Your RPG system sucks!

[Katarack21]

 

 

1. Having a front-line to hold back enemies while your remaining party members support has been a standard choice for table-top and CRPG games for years.

 

Sure, but your damage output didn't scale inversely to your ability to TAKE damage.  The fighter has always been the best damage dealer, outside of AOE effects.  Now my fghter has to just sit there and take it up the ass while some squishy that dies from a spitball gets all the glory.  May as well be playing WoW.

 

What? No, that's crazy. Magic (and psionic users) have been out-damaging fighters and barbarians at max level for decades in D&D, both AoE and single target, and it holds true in a large chunk of western RPG's that are based on a Tolkien/D&D style setting. It's actually part of the reason 4th Ed ended up like it did; they were trying to undo decades of screwing the physical combatants and make them actually worthwhile all the way through to level 20.

 

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LinearWarriorsQuadraticWizards

Edited March 29, 2015 by Katarack21

[Rafkos]

Your thread sucks.   
I find battles to be hard and last about 1-2 minutes with normal fight and 5> while fighting with demanding ones, sometimes had to reload several times.

[JRRNeiklot]

So, instead of one tank specialized in a purely defensive configuration, set up multiple front-line characters with armour for DR and weapon configurations for damage and spread the aggro around? You're not forced into having a purely defensive tank to manage all the aggression himself while everybody else deals the damage, that's just one style of playing. It just sounds like you're trying to force yourself into a specific style and it's boring you, so switch it up.

 

I'm forced into a stupid aggro mechanic, and I'm forced into having some kind of a tank.   Putting that kind of armor on my characters again, affects their damage.  You're suggesting I have multiple tanks instead of one tank. 

[JRRNeiklot]

 

 

 

1. Having a front-line to hold back enemies while your remaining party members support has been a standard choice for table-top and CRPG games for years.

 

Sure, but your damage output didn't scale inversely to your ability to TAKE damage.  The fighter has always been the best damage dealer, outside of AOE effects.  Now my fghter has to just sit there and take it up the ass while some squishy that dies from a spitball gets all the glory.  May as well be playing WoW.

 

What? No, that's crazy. Magic (and psionic users) have been out-damaging fighters and barbarians at max level for decades in D&D, both AoE and single target, and it holds true in a large chunk of western RPG's that are based on a Tolkien/D&D style setting. It's actually part of the reason 4th Ed ended up like it did; they were trying to undo decades of screwing the physical combatants and make them actually worthwhile all the way through to level 20.

 

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LinearWarriorsQuadraticWizards

 

Really?  A first level fighter with a long sword and an 18 strength in D&D does 1d8+2 damage.  A wizard does 1d4+1 with a magic missile.  At 7th level, the fighter gets an extra attack, for a possible 2d8+2, the wizard can do 4d4+4, about even, but the wizard  can only keep that up a  maximum of 4 times a day.  The fighter can double that output with a decent dex.  You make me laugh.  Until 3e, magic users were NEVER king of the hill.  Sure, they have meteor swarm, but it took 2 rounds to cast and a three year old with a rock could interrupt it.  I've seen that trope, and while it's humorous, it's a spheric cow.  In a vacuum, wizard are very powerful, but in reality most of their spells take too long to cast to be that useful in combat.   3e did away with casting times and 4e just turned every one into a magic user. 

[pedroantonio]

I wasn't asking for feedback

Yet you made a thread. If you didn't want feedback from us, you should have sent a PM to the developers instead.

[View619]

 

So, instead of one tank specialized in a purely defensive configuration, set up multiple front-line characters with armour for DR and weapon configurations for damage and spread the aggro around? You're not forced into having a purely defensive tank to manage all the aggression himself while everybody else deals the damage, that's just one style of playing. It just sounds like you're trying to force yourself into a specific style and it's boring you, so switch it up.

 

I'm forced into a stupid aggro mechanic, and I'm forced into having some kind of a tank.   Putting that kind of armor on my characters again, affects their damage.  You're suggesting I have multiple tanks instead of one tank. 

 

 

Well, if you just don't like the mechanics there's nothing else I can suggest. Good luck.

[Jouni]

Really?  A first level fighter with a long sword and an 18 strength in D&D does 1d8+2 damage.  A wizard does 1d4+1 with a magic missile.  At 7th level, the fighter gets an extra attack, for a possible 2d8+2, the wizard can do 4d4+4, about even, but the wizard  can only keep that up a  maximum of 4 times a day.  The fighter can double that output with a decent dex.  You make me laugh.  Until 3e, magic users were NEVER king of the hill.  Sure, they have meteor swarm, but it took 2 rounds to cast and a three year old with a rock could interrupt it.  I've seen that trope, and while it's humorous, it's a spheric cow.  In a vacuum, wizard are very powerful, but in reality most of their spells take too long to cast to be that useful in combat.   3e did away with casting times and 4e just turned every one into a magic user.

