Jump to content

Injury System is way too brutal


Recommended Posts

There's no reason to make resting limited. People who don't like having to rest will either do the thing that's annoying to get around it - like treking back to town every few fights to resupply - or just get annoyed and stop playing the game. Having unlimited resting with incentives for people who enjoy playing the resource management game seems like a better system in every way. Food just needs to be balanced to the point where the bonuses are tantalizing and it isn't now because food crafting isn't in the game yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Why didn't they just keep it as the camping supplies thing and just not litter them everywhere? Like cool abilities are still per encounter and it is wounds and empower you have to worry about now. Maybe make resting free on story mode or whatever. 

Because people were trekking back every chance they got to rest at an inn. Yes, it's tedious, but people did it anyway. The solution is one-time use camping sites in dungeons and the dungeon to slam the door behind you so you can't go back. With an an autosave just before you enter the dungeon as a sort of compromise, so you don't end up trapped in the dungeon with no save file and no way out.

 

 

It amazes me that people would do that and not just turn down the difficulty or respec their party and I am in no way some video game veteran who plays on POTD. I do actually like that idea though because camping supplies were a little annoying. I enjoyed the challenge of making the ones I had last and as I got better at the game I found I almost never needed the ones that were always conveniently placed in every dungeon. 

 

That's a *terrible* system. What you're basically talking about is save-points, and those have mostly been done away with because it artificially binds you to the developers idea of how long you should be able to go before you reach that camping area. Then they have to balance where and how many of those one-time-use resting areas there are--you run into the same problem as camping supplies, where there's either to few for anybody but the die-hard "I wish you just died!" people or so many that it becomes pointless.

 

The solution to the problem is to increase the number of wounds until death, and make the amount of damage dealt by wounds vary by type of wound--5% to 25% depending on wound type. So you could have three wounds and be down 15% or 55%, or some combination up 'till death. That way not every two-wound situation immediately equals a strong pressure to rest, there's interesting variability in the wound affliction, and meaningful choice comes back into play.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Why didn't they just keep it as the camping supplies thing and just not litter them everywhere? Like cool abilities are still per encounter and it is wounds and empower you have to worry about now. Maybe make resting free on story mode or whatever. 

Because people were trekking back every chance they got to rest at an inn. Yes, it's tedious, but people did it anyway. The solution is one-time use camping sites in dungeons and the dungeon to slam the door behind you so you can't go back. With an an autosave just before you enter the dungeon as a sort of compromise, so you don't end up trapped in the dungeon with no save file and no way out.

 

 

It amazes me that people would do that and not just turn down the difficulty or respec their party and I am in no way some video game veteran who plays on POTD. I do actually like that idea though because camping supplies were a little annoying. I enjoyed the challenge of making the ones I had last and as I got better at the game I found I almost never needed the ones that were always conveniently placed in every dungeon. 

 

That's a *terrible* system. What you're basically talking about is save-points, and those have mostly been done away with because it artificially binds you to the developers idea of how long you should be able to go before you reach that camping area. Then they have to balance where and how many of those one-time-use resting areas there are--you run into the same problem as camping supplies, where there's either to few for anybody but the die-hard "I wish you just died!" people or so many that it becomes pointless.

 

The solution to the problem is to increase the number of wounds until death, and make the amount of damage dealt by wounds vary by type of wound--5% to 25% depending on wound type. So you could have three wounds and be down 15% or 55%, or some combination up 'till death. That way not every two-wound situation immediately equals a strong pressure to rest, there's interesting variability in the wound affliction, and meaningful choice comes back into play.

 

 

Any resting mechanic is pointless if you can rest as much as you want. You can just ignore bonus from food and rest all the time. Why should i care about these bonus? I did not care about resting bonus in the first game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a *terrible* system. What you're basically talking about is save-points, and those have mostly been done away with because it artificially binds you to the developers idea of how long you should be able to go before you reach that camping area. Then they have to balance where and how many of those one-time-use resting areas there are--you run into the same problem as camping supplies, where there's either to few for anybody but the die-hard "I wish you just died!" people or so many that it becomes pointless.

