Fallout Polygons Charlie Hall got stuck in Fallout.

[Daemongar]

The skill books in Fallout were dumb though. Having a specific set of skills for which you can convert money (nigh-infinite) -> skill points (limited) was silly. Should have been limited to one use per game, or being a carried item that gives an effect, or whatever.

I wonder if the books were an afterthought or not completely tested. Seemed like they may have figured that the price of the books would make it impossible to buy more than one or the other, or it was a bug that the librarian in the hub would have an "infinite supply." They could have also made the effect like Mount and Blade: you carry a book around for two weeks gametime, then get the effect.

I'll forgive them, as books for me became a problem from my meta knowledge of the game, not my first playthrough. If I tagged barter, I knew I could swim in money later, so I could buy massive amounts of books/armor/ammo later on. On my first play-through, I just wanted to get the chip before the 150 days were up/stay alive.

Still, these idiots who think that they have to 100% complete everything in the game with the perfect powergamed build are disgustingly retarded. Ohnoes, I blew up the Radscorpion cave while it still had 12 9mm HP bullets in it and now I can't get them, game is broken to let you do that and lose loot. *kills self*

Well, I think the POE talk of "bad builds" is fanning the flames of peoples discontent. CRPG's derived from D&D which limited a player to a specific class. There were tradeoffs and doors open to some classes and not to others based on alignment, class, and magical aptitude. There were no bad builds then either, you picked a class based on your play-style and accepted your choice.

Now, nobody reads the manual or does any work (ie: the game is organic) and developers want to cater to this mob of lazy slobs. They probably know folks don't replay as much as they used to and want people to see all their handiwork on the first play-through. That's fine, but don't tell me you are evolving the genre when in fact you are developing for the lowest common denominator.

 

[Wizfall]

Well having to go to an inn (to hire/pay a rogue and then return) to open a locked door means being side tracked from your adventure. But the same thing is true in Fallout if you don't have a crowbar or dynamite or lockpicks: you have to get them somewhere. The difference is in Fallout you might not have enough strength or mechanics skill to open the door, whereas in the example given for PoE you'll always be able to (if you can pay the small fee). However, someone else in this thread said traps and locked doors are so trivial in PoE you never have to go to an inn to create a rogue for them, so being side tracked isn't a problem. The ability to hire a class you create at the inn is just a backup means to solve problems (while allowing high customization).

The difference is in Fallout if you don't have a high lockpick skill enough even with a lockpick, not a crowbar, not enough strengh even with taking drugs (you do know that some drugs increase strengh, don't you ?) you can go buy some dynamite (you do know you don't need to be skilled to use dynalite, do you ?), which make more sense and is much more immersive, than creating an NPC for the sole purpose to open a door ?
You are either stupid or have not played the game like the reviewer, pfff.

 

[Average Manatee]

Not sure how creating NPCs works in PoE, but going back to town to hire a thief to help with a job is the kind of thing that can make sense if done well.

 

[Daemongar]

Not sure how creating NPCs works in PoE, but going back to town to hire a thief to help with a job is the kind of thing that can make sense if done well.

If there was a thief who said "ok, I'll open it, but I keep half..." It would be a nice tradeoff, as the player gets the door/box open, but suffers a penalty for not having thieving skills. If the player pays an NPC 50 Gold to open a chest with a +5 sword and 10,000 Gold in it, why would you even bother to take the lockpick class?

 

[Cadmus]

Not sure how creating NPCs works in PoE, but going back to town to hire a thief to help with a job is the kind of thing that can make sense if done well.

you go to an inn, pay 4k or something for the character that has your lvl-1 and pump his mechanics skill, after he opens the door for you you discard him into an empty room in your empty castle.
It could work but 1) you never ever need to do anything like this and 2) the way it's done here is totally retarded, what the fuck is this? Make a new char to open 1 door?

The reviewer is a fucktard and Sawyer is a fucktard and Fallout and Morrowind had it right. You don't get stuck because your options mostly derive from using the game mechanics and systems and the game adhering to them at all times.