Before 3E and other "modern" editions of D&D, wizards were definitely more powerful than fighters at high levels.

 

My experiences are mostly from AD&D 2nd Edition. At low levels (roughly 1-5), wizards needed fighters to keep them alive. While they knew a trick or two, low-level wizards didn't really get anything done in a fight. The game was most balanced with mid-level (level 5-10) characters, when the classes complemented each other quite nicely. Fighters held the line and enganged enemies that dealt heavy damage, while wizards controlled the battlefield, wiped out masses of low-level enemies, and dealt heavy damage themselves. Things changed beyond level 10. While fighters didn't really grow any more powerful, wizards could cast more spells and got access to even more powerful ones.

 

3E changed the balance in two ways. First, the introduction of feats, prestige classes, and other special effects meant that high-level fighters continued gaining new abilities and dealt more damage. Second, the proliferation of magic items added even more abilities to non-spellcasters.

 

To some degree, this all depended on the playstyle of the group. While fighters were reactive characters, wizards were active characters. If the group regularly ended up in an ambush at close quarters, fighters were the ones who would get them out of trouble. On the other hand, if the group preferred to ambush their enemies and fought over long distances, wizards were the ones who did the real fighting. To put it another way, while a high-level fighter could arguably beat a high-level wizard in a fair fight, the wizards who had a habit of ending up in a fair fight with fighters already died at low levels.

[Qiox]

Sawyer says that you can easily ruing a character in D&D by not specing it properly. Well how is this any different? I can't make a basic class worth a damn with this stupid system you guys devised, just gimmick builds.

 

How does this game not force you into play styles? You basically always have to sneak into battle. You pretty much have to crawl around sneaking everywhere, which is a PITA.

 

Your non-tanks are beyond squishy. Monks have to get hit in order to use their skills/powers? That's ****ing stupid beyond belief! Almost every fight my rogue/monk/wizard get dropped. The tanks can't hold aggro. It's just bad design all around. Yet again, this shows the major problem with paid betas when its the fanboys telling the devs what they want to hear instead of giving them the criticism they need to hear.

 

And trying to manage a party of 6 in real-time combat is patently absurd - even at slow speed. All it does is result in spamming the space bar pauses. DOS is infinitely better with its turn-based combat.

 

The spell system and spells themselves are terrible. Fights happen so fast that de/buffs are basically pointless because the fight is over by the time the spell is cast. It also makes most food/potions/scrolls useless in that regard as well. The spell times should be instant - seeing as you get so few spells to actually cast anyway and mana doesn't play a factor. And durations on all that stuff should be upped by a factor of 10 at least. I should be able to have those buffs going for an entire map. Otherwise, it's just camping after every encounter - and that's way too expensive at low levels.

 

There are so many things I *hate* about the system you designed. Why did you try and reinvent the wheel? Yes, D&D is far from perfect but it's a damn sight better than this rubbish. And that's the real shame of it just completely takes the fun out of the game and destroys all the hard work that was put into the beautiful artwork and excellent writing. I've loved most all of Obsidian's work - and Black Isle before that - down through the years, but this is really just awful, awful stuff.

 

I hope you guys can do a follow-up for Fallout 4 a la FNV. I'll at least look forward to that - so long as it doesn't use this crappy system.

That's nothing like the game I'm playing.

 

Perhaps it's a difficulty level thing?   My 1st try is on Trial of the Damned and fights are not short.  I do not cast just one spell.  And my squishy characters pretty much never get hit by melee attacks.

 

My fighter + paladin will block a doorway (+ chanter if need to block a hallway) forming a wall nothing can get by.   My priest is behind throwing buffs, heals, debuffs.  My Mage is behind throwing AOE nukes doing nearly double the total damage output of everyone else.  Ranger is also in back going pew pew.

 

I almost always have to rest after every fight because my casters used up all their spells.

 

 

I do set the game to Fast Speed, and Sneak all the time.  That's adds up to a normal walk speed and lets me spot all the traps and secrets.  But in fights everything is at normal speed.

 

Fun times.

Edited March 29, 2015 by Qiox

[JRRNeiklot]

 

Before 3E and other "modern" editions of D&D, wizards were definitely more powerful than fighters at high levels.

