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

[Athelas]

Start BG1 with a fighter that has 3 in STR, DEX and CON, tell me how it goes (tip: run from the wolves).

Well for starters, you can't, because classes have mandatory minimums (even moreso when dual and multi-classing). Besides, I wasn't talking about extremely gimmicky character builds for unique playthroughs. I was talking about normal character building. There really is no difference between a fighter with 9 str (mandatory minimum) or one with 15 str, a mage with 9 int (mandatory minimum) can learn level 9 spells, etc.

The capability of classes (spell arsenal, thac0, number of attacks per round, equippability, weapon proficiencies) was largely determined by their class. Which isn't a good or a bad thing, it's just how it was. Not sure what's up with the revisionist history.

 

[Lilura]

The lack of impact of stats should definitely be criticized (and it's something I'm disappointed with myself), but doing it on the basis of the IE games is bizarre. Here's the class progression chart for the Baldur's Gate - none of the stats are even referenced in it: http://playithardcore.com/pihwiki/index.php?title=Baldur's_Gate:_Progression_Charts

What are you trying to prove here, that only tells a small part of the story. AD&D has separate charts for stats:
http://playithardcore.com/pihwiki/index.php/Baldur's_Gate:_Races_and_Stats

And those tie into the progression chart you linked to. For example, a STR bonus in the stat chart will be applied for each hit from ApR in the progression chart.

Get a clue.

 

[Athelas]

So your argument that stats mattered more than your class is to point towards attack per rounds...which were determined by your CLASS?

 

[Shadenuat]

haha

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/67716-request-pause-when-character-turn-starts/

 

[Lilura]

There really is no difference between a fighter with 9 str (mandatory minimum) or one with 15 str, a mage with 9 int (mandatory minimum) can learn level 9 spells, etc.

Nice, so you just cherry pick "the void" in the chart for to-hits and dmg bonus between STR9-15, ignoring other stat levels which do have a combat difference, and ignoring carry weight and open doors adjustment...

 

[Mangoose]

The lack of impact of stats should definitely be criticized (and it's something I'm disappointed with myself), but doing it on the basis of the IE games is bizarre. Here's the class progression chart for the Baldur's Gate - none of the stats are even referenced in it: http://playithardcore.com/pihwiki/index.php?title=Baldur's_Gate:_Progression_Charts

Start BG1 with a fighter that has 3 in STR, DEX and CON, tell me how it goes (tip: run from the wolves).

So.. in other words there isn't much choice involved in creating a character in BG1 unless you intentionally want to gimp yourself?

 

[Sensuki]

You're the Dragon Age guy IIRC?

 

[Frusciante]

I like this guy.

 

[ZagorTeNej]

Well for starters, you can't, because classes have mandatory minimums (even moreso when dual and multi-classing).

You can, with a Sword Coast Keeper

Besides, I wasn't talking about extremely gimmicky character builds for unique playthroughs. I was talking about normal character building. There really is no difference between a fighter with 9 str (mandatory minimum) or one with 15 str, a mage with 9 int (mandatory minimum) can learn level 9 spells, etc.

0-15 STR being the same (aside from minor stuff like carry weight, bashing etc.) sucks sure but you're still far more rewarded with a high STR score than in PoE (so far). Same goes for DEX for example (difference between 3 and 18 is 8 armor class, quite a bit in BG).

IIRC according to the BG2 manual mages weren't supposed to be able to learn 9th level spells unless they have 18 INT.

I'm not saying BG attribute system is perfect but atleast it has a very solid impact on non-pure caster classes' performance in combat.

 

[Sensuki]

I would have asked different questsions tbh - even I would have told you that making the attribute system have more of an impact is an easy fix.

Some bigger problems (off the top of my head):

Characters not being distinguishable enough from the background
Inventory system
Character progression - pretty banal atm
Item properties being a bit meh/uninteresting
Racial and Cultural attribute bonuses almost meaningless

 

[Frusciante]

I would have asked different questsions tbh - even I would have told you that making the attribute system have more of an impact is an easy fix.

So ask him your questions then smartass

I like that he realises that it needs work. And I like his comment about D&D attributes. Simply said he has a clear vision, has been very open about it from the start and stand behind it.

 

[Black]

Turn-based Pillars of Eternity.

It's amazing how much they want it to be tb yet not realize this.

 

[Sensuki]

Don't have twitter

 

[Shadenuat]

Characters not being distinguishable enough from the background

There's some bug into it, not just visual design. Sometimes characters become transparent.

 

[Mangoose]

IIRC according to the BG2 manual mages weren't supposed to be able to learn 9th level spells unless they have 18 INT.

I'm not saying BG attribute system is perfect but atleast it has a very solid impact on non-pure caster classes' performance in combat.

Except that you have to be a complete retard not to max your intelligence and min (most) everything else.

Call me when you actually have to spend time deciding how to spread your attributes in BG.

 

[Sensuki]

There's some bug into it, not just visual design. Sometimes characters become transparent.

No no

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/67653-combat-readability-analysis-graphics/

 

[Frusciante]

I would have asked different questsions tbh - even I would have told you that making the attribute system have more of an impact is an easy fix.

Some bigger problems (off the top of my head):

Characters not being distinguishable enough from the background
Inventory system
Character progression - pretty banal atm
Item properties being a bit meh/uninteresting
Racial and Cultural attribute bonuses almost meaningless

First of all: it's twitter, no room for tons of questions. And attribute system and it's implications is by far the biggest issue on this forum.

Characters not being distinguishable enough from the background: Agreed but more a question for artists/modeller/programmers
Inventory system Don't have a problem with it
Character progression - pretty banal atm Agreed but we know most of the feats still need to be implemented, so that would also be an easy answer
Item properties being a bit meh/uninteresting Don't know about this at all. I think this is whining mostly especially because it's just a few items in a backer beta. We have no idea about full game
Racial and Cultural attribute bonuses almost meaningless Yes it's mostly flavor as it should be. There are some people who like the ROLEPLAYING aspect of rpg's and are not just there for the mechnics

 

[ZagorTeNej]

Except that you have to be a complete retard not to max your intelligence and min (most) everything else.

Call me when you actually have to spend time deciding how to spread your attributes in BG.

Not gonna happen, it's a fairly one-dimensional system in that regard. I just feel it still has some strengths that is all.

So.. in other words there isn't much choice involved in creating a character in BG1 unless you intentionally want to gimp yourself?

When it comes to stats, yup.

 

[Mangoose]

Racial and Cultural attribute bonuses almost meaningless Yes it's mostly flavor as it should be. There are some people who like the ROLEPLAYING aspect of rpg's and are not just there for the mechnics

Mechanics are how roleplaying is expressed in an video game.

 

[Frusciante]

Racial and Cultural attribute bonuses almost meaningless Yes it's mostly flavor as it should be. There are some people who like the ROLEPLAYING aspect of rpg's and are not just there for the mechnics

Mechanics are how roleplaying is expressed in an video game.

Yes but there is also things like flavor text, biographies, reactivity in conversations (which we know nothing about so far) etc

 

[Mangoose]

Racial and Cultural attribute bonuses almost meaningless Yes it's mostly flavor as it should be. There are some people who like the ROLEPLAYING aspect of rpg's and are not just there for the mechnics

Mechanics are how roleplaying is expressed in an video game.

Yes but there is also things like flavor text, biographies, reactivity in conversations (which we know nothing about so far) etc

Yeah and I can write those in Notepad.exe

 

[Shadenuat]

There's some bug into it, not just visual design. Sometimes characters become transparent.

No no

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/67653-combat-readability-analysis-graphics/

And that's lightning/modern effects system at work. I did see chars become transparent a few times too however.

I don't disagree with the link.

 

[Harold]

Mechanics are how roleplaying is expressed in an video game.

For shame, how dare you demand that LARPers learn how a game's mechanics work!

 

[Athelas]

The obvious question to ask Sawyer is about the itemization.

 

[Zorba the Hutt]

Racial and Cultural attribute bonuses almost meaningless Yes it's mostly flavor as it should be. There are some people who like the ROLEPLAYING aspect of rpg's and are not just there for the mechnics

??? I can understand the arguments of those who like Sawyer's changes, even if I wouldn't have thought an "IE successor with IWD combat" is the best place for them. Fine, we'll never all agree and this thread will keep going in circles.

But for someone in favour of Sawyer's changes to pull out the 'roleplaying not mechanics" card? Really? Isn't that what some of the BG2 devotees on the Obs forums have been going on about? How the BG attributes better described their character for roleplaying purposes even if they had flaws mechanically? Very surprised to see this argument from you, I would have thought that 'flavour and roleplaying' over mechanics is the last thing Sawyer stood for.