We need to be able to con mob levels

[Enoch]

 

A "con system"?

 

From the /con ("consider") command in EverQuest and maybe earlier (and/or subsequent) MMORPGs or MUDs, whereby you checked the relative level of a mob ("Mobile OBject" or NPC/monster) you had targeted.  EverQuest would respond with a color-coded message ranging from green for easy "you'd probably win this fight" to red for "what would you like your tombstone to say?"

 

Common sense should prevail in Pillars.  You never want to fight.  If you can avoid the fight, do so.  Consider that!  

 

That said, an option to present color-coded relative level tooltips (or just outright present the level number itself) would be useful.  Maybe tie it to the bestiary system so that it begins rather vague (perhaps even just red/purple to warn you away from truly dangerous beasties) and then refines the more you glean with experience.

 

Thanks, that was a more patient explanation that my joke deserved.  I mean, it was clear what the original post meant from context, but I do appreciate the etymology. 

 

Anyhow, I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to an options setting to give the player more general difficulty information about enemies, but, personally, I wouldn't turn it on.  It'd just dissuade me from attempting difficult targets that I would otherwise stumble into and attempt.  And those stumbles are part of the fun of a first run in a new system/gameworld. 

[Killyox]

Use bestiary to see Lvl. Also no, it's not really needed. In life you have to plan and account for unknown as well.

Edited March 30, 2015 by Killyox

[pi2repsion]

Knowing in advance the difficulty is the ONLY WAY TO HAVE A STRATEGIC ENCOUNTER IN A CRPG.  Anything else is a guess, not strategy. 

Objection.

 

The more information you have the better plans you can make (potentially, that is, if you are able to take advantage of it), but to have a strategy does not require complete information, neither in CRPGs, in Pen and Paper RPGs, in games in general, nor elsewhere.

 

I have absolutely no objections to the idea of an optional colour-coded tooltip for people who prefer to be held by the hand so they don't risk attempting something that might be beyond them, thus losing out on both the frustration of trying and failing and the occasional joy of winning hard-fought battles that turned out much harder than one expected, but your argument that you can't have a strategic encounter without knowing the difficulty in advance is plainly ridiculous. The same line of thinking can be used to justify any lack of information as preventing you from having a strategic encounter, because you might run into something that you weren't able in advance to devise an exact counter for and, indeed, might not be able to easily counter with the resources you had available at the time, while another player with a slightly different party of the same level might find it a cakewalk.

 

And yet, except for exceptionally simple games such as traditional board games, lacking full information is the norm and any strategy worth its name doesn't rely on everything working as planned but takes into account as well as it can the unexpected. And that goes for games, non-game military strategy, and indeed, anything that can be called strategy in the first place. Wanting to know the odds in order to plan better is natural in both strategy and tactics, but it sure isn't a necessary part.

[wpmaura]

no. please stop dumbing down games

[Xavori]

no. please stop dumbing down games

 

My suggestion is the opposite of dumbing down the game.

 

Dumb is where we are at.  You are blindly stumbling into fights (and the bestiary in-game is no help until after you've already won several fights...which means you don't need the bestiary to tell you if you can win a fight).  You are forced to reload all the time because you end up fights that are flat out unwinnable with no idea that that is the case until after you're stuck in the fight.  (well, at least until if you're like me you've done so much side content, and killed so many extra mobs, that you've outleveled and outgeared the content)

 

I actually agree with  pi2repsion that you need to be able to plan for fights without all the information.  That's why my suggestion is for only level (the completely arbitrary bit) and the not the full beastiary listing.  I'm not asking for the game to tell me if I'll win/lose the fight in advance.  I'm only suggesting that we get the information that we cannot deduce in any way on our own because it's completely arbitary.  

