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

[Roguey]

Well IE games kinda forgot to implement ability usage that isn't printed in the respective tables. They also forgot to implement mounted combat, reach and charging and that's why spears and halberds are easily the most worthless weapons in the game

IWD2 definitely had reach.

that's not proper gaming.

Pen & Paper players from 1998 called. They want their negatively delimiting "which of us roleplays in the right way" discussion back.

There's ~playing~ and then there's ~gaming~. ~Playing~ with rules is like a step above LARPing; for these sessions it doesn't matter how bad the rules are as long as some exist.

 

[Excidium]

Well IE games kinda forgot to implement ability usage that isn't printed in the respective tables. They also forgot to implement mounted combat, reach and charging and that's why spears and halberds are easily the most worthless weapons in the game

IWD2 definitely had reach.

Well I wouldn't know since I never played IWD2. But it's 3e so...then again it's the same engine. Maybe all IE games do have reach but if they do it's really negligible.

 

[Sensuki]

Um Roguey I am pretty sure that playing and gaming are the same thing.

Remember that P&P has a Dungeon Master and if you try to be a rule exploiting faggot they can shut you down straight away.

You're talking about POWER GAMING.

 

[Cynic]

Grunker higher or lower CHA should be used to influence situations in the character's favour or to their disadvantage, it's not the attribute's fault if DM's or game creators don't use it to provide meaningful choices or pathways to open up to the player.

 

[tuluse]

I also disagree that D&D has "dump" stats.

Give me a single good reason to have a Charisma of above minimum on any character that isn't using it as a caster stat (in video games).

For AD&D, since IE games are the only relevant comparison for this game: give me a single good reason not to give my non-protagonist fighter Wis 3, Int 3, Cha 3.

Prices are better if you have higher charisma

 

[Jim the Dinosaur]

Well IE games kinda forgot to implement ability usage that isn't printed in the respective tables. They also forgot to implement mounted combat, reach and charging and that's why spears and halberds are easily the most worthless weapons in the game

Mounted combat I can sort of understand, but doing something like making saves dependent on wisdom seems ridiculously easy to implement. I vaguely remember reading somewhere that they intended to implement it in BG2, but "forgot", whatever that means.

That's also what annoys me most about Sawyer using the specter of supposedly ubiquitous dumpstats to cover for his far more radical intentions: it's extremely easy to find a way to avoid having dumpstats with D&D attributes (wisdom/strength for mental/physical saves, intelligence for skills and, because Sawyer really doesn't like charisma, perception for obvious reasons). Of course this doesn't matter because dumpstats aren't really what Sawyer's interested in.

His statement that STR is an imbalanced stat in D&D because nothing ever modified spell damage is fucking retarded because spell damage in D&D does not NEED to be modified and in many cases their nature already gets modified by the caster's level. INT and WIS are not less useful stats, they increase the effectiveness of their dependent classes just like STR does for others.

The whole magic system in the BG's (don't know if it was also the case in D&D) was broken though because of saving throws: they'd balloon as you leveled up, while spells stayed the same. I'd never get to use the nice spells like disintegration because of that. There's a mod that (supposedly) fixes that though.


I don't remember a lot about the details of the magic system in PE, but I never understood the whole subdivision of spells into levels thing. The most fun spells were the ones like Chromatic Orb anyway, which had effects change from level to level. Just have a big pool of these types of spells and if necessary have any a priori better spells hidden in difficult dungeons or "cost" more to memorize.

 

[Infinitron]

Of course this doesn't matter because dumpstats aren't really what Sawyer's interested in.

Go on, tell us what you really think.

 

[Jim the Dinosaur]

Of course this doesn't matter because dumpstats aren't really what Sawyer's interested in.

Go on, tell us what you really think.

Huh? We've had this discussion lots of times: just removing dumpstats doesn't adequately balance things yet, it's a Sawyerist half-measure. It's an adequate foil for his more ambitious ideas though.

 

[Infinitron]

Of course this doesn't matter because dumpstats aren't really what Sawyer's interested in.

Go on, tell us what you really think.

Huh? We've had this discussion lots of times: just removing dumpstats doesn't adequately balance things yet, it's a Sawyerist half-measure. It's an adequate foil for his more ambitious ideas though.

What ambitious ideas? What is Sawyer "really interested in"? Are you suggesting there's some sort of covert agenda here?

 

[Jim the Dinosaur]

Of course this doesn't matter because dumpstats aren't really what Sawyer's interested in.

Go on, tell us what you really think.

