Preview RPG Codex Preview: Blackguards

[Darth Roxor]

Also, a funny thing about RPGWatch, I have to say I find it massively amusing how they put up a newspost of this preview, but didn't make one for my review of RoA HD

 

[Cyberarmy]

Let me guess: they've built their character in a particularly lame way and now complain about the spell failure rates, right? Wouldn't surprise me, coming from Steam forum regulars.

My full plate armored, great sword swinging mage fails to land a fireball!?!?!?!1

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

Strange how i never had a spell fail on casting, i mainly use burst of flame and fireball.

You probably put your points correctly. It's easy to experience "ridiculous spell failure rates" when the stats the spell rolls for are low and you never put points into improving the spell. Not having a good documentation on the rules makes it even harder for those new to the ruleset. I assume Steam's userbase is not so well versed in TDE.

 

[MicoSelva]

This game is now on your wishlist.

I will wait for the release to buy, though, as I'm not so keen on the Early Access model.

Thanks, felipepepe and Darth Roxor.

 

[V_K]

Using -fag as a suffix is stupid 4chan kid shit.

I agree with you

Buuut, at the same time, it's clear roxor meant no offense to gays.

Waaaaait a bit, so "-fag" stands for "faggot"? Oh shit. And here I go, having it confused with "-phage" all the way...
Non-native speaker, aha.

 

[CappenVarra]

Cool preview, now I can actually tell Blackguards apart from all these other games in development - and actually want to play it Now, to refresh my TDE lore...

 

[DramaticPopcorn]

http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1061226471&postcount=31

Last sentence is too ironic...

 

[norolim]

Well. I'm sold. I was mildly interested before, but I didn't expect this title to be that good. Great job with the preview. I also like the two-contributor format.

 

[Grunker]

Not having a good documentation on the rules makes it even harder for those new to the ruleset. I assume Steam's userbase is not so well versed in TDE.

This much is true. Howevermuch I can hate on steam users for not thinking their choices through, it is hardly their fault if game documentation is a mess.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Tbh I don't think you need ace documentation to realize that investing points into improving spells is a Good Thing™ and most likely does something about spell failure rate

 

[felipepepe]

Tbh I don't think you need ace documentation to realize that investing points into improving spells is a Good Thing™ and most likely does something about spell failure rate

Indeed... the party's mage stars with something like 5 ranks in firebolt and 1 in fireball. His firebolt has a 60% hit chance, the fireball has like 20% chance only.... does not take genius to figure this out, especially since the game shows you how much will your spell improve with each point spend.

Still, it is easy to screw up things. You could spend 380 AP to increase your character's Cleverness by one point, thinking that you're doing the best to be a spellcaster, but the result in casting % is almost null; spending that in a single spell would allow you something like 5-6 upgrades, giving you a solid hit chance and maybe access to a new casting tier...

 

[Grunker]

Tbh I don't think you need ace documentation to realize that investing points into improving spells is a Good Thing™ and most likely does something about spell failure rate

Yes and no. Newcomers to complex RPG systems have no clue. Remember that in most games stuff "works by default", and investing "XP" into it just makes you better/more functional. I don't think it's fair to hold lack of documenation against the player.

In effect, you can't say "RTFM IDIOT!" when there is no manual

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Well, you know those times when you walk into a door and fall on your ass, clutching your broken nose? At that point, you have two options:

a) Get up and walk into the door again, wondering why it's not working

b) Get up and realize that you need to do something about the door first, like opening it


It's fine to not know what's going on at first, but if you only have one point in fireball and it's shitty, while the other spell with five points in it is good, it's safe to assume you're supposed to invest points in fireball if you want to use it.

 

[felipepepe]

c) OMG, DOOR IS BRUKEN! Developers clearly don't care that everyone is breaking their nose on the doors. I bought a house, how can this be a house when I can't even get in?

 

[Grunker]

Well, you know those times when you walk into a door and fall on your ass, clutching your broken nose? At that point, you have two options:

a) Get up and walk into the door again, wondering why it's not working

b) Get up and realize that you need to do something about the door first, like opening it


It's fine to not know what's going on at first, but if you only have one point in fireball and it's shitty, while the other spell with five points in it is good, it's safe to assume you're supposed to invest points in fireball if you want to use it.

If you have the patience. If not, it's pretty fair to at least say "OK, I can't figure out what I'm doing wrong, is there a place I can read about how this stuff works?"

Seriously, we spent years raging at noobs for not reading the fucking manual. If that's our schtick, the least we can do is acknowledge that it's probably pretty important that there is one.