 

Honestly, if I were designing a CRPG in this day and age, I'd dump the whole idea of levels period.  Computers can handle much more complex bookkeeping and don't need that holdover from the pen and paper days where counting how many swings of a blade a character made would have been beyond tedious.  Computers don't care about tedious.  And once you get rid of levels, you can then get started on getting rid of hitpoints which are another holdover to let pen and paper players simulate the idea of lots of swings and parries and dodging in a single dice roll instead of having to calculate each and every one until you get to that one good strike that ends the fight.  But these are topics for another day and another game

Edited March 30, 2015 by Xavori

[FalloutBoy]

I honestly don't think we would even be talking about this if not for that stupid bear cave. You are an hour into the game, with no party members, and they put in an encounter that one-shots you with no way of predicting this or responding to it other than to reload your game. It's a stupid dirty trick that some designer probably thought was clever or funny or something.

[Tigranes]

I honestly don't think we would even be talking about this if not for that stupid bear cave. You are an hour into the game, with no party members, and they put in an encounter that one-shots you with no way of predicting this or responding to it other than to reload your game. It's a stupid dirty trick that some designer probably thought was clever or funny or something.

 

Or, you know, you reload (which takes ten seconds or less), you learn that this game isn't going to scale to your level, and you walk away with a newfound appreciation for the dangers of the gameworld. (Or even, try multiple strategies to pull off an improbable victory, which teaches you more about the game mechanics and helps you not jsut do the same thing every battle.)

[Xavori]

I honestly don't think we would even be talking about this if not for that stupid bear cave. You are an hour into the game, with no party members, and they put in an encounter that one-shots you with no way of predicting this or responding to it other than to reload your game. It's a stupid dirty trick that some designer probably thought was clever or funny or something.

 

The temple in the first town isn't much better.  It's seriously overleveled for the player (and party) at the point you get to it, and there is no indication at all that this is the case.

 

 

 

I honestly don't think we would even be talking about this if not for that stupid bear cave. You are an hour into the game, with no party members, and they put in an encounter that one-shots you with no way of predicting this or responding to it other than to reload your game. It's a stupid dirty trick that some designer probably thought was clever or funny or something.

 

Or, you know, you reload (which takes ten seconds or less), you learn that this game isn't going to scale to your level, and you walk away with a newfound appreciation for the dangers of the gameworld. (Or even, try multiple strategies to pull off an improbable victory, which teaches you more about the game mechanics and helps you not jsut do the same thing every battle.)

 

 

That's the whole thing I want to get rid of.  I don't want to get randomly ganked and reload.  I want to be able to make intelligent decisions.

 

As for improbable victories, you're talking tactics not strategy.  Tactics I have down pat.  My party is pretty reliable at taking down groups of mobs that are all a bit higher level than they are at this point.  However, unless you're doing the same as me and digging through every nook and cranny for quests and stuff to kill and loot, it's really easy to run into fights you cannot win at any point in the game.  And even doing what I do, and using really good tactics, things like the fight with Cail the Silent can be seriously tricky since he's so freakin' well armored and has a whole group of AoE spamming buddies.

[Nukenin]

Perhaps the bestiary tooltip can display level (or a level range) if your character has some certain combination of Lore and/or Survival.  Maybe a total of 2 (i.e. Lore 2, Survival 2, or Lore 1 Survival 1) would permit the display of a level range even if nothing else in the bestiary info for that opponent is fleshed out.

[ComplyOrDie]

I honestly don't think we would even be talking about this if not for that stupid bear cave. You are an hour into the game, with no party members, and they put in an encounter that one-shots you with no way of predicting this or responding to it other than to reload your game. It's a stupid dirty trick that some designer probably thought was clever or funny or something.

 

Thought process:

 

a) I just nearly died in some ruin, and I have a potentially serious illness

b) Both my companions are dead

c) Town is just down the road where I can get some help

d) Oh look there's a cave, going in there would be a much better idea

e) Oh look a bear, well despite the serious **** I'm already in, it certainly would seem sensible to try and take him down.

[Xavori]

Perhaps the bestiary tooltip can display level (or a level range) if your character has some certain combination of Lore and/or Survival.  Maybe a total of 2 (i.e. Lore 2, Survival 2, or Lore 1 Survival 1) would permit the display of a level range even if nothing else in the bestiary info for that opponent is fleshed out.