 

 

 

Depends on the situation.  For AOE, sure.  For save or dies, yep.  For single target. not even close.  And after spell level 3 or 4, casting times for most spells are so long, those spells only get cast in optimum circumstances.  I wish I had a dollar for every time one of my casters tried to cast a high level spell just to get it ruined.  Example:  Wizard begins to cast Bigby's grasping hand.  Initiative, wizard rolls a 6 (the best possible result), bad guy rolls a 1 (worst possible result).  Wizard adds casting time (7 segments) .  Bad guy adds weapon speed of a +1 dagger (1).  Bad guy goes first, wizard's spell is interrupted.  The wizard has to actually roll a 4 or higher just to get that particular spell off in the same round he started it.  It's so easy to disrupt, it's not even funny.  The wizard can't even use his dex bonus to dodge an attack, that alone will ruin the spell.  This trope of wizards ruling the roost is perpetrated by people who never played the by the rules.

Edited March 30, 2015 by JRRNeiklot

[Prime-Mover]

That's right, they are my opinions and the further I get into the game the more I stand by them. Maybe it comes from being to set in my ways of playing D&D for 30 years, but I *really* don't like the system they've designed for all the aformentioned issues and more. However, like I said, the art and the wriring are exellent so I'll push through and finish it. I actually applaud Obsidian for at least tryng to shake things up. They just failed miserably at it IN MY OPINION. Disagree? Cool. I wasn't asking for feedback, just letting Obsidian know what I think. If you love it, then tell them, don't tell me.

Do you mean "they failed to make a game that suits my particular preferences"? Because that's cool. No one will have any beef with that. It's when you have an oppinion about it being an objectively bad game - like the title indicates - that people will react. Calling it an 'oppinion' doesn't make it any less objectionable.

[paz12]

When did the term "RPG", as in "Roleplaying Game", change it's meaning to "Single Player World Of Warcraft"? You don't need to have a bull**** crafting system where you create minor health potions you never use, nor do you need to swap from your cow leather armor to space cow leather armor every 5 minutes for incremental upgrades. You don't need to go on search for le epic loot and kill a big spider for a sword of cutting +1 that magically cuts through flesh somehow better than a regular ass sword.

 

Simple version: Why do people whine for these things and associate them with the term "RPG"

It's called evolution:

 

amoeba

enhanced amoeba

very much so enhanced amoeba

This all leads to the pinnacle of creation: mankind

 

ultima I-V

Diablo 1-3

WoW

This all leads to the pinnacle of creation: cow clicker

 

(At least from the PR&investment department's point of view)

Edited March 30, 2015 by paz12

[Jouni]

Depends on the situation.  For AOE, sure.  For save or dies, yep.  For single target. not even close.  And after spell level 3 or 4, casting times for most spells are so long, those spells only get cast in optimum circumstances.  I wish I had a dollar for every time one of my casters tried to cast a high level spell just to get it ruined.  Example:  Wizard begins to cast Bigby's grasping hand.  Initiative, wizard rolls a 6 (the best possible result), bad guy rolls a 1 (worst possible result).  Wizard adds casting time (7 segments) .  Bad guy adds weapon speed of a +1 dagger (1).  Bad guy goes first, wizard's spell is interrupted.  The wizard has to actually roll a 4 or higher just to get that particular spell off in the same round he started it.  It's so easy to disrupt, it's not even funny.  The wizard can't even use his dex bonus to dodge an attack, that alone will ruin the spell.  This trope of wizards ruling the roost is perpetrated by people who never played the by the rules.

Remember that we're talking about high-level wizards. The fact that they've made it to a high level and survived means that they're probably smarter than any of us. They're very good at taking calculated risks, while simultaneously playing it safe and avoiding stupid mistakes.

 

High-level wizards generaly don't roll for initiative, because it's only necessary in a fair fight. By the time the battle begins, the wizard has probably observed the enemy from a safe distance for a long time. They try to make the initial assault as unfair as possible. There may be traps, summoned monsters, illusions, landslides, and triggered spells all at once. The ambush is definitely not appropriately challenging to the opposing side.

 

As I said, wizards are active characters, while fighters are reactive characters. High-level fighters are good at surviving whatever is thrown at them and affecting their immediate environment. A properly played high-level wizard, on the other hand, takes the initiative and works at a larger scale.

 

In original D&D and AD&D 1st Edition, high-level fighter became lords, while high-level mages became wizards. Both had similar levels of power to affect the wider issues, but while the power of a lord came from their status, the power of a wizard was personal power. While name levels disappeared in the 2nd Edition, game balance remained pretty much the same.

