RPGCodex Review #1 - Hŵrpa Dwrp

[Gromnir]

 

you are making no sense at all.  the infinity engine game hard counters and insta-kills are problematic or not regardless o' their origin.  their origin is d&d rules, but so what? if hard counter's had been dreamt up by kevin ohlen while running his pnp campaigns before working on bg, it wouldn't make one bit o' difference to a discussion o' their usefulness or detriment.

What is this, a new tactic from you? You can't refute the points, so you'll just turn around and agree with them?

 

YES Gromnir. The IE games had hard counters and insta-kills. And for those of us who enjoy those mechanics, it does not matter whether they came from D&D, or whether Ray Musyka invented them in a Canadian medical school. And it does not matter because we don't care about D&D... Our PoE vs. IE comparison arguments on this thread are based strictly on our IE games experiences, not our D&D ones, contrary to your incessantly repeated previous claims that we're just whining because we want more D&D. Duh.

 

what on earth are you talking about?  go back and review where we asked lucky why it freaking mattered that the origin o' the ie game hard counters and insta kills.  if you are agreeing that identifying as d&d or ie origin makes no difference, then you are freaking agreeing with Gromnir and Not lucky.  he were the guy insisting that those pointing to ie game insta-kills and hard counters could not be lumped together with those who were advocating for d&d insta-kills and hard counters.  they is the same.

 

you are being so obtuse that it is literal beyond our comprehension to absorb.  is no way you can be doing this accidental.  no way.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Sensuki]

am not seeing why additional mandatory steps make a quest better.

Didn't say that either.

 

there is any number o' possible blood legacy steps you are ignoring by identifying that it is an option than you can simple bull your way into the skaen temple and kill stuff. you say you like options, but you ignore them? well, that is hardly fair, is it? is more than a few folks in dyrford village that can contribute to your investigation. is funny that you note investigation, 'cause you can actual do investigation in blood legacy that is absent in eyeles and the thieves guild quest from bg2. in poe we can ask villagers questions, and depending on our question, dispositions and attribute scores, our Investigation will yield different information. but again, you should at least be recognizing that what you think is objective is actual just sensuki opinion. more mandatory steps?

No, I just listed the simplest way of doing it and I did not even state that that is the way I did it in the game (it wasn't, either). The investigation is optional. I posted that earlier in the thread. The quest itself is pretty straightforward as far as progressing through it goes but the fact that townsfolk have information on the quest is good design.

 

Nowhere did I say that The Blood Legacy is a bad quest. I said that it is less complex than the BG2 quests.

 

and the monotony o' the skaen temple is, again, opinion. weren't our favorite portion o' the game neither, but the sacrifice pit is kinda unique, and the multiple ways to gain access to the temple make it less monotonous for people who didn't play it dozens o' times in the beta. heck, can skip a significant number o battles using sneak and the rope trick, which makes much o't the monotony you found optional.

The Sacrificial Pit was good. I liked that bit. The Temple of the Unseeing Eye has a lot of optional content in it too, however the optional content is awesome. The Skaen content is not.

 

Not sure what your fewer enemies rant is about, I talked about quest complexity and why I didn't like the Skaen Temple content when you brought up the Blood Legacy as your example of a good quest. I think the quest itself excluding the content associated with it is pretty good but the Skaen Temple is crap, and the dialogue with Wymund could have been better.

[Sannom]

is funny that you note investigation, 'cause you can actual do investigation in blood legacy that is absent in eyeles and the thieves guild quest from bg2.  in poe we can ask villagers questions, and depending on our question, dispositions and attribute scores, our Investigation will yield different information.

Based on my memories of BG2, I'm not exactly seeing why people are calling the Eyeless and the Thieves' Guild "investigative" quests, so in your opinion, how does the Blood Legacy quest compare to the Tanner quest (AKA the one in which I never thought of going to the relevant authorities with my clues ) in BG2 as far as investigative questlines go?

[Gromnir]

 

am not seeing why additional mandatory steps make a quest better.

Didn't say that either.

actual, you kinda did. you insisted that thieves guild and eyeless were better because it had more steps. depending on you count, the optional steps in blood legacy can total 'bout same as total.

 

"The investigation is optional. I posted that earlier in the thread. The quest itself is pretty straightforward as far as progressing through it goes but the fact that townsfolk have information on the quest is good design."

 

am gonna stop and see if you see the conflict with earlier sensuki observations.

oh and our rant about monster diversity were inspired by one o' your few factual observation:  

 

"On Hard difficulty there's like 70 Skaen Cultists, most are the same five classes and most encounters are makeups of these classes. It was literally the most monotonous content I played in the game. I absolutely hated it."

 

clearer?

 

HA! Good Fun!

[perilisk]

I read the review, but not the 29 pages of comments here, so sorry if I say something out of context.

 

The review is way too negative IMO, but I have to agree to some of the points. And I feel the need to share because I hardly manage to continue playing (Skaen dungeon really annoyed me, too).

Reasons:

 

- The main story just won't catch fire. I don't understand the motivation that's supposedly driving the player character. Why am I even doing all this?

 

- I also don't understand the motivation behind the NPCs. Why is Aloth following me through hell and beyond? Who am I to him? To Kana or to the little druid guy? Why are people helping me, why do I help people? Believable motivations are scarce in this game.

 

- Combat is extremely repetitive. I use the same skills over and over, each encounter is the same. Druids, lions, trolls, spiders, ... just send your tank(s) ahead, use a few disablers/debuffs, focus-fire each enemy until they are dead, done. I never need to adapt my strategy, except for ghosts - maybe, a bit (I play on hard).

 

- The attributes are unimmersive and easily exploited by minmaxing. I have a 3 con main char and never regretted it.

 

I haven't played for days and might dump the game for a while if nothing changes soon. But then again, most games nowadays need a few weeks/month and at least 2 or 3 major gameplay patches to become good, so it's not overly surprising

 

1. Act I: What is up with my condition, what does it mean? Act II: Find the guy who caused my condition, maybe he knows how to undo it so I don't end up like the guy from Act I (and in so doing, learn a lot about his nature, group, and agenda). Act III: If I'm a good person, I want to find the guy who caused my condition because of all the evil stuff he has done, which I learned about in Act II. Otherwise, well, I still don't want to end up like the guy from Act I, and part of my problem is clearly unresolved business my soul has with his. Either way I need confront this clown.

 

2. Eder has basically ceased to give a **** about anything, including self-preservation, until you show up and (due to your condition) give him some hope for finding answers about his god, his family, and so on. Aloth's motivations don't fully surface until Act 3, but it's a similar case of seeing in your mission (not so much your abilities) a chance to find some direction. Sagani is following you because your abilities are pretty much essential for completing an otherwise impossible quest. With the Grieving Mother, it's a sense of relief at finding someone who can break through the not-entirely-voluntary isolation she imposed on herself with her cipher abilities, for backstory reasons. Durance is complicated, but initially he is just seeing whether you should be destroyed by fire as an abomination or not. With the other three, it basically comes down to wanting to have a group backing them on their personal quests, which is about as much motivation as, say, Minsc or Kivan ever had.

 

3. It's not as bad as some parts of Arcanum, but for a game that doesn't even bother to give combat XP, there sure are a lot of repetitive trash encounters.

 

4. Fair enough. Having two attributes for each defense (rather than, say, splitting them between 3 accuracy and 3 defense) is a contributing factor. The interrupt/concentration mechanics are also not enough to carry two attributes.

[Gromnir]

 

is funny that you note investigation, 'cause you can actual do investigation in blood legacy that is absent in eyeles and the thieves guild quest from bg2.  in poe we can ask villagers questions, and depending on our question, dispositions and attribute scores, our Investigation will yield different information.