 

I wouldn't be opposed to tying it to lore so long as it used the highest lore in the party.  That'd actually make a bit of sense given that higher lore characters should be more familiar with the world, including reading up on the local beasts and wildlings.

 

And really, you can alt-tab to a wiki now to do this which is pretty much saying that you the player have effectively max lore

[dirigible]

I haven't had a problem with this, at all.

 

I actually prefer going up against a new enemy without being exactly sure how tough they'll be. Adds a sense of suspense and tension.

[barakav]

No ,don't make this game like  Dragon age with all of it's stupid hand holdings!

 

But yes I do agree that it might make the lore and survival skills more useful. Just don't make it possible early in the game so we can enjoy the sense of danger ,but it might also provide a strategic advantage later on when you are fighting a group of enemies as you will prefer to kill those with the lower levels first.

Edited March 30, 2015 by barakav

[Maviarab]

Maybe you'd like a big red button too which says 'complete the game for me' ?

[zultor]

For people who enjoy ironman mode (whatever it is called in this game) this or something like it is a must.   I was excited to do a replay with the top difficulty using ironman until I started playing my first playthrough on normal and seeing that the designers intentionally put encounters in the game your are required to avoid and come back to later.    There is no way to gauge your relative power compared to a mob.

 

There are other problems besides the lack of a con-like system while at the same time sprinkling in auto-lose encounters.    For example with the very limited line of sight you rarely see all of the enemies in an encounter until you are already committed.   My party could con equal to a single mob but 5 of them will wipe my party, etc.

 

I personally would like to see this integrated with the attribute/skill system where the higher level the better indication of strength you received.   It could be tied to Perception, lore, survival, etc.

[Nukenin]

Maybe you'd like a big red button too which says 'complete the game for me' ?

 

YES!

 

 

Make sure it's at least two uses per encounter!  Complete game early, complete game often, I always says.

 

Whether we win or lose should be a flip of the coin.  I call the edge!

[StubbinMyToe]

You do not need a con system, this is not your typical zergfest rpg.  I too have played all rpg's, I am 53 y/o and have been around games since the 70's.  

Even some VERY successful MMO's such as Ultima Online did not have or need a con system,  you simply tried to fight something and learned the difficulty.  Everquest was a bit more forgiving, it had a con system, but for the most part people knew the difficulty of each zone so it was really not needed.   AD&D did not have a con system, the campain you ran was always around your level just like PoE story quests, it's just that battles are difficult since this is not your typical zergfest game, even things like the bear cave are possible while you are in that zone IF you know what you are doing.  if it is too hard, then you are playing at a difficulty level beyond your capabilities.

 

So no, lets not dumb this game down for the generation that wants all RPG's to be highlight my team, zerg in and steamroll through the content.  We have games like WoW for that.

[Tigranes]

You can run away from most non-critical path encounters, can't you? I haven't tried running out of a map, though, so maybe that's a factor. 

 

Still, ironman wouldn't be very fun for me if the game told me "THIS ENCOUNTER MAY BE TOO HARD FOR YOU". It would just encourage monotonous and thoughtless play where I just run around looking for encounters I know I can win. 

[Enoch]

 

I honestly don't think we would even be talking about this if not for that stupid bear cave. You are an hour into the game, with no party members, and they put in an encounter that one-shots you with no way of predicting this or responding to it other than to reload your game. It's a stupid dirty trick that some designer probably thought was clever or funny or something.

 

The temple in the first town isn't much better.  It's seriously overleveled for the player (and party) at the point you get to it, and there is no indication at all that this is the case.

 

 

There's also nothing that tells the characters to go down there, other than that it's a door that the player can have him/her enter. 

 

"Hey, the authorities in this town are looking to lynch folks at the drop of a hat-- let's go poke around in the basement of the ruined temple to the god whose followers were at the top of the hangin' list!" 

[Nukenin]

You can run away from most non-critical path encounters, can't you? I haven't tried running out of a map, though, so maybe that's a factor. 

