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

[Lhynn]

Triggers, globes of invlunerability, etc. were low level spells and were somewhat interesting. Will we see that in pillars of eternity?

 

[tuluse]

Triggers, globes of invlunerability, etc. were low level spells and were somewhat interesting. Will we see that in pillars of eternity?

We have arcane veils which are basically Sawyer's version of globes of invulnerability.

 

[Dorateen]

I was thinking the arcane veil was more like a standard defense mechanism, rather than a specific spell in a wizard's arsenal, which could be prepared as part of a strategy for tackling a tough encounter. Need to see more combat in action and in context, before I can judge how they are handling all this.

 

[Arkeus]

Triggers, globes of invlunerability, etc. were low level spells and were somewhat interesting. Will we see that in pillars of eternity?

Triggers were added in BG2, probably to make all the low-level spells more useful early on.

 

[Doctor Sbaitso]

Ugh yeah, me too.

http://media.pcgamer.com/files/2013/12/Pillars-of-Eternity-1.jpg

I've seen this shit a million times.

Good thing that pillar in the front crumbled or we wouldn't be able to see the sinister yet ornate device in the center. Oddly, the room is pristine and the broken pillar fragments have not been discarded. One appears too large to have been a part of the pillar, and all of the fragments have been worn and polished. Maybe the rest of the fragments are in that coffin.


These guys seem to appreciate cable management.

 

[Arkeus]

We're definitely going to start with traditional forms but we plan to expand the roster over time. I like weresharks as much (more?) than anyone, but I wouldn't put a wereshark form ahead of a werewolf or werebear.

Yes, the game should be beatable without reaching max level. We're unlikely to tune the ending up for higher level characters, but we do have side content that is going to be tuned for characters at the upper limit of advancement and gear.

 

[LivingOne]

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/65126-thoughts-on-damage-types/page-3

All base armor types have different strengths and weakness against different damage types, mostly physical, but some elemental as well. The majority of damage types are 1:1 with the base DT. It's not at all unique to plate armor.

PoE's plate's stats don't make you more susceptible to shock damage (no armor makes you more susceptible to any damage type). Plate armor has a modifier that reduces base DT when Shock (electrical) damage is involved. The armor is still absolutely protecting you from damage, but a lesser amount than it does against Slash, Pierce, Crush, Freeze, etc.



These are temporary values, but let's say plate armor has a base DT of 16. Its Shock modifier is -50%. Against Shock, the DT is 8. If you later find a suit of Cool Guy Plate Armor with a DT of 20, the Shock DT would be 10. These values are still much higher, even modified, than the base DTs that light armors provide. Shock is just the damage type it doesn't protect against as well.



Would it be more accurate to give Shock-based attacks an Accuracy bonus against plate armor or to covert some percentage of Misses to Grazes or Grazes to Hits but leave the base DT alone -- i.e., it's more likely to hit you in the first place, but no more likely to damage you? Sure, I could see that, but I think giving different modifiers to the base armor types mechanically comes close to achieving the same outcome.

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/65188-shapeshifting-request/page-2

Yeah, definitely. I've written this before, but the druid's forms are some of the most expensive class abilities to implement because each one requires its own unique skinned mesh -- it can be time consuming.

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/65...u-guys-want-to-see-in-dialogue-options/page-2

I ask all of our designers, area or narrative, to provide responses that they feel would spring to various characters' minds. I encourage them to make heavy use of our personality reputation system, but only to provide specific types of responses when they feel like they would naturally flow from the conversation. This means that when it doesn't seem like the character would naturally say something witty or cruel (for example), we don't try to force that reply into the node. We do try to provide regular "play it straight" replies so the player doesn't feel shoehorned into picking an uncharacteristic response. That said, occasionally those responses are in tense or crazy situations and will earn you a reputation for being stoic.



The important thing is to give the player a good range that feels appropriate and entertaining, then work out the gameplay implications as a secondary concern.

 

[tuluse]

Am I the only one who wants to play an RPG with Sawyer design-talk descriptors?

Bring on the Cool Guy Plate.

 

[Copper]

SInce I've been such a negative bastard over Sawyer saying 'No, our art is totally deep', I should say I'm really into everything he has to say about reputation, etc.

 

[Ninjerk]

The important thing is to give the player a good range that feels appropriate and entertaining, then work out the gameplay implications as a secondary concern.

Does this sound strange to anyone else?

 

[Infinitron]

The important thing is to give the player a good range that feels appropriate and entertaining, then work out the gameplay implications as a secondary concern.

Does this sound strange to anyone else?

If by "strange", you mean "Sawyer's gamist design philosophy abruptly STOPS at the border between non-dialogue and dialogue", then yes.

But I'm not surprised by it.

 

[Rake]

The important thing is to give the player a good range that feels appropriate and entertaining, then work out the gameplay implications as a secondary concern.

Does this sound strange to anyone else?

No, it sounds perfect.

 

[Roguey]

If Josh Sawyer wanted to balance Contigencies and Time Stops he'd find a way to do it. He doesn't need to because this isn't a high level uber-cheese campaign.

I can't find where I read it but Josh thinks contingencies and spell sequencers are stupid, rote, and rely too much on prescience/post-reload metagaming.

Time Stop was even nerfed in 3rd edition, preventing casters from slamming spells on helpless enemies/you. That kind of experience is never coming back, ever.

but I doubt PoE1 will be better than BG2. and this has nothing to do with josh sawyer's design philosophy or anything else like that. its just not feasible.

