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.

Game News Pillars of Eternity II Fig Update #58: Forgotten Sanctum DLC coming December 13th, Patch 4.0 Preview

Infinitron

I post news
Patron
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
99,595
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
back off and force the players to come through

I wish devs would try to do this. Very effective to way to make enemies in games look intelligent, since it's so rare to see them do anything but bum rush you. "Wait, where is he going?? Ooh, you clever girl."

The thing is that enemy formations have to be taught to retreat en masse, otherwise they're just allowing themselves to be divided and conquered. The old Myth games knew how to do this.
 
Self-Ejected

Safav Hamon

Self-Ejected
Village Idiot The Real Fanboy
Joined
May 15, 2018
Messages
2,141
Compared to the first game, there are more encounters in Deadfire that force you to fight in open space with limited obstruction.
 

Ulfhednar

Savant
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
809
Location
Valhalla
I agree with this sentiment in a general sense, but sometimes an ugly, duct-taped hack can be good enough, no? Just like the self-enforced "hack" of not rest-spamming in the IE games.
The IE games were designed with some attrition in mind. By not rest spamming, you’re actually getting a play experience that’s intended.

In this case they are trying to recreate a play experience that Obsidian intentionally removed from their design. It’s enough to entice me to play it again, and hope that it’s enjoyable, but it’s not clear that it’s actually salvageable.
 

Lady_Error

█▓▒░ ░▒▓█
Patron
Joined
Oct 14, 2012
Messages
1,879,250
Compared to the first game, there are more encounters in Deadfire that force you to fight in open space with limited obstruction.

I thought the ship battles solved this nicely: While there is a choke point you can use if you're smart, some enemies also jump onto your ship from the sides. So you cannot rely just on the choke point alone.
 

Lawntoilet

Prophet
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
1,840
SSS seems deliberately designed to fuck with try-hard munchkin builds. Which I gotta say is quite amusing.
Didn't Obsidian base most of their nerfs on people saying "hey this build is really fun and strong" or is that just paranoia in the Obsidian forums? :balance:
No it wont alter the core design principles, but it will alter the gameplay experience in a major way.

Play it with Rymrgand + Eothas challenge on and it will be quite grueling and fun.
Kingmaker has Woedica + Rymrgand + Eothas challenges built in :incline: but that does sound like a fun challenge. You would get so few per-rest abilities that it would be very challenging, and make Ciphers and Chanters extremely valuable.
 

Ulfhednar

Savant
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
809
Location
Valhalla
Didn't Obsidian base most of their nerfs on people saying "hey this build is really fun and strong" or is that just paranoia in the Obsidian forums? :balance:
They have targeted specific builds in the past (e.g. Firebug on the Unlabored Blade from Pillars 1) and also have done sweeping nerfs and buffs system-wide from general feedback (“Deadfire items are amazing ”, “PotD is too easy”, etc.).
 

Lawntoilet

Prophet
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
1,840
Didn't Obsidian base most of their nerfs on people saying "hey this build is really fun and strong" or is that just paranoia in the Obsidian forums? :balance:
They have targeted specific builds in the past (e.g. Firebug on the Unlabored Blade from Pillars 1) and also have done sweeping nerfs and buffs system-wide from general feedback (“Deadfire items are amazing ”, “PotD is too easy”, etc.).
Sometimes that makes sense (PotD was embarrassingly easy at midlevel on release) but autistically fiddling with builds to find cool synergies is a big part of the fun of these games, unless it results in the build being nerfed into oblivion.
 

Immortal

Arcane
In My Safe Space
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
5,070
Location
Safe Space - Don't Bulli
Didn't Obsidian base most of their nerfs on people saying "hey this build is really fun and strong" or is that just paranoia in the Obsidian forums? :balance:
They have targeted specific builds in the past (e.g. Firebug on the Unlabored Blade from Pillars 1) and also have done sweeping nerfs and buffs system-wide from general feedback (“Deadfire items are amazing ”, “PotD is too easy”, etc.).
Sometimes that makes sense (PotD was embarrassingly easy at midlevel on release) but autistically fiddling with builds to find cool synergies is a big part of the fun of these games, unless it results in the build being nerfed into oblivion.

I guess in the long term.. it's better for the overall health of the game.
It's always annoying when Swen and Sawyer constantly peck away anything that has a whiff of OP.. but look at games that didn't do that. Things like BG2 or IWD.. where you can completely destroy the game with a single character using some of the more broken mechanics / builds.

