Pathfinder Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous Pre-Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Efe]

just remove it is how you end up in decline.
make it better instead

 

[Lacrymas]

To make pre-buffing better, you'd have to make the game extremely hostile to casuals and I doubt that's a thing they want to do. And it's not like you are removing a thing, you are just changing the way it works, i.e. buffs are only allowed in combat

 

[Efe]

that creates situatios where you cannot cast protection from fire before fighting a fire elemental. it is just as jarring for the player, maybe even more so.
arcanum did spell slots + upkeep cost which i think would be the best solution with a few tweaks

 

[ArchAngel]

To make pre-buffing better, you'd have to make the game extremely hostile to casuals and I doubt that's a thing they want to do. And it's not like you are removing a thing, you are just changing the way it works, i.e. buffs are only allowed in combat

5e has you only be able to upkeep one buff which is a better solution than no prebuffing.
Now to make buffing only work during combat, buffs needs to be worth as much as your attack or CC option which is not always easy to balance.
In Poe that was terrible. It ended up as all CC being -10% to some chance rolls which was boring.

 

[LannTheStupid]

make the game extremely hostile to casual

I wonder if it can be a good business plan for a non-american gaming studio. Or, even better - a good Kickstarter goal. I'd pay $100 for this.

 

[ArchAngel]

make the game extremely hostile to casual

I wonder if it can be a good business plan for a non-american gaming studio. Or, even better - a good Kickstarter goal. I'd pay $100 for this.

It worked for few games but in that case it needs to be a more polished product.

 

[Lacrymas]

that creates situatios where you cannot cast protection from fire before fighting a fire elemental. it is just as jarring for the player, maybe even more so.

I wouldn't say it's jarring when the whole game is designed around no pre-buffing. And even if it were, you can have items with fire resistance/immunity, as opposed to protection from fire spells.

 

[Efe]

so items work but spells do not? what if items provided no bonuses out of combat too? you can even add some shitty flavor like passion of a fight activates magical qualities of magical equipment in this retardo realm.. where does decline end?

exchange elemental with a fire trap. if i combat a tarantulos, cast fire protection and walk over a fire trap.. it works but without a spider i cant do it.
what you say is only equivalent if they take extra time to implement these interactions fore ach encounter...

or they could spare themselves tedious extra work and make spells work both in and out of combat and let player use them as he sees fit

 

[Lacrymas]

Yes, items work obviously, especially since it doesn't take 5 minutes to put on a fire resistance ring after every rest. It also gives a use to these items. You are claiming it's decline, but I'm not seeing it. Let me copy my post from the other thread because I know the same things will be brought up:

Ugh, it's as if nobody ever reads anything that is posted on here. Let's get some things out of the way.

1. "The BG series did pre-buffing and resource attrition perfectly so there was no need to change anything!"

No, it didn't. You always, ALWAYS had the option to rest and recharge whatever you wanted, effectively removing any sort of resource attrition that might've been intended (which we know it wasn't, BG was a dumbed down game for casuals). There wasn't a single fight in the whole game which required you to empty your entire spellbook to force you to think whether to use the spell slots for buffs or damaging spells. Both of these things combined means the Vancian system was mangled and wasn't used at all for the purpose it was created.

2. "Nobody complained about pre-buffing in ye olden days!"

Even if this is absolutely true (which it isn't) and nobody ever complained, that doesn't mean it's not a degenerate mechanic that only serves to waste time and only ever truly rewards metagaming even if done perfectly. If done perfectly, you wouldn't be able to scout out a fight, change the spells, rest and then do the fight, you'd be locked in your choice for a duration of time/the whole dungeon, so only metagaming can ever be rewarded. When there is no pre-buffing, at least you get the knowledge to not use that spell you've memorized in that fight when you scout and save it for later. Sawyer might be the first person to ever notice it and that wouldn't make it less valid.

3. "It's action economy!" (in the sense that it frees you to do other stuff during combat)

There are other ways to eliminate buffing to let you do other things in combat, whether that is permanent auras or feats, lack of buffing in general, permanent buffs you get from quests, etc. There's no need for it to be a time-waster the way it is now. It also removes a defensive layer in combat, you can only ever use your spells offensively if this is taken to the logical extreme. The exceptions being healing spells and if a buff runs out in combat, which people praise, but that can be applied to all buffs to always add that bit of choice. Which leads to -

4. "It adds a tactical choice!" (and it's conspicuously only when a buff runs out in combat)

I don't know why people do this, purposefully ignoring their own arguments. You praise the addition of tactical choice, but condemn it when it's actually present. It's only ever a choice when there is another, equally valid, choice to make in its place. That means that you EITHER buff OR do something else, not have the option to do both at the same time, which pre-buffing allows. The counter argument here is that it's resource conservation to choose to not use the slots for buffs, but that is not an inherent pro in pre-buffing. You can still have spell slots AND no pre-buffing, like PoE showed. Let's transpose this to a D&D game with no prebuffing, you choose Armor, Burning Hands and Blindness, so you are now free to cast those spells in combat. You cast Armor in the first fight (instead of before the first fight) and bam, that spell slot is already used. You could've chosen 2 times Burning Hands instead of Armor. There is no argument here because this can be present when there is pre-buffing and when there isn't. I.e. this is irrelevant.

5. "You can choose not to pre-buff if it's that tedious; or there is no need to pre-buff for every fight, so there is no tediousness involved!"

I didn't know not using the system to your fullest advantage is a virtue. I really don't know what else to say here, the argument is basically that it is tedious but you can make it not tedious by not using it. How is this a defense and not an indictment?

People only like pre-buffing because it makes them feel smart compared to people who don't pre-buff. Like they've found the Holy Grail. It's a shiny veneer that seems intelligent because it makes you win fights, but in actuality it enabled everyone to win by increasing the stats of your characters to such high levels before combat that it's almost impossible to lose without actually having to do any thinking or make any erudite choices.

If you have any other arguments, come at me.

 

[LannTheStupid]

Yes, items work obviously, especially since it doesn't take 5 minutes to put on a fire resistance ring after every rest.

So what exactly is your beef with prebuffing? Just the time spent on clicking spells? Is that all?
Monster Hunter World can be used as an example of extreme itemization. There is no character progression in the game, only items and the player's skill. Because there can be about 1-2 dozens of items which should be assembled to create a consistent set, MHW allows a player to create item sets and to store them under player defined names. There can be several hundreds of such sets (I think).
Would you like to play CRPG's like this? And in case of spells would you like to have a buff bot that fires a set of spells created for a particular kind of enemies?

 

[Lacrymas]

No, that's not all. My biggest gripe is that it's not a choice and it adds a veneer of complexity that makes you feel intelligent, but in reality it's a crutch that allows everyone to win. Or at least it has devolved into that because nobody has the balls to implement restricted resting the way it should be done.

 

[Roguey]

No, that's not all. My biggest gripe is that it's not a choice and it adds a veneer of complexity that makes you feel intelligent, but in reality it's a crutch that allows everyone to win. Or at least it has devolved into that because nobody has the balls to implement restricted resting the way it should be done.

Kingmaker has time limits and rations with weight to prevent such things.

 

[Lacrymas]

It has a time limit on the main quest which isn't really tied to pre-buffing, especially since walking on the overmap is what takes the most in-game time and not resting, the way to make pre-buffing make sense is to lock you into a dungeon with restricted resting while somehow giving you information about what kinds of creatures you are going to be facing (like side quests, remember when those had a purpose?).

 

[LannTheStupid]

My biggest gripe is that it's not a choice and it adds a veneer of complexity that makes you feel intelligent, but in reality it's a crutch that allows everyone to win.

When I am reading this I feel like I am learning English again. I understand every word, but the sentence is completely meaningless.

 

[Lacrymas]

I can't do anything about that, now can I? You can read my bigger post for context, but I think it's clear enough.

 

[LannTheStupid]

But now I know that if someone has any problems with prebuffing in CRPG's then his/her way of thinking is totally incomprehensible and, as the result, any opinion of such a person is to be ignored. Thank you for the life lesson.

 

[Lacrymas]

And you would be totally mistaken because you didn't take the time to think it through or read the bigger post. How easy it is to take the wrong lessons in life.

 

[Efe]

Yes, items work obviously, especially since it doesn't take 5 minutes to put on a fire resistance ring after every rest. It also gives a use to these items. You are claiming it's decline, but I'm not seeing it. Let me copy my post from the other thread because I know the same things will be brought up:

do not quote me your answers to other peoples opinion as if those are related to what i said.
it doesnt take 5 minutes to cast a spell but it definitely takes more than 5 minutes to put on fire resistant heavy armor. i didnt say magical items working out of combat is decline, i reapplied your logic on spells onto items to show you the absurdity of it. i suggest you reread that post.

about your reply to roguey, you want "restrictions" but do not accept pathfinder which has weight and time limits + risk of encounter? You talk about travel taking time but it also causes fatigue (which is based on CON) which forces player to manage their resting/camping in a context of adventure rather than mechanical replenishing of spells and health.

how else do you want resting to be restricted? can rest only on "checkpoints"? can rest only under full moon?

 

[Lacrymas]

It takes 5 minutes to reapply all your buffs after a rest. It definitely doesn't take 5 minutes to put on an item lololol, especially situational items like rings of fire resistance you'll probably only use 3 times in the whole game, while you have to prebuff every fight/rest. I don't see how items only working in combat is related to the actual tactical benefits you get when you have no pre-buffing. You don't have to re-equip all your items once you rest. No, the analogy just doesn't work, I don't see it. I "accept" the limits in Kingmaker, I just said they aren't related to pre-buffing.

 

[Efe]

you cast 4 spell at most. so 20 seconds if only person is buffing. 10 if two.
finding items in your inventory or stash full of other similar items definitely takes time. It's really saddening to see that you dont really use rings of fire resistance this much and very unsuprising that you think this behavior extends to rest of players.

Removing prebuffing is not the answer.
i will reiterate since you dont seem to be reading: Make it better.
you can add negatives, a poison resistance effect might disable your food bonus. or a more typical fire/cold +/- adjustment. They could cost your caster their casting stat thus limiting their effectiveness.
you can limit buffs by number like 5E, arcanum. Think of how drugs work in fallout.

removing prebuffing just takes away options from player.

Or at least it has devolved into that because nobody has the balls to implement restricted resting the way it should be done

you said it related here.

 

[Darth Canoli]

you can limit buffs by number like 5E, arcanum. Think of how drugs work in fallout.

Looks like a good solution, not that i use buffs that much, except before very tough fights i'm aware of or long buffs if i'm in a dangerous area.

The kingdom buff from pathfinder are pure bullshit as well, as if the game wasn't easy enough before and worse, there's so many icons you can't even see which debuff you have.

 

[Grampy_Bone]

Pre buffing is fine in PnP because no DM would allow a party to sit outside the boss's room casting spell after spell without interruption. Meanwhile in Pathfinder you can sit outside of the Troll boss's aggro radius and go to sleep, and then buff to your heart's content just outside of the fog of war.

Banning pre-buffing in these cases is a band-aid for bad game design. Everyone in a room should be able to see each other under normal conditions, 30' RTS-style "fog of war" makes no sense. Enemies should hear the player when they approach and act accordingly.

This would require completely rethinking how encounters are set up and how they are linked, how enemies detect players and vice versa, how noisy combat really should be and how likely it will be before reinforcements, etc. etc. Setting up encounters that way is a PITA for game devs, easier to just ban pre-buffing.

 

[LannTheStupid]

This would require completely rethinking how encounters are set up and how they are linked, how enemies detect players and vice versa, how noisy combat really should be and how likely it will be before reinforcements, etc. etc. Setting up encounters that way is a PITA for game devs, easier to just ban pre-buffing.

Well, with all of that I can definitely agree. I hope it will be implemented sometime somewhere. In contrast to a human DM who can forget to punish the party for buffing or make an exception for mentally challenged players, the game engine never forgets, does not lose concentration, and always remembers everything it is programmed to remember. I would definitely prefer CRPG with such an engine to what modern CRPG's are trying to emulate.
Someone would have to pursuade one of Putin's oligarchs to back such a project; otherwise I do not see it happening.

 

[Lacrymas]

Removing prebuffing is not the answer.
i will reiterate since you dont seem to be reading: Make it better.
you can add negatives, a poison resistance effect might disable your food bonus. or a more typical fire/cold +/- adjustment. They could cost your caster their casting stat thus limiting their effectiveness.
you can limit buffs by number like 5E, arcanum. Think of how drugs work in fallout.

The thing I was trying to say is that pre-buffing the way we have seen it being implemented doesn't make design sense, making it more or less tedious is pointless when the underlying idea is ...misguided. You gain nothing outside of simulationist brownie points, but lose a tactical dimension while wasting time which has the possibility to not be wasted. I'd rather search my bag for a ring of fire resistance when I need it than constantly pre-buffing. I suppose if you add really substantial negatives which prevent you from constantly having buffs up, it might work, like banning you from casting a particular school or making you unable to attack with weapons. Buffs could also be consumables that are rare and only a set number exist in the game, then pre-buffing is also ok.

Banning pre-buffing [...] This would require completely rethinking how encounters are set up and how they are linked, how enemies detect players and vice versa, how noisy combat really should be and how likely it will be before reinforcements, etc. etc. Setting up encounters that way is a PITA for game devs, easier to just ban pre-buffing.

It's not about banning pre-buffing and more about what kind of design role it's trying to fill in the context of video gaming. Even if you do implement all that shit, it just makes a frankly dumb design decision even more of a mind-numbing nightmare to manage and more expensive to develop. If you are designing the combat around being pre-buffed, bake the buffs into the classes and spare us minutes after every rest and hundreds of mouse clicks.

Buffing needs some kind of drawback (when you don't have severely punishing rest restrictions) so that you don't constantly have them up, if you do implement a drawback (and not only eating up spell slots, that's not exclusive to this situation) then there can be a valid discussion about the pros and cons of pre-buffing and not pre-buffing. Having no pre-buffing means more tactical choices, having pre-buffing means having more strategic choices.

I feel like people have too strong of an emotional attachment/response to pre-buffing and that clouds their judgement a little bit.

 

[ArchAngel]

Pre buffing is fine in PnP because no DM would allow a party to sit outside the boss's room casting spell after spell without interruption. Meanwhile in Pathfinder you can sit outside of the Troll boss's aggro radius and go to sleep, and then buff to your heart's content just outside of the fog of war.

Banning pre-buffing in these cases is a band-aid for bad game design. Everyone in a room should be able to see each other under normal conditions, 30' RTS-style "fog of war" makes no sense. Enemies should hear the player when they approach and act accordingly.

This would require completely rethinking how encounters are set up and how they are linked, how enemies detect players and vice versa, how noisy combat really should be and how likely it will be before reinforcements, etc. etc. Setting up encounters that way is a PITA for game devs, easier to just ban pre-buffing.

Your suggestion for better design is not about prebuffing. There are certainly more problems in how dungeons are currently designed beyond buffing just outside their sight range. Like how dungeons are filled with packs of enemies that never care what happens to others, they never communicate or tell each other what is happening.
This change in design should be about fixing all this, not just prebuffing. Real life DMs make sure dungeons are one whole, not just rooms with zero connection.