Based on my memories of BG2, I'm not exactly seeing why people are calling the Eyeless and the Thieves' Guild "investigative" quests, so in your opinion, how does the Blood Legacy quest compare to the Tanner quest (AKA the one in which I never thought of going to the relevant authorities with my clues ) in BG2 as far as investigative questlines go?

 

we liked the tanner stuff, especially when fully realized, but bioware did kinda railroad you in bg2.  the tanner quest were not providing you with clues and allowing you to uncover the ultimate villain.  we were allowed to follow bioware's investigation.   nevertheless, we were responding to those investigation quests as presented. am agreeing that tanner is a much better example, but it were far more similar to final act than blood legacy.  is no question in our mind that tanner did similar as final act, but better.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Svirfneblin]

 

Ah yes. The lack of arrows. The lack of choice between a detonation arrow, a fire arrow, a poison arrow and the various other arrows. I don't see the problem with having all those types of arrows in the IE games. I thought it was great that my character with a bow could shoot fireballs and then instantly change to poison arrows and then change to biting arrows because I had three different types of arrows in the quiver slots. Interesting that you would forego all that and go with the infinite ammo in PoE that never runs out. And in PoE, if your bow does fire damage but you want to do cold damage but still want to be able to keep fire for other enemies, you have to swap with another bow. Yep, you have to keep an assortment of weapons for different types of damage. But that's okay, because at least we don't have the different types of arrows from the IE games. All that's done is swap different arrows with different bows.

 

 

I liked having different ammunition types, but I am not missing having to manage stacks of generic ammunition.

 

 

Edited April 24, 2015 by Svirfneblin

[Gromnir]

ps am not certain how funny we find sensuki complaints about quest design given our perspective o' having actual followed the message boards during and after bg2 development as well as observing the development o' poe.

 

following totsc, the Co6 boards were very much extolling the virtues of large, set-piece dungeons.  folks wanted more durlags and less random wilderness map encounters... and get rid o' the mini-quests that were little more than a 1-2 step fed ex.  mindless mowing o' wilderness maps were anathema post totsc. so for bg2, bioware builds eyeless, umar hills and the planar sphere, as well as similar locales.  they also gave far less attention to mini-quests and wilderness exploration.

 

following bg2 release, the grognards complained that there weren't enough wilderness exploration in bg2.

 

...

 

*sigh*

 

when poe development were getting started, the obsidans actual addressed the issue o' durlags/eyeless v. exploration.  we thought it were a mistake, but obsidian stated that they would choose a middle path.  there would not be as many durlag locations/quests, but they would offer more exploration (wilderness and otherwise) and more o' the shorter quests w/o devolving into the "bring me my boots" nonsense that were so common in bg1.  given the scope o' poe, there were no way obsidian could do exploration + many smaller quests as well a numerous larger set-piece quests.  so, middle road were the choice.

 

sure enough we got sensuki lamenting that obsidian didn't provide enough eyeless kinda quests.  could be a vaudeville actor doing rehearsed schtick if we weren't convinced he is serious.

 

*shrug*

 

almost makes us feel sympathy for obsidian.  almost.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited April 24, 2015 by Gromnir

[Stun]

what on earth are you talking about?

This:

actually, yeah, there is more than a few folks arguing for more d&d

Not on this thread there isn't. So that comment of yours is nothing more than a pathetic and dishonest attempt to spin our arguments into something they're not.

[Luckmann]

 

Ah yes. The lack of arrows. The lack of choice between a detonation arrow, a fire arrow, a poison arrow and the various other arrows. I don't see the problem with having all those types of arrows in the IE games. I thought it was great that my character with a bow could shoot fireballs and then instantly change to poison arrows and then change to biting arrows because I had three different types of arrows in the quiver slots. Interesting that you would forego all that and go with the infinite ammo in PoE that never runs out. And in PoE, if your bow does fire damage but you want to do cold damage but still want to be able to keep fire for other enemies, you have to swap with another bow. Yep, you have to keep an assortment of weapons for different types of damage. But that's okay, because at least we don't have the different types of arrows from the IE games. All that's done is swap different arrows with different bows.

 

I liked having different ammunition types, but I am not missing having to manage stacks of generic ammunition.

 

The issue of generic ammo comes up every time this is discussed, yet I've never seen anyone actually arguing for generic ammo to be added. I'd love for there to be loads of different special ammunition, different for each type of weapon (arrows, bolts, bullets), but I see no point in generic ammo either.

 

 

what on earth are you talking about?

This:

actually, yeah, there is more than a few folks arguing for more d&d

Not on this thread there isn't. So that comment of yours is nothing more than a pathetic and dishonest attempt to spin our arguments into something they're not.

 

Stun, why do you even bother? I can't even be bothered to trudge through his posts anymore, because they never even try to be constructive, just derisive and obtuse.

[Volourn]

"Ever since Obsidian brought back the fallout franchise from the dead"
 

Obsidian did no such thing.

 

 

"Well games were better at that time than what we get now. People would not analyze PoE so much if it was as good as BG."
 

\Nonsense. The more popular the net is the more complaints you see. BG was criticized and bashed quite ehavily when it comes out. Trust me,, no matter the game, it would be bashed. Games made before the rise of the net into common use were REALLY lucky.

 

 

"(and, I'd bet sales)"

 

Million or bust.

 

 

"Because there's no reason for it. Defiance Bay is open to the player again the moment you reach Twin Elms. In fact the whole "closing" of Defiance Bay is such a non-event, it makes me wonder why they even did it."

 

Agreed. And, I think they should have done more with DB in Act 3 as well.. some reactive quests from what occured should happen too but.. really.. as far as I know.. nothing.

\

 

P.S. The thing about maze and other spells is that they really put the magic into magic. Every game system can haz fireball but weird and wonderful spells like maze , imprisonment, etc.? AWESOMESAUCE.

Edited April 24, 2015 by Volourn

[Gromnir]

 

what on earth are you talking about?

This:

actually, yeah, there is more than a few folks arguing for more d&d

Not on this thread there isn't. So that comment of yours is nothing more than a pathetic and dishonest attempt to spin our arguments into something they're not.

 

*groan*

 

yes folks is asking for more d&d.  the statement you quote were made in the context o' hard counters and insta kills.  insta kills and hard counters from the ie games is a legacy o' the d&d mechanics.  but again, label d&d is soooooo not the point... and nobody can be this obdurate.  the d&d label in reference to insta-kills and hard counters is complete deflection and irrelevant.

 

...

 

wacky.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Volourn]

Yeah, b/c DnD is the only system with insta kills and hard counters. L0LZ

Edited April 24, 2015 by Volourn

[Stun]

*groan*

 

yes folks is asking for more d&d.

Dear Broken Record,

 

We are not talking about the voices in your head. We are talking about the posters on this thread.

 

PS: hard counters and insta-kills are mechanics present in completely NON-D&D based games, such as Divinity Original Sin, And Dragon Age: Origins, therefore, your attempts to equate wanting them in PoE to "wanting more D&D" is about as erroneous as it is stupid.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

Me.

Edited April 24, 2015 by Stun

[Gromnir]

Yeah, b/c DnD is the only system with insta kills and hard counters. L0LZ

when folks is using their examples o' what poe should have done from a d&d crpg that has hard counters and insta kills that is lifted entire or largely from d&d pnp mechanics, it is not unfair to claim that the feature being requested is a d&d feature.  those hard counter examples offered in this thread is d&d. 'course, as been explained many times now, the label were meaningless.  call it more d&d or more t&t (tunnels and trolls) not freaking matter.  

