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]

Starym

Educated
Joined
Jun 17, 2013
Messages
40
Not to derail the rape discussion or anything but an actual daily spell that cured the disability debuff after a character died would actually be pretty damn good - you'd spend a daily resource and yet the party member would still be at 1 health and a huge liability if you didn't keep him extremely safe. Really like that kind of tradeoff tbh. The spell would have to be somewhat high level though, so it could never "drop down" to per-encounter.
 

Hormalakh

Magister
Joined
Nov 27, 2012
Messages
1,503
I bet if Sawyer was in charge of Fallout 2, he would have retconned rape and impregnation into Tandi's kidnapping.

It's a lot better than what actually happened: Bethesda raped the whole universe with fallout 3 and we're stuck with its bastard child.

OK! My edgy post count has reached its limit for the day. :)
 

Sensuki

Arcane
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Messages
9,825
Location
New North Korea
Codex 2014 Serpent in the Staglands Shadorwun: Hong Kong A Beautifully Desolate Campaign
Not to derail the rape discussion or anything but an actual daily spell that cured the disability debuff after a character died would actually be pretty damn good - you'd spend a daily resource and yet the party member would still be at 1 health and a huge liability if you didn't keep him extremely safe. Really like that kind of tradeoff tbh. The spell would have to be somewhat high level though, so it could never "drop down" to per-encounter.

I think that's a waste of an ability tbh.
 

Absalom

Guest
Oh, he has nothing to worry about. The assertion from my IWD2 article didn't make waves outside the Codex.

I bet if Sawyer was in charge of Fallout 2, he would have retconned rape and impregnation into Tandi's kidnapping. Also the woman kidnapped by the raiders at Vault 15 would have been raped for real instead of comically kicking all her would-be attackers in the junk.
Pretty sure the ball kicking comment was just an attempt to cope by her part
 

~RAGING BONER~

Learned
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
420
Update by Chris Avellone
This week? Companions. I have been designing companions.

I lucked out, because I got to do companion design work for BOTH Eternity and Torment, so two birds, one stone. Or three companions, one lodestone? I don’t know.

Eternal Companion Facts
Some facts from our Eternity design documents that I wanted to say up front before going any further: thanks to backer support, Eternity supports 8, yes 8, pre-made companions and 8 hired adventurers (16 total). You can have up to 5 in the party at any point in time (the 6th/1st role is your player character, who, well, sort of has to be there, you know, because it’s your game). It’s a lot of writing.

We want to allow you to encounter all companions before the mid-point of the story. One issue we’ve found with introducing companions too late is that it doesn’t give players enough time to bond with them, and/or the player may have already formed a strong attachment to their other allies so much so there’s no physical or emotional room for more party members in their lives.

Each companion also has their own mini-arc and quest woven into the game as well, so be prepared - they have agendas of their own. You know, like real people.

Lastly in the fact train, we don’t force you to take anyone in your party. If you want them, take them. If you want to go to the Adventurer’s Hall and make your own, do it. Go solo. We don’t own you. We’re not trying to control you. Play how you want.

Narrative Update...
So a narrative update related to companions... Eric Fenstermaker (designer, Fallout: New Vegas, also responsible for Boone and Veronica and worked on NWN2: Mask of the Betrayer and... and... oh, just Google him) has been hard at work on the narrative, and it’s reached the point with the arc and themes that now seemed like a good time to introduce the companion supporting pillars to the process to take the story higher (...not necessarily in a “Can you Take Me Higher” Creed sort of way, since it’s not really a question, it’s more like, “yes, we will take you higher.”)

Over the past few months, I’ve been scrutinizing the systems and story documents for Eternity (and Torment), the themes, and also checking out the other companion briefs from the other designers. Aside from the companion designs I wrote, feedback has been wildly traded in the interests of making companions even better than their core concepts. It was my goal to read EVERYTHING about the narrative I could, even brainstorming - and in Torment’s case, novellas as well. Now it was time to work on the structure of the individual companions.

...and now on to Companion Design
We discussed companion design (http://forums.obsidi...aracterization/) way back at the start of Eternity, so some points in this update will callback to this. There shouldn’t be a need for a refresher read unless you want to. The process for Eternity (and Torment) has followed these bulletpoints, and we’re holding true to our goals as well as expanding the design methodology as we go ahead.