The solution to the problem is to increase the number of wounds until death, and make the amount of damage dealt by wounds vary by type of wound--5% to 25% depending on wound type. So you could have three wounds and be down 15% or 55%, or some combination up 'till death. That way not every two-wound situation immediately equals a strong pressure to rest, there's interesting variability in the wound affliction, and meaningful choice comes back into play.

 

 

 

 

I don't think it does bind you to the developers idea of how long you should be able to go any more than having difficulty settings at all binds you to the developers idea of what level of challenge players should be able to handle. Also what save points? This system is way to complex to be comparable to such a basic system. The number of resting points should scale with difficulty like the number of camping supplies did, the biggest issue with that was that there were like two or three more of them in each dungeon which made scaling how many you can carry somewhat pointless. I managed to get by with two in most areas but then I would find one and because I like to pick up everything I felt compelled to rest or go back and get it later, though to be fair that's specific to me I guess. 

 

Why is making the game easier the solution to my suggestion that this aspect of the game is a little too easy? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because people were trekking back every chance they got to rest at an inn. Yes, it's tedious, but people did it anyway. The solution is one-time use camping sites in dungeons and the dungeon to slam the door behind you so you can't go back. With an an autosave just before you enter the dungeon as a sort of compromise, so you don't end up trapped in the dungeon with no save file and no way out.

 

That's in a sense how Stalwart Village worked at the start of WM1.  You were thrust into a combat situation, quickly discovered you couldn't rest, and would need to defeat multiple groups with what you brought with you.  That also IMO made it one of the most fun combat situations in the entire game, especially if you got there at an early level.  There was an initial sense of panic: "ruh roh...", and then planning out how best to scramble to survive.  I remember finishing several characters barely alive, and finding creative uses for lesser known spells I typically never thought about.  It was brilliant game design.  It's also lost, the more and more auto-regen there is.

 

I'd love to see more of that "slam the door" dynamic, but realistically, most gamers don't like or want it, which is why games are moving away from it.  It's down to different preferences: many people prefer effectively unlimited resources.  I believe a reasonable solution is to provide both styles, keyed on either difficulty level, or an orthogonal new-game-screen switch.  Then you and I can have our "lock us in the dungeon with no spell or health regeneration, slam the door, and wish us luck..." mode, and people who hate that can have their style of fun too.  Unfortunately, it's more testing and balancing burden for the game developers, in an already niche genre.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's a *terrible* system. What you're basically talking about is save-points, and those have mostly been done away with because it artificially binds you to the developers idea of how long you should be able to go before you reach that camping area. Then they have to balance where and how many of those one-time-use resting areas there are--you run into the same problem as camping supplies, where there's either to few for anybody but the die-hard "I wish you just died!" people or so many that it becomes pointless.

The solution to the problem is to increase the number of wounds until death, and make the amount of damage dealt by wounds vary by type of wound--5% to 25% depending on wound type. So you could have three wounds and be down 15% or 55%, or some combination up 'till death. That way not every two-wound situation immediately equals a strong pressure to rest, there's interesting variability in the wound affliction, and meaningful choice comes back into play.

 

 

 

 

I don't think it does bind you to the developers idea of how long you should be able to go any more than having difficulty settings at all binds you to the developers idea of what level of challenge players should be able to handle. Also what save points? This system is way to complex to be comparable to such a basic system. The number of resting points should scale with difficulty like the number of camping supplies did, the biggest issue with that was that there were like two or three more of them in each dungeon which made scaling how many you can carry somewhat pointless. I managed to get by with two in most areas but then I would find one and because I like to pick up everything I felt compelled to rest or go back and get it later, though to be fair that's specific to me I guess. 

 

Why is making the game easier the solution to my suggestion that this aspect of the game is a little too easy? 

 

Because I'm disagreeing that the game is to easy. That's...well, frankly I don't understand that at all. The problem with the injury system is that it's not granular enough; it doesn't provide meaningful choice, it just encourages the same reaction to the same situation repeatedly--resting every time you hit two injuries.

