PoE - A game for Road Runner only? "Pausable Real Time Combat"

[nipsen]

^you came to the beta just a few weeks after me. But if you had played the first version, and then seen the changes afterwards, I'm guessing you would probably be more than just worried as well. See, the impact of the attributes was already very small. There were the area bonus vs. strength... intellect vs. might.. that was to at least me almost pointless. Same with the maxed perception vs. maxed resistance. They had some impact, but they were insignificant enough that people got by even in the difficult fights with a might-maxed, res/per dropped build.

 

In other words, it was at once too significant and complicated, but at the same time not significant enough. And the feedback here reflected "both sides" of that.

 

So yeah, I'm genuinely curious about what prompted the decision to drop this from the design.

 

I mean, I'm open to the idea that you could make your perception-based and int-based fighter, not have that make any impact on the combat, and just role-play the character as what you wanted. And that this means the combat stats being disconnected from the character creation doesn't matter. I'm sure you could play the game all the way through and not have any issues with that.

 

But like I said (and gave a few examples of ^up there), they did remove some character types from the game by normalizing.. removing the attribute choices from affecting the combat. That's what happens when no matter what you choose, the combat stats stay the same. The end result is that you will favor certain weapons, and at best hobble your characters to role-play them. As.. we are used to doing from the IE games..

 

This is the last time I'm going to comment on the issue of,  "Nipsen thinks the community is why poe is so messed up":
 
1) This is not a community designed game. Literally none of the fans suggestions on attributes were implemented. NONE. Every change was thanks to Josh. Not the community. Stop suggesting that this is a community designed game when it isn't. Josh went out of his way to establish that he planned to get rid of interrupt and add action speed increases BEFORE he ever read Sensuki's and Matts ideas. They are not to blame for the change, nor is the community. Please accept this.

So why does my opinion about that matter? If I change my opinion 180 degrees, it's not going to change anything. If one random guy on the intertron says something untrue - it's not going to change reality. So why does me "admitting" the community had nothing to do with the changes so important?
 
Besides, what I've said is that it's extremely likely that the people in the "community", that Josh talks about as if they were trusted friends: "we know these people, they've been with us from the beginning", has had a certain degree of impact on the decision making. Specially when the argument has been that the system is so broken it is not salvageable. That it's an "internal joke" that only Josh understands. That the system is one that no human mind that isn't tainted with madness can fathom. Etc.
 
And I can not see another reason why Obsidian would throw their fairly obvious and clearly targeted designs out the window, than that they have read the feedback here, put it together with selected feedback from their internal testers, found a "tendency", and acted on that.
 

2) The old system was not great. Resolve was near useless for back row classes like the Priest or Ranger, and the attributes made almost no impact on your characters at all. Not to mention percentages are harder to comprehend than integers. Stop pretending the old system was brilliant. It wasn't terrible, but it was far from brilliant. Again, the new system is flawed as well; thanks to the flawed ideas from Josh Sawyer like getting rid of interrupt.
 
EDIT: Sorry Gifted1; I'm done on this now though.

Well, you could make priests that fought on the front with that system. You could create a single-minded fanatic that no one could stop from praying if he put his mind to it. And that would be a maxed resolve character. Who would also have specific bonuses and options in dialogue. See how it fits together? How a variable makes sense both in combat and in other role-playing aspects?
 
A Paladin, for example, could follow largely the same build if you wanted to make sure that the abilities would go off, no matter how pressured the situation was. So you would choose to focus on aspects of combat, that in turn would suggest certain things about what the character would be like. Or you would design a character out of the personality traits, and get a combat type out of that that would match it.
 
And you could make rangers that were designed to traverse the battlefield and be very dynamic and fast fighters, both on range and in close combat. He or she would have higher than normal resolve to compensate for the increased chance of getting attacks of opportunity, even from low perception critters. That was what the system allowed for.
 
But when there's been literally not one person who has been playing the beta who actually made use of that system. And the general opinion is that it is unfathomable that anyone (who isn't mad) would see any value in it. In "Josh's internal joke that no one understands". Then it's probably not unreasonable to start wondering if it might be an idea to drop that part of the game altogether. When the design very clearly does complicate the game too much for people, to such an extent that they can't complete the game. ..

Edited November 26, 2014 by nipsen

[Namutree]

So why does my opinion about that matter? If I change my opinion 180 degrees, it's not going to change anything. If one random guy on the intertron says something untrue - it's not going to change reality.

 

 

That uh... Is a really good point.

[nipsen]

Ok. So then express an informed and rational snark the next time someone argues that they speak for everyone, that everyone agrees with them (because reasons), and that anyone disagreeing are obviously denying clear facts (that are obvious and clear).

 

(next time on "Rhetoric Camp!": Yvonne experiments with litotes to transform a declarative statement into what sounds like a thoughtful argument).

[Sensuki]

I speak for everyone

[Labadal]

^I don't understand. That's not going to stop me from reading your posts and disapproving sarcastically, is it?

 

I also wanted a refund and to have the beta-codes revoked and the kickstarter privilege removed - because as it was I don't want to be on the credits, or even be known to have been part of the beta or even sponsoring the project. Which is going to go down in the short history of games-development as one of the most incredible community-developed failures we've ever seen.

 

Then why even bother posting on their forum about this failure?

 

(I'm not telling you to leave, but I will use myself as an example: I had enough of BioWare, and their games did not compare to their games of old. What I did then was to stop visiting their forum because their past few games showed me that they were not the studio I used to like.)

 

..because I'm fascinated by people around here who can take everything you say literally, but at the same time somehow don't seem to have the same definition of a specific word from one day to the next. 

 

No, seriously, though.. Not that I see how this would interest anyone. But since you ask.. I wrote a preview of the beta, and I've promised to write a follow-up. Where it seems I'm likely going to have to reverse everything I said about the PoE beta (which is embarrassing enough).

 

And dropping by is a way to keep my attention on PoE in the meantime. And I'm genuinely curious about how this will turn out. It would be the first time Obsidian has ended up with a game that didn't keep the design and the threads woven from that into the gameplay elements, even if the visual representation was in tatters because of it. Which is.. what I like about Obsidian's games. Arguably, it's what led to Obsidian using kickstarter to fund their project, instead of getting in with a publisher.

 

So since the opposite approach to the importance of design and mechanics is not something I normally see from Obsidian, and the explanations I got on PM were.. very strange, to put it mildly.. I'm interested in seeing what happens towards release. Which is relatively soon.

Fair enough. I personally feel that most of the changes I have seen have been for the better. I say this as someone who has played the beta every time it updates. Most of the changes we have seen were already intended before a lot of us on these boards even suggested them. Changes about rule-sets, implementations of different systems and so on continuously change during development of games. This is the case for other Obsidian games. It's just that we have been told about things much earlier than we would if a publisher was involved. There are maybe one or two things I am not agreeing with from the changes Obisidan have made, and I'm not even sure anyone on these boards suggested it. Non-combat skills are linked to talents.

 

Other than that, most of what has been suggested on these boards or changes the developers made without any feedback have been good.

[Lephys]

Did they remove interrupts entirely? I thought they only divorced them from the stat system.

[nipsen]

^yeah, they seem to have moved the variable that determines the chance to trigger an interrupt into the class skills. What happened then was that interrupts became too frequent in both directions. And it's definitely in the cards that it's not going to be replaced with a 50% chance system. So it's probably not unreasonable to guess that it might be removed altogether in the end.

 

This is the case for other Obsidian games. It's just that we have been told about things much earlier than we would if a publisher was involved. There are maybe one or two things I am not agreeing with from the changes Obisidan have made, and I'm not even sure anyone on these boards suggested it. Non-combat skills are linked to talents.

 

That's a fair point, that we've been kept in the loop and gotten to see the beta before any changes happened, and so on. It's reasonable to say that.

 

And I'm not going to publish something I was sent in PM, because I'm not a complete bastard. But if you look at the changes that have been made, and what they actually are - as in making skills into talents, allowing you to "pick" something every level. Or when it comes to actually normalizing every combat stat, so that nothing you do on the character creation screen matters in the slightest (that's a pretty serious change, yes?). Or when it comes to removing engagement mechanics, simplifying the threat rolls, lowering defense/DT as a dynamic, lowering speed, etc.

 

Put all of those together, and there is a tendency here that is difficult not to spot. Where the theme is: "forgiving", "handholding", and "automatic".

 

And these specific things turned up after Josh declared that a late 2014 release date was pretty much a certainty. He said that if anything, the extra funding the kickstarter brought in had increased the development time for the game. That if they got a sum nearer to what they expected, the game would have released already. Which at this point I think might have been for the better.

 

So no, I don't really accept the idea that all other Obsidian games actually went through the blender in this way, right before release. I mean, do you really think that any publisher are keen on throwing out fundamental designs late in the process? These are things you'd better have finalized by the time development begins.

 

I mean, I know a few publisher spawn folks who would have stalled at the idea of releasing a game with a ruleset like what PoE had at the start of the beta. They'd have objected to that from the beginning, before the development would start. But making significant changes to the game late in the process, without even mapping clearly what the changes would affect - that is an amateur problem. It's something that isn't done when people know how it might complicate the development later.

Edited November 27, 2014 by nipsen

[Labadal]

^yeah, they seem to have moved the variable that determines the chance to trigger an interrupt into the class skills. What happened then was that interrupts became too frequent in both directions. And it's definitely in the cards that it's not going to be replaced with a 50% chance system. So it's probably not unreasonable to guess that it might be removed altogether in the end.

 

This is the case for other Obsidian games. It's just that we have been told about things much earlier than we would if a publisher was involved. There are maybe one or two things I am not agreeing with from the changes Obisidan have made, and I'm not even sure anyone on these boards suggested it. Non-combat skills are linked to talents.

 

That's a fair point, that we've been kept in the loop and gotten to see the beta before any changes happened, and so on. It's reasonable to say that.

 

And I'm not going to publish something I was sent in PM, because I'm not a complete bastard. But if you look at the changes that have been made, and what they actually are - as in making skills into talents, allowing you to "pick" something every level. Or when it comes to actually normalizing every combat stat, so that nothing you do on the character creation screen matters in the slightest (that's a pretty serious change, yes?). Or when it comes to removing engagement mechanics, simplifying the threat rolls, lowering defense/DT as a dynamic, lowering speed, etc.

 

Put all of those together, and there is a tendency here that is difficult not to spot. Where the theme is: "forgiving", "handholding", and "automatic".

 

And these specific things turned up after Josh declared that a late 2014 release date was pretty much a certainty. He said that if anything, the extra funding the kickstarter brought in had increased the development time for the game. That if they got a sum nearer to what they expected, the game would have released already. Which at this point I think might have been for the better.

 

So no, I don't really accept the idea that all other Obsidian games actually went through the blender in this way, right before release. I mean, do you really think that any publisher are keen on throwing out fundamental designs late in the process? These are things you'd better have finalized by the time development begins.

 

I mean, I know a few publisher spawn folks who would have stalled at the idea of releasing a game with a ruleset like what PoE had at the start of the beta. They'd have objected to that from the beginning, before the development would start. But making significant changes to the game late in the process, without even mapping clearly what the changes would affect - that is an amateur problem. It's something that isn't done when people know how it might complicate the development later.

They've held internal play weeks. It seems the developers have come to many conclusions that a lot of people on these boards already have. Attributes were also more meaningless than they are now. You can actually get negative bonuses if you decide to lower your attribute below 10. The bonus percentages have also been slightly increased. The beta was never properly balanced at release and it still isn't. We'll see several iterations of the attribute and talent systems before they are completely locked. I for one, am happy with the changes that have been made so far and think the game is better for it. This is an opinion of mine, so it means that I disagree with yours. (I would have agreed with you if I felt the game played worse now than it did when the beta released.)

 

Alpha Protocol.

[nipsen]

They've held internal play weeks. It seems the developers have come to many conclusions that a lot of people on these boards already have.

The number of times that seems to happen is what is making me concerned, yes.

 

Attributes were also more meaningless than they are now. You can actually get negative bonuses if you decide to lower your attribute below 10. The bonus percentages have also been slightly increased. The beta was never properly balanced at release and it still isn't. We'll see several iterations of the attribute and talent systems before they are completely locked. I for one, am happy with the changes that have been made so far and think the game is better for it. This is an opinion of mine, so it means that I disagree with yours. (I would have agreed with you if I felt the game played worse now than it did when the beta released.)

 

Alpha Protocol.

I know they made some of the bonuses scale, and went for something more similar to the IE games. But the impact on combat from any of the bonuses is extremely small. While, like explained, some of the abilities were removed from the attribute stats altogether.

 

So it's a sleigh of hand - you're given more attribute points than the game really needs to drive the current system. While the class stat bonuses and stats that seem to scale when you level up are more significant in every respect. And I think it's just a very curious way to keep the system in place. Functionally, they have turned the character creation into dragon age or an mmo. While visually, the character creation system looks as complicated as before.

 

The worst of both worlds, basically. More numbers to fiddle around with, but making them less meaningful for how the game plays.

 

I don't know if Alpha Protocol had major changes done to the underlying system either. Or why that would have been a problem for that game even if it happened, at least with the actual gameplay mechanics. They definitely axed content. But they kept things like the recoil and aiming system that .. a lot of people hated. And the game still had a huge amount of stuff for perks and inventory that for example Mass Effect didn't have.. The way they had content and branches of content interfere as well, that went further than anyone has ever done in a game like that. So.. 

 

It's just that in a traditional party-based, class based role-playing game, what could be more significant than the way the attributes affect how you play the game? You really can't cut that out or tone it down without calling it a major change. Or, as they have done - keep the attributes in the creation screen, and remove them from combat. That is a curious thing to do.

[Labadal]

The attributes in PoE have as much impact as the IE games (imo).

 

Alpha Protocol went through three big phases of changing stuff, if I remember correctly. SEGA changed their minds on combat and it was overhauled.

 

I also think the general tone of the game and especially the main character were changed.

 

In the end, I hope that you (and me) will enjoy the end product that will be Pillars of Eternity. That's basically all I have left to say on this matter.

[Jfk003]

 

They've held internal play weeks. It seems the developers have come to many conclusions that a lot of people on these boards already have.

The number of times that seems to happen is what is making me concerned, yes.

 

Hello there,

My first post ever here. I'm a BG fan, backed the project almost day one, although lower tier.

I don't want to be involved in the Beta, don't want to be spoiler, but feel it is a good way to improve. SInce I don't post or beta test, I'm almost "neutral" if you will. I'm also a developper, professionally speaking. Not of games, but still.

 

My input: reading these forums, not to be rude, but.... I do hope they don't take the backers feedback into account. I have no words for what I read here, it's like 75% childish feedbacks and complaints and in the middle, absolutely valid points. Lost in the other crap, sadly.

 

You know, project management means that basically you have to have the guts to say no 99% of the time, so that you filter out those "I know better" suggestions. But the 1% of the suggestions that goes through, at least, you know will be decent and valid.

I don't think the devs or the team don't respect "us" (the backers), but more than programming, I am pretty glad that they filter things. You should be too.

 

I know this ain't going to be popular but there you go. Had to say it.

[Namutree]

The attributes in PoE have as much impact as the IE games (imo).

 

That is objectively not true. Make a melee character in the IE games, and dump strength. See how much of a difference it makes. You won't be able to wear any heavy armor. You'll miss nearly every melee attack you make. You won't be able to carry basically anything even remotely heavy, and you'll do almost no damage since you will have damage penalties and won't be able to use any heavy weapons.

 

The attributes in the IE games have about double the impact of attributes in poe. If you insist that I'm incorrect; I could literally do the math comparing a melee character with 4 STR in an IE game vs. a melee user with 4 MIG in poe.

 

EDIT: I forgot the word double. Oops.

Edited November 28, 2014 by Namutree

[Sensuki]

Perception is pretty impactful. That's about it really.

[Quetzalcoatl]

 

The attributes in PoE have as much impact as the IE games (imo).

 

That is objectively not true. Make a melee character in the IE games, and dump strength. See how much of a difference it makes. You won't be able to wear any heavy armor. You'll miss nearly every melee attack you make. You won't be able to carry basically anything even remotely heavy, and you'll do almost no damage since you will have damage penalties and won't be able to use any heavy weapons.

 

The attributes in the IE games have about the impact of attributes in poe. If you insist that I'm incorrect; I could literally do the math comparing a melee character with 4 STR in an IE game vs. a melee user with 4 MIG in poe.

 

Most of the attributes in the IE games were useless for most classes, and most of the attributes didn't raise anything most of the time until you went really high or really low.

[Namutree]

 

 

The attributes in PoE have as much impact as the IE games (imo).

 

That is objectively not true. Make a melee character in the IE games, and dump strength. See how much of a difference it makes. You won't be able to wear any heavy armor. You'll miss nearly every melee attack you make. You won't be able to carry basically anything even remotely heavy, and you'll do almost no damage since you will have damage penalties and won't be able to use any heavy weapons.

 

The attributes in the IE games have about the impact of attributes in poe. If you insist that I'm incorrect; I could literally do the math comparing a melee character with 4 STR in an IE game vs. a melee user with 4 MIG in poe.

 

Most of the attributes in the IE games were useless for most classes, and most of the attributes didn't raise anything most of the time until you went really high or really low.

 

CON, STR, and DEX were useful for everyone, and the other attributes that did matter had great impact. Your point about most attributes not raising anything unless high or low is not true.

 

STR, CON, DEX: These are half the attributes; any modifier from them is important for any class.

 

INT and WIS: These are the attributes you are referring to. They are less than half; far from most.

 

CHA: This attribute is weird. It matters for Paladins and Bards no matter what (Sorcerers too in IWD2). Yet it is usually very important for 1 npc, and meaningless to the others. How important this attribute is varies greatly depending on the size of your party. 

Edited November 28, 2014 by Namutree

[archangel979]

I agree that attribute system as a whole was not good enough in AD&D and IWD2 that used 3e system did that part better. Still attributes contributed more in IE than PoE even if your class needed only 2 or 3 attributes. Those made a big difference (high wisdom gave lots of extra spells to clerics and druids)

[archangel979]

 

 

 

The attributes in PoE have as much impact as the IE games (imo).

 

That is objectively not true. Make a melee character in the IE games, and dump strength. See how much of a difference it makes. You won't be able to wear any heavy armor. You'll miss nearly every melee attack you make. You won't be able to carry basically anything even remotely heavy, and you'll do almost no damage since you will have damage penalties and won't be able to use any heavy weapons.

 

The attributes in the IE games have about the impact of attributes in poe. If you insist that I'm incorrect; I could literally do the math comparing a melee character with 4 STR in an IE game vs. a melee user with 4 MIG in poe.

 

Most of the attributes in the IE games were useless for most classes, and most of the attributes didn't raise anything most of the time until you went really high or really low.

 

CON, STR, and DEX were useful for everyone, and the other attributes that did matter had great impact. Your point about most attributes not raising anything unless high or low is not true.

 

STR, CON, DEX: These are half the attributes; any modifier from them is important for any class.

 

INT and WIS: These are the attributes you are referring to. They are less than half; far from most.

 

CHA: This attribute is weird. It matters for Paladins and Bards no matter what (Sorcerers too in IWD2). Yet it is usually very important for 1 npc, and meaningless to the others. How important this attribute is varies greatly depending on the size of your party. 

 

Str was useful but not important to pure spellcasters. 

Int was important for any spellcaster as you needed at least Int 9 (or was it 11) to use scrolls. 

High wisdom gave any class a bonus to saves. 

Charisma was good for certain quests and vendor prices. No, Bards didn't need Charisma. They also used Intelligence to scribe spells and for determining how many they can have per level. (only in IWD2 Bards, Paladins and Sorcerers got a real benefit from having high Charisma).

[Osvir]

Yo! Long time no see. Or... well, I've been lurking a bit from time to time~ :D

Just going to note down some thoughts here instead of making a new thread.

Just played and finished all of the content for the very first time. This was very difficult to do previously, either because of horrendous sudden mega lag, or because of bugs breaking the beta.

The game looks better, flows better, feels better.

The main issue I have currently is animation speed when attacking (in combat), and perhaps the animation+recoveryt+hit could be timed, so that a polearm wielder might begin his/her swing mid-way of the recovery bar, and hit at the end of. Not to mention "acceleration" of swinging a weapon. For instance, a wielder of the polearm begins to "charge" or lifting a great sword slow above their head, and then with upper body motion slash downwards, horizontally, or whatever, much faster.

I didn't pay too much attention when I picked skills (not in the way of min-maxing in any way), but rather what I felt fitted best with the character build concepts I had, and it worked really well.

I played on Easy because I wanted to run through the content (for once, without issues) and left all default options as is (except for the map scroll *thumbs up* much needed). Will try out harder difficulties. I also "roleplayed" my character this time, "immersed" into it rather than look at the product objectively, and I can't wait to play the full product! (Also, seeing Jesse Cox play the game was hilarious, and also insightful)

Some bugs still linger, but seeing this build (and Jesse Cox playing part of the real thing) makes me see how amazing it will be at the end of the tunnel :D

GGWD (Good Game, Well Developed)

EDIT: LOL! Wrong thread! Had a tab on "First Impressions" up. This post belongs there.

Edited November 28, 2014 by Osvir

[Quetzalcoatl]

 

 

 

The attributes in PoE have as much impact as the IE games (imo).

 

That is objectively not true. Make a melee character in the IE games, and dump strength. See how much of a difference it makes. You won't be able to wear any heavy armor. You'll miss nearly every melee attack you make. You won't be able to carry basically anything even remotely heavy, and you'll do almost no damage since you will have damage penalties and won't be able to use any heavy weapons.

 

The attributes in the IE games have about the impact of attributes in poe. If you insist that I'm incorrect; I could literally do the math comparing a melee character with 4 STR in an IE game vs. a melee user with 4 MIG in poe.

 

Most of the attributes in the IE games were useless for most classes, and most of the attributes didn't raise anything most of the time until you went really high or really low.

 

CON, STR, and DEX were useful for everyone, and the other attributes that did matter had great impact. Your point about most attributes not raising anything unless high or low is not true.

Then I'm going to assume you never actually played the IE games. Or would you like to tell me how great that 15 str fighter was, or how useful it was to have 14 dex? Because those stats didn't raise a single thing (apart from carry weight) at those levels, despite being well over the minimum.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The attributes in PoE have as much impact as the IE games (imo).

 

That is objectively not true. Make a melee character in the IE games, and dump strength. See how much of a difference it makes. You won't be able to wear any heavy armor. You'll miss nearly every melee attack you make. You won't be able to carry basically anything even remotely heavy, and you'll do almost no damage since you will have damage penalties and won't be able to use any heavy weapons.

 

The attributes in the IE games have about the impact of attributes in poe. If you insist that I'm incorrect; I could literally do the math comparing a melee character with 4 STR in an IE game vs. a melee user with 4 MIG in poe.

 

Most of the attributes in the IE games were useless for most classes, and most of the attributes didn't raise anything most of the time until you went really high or really low.

 

CON, STR, and DEX were useful for everyone, and the other attributes that did matter had great impact. Your point about most attributes not raising anything unless high or low is not true.

 

STR, CON, DEX: These are half the attributes; any modifier from them is important for any class.

 

INT and WIS: These are the attributes you are referring to. They are less than half; far from most.

 

CHA: This attribute is weird. It matters for Paladins and Bards no matter what (Sorcerers too in IWD2). Yet it is usually very important for 1 npc, and meaningless to the others. How important this attribute is varies greatly depending on the size of your party. 

 

Str was useful but not important to pure spellcasters. 

Int was important for any spellcaster as you needed at least Int 9 (or was it 11) to use scrolls. 

High wisdom gave any class a bonus to saves. 

Charisma was good for certain quests and vendor prices. No, Bards didn't need Charisma. They also used Intelligence to scribe spells and for determining how many they can have per level. (only in IWD2 Bards, Paladins and Sorcerers got a real benefit from having high Charisma).

 

Wisdom didn't give any bonuses to saves in the IE games. Wizards also didn't need INT, you could cast level 9 spells with the class minimum (think about that for a second, wizards didn't need INT). Neither did clerics and druids need WIS, it gave a few bonus spells, but it didn't improve their spells. Charisma is useless, no way around it.

 

Edited November 28, 2014 by Quetzalcoatl

[Namutree]

 

Then I'm going to assume you never actually played the IE games. Or would you like to tell me how great that 15 str fighter was, or how useful it was to have 14 dex? Because those stats didn't raise a single thing (apart from carry weight) at those levels, despite being well over the minimum.

 

15 STR gives you a +2 to hit with a melee weapon, a +2 to melee damage, and of course it lets you carry more weight. 14 Dex gives a +2 to AC, a +2 to projectile damage, and a +2 to your chance to hit with a projectile. A fighter with 15 STR can be just fine; if his DEX is high he'll be accurate with a bow, and still strong enough to weild a composite longbow or heavy crossbow. Also strong enough to wear decent armor, and even use a melee weapon competently as a secondary weapon choice. I guess it's you who never played the IE games. 

[archangel979]

@Quetzalcoatl:

Of course you needed Intelligence with wizards, it decided how many spells per spell level you could have and your chance to put new scrolls into your spellbook. not eveyone used Genius potions (and with minimal Int those potions still were not good enough) or savescummed. 

 

And how can you say Wisdom was not needed for clerics and druids?! Bonus spells is a bigger bonus than anything spellcasting stats give in PoE. Spells in AD&D were already very good, but all casters had low number of spell slots. Anything that gave them more spell slots was best. 

Edited November 28, 2014 by archangel979

[archangel979]

 

 

Then I'm going to assume you never actually played the IE games. Or would you like to tell me how great that 15 str fighter was, or how useful it was to have 14 dex? Because those stats didn't raise a single thing (apart from carry weight) at those levels, despite being well over the minimum.

 

15 STR gives you a +2 to hit with a melee weapon, a +2 to melee damage, and of course it lets you carry more weight. 14 Dex gives a +2 to AC, a +2 to projectile damage, and a +2 to your chance to hit with a projectile. A fighter with 15 STR can be just fine; if his DEX is high he'll be accurate with a bow, and still strong enough to weild a composite longbow or heavy crossbow. Also strong enough to wear decent armor, and even use a melee weapon competently as a secondary weapon choice. I guess it's you who never played the IE games. 

 

Not true. That are 3e rules and only worked in IWD2. 

[Seari]

18 INT was intented to be a requirement to cast 9 level spells, but never made it into the game for some reason, probably a bug that was never fixed. It does affect your % of learning spells and the number of spells you can put into your spellbook.

 

Well you can easily get 21 WIS by the end of BG1, and 22 WIS at the end of SoA. That's a lot of bonus spells - not useles.

 

I think party leader's CHA affects morale failure.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Quetzalcoatl: I have played the BG and IWD series heaps of times, and I am an old D&D buff: Your claims here are for the most part just wrong. For instance, 15 STR +2 hit and dam, it's pretty huge, especially under 3rd rules IWD2,  that's like useful during the first eight levels (and ever on) and myriads of encounters right there, with quite an edge on hitting and dealing damage. Well, in BG+SwordCoast, STR 15 didn't give you any + to hit and dam (It had that almost logarithmic STR 18/01, 18/73 or 18/99, 18/00, instead, so you had to adapt to hat, but the game itself included plenty of other stuff buffing your relative STR-level, if the enemy was weakened and other such effects or states, and then 15 could mean sweet bonuses even then. It was based on the d20 system, remember?

Edited November 28, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[archangel979]

Str 15 in BG, BG2 and IWD1 gave you access to heavy armor and longbows (also I think two handed weapons). I remember I was not happy Viconia could not use half the armors due to her 9 Str and had to give her Ogre Strength gauntlets just so she can weapon better armor.

Edited November 28, 2014 by archangel979