 

[almondblight]

If the player pays an NPC 50 Gold to open a chest with a +5 sword and 10,000 Gold in it, why would you even bother to take the lockpick class?

If you can just blow up the door with dynamite, why even bother putting points into lock picking? What I'm getting from this thread is "you should be locked out of content if you don't have the right skills" and "Fallout is awesome because it didn't lock you out of content for not having the right skills."

 

[belowmecoldhands]

If the player pays an NPC 50 Gold to open a chest with a +5 sword and 10,000 Gold in it, why would you even bother to take the lockpick class?

If you can just blow up the door with dynamite, why even bother putting points into lock picking? What I'm getting from this thread is "you should be locked out of content if you don't have the right skills" and "Fallout is awesome because it didn't lock you out of content for not having the right skills."

Exactly.

HOwever, I do think there's limited dynamite. My character only had X amount. I did have trouble with that door in the military base. I did eventually open it. Can't remember what I did. I was worried at first I'd not use the dynamite correctly and kill myself. As someone else here rightly says, dynamite doesn't require skill to use (the wiki says "if lighted with an external means").

 

[Daemongar]

If the player pays an NPC 50 Gold to open a chest with a +5 sword and 10,000 Gold in it, why would you even bother to take the lockpick class?

If you can just blow up the door with dynamite, why even bother putting points into lock picking?

Because not every door can be blown up, and there are more locked doors than there is dynamite. Also, lock-picking is free.

What I'm getting from this thread is "you should be locked out of content if you don't have the right skills"

Yes, you should be locked out of content if you don't have the right skills. There should be choices and consequences for the players character creation. That is, you sacrifice something (combat) to get something else (speech/verbal skills) or something else, allowing you to approach the same area differently based on your character selection. A player gives up combat ability to be a smooth talker. It may be a bad build if you are given no choice but to fight, but a great build if your have to gather info. Hopefully, the designers balance things out, but oftentimes, they just don't bother and allow for a player to have everything "I'm head of the mages guild, fighters guild, thieves guild, and just between you and me, the asssassins guild. Pleased to meet you."

and "Fallout is awesome because it didn't lock you out of content for not having the right skills."

Fallout is awesome because it did lock you out of content for not having the right skills, increasing re-playability and making character creation matter. Some doors could not be blown up. If the door could only be picked, you just dealt with not getting whatever is behind that door. Was there a door that couldn't be blown up on the main quest line which prevented the player from finishing the game? No. Was there a door locked that couldn't be blown up that prevented the player from achieving a particular endgame? Yes. That made it great.

 

[Morkar Left]

Not sure how creating NPCs works in PoE, but going back to town to hire a thief to help with a job is the kind of thing that can make sense if done well.

you go to an inn, pay 4k or something for the character that has your lvl-1 and pump his mechanics skill, after he opens the door for you you discard him into an empty room in your empty castle.
It could work but 1) you never ever need to do anything like this and 2) the way it's done here is totally retarded, what the fuck is this? Make a new char to open 1 door?

The reviewer is a fucktard and Sawyer is a fucktard and Fallout and Morrowind had it right. You don't get stuck because your options mostly derive from using the game mechanics and systems and the game adhering to them at all times.

Actually for that purpose it's perfectly balanced. If the door isn't that hard to open you can hire a cheaper low-level char. It's works actually like in real-life. He gets payed (the hiring fee) to do a task for you. For the rest of the game you can just put him in the recruitmentpool. It only falls flat that you can use him now forever when ever you like without paying him again.

 

[belowmecoldhands]

(...)
Well, I think the POE talk of "bad builds" is fanning the flames of peoples discontent. CRPG's derived from D&D which limited a player to a specific class. There were tradeoffs and doors open to some classes and not to others based on alignment, class, and magical aptitude. There were no bad builds then either, you picked a class based on your play-style and accepted your choice.

