Disco Elysium Pre-Release Thread [GO TO NEW THREAD]

[barghwata]

It just makes sense.

MUH REALISM.

I'm going to sketch three characters for you. Read them without looking at the skill list.

1) Bodybuilder. Paranoid. Sex addict. Expert pharmacologist. Danger sense. No one takes him seriously.

2) Smooth liar. Terrible shot. Reads people well. Persuasive. High school dropout. Can throw his lighter in the air and catch it in his pocket.

3) Educated. Good team player. Has a "feel" for the city. Thoughtful. Slow-moving. Speaks quietly and strains to be heard.

The example i've given you is very simple, an uncharismatic character shouldn't be a smooth talker and i've given an example of a game that has this issue which is FNV, the examples you gave are hypotheticals and i've never seen a game that has this level of depth and character building but if such a game exists i agree that it should have a much more complex system then the simpler system that fallout has where certain skills are attached to certain stats (as in speech is attached to charisma and intelligence, hand to hand combat is attached to strength etc..........) which works pretty well in FO1.

According to you, only one of these characters is "good roleplaying". The other two "make no sense" and take massive penalties. Can you guess which is which?

Congratulations! If you guessed (1) the pharmacologist bodybuilder, you are right! That is the only concept that makes sense. (2) The smooth talking liar and (3) the quiet team player both make no sense and cannot be played in Disco Elysium without a massive point cost to basic attributes.

Not sure why you assume i think they don't make sense, the examples i've given are very simple, if you have terrible perception you shouldn't be a good shot, i am sure you agree with this.

 

[Egosphere]

Give any of these people free reign, and they'll bang out a user interface that will be every bit as splendid as the one in DE.

Dude, if you can't see the differences in quality between these guys, you have an eye made out of wood. Those range from great, to good but derivative, to frankly pretty bad.

To you, maybe. Although I can very much say the same thing about that UI. Visual Calculus is really good. Volition is utter shit.

 

[Saduj]

Saying that a nearly blind character shouldn’t be able to be a good sniper should not be controversial.

That has nothing to do with whether someone can be strong and smart and good looking all at the same time. That’s really an argument against limiting the number of attribute points available.

 

[Zombra]

The example i've given you is very simple, an uncharismatic character shouldn't be a smooth talker

So you are saying "If a game is stat-based, then it makes sense for stats to govern skills and be extremely limiting in character builds, therefore this is a good system."

I agree with the if:then part; it is logical. I disagree however that a stat-based game that limits build diversity is a great idea in the first place, particularly in a game that has so many fascinating skills that could interact in amazing ways ... if only we could try out different combinations.

Instead of a possible 1,048,576 build concepts (20 skills that a character could be good or bad at), I basically have 5. Five characters I can make. Intellect Guy, Psyche Guy, Strength Guy, Motorics Guy, and Jack-of-all-Trades-shit-at-everything Guy. This is not inspiring me to come up with diverse and creative builds. Instead it's making me look at the list and go "OK, if I want a logic guy I guess he should also be an actor."

Not sure why you assume i think they don't make sense, the examples i've given are very simple, if you have terrible perception you shouldn't be a good shot, i am sure you agree with this.

First: this game doesn't have a "Perception" stat. It has skills grouped by vague concepts that don't particularly make sense. (cough bodybuilder pharmacologist cough)
Second: if it did, it would still be limiting design for no good reason.

If you support this system, you must agree that the examples I gave "don't make sense". A smooth character in Disco Elysium must have high Drama (intellect, for lying), Empathy (Psyche, to read people) and Motorics (Savoir-Faire, to be smooth and cool). Therefore this character cannot exist without massive penalties because it requires a heavy investment of 3 of the 4 basic stats. If you think this system is great, you have to agree that such a character should not exist. If you think it would be nice to be able to make this character, you have to join me in being disappointed with a stat-limited system.

 

[JarlFrank]

Saying that a nearly blind character shouldn’t be able to be a good sniper should not be controversial.

