Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

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

Hormalakh

Magister
Joined
Nov 27, 2012
Messages
1,503
Yeah I should ask about the cipher class. He comes and goes from the forum, but I'll ask about ciphers next time: maybe we'll get something interesting. I asked a little more about the monks and the lore behind them and your question. Let's see if he answers.
 

Rake

Arcane
Joined
Oct 11, 2012
Messages
2,969
Really liked, not "P:T had cool story but gameplay was a chore, or BG2 had great encounter design but the actuall combat sucks"

Anyone who believes otherwise needs to explain themselves as to why or admit it's nostalgia goggles.

I realy liked combat in IE games equally with TOEE combat, and more than Gold Box games combat. Combine that with encounter design an BG2 combat were great for me. P:T had not good combat, but it wasn't a chore, as said combat were quicly resolved. It was not deep, but it wasn't irritating. So to say that "IE combat is crap" is not a fact but your opinion. And is not nostalgia as i replay these games almost every 2 years. The combat is not a problem. To prefer TB is ok. To say that unless is TB will be crap is false.
 

Raapys

Arcane
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
5,013
To say that unless is TB will be crap is false.
Agreed. But claiming combat was good in IE games? Wut? It's about as basic as it gets. Even NWN did it better. You put your fighters to attack the toughest foes, then you spend the rest of your time and actions slinging out spells with your casters, running away if anything gets close.

Granted, BG2 and IE games in general had an amazingly large and varied spell list, BG2 is easily the best spellcaster game ever made( to which there is about a 0% chance that PE will equal ), and that made that part very fun. However, to claim that the non-spellcasting parts of combat were good is kinda absurd.
 

coffeetable

Savant
Joined
Dec 18, 2012
Messages
446
To say that unless is TB will be crap is false.

Strangely enough, I have actually never said it like this, although I must admit that I consider that party based games should be optimally made with TB combat if they really have a lot of tactical options. That is the ideal way of presenting the game mechanics in my view.

As to your assertion that IE combat was good, you should probably (really) try and play other tactical games such JA2. If you have already played that game, then I am wondering why (WHY) are you so inclined to consider combat in IE games as worthwhile. If you expressly hate TB combat, RT games such as .... offer amazingly tactical party based combat. Fill in the blanks. I can't.

Does SWAT 4 count? Or Frozen Synapse?

RTwP can require just as detailed planning as turn-based, but the thing is that encounters in RTwP are usually designed to be played with only a minimal amount of pausing (and as such a minimal amount of planning). It's not a fundamental issue with the mechanic, it's an issue with the content designed around the mechanic.
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
37,016
I hope today's update is full of exciting controversial stuff because skimming today's pages of fanwank has been so dull. I want to see attributes in particular, his ideas on those are inevitably going to cause a lot of rage based on his non-realism-attempting, streamlined approach.
 

Rake

Arcane
Joined
Oct 11, 2012
Messages
2,969
To say that unless is TB will be crap is false.

Strangely enough, I have actually never said it like this, although I must admit that I consider that party based games should be optimally made with TB combat if they really have a lot of tactical options. That is the ideal way of presenting the game mechanics in my view.

As to your assertion that IE combat was good, you should probably (really) try and play other tactical games such JA2. If you have already played that game, then I am wondering why (WHY) are you so inclined to consider combat in IE games as worthwhile. If you expressly hate TB combat, RT games such as .... offer amazingly tactical party based combat. Fill in the blanks. I can't.
I never said i hate TB. I like it, and yes it is tactically superior to RTwP. But that doesn't mean that RTwP can't be fun. For me BG2 and IWD 1+2 had good combat. Less tactical than TOEE for examble? Yes.That doesn't make it bad,or boring.
I haven't played JA2 so thanks for the recommendation.
 

Hormalakh

Magister
Joined
Nov 27, 2012
Messages
1,503
I hope today's update is full of exciting controversial stuff because skimming today's pages of fanwank has been so dull. I want to see attributes in particular, his ideas on those are inevitably going to cause a lot of rage based on his non-realism-attempting, streamlined approach.

:lol: Is the Codex where you come for your soaps? Better start heating that popcorn. Showtimes about to begin.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,059
:bounce:

PS.

1761.jpg
this is just wrong. Change it back!
 

Lyric Suite

Converting to Islam
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
58,656
Torment didn't have bad combat per-se, just boring to abysmal encounters that made fighting redundant and inane. Also at least one third of the game was obviously left unfinished (trololo Obsidian will Obsidian). But frankly, that's what happens when you try to make a good game but don't have the resources to pull it off completely. But i'm sure we'd all rather play a flawed masterpiece then a perfectly crafted piece of shit. Well, most of us at any rate.

My only reservation about Obsidian is that they are a bit too zealous in following a specific design goal once they set certain bounds for a specific game. NWN2 is a good example. The main campaign was obviously designed to be one large tutorial for the tool assets of the game as well as the setting, sort of what the main campaign from the original NWN was also meant to be. This is why everything just feels so boring and cliched. We know they could have done much better, but decided not to because they are just trying to be "professional", or whatever, so they artificially forced themselves to remain within the limits set for the project without any personal or creative attachment. This charade obviously stems from their disastrous experience at BIS, except its not that they are "selling out" per se, they are actually trying to convince themselves that they need to do the "responsible" and "adult" thing and treat their projects as impersonally as they can, just as one would with any other profession. I think a lot of the misgivings people are getting about PE is that they seem to be bringing that attitude along even now that they actually have carte blanche to do whatever the fuck they want to do, which would be a shame if true.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Patron
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
100,257
Enjoy the Revolution! Another revolution around the sun that is. Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
Torment didn't have bad combat per-se, just boring to abysmal encounters that made fighting redundant and inane. Also at least one third of the game was obviously left unfinished (trololo Obsidian will Obsidian). But frankly, that's what happens when you try to make a good game but don't have the resources to pull it off completely. But i'm sure we'd all rather play a flawed masterpiece then a perfectly crafted piece of shit. Well, most of us at any rate.

My only reservation about Obsidian is that they are a bit too zealous in following a specific design goal once they set certain bounds for a specific game. NWN2 is a good example. The main campaign was obviously designed to be one large tutorial for the tool assets of the game as well as the setting, sort of what the main campaign from the original NWN was also meant to be. This is why everything just feels so boring and cliched. We know they could have done much better, but decided not to because they are just trying to be "professional", or whatever, so they artificially forced themselves to remain within the limits set for the project without any personal or creative attachment. This charade obviously stems from their disastrous experience at BIS, except its not that they are "selling out" per se, they are actually trying to convince themselves that they need to do the "responsible" and "adult" thing and treat their projects as impersonally as they can, just as one would with any other profession. I think a lot of the misgivings people are getting about PE is that they seem to be bringing that attitude along even now that they actually have carte blanche to do whatever the fuck they want to do, which would be a shame if true.

You bring up some good points, but most of the "misgivings" people are having about PE are related to game mechanics, not story or setting.
 

Hormalakh

Magister
Joined
Nov 27, 2012
Messages
1,503

Rostere

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
2,504
Location
Stockholm
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 RPG Wokedex Shadorwun: Hong Kong Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire
RtWP can INDEED be highly complex and designed around tactical depth. The problem is the party. If you have to pause for micromanaging every party member midway of their actions, it is rather considered annoying than deep. It is simply more convenient (in my opinion) to allow for Single Player (no party) combat when designing RtWP games.

One of my own favourite RTwP games, Hearts of Iron 2, requires a lot of micromanagement as a large nation on the harder difficulties. That is also the part of the charm of the game. In terms of keeping watch over what's happening in the game, going to NWN 2 from there is like going back to kindergarten from university. If you think it's annoying to pause every time you want to give an orderin NWN 2, is it because your keyboard hand gets exhausted? I have a hard time seeing exactly why.

If you have problems with the AI, turn it off. It's often the most sensible thing to do anyway unless you're on autopilot.
 

Kirtai

Augur
Joined
Sep 8, 2012
Messages
1,124
I hope today's update is full of exciting controversial stuff because skimming today's pages of fanwank has been so dull. I want to see attributes in particular, his ideas on those are inevitably going to cause a lot of rage based on his non-realism-attempting, streamlined approach.
I feel it's better to have controversy and rage than to have everyone go "meh, boring".

It's more entertaining to watch anyway.
 

Arkeus

Arcane
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Messages
1,406
Josh Sawyer said:

Hail, elves. It's been a while since we've had a mechanics update, so I'd like to cover a variety of topics today: the basics of our "non-core" classes, our cooldown system (or lack thereof), an update on how attacks are resolved, and another update on the evolution of our armor system. I'd also like to show you a dungeon tileset test render and some sweet shakycam of some of the combat basics running in engine.

Non-Core Classes
We've previously discussed the design of our "core four" classes: fighter, priest, rogue, and wizard. The non-core classes are the other seven: barbarian, paladin, ranger, druid, monk, chanter, and cipher. Like the core four classes, the non-core classes all start the game with two active or modal abilities and one passive ability.

When it comes to the balance of active/modal and passive options, the classes generally reflect their D&D counterparts, with spellcasters having more active use abilities and weapon-based classes being oriented toward more passive or modal abilities. Even so, it will be possible to push a spellcaster toward more passive talents and to optionally buy more active/modal abilities for traditionally low-maintenance characters. While all classes will have many more abilities as they advance, here are some basic elements for each of the seven classes.
  • Barbarians can use Wild Sprint a limited number of times per day, allowing them to rapidly rush across the battlefield to a distant target while ignoring hazards along the way.
  • Paladins have limited healing capabilities, but their Revive command allows them to instantly snap an unconscious ally awake with a large Stamina boost.
  • Rangers' animal companions are so closely bonded to their masters that they share Stamina and Health pools, which can be both a blessing and a curse.
  • Druids can Shapeshift into animal forms, gaining natural -- and some supernatural -- abilities associated with those creatures.
  • Monks absorb a portion of incoming damage and convert it into a Wounds resource they can use to power their soul-based abilities (such as Stunning Blows) through any weapons they use, including unarmed strikes.
  • Chanters begin the game with a number of phrases they can arrange to form songs with different effects. Aefyllath Ues Mith Fyr is a phrase that causes allies' weapons to emit magical flames.
  • Cipher powers often gain intensity as they maintain focus. Their basic Mind Jab starts as a minor irritant but can build to inflict devastating damage.
Cooldowns
Early on, some folks asked about cooldowns and both Tim and I agreed that we weren't opposed to using them in some form if it made sense for our mechanics. To be more explicit about it, the only way in which we are currently using anything cooldown-like is for per-encounter and per-rest abilities. Per-encounter abilities can be used a number of times in an encounter and are then disabled until combat ends. Per-rest abilities can be used a number of times after resting before you must rest to recover them. We've previously discussed grimoire-switching for wizards possibly invoking a cooldown. It's more likely that grimoire-switching will be limited through the inventory system and not by a cooldown.

We also have modal abilities that can be turned on and off at will, with some abilities being exclusive to others, meaning you can only have one active at a time.

Attack Resolution
I've talked about this a bunch on the forums, but not in an update. All attacks in Project Eternity compare the attacker's Accuracy value to one of four defenses: Deflection (direct melee and ranged attacks), Fortitude (body system attacks like poison and disease), Reflexes (area of effect damage attacks), and Willpower (mental attacks).

A number between 1 and 100 is generated to determine the attack rules. If the Accuracy and target defense are the same value, these are how the results break down:
  • 01-05 = Miss
  • 06-50 = Graze
  • 51-95 = Hit
  • 96-100 = Critical Hit
A Hit is the standard damage and duration effects, a Graze is 50% minimum damage or duration, a Critical Hit is 150% maximum damage or duration, and a Miss has no effect. In a balanced Attack and defense scenario, the majority of attacks wind up being Hits or Grazes. If the Accuracy and defense values are out of balance, the windows for each result shift accordingly, while always allowing for the possibility of a Graze or a Hit at the extreme ends of the spectrum.

Damage Type vs. Armor Type
We've previously talked about how different weapon damage types (Slash, Crush, and Pierce) fare against Damage Threshold (DT) in the game. We implemented that system and found that while it worked well on paper and scaled well, it was unintuitive when put into the game. It was not possible for players to make informed decisions about what weapons to use against a given armor type because doing so required making relative damage vs. DT calculations for all weapon types, i.e. having a spreadsheet open for comparison at all times.

In light of this, we are going to try a more explicit damage type vs. armor type model where armor, regardless of its DT, has a familiar weight classification: Light, Medium, and Heavy. Damage types are either good or bad against a given weight classification. When a damage type is "bad" against an armor type, it does half damage before DT is applied, making it very inefficient. Within the "good" types of damage, there's still an efficiency curve against DT for meticulous players to figure out, but it has less impact than avoiding "bad" damage types in the first place.
Energy-based attacks (like most spells) oppose a different characteristic of the armor, its substance type (Natural, Armor, or Spirit) and like damage types, have good and bad opposition characteristics. Weapon bonus damage that is energy-based is applied to the target separately, but at a fractional DT value matching the bonus damage. E.g. if a sword has a fire effect that does +15% the sword's damage, it is opposed by 15% of the target's Damage Threshold.

Tileset Trials and Tribulations

Environment artist Sean Dunny has been experimenting with building tilesets for our dungeons. "Tilesets?!" you may be saying (or thinking). It may be a surprise, but many Icewind Dale and Planescape: Torment levels started from a tileset or modular unit base. We use these tilesets to generate basic renders for testing layout, navigation, and combat. Once we like the basic layout, we refine it by adding additional "meta" (special) tiles, modifying the tiles individually in the layout, adding lights, and of course having an artist do a 2D touchup pass.

That's all for this week. Thanks for reading!

Update by Josh Sawyer
 

Arkeus

Arcane
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Messages
1,406
I am guessing that Chanters learn how to imbue longer and longer songs as they level up,earn new more powerful words, or learn how to enhance the words at the price of having shorter songs.
 

Hormalakh

Magister
Joined
Nov 27, 2012
Messages
1,503
You know what I realized? Tim and Josh are the best possible team of designers you could have. Tim is a master of fun game mechanics but is pretty horrible at balance (see Arcanum, Fallout). Josh is a balance taskmaster. It's like yin and yang.

Chanters sound like those fridge-magnet-poem-words that you mess around with to come up with poetic phrases. Can't wait to come up with some sexual innuendo chanter phrases XD
 

Harold

Arcane
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
785
Location
a shack in the hub
NO MORE COOLDOWNS!!!!!!! :bounce::dance: :bounce::dance:

:kfc::martini::drink:

All is forgiven, Josh. :love::excellent:

And it only took him three months to throw them out.
I wonder how long before he realises Aumaua is an incredibly retarded name for a race.:troll:

Also, inb4 limited rest mechanics update:obviously:
 

Zed

Codex Staff
Patron
Staff Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Messages
17,068
Codex USB, 2014
I'm sitting here trying to discern what the hell is happening on his screen. Fucking douchebags why don't they just record some clean WIP footage.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom