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

[imweasel]

DraQ Ohh, ok. Removing xp from combat is good, because it is more important than loot. Well, if you want to prevent unsensical killing (as you like to put it) then you have to remove combat loot too. People kill for loot, especially if it's rare (like it should). We don't need any more Bethesda Skyshit crap where everything has been dumbed down to retard level.

But what if I am wandering around and see some orcs? I won't bother to attack them, because it is pointless. I "won't" need the loot and you don't get xp for combat. And if they attack me I'll be like "Screw those raiding, pillaging, filthy, child killing super evil fucks, combat is just a pointless chore and a waste of time and resources. I'll just run away, so, buh bye evil orcs. Go fuck yourselves and play with DraQ, the quest xp only lover so he can have some phun". Avoiding "annoying" combat as much as possible sounds great. Must be fun, when you roll your eyes after having to engage in the umpteenth worthless combat situation because you fucked up trying to avoid it. hehe

Unless of course I get a quest reward for killing them. Oh yeah, "Kill 20 orcs for 500xp" sounds like a great quest and a lot of fun. And what if I only feel like killing 15 orcs? well too bad. My name is Josh Sawyer and I said you have to go back and kill some more orcs even though you don't want to you stupid fuck. Otherwise you won't get this xp.

But anyway, thank you Brian Fargo! You know how to do it right!

 

[Infinitron]

 

[Drowed]

I wanted to say something here, but after all that has been said and this pathological refusal to understand, we can conclude that: or this is a perfect example of trolling or it is a case of sheer ignorance/stubbornness. In both, it is useless to say anything anymore.

...But I guess I'm a masochist, then I will ask a single question. You don't get "xp" when you kill enemies in shooters, action games, platformers, whatever. In most situations, you can simply run past them, ignoring most enemies to win the stage in a more quickly and efficiently way. But very few people do it.

Guess why?

 

[Drowed]

Oh, and posting here before someone not understand the point of this question and start talking that the game in question is an "RPG" and that's why it is different, or something similar.

 

[GordonHalfman]

A possible further evolution of this system would be to have a plot where each chapter is set several years apart. The player advances to a new level at the beginning of each chapter and gets nothing else. The first perfectly realistic levelling system! Easy to balance, impossible to exploit and best of all no more mental anguish when deciding whether to larp or chase down that last fleeing bear.

 

[Captain Shrek]

A possible further evolution of this system would be to have a plot where each chapter is set several years apart. The player advances to a new level at the beginning of each chapter and gets nothing else. The first perfectly realistic levelling system! Easy to balance, impossible to exploit and best of all no more mental anguish when deciding whether to larp or chase down that last fleeing bear.

Dude.

Keep realism out of this.

 

[Infinitron]

A possible further evolution of this system would be to have a plot where each chapter is set several years apart. The player advances to a new level at the beginning of each chapter and gets nothing else. The first perfectly realistic levelling system! Easy to balance, impossible to exploit and best of all no more mental anguish when deciding whether to larp or chase down that last fleeing bear.

Something similar actually happens in practice with these sorts of games. Since completing main quests and defeating "bosses" gives disproportionately more XP than most other things, the player does tend to level up at the end of each major objective or "chapter".

 

[Infinitron]

http://www.formspring.me/JESawyer/q/415058606723985511

When talking about designing combat system you make a distinction between strategy and tactics. What is the difference?

The definitions are not used concretely, but strategies focus on planning or preparation and tactics focus on reactive elements "in the moment". A simplified way of looking at it might be to consider good tactics necessary to win battles, but good strategy is required to win wars.

In a D&D campaign, how you build your character is strategic. You're making choices for the future based on some amount of speculation. A wizard selecting magic missile for his or her spellbook is not necessarily a bold choice because its applicability is broad. A ranger selecting abominations as his or her favored enemy either knows something really specific about the setting and campaign or is making a wild gamble.

Similarly, gear selection and spell preparation is strategic -- how strategic depends on how limited the availability of options is in the field. If you can carry eight weapons at a time, per character, you don't need to be that careful. If it's like XCOM EU, where most characters go into the field with one main weapon and one sidearm, it's a big deal.

Sometimes, a decision made in battle can be tactical and strategic. For example, using a limited resource ability (e.g. a high level spell). The most tactically efficient thing to do may be to spend the limited resource ability, but if you think you have more difficult enemies coming up prior to regaining that resource, you may want to hold off.

I like RPGs to have both tactical and strategic elements, which is more in line with the AD&D-based RPGs of the late 80s-early 2000s. I'm trying to ensure PE will have both layers for players to consider.

http://www.formspring.me/JESawyer/q/415068156625703555

Can you describe your vision for how loot will be gained by the player? Will it be mostly gained through combat, quests, or other forms?

Quests will probably be the least frequent, with combat and environment making up the dominant methods. Most of our loot will be hand-placed with a small amount randomization. The amount of loot you will find will be more in line with the IE games than games focused more heavily on finding/sorting/selling items.

 

[Grunker]

The amount of loot you will find will be more in line with the IE games

Whenever he says shit like this I have no idea whether he hasn't played the IE-games that much after working on IWD, whether he doesn't remember that much about them, or whether there's something he isn't saying which makes it makes sense.

The IE-games had insanely different drop rates and item power levels. BG1 = Low drop-rate, low power. BG2 = High drop-rate, medium power. ToB = Medium drop-rate, high power. IWD = High drop-rate, high power.

So what exactly does "in line with IE-games" mean in this context?'

EDIT: Spelling.

 

[Captain Shrek]

So what exactly does "in line with IE-games" mean in this context?

More nostalgia.

 

[Infinitron]

The amount of loot you will find will be more in line with the IE games

Whenever he says shit like this I have no idea whether he hasn't played the IE-games that much after designing him, whether he doesn't remember that much about them, or whether there's something he isn't saying which makes it makes sense.

The IE-games had insanely different draw-rates. BG1 = Low drop-rate, low power. BG2 = High drop-rate, medium power. ToB = Medium drop-rate, high power. IWD = High drop-rate, high power.

So what exactly does "in line with IE-games" mean in this context?

I'll ask him.

 

[Kem0sabe]

Yep, i wish he would stop saying that kind of crap without elaborating on it.

 

[Infinitron]

Grunker Josh has a response for you:

The spectrum across all IE games is less than something like an Elder Scrolls game, F3/F:NV, or Diablo 2/3. It's hyperbolic to characterize the loot quantities between the IE games as "insanely" different (excepting PS:T).

I'm not going to be your messenger, so if you have a reply, go on Formspring and post it yourself.

 

[Grunker]

Grunker

The spectrum across all IE games is less than something like an Elder Scrolls game, F3/F:NV, or Diablo 2/3. It's hyperbolic to characterize the loot quantities between the IE games as "insanely" different (excepting PS:T).

Oh, OK, so he was speaking out of ignorance. Good to know have it black on white that he doesn't remember the games he's paying tribute to

Hyperbole aside, he is being evasive as hell here, he's not answering the question (are we in BG or IE territory) and it's understandable. He doesn't know what it's going to end up with. He's just making those vague statements about how it will be IE-like to satisfy the barrage of questions on the matter.

That's what it is though, but being passive-aggressive about getting the question is, as usual a bit odd.

 

[Mrowak]

Grunker

The spectrum across all IE games is less than something like an Elder Scrolls game, F3/F:NV, or Diablo 2/3. It's hyperbolic to characterize the loot quantities between the IE games as "insanely" different (excepting PS:T).

Oh, OK, so he was speaking out of ignorance. Good to know have it black on white that he doesn't remember the games he's paying tribute to

Hyperbole aside, he is being evasive as hell here, he's not answering the question (are we in BG or IE territory) and it's understandable. He doesn't know what it's going to end up with. He's just making those vague statements about how it will be IE-like to satisfy the barrage of questions on the matter.

That's what it is though, but being passive-aggressive about getting the question is, as usual a bit odd.

With all due respect to Josh, he is a pro at making completely vague statements that don't mean anything to anyone.

 

[Infinitron]

Oh, OK, so he was speaking out of ignorance. Good to know have it black on white that he doesn't remember the games he's paying tribute to

Hyperbole aside, he is being evasive as hell here, he's not answering the question (are we in BG or IE territory) and it's understandable. He doesn't know what it's going to end up with. He's just making those vague statements about how it will be IE-like to satisfy the barrage of questions on the matter.

Well, he refers to a spectrum of drop rates, not one single drop rate. Perhaps the early parts of Project Eternity would have a BG1-like drop rate, while the later parts would be more like BG2. Drop rates don't need to be constant.

That's what it is though, but being passive-aggressive about getting the question is, as usual a bit odd.

He knows I'm an RPGCodex representative.

 

[Grunker]

Well, he refers to a spectrum of drop rates, not one single drop rate. Perhaps the early parts of Project Eternity would have a BG1-like drop rate, while the later parts would be more like BG2. Drop rates don't need to be constant.

I highly doubt they have any idea on what exact form the itemization will take.

 

[Grunker]

Grunker

The spectrum across all IE games is less than something like an Elder Scrolls game, F3/F:NV, or Diablo 2/3. It's hyperbolic to characterize the loot quantities between the IE games as "insanely" different (excepting PS:T).

Oh, OK, so he was speaking out of ignorance. Good to know have it black on white that he doesn't remember the games he's paying tribute to

Hyperbole aside, he is being evasive as hell here, he's not answering the question (are we in BG or IE territory) and it's understandable. He doesn't know what it's going to end up with. He's just making those vague statements about how it will be IE-like to satisfy the barrage of questions on the matter.

That's what it is though, but being passive-aggressive about getting the question is, as usual a bit odd.

With all due respect to Josh, he is a pro at making completely vague statements that don't mean anything to anyone.

's what I'm sayin'

 

[imweasel]

I wanted to say something here, but after all that has been said and this pathological refusal to understand, we can conclude that: or this is a perfect example of trolling or it is a case of sheer ignorance/stubbornness. In both, it is useless to say anything anymore.

...But I guess I'm a masochist, then I will ask a single question. You don't get "xp" when you kill enemies in shooters, action games, platformers, whatever. In most situations, you can simply run past them, ignoring most enemies to win the stage in a more quickly and efficiently way. But very few people do it.

Guess why?

Hehe. Good one. All Fallout, Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale or Planescape lovers, you heard it here! You are all: Todd Howard Ha duuuuuuuuuhuhuh huhhhhhhhh duhhhhh Skyrim loving hduuuuuuuuuuh hadudhud udue duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhu du retards. had uuududhhhhhhhhhhh. Because the game uses had uhhhhd duhhhhhhhhhhhh da duuhhhhh dha duhhhhhhhhhhhh comabt xp and haddddddddduuuuuuuuuuuuuuu hdhdh haduhhhhhhhh quest xp. lol

This is amusing. But I'll drop it for now, seeing that some of you are pretty aggressive and really like to throw hissy fits, seeing that combat xp is only for those who actually like combat. we can continue this "conversation" another time. Like, after they xp system has been changed to the one that fits.

I gotta hang out in the wasteland 2 thread more often, Brian Fargo knows how to make a tactical combat based game. You know, with combat + quest xp. ta taaa

 

[Harg Harfardarssen]

Kind of lessens the power of dramatic your exit when your big finish is just going to another thread on the same forum.

 

[DraQ]

DraQ Ohh, ok. Removing xp from combat is good, because it is more important than loot. Well, if you want to prevent unsensical killing (as you like to put it) then you have to remove combat loot too. People kill for loot, especially if it's rare (like it should). We don't need any more Bethesda Skyshit crap where everything has been dumbed down to retard level.

But what if I am wandering around and see some orcs? I won't bother to attack them, because it is pointless. I "won't" need the loot and you don't get xp for combat. And if they attack me I'll be like "Screw those raiding, pillaging, filthy, child killing super evil fucks, combat is just a pointless chore and a waste of time and resources. I'll just run away, so, buh bye evil orcs. Go fuck yourselves and play with DraQ, the quest xp only lover so he can have some phun". Avoiding "annoying" combat as much as possible sounds great. Must be fun, when you roll your eyes after having to engage in the umpteenth worthless combat situation because you fucked up trying to avoid it. hehe

Unless of course I get a quest reward for killing them. Oh yeah, "Kill 20 orcs for 500xp" sounds like a great quest and a lot of fun. And what if I only feel like killing 15 orcs? well too bad. My name is Josh Sawyer and I said you have to go back and kill some more orcs even though you don't want to you stupid fuck. Otherwise you won't get this xp.

But anyway, thank you Brian Fargo! You know how to do it right!

And yet you still complain when you get called out for being a moron.

 

[imweasel]

Kind of lessens the power of dramatic your exit when your big finish is just going to another thread on the same forum.

Na, I'm not going anywhere. That was just my way of saying: Fuck you morons, some of the greatest RPGs ever made used combat + quest xp. And oh yeah, screw you too DraQ, you are the biggest moron of them all. lol

Ahh, but who gives a fuck. So new topic.

 

[Murk]

People here enjoy arbitrarily jumping to extremes and strawman fallacies too much. It makes entering discussion ...unappealing.

 

[evdk]

Fishing for a custom title, are we?

 

[Kirtai]

But I'll drop it for now, seeing that some of you are pretty aggressive and really like to throw hissy fits...

Did you bother to, y'know, actually read this forum before joining?