Game News NWN2: DnD redefined - I live ... again!

[Vault Dweller]

Tags: J.E. Sawyer; Neverwinter Nights 2; Obsidian Entertainment

There is a long and interesting discussion over at the <a href=http://nwn2forums.bioware.com/forums/viewtopic.html?topic=492498&forum=95>NWN2 forums</a>. A list of the DnD "improvements" has been compiled, followed by some JE Sawyer's comments. Prepare for some reading:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote>The following is a list of the unecessarry deviations from the Dungeons & Dragons rules made by Obsidian. This does not include deviations which were necessarry to adapt the game to the PC...
<br>
...
<br>
The "Mitchell Brothers" resurrection system. - <b>NWN2 will grant your characters complete and utter immortality. Death is merely a temporary inconvenience and all party members will be revived at the end of a fight </b> (or even during combat if the implementation is anything like KOTOR2). Like the aforementioned game, all joy will be sapped from the (probably endless) combat sections, by the fact that it will be impossible to die. No strategy will be necessary as you will be able to spam your way through any fights.
<br>
You will never be able to say "we lost a lot of friends on the way, but we finally made it," or "I never liked that guy, let's leave him to rot." You will not even be asked if you want to resurrect your characters, never mind receive a gold or xp penalty. Raise Dead and Resurrection will be made completely irrelevant, which will likely lead to further disregard for the rules in attempt to balance this out. And so we take another step on the road to a magic system that contains only direct damage spells and buffs.
<br>
<br>
Merging of Knowledge skills into "lore" - The idea that all knowledge is summed up in one skill is completely ridiculous: better to separate it from the rules altogether. I'm not asking for every type of knowledge skill, but a selection of three or four could have worked. With synergy bonuses, they could have been quite powerful. They could have been used to examine creatures, track, identify different types of item, aid in crafting items, as well as in dialogue. If that wasn't enough, you can just make the DCs lower so that one rank counts for a lot more.
<br>
...
<br>
Inability to equip non-proficient items - again, limiting this adds nothing to the game. Is it not reasonable that sometimes characters might have choose to use items they might otherwise not? Perhaps to take advantage of magical effects or damage certain creatures? So we loose the ability to put players in interesting situations. If you're worried about new players, just add a pop up box saying "your character is not proficient with this item and will suffer a penalty to hit" with another box to "never show this message again." The new players argument is invalid and this only subtracts from the game experience.
<br>
...
<br>
Petrification - Petrification is permanent by definition. I have no problem with weighing the dice in the players favour with the difficulty slider, but to say something is temporary when it is not is just blatant disregard for the spirit of the rules. How many plots would be spoiled if that ancient wizard had walked off five minutes later, instead of standing forgotten in the desert for untold millennia? If you really want people to be able to chicken out of this, they make a separate rules slider which is independent of difficulty, so that players can have a chance without needing to mangle the rules in the process.
<br>
...
<br>
32 point buy. For some reason (which I remain forever unable to comprehend) point buy has been increased to 32, the maximum allowable under 3.5 rules. Presumably to make the game more "epic." Every kind of interesting character is possible with 25 point buy: the all-rounder cleric, the intelligent but frail wizard. All that this ability point gluttony actually serves to accomplish is to make it completely unnecessary to have any weak or even average stats, so that all characters are superior to normal people in every way. If you want to make the game easier, just lower the ability scores of everyone else; it's all completely relative anyway. So what are you actually achieving, other than distorting the game? I am fairly certain that this will merely lead to all enemies being scaled up too, ruining any sense of proportion (or perhaps they'll just make the game ridiculously easy like KOTOR2?).
<br>
...
<br>
Always Max Hit Points - No longer is this tied to game difficulty. All characters will now receive max hit points per level. The whole point of the random hp on level up is to enforce the idea that hp is not proportional to level: 2 level 1 characters are supposed to be more powerful than 1 level 2. Get rid of the randomness if you want, but anything but the max. What's wrong with the average rounded up/ down? Or any other approach? Or a selection of options? Again, it's all completely relative. Just make the enemies weaker (or more accurately, bring them back down to where they should be by the rules). I can't think of any other approach that would have been worse than the one they have taken.
<br>
...
<br>
Up to level 20 in a single campaign - It takes characters like Drizzt a lifetime of adventuring to reach level 14, and they propose to take us to the maximum allowed in the standard rules in a single campaign. <u>If you do the maths, it works out approximately 5 times as fast as Baldur's Gate.</u> Now I'm prepared to compromise, but that's just ridiculous. It's even faster than nwn, which was unanimously agreed to be too fast anyway.</blockquote>Can't disagree with anything he says. Being immortal removes every element of challenge from games. You don't need to worry about your party members - if you live, they are going to be alright. Obsidian is turning into a real market pleaser.
<br>
<br>
Anyway, here is Sawyer's take on it:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote>I also dislike the Parry/Discipline/Knockdown trifecta and I wish we had dealt with changing it over to the proper rules a long time ago.
<br>
<br>
The companion death rules and advancement rate are for our Official Campaign only. The former is scripted and the latter is simply how we chose to give out XP. Raise Dead/Res. are not irrelevant in the OC; I use them regularly to bring back allies in combat. A wipe is still a wipe.
<br>
<br>
I completely disagree on knowledge skills. I think the "find out what skills are worthless by playing the game!" approach contributes nothing to anyone's experience. Even in pen and paper sessions, DMs often have to stretch to allow players to make use of their various knowledge skills.
<br>
<br>
The ability to equip items with which the character is non-proficient is something I talked to the programmers about. The effects would have to be coded or scripted and we had time for neither, unfortunately. I also agree that it should be allowed with a warning.
<br>
...
<br>
<u>The choice to revive companions after combat automatically was made very early in the project and many aspects of the OC rely upon it.</u>
<br>
...
<br>
This is not my design. It is not my story. It is a choice that I inherited from the original lead designer, so I can only explain that it is integral to how the campaign functions but not to how the game itself functions. I'm not going to defend it because it isn't a choice I would have made.
<br>
<br>
If I were making my own campaign, people would drop like stones, you'd have a level cap of eight, and no prestige classes.</blockquote>There is a lot more stuff there, so go read some more, and then let's try to come up with some crazy theories about those design aspects that depend on the auto revival thing.
<br>

