Editorial Josh Sawyer Explains: How to Balance an RPG

[MuscleSpark]

Givem him/her an "I support patriarchy" tag and a Witcher 1 sex card avatar instead.

Can I have one?

 

[Shannow]

The proper way to come up with an attribute system that doesn't feature easy dump stats, I think, would be to rather give each stat more variables that it affects, rather than reducing each to one or two universal % modifiers. You start by defining, ok we plan on having these base attributes for each character - what should they affect? Strength would affect how heavy armor you can equip (or how fast you get tired in it), how big a bow you can draw, how much HP you have, etc.. These things can be very relevant for a wizard too, actually, at least if you don't enforce strict class restrictions into what kind of armor they can equip, or give them magical blast attacks they can use at any time if they're not casting proper spells. If you want you could also have it affect some part of spellcasting too, like give a minor boost to how quickly you can cast a spell, or how good you are at keeping casting a spell when you take a hit while spellcasting. Or give wizards some self-buff spells that can turn them into serviceable fighters, so that their combat stats can matter more (yet it's still doable to just ignore those spells).

Welcome to The Dark Eye. Glad you could join us.
Sadly this system is "obtuse" (as in not :incloosive.

That of course means we have to go with "everything is the same". That way we can argue that our system does not repeat some of D&D's failures. (Of course we also don't repeat many of its successes. But since our whole aim is to get rid of contrasts we can say "mission accomplished". Well, as soon as the few cinks that are still present are ironed out...)

 

[Jim Cojones]

Roguey should have 'Pillars of Eternity lead designer' tag and Obsidian logo for avatar.

 

[hairyscotsman2]

Now, I haven't played the PoE beta. But I've seen the attribute screens which already pretty clearly underline a problem with the game's system.

It's not about whether the stats are competitive vs. each other, or significant enough to alter your playstyle - those numbers can be easily tweaked to reach a reasonable balance.

It's just the core concept that's iffy. Basically you've got Damage Dealing stat, AoE/duration stat, HP stat, Accuracy stat, and so on. These could really be named anything and the description text could say anything, in their core they're still just that. Which is kinda ok from a mechanic perspective, I suppose, but thematically the attributes presented don't really let you realize different character concepts you might have. Does a PoE mage with high Might really feel like a muscular dude? Or just a mage who has high damage spells? Basically the stats feel like very different things depending on which class they're given to.

D&D is simplistic and in some ways just bad, sure, but at least it tells us some things - warriors are strong and tough, and mages are smart, as a rule. Which gives a thematic background into what kind of people would pick which profession. PoE tells us that any kind of person is fit for any profession, only thing that varies is their exact combat role. ToEE implementation (the point buy side of it) was p. good all in all, you had real choices to make. The BG/IWD method was p. pointless of course.



The proper way to come up with an attribute system that doesn't feature easy dump stats, I think, would be to rather give each stat more variables that it affects, rather than reducing each to one or two universal % modifiers. You start by defining, ok we plan on having these base attributes for each character - what should they affect? Strength would affect how heavy armor you can equip (or how fast you get tired in it), how big a bow you can draw, how much HP you have, etc.. These things can be very relevant for a wizard too, actually, at least if you don't enforce strict class restrictions into what kind of armor they can equip, or give them magical blast attacks they can use at any time if they're not casting proper spells. If you want you could also have it affect some part of spellcasting too, like give a minor boost to how quickly you can cast a spell, or how good you are at keeping casting a spell when you take a hit while spellcasting. Or give wizards some self-buff spells that can turn them into serviceable fighters, so that their combat stats can matter more (yet it's still doable to just ignore those spells).

This whole Sawyer philosophy outlined in the article - everything must be simple without many modifiers so that it's easy to balance - is very obviously Dumbing Down. It may be Dumbing Down Done Right, but it's still much worse than a proper, complex RPG system. Proper balance in a game is a great thing, but you mustn't sacrifice complexity for it. You should first make a system that's properly cool and interesting, then when that's lined up, then you balance it to the best of your ability.

Placing these build options into attributes means there's less complexity required in later character development in each class. I think it's a very good idea for a class based system.

 

[Telengard]

And it came to pass that in the two thousandth and twelfth year there were many dissensions in the codex, and there was was also a contention amongst the people, insomuch that there was much namecalling and calling of the faggotry. But Sawyer did walk among these heathens, and he spaketh unto them of deliverance and balance, telling of a time hence when all would be equal. And the larpers rejoiced, for now all their choices would not just matter, their choices would all matter equally. But none rejoiced more so than the one called Roguey, who had heretofore walked only in darkness, one of the smallest criminals of all, a stalker. And as his light touched her, she did fall upon Sawyer, kissing his hand and praising his every word. And he said unto her "You have walked long in sin and degenerative gameplay, my child. But no more. Bring me your false works, and I will make of them something great." And she and others brought unto him their most holy object, the box of Baldur's Gate. But Sawyer only gazed upon this box in sadness and despair, that they should worship it so. "This is nothing to worship," he said unto them. "But I shall make it as into that which should be." And then he reached out to give his true blessing. And lo, when Sawyer touched this box of Baldur's Gate, it gave to Roguey a great vision. This box of Bladur's Gate would be transformed! Cleansed at last of all that had once marred and weakened it; it had become the Pillars of Eternity! Miracle of miracles. "If you believe strong enough, this is what I will give unto you." And Roguey did then fall upon the ground, giving him worship, and thusly did she become the first disciple of Sawyer.

Spoiler

 

[Infinitron]

Well done.

 

[VioletShadow]

I a lot. Good job!

 

[Jaesun]

 

[DefJam101]

dat tag

 

[Delterius]

It would be a crime not to give Roguey that tag.

