Development Info Josh Sawyer's GDC 2016 talk about attribute tuning in Pillars of Eternity

[Excidium II]

Those skills are more general videogame ones. Being a good RPG player is more about being good at character/party building.

 

[vortex]

Everything what he talked about, will it reflect in future balance patch for PoE?

 

[Roguey]

Everything what he talked about, will it reflect in future balance patch for PoE?

There will likely be no more (balance) patches for Pillars. We'll know for sure in a few weeks.

 

[Excidium II]

Everything what he talked about, will it reflect in future balance patch for PoE?

There will likely be no more (balance) patches for Pillars. We'll know for sure in a few weeks.

They are stopping so you can go ahead play the damn game.

 

[l3loodAngel]

An intelligent combatant can possibly think of several movements ahead, predict and plan more precisely, read finer details in an opponent's body language. A charismatic combatant can instill various emotions in an opponent to make him or her flinch and shake his or her resolve, as well as better hide whatever shortcomings (s)he may have. So in a sense, they would directly affect, not the particular combat stats but the ways a combat encounter itself can play out (though they would probably affect some of the derived stats as well to keep things simpler and easier for calculations).

But of course, to have such and such, you would need to have a combat system that takes into account the likes of character traits, predictions, spontaneity, body language, (mis)direction, resolve. Does any computer role-playing game provide that? Not to my knowledge, even though some pnp rpgs do to various degrees. So, as a concept, I'm okay with the idea on a theoretical level.

Sorry, but complicated and unrealistic stuff never works. You don't need to be very smart to plan in combat. You need stamina, agi to execute move and str. to knock out or smth. similar. Cha is useful to inspiring other people or with classes that can logically utilize it. Same situation should be with int. Using multiple stats for combat you end up with POE. Un fun to play, no meaningful balance and etc.

I personally prefer DnD way, where you need 13 Int to take some feats to become a weapon master, but even then it is used as a balancing act. And this does make as you have to have a certain amount of int to be able to learn stuff/concepts.

 

[cherry blossom]

Complicated and unrealistic? Compared to what? Never works? Whoa, there goes an entire RP history of several generations down the drain.

I disagree. Problem with POE is putting balance itself as a goal before anything else, not making more than a couple things factor into mechanics. Even your DnD example agrees with me.

 

[MrE]

SPECIAL stat system is bestest and most fun I've played with so far, doesn't have to be balanced to within an inch of its life to be a valid game mechanic.

Agree. Maybe it's the nostalgia speaking but yes. Of course there's a lot of various improvements that could be introduced - just not the ones Josh suggested for F3(VB).

Hmmm, let me get this straight. You're saying that you think an "optimal character" should never be a 20/10/10/3/3/3 kind of freak? In other words, not only should there be no dump stats in the sense that all stats are potentially useful to all classes, but there should be no dump stats in the sense that all stats are useful or even critical to all characters (ie, no matter how you build a character from a certain class, melee or ranged, offensive or defensive, he'll need them all)?

I think perhaps if the primary statistics had more direct influence on the game besides influencing secondary stats then what Excidium II suggested would work better. Some class would pick primary stat X, some other class would go for Y, even if they both want secondary stat Z high, which is influenced by both X and Y because at the same time they gain different perks from having X or Y high.

An intelligent combatant can possibly think of several movements ahead, predict and plan more precisely, read finer details in an opponent's body language. A charismatic combatant can instill various emotions in an opponent to make him or her flinch and shake his or her resolve, as well as better hide whatever shortcomings (s)he may have. So in a sense, they would directly affect, not the particular combat stats but the ways a combat encounter itself can play out (though they would probably affect some of the derived stats as well to keep things simpler and easier for calculations).

This being an example of the primary stats influencing the game to a larger extent, as suggested in the previous paragraph.

Not happening, Josh doesn't want anyone to do that much planning upfront.

This is just wrong and disappointing. Like somebody already mentioned, what's the difference between Bethesda games where you can max everything and become god and any game which doesn't allow for bad builds? This in particular might come off as condescending towards players (though in reality it's just business = pandering to potential new (retarded) customers).