<br>
<br>
Thanks, Surlent

 

[Azarkon]

Can't disagree with anything he says. Being immortal removes every element of challenge from games. You don't need to worry about your party members - if you live, they are going to be all right. Obsidian is turning into a real market pleaser.

As if there was any real challenge to begin with in games where a player can reload whenever anything doesn't go his way. But the principle reason behind this isn't a matter of making it more convenient for the average joe so that he doesn't have to click reload; it's more a matter of not wanting plot-critical NPCs to die in case the game comes across someone who *doesn't* reload.

It has to do with design priorities, and JE's defense of it is that people want fairly linear, cinematics-driven plots with interesting characters over non-linear, gameplay-driven worlds where going solo is just as fun.

 

[Vault Dweller]

As if there was any real challenge to begin with in games where a player can reload whenever anything doesn't go his way.

Hmm... you are right. Let's also remove the concept of health and damage to your characters and any failures. Come to think about it, we don't need skills either. If you miss or fail a roll, you always reload anyway, am i rite?

... it's more a matter of not wanting plot-critical NPCs to die in case the game comes across someone who *doesn't* reload.

That made KOTOR so much fun!

It has to do with design priorities, and JE's defense of it is that people want fairly linear, cinematics-driven plots with interesting characters over non-linear, gameplay-driven worlds where going solo is just as fun.

Sad, but true.

 

[Mr. Teatime]

As if there was any real challenge to begin with in games where a player can reload whenever anything doesn't go his way.

Hmm... you are right. Let's also remove the concept of health and damage to your characters and any failures. Come to think about it, we don't need skills either. If you miss or fail a roll, you always reload anyway, am i rite?

