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

[S2ensuki]

The combat state persists as long as anyone in the party is being targeted by hostile AI, so no, that wouldn't work. A few seconds after the combat state drops, all per-encounter abilities will replenish. In essence, it's similar to the 4E concept of "short rest".

 

[Arkeus]

The combat state persists as long as anyone in the party is being targeted by hostile AI, so no, that wouldn't work. A few seconds after the combat state drops, all per-encounter abilities will replenish. In essence, it's similar to the 4E concept of "short rest".

EDIT: Here was the question:

avoraciopoctules posted:
Interesting. How exactly do per-encounter abilities refresh? If you run back and forth between 2 rooms full of monsters can you rapidly fire off all your encounter powers with each alternation? If the party hides behind a force wall for a couple rounds, do their encounter powers refresh?

 

[S2ensuki]

Depending on the AI implementation you could technically abuse encounter powers, but who knows if even if you close a door and wait a bit if enemies stop targeting you.

 

[Infinitron]

"You must defeat all enemies before venturing forth."

 

[tuluse]

One would assume that enemies would be "targeting" the party characters even if they were behind a wall or door or something. They would be actively trying to move towards and attack the party.

 

[Arkeus]

posted:

If I might go off on a tangent, how much has D&D 4th Edition influenced the making of Eternity? One of the criticisms leveled at it was that it was 'too much like a video game'- would you say that this is true? I mean, I know you guys play D&D (I think Chris Avellone posted his 'blanket of war' somewhere), so of course there's be some influence in howyou do things, but how much?

Of the OEI devs, I probably have the most experience playing and DMing across various editions of A/D&D (B/E/C, 1st, 2nd, 3.X, 4E) and Pathfinder. I've had fun in every edition despite the reservations I've had about mechanics in each one. After playing 3.X and 4E for years, 2nd Ed. looks insane in retrospect but that's where I played and DMed my most enjoyable campaigns. That said, I think 4E is the most mechanically balanced and consistent edition of A/D&D. It addresses issues that I think needed to be addressed (e.g. rogues being a pile of garbage in most fights, two different types of attack resolution mechanics: AC and saves) and the advancement mechanics are much more consistent. It still has issues, but I enjoy playing it. I also enjoy playing 3.5 and running Pathfinder. The players, DM/GM, and content of the session have much more impact for me than the specific system being used.

The things we've taken from 4E largely focus on consistency in mechanics and trying to achieve distinct but equivalent value between classes. Like 4E, PE has four target defenses that all work similarly. Whether you're attacking with a sword or a spell or against a target's Deflection or Psyche, the mechanics are consistent. Like 4E, no class is a non-combat class or a designated "skill class". Unlike pretty much every edition of A/D&D, base weapon and armor types are designed to allow you to switch them per character over the course of that character's career. Unlike 4E, classes do not all have the same number of active-use abilities. PE is a single-player game in which the player controls up to 6 characters. Not all characters need to do the same amount of things, though they all should feel like they have interesting options. And as I've written previously, PE's Attributes system is designed to avoid dump stats, something that continues to be an issue for every edition of A/D&D.

Fair Bear Maiden] posted:

Wouldn't it be possible to cheese that by making the AI lose your targeting, then immediately getting back and unleashing the per-encounter abilities again?

The combat state is generally pretty hard to break unless you've actually defeated all of the active enemies.

 

[Infinitron]

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/64399-update-64-developer-qa-with-kaz/?p=1377916

PE doesn't put any special marking on quest-related NPCs. We also don't use quest markers. You have to read what NPCs say and refer to your journal to figure out where to go. That said, we've established a standard for writing those entries that should ensure you will always know generally where you're supposed to be heading.

Re: portraits: we've revised them a little bit. We are currently using two sizes of portraits, one for the character/inventory/dialogue screen and one for the main HUD. The "big" portrait is 210x330, the size of BG and IWD portraits. The smaller portraits are 73x86, though that size may change a little. The larger portraits are "head and shoulders" with a bit extra, the closest comparison would be BG1 portraits. For the companion portraits we've done so far, Kaz has managed to really capture some engaging characters. I think you will like them.

The smaller portraits are cropped to just the face for easy recognition.

 

[Arkeus]

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/64399-update-64-developer-qa-with-kaz/?p=1377916

Soon, i can brofist....Soon...

EDIT:

Priests, druids, and wizards all effectively have "sorcerer-style" cast X of Y level per-rest or per-encounter. If your wizard can cast four 3rd level spells per-rest and you cast Fireball and Noxious Burst (both 3rd level spells), it doesn't matter if you switch to another grimoire, you still only have two 3rd level spells left.

Grimoires do not currently grant additional effects outside of what spells they hold. It's something we've talked about, but not something we're planning to do.