Now, nobody reads the manual or does any work (ie: the game is organic) and developers want to cater to this mob of lazy slobs. They probably know folks don't replay as much as they used to and want people to see all their handiwork on the first play-through. That's fine, but don't tell me you are evolving the genre when in fact you are developing for the lowest common denominator.

I agree with you. BUT I disagree with your idea that "the game is organic" is the same as "nobody reads the manual". When I created my character in Fallout, for example, I did look at the stats to see what they did. I did read the manual when I was having trouble. Generally, I didn't have trouble. When I say "organic" I mean it didn't seem to be a problem for me.

The manual didn't tell me I created a bad build. Like I said, I didn't know until after I had finished the game.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

The skill books in Fallout were dumb though. Having a specific set of skills for which you can convert money (nigh-infinite) -> skill points (limited) was silly. Should have been limited to one use per game, or being a carried item that gives an effect, or whatever.

I wonder if the books were an afterthought or not completely tested. Seemed like they may have figured that the price of the books would make it impossible to buy more than one or the other, or it was a bug that the librarian in the hub would have an "infinite supply." They could have also made the effect like Mount and Blade: you carry a book around for two weeks gametime, then get the effect.

I'll forgive them, as books for me became a problem from my meta knowledge of the game, not my first playthrough. If I tagged barter, I knew I could swim in money later, so I could buy massive amounts of books/armor/ammo later on. On my first play-through, I just wanted to get the chip before the 150 days were up/stay alive.

Doesn't tagging barter come with some opportunity cost, though? Also, the main problem with skills is that they don't have a cost progression like in GURPS which allows to create "master of all trades" character types.

 

[Daemongar]

The manual didn't tell me I created a bad build. Like I said, I didn't know until after I had finished the game.

Maybe what I'm having trouble with is your choice of words, so help me out: what is a bad build?

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Well having to go to an inn (to hire/pay a rogue and then return) to open a locked door means being side tracked from your adventure. But the same thing is true in Fallout if you don't have a crowbar or dynamite or lockpicks: you have to get them somewhere. The difference is in Fallout you might not have enough strength or mechanics skill to open the door, whereas in the example given for PoE you'll always be able to (if you can pay the small fee). However, someone else in this thread said traps and locked doors are so trivial in PoE you never have to go to an inn to create a rogue for them, so being side tracked isn't a problem. The ability to hire a class you create at the inn is just a backup means to solve problems (while allowing high customization).

The difference is in Fallout if you don't have a high lockpick skill enough even with a lockpick, not a crowbar, not enough strengh even with taking drugs (you do know that some drugs increase strengh, don't you ?) you can go buy some dynamite (you do know you don't need to be skilled to use dynalite, do you ?), which make more sense and is much more immersive, than creating an NPC for the sole purpose to open a door ?
You are either stupid or have not played the game like the reviewer, pfff.

Tell us about all the doors that you have blown with dynamite.

 

[snoek]

He clearly didn't play the game. Been years since I touched fallout and the first thing I thought about when reading this was 'dynamite'

 

[Daemongar]

Doesn't tagging barter come with some opportunity cost, though? Also, the main problem with skills is that they don't have a cost progression like in GURPS which allows to create "master of all trades" character types.

Its hard for me to compare GURPS to other systems because I never played GURPS but read the hell out of the core rulebook I bought (used) but never could find anyone to try it out (friends were D&D... uh... grognards.)

Tagging Barter... It's probably the one skill that doesn't come with an significant opportunity cost. By investing in Barter, you can buy books which increase other abilities quite a bit, it also allows one to purchase better armor and ammo earlier. This is the exception, though, and on a first time run through the game, most players wouldn't know this.

Now, just to help me understand, GURPS allows you to put points in positive stats as long as you put points in negative stats as well. Part of the game is achieving goals which allow you to buy out negative stats or so. I can understand it on paper, but don't know how significant this was in execution. Am I close?

 

[Average Manatee]

After you've tagged a combat skill the opportunity costs of the 2nd and 3rd tag aren't that great anyway. If you want to cry about bad builds that require foreknowledge to avoid, cry over people tagging anything but Small Guns expecting to get a decent weapon to last the game*. The only other combat skill that approaches being usable throughout the game is unarmed in FO2, with HtH evade to make you nigh unhittable through the 2nd half of the game. Everything else is a varying amount of deadweight that requires the party to carry it.

That said I don't think I'd ever consider taking Barter in FO1. Money just isn't often a limiting factor in equipment, the limit is what the location offers, aside from perhaps an immediate upgrade to Combat Armor when you hit the hub (which still isn't too hard to get soon). Rest-spamming for books is counterproductive in a game where you are supposed to be rushed for time. FO2 is a different matter since you'll be wanting to buy expensive armor and weapons for all of your NPCs.


*And let's not forget how horrible most of the premades are. Max Stone is literally made to be shit who never crits, and Narg isn't much better. Natalia has decent stats but tags unarmed because lolwut no reason. Mingan tags no combat skills at all. Only Chitsa and Albert really count as decent character guides, with Albert having Small Guns and Chitsa having enough Charisma to form a party.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Narg has Throwing tagged, lul. Though if you get a decent supply of spears it could be somewhat useful early on, I guess...

 

[Caleb462]

(...)
Well, I think the POE talk of "bad builds" is fanning the flames of peoples discontent. CRPG's derived from D&D which limited a player to a specific class. There were tradeoffs and doors open to some classes and not to others based on alignment, class, and magical aptitude. There were no bad builds then either, you picked a class based on your play-style and accepted your choice.

Now, nobody reads the manual or does any work (ie: the game is organic) and developers want to cater to this mob of lazy slobs. They probably know folks don't replay as much as they used to and want people to see all their handiwork on the first play-through. That's fine, but don't tell me you are evolving the genre when in fact you are developing for the lowest common denominator.

I agree with you. BUT I disagree with your idea that "the game is organic" is the same as "nobody reads the manual". When I created my character in Fallout, for example, I did look at the stats to see what they did. I did read the manual when I was having trouble. Generally, I didn't have trouble. When I say "organic" I mean it didn't seem to be a problem for me.

The manual didn't tell me I created a bad build. Like I said, I didn't know until after I had finished the game.

Do you not see the contradiction here? You finished the game. How was it a 'bad' build?

 

[almondblight]

If you want to cry about bad builds that require foreknowledge to avoid, cry over people tagging anything but Small Guns expecting to get a decent weapon to last the game*. The only other combat skill that approaches being usable throughout the game is unarmed in FO2, with HtH evade to make you nigh unhittable through the 2nd half of the game.

Melee in FO1 is useful throughout the game; probably the most fun way to play as well. Though you don't really need combat skills for the beginning of FO1. The first time I finished the game I tagged energy weapons and big guns, and just relied on Ian and Tycho (plus SMG spray and pray) for the early fights.

 

[Average Manatee]

If you want to cry about bad builds that require foreknowledge to avoid, cry over people tagging anything but Small Guns expecting to get a decent weapon to last the game*. The only other combat skill that approaches being usable throughout the game is unarmed in FO2, with HtH evade to make you nigh unhittable through the 2nd half of the game.

Melee in FO1 is useful throughout the game; probably the most fun way to play as well. Though you don't really need combat skills for the beginning of FO1. The first time I finished the game I tagged energy weapons and big guns, and just relied on Ian and Tycho (plus SMG spray and pray) for the early fights.

I was talking strictly of playing alone or nearly alone. Large parties can handle anything, of course, but the party's job is to help cover in deficiencies for the player, and players who have builds strictly designed to be 100% combat builds (like those premades) shouldn't have deficiencies in combat. Plus in FO2 those premade characters are statted to have a very small party sizes anyway.

In melee range your average end-game enemy can easily get 50-70% chance to hit with an aimed shot to the eyes even with power armor, which is almost certain death if you can't finish them off before their turn comes. Melee often can't.