[LastPioneer]

You people have no idea about the game, instead of judzging it for 5 min of gameplay try it out several times... This game has one of the best rpg systems, you can play the game the way you really want.

 

Proof? Im actually trying to solo the game ( and sucess so far) with a Druid. 

 

YOu just aren't good at videogames and blame devs. I've seen it in every released videogame, rpg or not for the last 5 years.

 

If devs read this, you did a really gj. No fanboy just the truth.

 

Cant EDIT: replaced a word with one hopefully less provocative. Please attack each other's arguments and not each other's person.

[Bryy]

That's right, they are my opinions and the further I get into the game the more I stand by them. Maybe it comes from being to set in my ways of playing D&D for 30 years, but I *really* don't like the system they've designed for all the aformentioned issues and more. However, like I said, the art and the wriring are exellent so I'll push through and finish it. I actually applaud Obsidian for at least tryng to shake things up. They just failed miserably at it IN MY OPINION. Disagree? Cool. I wasn't asking for feedback, just letting Obsidian know what I think. If you love it, then tell them, don't tell me.

You seem to think this forum is a one way conversation between the devs and you.

 

That's not its point or purpose.

[Novare]

I disagree with the original post as all of his frustrations I have not encountered.  I will say however to find traps and hidden objects you need to stay in constant stealth is bloody annoying.  Let me detect in normal mode and stealth only when I need to, you know, stealth =P

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Overall, I'm enjoying the game far more than I had expected. I still don't like the class designs very much, and nearly everything related to spell casting (particularly the wizard) is far worse than it could and should be, but combat is still enjoyable despite that. I have strong faith that a Spell Revisions mod will be created, so it's just a matter of waiting. Once that's in--this game will be a keystone of this RPG renaissance we are enjoying.

[Cantousent]

Hey guys, remember to keep the attacks to each other's arguments and not make it personal.

[SeekDWay]

Just expressing some opinions here.

 

Combat mechanics are shallow. As a result damage reigns supreme, while the game si riddled with extremely situational spells. By the time an opportunity presents itself to use certain abilities I've often forgotten they ever existed (even on Hard). Even better it turns out this 1 ability is 1 per rest and you just laugh at it. I really hope for a mod that increases stamina everywhere in the game, so nuking is less tempting.

 

I agree about sneaking, it is always beneficial to move in scouting mode, as it is this mode is entirely pointless. I just use scouting mode + fast mode, but if I should do that then something is wrong in the first place.

 

AI pathing is still horrible to the point where it is hard to not abuse it because you cannot avoid it.

 

Attributes are boring. This is a personal opinion, just last night me and a mate were discussing how similar this games is to Diablo 3 in terms of stats. I see why they did that, but I just find them plain boring. :-/

 

I gotta make it clear that I am saying all of this because I freaking love this game, I've been playing it on and off for 3 days now and it feels awesome. Companions are a bit meh (I like more plain party members with less deranged personalities, some blond dude is a blessing) but I think they will pick up once the game gets into later stagies.

[PrimeJunta]

Really?  A first level fighter with a long sword and an 18 strength in D&D does 1d8+2 damage.  A wizard does 1d4+1 with a magic missile.  At 7th level, the fighter gets an extra attack, for a possible 2d8+2, the wizard can do 4d4+4, about even, but the wizard  can only keep that up a  maximum of 4 times a day.  The fighter can double that output with a decent dex.  You make me laugh.  Until 3e, magic users were NEVER king of the hill.  Sure, they have meteor swarm, but it took 2 rounds to cast and a three year old with a rock could interrupt it.  I've seen that trope, and while it's humorous, it's a spheric cow.  In a vacuum, wizard are very powerful, but in reality most of their spells take too long to cast to be that useful in combat.   3e did away with casting times and 4e just turned every one into a magic user.

Uhh.

 

Here, have two level 10 fighters. Now go fight Firkraag. Good luck.

 

Here, have a level 10 wizard and level 10 cleric. If it takes you more than 6 rounds or so and you're taking damage, you're doing something wrong.

[ProjectBG2Respawn]

I don't understand the OP...

 

He doesn't play with the pause ??? How can he do that unless he cheats ?

 

I don't understand either what does he tries to say about sneaking. I never sneak in combat i don't like that much, what's the problem with that ? (i play normal mode)

 

He says also the tank cannot defend the weakers charas : absolutely wrong, i got a perferct tank and Eder supporting him. Well sometimes Aloth gets wasted but that's the game hey. I prefer that than the stupid wizards of BG2 - invincibles. (even if i love this game). And i find cool some passive capacities like "escape" (dunno the english). Good for a priest or a wizard.