 

[Ninjerk]

It's full of stars

 

[imweasel]

Best post ever.

And the tag is perfect for Roguey too.

 

[Roguey]

I burst out, I'm transformed.

 

[imweasel]

The new avatar fits too.

 

[Metro]

 

[CyberP]

The Codex is a fucking circus

 

[Pope Amole II]

The Codex is a fucking circus

You'll have to try harder than that to get your own unique tag, bro. Don't be too jealous.

 

[twincast]

1st looks like IST, tho

Agreed.
Mind, pseudo-German sentences that don't actually try to be German give me warm fuzzy memories of this:

Spoiler

And at least in this case it would be (albeit totally random) grammatically sound.

 

[VioletShadow]

I burst out, I'm transformed.

You look beautiful now mami.

 

[SuicideBunny]

The new avatar fits too.

only the fire godlikes' inability to reproduce...

 

[Cowboy Moment]

It's a balance issue that's fairly easy to solve, though. If your beefed up attributes made some weapon or tactic or whatever too effective, then find a way to nerf it.

Indeed, balance issues are so easy to solve, just nerf the overpowered thing! If only your wisdom was available to all game designers, struggling to create balanced systems over the years. Maybe World of Warcraft would've still had competitive PvP if they had hired you instead of Ghostcrawler!

Come on, man. You're not this stupid.

My point is, there are two separate issues here:

1) Attributes are truly valuable to all classes and all characters, and not just in the half-assed/auxiliary way they can be in D&D ("If your fighter dumps Wis he'll have worse will saves!"). Some people don't like this. THIS principle is what makes it so that all attribute builds are viable.

2) The attributes don't have a powerful enough effect on characters. Which makes it so that characters with wildly different attribute builds can play too similarly to each other. In theory, this has little to do with the actual viability of those characters, since, as mentioned in 1), those attributes are useful no matter what.

"In theory", haha. Yes, in theory these can be unrelated. In practice, however, in any system of non-trivial complexity, messing with the effects of base attributes will cause huge balance problems, and yes, impact the viability of characters. Again, you can easily exchange the "viability" problem for a "balance" problem, but that doesn't actually solve the problem itself.

The goal here, is to have a system with multiple viable builds that are also balanced. One way of achieving this is limiting the impact of these builds, making balancing much easier. You can't just then say "We already have viable builds, these builds not having enough impact on gameplay is an unrelated problem". It is related. You've designed it this way to make achieving another goal - balance - much easier. They only become unrelated once you throw that out the window, which is impossible in practice.

That's a purely academic distinction between "build viability" and "balance", I think. You can basically take any system, and buff all builds across the board until the worst ones become viable, but that just replaces one problem with another. I do think this is preferable to builds not actually making any difference, but then you're basically hoping that your core gameplay is engaging enough despite serious systemic imbalance - as is the case for a lot of the Codex' beloved RPGs.

I don't know. Imagine if in the IE games, you weren't allowed to dump the most important attribute for each class.

If you picked wizard, the game automatically forced you into 18 INT, likewise STR for figther, and so forth.

Would like the lack of making "bad" fighters and wizards make the game worse in any appreciable way?

If you took multiclassing out of the picture, I don't think it would make much of a difference. Then again, IE games don't really have particularly good character customization through attributes. They're a primary example of what Infinitron calls the "content-is-King" design principle - they're only really good because of dungeon and encounter design, and itemization.

 

[Infinitron]

Indeed, balance issues are so easy to solve, just nerf the overpowered thing! If only your wisdom was available to all game designers, struggling to create balanced systems over the years. Maybe World of Warcraft would've still had competitive PvP if they had hired you instead of Ghostcrawler!

Come on, man. You're not this stupid.

Sawyer agrees with me: https://twitter.com/jesawyer/status/503489827417767936

Again, the builds aren't all viable because the attributes lack impact. That is a way of making all builds viable in an RPG, but it's not the way Pillars is taking. The builds are all viable because each individual attribute is designed, per its description which you can read in its tooltip, to be fairly helpful for all classes. Right now that's not quite the case yet (Perception and Resolve aren't helpful enough in what they affect, which again is a separate problem from the sheer numerical impact of each attribute) but that is the basic principle.

 

[set]

As Wow's success shows, removing specialization is not only the best way to balance an rpg, it's the best way to maintain the size of your large paying audience.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Sawyer agrees with me:

Infinitron confirmed for Roguey alt.

 

[TheGreatOne]

I told you so. Sawyer hasn't made a single RPG with good gameplay since IWD (and that was with D&D rules that he despises) and he has only made one notable game (FO:NV). Other than he's a second class designer, always living in the shadows of other contemporary RPGs. Loosing to Larian after months of Original Sin trashing will be the last nail in his coffin.
All this talk about balance and elegant design yet he can't make a RPG with good gameplay to save his life while many others have just succeeded in doing so (and this is during an era with little competition). He never should've become a RPG designer as he obviously hates the kind of unfinished and uneven design that's inherent to PC gaming and CRPGs. But he knows that he could never compete against Japanese developers in making platformers and shmups (plus the fact that he's incapable of making a) games with fun gameplay and b)challenging games), so he attempts to make lame watered down CRPGs instead. He fails at making proper CRPGs and he couldn't make the kind of balanced and flawless games he dreams about(*), so he fails as a designer. He's neither fish nor fowl.

(*)=Just look at how buggy and broken New Vegas was when it was released. If you want to make games with flawless design and polish, you need Nintendo level polish and quality control. He would never be able to work again if he released a game so buggy under those conditions. But his games are neither as fun and creative as buggy, unfinished and broken PC games like Troika games. So again, he's neither fish nor fowl. Has the negative aspects of both design philosophies and none of the positives. What a joke.

Face it Roguey, you're done. Game over.