There's a difference between being good at combat gameplay and being good at character building. Many good players will be good at both

The problem is you need neither to be successful in PoE.

 

[Infinitron]

Like somebody already mentioned, what's the difference between Bethesda games where you can max everything and become god and any game which doesn't allow for bad builds?

Is this a serious question? In one of them you become a god, in the other you just don't ever completely suck.

 

[Shadenuat]

I don't think player even supposed to have control over his stats, if they're D&D inspired. They're something you are born with (and even randomly roll in AD&D), and then based on that you pick profession and skills. They're like height or weight or beauty, and should't change during one campaign and especially one game. They just represent some additional characteristics like hp or saving throws and basic creature concept (cat has 4 int, human 8 int, and so on). Basically, their role is simulation, a backbone of the system so you could compare one creature to another.

So of course wizards have high int and fighters high str. That's how wizards and fighters are in D&D.

In a CRPG, it just clashes with powergaming and fact that you often play parties of characters or can pick classes. Something like a character with predefined stats and role in society that grow and change depending on your actions in game might fix that issue. (while companions should also be defined characters with flaws in both their stats and personalities, which you'd have to fix somehow - like when you use spells and potions to make Khalid with his 15-17 STR a good fighter and remove fear so he would't break from low morale; full party gen with minmaxing - leave that for games like Wizardry where roleplaying doesn't matter anyway and stats can do whatever developer wants)

For PoE, if everything in it's setting is Dragonball Z, a pool of "soul points" distributed between accuracy/defence/hit points so there could be a little dwarf hitting everyone with anime glowing 2 handed sword would make more sense. As for now their system allow wacky builds at the expense of archetypical characters (you can't be kind, little female cleric who heals well, because you will start getting "lift them in the air by their throat and beat the shit out of them" dialogue).

 

[MrE]

Like somebody already mentioned, what's the difference between Bethesda games where you can max everything and become god and any game which doesn't allow for bad builds?

Is this a serious question? In one of them you become a god, in the other you just don't ever completely suck.

No, a rhetorical one. Intended to suggest there's no challenge in either of the situations (therefore neither is really fun).

 

[l3loodAngel]

Complicated and unrealistic? Compared to what? Never works? Whoa, there goes an entire RP history of several generations down the drain.

I disagree. Problem with POE is putting balance itself as a goal before anything else, not making more than a couple things factor into mechanics. Even your DnD example agrees with me.

First of all you didn't put anything on the table. What exactly are you suggesting? Where does that Mystary Supah system lives? Besides RP history is already gone down the drain.

So you want a similar system to POE, where all stats are relevant and more complicated, but less balanced and you think it would work? I will spare your time and tell you how this will end: CLUSTERFUCK.

My example is the exact opposite of what you said. Int is still a dump, but cleverly used FOR balancing reasons, by reducing number of stat points that can be used for useful statistics. It also adds flavor as it makes early game a bit harder. Its an early game pain for late/mid game gain.

 

[Infinitron]

Like somebody already mentioned, what's the difference between Bethesda games where you can max everything and become god and any game which doesn't allow for bad builds?

Is this a serious question? In one of them you become a god, in the other you just don't ever completely suck.

No, a rhetorical one. Intended to suggest there's no challenge in either of the situations (therefore neither is really fun).

There's definitely more challenge when you're merely competent than where you're a god.

Lack of challenge in PoE is due to underlevelled or easily outsmarted foes, not due to "no bad builds".

 

[l3loodAngel]

Like somebody already mentioned, what's the difference between Bethesda games where you can max everything and become god and any game which doesn't allow for bad builds?

There is no difference from character system perspective, thats the whole point of POE system. Theres only difference from the rest of game design which is more challenging and is used to mask the real situation. The only minor difference is that Beth system is more gratifying to some people.

Max everything and become a dragon VS max something and become a Dragon. Which is better and why?

 

[MrE]

Like somebody already mentioned, what's the difference between Bethesda games where you can max everything and become god and any game which doesn't allow for bad builds?

Is this a serious question? In one of them you become a god, in the other you just don't ever completely suck.

No, a rhetorical one. Intended to suggest there's no challenge in either of the situations (therefore neither is really fun).

There's definitely more challenge when you're merely competent than where you're a god.

Lack of challenge in PoE is due to underlevelled or easily outsmarted foes, not due to "no bad builds".

Not much of a difference for competent players. But of course nobody is saying PoE is as bad as Bethesda's shit.

I'd like to stress that this is a completely new system. For example in the first Fallout there was a lot of fun to be had discovering the system by trying different builds and testing them in the game world. Sure, due to some problems with SPECIAL you could really fuck your character up. But here's the opposite extreme, you can't get anything wrong really. And even if try to go un-optimized on purpose (which can only be compared to trying Fallout with stupid character, kind of a meta-play for experienced players rather than something you do on your first playthrough) you then encounter stupid weak enemies and numbers still don't matter.

 

[Infinitron]

I'd like to stress that this is a completely new system. For example in the first Fallout there was a lot of fun to be had discovering the system by trying different builds and testing them in the game world

It's a poor comparison, though. You have a party of six characters under your full control in this type of game. Forget bad builds, even if you completely refuse to use your character you're still only losing 1/6th of your party's potential power.

Like I've said before, I believe this is why folks on this forum really like these new single-character RPGs like AoD and Underrail. Every difference in your character build is something you really feel, because that's all you've got. You'll never get that "omg, I created a different character and combat is entirely different now!" feel in a party-based RPG, that's just not how these games work.

(This may also explain the popularity of those BG2 mage duels. What BG2 does in effect is collapse the Baldur's Gate gameplay from a party-based RPG down to a single character RPG where every decision you make on how to configure one single character (your mage) has a powerful impact. If he has the right spell, you live. If he doesn't, you die.)

 

[Zorba the Hutt]

If he has the right spell, you live. If he doesn't, you die.)

Come on, that's an excessive oversimplification, even for a theory on why people criticise PoE. I used to rest as seldom as possible and sometimes stumbled into battles for which I was completely unprepared, but you had inquisitors, items, all sorts of other things one could do even against a mage. I remember one battle where I had no 'magic piercing' spells left and ended up in a lengthly delaying action using the spider stones and every other summoning item I had and eventually won - pretty fun actually.

 

[Infinitron]

Zorba the Hutt Sure, you're right. But it's not so crucial to my point, which is that mages in BG2 can become characters whose build has an impact, if not equal then at least beginning to approach the impact your character build has in a single character RPG. Even if that's not strictly true, I think a lot of people feel that it is.

 

[Zorba the Hutt]

Yes, can't argue with that bit, mages are definitely influential

 

[FeelTheRads]

You'll never get that "omg, I created a different character and combat is entirely different now!" feel in a party-based RPG, that's just not how these games work.

What a bunch on bullshit. Different party compositions make plenty of difference.

 

[vivec]

Is this person still talking about muscle wizards?

 

[l3loodAngel]

Zorba the Hutt Sure, you're right. But it's not so crucial to my point, which is that mages in BG2 can become characters whose build has an impact, if not equal then at least beginning to approach the impact your character build has in a single character RPG. Even if that's not strictly true, I think a lot of people feel that it is.

Just out of curiosity by build you mean choosing int. not less then something to be able to cast certain level spells?

 

[Infinitron]

No. That rule wasn't actually enforced in the Baldur's Gate series, I think.

 

[Murk]

According to the original's manual, you need a minimum INT to cast certain spell levels (13 INT can only cast up to level 6, etc.)

This isn't much of an issue for BG original without the expansion given the XP cap, but I suppose it's _there_. Though I cannot recall if the game actually enforces that or not.

 

[oldmanpaco]

Someone obviously needs to test this out right away. If I had been wasting points on INT when it could have been yet another dump stat I am going to be mad.

 

[Roguey]

It doesn't, none of the mages in BG2 have 18 int (except maybe Edwin?) and they still can cast level 9 spells and beyond once you get HLA.

You still need to meet the int minimums to have a wizard of course.