That has nothing to do with whether someone can be strong and smart and good looking all at the same time. That’s really an argument against limiting the number of attribute points available.

This. It makes sense for some attributes to put limits on some skills, within reason.

If you have 2 INT and talk like a retard, you shouldn't be able to raise your science to 200.
It's just common sense.

 

[Background Character]

I'm gonna put one point in every skill and be a worthless piece of shit just like I am irl THIS IS GONNA BE THE BEST

 

[Kyl Von Kull]

Zombra there are a bunch of ways to customize your character beyond that initial stat distribution. Thoughts in your thought cabinet, equipment, items--they can boost stats or individual skills and maybe do even more than that. I suspect there will be more build flexibility than you're anticipating.

 

[barghwata]

The example i've given you is very simple, an uncharismatic character shouldn't be a smooth talker

So you are saying "If a game is stat-based, then it makes sense for stats to govern skills and be extremely limiting in character builds, therefore this is a good system."

I agree with the if:then part; it is logical. I disagree however that a stat-based game that limits build diversity is a great idea in the first place.

Instead of a possible 1,048,576 build concepts (20 skills that a character could be good or bad at), I have 5. Intellect Guy, Psyche Guy, Strength Guy, Motorics Guy, and Jack-of-all-Trades-shit-at-everything Guy. This is not inspiring me to come up with diverse and creative builds. Instead it's making me look at the list and go "OK, if I want a logic guy I guess he should also be an actor."

Not sure why you assume i think they don't make sense, the examples i've given are very simple, if you have terrible perception you shouldn't be a good shot, i am sure you agree with this.

First: this game doesn't have a "Perception" stat. It has skills grouped by vague concepts.
Second: if it did, it would be a limiting design for no good reason.

If you support this system, you must agree that the examples I gave "don't make sense". A smooth character in Disco Elysium must have high Drama (intellect, for lying), Empathy (Psyche, to read people) and Motorics (Savoir-Faire, to be smooth and cool). Therefore this character cannot exist without massive penalties because it requires a heavy investment of 3 of the 4 basic stats. If you think this system is great, you have to agree that such a character should not exist. If you think it would be nice to be able to make this character, you have to join me in being disappointed with a stat-limited system.

I see your point now, i was simply noting how disco elysium's system is definitley a step up from that of games like FNV, but if what you're saying is that the game can do alot better then that and that there is room for improvement from a simple stat/skill based system then i definitley agree.

 

[Zombra]

Zombra there are a bunch of ways to customize your character beyond that initial stat distribution. Thoughts in your thought cabinet, equipment, items--they can boost stats or individual skills and maybe do even more than that. I suspect there will be more build flexibility than you're anticipating.

Well, I was certainly exaggerating to try to drive the point home. I anticipate having a lot of possible combos. I just think shackling skills to stats was a push towards "character classes" and a bonehead design move.

I see your point now, i was simply noting how disco elysium's system is definitley a step up from that of games like FNV, but if what you're saying is that the game can do alot better then that and that there is room for improvement from a simple stat/skill based system then i definitley agree.

Thanks for taking the time. Really I'm blowing this out of proportion and I'm sure we can make plenty of cool characters. I'm just sad they stat limited things instead of encouraging us to make our own amazing combos. Seeing you actually praising this system was a disappointment.

Enjoy the game! I know I will.

 

[barghwata]

Zombra there are a bunch of ways to customize your character beyond that initial stat distribution. Thoughts in your thought cabinet, equipment, items--they can boost stats or individual skills and maybe do even more than that. I suspect there will be more build flexibility than you're anticipating.

Well, I was certainly exaggerating to try to drive the point home. I anticipate having a lot of possible combos. I just think shackling skills to stats was a push towards "character classes" and a bonehead design move.

I see your point now, i was simply noting how disco elysium's system is definitley a step up from that of games like FNV, but if what you're saying is that the game can do alot better then that and that there is room for improvement from a simple stat/skill based system then i definitley agree.

