Obsidian's Pillars of Eternity [BETA RELEASED, GO TO THE NEW THREAD]

[uaciaut]

As someone somewhere else pointed out - would turning off the AOE bonus from Int to prevent friendly fire make sense, since the increase in a stat potentially working against you would be a first.

 

[SCO]

I imagine that spells themselves can do whatever they want with the bonus. So if it doesn't make sense for a certain spell of that to be a 'bonus' i suppose it wont. It will probably substitute another 'bonus'. For buffs, maybe a logscale affected stat bonus.

:imbalance:

 

[MicoSelva]

BTW, being kind of busy I completely missed the iteration where INT was supposed to directly affect damage dealt in combat. Good thing too, as I would go mouth-foaming or possibly die of heart attack or something.

Q: I wonder what the thinking is behind making Intellect affect damage. Just a balance thing? Doesn't really bother me, but I always assume STR will benefit raw damage output.

JES: It is completely for balance.

Seeing as it was already changed, even must have understood that it would be too hard to justify. Or he was overruled by majority. Either one works.

 

[Grunker]

BTW, being kind of busy I completely missed the iteration where INT was supposed to directly affect damage dealt in combat. Good thing too, as I would go mouth-foaming or possibly die of heart attack or something.

Ah, if only the simulationists themselves could agree on anything.

 

[Roguey]

Being intuitive is important to Josh since bad players don't read. He created a poll at both the Obsidian and Something Awful forums and everyone agreed that they'd expect strength/might to be the stat that governs damage.

 

[MicoSelva]

I can easily imagine how INT could be affecting damage in combat. However, it is hard to imagine how STR would NOT affect it (for melee, obviously).

I like Wasteland 2's approach to stats - with secondary stats being affected by multiple primary stats. However, W2 could use some balancing in this regard.

Since PE is going a different route (a secondary stat is only affected by one primary stat), I expect these dependancies not to be completely ass-pulled for balance's sake.

 

[Athelas]

I'm pretty sure that's the case for PoE as well, i.e. Psyche is affected by both Intelligence and Resolve.

 

[MicoSelva]

I believe that is more an exception rather than standard, at the moment.

 

[Grunker]

Being intuitive is important to Josh since bad players don't read.

Josh also believes you should listen to people who don't buy equipment from Pomab. The real question is: why listen to people who are fundamentally uninterested in playing his game? He said as much himself ("I make this game for a particular audience, and not to everybody else"), so why this focus?

If you agree with Josh that Int should govern damage for balance purposes, why do you accept his compromise to make a BAD design decision because of people who play blindly anyway?

You seem awfully hypocritical when it comes to Josh.

 

[MicoSelva]

Bros, explain something to me. It seems that damage bonus from attribute(s) applies to every type of damage. Am I wrong?

If that's the case, Might affecting gun damage is just as stupid as Might not affecting melee damage, so the switch from INT is not much of an improvement after all.

 

[Chaotic_Heretic]

Bros, explain something to me. It seems that damage bonus from attribute(s) applies to every type of damage. Am I wrong?

If that's the case, Might affecting gun damage is just as stupid as Might not affecting melee damage, so the switch from INT is not much of an improvement after all.

You aren't wrong. Except Fortitude, Reflex and Psyche/Will, each derived statistic is only governed by ONE ATTRIBUTE for all types.

So you get retarded shit like Stephen Hawking being a melee master or a muscular Rugby player with brain damage being an awesome wizard.

You can say that both models are in with regards to unintuitiveness.

 

[Goegoff]

Bros, explain something to me. It seems that damage bonus from attribute(s) applies to every type of damage. Am I wrong?

If that's the case, Might affecting gun damage is just as stupid as Might not affecting melee damage, so the switch from INT is not much of an improvement after all.

Looks like renaming it from Strength to Might didn't do the trick. How about MoreDamageness?
Because ultimately, it's one of the most banal things to trip over; it's just a label for an attribute that increases damage (whatever particular attribute or set of attributes You need to apply to the particular situation that results in You doing more damage).

 

[tuluse]

He should just call it power like he was earlier.

 

[MicoSelva]

Looks like renaming it from Strength to Might didn't do the trick. How about MoreDamageness?
Because ultimately, it's one of the most banal things to trip over; it's just a label for an attribute that increases damage (whatever particular attribute or set of attributes You need to apply to the particular situation that results in You doing more damage).

True enough.
The name doesn't matter if the attribute only has one use (increasing damage). I am used to p&p-like thinking, with strength being an attribute that lets you do things that require using muscles. There will be no non-combat stuff to do with strength in the game (as it seems), so whatever.