 

*sheesh*

 

suggest that a feature is inspired and inextricably linked to d&d does not make the actual feature anymore or any less broken... or valid.

 

btw, you have vol on your side o' an argument.  that alone should give you pause.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps explain why the difference matters.  what is so significant about calling a feature a d&d legacy or an ie feature?  

Edited April 24, 2015 by Gromnir

[Stun]

Gromnir logic: D&D has Maces and Axes. And so do the IE games (and a bunch of other RPGs), therefore anyone who ever requested Maces and Axes in PoE is simply asking for more D&D.

[Gromnir]

Gromnir logic: D&D has Maces and Axes. And so do the IE games (and a bunch of other RPGs), therefore anyone who ever requested Maces and Axes in PoE is simply asking for more D&D.

 

you can't be this logic challenged.

 

answer the question:  why does it matter?  

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Stun]

.

 

answer the question:  why does it matter?

It matters because when I make an Argument, I expect people to respond to it, not to make up their own argument, attribute it to me, then respond to it. It matters because I love Baldurs Gate 2's combat more than 2nd Edition AD&D's. It matters because the devs did NOT promise us the tactical combat of AD&D, but rather, the tactical combat of Icewind Dale, and therefore, asking for Hard Counters and insta-kills is a VALID request, and very much within the scope of what they promised us.

[Gromnir]

 

.

 

answer the question:  why does it matter?

It matters because when I make an Argument, I expect people to respond to it, not to make up their own argument, attribute it to me, then respond to it. It matters because I love Baldurs Gate 2's combat more than 2nd Edition AD&D's. It matters because the devs did NOT promise us the tactical combat of AD&D, but rather, the tactical combat of Icewind Dale, and therefore, asking for Hard Counters and insta-kills is a VALID request, and very much within the scope of what they promised us.

 

the hypocrisy is not lost on us.

 

"YES Gromnir. The IE games had hard counters and insta-kills. And for those of us who enjoy those mechanics, it does not matter whether they came from D&D, or whether Ray Musyka invented them in a Canadian medical school. "

 

your response ain't logical or even reasonable and you is actual arguing against self. you insist that d&d and ie are different, but you noted earlier that the hard counters and insta-kills distinction 'tween d&d and the ie games didn't matter, which is what is being discussed. so regardless o' your like feelings for ie and less like (?) o' d&d, is there a meaningful or reasonable or rational difference for contesting the d&d label o' ie game hard counters?  what makes reference to the hard counters as an ie legacy as 'posed to a d&d legacy meaningful other than some kinda blue blankee nostalgia thing you got for one.  is a d&d finger of death insta-kill bad, but a ie finger of death insta-kill ok?  why?

 

is this all just some ridiculous d&d is bad, but ie is good sillines?  that is a question btw.  if so, it ain't reasonable or logical or rational, but you tell us what the issues is if not feel.

 

delusional, hypocritical and apparently suffering from short-term memory loss.

 

we can't attribute an argument to you.  we can't make heads or tails outta what you are trying to say most o' the time.  am frequently left guessing, but that is why we is reduced to adding so many question marks in responses to you-- cause you make no rational sense.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Stun]

Not following. Saying we don't care about D&D, or the origins of Hard Counters, and then arguing that we Prefer Baldurs Gate 2 and dislike having our arguments construed as preferring D&D is hypocrisy....how?

 

Excuse me, let me rephrase that. How is it hypocrisy in the real world, as opposed to "hypocrisy" as defined on planet Gromnirea.

Edited April 24, 2015 by Stun

[Gromnir]

Not following. Saying we don't care about D&D, or the origins of Hard Counters, and then arguing that we Prefer Baldurs Gate 2 and dislike having our arguments construed as preferring D&D is hypocrisy....how?

