Game Attributes - A Science Project

[Fiebras]

 

 

 

Intelligence is commonly described as solving problems on the fly. Understanding your enemy weakness is a part of Intelligence. This can be used both for offense and defense.

 

Really? Then PhDs in physics must be terribly good swordfighters.

As Azrael Ultima said. Put two people of same skill to face each other and the more intelligent one is going to win every day of the week.

If you watched Game of Thrones, Bronn duel to save Tyrion is pure intelligence win.

Yeah and that's why the Mountain won his duel and was the most feared fighter in the entire kindgom, cause he is such a genius.

 

 

No, he won because GRR Martin needed his go-to "invincible bad guy who eats babies and is bad" alive so he can have a recurring character the audience hates that can be a boggieman that does bad stuff to fuel the "the world is ****" and "would you like some grim with that dark, sir?" theme of the setting. Also, what Matt said.

 

But yeah, its not far-fetched to have an inteligent guy be better at not getting hit. Its not about reading books and scoring A+s, its about using your head.

You can also just brute-force everything like the Mountain (High CON + MIG) but you are gonna take more hits or get dodged by better fighters (like the Hound).

[Karkarov]

No, he won because GRR Martin needed his go-to "invincible bad guy who eats babies and is bad" alive so he can have a recurring character the audience hates that can be a boggieman that does bad stuff to fuel the "the world is ****" and "would you like some grim with that dark, sir?" theme of the setting. Also, what Matt said.

 

But yeah, its not far-fetched to have an inteligent guy be better at not getting hit. Its not about reading books and scoring A+s, its about using your head.

You can also just brute-force everything like the Mountain (High CON + MIG) but you are gonna take more hits or get dodged by better fighters (like the Hound).

Being intelligent doesn't make you a better swordsman or help you dodge.  Maybe it helps you use your environment to your advantage, maybe it helps you trick your opponent into doing something stupid.  Neither of those things is "deflection" however.

[Lephys]

The thing about the attribute math is this:

 

You don't have to DO the math just to understand how it works. I know how addition works, so even if I can't tell you what 7,328,508.027 plus 1,427,195.297 is in a mere second, I know that it's gonna be more than 7,328,508.027 + 5.

 

I don't have to sit down and crunch the actual numbers to know that they relate.

 

So, with Might, for example, the OP says it's unintuitive? But, +X% damage is about as intuitive as you can get. It doesn't even break it down into physical damage, or ranged/melee damage, etc. It's just damage. Did something get hurt as a consequence of your action? Okay, take whatever number you made, and multiply it by one-point-whatever_your_damage_bonus_is.

 

Now, if you mean "How come I put like 5 extra points of Might on my Fighter than my Paladin, but I don't really notice the difference in damage output while playing?" That, as other pointed out, is due to a lot of different factors. Maybe the % bonus per point needs to be higher. Maybe enemies, in general, need to have lower Deflection, so as to reduce the number of grazes you see. Maybe base damage values need to be higher, etc.

 

But, none of that has anything to do with the intuitiveness of something like Might. Might = extra damage. That's it. If you make damage, you make more damage than you WOULD have made, had you had less Might.

 

I very much agree with Sensuki, though, in that they ought to really show you how your points are affecting things. That would help. ESPECIALLY at character creation, but, even beyond that, I don't think it would hurt to always show you what your modifier is accounting for. When you view your character screen, it could show your base damage, according to the weapon you have equipped, plus your modifier damage in parentheses or a different color or something.

 

Kind of like D&D character sheets. You saw your AC total, but then you also had a box for your Dex modifier. That way, when something was all "your Dex modifier doesn't count, foo!", you just looked at that. You didn't go "well, I know my AC value's LESS than it would be if I had my Dex modifier, but by how much?!" and be really confused.

 

It's just nice to see that. When you look at your 7 Might character, and he's got "(-1.4 damage)" beside his total base damage value, and you toggle over to your 18 Might character, and he's got "(+6.3 damage)" beside HIS, then you'll know, right then and there, exactly how much of a difference your attribute choice is making, instead of having to extrapolate that information from combat data.

[Fiebras]

Being intelligent doesn't make you a better swordsman or help you dodge.

I disagree. But Im not an expert swordsman.