The first and best place to start with companion design is the game systems. For companions, this means considering race, class, and their role in the conflict mechanics of the game. Knowing what class of character you’re making is key to building their history and personality. For example, in the case of Gann in NX1: Mask of the Betrayer, knowing his class before writing was a big help, and I can use that class’s list of abilities, class focus, and the abilities the class specializes in and weave it in with the backstory. The Eternity designers have been good about indicating the spread of classes and races for the companions and rationing those out during the process.

For Eternity, since combat is the primary challenge mechanic, one major goal is to make sure the companion is combat effective. Why would you take them in your party? How are they useful? In other instances of conflict mechanics (for example, dialogue or Tide reactivity in Torment), we also examine how the character is useful in terms of these challenges as well.

A Note About Challenge Mechanics
Really quick, I want to clarify what I meant about “challenge mechanics.” That doesn’t always mean combat – it’s whatever the primary challenge in the game is. If we were doing a Thief-style RPG, then stealth and avoiding detection becomes the primary challenge mechanic, not combat. Depending on the RPG and its range of challenges, a character can still be fairly weak in combat, but if that’s the case, we try to think of how they’re helpful with regards to the game’s other challenges (giving an edge in dialogue, healing, fast travel).

For all the characters I’ve seen or designed for games that don’t cater to at least one of the game’s primary challenge mechanics, those guys are often unpopular or unused because they’re not helping out with the systematic gameplay, regardless of how cool they might seem. And the more actively these characters can participate in the mechanics (vs. passive), the stronger their appeal.

Also at the same time, I try to be careful that the companion's skill set doesn’t overlap with the challenge roles of the other characters. We try to indicate in the companion briefs how each companion's challenge role is intended – one thing I learned as a pen-and-paper Gamemaster is you want to be careful about two players sharing the same role (Tank, Mage, Priest, etc.) – if one is clearly stronger than another, then the second one needs something else to make them stand out and be “special” in the party and fulfill an equally cool role in the party dynamic, otherwise one ends up getting upstaged by the other. And feelings get hurt. Which isn’t something you want in a game designed to entertain.

For Eternity, we’re setting it up so even if players choose the same classes as some companions, the companions are designed to assist those character types and make them more special (ciphers, for example, can chain, and even priests with the same religion can discuss theology and combo attacks).

In addition, we wanted to be careful about personality overlaps as well. I wanted to make sure any companion design didn't overlap with ideas or “concepts" of the other characters (or across projects – so for example, while I’m doing a Glaive for Torment, I’m not doing any fighters for Eternity) ...and that extends to personalities as well. As an example, I told Colin for Torment it might be a good idea if I didn't do a female rogue with a ruthless hidden agenda who can shape-shift according to your personality and have her/it be redundant with the Toy or the Cold, Calculating Jack in Torment.
So knowing the general class-focus, role, and personality for each, as well as ones that would be useful, we try to include in the character briefs and get that info to people as quickly as possible so everyone can get a sense for what direction to take their characters.

As for me, after much begging for the class itself and begging for the specific companion, I asked for the cipher. The cipher is near and dear to my heart, it felt like the first brand new class we were introducing that was tied into the soul mechanics of the Eternity world, and the freedom to explore it is a great opportunity.
Character Freedom
Both the Eternity and Torment leads have been strong advocates about letting designers channel their characters. If you are excited about an idea, they are willing to work with you to help realize that idea and help it fit into the world, without giving barriers to entry. In my opinion, the best GMs do this – rather than give you character sheets, they help you make a character you care about. In essence, companion design is a designer’s chance to design their very own player character that fits in with the world and the theme.

On Eternity, Eric has a strong theme for the story already. While not the original theme, Josh was accommodating and we all recognized that if another theme came to the forefront naturally through the writing process, it’s fine to alter it to make a stronger design. Having this theme clearly identified and supported in the narrative is good, but we’re taking care to make sure the companions can provide direct examples of the theme at work (or present counters or alternate viewpoints to it) - and the more, the better.


The companions cover a good range of culture and religion and factions in the game, which we hope to showcase more of in the future... the machinations of the world and the politics are prominent in the story (along with the magic system), and the characters showcase these elements very well.

