Codex Interview RPG Codex Interview: Eric Fenstermaker on Pillars of Eternity​

[Irenaeus III]

For the PC, it was the most important fact of his past lives. For Thaos, it was Tuesday.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

The fact itself wasn't even important for the PC, they have no reason to care for it aside from their past self's butthurt causing them trouble. Could've had your past self's actions influence the present somehow the same way the actions of your past incarnations did in PS:T, but alas.

I could say the same. You're geeking out about how TTO despises TNO which you find to be particularly profound. Okay.

Hey, better to spend a paragraph geeking out about a good game, rather than two years playing defense force for a mediocre one.

Don't agree. I would argue this, but TBH I'm getting tired of this thread. But take a look at theme of the other companions' subplots, which we've already discussed ITT.

Are you talking about the "values in the face of metaphysical uncertainty" theme? That is indeed something that connects Iovara's ideas to Eder and Sagani's quests, but it doesn't form the emotional core of your past self's story, which is about divided loyalties more than anything else. Emotionally, like you said earlier, your past self wants closure for his relationship with Thaos, rather than being conflicted over gods not being real and all that jazz.

No, I wouldn't go as far as "poorly", and certainly not barely noticable - as I said it's blatant. Positive? Yes, it's another layer of meaning - more complexity - which I regard as positive.

Well, if just throwing various elements in haphazardly is what resu

 

[Infinitron]

Are you talking about the "values in the face of metaphysical uncertainty" theme? That is indeed something that connects Iovara's ideas to Eder and Sagani's quests, but it doesn't form the emotional core of your past self's story, which is about divided loyalties more than anything else. Emotionally, like you said earlier, your past self wants closure for his relationship with Thaos, rather than being conflicted over gods not being real and all that jazz.

Your past self wants closure because what? The penultimate flashback before the final battle shows that Thaos left him rather "metaphysically uncertain", refusing to give him a straight answer about the gods. The divided loyalties and personal betrayals are a factor there, but in my opinion it's that final moment of doubt that leaves your past self in a state of trauma. That's why it's the last thing you see, and not, say, the betrayed Iovara burning on the wheel.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

Are you talking about the "values in the face of metaphysical uncertainty" theme? That is indeed something that connects Iovara's ideas to Eder and Sagani's quests, but it doesn't form the emotional core of your past self's story, which is about divided loyalties more than anything else. Emotionally, like you said earlier, your past self wants closure for his relationship with Thaos, rather than being conflicted over gods not being real and all that jazz.

Your past self wants closure because what? The penultimate flashback before the final battle shows that Thaos left him rather "metaphysically uncertain", refusing to give him a straight answer about the gods. The divided loyalties and personal betrayals are a factor there, but in my opinion it's that final moment of doubt that leaves your past self in a state of trauma. That's why it's the last thing you see, and not, say, the betrayed Iovara burning on the wheel.

But if that's the case, then why doesn't Iovara outright explaining everything resolve the trauma? Thaos admitting that she is correct doesn't resolve it either. I think you were right when you said that your past self feels betrayed by Thaos, having sacrificed so much for their faith, only to have Thaos dodge their most important question and basically threaten them into submission. I thought that what ultimately resolved it was Thaos' memory, where Engwithans sacrifice themselves in order to create the gods, and he becomes the keeper of their legacy. That is, after all, the core of his motivation, rather than all the contradictory intellectual arguments about gods being needed to keep mortals in check.

 

[Infinitron]

I realize now that you defined the theme as "values in the face of metaphysical uncertainty". I'm not sure if "metaphysical" is the right word. It's some kind of uncertainty - uncertainty about matters held in the highest esteem, existential matters like one's god or one's tribe. Logically, in an epic fantasy tale, such things will tend to have high concept, metaphysical connections. But is that essential to the theme?

Your past self had an uncertainty about the gods and his mentor's teachings about them, that much is certain. I guess learning Thaos' motivation was the final piece of the puzzle that he needed. He'd already heard Iovara's preaching in his life so just that probably wouldn't be enough.

Anyway, we've digressed a bit here. All I wanted to do was establish that there was a personal element to the conflict with Thaos.

