Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • 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.

Pillars of Eternity Beta Discussion [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

imweasel

Guest
I think some people ITT should accept the core design "for what it is." I understand being disappointed by it if it isn't to your liking, but I doubt Sawyer is gonna change it fundamentally anyway.
Sawyer watered down the wine so much that you can't even taste the wine anymore. The system needs a fundamental redesign, which Sawyer will refuse to do to his perfectly balanced system. Pouring a bit of glitter on this turd of a system won't change much anyway, so it's just a waste of time to make recommendations.

Obsidian should just leave it the way it is and shove it out the door, then brace themselves for the inevitable trolling of disgruntled fans during their next kickstarter. That is what you get for promising the backers an apple pie but giving them a lemon-garlic-jalapeno pie full of Sawyerisms. (i'm not sure it will happen, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Osvir

Learned
Joined
Oct 7, 2012
Messages
193
http://kotaku.com/how-to-balance-an-rpg-1625516832

Hmm.. this is one of the very first things I see in this article. I recommend reading this article 2-3 more times, it tells us valuable insights into the project, how Obsidian is scheduling, where we're at now and where we can expect to be in a month or two.

Broad Strokes Implementation

What do you think the paragraph underneath it could mean, Chaotic_Heretic, hm? I'll include felipepepe because you asked.

And under "Field Testing" Josh speaks (i.e. gives insight), I'm underlining the important stuff:

"The (first real balancing efforts happen after base functionality is established) and (everything can be seen in the proper interconnected context), i.e. the game. It's all well and good to test ideas out in a " grey box" test level, but (proper balance won't start happening) (until all of the game's various systems are working together within the framework of actual game) levels."

We don't have base functionality, we have minimum functionality (because of bugs/crashes/technical issues that backers and Obsidian staff are trying to find, report and fix).

Balance will come after we have a floor to walk on without holes in the ground.

Stop looking up Obsidians ass with a flashlight screaming "Are you in there!? Hello??", the shit you're looking for isn't there because it isn't implemented/does not exist yet (too soon to say anything). Or rather, you are yelling/screaming at BROAD STROKE IMPLEMENTATIONS LOL. You're only making a fool of yourselves, just like you would if you were standing outside a construction site yelling at all the construction workers.

The difference between this Beta Construction and a real Construction site is that you are invited to join in and help make the construction more stable and more secure in the Beta, so that people can walk on the floor without falling and dying.
 
Last edited:

Hegel

Arcane
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
3,274
I think people should realize it's not a matter of balance, therefore the "beta" excuse is completely irrelevant. From the designer's POV the system is working as intended, and that's the problem. It might have worked on paper, but in the pursuit of "balance" and equality they jettisoned all the fun away. They eschewed the discovery factor, a process they mistakenly labeled "trash". While there are many other issues (the UI, the lack of feedback, models etc.) the combat/char management/attribute/magic system are actively bringing down the quality of an otherwise excellent game, those are not mere bugs you can dismiss as physiological beta symptoms, we are talking about core principles in dire need of a redesign.
 
Last edited:

Trash

Pointing and laughing.
Joined
Dec 12, 2002
Messages
29,683
Location
About 8 meters beneath sea level.
I think what people want from classes is strange. I literally don't understand most of the complaints.
Having non-combat skills helps to flesh out the classes and the party. Maybe your BG Rogue deals less damage, but he's very useful for traps and locked doors.

PoE just discards that layer, making every class identical when out of combat. This means you don't really need a complete party, you can play with 6 Barbarians without any problem. They are resistant, deal a lot of damage and can use guns for ranged combat.

Conan was an amazing thief and a great barbarian. Not to mention a smith. Class based stuff is droll. Gimme a system like this or for instance the one in Fallout where I can tailor my characters to my liking and I'm much more happy than being confined to genre tropes. Not to mention that it was about time someone turned some of the genre conventions upside down. This is a fresh system and I like it, though I suspect they underestimate the sheer nostalgia factor that they've now got working against them and just how much some people (and especially dnd geeks) dislike any change.

Anyway, after trying the beta I can say this. Liked the graphics, music, conversations, skill based options, area design and what I've seen of the quests so far. Also love how this is not a 'whittle away the layers of protective spell puzzle game' that the IE ones had for combat.