 

Excuse me, let me rephrase that. How is it hypocrisy in the real world, as opposed to "hypocrisy" as defined on planet Gromnirea.

answer the question rather than deflecting.  is the ie game hard counters any worse if they is labeled as d&d legacies.? we quoted where you said the difference weren't important, but perhaps you have had a change of heart, or you were channeling demons or lord only knows why you would do a 180 so quick?   does calling a bg2 finger o' death a d&d legacy insta-kill make it worse than it would be if we called the same insta-kill an ie legacy?  what makes the label important?

 

is getting ridiculous but this is always how we end up with stun. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Luckmann]

 

.

 

answer the question:  why does it matter?

It matters because when I make an Argument, I expect people to respond to it, not to make up their own argument, attribute it to me, then respond to it. It matters because I love Baldurs Gate 2's combat more than 2nd Edition AD&D's. It matters because the devs did NOT promise us the tactical combat of AD&D, but rather, the tactical combat of Icewind Dale, and therefore, asking for Hard Counters and insta-kills is a VALID request, and very much within the scope of what they promised us.

 

 

The sad thing is that I personally hate Save-or-Lose, although I think that a game without at least some degree of hard counters is idiotic, yet Gromnir would lump as all together into a single strawman instead of arguing the merits or lack thereof of either. Because, y'know, it's "D&D-like" or somesuch baloney.

[illathid]

I'll admit I'm not entirely sure what the substance of the whole Gromnir v. Stun & Luckman debate is. It seems rather like everyone is just talking past each other. That being said, I think Gromnir is right, there's no meaningful distinction between wanting something to be more like an IE game and wanting it to be more like AD&D 2e unless those are divergent in someway.

[Gromnir]

 

 

.

 

answer the question:  why does it matter?

It matters because when I make an Argument, I expect people to respond to it, not to make up their own argument, attribute it to me, then respond to it. It matters because I love Baldurs Gate 2's combat more than 2nd Edition AD&D's. It matters because the devs did NOT promise us the tactical combat of AD&D, but rather, the tactical combat of Icewind Dale, and therefore, asking for Hard Counters and insta-kills is a VALID request, and very much within the scope of what they promised us.

 

 

The sad thing is that I personally hate Save-or-Lose, although I think that a game without at least some degree of hard counters is idiotic, yet Gromnir would lump as all together into a single strawman instead of arguing the merits or lack thereof of either. Because, y'know, it's "D&D-like" or somesuch baloney.

 

for chissakes. somebody explain strawman to lucky.  we have tried more than once, but have had no, well, luck.

 

if Gromnir is claiming that there is no functional difference 'tween ie insta-kills and d&d insta-kills, then claim that folks is advocating for more d&d in their poe is NOT strawman.  am not attributing a weak argument to you and others and then beating the proverbial stuffing outta it.  is Gromnir who is saying that it don't make a difference what is the label and you ain't offered any reasonable, rational or logical reason as to why the name matters.  the examples o' bg2 insta-kills and hard counters offered in this thread is NOT better 'cause they is ie as 'posed to d&d, 'least not insofar as any Logical argument we can imagine.

 

please.  somebody help lucky.  he and stun need help.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Stun]

if Gromnir is claiming that there is no functional difference 'tween ie insta-kills and d&d insta-kills, then claim that folks is advocating for more d&d in their poe is NOT strawman.

Sure it is. Because claiming that we want more D&D is a blanket generalization that encompasses a hell of a lot more than simply wanting Hard counters and death spells. It also includes things like: wanting to force XP penalties on item enchantment sessions; Wanting to incorporate material component requirements on every wizard spell; wanting strict behavior codes placed on Paladins and Monks; and a bunch of other things that NO ONE HERE HAS SAID THEY WANTED.

 

Perhaps if Gromnir had shown a little more intelligence and a little less crap debating skills and said something more like this instead: "yes, folks here want more D&D-based Hard counters and insta-kills", this discussion would have probably died down about a page later, or shortly after someone came into the thread to tell Gromnir to kindly speak for himself.

Edited April 24, 2015 by Stun