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

[Art Vandelay]

Eternity engine sounds suspiciously similar to "infinity" engine...




P.S. Except no D&D licence hahaha

 

[Hobz]

Combat should be an "oh fuck" moment for diplomat characters. It should be a last resort for them, and they should fucking suck at it. That's why they should also have to gather a party of good combatants and good supporters -- because it's a class & party-based game. You should have to make sacrifices at what you want to be good at. Your PARTY should somewhat be able to "cover all bases", not YOUR CHARACTER.

And why is that ? what is wrong with a diplomat learning how to fight because he knows you can't get out of ALL situations with his silver tongue. You're making it as if suddenly the player could take absolutely all the skills without making a choice. They are separating combat from non-combat skills but that's all. They are not giving you free points in every skill.

Beside, as it is class-based and stat-based, you'll most likely have to make compromises if you want to be decent at both, you won't suddenly become a terminator-Gandhi, like any other crpg you played before.

 

[Roguey]

A headshot in a turn-based game that doesn't kill can easily be interpreted as say, taking off an ear or just grazing someone, but in a shooter when you nail someone between the eyes and they just growl at you a bit, there is no room for ambiguity.

I'd say that Fallout's text descriptions leave no room for ambiguity either. Lots of things surviving eyeshots in that one.

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/60585-tropes-vs-women/

I'm really looking forward to this game, it makes me want to replay all of the old games (now, if I could just get PS:T to work properly...).

However, something I really hope to not see is the stereotypical Damsels in Distress and other unpleasant tropes. I mean, this is a fantasy world, equality is a possibility!

This isn't to say that Baldur's Gate, Planescape and all the other games are filled with such tropes, but I do think that it would be awesome if, when making Project Eternity, this is given some real consideration.

Maybe talk to Anita, who is behind Tropes vs Women in Video Games?

Sawyer gave money to that project FYI.

That said (and in contrast to everything written above), if they showed a screenshot of an in-game item with the three letters D, P and S, I'd withdraw my pledge so fast that the echo would travel back in time and create a positive feedback loop of butthurt that would undo the very concept of Kickstarter itself. Why? Because I'd be 99% sure the resulting game mechanics will suck and not interest me in the least. (I can check for presence of 1% probability exception by playing the demo when it's out, but there's no way I'm preordering that).

Fair 'nough but reminder: Fallout New Vegas weapons showed their DPS value. If it's truly real-time with no rounds they're very likely going to give you that info.

 

[Pelvis Knot]

Eternity engine sounds suspiciously similar to "infinity" engine...

That was the point actually.




As for the above: you are aware that, for example, D&D 3rd edition, which seems to be generally considered mechanically best here on the Codex, had separate combat and non-combat skills? And yet a bard is somehow considered better at diplomacy than barbarian, and worse at combat.
Why do you believe mr. Sawyer, mr. Cain etc. are so incompetent and obtuse they couldn't get any inspiration from known systems?
It is certainly possible they will make a too easy game, at least at default setting. It is also highly probable there will be some challenging difficulty levels too.
This could be a good opportunity to expand the difficulty levels with more features than commonly expected - instead of just higher combat difficulty, why not make skill checks have higher DC? That would certainly force more specialization.

 

[General Maxson]

This sounds to me like Baldur's Gate made by Troika.

The more I hear about the game the more it makes me pledge. At first I was a bit skeptical, but the more they reveal, the more I'm interested, and fantasy isn't exactly my favorite genre...
I like everything in this last update. How it obviously won't be just a copied IE game, but much deeper, similar to Arcanum. In Arcanum you could be a great fighter AND a diplomat, or mage and diplomat etc. And I think arcanum has a great character system, and that even this class system they will have can be made to be good, even if allowing fighters to be somewhat proficient in social, or other non combat skills.

 

[Spockrock]

SHOCKER! The poster 'alanschu' on the forums is a Bioware developer: https://www.facebook.com/alanschu

he's in QA IIRC

 

[Grunker]

How is that in any way fuuuuu-?

Sawyer gave money to that project FYI.

It's a pretty great project.

 

[Roguey]

Hey guys if you want to play a RPG where you're either forced to play a boring diplomat or be decent at fighting, go play Age of CYOA.

Anyway, noncombat abilities separate from combat abilities? Speech, stealth and crafting skills? "Herbalism?" What does this remind me of, oh yes, Dragon Age.

Sounds like they are designing a very videogame-y system. In before ability trees.

A system designed by Josh Sawyer is going to be very videogame-y.

It's ok because it's Obsidian. Also that kinda confirms binary skill checks.

Sawyer actually gave a talk to GDC earlier this year where he ragged on "skills as a win button" among other outdated ways of handling dialogue. It'd be p. hypocritical for him to design such a system after talking about how much it sucks.

 

[Infinitron]

Party Selection System poll: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/60550-what-party-selection-system-is-best/

I don't think this is very important but it's interesting to think about nonetheless.

 

[skuphundaku]

It's ok because it's Obsidian. Also that kinda confirms binary skill checks.

Sawyer actually gave a talk to GDC earlier this year where he ragged on "skills as a win button" among other outdated ways of handling dialogue. It'd be p. hypocritical for him to design such a system after talking about how much it sucks.

I'm afraid that I'll have to break poor Josh's bubble here, but skills are, you know, a win button even in real life. Is this guy for real? The more I hear about him, what he thinks and what he says, the more he comes across like a fucking moron.

 

[Infinitron]

Anyway, noncombat abilities separate from combat abilities? Speech, stealth and crafting skills? What does this remind me of, oh yes, Third Edition D&D.

Fixed. Try harder next time.

 

[Grunker]

Voted #2.

EDIT: This is a pretty good thread btw.

 

[Norfleet]

I'm just so used to games nowadays going out of their way to handhold the player, my initial reaction to having combat/non-combat skills draw from different pools was that this would be another case of that. I don't see the issue with having rounded and balanced characters or jack of all trades types, what I'm afraid of seeing of a king of all trades type where it is possible to master both combat and non-combat skills as they don't draw from the same pool.

I don't see anything that suggests this would be the case. Separate pools just means the character will have both a combat specialty and a non-combat specialty, rather than being an autistic psychopath who only knows how to kill things and is completely incapable of functioning outside of violence.

It seems more interesting this way than to have a party composed of a homicidal maniac and a guy whose only ability in a fight is to shit himself.

 

[Infinitron]

I must admit that I don't really a give that much of a fuck about this. As far as I'm concerned, let me swap them in and out whenever I want to, unless it fucks up the narrative or game difficulty (which admittedly it often does).
KOTOR had some areas where you could do that and it was pretty handy.

 

[Roguey]

It's ok because it's Obsidian. Also that kinda confirms binary skill checks.

Sawyer actually gave a talk to GDC earlier this year where he ragged on "skills as a win button" among other outdated ways of handling dialogue. It'd be p. hypocritical for him to design such a system after talking about how much it sucks.

I'm afraid that I'll have to break poor Josh's bubble here, but skills are, you know, a win button even in real life. Is this guy for real? The more I hear about him, what he thinks and what he says, the more he comes across like a fucking moron.

Win buttons make for shit gameplay (See: Age of CYOA). That actually makes him very smart.

Anyway, noncombat abilities separate from combat abilities? Speech, stealth and crafting skills? What does this remind me of, oh yes, Third Edition D&D.

Fixed. Try harder next time.

Nope, 3e D&D had "stuff that makes you better at combat" mixed in with noncombat skills. Tumble, Concentration, Spot, Use Magic Device... (while these things could be used in noncombat situations, in computer games they were pretty much used exclusively in combat)...

 

[Infinitron]

Nope, 3e D&D had "stuff that makes you better at combat" mixed in with noncombat skills. Tumble, Concentration, Spot, Use Magic Device... (while these things could be used in noncombat situations, in computer games they were pretty much used exclusively in combat)...

http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Skills

There are eight skills, each having four skill levels ranging from Basic to Improved to Expert, and then Master. The skills are: Coercion, Stealing, Trap-Making, Survival, Herbalism, Poison-Making, Combat Training, and Combat Tactics.

So it won't be like either 3E or Dragon Age, you say?

 

[Roguey]

Aw snap. In my defense it looks like the companion-related abilities will improve their effectiveness in combat.

Once we have added many interesting and useful NPC companions, we will have to give you ways to recruit them, improve their usefulness, and keep them from dying (or even worse, disliking you!). We will make non-combat abilities that interact with your companions, so you can keep them alive and filled with a grudging respect for you.

 

[Infinitron]

Sure, why not? You could unluck stat bonuses on your companions via dialogue in PS:T, after all.

Anyway, saying this game will be "like Dragon Age" isn't saying much even if it's true. DA isn't the most distinctive game out there.

 

[kaizoku]

I've pondered about this a bit more, and this system can still be viable.
Provided you have enough combat and non-combat skills and there is proper balancing.

And since there is no publisher involved, they have no excuse to come up with a broken system.

D&D 3.5 skills list

Appraise (Int) 
Autohypnosis (Wis) 
Balance (Dex) 
Bluff (Cha) 
Climb (Str) 
Concentration (Con) 
Control Shape (Wis) 
Craft (Int) 
Decipher Script (Int) 
Diplomacy (Cha)
Disable Device (Int) 
Disguise (Cha) 
Escape Artist (Dex) 
Forgery (Int) 
Gather Information (Cha) 
Handle Animal (Cha) 
Heal (Wis) 
Hide (Dex) 
Intimidate (Cha) 
Jump (Str)
Knowledge (Int) 
Listen (Wis) 
Move Silently (Dex) 
Open Lock (Dex) 
Perform (Cha) 
Psicraft (Int) 
Profession (Wis) 
Ride (Dex) 
Search (Int) 
Sense Motive (Wis)
Sleight of Hand (Dex) 
Speak Language (none) 
Spellcraft (Int) 
Spot (Wis) 
Survival (Wis) 
Swim (Str) 
Tumble (Dex) 
Use Magic Device (Cha) 
Use Psionic Device (Cha) 
Use Rope (Dex)

While most skills can be min-maxed by a single character, others may need to be usable by all characters.

 

[Stinger]

Sawyer actually gave a talk to GDC earlier this year where he ragged on "skills as a win button" among other outdated ways of handling dialogue. It'd be p. hypocritical for him to design such a system after talking about how much it sucks.

Sawyer has since clarified on his formspring that his stance on good dialogue mechanics is that you don't "win" but just get different consequences and bonuses/penalties depending on what you've said. He cited Alpha Protocol as a reference for this.

I say this, just to point out that this doesn't mean some sort of additional minigame component to dialogue ala DXHR. Binary skill checks might just as easily be in the game but they're not going to lead to automatically 'winning' dialogue i.e. the perfect outcome to a dilemma and instead just affect your C&C.

That said, Binary Skill checks don't automatically mean dialogue awesome buttons. Diplomatically handling factional disputes in Fallout New Vegas required a lot of quest solving and build up of reputation with both factions involved as well as actively trying (as opposed to the iwin buttons presented from the getgo) to search for an actual diplomatic outcome by speaking to the various NPCs involved in the dispute with Binary Skill checks serving as key threshold moments done to lock out non-diplomatic builds...and even then a resourceful and inquisitive player could still find a way in some cases if they tried different things.

 

[Infinitron]

I want to ride a horse: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/60...mbat-should-they-be-added-as-a-stretch-goals/

What do you think? On one hand, it's not important. On the other hand, it is fucking ridiculous how all these medieval fantasy worlds are mysteriously empty of horses and riders!

 

[Stinger]

Well seeing as this is a class based RPG you could easily have a 'Rider' class who fights on horseback with a lance or something and give them a series of skills, bonuses, penalties etc.

I think giving horses to everyone though might be a little too difficult to setup.

 

[sea]

Horseback enemies are cool but it'd probably be too much to deal with for players (unless it was just for world map travel or something). A boss enemy who rides a horse and has faster movement, defense bonuses and a chance of trampling party members would be a lot of fun.

 

[Orchestra of Wolves]

Liking the concept but have reservations about how well it's going to be pulled off. It could lead to a moronic system in which the main character becomes an unstoppable force of nature proficient in any challenge laid before him, or it could lead to something quite good. We'll see come release day (or whenever they publish direct skill system information).

 

[suejak]

Yeah, I really agree that New Vegas did it right on this issue.

Games like VTM: Bloodlines do it wrong. You get sort of an empty feeling as a talky character in that game. You choose the "persuasive" option (HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE WITH A SPECIAL FONT) -- which, in true Troika/Tim Cain fashion, is a single sentence that doesn't even feel especially persuasive -- and then, viola, in one line, you win.

Lame.

Sawyer Gets It, though, in my opinion. He is a good designer. New Vegas was perfect: you don't just win, you need a whole variety of skills used in a variety of places and a variety of ways to bring everything together.