 

The advantage to the endurance/health split was that the gradual decline of health over time allowed calculated planning about how far you could push it. Now you don't get a gradual decline in health; you get hard shifts of 25% each, which are *far* to large.

 

I'm not saying "make the game easier", I'm saying "make the injury system mire finely detailed instead of hitting you exclusively in one large size".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because I'm disagreeing that the game is to easy. That's...well, frankly I don't understand that at all. The problem with the injury system is that it's not granular enough; it doesn't provide meaningful choice, it just encourages the same reaction to the same situation repeatedly--resting every time you hit two injuries.

The advantage to the endurance/health split was that the gradual decline of health over time allowed calculated planning about how far you could push it. Now you don't get a gradual decline in health; you get hard shifts of 25% each, which are *far* to large.

 

I'm not saying "make the game easier", I'm saying "make the injury system mire finely detailed instead of hitting you exclusively in one large size".

 

 

 

I'm not saying the game is too easy, I'm saying that this aspect of it is easier than it was in the last game as you can just rest after every fight with seemingly no consequences. I just don't really see the point in changing it this way. 

 

Sure you want a more complex injury system and that's cool but you have said many times that system includes making the penalties less and it taking more injuries to reach death which would definitely make it easier. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Because I'm disagreeing that the game is to easy. That's...well, frankly I don't understand that at all. The problem with the injury system is that it's not granular enough; it doesn't provide meaningful choice, it just encourages the same reaction to the same situation repeatedly--resting every time you hit two injuries.

The advantage to the endurance/health split was that the gradual decline of health over time allowed calculated planning about how far you could push it. Now you don't get a gradual decline in health; you get hard shifts of 25% each, which are *far* to large.

 

I'm not saying "make the game easier", I'm saying "make the injury system mire finely detailed instead of hitting you exclusively in one large size".

 

 

 

I'm not saying the game is too easy, I'm saying that this aspect of it is easier than it was in the last game as you can just rest after every fight with seemingly no consequences. I just don't really see the point in changing it this way. 

 

Sure you want a more complex injury system and that's cool but you have said many times that system includes making the penalties less and it taking more injuries to reach death which would definitely make it easier. 

 

My suggestion included both -5% injuries *and* -25% injuries, which are what we have now, so that you could have more variable combinations. In that scenario, you wouldn't rest *every* time you get two injuries, because *every* time you get two injuries wouldn't be -50% health and a hard press to rest, just *sometimes*.

 

EDIT: My suggestion implied the existence of -10% and -15% and -20% health injuries, as well, so that you end up with multiple possible combinations. I think it would make a much more interesting system with much more actual choice.

Edited by Katarack21
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Because I'm disagreeing that the game is to easy. That's...well, frankly I don't understand that at all. The problem with the injury system is that it's not granular enough; it doesn't provide meaningful choice, it just encourages the same reaction to the same situation repeatedly--resting every time you hit two injuries.

The advantage to the endurance/health split was that the gradual decline of health over time allowed calculated planning about how far you could push it. Now you don't get a gradual decline in health; you get hard shifts of 25% each, which are *far* to large.

 

I'm not saying "make the game easier", I'm saying "make the injury system mire finely detailed instead of hitting you exclusively in one large size".

 

 

 

I'm not saying the game is too easy, I'm saying that this aspect of it is easier than it was in the last game as you can just rest after every fight with seemingly no consequences. I just don't really see the point in changing it this way. 

 

Sure you want a more complex injury system and that's cool but you have said many times that system includes making the penalties less and it taking more injuries to reach death which would definitely make it easier. 

 

My suggestion included both -5% injuries *and* -25% injuries, which are what we have now, so that you could have more variable combinations. In that scenario, you wouldn't rest *every* time you get two injuries, because *every* time you get two injuries wouldn't be -50% health and a hard press to rest, just *sometimes*.

