Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Fallout The original Fallout is the Mortal Kombat of CRPGs

Serus

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
6,680
Location
Small but great planet of Potatohole
The OP names some of its problems like lack of tactical combat, some skills or stats being useless...
Such as?

Recall that Fallout was originally GURPS; it supported GURPS characters. Fallout (as shipped) was essentially the same game, but with a quick (two week) overhaul to distance it from the GURPS license. The game allows the player to design their character to suit—to even specialize in the (oft maligned) Traps skill if they so choose. Traps are rare in the games, but when encountered your PC can be an expert where others are not. *It would have been nice to have the skill work both ways, and allow for recovering, and re-setting of traps.

Also, (serious question) why is the combat perceived as non-tactical?
Such as what? You mean stats? Charisma is barely used.
Skills? Some are only marginally useful at best. Yes, you can larp being expert in traps. That's the point, it doesn't do much gameplay wise at all - as you yourself admitted. I really like when people make my points for me, it saves time.

Why it is perceived as such? Are you really serious about that?
I'll bite. Because it isn't. You have control of one character in combat - so any team tactics are out of the question. And the only character you control doesn't have many options. All you do most of the time is basically decide where to target the enemy, if at all. And even the targeted shots are usually just about more damage. Terrain also rarely plays any role. Tactics are about meaningful choices - and you have very few of those in Fallout 1. Doesn't mean that there aren't sometimes some tactical options but overall, it's "not-tactical".
Combat is imho entertaining in Fallout 1 - but not because of tactics, that's for sure.
 

Mud'

Scholar
Joined
Oct 9, 2018
Messages
225
Such as?

Recall that Fallout was originally GURPS; it supported GURPS characters. Fallout (as shipped) was essentially the same game, but with a quick (two week) overhaul to distance it from the GURPS license. The game allows the player to design their character to suit—to even specialize in the (oft maligned) Traps skill if they so choose. Traps are rare in the games, but when encountered your PC can be an expert where others are not. *It would have been nice to have the skill work both ways, and allow for recovering, and re-setting of traps.

Also, (serious question) why is the combat perceived as non-tactical?

Take for example UFO Defense, even if the combat is pretty simple you have ample of choices when you are in combat.

You can crouch to use cover, you can use smoke as a way to cover your movement, you have a large squad where you can coordinate your moves in such a way that one action leads to a opening to other action (destructible terrain leads to tons of choices) and you need to make choke points and think of how each alien behaves (if they are going to psy rape you or rush you) to combat it.

In Fallout 1/2 i cant recall a single time where the AI did something clever, no matter what you are fighting, either civilians, soldiers, BoS, Super Mutants and any type of mutant, the flow of the battle is always going to be that combat starts and the enemy will rush you running, stop when they are close enough that they have a good % to hit and shoot you, they will never shot you and then take cover, some rare times they will throw a grenade your way but never in a clever way (like UFO Defense when you are stacked up against a door and the alien throws a nade your way and kills everyone) or sometimes they will use a stimpack, other than that they will always rush you and shot you, i think that when they are low in HP some of them run away but i am not 100% sure.

When you play Fallout in PVP you realize how simple the combat is in turn base.
 

almondblight

Arcane
Joined
Aug 10, 2004
Messages
2,549
You haven't mentioned sniper perk at all which is crucial for this build, obviously.

If the sniper perk is crucial for the build then it's not a build applicable to 99.99% of the players. To quote an old Codex post:

Without grinding, you could get 91,000 XP in Fallout.

In order to get both Slayer and Sniper, you have to gain another 119,000 XP. That's the amount of XP you would get from playing the whole game two times over.

Effectively, it means killing 119 Deathclaws in LA or ~60 Super Mutant + Master's Pets encounters near Mariposa. Which is exactly what I did a year or two ago when I had too much free time. The whole process required more hours than what was required by the core game. In other words, you have to be an absolutely crazy person (like me) to spend a whole week with a sum of 10 hours of killing Deathclaws over and over and over again with the Alien Blaster to the eye, until you get Sniper.

But otherwise, most people playing the game wouldn't be absolutely crazy, like me. So it is a mystery!

