Max Level

[CaptainMace]

I don't like level caps that you can easily hit before the game is over.

Because character progression is an important part of the RPG experience, and it's demotivating when it simply stops happening for the rest of the game.

 

Also, some of the replayability value of, say, Icewind Dale, imo comes from the fact that you can level faster and reach higher levels if you play with a smaller party or on higher difficulty. So battles play out differently compared to a "normal" playthrough, since you'll have better spells, but less of them per round. For some battles that makes things easier, for others harder. But it's different (in an interesting way), hence replayability.

 

I'm not sure why Sawyer/Obsidian feel the need to control the player's progression through this game so tightly, what with

• low level cap
• smaller parties getting hardly any extra XP per character
• no kill/trap/lock XP
• etc.

 

I realize it's easier to develop a game that plays out pretty much the same for every player (or every playthrough), and difficult to design a game where different playthroughs are allowed to diverge considerably and yet are all fun. But that's what should be expected of an RPG, otherwise it could've been made as an adventure game instead.

Considering low level cap, I guess they keep some in the bag for the expansion and a potential sequel. I'd say they'd like to have the possibility, for a sequel, to make it coherent gameplay-wise by adding the possibility to import the character from the first game with his level and abilities. Though I haven't followed this matter closely, maybe they declared otherwise, or already declared they'd like to do it indeed.

 

Considering trap and lock xp, the problem is that it's either an irrelevant amount of xp (so whether they give some or not doesn't really matter) or it's a relevant one and then, you'd "farm" some traps and locks you could avoid for the sake of gaining more xp. If traps and locks are, all, unavoidable then that'd mean you'd have to be able to disarm/lockpick everything in order to get the "full" reward of the dungeon/area in terms of xp. Either way it's a bit tedious.

Edited March 7, 2015 by CaptainMace

[anameforobsidian]

 

I hadn't even heard of the "smaller parties gets extra experience"; that sounds odd and arbitrary as all hell. If it's 10% per character past the first, that means that soloing nets you an insane 50% experience increase.

 

That means it's going to be wonky beyond belief to balance in regards to available experience and the level 12 cap, for something that doesn't even make sense nor is warranted.

Considering in the IE games your experience is divided between each party member this new xp system is pretty tame.

 

 

Yeah, it's definitely lower than IE games.  Although, I only heard the 10% thing halfway through development, so it could have changed.  Anyeays interview from that time confirms that sliding experienced based on party size was still in and intentional.  Also, I doubt the 10% figure was fueled by a need for control, it was probably just an arbitrary this feels fair number.

[Emerwyn]

So if a solo character gets 150% XP, it's really not that much. In most other games, the solo character would get 400-600% XP (that is, the full encounter XP without having to split it 4-6 ways). It should still give the solo character a significant boost to keep ahead of the curve and help her survival against the odds.

[anameforobsidian]

So if a solo character gets 150% XP, it's really not that much. In most other games, the solo character would get 400-600% XP (that is, the full encounter XP without having to split it 4-6 ways). It should still give the solo character a significant boost to keep ahead of the curve and help her survival against the odds.

It's worth pointing out that the IE games also had a lot of quest XP (where each person got the same amount), so it wasn't a full 600% boost.

[Stun]

And if a game has a moderate level cap, the balance issue doesn't become so severe. Whatever giant massive advantage someone gets from being 6x higher in levels is mitigated by the fact that....He's going into combat alone.

[Namutree]

 

So if a solo character gets 150% XP, it's really not that much. In most other games, the solo character would get 400-600% XP (that is, the full encounter XP without having to split it 4-6 ways). It should still give the solo character a significant boost to keep ahead of the curve and help her survival against the odds.

It's worth pointing out that the IE games also had a lot of quest XP (where each person got the same amount), so it wasn't a full 600% boost.

 

Not so much in BG1.

[Dark_Ansem]

as long as we can mod a higher level + multiclassing or equivalent in terms of versatility...

[ISC]

as long as we can mod a higher level + multiclassing or equivalent in terms of versatility...

 

I dont think modding the cap itself is very meaningful since there is no additional content beyond level 12 yet (e.g. spells and abilities). Multiclassing sounds pretty difficult to mod, but who knows (well, bester/sensuki)

Edited March 8, 2015 by ISC

[Karkarov]

Not feeling the complaints.  12 is a pretty substantial level cap and smaller parties getting EXP boosts has always been that way.  That said you can level as fast as you want, there is still a level 12 cap.  I doubt any decent modders will try to mod it out or try to mod in something like multiclassing either as it breaks the game balance.

