just a worse play experience, but a different play experience. Because I jacked these stats, my character veers into this other play style, so I have to play him a different way."