(That's for both, for just Sniper it'd be the XP from the entire game plus 62,000xp from grinding.)
 

jackofshadows

Magister
Joined
Oct 21, 2019
Messages
4,488
Well, any ranged character should pick up Sniper perk. There's not too much choice: Slayer for melee and Sniper for ranged.
Finesse is a matter of preference. Some folks prefer stable damage output, some like to gamble for crits. I would say that Sniper comes only at level 24 and you got to kill people before it comes - and some nasty dudes could have DR higher than your damage output.
Light weapons here are still useful because you got to use something early on and maybe you would like to conserve ammo on lesser foes if you use something like Vindicator later.
Eh, with low lk there's no point in taking it. More importantly, you should finish your playthrough much earlier :) As for preference - of course it is, game is not that hard anyway. I just prefer reliability with fast shot.
If the sniper perk is crucial for the build then it's not a build applicable to 99.99% of the players. To quote an old Codex post:
Some nice autistic calculations but a) why would you want both sniper and slayer for the same build and b) 60k xp is just a ~10 packs of aliens/floaters near SF which is something like 30-60 mins of grind not a whole fucking week, lol.
 

almondblight

Arcane
Joined
Aug 10, 2004
Messages
2,549
Some nice autistic calculations but a) why would you want both sniper and slayer for the same build and b) 60k xp is just a ~10 packs of aliens/floaters near SF which is something like 30-60 mins of grind not a whole fucking week, lol.

In Fallout 1 it's like 60 Deathclaws after you finish the game. A lot more if you want it early enough for it to matter. I tried one playthrough to grind up enough so I could see Slayer, but eventually gave up because it was tedious (would have taken much more than 60 minutes), because grinding in Fallout is kind of silly, and because in the end, what is the point? If you're already plowing through dozens of some of the hardest enemies in the game anyway, the highest level skills obviously aren't that crucial.
 

Glop_dweller

Prophet
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
1,161
When I play combat encounters in Fallout, I target enemies based on relative threat, and the condition of my party members (if any).

I will cripple legs to reduce enemy movement, and will cripple arms to reduce accuracy at range. A crippled arm prevents the use of a two handed weapon; two crippled arms will often see the opponents run. I use the buildings for cover, and use the enemies themselves for cover; there is a good chance they shoot their own team. I sometimes use bystanders as cover. It is very possible to involve the police in the Hub (for instance) to attack enemies who have shot them while trying to shoot the PC.

Enemies expend APs closing distance, and when interacting with objects. Close a door, and they must not only close the distance, but also open the door—often ending their turn. Empty their guns, and they have to reload them; sometimes that's better than stealing their ammo outright. Leave them a bullet, and they waste 2 APs reloading it, instead of pulling a knife, or a HtH attack.

Enemies can be lured. Many times I discard (live/ticking) explosives on the ground where I suspect they will end their turn after closing in. Many times they do, and they blow up during the round.

Dropping flares will improve your character's aim at lighted targets; throwing those flares at enemies might even injure them as a bonus.

Among the PC's actions is the option to use stimpaks on party members during combat. Another option is to begin combat with active Sneak; where by if the target is killed within the first turn —the attack goes unnoticed. You can even Sneak away from attackers (that the PC attacked first), and end combat if not in line of sight with them.

_________________________

Such as what? You mean stats? Charisma is barely used.
Skills? Some are only marginally useful at best. Yes, you can larp being expert in traps. That's the point, it doesn't do much gameplay wise at all - as you yourself admitted. I really like when people make my points for me, it saves time.
Hardly. That is not larping, that is choosing one skill over another. If your PC is a trapper/thief, then they would know the Traps skill, and be remiss for not taking it. Traps are rare, but it would be absurd if they were not. Sadly, Fallout 2 was a hodgepodge of disparate maps, and mapping techniques. Traps were more uncommon than expected, but that doesn't diminish the utility of the skill when it's needed. Almost every door is trapped in the Bishop's house, and some of those will bring the guards if triggered.