 

[Infinitron]

There will be no non-combat stuff to do with strength in the game (as it seems), so whatever.

No, it'll be used in skill checks in dialogue and elsewhere.

The idea here is that the numbers are balanced such that mage spells do enough damage that you don't really NEED to increase Might much to do more damage than a Fighter.

 

[Decado]

Strength should be a derived attribute, like health or stamina. It should go up or down depending on circumstances, and used to determine melee damage accordingly. A person will be quite weak after three days of not eating, even though they have the potential to be very strong.

Intelligence or perception or accuracy should be used to determine damage bonuses for weapons like wands or guns. But they should stay as hard stats. You can still be very smart and know where to aim your pistol or how to use your wand, even if you haven't eaten in three days. There should be a penalty, sure, but it would have to be a lot more forgiving.

 

[Harold]

Now that this update's smoke has almost cleared, cue in another 50 pages of simulationchat, sprinkled with some Grunker vs. Draq wall-of-text-quote-duels.
Repeat until next update.
Godspeed, gentlemen

 

[Monad]

 

[Grunker]

Now that this update's smoke has almost cleared, cue in another 50 pages of simulationchat, sprinkled with some Grunker vs. Draq wall-of-text-quote-duels.

I dare you to find posts where I wall-of-text, DraQ-style.

I am always eloquent and brief.

Spoiler

or maybe not

 

[Hormalakh]

Josh also believes you should listen to people who don't buy equipment from Pomab. The real question is: why listen to people who are fundamentally uninterested in playing his game? He said as much himself ("I make this game for a particular audience, and not to everybody else"), so why this focus?

If you agree with Josh that Int should govern damage for balance purposes, why do you accept his compromise to make a BAD design decision because of people who play blindly anyway?

You seem awfully hypocritical when it comes to Josh.

because josh believes that even, fairly decent players who are in his audience don't read or miss fundamental stuff in other ways (or just do sometimes stupid shit anyway). in reality, the decline is more insidious than you or i believe it is. a cursory glance at the codex proves this point, doesn't it? he sometimes chalks this up to poor designer implementation.

as for his design decisions, not all of them are bad and many were sorely needed. some of them i chalk up to brain farts or just not thinking through the new decision completely, others as a fundamental misunderstanding for why players do certain things.

 

[Surf Solar]

 

[Infinitron]

I had no idea!

 

[Space Satan]

Wait, someone actually used that Guard ability?

 

[ZagorTeNej]

Now that this update's smoke has almost cleared, cue in another 50 pages of simulationchat, sprinkled with some Grunker vs. Draq wall-of-text-quote-duels.
Repeat until next update.
Godspeed, gentlemen

Yeah, it's gonna be fun.

Which reminds me, will PoE feature IE games style exploration (I mean with it being a spiritual successor to those games and all)? How will it compare to similar games like Morrowind, Skyrim and Stalker in that regard?

 

[Roguey]

Josh also believes you should listen to people who don't buy equipment from Pomab. The real question is: why listen to people who are fundamentally uninterested in playing his game? He said as much himself ("I make this game for a particular audience, and not to everybody else"), so why this focus?

I wonder how many times I've quoted this

A lot of people are not great at games. I don't mean they are terrible at them, but they aren't great. They may or may not realize this, but when you get right down to it and see them sit down at a game and start to play, they do pretty well but some stuff just slips by. In RPGs, often that error is a strategic one that you don't immediately get stung by. The poison bites you 10, 20, 30 hours down the road.

I don't know what sort of person you're picturing in your head, but from comments that a lot of people make, I get the feeling you see a moron, a person who doesn't really like games, who isn't enthusiastic about them in the same way that you are. In some cases, this is true. But I've seen hundreds of volunteer and professional testers come and go. Most of them are actually pretty intelligent. They like or love games. They like or love RPGs and have played a bunch of them. They're still not terrific at them. They miss a bunch of things and they make a bunch of mistakes.

If you agree with Josh that Int should govern damage for balance purposes, why do you accept his compromise to make a BAD design decision because of people who play blindly anyway?

How is this a compromise and how is it bad?

I know this disappoints some people, but PoE is going to have both classes and attributes (ability scores). Exactly what they're named and exactly what they affect is still flexible. My goals for them are what I said before: every attribute can be bumped for some meaningful benefit for every class and every attribute will inflict a meaningful loss for every class if it is dumped

He should just call it power like he was earlier.

1. physical strength: He swung with all his might.
2. superior power or strength; force: the theory that might makes right.
3. power or ability to do or accomplish; capacity: the might of the ballot box.

Judging by the complete lack of care at the Obsidian forums and the Kickstarter comments, no one gives a damn except a couple of grogs at the Codex.