 

 

and i'm not even really against this I don't have a strong opinion on it but in the current system how does it even make a difference, you can rest whenever what incentive is there to put up with any injury at all other than the player choosing to make it harder for themself? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Because I'm disagreeing that the game is to easy. That's...well, frankly I don't understand that at all. The problem with the injury system is that it's not granular enough; it doesn't provide meaningful choice, it just encourages the same reaction to the same situation repeatedly--resting every time you hit two injuries.

The advantage to the endurance/health split was that the gradual decline of health over time allowed calculated planning about how far you could push it. Now you don't get a gradual decline in health; you get hard shifts of 25% each, which are *far* to large.

 

I'm not saying "make the game easier", I'm saying "make the injury system mire finely detailed instead of hitting you exclusively in one large size".

 

 

 

I'm not saying the game is too easy, I'm saying that this aspect of it is easier than it was in the last game as you can just rest after every fight with seemingly no consequences. I just don't really see the point in changing it this way. 

 

Sure you want a more complex injury system and that's cool but you have said many times that system includes making the penalties less and it taking more injuries to reach death which would definitely make it easier. 

 

My suggestion included both -5% injuries *and* -25% injuries, which are what we have now, so that you could have more variable combinations. In that scenario, you wouldn't rest *every* time you get two injuries, because *every* time you get two injuries wouldn't be -50% health and a hard press to rest, just *sometimes*.

 

 

and i'm not even really against this I don't have a strong opinion on it but in the current system how does it even make a difference, you can rest whenever what incentive is there to put up with any injury at all other than the player choosing to make it harder for themself? 

 

That's pretty much *exactly* what I'm complaining about. Rather thing creating a real choice about how far you can press your adventure, it creates such a severe punishment for having to injuries that it just encourages spamming rest after every battle. That takes away that strategic, tactical element of planning how many battles you can push through before you have to rest--the system just encourages spamming rest.

 

The incentive to *not* rest would be in keeping inn bonuses, food bonuses, shrines bonuses, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's pretty much *exactly* what I'm complaining about. Rather thing creating a real choice about how far you can press your adventure, it creates such a severe punishment for having to injuries that it just encourages spamming rest after every battle. That takes away that strategic, tactical element of planning how many battles you can push through before you have to rest--the system just encourages spamming rest.

The incentive to *not* rest would be in keeping inn bonuses, food bonuses, shrines bonuses, etc.

 

 

 

That's a good argument though I would say food bonuses would have to go if this was to be any decent incentive. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's pretty much *exactly* what I'm complaining about. Rather thing creating a real choice about how far you can press your adventure, it creates such a severe punishment for having to injuries that it just encourages spamming rest after every battle. That takes away that strategic, tactical element of planning how many battles you can push through before you have to rest--the system just encourages spamming rest.

The incentive to *not* rest would be in keeping inn bonuses, food bonuses, shrines bonuses, etc.

 

 

 

That's a good argument though I would say food bonuses would have to go if this was to be any decent incentive. 

 

I think keeping foods but making decent bonuses from foods more rare, and thus the bonuses themselves more valuable, is a better option.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

That's pretty much *exactly* what I'm complaining about. Rather thing creating a real choice about how far you can press your adventure, it creates such a severe punishment for having to injuries that it just encourages spamming rest after every battle. That takes away that strategic, tactical element of planning how many battles you can push through before you have to rest--the system just encourages spamming rest.

The incentive to *not* rest would be in keeping inn bonuses, food bonuses, shrines bonuses, etc.

 

 

 

That's a good argument though I would say food bonuses would have to go if this was to be any decent incentive. 

 

I think keeping foods but making decent bonuses from foods more rare, and thus the bonuses themselves more valuable, is a better option.

 

We already know that's going to be the case. The food in the game currently is pretty common fare. Large meals with lots of bonuses will be rare but just aren't in the game yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Because people were trekking back every chance they got to rest at an inn. Yes, it's tedious, but people did it anyway. The solution is one-time use camping sites in dungeons and the dungeon to slam the door behind you so you can't go back. With an an autosave just before you enter the dungeon as a sort of compromise, so you don't end up trapped in the dungeon with no save file and no way out.