It's a roleplaying game, and that is their role; that is how they would respond and react to the given situations; succeed or fail. If the PC doesn't have a developed Traps skill, then they don't have that reliable option.
 

barghwata

Savant
Joined
Sep 13, 2019
Messages
504
When I play combat encounters in Fallout, I target enemies based on relative threat, and the condition of my party members (if any).

I will cripple legs to reduce enemy movement, and will cripple arms to reduce accuracy at range. A crippled arm prevents the use of a two handed weapon; two crippled arms will often see the opponents run. I use the buildings for cover, and use the enemies themselves for cover; there is a good chance they shoot their own team. I sometimes use bystanders as cover. It is very possible to involve the police in the Hub (for instance) to attack enemies who have shot them while trying to shoot the PC.

Enemies expend APs closing distance, and when interacting with objects. Close a door, and they must not only close the distance, but also open the door—often ending their turn. Empty their guns, and they have to reload them; sometimes that's better than stealing their ammo outright. Leave them a bullet, and they waste 2 APs reloading it, instead of pulling a knife, or a HtH attack.

Enemies can be lured. Many times I discard (live/ticking) explosives on the ground where I suspect they will end their turn after closing in. Many times they do, and they blow up during the round.

Dropping flares will improve your character's aim at lighted targets; throwing those flares at enemies might even injure them as a bonus.

Among the PC's actions is the option to use stimpaks on party members during combat. Another option is to begin combat with active Sneak; where by if the target is killed within the first turn —the attack goes unnoticed. You can even Sneak away from attackers (that the PC attacked first), and end combat if not in line of sight with them.

True, people saying that fallout's combat has 0 tactics are obviously being hyperbolic for the sake of making a point or trolling but let's face it, everything you described is great and all but it's still very shallow and barebones in comparison to many party-based combat focused rpgs or even something like Underrail, then again dismissing Fallout completely for its lackluster combat system is retarded, the game has SO MUCH more to offer outside of this one aspect of its gameplay.

Hardly. That is not larping, that is choosing one skill over another. If your PC is a trapper/thief, then they would know the Traps skill, and be remiss for not taking it. Traps are rare, but it would be absurd if they were not. Sadly, Fallout 2 was a hodgepodge of disparate maps, and mapping techniques. Traps were more uncommon than expected, but that doesn't diminish the utility of the skill when it's needed. Almost every door is trapped in the Bishop's house, and some of those will bring the guards if triggered.

It's a roleplaying game, and that is their role; that is how they would respond and react to the given situations; succeed or fail. If the PC doesn't have a developed Traps skill, then they don't have that reliable option.

I agree for the most part and i am certainley not one to advocate for balancing for the sake of balance (guns are more effective then fists, DUH), but if we were being honest alot of the skills from Fallout were underdeveloped and could've easily been expanded upon to give players more incentive to invest in them, like why not have craftable traps that can be used in combat for characters specialised in traps for example; i mean i've played with several characters specialised in traps and outdoorsman and other less useful skills for the sake of roleplaying but i still couldn't shake the feeling that i was wasting skill points that could have been better spent, which is a feeling that should preferably be minimised as much as possible in RPGs (without sacrificing realism for the sake of balance of course).
 
Last edited:

jackofshadows

Magister
Joined
Oct 21, 2019
Messages
4,488
In Fallout 1 it's like 60 Deathclaws after you finish the game. A lot more if you want it early enough for it to matter. I tried one playthrough to grind up enough so I could see Slayer, but eventually gave up because it was tedious (would have taken much more than 60 minutes), because grinding in Fallout is kind of silly, and because in the end, what is the point? If you're already plowing through dozens of some of the hardest enemies in the game anyway, the highest level skills obviously aren't that crucial.
Sure, getting 18 lvl in F1 is harder than 24 in F2 and agree that basically no point in that but I beleive that grinding mutants is relatively easy way although it's a long way to refill the ammo back and forth.
Sniper works as Luck * 10 = chance for critical.
Let's see: we have a guy with Luck - 1. Hubologist' scan can give you permanent +2 to luck, so it's already 30% for critical hit. Add Gain Luck perk and it's 40%. Not bad at all.
I know how it works. I meant that if your build doesn't rely on sniper/slayer it's not a big deal (w/o fast shot you'll get 60% eyes bonus anyway) plus you can simply forget about it and finish the game earlier. If you wanna talk from power-gaming perspective gifted is pretty much mandatory so it also will be 2 lk as a baseline.
 
