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

[Lilura]

Spell scroll availability in IWD2 was appalling... A sorcerer could have Fireball in the fucking prologue, wizards had to wait until Horde Fortress. There were only four scrolls you could get in chapter 4. Four.

IWD1 p. much only catered for one wizard, spellscroll-wise.

BG1 mookhordes ensured enough random drops.

BG2 did a good job with dedicated spell merchants but pre-Underdark had only two copies of the most sort-after scrolls. And other than an ultra-rare random drop you couldn't get a Tenser's Transformation scroll in chapters 1-4.

PS:T had Dak'kon as a spell-dispenser (Zerthimon circles).

 

[Sensuki]

Sawyer answered a few tumblr questions

http://jesawyer.tumblr.com/

lilarcor asked: You mentioned in the past that weapon proficiency perks would come in 'theme groups' similar to Cowboy and Grunt from New Vegas. Can we expect that these specializations will have at least one weapon from each damage type, since the combat system seems to encourage switching weapons based on the encounter context?

Yes, the weapon groups will cover all of the physical damage types.

waltzforjustice asked: Have you given any thought to how slow/pause hotkeys will work in Project Eternity yet? Since you'd need more than just the space bar now

Currently we’re using “S” for “slow” (amazing!), but we will probably remap that and allow the player to re-map it as well.

daggity asked: I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but will dialog and quest options relating directly to the skills your character has available? For example, New Vegas had some simple dialog options in regards to your skill levels (Explosions skill needs to be 25 to get dynamite from that one guy, for example). Will PE have something similar, and if so, will be it be any deeper than New Vegas' implementation?

We will definitely have skill use in our “scripted interactions” (like the bridge-jumping sequence we showed in Update 47.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/obsidian/project-eternity/posts/438485
Skill use in actual conversations will be less common, but we will have attribute (i.e. “ability score”) use in conversations in addition to elements like reputation. This does include the ability to perform narrated physical actions in conversation.

 

[Sensuki]

I just found this in the Kickstarter Q&A

Q: An idea for you guys. If you can queue actions (use this skill, then this skill, then go here, then attack this guy), you could do tactical combat pause style, but then unpause and watch the action unfold for a bit.
A: Absolutely, we are going to have a queue system so that when you un-pause your party will follow a certain number of them. Not sure on the number exactly yet, probably around three though.

Count me concerned about that. I hate action queuing as it's usually clunky as fuck.

 

[Duraframe300]

At first it seemed the different cultures would be more in a high/late Middle period. From your recent answers, it seems that pretty much all the big human factions are actually in what would be a modern, colonial period. 1. So PE is more of a Renaissance/early modern world than a High/Late Medieval one? 2. Is there still some place for knights (vassal system...), Gothic Architecture, Medieval weaponery and other typical Middle Ages characteristics?

The Dyrwood is in the equivalent of a Renaissance/early modern tech level, but even Europe’s own Renaissances didn’t abandon earlier architecture and technology. Swords and armor were used alongside firearms for centuries (as they are in the Dyrwood, where firearms are still uncommon).

Rural communities in the Dyrwood tend to have Romanesque/Norman architecture, with Renaissance features (e.g. domes, symmetrical façades) found in large urban centers. Previous colonial cultures also tried to settle in the Dyrwood and their ruins tend to be more traditionally “Medieval”. In the village concept we released, the buildings are vaguely Romanesque with a few Renaissance features, but they are built adjacent to much older, rougher remnants of a castle and bridges from centuries ago.

Hi Josh.You said that Aedyr are white humans and elves with green and blue eyes. But they are from very hot, tropical regions of the world. Wouldnt people living in a climate like that develop a darker skin and darker eyes?

If they had been there for more than a few thousand years, yes. Most people living in Aedyr are Thyrtan humans, "meadow folk". Their ethnic group is not native to Aedyr, but comes from the far north (like the Sceltrfolc elves). They migrated south over thousands of years. Their nickname, "meadow folk", is seemingly a misnomer but is still used because of their origin.

Similarly, the Grand Empire of Vailia (from which the Vailian Republics sprang) was farther south in the southern hemisphere, but the Calbandra people originally lived near the equator for many millennia (hence their name -- Calbandra = warm ring).