Companion Iteration
There’s still plenty of work to do – like all design, iteration is key, and we have been doing passes of the characters to make them stronger. While the companions exist as individual entities, we also feel it’s important to do a pass of the companions to show how they relate to each other, which we feel is an important part of making the game Infinity Engine-esque, and it was a big part of the dynamics in Baldur’s Gate and Torment – describing how companions relate, fight, argue, or even act as sounding boards for both your character and each other’s viewpoints is an important part of creating a living world – and your party is very much the living world that follows you around.


The work doesn’t stop there. A pass of the companions asking “why the players should care” is also something we like to make sure we have an answer to for each companion. While the answer of “good fighter” is an answer (and one that’s worked well for a number of companions in the past), we prefer to add more layers showcasing how they’re specifically adding to the player experience.


Companion Nuts and Bolts
There are other finishing touches we like to add.

The companions have unique signature items (very Torment and Baldur’s Gate) in addition to their personalities and strong visual signatures as well. One comment we’ve always tried to include in these visual hooks is that because of the camera angles in the game, we want to make sure these visual hooks are easy for the players to see in the environment as well.


Also we’re doing what we can to get the area designers involved with not just the story, but companions as well. A good chunk of the game is dungeon exploration, and we felt that what the designers had done in NX1: Mask of the Betrayer in making sure that each companion had a significant interaction in a specific area was important for the story – and having areas that revolved around companions as well gave them and the dungeon design more strength. Right now, the companions already have strong internal conflicts (and religious and faction, if not inter-party), now tying those more to NPCs and dungeon explorations is one of our next targets.

With the companion design, we also tried to include narrative samples of analogies to that character that we’ve seen in other media or fiction that we feel help capture the character’s essence. Also, as we’re designing the characters, we include sample lines of dialogue when we can as another layer in the process so audio and other designers can get a sense of how the character sounds (both spoken and text-wise).

That’s all I can share about companions for the moment, and we’re looking forward to elaborating further as the game progresses.

If you have any thoughts or ideas on companion design, specific or general, feel free to post in our forums, we look forward to hearing from you!
 

Space Satan

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
6,368
Location
Space Hell
fuac.jpg

febq.jpg
 

tuluse

Arcane
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
11,400
Serpent in the Staglands Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Shadorwun: Hong Kong
3E (or at least pathfinder) gives double value to physical attributes over mental attributes, but I don't think STR is treated differently from DEX.
 

Cynic

Arcane
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
1,850
Fuck he is saying some retarded shit here. It's natural for a stronger person to inflict more pain with a weapon than a weaker person, and for a more coordinated person to have a greater chance to land a blow or dodge a hit. It is NOT logical for intelligence to change the damage your spells do.

Intelligence and Wisdom effect something different about their dependent classes, they give you greater access to more spells per level in your spell book and more spells to choose from each day. It increases your ability to be a better spell caster this way. It also makes playing a spell caster hugely varied. Spell damage doesn't need to be modified, because spells are fucking powerful as it is. Higher level spells, which you get more of if your INT or WIS are higher, do more damage and have far more severe effects, FFS you can instantly kill things in D&D with a single word! If you add to this an attribute that modifies spell damage, then fucking hell Wizards would be EVEN MORE OP than they already are!

He's not as smart as he thinks he is honestly. I'll wait to see how much Tim Cain can fix when it comes to combat :smug:
 

Sensuki

Arcane
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Messages
9,825
Location
New North Korea
Codex 2014 Serpent in the Staglands Shadorwun: Hong Kong A Beautifully Desolate Campaign
Balance obsession. I'd actually say he's got more of a mathematical symmetry obsession. Most games that strive to achieve balance (for example, RTS games) the mechanics for stuff are different and are just balanced through experimentation and iteration.

In Starcraft for example all three races work completely differently to eachother, yet somehow they are fairly well balanced (it changes with every patch). If they all worked the same and just looked different or had minor differences, the game would be alot more boring.
 

Cynic

Arcane
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
1,850
There are different kinds of balance and varying degrees.

I'd say the only kind of balance you need to worry about in a cRPG is whether the encounter design can be balanced vs your party make up. Balancing things on a pure statistical/numerical scale is MMO faggotry.

Here's all the balance you need - Make the classes fun to play and build. Make the encounters challenging. Put a level cap in to make sure you cannot fuck up the encounter design. Do these and you have a fun, challenging game that can be played over and over again with different party make ups and builds.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Patron
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
99,049
Codex Year of the Donut 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
Fuck he is saying some retarded shit here. It's natural for a stronger person to inflict more pain with a weapon than a weaker person, and for a more coordinated person to have a greater chance to land a blow or dodge a hit. It is NOT logical for intelligence to change the damage your spells do.

Who gives a fuck what you find "natural" and "logical", simulationist scum? :smug:

Spell damage doesn't need to be modified, because spells are fucking powerful as it is. Higher level spells, which you get more of if your INT or WIS are higher, do more damage and have far more severe effects, FFS you can instantly kill things in D&D with a single word! If you add to this an attribute that modifies spell damage, then fucking hell Wizards would be EVEN MORE OP than they already are!

Maybe the fact that Wizards are OP is the problem that needs to be addressed in the first place?

He's not as smart as he thinks he is honestly. I'll wait to see how much Tim Cain can fix when it comes to combat :smug:

Sorry, Tim "Wildstar MMO" Cain isn't going to save you.

I'd say the only kind of balance you need to worry about in a cRPG is whether the encounter design can be balanced vs your party make up. Balancing things on a pure statistical/numerical scale is MMO faggotry.

The only kind of balance you need to worry about in a cRPG is the balance of making sure every single particular stat, skill, ability or spell is consistently useful enough and therefore worth picking on level up, for all classes and all characters. No "dump stats" and no "must haves".
 

uaciaut

Augur
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
505
3E doesn't, because a Dwarf gets +2 CON -2 CHA and there are similar examples.

He's talking about STR relative to other stats, not CON. Give" similar examples" to STR valued relative to "dump" stats rather than CON, otherwise i don't see how your argument against him is valid.

Balance obsession. I'd actually say he's got more of a mathematical symmetry obsession. Most games that strive to achieve balance (for example, RTS games) the mechanics for stuff are different and are just balanced through experimentation and iteration.

In Starcraft for example all three races work completely differently to eachother, yet somehow they are fairly well balanced (it changes with every patch). If they all worked the same and just looked different or had minor differences, the game would be alot more boring.

How the fuck does race balance in Starcraft 2 (which is still fairly far off given how much money they're putting in both the game itself and the pro scene) compare to how NUMERICAL stats are balanced. That's why they're given simple numerical values, so you have a real estimate of how good they. I don't even get why people would be arguing against him in this case given how non-combat stats were shit to heavily invest in/dump stats.
 

Sensuki

Arcane
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Messages
9,825
Location
New North Korea
Codex 2014 Serpent in the Staglands Shadorwun: Hong Kong A Beautifully Desolate Campaign
He's talking about STR relative to other stats, not CON. Give" similar examples" to STR valued relative to "dump" stats rather than CON, otherwise i don't see how your argument against him is valid.

What the fuck are you talking about? I was replying to Cynic.

How the fuck does race balance in Starcraft 2 (which is still fairly far off given how much money they're putting in both the game itself and the pro scene) compare to how NUMERICAL stats are balanced. That's why they're given simple numerical values, so you have a real estimate of how good they. I don't even get why people would be arguing against him in this case given how non-combat stats were shit to heavily invest in/dump stats.

That specific example is a reference to how Josh states on Something Awful that systems that strive to achieve balance do not even try to be simulationist. My example shows that such systems have more mechanical variation than the systems that Josh Sawyer is proposing for Project Eternity. I have said nothing of the sort that non-combat/dump stats should exist in P:E. What I have said is that I do not like the oversimplification of the application of bonus damage and I think that the D&D style physical/mental stats can be done properly without having to resort to such extreme simplification/gamism.

RPGs have all sorts of wacky systems but even RTS games have a mechanical separation of the application of bonus damage between different types of attacks. Warcraft has different upgrades for Melee and Ranged physical attacks. The Terran Starcraft race has separation of damage upgrades for organic, ground vehicle and air vehicles.
 

Hormalakh

Magister
Joined
Nov 27, 2012
Messages
1,503
He's talking about STR relative to other stats, not CON. Give" similar examples" to STR valued relative to "dump" stats rather than CON, otherwise i don't see how your argument against him is valid.

What the fuck are you talking about? I was replying to Cynic.

How the fuck does race balance in Starcraft 2 (which is still fairly far off given how much money they're putting in both the game itself and the pro scene) compare to how NUMERICAL stats are balanced. That's why they're given simple numerical values, so you have a real estimate of how good they. I don't even get why people would be arguing against him in this case given how non-combat stats were shit to heavily invest in/dump stats.

That specific example is a reference to how Josh states on Something Awful that systems that strive to achieve balance do not even try to be simulationist. My example shows that such systems have more mechanical variation than the systems that Josh Sawyer is proposing for Project Eternity. I have said nothing of the sort that non-combat/dump stats should exist in P:E. What I have said is that I do not like the oversimplification of the application of bonus damage and I think that the D&D style physical/mental stats can be done properly without having to resort to such extreme simplification/gamism.

RPGs have all sorts of wacky systems but even RTS games have a mechanical separation of the application of bonus damage between different types of attacks. Warcraft has different upgrades for Melee and Ranged physical attacks. The Terran Starcraft race has separation of damage upgrades for organic, ground vehicle and air vehicles.

Sensuki, that's what I was trying to do with the six attributes being emphasized differently with different classes when you said it was 11X the programming. So I'm a little unclear: should we invest in the increase in programming to have varied mechanics for each class and its attribute implementation or should we simplify for 1x the programming? I would say the former.
 

Zed

Codex Staff
Patron
Staff Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Messages
17,068
Codex USB, 2014
I'm glad you'll get to meet all companions by the mid-point of the game. One of my major complaints in BG is that you can't pick up certain NPCs before Cloakwood/Baldur's Gate. I would have loved to have Skie much earlier. She really is the whiniest woman in a game ever.
 

Jim Cojones

Prophet
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
2,103
Location
Przenajswietsza Rzeczpospolita
3E doesn't, because a Dwarf gets +2 CON -2 CHA and there are similar examples.
There's no strict rule about that because races aren't defined only by attributes bonuses but also have other positive and negative traits. However, in GMs book it is discussed that in general physical attributes are worth more and if you want to create your own race, you should take that into account, and you can balance bonuses to physical stats in many ways, one of them being double penalty to mental ones.
 

Grunker

RPG Codex Ghost
Patron
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
27,716
Location
Copenhagen
Pathfinder let's you customize your race as well as your class with alternative features.

I'd brofist @Infinitron's comment to Cynic if not for the fact that it, yet again, ignores complexity of scale, the lack of precedence for Sawyer's balance antics (which makes his success far more unlikely) and Sawyer's love for a broken system (4E). You're right in your response, but neither you or Roguey seems to have given any of these valid arguments much thought.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Patron
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
99,049
Codex Year of the Donut 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
Pathfinder let's you customize your race as well as your class with alternative features.

I'd brofist @Infinitron's comment to Cynic if not for the fact that it, yet again, ignores complexity of scale, the lack of precedence for Sawyer's balance antics (which makes his success far more unlikely) and Sawyer's love for a broken system (4E). You're right in your response, but neither you or Roguey seems to have given any of these valid arguments much thought.


Well, "Sawyer is right...but he might fail!!" isn't a very constructive argument. Sure, he might fail. Everybody might fail.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
6,933
Cynic said:
It is NOT logical for intelligence to change the damage your spells do.

That's a pretty fucking stupid thing to say. Retarded even. Spells are per definition made up shit that works according to its own logic, it's most certainly not hard to imagine a spell system where intelligence affects spell damage. Just say that spells require extensive mental effort and more effort=more magic.

And heck, since you seem to be comparing it to D&D, you've presumably already accepted how tons of spells scale with level. And in some Monte Cook edition, didn't intelligence affect the spell penetration or spell DC saving throw or something?

I mean dude, you're using a simulationist argument against a spell system - simulationism is tarded enough in itself, but then you apply it to something that cannot possibly be simulating anything real life. Nigga get real
you add to this an attribute that modifies spell damage, then fucking hell Wizards would be EVEN MORE OP than they already are!

You know nothing about the spell system or spell power in PE, the last thing you can talk about is balance, jesus christ. After that little tirade, I'm afraid you have no business calling anyone stupid let alone retarded.
 

Cosmo

Arcane
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
1,387
Project: Eternity
P the lack of precedence for Sawyer's balance antics

His mod for F:NV was a model of balance and sobriety.
Which is why i've decided i'd give him the benefit of the doubt, at least this one time.
 

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