 

[tuluse]

[4E] addresses issues that I think needed to be addressed... two different types of attack resolution mechanics: AC and saves

Interesting that he thinks this was addressing an issue, when most players I know feel the opposite. They made magic feel mundane by treating it the same as a physical attack.

 

[S2ensuki]

That's too small.

 

[S2ensuki]

Soon, i can brofist....Soon...

Me too, but I'm not using that account unless they unlock my profile image

[4E] addresses issues that I think needed to be addressed... two different types of attack resolution mechanics: AC and saves

Interesting that he thinks this was addressing an issue, when most players I know feel the opposite. They made magic feel mundane by treating it the same as a physical attack.

Agreed.

Priests, druids, and wizards all effectively have "sorcerer-style" cast X of Y level per-rest or per-encounter. If your wizard can cast four 3rd level spells per-rest and you cast Fireball and Noxious Burst (both 3rd level spells), it doesn't matter if you switch to another grimoire, you still only have two 3rd level spells left.

Grimoires do not currently grant additional effects outside of what spells they hold. It's something we've talked about, but not something we're planning to do.

 

[S2ensuki]

The inventory and character screens are separate, but the inventory does show the individual pack of every party member on one screen.

 

[Infinitron]

[4E] addresses issues that I think needed to be addressed... two different types of attack resolution mechanics: AC and saves

Interesting that he thinks this was addressing an issue, when most players I know feel the opposite. They made magic feel mundane by treating it the same as a physical attack.

In D&D, you get better at dodging fireballs as you level up. You don't get any better at dodging swords, though. Which is more mundane?

 

[tuluse]

In D&D, you get better at dodging fireballs as you level up. You don't get any better at dodging swords, though. Which is more mundane?

The point isn't which system makes sense or is better, but just that they are use different rules. Every DnD player I know likes this fact, even if both systems could probably be improved.

 

[S2ensuki]

[4E] addresses issues that I think needed to be addressed... two different types of attack resolution mechanics: AC and saves

Interesting that he thinks this was addressing an issue, when most players I know feel the opposite. They made magic feel mundane by treating it the same as a physical attack.

In D&D, you get better at dodging fireballs as you level up. You don't get any better at dodging swords, though. Which is more mundane?

D&D isn't perfect, but there's no reason why you couldn't have advancement for AC by level and still have saves.

I agree with Tuluse.

 

[Excidium]

Both Armor Class and Saving Throws are just leftover design. They only still exist because of the brand recognition, watching 3e vs 4e saving throws argument is like watching two retards fight

The two only made any sense in AD&D, the heavy abstraction of AC because of the 1-minute rounds and Saving Throws because they were the stats that separated the heroes and mythical creatures from the common rabble (which is why they increased with levels).

One of the things Next is doing right is getting rid of them completely, the only way a "saving throw" differs from a regular ability check is nomenclature.

 

[S2ensuki]

The majority of valuable loot will be hand-placed. The "lesser" value loot is lightly randomized. The exception to the high-value stuff will be unique items that are only discovered through the stronghold's event system. These will likely be "redundant" items so players don't have to worry about finding a good version of X base weapon or Y base armor. E.g. we have a mid-power morning star called The Rose of Salthollow. If a backer winds up making a mid-power morning star, either their weapon or our weapon will appear placed in the world and the other one may appear in the stronghold event system. If no backer makes a mid-power morning star, we're not going to put The Rose of Salthollow in the stronghold system.

 

[Ninjerk]

the other one may appear in the stronghold event system

Based on what, I wonder?

 

[Rake]

the other one may appear in the stronghold event system

Based on what, I wonder?

What do you mean?

 

[Ninjerk]

What decides whether it appears or not? If the backer-designed morning star appears in the world then the RoT doesn't appear in the stronghold even system?

 

[Rake]

What decides whether it appears or not? If the backer-designed morning star appears in the world then the RoT doesn't appear in the stronghold even system?

The way i understood it, the world found item will be handplaced, while the stronghold even system will be randomized. So, if there is a backer-designed mid-tier morningstar, either that or the RoS will be handplaced somewhere in the world while the other will be in one of the random stronghold events. If there is no backer-designed mid-tier morningstar, RoS won't be part of the random stronghold events and will be handplaced somewhere in the world in order for the player to have sure access in a mid-tier morningstar.
I imagine most backer designed weapons will be similar. If the devs have alredy designed a similar weapon, one of them will go to the stronghold pool of randomized items.

 

[Zed]

I scanned a CGW from an alternate future

 

[tuluse]

Those quotes Zed

 

[Minttunator]

That's absolutely hilarious! :D

 

[Hobz]

I managed to find the full Codex quote :

I can't say I enjoyed this game. Combats clearly lacked depth and all classes felt the same, I guess you could say balance between classes is good as a result. The setting is conventional and boring and the plot could have been written by David Cage. Grimoire which came out recently is a load more fun.​