Last edited:

Ol' Willy

Arcane
Zionist Agent Vatnik
Joined
May 3, 2020
Messages
24,569
Location
Reichskommissariat Russland ᛋᛋ
I know how it's work. I meant that if your build doesn't rely on sniper/slayer it's not a big deal (w/o fast shot you'll get 60% eyes bonus anyway) plus you can simply forget about it and finish the game earlier. If you wanna talk from power-gaming perspective gifted is pretty much mandatory so it also will be 2 lk as a baseline.
Of course, gifted. So, 2 at chargen, +2 from scan, + 1 from perk. That's gives us 50% chance to crit with non-aimed shots and 100% chance to crit with eye shots. That's definitely better than 5% and 65% to crit respectively. Also, non-aimed with sniper has 50% crit chance vs eye shot without sniper and 60% crit chance, but former costs one less AP. Throw in bonus right of fire, more criticals to have 60% even with non-aimed and now Gauss pistol looks even more dangerous than rifle. With two ranks of action boy we have 4 shots with pistol, each with 60% crit chance. Noice
 

Serus

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
6,680
Location
Small but great planet of Potatohole
Hardly. That is not larping, that is choosing one skill over another. If your PC is a trapper/thief, then they would know the Traps skill, and be remiss for not taking it. Traps are rare, but it would be absurd if they were not. Sadly, Fallout 2 was a hodgepodge of disparate maps, and mapping techniques. Traps were more uncommon than expected, but that doesn't diminish the utility of the skill when it's needed. Almost every door is trapped in the Bishop's house, and some of those will bring the guards if triggered.

It's a roleplaying game, and that is their role; that is how they would respond and react to the given situations; succeed or fail. If the PC doesn't have a developed Traps skill, then they don't have that reliable option.
Not again the "It is is a rpg". No, it is not only that, nor it is a much as that. It is a computer role playing game. And it does not give you the option to be a trap skill specialist. It "lies" to you that it does by having a skill but the skill is barely used. Because there are few traps present - as you admitted yourself. And because there are no hidden interesting of significant options or content that are closed behind traps skill. That's the point and you are still making it up for me. So you might "chose" trap skill over another skill all you want, just that it won't be a relevant choice.
And no Bishops don't count because they are not in Fallout 1. I always said that F2 is underappreciated on the codex - relative to the F1 - not in general. It might have worse realised setting, too much jokes, etc... But when it comes to mechanics and the diversity of the game world it beats F1. Charisma i mentioned - does have a bigger role there than in F1. Some problems with skills or stats might still be present though.
In the end, You may chose to "roleplay" a trap specialist all you want. There is only mindless computer and you playing, so no one will judge you. And no one will recognise your "roleplay". Because the only way a computer game can do that, is if there are meaningful gameplay options for a given "roleplaying". Otherwise it is called "larping" in Codex-speech in case you didn't know.

Also the whole discussion started not about whether you can roleplay anything or not. This is not very relevant. The question was if traps sill is very underused mechanically. And it is.

TL;DR: I like Fallout 1 and 2
 

Glop_dweller

Prophet
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
1,161
Not again the "It is is a rpg". No, it is not only that, nor it is a much as that. It is a computer role playing game. And it does not give you the option to be a trap skill specialist.
Yes it does; in fact, you have to intentionally specialize in traps, as it cannot be developed any other way... unlike First aid, for instance.


It "lies" to you that it does by having a skill but the skill is barely used. Because there are few traps present - as you admitted yourself.
How many traps have you ever seen in real life? Would you seriously expect to find a trap in every abandoned building?... or in every inhabited building? How many traps do you have in your own house?—real boobytraps.

Here is an example of the absurd:
In Wasteland 2, inside the inhabited Agro-center, inside their own infirmary, random crates are wired to explode.