... it's more a matter of not wanting plot-critical NPCs to die in case the game comes across someone who *doesn't* reload.

That made KOTOR so much fun!

It has to do with design priorities, and JE's defense of it is that people want fairly linear, cinematics-driven plots with interesting characters over non-linear, gameplay-driven worlds where going solo is just as fun.

Sad, but true.

Hey, a game focused on dialogue and other gameplay challenges rather than your hitpoints and combat stats... doesn't sound so bad to me.

But I guess that's not what Obsidian are getting at.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Hey, a game focused on dialogue and other gameplay challenges rather than your hitpoints and combat stats... doesn't sound so bad to me.

Sounds awesome. What game are you talking about again? If NWN2, take a good look at KOTOR2. Also, take a look at the Prestige Classes and try to figure out which one is the diplomatic one, focused on "dialogue and other gameplay challenges".

 

[Azarkon]

I'm not averse to being challenged in games, but these days the general impression is that gamers have become more and more irritable by even the slightest presence of tedium. To use an example, back in the days of Everquest deaths brought about 3-4 hour corpse retrieval runs + 2-3 hours worth of exp loss and people sucked it up. Today deaths in World of Warcraft causes a 10 minute run and people still whine about it being too much. I like the fact that JE is at least honest about it, and that Obsidian, despite abandoning the hardcore camp, still seems reasonably in tune with what makes a game fun as opposed to, say, Besthesda marketing's of soil erosion and Patrick Stewart.

 

[DemonKing]

I guess the focus on keeping critical NPCs alive is the decision process behind this. Also as has been pointed out, most people hit quickload as soon as one or more of their party dies anyway.

I imagine a game with a fully player-generated party (eg Icewind Dale) is more suited to the old "style of death" system.

In any case, having a character in PST who was immune to the death process didn't exactly hurt that game, did it (although obviously NWN2's storyline won't revolve around this issue)?

 

[Volourn]

"JE's defense of it is that people want fairly linear, cinematics-driven plots with interesting characters over non-linear"

Weird. Both BG2, and PST were character focused games yet both had characters who could die. Nice try; though. You fail, again.

 

[Azarkon]

"JE's defense of it is that people want fairly linear, cinematics-driven plots with interesting characters over non-linear"

Weird. Both BG2, and PST were character focused games yet both had characters who could die. Nice try; though. You fail, again.

Wtf. Thats his defense, not mine, you idiot. If you got a problem with that argument, go take it to JE (or better yet, your favorite company Bioware for coming up with the whole shtick in KOTOR), though I'm sure he'll tell you something along the lines of: the characters in BG 2 that were important to the plot, couldn't die until they were done with the plot (ie Imoen), whereas in PS:T you were practically immortal and no character was central to the plot except for you.

 

[Major_Blackhart]

So what, JE is defending it? Or criticizing it? I dont have time to read the messages, so someone let me know. Also, if he's criticizing it, does that mean he's no longer at Obsidian? So much for Obsidian being a bastion of good rpg's.

 

[Azarkon]

He's doing the classic "I might not agree with it, but this is just the way games are nowadays so suck it up suckas" maneuver. He's still a lead designer for Obsidian.

 

[Gambler]

If NWN2, take a good look at KOTOR2.

KOTOR2 was a game focused on dialogue and other gameplay challenges. It's one of the few recent titles where non-combat skills were actually used throughout the game, and mental attributes really affected dialogue options.

Also, take a look at the Prestige Classes and try to figure out which one is the diplomatic one, focused on "dialogue and other gameplay challenges".

How do prestige classes relate to this discussion?

 

[Claw]

So what, JE is defending it? Or criticizing it?

I was a little confused about that in the first moment too. He's defending it; the criticism comes from a post on the Obsidian forums.

If I were making my own campaign, people would drop like stones, you'd have a level cap of eight, and no prestige classes.

