Roguey vs the Grognards Thread

[Roguey]

I dunno if Sawyer is responsible for tuning all the NPCs, but yeah as lead designer it's his responsibility to lay down the law and make it a design requirement for every NPC to be built as passive as possible when you meet them.

 

[Infinitron]

I dunno if Sawyer is responsible for tuning all the NPCs, but yeah as lead designer it's his responsibility to lay down the law and make it a design requirement for every NPC to be built as passive as possible when you meet them.

This is an unlikely and rather strange request. We know there's a wizard NPC - he will likely require "active" use. And some players might actually like having a main PC who's the solid, passive linchpin of the party while the other members of the party act as specialists who do all kinds of stuff.

Most likely the companion NPCs will be an even mix of passive and active.

For example, I doubt most people had problems with thief being mostly a utility class and even if they did it's questionable whether they wanted the problem tackled with turning thief into a DPS class that more resembles a dirty fighter or an assassin than a traditional thief.

There's a difference between what players say they want and what they seem to want as expressed by what they actually do. For example, Sawyer might watch a lot of players using their rogues as auxiliary melee dudes and kinda struggling with them in that role. Eventually those players do win the fight and go "Yeah, that's a rogue, that's how it's supposed to go, right?", but that doesn't mean they wouldn't enjoy it more if those rogues were a bit more useful.

 

[Roguey]

This is an unlikely and rather strange request. We know there's a wizard NPC - he will likely require "active" use.

Josh said that some classes are more active than others, and that the talents you choose can slide characters to being even more active or more passive. I think it will please the greatest amount of people if every NPC is given talents that make them lean towards passive when you meet them. If you want to make them more active, give them active talents going-forward. It's like testosterone: easier to add than it is to take away.

Most likely the companion NPCs will be an even mix of passive and active.

I predict quite a few unused companions if this happens. Though Josh may be satisfied with that since he doesn't believe any given thing should try to have universal appeal.

 

[tuluse]

I would think different companions would be tuned to appeal to different players. However, they don't all that many companions total compared to say a BG game, so maybe not.

 

[Chaotic_Heretic]

Its appealing to casuals alright...with its shitty stat system.

 

[ZagorTeNej]

There's a difference between what players say they want and what they seem to want as expressed by what they actually do.

Sometimes, not always. Besides, I've seen people complain about rogue class not feeling very roguey (no pun intended) on Obsidian forums, they want a cunning trickster/finesse character (atleast as an option), not a killing machine that may be slightly better at thievery compared to your party Barbarian or Paladin.

Of course this also depends on how much customization will be allowed via talents, I'd love to see the invisibility one they talked about implementing as it would definitely spice up the class IMO.

For example, Sawyer might watch a lot of players using their rogues as auxiliary melee dudes and kinda struggling with them in that role. Eventually those players do win the fight and go "Yeah, that's a rogue, that's how it's supposed to go, right?"

Possibly but I don't think so in this case, IMO it's just something Sawyer feels strongly about regardless of any fan/tester feedback, IIRC there are even some of his posts in PoE thread on SA that basically confirm that.

...but that doesn't mean they wouldn't enjoy it more if those rogues were a bit more useful.

It comes down to personal preference, I'm fine with rogues/thieves being weaker in straight combat compared to a fighter but making up for that by being able to scout, detect/disarm traps, open locks, detect illusions, pickpocket etc. and I find it to be a more interesting way of differentiating thief from the fighter class compared to one being a tank and the other DPS.

 

[Sensuki]

I predict quite a few unused companions if this happens. Though Josh may be satisfied with that since he doesn't believe any given thing should try to have universal appeal.

I really, really doubt people will be selecting companions based on how active they are in combat. You might, but I don't know anyone else who does that. Sounds like a Rogueyism/Laziness to me.

 

[Roguey]

There have been arpegs where I outright refuse to run with certain characters because the idiot game designers built their stats with role playing in mind, that is, poorly since this is a computer game and not a tabletop RPG with a human DM.

Fortunately the JES system fully supports role-playing builds.

 

[SymbolicFrank]

Roguey brings up an interesting point. If you look at LPs of Baldur's Gate on Youtube, you see people pausing a lot. A LOT.

I wouldn't be surprised if IE game playtesters at Black Isle played the same way. Sawyer might think of "pause minimizers" the same way as he thinks of "rest minimizers" - a curious breed only encountered on Internet forums, never in real life.

As you might suspect, I'm one of the guys who reload and retry the setup (positioning, spell selection, equipment, buffs, summons and such) until I get it right and can run the battle mostly on auto.

If I pause to adjust or puppeteer more than one character, it is a REALLY hard battle.


I would prefer to have auto-pause for just the lead char.

 

[Sensuki]

There have been arpegs where I outright refuse to run with certain characters because the idiot game designers built their stats with role playing in mind, that is, poorly since this is a computer game and not a tabletop RPG with a human DM.

Fortunately the JES system fully supports role-playing builds.

Actually I would say it's the other way around - there are no roleplaying builds.

 

[Roguey]

No roleplaying builds in the sense that there are no LARP builds e.g. a fighter with high int, wis, and cha and low everything else who gets no systematic benefits other than lower store prices and hardly any scripted benefits (and definitely nothing worth being terrible when it comes to core gameplay).

 

[Sensuki]

Well according to a certain Obsidian forums poster the new attribute spread promotes less roleplaying and is built for autists who like watching numbers go up

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

I don't think rest-minimizers are in the minority, quite the opposite actually. People who rest spam play/use casters a lot while I reckon your average BG1/2 player rolls a paladin, uses a party mage to cast haste, breach and occasionally a high damage AoE spell, uses a thief to detect/disarm traps and open locks and a cleric to heal, they don't bother with spell sequencers and contingencies nor do they use backstab (well maybe once for novelty sake). There's no tendency to rest spam when you deal with most opposition via hasted melee/ranged combatants.

Haste should be a higher level spell. Because in PnP it has the huge downside of age cost. No one sane would use haste outside a desperate situation.

 

[Higher Animal]

Roguey brings up an interesting point. If you look at LPs of Baldur's Gate on Youtube, you see people pausing a lot. A LOT.

I wouldn't be surprised if IE game playtesters at Black Isle played the same way. Sawyer might think of "pause minimizers" the same way as he thinks of "rest minimizers" - a curious breed only encountered on Internet forums, never in real life.

There is a lot of bully pseudo-grognard talk on these forums about the importance of turn based, tactical battles. However, what is the point of constructing a real time game in which the constraints of real time don't present themselves? RTwP implies a speed chess scenario - where quick, intuitive thinking is more important than spreadsheet thinking. I mean, why even deign to play a RTwP game instead of something like X-com or Jagged Alliance? We (now) have tactical games by the boatload (in addition to, y'know, chess). The pause button should be used in learning phases but it use should become more limited as the player learns the details of the system to ever greater degrees. Ideally the pause button should be used for setting up battles and tactics while adjustments in the fighting are done in real time.

 

[Sensuki]

^ This.

Sawyer's designs are far more suited to turn-based. Many of the things he does are in opposition to "fun" RTwP gameplay.

 

[Infinitron]

I'm a fan of the pause minimizing gameplay style myself - at least in theory. But seeing Roguey's and tuluse's description of how they handled RTwP combat in the IE games, I can't claim that style has a monopoly on "fun".

 

[Declinator]

RTwP implies a speed chess scenario - where quick, intuitive thinking is more important than spreadsheet thinking. I mean, why even deign to play a RTwP game instead of something like X-com or Jagged Alliance? We (now) have tactical games by the boatload (in addition to, y'know, chess). The pause button should be used in learning phases but it use should become more limited as the player learns the details of the system to ever greater degrees. Ideally the pause button should be used for setting up battles and tactics while adjustments in the fighting are done in real time.

Yeah, that's a load of crap. RTwP might be suited for that too but it is not the only possibility. Something like 7.62 High Calibre presents us a more interesting view at the possibilities of RTwP in that sort of games.

I still prefer turn-based in small-scale tactical battles but look at Total War or HOI and tell me that they are RTwP because "speed chess." Perhaps the biggest benefit to RTwP is the obvious: when you move, the enemy moves, and when the enemy moves, you can instantly react to it. In turn-based games you won't move simultaneously with the enemy and you can only react on your own turn. Similarly, in phase-based games you and the AI execute your moves simultaneously but you cannot react before the next order phase.

 

[Higher Animal]

Perhaps the biggest benefit to RTwP is the obvious: when you move, the enemy moves, and when the enemy moves, you can instantly react to it.

Yes, instantly is a good way to describe how strategic reactions should occur in an RTwP game.

HOI and its ilk are interesting games because very often (especially in a title like EU 3) missing a day or hour due to speed can result in the annihilation by the enemy and total defeat in war. Part of the reason why HOI had VCR turn-mode is because so much of the game is boring that repeatedly clicking to end a turn would be impossible to play. How does the game determine that turn 3,789 is the AI's invasion of Poland? Turn based mode is poor in massive 4x undertakings like HOI.

As far as your example is concerned, you need to consider why you like being able to react instantly to opponent movements and how that can be a good gameplay mechanic. TB games rely on prediction and deep strategy. It is a variant of chess. If you wish to react instantly to an opponent's move you need to justify eliminating the predictive mechanics of Chess (also known as thinking several moves ahead). If you're allowed to make a move, then cancel in pause you remove the fun from the tactical titles. Making quick decisions under pressure in an evolving situation is what is intriguing about RTwP. It seems like you wish to gimp what makes good turn based titles in the process of making a RTwP game. Not my example of interesting - let alone fun.

 

[tuluse]

It seems like you wish to gimp what makes good turn based titles in the process of making a RTwP game. Not my example of interesting - let alone fun.

It's almost like they're not making a turn based game at all!

 

[Higher Animal]

Consider this example:

In TB rpg you are an LGBQT elven warrior with a sword. You come across an orc pervert who looks like he's easy to kill. You notice he is a melee character. Cleverly you decide to get in range of this orc triggering battle mode but instead of moving in range of his blade you engage ambush mode so he'll expend his energy running to you and will get killed instantly upon the use of your ambush. Now, let's say this orc pervert sees what you're doing and decides to throw his blade at you and run away, causing damage without exp. This is a failure of your predictive understanding of this character.

You would have the RTwP version be a character engage in ambush mode only to see the orc begin his throw dagger animation. Cleverly (?) you pause the game, de-inititate ambush mode and instead initiate shield mode to heroically block the thrown blade's damage to your character. Upon seeing the orc turn and run animation you'd again intelligently (?) pause the game, select your throw ability, and nail the fleeing orc in the back causing a falling animation simultaneously triggering a see of blood and loot popping from his anus.

The only idea making this encounter "tactical" is if you make it a real-time event where the actions of the player must be quick and rhythmic. Anything else is Tri-cycle TB.

 

[Roguey]

Skyrim journal update: Ran into slut-shaming sidequest. What the hell??????????????? I would love to read about the thought process that went into making it. "Let's do one where the PC shames this slut. A woman of course, because a man being with three different women in a month is fine." About one person a week doesn't even seem that excessive ffs.

I'm doing the quest anyway hoping that there's some "lol why do you think I care?" ending.

Josh-quotes:

come to think of it im actually sort of surprised that nobodys tried to mine rope kids post history for controversy/clickbait

Hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii.

it's really obvious that rope kid thinks before he speaks all the time on the internet

there have been two occasions where statements i've made online have been used against me with a negative outcome. the first were e-mails (personal/not work-related) and the second were statements i made about engine technology. now i abstain from commenting on things, i comment in the most neutral tone i can, or i assume that what i say will be taken in the most offensive way regardless of intent and accept it. my assumption with everything i send online in any environment is that it can/will be shown to every human being on the planet in the worst circumstances.

Ugh, that engine technology thing was when he was talking about New Vegas's PS3 problems and when Skyrim came out a few game journalists were all "This must be Skyrim's problem too!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *write clickbait article claiming Josh was talking about Skyrim* Fucking game journalists, wish they'd become obsolete already.

do you ever just cut loose on anonymous accounts you really strenuously keep disconnected from yourself or do you have to watch what you post all the tim everywhere forever because that sounds miserable. i guess the safer answer is "no" regardless of the reality

i just watch what i post/send all the time.

beloved hipster dev revealed to spend more time on interpreting autistic rules for pretending to be wizards than on his own projects; sales of pillars of eternity skyrocket

i can't play TTRPGs without aggressively houseruling a million things. *fart sound*

just intuitively, wouldnt most game design ppl start doing that eventually

it's not as common as you might expect. i think one of the reasons i got into game design professionally is because i was already doing that and going berserk about it.

it's kinda just a matter of what degree is meant by "aggressively," since no one plays ttrpgs as written, either through getting a rule wrong or thinking a rule sucks and changing it

IME most designers play TTRPGs more-or-less as-written with only a small handful house rules. it's strange.

what's the point if you can't houserule to the heavens

it seems really weird to me that so many people are reticent to house rule TTRPGs, devs or otherwise. comparatively, it's trivial. do you and the other players think a rule stinks? talk about changing it and then write down what you think will work. play the game. if it still has problems, continue in this fashion.

i wound up listening to this strange discussion about problems with a spell in a game people were running/playing in. no one in the group liked how it worked and they were all complaining about it. guys, just... change it. it took about five minutes of conversation to decide how it would be better and it was done. no one had a problem with it after that, but it took literally weeks of complaining for them to arrive at the decision to do something about it.

As expected, Josh good, other devs bad.

 

[TheGreatOne]

Skyrim journal update: Ran into slut-shaming sidequest. What the hell??????????????? I would love to read about the thought process that went into making it. "Let's do one where the PC shames this slut. A woman of course, because a man being with three different women in a month is fine." About one person a week doesn't even seem that excessive ffs.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/forums/activity.php
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/
Also in what universe 36 different partners a year isn't a whore of the highest caliber? The same one where Pillars of Eternity is the first elegantly designed game in RPG history and Zoe Quinn is a victim of greedy misogynists who are trying to exploit her for financial gains?

there have been two occasions where statements i've made online have been used against me with a negative outcome.

Not counting all the incidents on the codex. He must be really happy about Roguey constantly pumping that number higher by pasting his quotes out of context.

 

[abnaxus]

Skyrim journal update: Ran into slut-shaming sidequest. What the hell??????????????? I would love to read about the thought process that went into making it. "Let's do one where the PC shames this slut. A woman of course, because a man being with three different women in a month is fine." About one person a week doesn't even seem that excessive ffs.

I'm doing the quest anyway hoping that there's some "lol why do you think I care?" ending.

What quest is that?

 

[TheGreatOne]

The one where you're sent to kill 10 wolves and one of them is a female

 

[hemtae]

Skyrim journal update: Ran into slut-shaming sidequest. What the hell??????????????? I would love to read about the thought process that went into making it. "Let's do one where the PC shames this slut. A woman of course, because a man being with three different women in a month is fine." About one person a week doesn't even seem that excessive ffs.

I'm doing the quest anyway hoping that there's some "lol why do you think I care?" ending.

What quest is that?

It's the one in Riften where the niece is mad at her aunt and gets you to embarrass her by collecting an artifact from the people the aunt screwed.