Game News Pillars of Eternity Kickstarter Update #71: The Heavy Hitters: Rogues and Rangers

[Rivmusique]

But having 'might', or even 'strength' is fine. Muscle fighter hits harder, more damage, fine. Muscle wizard pitches his fireballs/magic missiles harder, more damage, fine. Where's the confusion? And it will be muscle wizard I think, not this "well might for wizard means mental might, for fighter/rogue it's physical muscles" that some people go on about, because it needs consistency for the CYOA screens and dialogue checks. "[Might] Grab the boulder blocking the path with bare hands and throw it out of the way" etc.

Accuracy is relevant to spells in PoE as well, yeah? I wonder if a 'miss' uses up the spell slot.

 

[Excidium]

Muscle wizard

 

[Johannes]

The stat should be called "Lifting".

 

[Sunsetspawn]

But wizards don't even lift, bro.

 

[Kz3r0]

How about VITALITY, in this way fighters can use it for enhancing their fighting skills and mages can use it to fuel their magic.

 

[Jasede]

Or how about you split them into two stats like it has always been, and make that stat for Fighters increase their magic resistance / saves / unlock "intelligence"-dominated fighter feats and making it give extra HP or melee damage or something for wizards...

 

[Shadowfang]

But then they can't change the name to Heroes of Might & Intellect.

 

[Hormalakh]

After investigation the cat hobbits: bleh. I expected at least a furry cat face too - but nahw - it's a human face.

"Hey buddy, your ears are a bit larger than mine, you are a different race".
"Hey buddy, you are 10cm smaller than I, you are a different race."

Ridiculous. All these "high-fantasy" craps suffer the same unimaginative "fantasy".

The worst: even the races in The Elder Scrolls are more distinct in appearance.

You didn't look hard enough. Search "hearth orlans" for all your furry pleasure.

 

[Jasede]

I searched them. They look like Star Trek aliens.
Cat furries would be a step up from that. At least you could hate 'em if you're into that. But at least they would elicit more than an uninterested shrug or a yawn.

 

[Goegoff]

So...
one can say that someone is a fast/clever/skillful athlete, and that someone else is a fast/clever/skillful writer,
but one can't say, that someone is a mighty fighter, and someone else is a mighty mage?

 

[Jasede]

It's not /about/ that.


How do I explain?

Okay, so, imagine you're a Fighter. You wanna be a better fighter. You train really hard or whatever it is you do, and you're better now. You got +2 might.
You're a Wizard. You wanna be a better wizard. You study really hard and practice your invocations, and you're much better now. You got +2 might.

Is it really okay for you to have this kind of completely different spheres of training, one intellectual, the other physical, be abstracted into a single stat?

Why stop there? Make all stats useful! All classes should derive everything from 1 stat: FightanTalkanThinkan. Bam, no more dump stats.

 

[Arkeus]

It's not /about/ that.


How do I explain?

Okay, so, imagine you're a Fighter. You wanna be a better fighter. You train really hard or whatever it is you do, and you're better now. You got +2 might.
You're a Wizard. You wanna be a better wizard. You study really hard and practice your invocations, and you're much better now. You got +2 might.

Is it really okay for you to have this kind of completely different spheres of training, one intellectual, the other physical, be abstracted into a single stat?

Why stop there? Make all stats useful! All classes should derive everything from 1 stat: FightanTalkanThinkan. Bam, no more dump stats.

It's good that as far as i know we can't change stats (they don't increase on level up), and usually a better wizard won't get 2 Might but 2 Intelligence, whichs increases the caster's ability to control his spells (longer and bigger spells).

So, yeah, that's not what's happening.

 

[Jasede]

We'll see, I guess. It's premature to judge too much, but of course, that won't stop any of us~!

 

[Goegoff]

Is it really okay for you to have this kind of completely different spheres of training, one intellectual, the other physical, be abstracted into a single stat represented by the same word?

Yes?


Ultimately - for both classes - the result is bigger AoE, or longer duration, or more hit points, or whatever...
As far as I'm concerned the attributes could be called More_Damage_Stat, Bigger_Area_Stat, Can_Take_More_Hits_Stat, or they could have completely unique names for every individual class.

 

[Jasede]

I'd prefer those names.