 

Still, ironman wouldn't be very fun for me if the game told me "THIS ENCOUNTER MAY BE TOO HARD FOR YOU". It would just encourage monotonous and thoughtless play where I just run around looking for encounters I know I can win. 

 

This is the bottleneck I'm running into.  I'm not sure how I can run from an encounter (in which I find myself "in combat") across a map transition.  My monk died to enemies that would have "con"ned even (they were level three, same as my monk) but had much higher endurance (I know from reviewing data from other sources).  I did open some distance but I didn't actually try to click on the transition (this was in a cave) because a past experience revealed that you can't do map transitions in combat.

 

Is it actually possible to escape combat at all once it's initiated?

[Xavori]

 

 

I honestly don't think we would even be talking about this if not for that stupid bear cave. You are an hour into the game, with no party members, and they put in an encounter that one-shots you with no way of predicting this or responding to it other than to reload your game. It's a stupid dirty trick that some designer probably thought was clever or funny or something.

 

The temple in the first town isn't much better.  It's seriously overleveled for the player (and party) at the point you get to it, and there is no indication at all that this is the case.

 

 

There's also nothing that tells the characters to go down there, other than that it's a door that the player can have him/her enter. 

 

"Hey, the authorities in this town are looking to lynch folks at the drop of a hat-- let's go poke around in the basement of the ruined temple to the god whose followers were at the top of the hangin' list!" 

 

 

But in terms of level-based CRPG design, it's a bad design to put in an area that is immediately accessible WITHOUT TELLING THE PLAYERS AT ALL THAT IT IS TOO HARD FOR THEM.

 

Yes.  Everyone in this thread likely knows the temple is stronger than the player when they first reach it.  You likely know this because either you a) got roflstomped yourself, or b) have read other people who got roflstomped.

 

There is nothing exciting or fun about getting roflstomped with no warning.  In my case, it makes me roll my eyes at bad design decisions.  For others, it's a frustration that leads to anger that leads to quitting the game and writing really nasty reviews.  And since the whole thing could be avoided simply by having the mobs you run into con higher levels, it's silly.

 

I honestly do not understand how so many people enjoy the pure trial and error system we're forced into.  I've not once asked for an easy button (I already came up with my own if I so desired...so much possible cheese in this game).  I've not once asked for magically knowing whether I'll win or lose a fight.  All I want is the same kind of idea about an enemy that I'd have if I actually was a character living in this world.  I would never be blindly stumbling into fights with things because I'd already have read or heard a story about the things in the area.  I'd have learned the way people in the real world learn.  Except here we're talking about a level based game which means I'd know levels of most creatures.

 

 

You do not need a con system, this is not your typical zergfest rpg.  I too have played all rpg's, I am 53 y/o and have been around games since the 70's.  

 

Even some VERY successful MMO's such as Ultima Online did not have or need a con system,  you simply tried to fight something and learned the difficulty.  Everquest was a bit more forgiving, it had a con system, but for the most part people knew the difficulty of each zone so it was really not needed.   AD&D did not have a con system, the campain you ran was always around your level just like PoE story quests, it's just that battles are difficult since this is not your typical zergfest game, even things like the bear cave are possible while you are in that zone IF you know what you are doing.  if it is too hard, then you are playing at a difficulty level beyond your capabilities.

 

So no, lets not dumb this game down for the generation that wants all RPG's to be highlight my team, zerg in and steamroll through the content.  We have games like WoW for that.

 

*rolls eyes*

 

Thy gold or thy life, knave.

 

The challenging targets in UO were the other players, and I was oh so very good at killing them.  

 

I really wish the people in this thread would quit equating having information with dumbing down.  It's exactly the opposite.  Asking for information that you have no 'real' way to glean anyway because it's a totally arbitrary abstraction is not dumbing down.  It's asking to actually be allowed to use my brain rather than save-reload.

 

And AD&D didn't need a con system because good DM's and later on the gold box games never randomly threw mobs at players they couldn't handle.  In fact, the first time I think I ran into mobs way stronger than me was in Ultima IV because the game didn't stop you from going anywhere, and you could go into dungeons you had no business being in.  And the solution there was save-reload which wasn't particularly popular back then either. 

