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

[Blaine]

You tell me why we aren't having this discussion about Wasteland? About Shadowrun: Returns?

Because neither of those will feature universal attributes.

Someone saw that Josh wanted to make attributes universal, cried "OMG MMO!" and the stream of butthurt continued to flow.

Mostly it's because in a class- and level-based system where every character must apparently be perfectly balanced for combat, refusing to have any dump stats at the same time is a recipe for tomfoolery. In actual reality, some people are tall, handsome, charismatic, smart, strong, AND fast, while others are short, fat, stupid, socially inept, and slow as fuck.

The unreality comes from everyone having to be perfectly "balanced" in a diverse selection of professions with no dump stats at all.

Yet here the criticism is constantly some brainless idiot discussion like "oh, a wizard slamming someone with a book, how silly" or "I want realistic attributes like they used to make them."

So what's your answer to the dull-witted musclewizard and quiz bowl smartsfighter? It's either gonna be that, or the attributes will be vague as fuck.

 

[Grunker]

Because neither of those will feature universal attributes.

So? You could make tons of arguments that their attributes are unrealistic and bad for simulationism.

Mostly it's because in a class- and level-based system where every character must apparently be perfectly balanced for combat, refusing to have any dump stats at the same time is a recipe for tomfoolery.

I see a statement but not an argument. Why is it a recipe for tomfoolery? At most, it's a recipe for actual choice in stat distribution.

So what's your answer to the dull-witted musclewizard and quiz bowl smartsfighter? It's either gonna be that, or the attributes will be vague as fuck.

That I'm a) waiting to see what the stats are and b) don't care that much about quiz bowl smartsfighters? Why are they a problem? Baldur's Gate had you running around with fighters with the intelligence of a rat's anus and it was never more than a minor concern. Even at its worst, the dull-witted mage is an improvement to that.

 

[Blaine]

That I'm a) waiting to see what the stats are....

You and everybody else.

I'm betting on nonspecific attributes that don't cover "real" descriptive physical and mental traits such as strength, dexterity, etc. Amusingly, I suspect that a class-less, level-less point buy system (sans most non-combat options) would work much better and would ultimately fit exactly what Josh wants to do.

 

[Infinitron]

It's the whole Fallout thing again - the idea that combat can't be difficult unless you (intentionally or unintentionally) fuck up your build.

Project Eternity is trying to have enough depth so that instead of it being a question of being a "bad fighter" with low primary stats or a "good fighter" with high primary stats, it's about being a "high damage fighter" or an "accurate fighter" or a "dodging fighter", with different archetypes being more efficient in different situations.

"Oh crap, these enemies are hard to hit, my high damage fighter isn't very useful here. Better bring my accuracy guy to the front lines."

In the end, it's up to the content creators to create interesting encounters that make full use of the system. I'm more worried about that than I am about Josh Sawyer's systems-crafting skills.

 

[Blaine]

It's the whole Fallout thing again - the idea that combat can't be difficult unless you (intentionally or unintentionally) fuck up your build.

Not really. For me, it's about any attribute combination being equally effective (supposedly) among a diverse group of professions with fairly obvious specializations.

Grunker is an expert in these matters, however. Ask him about his Blood Bowl team sometime.

 

[NotTale]

I wonder what a "brilliant weakling fighter" will do in P:E combat.

I think the idea for P:E is that he needn't be weak to be brilliant.

 

[imweasel]

Project Eternity is trying to have enough depth so that instead of it being a question of being a "bad fighter" with low primary stats or a "good fighter" with high primary stats, it's about being a "high damage fighter" or an "accurate fighter" or a "dodging fighter", with different archetypes being more efficient in different situations.

Ok, so what is the point in having e.g. a rogue class if you can just skill a fighter to do high damage and dodge? To pick locks?

It doesn't sound versatile, it sounds like a class-less system or maybe some kind of fucktarded hybrid.

 

[jewboy]

I wonder what a "brilliant weakling fighter" will do in P:E combat.

I think the idea for P:E is that he needn't be weak to be brilliant.

I really hope that isn't the case. A character with 18 in every stat ruins the whole point of having them in the first place. They may as well just eliminate stats entirely if they are going to do that.

 

[NotTale]

I wonder what a "brilliant weakling fighter" will do in P:E combat.

I think the idea for P:E is that he needn't be weak to be brilliant.

I really hope that isn't the case. A character with 18 in every stat ruins the whole point of having them in the first place. They may as well just eliminate stats entirely if they are going to do that.

I just reread it and he said that brilliant weakling fighter is a viable concept in PE. So I apparently took the wrong thing from that anyway.

 

[dunno lah]

Don't you guys just wish you could have a look at the Attributes System for this game right now? Fucking Obsidian Josh making us speculate shit and talk shit(about him)...

 

[Delterius]

Now that I think about it, don't you guys just wish we weren't discussing vague design tenets for a game that is in pre-production?

 

[Grunker]

Now that I think about it, don't you guys just wish we weren't discussing vague design tenets for a game that is in pre-production?

795 pages and counting

 

[NotTale]

Now that I think about it, don't you guys just wish we weren't discussing vague design tenets for a game that is in pre-production?

As I see it, there are three things here.
Our discussion
vague design tenants
pre-production

We only have control over one of those, and it would be boring to stop.

 

[Delterius]

Yeah. This might not be the second best thread ever, but the only thing sadder than the P:E thread is this.

Now that I think about it, don't you guys just wish we weren't discussing vague design tenets for a game that is in pre-production?

As I see it, there are three things here.
Our discussion
vague design tenants
pre-production

We only have control over one of those, and it would be boring to stop.

I know, its like we can't stop making fun of BioWare just because they haven't done anything interesting these days, but that doesn't keep me longing for better days.