It's 100% feasible to me.

 

[Ninjerk]

The important thing is to give the player a good range that feels appropriate and entertaining, then work out the gameplay implications as a secondary concern.

Does this sound strange to anyone else?

If by "strange", you mean "Sawyer's gamist design philosophy abruptly STOPS at the border between non-dialogue and dialogue", then yes.

But I'm not surprised by it.

Reading it again, I know I've played a game or games that have this and I HATEHATEHATE the idea that you would give a false choice in dialogue (I could swear Josh or some ex-BIS person released an inhouse dialogue scripting tutorial where they said false choices and loaded dialogue are no good, which it seems like this is).

 

[aleph]

Obviously, balance (it should probably be Balance) is far, far superior to interesting dialog choices and meaningful consequences. So, of course, when the two clash, balance wins.

Time Stop was even nerfed in 3rd edition, preventing casters from slamming spells on helpless enemies/you. That kind of experience is never coming back, ever..

yes, and why would anyone think it could come back in a game that claims to be the spiritual successor to a 2nd Edition AD&D computer game. It should be obvious to anyone that such a successor game will take ides from D&D 3rd edition, 4th edition, every fucking MMO and MOBA, but not from 2nd Edition AD&D. The idea itself is ridiculous. Also praise sawyer and his golden calf, balance.

 

[Excidium]

The important thing is to give the player a good range that feels appropriate and entertaining, then work out the gameplay implications as a secondary concern.

Does this sound strange to anyone else?

If by "strange", you mean "Sawyer's gamist design philosophy abruptly STOPS at the border between non-dialogue and dialogue", then yes.

But I'm not surprised by it.

Reading it again, I know I've played a game or games that have this and I HATEHATEHATE the idea that you would give a false choice in dialogue (I could swear Josh or some ex-BIS person released an inhouse dialogue scripting tutorial where they said false choices and loaded dialogue are no good, which it seems like this is).

It's not necessarily "false choices", just different options to set the tone of the dialogue. Like letting you be cynical or professional or charming without necessarily having FAR REACHING CONSEKKKUENCES OMG

 

[dryan]

Balance is boring :/

 

[Harg Harfardarssen]

Time Stop was even nerfed in 3rd edition, preventing casters from slamming spells on helpless enemies/you. That kind of experience is never coming back, ever..

yes, and why would anyone think it could come back in a game that claims to be the spiritual successor to a 2nd Edition AD&D computer game. It should be obvious to anyone that such a successor game will take ides from D&D 3rd edition, 4th edition, every fucking MMO and MOBA, but not from 2nd Edition AD&D. The idea itself is ridiculous. Also praise sawyer and his golden calf, balance.

Taking ideas from AD&D 2E is one thing, taking stupid ideas from it is another. Of course, off the top of my head I can't really think of anything in 2E that 3E made worse.

 

[aleph]

Time Stop was even nerfed in 3rd edition, preventing casters from slamming spells on helpless enemies/you. That kind of experience is never coming back, ever..

yes, and why would anyone think it could come back in a game that claims to be the spiritual successor to a 2nd Edition AD&D computer game. It should be obvious to anyone that such a successor game will take ides from D&D 3rd edition, 4th edition, every fucking MMO and MOBA, but not from 2nd Edition AD&D. The idea itself is ridiculous. Also praise sawyer and his golden calf, balance.

Taking ideas from AD&D 2E is one thing, taking stupid ideas from it is another. Of course, off the top of my head I can't really think of anything in 2E that 3E made worse.

just off the top of my head, hit point inflation and bonuses for almost everything could grow way to large.

Anyway, you think 2nd edition timestop was a bad idea? or just its implementation in the infinty engine?

 

[DalekFlay]

Balance is boring :/

Being an invincible god is boring.

Being a useless class is annoying.

 

[Lancehead]

The important thing is to give the player a good range that feels appropriate and entertaining, then work out the gameplay implications as a secondary concern.

Does this sound strange to anyone else?

If by "strange", you mean "Sawyer's gamist design philosophy abruptly STOPS at the border between non-dialogue and dialogue", then yes.

But I'm not surprised by it.

Reading it again, I know I've played a game or games that have this and I HATEHATEHATE the idea that you would give a false choice in dialogue (I could swear Josh or some ex-BIS person released an inhouse dialogue scripting tutorial where they said false choices and loaded dialogue are no good, which it seems like this is).

Sounds like a good approach, considering they have a seemingly moderately complex generic reputation system into which dialogue options can feed. This way, not every dialogue option wouldn't cause a nonsensical cosmological shift in the game's universe, but may result in a more natural gradual shift towards some change.

 

[Ninjerk]

Well, that's certainly better.

 

[Infinitron]

I can't find where I read it but Josh thinks contingencies and spell sequencers are stupid, rote, and rely too much on prescience/post-reload metagaming.

Josh can think what he wants, but what I'm saying is, if he's told to make a PoE2 with BG2-like mage abilities, he'll find a way to make it work. Just like he's doing things with PoE that he'd otherwise not do, due to IE loyalty.

 

[aleph]

Balance is boring :/

Being an invincible god is boring.

Being a useless class is annoying.

seeing things black and white is boring

 

[Somberlain]

Balance is boring :/

Being an invincible god is boring.

Being a useless class is annoying.

seeing things black and white is boring

But there is a total balance between black and white.