P:E mechanics - how is it doing compared to IE?

[Malekith]

Madscientist, on 07 Jan 2015 - 12:58 PM, said:

About the magic system:

 

In most cases I like the way how the IE games do it.

But fights between high level mages are frustrating, I think.

They trigger protection from everything at the beginning and whoever can remove the protection of the other first (and is able to hit him) wins because every hit interrupts the spell.

Most annoying are the ones that start with protection from everything plus time stop.

 

You cannot beat this without meta gaming.

Like: When I enter the next room I will face a mage who is protected from magic and magic weapons and starts with a death and a fear spell.

 

There is one magic system I like very much: The elemental system of Divinity Originil Sin.

You can put poison slime on the ground and then let it explode with a fire spell. Or you can make them wet and then freeze or stunn a whole group with ice or lightning.

You have lots of spells for status effects, but most of them hit only one target and each spell has a cool down.

This makes combat very tactical and I like it.

But I admit that this system is better for turn based combat (like D:OS) than for real time with pause.

Ring of the Ram bypasses all protections. Even if it fails to do damage due to magic shields, it interupts the spell they cast, and since they usualy start with a big one, it's a huge bonus. Plus it gives your mage the time to cast his dispelling spells.

[PrimeJunta]

BTW finished IWD.

 

Damn that was a stupid boss battle. Shades of Decline there; the main challenge was the mountain of hitpoints and ghastly melee damage, which just meant a long time, effectively, kiting, since not even AC -11 was enough to keep a toon alive long enough to murder him. I finished off the iron golems quickly and then it was just a matter of keeping my toons off the traps while he chased someone, as my two archers were pelting him with arrows of piercing. Took a while and was rather dull and unimaginative; if there had been no pause available it would have been a lot harder but in a frustrating way. Regrettable end to an otherwise great dungeon crawl... and here I was, just about to compliment it for providing a great variety of challenges without going the easy way of hitpoint and damage bloat.

 

At least all my practice with not pre-buffing paid off with that one.

 

Generally speaking... Dragon's Eye was by far the best part of the game, and I also had a blast with the towers of Broken Hand. Upper Dorn's Deep and the glacier were easy; Lower Dorn's Deep was a welcome change of pace and had some nice set-pieces but it lacked the tension, and became a game of have-the-right-counter-to-win. More of a boss fight followed by a boss fight, with a fairly obvious strategy for beating each of them.

 

What's the relevance to P:E? 

 

I'm imaging what it would have been like to play IWD with the P:E mechanics and engine. I think about 80% of what I liked would still be in there: the variety of encounters and monsters and the variety of ways with which to deal with them, in particular. I would have enjoyed playing some of the setpieces with Engagement in place; to see how I could nail down the battlefield and keep it from becoming utter chaos, while using the abilities available to get at high-value targets. OTOH I would have missed the spell battles in the Broken Hand. As for encounter design, I could have done without Malavon and the final boss battle, but that really has nothing much to do with the mechanics.

 

Imma try BG2 again next. I think I'll enjoy it a lot more after all I've learned here.

[Madscientist]

I think the problem with IWD and BG was that they were too much rock, paper scissors (or counterspelling as you call it).

Only mages have high level protection spells and only mage spells can remove this (like stoneskin vs breach).

Only clerics have many spells that buff the whole group. (bless, preyer)

Only druids have high level nature spells (insect swarm)

You must have optimized chars and an optimized party setup and the right spell selection to proceed.

But first time players cannot know what an optimized group or char is.

(note: I know that there are many poeple who beat those games with a poor party or who soloed the game, but it makes things much more difficult.)

 

I like at PoE that it seems more forgiving in this regard. There seems to be no must have class or must have spell. If you do not have a class in your party, other chars can compensate this more or less. ( I have not played PoE yet, but this is what I saw in the videos.)

 

If you define role playing game only as "stat based combat", than BG and IWD are very good.

But I think role playing means also that you can play your char in a way that he plays a role you like.

I want to be a paladin who fanatically fights everything he considers evil, a priest who wants to help the weak or a rogue who robs and insults everyone he can.

 

BG and IWD were very good game, but that should not stop you from trying to make something better.