 

You'd think current game designers could learn lessons from the predecessors, but sometimes they don't.

 

Giving players information that they should have if they actually lived in the world you're putting them in isn't dumbing down the game.  It's giving players the same tools they'd have to make intelligent decisions if they actually where characters in that world.

[ceribaen]

Agreed that having a way to consider mobs is a good thing.

 

Since almost every other 'difficulty' setting is a toggle, just implement it as such so those who don't want it can have it turned off.  Even make it one of those permanent choice per game toggles.  Then everyone's happy as they can play their single player game exactly the way that they want to.

 

But even just a simple 3 levels of 'way over your head', 'you may or may not live', and 'you would crush it' set of buckets would be good.

 

The bear you get some warning from the nearby NPC, though you don't have a frame of reference yet to know whether you're 'special' and therefore much stronger than standard NPCs in the world.  The temple in Gilded Vale though very quickly gets significantly more difficult, so it sucks you into thinking that you're capable of it and then smacks you upside the head suddenly.

[StubbinMyToe]

 

You do not need a con system, this is not your typical zergfest rpg.  I too have played all rpg's, I am 53 y/o and have been around games since the 70's.  

 

Even some VERY successful MMO's such as Ultima Online did not have or need a con system,  you simply tried to fight something and learned the difficulty.  Everquest was a bit more forgiving, it had a con system, but for the most part people knew the difficulty of each zone so it was really not needed.   AD&D did not have a con system, the campain you ran was always around your level just like PoE story quests, it's just that battles are difficult since this is not your typical zergfest game, even things like the bear cave are possible while you are in that zone IF you know what you are doing.  if it is too hard, then you are playing at a difficulty level beyond your capabilities.

 

So no, lets not dumb this game down for the generation that wants all RPG's to be highlight my team, zerg in and steamroll through the content.  We have games like WoW for that.

 

*rolls eyes*

 

Thy gold or thy life, knave.

 

The challenging targets in UO were the other players, and I was oh so very good at killing them.  

 

I really wish the people in this thread would quit equating having information with dumbing down.  It's exactly the opposite.  Asking for information that you have no 'real' way to glean anyway because it's a totally arbitrary abstraction is not dumbing down.  It's asking to actually be allowed to use my brain rather than save-reload.

 

And AD&D didn't need a con system because good DM's and later on the gold box games never randomly threw mobs at players they couldn't handle.  In fact, the first time I think I ran into mobs way stronger than me was in Ultima IV because the game didn't stop you from going anywhere, and you could go into dungeons you had no business being in.  And the solution there was save-reload which wasn't particularly popular back then either. 

 

You'd think current game designers could learn lessons from the predecessors, but sometimes they don't.

 

Giving players information that they should have if they actually lived in the world you're putting them in isn't dumbing down the game.  It's giving players the same tools they'd have to make intelligent decisions if they actually where characters in that world.

 

 

I disagree with everything you said, you are just playing PoE at a level that is beyond your capability.  I can tell you have never designed a game, because adding a con system is nothing but trying to make a good game easy.   Also, not once has PoE put me in a zone that I could not handle, and I am not playing in easy mode.

[StubbinMyToe]

 

Is it actually possible to escape combat at all once it's initiated?

 

 

Yes, you use a disable or interrupt (or an escape spell, clone potion, etc).  There are ways to leave a battle, no need for easy mode to hold our hands.

[Nukenin]

 

 

Is it actually possible to escape combat at all once it's initiated?

 

 

Yes, you use a disable or interrupt (or an escape spell, clone potion, etc).  There are ways to leave a battle, no need for easy mode to hold our hands.

 

 

But can you cross an area transition?  The only time I tried I could not exit the area due to being in combat, even though I had apparently survived the disengagement.

 

I suppose I ought to get a non Trial of Iron character into such a fight so that I have a means of experimentation that can utilize reloads.