 

[Goegoff]

I'd say that the problem then is not, that the attributes are too abstract, but that the names for them are not abstract enough. :D

 

[Rake]

It's not /about/ that.


How do I explain?

Okay, so, imagine you're a Fighter. You wanna be a better fighter. You train really hard or whatever it is you do, and you're better now. You got +2 might.
You're a Wizard. You wanna be a better wizard. You study really hard and practice your invocations, and you're much better now. You got +2 might.

Is it really okay for you to have this kind of completely different spheres of training, one intellectual, the other physical, be abstracted into a single stat?

Why stop there? Make all stats useful! All classes should derive everything from 1 stat: FightanTalkanThinkan. Bam, no more dump stats.

You are a fighter . You wanna be a better fighter. You train really hard or whatever it is you do. You learned to channel your soul's power better, so you gained more damage. You got +2 might.
You're a Wizard. You wanna be a better wizard. You study really hard and practice your invocations. You learned to channel your soul's power better, so you gained more damage. You got +2 might.

 

[Jasede]

Yeah, I hate that for irrational reasons.
I'm right and you're wrong and if you were smart enough to see the truth you wouldn't question it /LyricSuite

 

[Johannes]

I'd say that the problem then is not, that the attributes are too abstract, but that the names for them are not abstract enough. :D

What? Jasede says that completely unambiguous specific names would be preferable, then you posit that the names should more abstract instead? How does that work out...

 

[Jim the Dinosaur]

Yeah, I hate that for irrational reasons.

Could it be because if everything is magical/soul powerful, nothing is? :hmmmmm:

 

[Goegoff]

I'd say that the problem then is not, that the attributes are too abstract, but that the names for them are not abstract enough. :D

What? Jasede says that completely unambiguous specific names would be preferable, then you posit that the names should more abstract instead? How does that work out...

Judging by the last few pages of this thread, the problem seems to be that attribute's names like 'Strength', or as it is now 'Might' carry with them cartain connotations, that several people for various reasons just can't let go of.
So a name like 'More_Damageness', even if very descriptive, is detached from those preconceptions, hence more abstract.

 

[Shadowfang]

I'd say that the problem then is not, that the attributes are too abstract, but that the names for them are not abstract enough. :D

What? Jasede says that completely unambiguous specific names would be preferable, then you posit that the names should more abstract instead? How does that work out...

Judging by the last few pages of this thread, the problem seems to be that attribute's names like 'Strength', or as it is now 'Might' carry with them cartain connotations, that several people for various reasons just can't let go of.
So a name like 'More_Damageness', even if very descriptive, is detached from those preconceptions, hence more abstract.

I don't know if it is really just that.
I would bet that what is really being made fun off is Swayer's attempt of making the game balanced, through a very boring path.
So the fighter and the mage end up getting very distinctive things from the same stat. Its no wounder they are not going to introduce multi-classing in the game, synergies would be so
obvious and rewarding that it would mess severely with the sacred balance.

Maybe Josh Sawyer is a keeper and that's why the balance is so important to him.

 

[Chaotic_Heretic]

to the furry.

 

[Infinitron]

In the Infinity Engine games, improving your spell damage in this way would have been pretty pointless because they did so much damage already. 6D6 damage fireball? Why would I want to pump my Might to add a few measly extra points of damage to that? I would rather increase the area of effect size.

Actually, generally speaking, damaging spells are not as important as crowd control spells in these games. Pump your Int and get a Hold Person spell that takes an enemy out of the fight for a long time.

 

[nihil]

Maybe if it was called something else, like "power".

It's called "Might"

The abstraction feels a bit wrong, still. It makes it feel like a "heavy hitter" mage will always be a huge, muscular type.

Spoiler

might 1 (mīt)
n.
1. The power, force, or influence held by a person or group.
2. Physical strength.
3. Strength or ability to do something. See Synonyms at strength. See Regional Note at powerful.

Note that I said "maybe". I was typing without thinking. My first reaction was that it would "maybe" work better with a different name. I take that back. (And I never meant "power" would be OK, but not "might".)

The abstraction feels wrong regardless of the name, but from a gameplay perspective it seems like a good idea. It better be muscle wizards, though, and not a stat that means two different things in different contexts. That would be problematic in many ways, not least for stat checks, as mentioned above.