 

[Irenaeus III]

Iovara is not to be trusted.

 

[Azarkon]

I realize now that you defined the theme as "values in the face of metaphysical uncertainty". I'm not sure if "metaphysical" is the right word. It's some kind of uncertainty - uncertainty about matters held in the highest esteem, existential matters like one's god or one's tribe. Logically, in an epic fantasy tale, such things will tend to have high concept, metaphysical connections. But is that essential to the theme?

Your past self had an uncertainty about the gods and his mentor's teachings about them, that much is certain. I guess learning Thaos' motivation was the final piece of the puzzle that he needed. He'd already heard Iovara's preaching in his life so just that probably wouldn't be enough.

Anyway, we've digressed a bit here. All I wanted to do was establish that there was a personal element to the conflict with Thaos.

They honestly did the whole Awakened side of the plot pretty damn bad, which I think explains why many people don't give a fuck about Thaos's actions in your past lives. To this end I think being Awakened and a Watcher both was excessive. You should be one, else the other, not both, because by being both, the game lost focus. Most of the times when you see past events in the game, it's your Watcher abilities that are responsible. But then there are certain events where it's your Awakened state that causes it. It's not hard to tell the difference - ie one of them involves you being active - but it takes away from the uniqueness of the "soul seeing" experience. Your past lives also just don't get as much time as they ought to get for how important it is to be Awakened. It's as though the game was pulled in two different directions - one a D&D adventure, the other a psychological drama - and never found which it wanted to be.

 

[Irenaeus III]

It works to me. The story, being an Awakened Watcher, resolution with Thaos, etc. All comes together in the end and works. If you don't give a fuck about Thaos, maybe you should play a game with less story, because PoE is story-heavy.

 

[Trashos]

Being a Watcher and being Awakened both provided the game with good moments and quests. But I agree with Azarkon that they were "too much" on top of each other. I could do without the Watcher effect (I am keeping the Awakened though), even if it meant that certain interesting quests had to be redesigned. It would have made the proceedings tighter.

 

[Infinitron]

Gotta think of the sequel, though. The PC has cured his Awakening, so if he wasn't a Watcher too there'd be nothing cool about him anymore.

 

[Irenaeus III]

I really hope there's a sequel with the same PC, but they have already hinted they are going in other direction with a new scenario/region. IF they ever make a sequel.

 

[Prime Junta]

A different region doesn't preclude the same PC. Worked for BG1/2 and NWN2 OC/MotB. They have hinted that it will be high-level. If so, it'd be kinda dumb/weird not to have the same PC.

(Also there will certainly be a sequel. They've as good as announced it, and it would make no sense whatsoever that there wouldn't be, from any point of view. They're just being coy.)

 

[One-and-a-half-Ivan]

I hope that there will be very few consequences to Watcher's choices, because it never ever works well.

 

[Trashos]

Gotta think of the sequel, though. The PC has cured his Awakening, so if he wasn't a Watcher too there'd be nothing cool about him anymore.

Maybe on the sequel he would realize that "curing" his Awakened condition turned him into a Watcher!

 

[Xzylvador]

The main character went comatose as a result of the snoozefest that was his first 'adventure'.
The entire game will take place inside his mind -an imaginary version of Eora where exciting things hopefully DO happen- as you play his soul struggling to wake up his body before he dies of starvation.

 

[MF]

If you don't give a fuck about Thaos, maybe you should play a game with less story, because PoE is story-heavy.

No. People should play a game with better writing and more engaging characters. Thaos is boring as fuck. His dialogue is boring, his motives are oblique and his relation to the PC has no direct conflict. He might be morally ambiguous in the end but he's a forced antagonist and there's nothing you can do about it. It wouldn't be so bad if there was any player agency where Thaos is involved, but nothing you do has any bearing on his fate except for a couple of token choices at the very last dialogue screen of the game.

Betrayal at Krondor is a story-heavy game with a complex narrative. PoE is a combat game with a convoluted plot. There's a difference.

 

[Irenaeus III]

If you don't give a fuck about Thaos, maybe you should play a game with less story, because PoE is story-heavy.

No. People should play a game with better writing and more engaging characters. Thaos is boring as fuck. His dialogue is boring, his motives are oblique and his relation to the PC has no direct conflict. He might be morally ambiguous in the end but he's a forced antagonist and there's nothing you can do about it. It wouldn't be so bad if there was any player agency where Thaos is involved, but nothing you do has any bearing on his fate except for a couple of token choices at the very last dialogue screen of the game.

Betrayal at Krondor is a story-heavy game with a complex narrative. PoE is a combat game with a convoluted plot. There's a difference.

Thaos is an awesome antagonist, your arguments have very little weight. His role has been thoroughly explained across this thread, maybe you should read it again. It's cool if you don't like PoE's story and prefer Betrayal at Krondor, but I think you are too blinded by rage to understand PoE's complex narrative.

 

[Lord Azlan]

Bravo. I know there was a reason I joined the Codex and amongst a lot of crap I find some true diamonds.

Respect and Infinite Kudos to the senior staff that got this done - truly amazing interview.

"We'd never stand a chance of evoking the same feeling of playing an IE game for the first time"

I hardly played the earlier BG/PST stuff - so this game was my first true IE type game - and I loved it.

 

[Infinitron]

Thank you, Azlan. The interview questions were written by me with a bit of input from Crooked Bee and felipepepe.

 

[Irenaeus III]

Thank you, Azlan. The interview questions were written by me with a bit of input from Crooked Bee and felipepepe.

to the team

 

[MF]

Thaos is an awesome antagonist, your arguments have very little weight. His role has been thoroughly explained across this thread, maybe you should read it again. It's cool if you don't like PoE's story and prefer Betrayal at Krondor, but I think you are too blinded by rage to understand PoE's complex narrative.

I'm not blinded by rage. I really liked Od Nua, for example. If the game was a dungeon crawler solely based on that dungeon, I would have enjoyed it. The writting in there was relatively solid, the conflict was more involving and the sense of mystery transcended the Illuminati bullshit of the Leaden Key by way of the archaeology archetype. Then I got back out and had to endure Act 3.

It's not because I'm a fan of dungeon crawlers, because I'm not. I like epic, sprawling stories. I think it's because Obsidian bit off more than they could chew and they failed at making an interesting story.

I'm not saying Thaos doesn't have potential as a character. His concept isn't that bad. I have a problem with the execution. PoE didn't make me like or hate him, it made me not care about him. That's very bad. I understand you're chuffed to bits about him, but I agree with Chricton and Tigranes: His appearances felt forced and contrived and his abstraction got in the way of making him compelling.

 

[One-and-a-half-Ivan]

Thank you, Azlan. The interview questions were written by me with a bit of input from Crooked Bee and felipepepe.

to the team

+1, the best interview about PoE I've read.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

I actually do like the part of PoE's narrative which deals with the region's recent history and politics - the hollowborn plague, Waidwen's invasion and all of its consequences, the animancy problem, power struggles between factions in Defiance Bay - it all feels logical and interconnected, explored from various angles in sidequests and ties into companion storylines in a very direct way. Would've made for a better story if they stuck to that, imo.

 

[Fenstermaker's Folly]

True story: I had intended to post about a week ago, and had typed a long response, and then my browser crapped out and I lost it all. This time I'm typing this shit in Word first.

A lot of things to talk about, so my answers are gonna be all over the place. Bear with me.

- It was asked if the side plot in the Endless Paths was intended to mirror the main plot of the game. Usually when you see that kind of thing, there's a good chance it's not an accident. It is possible to overdo it with theme, but with a 60+ hour game, probably better to do more than less, because players (the ones who stick with you) will be picking up and putting down your game over and over again, possibly over a long period of time. So you want to give your theme(s) every opportunity to soak in.


- Some spirited discussion as to whether Thaos is sympathetic, whether his actions make sense, or even if he is well written. I'm itching to weigh in but I don't think it's a good thing in general to start having it out with readers or players, saying, no, no, you're right/wrong, and this is what I actually meant. The text is the text. I do think some really smart things have been said already, and that there are some other more persuasive arguments that haven't been made yet.


- There were some folks weighing in about the godlike being underserved in the game. I think that's valid, though I do also agree that there are reasons why the godlike might be less eyebrow-raising in Dyrwood than they would be in some other regions of the world. There's also the issue people have mentioned with making the player maybe a little too special just for making that one choice at chargen. You would want to give a similar amount of love to all the racial reactivity so that godlikes don't feel so much cooler to play as than everybody else. It's a little like PS:T's problem with certain attribute builds creating a much more satisfying narrative experience. You want to be even-handed.


(Priest deities were the other character choice that I'd like to have done more with - especially for priests of Eothas, being a natural fit for this campaign.)

One of the most frequent posts you'll see on our forums is "why no love for character build x?" The answer is usually some combination of a) there was love but you may have missed a big portion of it in your playthrough (side quests you didn't try, maps you never visited, etc.), and b) because every other possible character build choice needed to get some love, and they all compete with one another for resources. Overall in Pillars, there was a lot of time spent to try to give reactivity to all of the character choices, and viewed in aggregate, it's an impressive chunk of text. But because only a small fraction of that text will show up for a given character build, most players never get a sense of the breadth of reactivity that the game offers. My dialogue editor says we checked for godlike 56 times over the course of the game. Which is simultaneously a lot and probably too thin.


Some of that can be alleviated either with a bigger resource investment or by a reduction of the number of categories that create reactivity. In practice the latter is accomplished in part by choosing to emphasize some categories more than others. I think we tended to give race less love in general because it often just leads to been-there-done-that fantasy stereotyping and racism, and in particular with the Dyrwood it's not central to the setting aside from the colonials' bigotry toward orlans. But yeah, ideally we'd have found a few more places to acknowledge the godlike because their appearances are so unlike those of the other races.


- On the Rymrgand being the god of both cold and entropy: I had the same thought, and I'm not sure if the juxtaposition was intentional or coincidental. The way I made sense out of it in my head was that something warm that cools into equilibrium within a relatively cold environment is exhibiting entropy. So if Rymrgand lives in a cold domain and is carries a cold environment with him wherever he goes, then everything that gets near him is relatively warmer and entropically cools in his presence. There's also that entropy sort of "begins" at absolute zero, so if we look at him as kind of the point of origin of entropy, we might expect him to be a cold dude.


- Are the companions dull? The general consensus I see, which is consistent with every game I've worked on, is that some are and some aren't, but people can't agree on which ones are which. If anything, it's an argument for a diversity of companions, because different people gravitate towards different aesthetics, and it's one reason why it's good to have a lot of different people author them. It may also be the strongest agreement against my desire to reduce the number of companions, but I think there's a happy medium.

That's not to say there aren't ways they can all be made better through some high-level design choices. For a potential sequel, I'd want to look at expanding on intra-party tension and conflict, on finding better plot ties to their motivations when possible, and into giving them more writing love after their quests are ended, so they remain interesting to players for the duration of the game. I'm always open to suggestions, too. I have no shame about stealing good ideas freely offered.


- Cowboy Moment , your post (#319) assumes a single theme in the game.


- Infinitron , my bad for misunderstanding your question about there being too much exposition in the game. Let me try to give a better answer.

Yes, there are certainly places in the game where the exposition gets too thick, even outside of the intro area. That's probably a result in part of needing to spread the information out over maybe a few more NPCs, which in turn was a result of trying to have a relatively light critical path in terms of production resource requirements. It's also a result of the plot being an overconstrained problem in some ways, and of some of the post-cut repairs that had to be made, which made some of the later game plot points klunkier.

Some people noted, "well, maybe you didn't actually have to talk about bîaŵacs yet in the intro," or that kind of thing, and that's fair. I think what happens, process-wise, is generally the first draft errs on the side of telling more than needs to be told, just to make sure the player has the information they need to understand what's going on, and then you kind of look at it in revisions and see what you can relax about the exposition. And we assumed at the time, I think, that we'd get more revision time than we ended up having. Which is on me, and is one reason I'm stumping for shorter games with more revision time.

Overall, there were a lot of good takeaways from the experience, and I hope we're on a better path now as a result. White March I think was relatively cleaner in this regard.

That a better answer or did I still fuck it up?

 

[Infinitron]

MRY You have a partner in sorrow.