 

Deflection is about avoiding damage. What you listed sure sounds like avoiding damage to me. Unfortunately we cant have the Fighter doing pirouettes and hiding behind the corpse of an Adra beetle to avoid damage so numerical representation will have to do. Its only adding some deflection after all. Even the smartest guy can still be killed by a dumb brute holding a larger shield and you have the dice roll to represent these diferences.

[Matt516]

Lephys - Agree 100%. Every single number in the Inventory and Character Sheet should have a popup breaking down how it is calculated when moused over. BG:EE did some great things in this regard, particularly with AC and THAC0.

[TheNationer]

A question that I didn't want to start a new thread for: Does the 'fast runner' ability that increases movement speed also then mean an increase attack speed?

[Fiebras]

Its only movement speed AFAIK. But I havent ever seen an increase in movement speed from any + movement speed modifiers outside of combat.

It would be kinda OP if it aplied to action speed, but would be nice for heavy armor wearers.

[Hellraiser789]

I think people are way too hung up on DnD rules. Just because Intellect seems like the same thing as Intelligence, it doesn't mean that it is. They even called it something else! Its a different system, so yes, things will be different. In DnD, yes, Intelligence = memorization and studying and books and such. But in PoEt, INTELLECT means critical thinking, problem solving, and being able to think quickly and make decisions faster (i.e. Battle Tactics, Strategic Thinking, etc).

 

I don't think the attributes are super obvious, but I can't really say they are illogical. I think that if the stat bonuses are accurately shown at character creation (and after) its just a matter of reading the descriptions of the attributes, right? If you don't want to read, this probably isn't the game for you....

 

Is it that hard to accept that a smart fighter will be better at deflecting attacks? Think of it like this: A high Might/Con, Low Int fighter is so focused on damage, they don't care about deflecting attacks because they do so much damage that they don't worry about it (Their thoughts: "Kill! Kill! Kill!"). A high Might/Con/Int fighter is going to be worrying about deflecting attacks because he doesn't want to get hit and wants to conserve his health, reflected in his desire to deflect attacks (Their thoughts: "Attack! Deflect! Get into position! Deflect & Counter Attack!"). Or a high Int/Per fighter is going to focus on accurately hitting his target with low damage attacks, while deflecting attacks in order to preserve his health, making the battle last longer but doing consistent damage (Their thoughts: "Deflect! Hit! Deflect! Hit!").

 

Now this is just my interpretation of the system. Doesn't necessarily work for everyone I guess, and no ones opinion is necessarily wrong per se, its just how you want to see it. I mean, if you have better ideas to make all stats equal in combat (Dev's Goal) that allows it to be more narratively consistent (Your Goal/Dev's Lesser Goal), then by all means, present them. But to say that Might should kill everything and Intellect should do nothing just BECAUSE or "Thats how it works in other games, especially DnD!" or "Intellect should be Magic and Studying and Lore because thats how DnD is and Intellect === Intelligence", well those really aren't helpful, nor entirely accurate.

 

PS: My comments are not directed at anyone specifically, just my interpretation of the general complaints. Please feel free to correct me if I interpreted incorrectly.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Hellraiser789

[Captain Shrek]

So why does might affect healing?

[Hellraiser789]

So why does might affect healing?

 

Honestly, I have no idea. Anyone got any reasoning? If I had to guess, I'd say soul strength or something. Didn't make a lot of sense to me, but personally I don't care about the small stuff. I just want a nice, good, old-fashioned game, that I can enjoy and reminds me a bit of the IE games and has a great story. Other than that.... The Devs can do whatever they want. Hahaha 

Edited September 30, 2014 by Hellraiser789

[Captain Shrek]

I will give you a reason:

 

Might affects healing because Healing was a stat the designers wanted to put into the game. These "derived" stats came before the main attributes. And when they realized they could put healing anywhere "lmeaningful" they tied it to Might.

 

That's the best I can do.

[Fiebras]

Because its about overall strength/power. Which means both healing and damaging is affected by it. It makes sense to me, though renaming it "raw power" would probably help people understand it better but I doubt thats gonna happen.

 

@ Hellraiser789: Also consider that PoE´s system is only just being defined while D&D´s systems have been around for so long that people are familiarized with the ins and outs of it to game it to hell and back for many years. Its also been nutured, refined and changed over several years, though I dont think PoE´s system has years to be developed and be refined for this game. Consider this a bumpy start if anything.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Fiebras

[forgottenlor]

While the attribute system is mechanically interesting, I'll be first to agree that it is non intuitive. That is because most RPG games work with a series of attributes which do certain things in those games. Another is that Obsidian is trying to keep some D&D names, which don't necessarily describe their attributes well, and lastly their attributes mix certain bonuses which are very unusual. Constitution is pretty much the only traditional attribute in their system. Perception in most games judges hit chances with ranged weapons, so I find it a decent name for what it does in POE. Attack speed is usually associated with a speed attribute. Deflection usually tied to a dexterity or agility attribute. Physical damage and magical damage are usually tied to two seperate attributes, and other factors such as range, duration, and area of effect are usually independent of attributes all together. For this reason might, dexterity, and intellect do things (at least partially) one wouldn't expect. And resolve is a completely new name. Because of these factors, the unique attribute system is unlike that of any CRPG that I can remember playing. I think that makes it non intuitive. I personally have always found game mechanics interesting, so it doesn't bother me, but I can completely understand people's confusion.

Edited September 30, 2014 by forgottenlor

[Captain Shrek]

hmm.

 

I perosnally do not find it interesting. I see it as a hacked D&D mechanics which fails to address the severe aspects of core SRD gameplay, like HP bloats and ridiculous static mitigations. Added to that I see only pointless (for me) things such as stamina or universal cooldowns. I can't really relate to that.

 

Everyone to their own devices I guess.

[forgottenlor]

Well, in D&D computer games, Charisma is often underpowered. Personally, if I were Obsidian, I'd have replaced charisma with resolve, wisdom with speed (or agility, but speed was used in Wizardry 1-8, and Morrowind/Oblivion, so I think its more familiar), and have kept the other D&D attributes. I'd have split spell damage and physical damage, which would have left one dump stat depending on class. I don't know if it would have made as mechanically an interesting of a system, but it would be more familiar. You could also tie all the wierd bonuses (like range and duration) to resolve, since it's a new attribute.

 

edit: I can understand not liking stamina and cooldowns. I'm used to cooldowns now, they're in so many games. As for the current health/stamina system, I'm not sure if its not overly complicated. Neither of these necessarily has to be tied to their six attributes, though.

Edited September 30, 2014 by forgottenlor

[Azrael Ultima]

Being intelligent doesn't make you a better swordsman or help you dodge.  Maybe it helps you use your environment to your advantage, maybe it helps you trick your opponent into doing something stupid.  Neither of those things is "deflection" however.

So you're saying that it doesn't help, but it might help you do that exact thing by way of better using the enviroment and feinting?

 

Make up your mind.

 

And that is deflection. Deflection is the sum of your ability to avoid getting hit(in a damaging way). The word might not be perfect, but i don't think there really is a single word that accurately describes the concept.

[Lephys]

^ We could call it "Damage Rejection." Haha. It would sound pretty terrible, then, though.

[Monte Carlo]

 

 

Intelligence is commonly described as solving problems on the fly. Understanding your enemy weakness is a part of Intelligence. This can be used both for offense and defense.

 

 

Really? Then PhDs in physics must be terribly good swordfighters.

 

As Azrael Ultima said. Put two people of same skill to face each other and the more intelligent one is going to win every day of the week.

If you watched Game of Thrones, Bronn duel to save Tyrion is pure intelligence win.

 

 

Jesus Christ on a bike.

 

(a) I know this is a gamist game and not a simulationist game (why these binary distinctions are so important is beyond me)

 

(b) This forum has lots of deeply smart people on it who would love to think their skill with maths somehow translates to a combat situation

 

but,

 

Seriously. Combat efficacy is down to a few simple factors - muscle memory (training, experience), commonsense (you define it, is it situational awareness? I dunno), body strength and fitness.

 

'Intelligence' and, in particular, 'intellect' doesn't really feature. Who here has ever really, really had to punch someone hard in the face? It's a pretty horrible thing to do. In fact, most of us are now conditioned to be reviled by it.

 

The people I know who are really, really good at fighting and killing (soldiers) are not, by any stretch of the imagination, intellectuals. They are fit, focussed, highly trained and brave. They would be bemused by some of the reasoning in this thread made by (allegedly) smart people.

 

Maybe 'gamist' games are in fact masturbatory wish-fulfilment by people who wish that their dominant geek-gene made them effective combatants? Now that is fantasy.

Edited October 1, 2014 by Monte Carlo

[Sensuki]

I know a lot of intelligent people who are absolutely terrible at multiplayer FPS games (competitive and casual), while not combat itself they don't have good aim or game smarts and choke under pressure and don't have the determination to get better.

 

A guy I know who's a bricklayer and who can't even type a sentence without making five spelling mistakes is amazing at them - he has ridiculous aim, great game smarts, performs well when losing or under pressure and always manages to give the best players a challenge. 

Edited October 1, 2014 by Sensuki

[Monte Carlo]

Ironically the solution is gamist and abstract. A discrete stat akin to 'cunning' solves the problem easily. All classes would benefit from it one way or another and it allows combat classes to make a dirty fighting type build.

 

I'm not opposed to abstracts when it comes to stats. I like luck, cunning and karma. Dammit RuneQuest had a very ambiguous stat simply called Power which was a spiritual force of character metric that boosted everything except (quite cleverly) stealth... a very spiritually forceful person stood out in that gameworld.

[Cantousent]

That's fair enough, but I just think that the stats should be more or less intuitive.  I think that the average gamer should read the name of the stat and have a basic understanding of what it might govern.  I think a lot of gamers will see "Might" and not understand that it governs spell damage.  Maybe I'm wrong, and that's fair enough, but I still think that the names mean something.

 

...And I think it's silly to argue that intelligence makes someone a better fighter when the real attribute that makes someone a great fighter is willingness to fight.  The idea that all great fighters (or soldiers) are simply knuckle dragging imbeciles that don't think for themselves is idiotic, but I'd also like to think that no one here really meant to say that smart people couldn't be great fighters but only that their skill at fighting didn't derive from smarts.  Street smarts, maybe, but not necessarily smarts.  ...And street smarts has a lot more to do with surviving which means a lot less fighting and a lot more of figuring out bad situations before they play out.  Of course, I would never call myself a great fighter.  Probably one of the few people in this forum that has literally been homeless and one of the few that has lived below the poverty line and one of the few that has lived in government subsidized housing.  I know how to cross the street to avoid a lot of ugly coming my way, and that is the definition of street smarts.

 

EDIT:  Unclear, and so I added a period and an ellipses.

Edited October 1, 2014 by Cantousent

[Monte Carlo]

I've been arguing for transparent stats all along. I don't like the current system whatsoever.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I don't really see how stats are unintuitive when they actually describe what they affect. Now the UI during character creation could certainly show how each point affects stuff, but that is something Sensuki covered in a suggestion mock-up.

[Infinitron]

I think the real issue may be that people just aren't used to having to think about attributes at all. 

[Azrael Ultima]

Some people really make you wonder whether you can't just drop the third and fourth last words in your sentence.

I know a lot of intelligent people who are absolutely terrible at multiplayer FPS games (competitive and casual), while not combat itself they don't have good aim or game smarts and choke under pressure and don't have the determination to get better.

 

A guy I know who's a bricklayer and who can't even type a sentence without making five spelling mistakes is amazing at them - he has ridiculous aim, great game smarts, performs well when losing or under pressure and always manages to give the best players a challenge.

Do those intelligent people play FPSes regularly? Do keep in mind that the claim is that under otherwise equal circumstances, the more intelligent person will, on average, perform better.

 

And nothing you said about that bricklayer indicates that he lacks intelligence. There're quite a few very intelligent people who are also dyslexic.

 

 

I do like "Cunning" better than Intelligence though, for two reasons. It better fits as a name for the range of things it affects, and we haven't even managed to figure out whatever this "intelligence" thing is in the real world, or, for that matter, how the hell it works.

It's sort of like Might, an intelligent character will be cunning, but a cunning character need not necessarily be intelligent.

Edited October 1, 2014 by Azrael Ultima