Disliked the current feel of the combat because it seems to lack weight and because I haven't fiddled with all the pauze options to my own preferred optimal state. The game also does feel like a very early build. Which isn't too much of a problem if I weren't expecting a release in the not so distant future. Hope they'll give this one a bit more time in the oven as it seems like it could be something special.

tl;dr incline?
 

Maculo

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
2,596
Strap Yourselves In Pathfinder: Wrath
Morning fellas, did Sawyer state how many talents there would be per class (and in general)? I think I saw it somewhere, but I cannot find it at the moment.

At this point, I am most worried about character customization/specialization in PoE. Right now (probably repeat ad nauseum by now):
  • Attributes do not seem to provide much customization.
  • The classes provide base archetypes, but not much beyond that. Even though wizard can use a weapon and chain mail, I do think that is meaningful customization, because they can pick up a gun at anytime. The only difference between a "battlemage" and "pyromage" is what item and combat restrictions a player imposes upon themselves.
  • Several classes can seemingly get everything without much sacrifice.
  • Based on the above, I think talents are one of the few ways Obsidian could inject more variety outside of starting over with attributes. By talents, I mean abilities (passive or active) that will allow a player to specialize as battlemage or pyromage as opposed to an everything mage that can just do everything.
I know Sawyer said that we would not get all the class talents, but when we do I hope they are substantial.
 

Nikaido

Arcane
In My Safe Space
Joined
Sep 14, 2013
Messages
521
Location
9th Hell
I like how the trainwreck started. They made an RTWP game because "we want it to be a spiritual successor to the infinity engine!" and then proceeds to be nothing like an IE game. The whole justification for making a game based on mediocre RTWP mechanics falls on its own face. And all we're left with is something much worse than an actual IE clone.
 

mastroego

Arcane
Joined
Apr 10, 2013
Messages
10,409
Location
Italy
I expected worse, actually.

Well, wait until it's released, then.
Excuses won't be enough to cover the fundamental design flaws and lack of inspiration by then, and our legions will grow.

As I've said, I've pretty much seen this exact situation already, and I have a fair idea how it is going to play out.
I've been wrong before, of course. You never know.
 

Decado

Old time handsome face wrecker
Patron
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
2,674
Location
San Diego
Codex 2014
The game is good. There is just a vocal minority that would have preferred if melee classes did nothing but autoattack while wizards got all the game's cool abilities and that the game were still run in "rounds." Next thing you know, people will wish for THAC0 and syphilis.
A lot of people seem really upset that a low int wizard is viable.

Which I don't really understand. Their magical ability comes from innate soul power, not intellect.

This is true. I think a lot of the resistance is coming from people's preconceptions being challenged.

Consider that the archetypical Dungeons and Dragons wizard was a essentially the manifestation of supreme nerdism. The DnD wizard is the expression of all of the innate qualities of anti-social nerds with no muscle tone: the wizard gets his power from books and learning and being very smart. This is in direct contrast to the jock/warrior archetype that is so often at odds with the wizard in normal gameplay. The nerds playing DnD in the 70s and 80s played wizards because it made them feel powerful, as if the things they loved would somehow make them relevant. It is no coincidence that the adoption and subsequent popularity of Vancian magic systems is based on its "academic" approach to learning spells. It is a metaphor for the sad nerd's intrinsic desire to have his toil rewarded with actual power. Reading and studying becomes a way to change the properties of the universe. I mean, look at the people making DnD back in the day and it is obvious why caster supremacy exists, why all the most powerful characters -- from Elminster to Kangaxx to any dragon you can name -- are extremely fearsome spellcasters. In the world of the impotent, pocket-protected nerd, the studious would inherit the Earth. Math and reading and science are quite literally fucking magical.

All serious RPG players of the last 30 years have essentially grown up with this assumption circulating in the background. Breaking the relationship between some nebulous idea of "intelligence" and spellcasting ability flies in the face of tradition, which many people find supremely irritating. But it is high time for that archetype to get a good challenge.
 

BGMD

Learned
Joined
Dec 8, 2013
Messages
71
combat schlombat... just have some good writing, characters, quests and sprinkle some nice c&c and we'll have codex GOTY/top 10 GOAT

:troll:

it's rtwp garbage anyway
 

Maculo

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
2,596
Strap Yourselves In Pathfinder: Wrath
Morning fellas, did Sawyer state how many talents there would be per class (and in general)?
1 per 3 levels
To clarify, do we know how large the total pool of talents will be? As in, will there be 10 class specific talents for each class and 30 general talents? If nothing much changes attribute-wise, they really need to up their game on talents.
 
Weasel
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
1,865,762
This is true. I think a lot of the resistance is coming from people's preconceptions being challenged.

Consider that the archetypical Dungeons and Dragons wizard was a essentially the manifestation of supreme nerdism. The DnD wizard is the expression of all of the innate qualities of anti-social nerds with no muscle tone: the wizard gets his power from books and learning and being very smart. This is in direct contrast to the jock/warrior archetype that is so often at odds with the wizard in normal gameplay. The nerds playing DnD in the 70s and 80s played wizards because it made them feel powerful, as if the things they loved would somehow make them relevant. It is no coincidence that the adoption and subsequent popularity of Vancian magic systems is based on its "academic" approach to learning spells. It is a metaphor for the sad nerd's intrinsic desire to have his toil rewarded with actual power. Reading and studying becomes a way to change the properties of the universe. I mean, look at the people making DnD back in the day and it is obvious why caster supremacy exists, why all the most powerful characters -- from Elminster to Kangaxx to any dragon you can name -- are extremely fearsome spellcasters. In the world of the impotent, pocket-protected nerd, the studious would inherit the Earth. Math and reading and science are quite literally fucking magical.

All serious RPG players of the last 30 years have essentially grown up with this assumption circulating in the background. Breaking the relationship between some nebulous idea of "intelligence" and spellcasting ability flies in the face of tradition, which many people find supremely irritating. But it is high time for that archetype to get a good challenge.

I wouldn't disagree with a lot of that, but I think it does go back even further. I mean, we had tales of Lancelot riding around slaying knights and beasts while Merlin studied and experimented in his tower. It seems quite logical that, if magic requires any sort of study that keeps you in a room full of parchments and arcane ingredients instead of out exercising you're more likely to be be of intelligent/weak persuasion rather than a muscular idiot.

Of course, in this game magic comes from "soul power" so it does change things. If that means you just get spells without any mental exertion and can still be a buffed-up warrior then fine. But it does challenge traditional ideas of the genre that go a bit deeper than just "lol nerds want to feel powerful" imo.
 

Osvir

Learned
Joined
Oct 7, 2012
Messages
193
I think I just got a light bulb about the Attribute System.

MIG 3 gives a pretty non-differentiated value compared to MIG 18, doesn't it? It hardly boosts anything, non of the attributes do? The design provides narrow differences between the Attribute builds. I think really what people are looking for in the system is a broader spectrum. 1 INT should equal almost no radius, whilst 18 INT should give a much greater radius. Leveling up should further increase the radius (but not intelligence as a stat). Because no stat in Pillars of Eternity is entirely "best" at the moment. 1 small/weak 18 big/strong*.

Another solution to the Attribute system would be to start as a Level 1 character with 30 points to spend on Attributes (5 points on all 6 Attributes together). 48 points left (30 out of 78, 48 left and divided by 12 equals 4. About 4 points every level). This could make the challenge progressively deepend. And you'll level up over time. I generally abhore these level up systems in games like Dragon Age Origins though and I have advocated strongly against this system these past two years......... but they are so gamified with 3 options in DA:O.

But with a slowly progressively growing attribute system your character would be a weakling on Level 1-3 with minimum Attributes, but towards the end have 14-15 in all stats. And the max caps could be "18-19" on all Attributes, so that you can't max out Might and have 1 in everything else. Obsidian doesn't even have to change the stats on the mobs, hostiles, creatures, because the difference between 3 and 18 was so small, remember? Scaling difficulty right there btw. If you face a Level 1 creature with 18 MIG equivalent and you have a party all with 3 MIG (total of 18 MIG) you can tactically defeat it. That's some pretty darn good strategy mechanic right there btw.

You could even insert "max" attributes mid-game, or late-early game and facing the Player with various challenges along the way to let them build their characters depending how they choose to solve it *shrug*

*Another incentive Infinitron is to add into the Attribute system could be "Poor, Weak, Average, Good, V. Good"~ regarding your Obsidian forums thread.

I like how the trainwreck started. They made an RTWP game because "we want it to be a spiritual successor to the infinity engine!" and then proceeds to be nothing like an IE game. The whole justification for making a game based on mediocre RTWP mechanics falls on its own face. And all we're left with is something much worse than an actual IE clone.