 

[DraQ]

Mostly it's because in a class- and level-based system where every character must apparently be perfectly balanced for combat, refusing to have any dump stats at the same time is a recipe for tomfoolery.

Then there is no point having attributes at all in a class based game.

If it is obvious how to minmax a class to be effective, then we can skip the middle-man and dump what would result from optimal stats into the properties of the class itself.

In actual reality, some people are tall, handsome, charismatic, smart, strong, AND fast, while others are short, fat, stupid, socially inept, and slow as fuck.

Wasn't that the whole point of rolling your character?

 

[Sensuki]

It's the whole Fallout thing again - the idea that combat can't be difficult unless you (intentionally or unintentionally) fuck up your build.

Project Eternity is trying to have enough depth so that instead of it being a question of being a "bad fighter" with low primary stats or a "good fighter" with high primary stats, it's about being a "high damage fighter" or an "accurate fighter" or a "dodging fighter", with different archetypes being more efficient in different situations.

"Oh crap, these enemies are hard to hit, my high damage fighter isn't very useful here. Better bring my accuracy guy to the front lines."

In the end, it's up to the content creators to create interesting encounters that make full use of the system. I'm more worried about that than I am about Josh Sawyer's systems-crafting skills.

I don't think it's that at all, a lot of us simply believe that there should be mechanical differences between stuff like a sword attack and a magic missile attack - from what contributes to making the attack better to the actual mechanics itself.

I don't hate Josh's proposed system, I just didn't want something that basic and unified for this game.

It's kinda lame now that there will be zerlo difference between a fighter with X in damage stat and a wizard with X in damage stat. A longsword attack will now do 5-8+X damage for both. Not having weapon proficiency wasn't enough it seems. Having a discrepancy between arcane and martial classes using martial weapons was unacceptable apparently (or just a side-effect from obsessive mathematical system balance).

I know I am speaking to deaf ears when saying this to you though, because I know you don't care in the slightest.

 

[NotTale]

It's kinda lame now that there will be zerlo difference between a fighter with X in damage stat and a wizard with X in damage stat. A longsword attack will now do 5-8+X damage for both.

I imagine there will be some feat and ability differences to distinguish the two.

 

[coffeetable]

It's kinda lame now that there will be zerlo difference between a fighter with X in damage stat and a wizard with X in damage stat. A longsword attack will now do 5-8+X damage for both. Not having weapon proficiency wasn't enough it seems. Having a discrepancy between arcane and martial classes using martial weapons was unacceptable apparently (or just a side-effect from obsessive mathematical system balance).

what makes you think that weapons will have exactly one property - their damage? what makes you think that there won't be weapon skills that fighters get a bonus to? what makes you think that fighters won't have talents (both passive and active) that affect their weapon usage?

what makes you think enemies won't have wildly varying resistances to the six damage types we know about?

 

[hiver]

It's kinda lame now that there will be zerlo difference between a fighter with X in damage stat and a wizard with X in damage stat. A longsword attack will now do 5-8+X damage for both.

o_O

 

[Sensuki]

what makes you think that weapons will have exactly one property - their damage? what makes you think that there won't be weapon skills that fighters get a bonus to? what makes you think that fighters won't have talents (both passive and active) that affect their weapon usage?

what makes you think enemies won't have wildly varying resistances to the six damage types we know about?

Are you serious man or do you just not read information - there are no weapon skills. There is no weapon proficiency, Fighters do not get damage bonuses to any weapon. They get a small accuracy bonus with melee weapons though. There will be weapon specialization talents available to Fighters and characters with X race or culture that will unlock at level Y or other characters at level Z (where Z > Y).

A Fighter will always be more accurate than other classes with melee weapons if their stat that contributes to accuracy, talents etc etc are the same. Rangers will almost 100% (but not yet confirmed) get the same for Ranged.

Weapons will have an arbitrary damage range and then a list of special properties.

A Pike does X-Y damage
special property: Range, can attack from behind other characters

A Flail does A-B damage
special property: ignores portion of shield deflection bonus

An estoc does C-D damage
special property: ignores some Damage Threshold

 

[hiver]

its so cool having an insider in the Obs team, to tell us whats what.

 

[coffeetable]

Back during damage type chat, there was definitely talk of a "Peasant Weapon" specialisation at one point. So, yes I am so sorry, not a skill like crafting or stealth.

A Fighter will always be more accurate than other classes with melee weapons if their stat that contributes to accuracy, talents etc etc are the same. Rangers will almost 100% (but not yet confirmed) get the same for Ranged.

Oh, so there is a difference between fighters and wizards beyond +X damage?

 

[Sensuki]

I am talking about damage only?

My point is that the damage stat (annoyingly) applies to anything and before that I was talking about how I didn't like that the proposed system for P:E is so basic and symmetrical even if it does not have any 'negatives' for character building.

Josh definitely wasn't lying. Goal = make no dump stats. Method: make stats so fucking simple it's impossible to fuck em up.

It's kind of funny because I only have a problem with damage being uniform, accuracy from the same stat isn't bothering me at all. Magic Missile should get bonus damage from some mental/arcane/soul stat and a sword attack should get a damage bonus from a physical stat.

 

[Infinitron]

http://www.formspring.me/JESawyer/q/483854030943058867

All attributes are used in both scripted interactions and standard conversations to unlock options -- as in PS:T, but with a heavier emphasis on equal use of the attributes.

One of the reasons we don't have a dialogue/speech skill is so a character's attributes can be used as dialogue prerequisites with greater frequency.

Wow, called it perfectly.

 

[Athelas]

So I assume they'll be putting that DEX stat to good use by having you continously bitchslap people mid-conversation. If your DEX is too low, the NPC will block your hand and your character wll be left in a rather humiliated state.