Yosharian
Arcane
Oh fuck off Grunker. Summoning some skeletons is not an 'exploit'.
-
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.
Pathfinder Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous - Game of the Year Edition
- Thread starter ferratilis
- Start date
Deskari is also easily the most disappointing fight in the game btw
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2012
- Messages
- 30,159
It is if they have insurance
You can get mad, but there's a reason I always play with suboptimal builds in these games. I fully expect them to become trivialized otherwise. The disappointing thing about Kingmaker was it was trivialized even by fairly mediocre builds very fast. WotR didn't become trivial for me until post-Nocticula.
Yosharian
Arcane
I'm not mad, I am calmly telling you to fuck off because what you said is complete nonsense =D
Casting the Animate Dead spell in a boss fight is not 'exploiting' the game.
Casting the Animate Dead spell in a boss fight is not 'exploiting' the game.
It is? The game is easier than Kingmaker?
If you think that, you seem to be part of a very small minority. I think it's significantly harder.
Yosharian
Arcane
Oh no, it's harder than Kingmaker.
I doubt we actually disagree that much. There were plenty of fights where summoning doesn't instantly solve your woes - in fact, I think Last Stand might be more of an issue because that bypasses a lot of the fights where summoning won't save you.
I also play without rest unless I absolutely have to rest, meaning I basically only summon in important fights.
As well, I do think Deskari is kind of a disingenuous example, because 1) it happens at a point where you are laughably OP and pupstomping everything, 2) it is easily the most disappointing fight of the entire game in opinion. Just shit design. Deskari has way too few defenses and way too few relevant attacks (which he won't get off because he is so easily killed). He should spawn a gazillion tough swarms and be undamagable until they are dealt with or something similar on Unfair.
There are two reasons I think you find the game so exploitable: your builds are better than mine, and you play without double damage. At least, until level 17-18 I had a few fights that were balls hard, and lots more where I had to pay attention, I couldn't just auto through them.
You say the AI is horrible, but it's all perspective, isn't it? After Kingmaker I thought maybe with all the shit going on in PF and all the power and synergy available to the player, maybe it is just impossible to create compelling gameplay. Especially considering 90% of the player-base thinks the game is nigh unbeatable on Core. I think WotR proves that there were actually venues for them to increase difficulty despite that. It still has a lot of the unavoidable problems that the system complexity introduces, but it nukes enough of them that I'm having a blast.
A lot of people say they would love an SCS for PF, and while I obviously agree in principle, this point itself highlights why these issue exist in Pathfinder: SCS is one of the most complex, layered and iterated upon mods in RPG history - maybe *the* deepest AI-scripting in RPG history *period* - and it "only" had to account for basic auto-attacking, a handful of defensive spells and the spell defenses vs. spell strip minigame.
Meanwhile, a similar mod (or developer implemented AI) would have so much fucking crazy shit to account for - and if you "overaccount", you could easily end up with unfun fights that required specific builds - meaning there would be an insanely heavy testing-and-iteration burden on a project - fan made or otherwise - that attempted to upgrade the AI significantly.
Now you're gonna say "how about they just do basic shit like bosses don't target summons and we'll get to the complicated stuff later," but considering a ton of much more basic shit still doesn't work as it should in these games (we're talking entire build paths or something like enlarging spells being hell to use with mounts, something almost every player is going to encounter yet which is still an issue), I think it's wholly unreasonable to expect better encounter and enemy design than what we have in WotR - it surpasses my expectations.
In other words, you could call the AI terrible in isolation. But I find discussions such as these become misleading very fast without context.
I also play without rest unless I absolutely have to rest, meaning I basically only summon in important fights.
As well, I do think Deskari is kind of a disingenuous example, because 1) it happens at a point where you are laughably OP and pupstomping everything, 2) it is easily the most disappointing fight of the entire game in opinion. Just shit design. Deskari has way too few defenses and way too few relevant attacks (which he won't get off because he is so easily killed). He should spawn a gazillion tough swarms and be undamagable until they are dealt with or something similar on Unfair.
There are two reasons I think you find the game so exploitable: your builds are better than mine, and you play without double damage. At least, until level 17-18 I had a few fights that were balls hard, and lots more where I had to pay attention, I couldn't just auto through them.
You say the AI is horrible, but it's all perspective, isn't it? After Kingmaker I thought maybe with all the shit going on in PF and all the power and synergy available to the player, maybe it is just impossible to create compelling gameplay. Especially considering 90% of the player-base thinks the game is nigh unbeatable on Core. I think WotR proves that there were actually venues for them to increase difficulty despite that. It still has a lot of the unavoidable problems that the system complexity introduces, but it nukes enough of them that I'm having a blast.