 

Talking about buffs that's fine to me to restart your défenses each combat even if i found more pertinent to be able to prepare befor a fight.

 

 

The game is out 2 days ago and the OP knows everything about it and its RPG rules what a troll. Crying out loud...

 

Concerning his statement about the monks i don't know, maybe it's a bad move from Obsidian. But for example i like very much the way the chanters cast spells : they need to warm up, very original and good

[ProjectBG2Respawn]

 

Really?  A first level fighter with a long sword and an 18 strength in D&D does 1d8+2 damage.  A wizard does 1d4+1 with a magic missile.  At 7th level, the fighter gets an extra attack, for a possible 2d8+2, the wizard can do 4d4+4, about even, but the wizard  can only keep that up a  maximum of 4 times a day.  The fighter can double that output with a decent dex.  You make me laugh.  Until 3e, magic users were NEVER king of the hill.  Sure, they have meteor swarm, but it took 2 rounds to cast and a three year old with a rock could interrupt it.  I've seen that trope, and while it's humorous, it's a spheric cow.  In a vacuum, wizard are very powerful, but in reality most of their spells take too long to cast to be that useful in combat.   3e did away with casting times and 4e just turned every one into a magic user.

Uhh.

 

Here, have two level 10 fighters. Now go fight Firkraag. Good luck.

 

Here, have a level 10 wizard and level 10 cleric. If it takes you more than 6 rounds or so and you're taking damage, you're doing something wrong.

 

 

10 lvl wizard and cleric to kill Firkraag ?

[AlperTheCaglar]

Simple truth: PoE system is awesome

 

This is coming from a BG2 aficionado, and a person who can't play Fallout 2 below hard anymore.

 

The rough edges will slowly be filed out as the game sets in patches arrive, classes are balanced and tooltips are decorated with a little flair instead of cold hard analytical data on hover. But its great.

 

If you're older than 25, you'll recognize how awesomely similar it is to AD&D 2nd Edition while improving upon the proficiency and certain resistance pitfalls that TSR system had.

 

My only minor gripes are about limiting resting to this superficial "resting supplies" system instead of defining areas as Minor rest / Major rest areas, and the fact that Rogue is utterly overpowered right now in combat.

 

Other than that my two cents is that the game system is astonishingly clever and punishing without resorting to power inflastion tactics a la Bethesda

[ProjectBG2Respawn]

Simple truth: PoE system is awesome

 

This is coming from a BG2 aficionado, and a person who can't play Fallout 2 below hard anymore.

 

The rough edges will slowly be filed out as the game sets in patches arrive, classes are balanced and tooltips are decorated with a little flair instead of cold hard analytical data on hover. But its great.

 

If you're older than 25, you'll recognize how awesomely similar it is to AD&D 2nd Edition while improving upon the proficiency and certain resistance pitfalls that TSR system had.

 

My only minor gripes are about limiting resting to this superficial "resting supplies" system instead of defining areas as Minor rest / Major rest areas, and the fact that Rogue is utterly overpowered right now in combat.

 

Other than that my two cents is that the game system is astonishingly clever and punishing without resorting to power inflastion tactics a la Bethesda

 

Hi BG2 friend

 

What do you think about his statement on monks ?

[AlperTheCaglar]

 

Simple truth: PoE system is awesome

 

This is coming from a BG2 aficionado, and a person who can't play Fallout 2 below hard anymore.

 

The rough edges will slowly be filed out as the game sets in patches arrive, classes are balanced and tooltips are decorated with a little flair instead of cold hard analytical data on hover. But its great.

 

If you're older than 25, you'll recognize how awesomely similar it is to AD&D 2nd Edition while improving upon the proficiency and certain resistance pitfalls that TSR system had.

 

My only minor gripes are about limiting resting to this superficial "resting supplies" system instead of defining areas as Minor rest / Major rest areas, and the fact that Rogue is utterly overpowered right now in combat.

 

Other than that my two cents is that the game system is astonishingly clever and punishing without resorting to power inflastion tactics a la Bethesda

 

Hi BG2 friend

 

What do you think about his statement on monks ?

 

 

I didn't check out monks but I suppose they're pretty similar with BG2 monk kit, I will see on my 2nd playthrough

 

Right now I'm dps barb, op dps rogue, and voiced NPCs

[Janet]

Regarding scouting mode, just set the game to autopause on enemy sighted. The game pauses before combat is engaged, and you can then engage sneaking with enemies none the wiser.