I like story focused games (PT, Mask of the Betrayer) very much and combat focused games are rather boring for me.

I like that PoE tries to combine the best from both worlds (PT story with IWD combat).

 

BTW: If you have beaten IWD, then BG2 will be a piece of cake in regards of combat.

[Sensuki]

Belhifet doesn't actually have super HP bloat, he has Regeneration. If you don't keep pouring the damage on, it takes a while to kill him.

[PrimeJunta]

OK, that explains it. Similar problem though. In any case that's how I beat him, didn't find it all that hard, just tedious. I'm sure that with foreknowledge I could now make a party that's better at it. Pay more attention to archers, and make an even more murderous fighter.

 

The kits in IWD:EE are LOL by the way. I started an HoW game too, importing two of my party (Trotsky and Rosy, my favorite fighter/clerics), but added an Inquisitor, Sorcerer, and Kensai. The Kensai has fairly ridiculous THAC0 and damage. Pretty sure I could have beat Belhifet faster with him + a tank with maxed-out AC and lots of potions. Add a dedicated archer and it would've gone even more quickly.

[Sensuki]

I'd appreciate if you blog about your BG2 playthrough 

[PrimeJunta]

I think the problem with IWD and BG was that they were too much rock, paper scissors (or counterspelling as you call it).

Only mages have high level protection spells and only mage spells can remove this (like stoneskin vs breach).

Dispel Magic works against Stoneskin. Clerics get that too.

 

Only clerics have many spells that buff the whole group. (bless, preyer)

That is true. Playing without a cleric would be hard. Even more important is the healing ability; relying on potions + resting only would make it very slow going, and/or you'd have to be really good at avoiding damage in the encounters.

 

Only druids have high level nature spells (insect swarm)

Druids have fabulous spells but most of them have counterparts in the priest or wizard list.

 

You must have optimized chars and an optimized party setup and the right spell selection to proceed.

True. There's also an inverse difficulty curve: a sub-optimal party is okay at low levels, but runs into a brick wall at higher ones.

 

But first time players cannot know what an optimized group or char is.

(note: I know that there are many poeple who beat those games with a poor party or who soloed the game, but it makes things much more difficult.)

Very true. My first IE game was BG2, and I really, really, really struggled with it. Even basic things like "why isn't my weapon doing any damage?" is not obvious at all when you're a newbie.

 

Rather than dumb it down (a lot) though, I think it would be better to have an extended and skippable prologue that introduced you to the mechanics and basic tactics. Again, I had been playing these wrong -- in some crucial ways -- for years, without ever realizing it, and I don't think I'm all that atypical, nor dumber than the average gamer.

 

If you define role playing game only as "stat based combat", than BG and IWD are very good.

But I think role playing means also that you can play your char in a way that he plays a role you like.

I want to be a paladin who fanatically fights everything he considers evil, a priest who wants to help the weak or a rogue who robs and insults everyone he can.

Ayup, not much room for this in IWD. Even the rather amusing end narration refers to your party as "the forces of Good" even if you were all vilest Chaotic Evils. BG2 is somewhat better in this respect, but even there, a lot of the time the alignment-related choice boils down to "accept the quest or not." The same is true for most games, natch, MotB being a notable and important exception.

 

BG and IWD were very good game, but that should not stop you from trying to make something better.

I like story focused games (PT, Mask of the Betrayer) very much and combat focused games are rather boring for me.

I like that PoE tries to combine the best from both worlds (PT story with IWD combat).

 

BTW: If you have beaten IWD, then BG2 will be a piece of cake in regards of combat.

Apples, oranges. IWD is a pure dungeon crawl and doesn't pretend it's anything else. It's very good at it. PS:T's main problem is IMO that it's actually a story game about discovery, but pretends to be a dungeon crawl. So you get just bad things like lots of content being gated by your ability scores.

[PrimeJunta]

I'd appreciate if you blog about your BG2 playthrough 

Will do, starting a thread now. I got Lilarcor yesterday. Woo!

[Surface Reflection]

Even watching a letsplay of BG2 or just reading it - is currently better and more interesting to someone who has also played it many times, then Pillars of Eternity.

[Madscientist]

@PrimeJunta:

- BG2 does have a tutorial and you can skip it if you like.

- Why do you call PST a game that pretends to be a dungeon crawn?

You get forward in the main story and in most quests mostly by talking to other people.

Your conversation options are often determined by your stats (int and wis mostly).

Combat is the only bad part in this great game.

The thing I disliked most was your very limited choice of equipment.

You could have tons of crazy items in such a strange world.

[PrimeJunta]

@Madscientist What, where? Which tutorial? I never saw one. You mean the Irenicus dungeon? That doesn't actually teach you anything, it just throws a series of challenges at you and does some plot exposition.

 

PS:T -- That's exactly what I mean: it's all about discovery, and by far the most interesting things happen in dialog and when finding new locations on the map. Yet it has DnD mechanics and dungeon-crawler combat, which it does rather badly also, and because of these mechanics you get stuff like ability-gated content. I.e., if you make the wrong build -- a thief, for example -- you'll find the game unreasonable hard and be locked out of a lot of story.

 

(I loved the equipment in PS:T by the way. It was wild and weird, and the limitations of it -- no missile weapons except Nordom, no swords except Trias -- made it all the more brilliant.)

[Guest 4ward]

@Madscientist What, where? Which tutorial? I never saw one. You mean the Irenicus dungeon? That doesn't actually teach you anything, it just throws a series of challenges at you and does some plot exposition.

 

[PrimeJunta]

:boggle:

 

Playing EE now, and it's absolutely not there. Checking out my old installation. How could I have missed it?

 

Edit: okay, found it in the vanilla one. All it does is explain how the UI works and the base mechanics at an extremely basic level. It doesn't even say anything about stealth actually requiring shadows, something I only found out about now, to pick one gotcha. Perhaps it was in the manual, but I'm way too cool to read manuals.

 

I.e. not at all what I had in mind.

Edited January 9, 2015 by PrimeJunta

[Luckmann]

To be honest though, I have never heard or noticed anything about Stealth working better in "shadows" in BG2. Distances and line of sight I've always known to matter, but "shadows"? Never.

 

And I've played *a lot* of BG2, fare moreso than any other IE game.

[Sensuki]

It's funny because I never knew that stealth actually did work better in shadows, but to me it always *seemed* to work better in shadows. So I would try and initiate it in baked shadows and stay in the shadows when moving. Pretty cool to learn that actually.

[Luckmann]

It's funny because I never knew that stealth actually did work better in shadows, but to me it always *seemed* to work better in shadows. So I would try and initiate it in baked shadows and stay in the shadows when moving. Pretty cool to learn that actually.

 

I'm still not convinced that it's true and without hard evidence, I'm going to chalk it up to the placebo effect.

 

Edit: I actually looked it up, and it's not as easy as "in shadow" because it's actually very hard to tell when you're in shadow or not, just by the landscape. For example, being behind a door doesn't constitute "shadow". There is, however, a very easy way to check: your model. During night or when in darkness, the hue of your model changes to a darker tone. This gives you a bonus to hide. There is no bonus to hiding in "shadow" at night, and your model doesn't actually change.

 

So yeah.

 

Also, interestingly, when it comes to actually hiding (no idea if it affects detection), Hide in Shadows and Move Silently counts just as much.

 

Edit: Might as well link the rest of you: http://forum.bioware.com/topic/357939-thesis-hide-in-shadows/

Edited January 10, 2015 by Luckmann

[Sensuki]

Possibly. If anyone would know if it's true it would be Beamdog at this point

[Guest 4ward]

:boggle:

 

Playing EE now, and it's absolutely not there. Checking out my old installation. How could I have missed it?

 

Edit: okay, found it in the vanilla one. All it does is explain how the UI works and the base mechanics at an extremely basic level. It doesn't even say anything about stealth actually requiring shadows, something I only found out about now, to pick one gotcha. Perhaps it was in the manual, but I'm way too cool to read manuals.

 

I.e. not at all what I had in mind.

the BG2 tutorial was included in BG1:EE by Beamdog, in BG2:EE it's not in. For me it was helpful, doing the tutorial with my sorcerer i got xp and levelled up to lvl 8 and rested so i got all spells (stoneskin included); it's a nice thing to finish and makes the start of the game easier.