But I do agree in that I think constantly nerfing fun builds instead of increasing the difficult curve is a little lazy.
 

Rake

Arcane
Joined
Oct 11, 2012
Messages
2,969
but look at games that didn't do that. Things like BG2 or IWD.. where you can completely destroy the game with a single character using some of the more broken mechanics / builds.
What exactly should i look for? Because from where i stand it seems being able to make broken builds and soloing the game with every possible class using broken mechanics in BG2 case, is a huge part of the games' appeal and longevity
 

Immortal

Arcane
In My Safe Space
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
5,070
Location
Safe Space - Don't Bulli
but look at games that didn't do that. Things like BG2 or IWD.. where you can completely destroy the game with a single character using some of the more broken mechanics / builds.
What exactly should i look for? Because from where i stand it seems being able to make broken builds and soloing the game with every possible class using broken mechanics in BG2 case, is a huge part of the games' appeal and longevity

It's a little boring to replay the game when you know for a fact that 90% of builds are a dead end and you can trivialize the game with a few spells.
Making the game balanced just adds longevity / depth to build options.
 

Ulfhednar

Savant
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
809
Location
Valhalla
Sometimes that makes sense (PotD was embarrassingly easy at midlevel on release) but autistically fiddling with builds to find cool synergies is a big part of the fun of these games, unless it results in the build being nerfed into oblivion.
Josh enjoys nerfing
 

Azarkon

Arcane
Joined
Oct 7, 2005
Messages
2,989
Not a bad thing. Cragholdt Bluffs was a high point because it was an adventure that could have come straight out of AD&D. I'm just asking for a little nod to earlier developers who flexed their creativity, as in an entire overland map and dungeons built out of Moander's dormant corpse.

Standing on the shoulders of giants.

The Pillars of Eternity game world is essentially a severe case of dissociative identity disorder. On one hand, it wants to be Dungeons and Dragons, with elves and dragons and liches. On the other hand, it wants to be a profound exploration of existentialism, nihilism, and the nature of souls. It wouldn't be so bad, had they simply decided to focus on one, or the other, but attempting to focus on both killed it for me.

To use your Cragholdt Bluffs as an example, the dungeon and its associated quests came out of no where and was a jarring interruption to the narrative. Concelhaut, aka not Irenicus, is given a faint motivation of being vaguely interested in your soul, but otherwise he's completely detached from the story, as are his rivals. You'd think that the most powerful wizards in the world would have a strong interest in Thaos and the Leaden Key, but no, they don't give a fuck, and act like they don't even live in the same world. Llengrath, for instance, pretends that her strategy of transferring her knowledge from generation to generation is cool shit, but her developer didn't seem to realize that all Llengrath is doing is what the Watcher and Thaos are already doing and that Llengrath is just doing it in a much more stupid way.

You want to do Dungeons and Dragons? Then do Dungeons and Dragons. Call Concelhaut, say, Larloch, and Llengrath, say, Szass Tam. Then your story becomes: Szass Tam is trying to steal the magical secrets of Larloch, and tricks a group of powerful paladins, clerics, etc. to do his bidding; the players get involved as contractors to the group, and are misled into thinking they were trying to rid the realms of an ancient evil, when in fact Larloch's existence is necessary to bring balance to the weave, or shit, and then you can have the standard Dungeons and Dragons alignment conflict, etc.

Or, you know, you can take the opposite path, and actually explore the ideas you've created. So instead of Cragholdt Bluffs, make it the ruins of an ancient Engwithan laboratory, where the Engwithans launched their inquiries into the nature of being. Have it be filled with the soul echoes of the Engwithan researchers, who ventured deep into the void, calling the names of their deities, only to find nothing. Show us what the Engwithans saw, what might have convinced them of the fact, and have it hint at how they dealt with the aftermath, of the idea of an empty existence. After all, isn't that the whole premise?

Not to mention this current offering, lifted straight from Dungeons and Dragons. You're telling me you couldn't come up with a better, more novel idea that would be consistent with the themes you've raised? Like what about the Wheel, which is referred to directly in the second game's beginning and ending? How about building a dungeon around that, so as to give context to the Eothas dialogue? Or how about an aborted Engwithan god, where the souls sacrificed to create the god failed to converge, and are now stuck in a dark, twisted place and you have to help them move on, either by escaping back to the Wheel, or by joining together to create the actual god? Why is this so difficult?