Thanks for taking the time. Really I'm blowing this out of proportion and I'm sure we can make plenty of cool characters. I'm just sad they stat limited things instead of encouraging us to make our own amazing combos. Seeing you actually praising this system was a disappointment.

Enjoy the game! I know I will.

Glad we've come to an agreement, however if a game is gonna have a simple "stat governs skill" based system then by god you have to at the very least limit how far you can be skilled depending on the governing stat, why have stats if they're not gonna have any impact on the advancement of skills in the first place, if so just remove them entirely.

 

[Zombra]

Glad we've come to an agreement, however if a game is gonna have a simple "stat governs skill" based system then by god you have to at the very least limit how far you can be skilled depending on the governing stat, why have stats if they're not gonna have any impact on the advancement of skills in the first place, if so just remove them entirely.

Yep. Since the game is built on the interaction of awesome skills, it's sad to put those limiters in. This game would be fine and more interesting imo without skill group "corrals". Free point builds are better than character classes.

 

[Prime Junta]

If you look at the stat screen, also you'll notice that the character has one really strong stat and another pretty strong stat. You could also spread your points across three different stats, so you'd have three pretty strong ones. The stats cap your skills, but assuming there aren't so many skill points in the game that you can max out everything to the caps, it would mean that you could probably make your character archetypes pretty well. Your suave sharpshooter simply wouldn't be quite as good at lying as someone who focused exclusively on being a drama queen, at reading people as someone who made cold reading their main thing, or someone with exceptional talent who practiced his sharpshooting skills like mad.

On the other hand he'd have pretty decent base motorics, intellect, and psyche skills -- which might have a big payoff, depending on how the thresholds for skill checks are spread.

I.e. I get your point Zombra but until you're able to actually play the game, it's all theorycrafting really. The game will play completely differently if most of the skill checks are near the theoretical maximums, if most of them are so low even an average character could pass them, or if there's a lot of them with a wide spread from easy to heroic.

 

[barghwata]

Glad we've come to an agreement, however if a game is gonna have a simple "stat governs skill" based system then by god you have to at the very least limit how far you can be skilled depending on the governing stat, why have stats if they're not gonna have any impact on the advancement of skills in the first place, if so just remove them entirely.

Yep. Since the game is built on the interaction of awesome skills, it's sad to put those limiters in. This game would be fine and more interesting imo without skill group "corrals". Free point builds are better than character classes.

To each their own opinion, personally i prefer a stat/perk/background based system then a free point building system because i feel it gives you the ability to personalise the integral characteristics of your character serpate from what skills the character has, however it could be because i really love the fallout games and i am just ultra biased i don't know.

 

[Zombra]

To each their own opinion, personally i prefer a stat/perk/background based system then a free point building system because i feel it gives you the ability to personalise the integral characteristics of your character serpate from what skills the character has, however it could be because i really love the fallout games and i am just ultra biased i don't know.

Yeah. Getting off topic now, but FYI my background is in point-based P&P systems such as GURPS or Champions. Come up with a concept, strengths, weaknesses, then build the character and realize the vision. So I get triggered when I get told "You can't have a swordsman character who is also a storyteller".

 

[barghwata]

To each their own opinion, personally i prefer a stat/perk/background based system then a free point building system because i feel it gives you the ability to personalise the integral characteristics of your character serpate from what skills the character has, however it could be because i really love the fallout games and i am just ultra biased i don't know.

Yeah. Getting off topic now, but FYI my background is in point-based P&P systems such as GURPS or Champions. Come up with a concept, strengths, weaknesses, then build the character and realize the vision. So I get triggered when I get told "You can't have a swordsman character who is also a storyteller".

I see..... i totaly understand that, but if a stat/skill based system is done correctly i am certain it can allow you to have as you said "A swordman character who is also a storyteller", unless it GREATLY limits how many points you can distribute in which case yes that would be a problem.

 

[HoboForEternity]

I'm gonna put one point in every skill and be a worthless piece of shit just like I am irl THIS IS GONNA BE THE BEST

me too. i can do everything a little bit, but i am never good as people who really put effort into 1 aspect. from python to balancing book, to fixing torn clothes to cooking.