I disagree, all those IE feels are the most thing I get out of gameplay of Pillars of Eternity. Exploration, adventuring. Even combat has its enjoyment when working, but mosty riddled in technical issues. Utility "Identify/Knock" spells are missing though, but both could be easily imlemented (I presume, an aspect that usually and actively gets modded) Identify could be a Spell that both works in combat and out of combat in Pillars of Eternity because of "Lore" mechanics.

Combat Identify: "Reveal Creature Lore"
Out of Combat: "Identify Item, Trap, Lock"

Identify could even be combined with Knock.
 
Last edited:

Dorateen

Arcane
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
4,422
Location
The Crystal Mist Mountains
Furthermore, the word Wizard comes in origin from wise, or learned. How shocking that it would be associated with characters displaying mental aptitude. Therein lies the contradiction in deviating from the archetype. If you want a low-intelligence, muscle-bound hulk slinging spells, then call the class something else. Like Magic User.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Patron
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
99,684
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
To clarify, do we know how large the total pool of talents will be? As in, will there be 10 class specific talents for each class and 30 general talents? If nothing much changes attribute-wise, they really need to up their game on talents.

"Class-specific talents" aren't actually called talents, I'm pretty sure; they're class abilities. Talents proper are all general.

And we don't have any numbers, no, other than that they will be "expanded significantly": http://forums.somethingawful.com/sh...d=17931&perpage=40&pagenumber=9#post433880205
 

Duraframe300

Arcane
Joined
Dec 21, 2010
Messages
6,395
I expected worse, actually.

Well, wait until it's released, then.
Excuses won't be enough to cover the fundamental design flaws and lack of inspiration by then, and our legions will grow.

As I've said, I've pretty much seen this exact situation already, and I have a fair idea how it is going to play out.
I've been wrong before, of course. You never know.

:lol:

This is going to be excellent.
 

Maculo

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
2,596
Strap Yourselves In Pathfinder: Wrath
To clarify, do we know how large the total pool of talents will be? As in, will there be 10 class specific talents for each class and 30 general talents? If nothing much changes attribute-wise, they really need to up their game on talents.

"Class-specific talents" aren't actually called talents, I'm pretty sure; they're class abilities. Talents proper are all general.

And we don't have any numbers, no, other than that they will be "expanded significantly": http://forums.somethingawful.com/sh...d=17931&perpage=40&pagenumber=9#post433880205
Good to know, thanks Infinitron, I did not see those last few messages. I am going to have to wait and see, but I am still a bit worried under the current system. That being said it is a beta with a sparse amount of content, talents, and abilities.
 

Black

Arcane
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
1,873,142
I expected worse, actually.

Well, wait until it's released, then.
Excuses won't be enough to cover the fundamental design flaws and lack of inspiration by then, and our legions will grow.

As I've said, I've pretty much seen this exact situation already, and I have a fair idea how it is going to play out.
I've been wrong before, of course. You never know.
Pfffshaw, patches/expansions will fix it.
And in case it's working as J. S. predicted- they'll alter it.
Donate to PoE; Mask of the Balance kickstarter now! Impress your Codex friends with a new badge!
 
Joined
May 1, 2013
Messages
4,505
Location
The border of the imaginary
Osvir
Referring Kotaku now are we? :lol:

That article is just Josh's opinion, which counts for shit since the itemization in P:E beta sucks (cue: shitty cheap uniques)

You are just rephrasing the "wait for the full version/expansion before you judge" argument. While the main problem, boring itemization of uniques, is a very deep flaw in Sawyer's Systems...worse than unique itemization in diablo 3.

Josh's beloved balanced systems are banal as fuck.
 

Hegel

Arcane
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
3,274
I expected worse, actually.

Well, wait until it's released, then.
Excuses won't be enough to cover the fundamental design flaws and lack of inspiration by then, and our legions will grow.

As I've said, I've pretty much seen this exact situation already, and I have a fair idea how it is going to play out.
I've been wrong before, of course. You never know.
Pfffshaw, patches/expansions will fix it.
And in case it's working as J. S. predicted- they'll alter it.
Donate to PoE; Mask of the Balance kickstarter now! Impress your Codex friends with a new badge!
Fool me once... :lol:
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom