I learned that fights don't give you experience

[Sarex]

So sarex I will turn your question around on you, not because I think it's a sensible question, but because I want to see what your answer is.

 

 

If there is no combat XP, how are you penalized? Because you got less xp then the guy who did the quests? You get exactly the amount of xp the game has been designed for you to get.

 

And this is how I know that you have read what I wrote in this thread, but nvm I'll say it again. The issue is when you explore and are forced to fight trash mobs you get no character progression. That means that you have been playing the game for hours and have nothing to show for it. Sure there is bestiary xp, but that is only on first kill and even that will probably be miniscule xp when looking at how much you need to level up.

 

It's all about character progression, it should be smooth no matter how you play the game.

Edited January 18, 2015 by Sarex

[illathid]

 

It's all about character progression, it should be smooth no matter how you play the game.

 

 

By refusing to do quests you are effectively not playing the game. You shouldn't get character progression for keeping the game paused and you shouldn't get  character progression for not doing quests.

[Sarex]

By refusing to do quests you are effectively not playing the game. You shouldn't get character progression for keeping the game paused and you shouldn't get  character progression for not doing quests.

 

That analogy doesn't work on any level. Also quest=/=game. You can ask any of the IE games veterans on this forum.

Edited January 18, 2015 by Sarex

[Lord Wafflebum]

I didn't ignore his point, I misunderstood his argument.

 

Now that I'm on board, I was under the impression you get xp for discovering new areas? Or am I mistaken?

[Yonjuro]

I didn't ignore his point, I misunderstood his argument.

 

 Yup, I didn't think it was intentional; more that you were 'talking past each other.'

 

... Now that I'm on board, I was under the impression you get xp for discovering new areas? Or am I mistaken?

 

  I think you do get a little, but if you were to play PoE like BG1 you would not level up fast enough to survive for very long (at least, that is my impression - based mostly on the BB).

 

 So, there you have it; a play style that a lot of people like that is not supported. That's the argument. I didn't really come to join the argument, just to point out what is being argued.

[illathid]

 

By refusing to do quests you are effectively not playing the game. You shouldn't get character progression for keeping the game paused and you shouldn't get  character progression for not doing quests.

 

That analogy doesn't work on any level. Also quest=/=game. You can ask any of the IE games veterans on this forum.

 

 

Ok, I'll ask myself then.

 

Self, do quests=game?

 

Yes, quests=game when the game is primarily narrative rather than sandbox in nature.

[Lord Wafflebum]

My guess is that as one explores, quests will be completed (intentionally or not) and that there will still be at least some xp gain even if you're avoiding the main questline(s). Xp is given out as parts of quests are completed, so it would stand to reason that you might unintentionally complete sections of quests as you poke around places.

 

It's hard to say, tho. I vaguely remember one of the devs saying at some point they didn't want the explorer-type players to get frustrated while exploring. Unfortunately, I think it might be a case of "hard to say" until we have the full release.

[Nakia]

@Sarek, As I understand your statement you have stated that backers will not get the game they expected if they if the game does not give them XP for killing.  I am a backer of the game and I did not back it in order to get XP simply for killing things.  That was the furthest thing from my mind when I made my pledge there fore it is incorrect to make a blanket statement.  Some backers may be disappointed and others may be happy.  Accusing me of being a troll is an Ad Hominid argument directed at my character and I protest it.  My comment is directed at your blanket statement and not at you personally.

 

XP for killing everything benefits those who wish to kill everything and penalizes those who chose the non-violent options that are also provided in the game.  PoE tries to balance this by limiting how you get XP.  Based on the BB it still favors those who choose to kill every thing but it is still fairer than giving XP for every kill.  By doing this it encourages role playing, encourages people to think about what they are doing and explore various means of solving a quest.   

 

My opinion is that games that favor XP for killing encourages a hack and slash game and discourage role playing.  Why bother with stealth except as a means to sneak up on an enemy or why use diplomacy to avoid conflict if the way to get XP is to kill?  Why should the developers of PoE bother to take the time and make the effort to provide choices and dialogue for a variety of options if all you are supposed is to go kill someone?  XP for all kills would have been the easy way out and been a lot less work for the devs.

[Yonjuro]

My guess is that as one explores, quests will be completed (intentionally or not) and that there will still be at least some xp gain even if you're avoiding the main questline(s). Xp is given out as parts of quests are completed, so it would stand to reason that you might unintentionally complete sections of quests as you poke around places.

 

 Well, in the backer beta, if you wander around and kill everything that attacks you and take possession of a dragon egg and an ogre's head you will not get very much XP (it used to be zero, but now there is bestiary XP etc.). You don't get the larger XP awards until you find the quest giver and (in those two cases) turn in the item.