 

That's in a sense how Stalwart Village worked at the start of WM1.  You were thrust into a combat situation, quickly discovered you couldn't rest, and would need to defeat multiple groups with what you brought with you.  That also IMO made it one of the most fun combat situations in the entire game, especially if you got there at an early level.  There was an initial sense of panic: "ruh roh...", and then planning out how best to scramble to survive.  I remember finishing several characters barely alive, and finding creative uses for lesser known spells I typically never thought about.  It was brilliant game design.  It's also lost, the more and more auto-regen there is.

 

I'd love to see more of that "slam the door" dynamic, but realistically, most gamers don't like or want it, which is why games are moving away from it.  It's down to different preferences: many people prefer effectively unlimited resources.  I believe a reasonable solution is to provide both styles, keyed on either difficulty level, or an orthogonal new-game-screen switch.  Then you and I can have our "lock us in the dungeon with no spell or health regeneration, slam the door, and wish us luck..." mode, and people who hate that can have their style of fun too.  Unfortunately, it's more testing and balancing burden for the game developers, in an already niche genre.

 

Of course it's one of the best combat encounters in the whole game, the combat system finally makes sense then. That's the whole point of limited resources and that's what I'm talking about. People like Katarack will always bitch about any kind of challenge and try to demagogue their way out of it with empty and manipulative phrases like "it doesn't give meaningful choice!" or "it creates developer-sanctioned save points!" instead of rising up to conquer said challenge, so what most gamers like or don't like is immaterial in that context. The point of gaming is to be challenged and to overcome, it's not about being on a guided tour where nothing really matters because you always have a get out of jail free card. Can't muster the skill to continue? Lower the difficulty until you get to story mode, since people are going to beat the game on PotD maybe then you'll (general you) finally realize that it is you who needs to improve, not the game.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The injury system is just fine. It adds cost to your characters getting knocked out. That's the point of the system. If people are complaining, this only means they are feeling the cost, hence system is working.

 

The two things I dislike right now are:

1. If you are left at one health point when combat ends, you get back all your health. If you lost that last health point, you lose 25% of your health ceiling. That's stupid. If there is going to be a cost for losing all your health, there should be a cost for losing every 0+n health point. That cost can be introduced if health regeneration is altogether disabled in Deadfire.

 

2. My impression is that there is too small cost attached to resting. Food is abundant enough to allow resting fairly often, if a player stocks up on food before going into dungeons. This can be solved in a number of ways:

- Make one rest heal only one injury per party member.

- Increase the cost of food / make food more scarce

- Make backtracking respawn enemies in the dungeon

- Make resting in dungeons have a chance to spawn a random encounter. It doesn't have to be a serious encounter, but it should prevent the rest, and possibly prevent the rest and expend the food used for that rest.

- Etc....

A Custom Editor for Deadfire's Data:
eFoHp9V.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

My two cents - go the Dragon Age route and scrap resting altogether, with auto-regen of health after combat ends. The advantage is that the devs can balance each encounter around a fully-resourced party, which has to be easier than estimating what sort of shape the party will be in and designing fights appropriately. The penalty for getting knocked out is that you're a man/woman down during a tough fight, which is a far bigger incentive to keep them alive than injuries.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The injury system is just fine. It adds cost to your characters getting knocked out. That's the point of the system. If people are complaining, this only means they are feeling the cost, hence system is working.

 

The two things I dislike right now are:

1. If you are left at one health point when combat ends, you get back all your health. If you lost that last health point, you lose 25% of your health ceiling. That's stupid. If there is going to be a cost for losing all your health, there should be a cost for losing every 0+n health point. That cost can be introduced if health regeneration is altogether disabled in Deadfire.

 

2. My impression is that there is too small cost attached to resting. Food is abundant enough to allow resting fairly often, if a player stocks up on food before going into dungeons. This can be solved in a number of ways:

- Make one rest heal only one injury per party member.

- Increase the cost of food / make food more scarce

- Make backtracking respawn enemies in the dungeon

- Make resting in dungeons have a chance to spawn a random encounter. It doesn't have to be a serious encounter, but it should prevent the rest, and possibly prevent the rest and expend the food used for that rest.

