Levels

[Opus131]

I would not be against a system like the one in Torment. But to advertise an unreachable level cap would not be nice.

Very well, Torment had a 'virtually' unreachable level cap, happy now ?!?

 

I don't take into account whatever cheese tactics or exploits a few fanatics may use in a game to gain unparalled power, the fact is that for most normal players Torment was reasonably balanced to end within a certain level limit, and yet there was no cap, or at least the cap was so hight to be almost unreatchable. (you would have to cloudkill so many worms to reatch level 99 you'd better off just shoot yourself in the head).

 

The point is that it worked, so why not ?!?

 

In BG1 i had reatched the cap beofre completing 2/3 of the game. It pissed me off immensely, and i would have thought Bioware would have learned by their mistake, but apparently i was mistaken...

[Shdy314]

I would not be against a system like the one in Torment. But to advertise an unreachable level cap would not be nice.

Very well, Torment had a 'virtually' unreachable level cap, happy now ?!?

 

I don't take into account whatever cheese tactics or exploits a few fanatics may use in a game to gain unparalled power, the fact is that for most normal players Torment was reasonably balanced to end within a certain level limit, and yet there was no cap, or at least the cap was so hight to be almost unreatchable. (you would have to cloudkill so many worms to reatch level 99 you'd better off just shoot yourself in the head).

 

The point is that it worked, so why not ?!?

 

In BG1 i had reatched the cap beofre completing 2/3 of the game. It pissed me off immensely, and i would have thought Bioware would have learned by their mistake, but apparently i was mistaken...

Nah there were plenty of dialogue exploits too.

 

Point is invisible level caps are just dumb. Why not just be honest about what level you are aiming for characters to be at? Anyways there is always a cap. who cares if it is 100 or 20?

[evil.E]

I'm not very clear on the whole presteige class system but are we going to be able to do things like save levels so we can get a lvl 2 gaurdian / lvl 18 sith lord?

[Sarkile]

No. The requirements for a prestiege class is probably going to be skill/feat requirements, not reaching a certain point in the game.

[Meshugger]

I'm not very clear on the whole presteige class system but are we going to be able to do things like save levels so we can get a lvl 2 gaurdian / lvl 18 sith lord?

I am guessing more of a "lvl 20 Consular/lvl 5 Jedi Master" implementation. Thus, after your character reaches lvl 20, you can select what prestige class you want, depending on your alignment.

 

Just speculation though.

[EUIX]

You always own Torment by the end. Especially if you play a Mage theres absolutely nothing that can stop you. You might have some trouble against vhaloir at the trial of impulse if your chaotic but thats it.

[Opus131]

Point is invisible level caps are just dumb. Why not just be honest about what level you are aiming for characters to be at?

That has nothing to do with what i'm trying to say. The point is to try to resolve the problem of hitting your beloved 'honest' cap well before the end of the game.

 

Since the game WILL end eventually, why not just allow the player to simply level as long as the game allows and that's it ?!? If you are afraid he's going to be too powerful, simply balance the number of XPs avaible so that the character will eventually end up around a reasonable level span (which was Bioware should have done in the first place, cap or no cap), and that's it, problem solved.

 

Reatching your maximum level within 2/3 of the game, now, THAT'S just dumb...

[Magnum Opus]

*agrees with Opus*

 

There are better ways to limit a character's development that aren't so blatant and artificial as to impose an arbitrary limit like a level or XP cap. The cap might be easier to implement, but it certainly detracts from the game when the XP distribution is so out-of-whack that you're bumping your head against it half way through the game. It's like your character just stops learning anything for no reason whatsoever. Not a good trait to have in a roleplaying game.

 

Leveling up might be the way they're choosing to represent a character's development in CRPGs these days, but it seems to me that it's becoming the focus of games instead of just a concrete representation of an abstract notion that happens to be necessary for your character's progression through the game. Too many levels coming too fast, and the game starts to take on the feel of a character generator more than anything else. I went through NWN's OC a couple times, but it certainly wasn't for the plot or the roleplaying. Seeing what items they included in the game was interesting, what with me being a packrat, but mostly it was just me trying out different classes and seeing how they'd develop and what power they could acquire. Yup... the OC was a good character generator. Made you work hard enough to feel like your character had done something to earn the levels they'd received. As an epic CRPG it was seriously lacking, but it was a good character generator.

 

IMO, BG1 had the rate of advancement just about right: 6 or 7 levels in a 100 hour game gave me plenty of time to figure out just what my characters could do. There were plenty of opportunites to get creative with my characters as well, trying out different tactics because I knew that wandering off for five minutes, killing something, leveling up, and then coming back to smite whatever might have been giving me trouble before simply wasn't an option. If you wanted to wander off in BG to get a little more power, odds were really good that something significant would happen to your chracter in the interim, plot-wise.

[Shdy314]

Point is invisible level caps are just dumb. Why not just be honest about what level you are aiming for characters to be at?

That has nothing to do with what i'm trying to say. The point is to try to resolve the problem of hitting your beloved 'honest' cap well before the end of the game.

 

Since the game WILL end eventually, why not just allow the player to simply level as long as the game allows and that's it ?!? If you are afraid he's going to be too powerful, simply balance the number of XPs avaible so that the character will eventually end up around a reasonable level span (which was Bioware should have done in the first place, cap or no cap), and that's it, problem solved.

 

Reatching your maximum level within 2/3 of the game, now, THAT'S just dumb...

I'm all for better XP distribution. Id prefer all RPGs be like Vampire TM Bloodlines and only give XP for quests. But I don't see why it's worth whining over if a game developer is honest and says you can hit level 20 and thats it or one that says there is no level cap when really there is and they've just cleverly placed a certain amount of XP or the cap is 100. You are asking for dishonesty. Level caps are in place for casual gamers. That way they can put in a lot of XP for people that don't do everything little thing in the game to still reach the high levels. Unfortunately these bastards are the ones that decide whether a game is a big commercial success so we have to grudgingly accept we need them.

 

Also this is based off the D20 system. So there is really no way you could let a character get above a certain level. There aren't enough force powers and feats so it could lead to all kinds of crazy bugs when the crazy people farm the few ever spawning monsters untill they get to level 50 or what have you and then Obsidian would be blamed for this because they DID say there was no cap....

 

Honesty is the best policy.

[sniggy]

maybe difficulty levels would help?

 

padawan

 

jedi knight

 

jedi master

 

that type of thing?

It's amazing how the simple concept of a difficoulty bar has managed to elude Bioware since the original Baldur's Gate (which was also incredibly easy, and loaded with XPs).

 

But even then, having an extra difficoulty setting would only buff the hit points, damage and saving throws of your opponets, making the game more fustrating rather then challenging.

 

I would prefer if they added a balanced strategic element to each encounter, creating challenge throught design rather then simply making the enemies stronger (which wouldn't make any sense).

 

Sadly, i doubt it'll ever happen...

in fallout, skill success, chance to hit etc. also decreased with increased difficulty. so it wouldn't just be enemies getting stronger.