 

 Compare that to, say, the map in BG1 where you find Bassilus (the insane cleric with the undead 'family'). You get a large reward (gold and some XP) for turning in the quest, but you get a lot of XP just for killing Bassilus and his undead minions (and whatever else you do on that map).

 

 You can still do an exploration focused game in PoE (I think) but you need to be careful about finding quest givers and turning in quests to get to a reasonable level. I don't think that's a disaster, but I can see how it might not be the preferred play style of a BG1 fan.

[Nakia]

In role playing games I like to see if I can anticipate a quest.  In the BB I did all the quests except Cat and Mouse before I had been given the quest then I found the quest giver and got the reward.  I like and find refreshing that no matter how you complete the quest the XP is the same, the rewards may be different and with the Egg quest you can even fail.   Blood Legacy I think very interesting because in a sense there is only one way to NOT fail the quest.  Although the quest does say you are to find Alyse which is a bit sneaky.  I love the twists that each quest has.

[Sarex]

@Sarek, As I understand your statement you have stated that backers will not get the game they expected if they if the game does not give them XP for killing.  I am a backer of the game and I did not back it in order to get XP simply for killing things.  That was the furthest thing from my mind when I made my pledge there fore it is incorrect to make a blanket statement.  Some backers may be disappointed and others may be happy.  Accusing me of being a troll is an Ad Hominid argument directed at my character and I protest it.  My comment is directed at your blanket statement and not at you personally.

 

XP for killing everything benefits those who wish to kill everything and penalizes those who chose the non-violent options that are also provided in the game.  PoE tries to balance this by limiting how you get XP.  Based on the BB it still favors those who choose to kill every thing but it is still fairer than giving XP for every kill.  By doing this it encourages role playing, encourages people to think about what they are doing and explore various means of solving a quest.   

 

My opinion is that games that favor XP for killing encourages a hack and slash game and discourage role playing.  Why bother with stealth except as a means to sneak up on an enemy or why use diplomacy to avoid conflict if the way to get XP is to kill?  Why should the developers of PoE bother to take the time and make the effort to provide choices and dialogue for a variety of options if all you are supposed is to go kill someone?  XP for all kills would have been the easy way out and been a lot less work for the devs.

 

I didn't say that, I said that the backers will be disappointed with a game that fails to deliver what was promised. Combat xp is just one aspect of that, there are many others too and people are pointing them out. As for calling you a troll, well I have no others words for a person who puts words in my mouth. Discuss what I said, not what you think I meant, because you are failing at that miserably.

 

You got xp for doing a quest in a no lethal way, most of the times even more so then you would for doing it in a lethal way, ie. you were getting xp the game power curve was designed for. So there were no penalties there at all. The problem with you people is that you care too much how other people play the game.

 

As for your last statement, are you saying that you can decide how to play the game for your self and it is determent but what other people tell you to do? I thought you guys wanted to roleplay? What does combat xp have to do with you roleplaying how you want?

[PrimeJunta]

Blood Legacy I think very interesting because in a sense there is only one way to NOT fail the quest.  Although the quest does say you are to find Alyse which is a bit sneaky.  I love the twists that each quest has.

Intriguing statement. I kind of thought the opposite, that there is no way you can fail the quest (other than abandoning it of course), but there's a remakrable number of ways in which it can be resolved.

[Sarex]

Ok, I'll ask myself then.

 

Self, do quests=game?

 

Yes, quests=game when the game is primarily narrative rather than sandbox in nature.

 

I meant any veteran with a brain.

 

Skyrim=Sandbox=Narrative

 

Anyone who played BGs for the nth time just skips the narative, does that mean he is not playing the game?

Edited January 19, 2015 by Sarex

[Hassat Hunter]

Oh, **** people... are we AGAIN back at the stand that people are going all "waaaah, there is no quests exploring. Quest XP"... OBJECTIVE XP...

Looking at footage of the BB I see finding the cave of the Ogre gives XP. That's not turning in a quest... and even if it was Quest-XP, it could be done gradually, as you complete OBJECTIVES.

Yes, exploring can (and is) one of said objectives. And objective XP system does NOT mean we need to attach a quest to each and every map just to keep the XP system working...

 

Why the heck do we keep falling back on it, it's not that hard to understand, is it?

 

Oh, and with Bestiary XP OE also added unlock/disarm mine XP... probably the most senseless, worst possible thing to add EVER. It's absolutely freakin' rubbish. OE knowns it, the fans know it (being the absolute lowest voted option in "what kind of XP do you want" and is an affront to role-playing. They seriously need to take that **** out... It's a freak reaction. I seriously have no idea WHY they added it, but hopefully now they're more levelheaded they see it's a trainwreck and remove it again.

 

And I still don't see what Sarex is heading for with "boohoo I get the same XP as people who resolve the quest with the poison they bought, or the skills they have... when I fought. I apparently lack the capacity to FIGHT as it no longer gives shiny XP, and this forces me to take other resolutions, even if those offer the same XP and are thus not more advantageous than fighting. While I love fighting, I can't since... why exaclty?" Do tell me...

No one is advantageous, or disadvantegeous, so DO tell me why selecting the combat sollution, a legit sollution is someone totally nerfed to the ground being actually a proper sollution too. Since it's not automatically the best? OH FOR SHAME... AND THAT IN A ROLE-PLAYING GAME WHERE YOU CAN PLAY A ROLE. THEY SHOULD MAKE THAT ILLEGAL!

 

[Time to cooldown]

[Hassat Hunter]

 

 

I don't see why there needs to be XP at all in these entirely handcrafted adventures, just hand out level-ups at appropriate spots. Now everyone can play however the hell they want without running into any balance issues. They can

That's the system "Silver" uses (it's an action RPG). You just level up after each boss fight, and that's it. While it's mostly linear, some bosses you can do in different orders, and it doesn't matter at all since every boss is simply level+1.

I really like that game. You can get it on GOG.

And as said it's an Action game, so don't even try not killing enemies. People with "boohoo, no XP" probably get an aneurysm though, having to fight so long without getting any rewards for it till they meet the boss.

 

Yes, I pretty much play combat-centric and STILL prefer them to use Objective-XP to give everyone the game they want instead of selfishly wanting the cake all to myself and everyone else should just deal with that. It's actually possible...! How about that?

[Gfted1]

So, we know the level disparity between a completionist run and a core run will be ~4 levels. Ermahgerd! Someones getting more xp than someone else! IT WILL BREAK THE GAME1!!1UNO11!!

[R.Alexander]

I am finally getting what some of the kill xp people are saying about exploring and not getting xp. It is very plausible in BG1 to go around exploring the maps killing creatures and gain levels. With only quest/objective related xp, someone who did that would have to stop their exploring occasionally and find some quests to do to level up. Someone like me who mainly focused on doing quests, however, did not have to stop doing quests and go out killing random creatures in the wilderness to gain levels. This is the only valid argument for kill xp that I can think of. The only solution I can think of off the top of my head is to give a significant amount of xp for just exploring the maps.

[Gfted1]

Unfortunately, the only way to solve this "issue" is to reward all players the same xp no matter how much or how little they did in the game.

[PrimeJunta]

Don't worry @Gfted1 you can award yourself all the XP you like with the console. No need for all that tedious grinding. Grand, isn't it?

[Gfted1]

Don't worry @Gfted1 you can award yourself all the XP you like with the console. No need for all that tedious grinding. Grand, isn't it?

 

Grinding? Provided I can stomach the combat Ill be doing a completionist run anyway. Hahahahahahaha, suck it everyone that has less xp than me. But you can always console it in to not be "cheated" by the game for not doing everything. :winkyface:

[illathid]

Skyrim=Sandbox=Narrative

Not sure what you are getting at here.

 

Anyone who played BGs for the nth time just skips the narative, does that mean he is not playing the game?

Well unless they're refusing to pick up quests, they're still engaging in the narrative (even if they don't read everything).

 

And obviously there's a sliding scale between narrative and sandbox games. BG2 is more narrative and BG1 is more sandbox, and skyrim is more sandbox than them both.

[Namutree]

 

If no kill XP disincentives people from wandering not picking up quests then I'd mission f'ing accomplished. If people don't want to engage the content of the game, there's no reason to reward them with a balanced level progression. Seriously, they're a blight on the community.

 

I personally don't care for stealth gameplay; guess it should be nerfed to the point where it is basically unplayable. Mission f'ing accomplished if it forces people to play differently. There's no reason to reward them with a balanced level progression. Seriously, they're a blight on the community

 

 

The people  who want to play the game that way are the reason the industry keeps making ****ty sandbox games like Skyrim. If you don't want engage in the narrative of narrative based game that's fine, just don't expect t be rewarded for it.

 

 

Poe is NOT a narrative based game. It's a combat based game. 

[Lephys]

Poe is NOT a narrative based game. It's a combat based game.

Cannot a game be based upon more than a single thing?

[Namutree]

 

Poe is NOT a narrative based game. It's a combat based game.

Cannot a game be based upon more than a single thing?

 

Sure.

[PrimeJunta]

P:E stands on more than one leg. Remember the original pitch? Hero + companions, exploration, combat, and writing.

 

"Project Eternity will take the central hero, memorable companions and the epic exploration of Baldur’s Gate, add in the fun, intense combat and dungeon diving of Icewind Dale, and tie it all together with the emotional writing and mature thematic exploration of Planescape: Torment."