I don't know, maybe they will actually surprise us and create a thematically consistent and creatively significant adventure, but knowing the precedents, I doubt it.
 
Last edited:
Unwanted

SlumLord

Unwanted
Edgy
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
152
Location
Thirdworldia
^Everything you wrote makes sense under the assumption that Obsidian has a modicum of creative talent left within its halls, which judging by their latest games simply isn't true.

And Carrie Patel's too busy picking which shade of neon she'll use as dye-of-the-week to pay any attention to rational grognards and other assorted cisscum.

Logic and good design are misogynistic. Especially when they overlap.
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
36,693
On one hand, it wants to be Dungeons and Dragons, with elves and dragons and liches. On the other hand, it wants to be a profound exploration of existentialism, nihilism, and the nature of souls. It wouldn't be so bad, had they simply decided to focus on one, or the other, but attempting to focus on both killed it for me.
Planescape Torment and Mask of the Betrayer were able to be both. It isn't an either/or decision.
 

Lawntoilet

Prophet
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
1,840
On one hand, it wants to be Dungeons and Dragons, with elves and dragons and liches. On the other hand, it wants to be a profound exploration of existentialism, nihilism, and the nature of souls. It wouldn't be so bad, had they simply decided to focus on one, or the other, but attempting to focus on both killed it for me.
Planescape Torment and Mask of the Betrayer were able to be both. It isn't an either/or decision.
If only Obsidian had somehow had access to the leads of those two games when they were making PoE... :mca::ziets:
 

Azarkon

Arcane
Joined
Oct 7, 2005
Messages
2,989
On one hand, it wants to be Dungeons and Dragons, with elves and dragons and liches. On the other hand, it wants to be a profound exploration of existentialism, nihilism, and the nature of souls. It wouldn't be so bad, had they simply decided to focus on one, or the other, but attempting to focus on both killed it for me.
Planescape Torment and Mask of the Betrayer were able to be both. It isn't an either/or decision.

You're ignoring "with elves and dragons and liches". I am talking about Obsidian's insistence on forcing their game to be a typical Dungeons and Dragons fantasy adventure. Planescape: Torment was not a typical Dungeons and Dragons fantasy adventure. That example is completely irrelevant because neither the Planescape setting nor the story of Planescape: Torment could be considered high fantasy. It never tried to be what it wasn't.

MoTB was also not a typical Dungeons and Dragons fantasy adventure, to be exact, but since MoTB takes place in the Forgotten Realms, I'll analyze it more. What are the central themes of MoTB? The gods need the Wall because otherwise people wouldn't worship them? The morality conflict between preserving the world and saving individuals? The former is the exploration of a Forgotten Realms world mechanic. The latter is a classic Dungeons and Dragons alignment struggle. It might be more intelligent than your typical goblin bash, but it stuck to what the setting was about. There was never a moment in MoTB where you had to ask, "wait, how is this related to the game's narrative again?"

By contrast, how is being an adventurer, hunting monsters, and diving dungeons for wealth and power consistent with Pillars of Eternity's narrative themes? Why, in the second game, do you spend 90% of your time doing random treasure hunts while pursuing Eothas? Why play up characters like Concelhaut when they are completely incidental to the main agents of influence and conflict in the world? They're not even animancers! It's like two different and completely separate lines of design pulling at each other. That's what makes it an either decision.
 
Last edited:
Self-Ejected

Safav Hamon

Self-Ejected
Village Idiot The Real Fanboy
Joined
May 15, 2018
Messages
2,141
Deadfire is not your typical Dungeons & Dragons adventure.

The worldbuilding is grounded and based on real-life cultures, history, and folklore. Your typical D&D setting is generic high fantasy where anything is possible.

Structurally it's much closer to Fallout: New Vegas. You have a large open world with multiple competing factions, and your actions determine the fate of the region in the ending slideshow.
 

Azarkon

Arcane
Joined
Oct 7, 2005
Messages
2,989
A historical setting based on 18th century colonialism does not make it fit any better. It's like a designer came in and imposed his own pet vision on the game without any attention to what came before, like he just dumped what he didn't like and came up with a convenient excuse to justify what he actually wanted to make, which was not a sequel to Pillars of Eternity, but a certain historical CRPG...
 
Last edited:

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