Attribute functionality confusion (Might for Wizard)

[Brimsurfer]

 

I understand Might is not Strength, instead Might covers both the physical and spiritual prowess.

 

But I don't understand that how come guns do more damage for the character with higher might? Bows may do slightly more damage and have extended range for characters with higher might but guns and xbows shouldn't because their trigger is mechanized. Guns and Xbows damage should depend upon the strength of their trigger mechanism rather than the strength of the wielder.

 

In the real world firearms do varying amounts of damage that is controlled by shot placement. Getting shot in the head is worse than getting shot in the ass. Physical strength plays a large role in holding the firearm on target and achieving a hit, especially after you fire.

 

Take an arquebus - large caliber, 0.80 or so, and an overall heavy and unwieldy weapon. There were no polymers nor the study of ergonomics back then. When you pull the trigger the hammer strikes the flint, the match comes into contact with the powder, whatever the mechanism there is a delay between pulling the trigger and the gunpowder being ignited. All this time you need to physically keep the weapon pointed at want what you want to hit. Next the gunpowder burns at a very fast rate causing an explosion. This action causes a reaction of the bullet being propelled out of the barrel, the only available route for the energy to be dissipated. This action also causes a reaction, recoil, to be transmitted to the hands and shoulder of the shooter. Failure to properly  control the recoil will result in the barrel moving before the bullet has left the barrel. This will cause a miss or at least a sub-optimal shot placement resulting in less damage inflicted and is a function of physical strength.

 

Physical strength affects being able to maintain control of a firearm during shooting by properly controlling the recoil, which is a function of the action=reaction  law from Newton.

 

 

On a similar subject the above holds true for archery as well. Watch Olympic level archers, they have an intricate follow through because their actions, or reactions, after releasing the string will affect the placement of their shot. Plus a bow could be restrung for a heavier pull for a stronger archer.

 

 

You are talking about weapon handling, which is entirely a different thing. And this gives birth to the idea that to use large firearms or other large ranged weapons the character must possess higher might score (say e.g. 16+ Might). This has no implication on damage as much, so for example a character with might score of less than 16 would be unable to use large ranged weapons entirely.

 

IMO firearms and Xbows damage should be related to perception of the character rather than might. Might must server only as a requirement to use larger ranged weapons.

Edited September 5, 2015 by Brimsurfer

[redneckdevil]

 

Now the 2 things I DO think needs to be worked on. First is the dialogue with might, so far all the might conversations imply the person is physically strong. Yes I understand u can chose not to use those options if u don't feel ur character is "physically" strong, but I think I know an easy and quick solution. Simply with "might" Dialogue options, add different ones for magic. When u got one for physical intimidation such as picking someone up, add a delegate option of u visibly cackling with energy or maybe using magic to do the same effect. Second is to remove might from crossbows and guns. It's just simply gotta jump thru hoops to explain why the attribute effects it and could easily just be explained that it's the weapon against magic users etc blah blah.

While there are might conversation options that read exactly like physical strength tests would in D&D games, that doesn't automatically imply that the person is physically strong, since in POE the force with which you lift/hit/impact the world depends on a mixture of physical and spiritual strength; In other words, it is only because we are used to such actions depending solely on physical strength that we read them that way, whereas if we truly accepted the game's universe, we'd acknowledge that lifting a heavy weight or throwing a mighty punch was a combination of physical and spiritual strength rather than merely depending on physical strength.

 

And then there are the other might conversation options that don't go that far. As an example, the two latest might conversation options I had were both [might x] [intimidate] and didn't - to my eyes - read like tests of physical strength at all, but rather like overawing and scaring the target into submission - i.e. intimidating.

Very true, but I guess the real core of my problem with the ones that read like a physical might is that I wish there was ingame examples or ingame lore (then again there might be and I may have missed it) of it being explained or accepted that might doesn't straight up mean physical might but that it's a soul power thing. Because a lot of people who have already dealt with established rpg systems are rightfully to think that magic power=how big ur muscles are. With having 2 separate dialogue options for might, one for physical and one for magical, that could simply go a long way to help the player roleplay without thinking their character is a huge mass of muscles.

[Akos]

I just accept that physical strength allows you to do more magical damage. Think of it like being able to increase the intensity of your raw magical damage by having better control over your body and thus the magical energies you conduit. More Last Airbender, less Harry Potter. 

Honestly, I feel like this system not only allows better role playing opportunities, but makes more sense besides. I've always thought it strange that highly intelligent wizards in D&D always resorted to the most basic methods of combat; Throw a fireball, shoot a lightning bolt, spam magic missile. Is that really the halmark of an 18 intelligent genius? Push comes to shove and their most creative idea is essentially a more magical approach equivalent to "hit it with a sword". I think somebody may have exaggerated their intelligence score. 

It makes a lot more sense to me that a highly intelligent wizard would excel at tactical crowd control, where as a strength based wizard would prefer the 'burn it with fire' approach. 

[FlintlockJazz]

Okay, let's imagine following situation:

 

Crew of 3 men operate a ballista, firing on enemy formation. There is an ammunition carrier, loading mechanism cranker, and aimer. Who should apply his might attribute to effective ballista damage? Answer is - no one, as ballista projectile damage only depends on ballista properties, operators only factor in loading speed and accuracy. Crossbow is a scaled down ballista, with one operator, but now we suddenly need to apply his might? "Because magic", right.

 

Actually, the more powerful the crossbow the more strength required.  This is because the more powerful the crossbow the more strength the operator would need to be able to load and **** the bolt, a weakling could fire it but he would not be able to reload it again.  There were devices used to make it easier for crossbowmen to load more powerful crossbows such as the crow's foot but they tended to lengthen the time needed to load the crossbow. 

[Wozzeck]

I think, it's kind of funny how 2 different groups in this thread seemingly talk about the same subject, but still completely talk past each other. The one group cares about accurate simulationism, the other about functional game mechanics.

 

Luckily I belong the second one to which this games design appeals more.

When I'm putting points into Might, I absolutely don't see my characters muscles grow. I simply don't care about that. I had to skip through all this talk about how 'Might' could influence missile damage, because I was just unable to see the point of it. I'm sorry!

'Might' is for me the thing that boosts damage. They could have called it differently, but 'Might' seems to be an ok name for a damage-boosting attribute. That's it.

 

Probably the system could still be tweaked to work better yet, but the more mechanical approach they took is the right one, at least for me.

Edited September 7, 2015 by Wozzeck

[Katarack21]

Might isn't magic. Might isn't strength. Might is a measurement of raw soul power, which translates into damage even for fighters as even fighters use their souls to inflict supernatural damage, as is made very, very clear in the guidebook, the wiki, etc. The problem is simply that this is not reflected in the flavor text--this sucks, and if it breaks your suspension of disbelief I'm sorry, but that also sounds like *YOUR* problem.

I am quite capable of both understanding this simple concept of what "Might" means, and of continuing to enjoy the story despite the admittedly unfortunate manner in which the flavor text is written. This isn't particularly complicated, and I'm rather sick of hearing morons whining about it all the time.

[FlintlockJazz]

I think, it's kind of funny how 2 different groups in this thread seemingly talk about the same subject, but still completely talk past each other. The one group cares about accurate simulationism, the other about functional game mechanics.

 

Luckily I belong the second one to which this games design appeals more.

When I'm putting points into Might, I absolutely don't see my characters muscles grow. I simply don't care about that. I had to skip through all this talk about how 'Might' could influence missile damage, because I was just unable to see the point of it. I'm sorry!

'Might' is for me the thing that boosts damage. They could have called it differently, but 'Might' seems to be an ok name for a damage-boosting attribute. That's it.

 

Probably the system could still be tweaked to work better yet, but the more mechanical approach they took is the right one, at least for me.

A bit of a false dichotomy there: you seem to be working from the premise that having one excludes the other or that you can only care about simulationism or functional game mechanics, not both.  You can care about and want both, like I do, or be willing to accept a degree of abstraction in regards to rules to make things simpler but still care about simulating as closely as possible.  I do not find Might to violate either excessively, though I agree with Katarack that the flavour text doesn't reflect what it's supposed to be quite right.

[ISC]

Might isn't magic. Might isn't strength. Might is a measurement of raw soul power, which translates into damage even for fighters as even fighters use their souls to inflict supernatural damage, as is made very, very clear in the guidebook, the wiki, etc. The problem is simply that this is not reflected in the flavor text--this sucks, and if it breaks your suspension of disbelief I'm sorry, but that also sounds like *YOUR* problem.

 

I am quite capable of both understanding this simple concept of what "Might" means, and of continuing to enjoy the story despite the admittedly unfortunate manner in which the flavor text is written. This isn't particularly complicated, and I'm rather sick of hearing morons whining about it all the time.

 

The problem remains the same, because might/soul power is perfectly 1:1 correlated with strength/magic. It is not that strength causes magic or the other way around, it is that might/soul power completely govern both traits, which means that you cant have one without the other. I totally get the concept, its just that it is a clumsy abstraction when it comes to character differentiation, and that it is poorly explained.

 

By the way, suspension of disbelief is as much a product of game design as it is of the players imagination (or perhaps lack thereof). 

[Stoner]

I agree that this is rather abstract and fresh, interesting concept but it also lazy simplification and only way to make use of all the stats for developers, like making easy pool which will affect every character, but in a long term it led to obvious issues like writing and ridiculous firearms damage explanation (or lack thereof). Some players already stated here (me included) that while it seems that game has no dumpstats and utilize them all in equal manner, that's still not completely true. We get priorities for ones over the others, and pretty obvious ones. This could be handled better by increasing penalty of lowering certain stats or adding something logically appealing for player to get them. Not simple MIG - Damage, CON - Health, PER - Accuracy and etc for each class. That's just too simple though might not seem that way for all, but for me it certainly is.

 

No logic or real life experience can be applied to fantasy universe, but you have to agree that most people (from books and games of that genre) got used to idea that magic is controlled by sheer willpower backed by memory (intellect) or some more vague traits like charisma, but still, on the surface it makes much more sense than soul power branded as Might. I still believe that magic damage could be handled way better by RES and INT combination as MIG serving for body or mental protection, like lowering chance of interrupt, kockdown and etc, and that would be pretty helpfull and nice since AI built around attacking weak casters, so mages really NEED those attributes, that still wouldn't be dump. But eh, it won't change anyway and I'm somehow already wrapped my head around present attribute system.

Edited September 9, 2015 by Stoner