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

[Wise Emperor]

Josh always twisted mechanics of ready settings to appeal more to his tastes. Here we will have inspired by/heavy modified D&D. It will change probably couple of times, how the cooldowns work etc. In the end, I think Codex will be pleased. I know its hard for many resident whiners, but be positive.

Oh really?

Can you give me some examples?

Have you seen his design proposals for van Buren? Oh, the flamewars.

Speech divided into 3 skills.

 

[Captain Shrek]

Yeah. That improved combat a lot! Thank god this genius is now putting cool downs in my game.

 

[evdk]

One handed and two handed weapons.

 

[Captain Shrek]

 

[felipepepe]

Isn't the idea of increasing the depth of a RPG mechanic something good? Like Intimidade, Persuade & Barter intead of just "Speech"?

 

[Captain Shrek]

Isn't the idea of increasing the depth of a RPG mechanic something good? Like Intimidade, Persuade & Barter intead of just "Speech"?

It is. I fail to see in any of the DnD games it being implemented properly.

Also, this is basically the narrative ability in RPG not its combat encounter ability (Except bluff for feint which was implemented terribly).

 

[CrustyBot]

Sarog is still bitching in @Infinitron's thread.

I think I know who it is, so let's see if I can push his buttons.

 

[Infinitron]

Wtf?

 

[almondblight]

It's possible that Sawyer has some great brain wave incoming which will fix everything, but I just don't see it. What made the IE games good when played properly was a range of powerful interesting spells that had be prepared in advanced and conserved across fights.

Again, most of the interesting fights people talk about in IE games were ones people went into fully rested and spelled up. I haven't played IWD in a while, but I just finished the BG trilogy recently and there was very little attrition there. The most I remember was from health when I played ToB with a new character and Jaheira as the only healer. But even then, there were enough health potions to make up for it. In BG and BG2, I usually forgot I even had potions because I never needed them.

 

[jewboy]

 

[tuluse]

It's possible that Sawyer has some great brain wave incoming which will fix everything, but I just don't see it. What made the IE games good when played properly was a range of powerful interesting spells that had be prepared in advanced and conserved across fights.

Again, most of the interesting fights people talk about in IE games were ones people went into fully rested and spelled up. I haven't played IWD in a while, but I just finished the BG trilogy recently and there was very little attrition there. The most I remember was from health when I played ToB with a new character and Jaheira as the only healer. But even then, there were enough health potions to make up for it. In BG and BG2, I usually forgot I even had potions because I never needed them.

I would LARP in BG1/2 and try to rest as little as possible.

The attrition definitely sets in, even the opening dungeon in BG2 is challenging only resting once in it (which is what I would do).

 

[jewboy]

It just occured to me that maybe Josh came to this point from thinking about FedEx quests. Perhaps he vowed not to have any of them based on the idea that they are just meaningless busywork even if you get a reword at the end like giving a dog a biscuit after he fetches something for you. So if traveling to some distant land to get a pink bow for the matron of the mages guild is boring and pointless then maybe the same round trip to a campsite is just as pointless. In a way the logic is convincing to me as well as long as you don't look at the Big Picture or think too much about what the alternative is like (insta-RESETS). There is definitely a counter-intuitive aspect to the whole thing. I think what we really need is for a smart Codexian with good writing skills to analyze the problem from many different angles and just utterly crush the convenience argument like a hydraulic ram hitting a fly. I'm thinking...Vince.

 

[almondblight]

If these things are in place, it isn't that important that each combat challenges your life. You could merely stand to get a scar, but if a scar is a pain in the ass enough, it is important. Heck, even if all you stand to lose is time, the combat still could be interesting. I know computer games haven't exactly shined in this area, but if they focused on it, I think they could make a pretty freaking good game.

Good point, but I haven't seen this implemented well outside of Rogue-likes. The problem, in my mind, is that if you want to have a string of 20 encounters matter, but each one only hurts you a little, then:
1. You don't realize you screwed up on encounters 1 - 5 until you get to the end, in which case you have to go through the whole thing again, often repeating the similar tactics but with some slight modifications (I won't use bless this time because I'll need it for encounter 20, etc.).

2. You don't need to start the whole thing over again, in which case doesn't do much except make the last encounter harder for bad players and easier for good ones. If you're interested in throwing a curveball, some random factor would be more interesting.

Attrition works well with rogue-likes because they're random. If they weren't, they'd be painfully boring. Do the exact same thing on levels 1 - 5, then finally get to the part that poses a challenge, etc. In rogue-likes, you never know when the challenge will be, so you're always guessing and trying to judge if you're extending yourself too thin or not (hell, that's the main point).

I'm not saying that attrition can't be done well outside of rogue-likes, just that I can't think of an RPG that did it well, and definitely not the BG saga. I heard Realms of Arkania did, but haven't played it yet.

 

[Infinitron]

It just occured to me that maybe Josh came to this point from thinking about FedEx quests. Perhaps he vowed not to have any of them based on the idea that they are just meaningless busywork even if you get a reword at the end like giving a dog a biscuit after he fetches something for you. So if traveling to some distant land to get a pink bow for the matron of the mages guild is boring and pointless then maybe the same round trip to a campsite is just as pointless. In a way the logic is convincing to me as well as long as you don't look at the Big Picture or think too much about what the alternative is like (insta-RESETS). There is definitely a counter-intuitive aspect to the whole thing. I think what we really need is for a smart Codexian with good writing skills to analyze the problem from many different angles and just utterly crush the convenience argument like a hydraulic ram hitting a fly. I'm thinking...Vince.

Yes, except Feargus has actually specifically stated that he doesn't mind Fedex quests in moderation. He thinks they add variety.

Then again...Feargus. So I dunno.

 

[almondblight]

I would LARP in BG1/2 and try to rest as little as possible.

The attrition definitely sets in, even the opening dungeon in BG2 is challenging only resting once in it (which is what I would do).

Yeah, I tried not to rest that often. The problem, though is that "as little as possible" is up to the player, and attrition isn't that great when you always have a way out. How many times, for example, do you get to rest? Once per dungeon? Might work for Irenicus' layer, but what about Watcher's Keep? Is it until you feel like your players are getting exhausted, in which case attrition is interesting, but there's always a way out? Did you restart many dungeons because you couldn't beat them without resting, and since you refused to rest, started it over instead?

 

[J_C]

>checks thread
>people still arguing about cooldowns
>yawn, goes back to sleep

 

[tuluse]

I would LARP in BG1/2 and try to rest as little as possible.

The attrition definitely sets in, even the opening dungeon in BG2 is challenging only resting once in it (which is what I would do).

Yeah, I tried not to rest that often. The problem, though is that "as little as possible" is up to the player, and attrition isn't that great when you always have a way out. How many times, for example, do you get to rest? Once per dungeon? Might work for Irenicus' layer, but what about Watcher's Keep? Is it until you feel like your players are getting exhausted, in which case attrition is interesting, but there's always a way out? Did you restart many dungeons because you couldn't beat them without resting, and since you refused to rest, started it over instead?

That's why I want Sawyer et all to come up with a mechanic to encourage players to not rest.

Yes, except Feargus has actually specifically stated that he doesn't mind Fedex quests in moderation. He thinks they add variety.

Then again...Feargus. So I dunno.

Fedex quests are good to get a player to go to a new area or point out something important in an area.

 

[Jasede]

Fedex quests aren't a big deal to me.

 

[Jaesun]

Fedex quests aren't a big deal to me.

Agreed. Like take the ones in NV, those were fine.

 

[Alex]

Good point, but I haven't seen this implemented well outside of Rogue-likes. The problem, in my mind, is that if you want to have a string of 20 encounters matter, but each one only hurts you a little, then:

1. You don't realize you screwed up on encounters 1 - 5 until you get to the end, in which case you have to go through the whole thing again, often repeating the similar tactics but with some slight modifications (I won't use bless this time because I'll need it for encounter 20, etc.).

2. You don't need to start the whole thing over again, in which case doesn't do much except make the last encounter harder for bad players and easier for good ones. If you're interested in throwing a curveball, some random factor would be more interesting.

Attrition works well with rogue-likes because they're random. If they weren't, they'd be painfully boring. Do the exact same thing on levels 1 - 5, then finally get to the part that poses a challenge, etc. In rogue-likes, you never know when the challenge will be, so you're always guessing and trying to judge if you're extending yourself too thin or not (hell, that's the main point).

I'm not saying that attrition can't be done well outside of rogue-likes, just that I can't think of an RPG that did it well, and definitely not the BG saga. I heard Realms of Arkania did, but haven't played it yet.

I think your post assumes too much that only two outcomes are possible in a dungeon. Either you get to the end and wil, or you don't and reload. I think games should be a bit more nuanced to this. If time is to play a part, then managing to finish a quest in one day could have very different outcomes than finishing it in 3, 5, 7 or 10.

Likewise, if you get to the end of a series of encounters hurt and battered, and unable to destroy the opposition, you might try to come to an arrangement instead. I mean, you killed half of the orcs in that cave, taking your 5000 GP and leaving is going to sound like a good deal to them. Even if they think they can win as a group, they probably know their individual chances of surviving the battle are less than 50%.

The thing about BG is that it only worked well if you "larped" there were long term consequences for your actions. If you pretend, for example, you shouldn't rest before ever combat, or that you didn't have time to do each and every quest (well, it was fun to do so, but it also gave you too much xp and money). I think it would be much more interesting to fix this lack of consequence than to reduce the scope of the threats you could tackle. Now, I am not saying a little randomness wouldn't be welcome either! But I double we will get anything interesting in that front.

 

[almondblight]

That's why I want Sawyer et all to come up with a mechanic to encourage players to not rest.

Probably the easiest way to do this would be to include single-use rest areas and prevent the player from backtracking into town once they enter a dungeon. A little game-y, though, and I think more people would be pissed than wouldn't.

I think your post assumes too much that only two outcomes are possible in a dungeon. Either you get to the end and wil, or you don't and reload. I think games should be a bit more nuanced to this. If time is to play a part, then managing to finish a quest in one day could have very different outcomes than finishing it in 3, 5, 7 or 10.

Likewise, if you get to the end of a series of encounters hurt and battered, and unable to destroy the opposition, you might try to come to an arrangement instead. I mean, you killed half of the orcs in that cave, taking your 5000 GP and leaving is going to sound like a good deal to them. Even if they think they can win as a group, they probably know their individual chances of surviving the battle are less than 50%.

All of which is decent theory-craft, but how many RPG's have something like this? Most people here, I think, agree that it would be nice to have more combat and quests that you can lose, or only partially win. Actually implementing this, especially in a story-driven RPG, would be hell though. My understanding is that AoD has tried some of this, but I haven't played the most recent demo.

You'd also have to redo the reward system in RPG's. In general, it'll be the better players that can go all the way in said cave, and in general, going all the way would lead to more riches than cutting a deal. You could try to change that (committing genocide against orcs leads to an orc shaman cursing you for half the game), but it'd take time, and have it's own challenges (and people might get pissed at changes to the norm).

The thing about BG is that it only worked well if you "larped" there were long term consequences for your actions. If you pretend, for example, you shouldn't rest before ever combat, or that you didn't have time to do each and every quest (well, it was fun to do so, but it also gave you too much xp and money). I think it would be much more interesting to fix this lack of consequence than to reduce the scope of the threats you could tackle. Now, I am not saying a little randomness wouldn't be welcome either! But I double we will get anything interesting in that front.

Well, I agree, and you could probably implement some things like towns being destroyed in Exile III if you take too long. But the other stuff you mention (having multiple levels of success for each quest/dungeon) seem to be out of the scope of this Kickstarter.

 

[DalekFlay]

The thing to remember about fedex quests in PE is that this is fucking Obsidian, so like New Vegas at least they will be well-written and likely matter to faction play. Bring 'em the fuck on, I say.

 

[Ion Prothon II]

Just got a massive butthurt on polish translation. Because, as maybe you know, those idiots obsidians put potato among stretch goals.

I mean, what the fuck? Nobody will fucking buy it in this shithole, all those 'hardkore gamers' (śmierdzące kuce) in the best case will buy it at a torrent site. RPGs have the lowest sales possible, and I mean also those AAAAA 'RPGs'. Fucking gry-online.pl called for spamming the Obsidian translation poll, like a pope pedophile for crusade. An army of dumbfucks voted for this bullshit, propably not even knowing what's an RPG is, screaming 'porand stronk' while jerking to Pilsudski/Korwin slashporn.

: x

TLDR: Wasted money.

 

[Infinitron]

The Polish translation is not a stretch goal. It's in no matter what.

 

[Jasede]

It was mentioned somewhere a few pages back that Obsidian found a distributor to do the translation at a very low cost.