I flat-out refused to play through Frayed Knights because for every "feat" you couldn't do anything but guess based on the feat's name what it kindda did.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Manuals are indeed important, but if after 15 seconds of intense staring at the character sheet you really can't figure out that investing points into a skill makes it better, you're probably a filthy casual and wouldn't read the manual anyway

 

[Infinitron]

https://twitter.com/daedalic/status/400929760265506816

 

[Grunker]

Manuals are indeed important, but if after 15 seconds of intense staring at the character sheet you really can't figure out that investing points into a skill makes it better, you're probably a filthy casul and wouldn't read the manual anyway

My point is precisely that in most games: more skills points = better. In this, as in a few other RPGs, more skill points = unlocks basic functionality.

Regardless, I can't see defending lack of documentation being a good thing in any universe.

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

Still, it is easy to screw up things. You could spend 380 AP to increase your character's Cleverness by one point, thinking that you're doing the best to be a spellcaster, but the result in casting % is almost null; spending that in a single spell would allow you something like 5-6 upgrades, giving you a solid hit chance and maybe access to a new casting tier...

Yeah. A single point upgrade of cleverness might not do much for this one spell right now but in the long run getting your significant stats up to at least 17 or more is the way to truly build a powerful character. High stats benefit all rolls not just that one spell. usually I'd only put a lot of points into certain spells if it was required, for example the armor spell, if you wanted a +8 modifier you also needed to have 8 points invested in the spell. At least it was so in Drakensang. Dunno how much AP you'll get in this game and how feasible it is to try to get your stats up, but getting high stats would usually improve your overall performance very much.

edit: of course that doesn't mean I would leave spells at 1, I'd just upgrade them until further points would start getting expensive

 

[Roguey]

The UI should explicitly tell you the number that's being increased and where. Looking at http://cdn4.steampowered.com/v/gfx/...5c7a053048e9ff8003b7baf7821ec55.1920x1080.jpg I thought that's what it did but I guess not???

 

[Clockwork Knight]

My point is precisely that in most games: more skills points = better. In this, as in a few other RPGs, more skill points = unlocks basic functionality.

Sure, but do you think that's really that hard to figure out with a bare minimum of experimentation? Skill is useless, maybe I should put a point into it to see if it becomes usable?

Regardless, I can't see defending lack of documentation being a good thing in any universe.

It's not, but there is "The spell FIREDEATH summons a pillar of flame that does 2d6+2 of damage to two adjacent enemies", and there is "Press W to move forward". One of those doesn't necessarily need to be the manual for you to figure it out. (and even then you can understand how the other one works if you use it once or twice)

 

[Grunker]

Sure, but do you think that's really that hard to figure out with a bare minimum of experimentation?

I don't know, but I don't see any argument for not telling the player exactly how it works.

Saying that the relation between skill points spent and spell failure is like "Press W to move forward" is hyperbole to the point of absurdity.

 

[Roguey]

This is like that "RPG conventions" thing whathisname was talking about. "Put points into a spell to make it more accurate" isn't a thing that exists in D&D or Diablo or what-have-you. If one can put points into a specific spell, it's usually to upgrade its damage potential. Someone looks at a spell and thinks "Well these damage numbers look fine, I just want it to be more accurate" and instead dumps points into the much-less efficient attribute that also determines magic accuracy and disaster strikes.

 

[felipepepe]

The UI should explicitly tell you the number that's being increased and where. Looking at http://cdn4.steampowered.com/v/gfx/...5c7a053048e9ff8003b7baf7821ec55.1920x1080.jpg I thought that's what it did but I guess not???

The game may lack documentation on some systems, but the spells are well explained in-game:

The full process is that you roll 1d20 for each ruling attribute of a spells (here Cleverness, Dexterity and Constitution), and every roll has to be LOWER than your character's corresponding attribute. If any roll is higher you fail, but you can use your Spell Levels to adjust the rolls. Here I have 8 points to modify it. However, enemy Magic Resistance subtracts from your Spell Casting level, so if I try to cast at a guy with RM 3, I'll only have 5 points to adjust my rolls.

It's a complex system that can't be taught in a tooltip, but all the basic info is there if you know the rules, and it gives you a % chance of casting success if don't know/care. The manual is really lacking, but I don't think people crying at steam would read it and understand it so easily... they would simply cry it's too complicated.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Saying that the relation between skill points spent and spell failure is like "Press W to move forward" is hyperbole to the point of absurdity.

More or less, but I was hoping you got the point. You are talking like "you should invest points into fireball or you won't hit shit with it" is some sort of weird mechanic, which that makes it understandable that some people are perplexed by it since it's not documented, while I think it's something that one should pick up way faster than it takes to go into the forum to complain about broken skills. I can only imagine the sheer xenophobic horror those people would feel if they played a platformer where jumping on your enemies doesn't kill them.

But...that's how it works in Mario and Sonic...what is this I don't even...mY wORLD is CRUMbliNG

I blame your documentation fetish.