And because there are no hidden interesting of significant options or content that are closed behind traps skill. That's the point and you are still making it up for me. So you might "chose" trap skill over another skill all you want, just that it won't be a relevant choice.
And no Bishops don't count because they are not in Fallout 1.
Fine, the theives guild then, and Hightower's place. It is not the point that there be a thousand traps in the game, it is the point that the PC who is expert at detecting and disarming traps is able to do so in the moment; even silently, where other PC could not—and it's an in character action.


In the end, You may chose to "roleplay" a trap specialist all you want. There is only mindless computer and you playing, so no one will judge you. And no one will recognise your "roleplay".
Why is this important to you? Who cares if others will see, or acknowledge roleplaying the PC? The only one that matters is the player, the one roleplaying the PC. The computer does its one (and only) job, which is to determine the outcome of the PC's actions. If the PC makes a mistake, then the trap is triggered; if the PC fumbles the conversation, then the NPC is not swayed, or convinced. If the PC fumbles setting the detonator, the explosives could trigger prematurely, even while still in inventory.

Having a high skill is being prepared—for sake of being prepared.

Because the only way a computer game can do that, is if there are meaningful gameplay options for a given "roleplaying". Otherwise it is called "larping" in Codex-speech in case you didn't know.
Then the speech is wrong. Larping is Live Action Roleplay ~ing... and even if applied to mean solo head-canon, this is not the same as roleplaying a guard in Oblivion; where the player pretends to be a guard, and actually mans a post in-game for the duration of a guard shift.

The question was if traps sill is very underused mechanically. And it is.
It's subjective; (I know, I hate that tac as well, but in this case it's true). I can agree that expanding the utility of the Traps skill would be a welcome improvement, but the Traps skill as-is, is described as:
Traps.jpg

, and mechanically, I think that's enough.
 
Last edited:

luj1

You're all shills
Vatnik
Joined
Jan 2, 2016
Messages
12,869
Location
Eastern block
Have to agree that build variety is not one of Fallout's strong suits, therefore replayability is rather average at best. It ranks A/A+ in virtually every other category thoughi, which is why it's constantly #1 in all our polls.
 

luj1

You're all shills
Vatnik
Joined
Jan 2, 2016
Messages
12,869
Location
Eastern block
How many traps have you ever seen in real life? Would you seriously expect to find a trap in every abandoned building?... or in every inhabited building? How many traps do you have in your own house?—real boobytraps.

Here is an example of the absurd:
In Wasteland 2, inside the inhabited Agro-center, inside their own infirmary, random crates are wired to explode.

I thought the bit in Wasteland 2 when you find booby traps while going through cow shit was very Fallout-like. So as the monks who worship a warhead.
 

Glop_dweller

Prophet
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
1,161
Have to agree that build variety is not one of Fallout's strong suits, therefore replayability is rather average at best. It ranks A/A+ in virtually every other category thoughi, which is why it's constantly #1 in all our polls.
Three different paths [minimum] is average?

I thought the bit in Wasteland 2 when you find booby traps while going through cow shit was very Fallout-like. So as the monks who worship a warhead.
I think I missed that; but it's definitely something to go check out.

_____________

 

Mud'

Scholar
Joined
Oct 9, 2018
Messages
225
Yes it does; in fact, you have to intentionally specialize in traps, as it cannot be developed any other way... unlike First aid, for instance.


How many traps have you ever seen in real life? Would you seriously expect to find a trap in every abandoned building?... or in every inhabited building? How many traps do you have in your own house?—real boobytraps.

Here is an example of the absurd:
In Wasteland 2, inside the inhabited Agro-center, inside their own infirmary, random crates are wired to explode.


Fine, the theives guild then, and Hightower's place. It is not the point that there be a thousand traps in the game, it is the point that the PC who is expert at detecting and disarming traps is able to do so in the moment; even silently, where other PC could not—and it's an in character action.


Why is this important to you? Who cares if others will see, or acknowledge roleplaying the PC? The only one that matters is the player, the one roleplaying the PC. The computer does its one (and only) job, which is to determine the outcome of the PC's actions. If the PC makes a mistake, then the trap is triggered; if the PC fumbles the conversation, then the NPC is not swayed, or convinced. If the PC fumbles setting the detonator, the explosives could trigger prematurely, even while still in inventory.

Having a high skill is being prepared—for sake of being prepared.

Then the speech is wrong. Larping is Live Action Roleplay ~ing... and even if applied to mean solo head-canon, this is not the same as roleplaying a guard in Oblivion; where the player pretends to be a guard, and actually mans a post in-game for the duration of a guard shift.

It's subjective; (I know, I hate that tac as well, but in this case it's true). I can agree that expanding the utility of the Traps skill would be a welcome improvement, but the Traps skill as-is, is described as:
Traps.jpg

, and mechanically, I think that's enough.


They could have fixed it and added a bit more to the skill, something like arming traps yourself to ambush enemies since part of the trap skill involves setting explosives.
 

Glop_dweller

Prophet
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
1,161
That could have been very cool. Trip-wired dynamite might have been cool; recovering traps intact—with enough skill— could have been fun as well.

Alas... I don't remember using the fully supported trap abilities in the Baldur's Gate series for much more than detecting & disarming traps. Setting the traps never seemed to have significant (enough) effect, and getting the enemies to step on them was an exercise in patience and tedium.
 

Citizen

Guest
Bethesda Fallouts brought these elements to our age, by using a modern engine with more freedom involved. Fallout 4 is a much better game than the original Fallouts.

Fallout 4 is the TemplarGR of fallout series
 

Glop_dweller

Prophet
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
1,161
Bethesda Fallouts brought these elements to our age, by using a modern engine with more freedom involved. Fallout 4 is a much better game than the original Fallouts. I know you don't want to accept this truth, but it is still the truth.
Which is the better game, Pac-Man, or Chess? How do you compare them? Is one an improvement upon the other?


Everything good about Fallouts 1 and 2 is in Fallout 4, but the engine is modern and the gameplay much more advanced. It is time to leave the past to the past and stop trying to hold RPGs back in the mid 90s just because you are too old to appreciate and immerse yourself to the modern games.
LOL


  • "Everything good about Fallouts 1 and 2 is in Fallout 4"
  • "you are too old to appreciate and immerse yourself"
You have it backwards. This is a case of 'Eat your Brussels Sprouts', and whining about them not tasting like candy.

You are too young to distinguish, let alone appreciate everything good about Fallouts 1 and 2. It's not that the older are unable to appreciate the modern gameplay, it is that they appreciate exactly what it is, and find it lacking; in the same way that an older person finds marshmallows lacking when served a plate of them when they were told it would be Brussels sprouts. Sure, the kids at the table go nuts for them, but kids love simple sugars; they are not an improvement, they are a substitution that lacks the complex flavor of the originals.

It's actually worse than that. There is a lament for what was lost to get this crap... it's as if they sold the sprouts to buy the marshmallows. Bethesda has irrevocably damaged the IP now. It's a saddening loss; and a waste of potential.

You don't believe.

The [so called] modern engine is fine; it's the way they use it that disappoints; they make Oblivion clones.

You make the claim of 'better game', and that's overly broad... 'better at what?' is a needed clarification here.
Is D00M2 the better game than Civilization? ...again, better at what? Is it Civilization sequel material? Could D00M3 be a better Civilization game? I think not. D00M (2016) ? No. The games play at cross purposes.

FO4 is not the better Fallout game; it's hardly a Fallout game at all when you strip out all of the IP names that it uses. I say FOBOS is a better Fallout game than FO4; it's arguable that FO3 is a spinoff of FOBOS, and that FO4 is just an aggressively streamlined sequel to FO3.



From experience, I attest that Bethesda's attempts at Fallout lack anything that I'd seek out the Fallout brand name to experience. No, everything good about Fallouts 1 and 2 is NOT in FO4; not even in FO3. Fallout fundamentally contradicts Bethesda's gameplay & design ethos; they can't make a good Fallout game, because it's against policy.
 
Last edited:

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom