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

[Delterius]

You can't tell me class variety isn't a problem in 4E and then claim it lost a lot of class variety. I don't care what bullshit excuses you use.

Oh, you misunderstand.

Its very much like measuring how much shit, exactly, got into your face after falling into a pigsty.

Or, if past iterations of high level D&D are any indication here, like taking a picture of someone who just dropped from a bridge and has yet to reach rock-bottom. But is going to.

In all seriousness, Name, the contradiction lies not on the fact that classes can feel similar and yet still different, which is a given, but rather on wether classes can feel much more similar than before and, yet, very much different still.

No, it seems YOU misunderstand.

FFS I was being sarcastic. I thought the pigsty, shit and suicide motifs provided enough of an imagery to infer that.

By the way, something that Roguey may not have considered is that Sawyer isn't Jesus and his opinions may change with time. World-shattering, I know.

 

[Hormalakh]

it is possible that sawyer is fine enough with the differences between two builds of the same class (earthstrength warden example) but not comfortable with the differences between two different classes (monk and earthstrength warden).

it is possible that you guys are sperging and he's not contradicting himself.

 

[Grunker]

You can't tell me class variety isn't a problem in 4E and then claim it lost a lot of class variety. I don't care what bullshit excuses you use.

Oh, you misunderstand.

Its very much like measuring how much shit, exactly, got into your face after falling into a pigsty.

Or, if past iterations of high level D&D are any indication here, like taking a picture of someone who just dropped from a bridge and has yet to reach rock-bottom. But is going to.

In all seriousness, Name, the contradiction lies not on the fact that classes can feel similar and yet still different, which is a given, but rather on wether classes can feel much more similar than before and, yet, very much different still.

No, it seems YOU misunderstand.

FFS I was being sarcastic. I thought the pigsty, shit and suicide motifs provided enough of an imagery to infer that.

I realize the first part was sarcastic, but I thought the last sentence wasn't? And that was the part I adressed in my post.

it is possible that sawyer is fine enough with the differences between two builds of the same class (earthstrength warden example) but not comfortable with the differences between two different classes (monk and earthstrength warden).

We are not speculating about what someone's REAL opinion must have been, but the sudden influx willing to apologize on his behalf and inform us of it was predictable.

 

[Delterius]

That last sentence included so much subjective tip toeing that its devoid of meaning. I'm just not very good at telling smart jokes.

 

[DraQ]

The whole reason that we're having this conversation

Could we please stop having it then?

 

[Grunker]

The whole reason that we're having this conversation

Could we please stop having it then?

I can't tell who are the worst 'spergers in this thread: the people who have constant minutely detailed discussions about the latest bit of PE info (like me or Infinitron) or the mobs of people who frequent this thread mostly to talk about its existance is silly and the people who post in it are as well.

 

[Hormalakh]

it is possible that sawyer is fine enough with the differences between two builds of the same class (earthstrength warden example) but not comfortable with the differences between two different classes (monk and earthstrength warden).

We are not speculating about what someone's REAL opinion must have been, but the sudden influx willing to apologize on his behalf and inform us of it was predictable.

WTF are you going on about you silly man? I'm just telling you that you're being an ignorant stubborn fool because you're pulling things out of your ass and making assumptions about how P:E will play out because of Sawyer's "feelings" about 4e.

How the fuck is that "details about P:E?" You're extrapolating (incorrectly, which was my point from the beginning) someone's opinion (which could change over time) to equal what a game (which is created by more than one individual) would be.

Let us all bow down to your glorious intellect oh wise one. Tell us more about how cool and awesome your PnP experiences are and how much that makes you an aficionado of COMPUTER RPGs. It seems your increased interaction with autistic kids playing PnP has rubbed off on you.

 

[DraQ]

The whole reason that we're having this conversation

Could we please stop having it then?

I can't tell who are the worst 'spergers in this thread

Why - those who derail it to discuss whether or not D&D4 : WoWblivion has a lot of build variety or not, of course.

 

[Sensuki]

The whole reason that we're having this conversation

Could we please stop having it then?

I can't tell who are the worst 'spergers in this thread: the people who have constant minutely detailed discussions about the latest bit of PE info (like me or Infinitron) or the mobs of people who frequent this thread mostly to talk about its existance is silly and the people who post in it are as well.

I must be one of them because I actually enjoy these discussions. Or perhaps that makes me non-'sperg. Who knows.

 

[Delterius]

The whole reason that we're having this conversation

Could we please stop having it then?

I can't tell who are the worst 'spergers in this thread

Why - those who derail it to discuss whether or not D&D4 : WoWblivion has a lot of build variety or not, of course.

I disagree, at least the pointless discussions lead to asking Sawyer questions.

Cue a discussing about whose discussions are the least pointless.

 

[Grunker]

The whole reason that we're having this conversation

Could we please stop having it then?

I can't tell who are the worst 'spergers in this thread

Why - those who derail it to discuss whether or not D&D4 : WoWblivion has a lot of build variety or not, of course.

You can always identify someone who hasn't got a clue what he is talking about by the fact that he will compare 4E to bad video games.

The whole reason that we're having this conversation

Could we please stop having it then?

I can't tell who are the worst 'spergers in this thread: the people who have constant minutely detailed discussions about the latest bit of PE info (like me or Infinitron) or the mobs of people who frequent this thread mostly to talk about its existance is silly and the people who post in it are as well.

I must be one of them because I actually enjoy these discussions. Or perhaps that makes me non-'sperg. Who knows.

No one does, and no one cares except the few fewls who stop by to point it out. Certainly doesn't improve the quality of this thread.

it is possible that sawyer is fine enough with the differences between two builds of the same class (earthstrength warden example) but not comfortable with the differences between two different classes (monk and earthstrength warden).

We are not speculating about what someone's REAL opinion must have been, but the sudden influx willing to apologize on his behalf and inform us of it was predictable.

WTF are you going on about you silly man? I'm just telling you that you're being an ignorant stubborn fool because you're pulling things out of your ass and making assumptions about how P:E will play out because of Sawyer's "feelings" about 4e.

I have no idea what the fuck you're raving about. We're purely discussing Sawyer's attitude towards 4E based on his own words.

Let us all bow down to your glorious intellect oh wise one. Tell us more about how cool and awesome your PnP experiences are and how much that makes you an aficionado of COMPUTER RPGs. It seems your increased interaction with autistic kids playing PnP has rubbed off on you.

 

[Sensuki]

No one does, and no one cares except the few fewls who stop by to point it out. Certainly doesn't improve the quality of this thread.

I was talking about the discussion of micro-details of the game. Not the back and forth between DraQ and You or [insert retarded conversation here].

And yeah I think you're a bit late to the party Horm. The discussion over the past few pages has mostly been about Why 4th edition sucks and what Josh Sawyer thinks about it (and how Roguey is an idiot for blindly quoting him like it's the truth of the heavens, whether through troll or not).

 

[Hormalakh]

WTF are you going on about you silly man? I'm just telling you that you're being an ignorant stubborn fool because you're pulling things out of your ass and making assumptions about how P:E will play out because of Sawyer's "feelings" about 4e.

I have no idea what the fuck you're raving about. We're purely discussing Sawyer's attitude towards 4E based on his own words.

Let us all bow down to your glorious intellect oh wise one. Tell us more about how cool and awesome your PnP experiences are and how much that makes you an aficionado of COMPUTER RPGs. It seems your increased interaction with autistic kids playing PnP has rubbed off on you.

yeah yeah whatever. i'm telling you that you're misconstruing his words and that his attitudes about 4e are probably not as black and white as you make it out to be. and your response was to say "oh here we go again - the apologists have come out of the woodwork." you didn't really disprove my statement.

from where i stand, it seems pretty clear to me that sawyer is trying his damnest to make an interesting game; whether it takes cues from 4e isn't an issue because he isn't making this game whole cloth from 4e.

but if you think i'm butthurt, that's fine too.

And yeah I think you're a bit late to the party Horm. The discussion over the past few pages has mostly been about Why 4th edition sucks and what Josh Sawyer thinks about it.

no i know what the discussion is about Sensuki. I'm just saying that 1: what Sawyer thinks about 4e isn't as blakc and white as some are making it out to be and 2: 4e isn't the only inspiration for this game in the first place and it's so hard to tell where exactly the game is inspired from 4e and where it makes its own adjustments that to make statements like "this game will suck because it's inspired by 4e" is ridiculous.

I think 4e... still has a lot of flaws that are shared by by other RPGs and editions of A/D&D"

That's enough for me to know this isn't Baldur's Gate 4e.

 

[Sensuki]

And I think what we are saying is that in his trying his damnest, it's possibly he's also trying a bit too hard/forcing a bit too much of his own design philosophy over what was already generally pretty good gameplay IMO which is running the possibility of making the game worse/less interesting than it could have been even if the intentions were the opposite.

Sawyer says that he cares very much about the player experience. But Grunker definitely has a fucking point about him using it when it suits him. Many times some of us have given him a player experience and he just discards it ... perhaps thats because he hasn't actually watched us play the game so can't trust our opinion or something I'm not sure.

I'm half tempted to do a P:E let's play solely because of this.

 

[Sensuki]

no i know what the discussion is about Sensuki. I'm just saying that 1: what Sawyer thinks about 4e isn't as blakc and white as some are making it out to be and 2: 4e isn't the only inspiration for this game in the first place and it's so hard to tell where exactly the game is inspired from 4e and where it makes its own adjustments that to make statements like "this game will suck because it's inspired by 4e" is ridiculous.

Actually it's not very hard at all.

At-will, Encounter Powers, Dailies - taken from 4E
Progression tables - taken from 4E
Unified Resolution mechanics - inspired by (but not completely copied from 4E)
Spells now following the same rules as physical attacks - taken from 4E
Separation of Combat/Consistent use spells from one off spells (Abilities/Rituals) - 4E
Rogue and Ranger highest DPS classes - 4E
Limit inputs into numbers - 4E and own design philosophy
Unified advancement mechanics - 4E

Want me to keep going ?

 

[Grunker]

yeah yeah whatever. i'm telling you that you're misconstruing his words and that his attitudes about 4e are probably not as black and white as you make it out to be.

I am not making them about to be anything. Roguey is. We are now discussing what the fuck two rather contradictory statements meant.

and your response was to say "oh here we go again - the apologists have come out of the woodwork." you didn't really disprove my statement.

Because your statement literally was nothing but an invented opinion that we have no evidence of. Would you listen to an argument I made if it consisted of "perhaps Josh Sawyer likes to pour chocolate milkshakes into his own lap, who knows?"

from where i stand, it seems pretty clear to me that sawyer is trying his damnest to make an interesting game; whether it takes cues from 4e isn't an issue because he isn't making this game whole cloth from 4e.

And here we go again. Another random statement that has nothing to do with the actual conversation. I've praised Sawyer multiple times for mechanical ingenuity, for the fact that he's a rare developer first and foremost interested in mechanics, for shitloads more. But right now we're discussing a directly outspoken intend of his to build a system of 4E's pillars, and what that statement means. So I really couldn't give much of a rat's ass about you thinking that maybe he 4E's internal class variety as opposed to its external. Because that's not what he has been saying.

but if you think i'm butthurt, that's fine too.

When you start making comments about my "glorious intellect", then yes, you sound like a butthurt fanboy.

 

[Hormalakh]

And I think what we are saying is that in his trying his damnest, it's possibly he's also trying a bit too hard/forcing a bit too much of his own design philosophy over what was already generally pretty good gameplay IMO which is running the possibility of making the game worse/less interesting than it could have been even if the intentions were the opposite.

Sawyer says that he cares very much about the player experience. But Grunker definitely has a fucking point about him using it when it suits him. Many times some of us have given him a player experience and he just discards it ... perhaps thats because he hasn't actually watched us play the game so can't trust our opinion or something I'm not sure.

I'm half tempted to do a P:E let's play solely because of this.

He's said many times that it doesn't matter what people say. It matters how people play. And he's seen enough of people playing. Watching Let's Plays and beta-testing aren't things he's pulling out of his ass. Those are more objective than your subjective "play experience."

When someone says that they like to play a particular character and that this is what is convincing to him, that's very different than saying that a particular play style is "fun."

 

[DraQ]

The whole reason that we're having this conversation

Could we please stop having it then?

I can't tell who are the worst 'spergers in this thread

Why - those who derail it to discuss whether or not D&D4 : WoWblivion has a lot of build variety or not, of course.

You can always identify someone who hasn't got a clue what he is talking about by the fact that he will compare 4E to bad video games.

I decided not to seek gifs depicting razors expecting you to point out me being edgy.

How disappointing.

 

[Grunker]

He's said many times that it doesn't matter what people say. It matters how people play. And he's seen enough of people playing. Watching Let's Plays and beta-testing aren't things he's pulling out of his ass.

It's painfully hard to take you seriously when your contribution to the conversation so far is an ad hominem and then the above argument which basically ignores the discussion for only the last four or five pages. There is a dissonance between him saying he watches how people play and then draws his conclusions, then when an instance of people playing goes against his arguments, it doesn't matter because *insert excuse here*. But I'm really not inclined to reiterate the same arguments I just made four pages go. Go read the discussion yourself.

And by the way, I have seen players play 4th Edition as well, probably more than he has. But you don't take my words for granted. Stop taking Sawyer's words for granted. I still find it excruciatingly hard to believe that he has witnessed quote-unquote "an abundance" of people who didn't buy gear to fight goblins in IWD, when I have seen retarded teenagers do that, and even if he had, meeting the capabilities of these players in his design is a bad decision, and should be seen as such by anyone who is tired of simplifying and streamlining.

 

[Hormalakh]

no i know what the discussion is about Sensuki. I'm just saying that 1: what Sawyer thinks about 4e isn't as blakc and white as some are making it out to be and 2: 4e isn't the only inspiration for this game in the first place and it's so hard to tell where exactly the game is inspired from 4e and where it makes its own adjustments that to make statements like "this game will suck because it's inspired by 4e" is ridiculous.

Actually it's not very hard at all.

At-will, Encounter Powers, Dailies - taken from 4E
Progression tables - taken from 4E
Unified Resolution mechanics - inspired by (but not completely copied from 4E)
Spells now following the same rules as physical attacks - taken from 4E
Separation of Combat/Consistent use spells from one off spells (Abilities/Rituals) - 4E
Rogue and Ranger highest DPS classes - 4E
Limit inputs into numbers - 4E and own design philosophy
Unified advancement mechanics - 4E

Want me to keep going ?

So what if some aspects of the game are inspired by 4e: I never denied that aspects are inspired by it. But even in your own post, you've shown that he's made his own adjustments to 4e mechanics (where you say "inspired by" and "own design philosophy").

It doesn't matter if aspects are inspired by 4e. The parts do not make the whole. Different mechanics play together differently and small adjustments can have huge implications for the overall gameplay. This 4e=suck is stupid IMO.

 

[Grunker]

it's so hard to tell where exactly the game is inspired from 4e

I never denied that aspects are inspired by it.

Yeah man, you're a beacon of argumentative consistency.

It doesn't matter if aspects are inspired by 4e. The parts do not make the whole.

We are discussing key mechanics and what they mean for the game. It's all this thread is for, basically. If that doesn't interest you then what the fuck are you here for?

This 4e=suck is stupid IMO.

Again you pull shit out of your ass. I've stated several times - even in posts you referenced - the ideas in 4E that were really solid.

 

[Sensuki]

To be honest man and this is just my opinion, from the sounds of it most people who beta test/QA test games aren't particularly fantastic gamers. I think he's been traumatized by how terrible people actually are at games. He seems to be pretty good at RPG games himself, but when he talks about his experiences of watching others it's as if he's seen some truly awful shit. It just goes to show with how bad Adam Brennecke and Chris Avellone are at games that people who work on games aren't necessarily very good at them. I'd wager that most of the people at Bioware are pretty awful at games too. Anyway as a result it seems he feels like he has to simplify systems to put a retard meter in there so it's possible for people like Adam and Chris to play through the content without being frustrated at the cost of perhaps some complexity that people like me would enjoy.

You honestly cannot tell me that ONE STAT for ALL BONUS DAMAGE sounds riveting. People who think that choosing attributes is annoying would probably be like "Great", but I just think it's terrible. I was expecting something a bit different but not this. Two sources of damage (magical and physical) is about the simplest I would go if I was an RPG designer doing a game like this.

This is frustrating to people like me and probably others here too that a game advertised as an "Old School RPG" has to have mechanics like this because people that play games in zombie mode and don't pay attention might accidentally pick a martial character and max the magical damage stat without realizing and then get frustrated at the game because they're having a hard time in combat. And I am telling you, based on what I have read (on SA and formspring, Obsidian etc) that is one of the reasons for a design decision like that.

Okay, I'd really like everyone to read my response to this, because it's important to me.

A lot of people are not great at games. I don't mean they are terrible at them, but they aren't great. They may or may not realize this, but when you get right down to it and see them sit down at a game and start to play, they do pretty well but some stuff just slips by. In RPGs, often that error is a strategic one that you don't immediately get stung by. The poison bites you 10, 20, 30 hours down the road.

I don't know what sort of person you're picturing in your head, but from comments that a lot of people make, I get the feeling you see a moron, a person who doesn't really like games, who isn't enthusiastic about them in the same way that you are. In some cases, this is true. But I've seen hundreds of volunteer and professional testers come and go. Most of them are actually pretty intelligent. They like or love games. They like or love RPGs and have played a bunch of them. They're still not terrific at them. They miss a bunch of things and they make a bunch of mistakes.

Even among hardcore PC RPG fans, there is a wide spectrum of skill, experience, and preference. When I started at Black Isle, I designed a bunch of fights in IWD that only a handful of veteran BG testers could get through. Memorably, I saw a QA tester blow a fuse because a fight in Lower Dorn's Deep was "impossible". When I showed him how I got through it, I started off by having my casters go through six rounds of buffs. "What are you doing?" he asked. "Uh... buffing my party?" This seemed normal to me. DUH YEAH BUFF YOUR PARTY TO HELL AND BACK LOCK AND LOAD PAY ATTENTION FFFFFFFFFF. Despite his high experience with RPGs and Baldur's Gate, he just... never thought of it. The problem was that the entire fight was balanced around a party that was optimally built and lit up like a Christmas tree from stacked buffs.

That's a combat example, but it really applies across the board: conversation details, reputation loss/gain, etc. Some players really do play as hard as they say they will. They stoically accept the consequences of companion death, of a dialogue node they carelessly picked 8 hours ago, of an Ironman combat that is going down the drain. For those players, the ability to turn off the "in case you missed it..." features is important. I get that and would like to support it as much as we can.

But again, just to be clear, a lot of actual players actually need these things. I'm not saying this because players come up to me and say, "Josh, I need this." I'm saying this because I'll talk to a tester (volunteer or pro) with a ton of RPG experience and later watch him or her play remotely. Or I'll pop open a Let's Play on YouTube from an enthusiastic player and watch how things turn out. Sometimes they ace it, sometimes they don't. Either way, what I see on that monitor doesn't lie.

 

[Grunker]

You are needlessly overcomplicating the issue Sensuki. The fact is that when Sawyer says he designs based on player experiences, and the player experiences he cites are from terrible retards who don't even buy armor for their characters, it paints a picture of someone who is designing for the lowest common denominator. That's really all there is to it.

EDIT: That might not be what he is doing, or what P:E will end up being. But this thread only makes sense in-so-far as we discuss based on what we know.

 

[Sensuki]

That's pretty much what I was saying, but I was complaining about it as well.

Leave no child behind

 

[Hormalakh]

it's so hard to tell where exactly the game is inspired from 4e

I never denied that aspects are inspired by it.

Yeah man, you're a beacon of argumentative consistency.

i bolded the important parts so you don't miss it.

It doesn't matter if aspects are inspired by 4e. The parts do not make the whole.

We are discussing key mechanics and what they mean for the game. It's all this thread is for, basically. If that doesn't interest you then what the fuck are you here for?

i'm here to discuss key mechanics in PE as they play within PE's overall structure. Not to discuss how individual mechanics pulled out of a backbone of 4e will suck in a different environment because "duh 4e sucks, everyone hates it".

This 4e=suck is stupid IMO.

Again you pull shit out of your ass. I've stated several times - even in posts you referenced - the ideas in 4E that were really solid.

so then basically you have no point. because your argument is that PE is using 4e as the backbone. I disagree with this. There are multiple aspects of 3.5/4e that he's using as well as things that are VERY basic to this game (RTWP, non-dice mechanics) that are not 4e. For every aspect of 4e that he's inspired with, there are just as many changes. When something's been so heavily modified how can you with a straight face, say that "he's usign 4e as his pillar"?

you take individual mechanics, ignore what doesn't suit you, and make blanket statements. hence you're sperging. you look at the trees and miss the forest.