Huh? We've had this discussion lots of times: just removing dumpstats doesn't adequately balance things yet, it's a Sawyerist half-measure. It's an adequate foil for his more ambitious ideas though.

What ambitious ideas? What is Sawyer "really interested in"? Are you suggesting there's some sort of covert agenda here?

Oh right, now I get it, didn't mean to sound conspiratorial. Sawyer's quite open about how radical he is with regards to balancing, that's what's nice about him; the only thing is that he always has "we're trying to remove dumpstats" as a fall-back position, which I find slightly disingenuous. Because it's not about dumpstats, which as I've pointed out is easy enough to remove without going the all-out "all damage needs one attribute" route.

 

[Grunker]

I also disagree that D&D has "dump" stats.

Give me a single good reason to have a Charisma of above minimum on any character that isn't using it as a caster stat (in video games).

For AD&D, since IE games are the only relevant comparison for this game: give me a single good reason not to give my non-protagonist fighter Wis 3, Int 3, Cha 3.

Prices are better if you have higher charisma

And gold is the scarcest resource on the Sword Coast, surely.

 

[Infinitron]

Oh right, now I get it, didn't mean to sound conspiratorial. Sawyer's quite open about how radical he is with regards to balancing, that's what's nice about him; the only thing is that he always has "we're trying to remove dumpstats" as a fall-back position, which I find slightly disingenuous. Because it's not about dumpstats, which as I've pointed out is easy enough to remove without going the all-out "all damage needs one attribute" route.

OK, but what does "balancing" actually mean?

All of the Sawyer-critics in this thread who aren't named "Grunker" throw the word "balance" around as if it was some kind of self-evidently horrible bugaboo. THE BALANCE, MOM! THE BALANCE IS COMING TO KILL US!!!

To me, removable of "dump" stats/skills/abilities/classes/spells/everything else and "balance" are the exact same thing. If everything is plausibly worth taking, then there is balance.

 

[Jim the Dinosaur]

To me, removable of "dump" stats/skills/abilities/classes/spells/everything else and "balance" are the exact same thing.

Except it's not. Wisdom for a fighter in the BG's is a dumpstat because it serves no purpose whatsoever; wisdom in D&D is not a dumpstat because it affects saves. However, Sawyer still opposes this because it's not balanced: a high wisdom/low strength D&D fighter is a gimped build, even if wisdom is not a dumpstat.

 

[Infinitron]

To me, removable of "dump" stats/skills/abilities/classes/spells/everything else and "balance" are the exact same thing.

Except it's not. Wisdom for a fighter in the BG's is a dumpstat because it serves no purpose whatsoever; wisdom in D&D is not a dumpstat because it affects saves. However, Sawyer still opposes this because it's not balanced: a high wisdom/low strength D&D fighter is a gimped build, even if wisdom is not a dumpstat.

Oh, I see. You're defining "dump stat" as "stat that isn't useful enough for ANY class".

Well, there's not much practical difference in my view. Once you've gone and ensured that every single stat is truly useful to somebody (ie, not just useful in the "lower prices in shops!" or "you can use this in a dialogue check once every 5 hours!" sense) then the distance from there to making every single stat useful to every class is short. You just have to do some consolidation.

Anyway, is it really that exciting to have three stats that are useful to one class and another three stats that are useful to another class? Isn't it cooler and more complex to have all six stats be useful to all classes?

 

[hiver]

Dump stats are created by lack of gameplay content in which to use the stat. Balance is created by creating gameplay content for that stat.

ffs...!

 

[Hormalakh]

but it's not systematic hiver. you need systematic content that play off of those stats as well. Sawyer, Cain, et al. have already said that they're going to make sure that every skill, stat, etc will have enough play in the game.

However, if some skills (like combat skills) have consistent systematic play and others do not, then those skills are always, by definition, better to take.

 

[Rake]

Dump stats are created by lack of gameplay content in which to use the stat. Balance is created by creating gameplay content for that stat.

ffs...!

Yes. But Sawyer doesn't want the system to be depended on content and scripted events. They are good, but he wants the stats to have systemic use through the game. In some way he wants the system to be balanced even on a vacuum.
The same way he wanted durability to be a systemic drain for money, in addition to scripted content like stronghold,house, quests etc. Or his example in Fallout that in addition to scripted checks, medicine provided bonuses to stimpacks. That's the reason every skill in PE will have combat bonuses in addition to checks through the game.

 

[Hormalakh]

Another thing that Sawyer can do to help "systematize" his attributes outside of making them all combat-worthy or derpy is to take a page from Arcanum by limiting the maximum skill level or talent level that a character can reach based on their attributes. It would be difficult to "balance" it I'm sure, but that could be another interesting thing to try. That way, certain skills cannot become fully maximized unless attribute points are placed towards them past a certain threshold.

Attribute points 1-6 would only let you get novice skill levels
7-9 "learned" skill levels
10-12 expert skill levels
13-15 master skill levels
15+ grandmaster skill level

and then divide the skills based on their primary (or secondary) attribute.

weapons handling - str
sneaking - dex
dialogue - charisma
magic - intelligence
etc etc


Of course, this would probably lead towards players min-maxing and trying to specialize their characters, (which isn't necessarily a bad thing). It does serve as a counter balance to the tendency to keep every attribute fairly even, though (jack of all trades/attributes, master of none).

 

[Jim the Dinosaur]

Oh, I see. You're defining "dump stat" as "stat that isn't useful enough for ANY class".

Not at all. A dump stat is what you'd "dump" points in after you'd filled out all the requisites. Strictly speaking that'd usually be Charisma for a fighter in the BG's after you'd made your 18str 18dex 18con 3int 3wis character. I.e. it's not necessarily completely worthless, but it's not something you'd ever consider sacrificing points from your primary stats for. You can't possibly think that's the case with wisdom affecting saves and intelligence skills: you'd still end up with more points in str/con/dex in all likelihood, but putting 3 in wis and int would be exceedingly risky.

Think about it. Is it really that exciting to have three stats that are useful to one class and another three stats that are useful to another class? Isn't it cooler and more complex to have all six stats be useful to all classes?

Like I said, yes, they should be useful to all classes, but there's nothing wrong with having one stat inherently less useful for one class than to the other. It's a question of gradation, with Sawyer on the far end of the spectrum that results in Damage, Accuracy and Defense stats. I really don't know why you'd throw in a word like "complex" here: like we went over with the crafting skill episode, this Sawyerist mentality leads to the need to amalgamate skills and thus more simplicity (at least in character skill terms). Even without examples the equation is not that hard to grasp: 10 skills/stats are feasible to systemically balance, but 20, or 30 (I know, I know, these are all the equivalent of Embroidery to you anyway)? And don't make the lame riposte that just because there's not a skill governing it something doesn't exist mechanically or I'll bust out the Halo comparison again.

 

[Infinitron]

putting 3 in wis and int would be exceedingly risky.

Would it? Maybe if hostile spells were a common enough threat in the game, and you couldn't reload again and again until you passed the saving throw.

Like I said earlier, in Project Eternity, due to derandomization and "genericization" of spells, the equivalents of Wis and Int (in terms of their effect on spell resistance) may very well be more useful than they were in the Infinity Engine games. Consolidation of damage does not imply consolidation of defense!

It's a question of gradation, with Sawyer on the far end of the spectrum that results in Damage, Accuracy and Defense stats

Again, we haven't seen the stats yet, so be careful with your assumptions.

I really don't know why you'd throw in a word like "complex" here: like we went over with the crafting skill episode, this Sawyerist mentality leads to the need to amalgamate skills and thus more simplicity (at least in character skill terms).

We already know Project Eternity will have around the same number of stats as D&D did. For a given number of stats, having them all be plausible choices to improve, rather than merely a subset of them, is more complex.

 

[hiver]

but it's not systematic hiver. you need systematic content that play off of those stats as well. Sawyer, Cain, et al. have already said that they're going to make sure that every skill, stat, etc will have enough play in the game.

However, if some skills (like combat skills) have consistent systematic play and others do not, then those skills are always, by definition, better to take.

Only if you play a combat specialist - character build, duh!

Yes. But Sawyer doesn't want the system to be depended on content and scripted events. They are good, but he wants the stats to have systemic use through the game. In some way he wants the system to be balanced even on a vacuum.
The same way he wanted durability to be a systemic drain for money, in addition to scripted content like stronghold,house, quests etc. Or his example in Fallout that in addition to scripted checks, medicine provided bonuses to stimpacks.

NO. The systematic resolutions are just a part of the whole package - AND THEY CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT GAMEPLAY CONTENT TO SUPPORT THEM EITHER.
It has nothing to do with "scripted events". Those may be used for specific purposes, to create specific situations in a quest or for narrative purposes - but they are just one set of tools out of many.
Which will be used - because they must be used since thats the fucking what the game dev is about.

That's the reason every skill in PE will have combat bonuses in addition to checks through the game.

Oh really? Every skill? And this has been literally confirmed - or is it another case of magical access to dev process, data and sawyers brain?

 

[Hormalakh]

but it's not systematic hiver. you need systematic content that play off of those stats as well. Sawyer, Cain, et al. have already said that they're going to make sure that every skill, stat, etc will have enough play in the game.

However, if some skills (like combat skills) have consistent systematic play and others do not, then those skills are always, by definition, better to take.

Only if you play a combat specialist - character build, duh!

This is a combat game. Everyone needs to be good at combat. Josh said as much. It will be a rare occasion that you could avert combat. Most of the time your skills will just adjust the difficulty of combat, but everyone fights.

since thats the fucking what the game dev is about.

That's the reason every skill in PE will have combat bonuses in addition to checks through the game.

Oh really? Every skill? And this has been literally confirmed - or is it another case of magical access to dev process, data and sawyers brain?

Yes, this has been confirmed.

 

[Rake]

Oh really? Every skill? And this has been literally confirmed - or is it another case of magical access to dev process, data and sawyers brain?

A few points of clarification:

* "Crafting" is one skill, but the crafting system uses multiple skills. I.e., the crafting system does not rely on the existence of the Crafting skill.
* Other than reaching the edge of a map to access the world map, there is no fast-travel in PE. That said, we will likely avoid the IWD-style 5-level dungeons without semi-regular shortcuts back to the surface (N.B.: this does not mean Skyrim-style loops).
* Most items do take up space in personal inventories! The party Stash is unlimited, but the Pack (made of personal inventories) is not. Crafting items (and quest items) always go into (and come out of) the Stash. We are doing this specifically to address common complaints about crafting items cluttering the inventory. Since crafting is typically done at camps or other non-combat locations, allowing the items to come out of the Stash doesn't seem to create any problems.

As I posted on SA, Crafting (the skill) and its associated subsystems (like durability) were the elements I felt least confident about in our skill system. I strongly believe that choices within an array should give the player reasonably balanced benefits. Because certain fundamental skills (like Stealth) can clearly benefit from multiple party members taking them and can contribute to party effectiveness in combat, I believe that other skills should do the same in their own way -- enough to make all of them appealing choices on multiple party members. This also has the benefit of making the uses of skills much higher-frequency than the individual uses that depend on designer content (e.g. unlocking doors or gaining a dialogue/quest option).

As an example, Medicine in its various Fallout forms contributes to the efficacy of stimpaks. There are many other places were Medicine can be used in quests and dialogue, but it has high-frequency use with stimpaks (in or between combats). It's a benefit that can apply to any character who has the skill, even if a character with a higher rating in a party may be "the guy" to perform the high-difficulty actions.

With all of the skills other than Crafting (specifically), those high-frequency benefits/uses were easy to come by. Crafting presented some difficulties and, as I wrote previously, I was concerned about the lack of systemic drains in the economy. Many people have mentioned a lot of potential uses for wealth. Most of them are great ideas and ones that we plan to use, but the vast majority of them are not systemic, rather content-dependent or scripted instances (e.g. bribes). However, it is clear from discussions here and elsewhere that the long-term balance of the economy is not a concern for most players who voiced their opinions -- and almost certainly not in the endgame.

Based on discussions on the forums and conversations I had with people on the team, we will be doing the following:

* Removing durability as a mechanic on items.
* Removing the Crafting skill (specifically). The crafting system and its associated mechanics will remain, as-is.

Ultimately, solving skill imbalance and endgame wealth abundance problems is not worth what players perceive as uninteresting and unenjoyable gameplay. I can still solve the skill imbalance problems by removing the problem skill. As for endgame wealth abundance, we will continue to create places for you to use wealth in the economy: unique items, the stronghold, optional quest/dialogue gates, etc. Ultimately, if those options go unused, I'll have to trust that the majority of players won't be significantly troubled by an excess of wealth in the late game.

Thanks for all of your feedback.

 

[hiver]

Yes, this has been confirmed.

YEAH? So you can quote that confirmation to me? Instead of just stating it is so?

Rake


o_O

Stealth and medicine will have use that one would reasonably expect? (oh there is no medicine in PE)
What, crafting will give you a better weapon or armor and shit? Economy should have some drains? my mind is BLOWN! BLOWN I SAY!

- that doesnt confirm what you said at all. -

Where are those COMBAT BONUSES FROM EVERY SKILL???



-edit-

listens:

 

[buzz]

Did you just skim through the quote?