Yeah, arbitrary limits are awesome.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

When Game Design Goes to Hell: The Story Behind Neverwinter Nights 2

 

[dojoteef]

I think this is really a tough issue to tackle. When games had less mass market appeal and a larger percentage of the clientele could be categorized as hardcore it might make sense to make games especially challenging. While I agree it would be nice to have a hardcore rule option ala ToEE, it seems Obsidian does not have time to implement such a feature. Despite how much you guys enjoy bitching, you all KNOW that with as expensive as game development has become companies cannot ignore mass market pressures on high profile games such as NWN2. I know you also realize 99% of this pressure comes from the publisher since they are fronting the money. Developers cannot come out and say: "The publisher decided this is the way we have to do it." If they did, they would have an extremely difficult time landing another publishing deal. Fortunately developers realize this and are actively trying to find ways to change development practices so this does not continue to be the case, i.e. episodic content, downloadable games, independent games, etc.

I hate to give the doom and gloom speech, but I sympathize with Obsidian's plight because I have seen some of it first hand now. If you do not already see behind the curtain, Obsidian is likely having to cater to their publisher's requests (though not all of the changes are likely from them). Publishers sometimes demand things that the developer just knows are going to suck, but they have to do it anyway, and they have to defend it to the public if they ever have a hope of developing another game.

 

[Jora]

and then let's try to come up with some crazy theories about those design aspects that depend on the auto revival thing.

Probably for similar reasons in the KoTORs. If Kreia or Bastila or whoever was killed *permanently* in a battle and then there's a cutscene which was supposed to feature them, it would probably cause... issues.

Pretty much.

 

[Twinfalls]

Well, my interest in this game is old-skool no-auto-revive.

and then let's try to come up with some crazy theories about those design aspects that depend on the auto revival thing.

Probably for similar reasons in the KoTORs. If Kreia or Bastila or whoever was killed *permanently* in a battle and then there's a cutscene which was supposed to feature them, it would probably cause... issues.

Pretty much.

Hurrah for making everything revolve around stupid cut-scenes with annoying characters, rather than actually doing what D&D is supposed to be about - the players making their own stories through how they play the game, not what fucked up cut-scenes they sit through.

 

[kingcomrade]

I think Diablo 2 did a great job with resolving saving issues, and it could be tweaked for RPGs and other genres. Checkpoint based, except when you leave the game it saves wherever you are like a normal save-game. Checkpoint based saving has always seemed a lot better to me because there's none of the perfectionist reload-reload-reload stuff. Adding in the save-when-you-leave allows people who have to get up from their computer to do something else to not lose their place. Sure, you could abuse this system, but it would take a lot of effort and time.

 

[Jim Kata]

Har har.

I guess there goes the any crazy doubts as to whether sawyer is an idiot or not. Why anyone ever doubted, I will never know. Of course, it's not like he can come out and say "Sorry boys, but my boss is a dumbfuck!"

The immortality thing does it for me - no NWN2 por moi. You can also infer from that that the difficulty will range for NONE to INSTAWIN.

 

[Jora]

I guess there goes the any crazy doubts as to whether sawyer is an idiot or not. Why anyone ever doubted, I will never know.

What in these quotes makes it clear that he's an idiot? Did you even read what he said or just what VD and others wrote? He doesn't defend immortal player characters, he's saying that the feature is only in the official campaign. As for breaking lore into seperate knowledge skills, it's not like even AoD will be doing that (for the same reasons Sawyer gave).

 

[butsomuch]

http://nwn2forums.bioware.com/forums/vi ... 8&forum=95

In our Official Campaign, companions are scripted to be revived after combat. It's not even a matter of modding as much as it is a matter of not using our scripts for your own modules.

The choice to revive companions after combat automatically was made very early in the project and many aspects of the OC rely upon it.

This is not my design. It is not my story. It is a choice that I inherited from the original lead designer, so I can only explain that it is integral to how the campaign functions but not to how the game itself functions. I'm not going to defend it because it isn't a choice I would have made.

If I were making my own campaign, people would drop like stones, you'd have a level cap of eight, and no prestige classes.

However, you'd still have max hit points. ^___________^

 

[spacemoose]

I think Sawyer wants to make a good game, and I think he's capable of it. In this case though - he came in after most of the design was done, even if he doesn't like it, what's he going to do? Badmouth the game he's being paid to finish?

edit: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ exactly

 

[Jora]

I've been focusing on just playing the game recently. It's hard to get in a lot of continuous playtime when a) the game is full of bugs and b) you have to coordinate design's fixing of bugs. But I think people will genuinely like the "OC". There are a few things here and there that aren't that great about it, but overall it feels like a lot of fun. I believe that if we fix our major current issues (which have more to do with overall playability), it will be well received.

I don't like aspects of all the games I've worked on. I think all of the previous games I've worked on that have been released are, at best, mediocre games that could use a great deal of improvment.

LONG ASS URL TO SOMETHING AWFUL FORUMS

 

[Sol Invictus]

It sounds to me like the original designer was attempting a Planescape: Torment approach by using auto-resurrection as a gameplay mechanic. It's definitely "different", and what JE Sawyer says about how he doesn't support it but had no choice but to inherit it is cause for dismay.

I can only hope that Sawyer has managed to follow through with the original "vision" of these gameplay mechanics and make them plausible in the setting and story that he's taken over.

See, I personally think that it's fucking stupid. How can it be classified a "game" if it has little to no challenge?

Even in World of Warcraft which some people seem to think is an easy game (at least early on), there are deaths, and wipes, and they are painful. Monsters respawn, and your equipment breaks down. By the time you get back, you're 5 gold poorer and totally pissed off that you couldn't accomplish what you set out to do. There's even dungeons that basically lock you out from fighting the boss if you fuck up at an integral point because your group doesn't deserve another try without resetting the instance.

There are of course contingencies, like a Warlock's soulstone or a Shaman's self-resurrection ability, but they're usable once per hour, and you can only stay unreleased in your corpse for 10 minutes, so it's really not an option to die over and over again.

The penalty for death and failure is harsh, as it should be. As 5.5 million people play World of Warcraft, I think it's fairly safe to say that Obsidian is barking up the wrong tree by thinking that everyone wants to play an easy 'cinematic' game. I could think of any number of other popular MMORPGs and RPGs that have a harsh penalty for death, but I chose WOW, so there you go.

If anyone wants to bring up the idea that console gamers don't like challenging games either, they should try Ninja Gaiden or something. Oh and also, the whole concept of savegems (instead of the quicksave key) means that if you fuck up, you'll have to start all over again from the beginning of the area. If you fail, try again. Games are supposed to be a challenge, so that's what it's all about.

It's bad enough that PC gamers are often pampered with quicksaves, and now Obsidian wants to moot even that. So much for challenge. If anything, NWN2 sounds like it won't be a lot of fun. It's a good reason why I prefer to play MMORPGs and games that have no quicksave feature like Diablo II and IVAN. They're a challenge to beat. That's what's fun about them. If I wanted to numb my mind, reflexes and shut my brain off, I'd just watch a fucking movie.

Unless NWN2 manages to feature some really nice multiplayer, and if (and only if) the single player campaign doesn't sound as bad as even the designer admits it is, I'm just going to avoid it like the plague and stick to World of Warcraft and Hellgate: London.

Games should feature challenge, or they aren't worth playing.

 

[Vault Dweller]

If NWN2, take a good look at KOTOR2.

KOTOR2 was a game focused on dialogue and other gameplay challenges. It's one of the few recent titles where non-combat skills were actually used throughout the game, and mental attributes really affected dialogue options.

Do you understand the word "focused", Gambler? K2 was a game that had decent "dialogues and other gameplay challenges". Much like IWD2, K2 was focused on combat, especially the last areas.

Also, take a look at the Prestige Classes and try to figure out which one is the diplomatic one, focused on "dialogue and other gameplay challenges".

How do prestige classes relate to this discussion?

Figure it out.