[Bryy]

Are we still on the "too low level" thing? They can set the level cap at 2 or 5. Hell, they can have no levels at all. 

[Karkarov]

Are we still on the "too low level" thing? They can set the level cap at 2 or 5. Hell, they can have no levels at all. 

Not really, as you can guess this close to release we have sort of run out of things to say so people are just nit picking a little.

[piggyhog]

Well, as someone who has been playing this game for a few weeks, I must say that the leveling system and the relative lack of progress is the ONE aspect that I dislike the most. It does not give the player the sense of achievements that I would seek in such a roleplaying game. 

 

The measly number of skills and abilities when you reached the pinnacle of 12 level and the inability to adjust and improves the stats of the characters during the leveling process makes it even worse. 

 

You might argue that level 12 is not the pinnacle, but in this game, it definitely is .. and especially so when it pits you against an immortal boss that threatens the world.

[Cirsphe]

I am a little disappointed with the level cap.  I just hit the level cap near the end of chapter 4 with a bunch of quests and tasks left to complete before I go onto the next chapter.  That and I haven't finished the endless paths either yet.  This seems a little too early to have hit the cap. 

[Hassat Hunter]

Quite the feat... you completed the game (since act IV is the end) and yet have game to play afterwards in 'the next chapter'

 

How's that X-pack time traveller friend?

[Bamboonga]

Oh goody...I'm level 14 and can't get any higher...

 

WELP, THAT'S IT FOR MY SIDE-QUESTING.

 

Seriously...14?  Did the devs actually want us to BOTHER with the side missions near the end?

[sapientNode]

I don't like level caps that you can easily hit before the game is over.

Because character progression is an important part of the RPG experience, and it's demotivating when it simply stops happening for the rest of the game.

 

Also, some of the replayability value of, say, Icewind Dale, imo comes from the fact that you can level faster and reach higher levels if you play with a smaller party or on higher difficulty. So battles play out differently compared to a "normal" playthrough, since you'll have better spells, but less of them per round. For some battles that makes things easier, for others harder. But it's different (in an interesting way), hence replayability.

 

I'm not sure why Sawyer/Obsidian feel the need to control the player's progression through this game so tightly, what with

• low level cap
• smaller parties getting hardly any extra XP per character
• no kill/trap/lock XP
• etc.

 

I realize it's easier to develop a game that plays out pretty much the same for every player (or every playthrough), and difficult to design a game where different playthroughs are allowed to diverge considerably and yet are all fun. But that's what should be expected of an RPG, otherwise it could've been made as an adventure game instead.

 

This tightly designed game worked for the old school days.

We had a very small number of magical items. (a +2 magical dagger was the best thing you might find for a character) 

Encounters were never trivial.  (There was no such thing as trash mob.  Wolves ate you for breakfast)

Stats/Attributes were much lower and restrictive (to disallow becoming godlike)

And the overall story was balanced and much more linear with less quests to do.

Also if I am remembering correctly at least one title BG or IWD you didn't even have the enemies to hit cap so a spawn encounter was modded in.

 

Level caps today simply do not work because you have none of the above parameters and you do not have the designers able to really refine the balance of the tight design.

E6 rule sets or some derivative would work fantastic in the current iteration of this style of game.  this way a level cap is maintained but certain progression elements continue on potentially infinitely.

 

Having a level cap in a game that tosses magic items at you like candy and has a large amount of trash fights that feel trivial doesn't make much sense because we already have been overpowered by level 6+  Sure there are a few battles that take a certain level of finesse and strategy but most are a lot of auto attacking or quasi AI usage with 1 or 2 micro manage sessions during the fight.

 

Its like they wanted to adhere to old school BG and IWD but they forgot about the other elements and forgot that you need to spend a inordinate amount of time plotting the trajectories and courses of players to strike that perfect balance with a cap.

With PoE if I do not use a exp nerf like iemod I hit cap before Twin Elms or very soon after getting there and I definitely cap out even with the new cap with White March.

Since the battles are trivial there is no feeling of accomplishment and with the loss of a potential skill up or talent increase the game gets blah after cap.

At least it does for me.  Thankfully I have iemod and use it for the exp nerf amongst other things.

I am sure the cap will be removed in some addition to this mod in the future as well.

[Hassat Hunter]

Poster logic

 

"Things are too easy if I get to level 14 early."

"We should totally remove the cap, that should make it harder!"

 

Me:

[Fenixp]

This tightly designed game worked for the old school days.

We had a very small number of magical items. (a +2 magical dagger was the best thing you might find for a character) 

Encounters were never trivial.  (There was no such thing as trash mob.  Wolves ate you for breakfast)

Stats/Attributes were much lower and restrictive (to disallow becoming godlike)

And the overall story was balanced and much more linear with less quests to do.

Have you actually played the original Baldur's Gate? Because it sure sounds like you haven't, or at least that it was very, very long time ago. Just about the only part of that post which holds true are rare magical items. Icewind Dale was at least more difficult and more linear, but that's about it.

Edited November 8, 2015 by Fenixp

[wanderon]

 

This tightly designed game worked for the old school days.

We had a very small number of magical items. (a +2 magical dagger was the best thing you might find for a character) 

Encounters were never trivial.  (There was no such thing as trash mob.  Wolves ate you for breakfast)

Stats/Attributes were much lower and restrictive (to disallow becoming godlike)

And the overall story was balanced and much more linear with less quests to do.

Have you actually played the original Baldur's Gate? Because it sure sounds like you haven't, or at least that it was very, very long time ago. Just about the only part of that post which holds true are rare magical items. Icewind Dale was at least more difficult and more linear, but that's about it.

 

 

I would pretty much agree - wolves might one shot your level 1 character but you could run away from pretty much anything and by the time you hit level 4-5 there was almost nothing left in the wilderness areas that would give you much challenge other than one of the "bounty hunter groups". (Xvart genocide anyone) - first time through knowing nothing was certainly challenging but stats were balanced between player and enemy as long as you didn't get too big for your britches and even then running away was most always an option.

 

As far as being linear - unless you did nothing but follow the story line - the game was a huge sandbox - if you were planning to dual class you could easily take only Imoen along and ignore the main storyline until you both hit the level to add your second class and then farm exp in several places until you got your old powers back also starting the storyline at 3/4 or 4/5 if you wished - even easier if you install ToTSC.

 

The BG series is still the #1 RPG ever in my book regardless

[dietrichrieper]

 bg was just as balanced or unbalanced as poe.

 I mean if you had the patience you could reroll your character until you had 18 on all stats.

I remember reloading my saves on level up to get the highest heath roll which was 16 if I remember correctly.

 

If memory serves I solo'd Kangaxx which was supposed to be the hardest fight in the game, but the berserker rage my character used made him immune to nearly all his high level spells.

 

we should not let nostalgia cloud our mind to much, I love poe just as much as I loved BG

[why]

Oh goody...I'm level 14 and can't get any higher...

 

WELP, THAT'S IT FOR MY SIDE-QUESTING.

 

Seriously...14?  Did the devs actually want us to BOTHER with the side missions near the end?

I was poking around because I wanted to find out the max level in the White March out of curiosity. I think you are wrongminded, Bamboonga. Apart from the fact that you might get some good rewards in terms of items or rep for doing side quests, there's always the silly idea that you might enjoy questing because you're playing an RPG. The quests are their own reward. Sure, getting levels is always cool, and I wouldn't want to feel like I wasn't making progress in the game, but it's not like I'm going to suddenly realize that my levels are maxed (they are) and therefore there's no fun in continuing in my side quest (there is). Side quests reveal things that are interesting to me, specifically as regards my companions.

 

I can see the argument about not wanting the level cap to come too early, but saying there is no value in side quests without the prospect of level gains could be extrapolated to reflect an outlook on the main path also. It's like the kill experience argument slid down the slippery slope to encompass everything. It would eventually end up being the argument that unless you get every type of reward for every type of action there would be no incentive to take any action at all. There's a line, I agree, but there's a difference between saying it's a bummer not to get any more experience and saying that the only reason to adventure is experience. Hell, my quest was already finished and I got no experience for killing the Alpine dragon, but I thought better of leaving a large evil monster lurking over the town and still went to finish it off. Even if there hadn't been a couple of cool items to be had, I would still have done it and felt rewarded by accomplishing the goal.

[scottii]

yeah, level 12 is fair considering the amount of quests in the game and how much experience you get.  

 

as for the wizard, learning other spells from grims helps add easy flavor.  =P