 

[Infinitron]

Yo Hormalakh http://www.formspring.me/JESawyer/q/451864063819927666

Re: PE armor system What about the effect of piercing weapons on light armor? Is it now also a percentage modifier on the DT like crushing weapons, or is still an absolute modifier like in the originally described system? (ie, -3 DT instead of -40% DT)

It is also a percentage modifier (if the armor is especially vulnerable or strong to piercing).

How boring. Time to rage?

 

[Duraframe300]

You can punch through armor, but that's not based on the raw damage type of the weapon. No, I don't think armor-piercer is a common character concept like a dodging character, but there will be ways to negate DT.

 

[Duraframe300]

Addition to the Aedyr question

Additionally, no one really got why their name meant "warm ring" for a long time because the Vailians pioneered cartography and theories of the world's shape. To most others, Calbandra are "ocean folk"

 

[Rake]

Sawyer answered a few tumblr questions

http://jesawyer.tumblr.com/

Skill use in actual conversations will be less common, but we will have attribute (i.e. “ability score”) use in conversations in addition to elements like reputation. This does include the ability to perform narrated physical actions in conversation.

 

[Duraframe300]

Sensuki

Never trust the Feargus when it comes to actual development. He tends to A: extaraggate B: declare things to be the case which are not at the point in time. See his comment of the Aliens:RPG being *finished*.

On action-queue.

Feargus was speaking prematurely. Personally, I would like to avoid the need for an action queue. Older editions of A/D&D promoted rote casting sequences (especially of buffs) and I would like to avoid that in PE. That said, if some aspect of PE would best be served by some sort of queue or sequenced action (e.g. multi-waypoint movement), I wouldn't rule it out.

 

[Infinitron]

You can punch through armor, but that's not based on the raw damage type of the weapon. No, I don't think armor-piercer is a common character concept like a dodging character, but there will be ways to negate DT.

 

[Roguey]

Some people are going to be upset over the lack of an action queue. I remember seeing people getting mad over the lack of one in DA:O.

Oh yeah also Josh's refusal to cater to buff-stackers.

 

[Infinitron]

Some people are going to be upset over the lack of an action queue. I remember seeing people getting mad over the lack of one in DA:O.

Oh yeah also Josh's refusal to cater to buff-stackers.

IE games didn't have them, nobody should give a fuck

 

[tuluse]

I'll be mad if there's no action queue, it reduces tedium.

 

[Roguey]

IE games didn't have them, nobody should give a fuck

The IE games didn't have a lot of things that would be considered expected features in PE e.g. crafting or an interface that allows you to go back to the game screen from any other screen by clicking whichever letter you pressed first instead of G and only G.

 

[waywardOne]

Someone needs to ask if we'll be able to write our own custom AI scripts for party members.

(nm, got someone to do it for me)

 

[Delterius]

I get that quest resolution will benefit from skills, but what about spells? Could someone ask/enlighten me if they're thinking of adding class based resolutions through specific abilities?

 

[BobtheTree]

It's possible. It's something they did for The Sith Lords. I remember resolving certain situations through my high heal and repair skills in that game. I imagine they are probably considering it.

 

[Sensuki]

Sensuki

Never trust the Feargus when it comes to actual development. He tends to A: extaraggate B: declare things to be the case which are not at the point in time. See his comment of the Aliens:RPG being *finished*.

On action-queue.

Feargus was speaking prematurely. Personally, I would like to avoid the need for an action queue. Older editions of A/D&D promoted rote casting sequences (especially of buffs) and I would like to avoid that in PE. That said, if some aspect of PE would best be served by some sort of queue or sequenced action (e.g. multi-waypoint movement), I wouldn't rule it out.

Just saw that exactly the answer I wanted.

That's why I wanted to ask. The only way it could be done right is if move actions cancel all queued actons.

 

[Delterius]

Another one: are there any plans to make trap detection more responsive?

 

[Arkeus]

Oh yeah also Josh's refusal to cater to buff-stackers.

Josh did say he would probably due 'special queues for buff-stacking' kind of effects (that are not actually queues).

 

[Sensuki]

On armor:

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/63696-update-51-prototype-2-update/page-7

Armor speed penalties currently only affect the speed of actions, not movement. They modify attack animations directly but may wind up dominantly affecting downtime between actions instead (because it allows more scaling before the animations look... not good).

Fighters currently have a passive ability called Armored Grace that increases the DT benefit from armor. The benefit of augmenting DT rather than reducing speed penalties is that it doesn't make the lightest armors irrelevant for fighters. Of course, in the heaviest armors, they will probably have the highest DT of any class (all other things being equal). If you want to keep a similar DT to other classes but "gain" speed (lose speed penalty), Armored Grace allows a fighter to use a lighter armor type. E.g., if a cleric is wearing plate armor with X% speed penalty, a fighter may be able to wear brigandine with the same (effective) DT as the cleric's plate armor and a lower speed penalty.

We are not preventing classes from wearing any particular type of armor, but the mechanics of classes may lend themselves more to certain weights. E.g., many monk abilities (both active and passive) are powered by Wounds. You acquire Wounds by taking damage, after armor. Several monk and barbarian abilities are effective for a certain amount of time rather than a certain number of attacks, which encourages faster attacks -- both from the choice of weapon and from a lower armor speed penalty. Paladins have more targeted-use abilities and "Zealous" auras but are not especially durable. I.e., the party gains the most benefit from having them on the front lines, but they do not need to be especially fast-acting, so heavier armor often makes more sense for them.

It sounds... nuanced. The aspect I wonder about is how well gaming newcomers will be able to pick up on those nuances and thus fine tune their character's equipment and combat actions?

Newcomers will probably not be as efficient, but efficiency is more important at higher levels of difficulty where the margins of victory become smaller.

Additionally, we're designing these mechanics to align with the traditional concepts of the classes. I believe most players think of barbarians, monks, and wizards as characters that wear light armor. If you put them in light armor, the mechanics will support that. If you put fighters, paladins, and clerics in heavy armor, the mechanics will also support that. You can also play against traditional concepts, and in certain circumstances that will be mechanically more advantageous, but typically there's efficiency loss or little benefit gained.

E.g., if the monk is really being slammed by attacks so hard that his or her Wounds are filling up too quickly, it may make more sense to wear heavier armor. If the monk wears heavy armor all the time, he or she will be protected against more damage (like anyone else), but his or her Wounds resource will take longer to build up, meaning he or she will spend more time in combat building up to the use of Wounds-based abilities.

 

[Hormalakh]

Yo Hormalakh http://www.formspring.me/JESawyer/q/451864063819927666

Re: PE armor system What about the effect of piercing weapons on light armor? Is it now also a percentage modifier on the DT like crushing weapons, or is still an absolute modifier like in the originally described system? (ie, -3 DT instead of -40% DT)

It is also a percentage modifier (if the armor is especially vulnerable or strong to piercing).

How boring. Time to rage?

i'e given up raging at Sawyer. He's got a vision and it'll take a billion SA'ers to change his mind and I'm not on SA. so.... I'll just quietly wait until it comes out and then i'll go on the forums and tell him what he did right/wrong

 

[Broseph]

Yo Hormalakh http://www.formspring.me/JESawyer/q/451864063819927666

Re: PE armor system What about the effect of piercing weapons on light armor? Is it now also a percentage modifier on the DT like crushing weapons, or is still an absolute modifier like in the originally described system? (ie, -3 DT instead of -40% DT)

It is also a percentage modifier (if the armor is especially vulnerable or strong to piercing).

How boring. Time to rage?

i'e given up raging at Sawyer. He's got a vision and it'll take a billion SA'ers to change his mind and I'm not on SA. so.... I'll just quietly wait until it comes out and then i'll go on the forums and tell him what he did right/wrong

Sawyer can do nothing wrong. I'll laugh when PE is released and it turns out to be the one gem in this utterly mediocre genre.

 

[Sensuki]

i've given up raging at Sawyer.

What was your problem with the language thing the other day? That seemed a bit unreasonable to me

 

[Infinitron]

http://www.formspring.me/JESawyer/q/452260203430174635