 

[Multi-headed Cow]

My general plan for my initial character is going to be a completely corrupt piece of shit cop that'll take every bribe and bit of payola he can, lean on his badge an position of authority for perks and benefits as much as he can, be a gigantic fucking coward who will try his best to get out of any confrontation (And have shit physical stats/skills), and take various dialog skills because he'll be a really shitty cop but he got his position by bullshitting and brownnosing. No idea specifically what stats I'll end up taking for him, that's just my plan for how I'm going to try to play 'em. Should be fun to play and (I imagine) nice for replays since he'll probably be complete garbage at actually solving cases, especially if he's being outright bought out at some points, so I'll probably still have mystery for future runs. Most of the time in RPGs I like playing an evil bastard, and being a dirty cop sounds like the closest equivalent in Disco with the Furries.

One question that's been dancing around in my mind though is how much authority I'll want. My reasoning is with too little authority, people probably won't want to try to bribe him. Too much authority, maybe he'll be seen as too much of a paragon of justice to bribe. My gut feeling is I'll want a happy middle ground of authority where he can lean on his badge to try to blackmail people into giving him free shit (And be seen as enough of a threat to want to buy off) without being so high that it gets in the way. God damn I can't wait until the 15th.

 

[Zombra]

I sketched my first concept a while back. Note the numbers don't map to actual game numbers, they're just relative ratings showing how important each skill is. I want to make a totally humorless genius with relentless problem solving powers but no people skills. Should be interesting to try to filter this guy through the hung over artistry of the game.

Now you all can see why I'm so annoyed by the stat gating system. I want high and low skills in almost every stat.

 

[Multi-headed Cow]

I sketched my first concept a while back. Note the numbers don't map to actual game numbers, they're just relative ratings showing how important each skill is. I want to make a totally humorless genius with relentless problem solving powers but no people skills. Should be interesting to try to filter this guy through the hung over artistry of the game.

Now you all can see why I'm so annoyed by the stat gating system. I want high and low skills in almost every stat.

That does look like it can be tough to juggle. And even my character will probably be a bit of a stretch. Like electrochemistry would be fairly important for my crooked cop (Those bribes aren't just to roll around on piles of money) but since it's in the physical side it might be hard to mesh with the rest of the character. But some of that will come down to the thought cabinet (This screenshot on Steam shows how it can adjust skills) and things like equipment which can fiddle with them too. And then on top of that I don't know exactly how leveling up stats/skills will work, so maybe bumping up physique enough to get a good amount of electrochemistry (And half-light. Since I want to be a coward I'll want that fairly high) while keeping the more regular physical skills at 0 or near to it. If leveling up the basic stat (In this case, physique) doesn't really cost any more/much more than leveling up the specific skills under it, maybe there'll still be room to do things like that.

 

[Prime Junta]

Don’t forget about the signature skill. You can tag one skill as your signature, which gives a bonus on it and lifts the cap. The screen earlier ITT tagged Logic in a 1-Intellect character. This should let you have an exceptional ability in an area you otherwise suck at.

 

[jf8350143]

Saying that a nearly blind character shouldn’t be able to be a good sniper should not be controversial.

That has nothing to do with whether someone can be strong and smart and good looking all at the same time. That’s really an argument against limiting the number of attribute points available.

This. It makes sense for some attributes to put limits on some skills, within reason.

If you have 2 INT and talk like a retard, you shouldn't be able to raise your science to 200.
It's just common sense.

It's not technically true though, I don't know about snipers but there are a Chinese basketball player who suffers heavy near-sightdness(he can barely see the basket), but still is one of the best 3 point shooter in China.

It should have a heavy penalty to make it harder to raise, instead of a hard limitation.

 

[Morgoth]

I'm gonna model my first char after this bad cop:

 

[vortex]

I'm rolling this bad cop

 

[Jenkem]

I'm going with this bad cop

 

[Kev Inkline]

I'm gonna model my first char after this bad cop:

I'll with the original.