- Etc....

The first point has been tried many times, especially in PnP campaigns, but it creates the so-called "Death Spiral" where if you are going down then the encounter is already difficult and since the game piles on more and more debuffs on you it becomes outright impossible to turn the battle around. While I understand the sentiment it just doesn't really work well in practice.

 

The second point will work, just without respawning enemies, it creates a grind-fest like Dark Souls where you are struggling with a boss, but the game constantly respawns mobs on you that you've already defeated and you are just going through the motions, mowing them down without any thought and it simply wastes your time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do injuries affect only health now? How about injuries that lower attributes? I think I wouldn't rest spam so hard if an injury only lowered one of the attributes by 2 or some such.

 

Also, why the heck priests can heal but not remove injuries? I sure wouldn't mind a spell like that for a priest.

Edited by Aramintai
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The injury system is just fine. It adds cost to your characters getting knocked out. That's the point of the system. If people are complaining, this only means they are feeling the cost, hence system is working.

 

The two things I dislike right now are:

1. If you are left at one health point when combat ends, you get back all your health. If you lost that last health point, you lose 25% of your health ceiling. That's stupid. If there is going to be a cost for losing all your health, there should be a cost for losing every 0+n health point. That cost can be introduced if health regeneration is altogether disabled in Deadfire.

 

2. My impression is that there is too small cost attached to resting. Food is abundant enough to allow resting fairly often, if a player stocks up on food before going into dungeons. This can be solved in a number of ways:

- Make one rest heal only one injury per party member.

- Increase the cost of food / make food more scarce

- Make backtracking respawn enemies in the dungeon

- Make resting in dungeons have a chance to spawn a random encounter. It doesn't have to be a serious encounter, but it should prevent the rest, and possibly prevent the rest and expend the food used for that rest.

- Etc....

The first point has been tried many times, especially in PnP campaigns, but it creates the so-called "Death Spiral" where if you are going down then the encounter is already difficult and since the game piles on more and more debuffs on you it becomes outright impossible to turn the battle around. While I understand the sentiment it just doesn't really work well in practice.

 

The second point will work, just without respawning enemies, it creates a grind-fest like Dark Souls where you are struggling with a boss, but the game constantly respawns mobs on you that you've already defeated and you are just going through the motions, mowing them down without any thought and it simply wastes your time.

 

My point of reference isn't PnP because that's a completely different ballpark from a videogame, even if the videogame is inspired by PnP as an experience. For a number of reasons, it can never begin to feel the same (mostly because you have a human being on the other end in PnP). In PnP the DM can always reconfigure the difficulty on the fly, because he can determine it, so that the party gets the impression that it's making progress and overcoming difficulties.

 

Taking the IE games as a reference, having no health regeneration does work, and it works great in the IE games. You have a number of ways to heal yourself - temple, casting healing spells, drinking healing potions, using scrolls. When convenient, I would go to a temple, the temple was a limitless source of health points. During combat I would normally use potions first because the other two methods consume more time, and I'm already in combat. Casting healing spells and scrolls I would usually do after combat, when I'm continuing on into the dungeon.

 

There is choice - should I heal at all, or should I conserve healing means for later? If the means of healing (spells, scrolls, potions) are insufficient, who should I keep most healed up? There is also obviously a cost to each healing method.

 

Having all your damage heal up after combat is done removes all those considerations.

 

My point was not to suggest all the methods for reducing resting at once, just to list possible methods. Refilling the whole dungeon with enemies would be fair IMO, if the player is also allowed to backtrack to town and refill all his powers, items, supplies, etc.

 

As for spawning a small encounter, just enough to prevent the rest, I imagined it as more of a cosmetic feature, as opposed to simply opening a modal with a message "you can't rest here".

 

Do injuries affect only health now? How about injuries that lower attributes? I think I wouldn't rest spam so hard if an injury only lowered one of the attributes by 2 or some such.

 

Also, why the heck priests can heal but not remove injuries? I sure wouldn't mind a spell like that for a priest.

Injuries still carry their negative effects. In addition to that, each injury reduces your health cap by 25%

 

If priests could remove injuries, that would make them a no-brainer choice for a party member.

Edited by Gairnulf

A Custom Editor for Deadfire's Data:
eFoHp9V.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

You misunderstood me, I wasn't talking about not auto-regenerating health, but about the debuffs at certain health levels during combat. Auto-regen is there so you don't have to bring a healing class along for the ride and spend minutes after every fight healing up, at least that's the justification, I was never in favor of it. Since crafting materials are abundant then maybe it prevents the need to bring a healing class and you can rely on healing potions or bandages.

The respawning enemies can work if they only respawn if you backtrack, so sure, whether it slams the door behind you or this it's functionally the same thing.

Edited by Christliar
Link to post
Share on other sites

Injuries still carry their negative effects. In addition to that, each injury reduces your health cap by 25%

 

If priests could remove injuries, that would make them a no-brainer choice for a party member.

 

Well, 25% per injury is too steep. I hope it's just one of those unbalanced beta things. Right now it feels like playing one the early Souls games where player almost all the time was afflicted by some perma health reduction until boss was defeated. Rest spamming is bad too.

 

As for the priests, why the heck not? They are already integral part of most parties, and healing should logically heal injuries as well. Maybe make it a higher level spell?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Priests healing injuries doesn't make sense in a world where their spells regenerate all the time. I think it would be more likely to appear on an item which apparently do still carry per-rest abilities like these Bounding Boots. 

Edited by Breckmoney
Link to post
Share on other sites

You misunderstood me, I wasn't talking about not auto-regenerating health, but about the debuffs at certain health levels during combat. Auto-regen is there so you don't have to bring a healing class along for the ride and spend minutes after every fight healing up, at least that's the justification, I was never in favor of it. Since crafting materials are abundant then maybe it prevents the need to bring a healing class and you can rely on healing potions or bandages.

The respawning enemies can work if they only respawn if you backtrack, so sure, whether it slams the door behind you or this it's functionally the same thing.

Aha, I see. But I never made a point for debuffs that happen at certain health levels. My point is that not only health ceiling penalties from injuries are fine, but what damage has been taken, shouldn't regenerate. In the case where you have 100 health and were knocked out, that would leave you with 75 health after the combat. If your health dropped to 50 but you didn't get knocked out, you will remain at 50, but will be able to heal up to 100.

 

I do understand that the point of auto regen is that you don't have to heal them manually :)

 

But I prefer to have a cost to my negligence which has lead to my party taking damage, instead of only having to worry if they've been knocked out. Auto regeneration of health has always seemed like a cheat to me. Even Call of Duty removed it. I get it that you dislike it too.

 

I agree that respawning enemies if the player backtracks is the same as making him start from the beginnig if he dies/runs out of rests. At least nearly the same, if you take into account the passage of ingame time (in case that is important), and the money spent on rest and resupply.

 

If I had a choice though, I would take respawning enemies on my backtracking to blocking me from backtracking. The latter feels more artificial, and more overtly breaking the illusion of choice. If you are allowed to backtrack, you still have some choices to make before you return, even if you will find all the enemies respawned upon returning.

Edited by Gairnulf
  • Like 1

A Custom Editor for Deadfire's Data:
eFoHp9V.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Injuries still carry their negative effects. In addition to that, each injury reduces your health cap by 25%

 

If priests could remove injuries, that would make them a no-brainer choice for a party member.

 

Well, 25% per injury is too steep. I hope it's just one of those unbalanced beta things. Right now it feels like playing one the early Souls games where player almost all the time was afflicted by some perma health reduction until boss was defeated. Rest spamming is bad too.

 

As for the priests, why the heck not? They are already integral part of most parties, and healing should logically heal injuries as well. Maybe make it a higher level spell?

I don't feel it's too steep, only that it requires the player to be more careful and save more often.

 

Priests or any other class should not feel like a no brainer choice, especially when the party is now limited to five members.

A Custom Editor for Deadfire's Data:
eFoHp9V.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...