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

[Jasede]

It's a shame, it was a good post.

 

[evdk]

Made a poll: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61...rience-points-only-for-completing-objectives/

You should've left the poll public so we would know who the dumbfucks are.

 

[Jasede]

Keep fighting the good fight.

 

[oldmanpaco]

It's a shame, it was a good post.

Yeah I even had a bit about Asian trannies and a Quererstaff of Penetration. It's all gone now! Lost to the ages!

 

[bminorkey]

FFS, diminishing returns!

They are called EXPERIENCE points for a reason. They are MEANT to be a numerical representation of your character's life experiences. Highly intelligent life forms gain knowledge, and by extension power, through experiences.

Fighting is an experience. Fighting something for the first time and surviving is of much more value than fighting it for the 100th time. Naturally then, the points gained for fighting the same things over and over again, should have diminishing returns.

Another way to combat this is to set the levelling bars at continually higher and higher points, and then basically setting some kind of cut off for actually getting experience points. So a level 5 should get like 1 exp for killing a level 1 goblin, but get the right amount of points for killing something much stronger.

Of course gain EXP for quest related non combat stuff as well as skill checks etc., but removing it from killing things is retarded and betrays the actual concept of experience points entirely.

Look at it from a gameplay perspective. You have a quest to "retrieve" a certain item from a misbehaving merchant. There are several approaches you could take: you might intimidate him, you might beat him up, or you might steal the item. Each one of these approaches befit a certain kind of character, and reward you for your playstyle. You get the satisfaction of appropriately roleplaying your character. The game rewards your character build and the choices you made.

Now take a different quest - enter a drake lair to kill a powerful dragon matron. Suppose you have three options to complete the quest: you can pay or convince an experienced band of adventurers to clear the dungeon for you, you could sneak past the enemies and cleverly activate a trap that collapses the entire lair into rubble, or you could straightforwardly challenge the matron and her minions. Presumably here too we have the option of three distinct playstyles, and the game rewards your character build etc. But the truth is, that in this scenario there is one crucial difference - one option is substantially more rewarding than the others. Challenging the lair straight-on is the option that gives you the most exp and loot. So what do you think the player's gonna do? Well, you bet your fucking ass both the charismatic, manipulative merchant and the clever thief are gonna be donning platemail tonight. Characterisation gets thrown out the window, enter a shitty min-maxing metagame.

 

[GarfunkeL]

Thanks, now you made me register and post there. Post count: (3)

 

[Excidium]

Experience being handed for kills only works if killing is the only objective.

 

[Infinitron]

In other news, Kickstarter pledges have skyrocketed. We may end up with as much as a quarter of a million dollars donated today. It's gonna go over 3.5 million tomorrow, for sure.

 

[Jaesun]

Quick #ProjectEternity PayPal update: $100,247 - Approx ~2050 backers

 

[Cynic]

Challenging the lair straight-on is the option that gives you the most exp and loot. So what do you think the player's gonna do?

Well this is the fault of poor game design and not a broken system. There is nothing stopping the devs from giving very similar EXP rewards and varying loot rewards depending on the action taken. If you pay that band of adventurers then maybe you can kill them later to get the loot from them...or maybe collapsing the lair causes that same band of adventurers to track you down later because they were searching for a treasure from within that lair.

 

[HanoverF]

They're gonna hit the last stretch goal while streaming their D&D game, you heard it here first (until it doesn't happen and I edit the post)

 

[Lockkaliber]

aight, so 3.5 is confirmed, and we'll probably get at least 11 levels of the dungeon. yay!

 

[Infinitron]

Quick #ProjectEternity PayPal update: $100,247 - Approx ~2050 backers

Only $105k left until stretch goal. Man, if this rate keeps up they might even reach that today.

 

[GarfunkeL]

Your poll is looking good so far, Infinitron

 

[Infinitron]

Your poll is looking good so far, Infinitron

Indeed it is. Though to be fair, I suspect most of the forum sheeple are just going with what Josh Sawyer wants.

 

[Digital Monocle]

Quick #ProjectEternity PayPal update: $100,247 - Approx ~2050 backers

Only $105k left until stretch goal. Man, if this rate keeps up they might even reach that today.

They should even try for another outlandish stretch goal, at least to get them more funding from the masses.. It would be funny since people were saying that this KS would make less than DoubleFine :declining:

 

[Captain Shrek]

They're gonna hit the last stretch goal while streaming their D&D game, you heard it here first (until it doesn't happen and I edit the post)

Foiled.

Counter.

It will never reach 11 levels. But it will reach 3.5 while or BEFORE the game is being streamed.

 

[jewboy]

I hate to interrupt you guys when you are so busy sucking each other off, but can someone please explain to me why getting at least some xp for killing, say, a dragon is a bad thing? I don't really have a horse in this particular race. I don't care about the details of how XP is granted or even whether the advancement system uses some kind of point based mechanic at all as long as there is some way to improve your abilities over time.

I just don't see the big deal or why it is such major incline. I mean it's not as if gaining XP for killing monsters is some kind of shitty nextgen game mechanic. It's been in RPGs right from the start. When I played Keep on the Borderlands in 1980 there was XP for killing monsters. It's not like it's anything new. Is leaving out XP for monster killing supposed to make balancing easier perhaps? That's the only possible advantage I can see offhand.

I am still curious as to how all of you are so excited about a game with real time Kooldown Kombat. Are cooldowns okay all of a sudden because Obsidian is doing them? Christ. Not that watching the numbers rise on the kickstarter page isn't exciting, but I still think the combat in the game is more likely to suck than be awesome. Don't get me wrong. I desperately want to believe that this game will be the very essence of awesomeness, but I don't think that's a realistic expectation. It's just wishful thinking.

 

[Infinitron]

They should even try for another outlandish stretch goal, at least to get them more funding from the masses.. It would be funny since people were saying that this KS would make less than DoubleFine

Oh yeah, it's not far from that now. 40k more.

 

[Lockkaliber]

It will never reach 11 levels. But it will reach 3.5 while or BEFORE the game is being streamed.

Why not? They are almost at ten, not counting the paypal backers right? And they are 2000, which is almost a new level.

 

[Nigro]

man not gaining Xp for killing enemies sounds kinda dumb IMO, best way to imrpove your skills in real life is to get hurt and hurt others

 

[Infinitron]

I hate to interrupt you guys when you are so busy sucking each other off, but can someone please explain to me why getting at least some xp for killing, say, a dragon is a bad thing? I don't really have a horse in this particular race. I don't care about the details of how XP is granted or even whether the advancement system uses some kind of point based mechanic at all as long as there is some way to improve your abilities over time.

I just don't see the big deal or why it is such major incline. I mean it's not as if gaining XP for killing monsters is some kind of shitty nextgen game mechanic. It's been in RPGs right from the start. When I played Keep on the Borderlands in 1980 there was XP for killing monsters. It's not like it's anything new. Is leaving out XP for monster killing supposed to make balancing easier perhaps? That's the only possible advantage I can see offhand.

There's nothing wrong with it, but I believe it doesn't fit well with Obsidian's philosophy of game design.

I am still curious as to how all of you are so excited about a game with real time Kooldown Kombat. Are cooldowns okay all of a sudden because Obsidian is doing them? Christ. Not that watching the numbers rise on the kickstarter page isn't exciting, but I still think the combat in the game is more likely to suck than be awesome. Don't get me wrong. I desperately want to believe that this game will be the very essence of awesomeness, but I don't think that's a realistic expectation. It's just wishful thinking.

I can only answer for myself - curiousity.

 

[Captain Shrek]

I hate to interrupt you guys when you are so busy sucking each other off, but can someone please explain to me why getting at least some xp for killing, say, a dragon is a bad thing? I don't really have a horse in this particular race. I don't care about the details of how XP is granted or even whether the advancement system uses some kind of point based mechanic at all as long as there is some way to improve your abilities over time.

I just don't see the big deal or why it is such major incline. I mean it's not as if gaining XP for killing monsters is some kind of shitty nextgen game mechanic. It's been in RPGs right from the start. When I played Keep on the Borderlands in 1980 there was XP for killing monsters. It's not like it's anything new. Is leaving out XP for monster killing supposed to make balancing easier perhaps? That's the only possible advantage I can see offhand.

That is because they will be smart enough to recognize when an encounter is TOO tough not to be rewarded for leveling points/exp. And yes, balancing is difficult for multiple approaches unless they are all object based.

Character Progression can be done at least in two distinct ways:

a) Through LEVELING
b) Through Point allocation

In Leveling, the player is given a condition at which he is allotted All or almost all the components of the modular parts of the Character design to distribute at the same time. Leveling is MOST appropriate in those games where Progress of the game occurs from scenario to scenario, with increasing difficulty. If every scenario contains the content roughly enough to cap your level to a particular value that map becomes a benchmark for a given level/s. Point allocation is best done for games with open maps, where it is completely possible to encounter stronger creatures early on. But honestly, as far as I can see it is completely possible to do it any way as long its implemented well.

An important issue is, should you be given points for completing objectives (goals) or successfully engaging in non-goal encounters along with completing objectives. I personally believe that the question is of game-design again. If the game focuses on Combat then the latter is the chief way of distributing the points. If the game has more encounter resolution elements than combat then probably it should depend on the BOTH but adjusted for the sake of balance.

http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...-basics-character-creation-progression.69522/

I am still curious as to how all of you are so excited about a game with real time Kooldown Kombat. Are cooldowns okay all of a sudden because Obsidian is doing them? Christ. Not that watching the numbers rise on the kickstarter page isn't exciting, but I still think the combat in the game is more likely to suck than be awesome. Don't get me wrong. I desperately want to believe that this game will be the very essence of awesomeness, but I don't think that's a realistic expectation. It's just wishful thinking.

Don't worry. One of the two sides has to come to its senses eventually.

 

[Captain Shrek]

It will never reach 11 levels. But it will reach 3.5 while or BEFORE the game is being streamed.

Why not? They are almost at ten, not counting the paypal backers right? And they are 2000, which is almost a new level.

Do paypals donations count towards the levels? Then I did not account for them.

 

[Infinitron]

I sent Josh a link to the poll I made. Hopefully that will steel his resolve.

It will never reach 11 levels. But it will reach 3.5 while or BEFORE the game is being streamed.

Why not? They are almost at ten, not counting the paypal backers right? And they are 2000, which is almost a new level.

Do paypals donations count towards the levels? Then I did not account for them.

Yes they do