A lot of people say they would love an SCS for PF, and while I obviously agree in principle, this point itself highlights why these issue exist in Pathfinder: SCS is one of the most complex, layered and iterated upon mods in RPG history - maybe *the* deepest AI-scripting in RPG history *period* - and it "only" had to account for basic auto-attacking, a handful of defensive spells and the spell defenses vs. spell strip minigame.
Meanwhile, a similar mod (or developer implemented AI) would have so much fucking crazy shit to account for - and if you "overaccount", you could easily end up with unfun fights that required specific builds - meaning there would be an insanely heavy testing-and-iteration burden on a project - fan made or otherwise - that attempted to upgrade the AI significantly.
Now you're gonna say "how about they just do basic shit like bosses don't target summons and we'll get to the complicated stuff later," but considering a ton of much more basic shit still doesn't work as it should in these games (we're talking entire build paths or something like enlarging spells being hell to use with mounts, something almost every player is going to encounter yet which is still an issue), I think it's wholly unreasonable to expect better encounter and enemy design than what we have in WotR - it surpasses my expectations.
In other words, you could call the AI terrible in isolation. But I find discussions such as these become misleading very fast without context.
Last edited:
Hard disagree. Maze is some of the hardest shit I've done in a video game. Kingmaker's Chap 1 was pretty hard, but there were no enemies I couldn't hit without a 20, unlike a bunch of WotR's. Kingmaker has nothing near the brutes or monks you meet in the maze (and then we're even leaving out water elemental etc.)
ga♥
Arcane
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2017
- Messages
- 8,174
The tomb encounter with Tartuccio henchmen was harder than the maze (and btw you couldn't even finish the prologue on unfair until several patches...). Did you play Kingmaker unfair too?
luj1
You're all shills
ga♥
Arcane
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2017
- Messages
- 8,174
I like Kingmaker a lot, even more than WOTR, but WOTR is a great game. I know you disagree.
ga♥
Arcane
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2017
- Messages
- 8,174
So, in RTWP and at release before all the nerfs (but not unfair in prologue if at release). Don't know how can you say the maze is harder.
luj1
You're all shills
KotC 2 shits on this whole franchise
Yosharian
Arcane
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2016
- Messages
- 6,606
To be fair, he mentioned fighting the entire entourage. On the other hand, why would you? PARTICULARLY on Unfair?
Average Manatee
Arcane
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2012
- Messages
- 15,511
The maze is also pretty hard if you run someone through to aggro the whole map then fight them all at once while surrounded.
Chapter 1 in Kingmaker is fairly easy on unfair if you plan around what's going to happen and know to avoid those few suicide dialog options. The hardest part is still the prologue + the first fight defending the trader guy if you are on unfair, by the time of Staglord you've beaten the leveling/power curve enough. There's also plenty of time to do basically everything in whatever order is easiest for your build.
On the other hand the Water Elemental in Wrath is pretty bullshit unless you get quite lucky, and if you want to fight it you have to do it there, with no ability to wait. You've also got an almost completely static party aside from the choice between Wenduag and Lann. But aside from the water elemental the early game of Wrath is easier IMO with nothing that gets to the pain of the reload fest that is tutorial Kingmaker. Wrath maintains difficulty and ramps up way better though as compared to Kingmaker where the difficulty curve faceplants.
Chapter 1 in Kingmaker is fairly easy on unfair if you plan around what's going to happen and know to avoid those few suicide dialog options. The hardest part is still the prologue + the first fight defending the trader guy if you are on unfair, by the time of Staglord you've beaten the leveling/power curve enough. There's also plenty of time to do basically everything in whatever order is easiest for your build.
On the other hand the Water Elemental in Wrath is pretty bullshit unless you get quite lucky, and if you want to fight it you have to do it there, with no ability to wait. You've also got an almost completely static party aside from the choice between Wenduag and Lann. But aside from the water elemental the early game of Wrath is easier IMO with nothing that gets to the pain of the reload fest that is tutorial Kingmaker. Wrath maintains difficulty and ramps up way better though as compared to Kingmaker where the difficulty curve faceplants.
Last edited:
Yosharian
Arcane
It's easy precisely because you can avoid fighting them all at once, also you can easily position your team to abuse his teleporting shenanigans
I had lots of fun with my Rowdy vital striker Trickster. It was not the most uber character ever(that's melee Lich or any Legend build) but killing targets in alpha strikes is always satisfying.
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.