[BrainMuncher]

People keep comparing magic in PoE to high-level BG2 as if it's somehow a valid comparison. The backer beta starts at level 5. A wizard at that point in an IE game will have a fireball or two and a few acid arrows per rest. The remainder of the time he's pew pewing with a sling or something and trying not to die.

 

Unless the wiki is completely wrong, the spell lists look very similar. Spells have been renamed but most of them are there. Haste and slow are there. Fireball, acid arrow, scorcher are all there. There's a bunch of situational defensive buffs. There's a bunch of debuffs.

I just can't see what you guys think is missing compared to the IE games, it's almost exactly the same setup in both.

Unless you're telling me that you were running around in IE games having epic Minor Spell Deflection vs Spell Thrust battles with your level 6 mage, what is it exactly you think is missing from PoE magic?

[BrainMuncher]

But with no spell counters, and no spells like Hold Person, Charm/Dire Charm/Dominate, Rigid Thinking and so on it does feel flatter, more one-dimensional. Extremely powerful, long-duration effects should still be in, as long as there is a way to counter and/or prevent them. A special kind of IE fun has been removed here, and that is a shame.

Genuine question here since I haven't played the beta: what are all these things I read about in the wiki that sound exactly like those spells you mention:

 

Hold person: http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Fetid_Caress & http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Mental_Binding

Confusion: http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Confusion & http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Bewildering_Spectacle & http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Tenuous_Grasp

Horror: http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Ryngrim's_Repulsive_Visage

Charm/dominate: http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Whisper_of_Treason & http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Puppet_Master

 

etc.

 

Are these spells non-functional or something?

Edited January 18, 2015 by BrainMuncher

[PrimeJunta]

The main issue is that the nastier status effects have very short durations. There's no point countering them since by the time you'd get the counter out it'd have worn off anyway.

 

Also: Whisper of Treason and Puppet Master are cipher Powers, not wizard spells. I've asked for similar spells for the wiz -- perhaps weaker at equivalent level, so he doesn't tread on Cipher's toes.

 

I don't know exactly what Terrified and Confused do, but I the effects aren't very dramatic, nothing like the IE games where enemis run away or wander around doing nothing or sometimes attacking each other. I just tried Bewildering Spectacle as an opening move on Medreth's group in the BB and it was pretty much a waste of a spell. I suppose it might be useful to stop someone for using special abilities/spells for a moment, but that's about it.

[Luckmann]

The main issue is that the nastier status effects have very short durations. There's no point countering them since by the time you'd get the counter out it'd have worn off anyway.

 

Also: Whisper of Treason and Puppet Master are cipher Powers, not wizard spells. I've asked for similar spells for the wiz -- perhaps weaker at equivalent level, so he doesn't tread on Cipher's toes.

 

I don't know exactly what Terrified and Confused do, but I the effects aren't very dramatic, nothing like the IE games where enemis run away or wander around doing nothing or sometimes attacking each other. I just tried Bewildering Spectacle as an opening move on Medreth's group in the BB and it was pretty much a waste of a spell. I suppose it might be useful to stop someone for using special abilities/spells for a moment, but that's about it.

 

Does it maybe break Engagement? That'd make sense, and could be useful even if it only lasts for a moment.

[BrainMuncher]

I don't know exactly what Terrified and Confused do, but I the effects aren't very dramatic, nothing like the IE games where enemis run away or wander around doing nothing or sometimes attacking each other. I just tried Bewildering Spectacle as an opening move on Medreth's group in the BB and it was pretty much a waste of a spell. I suppose it might be useful to stop someone for using special abilities/spells for a moment, but that's about it.

Well now I'm really curious to find out what they do, if you can find out somehow.

 

Maybe they just aren't implemented yet.

 

 

On paper those wizard spells look devastating, a 10-15 second AoE paralyze from a level 2 spell isn't too shabby.

[PrimeJunta]

I've never succeeded in paralyzing anyone with Fetid Caress in BB392.

[BrainMuncher]

So it sounds like half the wizard spells don't actually do anything at all. I can see how that could be a problem lol